Presentiment The retro-causality debate

Experimental approachesAnd

Theory

Dick Bierman, University of AmsterdamTowards a science of Consciousness, Stockholm, May 3-7, 2011

Synopsis of this talk• The experimental precursor ‘Presentiment’

– Method & Results• Bems approach

– Method & Results, example retroactive facilitation of recall– Criticism

• Statistical• Ontological

• CIRTS– Consciousness Induced Restoration of Time Symmetry

• New experiments– Necker Cube: retroactive interference – Retroactive recognition

Bem, D. (2011). Feeling the future, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 407-425.

9 experiments suggesting retrocausal effects.

Presentiment

a feeling about an event in the

future …

Emotion Study (1999)Emotion Study (1999)

Ski

n Conductance

time

6850 msec150 msec

Globisch, J., Hamm, A.O., Estevez, F., and Ehman, A. (1999). Psychophysiology, 36, pp. 66-75.

Fixation stimulus

7 sec

anticipation

response

Published ResultsPublished Results

Baseline had been set at stimulus-onsetAll signals are clamped to 0 there.

Results re-analysis raw dataResults re-analysis raw data

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Samplenumber (0.1sec)

calmeroticanimals

STIMULUS

Animal FearStudyALL DATAPOOLED:N = 38

Baseline set at -7 seconds

Presentiment

• Anticipatory physiology triggered by ‘future’?• Simple stimulus response paradigm• Comparing physiology within subjects

between conditions

e.g. anticipation of picture, random emotional or neutral

Presentiment variables

• Dependent Variables– Skin Conductance – HR– EEG, CNV– BOLD– Blinks, pupil dilation, eye movement

• Independent Variables– Pictures, sounds, shocks, slotmachine

Presentiment Meta-analysis

• 37 studies, 15 different main authors• Mean effect size: 0.29• Combined p <10^-9• Filedrawer fail safe: 670• Gambler’s fallacy

• Mossbridge et al (2011). In press.

Bem’s approach

• Behavioral measures– No physiology because of global replication

• Reversed standard Psychological Paradigms– Manipulation after the measurement

• Decision making• Habituation• Affective Priming• Retroactive memory facilitation

To which category belongs

CarpenterCarpenter

3. Practice exercise

To which category belongs

…........................…........................

2.Surprise Free Recall

Procedure retroactive facilitation of recall

CarpenterCarpenter

1.Visualize words

Random subsample of words

Results Bem studies

• Hypothesis Retroactive Facilitation of Memory– Improved recall performance on words that got

later extra exercise.

• Results Retroactive Facilitation of Memory– (N=150) mean effect size: 0.30 (p<0.01)

• Results all 9 studies– All Bem studies mean effect size: 0.22 (p<10^-10)

Criticism

• Statistical– Using Bayesian stats the null hypothesis is still to

be preferred (Wagenmakers et al, 2011)…..– Over-analyses are not corrected for….– Combination of experimental results is not

allowed….

• Theoretical– Temporal Causality violation is not allowed……

CIRTS• Consciousness Induced Restoration of Time Symmetry

• Symmetries in physics

• In EM theory–Retarded and Advanced Solution– Initial & Boundary conditions

»Conscious information processing as boundary condition restores time symmetry

• Coherence to account for individual differences

CarpenterHammerTrousers

….

CarpenterHammerTrousers

….

4. Extra exercise

Learn these words

CarpenterCarpenter

Did you see this word before?

3. Recognition Test

..

2.Filler task

Procedure retroactive facilitation of recognition

CarpenterCarpenter

1. Attention task

Random subsample of words

Retro-recognition results

Necker Cube study:retroactive interference

The Necker Cube experiment

time

First button press

Top view is experienced

Secondbutton presswhen experience switches

Change randomly into opaque

Top or Bottom view

Top view duration

19

interference

Retroactive interference Results

(difference = 129, p<0.03)

Effectsize = 0.17

Followed by:

N=153

Results split for experiment

The paradoxes

• Formally RetroCausality equivalent with bw time travel.

• Formally Time Symmetry predicted• But ……. philosophical ‘grandfather like’

paradoxes– Synchronicity protection postulate (Hawkins)

• Never allow time travel near grandfather• Never allow psi to become useable.

Conclusion

• Retrocausality is physically not impossible – See also Helmut Schmidt in Foundations of Physics

• Empirical evidence needs independent replication.– But replication runs against the ‘Synchronicity

Protection’ • Experiments have to be set up to avoid

paradoxes (can’t use the information from the future)

Thanks

• The Amsterdam & Groningen Universities

• Bial Foundation

• Eva Lobach, Stephen Whitmarsh, Jacob Jolij, Victor Lamme and many students