Dela Warr camera proved to be for real

[Syamsu]

I don't know if anybody has noticed this, but the Delawarr camera has been proved to be for real some years ago already.

Delawarr is identified as a fraud on the Randi website:
(can't post link)

On this page is a paper on the Dela Warr camera:
(google with keywords delawarr benford holographic, it is the first hit in my google)

The fact that images produced by the Dela Warr camera contain 3D information proves that the Dela Warr camera is for real. Normal photographs do not contain 3D information this way, if you let 3D software run on normal photographs the result is a jumble of shapes.

The paper was presented at a CASYS conference in Belgium. Some world class scientists attend the CASYS conferences, but these scientists are not so much mainstream in one aspect, because unlike mainstream science most of the scientists attending the CASYS conferences believe freedom is real. They believe that things really can turn out one way or another, and make theory accordingly. Or so to say, the physics of choosing instead of the physics of force. So generally they don't use the cause and effect logic in explanations that much, instead they use the logic of anticipation and decision in explanations. For example another paper presented at the conference talks about evolution proceeding by "reasoned and informed decisions".

[NoZed Avenger]

Reference to unquantifiable and unmeasured "energy" - check

"Quantum" - check

"unexplainable" - check

cite to Radin - check

misuse of statistics - check

made up words that are all sciency - check

Complicated theory, but no double-blind, repeatable study - check


But I am afraid it doesn't say anything about people laughing at Galileo, so it fails to hit 100% on 'how to present pseudo-science.'

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger

But I am afraid it doesn't say anything about people laughing at Galileo, so it fails to hit 100% on 'how to present pseudo-science.'

And not very high on the Crackpot Index either. But it's a first post. There's time.

[Skeptical Greg]

VFF Should find this interesting.

http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/A...-5/Benford.htm

Quote:

Much research exists regarding holographs in nature. These studies show that dolphins, bats, fish, flies, birds, and humans all process sensory information holographically. Dolphins and bats actually create holograms by transmitting acoustic reference and object waves that are then reflected back to the mammal for neural processing.3 In humans, studies in chemical oscillations and oscillation cellular dynamics strongly indicate that the holographic concept exists not only on the neural level but also on the cellular and molecular levels.

This totally explains VFF's powers ..

[Syamsu]

What you are saying is all besides the point. The proof is the presence of 3D information on the photographs. You can indepently, repeatably verify it in principle, run the 3D software again and again on the photographs, with the same result.

The reference to quantum theory in these kind of paranormal phenomena is obviously because in some interpretations of quantum theory freedom is real. The spiritual is what does the job of deciding in most paranormal ideas. All the other science theories don't posit any freedom, they just posit force. The fairly recent experiment in which a quantum computer searches a database simply by the operator looking at if the searchalgorithm could have run (but didn't actually run), proves that freedom is real. Or so to say it proves alternatives are real, and get decided, rather then that a particular result is forced by some hidden variable.

I am a longtime debater, so I already know all of that stuff your type is saying and going to say. You simply never use the logic of choosing in an explanation for anything, because the physics of choosing hasn't yet been established in mainstream science.

[Audible Click]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

What you are saying is all besides the point. The proof is the presence of 3D information on the photographs. You can indepently, repeatably verify it in principle, run the 3D software again and again on the photographs, with the same result.

The reference to quantum theory in these kind of paranormal phenomena is obviously because in some interpretations of quantum theory freedom is real. The spiritual is what does the job of deciding in most paranormal ideas. All the other science theories don't posit any freedom, they just posit force. The fairly recent experiment in which a quantum computer searches a database simply by the operator looking at if the searchalgorithm could have run (but didn't actually run), proves that freedom is real. Or so to say it proves alternatives are real, and get decided, rather then that a particular result is forced by some hidden variable.

I am a longtime debater, so I already know all of that stuff your type is saying and going to say. You simply never use the logic of choosing in an explanation for anything, because the physics of choosing hasn't yet been established in mainstream science.

Then why bother to post?

[Syamsu]

Well I thought there might be other people here, who actually do believe freedom is real. Who might care for the reputation of Delawarr, who would in principle accept the incontrovertible evidence of the 3D information in the Delawarr photographs.

This skepticism about choosing is phony, endless philosphical meandering about whether or not free will and such is real at all is not really skepticism, it is more willful ignorance.

[Skeptical Greg]

Quote:

...incontrovertible evidence.....

Then you should have no problem presenting same..

Perhaps you can understand why we don't just take your word for it...

[catbasket]

Journal of Theoretics - Recommended Links The Unsung Heroes of Science

Quote:

Velikovsky, Immanuel: Russian born theorist who in the 1940's developed theories of previous cataclysms of which the most famous was that Venus was a purged portion of Jupiter. Bizarre as this seemed to be, his predictions of Venus were later confirmed in 1962 by Mariner 2 (see "Neptune, Velikovsky, and the Name of the Game" by Gingerich in the Sept. 1996 issue of Scientific American). A Velikovsky archive is available at: http://www.varchive.org.

Syamsu, sorry but I've used up all today's ration of laughing dogs ... have one of these instead -

[Syamsu]

I see that the 1 million dollar rules of evidence state that it can only be a live event as it were, so that photographic records of the fifties are ruled out. Are you saying that doing this kind of thing live in the presence of a representative could qualify for the million dollar prize if verified?

I will admit this wouldn't be so easy to do as it sounds. The camera works by the free will of the operator. A skeptic present will hinder that, simply by exercising their skeptical will over it all. I don't know how this problem can be solved, I never used the device myself.

[SezMe]

Is there such a thing as a Faraday Cage for free will?

[RoboTimbo]

Originally Posted by SezMe

Is there such a thing as a Faraday Cage for free will?

Let's consult the quantum computer.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

What you are saying is all besides the point. The proof is the presence of 3D information on the photographs. You can indepently, repeatably verify it in principle, run the 3D software again and again on the photographs, with the same result.

The reference to quantum theory in these kind of paranormal phenomena is obviously because in some interpretations of quantum theory freedom is real. The spiritual is what does the job of deciding in most paranormal ideas. All the other science theories don't posit any freedom, they just posit force. The fairly recent experiment in which a quantum computer searches a database simply by the operator looking at if the searchalgorithm could have run (but didn't actually run), proves that freedom is real. Or so to say it proves alternatives are real, and get decided, rather then that a particular result is forced by some hidden variable.

I am a longtime debater, so I already know all of that stuff your type is saying and going to say. You simply never use the logic of choosing in an explanation for anything, because the physics of choosing hasn't yet been established in mainstream science.

With no offense, are you mentally troubled or are you incapable of putting together a meaningful sentence in English? I recognize that this may be an unkind question, but reading the op and your responses here I can see no other probability.

[Empress]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

I see that the 1 million dollar rules of evidence state that it can only be a live event as it were, so that photographic records of the fifties are ruled out. Are you saying that doing this kind of thing live in the presence of a representative could qualify for the million dollar prize if verified?

I will admit this wouldn't be so easy to do as it sounds. The camera works by the free will of the operator. A skeptic present will hinder that, simply by exercising their skeptical will over it all. I don't know how this problem can be solved, I never used the device myself.

Odd how that always happens. Proving once again that skepticism is the most powerful force in the universe.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by SezMe

Is there such a thing as a Faraday Cage for free will?

Nope, free will just overcomes psychic ability everywhere. Some kind of science plot I think!!.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Originally Posted by Empress

Odd how that always happens. Proving once again that skepticism is the most powerful force in the universe.

Thank the IPU (Blessed be Her name) for skeptics then, otherwise the Rules of the Universe (qv) would be changing all the time and that would be very confusing.

[Apology]

But you guys, there really is a camera called the De La Warr camera. It is proven to be real, here's a picture of it!

De La Warr Mark 1 Camera

Now, whether it actually takes paranormal pictures is unlikely, but it is REAL, I swear!

[Syamsu]

Experience in debate shows to me that people who don't have some understanding of choosing on an intellectual level should not debate about these things. I don't mean for you to have my understanding of it, but to have your own understanding of the logic of choosing you yourself use in every day life, in a bit formalized and abstracted way. Philosophizing about whether or not free will is real or not does not count. It has to be developed knowledge about how choosing works, otherwise we are not communicating. And don't go trying to figure it out how choosing works right now from scratch, that is also useless. This excludes about 99 percent of all socalled skeptics.

[RoboTimbo]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

The fairly recent experiment in which a quantum computer searches a database simply by the operator looking at if the searchalgorithm could have run (but didn't actually run), proves that freedom is real.

What is a quantum computer?

[arthwollipot]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

Experience in debate shows to me that people who don't have some understanding of choosing on an intellectual level should not debate about these things. I don't mean for you to have my understanding of it, but to have your own understanding of the logic of choosing you yourself use in every day life, in a bit formalized and abstracted way. Philosophizing about whether or not free will is real or not does not count. It has to be developed knowledge about how choosing works, otherwise we are not communicating. And don't go trying to figure it out how choosing works right now from scratch, that is also useless. This excludes about 99 percent of all socalled skeptics.

Wow. That sounds so much like yrreg that it's uncanny.

Syamsu, can you explain to us what this camera does and how it works? I am posting from a firewalled system and don't have the liberty to look up google or other various sites. Can you describe the camera in your own words please?

[shadron]

George De La Warr^WP
radionics^WP

[SezMe]

shadron, your first link is incorrect. Here is the one I think you meant:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_de_la_Warr

[Kilaak Kommander]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

Well I thought there might be other people here, who actually do believe freedom is real. Who might care for the reputation of Delawarr, who would in principle accept the incontrovertible evidence of the 3D information in the Delawarr photographs.

This skepticism about choosing is phony, endless philosphical meandering about whether or not free will and such is real at all is not really skepticism, it is more willful ignorance.

So if we believe in freedom and understand choosing.... we would have no choice but to accept the incontrovertible camera?

You're the one doing the philosophical meandering here. You've offered us more putdowns than hard details about the photographs.

[athon]

First of all, welcome to the boards.

Interestingly, I've been researching the history of vitalism and the concept of bioenergy for a while now, and came across this paper myself about three months ago.

Essentially, it comes down to something that could easily be tested - a camera that can detect 'living energy'. Of course, as others have said, there needs to be a way of screening it definitively to allow for controls. Until this is replicated with such controls and tested by impartial parties, there really isn't much to discuss. The rest of the paper is a flight of fancy that means nothing outside of its own context.

Athon

[pakeha]

Welcome to the forum, syamsu, here you'll find much to read, much to learn.
A phrase which struck me in your OP was this one:

Quote:

So generally they don't use the cause and effect logic in explanations that much, instead they use the logic of anticipation and decision in explanations

I'd like to learn more; could you point me to some sources about this type of logic, please?

[Syamsu]

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

What is a quantum computer?

Google, quantum computer database running. It is the first hit in my google.

"By combining quantum computation and quantum interrogation, scientists at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have found an exotic way of determining an answer to an algorithm – without ever running the algorithm."

[Syamsu]

Originally Posted by athon

First of all, welcome to the boards.

Interestingly, I've been researching the history of vitalism and the concept of bioenergy for a while now, and came across this paper myself about three months ago.

Essentially, it comes down to something that could easily be tested - a camera that can detect 'living energy'. Of course, as others have said, there needs to be a way of screening it definitively to allow for controls. Until this is replicated with such controls and tested by impartial parties, there really isn't much to discuss. The rest of the paper is a flight of fancy that means nothing outside of its own context.

Athon

In my opinion the finding of 3D information in the photographs is already sufficient evidence to discount the claim that Dela Warr was a fraud.

It is not the camera that detects "energy", the free will of the operator is the main measuring instrument in the set up. So it is not so easy as pushing a button. It must be a mistake to see this sort of thing in terms of some kind of energy. You should see this in terms of information, because it is based on the logic of choosing, and choosing is already described much in terms of information in some disciplines of humanities.

[Syamsu]

Originally Posted by pakeha

Welcome to the forum, syamsu, here you'll find much to read, much to learn.
A phrase which struck me in your OP was this one:


I'd like to learn more; could you point me to some sources about this type of logic, please?

I only know some abstracts available:
Google review hyperincursive
"Anticipation is not only related to predictions but to decisions: hyperincursive systems create multiple choices and a decision process selects one choice. So, anticipation is not a final goal, like in cybernetics and system science, but is a fundamental property of physical and biological systems."

Google: strong anticipation mercury perihelion
" the equation of general relativity is obtained in introducing anticipative propagation of the gravitational field."

Google: CASYS
"a computing anticipatory system is a system that computes its current states in taking into account its past and present states but also its potential future states."

This involves exotic math of for instance entering the equation of the theory of gravity as data into the theory of gravity. So to say objects are considered in terms of generating information themselves, rather then that information is just considered in terms of describing objects.

[Akhenaten]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

In my opinion the finding of 3D information in the photographs is already sufficient evidence to discount the claim that Dela Warr was a fraud.

Do how does one find 3D information in a photograph?

Originally Posted by Syamsu

I only know some abstracts available:
Google review hyperincursive
"Anticipation is not only related to predictions but to decisions: hyperincursive systems create multiple choices and a decision process selects one choice. So, anticipation is not a final goal, like in cybernetics and system science, but is a fundamental property of physical and biological systems."

Google: strong anticipation mercury perihelion
" the equation of general relativity is obtained in introducing anticipative propagation of the gravitational field."

Google: CASYS
"a computing anticipatory system is a system that computes its current states in taking into account its past and present states but also its potential future states."

This involves exotic math of for instance entering the equation of the theory of gravity as data into the theory of gravity. So to say objects are considered in terms of generating information themselves, rather then that information is just considered in terms of describing objects.

Google: Word Salad

[Fishstick]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

In my opinion the finding of 3D information in the photographs is already sufficient evidence to discount the claim that Dela Warr was a fraud.

.

So what is this "3D information" and how/where can we see it?

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

...Google: CASYS
"a computing anticipatory system is a system that computes its current states in taking into account its past and present states but also its potential future states."

This involves exotic math of for instance entering the equation of the theory of gravity as data into the theory of gravity. So to say objects are considered in terms of generating information themselves, rather then that information is just considered in terms of describing objects.

Computing 'potential future states' sounds something like setting up a retirement fund.
The phrase 'objects are considered in terms of generating information themselves, rather then that information is just considered in terms of describing objects' confuses me.
Something like observing an egg go bad?
Or projecting the evolution of a given process in time?
Or is Akhenaten right, yet again.

[athon]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

In my opinion the finding of 3D information in the photographs is already sufficient evidence to discount the claim that Dela Warr was a fraud.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. How does one define information as strictly 3D, and not caused by something else? And how does one extend that to reflect some undefined, unquantifiable living energy?

Quote:

It is not the camera that detects "energy", the free will of the operator is the main measuring instrument in the set up.

How does one control for that?

Quote:

So it is not so easy as pushing a button. It must be a mistake to see this sort of thing in terms of some kind of energy. You should see this in terms of information...

How do you define 'information'? I know it seems pedantic to ask such things, however pseudoscience is often distinguished from science on the basis of using terms in a unique or misleading fashion. By stating one should think of it in terms of information, but not energy, it conflicts with what the rest of the science community understands the words to mean.

Quote:

... because it is based on the logic of choosing, and choosing is already described much in terms of information in some disciplines of humanities.

Which further exemplifies my point. This seriously doesn't mean anything outside of its own position. Are you aware of an event called the 'Sokal Affair'? Really interesting. Now, I'm not saying you don't see such phrases as being meaningless. What I am saying is that simply because 'information' might be used to describe choice in an anthropological field, it does not translate directly into a physics or biology field. As Akhenaten said, it's basically word salad.

Athon

[Careyp74]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

Experience in debate shows to me that people who don't have some understanding of choosing on an intellectual level should not debate about these things. I don't mean for you to have my understanding of it, but to have your own understanding of the logic of choosing you yourself use in every day life, in a bit formalized and abstracted way. Philosophizing about whether or not free will is real or not does not count. It has to be developed knowledge about how choosing works, otherwise we are not communicating. And don't go trying to figure it out how choosing works right now from scratch, that is also useless. This excludes about 99 percent of all socalled skeptics.

DERAIL!!!!!

back to the argument.

Here is what is needed to prove that the camera actually does what it claims-

Set up a test with random people and random parts of those people to photograph. Tell us beforehand what we are going to see in the pictures. Make the test double blind. Show us that what was predicted actually happened. Do it again.

Now after all of that, I am sure more people will listen to you. Running the software over and over again on the pictures that are already out there is not a replicable test proving anything.

[dlorde]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

The fairly recent experiment in which a quantum computer searches a database simply by the operator looking at if the searchalgorithm could have run (but didn't actually run), proves that freedom is real. Or so to say it proves alternatives are real, and get decided, rather then that a particular result is forced by some hidden variable.

It's not a question of the operator 'looking at if the search algorithm could have run', it's a question of putting the photons in the equipment in a quantum superposition of both running and not running the search algorithm. This way you can get information about the answer even from the proportion of photons that don't actually run the search. This information about the answer is not the answer itself. The team also "showed theoretically how to obtain the answer without ever running the algorithm, by using a 'chained Zeno' effect". This was not an actual experimental result, it was a theoretical result - though it will presumably be targeted for future experimental work.

You need to be very careful when reading and reporting this kind of experiment - it's easy to make mistakes and cause confusion and misunderstanding.

[Toke]

3D photographs is old technology.
Take two pictures of the same scenery from two slightly different positions, then look at one picture with each eye. Ta Da!! 3d effect.

Guess this is not what the OP refers to.

[Aepervius]

As far as I can tell there is no evidence whatsoever presented in this thread about radionic. Do you have any Syamsu ? Because radionic and eveything de la ware made was about radionic and other pseudo-science claim. Not about the possibility of reconstructing a 3D model from 2D.

If this is about the possibility of reconstructing a 3D image from some 2D photo, it is possible to make some sort of extrapolation from a single exposition picture, there are a few program for that, but this is not something special to De La Ware equipment, and it is more of a hack than anything else.

Really, this is pseudo science at best, crackpoterry at worst. Or as some said "not even wrong".

[kedo1981]

Tell us again how there is no 3d information in a photo

Bryce 3d software and almost all others on the market will generate a height map "terrain" from any high contrast photo, an x-ray, shroud of Turin, whatever.

It's funny how an article about a "camera" invented in 1951 goes on to use a an example an image generated by software that was written no earlier than 1988.

[Ysidro]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

Well I thought there might be other people here, who actually do believe freedom is real. Who might care for the reputation of Delawarr, who would in principle accept the incontrovertible evidence of the 3D information in the Delawarr photographs.

This skepticism about choosing is phony, endless philosphical meandering about whether or not free will and such is real at all is not really skepticism, it is more willful ignorance.

What the heck does freedom have to do with the OP? Or are you refering to "the freedome to believe whatever I want?" Because you have that. Just as we have the freedom to say "you're not making any sense!"

[Ashles]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

I am a longtime debater,

It appears you have a mass of experience.

[fls]

Originally Posted by Syamsu

I don't know if anybody has noticed this, but the Delawarr camera has been proved to be for real some years ago already.

Delawarr is identified as a fraud on the Randi website:
(can't post link)

On this page is a paper on the Dela Warr camera:
(google with keywords delawarr benford holographic, it is the first hit in my google)

http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/A...-5/Benford.htm

The part of this paper that is interesting to me (I'm a doctor) is where it states that accurate clinical information can be obtained from a drop a blood or other tissues, even prior to the disease becoming manifest clinically. As you can guess, this would be an incredibly useful device to me. Far more useful even than devices that I commonly use, such as fMRI or laboratory tests. So my first question is, why is this incredibly useful device not in common use? Why haven't I even heard of it before this?

Quote:

The fact that images produced by the Dela Warr camera contain 3D information proves that the Dela Warr camera is for real. Normal photographs do not contain 3D information this way, if you let 3D software run on normal photographs the result is a jumble of shapes.

The paper was presented at a CASYS conference in Belgium. Some world class scientists attend the CASYS conferences, but these scientists are not so much mainstream in one aspect, because unlike mainstream science most of the scientists attending the CASYS conferences believe freedom is real. They believe that things really can turn out one way or another, and make theory accordingly. Or so to say, the physics of choosing instead of the physics of force. So generally they don't use the cause and effect logic in explanations that much, instead they use the logic of anticipation and decision in explanations. For example another paper presented at the conference talks about evolution proceeding by "reasoned and informed decisions".

Regardless of how these scientists choose to talk, it wouldn't prevent them from making billions of dollars by making these devices available to physicians. What gives? Alternatively, what sort of person discovers a way to save the lives of millions of people and then simply keeps it a secret, letting untold misery go unchecked?

Linda