The Scientific Impact of the Existence of Telepathic Power
kmhui at math.duke.edu
Sat Feb 3 09:12:21 EST 2001
My previous post missed to list some publications from Princeton PEAR Lab.
Now, I supply it in this follow up.
Richard Norman wrote:
> > But telepathy simply taps into the Universal Energy Field which
> > we already know is concentrated by pyramids and crystals.
> > (Sorry, I just couldn't help myself. Now this thread will go on
> > for another eight rounds about whether the "universal energy
> > field" is inverse-square or not!)
> A guy said you're scarcastic around. OK. Then, have you read concrete
> reports from Princeton Pear Lab about paranormal abilities?
> Try go to the web www.princeton.edu/~pear/
> and this page, www.princeton.edu/~pear/2b.html
> See how those experts earn their living by writing reports about that. By
> the way, those reports you won't be able to fully access them or by any
> public accessment. I think those may be their secrets.
I was wrong here in fact they've listed a number of publications to
some journals in this web page http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/publist.html
There're more than 50 publications. In the past, I didn't find that.
> Anyway, if you accept their theoretical models about paranormal
> activities. This is much more devastating to science.
> Let me copy a few sentences from there and comment about that.
> Rather, nothing less than a generously expanded model of reality, one that
> allows consciousness a proactive role in the establishment of its
> experience of the physical world, will be required.
> (view PDF)
> Such a model has been proposed and developed under the major premise that
> the basic processes by which consciousness exchanges information with its
> environment, orders that information, and interprets it, also enable it to
> bias probabilistic systems and thereby to avail itself of some control
> over its reality. This model regards many of the concepts of observational
> quantum mechanics, most importantly the principles of complementarity and
> wave mechanical resonance, as fundamental characteristics of
> consciousness, rather than as intrinsic features of an objective physical
> environment. In this view, the "anomalous" phenomena observed in the PEAR
> experiments become quite normal expectations of bonded human/machine and
> human/human systems, and the door is opened for all manner of creative
> consciousness/environnment interactions.
> End of Quote.
> The most devastating part of their models is they raise our physical mind
> to such a non-physical level that it is like another source of fundamental
> force of nature. In fact, it's much greater than that. It defies or
> alters the laws of physics.
> Now, the question is: Do you accept their findings with a
> pseudo-scientific explanation or if such a fact really exists then what
> compelling reasoning we must adopt in order to reconcile their findings
> with our current physical laws?
> Let me give you some more strange facts.
> In China, there are many Qi-Qong practioners can radiate intense heat from
> their palms. There are well established scientific reports about these
> facts. The lituratures are in Chinese.
> They even have already used this kind of Qi to cure some diseases or
> illness for people. This has been taken place at least for hundreds of
> years according to Chinese medical history, BUT so far no satisfactory
> scientific explanation is proposed. And needless to mention there is any
> proper scientific testing of any theory. There are lot empirical data, but
> no appealing understandable theory is made.
> Don't be narrow minded. Science is not just composed of empirical
> science only.
More information about the Neur-sci