Author Topic: Psionic time paradoxes  (Read 2847 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

September 03, 2006, 06:36:05 PM
Read 2847 times

`Nazukarr

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 631
  • Karma:
    14
    • View Profile
Okay, so we were in the chat today and we were talking about psionics and time. Please read through the log and see if you can try explaining any of this lol (especially prophecy and kobok).


21:03] <`Nazukarr> Mmmkay. I have a random question that I almost know the answer to, but I'm not sure.
[21:03] <Shadowarrior13> ?
[21:03] <`1000|laundry> Oh?
[21:03] <`Nazukarr> Wouldn't it be possible to charge a sigil in a physical object that's not presently there?
[21:04] <`Nazukarr> Like, a sigil in the past or future.
[21:04] <Shadowarrior13> What do you mean, in a physical object?
[21:04] <`1000|laundry> Hm ... in theory, yes.
[21:04] <`Nazukarr> Yeah, in theory.
[21:04] <Shadowarrior13> I'm not sure what you mean.
[21:05] <`Nazukarr> Hmm...
[21:05] <`Nazukarr> Its like...
[21:05] <`Nazukarr> There was this store, Family Dollar, that went out of business last year. Say I wanted to charge the sign that was up there last year with something.
[21:06] <Shadowarrior13> Remember, you're not charging the thing itself.
[21:06] <Shadowarrior13> You're charging the symbol. If the sign says "Moe's dollar store", you're charging that particular concept, and the sequence of words links to it.
[21:06] <`Nazukarr> Right, but...mmm. I can't phrase this right.
[21:07] <`Nazukarr> Shadowarrior13 - Righto. But would it affect the people that were looking at it?
[21:07] <Shadowarrior13> Yes, it's possible.
[21:07] <Shadowarrior13> Yes.
[21:07] * NathanE has joined #VSociety
[21:07] <Shadowarrior13> The conceptual isn't bound by time.
[21:07] <Shadowarrior13> This is why we can see into the past and future.
[21:07] <Shadowarrior13> It all exists in the conceptual.
[21:07] <Huginn> Please try to type complete thoughts out before pressing enter, rather than scrolling with many short lines, Shadowarrior13.
[21:07] <Shadowarrior13> Oh, go eat a rake.
[21:07] <`Nazukarr> Right. But since today is today, wouldn't it have no affect on anyone?
[21:08] <Shadowarrior13> You're thinking in physical time.
[21:08] * Dark_Mage has joined #VSociety
[21:08] <Shadowarrior13> That won't matter.
[21:08] <Shadowarrior13> If you charge the concept, it's charged. There's no time to deal with.
[21:08] * powdered_water has quit IRC
[21:08] <`Nazukarr> That doesn't make sense. :/
[21:09] <NathanE> physical time is only constrained by the mind brining it into being
[21:09] <Shadowarrior13> `Nazukarr: Tiem is a physical thing.
[21:09] <Shadowarrior13> Time*
[21:09] <Shadowarrior13> Time does not exist on the conceptual or celestial planes.
[21:09] <`Nazukarr> Yes, but that's not answering my question.
[21:09] <Shadowarrior13> Yes, it is.
[21:09] <Shadowarrior13> If you charge that concept, the sign is linking to the concept.
[21:09] <Shadowarrior13> No matter when, it's linking to it.
[21:09] <`Nazukarr> But would it affect the people?
[21:10] <Shadowarrior13> Yes, because the sign is linked to the concept
[21:10] * Arpspasm has joined #VSociety
[21:10] <NathanE> Kinda like my sigle to exspanding life
[21:10] <`Nazukarr> If I deciede to do something like this, it would mean that it was already there by the time I was in the past some years ago.
[21:10] <`Nazukarr> And if I didn't do it, then it wouldn't be there, unless I did do it, then it would be there but not now.
[21:11] <`1000|laundry> Hi Arpspasm
[21:11] <`Nazukarr> *decide
[21:11] <Arpspasm> 'ello.
[21:11] * venus666 has joined #VSociety
[21:11] <venus666> hello!
[21:11] <Shadowarrior13> `Nazukarr: You're looking too deep into it.
[21:11] <Shadowarrior13> Hey Venus
[21:11] <NathanE> hiya Arpspasm
[21:11] <`1000|laundry> Hi venus666
[21:11] * venus666 is now known as Venus666
[21:11] <Arpspasm> 'ello 666
[21:11] <NathanE> hiya venus666 long time no see
[21:11] <Venus666> ey guys whats up tonight
[21:11] <Shadowarrior13> If you go by that, then your belief itself will kill the sigil if you do indeed make it.
[21:12] <`Nazukarr> Shadowarrior13 - But logically, that is how it is.
[21:12] <Venus666> lotsa people here tonight
[21:12] <Shadowarrior13> Yes.
[21:12] <NathanE> Shadowarrior13 that why i only tried it once
[21:12] <Venus666> hey shadows
[21:12] <Dark_Mage> Venus666: I think Shad and Naz are debating Sigils
[21:12] * Venus666 is now known as Visitor-13B10E
[21:12] <Visitor-13B10E> what
[21:12] <Visitor-13B10E> dang
[21:12] <NathanE> no I just added sigles into it :-p
[21:12] <Dark_Mage> :P
[21:12] <`Nazukarr> NathenE - My question was originall about sigils.
[21:13] <`Nazukarr> *Nathan.
[21:13] <`Nazukarr> Ughaerkadf.
[21:13] <`Nazukarr> This isn't making any sense.
[21:13] <Dark_Mage> Naz: TAB dat shitz
[21:13] <`Nazukarr> lol.
[21:14] <`Nazukarr> I'm not planning to actually do any of that, but ideas just sprung into my head when I was reading this idiotic forum.
[21:14] <Shadowarrior13> Heh.
[21:14] <`Nazukarr> You won't believe these people on this thread. Like, at all.
[21:14] <`Nazukarr> They believe Digimon exist.
[21:14] <Shadowarrior13> I'm not surprised.
[21:15] <Dark_Mage> What forum?
[21:15] <`1000|laundry> Oi.
[21:15] <`Nazukarr> So one guy, he comes into this forum and starts talking about it. And he puts in elements of the astral with the digital world.
[21:15] <Shadowarrior13> Dude, I rule. I got everyone saying Oi.
[21:15] <Shadowarrior13> Then he's stupid.
[21:15] <`Nazukarr> Obviously, but listen.
[21:16] <`Nazukarr> No, don't listen, I  have nothing important to say lol.
[21:17] <`Nazukarr> Sorry. :P
[21:17] <Shadowarrior13> Heh
[21:17] <NathanE> OI
[21:17] <NathanE> Who ever likes chocolate say "Me"
[21:18] <NathanE> ME
[21:18] * Visitor-13B10E is now known as Venus666
[21:18] <Venus666> gosh..
[21:18] <NathanE> what about Venus666?
[21:18] <Venus666> its hard to keep a n ick around here
[21:18] <Gemini> Shadowarrior13 -- I've been saying "Oi" since before you were emo, kid.
[21:19] <Venus666> OMG gemini hehe
[21:19] <`Nazukarr> Shadowarrior13 - If energy isn't necessarily in time, why do psionically programmed constructs seem to deteriote over time?
[21:19] <Venus666> Naz because of entropy
[21:19] <Gemini> `Nazukarr -- They don't, unless they're tampered with, in my experience.
[21:19] <Arpspasm> Maybe the preconceptions of the programmer?
[21:20] <`1000|laundry> Shadowarrior13: oi was my second word.
[21:20] <`Nazukarr> Gemini - Right, by intent, right?
[21:20] <`Nazukarr> I said right twice...mwah.
[21:21] <Gemini> `Nazukarr -- Yeah. Constructs are more vulnerable to "unwitting intent", also. But, if it was well formed in the first place, that shouldn't be too much of an issue.
[21:21] <Venus666> in my experience, no matter how well a construct is made i tends to break down in time due to the forces of entropy (the natural breakdown of energy and matter).
[21:22] <Venus666> but were talking a year later..
[21:22] <Venus666> maybe
[21:22] <`Nazukarr> Venus - But wouldn't that process of entropy take _time_?
[21:22] <Venus666> hehe yes i sppose
[21:23] <Shadowarrior13> I've found that energy breaks down only if you follow the belief that it will.
[21:23] <`Nazukarr> Oh, question. Say there's some sigil out there, not very powerful. Suppose it's old, and has been there forever. If I were to destroy it today, wouldn't it cease to exist yesterday?
[21:23] <`Nazukarr> Even though I didn't exist yesterday?
[21:24] <Gemini> Sigil?
[21:24] <Shadowarrior13> 0_o
[21:24] <Gemini> Errr... as in a symbol?
[21:24] <Shadowarrior13> Naz, I suppose.
[21:24] <`Nazukarr> Like, a charged concept someone made.
[21:24] <Shadowarrior13> Gemini: Article...
[21:24] <Shadowarrior13> Go read it. >.>
[21:24] <Arpspasm> Maybe the process of entropy only takes the process of matter and energy having altered state to a less complex form which to our points of view is something which is reliant on time having passed.
[21:24] <Gemini> Later. :P
[21:24] <`Remakai> `Nazukarr: Would you still know of it's existance?
[21:25] <Venus666> shaddow, entropy is  a natural force
[21:25] <Shadowarrior13> I know.
[21:25] <Shadowarrior13> Hmm.
[21:25] <`Nazukarr> `Remakai - No, but if I took it apart, it wouldn't be there anymore in the first place.
[21:25] <Gemini> `Nazukarr -- Thats a construct?
[21:25] <Venus666> it has nothihing to do wehter you believe in it or not
[21:25] <`Nazukarr> Yeah.
[21:25] <Shadowarrior13> I confused myself.
[21:26] <`Nazukarr> Yeah, I know. That's whats happening to me. Stupid time.
[21:26] <Venus666> energy is more sucesseptable to breakdown than matter
[21:26] <Venus666> at least, it seems
[21:26] <`Remakai> `Nazukarr: You can't take something apart which does not exist. Therefore you failed, in whichever alternate present you tried to destroy it. :P
[21:27] <Arpspasm> 'Rem not nescicarily
[21:27] <`Nazukarr> `Remakai - How about if I took a sigil apart that you made? Since energy isn't affected by time, it would be destroyed when you made it. Yet it was there for some time. Yet I destroyed it. >_>
[21:28] <`Nazukarr> Disclaimer - Does not claim to be able to do any of that. :)
[21:28] <Beru`maple> `Naz: That was a really odd way of phrasing near the end.
[21:28] <Arpspasm> I believe it would be possible only that the action of doing so would cause it never to have happened and the nescesity to destroy it never to have existed and even the memory of doing so to be gone.
[21:29] <`Nazukarr> Mmm.
[21:29] <Venus666> still it makes for an interesting theory
[21:29] <`Nazukarr> Mhmm. Huge paradox.
[21:29] <Shadowarrior13> We'll have to consult Proph.
[21:29] <Venus666> btw energy can not be created or destroyed
[21:29] <`Nazukarr> Or kobok.
[21:29] * Shadowarrior13 blows the magic conch
[21:29] <`Nazukarr> Hahaha.
[21:30] * NathanE stopped paying attention due to writing can someone give me a rundown?
[21:30] <`Remakai> I don't know, to be honest. kobok was talking about the soul apparently being limited by time.
[21:30] <Shadowarrior13> NathanE, we confused ourselves.
[21:30] <`Remakai> I never understood, and lost the log. :P
[21:30] <Gemini> I need to dig up that log.
[21:30] <Shadowarrior13> I forgot how he said it, too.
[21:30] <Shadowarrior13> Something about it not being limited, but being limited. >.<
[21:30] <Arpspasm> 'Rem dont you mean being unlimited by time?
[21:30] <`Nazukarr> `Remakai - Yeah. Im thinking we assign energy time when we create it. But then if someone in the future takes apart energy now..
[21:31] <`Nazukarr> Not create it, program it.
[21:31] <`Remakai> Venus666: Physical energy cannot be created or destroyed. The type that we deal with can be made manifest, as there doesn't seem to be an actual limit.
[21:31] <`Remakai> `Nazukarr: I assume that in the end, that sort of thing would come down to a battle of will and specific intent. :P
[21:32] <Venus666> remaki: true
[21:32] <`Nazukarr> I think I'll post this in the forum to see some replies, lol.
[21:32] <`Nazukarr> Remakai - Mmm, yup.
[21:32] <Arpspasm> It can be changed in form though.


So if I can affect something in the past, and destroy it, yet it was there for some time, yet I still destroyed it...

Blahhh. :)
« Last Edit: September 03, 2006, 06:39:47 PM by Nazukarr »
I am not this hair, I am not this skin, I am the soul that lives within.

September 03, 2006, 09:43:13 PM
Reply #1

kobok

  • Tech Team
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Veritas Council

  • 5000
  • Karma:
    174
  • Personal Text
    Veritas Council
    • View Profile
[21:03] <`Nazukarr> Wouldn't it be possible to charge a sigil in a physical object that's not presently there?
[21:04] <`Nazukarr> Like, a sigil in the past or future.

Yep.  I do this all the time.

[21:05] <`Nazukarr> There was this store, Family Dollar, that went out of business last year. Say I wanted to charge the sign that was up there last year with something.
...
[21:07] <`Nazukarr> Shadowarrior13 - Righto. But would it affect the people that were looking at it?

Yep.  And that's not just speculation either.  The equivalent has been confirmed in a number of retrokinesis experiments.

[21:08] <`Nazukarr> That doesn't make sense. :/

Aye.  But common sense is organized around what we perceive as the everyday world.  The world doesn't organizes itself around what we perceive as common sense.

[21:10] <`Nazukarr> If I deciede to do something like this, it would mean that it was already there by the time I was in the past some years ago.
[21:10] <`Nazukarr> And if I didn't do it, then it wouldn't be there, unless I did do it, then it would be there but not now.

But you either did it, or you didn't do it.  Yesterday you either did or did not eat breakfast.  Tomorrow, you either will or will not eat breakfast.  Each time you only choose one action.

[21:19] <`Nazukarr> Shadowarrior13 - If energy isn't necessarily in time, why do psionically programmed constructs seem to deteriote over time?

They can last undegraded for years, and probably much more, if they are given the proper intent to do so.  If your expectation is that thy will degrade, then this is what will happen.

[21:27] <`Nazukarr> `Remakai - How about if I took a sigil apart that you made? Since energy isn't affected by time, it would be destroyed when you made it. Yet it was there for some time. Yet I destroyed it. >_>

By itself this is not a paradox.  This would be resolved the same way it would be resolved if one person were attempting to make a construct at the same time as a second person was attempting to destroy it.  In short, the better intent or stronger application of that intent would win.  So if the construct is created, this means the person creating it in the past had a stronger and more clear intent than the person who attempted to destroy it.  And if the construct is destroyed, this means the person attempting to destroy it in the present had a stronger and more clear intent than the person attempting to create it.


I am aware of no examples in which a person has successfully influenced a result in the past about which he or she already had knowledge.  This would be a necessary condition to make any sort of apparent paradox out of retrokinesis.  If anyone is aware of such a result, please let me know.

However, it does seem to be possible (although apparently optional) to successfully alter the future after one has obtained knowledge about it.
Latest article:  Construct Dynamics

Want to learn psi?  Check out our collection of psi articles.

September 04, 2006, 07:33:55 AM
Reply #2

solstice

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Dreamwalker

  • 2114
  • Karma:
    -7
  • Personal Text
    "Receive and transmit..."
    • View Profile
Quote
Yep.  And that's not just speculation either.  The equivalent has been confirmed in a number of retro-kinesis experiments.
You have made references to this in the past, yet did not explain the indications of the findings.  Could you elaborate?
If someone can change the past, then that would inadvertently change the perceptions of everything that had been aware of that event.  If I stopped the assassination of Lincoln by shoving him to the floor, the history books are not going to read "Lincoln was shot, but some stranger jumped out of no where and saved him, so he really was not shot, lol."  Of course not; the books would indicate that no assassination took place, but the attempt was made, and why, because that is what actually would have happened.
Can you see why scientific evidence that such things could occur may seem rather Sci Fi?  To conduct an experiment on such a thing implies that those participating were outside the timeline -- if their focus changed before they ever knew they had something to observe, then they would not be aware that something ever happened.  Pretend that the Veritas server crashed -- which it did not, because hypothetically someone psychically changed that event just now, so it was no longer an event at all.  How can this be objectively observed?
Tell all the Truth but tell it slant: Success in Circuit lies.  Too bright for our infirm Delight. The Truth's superb surprise. As Lightning to the Children eased, with explanation kind.  The Truth must dazzle gradually, or every man be blind.
Tefeari: The Giant Impact Hypothesis is a theory

September 04, 2006, 07:52:43 AM
Reply #3

Mobius

  • Veritas Council
  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 331
  • Karma:
    28
  • Personal Text
    Fundamental Psi Coordinator
    • View Profile
Quote
Yep.  And that's not just speculation either.  The equivalent has been confirmed in a number of retro-kinesis experiments.
You have made references to this in the past, yet did not explain the indications of the findings.  Could you elaborate?
If someone can change the past, then that would inadvertently change the perceptions of everything that had been aware of that event.  If I stopped the assassination of Lincoln by shoving him to the floor, the history books are not going to read "Lincoln was shot, but some stranger jumped out of no where and saved him, so he really was not shot, lol."  Of course not; the books would indicate that no assassination took place, but the attempt was made, and why, because that is what actually would have happened.
Can you see why scientific evidence that such things could occur may seem rather Sci Fi?  To conduct an experiment on such a thing implies that those participating were outside the timeline -- if their focus changed before they ever knew they had something to observe, then they would not be aware that something ever happened.  Pretend that the Veritas server crashed -- which it did not, because hypothetically someone psychically changed that event just now, so it was no longer an event at all.  How can this be objectively observed?

The Back to the Future thoughts on screwing around with time are not exactly accurate. There is only one timeline, that does not change. You also cannot alter the past quite so radically.

Basically, the past already accounts for all the tampering from the future that its going to get. We already know that no one is going to jump out and save Lincoln, because that is not what happened. One *could* influence the energy dynamics of the sign of a long gone business. However, the history of the company will already have that accounted for, and it apparently was not enough.

The principle of causality still applies, essentially, just modified. We're used to "action, reaction", in that order in time. However, that is not necessarily the case. They always go together, though.

As far as what you can change, I have a personal theory on the matter, though I've yet to discuss it with anyone. In true Mr. S's cat fashion, the outcome of an event is not known until you actually take a look; until that point, I think it is probably up for influence. In every experiment I've ever seen, that seems to be the case. What I wonder is whether it matters whether the outcome is only finalized when it is known by the acting psion, or by *anyone*. Either one would seem to have some very interesting implications. :)
Deus Ex Vir

September 04, 2006, 09:55:29 AM
Reply #4

Mobius

  • Veritas Council
  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 331
  • Karma:
    28
  • Personal Text
    Fundamental Psi Coordinator
    • View Profile
A conversation that occured as a result of the above post:

Quote from: #vsociety
[08:09:04] <solstice> Gemini, amen on your post.
[08:11:25] <solstice> yay, let's bash Kobot now! :P
[08:11:47] <Gemini> Well, I was simply expanding on what he said.
[08:12:13] <solstice> He said it is possible.
[08:12:19] <solstice> you are saying that it is not.
[08:12:58] <Gemini> Well, as I said in my post, it IS possible, it just obviously was not sufficent to get you anywhere. :)
[08:13:11] <Crowley> Gemini is saying it's possible, but that the present is the result of the changes you make. The changes have already occured in the past and that is why the present is the way it is.
[08:13:36] <solstice> which means it is not possible to know if such an attempt was a success.
[08:15:20] <Gemini> Thats true, as you don't know what would have happened if you had not altered the past. But, such is time, never pretty for us mortals. :)
[08:15:23] <solstice> if you cant test a thoery, the it is still just a guess :P
[08:16:07] <solstice> Kobot said it is possible and has been tested.  I would really like to know how such a thing can be acuratly and objectively observed.
[08:16:49] <Gemini> On smaller, more immediately observable scales. We've held retrokinesis experiments in #vpractice
[08:17:10] <solstice> care to explain how you can observe a success?
[08:18:25] <Gemini> SImple. We used a set of dice, trying to obtain a certain value on as many of them as possible. The experimenters proved able to do this, both in the present and on dice that had already been rolled but the values concealed.
[08:19:19] <solstice> How did they obtain the value, and how did they change the past while being aware that they actually changed the past?
[08:20:17] <Gemini> The obtained the value by having the party that was controlling the dice read it to them. :)
[08:20:58] <solstice> how did they change the rolls that already happened, and how did -anyone- know if the past values changed?
[08:21:03] <Gemini> And as I explained in my post, one *can* knowingly attempt to alter the past, provided the outcome is not known. In this case, the value of the dice was concealed from everyone until after the kinesis was performed.
[08:21:33] <Gemini> I don't remember quite how they did it, but they had some mechanism for the controller to roll the dice without seeing the results until it was time to reveal them.
[08:21:34] <solstice> You did not really explain how it can be observed, you only said it is possible.
[08:21:57] <solstice> if no one knew the values, then how can they know they changed at all?
[08:23:11] <Gemini> Because dice are a very predictable system. They have certain results that you can expect to get out of them, which you can compute statistically very easily. When something deviates from that very strongly, consistently, that is evidence of outside influence.
[08:24:04] <solstice> that did not answer the question.  You can not be aware of a deviation, without knowing what it is that is deviated.
[08:24:23] <solstice> so, if you dont know what -was- rolled, then how can one possibly be aware of that being changed?
[08:25:00] <solstice> I dont think anyone can.  IF such things are possible and can happen, then they do without us knowing that extent.
[08:26:53] <solstice> I think that is you had a really good psychic -predict- the rolls, then one could conduct a more relyable experiment, because the odds of knowing what has changed are favourable.
[08:26:53] <Gemini> Errr, I'm not sure you quite understood me. You don't know exactly what will be rolled (ever, at least without precognition), but through statistics you can easily determine what you expect to occur. There are mathematical formulas to measure deviations from this expected value, and on many of the rolls we had the results were 'statistically significant'.
[08:27:14] <Gemini> Indicating outside influence on the system, in this case being kinesis.
[08:27:29] <solstice> That sounds outlandish.  If you do not know what is changed, then you can not know if there is a deviation.
[08:27:56] <solstice> you basically make assumtions that something worked.
[08:28:27] <solstice> Let me know when you use precognition with these statistics.
[08:29:09] <Crowley> If it worked, you'd only be able to predict what you changed it to be, which is what was rolled.
[08:29:10] <solstice> if you have someone that is say 70% accurate at predicting numbers, and less than 50% of the precited numbers were rolled, then you may have something.
[08:29:26] <Gemini> This is a very common and well founded technique in many sciences, solstice.
[08:29:38] <solstice> IF it worked.  Which means no one can know if such a thing can be done intentionally.
[08:30:36] <solstice> "common and well founded" -- that is totle bullshit, sorry.  You can not expect to be aware of variable that do not exist to you, then claim to be able to change them.
[08:31:06] <solstice> there has to be a way to measure the outcome compared to the attempt that was made, which is not possible if you do not know what -was- rolled.
[08:31:36] <solstice> Inferences are not facts.
[08:31:54] <Gemini> The whole point is that because the outcome is unknown, it is 'up for grabs'. We have an expectation of what it should be, and then we compare that to what we get, to determine whether or not we were successful.
[08:32:09] <Gemini> Inferences are the foundation of much of our science, and they service us quite well.
[08:32:18] <solstice> Okay, yeah.  But you still can not say that you changed the past just because you think you can.
[08:32:40] <solstice> That's insane.
[08:32:43] <solstice> "I dont know if I did it, so it must be possible".
[08:33:12] <Gemini> Well, the fact that it is measurably and consistently distant from the expected value is indicative that something is taken place, is it not?
[08:33:31] <solstice> Again, get me some statistics with premonitions involved.  Then, we can make some real measurements.
[08:33:49] <solstice> real as far as such things go.
[08:34:17] <solstice> Gemini, I dont think you understand what I am saying.  If you do not KNOW the pattern, then you can not be aware of any change in it.
[08:34:31] <Gemini> But we do know the pattern.
[08:35:14] <solstice> Since no one knows what numbers are rolled, then it is nonsensical to think you changed them on the basis of not knowing.
[08:35:15] <solstice> You said no one knows what numbers -were- rolled.  Which means you can not know if they had been changed -- if they had, you still would not know.
[08:35:54] <solstice> That's like me saying that OJ Simpson did not kill his wife, and she is still alive, because I dont actually know either.
[08:36:07] <solstice> I must have changed the past!
[08:36:32] * Silver_Archer has joined #VSociety
[08:36:38] <Silver_Archer> Hi.
[08:36:43] <solstice> This line of reasoning does not sound scientific, because scientists have to be as objective as possible.
[08:36:45] <solstice> Hiya!
[08:36:54] <Silver_Archer> What have I stepped into?
[08:36:55] <Gemini> The assertion is not that the dice were a specific value, and then were somehow rotated to a new one. The assertion is that they were directed to the desired values in the first place. Retroactively.
[08:37:02] <Crowley> Hello, Silver.
[08:37:21] <solstice> Gemini, you can not possibly know that they were changed.  Do you understand this?
[08:37:23] <Gemini> Silver_Archer -- We are discussing the nature of psi acting through time.
[08:37:31] * Huo has joined #VSociety
[08:38:08] <solstice> So, I can admit that such a thing could be possible, BUT it is impossible to know.  There is no way to observe it in action as long as we are mortal.
[08:38:31] <Gemini> solstice -- No, I don't. Because we can measure an outside influence by comparison roll results to expected values.
[08:39:09] <Silver_Archer> Well.. I dont know. If you retroactively influence a random number generator, and the results of the random number generator are deviating significantly away from the average you'd expect it to have in a normal run, then yes... we do know that it changed. Had it not been acted upon the values would have remained average.
[08:40:19] <Gemini> Silver_Archer -- That is essentially what I am trying to say. I think what solstice is trying to get accross is that statistical arguments are not sufficent evidence for anything...
[08:41:47] * `Nazukarr has joined #VSociety
[08:42:02] <Silver_Archer> Gemini, so what is sufficient evidence ?
[08:42:09] <Silver_Archer> According to solstice, that is.
[08:42:18] * Nazukarr has joined #VSociety
[08:42:23] <Nazukarr> Ughh. Heya guys.
[08:42:25] <Silver_Archer> Hello Nazukarr.
[08:42:34] <Huo> Hey Nazukarr.
[08:42:43] * solstice has quit IRC (Killed (NickServ (Ghosted. By: solstice_ (solstice@14055a92.14055a38.64.80.imsk))))
[08:42:46] <Nazukarr> Uhoh. I need to reset my router.
[08:42:49] <Gemini> If I'm to understand correctly, there is no such thing, and and it is not knowable by mortals.
[08:42:49] <Crowley> Silver: Prediciting the rolls before hand and looking to see if they changed.
[08:42:50] * solstice_ has joined #VSociety
[08:42:53] <Nazukarr> Mmm, be back.
[08:43:00] * Nazukarr has quit IRC (Client Quit)
[08:43:02] <solstice_> sorry.  did you get the last thing I said?
[08:43:12] * solstice_ is now known as solstice
[08:43:12] <Crowley> How would we know>
[08:43:14] <Crowley> ?*
[08:43:18] <solstice> be alive.  I changed the past, because I do not actually know if she died or not.
[08:43:22] <solstice> whoops
[08:43:31] <solstice> I said that Miss Simpson must be alone...
[08:43:34] <solstice> alive
[08:43:42] <Crowley> That's a logically stupid question to ask...
[08:43:45] <solstice> then the rest that I pasted :P
[08:43:58] <solstice> If you were HERE, then it is not.
[08:44:08] <solstice> So the question would be, where are you?
[08:44:14] <solstice> And are you anyplace?
[08:44:22] <Gemini> [08:38:08] <solstice> So, I can admit that such a thing could be possible, BUT it is impossible to know.  There is no way to observe it in action as long as we are mortal. <- Last thing from you.
[08:44:43] <solstice> okay.  I said something else after that, which I just transcribed.
[08:45:08] * solstice changes the death of the Croc Hunter
[08:45:25] <Crowley> Now you see, the question "What was the last thing I said?" is a far more sensible question than "Did you get the last thing I said?" when we don't know if the last thing we saw was the last thing you said...
[08:45:45] * solstice is not listening to the silly English man
[08:46:03] <solstice> or reading, for that matter, if we must be specific :P
[08:46:18] * `Nazukarr has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
[08:46:31] <Gemini> solstice -- That completly disregards the information I'd provided in my post. The outcome of the Crocodile Hunter's fate is already known.
[08:46:59] <solstice> yes, but do WE really know he died; has any of us seen his body?
[08:47:13] * Equilibrium has joined #VSociety
[08:48:04] * Crowley sighs.
[08:48:06] <solstice> I found out by reading a Wikipedia article, which can be edited by anyone.  The news articles could be fabricated as well, since there was no fottage of his passing.
[08:48:06] <solstice> hi.
[08:48:06] <solstice> So, by what you said, I could bring him back to life.
[08:48:20] <Silver_Archer> Gemini, ok. here's a question. what if I bumped my head and lost some of my memories. Say, I do not remember the outcome of a lottery ticket I bought 10 weeks back. The outcome of that lottery result is now unknown to me. So how do we define something to be 'known' or 'unknown' in this context?
[08:48:27] <solstice> tomarrow, the headlines are gonna say "Oh, snap!  Our bad!!"
[08:49:02] <Gemini> That was the question I had at the end of my post; is knowledge required only by the psion in question, or by anyone? I don't know, so I can't really respond to that. I've yet to try something on that large a scale, time wise. :)
[08:49:22] <Silver_Archer> Gemini, fair enough.
[08:49:41] <solstice> That does not mean or even imply that you can change the past.  It just means you can change your perception of it.
[08:49:46] * solstice chats with the ressurected Croc guy
[08:50:16] * `Nazukarr has joined #VSociety
[08:50:18] <Gemini> Silver_Archer -- That is also a good question. Not exactly one I'm willing to test myself, however. :)
[08:50:22] * sihj2u has joined #VSociety
[08:50:24] <`Nazukarr> Heya guys.
[08:50:28] <sihj2u> hi
[08:50:28] <Silver_Archer> Gemini, i just got a crazy idea in my head.
[08:50:28] <solstice> hi.
[08:50:37] <Gemini> Hello `Nazukarr.
[08:51:05] <sihj2u> wow loads of peeps here
[08:51:08] <solstice> Silver_Archer, I contended on the basis that you can not be aware of such changes, which means it is not possible to know if chaging the past even works, if it happens at all.
[08:51:14] <Gemini> Silver_Archer -- Hmm?
[08:52:18] <sihj2u> wow sounds intellectual
[08:52:21] <Crowley> Have you heard of a concept known as p-value, solstice?
[08:52:24] <Silver_Archer> Gemini, ok. Lets take a look at the current scenario. some dice were rolled. their numbers were recorded. the experimentors know what they were. Then someone tried to influence them retroactively. Now, the outcome is already known, so, if any retroactive influencing is successful it will create a parallel existance where the experimentors recorded the changed version of the dice to begin with.
[08:52:51] <`Nazukarr> That's kind of how my thinking of the whole thing is.
[08:52:52] <solstice> No.  Not that it makes a difference, since I know for a fact that you can not be aware if changed you are not aware of.
[08:53:05] <solstice> ew, and that was a preposition!
[08:53:07] <`Nazukarr> Supposing that psi can actually make a difference in the past.
[08:53:11] <Equilibrium> ..Are you guys still talking about the death of that Irwing?
[08:53:18] <Crowley> Silver_Archer: You're looking at it wrong. The experimentor would have written down the changed version in the first place.
[08:53:24] <Silver_Archer> wait.. Steve Irwin is dead?
[08:53:25] <Silver_Archer> Darn... :(
[08:53:29] <solstice> Not exactly.  I used that as an example how how Gemini's idea is flawed.
[08:53:29] <sihj2u> OMG
[08:53:30] <Equilibrium> :<
[08:53:31] <sihj2u> thats sad
[08:53:42] <sihj2u> The croc hunter was a legend
[08:53:42] <Crowley> solstice: Well, don't argue then if you don't know what you're talking about.
[08:54:03] <solstice> lol, what's the matter?
[08:54:13] <solstice> I make sense and you are miserable.  It's life.
[08:54:26] <Silver_Archer> solstice, only in the way you see it./
[08:54:46] <solstice> You can not tell me that one can actually observe changes that CANT be observed.
[08:55:16] <Gemini> Silver_Archer -- That plays into the questions I'd asked. If the knowledge is only dependant upon the acting party, then that scenario seems potenially plausible. But thats just weird. :)
[08:55:27] <solstice> by your logic, I must be able to change all kinds of events as I see fit, since I do not know what really happend, not being there and all.
[08:55:41] <Gemini> But Crowley is actually correct.
[08:55:57] <solstice> hey!  my people where never raped and tortured by cowboys!!!
[08:56:00] <Crowley> If I flip one hundred coins, and then leave them without looking at them, and then I get you to try and effect the results, a statistical deviation from a 50:50 split in results is observable.
[08:56:06] <solstice> wow, I just saved millions of lives.
[08:56:51] <solstice> There would be no results TO replicate, if you dont know what they are.
[08:57:01] <Silver_Archer> Gemini, another crazy idea.  when you change things retroactively, you do change em perfectly, for everyone. For example, let us say that some experimentors rolled a dice. It landed 6. Now, they recorded it as 6. Then someone influenced it to become 4. Bam. The universe forgot the previous history entirely. The researchers had infact, recorded 4. And so now, you are say... changing it to 2. And then keep infinitely looping that.
[08:57:28] * Terry has joined #VSociety
[08:57:38] <Crowley> Silver: Yes, and?
[08:57:49] <Terry> mornin all
[08:58:01] <`Nazukarr> Heya Terry.
[08:59:08] <Silver_Archer> Crowley, in other words, an experiment where the values before change are already known has already succeeded before it even began, as the experimentors can only be aware of one version of things.
[08:59:28] <Silver_Archer> which, ofcourse.. makes no bloody sense. but I can live with that
Deus Ex Vir

September 04, 2006, 02:35:00 PM
Reply #5

kobok

  • Tech Team
  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Veritas Council

  • 5000
  • Karma:
    174
  • Personal Text
    Veritas Council
    • View Profile
solstice, in the log directly above you are asking the wrong question.  It is not "change" of the past that is observed, it is "influence" of the past.  The word "change" implies that the past was one thing and now is not (and to my knowledge no experiment has indicated this yet), while the word "influence" implies that a decision made in the future or present has had an impact on something that happened in the past.

Quote
Yep.  And that's not just speculation either.  The equivalent has been confirmed in a number of retro-kinesis experiments.
You have made references to this in the past, yet did not explain the indications of the findings.  Could you elaborate?
If someone can change the past, then that would inadvertently change the perceptions of everything that had been aware of that event.  If I stopped the assassination of Lincoln by shoving him to the floor, the history books are not going to read "Lincoln was shot, but some stranger jumped out of no where and saved him, so he really was not shot, lol."  Of course not; the books would indicate that no assassination took place, but the attempt was made, and why, because that is what actually would have happened.
Can you see why scientific evidence that such things could occur may seem rather Sci Fi?  To conduct an experiment on such a thing implies that those participating were outside the timeline -- if their focus changed before they ever knew they had something to observe, then they would not be aware that something ever happened.  Pretend that the Veritas server crashed -- which it did not, because hypothetically someone psychically changed that event just now, so it was no longer an event at all.  How can this be objectively observed?

You missed a key and essential part of what I said.  "I am aware of no examples in which a person has successfully influenced a result in the past about which he or she already had knowledge."

What I wonder is whether it matters whether the outcome is only finalized when it is known by the acting psion, or by *anyone*. Either one would seem to have some very interesting implications. :)

I know of one example which sheds some light on this.  In one retrokinesis experiment, a large sequence of random numbers was used that had been generated many years ago for another scientific experiment in a completely different field.  The researcher in the other field who had originally used this sequence of numbers had already used these numbers, and so they had been "observed", just not analyzed for the specific thing being examined in the retrokinesis experiment.  The attempt to influence the past generation of these numbers was observed to be successful when they were then analyzed after the fact.

It is possible to run a small experiment to test this more explicitly.  You would simply need a good random number generator.  You could for example, run PsiLink, and have one participant write down the sequence of results obtained.  This participant can then explicitly analyze the results by adding up the number of results of each.  Then a second participant would, after the fact, attempt to influence the results toward one specific result.

And, if you want to do this better, make it blind.  Do something like 8 runs, and don't tell the second participant whether that numbered run is generated and analyzed before or after the attempt to influence it.  To make this double-blind, you can simply run the experiment on a schedule so that there is no communication about the experiment between the two participants.  An experiment of this form should be fairly straightforward.

And, if you complete that, I have a second experiment in mind that could perhaps test the influence of results about which one has knowledge.  An experiment might be possible where the results are generated ahead of time, then the a participant chooses which result he or she will aim for, then the results obtained are TOLD to that same participant, and then that same participant attempts to influence the results.  I expect this would be a particularly challenging experiment due to the difficulty in expecting a result counter to what one has been told, but if a successful influence is observed it would strongly indicate that this is possible, even if difficult to observe by conventional methods.  Because of the difficulties with actualization in this second experiment, a failure to achieve influence with this one would not provide much indication that this is impossible.  But it seems to me that a successful observation of influence with this experiment would be quite profound.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2006, 02:37:00 PM by kobok »
Latest article:  Construct Dynamics

Want to learn psi?  Check out our collection of psi articles.