Have you ever had an experience of something not known to or accepted by the scientific community? It is so bizarre to know something is possible that is considered impossible by mainstream sources of information. I'm confident that it will be studied and accepted in the future but due to the stigma of my position I would not disclose the experience to those outside of my closest confidants.*
*In an effort not to seem paranoid, woo, or spiritual, I will disclose that I'm not getting probed by aliens, seeing Bigfoot in my backyard, communing with ley lines, or self-diagnosing "morgellons disease."
Prove me wrong about the Space Monkey.
What would prove the Space Monkey wrong?
What lack of evidence proves the Space Monkey wrong?
Who is required to prove the existence of the Space Monkey? You or Me?
Definitely have to give you props for putting that out there. Thanks for sharing! I think critical thinkers can be interested in what appears to be woo, because debunking it can be very informative. Look what useful information about human nature Heather's hypothesis brings to light...
A subjective experience is by it's nature is not provable by a scientific empirical method, which requires objective evidence, which is why personal testimony will never suffice as a means of proof.
The scientific method has been used to vet the question of "mind reading" in sufficient numbers to confirm that it does not occur. To overcome the mountains of objective testing (and confirmation of the nil) of the hypothesis (ie. mind reading), you will need some extraordinary objective evidence independently verified by many different sources.
If you truly would like to know why your brain "fools" you into thinking that you can or have read minds, get involved with Neuroscience, the advances in the last decade have been extraordinary.
It is possible to become so in sync with someone's else's thoughts that one can appear to be reading their mind.
That's the answer right there. No science needed. I've been friends with people with such mutual understanding that we often finished each other's sentences. If one is gullible, it can seem we are reading each others' minds, whereas we simply know each other.
However, one can be so in tune with a stranger, too, as to be able to anticipate the way they think. OR you can know their type (predatory or submissive, for example) to be able to anticipate their behavior to a large degree.
"Cold readers" are talented con men who can appear to be reading people's minds. Some of the techniques are outlined here.
I have known my share of folks, including myself at times, that could just about predict the 'next comment'. Sadly a few people I have known seem to be a little overly predictable. This can come from excess exposure, living together, or 'mental universe size', where you can finally get to the top of another's functional/cognitive space, and start looking around. I expect we each carry this 'top' with us, with a little variation thrown in for novelty.
I find myself very happy when I can't find it in another person, but just figure that my monkey brain just stopped looking for the bananas...
How about witnessing the same particle in 2 different places at the same time and take a picture of it. Then look closer and see the same particle, just 1 particle in 4 or 10 different places at the same time. All at a quantum level of course. How can something exist in the same exact time in 2 or more different places? Oh it's so lovely it makes me happy just to think about it. then pull out and the farther away you the particle the less places it exists in. Science is wonderful. and this is not the weirdest quantum discovery. Quantum gravity may well be the weirdest reality shift ever if proven true. Makes the god particle seem like small potato's.
There's that and the phenomenon called "entanglement" where something happening to a local particle can have a simultaneous effect on another particle a vast distance away.
Particles don't come with serial numbers. What makes two particles "the same." Likewise, I'd like to know how they know that two particles are entangled?
They suspend the particle in a field of energy and focus in on one like a photo paper, its an image of the particle because the actual particle is in and out of existance to quickly. But that does bring up a more amazing possiblity that no matter how close in you get on a particle that there truely is not one.
I do like entanglement although not so sure I get behind completely the multiverse theory. I think that its more of an attempt to narrow things down to hard and fast rules. I do lean toward waves of possiblities as a better explanation of quantum mechanics.
Sorry, an explanation I can't understand doesn't really answer my question. In fact, I think you're denying the possibility that one can know two particles in different places are the same particle. Like I said, they don't come with serial numbers, and I assume one particle of a type looks like any other particle of the same type. "All electrons look the same to me!"
Am I wrong?
Single Particle Explorer (SPE) enables you to reliably determine
the chemical composition, number, shape and size, of each individual particle larger than 0.5 µm.
The above is an industrial application they now have detectors developed for the accelerator that may go much smaller. They are sure this is the same particle.
Oh, really? So, subatomic particles are made of chemicals. Do you think they are elements, compounds, or mixtures?
Nothing whatsoever to do with entangled electrons.
Go read up on what an electron is in relation to an atom, and an atom in relation to a molecule. At which point you will understand why Unseen laughed.