Scientific Evidence for PSI?

This forum is for the discussion of psychokinesis and extrasensory perception.

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:59 pm

Ah, not so fast AD! :-)

You forgot about what happens to quantum mechanics near closed time-like curves (CTC):

www.hpc.unm.edu/.../deutsch_prd44_p3197 ... curves.pdf

DAVID DEUTSCH (OXFORD) -- The physics near closed timelike lines is dominated by macroscopic quantum effects and has many novel features. The correspondence principle is violated. Pure states evolve into mixed states. The dynamical evolutionis not unitary nor is it even the restriction to a subsystem of unitary evolution in a larger system. It is possible to “clone” quantum systems and to measure the state of aquantum system. The subjective probabilities of events can be different for different observers, even if all observers continue to exist throughout. “Asymmetric separation” between two observers is possible, whereby A may be separated from B even though B is not separated from A. Qualitatively new forms of computation are possible, and it is likely that there are improvements in the efficiency of existing forms. All these effects are stable and do not require the maintenance of quantum coherence. They therefore apply to macroscopic systems. Rival versions of quantum theory give qualitatively different predictions about many of the effects. This would provide a crucial experimentaltest of the Everett interpretation against all others. Global conservation laws continue to hold, but only at the level of expectation values even if locally they hold at the operator level. The second law of thermodynamics holds. The Church-Turing principle implies that if there is a non zero amplitude for a closed timelike line to occur somewhere in spacetime then it is possible in principle to manufacture time machines.
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am


Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Access Denied » Thu Nov 25, 2010 3:50 am

Gary wrote:Ah, not so fast AD! :)

Sorry…

[applies brakes so that Gary might have time to comprehend what has been said]

Time Travel and Modern Physics : Quantum Mechanics to the Rescue?
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/time-travel-phys/#9

There has been a particularly clear treatment of time travel in the context of quantum mechanics by David Deutsch (see Deutsch 1991, and Deutsch and Lockwood 1994) in which it is claimed that quantum mechanical considerations show that time travel never imposes any constraints on the pre-time travel state of systems.

[snip boring technical stuff]

Now whatever one thinks of the merits of many worlds interpretations, and of this understanding of it applied to mixtures, in the end one does not obtain genuine time travel in Deutsch's account. The systems in question travel from one time in one world to another time in another world, but no system travels to an earlier time in the same world. (This is so at least in the normal sense of the word ‘world,’ the sense that one means when, for instance, one says “there was, and will be, only one Elvis Presley in this world.”) Thus, even if it were a reasonable view, it is not quite as interesting as it may have initially seemed.

You were saying?

More generally, to my earlier point…

The quantum physics of chronology protection
Matt Visser
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0204022

This is a brief survey of the current status of Stephen Hawking’s “chronology protection conjecture”. That is: “Why does nature abhor a time machine?” I’ll discuss a few examples of spacetimes containing “time machines” (closed causal curves), the sorts of peculiarities that arise, and the reactions of the physics community. While pointing out other possibilities, this article concentrates on the possibility of “chronology protection”. As Stephen puts it:

    It seems that there is a Chronology Protection Agency which prevents the appearance of closed timelike curves and so makes the universe safe for historians.
[snip technical stuff nobody want to read anyway]

So, is chronology protected? Despite a decade’s work we do not know for certain, but I think it fair to say that the bulk of physicists looking at the issue believe that something along the lines envisaged by Stephen in his “chronology protection conjecture” will ultimately save the day, as Stephen puts it:

    There is also strong experimental evidence in favour of the conjecture — from the fact that we have not been invaded by hordes of tourists from the future.

Also, this just in…

Universe’s Quantum Weirdness Limits Its Weirdness
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/ ... certainty/
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:08 am

The systems in question travel from one time in one world to another time in another world, but no system travels to an earlier time in the same world.

AD, you are getting wiser but not yet enlightened :-)

Yes, in the Deutsch multiverse time machine you never return to the same world if you are travelling backwards in time. However, Deutsch also explains (see 'Fabric of Reality') how to use a time machine to obtain information in the present moment from an alternative future universe -- a universe that shares the same past as our own. Indeed, his description is not unlike the idea of obtaining precognitive information and using that information to change the outcome and prevent undesired results. This is called 'post-selection' by Mensky.

"Other times are special cases of other (parallel) universes." -- paraphrasing David Deutsch, Oxford

Time traveler? Human time machines battle terror threat

http://www.starpod.org/SPECIAL/Time_Tra ... 010281.htm

Btw I see the topic of non-locality is in the news. You might like to check out these two articles:

Future holds key to quantum physics

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/co ... ture_N.htm

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle sets limits on Einstein's 'spooky action at a distance,' new research finds

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-hei ... stein.html
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Access Denied » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:33 am

“Knowing the Future”... or not.

Gary wrote:AD, you are getting wiser but not yet enlightened :-)

On the contray, I figured out your pattern of deception a long time ago… :mrgreen:

Gary wrote:Yes, in the Deutsch multiverse time machine you never return to the same world if you are travelling backwards in time. However, Deutsch also explains (see 'Fabric of Reality') how to use a time machine to obtain information in the present moment from an alternative future universe -- a universe that shares the same past as our own.

That’s almost the funniest thing I’ve read all week… what part of “you never return to the same world if you are traveling backwards in time” did you not understand?

Sayeth Deutsch in Fabric of Reality

“Because no time machine provides pathways to times earlier than the moment at which it came into existence, and because of the way in which quantum theory says that universes are interconnected, there are some limits to what we can expect to learn by using time machines. Once we have built one, but not before, we may expect visitors, or at least messages, from the future to emerge from it. What will they tell us? One thing they will certainly not tell us is news of our own future. The deterministic nightmare of the prophecy of an inescapable future doom, brought about in spite of — or perhaps as the very consequence of — our attempts to avoid it, is the stuff of myth and science fiction only. Visitors from the future cannot know our future any more than we can, for they did not come from there. But they can tell us about the future of their universe, whose past was identical to ours. They can bring taped news and current affairs programmes, and newspapers with dates starting from tomorrow and onwards. If their society made some mistaken decision, which led to disaster, they can warn us of it. We may or may not follow their advice. If we follow it, we may avoid the disaster, or — there can be no guarantees — we may find that the result is even worse than what happened to them.”

And…

“In the multiverse view, the time traveller who visits Shakespeare has not come from the future of that copy of Shakespeare. He can affect, or perhaps replace, the copy he visits. But he can never visit the copy who existed in the universe he started from. And it is that copy who wrote the plays. So the plays had a genuine author, and there are no paradoxical loops of the kind envisaged in the story. Knowledge and adaptation are, even in the presence of pathways to the past, brought into existence only incrementally, by acts of human creativity or biological evolution, and in no other way.

QED
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:40 pm

I have to thank AD for doing my homework and providing the relevant quote from David's book (btw I also had the pleasure of asking David about this several years ago; he kindly responded by email to my request).

But let's think about this a bit, OK?

"Because no time machine provides pathways to times earlier than the moment at which it came into existence, and because of the way in which quantum theory says that universes are interconnected, there are some limits to what we can expect to learn by using time machines. Once we have built one, but not before, we may expect visitors, or at least messages, from the future to emerge from it. What will they tell us?"

Well, they might tell us how they prevented the 9/11 attacks. Remember: universes connected by a time machine (that is, a path for information to flow between them) share an identical history. They key point is when the time machine (or as I prefer, the 'cloud' of information time machines) came into existence (or the timeline trajectory of the information cloud.

"What will they tell us? One thing they will certainly not tell us is news of our own future. The deterministic nightmare of the prophecy of an inescapable future doom, brought about in spite of — or perhaps as the very consequence of — our attempts to avoid it, is the stuff of myth and science fiction only."

The key words above are "deterministic" and "inescapable" -- the human time machine escapes deterministic outcomes and is free willed to post-select course corrections.

"Visitors from the future cannot know our future any more than we can, for they did not come from there. But they can tell us about the future of their universe, whose past was identical to ours. They can bring taped news and current affairs programmes, and newspapers with dates starting from tomorrow and onwards."

Of course, one must also take into consideration when the universes branched off from one another, because we are not concerned with exact micro-scale quantum states but with emergent 'for all practical purposes' equivalent emergent states: for the same reason I have no need to know the exact state of the all the molecules in a room to measure the temperature.

"If their society made some mistaken decision, which led to disaster, they can warn us of it. "

As in the example of stopping 9/11 quietly behind the scenes, and not building a massive (if intrusive) intelligence machine which then leads to an act of nuclear terror (which was prevented in our world). Where is JJ Abrams when you need him? :-)

"Knowledge and adaptation are, even in the presence of pathways to the past [in other words, time machines], brought into existence only incrementally, by acts of human creativity or biological evolution, and in no other way.”

Which is exactly MY POINT -- thank you AD for your help! :-)

Post-selection is exactly the above concept (Michael Mensky).

Extended Everett's Concept (EEC) [Mensky's extended 'many worlds' with consciousness] recently developed by the author to explain the phenomenon of consciousness is considered. A mathematical model is proposed for the principal feature of consciousness assumed in EEC, namely its ability (in the state of sleep, trance or meditation, when the explicit consciousness is disabled) to obtain information from all alternative classical realities (Everett's worlds) and select the favorable realities. To represent this ability, a mathematical operation called postcorrection is introduced, which corrects the present state to guarantee certain characteristics of the future state. Evolution of living matter is thus determined by goals (first of all by the goal of survival) as well as by causes. The resulting theory, in a way symmetrical in time direction, follows from a sort of antropic principle. Possible criteria for postcorrection and corresponding phenomena in the sphere of life are classified. Both individual and collective criteria of survival are considered as well as the criteria providing certain quality of life and those which are irrelevant to the life quality. The phenomena of free will and direct sighting of truth (e.g. scientific insight) are explained in these terms. The problem of artificial intellect and the role of brain look differently in the framework of this theory. Automats may perform intellectual operations, but not postcorrection, therefore artificial intellect but not an artificial life can be created. The brain serves as an interface between the body and consciousness, but the most profound level of consciousness is not a function of brain.
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Access Denied » Fri Nov 26, 2010 9:46 am

But Gary, again there’s no evidence quantum mechanics plays a significant role in consciousness so Mensky is clearly a crank and time machines haven’t been invented yet… and that’s not to say they ever will be. That stubborn thing called the laws of physics most likely prevents it or make it impractical.

Quoting Deutsch from the Fabric of Time again…

[one wonders if you’ve actually read it]

“Even when Einstein's equations have been more fully understood, they will not provide conclusive answers on the subject of time travel. The general theory of relativity predates quantum theory and is not wholly compatible with it. No one has yet succeeded in formulating a satisfactory quantum version — a quantum theory of gravity. Yet, from the arguments I have given, quantum effects would be dominant in time-travelling situations. Typical candidate versions of a quantum theory of gravity not only allow past-directed connections to exist in the multiverse, they predict that such connections are continually forming and breaking spontaneously. This is happening throughout space and time, but only on a sub-microscopic scale. The typical pathway formed by these effects is about 10^–35 metres across, remains open for one Planck time (about 10^–43 seconds), and therefore reaches only about one Planck time into the past.

So we see that normally there are no pathways in nature that we can simply “tap into” to explain alleged psi. We have to create one with a time machine first…

“Future-directed time travel, which essentially requires only efficient rockets, is on the moderately distant but confidently foreseeable technological horizon. Past-directed time travel, which requires the manipulation of black holes, or some similarly violent gravitational disruption of the fabric of space and time, will be practicable only in the remote future, if at all.

And just how conceivable is this?

“Taken literally, Einstein's equations predict that travel into the past would be possible in the vicinity of massive, spinning objects, such as black holes, if they spun fast enough, and in certain other situations. But many physicists doubt that these predictions are realistic. No sufficiently rapidly spinning black holes are known, and it has been argued (inconclusively) that it may be impossible to spin one up artificially, because any rapidly spinning material that one fired in might be thrown off and be unable to enter the black hole.”

And what are some of other potential “no go” situations (in addition to my previous post regarding linearity) that remain to be discovered?

“It may be discovered that quantum fluctuations in space and time become overwhelmingly strong near time machines, and effectively seal off their entrances (Stephen Hawking, for one, has argued that some calculations of his make this likely, but his argument is inconclusive).”

Not to mention we still need a quantum theory of gravity…

Gary wrote:Well, they might tell us how they prevented the 9/11 attacks.

Or they might not. I should have included this that immediately followed my first excerpt in my last post…

“On average, though, we should presumably benefit greatly from studying their future history. Although it is not our future history, and although knowing of a possible impending disaster is not the same thing as knowing what to do about it, we should presumably learn much from such a detailed record of what, from our point of view, might happen.”

Deutsch emphasized the word might, after all it’s not our future, and as Deutsch points out, there’s a limited window of time for which we could except to receive a potentially useful “warning”…

“Possession of a time machine would allow us access to knowledge from an entirely new source, namely the creativity of minds in other universes. They could also receive knowledge from us, so one can loosely speak of a ‘trade’ in knowledge — and indeed a trade in artefacts embodying knowledge — across many universes. But one cannot take that analogy too literally. The multiverse will never be a free-trade area because the laws of quantum mechanics impose drastic restrictions on which snapshots can be connected to which others. For one thing, two universes first become connected only at a moment when they are identical: becoming connected makes them begin to diverge. It is only when those differences have accumulated, and new knowledge has been created in one universe and sent back in time to the other, that we could receive knowledge that does not already exist in our universe.

For another thing, the further into the future of another world with an identical past we receive information back from, the more likely it is for that future to have diverged significantly enough from ours such that information regarding future events might not be relevant to ours.

But this is all beside the point…

You do realize why it’s called the “many worlds interpretation” correct? So far there’s no way to distinguish it experimentally from any other interpretation of quantum mechanics… it’s largely a philosophical question. Some argue it might not even be answerable…

Anyway, bottom line is you’re putting the cart before the horse… and in this case that horse is a time machine. There’s really nothing more to discuss…

AD
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Fri Nov 26, 2010 2:23 pm

AD,I am really enjoying this discussion - it is very useful -- thank you!

Unfortunately, I will be very busy and have little time to devote to this until next week. Thank you for your patience.

I suggest you review Penrose 'Shadows of the Mind' on the need for something like Deutsch closed time-like curves in consciousness.

Later...
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby dazdude » Sun Nov 28, 2010 2:57 pm

Competition? Nope. Because quantum theory CANNOT explain 'psi' without being modified; this has been known for at least thirty years. Ryan needs to fact check his site prior to publication :-)


Gary - you are wrong here - quantum and holographic theory can easily accommodate the possible engine that we call PSI. Dont close your mind - and no we haven't known this for 30 years - because a large proportion of the Star Gate documents you like to quote so much detail (especially in their later years) that they suspect that quantum and other theories hold the answer to the missing mechanism. s some of these were form the period 90-95 and come from the top PSI researchers in the world at that time - then no we haven't known different for 30 years.,

Daz
User avatar
dazdude
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:23 am
Location: UK

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:03 pm

Hi Daz --

Quantum theory CANNOT explain Psi because it is IMPOSSIBLE to have superluminal communication faster-than-light speed signals using quantum theory.

If you want to extend quantum theory beyond the known domain you CAN build new theories where quantum theory is a limiting case of a larger theory...but there is no experimental evidence to support this, beyond the subjective 'psi' data.

-- Gary
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Sun Nov 28, 2010 5:07 pm

P.S. This was discussed for several years on the Quantum Mind discussion list with Hameroff, Sarfatti, Gary E.R. Schwartz, Puthoff and Targ, et al...and even Ira Einhorn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_Einhorn (prior to his extradition to the US). I have the emails archived on an older system.
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby dazdude » Tue Nov 30, 2010 2:46 pm

Gary,
I believe its too early to throw the baby out with the bath water and that we don't know as much as we think we do.

"Non-locality determines how well two distant parties can coordinate their actions without sending each other information. Physicists believe that even in quantum mechanics, information cannot travel faster than light. Nevertheless, it turns out that quantum mechanics allows two parties to coordinate much better than would be possible under the laws of classical physics. In fact, their actions can be coordinated in a way that almost seems as if they had been able to talk."


my bolding to show interesting wording/points.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/201010 ... _sys.shtml

Daz
User avatar
dazdude
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:23 am
Location: UK

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:25 pm

Daz, I agree there is plenty of room for new theories but they must include the existing quantum theory as a special case of a bigger, more comprehensive theory.

Here is an example of what I mean:

Beyond the Quantum by Antony Valentini
(Submitted on 15 Jan 2010)

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.2758v1

At the 1927 Solvay conference, three different theories of quantum mechanics were presented; however, the physicists present failed to reach a consensus. Today, many fundamental questions about quantum physics remain unanswered. One of the theories presented at the conference was Louis de Broglie's pilot-wave dynamics. This work was subsequently neglected in historical accounts; however, recent studies of de Broglie's original idea have rediscovered a powerful and original theory. In de Broglie's theory, quantum theory emerges as a special subset of a wider physics, which allows non-local signals and violation of the uncertainty principle. Experimental evidence for this new physics might be found in the cosmological-microwave-background anisotropies and with the detection of relic particles with exotic new properties predicted by the theory.

And from the above, ET-like new physics capabilities:

Subquantum Information and Computation by Antony Valentini
(Submitted on 11 Mar 2002 (v1), last revised 12 Apr 2002 (this version, v2))

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0203049v2

It is argued that immense physical resources - for nonlocal communication, espionage, and exponentially-fast computation - are hidden from us by quantum noise, and that this noise is not fundamental but merely a property of an equilibrium state in which the universe happens to be at the present time. It is suggested that 'non-quantum' or nonequilibrium matter might exist today in the form of relic particles from the early universe. We describe how such matter could be detected and put to practical use. Nonequilibrium matter could be used to send instantaneous signals, to violate the uncertainty principle, to distinguish non-orthogonal quantum states without disturbing them, to eavesdrop on quantum key distribution, and to outpace quantum computation (solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time).
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:40 pm

Daz and AD, et al:

The latest tests of quantum non-locality have been reported by PhysOrg here:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-phy ... alism.html


By showing that local realism can be violated even when the locality and freedom-of-choice loopholes are closed, the experiment greatly reduces the number of “hidden variable theories” that might explain the correlations while obeying local realism. Further, these theories appear to be beyond the possibility of experimental testing, since they propose such things as allowing actions into the past or assuming a common cause for all events.
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Access Denied » Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:22 am

Interesting…

dan wrote:He [Ron] said that he took upon himself an in-depth investigation of what appeared to the best Stargate/RV cases, e.g. the the Gen Dosier(?) case in Italy, and the missing plane in the African jungle. In both cases there was success, but the successes came about by conventional means, and only after the fact did the psychic-teams take credit, unbeknownst to the folks on the ground. That is until Ron when back to interview them. They were less than amused.

I believe this has been suggested for other alleged “hits” as well.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Re: Scientific Evidence for PSI?

Postby Gary » Wed Dec 08, 2010 4:11 am

Image
Gary
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:28 am

PreviousNext

Google

Return to PSI / Mind Control

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron