Horribily Interesting Measurement Qns

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the inquiry into defining physical quantities to quantify extrasensory perception (ESP), assuming its existence as a natural phenomenon. The original poster expresses skepticism about the reference book's credibility and questions the presence of strong evidence for ESP from respected investigators. Participants engage in a lighthearted critique of the topic, with some humor about the nature of psychic abilities. The conversation highlights a mix of curiosity and skepticism regarding the scientific basis of ESP. Overall, the thread reflects a blend of serious inquiry and playful banter about the legitimacy of psychic phenomena.
Delzac
Messages
389
Reaction score
0
Hi! i have a Qns, and i got it from a reference book(physic).


Many capable investigators, on the evidence, believe in the reality of extrasensory perception. Assuming that ESP is indeed a fact of nature, what physical quantity or quantities would you seek to define to describe this phenomenon quantitatively?

+ Ans is not provided by the book+

any suggestion?? ( i dun think that there is only one absolute ans to it)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What kind of kooky "Physics reference" book is this ? Show me 5 "capable", respected investigators who've produced strong evidence for ESP.
 
Everybody who believes in psychokinesis, raise my hand.
 
berkeman said:
Everybody who believes in psychokinesis, raise my hand.

In the same vein,

(One psychic greeting another) : Hi, you're well, how am I ? :biggrin:
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

Measuring the period of SHM using sound
Replies
1
Views
1K
B Understanding Quantum: The Particle/Number Duality
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Can the "measurement problem" just be an "epistemological ambiguity"?
Replies
15
Views
2K
B Quantum entanglement and hidden variables
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Could Two-Dimensional Physics Offer New Insights into Our Reality?
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Mean values of observables
Replies
2
Views
944
I Human eyes can detect single photons?
Replies
19
Views
3K
I Has anyone measured the speed of light in one direction?
Replies
45
Views
6K
Measured vs calculated quantities
Replies
8
Views
14K
I A Question about the empirical evidence of time
Replies
28
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top