From: Sanctius Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 04:31:14 GMT Organization: sanctius.fi Lines: 11 Sender: Maria Syväsola Distribution: Kaikille Universumin Asukeille - Tältä ette välty, Limalonkerot ! Message-ID: <68pnet$tum@filon.sgic.fi> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> Reply-To: isotissinen@nymfomaani.hieroo.kipeita.hartioitani.aah NNTP-Posting-Host: dynip-line34.hki.sgic.fi Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Summary: Hornanperkele tulee ja syö teidät kaikki, jollette Kadu ! Keywords: Mies 175cm 66kg 26v Järvenpää Sinkku Lempeä Ystävällinen Mystikko Huumorintajuinen Rikas Raitis Savuton Älykäs Karvainen Komea Hyväkuntoinen Lihaksikas Halukas Hetero Herkkupeppu Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!peerfeed.ncal.verio.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!194.22.194.4!masternews.telia.net!newspost.telia.com!nntp.teliafi.net!Filon.sgic.fi!locker Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:89 sci.skeptic:304 Dr. Jim Stevenson told the truth: >"astral projections" are dreams, hallucinations. >Nothing really leaves the body. You're correct ! Nothing FROM the Body leaves the Body. Nothing OF the Body leaves the Body. Something else leaves. Really. - Sanctius, Slowly erasing your life and what has been. ###### From: Steve Terrell Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Mon, 05 Jan 1998 12:45:01 -0600 Organization: TI Lines: 26 Message-ID: <34B12A2D.3291F536@hfab1.sc.ti.com> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> Reply-To: steve@hfab1.sc.ti.com NNTP-Posting-Host: brane.hfab1.sc.ti.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (WinNT; U) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wnfeed!worldnet.att.net!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.idt.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.ti.com!not-for-mail Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:94 sci.skeptic:305 Red@pantheon.global wrote: > > jimst@primenet.com (Dr. Jim Stevenson) wrote: > >"astral projections" are dreams, hallucinations. Nothing really leaves the > >body. Nothing can gather remote information, unavailable to the sences. > >See the works of Susan Blackmore, or read Skeptical Enquirer. > >Anyone who believes me wrong is encouraged to "project" to Randie's secret > >room. Anyone who can accurately report its contense can collect a million > >$ prize. > > > >And please have the courtesy to not followup to alt.mindcontrol, which is > >for victims of brain washing, and those who want to help them. > > > >Engineering is the implementation of science. > >Politics is the implementation of faith. > > > > Your test is invalid. It demonstrates a lack of understanding of psychic > phenomena. ... Well, the problem is that not even the psychics themselves can pass a test that they put together with a good skeptic. And all the skeptic does is make rules that prevent accidents, cheating, and arbitrariness. Chow, Steve ###### From: Dave Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 08:26:56 -0700 Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 Lines: 23 Distribution: world Message-ID: <34B39EBF.91878833@ictnet.net> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B12A2D.3291F536@hfab1.sc.ti.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.179.26.195 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news-in-east.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!157.161.139.130!news.imp.ch!vyzynz!inquo!news Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:125 sci.skeptic:349 Steve Terrell wrote: > Well, the problem is that not even the psychics themselves can pass a test > that they put together with a good skeptic. And all the skeptic does is make > rules that prevent accidents, cheating, and arbitrariness. Many scientific experiments have been done regarding telepathy and psychic phenomenon. No one is a better "skeptic" than science. So these experiments were run in very controlled circumstances.. I was on a web site the other day that explained one of these experiments. In a nut shell, they put two people in two different rooms with electro-magnetic shielding, etc. One person was the sender, the other was the receiver. Pictures were shown to the sender on a screen, and he was supposed to project those images to the reciever. The results favored the possible existance of telepathic communications. Seems to me that skeptics are people who are either difficult to convince, or refuse to see things who they are. Dave ###### From: phileigh@ix.netcom.NOSPAM.com (Phil Dennison) Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 10:56:34 -0500 Organization: . Lines: 36 Message-ID: References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B12A2D.3291F536@hfab1.sc.ti.com> <34B39EBF.91878833@ictnet.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh40-57.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Jan 07 9:51:19 AM CST 1998 X-Newsreader: NewsHopper 1.2 (Demo) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.onenet.net!news.oru.edu!WCG!ix.netcom.com!user Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:127 sci.skeptic:350 In article <34B39EBF.91878833@ictnet.net>, Dave wrote: > >Steve Terrell wrote: > >> Well, the problem is that not even the psychics themselves can pass a test >> that they put together with a good skeptic. And all the skeptic does is make >> rules that prevent accidents, cheating, and arbitrariness. > >Many scientific experiments have been done regarding telepathy and psychic >phenomenon. No one is a better "skeptic" than science. So these experiments >were run in very controlled circumstances.. I was on a web site the other day >that explained one of these experiments. In a nut shell, they put two people in >two different rooms with electro-magnetic shielding, etc. One person was the >sender, the other was the receiver. Pictures were shown to the sender on a >screen, and he was supposed to project those images to the reciever. The >results >favored the possible existance of telepathic communications. That's pretty vague. Can you post the actual results? 50%? 51%? 80%? How much better than chance were the results? >Seems to me that skeptics are people who are either difficult to convince, or >refuse to see things who they are. Things are not always what they appear to be. Skeptics are just that--skeptics. Show proven, tested data that can be duplicated and show the same results again and again, and from which accurate predictions about phenomena can be made. Do that, and they'll believe as strongly as anybody. ###### From: The Walrus Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 15:59:41 +0000 Organization: 'Dis Organisation Lines: 14 Message-ID: <34B3A66D.6BBE@bigfoot.com> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B12A2D.3291F536@hfab1.sc.ti.com> <34B39EBF.91878833@ictnet.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: pc01834.gmsws.gecm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-GECMMTL (Win95; I) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!warm.news.pipex.net!pipex!gecm.com!usenet Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:128 sci.skeptic:351 Phil Dennison wrote: > Things are not always what they appear to be. Skeptics are just > that--skeptics. Show proven, tested data that can be duplicated and show > the same results again and again, and from which accurate predictions about > phenomena can be made. Do that, and they'll believe as strongly as > anybody. In that case I have to come down as sceptical of the sceptics. Have you heard of Godel? How about Hume? Schrodinger? Proof is as useful a concept as determinism. d. ###### From: The Walrus Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 16:01:27 +0000 Organization: 'Dis Organisation Lines: 7 Message-ID: <34B3A6D7.206A@bigfoot.com> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B12A2D.3291F536@hfab1.sc.ti.com> <34B39EBF.91878833@ictnet.net> <34B3A66D.6BBE@bigfoot.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: pc01834.gmsws.gecm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-GECMMTL (Win95; I) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!warm.news.pipex.net!pipex!gecm.com!usenet Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:129 sci.skeptic:352 The Walrus wrote: > In that case I have to come down as sceptical of the sceptics ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ sKeptics, of course ... mental blip ;) d. ###### From: Steve Terrell Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 09:52:52 -0600 Organization: TI Lines: 30 Message-ID: <34B4F654.697D2682@hfab1.sc.ti.com> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B12A2D.3291F536@hfab1.sc.ti.com> <34B39EBF.91878833@ictnet.net> Reply-To: steve@hfab1.sc.ti.com NNTP-Posting-Host: brane.hfab1.sc.ti.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (WinNT; U) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.ti.com!not-for-mail Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:170 sci.skeptic:386 Dave wrote: > > Steve Terrell wrote: > > > Well, the problem is that not even the psychics themselves can pass a test > > that they put together with a good skeptic. And all the skeptic does is make > > rules that prevent accidents, cheating, and arbitrariness. > > Many scientific experiments have been done regarding telepathy and psychic > phenomenon. No one is a better "skeptic" than science. So these experiments > were run in very controlled circumstances.. I was on a web site the other day > that explained one of these experiments. In a nut shell, they put two people in > two different rooms with electro-magnetic shielding, etc. One person was the > sender, the other was the receiver. Pictures were shown to the sender on a > screen, and he was supposed to project those images to the reciever. The results > favored the possible existance of telepathic communications. > > Seems to me that skeptics are people who are either difficult to convince, or > refuse to see things who they are. > > Dave I noticed you left out the details on how it was determined that the reciever received any of the sent pictures. Chances are, the receiver was not forced to make an exact choice of what the picture was from a set of possible choices. I bet that the receiver just described in flowery detail what image they were receiving, and thus arbitrary interpretation came into play. Chow, Steve ###### Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic From: "George X. Kambic" Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <34B65801.103@ct.picker.com> Sender: news@picker.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.54.55.36 Reply-To: kambic@ct.picker.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Picker International References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:01:53 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) Lines: 53 Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!192.232.20.2!malgudi.oar.net!picker!news Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:158 sci.skeptic:385 Red@pantheon.global wrote: > jimst@primenet.com (Dr. Jim Stevenson) wrote: > >"astral projections" are dreams, hallucinations. Nothing really leaves the > >body. Nothing can gather remote information, unavailable to the sences. > >See the works of Susan Blackmore, or read Skeptical Enquirer. > >Anyone who believes me wrong is encouraged to "project" to Randie's secret > >room. Anyone who can accurately report its contense can collect a million > >$ prize. > Your test is invalid. It demonstrates a lack of understanding of psychic > phenomena. They are quantum functions, and so obey quantum logic, not > standard logic. Psychic functions are quantum functions? Please elucidate? Also, what exactly is quantum logic? QM follows its own rules, but how can you say they are logical? They are what they are. > That means that the uncertainty principle guarantees that there will > always be an undefined amount of error in transmittion. And any > error-checking routines will just add error by makine the system more > complex. QED, which covers all interactions of particles and light, does not require an uncertainty principle as part of the theory. I have no clue what your reference to error means here. Please explain. > Further, when one 'looks' at a quantum superposition state it changes it. > One doing psychic things must look through 'quantum eyes', where their > 'looking' sees the quantum probability waves instead of material things, > so as to not 'query' the quantum system. Please define a quantum eye. Please define a quantum probability wave. Wave theory is used to explain things in QM. However, all models are wrong, some are useful. QM helps us understand things, but does not fundamentally tell us what an electron is. > If it is done for another person to look at the results, that destroyes > the 'quantum eyes' effect and causes the system to fail. Oh, interesting prediction. How to test? > This is demonstrated by the experiment where a laser scanner attached to > a recorder records the quantum state of a system. Later, when someone > looks at the recorder, they 'query' the quantum system in the past and > cause it to drop out of superposition state to reality. You may want to go back to basic QM and understand observation. > If no-one ever looks at the recorder then the quantum state is not > queried. So, any scientific method or test will force the system to fail. Interesting claim. ANy proof for it? ###### From: red@pantheon.global Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: 9 Jan 1998 23:27:14 GMT Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Lines: 108 Message-ID: <696boi$adh@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B65801.103@ct.picker.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.67.1.161 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!europa.clark.net!204.127.161.1!wnfeed!204.127.130.5!worldnet.att.net!newsadm Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:182 sci.skeptic:415 "George X. Kambic" wrote: >Red@pantheon.global wrote: >> jimst@primenet.com (Dr. Jim Stevenson) wrote: >> >"astral projections" are dreams, hallucinations. Nothing really leaves the >> >body. Nothing can gather remote information, unavailable to the sences. >> >See the works of Susan Blackmore, or read Skeptical Enquirer. >> >Anyone who believes me wrong is encouraged to "project" to Randie's secret >> >room. Anyone who can accurately report its contense can collect a million >> >$ prize. > >> Your test is invalid. It demonstrates a lack of understanding of psychic >> phenomena. They are quantum functions, and so obey quantum logic, not >> standard logic. >Psychic functions are quantum functions? Please elucidate? Also, what >exactly is quantum logic? QM follows its own rules, but how can you >say they are logical? They are what they are. > >> That means that the uncertainty principle guarantees that there will >> always be an undefined amount of error in transmittion. And any >> error-checking routines will just add error by makine the system more >> complex. > >QED, which covers all interactions of particles and light, does not >require >an uncertainty principle as part of the theory. I have no clue what >your >reference to error means here. Please explain. > >> Further, when one 'looks' at a quantum superposition state it changes it. >> One doing psychic things must look through 'quantum eyes', where their >> 'looking' sees the quantum probability waves instead of material things, >> so as to not 'query' the quantum system. > >Please define a quantum eye. Please define a quantum probability wave. OK. If you read some of my other postings, I have reversed the definition of Quantum Eyes. And I will do so here as well. Humans actually have 'reality' eyes. We make tests, like the double slit test, to force an electron to lose it's supersition and 'freeze' into a discrete reality. And we turn the intensity down so that only one electron at a time comes down the beamline. And we see a single flash on the screen. However, a long term exposure shows that, after a population of such single flashes have occured, that the interferrence pattern of a wave is present. So, the electron actually 'choose' AFTER going through both slits in a superposition state first. But our human eyes looking at the flashes caused it to freeze into a discrete reality. An insect, seeing ten thousands of realities with each eye, is actually seeing average reality, which is another way of saying, probable reality. The insect can thus see both wave and particle at the same time, and can 'look' at the superposition state without 'querying' it. >Wave theory is used to explain things in QM. However, all models are >wrong, some are useful. QM helps us understand things, but does not >fundamentally tell us what an electron is. > >> If it is done for another person to look at the results, that destroyes >> the 'quantum eyes' effect and causes the system to fail. > >Oh, interesting prediction. How to test? That's the whole point. It CANNOT be tested without compromising the test. That's the whole difficutly in creating quantum computers. They query each other and destroy the superpositions. > >> This is demonstrated by the experiment where a laser scanner attached to >> a recorder records the quantum state of a system. Later, when someone >> looks at the recorder, they 'query' the quantum system in the past and >> cause it to drop out of superposition state to reality. > >You may want to go back to basic QM and understand observation. > >> If no-one ever looks at the recorder then the quantum state is not >> queried. So, any scientific method or test will force the system to fail. > >Interesting claim. ANy proof for it? I don't need proof. I have 'quantum eyes', so just my saying it makes it so. However, it is a fact that some people suffer terrible alterations of probability. One fella has been struck by lightening nine times. If there is even a tiny cloud on the horizon he has learned to run for cover. What is happening, is that his own mind is expecting this so powerfully that it becomes defined as 'faith' from a QM level. And his own past acts have modified the march of the probability waves to cause him to be far more likely to be struck by lightening than the average person. He has caused his own self-affliction by his eyes 'looking the wrong way' at the weather. Casting the 'evil eye' on himself, regarding the weather, even. Red -- Pantheon Unarmed Militia A valid and rational solution to our nations problems To participate visit this site and reply to the e-mail link http://www.angelfire.com/tx/STEF ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: 11 Jan 1998 00:46:44 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 36 Message-ID: References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B65801.103@ct.picker.com> <696boi$adh@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 red@pantheon.global emmitted some ASCII characters: [All the stuff up to here deleted. red's and my definiton of the meanings of words in the english language (particularly quantum mechanics) deviate sufficiently that it made no sense to me] >However, it is a fact that some people suffer terrible alterations of >probability. One fella has been struck by lightening nine times. If there >is even a tiny cloud on the horizon he has learned to run for cover. This is to be expected. Anyone who has made bad experiences with a particular situation will try to avoid that situation. >What is happening, is that his own mind is expecting this so powerfully >that it becomes defined as 'faith' from a QM level. Or more likely the part of his brain that predicts (on the base of previous experiences) that that lightening stuff will hurt him again soon and the part that knows that lightening hits uncovered parts are acting together to drive him under cover. > And his own past acts >have modified the march of the probability waves to cause him to be far >more likely to be struck by lightening than the average person. >He has caused his own self-affliction by his eyes 'looking the wrong way' >at the weather. Casting the 'evil eye' on himself, regarding the weather, > even. What evidence? Nine hits may be just bad look (someone has to be the most hit person, and stories of that person travel faster than those of single hits). Look into the mechanisms that propagate urban legends. -- Neil.Franklin.nospam@ccw.ch (remove .nospam), http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped ###### From: Dave Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 08:38:31 -0700 Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 Lines: 27 Distribution: world Message-ID: <34BB8A77.89594907@ictnet.net> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B65801.103@ct.picker.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.179.26.195 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-dc-3.sprintlink.net!news-dc-1.sprintlink.net!news-east.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!157.161.139.130!news.imp.ch!vyzynz!inquo!news Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:243 sci.skeptic:560 George X. Kambic wrote: > > That means that the uncertainty principle guarantees that there will > > always be an undefined amount of error in transmittion. And any > > error-checking routines will just add error by makine the system more > > complex. > > QED, which covers all interactions of particles and light, does not > require > an uncertainty principle as part of the theory. I have no clue what > your > reference to error means here. Please explain. > Please do. All of the discussion in this group points towards having MORE clarity and understanding than in the physical realm. Some claims have gone as far as to say they can see the threads in fabric. (Pardon me for being a skeptic) It seems like when you have been challenged in some way to prove yourself, you back out with four paragraphs of B.S. (no offense) explaining why "that is impossible". The explaination I understood was that you could go ANYWHERE in the Astral realm. Well? ###### From: Dave Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 08:50:23 -0700 Organization: inQuo Internet (801) 530-7160 Lines: 20 Distribution: world Message-ID: <34BB8D3F.20575AD2@ictnet.net> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B65801.103@ct.picker.com> <696boi$adh@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.179.26.195 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!newsfeed.usit.net!news-dc-3.sprintlink.net!news-dc-1.sprintlink.net!news-east.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news-in-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!157.161.139.130!news.imp.ch!vyzynz!inquo!news Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:244 sci.skeptic:561 red@pantheon.global wrote: > An insect, seeing ten thousands of realities with each eye, is actually > seeing average reality, which is another way of saying, probable reality. > The insect can thus see both wave and particle at the same time, and can > 'look' at the superposition state without 'querying' it. > You seem to explain things quite well. However, you have no proof to back it up. No matter what you see with your so called "Quantum eyes", it will hold no ground with a lot of people. You need to have some sort of proof. Otherwise, most people will just discard what you've said. If you are so convinced that what you say (or see) is true, and you don't care what we believe, why do you continue to try and convince us? ###### Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic From: "George X. Kambic" Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <34BBA138.6A20@ct.picker.com> Sender: news@picker.com Nntp-Posting-Host: 144.54.55.36 Reply-To: kambic@ct.picker.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Picker International References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <34B65801.103@ct.picker.com> <696boi$adh@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 17:15:36 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) Lines: 113 Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!nntprelay.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!192.232.20.2!malgudi.oar.net!picker!news Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:249 sci.skeptic:588 red@pantheon.global wrote: > "George X. Kambic" wrote: > >Red@pantheon.global wrote: > >> jimst@primenet.com (Dr. Jim Stevenson) wrote: [....] > >> Further, when one 'looks' at a quantum superposition state it changes it. > >> One doing psychic things must look through 'quantum eyes', where their > >> 'looking' sees the quantum probability waves instead of material things, > >> so as to not 'query' the quantum system. > > > >Please define a quantum eye. Please define a quantum probability wave. > > OK. If you read some of my other postings, I have reversed the definition > of Quantum Eyes. And I will do so here as well. > > Humans actually have 'reality' eyes. We make tests, like the double slit > test, to force an electron to lose it's supersition and 'freeze' into a ^^^^^^^^^^^ - not sure what this word is > discrete reality. Also, we aren't forcing the electron to do anything. It is going to do what it damn well pleases anyway. > > And we turn the intensity down so that only one electron at a time comes > down the beamline. And we see a single flash on the screen. > > However, a long term exposure shows that, after a population of such > single flashes have occured, that the interferrence pattern of a wave is > present. > > So, the electron actually 'choose' AFTER going through both slits in a > superposition state first. But our human eyes looking at the flashes > caused it to freeze into a discrete reality. Nonsense. The electron has a probability function of producing an interference pattern all of the time. The slit produces a situation where the probability of more electrons being far away from the slit is not cancelled by other electrons with other probability states. It does not require human eyes. It only requires a detector. > An insect, seeing ten thousands of realities with each eye, is actually > seeing average reality, which is another way of saying, probable reality. > The insect can thus see both wave and particle at the same time, and can > 'look' at the superposition state without 'querying' it. I have no clue as to what you are saying here. I have no idea of what you mean when you say an insect sees the wave and the particle at the same time. Whatever a photon is, an insect eye detects it. Sometime this thing displays wave characteristics, sometimes particles. So what? The insect eye is *not* seeing quantum effects. > >Wave theory is used to explain things in QM. However, all models are > >wrong, some are useful. QM helps us understand things, but does not > >fundamentally tell us what an electron is. > > > >> If it is done for another person to look at the results, that destroyes > >> the 'quantum eyes' effect and causes the system to fail. > > > >Oh, interesting prediction. How to test? > > That's the whole point. It CANNOT be tested without compromising the > test. That's the whole difficutly in creating quantum computers. They > query each other and destroy the superpositions. Untestable predictions are useless. So you have some conjectures that cannot be tested, and hence have no use in physics. > > > >> This is demonstrated by the experiment where a laser scanner attached to > >> a recorder records the quantum state of a system. Later, when someone > >> looks at the recorder, they 'query' the quantum system in the past and > >> cause it to drop out of superposition state to reality. > > > >You may want to go back to basic QM and understand observation. > > > >> If no-one ever looks at the recorder then the quantum state is not > >> queried. So, any scientific method or test will force the system to fail. > > > >Interesting claim. ANy proof for it? > > I don't need proof. I have 'quantum eyes', so just my saying it makes it > so. Wrong. You don't understand QM observation. I would suggest (gently) again that you go back and understand the terms first. You cannot mix your definitions with QM definitions and come up with anything useful. You are more than welcome to your own opinion. It is at variance with the observations of physical laws. > However, it is a fact that some people suffer terrible alterations of > probability. One fella has been struck by lightening nine times. If there > is even a tiny cloud on the horizon he has learned to run for cover. What you might regard as highly improbable events usually aren't once examined. > What is happening, is that his own mind is expecting this so powerfully > that it becomes defined as 'faith' from a QM level. And his own past acts > have modified the march of the probability waves to cause him to be far > more likely to be struck by lightening than the average person. Does he work outdoors? Does he work in a state with more thunderstorms? How do his activities around thunderstorms make him more likely to be struck? I would suggest that you have missed some obvious investigation before making your statement above. QM does not do what you say. > He has caused his own self-affliction by his eyes 'looking the wrong way' > at the weather. Casting the 'evil eye' on himself, regarding the weather, > even. ###### From: Steve Terrell Newsgroups: alt.oobe,alt.out-of-body,alt.research.monroe-inst,alt.mindcontrol,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Levitation and Meditation Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 09:25:55 -0600 Organization: TI Lines: 73 Message-ID: <34BF7C03.7C52CBD6@hfab1.sc.ti.com> References: <34a51268.93671191@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <68nt19$3sf@nntp02.primenet.com> <68ofct$pi2@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> <199801160657.XAA04521@usr02.primenet.com> Reply-To: steve@hfab1.sc.ti.com NNTP-Posting-Host: brane.hfab1.sc.ti.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (WinNT; U) To: "Dr. Jim Stevenson" Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!streamer1.cleveland.iagnet.net!qual.net!iagnet.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.ti.com!not-for-mail Xref: ccw.ch alt.out-of-body:307 sci.skeptic:666 Dr. Jim Stevenson wrote: > > Your followup crossposted to alt.mindcontrol, hopefully by mistake. > This group is for mindcontrol victims and those who want to help them > and understand mindcontrol. > Mindcontrol means brainwashing, torture, forced drugs, etc. Well, you could be right, but you didn't include what I posted, so I don't know for sure. If I did, sorry for the inconvenience! > This group is getting over 90% of these off topic crosposts and is all most > useless until we get the number way down. > > You probably replied to another post using a follow up command and > neglected to edit the first line which selects the newsgroups for reply > When you reply to a crossposted message, you assume the responsibility to edit > the off topic newsgroups from the Newsgroups: and Followup: lines. > The originator of the thread can not take the responsibility to stop > your off topic followup. Well, I think it is more a matter of net-etiquet (pardon my spelling) than responsibility. For example, I notced that you did not cut alt.mindcontrol out of the message you sent, and the content of your message has very little to do with mindcontrol itself. > If you get this message more than once, it is my error, and I apologize. > Sorry. I have not found a way to keep track if I sent you this message > before, in response to another crosspost. > I am a few days behind reading news, so you may not have crossposted > resently. > > Next time please reply by private e-mail. Am doing! But please, do not send me private e-mail that is off topic to what I post about. Such as your message. > Please understand that this message is attempting to be polite. > I am not angry, just trying to make this newsgroup more usable. I understand. I am not trying to be a total wise-___, but I'm trying to make my private e-mail more usable by discouraging off topic emails. > When you answer my messages, please save bandwidth, and don't e-mail my > text back to me, so I don't have to listen to it again. But you wanted ME to read all this, and to take on all those bytes... Next time, please don't email me. A simple post to the newsgroups will suffice. > Thanks. Chow, Steve > Signature Memetic Virus > > The worst enemy of those who now or will need medical care is the politician > who proscribes what doctors are allowed to prescribe and research, > with the consent of their patients. > > Those who understand this are strongly encouraged to modify this to > fit their personality, and add this to their signature file, and > organize to recover our freedom from Big Brother. > > For those who wait until they are sick, it will be too late. > > Those who suffer from diseases which might have been cured by fetal tissue > research or schedule 1 drugs banned by Big Brother have the right to > hold those accountable who sat on their hands while they remained ill. > > Long healthy life.