any experience with people predicting numbers in roulette? (as in psychics)
I am. I do think you're a sock puppet or tout, not sure who/what, but I'm certain you are up to something fishy. That's one of my many special abilities.Quote: MRXthought you serious...
Aside from that, show me your special Supernatural abilities and I'll show you how to make millions.
Quote: unJonMy supernatural ability is empathy.
Mine is getting 25 avocado's for $2.50
I believe psychics can exist, but they can only have a material affect on the universe if the universe wants it to be.
I am firm I believe we in fact live in a simulated universe. There are so many reasons for it, but the biggest is how electrons behave when being observed and the speed of light being constant and spooky action at a distance where information travels faster than the speed of light, and time being relative. There are more I don't need to mention. I think the biggest is the universe coming into existence from nothing. It was created from a universe which always existed in the base reality, this is how a universe can come from nothing and also because a universe which was created needs to have continuity I think. The parts are interconnected with time and space, so it has to be locked in on something. We know people have had brain injuries being able to understand languages, people who are human calculators, they see numbers in the same way. In a real universe, I call bs on the brain being able to work this way.
A psychic can know in his mind and people can observe his predictions, but the second he tries changing the universe, it cannot work unless the universe wants it to work. In Super Mario Brothers, some little monster mushroom, can't just decide to switch with Mario unless the game allows it. Only Mario can be Mario within that universe and he can't do what the game won't let him because he cannot change the game programming. The creator can give God powers or cheat codes.
You can debunk because you are able to debunk it. There can be 2 states, and you can see one or the other. Debunking is an option and the debunked requires self-correction. The universe would change to another if the universe decided to be bunked by you. You would declare you bunked it, and the the universe would comply with consistency. One movie I like is Stranger than Fiction, it deals with this issue with a meta aspect.Quote: redietzI suggest anyone who thinks this is remotely possible ("remotely" -- that's a joke, get it, as in "remote viewing?") read James Randi's FlimFlam and go from there.
Debunking paranormal is a hobby of mine, but I sure wouldn't waste time on a roulette dude. If anybody wants to bet him, dig up your own roulette wheel, make him a bet he can't do a couple standard deviations above chance, and have at it.
Now the problem (I'm a stickler for details) is whether the dude is displaying precognition or telekinesis. So you've gotta discern if he is picking the numbers well in advance without being on site with the wheel (precognition) or whether he is telekinetically affecting the spins while on site, or both. Now both would be tricky to test.
I'm sure the mods are impressed by my sophistication, eh?
Of course, you have to also make sure he isn't using telekinesis to affect the neurons in your brain to influence what you think that you see as opposed to the roulette ball itself. One would think affecting neurons would require less telekinetic brute force, but maybe it's so delicate, it's easier to affect the wheel.
I'm just getting started, but you get the picture, eh?
Good luck with that.
You can relive the same life exactly the same way if compelled, but you can have different thoughts every time as long as they have no influence. Maybe compulsions really are compulsions, the people literally cannot stop. A grain of sand on a beach, cannot control all the others, but it can in an hour glass.Quote: odiousgambitIf someone was to say he discounted completely the idea that there is a sixth sense or asserted that all psychics in the world were fake, I'd say that person has a closed mind.
If he said he needs convincing evidence is all, well, OK
If he* said the idea that a psychic could have a vision or something that emanated from an inanimate object like a roulette ball, that's a concept that is really out there ~ far enough out there to just dismiss and not legitimately be accused of having a closed mind. If the psychic could pick out a player who was on track to win, though still needing a lot of evidence at least we are no longer talking about inanimate objects.
*that would be me dismissing this btw
Quote: onenickelmiracleI'm just noticing this thread. I was originally going to respond to cool Ben Franklin (memory loss) about psychics.
I believe psychics can exist, but they can only have a material affect on the universe if the universe wants it to be.
I am firm I believe we in fact live in a simulated universe. There are so many reasons for it, but the biggest is how electrons behave when being observed and the speed of light being constant and spooky action at a distance where information travels faster than the speed of light, and time being relative. There are more I don't need to mention. I think the biggest is the universe coming into existence from nothing. It was created from a universe which always existed in the base reality, this is how a universe can come from nothing and also because a universe which was created needs to have continuity I think. The parts are interconnected with time and space, so it has to be locked in on something. We know people have had brain injuries being able to understand languages, people who are human calculators, they see numbers in the same way. In a real universe, I call bs on the brain being able to work this way.
A psychic can know in his mind and people can observe his predictions, but the second he tries changing the universe, it cannot work unless the universe wants it to work. In Super Mario Brothers, some little monster mushroom, can't just decide to switch with Mario unless the game allows it. Only Mario can be Mario within that universe and he can't do what the game won't let him because he cannot change the game programming. The creator can give God powers or cheat codes.
Thank you for reply. have look at the you tube /WO4XXgHu00c the play list, would you say person can "see" the future?
Quote: audionutCheck out the youtube video with the "mind psychic" Derren Brown... On live tv in england, he perfected a way to predict the number on a roulette wheel... when he finally tried it on live tv, he missed the pocket of his predicted number by just one pocket!! Kind of amazing..
link to original post
So a 1/12 event?
Quote: unJonQuote: audionutCheck out the youtube video with the "mind psychic" Derren Brown... On live tv in england, he perfected a way to predict the number on a roulette wheel... when he finally tried it on live tv, he missed the pocket of his predicted number by just one pocket!! Kind of amazing..
link to original post
So a 1/12 event?
link to original post
As I understand, most people predict incorrectly around 36/37 of the time.
Quote: audionutIf your predicting a number, there are 37 numbers on a European wheel. So it's 1/37.
link to original post
When I predict a number on a European wheel, it hits that number or within one slot of it 3/37 times, or about 1/12.
A lot of good and very important science is done by testing "the next decimal point," looking for smaller and smaller effects that demonstrate the existence of something you don't know about yet. The classic was the discovery of Pluto, after tiny discrepancies in the orbits of Uranus and Neptune were observed that couldn't be explained by anything else. Another one is the discrepancy from Keplerian orbit in the time it takes Mercury to transit the sun, as observed from the earth, which provides empirical support for General Relativity.
So I don't know if anyone has ever done an experiment that could show someone can predict a roulette result correctly 1 out of 36.999 times as opposed to 1 out of 37. The casino couldn't prove or disprove that with their data. An effect like that would be insignificant relative to the motivations of a roulette player or a casino. But if you could produce such a finding, with an experiment controlled tightly enough to prove something like that with statistical confidence, you would become a peer of Einstein in making one of the most important scientific discoveries ever- that parapsychology is real, that the human mind can either predict or control (because you haven't gotten to the part where you distinguish cause from effect yet!) future events.
If such an experiment hasn't been done, why not? A few reasons. Ethics might be the biggest one. In my former life as a lab monkey I knew that if there is even one person in the lab who is not you, there are ethical concerns, and there were a few things I did only late at night when I was the last one in the building. This experiment is going to take a lot of time out of an experimental participant's life, and that participant may have been attracted to the experiment because of a gambling addiction or a yet-unfounded belief in supernatural abilities that could be harmful to him or someone else in his life. Who am I do to that to him, and what makes my scientific curiosity more important than his personal well-being? Doing research like that also stigmatizes a physical scientist (it's fine for a psychologist, but he may not have the tools or background to properly design or execute the experiment) and someone might think I was scamming, promoting casino gaming or supernatural beliefs that are outside of the grasp of the scientific method. And there's the cost, as this would take a lot of money-time and the likely negative result would expose one to ridicule and being a fraud and an abuser of funding.
Finally there is the fear of a positive outcome. What would that mean to the world if I went out there and told everybody there are psychic effects that are available at a roulette wheel? Not enough to affect you or the casino financially, but enough to measure, which makes them real, and requires a rethinking of everything we know about the natural world. That's too big to just throw it out there and let it flop around on its own, that's something that would have to be done in a very thoughtful way.
-the prize is just bragging rights
-if the number hits [I"m referring in this case to D. Brown] hits, he's got great bragging rights
-if he misses, maybe that can be explained as 'pretty close'. Even if he misses by a mile, it's quickly forgotten.
-my conclusion, you should never agree to a single trial or a small number of trials.
Or take something that happened here, the Wizard got free-rolled in it. A member* claimed he could beat online roulette by exploiting patterns and it was set up so the Wizard could watch live. After a few trials there was no success at all and the member started slow rolling the process [anyway that's my impression] and the Wizard begged off due to boredom.
I say the Wizard gave him a freeroll. If he had "hit" then he'd have the bragging rights of a lifetime. He was failing miserably, that's my impression anyway, and he chose successfully in this case a way out. It is still an open matter, as far as proof, as to whether he can beat online roulette like he says. Some people may believe him. Freerolled!
* I'll decline to name him
