Air Force report calls for $7.5M to study psychic teleportation
http://news.yahoo.com/news/
by Dan Vergano -- Star Trek fans may be happy to hear that the Air Force
has paid to study psychic teleportation. But scientists aren't so
thrilled.
The Air Force Research Lab's August "Teleportation Physics Report,"
posted earlier this week on the Federation of American Scientists (FAS)
Web site, struck a raw nerve with physicists and critics of wasteful
military spending.
In the report, author Eric Davis says psychic teleportation, moving
yourself from location to location through mind powers, is "quite real
and can be controlled." The 88-page report also reviews a range of
teleportation concepts and experiments:
• Quantum teleportation, a technique demonstrated in the last decade
that shifts the characteristics, but not the location, of sub-atomic
particles at great distances.
• Wormholes, a highly theoretical possibility whereby the intense
gravitational field near black holes could rip open entrances to distant
locales.
• Psychokinesis, or psychic teleportation. In support of the idea, the
report cites UFO reports, Soviet and Chinese studies of psychics and
U.S. military studies of spoon-bending phenomena.
"It is in large part crackpot physics," says physicist Lawrence Krauss
of Case Western Reserve University, author of "The Physics of Star
Trek", a book detailing the physical limits that prevent teleportation.
He describes the Air Force report as "some things adapted from
reasonable theoretical studies, and other things from nonsensical ones."
Some experts have long criticized what they see as a military sweet
tooth for junk science. A "remote viewing" project, for example,
undertaken by defense intelligence services and declassified in 1994,
sought to see whether psychic powers could be employed to spy on the
Soviet Union. The teleportation report "raises questions of scientific
quality control at the Air Force," the FAS' Steven Aftergood says.
Davis, a physicist with Warp Drive Metrics of Las Vegas, couldn't be
reached for comment. The Air Force paid $25,000 for the report, part of
a $20.5 million advanced rocket and missile design contract. The report
calls for $7.5 million to conduct psychic teleportation experiments.
"The views expressed in the report are those of the author and do not
necessarily reflect the official policy of the Air Force, the Department
of Defense or the U.S. Government," says an Air Force Research Lab
(AFRL) statement sent to USA TODAY. "There are no plans by the AFRL
Propulsion Directorate for additional funding on this contract."
Explaining why the lab sponsored the study, AFRL spokesman Ranney Adams
said, "If we don't turn over stones, we don't know if we have missed
something."
Philosophers.
Dean, to the physics department.
"Why do I always have to give you guys so
much money, for laboratories and expensive equipment and stuff. Why
couldn't you be like the math department - all they need is money for
pencils, paper and waste-paper baskets. Or even better, like the
philosophy department. All they need are pencils and paper.".......what
no baskets........
The
First Law of Philosophy: For every philosopher, there exists an equal
and opposite philosopher. The Second Law of Philosophy:
They're both wrong.
Descartes is sitting in a bar, having a drink. The
bartender asks him if he would like another. "I think not," he says and
vanishes in a puff of logic.
What is Mind? No Matter.
What is Body? Never Mind.
The French existentialist Jean-Paul
Sartre was sitting in a cafe when a waitress approached him: "Can I get
you something to drink, Monsieur Sartre?"
Sartre replied, "Yes, I'd like a cup of coffee with sugar, but no
cream".
Nodding agreement, the waitress walked off to fill the order and Sartre
returned to working. A few minutes later, however, the waitress returned
and said, "I'm sorry, Monsieur Sartre, we are all out of cream -- how
about with no milk?"
A boy is about to go on his first date,
and is nervous about what to talk about. He asks his father for advice.
The father replies: "My son, there are three subjects that always work.
These are food, family, and philosophy."
The boy picks up his date and they go to a soda fountain. Ice cream
sodas in front of them, they stare at each other for a long time, as the
boy's nervousness builds. He remembers his father's advice, and chooses
the first topic. He asks the girl: "Do you like potato pancakes?" She
says "No," and the silence returns.
After a few more uncomfortable minutes, the boy thinks of his father's
suggestion and turns to the second item on the list. He asks, "Do you
have a brother?" Again, the girl says "No" and there is silence once
again.
The boy then plays his last card. He thinks of his father's advice and
asks the girl the following question: "If you had a brother, would he
like potato pancakes?"
I passed my ethics exam. Of course
I've cheated. Philosophy is a game with objectives and no rules.
Mathematics is a game with rules and no objectives. Theology is a game
whose object is to bring rules into the subjective.
A renowned philosopher was held in high regard
by his driver, who listened in awe at every speech while his boss would
easily answer questions about morality and ethics.
One more final exam:
Q: Is this a question?
A: If this is an answer!
A philosopher went into a closet for ten years to
contemplate the
question, What is life? When he came out, he went into the street and
met an old colleague, who asked him where in heaven's name he had been
all those years.
"In a closet," he repied. "I wanted to know what life really is." "And
have you found an answer?"
"Yes," he replied. "I think it can best be expressed by saying that life
is like a bridge."
"That's all well and good," replied the colleage, "but can you be a
little more explicit? Can you tell me how life is like a bridge?" "Oh,"
replied the philosopher after some thought, "maybe you're right; perhaps
life is not like a bridge."
Raymod Smullyan, "5000 B.C."
Two freshman philosophy students see
the following bulletin posted on the wall of their lecture hall:
Crash Course in Logical Assumptions All Day
Neither of them knows what it means and they are both curious. The pair
decide to find the professor and ask some questions. When they locate
the professor's office, the bolder of the two enter the building while
the other remains outside.
Student: "Uh...Sir..What does Crash Course in Logical Assumptions mean?"
Professor: "Well, it involves taking information that you have, forming
assumptions using logic, and then creating new information. Let me try
to answer your question by asking you a question. Do you own a car?"
Student: "Uh...Yes, I do." Professor: "Well, then I can now logically
assume that you drive." Student: "Yes, I drive. " Professor: "Then I can
logically assume that you drive on weekends." Student: "Yeah, I drive on
weekends, I go out on dates." Professor: "Then I can logically assume
that you have date partners." Student: "Well, yes, I have a girlfriend."
Professor: "Then I can logically assume that you are heterosexual."
Student: "Uh...hell yes! OK, I think I understand what this course is
about now. Thanks a lot for your time."
Once back outside, his friend asks him: "So, what's it all about?" "Its
about using information and stuff...Let me answer your question by
asking you a question. Do you own a car?" "No."
"Uh...Then you're homosexual, dude!"
Don't LOOK at anything in a physics lab. Don't TASTE anything in a
chemistry lab. Don't SMELL anything in a biology lab.
Don't TOUCH anything in a medical lab.
and, most importantly,
Don't LISTEN to anything in a philosophy department. The
point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as
to seem not worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that
no one will believe it.
Graduate student lends his advisor a book
on tensed logic by Arthur
N. Prior. Advisor reads it, then tells his student that he dropped it
off in the student's mail box. Moments later the student returns, and
breathlessly exclaims: "Professor, professor. Someone's stolen my
Prior."
To which the professor sagely replies: "You're lucky around this
department they haven't stolen your posterior."
How philosophers do it...
Philosophers do it deeper.
Philosophers do it a posteriori.
Philosophers do it consistently.
Philosophers do it conceptually.
Philosophers do it for pure reasons.
Philosophers do it with their minds.
Philosophers think about doing it.
Philosophers wonder why they did it.
How many philosophers does it take to change a light bulb? "Hmmm... well
there's an interesting question isn't it?" "Define 'light bulb'..."
"How can you be sure it needs changing?" Three. One to change it
and two to stand around arguing over whether or
not the light bulb exists.
How many Hegelians does it take to change a light bulb? Two, of course.
One stands at one end of the room and argues that it
isn't dark; the other stands at the other end and says that true light
is impossible. This dialectic creates a synthesis which does the job.
How many Zen masters does it take to change a light bulb?
Two. One to change it, and one not to change it. Three. One to
change it, one not to change it, and one both to change
it and not to change it.
How many existentialists does it take to change a light bulb? Two. One
to change the lightbulb and one to observe how the lightbulb
symbolizes an incandescent beacon of subjectivity in a netherworld of
Cosmic Nothingness.
How many Kuhnian constructionist philosophers of science does it take to
change a light bulb?
You're still thinking in terms of 'incremental change'--what we
really need is paradigm shift...we don't need a bulb with more
attributes added on, we need ubiquitous luminescence.
How many Marxists does it take to change a light bulb? None. Every light
bulb contains the seeds of its own revolution.
