WilliamBlue

I have been following this, with some interest, for some time as they have shown that these random number generators have produced some interesting results. Specifically before the 9/11 and south east Asia Tsunami events, they seemed to recognize that there was something of significances was about to happen, the story is here...

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science...to_the_future/

Now they are taking it a few steps forward and allowing the data to be seen in real time. I believe that if they are able to prove that there is something that connects us in real time and maybe in pre-real time it may tie into what OG has been saying in that we are all part of a whole, although I not sure what he would say about something that seems to, in some way, predict the future. Here are some new links to look at and wonder about...

http://noosphere.princeton.edu/

http://noosphere.princeton.edu/gcindex.html

__________________
When you dance with an elephant it's up to you to not get stepped on.
How can we be so arrogant and egotistical to believe that the whole Universe was created just for us?

to_hobbes

I'll admit, I'm excited by the idea that maybe all humans are part of the same conciousness and we can actually communicate with each-other and past and future people using only our mind. Fun!

However, there is absolutely no scientific basis for this and I think those scientists at Princeton are discrediting themselves.

A random number generator? Ok, first of all, there is the "million monkeys on a million typewriters" theory -- the million-monkeys are a random-letter generator. As time goes on to infinity, the chances that something that makes perfect sense will be written goes to a 100% chance. Go ahead and write a computer program that spits out random characters, and tell the program to halt when sentance "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog." appears. The question is not, "will that program terminate?", the question is "how long will it take that program to terminate?" Its like, if you look at enough digits of the number Pi, somewhere along that infinite string of digits is a string of a billion zeros in a row.

Now, change random-letters to random numbers. Numbers have an even more vague and indefinite meaning than letters and are therefore open to even looser interpretations.

Further, significant world events, like 9/11 or the tsunamis happen at random. So consider two random-number generators running in parallel. The question is not "is there a mysterious correlation between the numbers", its is "how often will those numbers be perfectly correlated?" In other words, the chances that a random number generator correlates with significant world events is simply a question of how often, because there is a 100% chance that eventually any given finite pattern will appear at the same time on both random number generators.

WilliamBlue

If you have many random number generators all over the planet all start flipping heads at the same time for an extended period of time and then there is some kind of significant event and after the event they all return to the normal 50/50 chance of heads/tails, well then the odds of this occurring would have to be astronomical. To have it happen twice, well... I want one of these running in my house.

Yes, it is an experiment, a valid one I believe and it would have to be run over a long time to see if there is anything worthy of further pursuit.

__________________
When you dance with an elephant it's up to you to not get stepped on.
How can we be so arrogant and egotistical to believe that the whole Universe was created just for us?

to_hobbes

I read more about it on their web site, and yeah, they put a disclaimer that the data should not be interpreted. So I take it back, the scientists are not discrediting themselves. But still, I don't know...

Even if it correlations happened three or four times, the odds are staggering but still its not impossible for it to be a coincidence (by the very nature of random numbers).

An analogy: lets say someone hands you a paper tape with the digits of Pi on it. It is handed to you not from the beginning of the tape, but somewhere in the middle. But you look at the tape and for as far as you can see in both directions, there are nothing but zeros. You might theorize that someone handed you the wrong tape. Or you might theorize that Pi actually does eventually terminate despite the mathematic proofs that state otherwise. Really, you just got handed the tape where Pi happens to be a billion zeros in a row. I think this is analogous to our random number generators predicting significant human events. Maybe we are at a point in history where we got a billion zeros in a row -- that is, the random numbers coincidentally happen to correlate to significant human events often.

Now I can see the other point of view as well. In order for it to be called "science", you need a hypothesis. I'll hypothesize that humans minds are susceptible to random radiation coming from deep within the earth that can modify our behavior, and the same radiation generates the background noise from which the random numbers are generated. That would explain 9/11. Also, this radiation changes according to the plate-tectonics of the earth. That would explain the tsunami.

Now, how do you experiment to test this hypothesis? Collecting data isn't the same as an experiment. Someone needs to come up with an insightful experiment to perform.

Perhaps collecting this data is the first step towards an insight. However, without experimental data to back the hypothesis, this research won't amount to anything. And it still might just be a coincidence.

WilliamBlue

You could set off a weapon underground that would cause an earth quake, but your hypothesis may be pointed in the wrong direction to begin with as I do not see 9/11 causing a big enough bump on the tectonic plates to effect it much, but I could be wrong. Another way to test to see if there is some correlation between a lot of people dieing and the flipping of electronic coins is to kill a lot of people, but ethically that would be suspect . I have no idea what could cause something like this to occur, I could guess but many of these would be untestable at this time.

I disagree that it is not an experiment, the experiment is to see if there is some correlation between major human events and the electronic flipping of coins, whether it is a valid experiment is debatable.

__________________
When you dance with an elephant it's up to you to not get stepped on.
How can we be so arrogant and egotistical to believe that the whole Universe was created just for us?

to_hobbes

Heh, heh , no I am not saying 9/11 caused a shift in tectonic plates. I am saying if my hypothesis is accurate then radiation coming from within the earth somehow changed in intensity which influenced global consciousness which caused the terrorists to make them commit the horrible crime, and this changed intensity was detected by the random number generators. Then, a shift in the tectonic plates was also detected by the random number generators, then an under-sea earthquake happened and caused the tsunami. Of course, my hypothesis might still be way off.

Another problem with the experiment is that a "significant event" in the world is a matter of opinion -- its subjective and not objective like scientific experimentation should be. We can certainly agree that its bad when lots of people die. But how about the Democrats winning both houses of congress? Was that also predicted by the random number generators as a shift in global consciousness? Was that event good or bad? The problem with this is, as soon as you see the random number generators becoming correlated (as soon as that real-time dot on the website turns red), all you have to do is read the news and pick something bad that happened, which happens every day in Iraq, Darfur, or the Gaza Strip. Once you have your "bad event", you can say the numbers predicted it. Or you could say that on a day when the dot was mostly green or blue, nothing bad happened as long as you ignore the news.

So they want to see how often the dot turns red, and whether or not this predicts a terrible thing happening or a shift in global consciousness. The problem is they haven't defined what a "significant event" is. So I am inclined to call this non-experimental. I would say as for the scientific method (the 5-step method), they are still on step 1: observing a natural phenomenon, and they haven't even defined a hypothesis (step 2) or an experiment (step 3) yet. Without an experiment, there is no data to analyze (step 4) and no conclusions to yield (step 5).

to_hobbes

Ok WilliamBlue, I just got done reading this explanation and I think you and I are both wrong.

Experiments have been performed, but they have nothing to do with random numbers predicting the global events. It has to do with, if everyone is thinking the same kinds of thoughts at the same time, does this change the behavior of a quantum random number generator.

Now this is interesting. I think the results imply that the human mind emits energy waves in certain patterns, and that the patterns emitted have a net effect on the environment, enough so to influence tiny quantum events. In other words, when lots of people think the same thing, noticable energy patterns emerge.

Now, lets say for example, that a concrete mathematic theory was formed that allowed us to know exactly what a large group of people were thinking if they were all thinking the same thing at the same time. This would be useful, for exapmle, if the military could station 'eggs' around Iraq and then look for shifts in the random numbers to determine if lots of people were actively thinking about committing a suicide bombing. They might be able to find the evil-thinkers and stop them, or at least tighten security.

But this is also kind of creepy, it means it might be possible to read peoples minds using non-intrusive techniques, i.e. someone could read your mind and you wouldn't even know they were doing it.

WilliamBlue

Or it could mean that the Human mind is naturally connected to nature/ everything and not just a separate entity and is thus influenced/influences. There are a lot of different scenarios that I could think of that could explain the data they present, but as I said before not many are testable.

What they need is not a random number generator, but a multiple synchronous thoughts detector. What I mean is, something that is a little more attuned to whatever bandwidth the random number generators are picking up, but first you need to know there is a frequency before you can tune to it and this experiment is the start of that search?

__________________
When you dance with an elephant it's up to you to not get stepped on.
How can we be so arrogant and egotistical to believe that the whole Universe was created just for us?

romansh

There are several possible explanations four that come to mind.
in order of probability?
1 poorly construed statistics (either calculation or more likely formulation)
2 coincidence
3 correlation with a third party effect not considered.
4 a direct cause and effect

this touches on the princeton work from a while back

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...own-world.html

__________________
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. ........... Douglas Adams

AB517

My mum got sick and said “she had her baby”. My sister called to inform us. We did not know she even went to the hospital. My mom had similar events with my siblings in other areas. These event are documented else where.

What to make of them, I do not know. I do believe that with the Big Bang went a Big WOW. God was born or whatever you want to call it.