GERALD EPLING - Shimmering Leaf Inventor

[Ririon]

This guy has his mind read by an... EGG! :D

http://arthurepling.com/aec/aec.shtml

Challenge application thread:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57370

[Jon.]

He's detecting something coming from an egg, using a plant activity detector! Gotta be paranormal! :rolleyes:

[TheBoyPaj]

Man, that video of the terrified egg is going to give me nightmares!

This HAS to be a joke, right?

[TheBoyPaj]

Looks like stocks are running low:

http://www.bioexperience.com/

"Remember folks. There's only ONE Shimmering Leaf Bio-thingy Monitor."

[SkepticScott]

Well, if all he's detecting is "the egg is boiling", there's nothing paranormal there. If on the other hand, as his web page says he can detect intention, he can detect when someone in the room is thinking about boiling the egg, then that is paranormal.

I can see some problems with conducting the test. Telling someone to not think about boiling the egg is going to make them think about it anyway.

My initial opinion as to what's happening here is that his device has a very high gain and is reacting to electrical noise.

[TheBoyPaj]

Ah, but there's a difference between thinking about boiling an egg and intending to actually do it. One could always instruct someone to boil something else, like a piece of broccolli. Can eggs feel sympathy for other foods?

[Jeff Wagg]

I believe he's claiming that he can get the egg to emit a detectable frequency that his device can pick up, and he makes this happen with his mind.

[Jackalgirl]

I believe he's claiming that he can get the egg to emit a detectable frequency that his device can pick up, and he makes this happen with his mind.

Oh my. Oh my oh my. I went to the website and had to laugh like a hyena at the warning. Oh, and "Time Passes" -- that's a classic.

Boy, am I ever so full of questions --

1) One presumes that the egg is unfertilized. So what is it in the egg that is "reacting" to his intentions?

2) Would the egg also "freak out" if he intended to smash it? (that is, is this "intent monitor thingummy" maybe, just maybe, indicating an increase in conductivity brought on by, oh let's see, heat?)

3) Would other squishy and partly conducive things, yet verifiably non-living stuff also "react" to his intentions? I am thinking of that disgusting, yet strangely alluring "glop" or "snot" type toy stuff one can buy from most toy stores...

I wish I remembered more about electricity and electrical doo-dads!

-- Jackalgirl

[hellaeon]

how about if you give the egg lots of love? you know...dress it up like a little doll and nuture it...Show it respect...give it a name like 'Humpty Dumpty'

[Zep]

Mmmmm... Who's up for a boiled googy?

http://www.wda.co.uk/templates/extranet/FoodWales_3200/assets/col14.jpg

[SkepticScott]

Are we really talking about what's essentuially an egg EEG? :)

[strathmeyer]

How come nobody's brought up the fact that this guy submitted an application without even hinting at what he can do? And he even writes out "Question 1: HOW WILL YOU DEMONSTRATE YOUR ABILITY?"

[Mr. Scott]

This thing is clearly descended from a brief fad in the early 1970's described in the book "The Secret Life of Plants." At the time they simply hooked a lie detector (skin resistance galvanometer) to a plant, usually a rhododendron leaf IIRC. In one experiment, a live shrimp was dropped into a pot of boiling water and a plant leaf in an adjacent room showed a change in resistance that moved a needle on a chart. The assumption was that the plant could feel the shrimp's pain. This idea that all living things are tuned in to some "force" connecting all of nature was only a few years later echoed in Star Wars and I have always suspected the plant exeriments inspired Lucas.

The whole "secret life of plants" movement fizzled out after only a year or two, no doubt because the experiment results could not be duplicated by reputable scientists.

The video of water being fed to the plant is one amazing freaking waste of 2.2 megabytes. If that's the best they can show they've got nothing to show. I think it's a scam to sell their silly, expensive electronics, and applying to the JREF challenge is a lame publicity stunt.

[TheBoyPaj]

How come nobody's brought up the fact that this guy submitted an application without even hinting at what he can do? And he even writes out "Question 1: HOW WILL YOU DEMONSTRATE YOUR ABILITY?"

Yeah, but there wasn't a question labeled Question 0.5: WHAT IS YOUR ABILITY?

They should also add a new one saying Question 4: YOU'RE KIDDING, RIGHT?

[Flange Desire]

I believe he's claiming that he can get the egg to emit a detectable frequency that his device can pick up, and he makes this happen with his mind.

You are probably right, but it is such a pity that he cannot say it clearly.

Seems that wooism and poor expression skills often go hand in hand.

[rjh01]

Here is another link that explains what the device does. No mention of an egg. It detects if a plant has had enough water.

http://arthurepling.com/aec/letters/200603aenews.html

[hipparchia]

One could always instruct someone to boil something else, like a piece of broccolli. Can eggs feel sympathy for other foods?

Can eggs feel sympathy for other eggs? How about boiling something in say five non-transparent pots and the guy has to identify whether other eggs are being boiled. Unless of course boiled eggs sort of die and stop emitting their eggy emotion. But they should emit some sort of scream:eek: just before they croak:)))

[steenkh]

Things certainly have changed at the JREF, if this application is not rejected immediately on the grounds that there is no specified paranormal claim.
The ability to pick up noises from a boiling egg does not impress anyone. I can even pick up noises from boiling water!

[Mojo]

This thing is clearly descended from a brief fad in the early 1970's described in the book "The Secret Life of Plants." At the time they simply hooked a lie detector (skin resistance galvanometer) to a plant, usually a rhododendron leaf IIRC. Like this (http://www.xenu.net/archive/techniques/tomato.jpg)?

[Zep]

Things certainly have changed at the JREF, if this application is not rejected immediately on the grounds that there is no specified paranormal claim.
The ability to pick up noises from a boiling egg does not impress anyone. I can even pick up noises from boiling water!I wouldn't get your hopes up. This guy seems to be a parallel to Joe Delivera, who can write good syntax and grammar, but the actual content turns out to be apallingly meaningless and loopy.

In the case of Q1., I think the guy simply misunderstood the question. He thought it asked about his experimental method (that is what he will do, as in his experimental design), as opposed to what we expected - about his ability that will be tested (what he will do, as in succeed in demonstrating). I'd give him the benefit of the doubt on that basis. But not a lot more than that - he still needs to clearly state the magical mystical paranormal power he will attempt to demonstrate.

[kalen]

Things certainly have changed at the JREF, if this application is not rejected immediately on the grounds that there is no specified paranormal claim.
The ability to pick up noises from a boiling egg does not impress anyone. I can even pick up noises from boiling water!
I have to agree. I can't understand why this guy wants to dowse a chicken egg and alot of posts in this thread are just speculating on what he was really proposing. I guarantee that the answer (if there is one) will be kookier than any of the guesses.

Anyway, I'm glad to see the applications being posted again. Weirdos: they're so much fun.

[webfusion]

I happen to think that Mr Epling is proposing to illustrate the 'pain' felt by an egg when placed in boiling water.

This demonstration of a 'nerve-reaction' by a chicken egg in hot water, would indeed be a revelation of paranormal activity.

I have done a bit of research, and come to the following points:

1. If the invention is sensitive to changes in water saturation/humidity levels, how can it possibly be allowed to be placed into a pot of water? rjh01 has provided the link to Arthur Epling's website that describes this H2o reaction being 'measured' with two dracaena plants.

2. Other than the determination of the presence of water, this Epling invention might be able to detect temperature fluctuation.
http://www.mste.uiuc.edu/users/carvell/LoggerProExperiments/Pictures/SensorsInUse/temperatureprobe.jpg
(image link)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In any case, the renewal of the Challange is very egg-citing!

[Admiral]

In any case, the renewal of the Challange is very egg-citing!

That's eggs-actly what I was thinking!

[GzuzKryzt]

That's eggs-actly what I was thinking!

Eggs-queues me, I still have no clue what Mr. Epling's claim "is". Hopefully, Mr. W-egg-'s inquiry and Mr. Epling's ensuing response will eggs-plain it further.

[Admiral]

But all yolks aside- all you hard-boiled skeptics, can't you egg-cept this claim as a valid attempt to egg-celerate scientific understanding?

Sure it's not as egg-citing as a claim about eggs-tra sensory perception or eggs-tra-terrestrials, and the language might be a bit scrambled, but I don't think this guy's brain is fried. His attempt to eggs-tract information from eggs eggs-ibits eggs-actly the sort of curiosity that the JREF should be celebrating in people today!

Sure, you may be eggs-austed by the constant stream of failed applicants, but don't eggs-it this forum, or crack up at this guy's misfortune. Don't hide in your shell of cynicism- instead, keep your sunny side up and quit beating this poor, honest applicant. I know one thing for sure, omelet-ting him speak for himself before I make up my mind.

[Zep]

Hoorah! Puns are back in vogue...

[GzuzKryzt]

Hoorah! Puns are back in vogue...

Eggs-cellent contribution.

[Thing]

Get ova it.

[TheBoyPaj]

Is Randi beaten? He may have to shell out on this one.

Either way, it should be one for the albumen.

Ok, I'm out.

[Johnny Pixels]

Anyone else noticed:

I will be able to make a monitored chicken egg produce an electrophysiological response that is strong enough to trigger my Shimmering Leaf(TM) Plant Activity Detector. The Shimmering Leaf(TM) Plant Activity Detector produces a pulsating tone centered around 440 Hertz.


The egg appears to be tuned to A

[Psiload]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/57/Egghead_batman.jpg/200px-Egghead_batman.jpg

[Ririon]

The egg appears to be tuned to A
Not the egg. The detector beep. Can you say "it is science because it uses numbers and units and stuff" and "standard off-the-shelf components"? :p

[steenkh]

Off -the-shell components?

[Ririon]

Off -the-shell components?
BZZZT! Wrong. :p

[Zep]

Scrambling for dreadful puns again. The lot of you are just hard-boiled skeptics!

[rjh01]

Come on you guys. This is a serious thread about the inflicting pain on defenceless eggs. If you want dreadful puns go to the humour section. Otherwise you might end up with egg on your face.

[sackett]

Sorry, but I think this guy's more than a bit addled.

[Admiral]

The lot of you are just hard-boiled skeptics!

Hey, I used that one. Get your own! ;)

[petre]

How can he tell if his machine detects the paranormal, or is just fried? Does he think JREF is going to just roll over easy and give him the money for something not paranormal? When it come to this application, I'll leave finding the sunny side up to the rest of you.

[webfusion]

sackett:
Sorry, but I think this guy's more than a bit addled.

You mean his brain is scrambled?

[Zep]

Hey, I used that one. Get your own! ;)Whoops, so you did! I'm sorry I poached it.

[webfusion]

You guys crack me up!

[Ririon]

From the Challenge Applications thread, the applicant writes:

The post by Ririon comes close to the claim that I am making. I do claim that an egg can sense my intention or action involved with boiling another cohort egg. This is the essence of my paranormal claim.

Yeay me! What do I win?

[macgyver]

This is your brain.....


This is your brain believing in paranormal woo-woo claims...


This is your brain believing in paranormal woo-woo claims with a side order of bacon...

[sackett]

Come on, Randi, shell out!

[SkepticScott]

Why don't we switch from egg jokes (yolks?) to figuring out possible issues with a protocol? This test involves what people are thinking, which is impossible to verify. It's trivial to test detection -- send someone into the room who's thinking about boiling the egg -- but how do you control? Perhaps Mr. Epling would have to provide the "thinkers". Otherwise he could never be sure that the people were or were not thinking of not boiling the egg during the appropriate trials.

[Ririon]

Why don't we switch from egg jokes (yolks?) to figuring out possible issues with a protocol? This test involves what people are thinking, which is impossible to verify. It's trivial to test detection -- send someone into the room who's thinking about boiling the egg -- but how do you control? Perhaps Mr. Epling would have to provide the "thinkers". Otherwise he could never be sure that the people were or were not thinking of not boiling the egg during the appropriate trials.
Well, he does the thinking himself. The problem is not getting him to think about boiling an egg. The problem is getting him to not think about it as a control. Try for yourself to go even ten seconds without thinking about penguins, starting... Now. :)

[Ririon]

This appears to be similar to "regular" telepathy and can probably use a similar protocol. What is transferred is not a word or a symbol, but in essence a binary number. "I will boil you" or "I will not boil you anytime soon", "1" or "0". The statistically inclined can figure out how many such binary numbers you would need for a significant result. Other than that, just make sure everything is blinded, make sure he can't influence the result by non-paranormal means and run the experiment.

[SkepticScott]

Try for yourself to go even ten seconds without thinking about penguins, starting... Now. :)That was easy, I stared at your avatar and counted the ten seconds to myself in German. No penquins.:)

This appears to be similar to "regular" telepathy and can probably use a similar protocol. What is transferred is not a word or a symbol, but in essence a binary number. "I will boil you" or "I will not boil you anytime soon", "1" or "0". The statistically inclined can figure out how many such binary numbers you would need for a significant result. Other than that, just make sure everything is blinded, make sure he can't influence the result by non-paranormal means and run the experiment.Right. I was pointing out that Mr. Epling might have to be, or provide, the senders, so he'd have no fears that the senders were intentionally messing up the test.

Yes, the precautions and protocol you suggested sound good, Ririon. It should be an interesting test, and regardless of the outcome, all parties can have breakfast afterwards.:)

[Ririon]

That was easy, I stared at your avatar and counted the ten seconds to myself in German. No penquins.:)

So that's that problem taken care of. Excellent.

Right. I was pointing out that Mr. Epling might have to be, or provide, the senders, so he'd have no fears that the senders were intentionally messing up the test.

Yes, the precautions and protocol you suggested sound good, Ririon. It should be an interesting test, and regardless of the outcome, all parties can have breakfast afterwards.:)
OK. My suggestion would be something like this: You need two rooms:

In one room, you put a Faraday cage. Inside the cage is a clock and an egg hooked up to the device (with the beep turned off, a light signal is better). A video camera is filming both.

In the second room is the applicant and a clock synchronized to the egg clock.

A coin is flipped (or some other random event). Heads="Think about boiling the egg". Tales="Count in German while staring into the hungry eyes of a lynx (or something else not egg-related)". He does the chosen activity for a set amount of time (say 2 minutes) and then takes a break for a set amount of time. (say 3 minutes). "Rinse and repeat". THEN compare with the tape from the first room.

ETA: The beauty of this setup, is that he can practise/self test without a single assistant.

[SkepticScott]

Yes, if Mr. Epling were doing the sending that would assure him that the subject was thinking the correct things. But first you should set up everything, with the device and egg isolated -- everyone is outside of the egg's detection range (how far away must someone be before the egg doesn't react to that person's thoughts?). You need to determine the false positive rate.

[Ririon]

Yes, if Mr. Epling were doing the sending that would assure him that the subject was thinking the correct things. But first you should set up everything, with the device and egg isolated -- everyone is outside of the egg's detection range (how far away must someone be before the egg doesn't react to that person's thoughts?). You need to determine the false positive rate.
Perhaps the user known as "bassett" can give some input regarding this? If I am not mistaken, Mr. Epling sent a PM to Jeff Wagg using that name, and he reads this thread. (It appears like that in the Challenge Applications section.) As I am sure he understands, we do not represent the JREF, but we are eager to help and/or make silly puns.

[hcmom]

From the Challenge Applications thread, the applicant writes:The post by Ririon comes close to the claim that I am making. I do claim that an egg can sense my intention or action involved with boiling another cohort egg. This is the essence of my paranormal claim.

Eggs have cohorts? I knew that birds of a feather flock together, but I didn't realize it was true of eggs too.

(Sorry, I couldn't come up with any original egg puns, so a related idiom will have to do.)

[Ririon]

(Sorry, I couldn't come up with any original egg puns, so a related idiom will have to do.)
I would make a silly joke about eggs usually travelling in packs of 6 or 12, but purple? <Reads color tag> "DarkOrchid"??:confused: :covereyes

[rjh01]

How you can do this using magic

Method 1
When the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor is turned on it will wait a fixed number of minutes then sound the alarm. After the alarm is deactivated the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor will then sound the alarm after another fixed number of minutes. Gerald A. Epling will know what time the alarm will go off and will ensure that he can give paranormal reasons for it to go off at these times.

Method 2
Gerald A. Epling has a device that can make the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor go off by remote control. This remote control can be hidden in the body in a way that cannot be found by a body search. When the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor Gerald A. Epling will state that there are paranormal reasons for it to go off.


To detect these methods would be very difficult. I say reject the application as I have shown that it can be faked.

I apologise if the wording in the spoilers is insulting to anyone.

[Ririon]

How you can do this using magic

Method 1
When the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor is turned on it will wait a fixed number of minutes then sound the alarm. After the alarm is deactivated the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor will then sound the alarm after another fixed number of minutes. Gerald A. Epling will know what time the alarm will go off and will ensure that he can give paranormal reasons for it to go off at these times.

Method 2
Gerald A. Epling has a device that can make the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor go off by remote control. This remote control can be hidden in the body in a way that cannot be found by a body search. When the Shimmering Leaf™ monitor Gerald A. Epling will state that there are paranormal reasons for it to go off.


To detect these methods would be very difficult. I say reject the application as I have shown that it can be faked.

I apologise if the wording in the spoilers is insulting to anyone.
Both of which, I am proud to say, are covered by my protocol suggestion on post #50. Method 1 by randomization and method 2 by a Faraday cage. :)

[rjh01]

A Faraday cage will give protection from electrical fields. But I do not think it will stop radio fields. I just put my mobile phone (you call it cell phone) inside my microwave oven. The phone still worked. If someone can tell me how to build a better Faraday cage I will try again.

In case someone has a sense of humour - I did not turn the oven on.

[hcmom]

I would make a silly joke about eggs usually travelling in packs of 6 or 12, but purple? <Reads color tag> "DarkOrchid"??:confused: :covereyes
Eggs come in packs of purple? <Reads hair dye bottle> "Will not cure blonde-ness.":shocked: :D

[Ririon]

A Faraday cage will give protection from electrical fields. But I do not think it will stop radio fields. I just put my mobile phone (you call it cell phone) inside my microwave oven. The phone still worked. If someone can tell me how to build a better Faraday cage I will try again.

In case someone has a sense of humour - I did not turn the oven on.
A tighter mesh will do. EM radiation with a wavelength of about the same size as the holes in the cage (or shorter) will pass through. I haven't tried to build one myself, but the Mytbusters (appeal to authority) made one from a fine metal mesh and got no reception on their cell phones on the inside. A 900 MHz mobile phone has a wavelength of 33 cm, and should not work inside a microwave oven. <Walks off to check with the nearest microwave oven.> Nope. The phone worked just fine inside there. Clearly I am missing something, or microwave ovens really ARE dangerous. (And I call it a "mobiltelefon" or just "mobil". :) )

[rjh01]

Radio waves used by mobile phone can penetrate a metal ammunition box or a fridge. Not to mention a microwave oven. I tried both. We will have extreme difficulty in building a device that will stop a mobile phone from working. So my post 55 in this thread stands.

[rjh01]

I take everything back. One layer of alfoil will block a mobile phone signal. Or a steel saucepan.

[SkepticScott]

How about another level of randomizing? I'd need to know more about the claimed abilities, but perhaps there could be a way to organize tests so that any one of multiple senders doesn't know if their attempt is going to count.

For example, assume a device that reacts only when two or more of the three senders think about boiling an egg. Each sender is isolated, when one is told to think about boiling, that sender doesn't know if the expected outcome is a reaction or not. If one sender had a remote control, it would be obvious upon analysis that the reaction correlated to that sender. Of course there are steps a dishonest sender could take to try and disguise that correlation.

It might be easier to try to detect or block any EM transmissions. When I worked for a defense contractor, there was a shielded room that some groups used for tests and measurements.

Another possibility is if a second detector could be set up out of "range" of any influence the sender might have and used as a control, but again we need Mr. Epling to speak on the feasibility of that idea.

[MRC_Hans]

rjh, its not a question of thickness, its a question of tightness. Cracks or slots in a cover, which means a strech where plates are not electrically connected, work like an antenna, provided they are not very short, compared to the wavelenght. And since the wavelength for a mobile phone is quite short (33 cm for 900mHz), even moderate slots will let signals in and out.

Thus, a good wrapping in alu foil is tight enough to keep signals in and out, but the fridge has a long slot all along the door (and probably part of the enclosure is not metal, but plastic), so it works fine inside that.

If it works inside your microwave oven, otoh, I'd give it a thorough check. However, it could be all right, because the microwave works on a much shorter wavelength, so the filters installed where wires to internal lightning, fans, etc. pass therough the enclosure may not be efficient at cell-phone frequencies.

PS: When trying a cellphone in a microwave, D.O N.O.T turn on the microwave :eek:.

Hans

[Ririon]

(good points snipped)
If it works inside your microwave oven, otoh, I'd give it a thorough check. However, it could be all right, because the microwave works on a much shorter wavelength, so the filters installed where wires to internal lightning, fans, etc. pass therough the enclosure may not be efficient at cell-phone frequencies.
(...)
I guess a microwave oven is just not a good Faraday cage. It is just decent (hopefully) at it's own wavelength. Does this mean that my idea of using a Faraday cage is vindicated after all? Anyway, mr. Epling has not claimed to be able to communicate with an egg sealed in a Faraday cage. It may be a "telling a violinist to play the piano"-thing.

[Hellbound]

I guess a microwave oven is just not a good Faraday cage. It is just decent (hopefully) at it's own wavelength. Does this mean that my idea of using a Faraday cage is vindicated after all? Anyway, mr. Epling has not claimed to be able to communicate with an egg sealed in a Faraday cage. It may be a "telling a violinist to play the piano"-thing.

Perhaps make a large Farraday cage, and have the testee and the egg inside? Then you could use an EMF detector of some sort to determine if any signals were being sent within the cage.

Dunno the feasibility of that, but it's a thought. Mythbusters used a similar setup when they were testing cell phones and avionics equipment.

[macgyver]

If we are testing a device that Mr. Epling has made, and not actually a paranormal ability of Mr. Epling. Do we even need to have him present during the testing?

Perhaps we could have a randomly selected person perform the test (or several people) who would not be in collusion with Mr. Epling?

[Hellbound]

Oh! Another idea!

The device has lead wires to connect to the "egg", right? Well, run multiple trials. In some, the device is hooked to an egg. In others, it's hooked to something else (a cucumber? I dunno). Run the lead wires into a box that covers the object it's hooked up to.

If he's right, the machine should only react when the object his machine is hooked to is an egg, and not when it's something else.

[macgyver]

If he's right, the machine should only react when the object his machine is hooked to is an egg, and not when it's something else.

I thought his device would work with any "living" object, but he just got better results with an egg? What if I was threatening the cucumber with pickling brine?

Does anyone else see a similarity between the shimmering leaf, and a Scientology E-meter?

[Blackwell]

Does anyone else see a similarity between the shimmering leaf, and a Scientology E-meter?

I just had visions of shoving Tom Cruise into a giant microwave...

[macgyver]

I just had visions of shoving Tom Cruise into a giant microwave...

Perhaps we could connect Mr. Cruise to a Shimmering Leaf and threaten him with pharmaceuticals and some much needed psychotherapy?

[webfusion]

Perhaps we could have a randomly selected person perform the test (or several people) who would not be in collusion with Mr. Epling?

He could claim the person was not truly random, but a cohort of JREF; or incompetent in following directions how to operate the device; or not a true believer and the result was skewed by the 'negative vibes.'

[macgyver]

He could claim the person was not truly random, but a cohort of JREF; or incompetent in following directions how to operate the device; or not a true believer and the result was skewed by the 'negative vibes.'

Perhaps I don't fully understand the claim, then. I thought all that was required was that the egg be threatened with the possibility of being boiled. I didn't realize that the thoughts of the person doing the potential boiling was part of the protocol?

All we're trying to do is eliminate the chance of tampering by way of hidden remotes?

What if the egg were shown photographs of other eggs being boiled?

I'm finding it really hard NOT to be sarcastic right now....

[rjh01]

Also how far can the egg and the Shimmering Leaf™ be separated and still work?

The more I think about it the more I think this is a trick.

[SkepticScott]

How about this as a test setup to address the concerns of remote and/or timed activation?
Use two detectors. One set of leads is conected to an egg, the other set of leads is conected to an "egg substitute", perhaps an egg shell full of salt water. The leads go to a plug board or switches that allows either detector to be connected to either target. The switches and the person who does the connecting are out of sight of the sender.
For each test, randomly determine whether the sender thinks about boiling the egg or not, and randomly determine which detector is connected to which target.
Mr. Epling would have to verify that his equipment will work with this setup.
The randomized send/dont send should satisfy any who suspects the device just activates randomly or after a fixed time.
The random target should satisfy any who think there is a remote activation (both devices would go off) or even addressable remote activation (half the time the wrong device would go off).
Everything would be videotaped to later verify success or failure.

If the device can detect an egg detecting the sender's intention to boil an egg, then only the correct device should activate, and only when the sender is thinking abut boiling an egg. "Only" should be taken to also read "within the stated accuracy of the device"

The more I think about it the more I think this is a trick.
I suspect it doesn't work too, but I'm trying to come up with a protocol that's fair and protects both sides anyway. It's a fun challenge.

ETA: rjh01's quote and my response.

[macgyver]

I take everything back. One layer of alfoil will block a mobile phone signal. Or a steel saucepan.

Make sure any Faraday cage for RF shielding has a good earth ground! If you're using your cage to work on high tension lines, then I'd suggest skipping that step and connecting your cage to the same phase line that you are working on....

[Piggy]

its not a question of thickness, its a question of tightness.
Well, isn't the tightness positively correlated to the thickness?

Oh, wait... wrong forum.

[Jackalgirl]

I thought his device would work with any "living" object, but he just got better results with an egg?

Though I'm pretty honored that Mr. Epling would mention me in his response to Jeff, I'd like know the answer to my other question, one that touches on your quote, Macgyver --

Does the egg have to be fertilized? If it's an "ordinary" i.e., unfertilized, egg, what in the egg is "reacting" to the threat of being boiled? If it's unfertilized, is Mr. Epling hypothesizing that there is some kind of "spirit" or awareness in all things, living and non? If so, he could hook up the egg to /anything/ and "threaten" it, and get a response, yes?

I know that Mr. Randi and the JREF don't care how something works, but THAT it works, but I think we need to know how it's supposed to work in order to come up with a good way to proof against trickery. What does the "Shimmering Leaf" actually detect?

By the way, I like both of the ideas of randomizing times and also the Faraday cage. I'd rather come up with something other than "intent" sensing, because I could stare at a picture of a crocodile for 5 minutes or otherwise be distracted, but could always claim that I thought of "hurting" the egg if my experiment didn't go the way I wanted. Would it be possible to get some people who didn't know about what was going on, and then just simply have them boil random things without telling them why? Some might randomly be chosen to boil and egg, and others might be randomly chosen to boil, say, a rock.

(Problem, of course, is finding a way to guarantee that the people don't actually know what's going on.)

Other questions:
- Does the Shimmering Leaf(TM) only detect HUMAN intent, or could it detect future possibilities? If the latter, then you'd just program a rube-goldbergian device to randomly either drop an egg into boiling water or not...
- Has Mr. Epling tried hooking the Shimmering Leaf(TM) up to an already hard-boiled egg? How about a copper pipe?
- Would anyone like to pool together the money to buy one of these things and experiment with it or take it apart? On the one hand, I don't want to encourage quacks. On the other hand, I love taking things apart...
- Could someone with a multimeter please try and see if they can duplicate the effect?

-- Kat

[steenkh]

I know that Mr. Randi and the JREF don't care how something works, but THAT it works, but I think we need to know how it's supposed to work in order to come up with a good way to proof against trickery. What does the "Shimmering Leaf" actually detect?

I do not agree. We need to know the claim and the exact setup, but the theory behind is not necessary. If trickery is involved, the theory is in any case made-up to conceal the true workings. It is also possible that mr. Epling has no idea how it works, but that would not prevent the JREF from making a proper test.

[DevilsAdvocate]

The applicant should first test the setup to make sure it is OK. My first thought on a protocol was to put five possible things to boil (including an egg) under little cardboard boxes. Maybe some broccoli, a cup of pasta, some Styrofoam, a glass ball, whatever is acceptable to applicant as NOT setting off electronic thingy.

1. Get a pot of water to a roiling boil.
2. A tester (who preferably has no idea what is being tested) draws a number out of a hat (or uses some other random means) and goes into the room.
3. Tester uncovers the corresponding box and dumps the contents into the pot.
4. Wait however long applicant has pre-determined that we should wait for effect.
5. Any beeps from the electronic thingy are recorded.
6. “Wash, rinse, repeat.” Reset the electronic thingy if needed. Dump the pot. Fill it with water again and put it on the stove. Replace "sensory egg" with new egg. Take any solids that were dumped from the pot out of the room for disposal. Repeat starting at step 1 for all five items.

Applicant is not involved in test at all and doesn’t even know when test starts. Test passes if electronic thingy beeps only when egg is boiled, but does not beep in any other cases. I’d probably want to see three trials of this same test with positive results to eliminate any chance of the beeps going off randomly and just by luck going off during the egg trial.

However, I do like SkepticScott’s suggestion of using another detector as a control. Have the control detector hooked up to a single long piece of foil so that it does require any “replacement egg”.

Considering the simplicity of the test, it seems you should be able to have both a control detector electronic thingy and control boiling objects. Test passes if only test (egg-hooked-up) detector beeps during egg test and neither detector beeps in any other circumstance. No fancy stuff required.

We don’t know how much “time passes” in the given video, but I assume about 5 minutes would be sufficient for each test. So it would take about 25 minutes to do each test. To do the complete test three times with random starting times would take maybe 2-3 hours. The applicant and the head of the testing team could go watch a movie, or go to a restaurant, or play some golf, or whatever while some other tester (who preferably has no idea what is being tested) conducts the video-taped tests. :)

[bassett]

On June 8th, I responded to the questions that Mr. Wagg presented on June 7th. Mr. Wagg has not acknowledged receipt of my responses and he does not respond to my email to challenge@randi.org or pm here at the randi.org website. Perhaps, if I post my responses from June 8th here, someone could draw the attention of Mr. Wagg to those responses?

Gerald Epling

[Jeff Wagg]

Mea Culpa..i've been quite busy recently.. Going through this one now.

[Thing]

Let's have two pans of water, one boiling, one room temperature. The instrumented egg sits in a basket with n others. The experimenter fllips a coin and tells Gerald the result. If it's heads he picks up an egg and puts it in the boiling water, if it's tails he puts it in the tepid water. Repeat n times. Record the output of the device. If it only beeps for the eggs that are about to be boiled, give him the money.

Gerald, would this work for you? How far away could the pans be from the basket of eggs? And how far could the monitoring device be from both? I'm assuming that whatever transducer attaches to the egg has a lead from it to the device, is that correct?

[bassett]

...
Gerald, would this work for you? How far away could the pans be from the basket of eggs? And how far could the monitoring device be from both? I'm assuming that whatever transducer attaches to the egg has a lead from it to the device, is that correct?

I prefer my experiment design as presented on June 8th. The actual electrode surface is gold over aluminum foil. There are two leads that provide an electrical connection between the instrument and the foil.

[bassett]

I understand the skepticism involved in responses to my claim. I am really impressed with the investigative attitude that leads people to try things. By example, when rjh01 placed a cell phone in a microwave oven and noted that it could still receive calls, and the replication by Ririon "<Walks off to check with the nearest microwave oven.>" This sort of initiative is refreshing.

A focus on the ability of a cell phone to receive a call in a shielded environment suggests to me that there is some concern that I am using some sort of manufactured electronic transmitter and receiver arrangement. If that is the concern, then why not have someone do a scan for transmitters?

Gerald Epling

[macgyver]

I understand the skepticism involved in responses to my claim.

That's great, so you can understand that the main concern is to try and isolate every environmental influence, other than the egg, from affecting the Shimmering Leaf.

That includes, temperature fluctuations, air currents, radio waves, even changes in lighting in case there's a photovoltaic response.

The more you can assist in eliminating these factors as having any influence, the better!

For instance, could we encase the shimmering leaf and egg in a partial vaccuum RF shielded enclosure? Does the egg have to "see" the other egg going into the boiling water? Or could the enclosure also be sound proofed, and opaque so no light would affect the device?

This would help in the blinding requirements, because the egg could be replaced with other control objects, or no object, quite easily.

What is the nature of the communication of "intent" to the egg?

[Anti_Hypeman]

Does bassett have to see the egg for it to work? Why not just run the leads inside a box and have him do the same procedure with a egg and fake egg in the device. He sould not know if the device contains a geniune egg or not. The eggs could still be arranged so they can see each other. Put a door in the side of the box that can be raised or lowered if the eggs need line of sight.

If the claimant wont know when the device contains a real egg dosent that eliminate the concerns without requiring all sorts of fancy scanning equipment and cages?

He can run the experiment any way he wishes with the one condition that he not know when the real egg is being used. You could even use a drained shell for the fake or a plastic shell from the magic shop so it would be hard to tell if he managed to catch a glimpse in the box.

[macgyver]

He can run the experiment any way he wishes with the one condition that he not know when the real egg is being used. You could even use a drained shell for the fake or a plastic shell from the magic shop so it would be hard to tell if he managed to catch a glimpse in the box.

I like this idea too, real egg or fake egg? I think we'd have to match the fake egg to the real in terms of mass, in case the weight of the egg has an effect on the foil (reduced resistance between gold and aluminum foils when x-sectional area is increased)

How about this? Does it matter if the egg is double blinded and swapped with a counterfeit egg?

[Ririon]

I understand the skepticism involved in responses to my claim. I am really impressed with the investigative attitude that leads people to try things. By example, when rjh01 placed a cell phone in a microwave oven and noted that it could still receive calls, and the replication by Ririon "<Walks off to check with the nearest microwave oven.>" This sort of initiative is refreshing.

A focus on the ability of a cell phone to receive a call in a shielded environment suggests to me that there is some concern that I am using some sort of manufactured electronic transmitter and receiver arrangement. If that is the concern, then why not have someone do a scan for transmitters?

Gerald Epling
I can assure you that you will indeed be scanned for transmitters when you come in with a paranormal claim concerning an electronic device. :) I don't think you would try to use one, myself. But if you try to measure what is presumably a weak electric signal, shouldn't you be the first one to suggest blocking any kind of outside interference not coming from the egg? If you do indeed have a device that can measure electrical signals coming out of an egg, it will be extremely susceptible to all kinds of electromagnetic fields.

[bassett]

I can assure you that you will indeed be scanned for transmitters when you come in with a paranormal claim concerning an electronic device. :) I don't think you would try to use one, myself. But if you try to measure what is presumably a weak electric signal, shouldn't you be the first one to suggest blocking any kind of outside interference not coming from the egg? If you do indeed have a device that can measure electrical signals coming out of an egg, it will be extremely susceptible to all kinds of electromagnetic fields.

This is a problem with all electrophysiology. Fortunately, I have found ways to overcome the challenge of electronic smog.

Gerald Epling

[macgyver]

This is a problem with all electrophysiology. Fortunately, I have found ways to overcome the challenge of electronic smog.



I don't expect that you'll reveal your secret methods of doing this. But you do understand that it doesn't matter, the test protocol will still have to find external ways to eliminate it's influence.

[Ririon]

This is a problem with all electrophysiology. Fortunately, I have found ways to overcome the challenge of electronic smog.

Gerald Epling
In the process of "finding ways", did you try a Faraday cage? If so, what happened? If not, why not? Would it be acceptable to use one during the challenge test?

[RSLancastr]

From Mr. Epling's correspondence with Jeff Wagg:

The brand of egg that I have used most often in my experiments is Egglands Best. (See: http://egglandsbest.com/egglandsbest/ebaward.html ) I prefer these eggs because they come from vegetarian fed hens and taste really good.:D :D :D

I wonder if this is the first time that a JREF challenge applicant chose a subject for their experiment due to its deliciousness?

[Anti_Hypeman]

We do not have to know his intentions or if he remotely triggers the device just keep it simple. If they do the hammer test and base it on his intentions then he can claim that the testers had evil thoughts about the egg.

Double blind the egg and the whole thing boils down to if he can tell the difference.

The leads run behind a curtain or into a box.
Randomly decide if a real egg is placed in the device
The victim egg is boiled

He can use the device beeps or any other paranormal means to say "Yes" or "No". Is it a real egg or not?

Repeat numerous times with different eggs or blanks.

Does a hard boiled egg work in the device? perhaps they could us those as the decoys.

Testing of the device by the examiners without bassett in the room can easily determine if it is just a egg detector.

[Ririon]

We do not have to know his intentions or if he remotely triggers the device just keep it simple. If they do the hammer test and base it on his intentions then he can claim that the testers had evil thoughts about the egg.

Double blind the egg and the whole thing boils down to if he can tell the difference.

The leads run behind a curtain or into a box.
Randomly decide if a real egg is placed in the device
The victim egg is boiled

He can use the device beeps or any other paranormal means to say "Yes" or "No". Is it a real egg or not?

Repeat numerous times with different eggs or blanks.

Does a hard boiled egg work in the device? perhaps they could us those as the decoys.

Testing of the device by the examiners without bassett in the room can easily determine if it is just a egg detector.
A device that picks up random electromagnetic noise, and is slightly more likely to do so with a raw egg acting as an antenna could pass such a test, couldn't it? It would be a mindboggingly useless device, but not paranormal. I think this is exactly such a device. ;)

[macgyver]

Double blind the egg and the whole thing boils down to if he can tell the difference.



Pun intended I'm sure...

With this setup, one would expect that no matter what the object is in the Shimmering Leaf, the test should produce the same results?

This would have the advantage of the fact that it would show that egg or no egg, the device beeps. Combined with the claimant's attempt to determine if there is really an egg in behind the shroud or not.

The test could be set up just as the claimant suggests in his video, but the difference would be that the device would be shielded from view by a shroud. If the claimant is in a different room viewing through a window, the viewing window can be blinded as the objects are randomly changed.

One more point. If there is a possibility that the liquid material within a fresh egg changes conductance as it warms up (convection currents within liquid?) Would it be considered a "dead" egg if the contents were scrambled rather than hardboiled?

There are devices available that can scramble an egg within it's shell.

[Anti_Hypeman]

A device that picks up random electromagnetic noise, and is slightly more likely to do so with a raw egg acting as an antenna could pass such a test, couldn't it? It would be a mindboggingly useless device, but not paranormal. I think this is exactly such a device. ;)

Thats why I suggested testing the device beforehand to see if its just a egg detector.

[macgyver]

Thats why I suggested testing the device beforehand to see if its just a egg detector.

I think this is the right track. But I'm just wondering what "form" the egg can take? I think you suggested boiled, I'm suggesting internally scrambled.

However, we need to have a statement from the claimant agreeing that only a fresh egg, not a boiled, or scrambled one, will cause the detector to beep.

I think this is important to eliminate any vaguaries in determining what is causing the detector to beep.

The claimant is suggesting that the fresh unfertilized egg is somehow "living", and it's this "lifeforce" that's being detected....if a scrambled egg is considered dead, then it should be a perfect substitute.

[Ririon]

Thats why I suggested testing the device beforehand to see if its just a egg detector.
How do you propose to tell apart these two devices:

1. A badly constructed egg detector that sometimes detects an egg after a while depending on the electromagnetic noise in the room.

2. A device that sometimes detects the subtle feelings of an egg after a while apparently depending on the electromagnetic noise in the room.

[Ririon]

Hammer VS boiling water?

It doesn't really matter unless you only boil the water if you intend to boil the egg. The added humidity would be a whopping big non-paranormal hint about your intent. If you have the water boiling all the time and use a random event like the throw of a die to decide what your "intent" is, boiling water should be just fine. But a hammer is easier and more fun. :)

[steenkh]

Hammer VS boiling water?

It doesn't really matter unless you only boil the water if you intend to boil the egg. The added humidity would be a whopping big non-paranormal hint about your intent. If you have the water boiling all the time and use a random event like the throw of a die to decide what your "intent" is, boiling water should be just fine. But a hammer is easier and more fun. :)
I agree. The hammer is more fun, and makes for a shorter test, but if the Shimmering Leaf can only detect intent to boil, it is easy to set up this kind of test as you say.

I would really like to know what a "cohort" is! Do eggs get friendly when they sit in the same box for a long time? Would an egg be insensitive if you boil another egg that it has not been acquainted with, say, if the other egg hails from another egg farm and has been bought in another shop?

[webfusion]

If it is a cohort egg, it should be on the lookout and warn the other egg what horrible fate is about to occur.

You should blindfold that other egg (or wrap a blindfold around both eggs, for a true double-blind test).

[Meffy]

If there are any potatoes in the kitchen, cover their eyes too.

[Anti_Hypeman]

How do you propose to tell apart these two devices:

1. A badly constructed egg detector that sometimes detects an egg after a while depending on the electromagnetic noise in the room.

2. A device that sometimes detects the subtle feelings of an egg after a while apparently depending on the electromagnetic noise in the room.

You dont have to. If it hits every time there is a real egg in the box and a real egg being boiled within proximity he wins. If it hits with a decoy in the deivce and/or just boiling water he loses. The test can be done enough times to rule out chance.

If more than one device is available it will speed things up. Line up 3 of them and put 0-3 real eggs in them. He will not know if any real eggs are used or where they are at.

If he can build a device that differentiates between raw or boiled/scrambled in the shell eggs but only works with a pot of boiling water within a certain radius and only when a raw egg is in the boiling water I will be impressed.

If it only detects eggs or is set off by boiling water it will give false hits. If it only hits when a live victim egg is place in the boiling water under the exact same conditions and hits %100 of the time he wins.

Its not about if the device can detect a egg in the cradle. It would have to detect if a real egg is being boiled in the pot.

[hcmom]

Hammer VS boiling water? ... But a hammer is easier and more fun. :)
A hammer? Seems to me that a scrambled egg is as cooked as a boiled egg. Just tap it on the edge of a hot skillet, mix with milk, a little chopped onion, and some melted butter. No blunt force tools required. Of course, the onion juice might make the cohort egg cry, which would cause a false positive...

[Ririon]

You dont have to. If it hits every time there is a real egg in the box and a real egg being boiled within proximity he wins. If it hits with a decoy in the deivce and/or just boiling water he loses. The test can be done enough times to rule out chance.

If more than one device is available it will speed things up. Line up 3 of them and put 0-3 real eggs in them. He will not know if any real eggs are used or where they are at.

If he can build a device that differentiates between raw or boiled/scrambled in the shell eggs but only works with a pot of boiling water within a certain radius and only when a raw egg is in the boiling water I will be impressed.

If it only detects eggs or is set off by boiling water it will give false hits. If it only hits when a live victim egg is place in the boiling water under the exact same conditions and hits %100 of the time he wins.

Its not about if the device can detect a egg in the cradle. It would have to detect if a real egg is being boiled in the pot.
I get it. We were just using slightly different definitions for "egg detector".

Anyway. To continue being serious about this... You do not need a 100 % hit rate to win. Just statistically significantly more than chance dictates. A weak and unreliable effect can win the price if it really exists. It just takes a little more hard work, since you need a larger sample size than a "100 %"-effect would require. Since these tests are apparently both slow and unreliable, they would probably take forever. :(

[EricR]

Ok,

So the issue here is how to determine whether or not the egg can sense someone's intent. Any attempt to do this becomes muddied if participants actually know the full nature of the experiment. In essence, if they know they're not supposed to think about hurting the egg, it's almost inevitible they'll have images of scrambled eggs in mind at some point.

So here's a proposal:

Place the egg, along with the shimmering leaf, in a box with a lid.

Create several instruction notes with the following instructions:

1 Note will say: Open the box on the table in the center of the room and smash the egg.
9 Notes will say: Open the box on the table in the center of the room and feel the egg within.

Place these notes, folded, into a basket near the entrance to the room.

Have particpants enter the room, unaware as to the nature of the experiment. Upon entering, they will pull a note at random from the basket/box and act accordingly.

If the shimmering leaf works as advertised, the Egg won't make a peep until the participant with the "smash the egg" note arrives.

Obviously, if the first participant draws the "smash" note, it would probably be a good idea to conduct the expirement more than once.

Eric-

[rjh01]

You need to do the test run 10+ times. Instead of notes you have two boxes. One with a note and an egg. The note says count to 10 aloud and slowly and then smash the egg. The other with only a note that says 'Count to 10 aloud and slowly.'

If the person in the next room can say if there is an egg in the box before the person counts to 10 then 13 out of 14 times then they pass the test.

Or 10 out of 10 will do.

Do not forget the open test first.

[RobM]

What happens if you get an antisocial egg? Say for example you pick the one bad egg that couldn't care less whatever happens to his eggmates. Would this signal a failure or could an uncooperative subject be used as an excuse for a get out?

[Worm]

Every time I read this thread I'm reminded of the Robot stories by Isaac Asimov, particularly 'Little Lost Robot' - where one robot can detect gamma rays (? - I think) that others can't.

I have visions of a little egg bouncing up and down complaining that someone is hurting his friend....

[RSLancastr]

What happens if you get an antisocial egg? Say for example you pick the one bad egg that couldn't care less whatever happens to his eggmates. Would this signal a failure or could an uncooperative subject be used as an excuse for a get out?Or you get a batch of overly-shy eggs which sense bad intent all the time.

Or psychotic eggs whose perception of "intent to harm" changes from mimute to minute!

The whole thing is so patently asinine.

After decades of dealing with this sort of absurdity, it's no wonder Mr. Randi is sometimes on a short fuse with these people.

[bassett]

Two

[bassett]

Three

1.

You are only allowed to post URLs (e.g. REDACTED) to websites after you have made 15 posts or more.

Note: If you use the built-in "Enhanced Editor" to type your responses and you select a smilie from the smilie list you may find the system will believe you are trying to include an URL in your post. If you experience this problem either use the "Standard Editor" (UserCP>Edit Options>Miscellaneous Options>Message Editor Interface) or add smilies by typing the text alternative e.g. :)

We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

[bassett]

Four

This forum requires that you wait 60 seconds between posts. Please try again in 58 seconds.

[bassett]

Five

[bassett]

Six

[bassett]

Seven

[bassett]

Eight

[bassett]

Nine

[bassett]

Ten

[bassett]

Eleven

[bassett]

Twelve

[bassett]

Thirteen

randi.org

[bassett]

This is a good time to catch up on what is new. Since it has been so long, I will briefly recap the discussion to date. I am Gerald Epling, a fellow who responded to the JREF Paranormal Challenge.

In the winter or early spring of 2006, I decided to respond to the JREF challenge. At the time, I was apprehensive concerning the possibility that a response based on phenomenal biocommunication to the challenge would be denied, because it was an example of a natural event. The realization that the scientific investigation of life could move ahead more quickly with a large infusion of cash prompted me to move forward with the application.

Kramer acknowledged the response.

Months later Jeff Wagg took over the discussions with challenge respondents.

Here, at the 57372 thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57372), we all had a good time with puns. One fellow demonstrated the specificity of microwave shielding by placing his cell phone in a microwave oven and then calling his cell or mobile with another phone. The phone rang in the microwave. It was a really good demonstration of the use of active imagination in the investigation of a theory.

Another forum poster made the cogent observation, that I may not understand what the underlying mechanism of information transmission in the demonstrated phenomenon. This was a bright comment. I do not yet have a complete explanation of the physical basis of phenomenal biocommunication. This may be, in part, due to the nature of the Creator. The mind of the Creator is greater than my mind and I am only able to explore these things in a scientific manner with the mind of a man. Life is God-given and the study of phenomenal biocommunication is a study of life.

Some light-hearted posts were made along with some posts that were less light-hearted. (See the stop-Kaz, Sylvia, soup-of-the-day or whatever-else-is-popular-at-the-moment posts.)

Here is what has been going on behind the scenes,

On July 11th, 2006, I responded to Mr. Wagg. This response has not received the favor of a reply, nor has it been posted in the 57370 thread. Apparently, only JREF officers are allowed to post to this thread.

Here is my reply to Mr. Wagg from July of 2006:

“From: Future Mind
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 3:30 PM
To: challenge@randi.org
Subject: Egg Sense

July 11, 2006

Dear Mr. Wagg,

Smashing an egg can be accomplished in a number of more or less
controlled ways. Smashing an egg with a hammer would make quite a mess.
So, I am disinclined to use an actual hammer. May I suggest an
alternative to a literal hammer.

Since our last discussion, I have been investigating ways to smash an
egg without spreading pieces of the egg around in an uncontrolled
manner. So far, I have constructed a small chamber that accepts a
gravity-powered projectile that is capable of smashing an egg. The
chamber can be cleaned between uses, although it does not disassemble
easily. I will need to do some more work with the smashing chamber to
make it easier to use.

I see no problem with monitoring one egg while smashing another some
distance away. I am willing to do this as a part of the experiment.
However, my research shows that boiling an egg produces reliable
results. On November 11, 2004 I recorded the response of one egg to
another egg being selected for boiling and then dropped into boiling
water. We could do an experiment similar to this one, involving a
physiological amplifier. (See
http://www.arthurepling.com/aec/aec1b_1.html. There have been some
improvements made to the instrumentation that I used in November of
2004. The current model has a USB interface and will work with the
Windows XP Operating System. With the newer system, samples of the
physiological signal are taken several thousand times per second.

Perhaps we could smash some eggs and boil some others?

If you would like, I could provide the JREF with one of the BioPulse™
physiological amplifiers, USB interface and software for use with a
computer of your choice. Alternatively, I could provide you with the
amplifier settings and sample rates if you should choose to find an
alternative source of physiological amplifier and recording method.


Gerald A. Epling“


In November of 2006, I presented a poster on phenomenal biocommunication at a meeting of scientists in Houston, Texas. I chose an example of a plant being satisfied with water for the presentation. Also, included was an example of an egg responding to the selection and boiling of another egg – at a distance of about 30 feet. This poster presentation is available at http://www.mindjava.com. Look for the link to “Research” in the left-hand, navigation column.

Look for new information at http://www.arthurepling.com.

As you know, the web is a rapidly changing thing. The link in the July 2006 letter is somewhat outdated. The basic research is available at the MindJava® website. A video of the first observation of an egg responding to the selection and boiling of another egg is available at the ArthurEpling™ website – look for the “Sensing Intention” link in the left, navigation column. We are putting the finishing touches on a white paper and data disc which will provide a more in-depth description of certain aspects of phenomenal biocommunication.

[Cuddles]

Where do you get the eggs? Are they from a shop? Why eggs? Do only living things have a reaction of does everything respond to the correct influence?

[bassett]

Where do you get the eggs? Are they from a shop? Why eggs? Do only living things have a reaction of does everything respond to the correct influence?

I have tried eggs from a local shop.

Yes, I am inclined to use eggs from local grocery stores because they are easy for me to obtain. I have been told that eggs can be held on the shelf for 42 days in Texas. So, I look for the most recent date that I can find. I have tried the experiment with eggs from free ranging chickens. These produced longer reactions than eggs purchased at local grocery stores.

Why eggs? Eggs are well known to many people. I want my research to be available to as many people as possible. So, eggs are a good choice.

Most of my research is with biological preparations.

It is important to have a good theory to go with the data, although the JREF does not appear to be interested in theory. So, I thought it best to approach the challenge with a straightforward request - to monitor one chicken egg while selecting and boiling another egg. Of course, if the JREF would like to remove the boiling water from the equation, in order to make things much easier. However, that would preclude the JREF from ever reviewing the egg-boiling experiment. It doesn't appear to me that the JREF is very interested in the mind, paranormal events or Creation.

[GzuzKryzt]

Hi bassett,



first of all let me assure you, the puns were intended to eggspress my amusement. In no way I meant to ridicule you or your claim. If I have crossed a line, I sincerely apologize.

Since you posted again after quite a while I assume you have made some progress. What are your plans to continue to move towards a satisfiable JREF Challenge protocol, besides having the "egg-smash chamber" ready for use?


(On an episode of the Discovery Channel TV Show "MythBusters", a similar claim was put to the test. Instead of your Shimmering Leaf (tm), they used a polygraph. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(season_4)#Primary_Perception)

[GzuzKryzt]

...
It is important to have a good theory to go with the data, although the JREF does not appear to be interested in theory. So, I thought it best to approach the challenge with a straightforward request - to monitor one chicken egg while selecting and boiling another egg. Of course, if the JREF would like to remove the boiling water from the equation, in order to make things much easier. However, that would preclude the JREF from ever reviewing the egg-boiling experiment. It doesn't appear to me that the JREF is very interested in the mind, paranormal events or Creation.

For the purpose of the JREF Challenge, theories are not really needed. JREF also does not want to review your experiment.

Speculating about what JREF might or might not want does not move you one iota closer to the Prize. If you want the Million, which you proved by applying, you and JREF need to agree to a protocol.

Why does it seem so hard for you to abandon the boiling and proceed with the smashing?

[bassett]

I enjoyed the puns. I thought they were a lot of fun. The puns were a bright light in the forum. No need to apologize for the puns.

[bassett]

The prize may be out of reach for anyone. I submitted a simple egg-boiling experiment. For a million dollars, I am willing to do some research for the JREF with egg smashing. In my opinion the JREF asking for this research is not that unusual. However, I do not want to confuse my claim with egg smashing. The egg smashing is something that I am willing to do and report in conjunction with the JREF reviewing my claim that one egg will respond to another egg being selected and dropped into boiling water.

Why do I focus on egg boiling? It is really straight forward in technique. I have had great success with it. Why not?

[GzuzKryzt]

The prize may be out of reach for anyone. I submitted a simple egg-boiling experiment. For a million dollars, I am willing to do some research for the JREF with egg smashing. In my opinion the JREF asking for this research is not that unusual. However, I do not want to confuse my claim with egg smashing. The egg smashing is something that I am willing to do and report in conjunction with the JREF reviewing my claim that one egg will respond to another egg being selected and dropped into boiling water.

Why do I focus on egg boiling? It is really straight forward in technique. I have had great success with it. Why not?

For inquiries about the JREF reviewing you "egg-boiling claim": challenge@randi.org
Only JREF Representatives can give you definite information. I am simply a JREF Forum Member.

Bassett, does not the smashing also represent a really straightforward technique?

[bassett]

Hi bassett,

[snip]


(On an episode of the Discovery Channel TV Show "MythBusters", a similar claim was put to the test. Instead of your Shimmering Leaf (tm), they used a polygraph. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(season_4)#Primary_Perception)

This MythBusters episode is interesting. I have read many things on the web about it. I viewed the end of episode 61, "Deadly Straw". What I saw was an experiment with plants. The experiment involved growing peas in several tents on the roof of a building. This experiment was pretty good. There was a sprinkler system failure and the plants went dry for a week. However, this did not stop them. They kept going, one of the MythBusters suggested washing all of the dirt off of the roots of the plants and weighing them to get a dependent variable. Very good thinking! The "Myth" was rated as "Plausible" As far as using Stoelting lie detection equipment or other instrumentation, I did not see this part of the show. So, I can't comment on that aspect of the MythBusters.

However, I can comment on my own research. Of necessity, I developed a technique for connecting electrodes to the shell of an egg in a way that provides very good signals. The technique for doing this was presented recently at a meeting of scientists in Houston, Texas.

[bassett]

For inquiries about the JREF reviewing you "egg-boiling claim": challenge@randi.org
Only JREF Representatives can give you definite information. I am simply a JREF Forum Member.

Bassett, does not the smashing also represent a really straightforward technique?

No, the egg smashing is much more complicated. Here is why, the egg boiling maintains the integrity of the egg. Whatever there is about an egg is held intact, as the water heats the outer surface and continues to the core of the egg. Smashing an egg disrupts the biological preparation that is an egg. Additionally, the egg-smashing chamber is spattered with biological material that must be thoroughly cleaned between each use. It's a mess.

[rjh01]

How to smash an egg without making a mess.
Use a sharp knife. The knife will neatly cut the egg in two parts.

Bassett have you demonstrated your abilities to anyone? The local press should be able to provide a few people who would write up a report. You could easily be famous. That is provided it all works.

To all newbies
Not a good idea to make posts like posts 111 -122. You can get your wrists slapped. If you want to make 15 posts quickly go to the humour forum and have a good time for an hour or so.

[Cuddles]

I still interested in exactly why you choose eggs. What made you think of using them in the first place? Did you use eggs or plants first? Not really related to the challenge, but I'd quite like to know what made you think eggs would have a reaction in the first place.

[Marcus]

Unfertilized eggs are not alive. This challenge is an order of magnitude more unlikely that telepathy between living organisms. Much more likely is that you have constructed a device that detects boiling water. But perhaps if you came up with a protocol that precludes that possibility, they would reconsider. Confine the boiling water to a sealed chamber, monitor the humidity around the device,ect.

[bassett]

I still interested in exactly why you choose eggs. What made you think of using them in the first place? Did you use eggs or plants first? Not really related to the challenge, but I'd quite like to know what made you think eggs would have a reaction in the first place.


I began with plants. It would be difficult to isolate and "boil down" enough information to give you a more meaningful answer in this forum.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
The egg smashing is something that I am willing to do and report in conjunction with the JREF reviewing my claim that one egg will respond to another egg being selected and dropped into boiling water.

Why do I focus on egg boiling? It is really straight forward in technique. I have had great success with it. Why not?

Does this mean the end to your protocol negotiations with JREF, bassett?

The answer to your last question would of course be most likely: "To win the JREF Prize."

[bassett]

Unfertilized eggs are not alive. This challenge is an order of magnitude more unlikely that telepathy between living organisms. Much more likely is that you have constructed a device that detects boiling water. But perhaps if you came up with a protocol that precludes that possibility, they would reconsider. Confine the boiling water to a sealed chamber, monitor the humidity around the device,ect.

Marcus, notice that I offered to provide a physiological amplifier to the JREF on July 11th of 2006. Here is a quote from my letter of July 11th, 2006.

"If you would like, I could provide the JREF with one of the BioPulse™
physiological amplifiers, USB interface and software for use with a
computer of your choice. Alternatively, I could provide you with the
amplifier settings and sample rates if you should choose to find an
alternative source of physiological amplifier and recording method."

My offer of equipment to the JREF was declined. No interest was expressed in the settings necessary to observe the effect. If you read my presentation from Houston, then you will see some indication of what is required. For someone skilled in the field of electrophysiology, the clues given there will move them very near obtaining the result. Anyone, who has made a good faith effort to replicate my finding and is having difficulty can contact me through the contact feature at arthurepling.com.

Dr. Epling

[bassett]

Does this mean the end to your protocol negotiations with JREF, bassett?

The answer to your last question would of course be most likely: "To win the JREF Prize."

What is your position with the JREF?

[GzuzKryzt]

What is your position with the JREF?


...
Only JREF Representatives can give you definite information. I am simply a JREF Forum Member.
...


Duh?

[bassett]

[QUOTE=GzuzKryzt;2360491]Does this mean the end to your protocol negotiations with JREF, bassett?

No, this does not mean that I have ended discussions. My recent posts were made to let the forum know where the negotiations stand. Because, there has not been a response from the JREF in over eight months, I thought that it was a good time for an update. Here it is, I brought an egg-boiling experiment to the JREF, the JREF does not want me to use boiling water.

[GzuzKryzt]

Does this mean the end to your protocol negotiations with JREF, bassett?


No, this does not mean that I have ended discussions. My recent posts were made to let the forum know where the negotiations stand. Because, there has not been a response from the JREF in over eight months, I thought that it was a good time for an update. Here it is, I brought an egg-boiling experiment to the JREF, the JREF does not want me to use boiling water.

And you intend to proceed how exactly, bassett? I refer to your contact with JREF, which you can easily establish at your convince by contacting Jeff Wagg: challenge@randi.org

I edited this in "[QUOTE]" to make my quote visible.

[bassett]

[QUOTE=GzuzKryzt;2360989]And you intend to proceed how exactly, bassett?

[snip]

Right, here is what I suggest. Focusing on the egg to be monitored first. Place one chicken about 20 or 30 feet away from the hotplate or stove top, where another egg will be boiled. Monitor the distant egg with a physiological amplifier that is capable of showing the signal that drives the human heart, as demonstrated in my November presentation. There are details in this that are not easily explained in brief phrases. One of those details has to do with the establishment of good electrical contact with the chicken egg and skills associated with using the instrumentation.

As the chicken egg is monitored remotely, one would return to the stove, heat water to the boiling point. Next, an egg would be selected from the same dozen that the monitored egg was taken from and this egg would be dropped into water. The effect would be recorded.

The physiological amplifier is not unlike an amplifier that is used to monitor the heart of a patient in a hospital, in that it is connected with "wet" or gel electrodes to the subject. Just as an electrocardiograph does not vary inordinately with changes in humidity, so the physiological amplifier in the proper configuration will not be subject to variation due to humidity. This should remove any concerns about humidity affecting the study.

[Jackalgirl]

Howdy, basset --

I have a question, which I'm not sure has been answered yet. I've seen it asked, although sometimes parenthetically, but I'd like to see a more direct answer (and a thousand pardons if you already answered and I missed it!):

You talk about eggs sensing intent. However, as Marcus points out: "Unfertilized eggs are not alive." Or, at least, there's no chicken in there to do the sensing. What is it in the egg that is doing the sensing? (I ask this because, at some point, I may recommend using something other than an egg.)

Also, another point: your equipment seems to work with situations involving water and/or heat. Understand that the folks here are trying to remove humidity from the equation -- it's a control, one that allows you to demonstrate that it isn't the water or heat that your equipment is detecting. Distance, such as you have proposed, is one possible way to do it, but it would be far more effective to crush or cut the egg. I realize that this is messy, but it is rather conclusive insofar as the boiling water is removed entirely from the equation. Cracking the egg open into a bowl might do too, and should not be messy at all (unless, of course, I were to do it. I'm a terrible cook. ; ) ).

Lastly, please help me with some confusion: in your latest message (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2361536&postcount=143), you mention that a "a physiological amplifier that is capable of showing the signal that drives the human heart" be used. You then say that this device is "not unlike an amplifier that is used to monitor the heart of a patient", and then refer to the latter as an electrocardiograph. Are you actually talking about hooking an electrocardiograph to the egg? If not, is this "psysiological amplifier" another name for your Shimmering Leaf detector?

Please understand that if the latter is the case, comparing your device to an electrocardiograph will not convince anyone here (nor at JREF, I'll wager) that your device, "not unlike" electrocardiographs, "does not vary inordinately with changes in humidity". Your device does not display an oscilloscope-type display (or any kind of graphic display) to show the actual pattern of a signal (although that may have changed, please do correct me if I'm wrong). Your device simply beeps if a circuit is closed. That is not like an electrocardiograph at all, so it is still important to completely remove humidity from the list of possibilities.

Oh, sorry, one more thing -- just a tip here: when you quote someone, and you "snip" their response, make sure you add in a [/quote] end tag to the end of their stuff. That way, it shows up as an actual quote.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

[Expression_man]

Well, I do hope you get a response Mr Epling as it does seem to be very curious. If this has already been asked then I apologize but how did you stumble upon this supposed phenomenon?

Was it by accident?
Were you searching for something specific?

I don't subscribe to any particular religion but I do believe that on some level all life is connected. If what you say turns out to be true it would also mean having to reconsider what "consciousness" entails.

Well, simply put...if it's true, then it's very big. You'd get a lot of people thinking differently were this the case.

So, if you do feel unappreciated know that there are people who wish you "luck" on this. There are many who would like a new perspective on the study of life in general.

[Marcus]

Aside from the small detail of unfertilized eggs having no physiological responses to amplify, since they are not alive,and thus have no physiology, there are some holes in the protocol. You can't have anyone exhibiting their skills at using the instrumentation, or messing with the contacts, while the signal is being collected. No one would be allowed anywhere near the instruments while the signal is being collected. There would have to be control runs, in which water is allowed to boil without an egg being dropped in, or an object other than an egg. What constitutes a meaningful signal would of course have to be agreed upon beforehand. All of which is obvious to a newbie like myself, so should be very obvious to someone who has studied the rules and challenges carefully.

[Expression_man]

Aside from the small detail of unfertilized eggs having no physiological responses to amplify, since they are not alive,and thus have no physiology

If what he's saying is true then that means your notion of what life entails could be wrong...

That's one reason why this claim is paranormal.

[Marcus]

As to the question of whether eggs are alive, I attempted to post a link, but was not allowed because I have fewer than 15 posts, but you can find the information with a bit of googleing.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
So, if you do feel unappreciated know that there are people who wish you "luck" on this. There are many who would like a new perspective on the study of life in general.

Are those the same people who base their perspective on solid evidence? ;)

[Expression_man]

As to the question of whether eggs are alive, I attempted to post a link, but was not allowed because I have fewer than 15 posts, but you can find the information with a bit of googleing.

Will do, but if there's something specific you want me to look at you can always try fragmenting the link. I'm aware of what the general consensus will be regarding "various states of egg" being alive. :)

Are those the same people who base their perspective on solid evidence?

I imagine so...if you're referring to me and my out of body experiences then you're entitled to believe whatever you want...even without "solid evidence". Is this going to get derailed now?

[Marcus]

madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-1-/971370107.Cb.r.html

[Marcus]

Okay, that worked, I just typed out the URL instead of inserting a link. I dropped a number, though, here is the correct URL. madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-10/971370107.Cb.r.html

[Marcus]

Just general stuff you are probably already aware of, Expression, it just seemed germane to the discussion.

[Expression_man]

Thanks, although next time you can edit your original reply if you want to add more comments. : p

[GzuzKryzt]

...
So, if you do feel unappreciated know that there are people who wish you "luck" on this. There are many who would like a new perspective on the study of life in general.

Are those the same people who base their perspective on solid evidence? ;)


...
I imagine so...if you're referring to me and my out of body experiences then you're entitled to believe whatever you want...even without "solid evidence". Is this going to get derailed now?

Will you base your perspective on solid evidence, or will you base your perspective on belief, Expression_man?

[Dan O.]

Taking out all the details, this boils down to a simple test of communicating without using any of the known means to communicate. In this case, the communication in each trial is a single bit of information: the egg is or isn't being boiled. Since JREF appears to require a demonstration that is at least 1000 times better than chance, a minimum of 10 trials would be required if the applicant claims each trial would be 100% accurate.

As I recall, one of the sticking points in the negotiations was the time it would take to reset between trials. It was looking like the test might require 10 days to complete and this is completely unacceptable for volunteer examiners. Even 10 hours would seam too long unless there was already convincing evidence that the applicant might be successful. Before the test can be planned, specific information on the rate that successive trials can be performed and the claimed accuracy of each trial must be established.

[Expression_man]

Will you base your perspective on solid evidence, or will you base your perspective on belief, Expression_man?

I think a healthy mix is the way to go, what with all the times we've been proven wrong in the past and the current taboos no one will address for fear of committing professional suicide etc...

Are you asking me if depending on whether or not an egg can "talk" that I will change my world view?

If the egg "talks", yes!
If it doesn't, no. Eggs will remain a part of my daily breakfast.

Edit: Until this is over I will exhibit some hesitation in my pursuit of a full english breakfast. ;p

[Cuddles]

Unfertilized eggs are not alive. This challenge is an order of magnitude more unlikely that telepathy between living organisms. Much more likely is that you have constructed a device that detects boiling water. But perhaps if you came up with a protocol that precludes that possibility, they would reconsider. Confine the boiling water to a sealed chamber, monitor the humidity around the device,ect.

This is what I was trying to get at. While plants communicating in this way seems extremely unlikely, I am willing to accept it as possible, and a good candidate for the challenge. Eggs, on the other hand, are not alive. There is no debate about this, as Expression_Man seems to think. This is not an issue of when to consider an embryo alive, it is a simple fact that the eggs sold in shops are not fertilised and therefore cannot be considered alive whatever standards you hold. It seems a worryingly common misconception that since baby chickens come out of eggs, all eggs must contain baby chickens, despite this obviously not being the case if you've ever eaten one (an egg, not a baby chicken). It seems that Gerald has made this same mistake and has gone from a very unlikely but plausible experiment to one that has no basis in reality. Since the results appear to be the same in both cases, it seems fairly obvious that his results are simpyl the result of experimental error and do not show what he claims.

[GzuzKryzt]

I think a healthy mix is the way to go, what with all the times we've been proven wrong in the past and the current taboos no one will address for fear of committing professional suicide etc...


A healthy mix of belief and evidence? Those terms could not possibly contradict each other more.


Are you asking me if depending on whether or not an egg can "talk" that I will change my world view?


I am asking you whether you change your world view based on solid evidence or a comforting, unfounded, out-of-thin-air belief.


If the egg "talks", yes!
If it doesn't, no. Eggs will remain a part of my daily breakfast.

Edit: Until this is over I will exhibit some hesitation in my pursuit of a full english breakfast. ;p

At this point in time, Expression_man, will you cease to eat eggs because of Mr. Epling's claims: Yes or no?

[Expression_man]

I'm not saying that a chicken will come from an unfertilized egg...

People can't seem to get beyond that idea for some reason. The raw subject here is how certain states of life can be defined or at least, to an extent, observed. If it's real then it's certainly an energetic phenomenon.

What does that mean? Who knows?

A healthy mix of belief and evidence? Those terms could not possibly contradict each other more.

Hardly, are you going to say that Randi believes in what he does on the basis of having evidence or just a lack of it?

Randi is a believer just like anyone else although the difference is that he's advocating the negative view. By that I simply mean he has enough emotion involved in his pursuit of running the JREF that the integrity of his critical thinking may too have been compromised. If you can't suspend disbelief for even a few moments of your time then you have to ask yourself what your real reason for coming here was.

I am asking you whether you change your world view based on solid evidence or a comforting, unfounded, out-of-thin-air belief.

You mean would I go by my own experience rather than wait for someone to tell me what to think?

Yes, I would, although I'd take anything into account when presented with the information.

At this point in time, Expression_man, will you cease to eat eggs because of Mr. Epling's claims: Yes or no?

No...what are you getting at?

What's the point of all this?

[bassett]

I apologize, it seems that I accidentally posted the same message twice. So, I have shortened this one.

[bassett]

Howdy, basset --

Hello Jackalgirl, it's good to see your note here in the forum.

Thank you for the tip about the slash quote. It makes a nice effect. I will place three of your questions in quotes and then respond to them.


You talk about eggs sensing intent. However, as Marcus points out: "Unfertilized eggs are not alive." Or, at least, there's no chicken in there to do the sensing. What is it in the egg that is doing the sensing? (I ask this because, at some point, I may recommend using something other than an egg.)


There may be a problem with the statement that Marcus made regarding what is and what is not alive. It is true that what exists inside an unfertilized chicken egg is not generally recognized as a chicken. So, there is a mystery here regarding the response. It is a phenomenon of biocommunication. There are techniques to determine exactly what part of the egg is responding to the to the boiling of another egg. Unfortunately, the techniques are relatively expensive to employ, this is one of the things that attracted me to the million dollar challenge.

Plants will respond to people in a variety of situations. During a recent dry period, I began to look for patterns associated with a plant being satisfied with water. I did find a repeatable pattern with a grass-like plant. This information could help people use water to the best advantage in semi-arid regions. There is a room for a lot of research in the field of phenomenal biocommunication.

I did not select a plant study to present to the JREF because there are more variables to account for in a plant study than there are with an egg boiling study. The choice of an egg as suitable material for my response to the JREF challenge was a pragmatic one. The JREF has already accepted my response, and therefore the egg boiling experiment. It is curious to me why Mr. Wagg does not want to include boiling water in an egg boiling experiment.


Also, another point: your equipment seems to work with situations involving water and/or heat. Understand that the folks here are trying to remove humidity from the equation -- it's a control, one that allows you to demonstrate that it isn't the water or heat that your equipment is detecting. Distance, such as you have proposed, is one possible way to do it, but it would be far more effective to crush or cut the egg. I realize that this is messy, but it is rather conclusive insofar as the boiling water is removed entirely from the equation. Cracking the egg open into a bowl might do too, and should not be messy at all (unless, of course, I were to do it. I'm a terrible cook. ; ) ).


The assumption that it would be effective to crush or cut an egg is not in evidence. I presented an egg boiling experiment. The JREF accepted an egg-boiling experiment. Regarding messiness, there are reports in the field of bacteria producing measurable effects at a distance under controlled conditions. A broken egg is a good medium for growing bacteria and other things that might divert our focus from the response being studied. Every variable that is added to the experiment must be controlled. In order to control for bacteria, the egg-smashing chamber would have to be cleaned. If the cleaning agents were not thoroughly rinsed away, then the residue would become a variable. So, smashing eggs is mess in a number of ways. Fortunately, the JREF accepted an egg boiling experiment. So, there is no need to consider egg smashing in connection with the challenge.


Lastly, please help me with some confusion: in your latest message (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2361536&postcount=143), you mention that a "a physiological amplifier that is capable of showing the signal that drives the human heart" be used. You then say that this device is "not unlike an amplifier that is used to monitor the heart of a patient", and then refer to the latter as an electrocardiograph. Are you actually talking about hooking an electrocardiograph to the egg? If not, is this "psysiological amplifier" another name for your Shimmering Leaf detector?


Great question. The Shimmering Leaf has a physiological amplifier in the front end. The output can be seen in the short video of my first recorded experience with one egg responding to the selection and boiling of another. This video can be found by following the link "sensing intention", which currently appears in the leftmost column of the home page at http://www.arthurepling.com.

There have been some suggestions that the beeping is not as informative as a good digital recording of the event. In response, I decided to employ an earlier version of the Shimmering Leaf, one that had an analog to digital converter on the output. This makes the process more transparent. With this level of transparency, if there is a preference for using equipment designed by someone else then this can be done. I can provide the settings, and work with others to show them one method of connecting electrodes to an egg. The published report regarding which electrodes I found to be most suitable and my technique for connecting the electrodes is available at http://www.mindjava.com. I am referring to the November, 2006 presentation that is listed in the "research" section of the MindJava® website. I think that moving to a graphical representation of the sensed signal is a good move, one that makes the test easier to judge and more informative. I have examples of the chicken egg response and these examples can be visually compared to noise. This would reduce concerns about noise triggering the circuit.

An electrocardiograph could show the effect. There is a lot of electrocardiographic equipment on the market today. In my opinion it is best to use the ecg for people and other patients, who can gain a benefit from the proper use of the proper tool, in this case the ecg.

There are aspects of an ecg that make it really good for monitoring the heart, just as there are aspects of equipment designed for monitoring brain waves that make these products uniquely suited for the application. In my opinion, plants and eggs are best monitored with equipment that features filtering that varies from the optimal settings for an eeg or ecg. This is why I have invented the Shimmering Leaf and other tools that are uniquely suited to the exploration of phenomenal biocommunication.

[bassett]

Well, I do hope you get a response Mr Epling as it does seem to be very curious. If this has already been asked then I apologize but how did you stumble upon this supposed phenomenon?

Was it by accident?
Were you searching for something specific?

I don't subscribe to any particular religion but I do believe that on some level all life is connected. If what you say turns out to be true it would also mean having to reconsider what "consciousness" entails.

Well, simply put...if it's true, then it's very big. You'd get a lot of people thinking differently were this the case.

So, if you do feel unappreciated know that there are people who wish you "luck" on this. There are many who would like a new perspective on the study of life in general.

This is a great question. Discussing the research here might be confusing to people just dropping in. I would be more comfortable responding to this question on the message board at http://www.bioexperience.com.

[Marcus]

The problem with claiming life, or biological processes, or physiology, for an egg is not just the lack of a chicken, it is the lack of life. You might as well claim physiological processes for a piece of bread or a rock.

[Dan O.]

This is what I was trying to get at. While plants communicating in this way seems extremely unlikely, I am willing to accept it as possible, and a good candidate for the challenge. Eggs, on the other hand, are not alive. ... Since the results appear to be the same in both cases, it seems fairly obvious that his results are simply the result of experimental error and do not show what he claims.

Cell phones are not alive yet they appear to communicate with each other quite well. The claim is that eggs (alive or not) have a physical/metaphysical structure that allows them to communicate (or be used for communications). If this communications can be detected as the applicant claims and the know forms of communications can be ruled out then I would be one to admit that this is a paranormal event. At least until we study the phenomenon and find out what it is that science doesn't know yet.

[Expression_man]

The problem with claiming life, or biological processes, or physiology, for an egg is not just the lack of a chicken, it is the lack of life. You might as well claim physiological processes for a piece of bread or a rock.

There are too many variables we aren't aware of to claim anything regarding this concept. First impressions and observation wouldn't support the idea of a rock having some form of consciousness. It definitely doesn't have a biological process as we understand it.

We haven't even been able to define consciousness as it stands. So far we've mapped areas of the organic brain based on how it reacts to thought, there's nothing to suggest that it creates thought. Take into account how some clinically dead patients report all manner of strange phenomena during a near death experience (NDE) and what we know is very unclear. Last year was the first international medical conference on the subject of NDEs (June 2006). Some were quoted as saying that the patients were in fact braindead and they were still able to report on what was going on around them as well as events taking place beyond their ordinary sensory perception.

There's too much we don't know regarding the subject. Of course skepticism is required to ascertain some sort of truth but there's only so much one can be skeptical about. There are paranormal phenomena occurring throughout the world, the aim is to find a way of studying them so that they will no longer be misunderstood.

[Dan O.]

There are paranormal phenomena occurring throughout the world, the aim is to find a way of studying them so that they will no longer be misunderstood.

That should be "There are claims of paranormal phenomena occurring throughout the world". Just because something is unknown doesn't make it paranormal unless or until the normal causes are ruled out. Still, the unknown and unexplained are worth studying and may lead us to discovering the paranormal. But I'll keep an open mind until the facts are in.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
Edit: Until this is over I will exhibit some hesitation in my pursuit of a full english breakfast. ;p


...
At this point in time, Expression_man, will you cease to eat eggs because of Mr. Epling's claims: Yes or no?


No...what are you getting at?

What's the point of all this?

The point was for me to find out if you will base decisions that affect your daily routine on either solid evidence or on belief; in regard to Mr. Epling's yet unproven claim of egg sentience.

(I'd appreciate it, Expression_man, if you would not edit out the name of the posters you quote in your responses.)

[Expression_man]

I'd appreciate it, Expression_man, if you would not edit out the name of the posters you quote in your responses

I just copy and paste what people say for the most part. There's nothing to edit out. You want me to put them in? : p

[GzuzKryzt]

[/SIZE]

I just copy and paste what people say for the most part. There's nothing to edit out. You want me to put them in? : p

It would add to some transparence in your posts. :p

[Jackalgirl]

Hello Jackalgirl, it's good to see your note here in the forum.

Thank you for the tip about the slash quote. It makes a nice effect. I will place three of your questions in quotes and then respond to them.

Thanks for responding with such detail! : )

There may be a problem with the statement that Marcus made regarding what is and what is not alive. It is true that what exists inside an unfertilized chicken egg is not generally recognized as a chicken. So, there is a mystery here regarding the response. It is a phenomenon of biocommunication. There are techniques to determine exactly what part of the egg is responding to the to the boiling of another egg. Unfortunately, the techniques are relatively expensive to employ, this is one of the things that attracted me to the million dollar challenge.

Okay, so if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying things that have biological components (such as cells, mitochondria, etc) have a means to communicate with another. Even if they don't come from the same source (e.g., the same chicken). I am not a biologist, so I don't know if this is a valid statement; what I mean is, when an egg is unfertilized, does it "survive"? I mean, do the various components of the egg continue with their own life processes? Or is the whole thing dead and the only process that will be involved is decay? I rather suspect the latter.

I think what Expression_man is suggesting is that there may be a broader definition of "life" -- like the idea of kami (from Shinto, although may other philosophical beliefs share this), that even inanimate objects have spirits. In this case, your experiment would work with rocks. I am totally not wanting to be facitious here, but have you tried your experiment with boiling rocks yet? Example: find two smooth rocks from the same river and see what happens. Is there a positive indication when the "cohort rock" is boiled?

Plants will respond to people in a variety of situations. During a recent dry period, I began to look for patterns associated with a plant being satisfied with water. I did find a repeatable pattern with a grass-like plant. This information could help people use water to the best advantage in semi-arid regions. There is a room for a lot of research in the field of phenomenal biocommunication.

I did not select a plant study to present to the JREF because there are more variables to account for in a plant study than there are with an egg boiling study. The choice of an egg as suitable material for my response to the JREF challenge was a pragmatic one. The JREF has already accepted my response, and therefore the egg boiling experiment. It is curious to me why Mr. Wagg does not want to include boiling water in an egg boiling experiment.


Well, Jeff pretty much gives his reason here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1730979&postcount=4):

Ok, I've watched the video. I'm afraid, it doesn't really tell me much. It seems that your device detects boiling water, and it's unclear what role the eggs play in the experiment. How would it have been different if no eggs were included?

The assumption that it would be effective to crush or cut an egg is not in evidence. I presented an egg boiling experiment. The JREF accepted an egg-boiling experiment.

I'm sorry, but this is an incorrect statement. What the JREF accepted was your claim that your device can sense the egg's intentions. They did not accept your experiment in toto; rather, the whole point of protocol negotiation is to work out a protocol that's acceptable to both parties, which is why the negotiation process got stuck on the whole boiling vs. smashing egg argument.

No, I'm not speaking for JREF here, but I have read the thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57370) and I think it's pretty plain what has been going on.

Regarding messiness, there are reports in the field of bacteria producing measurable effects at a distance under controlled conditions. A broken egg is a good medium for growing bacteria and other things that might divert our focus from the response being studied. Every variable that is added to the experiment must be controlled. In order to control for bacteria, the egg-smashing chamber would have to be cleaned. If the cleaning agents were not thoroughly rinsed away, then the residue would become a variable. So, smashing eggs is mess in a number of ways.

Again, how about simply cracking an egg into a bowl? Cooks around the world do this and usually people don't end up dying. Yes, some people do end up with food poisoning, but usually because they haven't washed their hands, or have allowed eggs' outer shells to come into contact with the eggs' insides. Since no one will be eating these eggs, there should be no problem -- and, for added safety, I recommend that the person carrying out the test wash his or her hands in between eggs. You could even use different bowls (aluminum bowls are cheap), so there'd be no cross-contamination between the victim eggs at all.

Also, if your equipment is so sensitive that it will pick up the intentions of, say, bacteria, and throw the experiment results (if that in fact is what you're suggesting), then how are you going to control the experiment for that? In other words, is your workspace completely sterile?

Fortunately, the JREF accepted an egg boiling experiment. So, there is no need to consider egg smashing in connection with the challenge.

Incorrect, as I pointed out above. Please review Jeff's final post in your Challenge thread (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1731282&postcount=8), in which he indicates why the protocol negotiation is stalled.

An electrocardiograph could show the effect.

I'm still a bit confused as to this whole ECG/Shimmering Leaf issue. But I've come to realize that it doesn't matter. The issue here isn't that your device is or isn't an ECG for plants or eggs, but that the hypothesis of "biocommunication" is demonstrable. I think that this conversation will get pulled into a big, long derail if we start to try to get into the nitty-gritty of how your device works. We should focus on an experiment that rules out alternative explanations (such as, your device is detecting humidity) first, I think.

Seriously, I think you should consider boiling rocks. I'm not teasing or joking here. If you get two egg-shaped, smooth rocks and do everything exactly the same as you did for the eggs and there is no indication, that would be something to really jump all over.

[Dan O.]

Even if boiling the egg is accepted, there are still unanswered questions such as "Does a person need to actually think about the egg being boiled?"

Except for the extra cost, this might be setup as a double blind study.

Setup the experiment with 2 eggs (from the same carton), 2 closed pots, 2 burners a timer and a switch in a hidden box. Each pot would be filled with the same quantity of water, an egg would be put in 1 pot and an egg like object would be put in the other pot. The other egg from the pair would be connected to the detector. Each pot would be put separate burners. One burner would be plugged into the timer and the timer set to bring the pot of water to a boil. When the water has cooled and the results recorded, the egg and egg like objects would be removed and the next trial begun.

By separating the choices, nobody would know if the egg was boiled or not until after the result from the detector were recorded.

If it is the bonding of the eggs in the same carton that enables the communications between the eggs it should be possible to run simultaneous trials. Should egg pairs be selected from the same hen or pairs laid at the same time from different hens or is just spending quality time in the same carton enough.

[Miss Anthrope]

Thank you Jackalgirl for making this clarification. I had wanted to myself but I held back hoping someone could do the job as nicely as you did.

[Marcus]

Thanks for responding with such detail! : )



Okay, so if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying things that have biological components (such as cells, mitochondria, etc) have a means to communicate with another. Even if they don't come from the same source (e.g., the same chicken). I am not a biologist, so I don't know if this is a valid statement; what I mean is, when an egg is unfertilized, does it "survive"? I mean, do the various components of the egg continue with their own life processes? Or is the whole thing dead and the only process that will be involved is decay? I rather suspect the latter.

An egg, like a steak, may contain some living cells but it is not alive because it has ceased to carry out the organized functions that characterize life. Both objects will only decay.

How about putting eggs in a blender? no muss, no fuss, and no one can claim the damage is not as extensive as boiling.

[Dan O.]

The problem with claiming life, or biological processes, or physiology, for an egg is not just the lack of a chicken, it is the lack of life. You might as well claim physiological processes for a piece of bread or a rock.

If the unfertilized egg is really as sterile as you suggest then what process is responsible for producing a Century_egg?

[Marcus]

A century egg is an egg that has been preserved, usually by a mixture of wood ash,quicklime and salt, perhaps just by an alkaline clay mixture in ancient times. It is a method of food preservation, and does keep food from rotting, much like the salting and smoking that was so prevelent before the advent of refrigeration. Food preserved in this manner, be it meat, fish, or eggs, is not alive. These methods prevent the growth of microorganisms,keeping the food from rotting.

[Cuddles]

An egg, like a steak, may contain some living cells but it is not alive because it has ceased to carry out the organized functions that characterize life. Both objects will only decay.

When you say "ceased" what you mean is "never did in the first place". An unfertilised egg was never alive. It will contain various bacteria and other micro-whatsits, but it never even had the potential to turn into a chicken. A steak was once part of a living thing, an egg is simply food for a living thing that will only exist if fertilised.

[bassett]

Thanks for responding with such detail! : )

[snip]

Well, Jeff pretty much gives his reason here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=1730979&postcount=4):

Originally Posted by Jeff Wagg
"Ok, I've watched the video. I'm afraid, it doesn't really tell me much. It seems that your device detects boiling water, and it's unclear what role the eggs play in the experiment. How would it have been different if no eggs were included? "

Originally Posted by bassett
"The assumption that it would be effective to crush or cut an egg is not in evidence. I presented an egg boiling experiment. The JREF accepted an egg-boiling experiment."

I'm sorry, but this is an incorrect statement. What the JREF accepted was your claim that your device can sense the egg's intentions. They did not accept your experiment in toto; rather, the whole point of protocol negotiation is to work out a protocol that's acceptable to both parties, which is why the negotiation process got stuck on the whole boiling vs. smashing egg argument.


I would like to draw your attention to the the basis for the statement by bassett, concerning the acceptance by the JREF of an egg-boiling experiment. The proposal of an egg-boiling experiment appears in the original application that was accepted by the JREF and partially posted in the primary position of the Challenge Response forum thread http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57370 on the 24th of May 2006, 02:40 PM.

Here is an important part of the original Challenge Response that was accepted by the JREF,

"Question 1: HOW WILL YOU DEMONSTRATE YOUR ABILITY?
Answer 1: I can demonstrate my ability with the use of a special electronic instrument that I have invented, a dozen eggs and a suitable environment and time to boil an egg. The instrument is callled a Shimmering Leaf(TM) Plant Activity Detector. The instrument works well for monitoring a chicken egg.

Qustion 2: UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS WILL THE DEMONSTRATION TAKE PLACE?
Answer 2: I would prefer a quiet residence away from apartment complexes, shopping malls. A nice hotel room with a kitchen might work although a residence is probably better. Around midday I will need to set up my instrument, boil water and drop an egg."

Clearly, the JREF accepted an egg-boiling experiment.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
Clearly, the JREF accepted an egg-boiling experiment.

Provably wrong, bassett. The thread: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57370

And two important posts, #04 http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1730979#post1730979 and #08: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1731282#post1731282

Can you prove your claim with e.g. the hammer or any other device excluding boiling water from the equation?

Or does your insisting on the boiling - which has been rejected by JREF - mean you have abandoned negotiating a Challenge?

(Please pardon the undiplomatic and straightforward attitude of my posts, bassett. We Germans certainly value efficiency.)

[bassett]

(Please pardon the undiplomatic and straightforward attitude of my posts, bassett. We Germans certainly value efficiency.)

You have stated that you do not write in any official capacity for the JREF. Where is the leadership on this issue? I understand that it is their way to hold any official incoming communication concerning the challenge until they have a response that ensures a superior position for the JREF. Why have they waited to publish my response from July 11th, 2006? Why do they continue in failing to published my response that is over 8 months old?

There are many great people in Germany today, as there have been in historical eras. I suppose that in the narrow context of my response to the challenge, you have somehow lost focus of the important issues here. Boiling water, dropping an egg in water, these are indications of boiling an egg.

There is clear and outstanding evidence in my initial application that I submitted an egg-boiling response to the challenge. I can understand how the JREF may have subsequently researched the effect and become speechless. So, again I ask. Why did I have to publish my response from July 11th, 2006 here, rather than Mr. Wagg publishing it in the Challenge Response forum?

Entering negotiations concerning how the process will proceed can include a variety of topics. It has been my experience that negotiations may include discussions of the weather, cloud formations or various beverages. Similarly, there was a discussion concerning egg smashing with Mr. Wagg. To me this was a spurious conversation. However, Mr. Wagg indicated a sincere interest in the matter. So, just as I would have entertained a mention of how cold or warm it was outside, I entertained his discussion of smashing eggs. My response to the Challenge was and is about egg boiling. My response to the JREF Challenge was accepted by the JREF. Trying to go back and change that aspect of the process would be like "moving the goal posts" in a soccer match. This is not a good thing. It leads one to seriously doubt the credibility of the JREF in these matters.

[GzuzKryzt]

You have stated that you do not write in any official capacity for the JREF. Where is the leadership on this issue? I understand that it is their way to hold any official incoming communication concerning the challenge until they have a response that ensures a superior position for the JREF. Why have they waited to publish my response from July 11th, 2006? Why do they continue in failing to published my response that is over 8 months old?

There are many great people in Germany today, as there have been in historical eras. I suppose that in the narrow context of my response to the challenge, you have somehow lost focus of the important issues here. Boiling water, dropping an egg in water, these are indications of boiling an egg.

There is clear and outstanding evidence in my initial application that I submitted an egg-boiling response to the challenge. I can understand how the JREF may have subsequently researched the effect and become speechless. So, again I ask. Why did I have to publish my response from July 11th, 2006 here, rather than Mr. Wagg publishing it in the Challenge Response forum?

Entering negotiations concerning how the process will proceed can include a variety of topics. It has been my experience that negotiations may include discussions of the weather, cloud formations or various beverages. Similarly, there was a discussion concerning egg smashing with Mr. Wagg. To me this was a spurious conversation. However, Mr. Wagg indicated a sincere interest in the matter. So, just as I would have entertained a mention of how cold or warm it was outside, I entertained his discussion of smashing eggs. My response to the Challenge was and is about egg boiling. My response to the JREF Challenge was accepted by the JREF. Trying to go back and change that aspect of the process would be like "moving the goal posts" in a soccer match. This is not a good thing. It leads one to seriously doubt the credibility of the JREF in these matters.

I just quoted this post in PM to Jeff Wagg and asked him to respond in this thread.

Bassett, if you have an interest in an official response from JREF, you can reach Mr. Wagg here: challenge@randi.org

[GzuzKryzt]

You have stated that you do not write in any official capacity for the JREF. Where is the leadership on this issue? I understand that it is their way to hold any official incoming communication concerning the challenge until they have a response that ensures a superior position for the JREF. Why have they waited to publish my response from July 11th, 2006? Why do they continue in failing to published my response that is over 8 months old?

There are many great people in Germany today, as there have been in historical eras. I suppose that in the narrow context of my response to the challenge, you have somehow lost focus of the important issues here. Boiling water, dropping an egg in water, these are indications of boiling an egg.

There is clear and outstanding evidence in my initial application that I submitted an egg-boiling response to the challenge. I can understand how the JREF may have subsequently researched the effect and become speechless. So, again I ask. Why did I have to publish my response from July 11th, 2006 here, rather than Mr. Wagg publishing it in the Challenge Response forum?

Entering negotiations concerning how the process will proceed can include a variety of topics. It has been my experience that negotiations may include discussions of the weather, cloud formations or various beverages. Similarly, there was a discussion concerning egg smashing with Mr. Wagg. To me this was a spurious conversation. However, Mr. Wagg indicated a sincere interest in the matter. So, just as I would have entertained a mention of how cold or warm it was outside, I entertained his discussion of smashing eggs. My response to the Challenge was and is about egg boiling. My response to the JREF Challenge was accepted by the JREF. Trying to go back and change that aspect of the process would be like "moving the goal posts" in a soccer match. This is not a good thing. It leads one to seriously doubt the credibility of the JREF in these matters.

I agree with you, bassett, that I do not always understand the JREF's behaviour, most likely because I do not have enough information about what goes on behind the scenes. Over-worked, under-staffed, who knows?

However, I do not at all agree with your current approach of insinuations and misrepresentations.

Let's see if Mr. Wagg's response can clear matters up. We can take any meaningful discussion from there.

[steenkh]

Why have they waited to publish my response from July 11th, 2006? Why do they continue in failing to published my response that is over 8 months old?
When Jeff took over from Kramer, he did not follow Kramer's policy of publishing the correspondence because there was too much work involved, and Jeff has other tasks, and he is not physically based at the JREF HQ.

[Dan O.]

bassett, what is it exactly that you propose to demonstrate that shows a paranormal phenomenon? My understanding is that you want to boil an egg in water, look at an instrument connected to another egg and tell us that the first egg was boiled. This does not prove anything as I could do the same thing and I don't even need the second egg or the instrument.

I presented a test protocol a few posts back that should eliminate all other variables and determine if your instrument is actually recording a communication between the two eggs or just picking up some other signal such as from the boiling pot or the researcher. Have you conducted any blind test such as this?

[Jeff Wagg]

Bassett, I do NOT have a copy of this e-mail. Could you please e-mail me a jeff@randi.org?

Thank you.

This is a good time to catch up on what is new. Since it has been so long, I will briefly recap the discussion to date. I am Gerald Epling, a fellow who responded to the JREF Paranormal Challenge.

In the winter or early spring of 2006, I decided to respond to the JREF challenge. At the time, I was apprehensive concerning the possibility that a response based on phenomenal biocommunication to the challenge would be denied, because it was an example of a natural event. The realization that the scientific investigation of life could move ahead more quickly with a large infusion of cash prompted me to move forward with the application.

Kramer acknowledged the response.

Months later Jeff Wagg took over the discussions with challenge respondents.

Here, at the 57372 thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57372) (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57372%29), we all had a good time with puns. One fellow demonstrated the specificity of microwave shielding by placing his cell phone in a microwave oven and then calling his cell or mobile with another phone. The phone rang in the microwave. It was a really good demonstration of the use of active imagination in the investigation of a theory.

Another forum poster made the cogent observation, that I may not understand what the underlying mechanism of information transmission in the demonstrated phenomenon. This was a bright comment. I do not yet have a complete explanation of the physical basis of phenomenal biocommunication. This may be, in part, due to the nature of the Creator. The mind of the Creator is greater than my mind and I am only able to explore these things in a scientific manner with the mind of a man. Life is God-given and the study of phenomenal biocommunication is a study of life.

Some light-hearted posts were made along with some posts that were less light-hearted. (See the stop-Kaz, Sylvia, soup-of-the-day or whatever-else-is-popular-at-the-moment posts.)

Here is what has been going on behind the scenes,

On July 11th, 2006, I responded to Mr. Wagg. This response has not received the favor of a reply, nor has it been posted in the 57370 thread. Apparently, only JREF officers are allowed to post to this thread.

Here is my reply to Mr. Wagg from July of 2006:

“From: Future Mind
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 3:30 PM
To: challenge@randi.org
Subject: Egg Sense

July 11, 2006

Dear Mr. Wagg,

Smashing an egg can be accomplished in a number of more or less
controlled ways. Smashing an egg with a hammer would make quite a mess.
So, I am disinclined to use an actual hammer. May I suggest an
alternative to a literal hammer.

Since our last discussion, I have been investigating ways to smash an
egg without spreading pieces of the egg around in an uncontrolled
manner. So far, I have constructed a small chamber that accepts a
gravity-powered projectile that is capable of smashing an egg. The
chamber can be cleaned between uses, although it does not disassemble
easily. I will need to do some more work with the smashing chamber to
make it easier to use.

I see no problem with monitoring one egg while smashing another some
distance away. I am willing to do this as a part of the experiment.
However, my research shows that boiling an egg produces reliable
results. On November 11, 2004 I recorded the response of one egg to
another egg being selected for boiling and then dropped into boiling
water. We could do an experiment similar to this one, involving a
physiological amplifier. (See
http://www.arthurepling.com/aec/aec1b_1.html. There have been some
improvements made to the instrumentation that I used in November of
2004. The current model has a USB interface and will work with the
Windows XP Operating System. With the newer system, samples of the
physiological signal are taken several thousand times per second.

Perhaps we could smash some eggs and boil some others?

If you would like, I could provide the JREF with one of the BioPulse™
physiological amplifiers, USB interface and software for use with a
computer of your choice. Alternatively, I could provide you with the
amplifier settings and sample rates if you should choose to find an
alternative source of physiological amplifier and recording method.


Gerald A. Epling“


In November of 2006, I presented a poster on phenomenal biocommunication at a meeting of scientists in Houston, Texas. I chose an example of a plant being satisfied with water for the presentation. Also, included was an example of an egg responding to the selection and boiling of another egg – at a distance of about 30 feet. This poster presentation is available at http://www.mindjava.com. Look for the link to “Research” in the left-hand, navigation column.

Look for new information at http://www.arthurepling.com.

As you know, the web is a rapidly changing thing. The link in the July 2006 letter is somewhat outdated. The basic research is available at the MindJava® website. A video of the first observation of an egg responding to the selection and boiling of another egg is available at the ArthurEpling™ website – look for the “Sensing Intention” link in the left, navigation column. We are putting the finishing touches on a white paper and data disc which will provide a more in-depth description of certain aspects of phenomenal biocommunication.

[Jackalgirl]

...Clearly, the JREF accepted an egg-boiling experiment.

I'm sorry, but this just goes to show me that you do not understand the process, which I have boiled down to as simple as I can make it:

- Step 1: the claimant submits an application
- Step 2: if the application is accepted, the protocol negotiation phase commences.
- Step 3: after, and only after, a protocol design is determined that satisifes BOTH PARTIES, a preliminary test is held.
- Step 4: upon successful completion of the preliminary test, the formal test is held.

I cite, as my source, the JREF Million Dollar Challenge Application (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html). I call your specific attention to the following line, found in the second paragraph:

Applicants must state clearly what they claim as their special ability, and test procedures must be agreed upon by both parties before any testing will take place. (Emphasis added by Jackalgirl)

Also, you may wish to pay particular attention to Rule #1:

1. This is the primary and most important of these rules: Applicant must state clearly in advance, and applicant and JREF will agree upon, what powers or abilities will be demonstrated, the limits of the proposed demonstration (so far as time, location and other variables are concerned) and what will constitute both a positive and a negative result. (Again, emphasis added by moi)

By signing the Challenge Application, you affirmed your willingness to abide by these rules. An acceptance of an application therefore by no means indicates that the contents of that application are accepted, in toto, as is, with no alterations possible. Rather, I have demonstrably shown that a critical part of the process is the negotiation phase, by which both parties settle upon the terms of a demonstration that are satisfactory to both, and that by signing the application, you agreed to this process.

[Miss Anthrope]

...which I have boiled down to

Rimshot! :D

[Jackalgirl]

Rimshot! :D

Oh, Lordie -- that one got by me. I honestly did not attempt that pun! ; )

[Cuddles]

You have stated that you do not write in any official capacity for the JREF. Where is the leadership on this issue? I understand that it is their way to hold any official incoming communication concerning the challenge until they have a response that ensures a superior position for the JREF. Why have they waited to publish my response from July 11th, 2006? Why do they continue in failing to published my response that is over 8 months old?

As has been said many times in many different places, the forum is not the JREF. If you want to talk to the JREF, talk to them. The forum is simply a place for anyone who feels like it to discuss the JREF and its work. Complaining to us is not going to achieve anything.

[Miss Anthrope]

Oh, Lordie -- that one got by me. I honestly did not attempt that pun! ; )

A Freudian pun!

[bassett]

Bassett, I do NOT have a copy of this e-mail. Could you please e-mail me a jeff@randi.org?

Thank you.

Dear Mr. Wagg,

I sent the communication from July 11th, 2006 again. I did not get a bounce on the email. I didn't get an acknowledgment either. The time stamp is 2/28/2007 8:35 AM, the subject header is EGG SENSE.

Please let me know if you got it, or not. I will check back on this forum, it seems to be a good bridge.

[bassett]

On May 8th, 2007, Jeff Wagg responded to my resend of a message that was originally sent on July 11th, 2006. Here is the substance of my response to Mr. Wagg.


"May 8, 2007


Mr. Wagg,

It is good to see that you again have time to consider my response to the challenge. I understand your interest in phenomenal biocommunication. It is an interesting field of research. You have indicated an interest in harming an egg. Harming eggs is not part of my response to the challenge. I found that one egg could sense my intentions and actions in relation to selecting and boiling a cohort egg. Occasionally, I will boil and eat an egg. It is in connection with this sort of activity that I find the event related potentials. For a review of the event related potentials observed on the surface of a monitored egg, see my presentation to the Psychonomic Society from November 18th, 2006. In the November 18th presentation, I included enough detail about the technique of monitoring an egg to allow a trained and motivated scientist to replicate the study. If you have a driving interest in harming things, perhaps you could consult with another experimental psychologist and arrange for that individual to perform that research program for you.

Returning to my answer to the challenge. My experiment involves boiling water. I have read the insightful suggestions of some of the people who posted suggestions at the link,

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57372

The most salient suggestions regarding the planning of an experiment for the JREF were centered on the possibility that water vapor could have influenced the production of beeping sounds. In response to this suggestion, I have offered to remove the monitored egg some twenty or thirty feet away from the boiling egg.

A second concern that was raised in the link,

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=57372

centered on the possibility that the beeping produced by a monitoring unit could be the result of a timer. Setting a timer to start a beeping would be a relatively easy thing to do. So, in response to this concern, I have offered to monitor the event related potentials found on the surface of the monitored egg. The results of such an experiment were presented in November of 2006 to the Psychonomic Society in Houston, Texas. You can review this presentation by downloading a copy from http://www.mindjava.com.

I believe that you will find that my response is consistent with your stated goals as presented in your post of June 27, 2006 which may be viewed at,

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1731282#post1731282

Your response from June 27th, 2006 is partially reproduced below.

“…The problem is that your experiment doesn't prove your claim. It doesn't matter how the device works. If it can detect a signal from an egg that the egg is emitting due to it sensing the intention or action of a human, it will win the million dollars, provided it does so under controlled conditions. That's the stage we're at now.. figuring out the controlled conditions.” Jeff Wagg

Sincerely,
Gerald A. Epling"