Prayer = Telekenesis

smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 597
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Prayer = Telekenesis

Hey, kids! I've actually been doing some research on the beliefs that got me so alienated when first joined. Is anyone interested in having an open mind on the subject, or should I just forget it? I'm not all that interested in conversing with people who have already decided I'm wrong.

Ryan


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5492
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I can do it I guess. 

I can do it I guess.

 


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Well, I am not sure where

 

Well, I am not sure where you are going from the thread title. Something about prayer being an attempt to change reality with one's mind perhaps?

 

Honestly, you are going to have to just throw it out for people to work over and hope for the best.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


RatDog
atheist
Posts: 573
Joined: 2008-11-14
User is offlineOffline
 Well I'll try to be as

 Well I'll try to be as open minded as possible. 


Thunderios
atheist
Posts: 261
Joined: 2010-12-26
User is offlineOffline
I'm actually pretty

I'm actually pretty open-minded about telepathy, since I witnessed an experiment on it.
Whether or not telekinesis is true, I don't know, but it would be pretty easy to proof, so let's do it! (Or was that not your intention?)

Anyway, whatever you're going to do, I'll be with you (unless I have to travel all the way to the States or something Laughing out loud).


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Sure, throw your results at

Sure, throw your results at us! I wonder if you overcame any diffculties or got any results. When you try such a research, you find out, that there are no standardized people. Therefore there is no standardized prayer nor attempt for telekinesis. People should also try to start with some minor things, like praying for lab mice or growth of a small field of pea, not for people in hospital. 

As for telekinesis, that's not much better. I've had a little success with telekinesis, I mean, a psi-wheel turned in the direction I wanted and when I wanted, but only on lucky days. I still have no idea what should I do, by visualization, wish, or with vital body, and how exactly. 
Keep in mind, these are subtle, non-physical (or other-dimensional) forces, they may be strong in their own domain or dimension, but figuring out how to affect our good old matter with them is hell of a problem. The most common is to affect a person, (like telepathic contact) but again, people's sensitivity to such things is various, rare and highly influenced by training. As for training, it means that getting good at something usually requires 10 000 hours of practice. In our economically motivated (ransomed) civilization people are unlikely to have time for that. 

Although, there are a few impressive videos online. 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfan
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
No. Open minds are for

No. Open minds are for sissies and treehuggers.


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5134
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I'd believe it if I saw it

 

 

I guess - maybe...well. If it was like Samantha showed Darrin on their wedding night with the moving ashtray, then yeah. 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
prayer = begging... I

prayer = begging... I thought telekinesis required a lot of concentration and constipated facial expressions.  I'm quite unconvinced of the ESP claims, but I pride myself to have an open mind, so shoot.

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 597
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Wrong

Sorry, after I posted that I got super busy with work.

The evidence comes from a series of experiments conducted by physicist Helmut Schmidt. His methodology was a random number generator controlled by the decay of particles which is entirely unpredictable. When a particle decayed, it would set off an action in the mechanism. The number generator was run for weeks on end without pause to confirm the complete randomness of its results. When test subjects were brought in, they were asked to concentrate on the results of the generator. They succeeded in influencing the results to a relatively noticeable percentage either positive or negative, but either way, beyond random. An exceedingly high level of standard was used to ensure that no extra-experimental factors were influencing the results.

I don't know any more than when I first joined these forums what the explanation for this is, scientifically. All I know is that so many aspects of religiosity, spirituality, and Belief make so much more sense to me if the human mind, by whatever means, is able to influence the physical world.

Belief in prayer makes so much more sense. Belief that one can influence another person's decisions makes a lot more sense. And the idea that focusing on an Idol, be that the Venus of Willendorf or Jesus or Mohammed or a Spaghetti Monster, can legitimately yield concrete results makes a lot more sense. "Belief" itself is what makes these things possible, because it releases the brain from its restrictions.

As a post-script, I'll add a personal anecdote, which I know full well is not sufficient or applicable to any scientific inquiry. Nevertheless:

My roommate at the time was someone I lived with on and off for many years. Whether you choose to believe it or not is immaterial to me--we had numerous telepathic conversations. She was the nanny for this boy of about eight or nine, who also had the gift. At the boy's apartment one time, I had brought a Lego spaceship with me and was showing it to him. For some odd reason, the thought popped randomly into my head "I should give it to him." Immediately he asked me, out loud, "I can keep it?" My roommate said, out loud, "no, you just heard that in your mind, not for real."

I'm sure you all will be able to come up with all kinds of cockamamie excuses and explanations for this that appeal to your denial of the less-than-rational. That's fine. Personally, I know exactly what happened there, my roommate knew, and the kid knew. Frankly, I think if you accept that it would be silly for me to make up a story like that just for the purposes of this forum, that you realize something real and unusual happened there, also.

My point is not to prove ghosts and goblins and space aliens. All I'm saying is that there's some power of the human mind that we don't yet understand. My guess, the first time around, was the electrical energy generated by the brain and the waves that it might set off, noting the abilities sharks and other creatures have to detect magnetic waves and similar. That doesn't make it supernatural, it just makes it unknown. And if I'm right, it helps all these religious freaks and their belief in their prayers make a lot more sense.

Ryan


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:I don't

smartypants wrote:

I don't know any more than when I first joined these forums what the explanation for this is, scientifically. All I know is that so many aspects of religiosity, spirituality, and Belief make so much more sense to me if the human mind, by whatever means, is able to influence the physical world.

Yeah. But surely you realize, that there is not belief like belief. Otherwise on Evangelical mass meetings law of physics would stop working. I think the trick is to filter out the would-be belief that is essentially an emotional attachment. This, though seemingly most materialistic aspect, is actually the least probable to produce any mysterious effects. 

smartypants wrote:
 Belief in prayer makes so much more sense. Belief that one can influence another person's decisions makes a lot more sense. And the idea that focusing on an Idol, be that the Venus of Willendorf or Jesus or Mohammed or a Spaghetti Monster, can legitimately yield concrete results makes a lot more sense. "Belief" itself is what makes these things possible, because it releases the brain from its restrictions.
Belief can certainly lower conscious or subconscious inhibitions of "that's impossible". But even better than that is to be unconditioned at all. Like a child. As a child I saw (maybe caused) a case of telekinesis. It did not involve a belief or disbelief, just a simple order and my toy leaped to my hands... (didn't work the second time) When I shared this story many years later with my friend, he told me about similar cases of spontaneous telekinesis of he and his friend's toys... 

This is something very peculiar. It does not involve exertion of any force, or trying to believe, overcoming disbelief, or anything. This is not like belief or moving a pencil on the table with concentration... It is rather like some external force would do the trick.
(a piece of esoteric trivia says, that until about 7 years of age the child's Ego or superconsciousness dwells on astral plane, which is next to ours and probably it contributes to increased amount strange phenomena happening with young children, like this)

smartypants wrote:
 My point is not to prove ghosts and goblins and space aliens. All I'm saying is that there's some power of the human mind that we don't yet understand. My guess, the first time around, was the electrical energy generated by the brain and the waves that it might set off, noting the abilities sharks and other creatures have to detect magnetic waves and similar. That doesn't make it supernatural, it just makes it unknown. And if I'm right, it helps all these religious freaks and their belief in their prayers make a lot more sense.

Ryan

Well, I didn't experience such a case of telepathy, but there are minor things happening often enough. For example, I watch a movie with my friend, and I notice some minor aspect or implication of the story. I make up my mind about it, but don't consider it important enough to talk about it. In a moment, my friend pauses the movie and starts talking exactly about what I just thought. But who knows, these minor cases of "telepathy" might be identical processes going on in two different brains at once. 

Anyway, I don't think that mechanistic or materialistic explanations will do any good here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but influencing them with electric or magnetic fields on distance requires a damn strong intensity, stronger than the brains naturally produce. Brains aren't bluetooth broadcasters, neither they are electromagnetic coils of wire, which move (only metallic) objects around. You know my guess.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 597
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Yeah. But

Luminon wrote:
Yeah. But surely you realize, that there is not belief like belief. Otherwise on Evangelical mass meetings law of physics would stop working. I think the trick is to filter out the would-be belief that is essentially an emotional attachment. This, though seemingly most materialistic aspect, is actually the least probable to produce any mysterious effects.

Okay, well perhaps Belief acts as a sort of conduit for other processes, or at least that it greases the wheels for those processes. In other words, just because you grease the wheels on a pickup truck does not mean that everyone will have the strength to push it up a hill. The other thing is that whether everyone at those Evangelical masses does truly believe is definitely debatable. And all those who do have true belief might not have the gift or might concurrently believe without question that they have no power to influence the physical world.

Luminon wrote:
It did not involve a belief or disbelief, just a simple order and my toy leaped to my hands... (didn't work the second time) When I shared this story many years later with my friend, he told me about similar cases of spontaneous telekinesis of he and his friend's toys...
A better way to put it then, maybe, is not that belief is a grease, but that disbelief is an impediment. I had a very similar experience to yours with telekinesis, but as an adult of about 22 or 23. Not to discount your experience, but it's safe to say I no longer had the wild imagination of a child at that point.

Luminon wrote:
It does not involve exertion of any force, or trying to believe, overcoming disbelief, or anything. This is not like belief or moving a pencil on the table with concentration... It is rather like some external force would do the trick.

On the contrary, I've heard stories of telekinetic events that left the agent of them physically and mentally exhausted. Subjects of the trials in these tests also performed more poorly as time went on. Perhaps it was more that the single action you initiated was not a terribly taxing one.

Luminon wrote:
But who knows, these minor cases of "telepathy" might be identical processes going on in two different brains at once.

Which is why I provided the anecdote that I did. People who live together might often begin to think along the same lines (and still not with the precision of ideas with which she and I were able to communicate). I barely knew that kid; I think I only met him two or three times. The common denominator of my roommate does not convince me of anything. The fact that it was three people, all sharing the same consciousness of some state of mind, and so specifically concerning the Lego ship, is not something I will ever be able to chalk up to random coincidence, no matter what anyone says.

Luminon wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but influencing them with electric or magnetic fields on distance requires a damn strong intensity, stronger than the brains naturally produce. Brains aren't bluetooth broadcasters, neither they are electromagnetic coils of wire, which move (only metallic) objects around. You know my guess.

I won't say "wrong," but I'm not sure that distance has been established as a deciding factor. For one thing, none of my own personal experiences have required great distances. For another, we have no evidence that these waves or whatever they are will degrade through physical space. Light travels very well through space without much to slow it down. And finally, we have no idea how sensitive we are as receptors of these signals. Certainly the communication I've received from people, strangers mostly, has been as a result of our close proximity to each other, but I'm not convinced that makes any difference.

Just as an aside, I've never known where you were from, or what your native language is (I suspected Spanish), but your English has gotten really good since I first joined here.

Ryan


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:As a

smartypants wrote:

As a post-script, I'll add a personal anecdote, which I know full well is not sufficient or applicable to any scientific inquiry. Nevertheless:

My roommate at the time was someone I lived with on and off for many years. Whether you choose to believe it or not is immaterial to me--we had numerous telepathic conversations. She was the nanny for this boy of about eight or nine, who also had the gift. At the boy's apartment one time, I had brought a Lego spaceship with me and was showing it to him. For some odd reason, the thought popped randomly into my head "I should give it to him." Immediately he asked me, out loud, "I can keep it?" My roommate said, out loud, "no, you just heard that in your mind, not for real."

I'm sure you all will be able to come up with all kinds of cockamamie excuses and explanations for this that appeal to your denial of the less-than-rational. That's fine. Personally, I know exactly what happened there, my roommate knew, and the kid knew. Frankly, I think if you accept that it would be silly for me to make up a story like that just for the purposes of this forum, that you realize something real and unusual happened there, also.

My point is not to prove ghosts and goblins and space aliens. All I'm saying is that there's some power of the human mind that we don't yet understand. My guess, the first time around, was the electrical energy generated by the brain and the waves that it might set off, noting the abilities sharks and other creatures have to detect magnetic waves and similar. That doesn't make it supernatural, it just makes it unknown. And if I'm right, it helps all these religious freaks and their belief in their prayers make a lot more sense.

Ryan

First of all, I think we have much more control/power over our own perception more so than anything else.  I'll give you that we don't fully understand the workings of the human brain, but if you could successfully reproduce telepathy or any ESP, why are you not one million dollars richer via Randi's challenge?  

What I think may have happened, and what I use on regular basis, is a form of conscious self deception.  It may have been unconscious in your case, but I willfully force myself to forget about a stressful deadline, in order to concentrate on the work.  Or regarding some emotional issue, or quitting smoking... not giving in to a craving, you get the point.  

It is much more likely that you perceived your communication as telepathy, when it could have been any number of body language cues that could be used to communicate.  My wife and I usually communicate with our eyes, stares, or eyebrow movements.  It's quite common for people that spend a lot of time together.  It may look like telepathy to an outsider, but we're just reverting to a primitive form of communication.  You could also use pheromones, and a number of other ways that may seem mystical or what have you.  

 

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


ScientiaPotenti...
Posts: 20
Joined: 2011-04-02
User is offlineOffline
By verbalising and mentally

By verbalising and mentally picturing your goals in the future usually helps a lot to come up with new ideas how to fulfill them and makes u more focused on the task, like Khtulu said. It's a mental process were we justify our needs. If u're trying to convince a person about a topic, u can by verbalizing it find new ways and further arguments.

 

Prayer in the christian religion is kinda meaningless. It's a one-way communication form no matter if u are theist or atheist. If he doesn't exist he can't hear you. But let's play with the thought that God do exist as written in the bible. He's all knowing and allmighty, so he already know what u are going to tell him/ask from him rendering the conversation kinda meaningless. Prayers makes the prayer feel good by some degree i guess, a bottle of whiskey for believers =)


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 597
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Ktulu wrote:First of all, I

Ktulu wrote:

First of all, I think we have much more control/power over our own perception more so than anything else.  I'll give you that we don't fully understand the workings of the human brain, but if you could successfully reproduce telepathy or any ESP, why are you not one million dollars richer via Randi's challenge

Well, for me that's just not how it works. I've never been able to call it up at will, it happens more unexpectedly. It's also not a matter of intense concentration, but the very opposite. I find I'm most receptive when involved in some menial task or just falling asleep/ waking up, whatever. I could see the possibility of achieving above random results with that former roommate, but she turned out to be a major asshole and I don't have contact with her anymore. On top of it, the very reason it might have worked with her might have disqualified us from testing: we knew each other well.

Ktulu wrote:
What I think may have happened, and what I use on regular basis, is a form of conscious self deception.  It may have been unconscious in your case, but I willfully force myself to forget about a stressful deadline, in order to concentrate on the work.  Or regarding some emotional issue, or quitting smoking... not giving in to a craving, you get the point. 

Just, no. There was nothing to deceive myself of. There were many occasions where she would answer me aloud to thoughts I'd not verbalized.

Ktulu wrote:
It is much more likely that you perceived your communication as telepathy, when it could have been any number of body language cues that could be used to communicate. My wife and I usually communicate with our eyes, stares, or eyebrow movements.

I completely agree with you that tangible, physical factors may contribute in some subtle, unconscious way. But they are not at all sufficient to explain the complex ideas that have been communicated. We're not talking about basic concepts like "I'm hungry" or "that smells bad." We're talking about ideas that would require a much more sophisticated symbolic system like sign language to be communicated.

Ktulu wrote:
It's quite common for people that spend a lot of time together.  It may look like telepathy to an outsider, but we're just reverting to a primitive form of communication.  You could also use pheromones, and a number of other ways that may seem mystical or what have you.  

That's the whole point. After a lot of experiences that were confirmed with friends I knew fairly well, I began to recognize the same sensation with perfect strangers, people who I never did communicate with verbally. And not just everyone, either. Some people are stronger "senders" than others. Some so strong that I'll sit next to them on the subway and immediately sense their presence. Most people I get nothing at all.


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Using random number

Using random number generators and analysing their output for signs of influence is a very bad and insensitive technique, very prone to false positives. Like listening for a whisper in rainstorm.

Far better to look for disturbances in a system simply designed to be very sensitive to disturbance but isolated to as great an extent possible from external physical influence.  The 'normal' output from such a system would be a constant signal, with as small a random 'noise' component as possible. It is insane to bury any signal under the output of a noise generator. What kind of noise generator are they using?

Reducing the chance of false results would be done by having multiple such systems, set up with randomised orientations and placement.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 597
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
ScientiaPotentiaNostra

ScientiaPotentiaNostra wrote:

By verbalising and mentally picturing your goals in the future usually helps a lot to come up with new ideas how to fulfill them and makes u more focused on the task, like Khtulu said. It's a mental process were we justify our needs. If u're trying to convince a person about a topic, u can by verbalizing it find new ways and further arguments.

 

Prayer in the christian religion is kinda meaningless. It's a one-way communication form no matter if u are theist or atheist. If he doesn't exist he can't hear you. But let's play with the thought that God do exist as written in the bible. He's all knowing and allmighty, so he already know what u are going to tell him/ask from him rendering the conversation kinda meaningless. Prayers makes the prayer feel good by some degree i guess, a bottle of whiskey for believers =)

I'm actually more trying to work out an explanation as to why prayer would appear to work for some people that doesn't depend on the existence of god, but in this case innate abilities I know this forum doesn't agree with, but which I suspect might eventually be testable.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
smartypants wrote:Okay, well

smartypants wrote:

Okay, well perhaps Belief acts as a sort of conduit for other processes, or at least that it greases the wheels for those processes. In other words, just because you grease the wheels on a pickup truck does not mean that everyone will have the strength to push it up a hill. The other thing is that whether everyone at those Evangelical masses does truly believe is definitely debatable. And all those who do have true belief might not have the gift or might concurrently believe without question that they have no power to influence the physical world.

I see you well understand how many factors may be in play here. I hope those who say "undergo Randi's million dollar challenge or shut up forever or fail the challenge and shut up forever" will understand that too.

smartypants wrote:
 A better way to put it then, maybe, is not that belief is a grease, but that disbelief is an impediment. I had a very similar experience to yours with telekinesis, but as an adult of about 22 or 23. Not to discount your experience, but it's safe to say I no longer had the wild imagination of a child at that point.
Well, my memory is quite clear, it was really something unexpected, therefore very surprising. A desire or expectation might play tricks with my imagination, but that was not the case, so I wouldn't worry. I take the experiences seriously, only if I didn't imagine or expect them in advance.

smartypants wrote:
 
Luminon wrote:
It does not involve exertion of any force, or trying to believe, overcoming disbelief, or anything. This is not like belief or moving a pencil on the table with concentration... It is rather like some external force would do the trick.

On the contrary, I've heard stories of telekinetic events that left the agent of them physically and mentally exhausted. Subjects of the trials in these tests also performed more poorly as time went on. Perhaps it was more that the single action you initiated was not a terribly taxing one.

 
I think my case of telekinesis would be much more exhausting to perform that common tests, like spinning a psi-wheel or moving a pencil. This is why I suspect an external source. Some supporters of string theory say, that there may be other dimensions in the space around us, inhabited with life. For you it is just a hypothetical possibility, but I have some relatively recent memories of encounters. 

smartypants wrote:
 Which is why I provided the anecdote that I did. People who live together might often begin to think along the same lines (and still not with the precision of ideas with which she and I were able to communicate). I barely knew that kid; I think I only met him two or three times. The common denominator of my roommate does not convince me of anything. The fact that it was three people, all sharing the same consciousness of some state of mind, and so specifically concerning the Lego ship, is not something I will ever be able to chalk up to random coincidence, no matter what anyone says.
All right. I wish you patience with people downplaying the validity of your memories Smiling

smartypants wrote:
 I won't say "wrong," but I'm not sure that distance has been established as a deciding factor. For one thing, none of my own personal experiences have required great distances. For another, we have no evidence that these waves or whatever they are will degrade through physical space. Light travels very well through space without much to slow it down. And finally, we have no idea how sensitive we are as receptors of these signals. Certainly the communication I've received from people, strangers mostly, has been as a result of our close proximity to each other, but I'm not convinced that makes any difference.
I think the distance or plain sight is an important factor  with this form of telepathy, unless the people involved are connected with strong emotional bond. I suspect this has to do with the part of ourselves that is animal in origin. It's not very conscious, controllable or reliable. But it's fairly common in society. Even more so with telekinesis, which involves forces directly needed to run our nerve system, so they can't stray too far away. (as long as the person is conscious and alive)

I haven't yet got to read the esoteric textbook on telepathy by Alice A. Bailey, her books are many, big and complex. But maybe I should, it also describes etheric body, which is of prime interest to me. It might also give you some insight from a different perspective.

smartypants wrote:
 Just as an aside, I've never known where you were from, or what your native language is (I suspected Spanish), but your English has gotten really good since I first joined here.

Ryan 

Thanks! English & computer is my escape from the lack of intellectuals around. And recently I had some job concerning translation and correcture of english texts, that required to absorb in some grammar. 

I'm from Czech Republic, the land where political power is held by thieves, not by religious people. But still, there are numerous groups of deluded people led by mediums. The mediums rip people off with fairy tales and vague claims. They reputedly bless them with energies from n-th dimension, which is way too high frequency forany evil forces to tamper with. Little they know, that dimension is a variable of space, not frequency. And that angels on billboards, long guru's names and bright, warm colors are bad signs. And little they know, that these mediums themselves tend to have problems with sanity.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


smartypants
Superfan
smartypants's picture
Posts: 597
Joined: 2009-03-20
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:Using

BobSpence1 wrote:

Using random number generators and analysing their output for signs of influence is a very bad and insensitive technique, very prone to false positives. Like listening for a whisper in rainstorm.

Far better to look for disturbances in a system simply designed to be very sensitive to disturbance but isolated to as great an extent possible from external physical influence.  The 'normal' output from such a system would be a constant signal, with as small a random 'noise' component as possible. It is insane to bury any signal under the output of a noise generator. What kind of noise generator are they using?

Reducing the chance of false results would be done by having multiple such systems, set up with randomised orientations and placement.

Sorry, I should have explained better. There was no white noise. The particle decay would result in some observable mechanical action. The best example is probably a spinning wheel changing its direction from clockwise to counter-clockwise or vice versa. As I said, it was left running non-stop for several weeks or so and the results were recorded to ensure complete randomness. Then the test subjects could focus their attention on the wheel spinning in one direction instead of the other. It was done in other ways as well, using numbers that would light up in a random order, or a sort of meter gauge that would lean to one side or the other.