N/A (naturalreason) wrote in nonmundanes,
N/A
naturalreason
nonmundanes

Psi?

X-posted from my personal blog.
The passing of Francis Crick is a major loss to science. I find it interesting that in the long run he went from studying DNA and biochemistry to studying the brain, mind, and soul. I am sometimes tempted to make a similar transition, but with slightly different emphasis. In the course of reading on the subject, I have come to accept the existence of psi abilities in humans (and potentially other animals). The data, both anecdotal and statistical, is compelling. In tests of prediction, humans consistently perform slightly (a few percent) better than chance would predict, and this is even true when huge amounts of data are collected. There are many stories, such as those collected by Louisa E. Rhine in the mid-20th century, of phenomena inexplicable by current theories. In my eyes, this sort of data, compounded with vast archives of similar data, presents very solid proof that current theories about the world have flaws.

Quite clearly, the mind is able to affect objects at a distance or predict (sometimes) occurrences that are totally random. What this means is that the mind has a component that uses an unknown aspect of physics. By describing this component over time, it should be possible to deduce the manner in which it changes and describes the world. This would lead to new laws of physics and science.

There are a number of very interesting observations made. The most noticeable is a decline in better-than-chance results over the course of a series of trials for precognition or micro-psychokinetic ability (changing the probability of random events happening). This was noted by Dr. Rhine (husband to the Louisa E. Rhine from above) and many early researchers. There is also a corresponding increase in performance when a subject knows a trial is just about to cease. Also notable is the observation that young children tend to perform at a level above that of adults in psi testing.\

There is also evidence that neither the distance over which psi is applied nor time (before or after) difference significantly effects results.

What conclusions can be drawn from this information is beyond me, but it did seem somehow significant. To me, one thing seems clear: we're dealing with something unexplained by science.
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 0 comments