It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The problem with scientifically testing for psychic abilities

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 17 2011 @ 06:54 PM

Originally posted by amantine

Originally posted by Majic
Mathematics is also due for some shaking up. The universe is not Base10, and if we can get past it, we may begin to see things in a whole new way -- less �irrationally�, if you get my drift.

Every mathematical relation is true in every number system, although you sometimes have to write the question. An example where you have to rewrite the question is this problem: "The three-digit numbers have the following form: abc. In 750, a = 7, b = 5 and c =0. Identify all three-digit numbers above 0 that have the following properties: a + b = 4 and b*c = 12."

To make this problem have the same solutions in every number system you need to write out the assumptions of the decimal system. "The three-digit numbers have the following form: abc." becomes "A group of numbers has the following form: a*100 + b*10 + c, where a, b and c are integers ranging from 0 to 9. If you now move to base2, you can replace 100, 10, 0 and 9 with their base2 equivalents and the solutions of the problem will be the same as in the base10 or the base60 systems.

The only way you can make pi appear rational in a number system is working in base(pi). The result is, however, that you make every number that's not a rational multiple of pi irrational. The same applies for other irrational numbers like sqrt(n) (where n is not a square of a rational number), e, the Erdos-Borwein constant or ζ(2n+1) (where n is an integer).

Now, about science not being able to handle variable phenomena, I can think of a scientific technique that will allow testing for variable phenomena. Set up measuring equipment every in your house. I don't know exactly what psi-ability' you're talking about, but let's assume the equipment can measure it. You don't have to perform a trick on command, but you can do whenever you want to. The equipment will be running for a week to a few years, depending on the frequency of the phenomena. The equipment is then left to run the same period with you in the house, but without you using any psi-ability. Then the equipment is left to run for the same period without you in the house. If the difference in the occurance of psi-phenomena is larger in the period that you tried to use psi-ability and if it is statiscally relevent, further research should be done with multiple households and maybe more controlled research in a laboratory.

Isaac Newton was a genius's genius, but good luck getting him to accept the General Theory of Relativity in his day.

Isaac Newton revolutionized mathematical analysis and was very intelligent. I think that if you gave him the time to learn the newer mathematical techniques required for general relativity, which are not terrible different, and you show him the empirical evidence, he will accept the theory.

Was looking through some older threads for something interesting and found this. Mathematics just resonates differently than other realms such as music. There are some mathematicians like Ramanujan that could compose complex infinite series expressions without needing intermediate proofs.

I usually fall in the James Randi camp when it comes to psychic phenomena but the other day for no apparent reason I started hearing some 40 year old James Tayler lyrics while reading about Ramanujan.

"Walking my mind to an easy time" James Taylor lyric talking about beats and measures perhaps 4/4 time which would be an easy time for musicians to compose in.

Maybe mathematicians like Ramanujan just think in tighter resonant patterns than the rest of us?

posted on Nov, 11 2011 @ 08:53 PM
reply to post by amantine

I agree. But should scientists work with unusually talented psychics (ie Ingo Swann, Uri Geller) or should they concentrate on the baseline abilities found in the general population?

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in