What's the best scientific evidence for psi phenomena?

[PHIbonacci]

According to BK:

"If our personal psyches are merely localizations — alters — of mind-at-large, then, at bottom, our psyches are fundamentally one and the same mind. This opens the door for so-called psi phenomena, like clairvoyance and telepathy, to be credible and entirely natural. If the a priori bias against parapsychology were to disappear, what could science discover in this field? What practical applications could arise as a consequence of more widespread and better funded parapsychological research? In what variety of ways could that impact our personal lives, and those of our loved ones?"

Source: https://www.bernardokastrup.com/2014/09 ... is-in.html

So what's the best scientific evidence for psi phenomena? Any links to any relevant papers or to any books by serious experimenters?

[PHIbonacci]

Dean Radin claims that Mind affects Matter in the double slits experiment here:

[SanteriSatama]

What practical applications could arise as a consequence of more widespread and better funded parapsychological research? In what variety of ways could that impact our personal lives, and those of our loved ones?"

This is the more interesting question. A problem with telepathy is that it's pretty vague and inaccurate way of communication. But when there appears to be no other common language, telepathy with other multi-sense communication could be very valuable for inter-species communication which focuses in getting our ecological relations in better shape. When those are bad, that affects all other relations and general quality of life.

[SanteriSatama]

Dean Radin claims that Mind affects Matter in the double slits experiment here:

Yep, that was a good one. The following online discussions of implications to QM taught me a lot about non-communication theorem, unitarity etc. Not so much the comments and questions from the Big Names who attended Radin's presentation in Tucson conference. The quality of those was disappointing.

[PHIbonacci]

Yep, that was a good one. The following online discussions of implications to QM taught me a lot about non-communication theorem, unitarity etc. Not so much the comments and questions from the Big Names who attended Radin's presentation in Tucson conference. The quality of those was disappointing.

Thank you SanteriSatama. Have you got a link to where those online discussions took place?

[Martin_]

This is a good place to start:

American Psychologist
The Experimental Evidence for Parapsychological Phenomena: A Review
Etzel Cardeña
Online First Publication, May 24, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000236

[SanteriSatama]

Thank you SanteriSatama. Have you got a link to where those online discussions took place?

Sorry, no. Talks I had on Reddit with people with better grasp of QM, IIRC on some philosophy sub. They managed to convince me that Radin's experimental results violated non-communication theorem. Until then I had not realized that non-communication theorem and unitarity are - as the name says! - just mathematical theorems, with nothing to do with empirism. I'm far from getting to the bottom of unitarity, but from comments from various people in various discussions I've been able to gather that the motivation is a teleological 'should' of conservative character.

[Martin_]

They managed to convince me that Radin's experimental results violated non-communication theorem.

Well, It's bound to violate something, right?

Then again, from what i've seen when entering into discussions about the implications of these "psi" results, it's quite common for participants to bring unsubstatiated assumptions about HOW this interaction works, and based on that than draw further conclusions.

As an example, one might posit a (yet to be directly observed) PSI 'field' to be responsible for the interactions and then say: "given what we know about fields, this interaction would violate the non-communication theorem".

Trying to explain/model psi with an extended Physicalist toolkit may not be a fruitful way forward.

[SanteriSatama]

Trying to explain/model psi with an extended Physicalist toolkit may not be a fruitful way forward.

I agree. It can't explain even gravity and dark matter and energy and loads of other anomalies. It can't really even explain movement. The toolkit, what materialist physicalists refer as THE scientific method, has been the problem from the beginning.

On the other hand empirical results keep falsifying e.g. non-communication theorem, which results in censuring away the empirical results by the bloated bureaucracy of scientism.