The Paranormal: the Evidence and its Implications for = Consciousness

From: Subject: The Paranormal: the Evidence and its Implications for Consciousness - Jessica Utts and Brian D. Josephson Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 20:34:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://anson.ucdavis.edu/%7Eutts/azpsi.html X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 The Paranormal: the Evidence and its Implications for = Consciousness - Jessica Utts and Brian D. Josephson

Jessica Utts Home=20 Page
Brian=20 D. Josephson Home Page

THE = PARANORMAL: THE EVIDENCE AND ITS = IMPLICATIONS = FOR=20 CONSCIOUSNESS

.
Jessica=20 Utts and Brian D. Josephson

A slightly shortened version of this article was published in the = Times=20 Higher Education Supplement's special section on Consciousness linked to = the=20 Tucson II conference "Toward a Science of Consciousness", Apr. 5th. = 1996, page=20 (v).

Those who recognise that significant discoveries in science are very = often=20 prompted by observations that do not fit expectations will find a = stimulating=20 challenge in accumulating evidence that it is possible to elicit psychic = functioning in experiments with ordinary volunteers acting as subjects. = Even=20 more convincing results occur with specially selected subjects.

In one type of experiment, a "target" photograph or video segment is = randomly=20 chosen out of a set of four possibilities. A "sender" attempts to = transmit it=20 mentally and a "receiver" is then asked to provide an account either = verbally or=20 in writing of what she imagines it might be. She is then shown the four=20 possibilities, and selects the one she thinks best matches her = perception. By=20 chance alone, a correct match is expected on average one time in four, = whereas=20 the experiments typically show the considerably higher success rate of = around=20 one in three.

The recent declassification of the US government's psychical research = programme (experiments on "remote viewing", similar to the type just = described=20 except that it used independent judges to assess the matches rather than = having=20 the subjects judge themselves) has permitted a comparison to be made of = the=20 results of this programme with those described in the open literature. = Despite=20 the different judging procedure, similar success rates were found. In = addition,=20 many of the governmental experiments used gifted subjects. The success = rate was=20 then even higher, typically over forty percent. The few experiments in = the open=20 literature that used gifted subjects found similar success rates.

In the past, critics have attempted to discredit positive results in=20 psychical research on grounds of lack of repeatability. But, as anyone = with a=20 training in statistics knows, even where an influence exists, an = isolated=20 experiment with an insufficient number of trials may not demonstrate a=20 statistically significant effect. Accordingly, without a more = sophisticated=20 analysis, "failure to reproduce an effect" does not demonstrate its = absence.=20 Suppose, for example, psychic abilities, in line with the results = already=20 described, increase the chances of a successful match from 1/4 to 1/3. = Then=20 (according to the accepted statistical theories), an experiment with 30 = trials,=20 which has been typical of these experiments, would have less than a 17% = chance=20 of achieving a result of statistical significance. The more recent = larger=20 experiments still utilise only about 100 trials, and have only about a = 57%=20 chance of achieving statistical significance.

Detailed analysis of the complete collection of experiments on this = type of=20 phenomenon shows that what holds, despite changes in equipment, = experimenter,=20 subjects, judges, targets and laboratories, is far greater consistency = with the=20 1 in 3 success rate already mentioned than with the 1 in 4 chance = expectation=20 rate. Such consistency is the hallmark of a genuine effect, and this, = together=20 with the very low probability of the overall success rate observed = occurring by=20 chance, argues strongly for the phenomena being real and not = artifactual.

Reexamination of other types of psychical investigations reveals that = they=20 too achieved replicable effects, which went largely unappreciated = because of a=20 poor understanding of statistics. For instance, an analysis of = experiments in=20 precognitive card guessing and related "forced-choice" experiments, = published by=20 Honorton and Ferrari in the Journal of Parapsychology, found = that=20 gifted subjects were able to achieve consistently about a 27% success = rate when=20 25% was expected by chance. Similar U.S. government experiments have = been=20 revealed to have achieved the same 27% success rate over thousands of = trials. If=20 chance alone were the explanation for these results, it would be truly=20 remarkable to achieve a 27% success rate over thousands of trials, and = it would=20 be even more remarkable to see identical results in the government work. = For=20 further details about the recent evidence, including both a favourable = and a=20 skeptical assessment of the U.S. government experiments, consult the = Journal=20 of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 10(1), or http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/=20 on the Internet.

Strong statistical results are of course meaningless if experiments = are not=20 properly conducted. Debunkers of parapsychology are fond of showcasing = the very=20 few experiments that have been found to have serious problems. But that = ignores=20 the fact that the vast majority of experiments were done using excellent = protocols, paying close attention to potential subtle cues, using = well-tested=20 randomisation devices and so on. For the past decade the U.S. government = experiments were overseen by a very high-level scientific committee, = consisting=20 of respected academics from a variety of disciplines, all of whom were = required=20 to critique and approve the protocols in advance. There have been no=20 explanations forthcoming that allow an honest observer to dismiss the = growing=20 collection of consistent results.

What are the implications for science of the fact that psychic = functioning=20 appears to be a real effect? These phenomena seem mysterious, but no = more=20 mysterious perhaps than strange phenomena of the past which science has = now=20 happily incorporated within its scope. What ideas might be relevant in = the=20 context of suitably extending science to take these phenomena into = account? Two=20 such concepts are those of the observer, and non-locality. The observer = forces=20 his way into modern science because the equations of quantum physics, if = taken=20 literally, imply a universe that is constantly splitting into separate = branches,=20 only one of which corresponds to our perceived reality. A process of=20 "decoherence" has been invoked to stop two branches interfering with = each other,=20 but this still does not answer the question of why our experience is of = one=20 particular branch and not any other. Perhaps, despite the unpopularity = of the=20 idea, the experiencers of the reality are also the selectors.

This idea perhaps makes sense in the light of theories that = presuppose that=20 quantum theory is not the ultimate theory of nature, but involves (in = ways that=20 in some versions of the idea can be made mathematically precise) the=20 manifestations of a deeper "subquantum domain". In just the same way = that a surf=20 rider can make use of random waves to travel effortlessly along, a = psychic may=20 be able to direct random energy at the subquantum level for her own = purposes.=20 Some accounts of the subquantum level involve action at a distance, = which fits=20 in well with some purported psychic abilities.

These proposals are extremely speculative. What needs to be done, in = any=20 event, is to integrate mental phenomena more thoroughly into the = framework of=20 science (including the quantum level) than is presently the case. The = research=20 of Lawrence LeShan (as described in his book The Medium, the Mystic = and the=20 Physicist), where interviews with psychics disclosed that they were = aware=20 of a "hierarchy of meaningful interconnections", perhaps provides a hint = of what=20 might be involved. Science has a poor handle on ideas such as meaningful = interconnections since they are alien to its usual ways of thinking. = Perhaps it=20 will need to overcome its current abhorrence of such concepts in order = to arrive=20 at the truth.

* * * * * * * * * *

Jessica Utts is professor of statistics, University of California, = Davis, and=20 was one of two experts commissioned by the CIA to review the two-decade = U.S.=20 government psychic research programme in the Summer of 1995. She has = recently=20 published a book, Seeing Through Statistics, Duxbury Press, = 1996,=20 designed to improve understanding of statistical studies. Brian = Josephson, Nobel=20 Laureate, is professor of physics, University of Cambridge, and heads = the=20 Mind-Matter Unification Project at the Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge. =

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

The contents of this document are copyright =A91996 by Times = Supplements

Jessica Utts=20 Home Page
Brian D. Josephson Home = Page