Extrasensory Perception and Quantum Models of Cognition
By Patrizio E. Tressoldi, Lance Storm, & Dean Radin.
The possibility that information can be acquired at a distance without the use of the ordinary senses, that is by “extrasensory perception” (ESP), is not easily accommodated by conventional neuroscientific assumptions or by traditional theories underlying our understanding of perception and cognition. The lack of theoretical support has marginalized the study of ESP, but experiments investigating these phenomena have been conducted since the mid‐19th century, and the empirical database has been slowly accumulating. Today, using modern experimental methods and meta‐analytical techniques, a persuasive case can be made that, neuroscience assumptions notwithstanding, ESP does exist. We justify this conclusion through discussion of one class of homogeneous experiments reported in 108 publications and conducted from 1974 through 2008 by laboratories around the world. Subsets of these data have been subjected to six meta‐analyses, and each shows significantly positive effects. The overall results now provide unambiguous evidence for an independently repeatable ESP effect. This indicates that traditional cognitive and neuroscience models, which are largely based on classical physical concepts, are incomplete. We speculate that more comprehensive models will require new principles based on a more comprehensive physics. The current candidate is quantum mechanics.
The full paper is available at the online journal NeuroQuantology.
The possibility that information can be acquired at a distance without the use of the ordinary senses, that is by “extrasensory perception” (ESP), is not easily accommodated by conventional neuroscientific assumptions or by traditional theories underlying our understanding of perception and cognition. The lack of theoretical support has marginalized the study of ESP, but experiments investigating these phenomena have been conducted since the mid‐19th century, and the empirical database has been slowly accumulating. Today, using modern experimental methods and meta‐analytical techniques, a persuasive case can be made that, neuroscience assumptions notwithstanding, ESP does exist. We justify this conclusion through discussion of one class of homogeneous experiments reported in 108 publications and conducted from 1974 through 2008 by laboratories around the world. Subsets of these data have been subjected to six meta‐analyses, and each shows significantly positive effects. The overall results now provide unambiguous evidence for an independently repeatable ESP effect. This indicates that traditional cognitive and neuroscience models, which are largely based on classical physical concepts, are incomplete. We speculate that more comprehensive models will require new principles based on a more comprehensive physics. The current candidate is quantum mechanics.
The full paper is available at the online journal NeuroQuantology.
Comments
I have been getting a stronger and stronger feeling every day that the “when will it be enough” question will be answered much sooner rather than later. This paper comes at a great time for me as well, as I am ‘attempting’ to write a higher-education textbook based on subject of Telepathy including the origins, research findings (e.g. phenomenology, and especially observational theories).
I am wandering my way through writing two chapters right now on psi mediation and the experimental phase of psi, where I am attempting to approach current parapsychological models (e.g. memory model) of psi with current models springing up in the fields of quantum mechanics and the neurosciences.
Right now I probably have about 30 papers hiding my desk from me on various relative hypothesis and theories, a copy of your book ‘Entangled Minds’ to my left, and a copy of Harvey Irwin’s ‘An Introduction to Parapsychology’ to my right, which unfortunately fell apart all over my office yesterday because I’ve been going through it so much, as I am using it as a reference for content and a reference for structure. And I am rambling, so I will wrap up. I love the paper; you certainly made my day, and keep up the incredible work. :)
Sincerely,
Theresa M. Kelly
Good one! :)
I find it fascinating that only 5-10 years ago, almost everyone were saying that entangled or coherent quantum states in biology were impossible. And now it is being discovered in photosynthesis.
Maybe in this generation progress won't be made funeral by funeral. The exposure rate of new discoveries that were supposed to be impossible can end up being so high that new fresh scientists never get to solidify their views on what is impossible anymore. I certainly hope so!
http://sitescontent.google.com/google-workshop-on-quantum-biology/
Videos should be up in a couple of weeks.
It was interesting how quantum entanglement effects are happening in biological systems like photosynthesis, micro-tubules, etc.
However, the type of energy landscape needed seems like something that would preclude these processes being involved in psi experiments.
I came away thinking that psi must be utilizing something that goes beyond quantum entanglement or our current understanding. People admit quantum theory is more a metaphor in this regard and I can agree at least to that.
loosely anyways
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0415058988/ref=s9_simh_gw_p14_d2_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_r=0XG72XZWP5E9M76CZ875&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938811&pf_rd_i=507846
Is this a replication of Schlitz's study in Julliard School? If so, there are more replications?
before I quited smoking I was much more the "creative musician type" and had much greater ESP. I quite smoking two years ago and for some reason I have become much more "analytical" and do not have nearly the same amount of ESP......
http://www.liebertonline.com/toc/acm/16/11
I thought it was great. I don't usually see articles that go into that much detail on psi phenomena, even the positive ones.
http://www.hplusmagazine.com/editors........
to
http://tinyurl.com/2ep55ke
As for the paper Dean mentions, I will take a look at it. I'd be particularly interested in the criticisms of the paper. I have been reading "Psi Wars" by Alcock Burns and Freeman, and I find the sceptics' positions very interesting. How is it that the same data can produce such polarised conclusions. Personally, I'm not worried about it, as my understanding of some psi-related phenomena is experience-based, not intellectual, but the whole 'debate' does shed light on the way human beings think and perceive the world, including the way they 'analyse' intellectual information.
Cool to find this connection.
Cool to find this connection.
Ah,
the Quantum Lady delivers
us two
the superposition of
chivalry and treachery
to
leave us uncertain in her
wake
exhausted from the
Lechery.
Killeans Row.