ESP...can someone explain this?

[worm]

i'm pretty skeptical when it comes to the ESP and such, but there was something interesting i once saw on the discovery channel.

they had this research where they had someone sitting infront of a computer screen and hooked up to a device that records brain activity, especially the parts that deal with emotions. they showed the test subject a slide show of pictures. some pics were normal, nothing out of the ordinary...but some were pretty disturbing. now, the remarkable thing was that right BEFORE a disturbing picture was shown, the emotional sensation of the test subject would increase, indicating that the person sort of felt what was going to come, even though it was sub-conscious.

i don't have a lot of knowledge on neuroscience, so could someone explain how this is possible?

i've seen that show a long time ago, so i don't know if there were any inconsistencies in the testing procedure or the coclusion. like, it could be that the emotional reactions happened randomly and not before every single picture. but i don't really know.

so...anyone?

[DNAunion]

One would have to have more information on the exact setup used in the experiment.

As an example of how setup can make a huge difference ... I just watched something last night on the Science channel where a researcher from the Linus Pauling institute did an experiment that showed that taking a vitamin E capsule on an empty stomach did no good: vitamin E is a fat-soluble vitamin and without ingesting fat, the vitamin cannot be taken up and there was no elevation of vitamin in the blood. But another lab repeated the test and found exactly the opposite: that whether one took a vitamin E capsule on an empty stomach, with skim milk, or with whole milk, the same amount of vitamin E got absorbed in the blood. How can this be? A slight difference in the experimental setup. The first researcher used "lab-made" capsules that contained only vitamin E, whereas the second researcher used an off-the-shelf vitamin E product, which, already contained some fat.

The point here being that incorrect or conflicting results can be produced by what appear to be irrelevant details (lab-made vitamin E vs. store-bought vitamin E).

In the ESP experiment, was the movement from slide to slide done by a person or automated? If a person was doing it, it is possible that he/she knew what slides were coming up and subconsciously altered the timing of the slides, and the "ESPer" subconsciously learned the pattern and then responded subsconsciously to it.

[Viti]

It's possible that after a few slides, the brain began anticipating a pattern. Possibly the researchers simply threw out any incorrect "hits", where there was an anticipatory response to a normal picture. Unless we know how randomly the disturbing pictures were dispersed, how they controlled the experiement, etc. there is no way to draw any conclusions.

[worm]

It's possible that after a few slides, the brain began anticipating a pattern. Possibly the researchers simply threw out any incorrect "hits", where there was an anticipatory response to a normal picture. Unless we know how randomly the disturbing pictures were dispersed, how they controlled the experiement, etc. there is no way to draw any conclusions.

yeah. that's also what i was thinking.

well, as i remember the show wasn't wholly dedicated to ESP. it was something about time travel or something...and that bit came up. so i don't know any details.

[PoodleLovinPessimist]

This is why, when evaluating any experiment, the complete experimental protocol--and not just the conclusions--must be offered.

[whichphilosophy]

This is why, when evaluating any experiment, the complete experimental protocol--and not just the conclusions--must be offered.

This is correct.
At the same time ESP is one of the hardest things to prove even if the person feels they did perceive it. Personally I believe we all have perceptive abilities that can anticipate certain things by perceiving something already happening. Since this is only a personal perception then this is not expected to be believed by others of course.

[Ebonmuse]

like, it could be that the emotional reactions happened randomly and not before every single picture. but i don't really know.

Without knowing anything more about the protocol, that's what I would suggest. If I thought I might see a disturbing image next, I bet I would experience an instant of anxiety too. It could be that they're only telling you about the results where that anticipation happened to precede a disturbing picture rather than a calming one.

[DNAunion]

they had this research where they had someone sitting infront of a computer screen and hooked up to a device that records brain activity, especially the parts that deal with emotions. they showed the test subject a slide show of pictures. some pics were normal, nothing out of the ordinary...but some were pretty disturbing. now, the remarkable thing was that right BEFORE a disturbing picture was shown, the emotional sensation of the test subject would increase, indicating that the person sort of felt what was going to come, even though it was sub-conscious.

I and others already pointed out that without knowing the exact setup (experimental protocol) not much in the way of analyzing the experiment can be done.

But there's something else to consider, though it may not actually be relevant here. I many not have this exactly right, but ...

It has been found that peoples brains 'think' about an action about half a second before the people themselves become consciously aware that they thought about it: there's a half second lag between neural activity saying "move your thumb" and the corresponding conscious awareness by the person that he is going to move his thumb. So by the ESP researchers examining the brain functions directly (fMRI or PET maybe), the machines might actually be seeing the person's responses about half a second before the person himself knows about them.