As I suggested earlier in the thread, a lot of the apparent coincidence between plots and real life are probably down to selective memory. I happen to believe that most examples of "psychic powers" are either (a) selective memory, or (b) a demonstration of the degree to which the subconscious mind feeds data to our conscious mind without us being aware of it.

Of course, there is also (c): auto suggestion. People can be remarkably good at persuading themselves that black is blue, if they decide they want to believe it is. Way back when I was at primary school, our whole class was taken on a visit to a local farm, to show us how they work and what farming involves. While showing us around the milking sheds, the farmer showed us the equipment, and explained how it was attached to the cows' udders; except that he referred to the udders as "teats". When we got back to school, and the teacher wasn't around to overhear, one boy insisted that the farmer had said "tits", and would not take any argument to the contrary. Within a matter of minutes, virtually everyone else in the class was utterly convinced that this is what the farmer had really said. Because, of course, to have an adult say a rude word was much more exciting than if he had just used a word that they associated with a baby's bottle.


Alex

Actually he (farmer) refered to the 'ends' of the udders as teats which is indeed where the milking macine is attached to.



<Added>

oops, 'referred' and 'machine'

We are mortal and not possessed of supernatural powers

.

That is a belief. Nobody can say that for sure, because the doubts/considerations about such things work equally in both directions. It isn't given to us to know for definite, so the people who claim there is no such thing as psychic ability are just as misguided as those who state there is.

I think an open mind is one that can float any esoteric idea without damning or confirming it. At the end of the day, you can only go by your own experience and no one call tell you otehrwise.

JB

...would be unscientific to discount a theory simply because it cannot yet be proved or disproved

It's a common misconception that a theory (in science, as opposed to mathematics*) can ever be proven. It cannot; it can only be disproven. In fact, the most logical way of viewing any experiment is as an attempt to disprove the theory it sets out to test.

Positive outcomes of experiments add weight to a theory, but they don't prove it. Negative outcomes either disprove a theory completely or else establish limits to how accurate the theory is.

* In mathematics, of course, a proof is absolute and incontrovertible.


Alex

Nothing is what we think it is anyway. Our five senses veil most of 'reality' from us, and Einstein proved that time is an illusion, the measurement between between cause and effect.

We are conditioned to 'see' things in the 'suddenly syndrome' way i.e things appear to happen with no root 'cause'. A sudden illness, a sudden windfall, a sudden accident.

But, in truth, that isn't the case.

Everything has a cause, and an effect. That is the nature of the universe, so the idea of 'predicting' these things isn't so crazy when you consider there is in, in actual fact, only one moment in time - now. And in a cause and effect universe, everything happens for a reason.

JB

<Added>

Most of 'reality' is made up of atoms. If everything in the universe were compressed down to what it actually is, scientists reckon it would fit in a matchbox!

Einstein proved that time is an illusion

He proved that, mathematically, it behaves like one of the space dimensions (length, breadth, height), and that time differences can therefore distort in the same way as perspective distorts spatial dimensions. So far, no one has disproved this idea.

Most of 'reality' is made up of atoms

Atoms are relatively big entities. Physicists have a lot of ways of characterising things, but a good generalisation would be to say that "reality" consists of matter and energy, and that the two are directly equivalent (liked through the famous E=mc2 - that's a "squared", not a "two").

If everything in the universe were compressed down to what it actually is, scientists reckon it would fit in a matchbox

A very small matchbox. According to some versions of the Big Bang theory, it started off as a singularity, which is a dimensionless point. Quite how it didn't therefore remain as a Black Hole, I've never really understood.


Alex

Quite how it didn't therefore remain as a Black Hole, I've never really understood.

It has something to do with a Pea Instanton.

Why that seemingly random fact has bobbed to the surface of my memory I don’t quite know?

Grinder

It has something to do with a Pea Instanton

Not to be confused with an inspiron, which is the particle that, in interacting with the human brain, gives rise to inspiration.

Or so Terry Pratchett says...


Alex

Wow it's all such a huge subject isn't it? Nice to have a mathematical point of view Alex, as I'm just chucking stuff into the brew I've learnt through Kabbalah, Zen and studies of other religions compared to pop science.

I always liked Terry Pratchet's 'L-Space' (or Library space)theory - the discipline made possible by the "discovery of the bi-directional nature of Library Space. The thaumic mathematics are complex, but boil down to the fact that all books, everywhere, affect all other books. Books inspire other books written in the future and cite books written in the past. But the General theory of L-Space suggests that, in that case, the contents of books as yet unwritten can be deduced from books now in
existence.

There are a lot of parodies of physics in Terry's writing, if you know what to look for. L-space is a good one (a parody of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics). Then there's the whole magic thing at Unseen University (a "high energy magic" building - very reminiscent of high-energy physics departments). There's also my favourite parody: Hex, the wizards' "computer" that calculates magic spells. The first time I came across that, I fell about laughing. Especially with the "anthill inside" sticker and the 4 rams' skulls (presumably a parody of 4M of RAM). And who can forget his version of the Big Bang theory? Turtles, carrying worlds on their backs, getting together en-masse to mate and make more turtles. There's even a non-parody of relativity, in "Thief of Time", where the slowing down of time is inextricably linked with moving very rapidly.

If anyone is interested in a non-mathematical description of Relativity, I can recommend a book called, simply, "Relativity", by Albert Einstein himself. I spent ages trying to get my head around the concepts of Special Relativity (i.e. the simple version) when I was an undergraduate. Then I read this book, and it was like a flash of light. The Great Man himself reduces the whole thing to such a neat, simple concept that the whole business of time dilation suddenly becomes obvious, never mind easy to understand.


Alex

Terry is ok, if not horrendously hit-and-miss, and as far as I'm concerned, he's a one trick pony. Face it, there are far too many Discworld books! I gave up after the first fifteen or so. I recently picked up Going Postal, but just didn't have the mental energy for it. After page 3, I felt like I'd already read it.

No offence. I know lots of people love it, but I like there to be endings to things. Discworld is becoming the fantasy equivalent of Coronation Street.

For me, no one will ever beat Douglas Adams for taking the p*** out of the universe with such side-splitting results.

In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.

Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.

Douglas Adams

Wait...doesn't anyone want to make the point that this has implications about time itself?
Have you ever thought that time itself doesn't acutally exist as a set line.....it's just a series of events that only seem to be seperated by the cognitive processes of brains. (each piece of info has to be processed, therefore each new one has to be processed afterwards, therefore seems like time is passing.)
So, if you can somehow "tap" into this "future", then you would be able to process a piece of information by.....oh forget it.
You probably think I'm out of my mind.

Bu my other theory is this "universal conscience". If you have a thought, and hold onto it for long enough or hard enough (with emotion), then perhaps somebody on the other side of the planet feels that thought because of it. Scientists did an experiment on this, with two sets of orang-utans that were located several miles apart, but as one set discovered how to escape their cage, using the lock, the others escaped at exactly the same time, showing the same behavioural mannerisms in an odd change in behaviour. Weird no?

Somehow, being religious, I think it is God himself listening to your very thoughts, so if you have a dream or something that really touches you, means alot to you, then perhaps God causes it to happen. Many people believe the exact reverse of this, saying that dreams and deja vu are signs from God.

If you want to know whether I'm psychic or not, then perhaps, but not to the extent where I can accurately predict the future.
I know there have been three incidents, all involving a pen falling from nowhere, where I have had the weirdest sense of deja vu occuring, right before the pen drops. It usually occured when I was in the same place, doing the same thing, and occasionally the exact same sequence of events took place. It always got to me.

Plus, there are times where somebody has been coming up to me, and I have answered their question before they speak. You may think this is merely because I know the people and have logged the previous conversation and topic from the last meeting, and am just quick at recalling it.
Well, I saw my father and I said "John Tavener" then, he paused, and I said "you want it back.", now you may think this is because I had his CD and as listening to it, and had it at the forefront of my mind, but I hadn't touched the CD! I don't listen to that music! I had just go loads of CDs that I thought were mine and shoved them in my room!
And another time I have said "9.35" as somebody opens their mouth, and they say "thanks" because it's like I can read what they are going to say.
(internal nervious laugh occurs here)

Maybe it's because people are predictable, perhaps that's why psychologists can predict behaviour, so, maybe I'm just a good reader of people.
SCARY! I can read you!
WOOOOOOOOOOH!

Laughs to self.

Simon.

Well, yes, this one does.

I know I should probably go back and read the entire thread, but I have a fair idea what I'd find.

I look forward to the day when people move back into their power and realise that all this 'spooky' stuff is actually normal, and that spirits are here to help us not to frighten us.

We have made our lives so difficult because we have chosen to ignore and forget our birthright. Misery is a choice just as happiness is. Why, oh why, do so many of us choose to be miserable?

Just try this, reach out with unconditional love and see what happens to your life.

John

Simon,

I have had several of the same things happen to me with my daughter who I am extremely close to.

When she was a little girl, I was thinking about what to cook for dinner, and was going to go up into her bedroom and ask her what she fancied. She came downstairs before I got around to going up there and said 'fishfingers and chips please.' Somehow she knew what I was going to ask.

I believe we are all 'psychic' to a certain extent. How many times have you been humming a tune only to switch the radio on and it is playing. Or been thinking about a person only for the phone to ring and it is them.

We use about 20% of our brains, so what is the other dormant bit for? maybe it's the psychic part of our brains which we are not advanced enough to be able to use yet.

Maybe future generations will use all of their brains and be telepathic and psychic.

And maybe I am talking a load of b******s

Kat

Maybe future generations will use all of their brains and be telepathic and psychic.

Or just use them enough not to destroy the planet or the race.

I wonder how true that 20% figure really is? I've often heard it quoted, yet it's a fact that if someone has a stroke or a head injury, and loses some proportion of their brain (even a tiny proportion), the result can be devastating. For example, my father suffered polio-encephalitis while he was in Malaya in the army in 1949, and as a result his speech was seriously affected. I, my brother and my Mum could understand him, but most others couldn't (and I've always been convinced that this was where my ability to learn languages came from: I grew up having to know how to listen carefully).

I think a lot of that "spare" capacity is a mixture of redundancy and memory space (of which the human brain has a huge amount). Luckily for us, God and natural selection between them opted for a better solution than the kind of bare-bones no-capacity-for-the-unforeseen approach adopted by the NHS and the like. It's kind of amusing to think of something random like natural selection being more intelligent than the bean-counters who run this country. (Okay, I'll get down off my soapbox now.)


Alex