Collcetive consciousness and collective pray(for Sceptic,Ivan and others)

In summary, the Global Consciousness Project found that when people pray for peace, the number of heads on a machine that generates random numbers tends to increase. This effect has been seen 20 times in the experiment so far. Some people think this proves that global consciousness exists, while others think it's just a coincidence. There is no way to know for sure.
  • #1
No-where-man
191
0
1.I don't know if you have heard about this,but scientists supposedly tested thousand people who prayed in church for minimizing crime in Detroit(I think it was Detroit or some other city).The supposed result was that has been minimized for about 20% to 52% in each part of the city.
Does this prove that collective consciousness exist?
Does pray help at all to minimize crime or for getting better in job or does praying help for better health?
Any thoughts?
It's all here on this website:
http://npri.co.uk/Global-Consciousness-Project.htm [Broken]

2.Also,do you remember when terrorists who smashed Twin Towers in 2001?
And the Gulf War in Iraq?
Scientists(Roger Nelson and the likes) have said they have put 37 EGG computers in 37 countries around the entire world,so they can,if they can measure effects of,for humans,positive and negative events.What they have supposedly discovered is that whenever some catastrophic event(for humans) happened they have detected regularity:For example,when the Gulf war happened,scientists have detected hours earlier some regularity on the computer,as well it needed a few hours later to disappear.

3.Also,in this text(http://npri.co.uk/Global-Consciousness-Project.htm [Broken]) says that during the late 1970s, Prof Jahn decided to investigate whether the power of human thought alone could interfere in some way with the machine's usual readings. He hauled strangers off the street and asked them to concentrate their minds on his number generator. In effect, he was asking them to try to make it flip more heads than tails.

It was a preposterous idea at the time. The results, however, were stunning and have never been satisfactorily explained.
Again and again, entirely ordinary people proved that their minds could influence the machine and produce significant fluctuations on the graph, 'forcing it' to produce unequal numbers of 'heads' or 'tails'.
According to all of the known laws of science, this should not have happened - but it did. And it kept on happening.

Like I already said it has been told right here on this website:
http://npri.co.uk/Global-Consciousness-Project.htm [Broken]

Does this mean global consciousness exist?
Is there any way to prove these quasi-scientists that they are completely wrong and that they have understood these esperiments?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I made a small simulation with 10000 tosses. I attributed the values +1 to heads and -1 to tails and added the successive tosses.
If we had equal number of heads and tails, the result would be zero and hence a straight line.
The graph attached shows that we have initially (first 1700 tosses) many more tails than heads and the graph goes negative. Then the graph turns mostly positive until about the 9700st toss, with only very brief negative values. After that the graph turns negative.
I sware I didn't pray for this result and nothing catastrophic happened.
If instead of 10000 I used 10 billion tosses, the shape of the curve would not be very different.
 

Attachments

  • coin.jpg
    coin.jpg
    45.7 KB · Views: 417
  • #3
SGT,
Read anything about Chaos Theory, and if so, don't you suspect Chaos dynamics at work in your experimental results?
 
  • #4
zoobyshoe said:
SGT,
Read anything about Chaos Theory, and if so, don't you suspect Chaos dynamics at work in your experimental results?
Not at all! The results are totally compatible with the theory of random processes. What statistics say is that in the long run the number of heads and tails must be equal. Each time my graph crosses zero, this means that the numbers turned equal. This has happened about 20 times in my experiment. What the theory does not say is that in each time interval it must happen. for instance, between around the 1700th and the 5800th toss we had more heads than tails, but finally the things evened out.
What I am saying is that the experimenters of the Global Consciousness Project are misinterpreting the pseudo anomalies they found, either by ignorance of the laws of statistics or by deliberately cheating.
 
  • #5
SGT, you may well be right about the GCP, but you are making accusations with nothing to back them up.
 
  • #6
http://www.detnews.com/2003/metro/0312/17/b01-10366.htm [Broken]

They have prayed for peace for decades here. It has not worked.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #7
Heres an an article about 'retroactive prayer':

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/327/7429/1465

Conclusion

Questions raised by intercessory prayer and distant healing are far reaching, challenging basic assumptions about the nature of consciousness, space, time, and causality. Many consider these issues vexing and simply ignore them. But, if distant effects of consciousness are real, they will not cease to exist; these effects will operate in the background of our lives and, quite possibly, in our experiments. Others dismiss these events as trivial or irrelevant to the mission of healthcare professionals.

Conversely, non-local expressions of consciousness may be crucial in relieving human pain, medical science will be enriched by coming to terms with these phenomena, and an understanding of our place in the world will be increased in the process. We could achieve these advances by applying rigorous standards of empirical research that have consistently guided medicine through treacherous waters, including assessment of seemingly counterintuitive assertions. This is science doing its job.

Rather than dismissing studies of prayer because they do not make sense or confirm our existing knowledge, we should consider them seriously exactly for this reason. In the history of science, findings that do not fit in often yield the most profound breakthroughs.
 
  • #10
Ivan Seeking said:
SGT, you may well be right about the GCP, but you are making accusations with nothing to back them up.

Ivan and others,what are your opinions on this?
My opinion on this is simple-there is no glbal consciousness,you ALL FORGOT THAT THIS ONLY ELECTRONICS,what about magnetic storms from the sun,they could easily shut down all electronic systems in the world.Also,these EGG computers prove that there was only disturbance inside Earth's electromagnetic field(which happens all the time,but many of them are of so small and weak intensity that they are undetectable),so the Gulf War,attack on the World Trade center and all others,are only a slight disturbances of Earth's electromagnetic fields.
 
  • #11
No-where-man said:
Ivan and others,what are your opinions on this?
My opinion on this is simple-there is no glbal consciousness,you ALL FORGOT THAT THIS ONLY ELECTRONICS,what about magnetic storms from the sun,they could easily shut down all electronic systems in the world.Also,these EGG computers prove that there was only disturbance inside Earth's electromagnetic field(which happens all the time,but many of them are of so small and weak intensity that they are undetectable),so the Gulf War,attack on the World Trade center and all others,are only a slight disturbances of Earth's electromagnetic fields.
Not even that! Long sequences of more heads than tails or vice-versa happen all the time. In my small experiment with only 10000 tosses I found one period where there were 60 more heads than tails. In longer experiments we will find even bigger sequences all the time.
In the other way, catastrophes or death of famous people also happen all the time. Finding a correlation between a pseudo-anomaly in random numbers and an important event is easy, meanly if the time lag between the two events is unspecified.
A good question would be how many times the supposedly anomalous sequences happened without any significant world event ensuing and how many of those events didn't follow an anomaly?
 
  • #12
The ppl at Global Consciousness Project can of course mess around with statistics.
And so can opponents.

Who is right?

I don't know, but i have some faith in scientists doing their work objectively and do not assume they are frauds when the results are weird.
For now, i give them (aswell as PEAR)the benefit of the doubt and will wait anxiously for any publications.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
SGT said:
Not even that! Long sequences of more heads than tails or vice-versa happen all the time. In my small experiment with only 10000 tosses I found one period where there were 60 more heads than tails. In longer experiments we will find even bigger sequences all the time.
In the other way, catastrophes or death of famous people also happen all the time. Finding a correlation between a pseudo-anomaly in random numbers and an important event is easy, meanly if the time lag between the two events is unspecified.
A good question would be how many times the supposedly anomalous sequences happened without any significant world event ensuing and how many of those events didn't follow an anomaly?

So,what does it specifically mean,what would be your explanation of these events recorded on these 40 EGG supercomputers if there is any since you're an scientist-it's good to have you on these boards.
 
  • #14
SGT said:
Not even that! Long sequences of more heads than tails or vice-versa happen all the time. In my small experiment with only 10000 tosses I found one period where there were 60 more heads than tails. In longer experiments we will find even bigger sequences all the time.
In the other way, catastrophes or death of famous people also happen all the time. Finding a correlation between a pseudo-anomaly in random numbers and an important event is easy, meanly if the time lag between the two events is unspecified.
A good question would be how many times the supposedly anomalous sequences happened without any significant world event ensuing and how many of those events didn't follow an anomaly?

Also,do you think that collective pray helps at all?Like it was descibed that it helps in decreasing the crime(it was in an experiment where 1000 people prayed for crime decrease,and it supposedly work,about 20%-52% crime has decreased(I don't know if this was in Detroit or in an other city).
 
  • #15
Coooooooool.
 
  • #16
No-where-man said:
Ivan and others,what are your opinions on this?

Well, if I had a complete understanding of, the experiment, the analysis used, and all possible interpretations of the results, then I would have an opinion.
What I think is dangerous is to form opinions based on either claims made by the proponents, or claims made by internet debunkers. If we had five or six dispassionate experts on statistical analysis who were willing to discuss all of this in detail, that would be another thing altogether. :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #17
No-where-man said:
Also,do you think that collective pray helps at all?Like it was descibed that it helps in decreasing the crime(it was in an experiment where 1000 people prayed for crime decrease,and it supposedly work,about 20%-52% crime has decreased(I don't know if this was in Detroit or in an other city).
Read the post from hypatia!
 
  • #18
No-where-man said:
So,what does it specifically mean,what would be your explanation of these events recorded on these 40 EGG supercomputers if there is any since you're an scientist-it's good to have you on these boards.
Do they have a list of all the anomalous events with their times of occurrence? How many of those don't correlate with a worldwide catastrophe?
Do they have a list of all worldwide catastrophes: earthquakes, floods terrorist attacks? Do all those events correspond to anomalous series of random numbers?
If the answer of those two questions is yes we can say that there is a correlation between the two sets of events. This would be a very interesting fact, but we must realize that correlation does not mean causation.
 
  • #19
I *do* know for a fact that when that "false alarm" missile strike in Iran happened there was NOTHING on my GCP monitors at home. I happened to have them on while I was listening to the news.

Granted it wasn't a "real" event, but for a few dreadful moments, I'm sure tens of thousands of people all over the world thought it was. And if level of psychic excitement (or whatever) is postulated to be the parameter that the GCP is supposedly responding to, then the meters should've spiked. But they didn't.

Personally, I think this sort of thing is a load of codswallop. Statistics is a dangerous tool if not applied with strict discipline. Look for something hard enough, and you're sure to get an effect, albeit a spurious one.
 
  • #20
SGT said:
Do they have a list of all the anomalous events with their times of occurrence? How many of those don't correlate with a worldwide catastrophe?
Do they have a list of all worldwide catastrophes: earthquakes, floods terrorist attacks? Do all those events correspond to anomalous series of random numbers?
If the answer of those two questions is yes we can say that there is a correlation between the two sets of events. This would be a very interesting fact, but we must realize that correlation does not mean causation.

Yes,but my opinion still that it has with electrical,magnetic or electromagnetic fields.My argument would be this.Earth,for example is full of electrical fields,electircal energies and is sorrunded by EM(electromagnetic field),now whatever happens inside this field(or anything that penetrates this field) could disturb and debalance this electrical field(or any other form of field),and supercomputers(but not always) would be able to recognize it and detect it(of course if intensity of an let's say explosion is to small that even supercomputers wouldn't be able to detect it).This includes every event you can imagine,at least on Earth...
 
  • #21
No-where-man said:
Yes,but my opinion still that it has with electrical,magnetic or electromagnetic fields.My argument would be this.Earth,for example is full of electrical fields,electircal energies and is sorrunded by EM(electromagnetic field),now whatever happens inside this field(or anything that penetrates this field) could disturb and debalance this electrical field(or any other form of field),and supercomputers(but not always) would be able to recognize it and detect it(of course if intensity of an let's say explosion is to small that even supercomputers wouldn't be able to detect it).This includes every event you can imagine,at least on Earth...

Yub but the whole point of the GCP (and PEAR) is that takes these kinds of influences into account, and specifically sets up experiments to correlate the EGG behaviour with global conscious events and human intent.
 
  • #22
No-where-man said:
Yes,but my opinion still that it has with electrical,magnetic or electromagnetic fields.My argument would be this.Earth,for example is full of electrical fields,electircal energies and is sorrunded by EM(electromagnetic field),now whatever happens inside this field(or anything that penetrates this field) could disturb and debalance this electrical field(or any other form of field),and supercomputers(but not always) would be able to recognize it and detect it(of course if intensity of an let's say explosion is to small that even supercomputers wouldn't be able to detect it).This includes every event you can imagine,at least on Earth...
Pseudorandom numbers generation in computers rely on a mathematic algorithm. It is not believable that fields of any kind could alter an algorithm.
Of course, a strong disturbance could change the value of a bit in one of the generated numbers and, by consequence, all of the following numbers. But those numbers would still follow the algorithm and should have zero mean in the long run.
I stay with my hypothesis: there are no anomalies in the series of generated numbers, except what researchers want to find. This is the fallacy known as confirmation bias.
 
  • #23
PIT2 said:
Yub but the whole point of the GCP (and PEAR) is that takes these kinds of influences into account, and specifically sets up experiments to correlate the EGG behaviour with global conscious events and human intent.
See my answer to No-where-man. If it is unbelievable that electromagnetic fields can alter an algorithm, it is still more unbelievable that human intent could do it.
 
  • #24
SGT said:
See my answer to No-where-man. If it is unbelievable that electromagnetic fields can alter an algorithm, it is still more unbelievable that human intent could do it.

Coooooool,than electormagnetic fields' theory fails here.
 
  • #25
SGT said:
See my answer to No-where-man. If it is unbelievable that electromagnetic fields can alter an algorithm, it is still more unbelievable that human intent could do it.

Whereever did i say it was unbelievable?
I merely said that the GCP takes these kinds of factors into account.
Are u stating that it is impossible to do this?

Oh and btw, the moment u start talking about the unlikelyhood of human intent doing anything, u should supply us with an explanation for (the illusion of) free will.
 
Last edited:
  • #26
PIT2 said:
Whereever did i say it was unbelievable?
I merely said that the GCP takes these kinds of factors into account.
Are u stating that it is impossible to do this?

Oh and btw, the moment u start talking about the unlikelyhood of human intent doing anything, u should supply us with an explanation for (the illusion of) free will.
You didn't, I did. There is no theory capable of explaining the interference of electromagnetic fields on mathematical algorithms and none explaining the interference of human thought.
What has free will to do with the ability of human beings to interfere with matter at distance? Can you elaborate on this?
 
  • #27
SGT said:
What has free will to do with the ability of human beings to interfere with matter at distance? Can you elaborate on this?

U can ask urself how the 'will' can influence matter even if it is inside ur own body. What does it matter if the distance is a nanometer, a meter, or a kilometer?

Yes, it does make some kind of difference, because else we would all be using telekinetic powers to zap the TV on, but at its very base, the principle remains the same. The free will (if it exists) affects matter at a distance(however small the distance may be)and somehow it reaches the right places(in the brain).
 
Last edited:
  • #28
The prayer studies were flawed.

For example, one set of studies shows that being in a religious group gives you an edge on living to a ripe old age. You are more likely to survive illness, and so on.

Although subjects were paired for age, type of disease and so on - the conclusion that religion is good for your health ... is not justified. Another possible explanation is that being in a support group (not necessarily religion, but religion qualifies) is what is good for your health. Being a member of a golf club, for example, may confer the same benefits as being involved in religion. The importance of support to wellness in older age has been shown time and again.

There were other problems with other prayer studies, and most (if not all) have been retracted. In my understanding.
 
  • #29
PIT2 said:
U can ask urself how the 'will' can influence matter even if it is inside ur own body. What does it matter if the distance is a nanometer, a meter, or a kilometer?

Yes, it does make some kind of difference, because else we would all be using telekinetic powers to zap the TV on, but at its very base, the principle remains the same. The free will (if it exists) affects matter at a distance(however small the distance may be)and somehow it reaches the right places(in the brain).
You are kidding aren't you? The effects inside the body are explained by electrochemical reactions. And those reactions have nothing to do with free will. Your heart pumps the blood, your lungs absorb air, exchange CO2 with O2 and expel the residue, your kidneys, intestines etc all work independent of your free will.
But relate this to the influence upon an algorithm that runs in a computer several thousand kilometers away is just silly.
 
  • #30
SGT said:
You are kidding aren't you? The effects inside the body are explained by electrochemical reactions. And those reactions have nothing to do with free will. Your heart pumps the blood, your lungs absorb air, exchange CO2 with O2 and expel the residue, your kidneys, intestines etc all work independent of your free will.
But relate this to the influence upon an algorithm that runs in a computer several thousand kilometers away is just silly.

Now u must be joking. Noone has ever explained free will (nor consciousness) through electrochemical reactions. In fact, according to the known laws that govern such reactions, there is no free will.

U mention the lungs absorbing air. Can u not choose to breathe in deeper, or hold ur breath?

Now u can state that this choice is an illusion, but u end up with an equally tricky thing to explain then: consciousness.
 
  • #31
PIT2 said:
Now u must be joking. Noone has ever explained free will (nor consciousness) through electrochemical reactions. In fact, according to the known laws that govern such reactions, there is no free will.

U mention the lungs absorbing air. Can u not choose to breathe in deeper, or hold ur breath?

Now u can state that this choice is an illusion, but u end up with an equally tricky thing to explain then: consciousness.
Every nervous impulse in the body is originated by electrochemical reactions. And those are limited to the interior of the organism. They cannot affect anything at a distance of a few centimeters, even less hundreds of kilometers. EEG and ECG are done with sensors attached to the skin and not at any distance away.
The existence or not of free will is totally irrelevant to the discussion. Human mind cannot act at any distance from the body.
 
  • #32
SGT said:
Every nervous impulse in the body is originated by electrochemical reactions.

Not if free will exists.
 
  • #33
PIT2 said:
Not if free will exists.
May be I am a little obtuse. Can you explain why free will is independent of human physiology?
 
  • #34
SGT said:
May be I am a little obtuse. Can you explain why free will is independent of human physiology?

U said that "every nervous impulse in the body is originated by electrochemical reactions". If free will exists, then it would be the origin of those electrochemical reactions.

I hope were not going too much offtopic here.
But what i was trying to say with the free will argument, is that it apparently reaches certain parts of the brain and causes neurons in different places to fire. However this 'intent' propagates itself along these small distances(even within neurons or between atoms), it may be similar to what the GCP/PEAR is trying to demonstrate.
 
  • #35
PIT2 said:
U said that "every nervous impulse in the body is originated by electrochemical reactions". If free will exists, then it would be the origin of those electrochemical reactions.

I hope were not going too much offtopic here.
But what i was trying to say with the free will argument, is that it apparently reaches certain parts of the brain and causes neurons in different places to fire. However this 'intent' propagates itself along these small distances(even within neurons or between atoms), it may be similar to what the GCP/PEAR is trying to demonstrate.
I would say that the origin of those electrochemical reactions are stimuli and not free will.
To extrapolate that phenomena acting through interatomic distances should also act through hundreds of kilometers is to stretch (no pun intended) the reasoning somewhat.
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
7
Replies
222
Views
31K
  • General Discussion
Replies
29
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
59
Views
9K
Replies
27
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
25K
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top