The Paranormal and Physical Laws

[RSLancastr]

I am currently in an email correspondence with a gentleman who believes that psychic phenomena such as ESP and psychic mediumship might be possible. He does not state that they are a fact, just that he believes they might be possible.

He mentioned that he felt that levitation/telekinesis were impossible, and subsequently was offended when I said that I put levitation/TK in the same category as ESP and psychic mediumship - namely, paranormal things for which no scientific proof had been found.

He is of the opinion that levitation/TK are very different, because they violate known physical laws.

How would you respond to that?

[drkitten]

I am currently in an email correspondence with a gentleman who believes that psychic phenomena such as ESP and psychic mediumship might be possible. He does not state that they are a fact, just that he believes they might be possible.

He mentioned that he felt that levitation/telekinesis were impossible, and subsequently was offended when I said that I put levitation/TK in the same category as ESP and psychic mediumship - namely, paranormal things for which no scientific proof had been found.

He is of the opinion that levitation/TK are very different, because they violate known physical laws.

How would you respond to that?

He's technically very close to right; at the very least, levitation and TK have a more clear violation of known physical laws. In order to lift a 1kg object one meter in the air would require energy input of about 10 Joules. With no known energy source involved in TK (we know the energy of brain activity, and it's tiny), this violates Conservation of Energy.

Merely "knowing" something (e.g. ESP) doesn't violate energy conservation, since there's no gross energy change involved in seeing something vs. not seeing something.

[Cynric]

He's technically very close to right; at the very least, levitation and TK have a more clear violation of known physical laws. In order to lift a 1kg object one meter in the air would require energy input of about 10 Joules. With no known energy source involved in TK (we know the energy of brain activity, and it's tiny), this violates Conservation of Energy.

Merely "knowing" something (e.g. ESP) doesn't violate energy conservation, since there's no gross energy change involved in seeing something vs. not seeing something.

It's true that "imagining" something doesn't violate energy conservation, but ESP would imply the transfer of meaningful information in some manner. The generation of some sort of mind field, for example, which presumably would require a significant energy source. Generating a magnetic field which could reach to the opposite end of the average room with enough kick to queer a compass would take oodles of joules (approximately ;)) I would guess...

I'm not sure if that would persuade your correspondent, RS. Good luck though - if he sees the reasoning behind TK being implausible, there's hope for ESP.

[KingMerv00]

I am currently in an email correspondence with a gentleman who believes that psychic phenomena such as ESP and psychic mediumship might be possible. He does not state that they are a fact, just that he believes they might be possible.

He mentioned that he felt that levitation/telekinesis were impossible, and subsequently was offended when I said that I put levitation/TK in the same category as ESP and psychic mediumship - namely, paranormal things for which no scientific proof had been found.

He is of the opinion that levitation/TK are very different, because they violate known physical laws.

How would you respond to that?

I would ask for evidence of ESP and mediumship. THEN I decide if it violates the physical laws as we know them.

[Soapy Sam]

Robert- Depending on his own background, it may be readily apparent to him that there is a physical contradiction inherent between TK and his knowledge of real world mechanics or physics.
His experience may not clarify such a contradiction between his knowledge and ESP.
This suggests to me that he is more knowledgable about mechanics than neurology / psychology, which is a pretty common situation; most of us can drive, so have a reasonable grasp of Newtonian mechanics, even if we can't parrot the Laws. Conversely, few of us knows much about the mind so it's hard to be certain about what it can and can't do.

Likewise, many folk believe in UFOs because they hear learned people say there probably is intelligent life out there, while failing to understand that "out there" in this context means further away than all the Air Miles accumulated by all the airline passengers in history , including the ones on Tralfamadore and Barsoom.

You might try the angle that if he is sceptical of those paranormal claims in areas he is familiar with, maybe he should be equally sceptical where his is less informed, until presented with convincing evidence.

[RSLancastr]

This suggests to me that he is more knowledgable about mechanics than neurology / psychology, which is a pretty common situationFunny you should say this, as he tells me that he is a psychologist.

[Starthinker]

I wonder where he stands on bigfoot. I travel in cryptozoological circles and your story kinda mirrors the people who think bigfoot is a possiblity but the loch ness monster is not. It may not be a fair comparison, I know, but it's kinda close.

What's funny is that there is a debate going on at another forum about whether cryptids should be lumped into the same category as paranormal claims such as E.S.P., talking to the dead, and such because there is more of a possibility that a previously unknown hominid roams the midwest than someone talking to the dead or reading someone's mind.

Is this an apples/oranges or a kettle/pot?

[Soapy Sam]

Funny you should say this, as he tells me that he is a psychologist.

Well dang. Got that one wrong. Freudian or cognitive? Maybe he tinkers with motorbikes?:p

[Beady]

He is of the opinion that levitation/TK are very different, because they violate known physical laws.

So, why wouldn't ESP and psychic mediumship violate known laws? As Cynric points out, there has to be an energy transference of some sort. If the transference conforms to known laws, it can be measured; if it can't be measured, then it doesn't conform to known physics and is therefore speculation. If there is no transference, then the known laws are defacto violated.

This assumes that ESP and psychic mediumship have been validated. If they have not, what's the point in arguing about the mechanism by which they are accomplished?

[drkitten]

So, why wouldn't ESP and psychic mediumship violate known laws? As Cynric points out, there has to be an energy transference of some sort. If the transference conforms to known laws, it can be measured;

... not if the necessary amount of transferred energy is empirically indistinguishable from zero.

I know how much energy it takes to levitate a bowling ball; on the order of 50 Joules or thereabouts.
I can easily measure energy transferrence to within a Joule or two, enough to let me distinguish 50 Joules from zero.

If it takes only 0.00000000000000000000001 Joules to send "a thought" via ESP, I don't think I've got measuring equipment lying around that is sensitive enough to detect that.

[Beady]

If it takes only 0.00000000000000000000001 Joules to send "a thought" via ESP, I don't think I've got measuring equipment lying around that is sensitive enough to detect that.

In which case, a thought is the firing of various synapses, which can be measured, which offers possibilities for measuring by inference, which brings ESP back into the range of testability. I suspect, however, that a human brain operating at such a low output, and its owner, would soon be buried.

[andyandy]

haven't scientists been able to levitate a frog?

i think they used magnetic levitation......

http://www.hfml.ru.nl/pics/Movies/frog.mpg

or by "levitation violating physical laws" did you mean by using classical electromagnetism?

[Beady]

...or by "levitation violating physical laws" did you mean by using classical electromagnetism?

I believe the meaning in this case was of levitation without a power source. Maglev requires a power source; this kind... http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:nfoZ-4qWYGxt-M:http://americanswami.typepad.com/yogalife/images/levitation.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://americanswami.typepad.com/yogalife/images/levitation.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ghettodriveby.com/yogic/&h=273&w=200&sz=28&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=nfoZ-4qWYGxt-M:&tbnh=113&tbnw=83&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlevitation%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26l r%3D) ...would not, which would violate known physical laws.

[Anacoluthon64]

How would you respond to that?Nicholas Humphrey, in a book titled Leaps of Faith: Science, Miracles, and the Search for Supernatural Consolation (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0387987207?v=glance), examines the problems of PK, TK, RV, etc., from an information-content perspective. So, for example, PK, besides lacking a plausible mechanism, appears to violate strictures of information transfer: merely willing a die to fall on 6 ignores all of the complex information required in respect of a tumbling die to reliably and actually produce a 6. Similarly, RV seems to defy a need for the right kind of information being transferred.

I do not precisely recall the intricacies of the arguments, but I will retrieve them if so requested.

'Luthon64

[drkitten]

In which case, a thought is the firing of various synapses, which can be measured, which offers possibilities for measuring by inference, which brings ESP back into the range of testability.

Er, no. As you point out, this signal could only be separated from the "noise" (normal neural firing) under circumstances that would probably independently prevent ESP from working.

I suspect, however, that a human brain operating at such a low output, and its owner, would soon be buried.

[andyandy]

I believe the meaning in this case was of levitation without a power source.....

oh, the silly kind of levitation :)