Fruity

This week's abstract is in honor of the news of the closure of PEAR.

PEAR, or Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research operated for almost thirty years. PEAR's studies looked at the ability for human consciousness to interact with the physical world. In some cases they used machines that use various schemes to create random numbers. The researchers asked people to influence the outcome of binary events controlled by these random machines. Using statistics to analyze extremely large samples, they came up with some indications that the conscious intentions of their subjects could affect the physical world. There are a lot of objections to these experiments, both methodological and theoretical.
















The main objection to these experiments, beyond their methodology, is the idea that scientific research should build on what came before; new experiments and hypotheses should be formed in the context of current understandings. However, others argue that we don't have to accept the idea that these are paranormal phenomena, and the rejection of all evidence and study on these topics is based on certain beliefs that also cannot be proven.

An article in today's New York Times on Carl Sagan brings up some interesting points on the intersection of science and religion but somehow tows the line that investigation is more important than confirming our beliefs.

“It goes with a courageous intent to greet the universe as it really is, not to foist our emotional predispositions on it but to courageously accept what our explorations tell us.”