In Reply to: Re: Addendum: PEAR and Giessen experiments posted by geoffkait on April 19, 2007 at 11:05:01:
HiUnfortunately I have lost contact with the customer that knew some people doing the research so I hadn’t read any of the conclusion papers or heard anything in years.
I was surprised to find they had closed though given what they seemed to have found "back then".
I suppose it is appropriate that the whole thing is even more complicated and fuzzy, like they say “not reproducibleâ€.
Some quotes from that paper that actually do sound like high end hifi:“Dealing with psi anomalies scientifically therefore requires that I already believe in the existence of these anomalies if I want to obtain positive and significant results.â€
“If psi exists, and I believe it, psi will also acting in the skeptics attempt to obtain evidence for the non-existence of psi.â€
So, lets say you were the designer, your task to design an amplifier or speakers etc that will be sold to unknown people.
You have no idea what they think or like or what kind of music they will play.
Do you design based on engineering things that are reproducible every time or things that depend on the user having a particular pre-disposed (favorable) mindset?
Do you design a speaker to mentally evoke the strongest emotional reaction (in its appearance, physical complexity / weight / cost) or do you focus on reducing the myriad of invisible acoustical flaws they have?Keep in mind, what ever psi effect there is, it is small enough to evade conclusive detection / quantification even now.
Best,Tom
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Addendum: PEAR and Giessen experiments - tomservo 11:44:27 04/19/07 (1)
- Re: "Some quotes from that paper that actually do sound like high end hifi" - geoffkait 13:06:42 04/19/07 (0)