Psychic Feelings

[vernonk]

Do you believe that - maybe even have examples of - some people can somehow sense what you're thinking or feeling even if they're a long distance away and haven't seen in you in a long while?

[jim360]

Depends what you mean by Determinism. Bear in mind that "causality" lies at the heart of Physics and leads to the experimentally valid theories we have today so it's not too much of a stretch to assume that the original assumption was true.

[DTCwordfan]

I wouldn't advocate it for studying given where you are, but it's a fascinating area - and, guess what, no one's right! However, such study does help shape our own views (I am actually a Determinist when it comes to Geog/Geol/The Environment) - the study does leave you, hopefully, open to considering alternative views - yes perhaps on the fence at times, but that is the opening of the mind to consider all different dynamics to all the fields of science.

By the way, I thoroughly enjoyed Isaacson's and Neffe's bios of Einstein. His views on a stellar-god were very interesting, not one that I necessarily believe - my view being that some of the basic laws you refer to have always been there.

[Peter Pedant]

.

vernonk Carl Gustav Jung wrote a book almost about this

Synchronicity


Do not confuse with Marharishi Mahesh Jogi's ideas about synchronicity
which are wrong: Troot has synchronicity.....
No it doesnt, truth is metaphysical so has no time dimension at all.

get it and read it

[jim360]

You oughtn't really need any significantly complicated apparatus to demonstrate that someone has psychic abilities. You can read minds, you say? Then read his mind under controlled conditions. You can tell the state of health of someone you know even when they are so far away from you? Try doing it now. And so on.

So far, all such "psychic abilities on demand" experiments have drawn a blank. Why should something apparently so innate not manifest itself when tested?

The actual mechanics of psychic abilities, if confirmed, would certainly require apparatus we have not yet developed to see. But with so many reported (unverified) claims we presumably already have the ability to determine whether or not someone is psychic.

[naomi24]

The double-slit experiment springs to mind.

[jim360]

I doubt there's much you can tell me about that I don't already know.

[society]

"jim360
The actual mechanics of psychic abilities, if confirmed, would certainly require apparatus we have not yet developed to see. "

The psychic robot will be invented in time soon :)

[jomifl]

DTC, feel free to explore it but do leave a trail of breadcrumbs :-)

[naomi24]

I'm not trying to tell you anything about it. Simply saying that it came as quite an unexpected surprise to science.

[DTCwordfan]

Whilst there may be duality creeping in here, I am also pro the concept that things may not be totally physics driven, the chemical interactions coming into play particularly at sub-atomic level........

I am heading to bed now but this is a fascinating area of science and, to me, encapsulates many of the areas we are looking at in my area of specialism being more on the geographical/geological front and planetary dynamics in all its different forms, many of which are a part-mystery, even today.

[DTCwordfan]

lol jomifl, breadcrumbs or iron crumbs?

[DTCwordfan]

(That planetary dynamics being Earth processes - but with potential read across to other planets)

[Zacs-Master]

Mastermind:

John 'and your name iiiis?'
DTC 'deeteecee'
John'and your specialist subject?'
DTC 'metaphor ...metaphy....metaphyscal....oh bullocks, beer and wine'

[DTCwordfan]

please, Zacs, "sheep" - and maybe wine.

[Zacs-Master]

Night DTC. Don't have nightmares. ;-)

[jim360]

Timing is everything:

1799: Young explains his wave theory of light to the Royal Society.
1803: Young performs the experiment showing his prediction to be correct.

1905: Einstein's "quanta of light" paper produced.
1909: Experiment conducted by G.I. Taylor illustrates that even dimmed light (one photon at a time) diffracts.

1924: de Broglie's wave-particle duality paper published.
1927: G.P. Thomson demonstrates that this is correct for electrons
1961: electron double-slit experiment performed for the first time.
1999: The same again, for Buckyballs.

Not all Scientists were surprised by what they found. There was a lot of wrestling early on, yes (wave vs. particle light in the 1800s particularly). But it wasn't an "unexpected" surprise.

[naomi24]

It wasn't? That's not what I read.

Night all.

[jim360]

It depends on whom you ask, to be sure, as to whether it was a surprise. To many it probably was. But then to equally many it was not. Either way, that the experiment was performed at all shows that Scientists expected that something interesting was going to happen.

Good night!

[naomi24]

TheFamousCash, you seem to be talking about so-called 'mediums', but I don't think that's what the OP means. I'm assuming he's referring to inexplicable instinct.