Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
prometheuslocke

Mind Control. It's been here the whole time.

431 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Emma_Acid

If you actually enjoy reading about theoretical qm, this might be interesting also:

http://phys.org/news...erposition.html

Yep, I remember reading about that. Still not sure how it relates to mind control.

And if you really want to know, this *is* the reason for the disinformation campaign:

http://gajitz.com/qu...el-is-possible/

There is no disinformation campaign. And we've known that the concepts of both time and space break down at a quantum level for years, so what? This has nothing to do with things on the macro scale.

Edit - and you still haven't explained what any of this has to do with mind control. This is exactly what I meant when I said "appeal to quantum physics" as a logical fallacy. You're simply using scientific terms that most people don't understand and hoping it gives your idea credence. Which it doesn't, at all.

Edited by Emma_Acid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

Sure, I've heard of that thought experiment before. I'd love to know what your understanding of it is and how it relates to mind control.

So to me, that experiment, which has been shown in practice to disprove the no-communication theorum, at least brings us to the point where classical information can, sometimes be, transferred via entanglement solely.

When you "add in" results which have shown measurements can be taken without breaking superposition, i.e. without causing wave-function collapse, and experiments which have shown that large electron systems show charge teleportation (http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/7/1/172/), it should be clear that it is theoretically possible to entangle a diamondoid particle (for instance) to a structure within the neuron (this has been somewhat proven, also, though not specifically with a neuron). After that, changes in charge could be passively measured remotely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

Yep, I remember reading about that. Still not sure how it relates to mind control.

There is no disinformation campaign. And we've known that the concepts of both time and space break down at a quantum level for years, so what? This has nothing to do with things on the macro scale.

Edit - and you still haven't explained what any of this has to do with mind control. This is exactly what I meant when I said "appeal to quantum physics" as a logical fallacy. You're simply using scientific terms that most people don't understand and hoping it gives your idea credence. Which it doesn't, at all.

You have no way to know whether or not there is an actual disinformation campaign. I firmly believe I do, and there is. I have witnessed the use of technology which violates constraints of qm "known" in the public. I believe these constraints go back to Einstein and Kaluza, and what appears to me to be an intentional refutation of "very pretty math" on the part of an agent of the United States.

It is not uncommon for government agencies to be lightyears ahead of the public. If you recall, the NSA "discovered" public key cryptography decades before it was in use late in the 20th century. I think it would be much less common (and much less ethical) for them to actively be knowingly placing wrong information into the scientific community.... but it's exactly what it looks like to me.

QM has devolved from studying phenomenon like wave-function collapse, superposition, and entanglement into very public speculation into completely theoretical and fantastical ideas like the "multiverse" and the "holographic universe." That's all fine and dandy, but it's really not what QM is about.. at all. The public is being spoon fed fantasy in lieu of ... reality.

Edited by prometheuslocke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid

So to me, that experiment, which has been shown in practice to disprove the no-communication theorum, at least brings us to the point where classical information can, sometimes be, transferred via entanglement solely.

When you "add in" results which have shown measurements can be taken without breaking superposition, i.e. without causing wave-function collapse, and experiments which have shown that large electron systems show charge teleportation (http://iopscience.io...7-2630/7/1/172/), it should be clear that it is theoretically possible to entangle a diamondoid particle (for instance) to a structure within the neuron (this has been somewhat proven, also, though not specifically with a neuron). After that, changes in charge could be passively measured remotely.

Classical information cannot be communicated by entanglement, only quantum states. And this has never shown to be any other way. You can encode classical information in quantum states, in as much as the universe is classical information made up of quantum states, but this is very different.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid

You have no way to know whether or not there is an actual disinformation campaign. I firmly believe I do, and there is. I have witnessed the use of technology which violates constraints of qm "known" in the public. I believe these constraints go back to Einstein and Kaluza, and what appears to me to be an intentional refutation of "very pretty math" on the part of an agent of the United States.

It is not uncommon for government agencies to be lightyears ahead of the public. If you recall, the NSA "discovered" public key cryptography decades before it was in use late in the 20th century. I think it would be much less common (and much less ethical) for them to actively be knowingly placing wrong information into the scientific community.... but it's exactly what it looks like to me.

And I have no way of knowing there's no teapot on the far side of the moon, so what??

Simply saying "there could be a conspiracy, so I believe there is" isn't an answer. And do you want to elaborate on this amazing technology that would break the laws of physics as we know them?

Again - saying "the government did this, therefore they probably do that" is not a valid argument.

And you still - are several requests - demonstrated what any of this has to do with mind control. You're simply trying to baffle with science, drawing utterly misguided connections between various theories and models and hoping that people don't question it: "there is entanglement, you can send information with it, the government can't be trusted - therefore the government employ mind control via quantum entanglement".

If you know your physics you'll know this quote - "so wrong it's not even wrong".

Edited by Emma_Acid
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

Classical information cannot be communicated by entanglement, only quantum states. And this has never shown to be any other way. You can encode classical information in quantum states, in as much as the universe is classical information made up of quantum states, but this is very different.

You are mincing words. If you agree that you can encode classical information in a quantum state, and transfer that state, you have transferred classical information.

I think you need to re-read what I've written. I've given you a fairly concrete example of how it relates to mind control. To clarify further, remotely measuring the charge in an individual neuron is essentially mind reading. The reverse, is mind control.

Edited by prometheuslocke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid

You are mincing words. If you agree that you can encode classical information in a quantum state, and transfer that state, you have transferred classical information.

I think you need to re-read what I've written. I've given you a fairly concrete example of how it relates to mind control. To clarify further, remotely measuring the charge in an individual neuron is essentially mind reading. The reverse, is mind control.

No I'm not, you're just not getting it - you're confusing quantum states and classical information and assuming they're interchangeable - and I said you can encode classical information in quantum states - plural. Thats what the macroscopic world is.

And measuring the charge of an individual neuron is not mind reading, and the reverse doesn't even exist (pretending for a moment that you can actually "remotely measure the charge of a neuron", which doesn't even make any sense in this argument as neurons are macroscopic objects).

Edited by Emma_Acid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

No I'm not, you're just not getting it - you're confusing quantum states and classical information and assuming they're interchangeable - and I said you can encode classical information in quantum states - plural. Thats what the macroscopic world is.

And measuring the charge of an individual neuron is not mind reading, and the reverse doesn't even exist (pretending for a moment that you can actually "remotely measure the charge of a neuron", which doesn't even make any sense in this argument as neurons are macroscopic objects).

Everything you just said is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid

Everything you just said is wrong.

Oh, ok.

Edited by Emma_Acid
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quaentum

You have no way to know whether or not there is an actual disinformation campaign. I firmly believe I do, and there is. I have witnessed the use of technology which violates constraints of qm "known" in the public. I believe these constraints go back to Einstein and Kaluza, and what appears to me to be an intentional refutation of "very pretty math" on the part of an agent of the United States.

It is not uncommon for government agencies to be lightyears ahead of the public. If you recall, the NSA "discovered" public key cryptography decades before it was in use late in the 20th century. I think it would be much less common (and much less ethical) for them to actively be knowingly placing wrong information into the scientific community.... but it's exactly what it looks like to me.

QM has devolved from studying phenomenon like wave-function collapse, superposition, and entanglement into very public speculation into completely theoretical and fantastical ideas like the "multiverse" and the "holographic universe." That's all fine and dandy, but it's really not what QM is about.. at all. The public is being spoon fed fantasy in lieu of ... reality.

What we have here is a classic scenario on UM concerning some discovery of a fantastic nature and it always seems to follow a similar pattern.

The person making the claim is the only one can see the truth

Their perceived knowledge is always right and conventional knowledge is always wrong

Anyone who doesn't agree with the op and posts showing where the op is incorrect are labeled as clueless, not knowing what they are talking about, etc...

At some point the op inserts conspiracy as part of the theory.

In this case the conspiracy is disinformation. Of course if you have mind control and want to keep it secret you merely have certain words trigger an alarm and then those posts are checked out and if it has valid information they mind control the person to edit their post and then to forget what they know.

This brings up an interesting thought. :

prometheuslocke, If mind control does exist, how do you know you haven't been controlled to put out false information?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid
prometheuslocke, If mind control does exist, how do you know you haven't been controlled to put out false information?

But if thats true, then at least he is right - there is a conspiracy and mind control technology exists. And obviously being used to make sure that the conspiracy sounds as stoopid as possible, and therefore ridiculed by as many people as are willing to listen, leaving the aliens to get on with their nefarious plans...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

But if thats true, then at least he is right - there is a conspiracy and mind control technology exists. And obviously being used to make sure that the conspiracy sounds as stoopid as possible, and therefore ridiculed by as many people as are willing to listen, leaving the aliens to get on with their nefarious plans...

But if thats true, then at least he is right - there is a conspiracy and mind control technology exists. And obviously being used to make sure that the conspiracy sounds as stoopid as possible, and therefore ridiculed by as many people as are willing to listen, leaving the aliens to get on with their nefarious plans...

What we have here is a clear case of not attempting to argue, converse, or refute actual science. I've provided you with a series of actual studies, and ideas, that lead me to my conclusion. In lieu of actually reading them and attempting to understand, one person responds with the same statements theyve been saying all along (all of which have been refuted in the papers I am attempting to discuss.) The second has come along, and decided for the rest of humanity that nobody understands it, could possibly take part in a discussion about it, and I must be wrong.

I am the only one using evidence and explaining myself. The rest of you are stating your opinion as fact. Try explaining why you are so sure, I promise you, one day soon you will be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid

What we have here is a clear case of not attempting to argue, converse, or refute actual science.

Oh please. We've been arguing actual science for the last 2 pages, and you've shown that you don't really understand the workings, nor explained what it has to do with mind control. When I pulled you up on this, you simply stated "you are wrong". That was your argument.

Now who's not attempting to argue??

Explain how you can entangle particles at a distance and keep this entanglement steady.

Then explain how you entangle a neuron (which isn't a particle, or anywhere near particle-sized).

Then explain how classical information can be distributed by entanglement.

The explain how this can be considered "mind reading".

Then explain what "the reverse of this is mind control" even means.

Five points to answer.

And don't swerve the argument with "its probably a conspiracy and they probably have advanced technology etc etc" - that isn't an argument. And YOU explain, in your own words and understanding, how this works, how it goes back to ancient Egypt and what the hell it has to do with aliens. Because you said you have proof, but all I've seen it pseudoscience, misunderstandings, side steps and good old logical fallacies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

Oh please. We've been arguing actual science for the last 2 pages, and you've shown that you don't really understand the workings, nor explained what it has to do with mind control. When I pulled you up on this, you simply stated "you are wrong". That was your argument.

Now who's not attempting to argue??

Explain how you can entangle particles at a distance and keep this entanglement steady.

Then explain how you entangle a neuron (which isn't a particle, or anywhere near particle-sized).

Then explain how classical information can be distributed by entanglement.

The explain how this can be considered "mind reading".

Then explain what "the reverse of this is mind control" even means.

Five points to answer.

And don't swerve the argument with "its probably a conspiracy and they probably have advanced technology etc etc" - that isn't an argument. And YOU explain, in your own words and understanding, how this works, how it goes back to ancient Egypt and what the hell it has to do with aliens. Because you said you have proof, but all I've seen it pseudoscience, misunderstandings, side steps and good old logical fallacies.

Entanglement is not fragile. Read about sudden entanglement death, and you will see this. I cannot tell you how particles can be entangled at a distance, but the "normal" method usually discussed, splitting a photon beam and having a the two beams come in physical contact with the intended entanglement targets would theoretically work at a distance. Theoretically, if you were using something like a tachyon it could be a very far distance.

I mentioned structures within neurons, which could include anything from ions in the cytoplasm to complex proteins which are integral to the function of ion transporters, to DNA. However from our understanding of the way entanglement works, it is not outside the realm of possibility to believe an entire human cell could be entangled.

You've already conceded that classical information can be communicated with entanglement, whether or not you agree. Popper's experiment is essentially proof of as much, either way.

Assuming everything above, if you could remotely read charge in a sufficient number of neurons you can reconstruct thought patterns. There is significant research in neuroscience in literature showing that EEG and fMRI can be used to deconstruct action potential patterns and correlate those patterns to actual thoughts. http://www.cbsnews.c...tag=mncol;lst;2

http://www.telegraph...d-by-Intel.html

http://www.technolog...functional-mri/

As far as "the reverse," if we've already conceded that charge can be conferred from something within the neuron to a "diamondoid reading particle," then sending charge from the particle to the neuron is ... simply the function of entanglement.

Edited by prometheuslocke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

And don't swerve the argument with "its probably a conspiracy and they probably have advanced technology etc etc" - that isn't an argument. And YOU explain, in your own words and understanding, how this works, how it goes back to ancient Egypt and what the hell it has to do with aliens. Because you said you have proof, but all I've seen it pseudoscience, misunderstandings, side steps and good old logical fallacies.

This is anything but psuedoscience. I'd like to leave historical evidence to another thread, since we seem to almost have a discussion of science going. Needless to say, I believe there is evidence that our current understanding of both physics and neuroscience have been greatly sped up, by an outside force, since shortly after WW2.

Tell me, if there were a very old book that told you there was an unseen entity that could hear the thoughts of people, and answer the prayers, and a significant number of people took the stories in that book to be truth... would you feel strange if there were a scientific explanation for how such a thing could happen?

We have such a book, and it is riddled with evidence of the use of mind control technology. Prayer, divine inspiration, demonic possession, and hallucinations of burning bushes that do not char are all examples of things that could be done via direct neural stimulation.

Edited by prometheuslocke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emma_Acid

Entanglement is not fragile. Read about sudden entanglement death, and you will see this.

I have no idea what about Sudden Death makes you think that an entangled state is not fragile.

I cannot tell you how particles can be entangled at a distance

I know.

the "normal" method usually discussed, splitting a photon beam and having a the two beams come in physical contact with the intended entanglement targets would theoretically work at a distance. Theoretically, if you were using something like a tachyon it could be a very far distance.

Given that tachyons don't actually exist, that is very theoretical. But thats just you naming something scientific and hoping it sticks.

Edit - apparently tachyons are used in Babylon 5 for "communication over long distances".

That's Babylon 5, the TV series. The fictional TV series.

I mentioned structures within neurons, which could include anything from ions in the cytoplasm to complex proteins which are integral to the function of ion transporters, to DNA.

Again, you're just listing stuff. What does DNA have to do with it? Are you claiming they can entangle DNA, ions, or proteins?? And if so, so what???

You've already conceded that classical information can be communicated with entanglement, whether or not you agree. Popper's experiment is essentially proof of as much, either way.

Actually I didn't, and it isn't.

I said only quantum states are transmitted by entanglement, and classical information is consisted of many many quantum states, but these two things aren't interchangable. You can make a house out of bricks, but not a brick out of houses.

Assuming everything above

You can't, because it's wrong.

if you could remotely read charge in a sufficient number of neurons

You can't. "Reading the charge of neurons" doesn't mean anything, and has nothing to do with quantum states. You're just mixing stuff up again, and hoping something works. Sorry, its literally meaningless.

As far as "the reverse," if we've already conceded that charge can be conferred from something within the neuron to a "diamondoid reading particle," then sending charge from the particle to the neuron is ... simply the function of entanglement.

It isn't.

Edited by Emma_Acid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

I have no idea what about Sudden Death makes you think that an entangled state is not fragile.

I know.

Given that tachyons don't actually exist, that is very theoretical. But thats just you naming something scientific and hoping it sticks.

Again, you're just listing stuff. What does DNA have to do with it? Are you claiming they can entangle DNA, ions, or proteins?? And if so, so what???

Actually I didn't, and it isn't.

I said only quantum states are transmitted by entanglement, and classical information is consisted of many many quantum states, but these two things aren't interchangable. You can make a house out of bricks, but not a brick out of houses.

You can't, because it's wrong.

You can't. "Reading the charge of neurons" doesn't mean anything, and has nothing to do with quantum states. You're just mixing stuff up again, and hoping something works. Sorry, its literally meaningless.

It isn't.

You said nothing substantial. You have no argument. *Snip*

Edited by kmt_sesh
Refrain from telling other posters how to post. Either answer the challenges presented or do not reply at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

I have no idea what about Sudden Death makes you think that an entangled state is not fragile.

That's because you didn't read about it, at all.

I know.

*Snip*

Given that tachyons don't actually exist, that is very theoretical. But thats just you naming something scientific and hoping it sticks.

*Snip*

Again, you're just listing stuff. What does DNA have to do with it? Are you claiming they can entangle DNA, ions, or proteins?? And if so, so what???

I'm not claiming that, its documented science.

Actually I didn't, and it isn't.

I said only quantum states are transmitted by entanglement, and classical information is consisted of many many quantum states, but these two things aren't interchangable. You can make a house out of bricks, but not a brick out of houses.

You can't, because it's wrong.

You can't. "Reading the charge of neurons" doesn't mean anything, and has nothing to do with quantum states. You're just mixing stuff up again, and hoping something works. Sorry, its literally meaningless.

*Snip*

Edited by kmt_sesh
Either answer the challenges presented or do not reply at all. Refrain from ridiculing other posters as a means to sidetrack challenges to your opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quaentum

You said nothing substantial. You have no argument. Go away.

That's because you didn't read about it, at all.

You are an ignorant person.

Your opinion is meaningless.

I'm not claiming that, its documented science.

You do not understand how stupid you sound.

And so your rebuttal is reduced to abusive comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh

Note to all participating in this discussion:

I've been checking into this thread on occasion and am not pleased with the way it's depreciating. All posters are reminded to remain civil and to contribute worthwhile posts that add to and maintain the discussion. Refrain from ridiculing other posters.

If you disagree with another poster but cannot formulate a coherent and constructive response, it's best not to reply at all. Responding with inferences that the other poster is "ignorant" (or similar attacks) reflects badly on you, not the other.

Thank you.

kmt_sesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

Note to all participating in this discussion:

I've been checking into this thread on occasion and am not pleased with the way it's depreciating. All posters are reminded to remain civil and to contribute worthwhile posts that add to and maintain the discussion. Refrain from ridiculing other posters.

If you disagree with another poster but cannot formulate a coherent and constructive response, it's best not to reply at all. Responding with inferences that the other poster is "ignorant" (or similar attacks) reflects badly on you, not the other.

Thank you.

kmt_sesh

I was responding to rudeness. IMO it was "in kind."

When someone replies to a post carefully containing links and concepts which would clarify what we were arguing about by not reading them, responding rudely to the favor, and saying "just listing stuff" it doesn't leave a warm fuzzy feeling for someone who is genuinely trying to explain a concept to someone.

Further, my second point was deconstructed in thirds, the first reply flat out rude, the second which completely explained what she was looking for was completely ignored in her reply (I guess it didn't gel well with her attempt to pretend there was nothing substantial offered), and the third boiled down to calling actual theoretical physics nothing more than science fiction.

Essentially, the reply ignored every single thing Emma thought had value, and tore into every other line, ignoring context and the general message. That's not how you have a conversation, it's how you attempt to hide the truth.

By the way, a tachyon is a real theoretical particle with imaginary mass. That doesn't mean they don't exist, it means its theoretical. Not long ago, quarks were in the same category. Good luck learning in the future.

Also, charge is a quantum property, whose state can be modified via entanglement.

Edited by prometheuslocke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

And I forgot.... When did the quantum entanglement mind control start? Was it even before QM was thought up?

And if this is all Xeno-Tech, where is the proof of the aliens? Invention of technology is not proof of aliens. Even if it does advance rapidly. All that is proof of is individual Genuis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

And I forgot.... When did the quantum entanglement mind control start? Was it even before QM was thought up?

And if this is all Xeno-Tech, where is the proof of the aliens? Invention of technology is not proof of aliens. Even if it does advance rapidly. All that is proof of is individual Genuis.

I think you answered your own question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

I think you answered your own question.

People trying to be Clever usually don't really know what they are talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prometheuslocke

People trying to be Clever usually don't really know what they are talking about.

So, the answer: Since it's been around since before we knew about quantum mechanics, it must have come from somewhere else. I don't personally believe in demons, or that humans would time travel to the past to do this to ourselves.. so, I'm left with an alien force.

For a quick read on some of my reasons that it's really, really old:

The Dendera Light: http://unduecoercion...a-light_24.html

Hitler/Paperclip/MK-Ultra: http://unduecoercion...idden-hand.html

1984, Brave New World: http://unduecoercion...s-security.html

Religion, in general: http://unduecoercion...-and-devil.html

Edited by prometheuslocke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.