Every minute or so, a random generator “decides” which of the two kinds of images will be shown, and the computer then displays it. Needless to say, the physiological reaction of the subject will depend on the quality of the image shown, with a rather flat reaction to neutral images, and a sharp peak for shocking ones. Nothing surprising here. But what is surprising, and very exciting, is that the person’s physiology reacts differentially to these two kinds of images even before they are seen. A future violent image somehow “pre-triggers” a spike similar to (though smaller than) what we see following exposure to that image ; by contrast, the body’s “pre-reaction” is quite flat, when the future image turns out to be neutral. It is as if, at some deep, unconscious level, the person “knows”, beforehand, whether or not the upcoming experience will be disturbing.
Precognition is the supposed ability to predict or perceive future events before they occur. It is often linked to extrasensory perception (ESP) and is considered a psychic phenomenon.
There is currently no scientific evidence that supports the existence of precognition. Many studies have been conducted, but the results have been inconclusive and often attributed to chance or other factors.
Neuroscience is the scientific study of the nervous system and how it relates to behavior, cognition, and emotion. It does not directly relate to precognition as it is not considered a scientifically proven phenomenon.
No, current scientific theories and models do not support the concept of precognition. The idea of predicting future events before they occur goes against the laws of physics and the understanding of time as a linear concept.
Believing in precognition can potentially lead to confirmation bias, where individuals only remember and focus on events that support their belief. It can also lead to a reliance on predictions instead of taking action and making decisions based on rational thinking and evidence.