Told you so

"A series of quantum experiments shows that measurements performed in the future can influence the present." Read the article in Discover magazine.

Those of us conducting and publishing experiments in presentiment and precognition have been empirically demonstrating varieties of retrocausation for decades.

I look forward to the day when prejudices decline to the point that we don't have to wait for a few physicists to seriously entertain a topic before popular science editors feel comfortable enough to report on well established empirical effects.


Machina Labs said…
"In other words, you can see the effects of the future on the past only after carrying out millions of repeat experiments and tallying up the results to produce a meaningful pattern."

That seems so...familiar, like Deja vu all over again.

Oh wait, our experiments can demonstrate the effects of the future on the past only after conducting a few hundred repeat experiments.

Makes me think. Actually, it makes me want to develop a coincidence counter for psi tasks. That's the only way that these physics experiments can detect these effects - they collect millions of bits of uninteresting data, just to get one event demonstrating something exotic. Millions.
Tor said…
I'm worried that human nature will always contain some prejudice. It could change though. Maybe if contemplative practice methods became part of our educational upbringing it could create more openness.
YouTubeChef said…
The anomaly in the experiment when they abandon the final step is very akin to Everett's Many-Worlds Interpretation and Schrodinger's Cat thought paradox where reality "splits" into alternative probabilities.

In the case of this experiment when the choice was to abandon the final-step and the event still measured in the past; it is from the future probability where the choice is not abandoned and the result still measures.

This is valuable research as we need more knowledge of non-linear and non-locality through quantum mechanics.

We exist in a probability field with a very thin band of what actually actualizes and becomes our census reality. Experiments like this really give weight to multi-dimensionality, which we as consciousness already exist and dreams are examples of splits in self-awareness in a multi-dimensional state.

What a grand Universe indeed.
Tor said…
From the article:

“The goal is to find out whether Mother Nature has been doing her own postselections, causing these unexpected effects to appear,” Davies says.

Sounds eerily similar to the conclusion of the group who looked at quantum effects in photosynthesis. I predict that these findings will be nothing compared to the realization that happens when psi research enters the mainstream, and where consciousness suddenly enters square in the middle. The spiral is turning Dean!
Skiba said…
Wasn't this demonstrated by the "delayed choice quantum eraser experiment" years ago?
Mike said…
Psi phenomena, one day, will become commonly accepted. I just hope I live to experience such as renaissance.
Dean Radin said…
> Wasn't this demonstrated by the "delayed choice quantum eraser experiment" years ago?

Yes, pretty much, although not discussed in terms of "weak measurement."
K.L.Wright said…
Just another indicator that your excellent researches are on the right track. Follow your curiosity: it can't steer you wrong.
MickyD said…
Dean, I read you have contributed a chapter in Debating Psychic Experiences. I am debating (!) whether to buy it. What's your opinion of the book in general and the pro / skeptic contributions?
Gareth said…
I would also be interested in your opinion of the Debating Psychic Experiences book. Does it provide a fairly balanced coverage?
Dean Radin said…
Debating Psychic Experience: Human Potential or Human Illusion?

I just received my copy. I think it provides a good summary of both sides of the debate. I am interested to see what readers who are not already deeply immersed in this literature will have to say.

I suspect that, as usual, those who are already sympathetic to psi will be persuaded more by the arguments of the psi advocates, and those who are not, won't.
MickyD said…
.......but given the overwhelming database in favour of psi effects (at least in the lab), are the skeptic positions portrayed in the book tenable or do they re-hash the same outdated arguments?
Dean Radin said…
All I see are re-hashes of old criticisms and arguments first offered a century ago.

My reading of the literature is quite clear: The state of empirical psi research continues to advance while the state of skepticism continues to stagnate. It doesn't take precognition to guess who will eventually win that type of debate. How long "eventually" will be depends on how many people are actively engaged in research.
Dean Radin said…
You can now read part of the book Debating Psychic Experience on Google Books.
matthewx78 said…
Pertaining to the Post -WOW!
Helen said…
Hi Dean, I read some of the google books Debating psychic experiences. I admit I glossed over some of the material on debunking tarot, astrology etc, it just doesn’t seem very relevant. I think that is a different debate about the industry around a nugget of something that we can’t yet explain.

I thought Chris French’s entry was good, I agreed with him that there is a middle ground of people who want to look at the challenging questions and admit they don’t yet have an answer, but probably have biases over what the answer might be.

However I have also seen Chris on a TV programme in the UK and he took part in a supposedly scientific test of a psychic who apparently needed to score more than chance in a test of three real-life target places (not cards, but places that were hard to describe in vague terms). The psychic got one, hands down, very accurate, and not really the other two. Chris admitted it was a hit but said that it was chance and labelled the psychic over-imaginative. Anyone watching would think that either the one hit was very impressive and be drawn to the psychic, or, think that Chris was a hero for debunking him. I personally think that there was zero science in that programme and a hundred percent marketing (for both sides of the debate).
FloatingBones said…
Thanks for putting up the link to this article, Dean. I thought it was a fascinating article and very well-written. It's an exceedingly difficult concept to get across. I understand the major brush-strokes of the article and will review it again in a few days.

The inability to provide a concrete test of whether it's possible to rewrite history is obviously noteworthy. Currently, there are also a myriad of experiments happening to see if information can travel faster than the speed of light. No way to pass information faster than the speed of light has been found. To this lay person, the problems seem highly related to each other.

It's interesting that we seem to be much more comfortable thinking about the faster-than-light problem than the time travel one. On the other hand, having a reliable information conduit faster than the speed of light would also have a massive impact on our science as well as our psyche.
Julio Siqueira said…
Very interesting post. Just out of curiosity, check out the link below (a crazy "production" from me...)

Best Wishes,

Popular posts from this blog

Feeling the future meta-analysis

Show me the evidence

Skeptic agrees that remote viewing is proven