SCIY.Org Archives

This is an archived material originally posted on sciy.org which is no longer active. The title, content, author, date of posting shown below, all are as per the sciy.org records
111 ra. "Mind May Effect Machines"

Originally posted on sciy.org by Ron Anastasia on Wed 03 Aug 2005 05:36 PM PDT  

From: Ron Anastasia (rjon@vzavenue.net)
Date: August 3, 2005 4:35:39 PM PDT
To: rjon@vzavenue.net
Subject: Re: Y&R,Q&Q - "Mind May Effect Machines"

Hi Don & Jan,

You said:

…
If you like, rather than calling it a "hypothesis" it's simply a theme - that consciousness unfolds on many scales in similar ways - over the course of billions of years of evolution, over the course of lifetimes, over a life time, and in each moment. …

I just came across this article, "Mind May Effect Machines," which I think relates not only to questions re methodology, but also to your "theme re consciousness unfolding on many scales," in this case our lifetimes and moments of experience:

It's from a recent issue of *Wired News.* It reports on experiments over the past 26 years at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research program (PEAR: www.princeton.edu/ ~pear/), led by Princeton professor emeritus Robert Jahn, a physicist who was formerly dean of the Princeton School of Engineering.

It's an interesting article, research using accepted scientific methodology that comes up with definitely anomalistic results.

"Mind May Effect Machines"


Some teasers:

"Using random event generators — computers that spew random output — [researchers] have participants focus their intent on controlling the machines' output. Out of several million trials, they've detected small but "statistically significant" signs that minds may be able to interact with machines. However, researchers are careful not to claim that minds cause an effect or that they know the nature of the communication. …

"… Government intelligence, defense and space agencies also have shown interest in the lab's research, …

"Participants have been able to direct one out of every 10,000 bits of data measured across all of the tests. …

"There is very little that the researchers understand about the phenomenon, but they do know that results aren't affected by distance or time. Participants, for example, can have the same effect on a machine from outside the room or across the country. They can also have the same effect if they have the intention before the REG is turned on or even if they read a book or listen to music while the machine is running. - Environmental conditions — such as room temperature — also don't matter, but the tester's mood and attitude do. It helps, for example, if the participant believes he or she can affect the machine.

"Results are also greater if a male and female work together, but same-sex pairs produce no significant results. Pairs of the opposite sex who are romantically involved produce the best results — often seven times greater than when the same individuals are tested alone …

"… the phenomenon could be similar to quantum entanglement — what Einstein referred to as "spooky action at a distance" — in which two particles separated from each other appear to connect without any apparent form of communication. …

" '… The Pear lab has taken the best principles of rigorous science and applied it to extremely difficult questions and come up with some pretty interesting answers.'

"Jahn thinks that critics err in expecting the phenomena to follow the usual rules of cause and effect. Instead, he thinks they belong in the category of what Carl Jung called 'acausal phenomena,' which include things like synchronicity.

" 'They play by more complicated, almost whimsical, elusive rules,' Jahn said, 'but they play.' "

The fact that "government intelligence, defense and space agencies also have shown interest in the lab's research" is yet another warning of the dark side of all this stuff. That's why I'm so into finding ways of involving scientists in fruitful dialogues with practitioners of the yoga, using a method and language that works for all concerned. Robert Jahn is an example of the type of scientists who might be open to such a dialogue.

And I think the finding that "Pairs of the opposite sex who are romantically involved produce the best results — often seven times greater than when the same individuals are tested alone

 â€¦" is a particularly interesting result, pointing again to the centrality of heart and love.

Namaste,

~ ron

Attachment: