Discussions about Psychics and Psychic Phenomena, Extra Sensory Perception, Telepathy, Psi, Clairvoyancy, 6th Sense, Psychokinesis, etc.
[quote="G. ADAM"]Great! While we kill 24 hours, I just finished programming a website that does the batch protocol!
Only difference is the 4 words are entered up front. I got 2/4 first go, but going to do a proper set tomorrow.[/url]
Let us know the results. I'd be interested to know how many times you get 0/4, 1/4, 2/4, 4/4. Why don't you do 50 trials and give us the results?
Why Max 20? You're a maths guy. You know you need a decent sample to rule out simple variance. You know that by jumping from protocol to protocol you will inevitably get a small sample of between 5 and 20 that produces a decent hit rate. The only way to see if something is really going on is to keep on going until you have a sufficiently large sample. I'm not a maths guy so I don't know exactly how big it has to be, but its going to have to be larger than 20!
With your program you would be able to shoot out 50 trials in a pretty short period of time. It's still a relatively small sample, but it should at least start showing some trends.
Nobody will take my word for it for one! It's just to find a protocol worth testing by others.
80 words will take about 2 hours already.
At 50% guesses correct, 40/80 it's about 16,000:1 ODDS.
I applied a compensation factor to the binomial, this should be reasonably accurate in the 50% hit rate range, since replacement drops the odds from 25% to 29% in one batch, (>=2 right).
I.e WITH replacement, each word is P=0.25.
ODDS broken are 1/X the last row
Actually it's 0.26. Very close to 0.29 without replacement.
So 20 batches of 4 words without replacement
40 hits is close to 20,000:1 ODDS!
OK, see if I can get the screen recorder working...
I'm not an expert, but it still seems to me that your math is all mixed up on the ordering protocol. You will guess 2/4 25% of the time at chance.
Anyhow, doesn't really matter, we can look at the stats once you've done the trials. If you're getting 2/4 every time over a proper sample, than certainly something interesting will be going on. Course we haven't seen anything like that so far from you. But I'll await the results eagerly.
Doesn't matter if people trust you. Your own trials are preliminary anyway, as you've said, if it looks like something interesting is going on we'll have to do it more controlled. So there really is no benefit for you cheating other than to waste people's time. But we'll be able to see pretty quickly doing the more controlled test what's up. If your private results differ from the controlled results, which do you think people will believe?
So do your trials, and let us know. But please break it down by how many you get of 0/4, 1/4, 2/4 and 4/4
Let me know which line you first disagree with.
1 there's 6 ways to score 2/4
2 there's also 1 way to score 4/4
3 the probability of scoring 2 or higher is 7/24. 29.17%
4 with replacement, each word guess is 0.25 chance of a hit
5 by the binomial chart above, the probability of scoring 2 or higher with replacement is 26.17%
6 so, if your score is close to 50%, the difference between a replacement and a no replacement test is 3.00%
7 so all you have to do for a good approximation in the 50% range, is adjust the TotalHits/TotalGuesses binomial calculation - probability for a single hit by 29.17/26.17.
Say I get 35/80.
Trials = 80
Successes = 35
P(success for single guess) = 0.25 * 29.17 / 26.17 = 0.279
I used 0.29 but it's actually very, very close to the basic binomial odds with replacement, 28% Vs 25% for each hit.
This only works in the 40% to 60% hit ratio range.
Personally I don't see the difference between 10,000:1 or 1,000,000:1, and neither will Randi.
Did a couple batches with the screen recorder on, will do a bigger run tonight.
Like I've said, I'm a bit out of my league in the particulars of the stats. It doesn't matter at this stage though. What I suggest is we run the trials but making sure its always for a set amount (whether its 10 or 50, we shouldn't be stopping at a pre-arranged number. We can then analyse the results statistically afterwards.
Well in that case I should state I'm just going to start with however many batches I fit into 10 minutes so I can upload to youtube.
Proof of concept more than big odds. You have to assume I didn't take 100 takes.
You can still terminate a test at whim, but the unkown endpoint skews the stats slightly.
Minor hiccup with the screen capture
Will have some data tomorrow! Youtube vid. of me using paranormaltest.com if it works!
I got 0/4 0/4 but I see some promise!
haha! I'm just making a small change, the first batch when I typed in the 4 random words then did the test I seemed to get some matches / but STILL in the wrong order.
Then I moved onto the second batch "Here's one I prepared earlier".
The channels were too weak so I aborted, then when I had a second look a couple weak channels lined up, "he asked him" <-> "professor".
So I set up 5 batches and waited 2 days... and accidently closed Explorer Window!
Then the screen capture was crippleware when I tested it out, ...
It's my 40th tomorrow so I'll rearrange paranormaltest.com so the SUBMIT WORDS button is under the 4 words so I can do the test without seeing them.
Anyway, I figured out how to get it working.
I did the 1Q at a time batch test with BruceS and AB.
I did GREAT with BruceS, 11 questions, 4 guesses per question, expected was 4/11 and I got 7/11.
I could have done 9/11 too, but let's not go there.
Then with AB we went online at a set time, same test but the channels were randomized and not lined up.
SO, after 2 months I finally figured it out!
You have to
1/ Do 1 question per day. (BruceS took a week to get all 11 done)
2/ Guess all 'words' from all options after that.
That will work I'm sure of it! It fits all the experiments so far.
Anyway, I'll be back in a few days, then we should do the 5 day test. W1, W2, W3, W4, ABCD
Here's the successful test with BruceS, it's just me posting using his alias, the real test in on google groups.
http://hercshome.com/paranormaltest-com ... um.php?f=8
Just substitute QUESTION with WORD, and 4 guesses from 11 options.
Not sure I followed most of that, but Happy Birthday!
Keep us posted! But it still seems to me that you're stopping and starting until you get a good run. You know that will be inevitable, mathematically, the key will be in replication. I still don't get it G. In 10 years of trying to prove this stuff, why are you still tinkering with different methodologies. Don't you have a protocol by now that works consistently? If not, then why do you think you have an ability? Serious question, I'm not trying to bust your balls.
Thanks! going to be a quiet one I stocked up at the grocery store today!
I only found out about the page number system last year.
I need the *BLIND ANSWER* component to make it objective.
No skeptics will do the quiz part independantly, as seeing correlations between independatn subjective Qs and As is considered being unwell, what did you call it?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest