2 ms·

Taking ideas seriously is the only way to test them. If scientists hadn't once upon a time took the idea of perpetual motion machines and ESP, etc. very seriou

Taking ideas seriously is the only way to test them. If scientists hadn't once upon a time took the idea of perpetual motion machines and ESP, etc. very seriously, we could not be so certain today that they are not true. Instead of mocking someone who espouses one of these notions (which I have never found to be an effective method of convincing them that the notion is false), I wonder if encouraging them to take it more seriously (e.g., look up experiments, actually run them, etc.) would be much better t convincing them its wrong.

burgerbrain 15y ago
Perpetual motion doesn't need testing, and never did. It is a gross violation of thermodynamics, all of the science that has gone into that is sufficient. The so called inventors of cold fusion machines should make perhaps even the slightest attempt to not look like skuzzballs and actually demonstrate their work, then ask for reproductions.
disgruntledphd2 15y ago
You are aware that ESP still remains a subject of research? Some recent meta-analyses: http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=746UdU4yWacC&oi=fnd&pg=PA205&dq=esp+meta-analysis&ots=yP2hV-dltR&sig=xsUkb5c9qINOQ5e-VODPFDeyvzc#v=onepage&q=esp%20meta-analysis&f=false http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=746UdU4... Ganzfeld experiments http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/library/HonortonFerrari.pdf http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/library/HonortonFerrari.pdf Random number generators http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2006-08436-001 http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2006-08436-001 The recent feeling the future experiments: http://caps.ucsf.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bem2011.pdf http://caps.ucsf.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/be... - original article http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/100/3/426/ http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/100/3/426/ - reply by Wagenmachers et al http://dbem.ws/ResponsetoWagenmakers.pdf http://dbem.ws/ResponsetoWagenmakers.pdf -reply to the comment by Bem and Utts (a statistician who's researched widely into psi). http://www.ruudwetzels.com/articles/ClarificationsForBemUttsJohnson.pdf http://www.ruudwetzels.com/articles/ClarificationsForBemUtts... - another reply from Wagenmacher Original articles (most of them better run) showing the same results as Bem et al http://scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_18_2_radin.pdf http://scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_18_2_radin.pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.169.6146&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.169... - more commentary on this potential retrocausal influence. Now, these should be added to the 100 years plus research into all of this. Either all of the scientists involved in this research were deluded or lying, or there exist parts of the human mind that may influence the world outside themselves. Now, I suspect that these effects are quite small, but they are nonetheless interesting. Again, I note that this is extremely controversial, but arguing that ESP has been conclusively demonstrated not to exist (which would, in any case, be impossible) it might be worthwhile to figure out what the hell is going on with these experiments. There was also a meta analysis on the sense of being stared at which has never been refuted, link below. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/000712604773952449/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/00071260477395244... I actually ran an experiment on this (for my undergrad thesis) but didn't demonstrate significance (my first harsh intitiation into the importance of statistical power). On your more general point about testing ideas, no matter how crazy they seem, I totally agree, and i am saddened by the closed minded approach to many subjects displayed by scientists. I do understand though, the incentives are all wrong for this kind of unexpected research. When I was running the aforementioned experiments, I was told by most of my lecturers that I should never publish or write about this, as it would lead to me never getting a job, which is a really sad state of affairs for a science.

burgerbrain 15y ago

Perpetual motion doesn't need testing, and never did. It is a gross violation of thermodynamics, all of the science that has gone into that is sufficient. The so called inventors of cold fusion machines should make perhaps even the slightest attempt to not look like skuzzballs and actually demonstrate their work, then ask for reproductions.

disgruntledphd2 15y ago

You are aware that ESP still remains a subject of research? Some recent meta-analyses: http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=746UdU4yWacC&oi=fnd&pg=PA205&dq=esp+meta-analysis&ots=yP2hV-dltR&sig=xsUkb5c9qINOQ5e-VODPFDeyvzc#v=onepage&q=esp%20meta-analysis&f=false http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=746UdU4... Ganzfeld experiments http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/library/HonortonFerrari.pdf http://www.lfr.org/LFR/csl/library/HonortonFerrari.pdf Random number generators http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2006-08436-001 http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2006-08436-001 The recent feeling the future experiments: http://caps.ucsf.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bem2011.pdf http://caps.ucsf.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/be... - original article http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/100/3/426/ http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/100/3/426/ - reply by Wagenmachers et al http://dbem.ws/ResponsetoWagenmakers.pdf http://dbem.ws/ResponsetoWagenmakers.pdf -reply to the comment by Bem and Utts (a statistician who's researched widely into psi). http://www.ruudwetzels.com/articles/ClarificationsForBemUttsJohnson.pdf http://www.ruudwetzels.com/articles/ClarificationsForBemUtts... - another reply from Wagenmacher Original articles (most of them better run) showing the same results as Bem et al http://scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_18_2_radin.pdf http://scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_18_2_radin.pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.169.6146&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.169... - more commentary on this potential retrocausal influence. Now, these should be added to the 100 years plus research into all of this. Either all of the scientists involved in this research were deluded or lying, or there exist parts of the human mind that may influence the world outside themselves. Now, I suspect that these effects are quite small, but they are nonetheless interesting. Again, I note that this is extremely controversial, but arguing that ESP has been conclusively demonstrated not to exist (which would, in any case, be impossible) it might be worthwhile to figure out what the hell is going on with these experiments. There was also a meta analysis on the sense of being stared at which has never been refuted, link below. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/000712604773952449/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/00071260477395244... I actually ran an experiment on this (for my undergrad thesis) but didn't demonstrate significance (my first harsh intitiation into the importance of statistical power). On your more general point about testing ideas, no matter how crazy they seem, I totally agree, and i am saddened by the closed minded approach to many subjects displayed by scientists. I do understand though, the incentives are all wrong for this kind of unexpected research. When I was running the aforementioned experiments, I was told by most of my lecturers that I should never publish or write about this, as it would lead to me never getting a job, which is a really sad state of affairs for a science.