Manifestation works. I'm going to prove it scientifically.

[Endangered-EGO]

Okay. I've noticed a back and forth about manifestation, consciously creating reality and some people claiming it's possible or not. Either some of us can, or one of us can do it, or it's not possible for any of us.

I can quantify it and calculate the propability. I'm going to set up the experiment.

 

If enough people are willing to take part in the experiment, I'm going to make it, do the math, quantify it and calculate the probability of it being pure luck or manifestation.

We're going to play the lottery: here's the experiment:

I'm going to play  6 out of 49 numbers (once every week), post them here in the forum before the results come. Then, anyone who wants to manifest those numbers can try to.

[IF]; we get [AT LEAST] 2 or 3 numbers right. There is a 1% chance of it being luck and a 99% chance of it being manifeststion. (Just an example). Then we are going to play it next week again. If it works again, the probability will be multiplied if it's a win, or divided if it's a loss. So if it works again. It would be 1 in a 10 000 chance of ot being luck and 9 999 out of 10 000 chance of it being mafineststion.

 

If you believe you are able to manifest. It's quanitfiable, it's just a matter of how quantifiable it is and how practical.

 

Now I also know the common excuse. " The universe just wants to show you it's possible but doesn't want you (the ego) to profit from it.

Great. We're going to chose 2 sets of numbers of which only one is going to be played and the other set not.

 

If manifestation works. It doesn't matter if we get1, 2 or 3 numbers right every week, we could add up the probabilities until we get a 1 in a 3.5million chance of it happening, which is 5 sigma and will be written in the new physics books.

 

Every scientist, physician, mathematician can make that experiment. It's easy, it's quantifiable and it's going to show you the proof of it being true (or not)

 

"Oh it's just your ego". No it's not my ego. It's sharlatans ego's being delusional or making money from naive susceptible people.

 

"Don't waste your time on such nonsense". It's not nonsense. It might not be enlightenment, but it's an experiment that's worth it. If it's proven wrong, then nothing happens. Of it's proven right (5sigma), then consciousness directly influences and manifests reality, and it's the most important findinging in the whole history of science.

 

"Consciousness isn't quantifiable because it transcends the materialist paradigm".

I agree, however Siddhis and psychic powers don't. James randi gets a lot of criticism because he made the rules of chosing impossible probabilities limited in time. We're not going to do that. We're going to do that for one year straight if necessary and calculate the probability. It could be between 50% chance of manifestion being real up to 99.999999999% chance of it being real.

 

There might not be any proof, of it being possible or not, but at least we could say that f.e. "manifestation has an 80% chance of being true(if many people pray for some numbers to show up in the lottery)".

 

If you have any idea why it wouldn't work, we can ways redesign that experiment to include zour variable.

 

So if anyone wants to take part in the experiment I'm going to set it up and ask a mathematician friend to help me not make any mistakes with the probability part of it.

[Endangered-EGO]

@Moksha Something you could be interested in, because you already set up similar experiments with your students.

[Dazgwny]

I remember years ago I watched a show where the lottery numbers were predicted. It was a Derren Brown show. Used no form of manifestation or spirituality he doesn’t believe in any of that he thinks is bullshit. Can’t remember exactly how he done it but it seemed seriously impressive. Never ever did quite work out if it was a fiddle or not. No spirituality with his methods though and he openly admits that. He’s a master manipulator and he’s all about manipulating the mind, from a materialist perspective. Does some extraordinary feats by manipulation. The lottery was a little different though I think there was a lot of math used. As I say good few years ago now so can’t remember. But you should look it up and give it a watch

[Tim R]

Perfect example of confusing correlation with causation. Only because a result looks like what you expect it to look, that doesn't meant that the result is actually caused by some hypothetical explanation. If you want to be scientific, you must keep that in mind. We see what we want to see. 

So let's say you're right, and manifestation works - then in fact, you would be quantifying it. But if it doesn't work and the lottery and prediction results are aligning anyway, you will be quantifying probabilities and confuse it for manifestation. And you won't even know it because you are simply assuming that the results are that way because of the phenomenon of manifestation.

So unfortunately, your experiment will prove nothing, but go ahead - I will even take part in it because I find it admirable nonetheless and maybe we'll learn a thing or two. 

 

The work of a scientist is not to prove his theories, but to do everything he can do show that they are wrong. And let me tell you, only few scientists actually understand this. They have a theory about something and then create and collect data to find as much correlation as possible so that they can sell it as causation. And maybe it is! But maybe it's not and the way to find out is by trying to disprove your theory. 

Every scientist here will know exactly what I'm talking about because everyone of them will at some point have had results which look very much like what the theory predicted and so they think "well here's the proof!"

But it ain't necessarily so.

[herghly]

already been proven. Read dean radin's work

[Tim R]

@herghly Do you have any links or recommendations?

[herghly]

@Tim R Start with - Supernormal: Science, Yoga, and the Evidence for Extraordinary Psychic Abilities

There's also plenty of videos of him on youtube. It's not that there's no evidence for PSI, it's that people won't accept the evidence. 

[Endangered-EGO]

2 hours ago, Dazgwny said:

I remember years ago I watched a show where the lottery numbers were predicted. It was a Derren Brown show. Used no form of manifestation or spirituality he doesn’t believe in any of that he thinks is bullshit. Can’t remember exactly how he done it but it seemed seriously impressive. Never ever did quite work out if it was a fiddle or not. No spirituality with his methods though and he openly admits that. He’s a master manipulator and he’s all about manipulating the mind, from a materialist perspective. Does some extraordinary feats by manipulation. The lottery was a little different though I think there was a lot of math used. As I say good few years ago now so can’t remember. But you should look it up and give it a watch

If he didn't get the money, he didn't guess the numbers.

 

@Tim R If the experiment suggests that it's very unlikely for it to be chance, we can set up proper data collection. Double blind placebo study lol.

But it's not correlation if it works. Imagine winning the lottery jackpot 10 times in a row because we meditated on the numbers.

[Tim R]

7 minutes ago, Endangered-EGO said:

But it's not correlation if it works. 

But how would you know? 

For example: this week, I'll finish a scientific paper I've been working on for a while, it's on molecular plant physiology and a certain mechanism of a protein in these plants. I have a theory how it should affect the plant and lo' and behold, it turned out that the plants behaved as was predicted by the theory. 

But: I can't make any conclusive statements about the exact reason for the new plant behavior; all I can say is that there is definitely a correlation between this protein and the plant behavior, but maybe this correlation is because of something else which I haven't yet taken into account, you see? 

Quote

Imagine winning the lottery jackpot 10 times in a row because we meditated on the numbers.

As I said, if you set up this experiment, I will participate. 

Even if you did win 10 times in a row, you still can't say for sure that it's because you meditated on the numbers. 

"Coincidence is what you have left over when you apply a bad theory". (P. W. Bridgman)

Edited August 23, 2021 by Tim R

[Endangered-EGO]

1 hour ago, Tim R said:

But how would you know? 

For example: this week, I'll finish a scientific paper I've been working on for a while, it's on molecular plant physiology and a certain mechanism of a protein in these plants. I have a theory how it should affect the plant and lo' and behold, it turned out that the plants behaved as was predicted by the theory. 

But: I can't make any conclusive statements about the exact reason for the new plant behavior; all I can say is that there is definitely a correlation between this protein and the plant behavior, but maybe this correlation is because of something else which I haven't yet taken into account, you see? 

As I said, if you set up this experiment, I will participate. 

Even if you did win 10 times in a row, you still can't say for sure that it's because you meditated on the numbers. 

"Coincidence is what you have left over when you apply a bad theory". (P. W. Bridgman)

@Tim R You isolate the variables. and use a control group, but that would just be for later. I don't want to waste too much money  

I'm more doing statistics and probability with fewer variables. For your plants its very hard to first find the variables, and second isolate them.

And try not to have selection bias etc. 

You don't need to prove if meditation is the direct causation of having better results than chance. But what would be the underlying cause then? We would have to do more experiments and find the variables etc.

"you still can't say for sure that it's because you meditated on the numbers. "

Well you can be pretty fucking sure. The odds of winning 10 times in a row is 1 in 13.000.000^(10).
1 in 130000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Now you could say:" oh but maybe mother nature wanted you to win the lottery either way. That's why we would need to have a control case. Then a double blind etc etc. But in the beginning you just need probability, if it indicates that we win too much compared to chance (5percent) than we can proceed.

 

[Goldzilla]

?

[Nahm]

@Endangered-EGO

Like ‘yourself’, the “scientific proving” is already and also the manifestation. 

[Moksha]

Many experiments like this have already been conducted, and science has yet to reliably demonstrate the replicability of supernatural abilities in a controlled setting. The closest evidence I've seen are accounts of near death experiences, where the individual was able to provide information that wouldn't have been possible otherwise, for example:

However, even these accounts are case studies that only suggest the possibility of the supernatural, rather than proving it under controlled settings.

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Scientifically, it's impossible to prove something doesn't exist. You cannot accept the null hypothesis, you can only fail to reject it.

The problem is that science is testing phenomena which, if they do exist, are beyond the normal parameters of human existence. Who can say these phenomena follow the same rules? To the contrary, the closer we get to the extremes of the cosmos, at both the micro- and the macro-levels, the less reliable these rules become. As Einstein showed, at the extremes of relative reality, the rules of science break down. Reality becomes subjective, and is entirely dependent on the perceiver.

It's like a fish trying to prove there are no beings outside of the ocean, when the fish is bound to the ocean, and unable to see beyond it. Instead of chasing scientific proof, self-inquire. Consciousness, ultimately, can only be directly realized. Awakening is not a scientific exercise. It is direct Self-discovery.

[Tim R]

57 minutes ago, Endangered-EGO said:

"you still can't say for sure that it's because you meditated on the numbers. "

Well you can be pretty fucking sure. The odds of winning 10 times in a row is 1 in 13.000.000^(10).
1 in 130000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Of course you can be pretty fucking sure, I said that to make a point. Not to mention that this would be a one time event, which therefore doesn't allow you to make any statistical claims whatsoever about its cause . 

You and I know that winning the lottery 10 times in a row because you meditated on it is not going to happen, not in a million years, for the same reason that you can't know that it's not because you meditated on it. 

As I said, set up the experiment and see for yourself.

not to mention that if what you claimed were to be true, someone else would've probably figured it out long ago and manipulated all kind of shit. But it didn't happen. Because most of this "manifestation" business is utterly delusional, except for very few things like maybe the placebo effect, wehere in fact the mind can influence what goes on in the "physical" world. 

[Endangered-EGO]

@Nahm I have no problem with, god's will manifesting, or consciousness manifesting what it wants. So many people get deluded into the new age "wish your reality into existence".

@Moksha Best evidence I've fround was this study from Dean Radin:

 

 

<

@Tim R maybe tommorow.

[Nahm]

11 minutes ago, Endangered-EGO said:

god's will manifesting, or consciousness manifesting

Well if ya ever see either of those definitely take a picture. 

[Tim R]

1 hour ago, Endangered-EGO said:

So many people get deluded into the new age "wish your reality into existence".

@Endangered-EGO Then what are we talking about if not that? What is your understanding of manifestation? 

[Endangered-EGO]

@Tim R It's exactly that.

 

But we're going to measure it haha.

People get lost into that type of manifestation which comes with psychological issues.

[Tim R]

@Endangered-EGO Dude... then why not just use a number generator, you don't need to spend money - or wait, you secretly want to use us to win the lottery and become filthy rich... now I see what you up to??

[Endangered-EGO]

@Tim R I have made 3 test runs woth heads or tail.

I just missed a 95% of statistical importance.

 

I'm not gonna waste 1h of meditation for heads or tail. Where nobody can check the results for themselves.