An experiment involving a random event generator and some chicks seem to add to the proof that intense focus (like that used the the Law of Attraction) has an impact on physical reality.
Scientists designed a random event generator (REG) on wheels that rolled randomly either to the left or to the right. It's basically the techological equivalent of a coin toss - about 50% of the time it went left, the other half right.
They disguised this machine as a mother hen and "imprinted" it on some baby chicks so they thought it was their mother. Then the scientists set it up to roll toward and away from them. The machine's inner sensors recorded the number of times it went in each direction.
The experimenters found that the machine defied probablity, rolling toward the chicks far more often than rolling away. Possible explanation: the "intent" or desire of the chicks affected the machine. This was repeated over 80 times by scientists around the world using different chicks.
2007-03-25
11:01:57
·
6 answers
·
asked by
Huddy
6
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
All the proper controls and such were used - this was done by real scientists, and their results were peer-reviewed and verfied by their colleagues.
What implications does this have in regards to the uses of the Law of Attraction for human beings? If a freshly-hatched chicken's "thoughts" can affect a machine, how much stronger might our thoughts be?
I invite comments and even criticism, just don't be a wiseass.
2007-03-25
11:04:05 ·
update #1
Icarus: I know it sounds like nonsense, especially to people who think they have a good understanding of science. But what it sounds like is irrelevant. It's true, and it seems to me we ought to think about the implications.
2007-03-25
11:08:19 ·
update #2
Smarty Pants: It's not a question of buying it or not buying it, though. It DID happen, and there's no other explanation. It would be as if you tossed a coin 100 times and it turned up heads 90 times. You'd know something was up. You might not know WHAT, but you wouldn't just say "I don't buy it."
2007-03-25
11:10:30 ·
update #3