1 / 15

ANOMALOUS SWITCHING OF THE BI-STABLE PERCEPT OF A NECKER CUBE

ANOMALOUS SWITCHING OF THE BI-STABLE PERCEPT OF A NECKER CUBE. Dick J. Bierman University of Amsterdam. Psi. Are correlations that seem to transcend space or time or both and have no normal causal explanation. (‘information transfer’ or ‘signals’ is an interpretation)

tallulah-ross
Télécharger la présentation

ANOMALOUS SWITCHING OF THE BI-STABLE PERCEPT OF A NECKER CUBE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ANOMALOUS SWITCHING OF THE BI-STABLE PERCEPT OF A NECKER CUBE Dick J. Bierman University of Amsterdam

  2. Psi • Are correlations that seem to transcend space or time or both and have no normal causal explanation. (‘information transfer’ or ‘signals’ is an interpretation) • Correlation of conscious cognitive state with future (random) condition = precognition • Correlations of non conscious (often physiological) states with future (emotional) condition = presentiment

  3. Presentiment researchadvantages • Uses experimental set up, identical with main stream set ups. Allows for integrated research. • Subjects can be uninformed. Are not asked to do the ‘impossible’ (this is possible ;-) • Presentiment is well explained by a theory (Consciousness Induced Restoration of Time symmetry).

  4. Physics & CIRTS • Physical formalisms (set of differential equations) generate generally time-symmetric solutions (called ‘retarded’ and ‘advanced’ solution) • Solutions are determined by initial conditions • Solutions are also determined by ‘boundary conditions’. That’s why we don’t see ‘advanced’ wave (Feynman, Wheeler) • CIRTS: Boundary condition of ’information dissipated in coherent brain sustaining consciousness’ restores the time symmetry • Physics is not changed to accommodate the paranormal.

  5. Signals? • The big Rhinean interpretation error: • ESP = scanning for relevant signals • Requires unlimited information processing capacity and cannot be true • CIRTS: • ESP = time symmetry of ‘information’ available in the future. • Requires twice the ‘normal’ information processing capacity • Adds correlations not signals! (advanced & retarded wave are correlated)

  6. The role of emotion • (Reported) Spontaneous cases have always an emotional significance. • Presentiment deals by definition with (future) emotions • However CIRTS is a physical theory, emotions shouldn’t be crucial.

  7. Necker Cube Transparent Bi stable views

  8. The Necker Cube experiment • Is a well accepted main stream paradigm, especially in consciousness research • The subjects do not know that they participate in a psi experiment • Does not involve emotions • Fits into a series of time symmetric but main stream based experiments (like retro-active priming (de Boer), retroactive habituation (Bem), etc)

  9. The Necker Cube experiment 2 future conditions Top view is experienced Change into opaque Top or Bottom view Top view duration time First button press Second button press

  10. Prediction • The later random manipulation will have an effect on the earlier top-view duration. • More specifically: when a non-transparent bottom view is displayed the top-view duration will be shorter. • We call this: RETRO-ACTIVE INTERFERENCE

  11. Method • Set-up • Pilot • 2 independent replications (Amsterdam & Groningen) • Subjects • Pilot & Groningen: Psychology students (mean age: 23) • Amsterdam: Long term yoga & controls (mean age: 41) • Procedure • Computerized instruction. Also for experimenters! • Possibility to disregard a trial.

  12. Analysis • Pilot is considered exploratory • Determines the parameters • For Outliers • For Disregarded subjects (too many outliers) • Simple student t-test (confirmed by random permutation test)

  13. Results Necker Cube exp. Pilot + Amsterdam + Groningen: 129 millisec mean difference (t=1.97, N=153, p =0.026)

  14. Conclusions • Support for ‘Retroactive’ interference effect • Directly on bistable percept duration • NO EMOTIONS involved (but …..)

  15. Thanks • Dept. of Neuroscience University of Amsterdam • Henry Stapp • Jacob Jolij (dept.neuroscience, Uni. Groningen) • AUDIENCE

More Related