An SDMB test of astral projection

Great Debates
1

In this thread:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=225958

cityboy91 has made an interesting and important claim - that he can astrally project, and thereby remote view something he could not see directly.
(He has also helpfully linked to the Monroe Institute, who apparently claim to have remote viewed planets in the Solar System:
http://www.monroeinstitute.org/ )

cityboy91 has now offered to perform a remote viewing test.

I would like to say that I am grateful to him for this (because many previous posters have declined to do so), and that it is important that we agree on the conditions.
Obviously the Internet is not ideal for this test. It is cheap and easy to use, but difficult to arrange proper supervision. However it will still be interesting to do this!

So let’s get your advice, then cityboy91 and I can agree what to use.

My first attempt at a testing protocol:

I am typing this at a computer desk. I stick a post-it note on one object on the desk and invite cityboy91 to remote view it. Meanwhile I e-mail a moderator (or even two!) with the details. cityboy91 then e-mails the Moderator with the results of his efforts. The Moderator publishes both e-mails.

Notes:

I am sure DavidB, who moderates Great Debates, is also well versed in the sceptic world, so hopefully he would be interested. (To avoid suggestions of bias, could another Moderator also assist?)

It is not an ideal test because I have posted a lot on the SDMB, so the sort of things on my desk are not random.

If there is going to be ambiguity about describing the article, I suggest a second test be me giving a full list of each item on my desk, plus the identification of the chosen one. Then cityboy91 states which item he sees.

Other posters are welcome to join in!
They would act as controls, and should say whether they are using paranormal powers, careful analysis of my posts or just guesswork.

Let the discussion begin!

2

“Items” is a little vague, and subject to correct guessing (Mouse, keyboard, lamp…WOW!).

I suggest a six-digit number, written in large, bold marker pen, such that someone floating up on the ceiling would have no problem reading it, stuck above the screen on your monitor, and that this number be emailed to the mod. To generate this number randomly, flick through a large book six times, taking the second rightmost digit in the page number each time.

3

With my enhanced double vision caused by my second bottle of 2002 vintage WA Chardonnay, I can see at least one problem here.

If you are unable to peek at a street directory, how do you know whether or not you have found the right address (ie. Yours plus Paste It notes) and the right computer (but I repeat myself).

The alleged remote viewer must be able to know exactly where to go fairly swiftly, but in the absence of any intimate knowledge of your location, City, street address etc. this is just an incredibly great wank isn’t it?

4

I like SentientMeat’s idea of a six-digit number. It certainly does quite a bit to rule out guessing.

However, I would also take it a step further and suggest that glee is not the only person participating, because that would be a study of one. For all we know, cityboy paid glee $1000 to do this test and glee will give him the answer. OK, so I don’t really think this is the case by any stretch, but we should cover all possibilities to make sure we’re running a good test.

5

This is interesting. I read thru the other thread last night and got halfway thru posting an invitiation similar to yours, but then just decided to let it go. My idea was that I would post, under an undisclosed username, a passage from the Bible on another, undisclosed, message board at precisely noon today. The astral projector (or is it projectee) would then tell us who many words were in the passage. Afterwards, I’d give a link to the other message board and we could use the time index as verification. I’d also include a note at the top of the post to ensure there was no ambiguity about the fact that I had posted it as a test.

But your test is just as good, assuming a moderator will cooperate. In the spirit of good scientific practice, it really would be necessary to repeat this several times.

6

Yes, I know ‘items’ is vague, and already posters are guessing what is on my desk. :eek:

I did think this first test would show how people without any psychic ability can make clever guesses (why, it’s just like cold reading!).
The second test seemed much better (I give a full list of items, but only one has the post-it note stuck on it).

I do like your six digit number idea, but not your generation of the number. Surely 9 is far less likely to come up than 1?
Fortunately us roleplayers have plenty of 10-sided dice!

7

Well cityboy91 will have to answer whether he can view the location, without getting my address.

I was assuming that if the Monroe Institute can survey every planet in the Solar System, then finding one poster in Rutland, England should be do-able.

P.S. I didn’t know there was going to be sex involved - that’s a nice bonus. :wink:

8

Good point!

I hadn’t thought of bribery (perhaps because I didn’t think it would be worthwhile).
OK, let me go first, then other posters have a go!

9

Ah, but (assuming the worst of everyone), perhaps you post loads of messages to loads of message boards, thus nullifying the test.
Shows how difficult protocols are!

I agree that repetition is necessary - for both sides satisfaction.

10

The second rightmost page digit. So, in a large book, you might get page numbers 287, 235, 411, 345, 189, 83 yielding 831488. The furthest rightmost would be just as randomly chosen but you would have to make a “choice” which side of the page you looked at beforehand, perhaps yielding only odd numbers as in this example. The leftmost digit would suffer from the bias you speak of.

Rough and ready, but random enough and easy for anyone with eg. a dictionary nearby.

11

Might I also add doing it with numbers allows any weaselling to be examined rigorously, eg: cityboy: I see 893370.
David B: The number glee sent me is 490817. You are wrong.
cityboy: Yes, but I got the “9” correct, and the way he’d written “4” made it look like an “8”.
SentientMeat: Statistically, the probability of you guessing at least one correct number is about evens. We have no way to verify that the 4 looked like an 8. If you really can see the number, you should get it right almost every time. If you could not see the number clearly, you should have said so. “Patterns” can be found in any two numbers. You have failed to demonstrate that you could see the large, boldly written number which was as easily visible as any object on glee’s desk.

12

We should get cityboy’s claims clarified. Can he project astrally anytime, anywhere? Or does he only have a certain % hit rate? Does he see things as clear as if he were actually there, or is the image foggy? And how aboutt this-- can his astral projection interact with objects in the place he has projected astrally to? Now, that would be cool!!

13

I have a few observations: the first was another objection I had to your initial pitch of the test – it is not inconceivable that one of you colleagues knows who you (glee) are and could, mischievously or otherwise, influence the results.

The second is that with a good enough encryption method (say PKE(?)) you could publish the data to be observed in this thread – no-one will be able to read it until you provide the key (when it will be unambiguously revealed) – thus issues of whether one mod or another is wholly trustworthy (of course, they all are) doesn’t arise.

As to what constitutes a hit, that is always going to be a problem with anything that does not succumb to a precise description, which rules out just about every real-world object. However, you could make a two-stage test: Provide a list of items liberally saturated with invented dummy “control” items – when a reading is made, reveal the list and ask the reader to match with items from this list, only then reveal the real items. In a way you might as well miss out stage one, and tell the reader to choose from these items:

Computer
Plastic dinosaur
Photograph of computer
Rubik’s cube
Etc., etc.

Can we agree that if this goes ahead, you won’t just start the test before a proper consensus is reached (though, I admit, that might lead to perpetual dead-lock).

14

A thread on astral projection can’t be complete without due mention of Ellen White and her entirely correct counting the number of moons of the outer planets. That is, the number was correct according to scientific knowledge in 1847 when the transportation first occurred.

She was also able to give numerous exact dates for the end of the world during these out of body experiences. When one date was missed, she still had the psychic energy to see another.

15

Yes, that is true. I have met one SDMB poster, and it is possible to identify me in the world of chess. However I am in the UK, and cityboy91 isn’t.
Also this is a start. The real testing can come later under the supervision of Mr. Randi - for $1,000,000!

Good point. Is PGP available?

I deliberately want to give non-psychics a chance to do well in the first test. This will show the importance of a well-designed protocol, and encourage interest too!

The test will certainly take into account SDMB views, but it will start sooner rather than later, provided cityboy91 is ready.

16

Assuming someone could astrally project. Is their memory somehow better than when they have physically been there? Recounting what’s on the desk would not come out anymore accurate than those silly party games, where you show everyone a box full of items and then they have to list them a few minutes later. You get many different answers. How many of the items would prove a visit? What if one or two are missing? The “projector” would not have a pen and paper handy, so there is already a built in excuse for variation. It seems like it would need to be a fairly simple exercise, but with no “waffle” room. So maybe it should be a picture of something, or one very unique, but noticeable thing. No excuses then. Numbers also seems like it would leave room for getting some but not all, due to a foggy trip or something. It really should be proof, if you have one very unique item on say, the top of your computer.

17

Okay, first of all, the number on my username is 916, not 91. And way to start the 226916’th thread on the subject of my claim! :smiley:

Second, John Mace, as I said in the other thread I have not developed the ability to project at will. It’s always been spontaneous. But since this is an ability I intend to develop anyway, and it does me no good to refuse the challenge, I reluctantly agreed.

Projecting is being there in some nonphysical way. Finding glee’s desk shouldn’t be too difficult - it is actually easier to project to a person than to a place. I know this person as “glee” and can will myself to go to “glee’s desk”.

Interaction of objects will be left as a possible future extension of the experiment, to be considered if the initial test succeeds.

Am I going to be required to do so within a time limit? Might I suggest that, based on the frequency with which I have spontaneously astral projected in the past, that if there is a limit it should be on the order of years.

18

IWLN raises a good point. Memory would be just as good or maybe slightly less if the body is asleep. Perception would be just as good so I don’t think the number thing would get fogged up. But a single unique item would be best.

We should keep in mind the time of day. I am on Pacific time, which is GMT-0800. For me, projection is most likely to occur between 3:00 AM and 10:00 AM Pacific, which translates to 11:00 AM to 6:00 PM GMT. So odds are it will be daylight hours there - were it to be nighttime, there would be less light and it might not be so easy to make out colors or fine details.

19

Very important. Clearly define what constitutes success. Mutually agree in advance that all other outcomes are failures.

If a 9-digit number is made available for viewing, must all digits be supplied by the viewer? In the same order? If three out of nine are accepted as proof, in any order, that greatly increases the chance of success by probability alone.

If I had a camera that I could use to capture a clear image on top of someone’s desk from a few feet away, I would think the only possible success would be all digits, in exactly the correct order – not flipped, upside down, or rearranged. If astral projection claims to be functionally equivalent to a personal visit, shouldn’t the same result be expected?

A multi-digit number is preferrable to a list of objects. I can see a large number 9 just as well as a plastic dinosaur, and so should astral projection, right? But it is easy to say I am wrong if I come up with an “8”. It isn’t as definitive an outcome if I say I saw a purple plastic toy with a long tail.

20

There’s actually no way to do any kind of controlled experiment with open ended times, unless you can at least give glee a heads up that you’re about to do this. Years…bummer.:frowning: