Random Number generators and conciousness
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-07-2017, 12:27 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:24 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  You need to actually have a counter argument, as I stated in the final paragraph. Otherwise you are engaged in a belief system and your argument (or superstition) can be brushed aside.

According to The Age, Nelson concedes "the data, so far, is not solid enough for global consciousness to be said to exist at all. It is not possible, for example, to look at the data and predict with any accuracy what (if anything) the eggs may be responding to."


Nelson is one of the authors of the paper you linked. Nelson has refuted your claim.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
05-07-2017, 12:30 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:27 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 11:43 AM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  On September 11, 2001, the World Trade Centers were destroyed in a globally well-known terrorist attack. The entire world was focused on that singular event for the entire day, and the days immediately following. There was no air traffic permitted over the entire United States, with the exception of military aircraft. Almost every business closed, and people went home, glued to their televisions.

What the 7 billion people of the planet did not know was that there were computers that were stationed all around the world to generate random (Chaotic) number sequences that ran 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. There were dozens of them pumping out intentionally designed chaotic information for studying random
behavior, and pumping all of that chaotic data to Princeton, and they suddenly started deviating from this randomness. The instruments inexplicably began producing order out of Chaos*, to a mathematically impossible degree, on a Quantum Scale, to a planetary scale, all over the planet, all at the same time, and the formal hypothesis is that Consciousness, on a planetary scale, caused this effect, from a Quantum Scale, to a planetary scale.


Here quoted from a paper by Princeton researcher R. D. Nelson, "These deviations also correlate with a quantitative index of daily news intensity. Focused analyses of data recorded on September 11, 2001, show departures from random expectation in several statistics."

The entire pdf is currently available at: http://noosphere.princeton.edu/papers/gcpfpl.pdf

On September 11, 2001, during the terrorist attacks, and immediately following, the z score of all of the random number generators jumps to +2; in mathematical terms, absolutely impossible. Against the normal background noise, the certainty is 99.8%. Later in the day, when the news has spread worldwide, that z score jumps to 3.8, and over that 7 hour period an impossible 6.5 (the graph shown only extends to 4.0) - an impossibility in terms of randomness. A z value of 6.5 designates certain order out of chaos. If you read the paper carefully, you will note that the z score actually falls into the negative, indicating greater randomness (more chaotic) with even greater significance the day before the attacks.

What does all of this actually mean? It means that there is quantifiable proof that is hard data, reproducible, peer reviewed, and mathematically evaluated to the following statement – e.g., the hypothesis that Consciousness on a global scale effects order on a Quantum to a planetary scale is confirmed. When the people of the world focus on something it changes the randomness of the local (Earth proximity extending out to we do not know how far) environment such that the entire system of nature itself, the physics of everything - becomes more ordered. It states that chaos, true randomness, decreases measurably, significantly, and reproducibly to a degree that is impossible to occur spontaneously. By having a large number of people focus on a thing, we can quantify an impossibly large change in the background randomness of nature itself, from a Quantum Scale all the way up to a planetary macroscopic scale. Furthermore, we can quantify the fact to an impossibly large degree that the focus of attention to a specific event precedes the actual event by a macroscopic scale of several days. The awareness of the general population of the planet is that the event will occur in the future, days before the events occur. Foreknowledge is for the first time measured and quantified, and affects all of nature from a Quantum Scale to a planetary macroscopic scale. Consciousness is measured and quantified to affect all of nature from a Quantum Scale to a planetary macroscopic scale. Consciousness is measured and quantified to affect both order and chaos in nature from a Quantum Scale to a planetary macroscopic scale.

If you have issues with this interpretation, keep in mind that this is explicitly stated by the authors who are from the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Princeton University and published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. A counter argument requires more than an ideological disagreement. This particular case has been argued for many years with no solid refutable argument emerging from the scientific community. It remains unanswered but well characterized.

So I skimmed the paper.

I'm not qualified to analyze or dispute the methodology, so I didn't focus on it that much. What I was looking for would have been in the Discussion section, because it struck me as odd that they were concluding some sort of direct impact on RNGs by mass human consciousness. This did not seem to be a scientific conclusion based on the evidence described. At the very least, I wanted to see both (A) the authors' reasoning, and (B) what other explanations the authors addressed.

And there were plenty of other possible explanations. Just thinking through it for a few minutes, I came up with two alternative explanations:

* Significant distraction by the operators of these devices, which may have compromised the data. Did the authors go back and double-check to see that the devices were being logged and operated correctly in the hours after 9/11?

* Worldwide change in how, say, radio was being used. Photons interact with quantum effects, after all, and grounding all planes would have eliminated a lot of radio waves from the skies above the RNG devices. Similarly, worldwide media consumption and broadcasting changed in character. The same footage, be it video of the planes striking or various news conferences, was being broadcast on repeat on radio and television. The random noise of the airwaves was suddenly less random. Would this interfere with the quantum number generators? Could there be some other link, not based on media but based on more physical phenomena rather than a semi-mystical consciousness-influencing-the-quantum? How would the authors correct for this?

So I was looking for how, or whether, the authors would address these points.

The authors didn't, because they did not conclude some sort of quantum-influencing consciousness. In fact, the only thing they said on the subject was this:

"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."

In context, it is not clear whether they're referring to a more mystical sense of human-consciousness influencing things (like positive vibes or whatever), or a more conventional sense (like grounding planes and changing media usage). But looking at the sources they're citing, they seem to be pretty cognizant of the more woo-ish version. This raised a third possibility in my mind: Deliberate fraud by a proponent of this theory. It wouldn't be the first time this happened in science, and if this experiment was properly conducted then there would be controls in place to prevent such frauds from occurring. Were they in place here?

Well.... the paper doesn't say. But there is clearly a fraud at work here, because of this.

"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."

(05-07-2017 11:43 AM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  It means that there is quantifiable proof that is hard data, reproducible, peer reviewed, and mathematically evaluated to the following statement – e.g., the hypothesis that Consciousness on a global scale effects order on a Quantum to a planetary scale is confirmed.

.....

.... okay, let's see if I can make this fraud a bit clearer.


"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."

(05-07-2017 11:43 AM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  It means that there is quantifiable proof that is hard data, reproducible, peer reviewed, and mathematically evaluated to the following statement – e.g., the hypothesis that Consciousness on a global scale effects order on a Quantum to a planetary scale is confirmed.

....

.... maybe I can make the fraudulence even clearer than that.

"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."

(05-07-2017 11:43 AM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  It means that there is quantifiable proof that is hard data, reproducible, peer reviewed, and mathematically evaluated to the following statement – e.g., the hypothesis that Consciousness on a global scale effects order on a Quantum to a planetary scale is confirmed.

..... I have a particular loathing, sir-or-madam, for liars, con-artists, and frauds, and you have just shown this to be the nature of your character.

You have presented no evidence to refute my claims, and are therefore engaged in a cognitive belief system...move along.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 12:33 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:30 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 12:27 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  So I skimmed the paper.

I'm not qualified to analyze or dispute the methodology, so I didn't focus on it that much. What I was looking for would have been in the Discussion section, because it struck me as odd that they were concluding some sort of direct impact on RNGs by mass human consciousness. This did not seem to be a scientific conclusion based on the evidence described. At the very least, I wanted to see both (A) the authors' reasoning, and (B) what other explanations the authors addressed.

And there were plenty of other possible explanations. Just thinking through it for a few minutes, I came up with two alternative explanations:

* Significant distraction by the operators of these devices, which may have compromised the data. Did the authors go back and double-check to see that the devices were being logged and operated correctly in the hours after 9/11?

* Worldwide change in how, say, radio was being used. Photons interact with quantum effects, after all, and grounding all planes would have eliminated a lot of radio waves from the skies above the RNG devices. Similarly, worldwide media consumption and broadcasting changed in character. The same footage, be it video of the planes striking or various news conferences, was being broadcast on repeat on radio and television. The random noise of the airwaves was suddenly less random. Would this interfere with the quantum number generators? Could there be some other link, not based on media but based on more physical phenomena rather than a semi-mystical consciousness-influencing-the-quantum? How would the authors correct for this?

So I was looking for how, or whether, the authors would address these points.

The authors didn't, because they did not conclude some sort of quantum-influencing consciousness. In fact, the only thing they said on the subject was this:

"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."

In context, it is not clear whether they're referring to a more mystical sense of human-consciousness influencing things (like positive vibes or whatever), or a more conventional sense (like grounding planes and changing media usage). But looking at the sources they're citing, they seem to be pretty cognizant of the more woo-ish version. This raised a third possibility in my mind: Deliberate fraud by a proponent of this theory. It wouldn't be the first time this happened in science, and if this experiment was properly conducted then there would be controls in place to prevent such frauds from occurring. Were they in place here?

Well.... the paper doesn't say. But there is clearly a fraud at work here, because of this.

"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."


.....

.... okay, let's see if I can make this fraud a bit clearer.


"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."


....

.... maybe I can make the fraudulence even clearer than that.

"... extensive further replication is needed before proposals of a causal or otherwise direct link between human consciousness and the output of the network generators can be convincingly advanced."


..... I have a particular loathing, sir-or-madam, for liars, con-artists, and frauds, and you have just shown this to be the nature of your character.

You have presented no evidence to refute my claims, and are therefore engaged in a cognitive belief system...move along.

You have presented nothing that merits refutation. It says "may", and they (and you) have presented no mechanism, and nothing but a correlation.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 12:34 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:23 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 12:08 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  But, for the sake of argument, lets assume there is a global consciousness.
How does that disprove that every individual human being has an individual consciousness based on electricity and chemistry? Please enlighten me Drinking Beverage

The burden of proof is on the neuroscientists and biologists who claim consciousness is localized in the brain...they need to explain how such an impossibility happened.

This is impossible how and why exactly? Drinking Beverage

You have claimed that the experiment has disproven consciousness on a individual level. You were just too much of a coward, and thus did hide behind the "please enlighten me" part. Thumbsup
Want evidence for that? You just called it "impossibility" again Facepalm
When fighting your enemy, dont provide them with bullets.

Scientists have provided proof (as far as availiable yet) for their claim. You are free to reject that proof.

But back on track: Existing (or not) prooof by scientists notwithstanding, what exactly has GCP to do with consciousness on an individual level?
What is your comment on Nelson himself admitting that his data is inconclusive? Consider

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
05-07-2017, 12:36 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:23 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  The burden of proof is on the .... who claim ......they need to explain how such an impossibility happened.

(05-07-2017 12:30 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  You have presented no evidence to refute my claims, and are therefore engaged in a cognitive belief system...move along.

Facepalm

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 12:39 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 12:30 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  You have presented no evidence to refute my claims, and are therefore engaged in a cognitive belief system...move along.

You have presented nothing that merits refutation. It says "may", and they (and you) have presented no mechanism, and nothing but a correlation.

You must not have
a) not even looked at the paper
b) looked at it but did not understand the implications due to a lack of understanding of statistic or how RNG work

I tend to think of it as a ‘smoking gun’ with no explanation. Our science and philosophy have insufficient experience with this type of phenomenon required to explain it. It has never been done before, and the phenomenon was unexpected. Mathematicians monitoring the 37 global Random Number Generators (RNG) suddenly observed an impossible deviation that September 11. Looking at the RNGs over a many year period and using that as a background, the phenomenon described appears to be the only likely cause. Furthermore, it was not a localized effect; all of the 37 global RNGs being monitored showed this same deviation worldwide.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 12:55 PM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2017 01:07 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:39 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  You must not have
a) not even looked at the paper
b) looked at it but did not understand the implications due to a lack of understanding of statistic or how RNG work

I tend to think of it as a ‘smoking gun’ with no explanation. Our science and philosophy have insufficient experience with this type of phenomenon required to explain it. It has never been done before, and the phenomenon was unexpected. Mathematicians monitoring the 37 global Random Number Generators (RNG) suddenly observed an impossible deviation that September 11. Looking at the RNGs over a many year period and using that as a background, the phenomenon described appears to be the only likely cause. Furthermore, it was not a localized effect; all of the 37 global RNGs being monitored showed this same deviation worldwide.

Obviously I read it. I QUOTED from it.

It's *not even* a smoking gun. You are totally biased. It was not an "impossible deviation" if it happened. Very highly unlikely events happen all the time. Obviously you don't have any background in Probability Theory. You have JUMPED to a conclusion (without a mechanism and without justification) as you WANT it to be there.

Your crap is nothing but woo. We KNOW the conditions from which consciousness arises. You have no rational justification to *jump* to your (biased belief based) conclusion.

The entire position is irrational. If the total number of humans who are conscious can act somehow "together", and the phenomenon witnessed is seen once, and attributable to a cause such as this, then there would be gradations of the same phenomenon seen at other times, in greater or lesser degrees. For example, when billions of people are watching the Super Bowl, or the Oscars, or any other major news event, or worldwide phenomenon, there would be other gradations of the same phenomenon seen. Is that ever seen ? No. Did THEY have other data periods ? No. Are they ever seen ? No. Conclusion : it's woo bullshit.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
05-07-2017, 01:10 PM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2017 01:30 PM by mmhm1234.)
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 12:55 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(05-07-2017 12:39 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  You must not have
a) not even looked at the paper
b) looked at it but did not understand the implications due to a lack of understanding of statistic or how RNG work

I tend to think of it as a ‘smoking gun’ with no explanation. Our science and philosophy have insufficient experience with this type of phenomenon required to explain it. It has never been done before, and the phenomenon was unexpected. Mathematicians monitoring the 37 global Random Number Generators (RNG) suddenly observed an impossible deviation that September 11. Looking at the RNGs over a many year period and using that as a background, the phenomenon described appears to be the only likely cause. Furthermore, it was not a localized effect; all of the 37 global RNGs being monitored showed this same deviation worldwide.

Obviously I read it. I QUOTED from it.

It's *not even* a smoking gun. You are totally biased. It was not an "impossible deviation" if it happened. Very highly unlikely events happen all the time. Obviously you don't have any background in Probability Theory. You have JUMPED to a conclusion (without a mechanism and without justification) as you WANT it to be there.

Your crap is nothing but woo. We KNOW the conditions from which consciousness arises. You have no rational justification to *jump* to your (biased belief based) conclusion.


k
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 01:21 PM
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
Ah, Kallista. Fine computer indeed; I do believe that was one of Eris's postgrad CompSci projects. {Springy G logs onto the system as root and reconfigures a few things to make the world even weirder}

You're welcome. Angel

I'm sorry, but your beliefs are much too silly to take seriously. Got anything else we can discuss?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-07-2017, 01:33 PM (This post was last modified: 05-07-2017 01:43 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Random Number generators and conciousness
(05-07-2017 01:10 PM)mmhm1234 Wrote:  Biologists think by sticking an EEG on someones's head and seeing electrical activity they have discovered consciousness.

Wrong. Neurologists who read EEG's never say that. EEG's detect electrical activity, which AT TIMES correlate with consciousness. They are not, (nor are they claimed to be) the same.

Quote:Consciousness has been termed that thing that makes squiggly lines on an EEG, being awake, others make claims regarding quantum level activity in the substructures of the brain, which of course can neither be affirmed.

Who are these people YOU CLAIM make these claims ? References required.

Quote:Let me completely reword this. Let’s pretend I am a neurobiologist and I do not know ding-dong about quantum anything. I spend my days sticking needles in monkey brains measuring electrochemical processes in an effort to comprehend consciousness, for whatever reason, I think this path will work. What I don’t know, because I don’t know anything about Quantum Mechanics is that all electromagnetic, and I mean that to include all electrochemical processes, are defined as an exchange of virtual photons. These virtual photons arise out of the Quantum Electrodynamic Vacuum (pure absolute nothingness) whose energy is ‘borrowed’ via the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, exchange information between two points in space-time and then annihilate spontaneously back into the QED Vacuum again. These Virtual Photons exist in a timeless domain, outside of space-time, they do not experience space or time. In a sense we can say that they exist in an infinitely time dilated state. These are your thoughts, even on a rudimentary electrochemical level. It is more correct to think of the direction of time as being the wrong question to ask. It (the Virtual Photon) is carrying information to a conscious observer. If the conscious observer were in a finite time domain that were, in fact, going asymmetrically forward, then it would have to be the conscious observer who is causing this asymmetric time to exist, and making it go forward, because the photon cannot, prior to reaching the conscious observer, on its own. That is, the photon cannot unwrap itself into asymmetric time. There is a type of handshake in time put forth by Feynman-Wheeler. This temporal handshake comes to life in this description of the exchange of Virtual Photons as the electrochemical processes that make up the activity in your physical brain. In which case, the 'time exists and it is going forward' is not actually a property or artifact of this universe, but of consciousness selection, just as in the outcome of any process of Quantum Decoherence. If the conscious observer and not an artifact of this universe cause the existence and selection of the direction of time, then consciousness cannot exist in or be an artifact of this universe, because it is bringing about a process that does not and cannot occur in this universe. That is, our Feynman-Wheeler temporal handshake is temporally symmetric. The asymmetry we observe has never been described in any model of Quantum Mechanics, ever. All models agree that the observed asymmetry is a selective process, not an actual property of this universe. The exchange of Virtual Photons that make up the electrochemical processes of the physical brain are temporally symmetric, and yet we select temporal asymmetry to the extent that we completely ignore the temporal symmetry of the universe as it actually is.

No wonder you buy woo. That's the biggest pile of crap I ever read. Take some basic science, instead of reading woo books.

Quote:The physical brain has no possible means to unwrap the timeless, infinitely time dilated information in the virtual photons that make up its own electromagnetic processes. It is also not capable of transforming forward asymmetric temporal (time) information about its environment into infinitely time dilated zero symmetry information and/or back again. The physical brain, then, cannot be the ultimate recipient or initiator of information, but can only serve as some conduit through which information can flow in either direction. That is, assuming the physical brain plays any role at all in this process.

Yes it does. Clearly you know NOTHING about Neuro-science or how memories are stored, and how brain SYSTEMS work. We KNOW that physical brains ARE ALL THERE IS, as we know consciousness is absent in healthy brains, and we KNOW what systems and functions EXACTLY are impaired when CERTAIN parts of brains are injured and diseased. Clearly you don't.

Quote:Something must mediate the transfer of virtual photons because all electrochemical processes are the transfer of virtual photons,

Absolutely FALSE. Look it up.

Quote:You now have to derive a mechanism where the physical brain mediates and controls virtual photons existing in a timeless domain, which in turn are the source of the function of the physical brain.

I KNEW this was woo bullshit, based on nothing but woo ignorance.
"So the photon is defined as the boson that remains massless after electroweak symmetry breaking. A major difference between real and virtual photons is that virtual particles are not required to have energy and momentum on the "mass shell".
You have NOT explained why the data is MISSING in all the other situations, nor have you posited a mechanism (or explanation) for a one-time event.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: