https://youtu.be/nRSBaq3vAeY This video is incredibly fascinating.

The subject of conscious quantum manipulation is so fascinating! I like to think that it is proof we are made by a higher power of some kind by demonstrating consciousness dictates matter. kind of like matter is a byproduct of thought in a way.

>>18025231
that is certainly what some theories suppose, that consciousness is the most fundamental aspect of nature. I'm on the fence right now, and for a while I was against that kind of thinking (of course one always has experiences that causes them to drift back and consider that notion endlessly).

Is this PEAR? If not, Princeton has done similar experiments but I never heard anything come out of them other than breaking away as a non-profit called ICRL.

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/experiments.html

http://icrl.org/

Randi is a god

Damn hippies.

>>18025663
Who? Surely not James Randi, the fraud of all frauds.

>>18025663
I meant to say Dean Radin, he's the narrator in the OP. He's really great, talks about a lot of /x/ tier stuff. Chief Scientist at Institute of Noetic Sciences, my favorite institute, as they have essentially proven mass consciousness.

>>18025955
Oh yes. Dean Radin is great!

>>18025636
Awesome information, thank you for sharing

>>18025990
Yes. Just finished watching. This talk is really mind blowing. It seems to show that our consciousness can affect things across any distance.

>>18025689

I mean, I guess he has a beard, but his shirt was tucked in the whole time

>>18026367

Across time as well. At a quantum level time-reversibility is allowed.

>>18026719
Can you affect the past, or only send a message back in time?

really wanna know what lesswrong/rationalwiki guys have to say about this

>>18027387
OP here

I study cognitive science at a pretty prestigious university and mass consciousness etc is often laughed off, especially because Cog Sci was a fringe field for a while and we are really trying to avoid the stigma returning, so it was hard for me to even click the video. Once I overcame my ignorance, I actually watched the video, highly critical. At the end of the video, he had covered everything I considered as error. This is mind blowing stuff. I may send this to a professor and see what she says, but I will need to preface it heavily haha

>>18027482
I didn't have any issues watching it but I took it all with a kilo of salt anyway. I get very nervous/careful when consuming any sort of content that involves consciousness and quantum physics. The guy looks legit at least on the surface, and I liked when he said -multiple times- that he and his team did not believe the results and tried to find out where they had failed. That is a good sign in my view, but he might as well be a highly functioning schizo or a con artist. So until we have results from that USP researcher & others I'll keep silent about this.

>but I will need to preface it heavily
I wanted to share this on FaceBook, but I thought the same as you. I decided against sharing it because certain "friends" would literally go nuts over it. I hope your professor will be understanding.

>>18027387
Sam Harris commented on Dean Radin on Joe Rogan's podcast a while back, basically saying that is work and all of the other similar work (Daryl Bem, etc) all show a small effect and so there is probably some flaw with how the research was conducted or that they are biased in their analysis of the data. I lost a little respect for Sam after this statement. Not because he doesn't buy the research, he could very well have said it's a small effect and so he's waiting until others try to replicate it, but he didn't say that. Instead of "I don't know" or "jury is still out" he basically draws the conclusion that there's nothing to it. I think almost everyone is going to dismiss this until it's replicated enough times that a big name institution gets involved. I wouldn't put too much stock in anyone who dismisses this. Wait and see what the replications show. Until then no ones opinion really matters.

There's also no telling how political and military folks will take this. If there is research proving things can be influenced by consciousness from anywhere, then they may find it perfectly logical to take out or discredit those involved in this research.

>>18027482
Which Uni?

Help a scientifically illiterate guy out, I watched it and got the basic idea, I think, but I'm a little confused. In layman's terms, what is the implication here?

>>18027648
well, essentially it's saying that mind affects matter, which goes against the materialist view that there is no "extra stuff" involved in consciousness. That consciousness is just a byproduct of interactions among neurons. These findings imply that consciousness can affect quantum states, if not more than that.

Some may stretch this into a "consciousness causes the cosmos" thing but let's put one leg forward at a time

>>18027619
Dickchester

>>18027688
How does consciousness cause the universe? Where was consciousness in the big bang?

File: paralleuniverses.jpg (80KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 640x426px

>>18027648
The implication is that reality exists first in our consciousness, secondly in our physical reality. Ergo, by envisioning a mental image in your mind, all places in physical reality that might fit that image change their physical structure, in a way that is measured by the probability distribution of quantum wave forms. What the probability distribution of quantum wave forms means is egg head nerd science, but suffice to say anything you can imagine as physical motion can be accomplished by way of machines that transpose momentum in quantum probability distributions to linear force applications.

In other words, humans are fully telepathic, just maybe weak and untrained in doing so. We can measure telepathy, and build machines that measure telepathy. We can build machines that interface with this telepathy and are moved by this telepathy. Some materials are more easily moved than others. (You can take a wild guess at which natural or synthetic substances have been discovered so far which allow a person "leverage" by way of their natural telepathy.)

Or else these results are all just a coincidence / incorrect. But if they're legitimate, then humans are fully telepathic, and we know how to build machinery to detect this telepathy.

>>18027837
To extrapolate from the experiments, by increasing the probability that the quantum state collapses into something rather than nothing.

>Where was consciousness in the big bang?
Where is it now?

>>18027837
Consciousness selects which set of parallel universe come into vision.

At any given moment, many physical constructs are ordinarily in a state of quantum superposition. In the process of sunlight refracting off the ground, and diffusing through the environment to where things appear lit in your room, despite not having direct line of sight with the sun, innumerable quantum superpositions were created and collapsed in order to do so. It is no exaggeration to say that you are living in a set of parallel earths, that are infinitely far away from each other, but more or less in tandem so that it is impossible to distinguish which is which. (The act of distinguishing is what sets you in any given set of parallel earths.)

During the big bang, many parallel earths were created. They always were. Consciousness is what you use to select which version of the big bang you wish to experience, and upon doing so the physical universe will appear as if that was always the case. If you then decide to view a different set of parallel earths, then the physical universe will shift with your consciousness, and you will experience the realities in which THAT version of the big bang was "always" the one which happened.

>>18027854
It's in the minds of sentient beings

>>18025211
How does this tie into the idea that the universe is an simulation?

>>18027872
how do i select an universe where i have a gf?

>>18028180
Suck your own dick

>>18025211
Thing is right, you get all these people masturbating over 'le conscious observer affecting reality'.

But the actual experiment had a conscious observer each time, or rather neither. What happened is the second time they used recording equipment. For an electromagnetic experiment.

How do we know it wasn't the recording equipment messing with the photons, rather than the 'observation'?

>>18027837
Consciousness is what collapsed the cosmic waveform and caused the big bang. Once matter was observed into physical existence it interacted with itself and 'exploded'.

>>18028441
No. You're talking about a different kind of experiment. You didn't watch the video.

There was no difference in the recording equipment in the trial where an observer was focusing on the double-slit space, versus the trial where an observer was not focusing on the double-slit space.

Unless you count the human mind as recording equipment, which would be appear to be the case given observational evidence. The act of a person focusing a double-slit space causes the space to coherently balance itself as if there was a which-way type recorder present. The person's mind is a which-way type recorder.

>>18028441
What are you talking about?

The equipment used was controlled, the only variable they could identify was whether or not a human mind was attempting to influence the results. They showed there was a statistically measurable difference made by this variable.

>>18025211
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpcQNYa3VZ8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpz3xOZ0dyY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZm43BfNvt4

>>18028036
>mind
>sentience
>being

All of these are abstract concepts that do not exist in the sense of physical laws.

>>18025211
Good. The Science Delusion is cracking.

We don't know shit about reality.

>>18028568
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZm43BfNvt4

Huygen's principle. Sharply cutting off a laser beam by interposing a silhouette of an object like he did is mathematically equivalent to adding an out phase laser beam of the same frequency, in all the places of the silhouette which perfectly cancel out the light at that particular space/time coordinate. This is the basis of how diffraction grating creates the pattern it does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6dZjuw1KUo

If anything, his experiment proves that light is indeed a wave, or else from where comes the interference pattern? But, this is a well known and studied experiment in optical physics. The groundwork of the wave/particle duality was made in full knowledge of the phenomena he presented, and indeed requires his experiment to function as it does in order to support the wave/particle duality theory, which is a direct result of Huygen's Principle--that blocking a light wave is mathematically equivalent to adding an out of phase wave of the same frequency at those space/time coordinates.

>>18028612
physical laws do not exist except as abstract concepts and expressions of nature, just like mind, sentience and being

>>18028612
Also, consider 'Will' in the sense of a physical law

>>18027370
It's not fully understood at this time.
Some physicists have started doing experiments with retro-causality though. (like John Cramer)

>>18028764
I need to get a quantum eraser setup at my house so I can figure this out.

>>18025211
Holy shit, I just realized the Mendelbrot set looks like a uterus and vagina upside down.

Where am I and what's my name?

Try hard.

>>18029664
Faggot Mcfaggot in gayville

>>18029699
That's Lesbian McLesbo is Lezville, thank you.

>>18025211

Alright, get ready for this one:

Matter and mind are the exact same thing.

>>18029700
Lesbians are gay faggots too, dipshit.

So how do we affect reality? By trying to affect things like "change, things!" or by hoping they change, as in praying and hoping for a higher force to listen?

>>18029699
>>18029700
>>18029744
The last digit and the second to last digit are the exact same thing.

>>18029759
Former, but I'm not the most knowledgeable guy in this thread so if somebody else here has a better answer listen to them.

>>18029872
I'd say it's both. People do things of their own will, but if there is a higher force, it is that that ultimately directs them.
Create the change that you want to see, unless it's not your job.

>>18030096
From a materialist model there is no free will. But it's a self-fulfilling argument. Once you introduce an external consciousness you gave the possibility for free will.

>>18028748
That's not true at all. The physical laws developed through quantifiable, empirical data.

We have no such data for the abstracts I mentioned. Nor any need to posit them other than an illusory effect stemming from sensory input interacting with previous impressions of sensory input, Like the "triangle" in the pic - there's a bit of circumstantial evidence, but it doesn't really exist.

This experiment - if correct - seems to indicate for the first time that the triangle DOES exist, and is affecting things.

File: triangle-illusion.gif (2KB, 217x181px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 217x181px

>>18032161
>sigh

>>18032161
Dude, NUMBERS and LETTERS are just abstract symbols. They don't have any intristic meaning. They mean whatever we define them to mean. Then you build "physical laws" on this house of cards. Why are the "laws of physics" to be unquestionable? Because some low paid teacher working for the government said it? Or because some person whose primary motivation is selling books wrote it in their book? You need a heroic dose of shrooms man.

>>18032161
Empirical data, which is kept on paper or some digital media, which is made of molecules, which are made of atoms and mostly empty space, and atoms which are made of subatomic particles and mostly empty space, and subatomic particles which are just some electrical charges and mostly empty space, and electrical charges which are just vibrations and empty space. It's all nothing. Look at your hand. You think it's there, you believe it's there, but it's nothing but vibrating empty space. It's not really there. There is no empirical data.

>>18032771
Dicks, which is made up of dick particles and empty space, which is made up of subatomic dick particles and empty space, which is made of cheezits, means that dicks don't exist

>>18025914
i heard that that fraud randi tied you up and fucked your ass with a broken glass bottle. heard you cried like a little bitch too.

>>18025960
you would praise him. after all, you're his little pony bitch.

>>18026719
you know you're full of shit and have no real comprehension of quantum mechanics. i don't think anyone does.

>>18032862
Precisely!

Ok that's interesting.

>>18032755
>Then you build "physical laws" on this house of cards.

No. We use numbers and letters to communicate and describe our observations. The physical laws are built on that data to model and predict those observations.

>>18032771
Fields and vibrations are not nothing.

And EVERYTHING you mentioned was told to you as true because of empirical data. I find it funny you try to discount science with the very information science gave you.

Hate to break it to yall, but consciousness ain't what causes the observer effect, it's strictly observation. The ability to perceive information is not the same as observation of information.

>>18026719
As we understand time, it is only a facet of constants such as dark energy. As we continue to further our understanding of what causes the progression of time so will our understanding of reality.

>>18032755
u r gay and so r ur ideas

>>18027648
You general idea about life and how it works: will always be coincidentally proven true to you.

Implications are: you can manipulate your ideas about life to place yourself in the exact objective reality you wish to be in

Lying to yourself. Self hypnotism. Forcing yourself to be optimistic. Or pessimistic, i guess you could to either one.