computer that predicts the future

[Xenocrates]

http://www.redorbit.com/news/display/?id=126649#121

Every once in a while I see something on the net that's truly incredible. I mean so fantastical that it could completely change everything. The above link is one such article.

... according to a growing band of top scientists, this box has quite extraordinary powers. It is, they claim, the 'eye' of a machine that appears capable of peering into the future and predicting major world events.

The machine apparently sensed the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre four hours before they happened - but in the fevered mood of conspiracy theories of the time, the claims were swiftly knocked back by sceptics. But last December, it also appeared to forewarn of the Asian tsunami just before the deep sea earthquake that precipitated the epic tragedy.

Now, even the doubters are acknowledging that here is a small box with apparently inexplicable powers.

How does this machine work? Well it's a random number generater (1's and 0's only).

During the late 1970s, Prof Jahn decided to investigate whether the power of human thought alone could interfere in some way with the machine's usual readings. He hauled strangers off the street and asked them to concentrate their minds on his number generator. In effect, he was asking them to try to make it flip more heads than tails.

It was a preposterous idea at the time. The results, however, were stunning and have never been satisfactorily explained.

Again and again, entirely ordinary people proved that their minds could influence the machine and produce significant fluctuations on the graph, 'forcing it' to produce unequal numbers of 'heads' or 'tails'.

According to all of the known laws of science, this should not have happened - but it did. And it kept on happening.

The implications of this are extraordinary. And it means that if all the OTers concentrated we could crash a distant computer influence each others opinions or luck.

Let's look at what events have been preceded by unusual patterns of 1's and 0's:

Diana's funeral
Tsunami
9/11

Another fascinating passage:

Dr John Hartwell, working at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands, was the first to uncover evidence that people could sense the future. In the mid-1970s he hooked people up to hospital scanning machines so that he could study their brainwave patterns.

He began by showing them a sequence of provocative cartoon drawings.

When the pictures were shown, the machines registered the subject's brainwaves as they reacted strongly to the images before them. This was to be expected. Far less easy to explain was the fact that in many cases, these dramatic patterns began to register a few seconds before each of the pictures were even flashed up.
It was as though Dr Hartwell's case studies were somehow seeing into the future, and detecting when the next shocking image would be shown next.

The whole article is simply fascinating, even more than watching Mobboss trying to argue that the US invasion of Iraq is justified and going well.

I seriously recommend reading up on this stuff. I posted about the work of Rupert Sheldrake before and also recommend checking out his website; there's agood video there (a bit long though).

 

[Rhymes]

I'm sceptical. It would be freaking awesome if it were true, but I highly doubt it.
I'll have to find stronger sources before I start opening up about that story.

 

[Truronian]

I'm skeptical. People thinking at a box, then find an uneven distibution of 1s and 0s sounds like a case of mistaken causality to me.

 

[Xenocrates]

Don't be shy rhymes, there's a LOT of good work in parapsychology at the moment. We're all skeptical; what's your feeling about it?

 

[Kozmos]

A box spews random 0s and 1s and it looks into the future. Smash the damn thing now.

 

[Rhymes]

Don't be shy rhymes, there's a LOT of good work in parapsychology at the moment. We're all skeptical; what's your feeling about it?

i actually think it's impossible for a human mind to influence a machine in that kind of way. it reminds me of when I was bored back in highschool and tried to stop the fan with my will power, hehe, so many wasted hours.

But if a consistant scientific sources releases official works on those experiments I'll be willing to believe it, and I'll get back to try stopping the fan.

 

[warpus]

I instinctively roll my eyes at something like this, but I did some digging and this appears to be true in the sense that it's respected scientists who believe in the scientific method, doing research. They're making outrageous claims, but they actually seem to be basing it on something credible.

It'd be nice to see some data though - some graphs maybe.. some numbers.. SOMETHING!

There is a slashdot discussion regarding this here. It's over a year old - so this isn't breaking news.

I wouldn't put too much faith into this until the results are reproduced somewhere else - and the lack of any data in the article (even how the random number generator works! how is it truly random? does it use quantum effects?) is making me very suspicious.

 

[Xenocrates]

this reminds me a little about the CIA's remote viewing programm in the 70's and 80's (from Wiki):

The process of remote viewing was first developed by Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff at the Stanford Research Institute at the behest of the CIA in 1972. The program -- initially codenamed Scanate -- apparently came as a response to Soviet research into psychic phenomena, on which the USSR was believed to have spent 60 million rubles in 1970. Initially, the project focused on a small number of individuals who appeared to show potential, most famously New York artist Ingo Swann.

The program went through a number of changes over the years, both in structure and in name. Later code names include Gondola Wish, Grill Flame, and in 1991, Star Gate. Over the course of twenty years, the United States spent $20 million on Star Gate and related projects. Over the course of its existence more than forty personnel worked on the project, including more than twenty remote viewers. Though the program was classified throughout its existence, columnist Jack Anderson wrote about it in the mid-1980s. It is worth to note that from 2003 the entire scanate/grillflame/gondola wish/centrelane programs documents have now been mostly declassifed (1% or less still classified) and are available to the general public under the FOIA.

I'm more persuaded by the 'global consciousness' project than by remote viewing; has anyone got views on either?

 

[Urederra]

Yeah... a peer reviewed article should give more credibility. But anyway, the thing is just amazing.

The title of the thread is a bit misleading, IMHO, it is not a intel based computer or anything similar, just a Random number generator, and it doesn't predict the future, it just seems to 'misbehave' near world events, but anyway, just wow!

 

[ybbor]

I've heard about this before.

and my question isn't about what events it has predicted, my question is if every spike corresponds to an event?

and why would thought processes create more 1's tha 0's? If I sense an event is going to happen and my brain sends out random 1's, why wouldn't the guy next to me influence 0's?

EDIT: what would be interesting is a live RSS feed. Check up on your blogs, and then see if you should go shopping for bottled water

 

[Xenocrates]

The title of the thread is a bit misleading, IMHO, it is not a intel based computer or anything similar, just a Random number generator, and it doesn't predict the future, it just seems to 'misbehave' near world events, but anyway, just wow!

I had to simplify the title or no one would have looked! If I'd have called it 'statistically unlikely patterns of 1's and 0's precede emotionally significant events' you'd sleep. Sorry about that though.

Warpus: thanks for link I'll check it out.

Sheldrake's experiments have proved (really proved) that people know when they're being stared at, even when they can't see the starer. He also asks some good questions about the nature of mind.

I used to score 80% + on those psychic tests when I was young. I think there's something to this, I really do.

 

[Urederra]

I had to simplify the title or no one would have looked! If I'd have called it 'statistically unlikley patterns of 1's and 0's precede emotionally significant events' you'd sleep. Sorry about that though.

Yeah, you are right. I was nick-picking

thanks for the info.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

It's the computer from Lost. Don't forget to punch in the code.

 

[CruddyLeper]

Strikes me it's more of a strange attractor predictor - it predicts nexus for major world events, but not exactly what.

Getting a computer to produce truly random numbers is next to impossible. If they've done that much I take my hat off to them.

 

[Narz]

I've had times when I'm really focused that I've been able to predict the winner twice in a row (the results are all random BTW, including the beginning stats). : Pick the winner and test your psychic abilities

By the way, I'm not suprised to hear of this. I've heard about stuff like this before - a guy who had an electric heated in his barn that was suppose to be on exactally half the time. But one day he noticed that it had been running significantly more than half the time and went to the barn to invegtigate. He found a cat sheltering itself there and the thought passed thru his mind that perhaps the cat's desire for warmth had some subtle influence on the machine. I forgot how the story ends (maybe he took the cat into his house) but once the cat left the barn the machine's activities returned to their predictable patterns.

 

[blackheart]

If this were true, would we really want to see the future?

 

[Chieftess]

Old news - I saw this years ago...

 

[Xenocrates]

Old news - I saw this years ago...

Thus proving your psychic powers.

That's why you're a mod!

 

[cgannon64]

I'm more than skeptical: this sounds like total crap.

Maybe they could have had me if they didn't go with that whole changing outcomes via pyschic powers nonsense.

 

[zjl56]

I'm a little sceptical that a RNG could do this all. But their might be some truth to the science described in Asimov's foundation, whereas people are not trying to predict small scale events. But the events concerning millions if people.