"scientific impossibles" looking at them rationally

I will here give a rough outline for you ILP initiates - the rest of the world will have to wait for the actual study.

From experience I have gathered that, some “scientific impossibles” are in real life consistently operative. For the sake of simplicity I will here restrict myself to two well known and widely rejected things which I have already discussed on this board before: telepathy astrology.

What I aim to do is to show why these phenomena do not contradict our present science, nor are they unlikely from where we stand.

I say this standing ob the ground of this neurological knowledge: thought/consciousness relies on electrical circuitry. From readers who have neurological knowledge I ask special attention and criticism.

We know that electricity is not bound to organic matter, we even know that it is very difficult to bind it at all - we need heavy metals to isolate electricity.

The human skull does not contain a layer of heavy metal.

Furthermore, the currents in the brain are very weak, compared to the currents we use in appliances. I think that this means that they are relatively easily influenced by other currents. Please correct me wherever I am wrong.

We are certain that the brain produces the charges and discharges that we are able to parallelize with certain thought processes, such as decision making, and memory referencing. We know that such thought is comparable to brain activity.

There are a few unknowns as well. The main one of these is the translation process between the objective electrochemical and the subjective awareness.

Aldous Huxley proposed that the brain is not a constructor but a sieve or filter.
I propose that the brain is a constructor and a filter. I think that it not only interprets the body, but also the currents outside of it. I am even quite certain of this, but I have no formal proof.

In order to attain formal proof I attempt hereby to set some parameters. As the medium by which telepathy and solar, lunar and planetary influences are effected, I propose the same medium by which thought is effected in the brain: electrical force.

Brain-electricity has been thought of (also by me) as weak, but it appears that it is in fact very strong ----

“Using newly developed voltage-sensitive nanoparticles, researchers have found that the previously unknown electric fields inside of cells are as strong, or stronger, as those produced in lightning bolts. Previously, it has only been possible to measure electric fields across cell membranes, not within the main bulk of cells, so scientists didn’t even know cells had an interna electric field.” - source
—and that cells have internal electrical fields.
This strongly supports the idea that, since the head is not lead-lined, powerful electrical contact with the outside world is possible. Be this to the magnetic fields of other brains or of other planets.

Okay, you have a theory. Now design an experiment and test it. Gather some supporting evidence.

Experiments have already been done on telepathy and there is very little evidence to support it.

In this thread, I have proposed the following experiment. I am looking for participants…

So far I have guessed only one out of one.

I thought the OP was mainly about telepathy. Telepathy is fairly easy to test using existing scientific methods.
Tests of astrology are more difficult because the movements of numerous stars and planets cannot be controlled.

To my understanding of both they are the same.

We are communicated to ‘telepathically’ by the planets. By the same means as we super/sub-consciously communicate with each other or with animals or trees. (Unless of course we ‘master the art’ and do it consciously)

The planets exert a type of energy that reaches us in different angles as we seprate from the mother at birth.

Astrology is very well testable by interpretations of natal chart. Various people have confirmed that my experiment has scientific validity.

Person to person telepathy is easiest to test. Subject A:He is thinking of a pony. Subject B: I am thinking of a pony. Scientist C: Subjects agree.
How do we know what messages tree, animals or planets are sending out? They can’t tell us.

I saw your post in Rant. Your interpretation appears to be too vague to be scientifically valid. Precision matters.

This makes no sense to formulate it in terms of “pony” if you havent established that telepathy occurs by means of such simple conceptual terms.
Im pretty sure that it doesnt if my experience is anything to go by. I dont even believe thought really works like that, only language.

You did not see the guessing experiment, I would conclude from this reply.

Telepathy is some kind of sharing of thoughts or sending of thoughts to another person. The way to test it is for one person to think of a word, image, or idea and another person to pick it up. Do you think it is something else?

I guess not. I skimmed the thread. Someone submitted 3 dates and you picked the correct date and described his personality. I read that section thoroughly. Is there a link to some experimental result?

No offense, but I think you may have a simplistic and limited conception of what constitutes thought.
Or perhaps you teally think in separate words and neatly outlined images. I don’t, many people think more abstractly.

No, that is the experiment. Do you have a scientific objection to it?

If I would guess enough charts with a good enough success ratio, that would amount in proof.

Really, we do not think in terms of “cat” or “dog”.
To define thought as such and to conduct experiments to telepathy in this way is nonsense.

We think in terms of experience, meanings and feelings (telepathy)
for example, we may much easier communicate something like “I miss my cat” than “cat”.

“cat” is not really a thought, is it?

Okay so one person has a ‘feeling of missing a cat’ and another person picks up that ‘feeling’. Have there been any experiments which demonstrate this kind of telepathic communication?

Is there some data available showing the success of matching birthdates to personality?

My point was that such experiments have NOT been conducted, because the terms have not been understood. That was the outline of the OP. Was that not clear?

This is the type of experiment I am setting up.
I have had only one volunteer so far.