Research Suggests We Unconsciously React to Events Up to 10 Seconds Before They Happen

Some people just don't like the idea of psychic ability. Their incredulity is based on emotion. I can understand that, but honestly our psychic ability might be the key to our long-term survival as a species.

Evidence is accumulating. Soon skeptics won't have a leg to stand on. That's when we will be free to begin reaching for our psychic potential, with science as a guide instead of as an obstacle.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

These numbers are relative to the actual event ... not relative to the subject's perception. Delay needn't be factored in. And on average it takes 160-200 milliseconds for a person to physically respond to auditory and/or visual stimuli so the delay wouldn't even be significant if we're seeing a difference of 1-10 seconds.

a reply to: BlueMule

How have you tied your magical beliefs in psychic abilities to the OP?

a reply to: LeviWardrobe

But it's not just sight that we have to worry about. Sound travels at a MUCH slower speed than light does and the body needs to sync up sight with sound as well.

Like I said I've read about this before.

serendip.brynmawr.edu...

a reply to: purplemer

Very cool. Like it. No doubt in my mind either.

F&S&

Research Suggests We Unconsciously React to Events Up to 10 Seconds Before They Happen

What is missing from this title? The word Credible.

If the title read: Credible Research Suggests We Unconsciously React to Events Up to 10 Seconds Before They Happen

I read the article and saw nothing credible about it.

Like the poster said above, if this were true, then we would not have traffic accidents...or any accidents for that matter.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
I get what you're saying, but you're not understanding me. The physiological changes that they measure are happening before the future event happened. It doesn't matter how fast or slow light or sound is. The response comes before the event actually happens. And again, any delay in human or instrument perception is very insignificant. We react to visual and auditory stimuli in roughly 200 milliseconds, and instruments would react in microseconds. So just get it clear that any delay is insignificant. A delay of .2 seconds does not explain foreknowledge of event 1, 2, 5, or 10 seconds before the event even happened.

As far as educated guessing, that's impossible. In these tests the stimuli was random. That is the whole point of random. There is no discernible pattern. No amount of time spent observing the stimuli will enlighten you to the likelihood of any future stimuli.

I have thought for awhile that 'now' the moment we live in is not actually in real time.

I once poured a kettle of boiling water over my hand but as it happened I had a very weird sensation of feeling the pain as I watched the water pouring towards my hand. I knew it was hurting even though there seemed to be time to move my hand away. The two events did not match up properly and the only way I could explain it to myself was to accept that the scald had happened before my brain processed the visuals.

This research would support the idea that 'now' is happening up to ten seconds ahead of our awareness and this is why we have 'accidents' which we can't believe or understand. Why didn't we see that car or why didn't we move when we had the chance? Because it had already happened but we had to wait to perceive it.

a reply to: LeatherNLace

You must've not read the whole article. The response is unconscious. This isn't precognition, because we aren't cognisant of it.They make that very clear. It is a basal, primal, physiological response.

originally posted by: SaturnFX
I think if this was true, there would be no such thing as car accidents.

This is exactly why I have avoided so many car accidents (accidents that would have been caused by others) while riding my motorcycle. I very often sense when others will put me in harm, and can detect accidents before they happen.

The real problem is reacting correctly to the stimuli. You can know an accident is about to happen, but it all comes down to making the right decision when trying to avoid it. Most people just make the wrong decisions and end up crashing anyway. That is, of course, if they don't ignore the stimuli they received by the subconscious.

A lot of people are able to control and or sense their own subconscious, which is what makes precognition possible.

I think that what a lot of the posters here don't understand is that these are things that are being registered on a biological and subconscious level. If it's not registering on a conscious level you're not gonna avoid "a car accident." If it were scientifically untrue don't you think that one of the science experts here would claim that it was false? There's dead silence.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: BlueMule

How have you tied your magical beliefs in psychic abilities to the OP?

I take it you're someone who doesn't like the idea of "magical" psychic abilities. Well to each their own I guess.

Presentiment is a psychic ability, and it's what the op is all about.

www.cornel1801.com...

a reply to: purplemer

I tend to agree with this. I don't know how many times I've just been driving along and suddenly I'll get an idea - "hey you should watch out for cyclists" and a little way down the road around a blind turn - a cyclist in the middle of the road...always. I've avoided a bunch of accidents that way too. The little tickle in your brain that that car's going to switch lanes without signalling and cut you off or that one's going to blow through the stop sign. Good for driving but I want a couple of hours warning for the lottery...now that would be super helpful.

a reply to: brazenalderpadrescorpio

You must understand that it is indeed possible for our unconscious mind / subconscious to exert an impact on our behavior.

This basically means that we've swam these waters before. Perhaps time flows both ways.
-Also backed up by people getting "funny feelings" before a loved one dies.
-Throw the strange coincidences that happen to twins sometimes, and also deja-vu..

Mind # of the day, s&f

a reply to: More1ThanAny1

That's pretty much what I'm saying.

Was watching an episode of Through the Wormhole", I think it was the episode with the God Helmet though I could be wrong. But it occurred to me then that there may be a lag between reality and our perception of it. Was thinking 3-4 seconds at the time. 10 seconds seems a bit much though.

originally posted by: Terminal1
Was watching an episode of Through the Wormhole", I think it was the episode with the God Helmet though I could be wrong. But it occurred to me then that there may be a lag between reality and our perception of it. Was thinking 3-4 seconds at the time. 10 seconds seems a bit much though.

10 seconds doesn't feel like much when you routinely dream of stimulating events a month before they happen like I do.

a reply to: purplemer
This reminds me of an experimental computer program someone developed a few years back - participants were asked to guess (with two options) which 'door' had the pornographic image behind it.

More often than not, they were able to do so.

a reply to: Greven

Yeah, Stephen Colbert called it 'time-travelling porn'. Guffaw.