|
My concern is mostly just that people don't walk away misunderstanding EPR, I'm not actually that worried about telekinesis. I don't think version 2 is really all that tenable, or at least it has to have the strong caveat that particles can only communicate their state collapses to each other. No info can be sent by EPR, and I would hate to have people think that it could just because the couldn't find the knife between truth and pseudoscience. ...And actually, I'd like to call numerous studies into question, too. |
|
It would make me happy to see some of this edited and place on the main page. I personally don't think that skepticism about telekinesis requires us to debate very much -- we can simply explain the scientific consensus and indicate exactly what LDC indicated above -- that just because some explanation uses scientific jargon that most people don't understand, doesn't mean that it is correct or even plausible. |
|
It would make me happy to see some of this edited and place on the main page. I personally don't think that skepticism about telekinesis requires us to debate very much -- we can simply explain the scientific consensus and indicate exactly what LDC indicated above -- that just because some explanation uses scientific jargon that most people don't understand, doesn't mean that it is correct or even plausible. |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)