0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
You said earlier , and i quote :Quote"Psi phenomena don't exist. Placebo/nocebo effects are the autonomic nervous system at work." . End quote .Well , see what Carter had to say about that :<snip book extract>
"Psi phenomena don't exist. Placebo/nocebo effects are the autonomic nervous system at work." .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 24/10/2014 17:22:43... see what Dean radin says about entaglement in his "Entangled Minds ..." book Yeah, that's typical Radin guff alright. Invoking the counter-intuitive strangeness of quantum theory in support of ideas (e.g. psi) that contradict quantum theory. He's been publicly corrected many time over the years, but still promotes the same errors, judiciously scattering 'if's and 'maybe's around to claim plausible deniability. It's a living...
... see what Dean radin says about entaglement in his "Entangled Minds ..." book
dlorde : See also the following regarding psi phenomena and science :
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 24/10/2014 17:41:00You said earlier , and i quote :Quote"Psi phenomena don't exist. Placebo/nocebo effects are the autonomic nervous system at work." . End quote .Well , see what Carter had to say about that :<snip book extract>What about it? what are the salient points you'd like me to address?
What's exactly wrong about that particular above displayed Radin's excerpt regarding entanglement ?
I request from you to try to pinpoint exactly what you think is wrong about Carter's arguments mainly , since almost all non-materialist scientists do rely heavily on one particular interpretation of quantum theory : the conscious collapse of the wave function.
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 24/10/2014 17:48:39dlorde : See also the following regarding psi phenomena and science :OK. What's your point?
author=dlorde link=topic=52526.msg443015#msg443015 date=1414170157]Quote from: DonQuichotte on 24/10/2014 17:54:38What's exactly wrong about that particular above displayed Radin's excerpt regarding entanglement ?He's claiming the support of quantum mechanics for things, such as psi, that quantum mechanics doesn't support - and has ruled out.
QuoteI request from you to try to pinpoint exactly what you think is wrong about Carter's arguments mainly , since almost all non-materialist scientists do rely heavily on one particular interpretation of quantum theory : the conscious collapse of the wave function. That's (bolded) quite enough on its own.
"ETA - oh wait, I see you quote Carter as suggesting an energyless and instantaneous transfer of information via quantum non-locality. Sadly that too is 'not even wrong'. Whatever the mechanism, information transfer requires state change; state change requires energy. Quantum mechanics and general relativity tell us that information transfer can not exceed the speed of light, i.e. cannot be instantaneous; and quantum entanglement is actually an example of that.If Carter really made that argument, he's gone seriously off the rails in trying to use quantum mechanics to break the laws of quantum mechanics..."
... Carter says , for example , through the work of many prominent scientists ...that QM has been opening the door to the existence of psi phenomena ....that QM can account for psi phenomena ...
I am afraid i would be just distorting Carter's arguments ,since i have read him quite some time ago , that's why i have been quoting him extensively on the subject .
author=dlorde link=topic=52526.msg443020#msg443020 date=1414171634]Quote from: DonQuichotte on 24/10/2014 18:01:18... Carter says , for example , through the work of many prominent scientists ...that QM has been opening the door to the existence of psi phenomena ....that QM can account for psi phenomena ...It's simply false. There are no psi phenomena to account for, just magical and wishful thinking coupled with the capacity of the human brain for self-deception; As Feynman said, "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
Further than that, the electromagnetic force can't play a role in any putative psi effects, and quantum field theory rules out any novel fields, particles, or forces relevant to human scale interactions. For full details, see my earlier post to cheryl in this thread, #139 - particularly the video link.
QuoteI am afraid i would be just distorting Carter's arguments ,since i have read him quite some time ago , that's why i have been quoting him extensively on the subject .We want to hear your arguments, not arguments you don't understand or remember from someone else.
Don, several times David Cooper has attempted to convince you that the only aspect of consciousness that isn't entirely explained is feeling and qualia. And you appear to accept that argument in the moment but then several conversations later drift back into including under your heading of consciousness every sort of mental activity that ever occurs - memory, recognition, language, attention, problem solving and learning, beliefs, perception, creativity, and so on. Not just our experience of events involving these processes, or feelings associated with them, but anything that be can be classified as "mental." All of the above processes, along with everything else, like personality traits and volition, emotion, feeling, qualia, are in your view all carried out "somewhere else" by some other means, than the particles and forces described by Carroll. Like Stapp, you seem to take the position that none of that requires any explanation at all - it just "is." Then you look for some means like entanglement to shoe horn in a connection between your non local consciousness and the biological robot on earth, still without explaining anything about how those mental processes of non-local consciousness work. I fail to see the explanatory benefit of doing that, which is why I think that it is, deep down, a religiously motivated argument. As far as whether entanglement does provide you with some kind cosmic information highway, Carroll doesn't seem to think so, given his discussion of entanglement in these excerpts. If I understand him correctly, entanglement establishes correlations between different possible measurement outcomes - you are not actually manipulating objects at a vast distance faster than the speed of light. Perhaps Dlorde can probably summarize his explanation of entanglement better than I have.http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/05/29/visualizing-entanglement-in-real-time/http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/eternitytohere/quantum/
Carter's books prove the opposite of what Caroll 's video says .
Are all those scientists from whose work Carter supported his claims are all worng ? Seriously , come on .
Caroll says almost the same regarding QM : that no significant detectable force remains to be discovered , just minor ones that are not relevant .Well, see how a minor "anomaly " toppled classical physics through the work of Max Planck.
Here You go : Carter says on the subject :...Several points about nonlocality are worth noting. First of all, non-locality does not seem to violate special relativity’s prohibition of faster-than-light signals, as no signals are sent.