The True Nature of Psi

[kobok]

Links to these tests please?

The original autoganzfeld studies are discussed in:

Honorton, C., R. E. Berger, M. P. Varvoglis, M. Quant, P. Derr, E. I. Schechter, and D. C. Ferrari.  1990.  Psi communication in the ganzfeld:  Experiments with an automated testing system and a comparison with a meta-analysis of earlier studies.  Journal of Parapsychology 54:99-139.

There were also tests done with faraday cages and other shielding in the SRI experiments.  You should be able to find information about this in:

May, E. C., J. M. Utts, V. V. Trask, W. W. Luke, T. J. Frivold, and B. S. Humphrey.  1998.  Review of the psychoenergetic research conducted at SRI International (1973-1988).  SRI International Technical Report (March)

and

Puthoff, H. E. 1996.  CIA-initiated remote viewing program at Stanford Research Institute.  Journal of Scientific Exploration  10:63-76.

You can probably find descriptions of most of these results on the internet somewhere, but if you want in-depth details, you usually have to check the literature.

[solstice]

*Another year later*

You guys can also find information dealing with the non-local aspect to energy, from of these other sources:
"Morphic Fields, and Morphic Resonance" and "Mind, Memory and Archetype" by Rupert Sheldrake (sheldrake.org).
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, and I think Bohr and Pauli had contributed.
Bell Test Experiments, one of which was conducted by Alain Aspect.
"Dreaming Universe" by Fred Wolf, which is a unique attempt to connect physics with psychology. 
"Interference of Idependent Photon Beams" by Pfleegor and Mandel.

[BohmaN]

I do not understand the criticism given to this article. The evidence arguing that psi does not belong to electromagnetism, but rather something non-physical and not bound to spatiotemporal interaction, is simply irrefutable.  I thought it was very comprehensive and nicely written - well done. 5/5

[Mystan]

I agree with BohmaN, a good article and very compelling.

Personally, I keep an open mind. Just because right now this is the best way to explain it, doesn't mean at some future point in time, we find out some unknown rules or exceptions to electromagnetism that explains such. I don't think it likely but it doesn't mean its impossible. We are forever learning and growing in both our knowledge and understanding of these concepts. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and it is best in my opinion not to become to entrenched in your own opinion that you can't consider someone else's with an open mind. Most of what we consider fact is an opinion or theory that just hasn't been proven wrong yet (in my opinion). I think we attatch to much emotion to our personal opinions and consider them part of our identity and thus get ruffled when someone has something that differs. Go with what makes sense the most and if something comes along that sounds like it better explains it, go with that. Currently, what makes sense to me is that it is not Electromagnetic but just because current knowledge compells me to that viewpoint does not mean that I discount it. It just isn't logical to me at this time.