 |
|
Topic started on 12-2-2005 @ 01:01 PM by mickmeaney
|
www.rinf.com
Can This Black Box See Into the Future?
DEEP in the basement of a dusty university library in Edinburgh lies a small black box, roughly the size of two cigarette packets side by side, that
churns out random numbers in an endless stream.
At first glance it is an unremarkable piece of equipment. Encased in metal, it contains at its heart a microchip no more complex than the ones found
in modern pocket calculators.
But, according to a growing band of top scientists, this box has quite extraordinary powers. It is, they claim, the 'eye' of a machine that appears
capable of peering into the future and predicting major world events.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Scottish scientists believe they have cracked a prophecy code, predicting the WTC attacks four hours before they happened. They also claim the device
forewarned of the Asian tsunami.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 12-2-2005 @ 03:12 PM by CAConrad0825
|
It's amazing that all this is coming out after these events occur. There is no proof nor is there any reason to believe them. Get some more evidence
and then post
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 12-2-2005 @ 10:10 PM by spike
|
This study MAY IMPLY that people can see something bad coming. But then again,....we have always known that. It didn't PREDICT any single event.
Peroid. It's an Aprhension meter at best. Nothing was predicted. Furthermore, There's no such thing as a new age-scientist. New Agers are
notorious for having a poor and convoluted understanding of science.
[edit on 12-2-2005 by spike]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 12:17 AM by onlyinmydreams
|
Well, it seemed to me that these scientists were not claiming to be 'prophets', nor were they 'new agers'. They noticed that a random number
generator picked up what they think was the psychological stress generated by 9-11 and the recent tsunami.
Here's the original rednova story:
www.rednova.com...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 12:49 AM by stargazernate
|
Hmmm... I want to see their data. It's an interesting idea, and no stranger IMHO than atomic entanglement or quantum tunnelling that has been
observed in the lab.
I'd also like to see the schematics for their "black box" source of randomness, build my own, and try it out. According to the article, it's based
on simple electronics, so it's probably only pseudo-random. But maybe for this it doesn't matter.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 12:52 AM by GradyPhilpott
|
Here are a couple more links regarding Roger D. Nelson and his research.
It might be crazy, but it's an interesting concept.
www.princeton.edu...
www.parapsych.org...
[edit on 05/2/13 by GradyPhilpott]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 01:13 AM by stargazernate
|
If anyone else is interested, I found the three devices they're using at noosphere.princeton.edu... No schematics, but it's a start.
The first one relies on "thermal noise" from resistors, and the others use the quantum tunnelling effect* from a field effect transistor or two
zener diodes.
Their website mentioned something else I found interesting: "Venues that appear to be particularly conducive to such field anomalies include small
intimate groups, group rituals, sacred sites, musical and theatrical performances, and charismatic events. In contrast, data generated during
academic conferences or business meetings show no deviations from chance." ( www.princeton.edu...) Meaning, more emotional
events/venues produced a greater effect.
Okay, I've gotta try this....
* Makes me wonder if our minds have access to some kind of quantum tunnelling as well.
[edit on 13-2-2005 by stargazernate]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 01:44 AM by slank
|
.
Random number generator or pseudo random number generator?
Integer numbers are infinite. Half the numbers are infinity/2
Three quaters are 3*infinity/4
A REAL random number generator would endlessly be spewing out infinity, infinity, infinity, . . .
A pseudo random number generator has to put out numbers in a limited range. What arbitrary limit did they choose?
They could be using some kind of floating point number generator, but it has essentially the same problem. Finite digits = limited domain.
Can you say 'Mrs Cleo goes high tech'?
BTW she was arrested if you don't know.
My crystal ball says they don't know what they are doing.
.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 02:07 AM by GradyPhilpott
|
www.parapsych.org...
www.princeton.edu...
www.princeton.edu...
I am reminded of "Ghost Busters."
INT. THE LAB -- DAY
As they enter, janitorial and maintenance personnel are busy dismantling
their apparatus and equipment. DEAN YAEGER is supervising. Venkman
confronts him.
[...]
DEAN YAEGER
Fine. This University will no longer
continue any funding of any kind for your
group's activities.
VENKMAN
But why? The students love us!
DEAN YAEGER
Dr. Venkman, we believe that the purpose of
science is to serve mankind. You, however,
seem to regard science as some kind of
"dodge" or "hustle." Your theories are the
worst kind of popular tripe, your methods
are sloppy and your conclusions are highly
questionable. You're a poor scientist, Dr.
Venkman, and you have no place in this
department or in this University.
VENKMAN
I see.
[...]
EXT. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY -- DAY -- A LITTLE LATER
Stantz and Venkman are sitting on a bench both looking desolate.
STANTZ
(shaking his head)
This is like a major disgrace. Forget
M.I.T. or Stanford now ... they wouldn't
touch us with a three-meter cattle prod.
VENKMAN
You're always so worried about your
reputation. We don't need the University.
Einstein did his best stuff while he was
working as a patent clerk.'They can't stop
progress.
STANTZ
(not cheered)
Do you know what a patent clerk makes? I
liked the University. They gave us money,
they gave us the facilities and we didn't
have to produce anything! I've worked in
the private sector. They expect results.
You've never been out of college. You don't
know what it's like out there.
VENKMAN
(with visionary zeal)
Let me tell you, Ray, everything in life
happens for a reason. Call it fate, call
it luck, Karma, whatever. I think we were
destined to get kicked out of there.
STANTZ
For what purpose?
VENKMAN
(with real conviction)
To go into business for ourselves.
www.awesomefilm.com...
 
[edit on 05/2/13 by GradyPhilpott]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 02:32 AM by Netchicken
|
Hmmm, its something you WANT to believe in.
It predicted the Kursk submarine tragedy, but that only affected about 200 men, events like that must happen quite frequently, and on a world wide
scale are minsule....
It feels like firing an arrow and then saying what you hit is the target....
Besides, even if there is some psychic connection, its uselesss in prediction as you only have a graph, no indication of what, where, when, how many
etc.
Sure would be fun it it is true though....
[edit on 13-2-2005 by Netchicken]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 02:40 AM by dgtempe
|
Interesting enough. We'll have to keep our eyes on this one. 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 02:40 AM by HeirToBokassa
|
Originally posted by slank
A REAL random number generator would endlessly be spewing out infinity, infinity, infinity, . . .
A pseudo random number generator has to put out numbers in a limited range. What arbitrary limit did they choose?
...
They could be using some kind of floating point number generator, but it has essentially the same problem. Finite digits = limited domain.
.
Your perspective seems to be skewed by an emphasis on digital techniques for "random" number generation. From the FAQ,
The REG uses a quantum level source of electrical potential that varies randomly. We sample this truly random time series and count the samples
that are greater and smaller than the average. These samples counts are "bits" with a value of 1 or 0. We take 200 samples in one second and count
the 1's, and this sum is recorded as the trial score. It is expected to be near 100, but varies by chance with a standard deviation of about
7.071.
...
The GCP uses three types of micro-electronic random sources, all physical, and based on quantum level noise. One uses Johnson noise, one uses an FET,
with backvoltage, and one uses a pair of diodes with backvoltage.
noosphere.princeton.edu...
The news articles are a gross simplification of their work. The scientists working on this have considerable reputations. This does not imply
that their work should not be questioned, but it does imply that critics who want to be taken seriously should look into their actual work rather than
respond to a dumbed-down summary article. Outside of that, a simple "I'll believe it when I see it" will suffice and no doubt expresses the
sentiment of many, however unique one might consider one's opinion.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 02:43 AM by HeirToBokassa
|
Originally posted by Netchicken
It feels like firing an arrow and then saying what you hit is the target....
Almost like that, as confirmed by the FAQ:
To see precursors we have to look back across that time from a post facto perspective. Unique point events have little chance of being seen, at
least by our current methods.
noosphere.princeton.edu...
I wouldn't be accusing the scientists of misrepresentation here, whatever the dumbed-down articles might or might not say.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 02:59 AM by GradyPhilpott
|
Well, I think since most of us here are far below Dr. Nelson's scientific level, some of us can have a little fun with it. As long as their research
methods are sound, I have no problem with it, but there must be exactly two people on the planet who have any idea what this guy is talking about.
I hope he's right though, even if we never get to the point of prophesy. If we can prove that collective faith can indeed move mountains, that could
have a world changing influence on the world.
[edit on 05/2/13 by GradyPhilpott]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 03:36 AM by slank
|
.
HeirToBokassa
Even using some kind of detection reading it is only as good as its ability to read some minimum change. Changes below that threshhold do not
register.
Also if you get to the quantum level trying to read the information is actually creating the information.
If they were reading some general quantum flux of the Universe Im still not sure it would apply to specific events.
When they predict specific events in the stock market for a couple years running i will probably believe it. Till then I do not believe.
If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullsh*t.
.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 06:47 AM by mOjOm
|
Originally posted by slank
Even using some kind of detection reading it is only as good as its ability to read some minimum change. Changes below that threshhold do not
register.
Yes you're right. But thats just fine. Some form of adjustment to the threshold will most likely always be needed anyway simply based on the type
of device it is and it's purpose. Just like how a reciever uses various methods to control the reception of the broadcast it's supposed to be
listening in on.
You wouldn't wan't the threshold of this device to be too low or too high. If it reacted every time someone's dog dies or someone breaks up with
their g/f it would never have a base level from which to measure anything.
Also if you get to the quantum level trying to read the information is actually creating the information.
That's a good point. Although the information that is being created, by the Observation itself happening at the quantum level, should be able to be
accounted for and removed to produce "high probably" results of what else is happening.
After all, since the machine should produce the same or very similar degrees of change to the quantum level at all times, any unique moments of flux
that result over an extended period would still be of interest. Maybe it won't turn out to be a "Prophet Machine" after all, but that still leaves
a lot of "Potential" for it to be some other amazing new device.
Perhaps the "First Quantum Toaster" will be discovered. It will only toast your bread when that specific slice is properly aligned to the quantum
harmony of your desire to eat it!!
If they were reading some general quantum flux of the Universe Im still not sure it would apply to specific events.
Or even if it does, that doesn't mean that we would have the ability to connect our readings with the correct event or series of events to be of any
use. But then again that is where the fine tuning would come in. 1,000 years ago who would have believed that we would one day be listening to stars
and galaxies thousands of light years away?!?!?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 13-2-2005 @ 09:27 AM by HeirToBokassa
|
Originally posted by slank
Even using some kind of detection reading it is only as good as its ability to read some minimum change. Changes below that threshhold do not
register.
There doesn't need to be a minimum threshold in this case. The random signal is in bits, where each bit represents whether an analog value is past a
certain value. Any deterministic error from this measurement is simply added to the original probalistic function. It isn't necessary for the
received random signal to be equal to the originating random signal -- just that the received signal random.
Also if you get to the quantum level trying to read the information is actually creating the information.
That's fine. See my previous paragraph.
When they predict specific events in the stock market for a couple years running i will probably believe it.
Again, this comment seems to be responding to the sensationalism of the dumbed-down article rather than what the scientists are presenting their work
to be.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 12-3-2005 @ 08:30 PM by B2TheE
|
The current hypotheses for the REG is that it can read global unconscious communication. The researchers continue building upon research on the REG
because it would make alot of sense if such communication existed. Unconscious communication could serve for a million purposes. The researchers
believe that the communication goes to one person; like a being called God. So when alot of people are getting killed, or when a major event
happens... for whatever reason, our unconscious communicates. The real question is how de we communicate unconsciously and why. The REG can only
predict the inevitable. And that of course is not important unless if theres more you can get out of REG besides predicting a significant event.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
