• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

"Connected Consciousness" detected on global scale

Migrated topic.
Bancopuma

Bancopuma

Esteemed member
Senior Member
Senior member
Article discusses the Global Consciousness Project (GCP), which got its start at Princeton University in 1998.

"We can conclude," says Nelson, "that there really are effects of consciousness in the world, unexpected correlations in our network of random devices. Something is going on, and the most likely conclusion is that there is an interconnection of consciousness at deeply hidden levels between people and among people across the globe."

"Odds against chance ranging from 20-to-one to 100-to-one are commonly considered sufficient. The certainty level is set unusually high for the Higgs Boson; data for validating its existence are considered acceptable if they exceed one in 3.5 million. The GCP level of statistical certainty is now more than 285,000 times greater than that."

Signs of "Connected Consciousness" Detected on Global Scale

wfs.org - This website is for sale! - wfs Resources and Information.

This website is for sale! wfs.org is your first and best source for all of the information you’re looking for. From general topics to more of what you would expect to find here, wfs.org has it all. We hope you find what you are searching for!
www.wfs.org www.wfs.org

Any thoughts?
 
Can't take a look just yet. But after years of documenting countless telepathy/precognitive/synchronicity/etc. experiences, reading others experiences, and exploring the studies in this area, it wouldn't come as a surprise. Harmalas in particular seem to tune one into a kind of field where experiencing others lives can often be common place. I've long suspected that consciousness and the imagination in particular is non-local in some way, because nothing about this seems to make sense otherwise
 
Interesting to hear from this side of the fence Mr Infundibulum! Who ever knew spending on science and technology was so closely linked to deaths involving suffocation in some way!?

But, given the nature of their data and how they collect it, what IS going on here??

"The detection system is a global network of random number generators (RNGs) based on quantum tunneling. Up to 70 are active at any one time. Each RNG outputs a continuous stream of completely unpredictable zeroes and ones. The stream ordinarily averages out at 50% ones and 50% zeros, just as flipping coins tends to produce roughly equal heads and tails over time. The RNG data are transmitted to a central archive for later analysis."

So, in this context, may not as easy to make a hypothetical link between spurious, unexpected correlations, as given chance alone, these RNG outputs should produce roughly equal proportions of one's and zero's, correct? I'm NOT saying this has to be down to the effects of remote consciousness, just that it is a little different to two unrelated streams of continuous or discrete data, whereas in this case the data is binary and is *expected* to be 50/50 overall.
 
I got the impression that their data are continuous; i.e. the absolute difference in the number of the randomly generated "0"s and "1"s plotted over time; when the difference shifts away from the average of net 0, then this produces a peak (above the background) and then the researchers can check if this has correlated to any global events.

According to their web report, not all global events have corresponded to the spike, which kind-of compromises their conclusion
It doesn't happen every time, but often enough and strongly enough to produce compelling statistics.
Click to expand...

It would be particularly interesting to see not if the are getting global events but not a corresponding spike, but rather the opposite, i.e. if they are getting spikes without obvious global events. I would also love to find out the statistics they used; could it be some sort of chi-square?
 
Ah good point. Well correlation does not infer causality, but it does seem that *something* is going on here that something is a little strange and pretty intriguing. Quite what that something is though does not seem clear. But yeah it would be good to hear more about how they analyzed their data before making these deductions.
 
Back
Top Bottom