Precognition Causality Quantum Theory and Mysticism

It depends on how you define precognition. If precognition is simply knowledge of the future, then yes, precognition is possible, and possible without resorting to quantum physics. It is possible to mathematically model the behaviors of a system and use that model to predict outcomes.Now physical systems are relatively easy to model. Systems that include biological components are more complex due to the competing variables that biological organisms bring to the equations - essentially, there are a greater number of variables to consider when modeling systems with biological components. However, the task, while daunting, can be done if the variables can be listed and defined. We try to do that all the time and we get increasingly better at it as technology and our understanding of humans progresses. As we progress, our ability to predict the future more accurately will increase. Of course we then run into the problem of free will, that is, knowing the outcome, people may choose a different course in opposition to what the prediction states. Thus our precognitive ability is ultimately useless as a tool if the principal actors know the prediction.Aasimov understood this problem when he wrote the Foundation series and introduced Psychohistory. His solution was to have the principal actors be unaware of the plan ensuring that they would continue upon the course he had set. Keeping in mind that Aasimov's story was Science Fiction, if something similar could be done, then yes, precognition through mathematical models could be a reliable tool to influence the course of human events as long as the principal actors are unaware of the predictions.On the other hand, if you are arguing for precognition as a supernatural ability, then I couldn't say. At a point in my life, I had dabbled in the Tarot. After learning about it and understanding it, I tried it out on some friends. What they told me was how eerily accurate I was. The thing is, my statements weren't actual specific, but Tarot is based on what cards are turned over, so there is that randomness to it. And every card in the tarot does have a meaning attached to them. The idea behind the Tarot is that a person's "energy" influences the what cards appear. There is a small ritual that involves focusing that energy so that their question is addressed by the cards, typically asking the person to shuffle the deck. Where the card is placed is also important in the Tarot reading. As I was just beginning, I did reference the book a lot to see what the cards that were drawn meant and I was a bit nervous about getting it wrong. But, as I said, my friends were quite amazed at my "precognitive" abilities. Do I believe in the Tarot as a form of precognition? Not really, because I learned to do it as a gag, like how some people learn magic tricks. But perhaps I made believers out of some people out there.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

You'd probably have to ask a Wiccan on this point. I don't know enough on this subject to give you any adequate answers. What I infer from what I have been told is that this "energy" is a supernatural energy akin to a person's "life-force." Setting aside the supernatural aspect for a minute, I would have to say no. Perhaps you could explain in what way would precognition violate the known laws of physics?

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

Ok. Let me make a scenario.Let's say some being, like Q, who is not inhibited by the our linear perception of time, tells some Joe about something that will happen in the future. Joe goes out to try and prevent that thing from happening but ends up causing the very thing he was trying to prevent. Q, wanting that particular thing to happen, knew that by telling Joe, Joe would perform actions consistent with his personality which would eventually lead him to be the reason the thing happened, but Q was the cause, or first domino. In essence, what if precognition causes the future to occur exactly the way it was seen, would this satisfy causality? I think it has more to do with the imprecise nature of the English language. People either invent new words or old words take on additional meanings as people try to find a way to describe a new concept. It might make you feel better if we called it "vurtax" and "life-grumac," but I think you would still have disagreements with the basic belief regardless of what it was called. The name for the concept, I believe, is a rather small point to be addressing in light of the bigger argument.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

I don't agree with that statement because many of the terms science uses have been around much longer than scientific thought has. Take the word, force. Force is derived from the Latin word, fortis, meaning strong. "Strong" is certainly a far cry from how we use force in science.What people often do is use words that have a meaning similar to what they want to say and imbue it with an additional meaning. That is the evolution of a language. To say science has claim over any word that was already in everyday language is saying that science can usurp words for its own use and once usurped can never be made to mean anything else, even its original meaning.I would agree that there needs to be a differentiation between the scientific use and everyday use, but to be honest, I don't think there are many Wiccans that would argue that their brand of belief is scientific in any way. All that they are trying to do, as with any person, is make sense of the Universe around them. And Wiccans are generally nice, reasonable people - at least the ones I've met. Just keep in mind that many of those terms weren't scientific terms to begin with. When people talk about "life-force," they aren't trying to gain respectability by using the scientific meaning. They are using the common definition to explain the world around them. It's like the word, "work." Work is a scientific term, but its usage began long before it was used in science. Would you argue that the way people use work nowadays is an affront to the scientific definition to work?Give people a little credit. Most aren't trying to create a science out of beliefs. I don't hear of Shaolin monks going around trying to make "qi" a part of biology. I haven't heard of Wiccans trying to make "magic," scientific. Most people are quite capable of separating reality from the supernatural. Don't let the small, albeit vocal, minority sour you to people who have beliefs.Just remember, like everything else, language evolves (except French from France). It's not surprising that scientists would use familiar words to describe the things they see, giving those words added meanings. That's the way things are, but that's no reason to go off on people for something the scientists have done.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

I'm assuming Q exists outside our timeline. He can witness the entirety of our timeline because time in his dimension operates differently. I guess it'd be something similar to Aasimov's "Eternals." Of course, we'll never know if our paranormal cause wasn't the cause of some time traveler or a Q-like entity. This is why I don't think long about things like this. It's too much of a headache to think about and no one has all the facts. Even the supernatural may have a logical and natural explanation if we knew more about our Universe and the hypothetical multi-Verse. The problem is humans aren't inherently logical. By logical thinking, of course it would be silly to actually believe in fortune-telling, but humans are irrational. Many times, people will do things that work directly against their self-interest and that's probably a consequence of our evolution. Humans aren't naturally long term thinkers. Just look at human history and you'll see how often short-sighted people tend to be.

Not to the layperson simply because the layperson has no conception of why precognition contradicts the causal laws of physics and because the layperson is not sitting there thinking about it.You and I may find the topic fascinating to discuss, but for the average person, it's not something to consider. Explain it to them, and they may not be interested or even understand what you are saying. It isn't because they are stupid, but because those are ideas that they don't regularly encounter in their daily lives. Education, then, is the start to dispel such arcane beliefs. Still, you can't get rid of them because there will be people who are willfully ignorant. I may be one of them, after all, I am not atheist despite my acceptance of natural explanations about the real world.I suppose, thinking about science as a study of causality, then yes, precognition probably contradicts the laws of physics. Having thought about it, I can honestly say that I will forget about it because I never really accepted precognition anyway. I will admit the guilty pleasure of having my future told, but beyond that, I don't believe in the predictions. So my life doesn't change with this understanding. Sorry to disappoint you.

Don't dismiss the mystical or paranormal out of hand immediately. Check to see if something like that is falsifiable first.I am reminded of acupuncture when it first arrived from China to the US. It was dismissed by the medical community as crackpot theories precisely because it was based in mystical understandings of the human body - the concept of qi and the directing and redirecting of the flow of energy to induce healing. But acupuncture, for all its mystical underpinnings, is falsifiable and the AMA has stated that further research is need to study its efficacy. I wouldn't recommend that you go to your local acupuncturist or forgo modern medicine, but keep in mind that some things that may seem mystical or paranormal at first can be be subjected to the scientific method and studied.That's why we find some scientists are studying the mystical effects of herbs because we understand now that there are herbs out there that, while natives may claim has mystical properties, might actually work well because of their unique chemical properties. Those herbs can be tested for their efficacy, bringing science to mystical claims.

Hey now! I'm not defending their attempts at pseudoscience. What I am defending are people's usage of words that happen to have one scientific definition out of many non when it doesn't relate to science. Words like force, energy, work, and fields all have usage outside of science and prior to science using them. If they use words like those it's precisely the same reason why science uses words like those - the definition of those words have meanings similar to what they want to express. What you are arguing is the exclusivity of science over those words disallowing anyone from using those words as a way to explain their ideas.I don't condone anyone trying to use science to justify supernatural beliefs that have no method of falsification in the real world. But I don't like the smug attitude that some people have when others are attempting to explain a belief using words that are in common everyday usage and have other definitions other than the ones science has attributed. Science has no claim over words.Once again folks, there is a world of difference between who use words with alternative meanings that are in everyday use to explain their beliefs and those who attempt to justify those beliefs using the scientific definitions of terms. If you want to argue against one, argue against the people who are trying to justify their beliefs through science; they are trying to confuse the issue. The guy in your local New Age store who is simply using words he knows with meanings close to what he wants to convey is not and no one who listens to his explanations will ever confuse his usage of the words as scientific in any way.And if you think that there is no consensus on what the words mean outside of science, trying cracking open a dictionary once in a while. Words like force (strength or energy exerted or brought to bear), work (activity in which one exerts strength or faculties to do or perform something; sustained physical or mental effort to overcome obstacles and achieve an objective or result), field (a space on which something is drawn or projected), and energy (dynamic quality) have others meanings than the ones attributed by science and it could very well those other meanings that many practitioners are using to explain their beliefs.So argue all you want against those that attempt to use science to justify their supernatural beliefs, and more power to you. However, do not think that just because someone is using a word that happens to have a scientific meaning that they are trying to justify their beliefs through science. Otherwise you are doing exactly what all of you have argued creationists shouldn't do - jumping to a conclusion that you like without considering that there may be alternative explanations for why those people use those words.Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

Then I suppose I was mistaken on what was being criticized. I agree with you that people who use science to try to justify their beliefs and make money off those justifications are charlatans at best. Certainly, I like to try and imagine a scientific explanations for certain things, but I would never think of advancing any idea that wasn't falsifiable although I have, as a topic of light discussion, talked about some of my thoughts with friends.And I'll be honest, I have had a few spooky moments that I couldn't readily explain. Mostly, I just chalk it up to coincidence. For example, and this goes to precognition, I had left my cell phone in my car overnight without realizing it. The next day, I was in my home when I thought someone was calling me. I couldn't find my phone and it was at that moment that I realized I had left my phone in my car. I went out to my car and got my phone and looked at the missed calls. Apparently just a couple of minutes before, around the time I had thought someone was calling me, someone had called me. I don't chalk it up to the supernatural, but if it was a coincidence, which I mostly believe, then it was a pretty strange coincidence at that.Or perhaps I have the power of precognition. Or maybe Q just told me someone was calling.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

Of course, that's why I chalked it up to coincidence. It doesn't help me to think that I have predictive powers and it could be extremely harmful.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

I think Linda has a point in that sometimes it seems scientists do tend to dismiss out of hand the paranormal simply because it is classified as the paranormal.I feel scientists are more willing to believe in multiple universes and multiple dimensions than in the paranormal even though multiple universes and dimensions have no evidence supporting them either (as far as I know). So why should those concepts have more merit than telepathy?

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

No one is assuming anything. Someone made an observation, made a hypothesis, and tested that hypothesis. That's how science is done. Sheldrake observed that dogs seemed to be aware of when their owners would be going home, and so he made a hypothesis that this was due to telepathy and performed an experiment to test that hypothesis. Results of the hypothesis aside, you can't fault his adherence to the scientific method. He randomized the times, had a control, and did everything he could to ensure that the data could not be faulted. Could he have done more? Maybe. But the fact that he was testing a hypothesis on telepathy immediately makes him the ridicule of the scientific community simply because of the stigma attached to it. Mathematical models do not make a hypothesis true. If mathematical models were needed, then Germ Theory would be a hypothesis because how do you use mathematics to model Germ Theory? Theories ultimately require observable data. If your model predicts a particle, then physicists need to be able to test for that particle, not see the effects of the particles. That's why dark energy and dark matter are hypothetical, because as of yet, no one has been able to verify their existence. That's why String Theory* is considered by many physicists as pseudoscience, because it is unfalsifiable at this time due to the high energy requirements to even begin to test for strings. And the MWI is unfalsifiable because the many worlds are non-communicative. That means they cannot communicate with each other. So how do you test for it? But String Theory, dark matter, dark energy, and MWI are accepted by a number of physicists and theoretical physicists around the world simply because there is no stigma attached to them (except maybe String Theory.) Sure the math supports the theories, but in science, math only makes models; observations and experimental data are needed to support or disprove the models.Since no one can make observations or do experiments to verify any of those concepts, and since mathematical models aren't fully accepted by science without corresponding data, why are those concepts given more weight than the concept of telepathy?*Note: As far as I know, there are many mathematical models of String Theory so one of the criticisms of String Theory is that there are so many models, it's difficult to know which one is correct and which one to test for.Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

Are you as dismissive of MWI as you are of telepathy? If you aren't, then why aren't you dismissive of MWI?

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

You are not accepting telepathy as a valid explanation of the described phenomenon, just one explanation of many. That's the reason why scientists form hypotheses; they think up an explanation and experiment to see how their explanation holds to real world data. But that's what Sheldrake was trying to do - provide a scientific explanation for telepathy. It's the scientists that are derisive of his explanation and many people, including yourself I imagine, claim his methodology is pseudoscience. Instead of attempting to falsify his results through more experimentation, which Sheldrake wants, people either latch on or sneer at his experiments and conclusions. The scientific approach would seem to require neither acceptance or derision, but additional experimentation if only to acknowledge his efforts at trying to scientifically falsify the idea of telepathy. And if mathematical models were all that was required, then all versions of String Theory would have been accepted. So explain to me why there are physicists that scoff at String Theory? They are hypothetical. If they aren't, name the experiments that have shown dark matter and dark energy exist. Dark matter is matter which light doesn't affect, which means we can test for it. Where are the results of those experiments? Dark energy is the energy countering the force of gravity and causing the expansion of the Universe. Where is the data of experiments testing for dark energy?At least gravity has an explanation for its occurrence - warped spacetime. What are the natures of dark matter/energy? What are the explanations for the "forces" of dark matter/energy beyond particles? If the particles aren't detected, what does that mean for dark matter/energy? What about the alternative explanations for dark energy?Notice, those are the same types of questions you ask of Sheldrake and his definition of telepathy. While physicists may speculate since no direct observation has been made, that's all there is: speculation. Peter Woite with a blurb about his book, Lee Smolin and the website for his book, Philip Warren Anderson and an article he wrote in the NYT on String Theory, Sheldon Glashow and his views on String Theory from an interview with NOVA, Lawrence Krauss and a blurb about his book, "Hiding in the Mirror", and Carlo Rovelli and his stuff was a bit harder to find but here's something. The gist of their arguments, from what I gather, is that String Theory is not good science.
Is that enough for you? Is it crap now? Except for the competing theory of loop quantum gravity which doesn't need extra dimensions.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole

What is dark matter? What is dark energy? What are Strings in string theory? Where are the experiments proving all of those?Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given.

---

It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott
----------------------------------------
Marge, just about everything is a sin. (holds up a Bible) Y'ever sat down and read this thing? Technically we're not supposed to go to the bathroom. - Reverend Lovejoy
----------------------------------------
You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole