> I have the hypothesis that the set of measurable effects is smaller than the set of all true things. This seems to be an indisputable fact, at least for "sc

> I have the hypothesis that the set of measurable effects is smaller than the set of all true things. This seems to be an indisputable fact, at least for "scientifically measurable" effects that is. I've been trying to explicitly carve out the phenomena where modern science doesn't cover, and in short, they are the things that are: non-repeatable (on demand) in laboratory settings involving subjective experiences. Your wife's experiences is a perfect example of that. It's interesting because one can relax the requirements for evidence and still learn something coherent about the world.