Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Feeling the future

  1. May 16, 2007 #1
  2. jcsd
  3. May 17, 2007 #2

    honestrosewater

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Haha, while I was reading the story, I thought of Minority Report for some reason, I saw some images of it in my head, and a couple minutes later, it was mentioned in the story. :uhh: I don't think it was a short enough time for the words to have been on the page already, but I wasn't paying enough attention. Anyway, that leads nicely to my first reaction...

    Who says that a mechanism for people to predict the future doesn't already exist? People predict the future all the time, e.g., when they step out of the way of a falling object (by predicting its future path). Could these things, or at least some of them, be people simply deriving the future, or a possible future, from past experiences rather than somehow receiving information from the future? It seems to me that our brains can do an awful lot of computing without us, and perhaps these vague feelings are just subconscious theoretical predictions. No?
     
  4. May 17, 2007 #3
    I agree. I am just really excited that they had found some proof. Maybe more testing and more experimenting and you will maybe someone will begin to understand the future and not just react to it subconsciously .
     
  5. May 17, 2007 #4

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Not proof until duplicated many times by other scientists and peer reviewed.

    ...not to mention the fact that a little more skepticism might be in order when the source is called "smellybean" and offers a "fart button" on the page.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2007
  6. May 17, 2007 #5

    hypnagogue

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It's impossible to evaluate these claims without taking a direct look at the research involved. I would certainly not trust claims made in a news article like this-- I don't trust claims put forth in news articles even when they're talking about tapioca science. It seems like each of the phenomena mentioned in the article that are supposed to evidence information coming from the future are open to viable alternative explanations that do not posit information flowing backwards in time, though the skeletal claims made in the article are really not substantive enough on their own to support substantive discussion.
     
  7. May 17, 2007 #6

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Much of the article is about conspiracy theory and at least one line is "plagarized" from conspiracy theory sites (in quotes because most share the exact same text without citations - that's the nature of the business). I'm not inclined to accept much of the article as having any merit, but if the test and results are as straightforward as they say, there should be no reason why they couldn't publish them for real instead of submitting them to a newspaper. That also makes me skeptical.

    And apro pos...I'm getting a feeling of deja vu about this article...
     
  8. May 17, 2007 #7

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Two completely different things. The idea of predicting the future based on the past is completely different from predicting the future without any past data for building the predictive model.
     
  9. May 17, 2007 #8
  10. May 17, 2007 #9

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    In order to do that you have to press the fart button.
     
  11. May 17, 2007 #10

    honestrosewater

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Right. I wasn't agreeing with their interpretation. I was offering an alternative that I found much more plausible: "simply deriving the future, or a possible future, from past experiences".
     
  12. May 20, 2007 #11

    Q_Goest

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Being skeptical of a sensationalized article is the right reaction, but it's easy enough to google for the references. I haven't read these two through, but they seem legit.
    http://cognet.mit.edu/posters/TUCSON3/BiermanRadin.html
    http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/pdfs/presentiment.pdf

    Other references are given in those papers, including this one (probably one of the references the SmellyBean article would have picked up on):
    Bierman, D. J. & Radin, D. I. (1997). Anomalous anticipatory responce on randomized future conditions. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 689-690
    Don't know if that's the right link, but you can try Google scholar and find other links here:
    http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...se+on+randomized+future+conditions"&hl=en&lr=

    There seems to be a handful of articles that have been published on the phenomena of "anticipatory responce". Personally, I'm not too interested in debating them on either side, but I'd be interested in seeing what others might think.
     
  13. May 20, 2007 #12

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Oh geeze, if Dean Radin is involved, the results are more than likely skewed.
     
  14. May 20, 2007 #13

    Q_Goest

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I've never heard of Dean Radin, but apparantly he's got quite a reputation, as does the university he works at.

    Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Radin

    Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Noetic_Sciences

    And this article certainly throws some mud on his name:
    http://skepdic.com/essays/radin.html
     
  15. May 20, 2007 #14

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

  16. May 21, 2007 #15
    you often see these sort of empty attacks against Radin- yet the man's work has been published and reviewed in the likes of Nature/ Science/ Phys Review

    http://www.deanradin.com/NewWeb/EMbiblio.html

    it just goes to show you that regardless of peer reviewed experiments and a mountain of evidence published in the most respected scientific journals on earth- this sort of research is still ignored and disrespected simply because the subject makes some uncomfortable- mostly because 'psi' challenges some trivial concepts in classical Newtonian/ Cartesian notions of the universe- but we DO NOT LIVE in a classical universe [and even if we did- there is no working classical physical theory which works at the quantum-scale domain of electrochemical reactions in neurons anyway!]- we live in a quantum mechanical universe in which parallel quantum states interfere and histories/futures exist in probabilistic superpositions where observers affect what is observed- processes like 'psi' then are not only unproblematic- but such phenomena can actually be predicted when observers are rightly treated as part of a quantum system-
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2007
  17. May 21, 2007 #16

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Yeah, he got raked over the coals in a review of one of his nonsense books, the criticism of his book is what appeared in Nature. :rolleyes:

    http://members.cruzio.com/~quanta/review.html
     
  18. May 21, 2007 #17
    I'm assuming, ofcourse, that they are speaking of the red fart button.



    And he has concluded somehow that experience has nothing to do with this survival?

    The whole experiment with measuring electrical current on the skin to predict an image one has not yet seen sounds a bit strange to me. Has nobody tried something similar before now? It doesn't sound very complex.
     
  19. May 21, 2007 #18
    I refered to the many papers of experimental data published in peer reviewed journals- not an editorial book review or other ephemera located in one of the magazines- [which was mostly ranting against a straw-man of radin's personal interpretations of that data- not the data itself- which includes well-established results such as Bell's Inequalities and the DCQE]
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2007
  20. May 21, 2007 #19

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Please post links to those Radin "peer reviewed" papers, I'd love to see them.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Feeling the future
  1. Feeling (Replies: 38)

  2. The Future (Replies: 5)

  3. The future (Replies: 3)

  4. The Future (Replies: 4)

  5. The future (Replies: 3)

Loading...