A Little Weird » Science

A Little Weird

reality bizarres the standard

## Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

July 20th, 2007 by Sean How to Prove Psychic Abilities are Real

In light of dealing with skeptics on ld4all.com’s message boards, I will offer multiple ways to prove psychic abilities are real. There are two main paths: do the research, or experience the phenomenon. Feel free to do both at the same time for double the proof.

### Do the Research

Here are some links that JoeT provided (I hope he doesn’t mind I ripped them off from him):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology
http://www.parapsychology.org/
http://www.parapsychologydegrees.com/
http://www.rhine.org/
http://perso.orange.fr/basuyaux/parapsy_eng/links/
http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/
http://www.espresearch.com/
http://www.parapsych.org/
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0003044

Here are some links of my own that I’ve enjoyed:

http://www.ions.org/
http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/
http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/psy1.html
http://www.fmbr.org/
http://www.psywww.com/asc/obe/missz.html

Here are some books:

Out-of-Body Experiences - A Handbook, by Janet Lee Mitchell, Ph.D.
Remote Viewing Secrets - A Handbook, by Joseph McMoneagle
Journeys Out of the Body, by Robert Monroe
Altered States of Consciousness, by Charles T. Tart
The Invention of Telepathy, by Roger Luckhurst
Experimental Telepathy, by Rene Warcollier
Telepathy and Clairvoyance, by Rudolf Tischner

The links and books above give more than enough proof. How many of you searching for proof will actually read any of it though? The information is usually pretty dry, I admit. Nonetheless, if you really want that scientific proof - there you go. It’s all at your fingertips. The only thing holding you back is your ability to read.

### Experience the Phenomenon

The path that I personally enjoy is to experience the phenomenon directly. You can’t really argue with personal experience! Oh sure, after you have a bunch of weird experiences, people will look at you differently. Some will call you crazy, and tell you what you experienced was simply impossible. Some will treat you like a circus animal, asking you to perform on cue for their personal amusement. Some will say you’re a liar, and that you’re trying to deceive people for profit. But hey - if you really want that proof - you’ll need to make some sacrifices.

Here are some links with “How-To” information:

http://psipog.net/articles.html (I like this one, personally)
http://www.psipalatium.com/
http://www.psc-online.org/sections/view.php?id=9
http://www.upconline.net/articles.php
http://zhkyrl.brinkster.net/psionline/allarticles.html
http://www.psipog.net/activepsy/contents.html (This is where I started)
http://www.fork-you.com/
http://www.crvmanual.com/
http://www.robertpeterson.org/obebook.html
http://www.firedocs.com/
http://alittleweird.com/2007/05/11/how-to-receive-anything/
http://alittleweird.com/2007/07/04/how-to-leave-your-body/

Here are some books with “How-To” information:

You Are Psychic!, by Pete A. Sanders
Astral Dynamics, by Robert Bruce
Astral Travel for Beginners, by Richard Webster
Out of Body Exploring, by Preston Dennett
Psychic Development for Beginners, by William W. Hewitt
Develop Your Psychic Skills, by Enid Hoffman
Kundalini Awakening, by John Selby and Zachary Zelig

### Conclusion

There you go. There’s your proof. Everything you need - right there. A lot of the information is free on the web. Purchasing books does cost some money, but surely it’s not that much. Maybe $10 per book. If you’re going to invest in only one book, my personal favorite is You Are Psychic!, by Pete A. Sanders. It gives a lot of great exercises to try and has a nice explanation for how psychic phenomenon might work.

It’s really not that hard to prove psychic abilities are real. The actual work involved isn’t that much. Mainly it consists of reading. If you decide to try some exercises, they aren’t difficult either. What usually happens is that people refuse to do the research because they’re lazy, or they refuse to try an exercise because they feel silly. Then they proclaim that psychic abilities can’t exist because they’ve never seen proof. Well no duh.

One last thing: This is by no means an exhaustive list. Use Google. Search. Go to a library. Actually GO TO A LIBRARY. I spent countless hours at the University of Georgia’s library, reading random books on psi research. The main keywords to look for are “telepathy”, “clairvoyance”, “esp”, and “psychokinesis”. Searching for other terms doesn’t usually produce results.

That’s it.

Posted in How-To, ESP, Books, Science | 11 Comments »

July 10th, 2007 by Sean Out of Arm + Steorn

Today I present two short posts in one:

The first thing to note is that I just had an out-of-arm-experience. I have these every once in a while. Someone called me at 9:45am speaking Spanish that woke me up. I went back to bed in a weird state of mind. I did dream some, but I also experienced laying in bed messing around with my arms.

The experience went on and off for about 20 minutes. I was laying in bed, looking at my wall, and my arms were “out” of my body. I couldn’t see them, but I could sense where they were. I moved them in front of my face, trying to see them, but no luck. I felt my face with my hands, and my hands felt my face, but my face didn’t feel my hands. It was pretty cool. I had an experience like it before, years ago when I was 16 years old.

I almost decided not to post about it, because it was a mundane experience, but there was one important feature. On my wall, I have playing cards taped to it for decoration. While having these out of arm experiences, I focused on one of the playing cards to keep my consciousness aware. When I woke up, it dawned on me that I should check that specific card to see if I perceived it correctly. While in the bathroom, I predicted the card would be dark with two symbols on the front. When I checked, I was correct - it was exactly as I remembered it. This isn’t die-hard proof of anything, however it is an interesting thing to note.

In other news… Steorn, the guys who claim to have discovered perpetual motion, had a public demonstration July 6th, 2007. Unfortunately, they couldn’t get their technology to work. Here is a video of Sean McCarthy making excuses. I didn’t watch the whole thing because of the bad quality and length, but maybe someone else is interested:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-410336726209552529

Posted in Video, Science, Dream Phenomenon | 10 Comments »

May 23rd, 2007 by Sean Randomness Doesn’t Exist - Part 3

I’ve been posting a lot lately, because the comments from the previous posts engage my mind :-). If you haven’t visited the blog in a few days, be sure to check out the previous posts. I’m moving somewhat fast.

Why do we love this idea of randomness? Why are we attached to it?

I was sitting and thinking about this question, and the solution popped into my head. In hindsight, it’s actually pretty obvious, and it’s spelled out very clearly in the movie “The Secret” (which I’ve seen a few times, Joe :-P). The way the solution popped into my head is pretty funny though… I was getting bored with the question of why people love randomness (because I couldn’t answer it), so I decided to start an entirely new and unrelated line of questioning. I asked myself what my most offensive belief was. I answered that karma and cause and effect is a pretty offensive belief. Then the solution to my previous question about randomness hit me.

The reason we love this idea of randomness is because we use it 99% of the time when something bad happens.

One of the biggest problems in all religions is answering the question of: why do bad things happen to good people? This is a very hard question. Small bad things can be reasoned away, but then you see extremely bad things, like child molestation, rape, or natural disasters that kill millions of people… and in religion, people are forced to ask themselves: if God is a good God, then why would he allow this to happen? Big problem for religion.

What do we do? I believe that while we all have our own religious beliefs, and we all will answer why bad things happen to good people differently - I believe that in our hearts, most of us will rely on this idea of randomness. Some of the really bad things in this world don’t have a good explanation, no matter how much faith we have. So at some point, in our conscious or subconscious mind, we latch onto the idea that sometimes random shit happens.

But now look at what we’ve done. We’ve attached the idea that randomness exists to the most emotionally charged experiences we can think of. That means we really need this idea of randomness. If randomness were to leave the picture, then we would have to deal with all these highly emotional issues again. Our subconscious mind does not want this.

For example, when I was a little kid, my aunt died from cancer. I think she was in her 30’s. I must have been 8 years old, and at such a young age, I had to deal with this extremely emotional situation. I barely understand death as it is, and now my aunt is gone. I ask my parents why she died, but they can’t give a solid explanation. Maybe I hear that it was “her time”, and that “God decided to take her”. Those are great ideas… but what sinks into the subconscious mind? What is the belief I form in my heart?

Probably that random shit happens. Now I’m 24, and I’m challenging this belief. Which means I have to re-live my aunt’s death, and try to make sense of it again. I also have to re-live everything else where I’ve used randomness as the explanation. Talk about exhausting!

I think we all latch onto this idea of randomness because we’ve all had bad experiences. No one lives a perfect life. Everyone has family members who have died, or friends, or teachers. My 6th grade teacher died when I was 13 years old - he was a volunteer firefighter, and was responding to a call, and a tree fell on his car with him in it. How do I explain that to myself? It seems the only way I can live in peace is to use this idea of randomness.

If you don’t like my theories on randomness, or even if you do, I submit to you an exercise: ask yourself, “What would it mean, emotionally, if randomness didn’t exist?” - you can start by finishing this sentence: “If randomness didn’t exist, then _______”. Don’t give a one sentence answer either :-P. Chances are that blank should be a few pages long. (No need to post your response in the comments :-P).

Posted in Lottery, Philosophy, Science | 15 Comments »

May 21st, 2007 by Sean Randomness Doesn’t Exist - Part 2

This is a continuation of ideas from my last post on randomness…

Let’s assume you look at someone winning the lottery twice, and you have the same reaction that I do: there’s no way our current model correctly predicts it happening. Now I notice a lot of people in the previous post don’t have that reaction :-P. I’ll attempt to address people’s complaints, but also move along at the same time.

There are a few problems that spring up if we say that randomness doesn’t exist. The idea of randomness is essential to the field of probability and statistics. It’s also essential to Quantum Physics, where matter phases out into a “probability-cloud” that acts as a wave-form when not being observed. Mad Hatter made the observation that if randomness doesn’t exist, then reality is deterministic - and we have no free will.

There is a solution to these problems though. What if, where we perceive randomness, what actually exists is a conscious choice?

Probability and statistics are still useful. They just model choice instead of random behavior. Quantum Physics is still correct - but it just means that when matter phases out of existence, it just hasn’t chosen where to exist yet. And free will still exists, because everything is now free will!

So my current understanding is that, where we perceive randomness, what we’re really perceiving is a choice that we don’t understand completely.

Think of a hypothetical situation: imagine that I’m paralyzed, and all I can control is my blinking. Now imagine that you come to see me, and you are absolutely convinced that I’m a machine. You believe you are looking at a complicated clock. Perhaps I try to communicate with you by blinking letters of the alphabet… maybe using morse code. I painstakingly spell out “Hey Jimmy, how’s the wife and kids?” What do you perceive?

You will see me blinking, but you’ll think it’s just random movement. You can watch my blinking, and figure out the “probability” that I’ll blink or not. You might declare that “This machine has a 0.476 chance of blinking at any given second” - and that might true. But because of your belief that my blinking is inherently random, you miss the message.

A strange analogy… but that’s what I think is happening. We witness seemingly random events, and sure - we can calculate the odds of that event happening, and we can study it, and analyze it, and make great models. But so long as we believe that the event itself is inherently random - we are stuck. If randomness exists, then that means events are meaningless.

If we replace the idea of randomness with conscious choice, then everything has meaning. Things fall into place.

Perhaps you disagree with me :-P. Or perhaps you think it’s interesting, but haven’t made up your mind. Either way, that’s fine. This is only my current understanding - there’s a good chance the more I think about it, the more this will change as well :-P.

“God does not play dice with the universe.” - Albert Einstein

Posted in Lottery, Philosophy, Science | 8 Comments »

May 19th, 2007 by Sean Randomness Doesn’t Exist - Part 1

I will explain my ideas on why I believe randomness doesn’t truly exist. I believe I can win the lottery using these ideas.

The first thing to understand is what society’s current beliefs are about randomness.

One of the first things you might think about, is that when you play video games on your computer, there is obviously some random stuff going on. Sometimes an enemy turns left, sometimes he turns right - completely random. You might even know some things about programming, and know of functions to call when you want a random number.

All these random numbers on computers aren’t truly random though - they are pseudo-random numbers. What that means is that usually some number is taken from the outside world - for example, the time it takes you to click on the “New Game” button in milliseconds - or the time of day you run the program in milliseconds - and that number is treated as the “seed”. From this seed number, the computer can generate a sequence of numbers that appear to be random. All it does is perform some math on the seed number, and spit out the result for you. Then change the seed number (according to a formula), so the next time you want a random number, it has a new result.

You don’t have to understand the exact formulas. If you’re curious you can do some more research on pseudo-random numbers, and random number generation. It’s a large field in computer science. The important part to understand is that these “random” numbers on computers aren’t actually random. They are calculated from some seed, based on formulas. Not random.

So randomness doesn’t exist on a computer. But surely randomness exists in reality?! You might argue, for example, what about flipping a coin? What about rolling dice? These events are truly random.

Well, on the surface they sure do seem like it. After all - how many of us can predict 100 dice rolls in a row? No one. So it does seem like that is a random system. However, there is a problem.

The problem comes in when we research how many people have won the lottery twice. Google, Video, Couple, Family, PA, NY Deli, etc, etc…

Now of course there are skeptics on the issue, claiming that with so many people playing, surely there will be some people who win twice. For those with some common sense, reading the skeptic side of things is actually pretty hilarious - they claim: “the odds of someone winning the lottery twice to be something like 1 in 30 for a four month period and better than even odds over a seven year period. Why? Because players don’t buy one ticket for each of two lotteries, they buy multiple tickets every week” - wow. Then how come everyone doesn’t win twice? All they have to do is play 40 times ;-). An absolutely ridiculous article, especially for those that understand statistics and probability at a high-school level.

The truth is that our current understanding of reality can NOT explain how people win the lottery twice.

So, we have to do what’s right. We have to be honest with ourselves. Probability and statistics are models for reality. The models work pretty good most of the time, but when we look at people who win the lottery twice, we notice that our model is incorrect. If our model is mostly correct, but has some incorrect moments, then what do we do? Modify the model. Clearly our model isn’t completely accurate. So we modify it. We DO NOT spatter off nonsense to try and convince ourselves that our model must be correct, and that reality is just being rude for not following our laws. We take an honest and humble look at it and say: Well gee, we’re a little bit off, how can we make a more accurate model?

Think about it. Study probability and statistics a little bit. Try to digest the odds of someone winning twice. In this article we’re told the odds are 419 million to one. That would mean the winner would have to play the lottery every minute - for 796 years - to accomplish this using our current model. Now you see how impossible this really is with our current model.

Think about it. I’ll post more on it later.

Posted in Lottery, Philosophy, Science | 20 Comments »

April 30th, 2007 by Sean Steorn

Something I’ve been keeping my eye on for a while is Steorn.com. It’s an engineering company in Ireland, that claims to have discovered how to make a perpetual motion device. Now, of course that breaks the laws of physics :-). Nonetheless, they seem to be legit (or … at least more legit than your backyard mad scientist :-P).

They haven’t said how their technology works exactly yet - only that it is based on having magnets in a circle, and pushing an object around the circle using the magnets. They understand that people will be skeptic, so they have devised a way to prove it works — a long time ago, they took out an advertisement in a popular magazine, inviting scientists to debunk their device. The only catch is: if the device works, the scientists have to publicly state it works. Steorn had over 5000 applicants, and out of them, whittled the list down to 22 scientists with both the free time and academic background to properly investigate their device.

Pretty cool stuff! We’ll have to wait and see if it’s a hoax of some sort :-). If it is a hoax, Steorn has done an amazing job at fooling a lot of people. Check out this page on their website with two videos explaining the entire thing - and this page with their most recent video from April 13, 2007 (or you can just search YouTube).

Posted in Science | 6 Comments »

- You are currently browsing the archives for the Science category.

- ## Pages

  - Welcome!
  - Blog
  - Forums
  - Games
    - Emergence Game
    - Geiger Game
    - Lottery Game
  - Contact

- ## Experiments

  - Lottery Project, Part 1
  - Lottery Project, Part 2

- ## Categories

  - Belief Systems (28)
  - Books (7)
  - Consciousness (4)
  - Conspiracy (5)
  - Dream Phenomenon (24)
  - ESP (17)
  - How-To (11)
  - Lottery (32)
  - Note to Self (21)
  - Personal Development (17)
  - Philosophy (31)
  - Random Stuff (11)
  - Science (26)
  - Subconscious (14)
  - Uncategorized (1)
  - Video (16)
  - Website (13)

- ## Archives

  - November 2011
  - November 2010
  - June 2010
  - February 2010
  - December 2009
  - November 2009
  - October 2009
  - August 2009
  - July 2009
  - May 2009
  - April 2009
  - March 2009
  - February 2009
  - January 2009
  - November 2008
  - October 2008
  - September 2008
  - August 2008
  - July 2008
  - June 2008
  - May 2008
  - April 2008
  - March 2008
  - February 2008
  - January 2008
  - December 2007
  - November 2007
  - October 2007
  - September 2007
  - August 2007
  - July 2007
  - June 2007
  - May 2007
  - April 2007

- ## Links

  - A State of Mind
  - Dreaming to Infinity
  - Monroe Institute on YouTube
  - Shifted Perspectives
  - UC Berkeley on YouTube

- ## Meta

  - Login
  - Valid XHTML

All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2007-2009 Sean Connelly and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.
Best viewed with Firefox, with minimum resolution of 1024 x 768. Microsoft can suck my balls.
A Little Weird is proudly powered by WordPress - Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).