I was watching a weird program (on the Science Channel this time) in which the claim was made that significantly beyond expected measurements (roughly, half low and half high, I suppose expected) of "skin induction" (what it sounded like) of subjects prior to their being shown random pictures coincided with the nature of the upcoming pictures. When skin induction was low, the pictures which did come up were "calm pictures"; when skin induction was high, the pictures which did come up were "emotional pictures." Then, the explanation was scientifically theorized (ahem) that since time can work symmetrically before and after an event, this is a possible relevant factor of the human ability to predict events. Never mind what you make of the science, whether or not you can understand/digest it, what other explanation can you come up with for a measureable ability significantly beyond that expected, given random events, to predict the nature of two differing events?
GarColga: Obviously, the program did not supply enough information to fully understand and fairly judge the example given. I especially disliked that info was omitted on how far from typical the predictions had to be before being considered to be statistically significant. So let's make up our own example.
We know that a fair coin when tossed 100 times will come up (in enough trials of 100 tosses each) on average 50 times heads and 50 times tails, or 50% of the time heads and 50% of the time tails. The first question is whether a person would typically correctly predict what the toss will yield--a head or a tail--50% of the time. We would have to try this to see what we can do. Maybe we are so lacking in predicting ability that we predict only 20% of the time. Nevertheless, assuming that we can typically predict the correct outcome of each toss of a fair coin, regardless of head or tail, 50% of the time, my question is what would cause a person to correctly predict more often, say 75% of the time? Or, more concretely (less abstractly), regardless of heads or tails on a fair coin, say A correctly predicts 52 tosses, but B correctly predicts 74 tosses? What would cause B's ability to predict to be better than A's?
Maybe we should first try tossing a coin 100 times to determine what is average, and honestly, if anyone can do better than the rest of us, the rest of us would surely like to know what is causing that person's greater ability so that we can tap that person for lotto, ponies, and the like. I think that such an ability does not even exist!
what other explanation can you come up with for a measurable ability significantly beyond that expected
tsaeb, given the nature of the subject, and applying the principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, I would answer that there's a good chance it's a hoax. Somebody's cheating. An insider signaling the subject, perhaps. Or the subject secretly peeking in advance. Such things happen commonly. That's why testing such claims usually requires consultation with a magician -- someone well-versed in all forms of trickery.
James Randi is confident that nobody will claim his $1M prize for demonstrating paranormal phenomena, because he can set the appropriate controls on the experiment. I would suggest that the producers of the tv show in question failed to do so. (Johnny Carson consulted with Randi to famously foil 'psychic' Uri Geller when he appeared on his show in the 1970s.) Indeed the producers might have been in on the set-up. Whatever sells the sponsors' products!
As for the explanation that 'time works symmetrically': Another case of scientific terminology being abused for illicit purposes. The interactions of elementary particles are time-symmetric; macroscopic phenomena are not. Guessing pictures is in the latter category. It's believed that the 'arrow of time' arises from the second law of thermodynamics -- time runs toward maximum entropy. You can't know the future outcome of a random event for fundamentally the same reason that you can't unscramble an egg.
Posts: 1976 | Location: U.S. | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by Professor: extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof
You identified what I have to come up with--extraordinary proof--to make my first million.
it's a hoax. Somebody's cheating. An insider signaling the subject, perhaps. Or the subject secretly peeking in advance. Such things happen commonly. That's why testing such claims usually requires consultation with a magician -- someone well-versed in all forms of trickery.
It's a lot hairier than you say. After all, anyone can be unintentionally signaling.
James Randi is confident that nobody will claim his $1M prize for demonstrating paranormal phenomena, because he can set the appropriate controls on the experiment.
I already succumbed to such an experiment. When I had my prophecy website listed on the dmoz directory, human intervention cast my abilities more in the occult category than in the religion category. When I complained that I was being cast as a false prophetess, my website was kicked out of the directory. Since the effects were lingering in the search engines (I was listed with tarot cards, crystal balls, whatever), I had to "Holy Spirit" tone up my website, and only recently did I begin to "Holy Spirit" tone down my website. In time I may apply to the dmoz directory again, but we know that I would likely be watered down to "mystic" or the like by Randi.
As for the explanation that 'time works symmetrically': Another case of scientific terminology being abused for illicit purposes. The interactions of elementary particles are time-symmetric; macroscopic phenomena are not. Guessing pictures is in the latter category. It's believed that the 'arrow of time' arises from the second law of thermodynamics -- time runs toward maximum entropy. You can't know the future outcome of a random event for fundamentally the same reason that you can't unscramble an egg.
While I didn't quite understand you, I thought that there is a difference in the macro phenomenon due to what Einstein said about a space-time curvature or distortion creeping in.
Originally posted by Elexina: Actually, a quarter will come up tails more often than 50%. A "fair coin" that is the same on both sides is more likely to be 50-50.
I still don't see what you're asking, though.
I'll try again. Can we name any cause of such an extraordinary ability as predicting the future?
Elexina: I must have missed the fact that some ascribe the word "deity" to other than God--the one with the capital "G."
Although we know which believers would call this blasphemy, I wonder if God would agree on the blasphemy. You probably wonder whether the goddess would agree on the blasphemy.
Originally posted by tsaeb: Elexina: I must have missed the fact that some ascribe the word "deity" to other than God--the one with the capital "G."
Many people believe in deities other than your Christian God. Some people believe in Zeus and Isis, they are certainly deities -historically and religiously.
quote:
You probably wonder whether the goddess would agree on the blasphemy.
No, actually, I don't.
Posts: 4497 | Location: Rochester, NY, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
AnswerPool.com 
