Conference hydra::dejavu

    
    
         I've read of various people who have telekinetic power. The
    one who stands out the most in my mind is this young martial arts
    student. He was a "troubled youth" for many years, constantly on
    the wrong side of the law and hyperactive, as such kids often are.
    Anyway, he was introduced to this martial arts master from the far
    east (I forget which country), and the master decided to take him
    as a student. Well, the youth excelled in no time at all and his
    master recognized the incredible power of his mind. He had developed
    the ability to move small objects by simply focusing his energy
    on them. 
         I had read about this years ago, but it has stood out in my
    mind ever since. I think essentially that we all have, in various
    degrees, potential to become telekinetic, as we have many many
    other areas of great, heretofore untouched potential that only time
    will unveil for us. 
    
    
    Roy

    I want to be telekenetic too.

	Any new information since 1989?

	I remember seeing someone on a show called "That's Incredible"
	that claimed to have the ability to move objects with his
	mind; he demonstated turning a page of a phone book with his
	mind and he made match sticks jump; he also made a pencil
	move that was balanced on the edge of a table move.

	I was quite fascinated, but one of the hosts of the show kept
	saying:  "I'm sorry, but I could here you blowing".  The
	next week, a man named the "Great Randy" came on and bet this
	person $10,000 dollars that he was a fake and that he could
	prove it.  The "Great Randy" actually showed that this person
	was a fake when he placed very light styrofoam next to the
	phone book upon which the telekinetic person's powers were
	supposedly focused.  Randy said that if you blow, these will
	move and reveal it.  The telekinetic person said that he could
	not move the pages because the styrofoam had some magnetic
	effect on the pages and made them too hard to move.

	Randy also showed that the other tricks were the result of
	blowing too.  In fact, Randy himself demonstrated that he could
	do the same -- even though he claims to have no telekinetic
	powers.

	From then on, I lost hope in this thing called telekinesis.
	But, being more open-minded, I know that there is more to
	our minds than we could probably understand; I just wish I
	could find someone who truly had the ability to move objects
	with his mind so that I may determine how he acquired the
	ability and if it can be taught.  I don't think that I'll
	ever possess this ability, but some study of it would prove
	quite exciting.


	Dennis

    "Telekinesis" is a kind of old fashioned word, although it is still
    used by some occultist groups (it was originally a technical term
    invented by psychical researchers).  Modern researchers prefer the
    term "psychokinesis" or PK.  Telekinesis means movement at a distance
    -- which would accurately describe what a magnet does -- while
    psychokinesis means movement by the mind, which gets much more at the
    heart of the matter.

    Anyway, modern parapsychologists divide PK into two categories micro-PK
    and macro-PK.  Micro-PK is essentially (though there is some
    disagreement as to the best way to define it within the community) the
    supposed ability to influence the probability of random events.  For
    example, getting a pair of dice to come up seven slightly more often
    than 1/6 of the time would be an example of micro-PK.  Macro-PK is
    what you have described as being simulated on That's Incredible: making
    things move in ways they wouldn't be expected to at all.

    Laboratory experiments seem to show quite strong overall evidence for
    micro-PK, and seem to indicate that at least slight "talent" for it is
    widespread in the population.  In other words, I probably know many
    people who can do PK, and so do you -- only most of them don't know
    it.

    Macro-PK seems to be relatively rare -- even among psychics.  Since it
    is apparently concentrated in a few "star" performers, the risk that
    any particular demonstration may be a clever fake is quite high
    (blowing is a not-particularly-clever method of faking and almost any
    experiment would exclude it).  Nevertheless, if you start with the
    assumption that if micro-PK exists macro-PK is not a priori *too*
    extraordinarily unlikely, a number of demonstrations under fairly good
    conditions have been made which are pretty convincing.  I have
    witnessed one instance of fairly unspectacular, apparent macro-PK which
    I would classify as highly probably real.

    By the way, the magician/debunker in question goes by the name of
    The Amazing Randi.  There are a fair number of notes in this conference
    discussing him.

					Topher

Hi,

	Mr. Randi (however Great or Amazing :-)  ) must be the same guy who has
	recently had a TV show here running in the UK... I must say his style
	is brash, uncompromising and brusque - he gives guests the slightest
	chance to demonstrate powers which rely heavily on the right state of
	mind and "conducive" conditions, hurries them along... then drops on
	them like a ton of bricks, bulldozing his way through a debunking speech
	which the "guests" cannot interrupt no matter how they try.

	This guy claims to be a scientist? Even friends of mine who are skeptics
	agree he is way out of line in his handling these "investigations"...

	(All IMHO)

	Cheers.
								- JIM CAD*

	.4 Topher
	
>    Macro-PK ....      ..., a number of demonstrations under fairly good
>    conditions have been made which are pretty convincing.  I have
>    witnessed one instance of fairly unspectacular, apparent macro-PK which
>    I would classify as highly probably real.

	Could you and would you describe the instance?  (Have you already
	somewhere else?)
	
	Jay

    Topher,
    
    Would consistently averaging one yahtzee(sp?) per game, with frequently
    rolling two and even three yahtzees in a game qualify as microPK?
    
    Mary :-)

RE: .5 (JIM CAD*)

    No he does not claim to be a scientist -- he only claims to be a
    "skeptic" and to, in some ill defined sense, be defending science and
    rationality.  Many scientists seem to emotionally involved to see that
    his methods are frequently not in the best traditions of the scientific
    enterprise.

    In one incident he essentially defended himself from accusations of
    violating the professional ethics of magicians by claiming that he was
    acting not in the role of a magician but in the role of a "researcher"
    (i.e., a kind of scientist).  Simultaneously he defended himself from
    accusations of violating the ethics of a scientific experimenter by
    claiming that he was not a scientific experimenter but only a magician.

				    Topher

RE: .6 (Jay)

>	Could you and would you describe the instance?  (Have you already
>	somewhere else?)

    See note 1297.16

				Topher

    I don't know, Mary.  I know that Yahtzee is a game, but I don't know
    anything about the rules or typical conditions.  If such a record
    is sufficiently unlikely to occur by chance or some conventional
    physical mechanism then it would fall in the category of micro-PK as I
    define it (some researchers draw the line purely on the size of the
    thing being influenced and class dice-influence as macro-PK, but I
    don't think that this distinction has much utility and I think I'm
    in the mainstream).

				    Topher

    The game is that you roll 6 dice to come up with potential scores for
    each number.  For example, if you roll 3 ones and 3 sixes, you can
    either claim 3 points for your ones or 18 points for your sixes.  You
    get to pick which way you score it.  In any given game you can only
    have one tally for each number, so once you've made your choice, that's
    it.  If, for example, you decide to use that roll as your sixes score,
    and then in your next roll you get 5 sixes and a one, then you have to
    use the 1 point for your ones.
    
    You also get to include a single "yahtzee" score in any given game, a
    yahtzee being rolling six of a kind.  If I remember correctly (and its
    been many years since I've played) rolling a yahtzee gives a flat 50 
    points.  Most people consider themselve fortunate to roll a
    single yahtzee in a game.  From what I've seen they only will get one
    every several games or so.  I used to be so good at rolling yahtzees that
    if I rolled a yahtzee of fives or sixes early on in a game, I would
    score it as fives or sixes instead of taking the flat 50 points,
    because the odds were good that I would roll at least one more yahtzee 
    later on anyway.  I could keep this up for 2-3 hours, but then would 
    start to get mentally tired and suddenly my yahtzees would disappear.
    
    I used to play quite a bit with one of my sisters, but eventually she
    refused to play with me (she got mad because I rolled so many
    yahtzees).  I also played quite a bit with a boyfriend of mine (the one
    who used to answer my questions before I asked them).  After several
    months, he finally caught on and starting trying to block my rolling
    mentally.  Although he couldn't stop them totally, he could wear me out
    much more quickly (in less than an hour), so we were more evenly
    matched.  I used to wish that they would have some form of yahtzee at
    Vegas.  Sigh.  No such luck!  
    
    Mary :-)

	.9
	
	Thanks Tohper. I recall reading that.
	
	Jay

RE: .11 (Mary)

    How many rolls does a player typically make in a game?  I get a
    probability for a yahtzee of 5/54 per roll, or about one roll out of
    11 would be expected by chance to come up a yahtzee.

				Topher

    re: .13
    
    This is where my memory gets really fuzzy.  I think that the
    number of rolls would be 7 -- one for each number of the die and one
    for the yahtzee score.  I don't remember any other types of rolls and
    the way I remember it, when you get to the last boxes, if you don't
    roll any of the remaining numbers, you have to take a zero for one of
    them.
    
    I never counted, but my feeling was that I was averaging between 1.5 and
    2 per game.
    
    How do you arrive at 5/54?
    
    Mary

    I've played Yahtzee - I believe it has in fact only five
    dice.  Thus, rolls like "full house" = 3 of one number,
    2 of another.  I mention it to aid in odds calculations.
    
    I reckon 32-36 rolls per game.
    
    Joel
    

    Another thing, which should complicate the odds-calculating
    process.  You start with five dice, but subsequent rolls
    generally have fewer.  E.g.: 1st roll, three 6's, two X's.
    You leave the three sixes and roll the other two.  You get
    another six.  Roll the last one for "Yahtzee". (five of a kind)
    
    Joel
    

    So much for relying on my memory.  But I don't remember getting to
    re-roll indefinitely till you get to yahtzee -- aren't there some
    limitations there?  Otherwise, everyone would just keep rolling till
    they had all yahtzees.
    
    Mary

    Yeah, three rolls.  The "skill" in this game is to try to 
    decided what you're going to go for after the first roll.
    And this choice becomes a bit more difficult as the game
    progresses as the choices narrow.
    
    Joel
    

    Forget the 1/11 anyway -- its completely wrong.  I didn't think through
    what I was doing and applied the wrong formula.  I'll try again (more
    carefully) when its settled as to what constitutes a Yahtzee and how
    often it can come up in a game on the average.

				    Topher

    
    I had a perfect cribbage hand once...including the correct jack.
    
    Does this mean anything?
    
    Cindy

    re: .20
    
    Yep.  It means I'm glad I wasn't playing you that day... ;^)
    
    re: (Topher)
    
    Here's the scoop on Yahtzee.
    
    You've got five dice.  You go 13 rounds with a potential of
    up to three throws per round.  Most of those rounds involve
    multiple throws, and most of the multiple throws go to
    the maximum, i.e., three.
    
    I haven't a clue as to how to calculate odds in this game.
    Frankly, it sounds like a formidable task.  In a two
    player game my opinion is that at least one Yahtzee generally
    comes up - but that's just a thumbnail observation.
    
    The really fun Yahtzee variant is found in the odd tavern,
    where you roll the bartender for the drink.
    
    Joel
    

RE: .21 (Joel)

    I still don't understand Joel.  Is a Yahtzee when all five dice come up
    with the same number?  When you re-roll do you re-roll only those dice
    you wish to, only those dice selected by some specific rule, or with
    all the dice?  Does each round start with all 5 dice?

				    Topher

   Topher,

   On your first roll, you roll all five dice.  You choose the ones you want
   (note that Yahtzee is five of any number) and roll the rest.  You then
   remove the ones that fit, and roll the remainder a third time.


   							Terza

    Yahtzee vaguely resembles draw poker, but with two draws, if
    that analogy helps.  
    
    Yea, Yahtzee is when you wind up with all five dice showing
    the same number.  When you re-roll, you re-roll only
    the dice you wish to, which at times could even be all
    five dice.  And yes, you start each round with all five dice.
    
    The object of the game, very simply, is to score the most
    points.  You accumulate points in three different ways, depending
    upon the circumstance.  (more on this in a sec)  The play of
    the game is by turn, each player trying to fill in a score sheet
    by coming up, once each, of various dice combinations, to wit:
    
    1's - get as many ones as possible and put total here --->
    2's - same as above
    3's - same as above
    4's - as above
    5's - as above
    6's - as above
    
    If the total of the above is equal to or greater than 63, the
    player gets a 35 point bonus.  You will note that 63 = 3X
    each of the above - a little point that determines strategy.
    If you get an "extra" four, say, you then have four to waste.
    This allows you to take as risk and go for a Yahtzee.  If you
    fail, and come up with nothing useful, you can just put a
    zero in the ones and still be on target for the bonus.
    The totals above are a discrete unit, later added to the
    totals of another group of combinations.
    
    Three of a kind - total of all five dice 
    Four of a kind - total of all five dice
    Full House - three of a kind plus two of a kind, 25 points
    Small straight - four in a row, 35 points (I think)
    Large straight - five in a row, 40 points
    Yahtzee - five of a kind
    Chance - aka "I've got nothing else" - total of five dice, no
    other relation needed.
    
    You have three rolls on each turn.  Total of upper and lower sections
    is your score, high score wins.  300 and up is a good score
    for a game.
    
    Joel
    

    Geez, this shows just how bad my memory is on details...at least after
    10+ years.
    
    Anyway, all I know is I rolled a lot more yahtzees (maybe 1st roll
    yahtzees?) than anybody I played against.  As I mentioned, my one 
    sister got so mad about it that she stopped playing with me!
    
    Mary

    OK, here's how it goes.

    If the problem were to calculate how many Yahtzee's to "expect" it
    would be very difficult, because it would depend on the strategy used
    which would further depend on the previous rolls, and would not
    necessarily be the optimal strategy, and would need to take into
    account errors that she might make in whatever strategy -- good or bad,
    rigid or loose -- that she uses.  I could only even attempt to approach
    it by observing her play over a long period of time.

    Fortunately, that is not what we need to do here.  In answer to the
    question "is their evidence for PK here", I would seek to eliminate
    the possibility that *whatever* strategy she used that she could
    plausibly get that many Yahtzee just by chance.  That means that I can
    assume, though it is not really likely in fact, that she played a
    strategy optimal for getting Yahtzees regardless of how poor that
    strategy might be in general for getting high scores.

    That strategy is simple.  In each reroll keep whatever is the largest
    match and reroll the rest.  If you have 2 pair, keep either one.  If
    you have no match, either reroll all of them, or any five (the
    resulting odds are identical as far as getting Yahtzees are concerned).

    Using that strategy the probability of rolling a Yahtzee on any round
    is straightforward (if too tedious to describe).  I used Maple (an
    algebraic manipulation system/calculator) to keep track of the
    calculations.  The basic result is that the probability of getting a
    Yahtzee on a round where you are trying for it is about .046029, or
    about one chance in 21.

    From that and some standard formula, you can calculate that, if you use
    the maximize-Yahtzee strategy, you can expect to get no Yahtzee about
    1 game in 2; 1 Yahtzee about 1 game in 3; 2 Yahtzee about 1 game in 10;
    3 Yahtzee about 1 game in 50; 4 Yahtzee about 1 game in 500; 5 Yahtzee
    about 1 game in 5000; 6 Yahtzee about 1 game in 100,000; and down from
    there to 13 Yahtzee in about 1 game in 200,000,000,000,000,000.

    The probability of rolling a Yahtzee on the first roll of a round is 1
    in 1296, by the way, so you would expect that to happen to you about
    one game out of 100.

					Topher

    Great job, Topher.  
    
    Joel
    

    Topher,
    
    I can make it a little easier.  I don't play any games with a strategy
    (at least, not one that I'm consciously aware of).  I just play by gut,
    a move at a time with a long term goal of winning.
    
    Considering the odds you came up with, I'm inclined to believe it was
    not chance.
    
    Hmmmm, I wonder if I still have the skill?  I wonder if I could put it
    to practical use?  Hmmmm...how would I market such a thing?  Hmmmmm....
    
    
    Thanks, Topher!  
    
    Mary ;-)

RE: .28 (Mary)

    In the sense in which I mean "strategy" (a slightly technical sense
    from game theory), its impossible *not* to play by some strategy even
    if the strategy is "play completely at random" (which is next to
    impossible for a person to do without some kind of mechanical aid, by
    the way).  What you are saying is that your strategy (in this sense)
    is not, as you say conscious, and is probably not consistent (i.e.,
    there is a random or arbitrary component to it).  That makes it harder,
    not easier, since if you had said something like "I always roll to
    get as many of the lowest uncommitted number as possible,..." I could
    have based something on it (assuming your strategy covered all
    situations and that you always followed it without error or exception).
    As it stands we don't know how likely it is that you would do "X" in
    situation "Y" and so we need to stick with the conservative assumption
    that what you did was (unconsciously) play for as many Yahtzee as
    possible.

    Note that if the estimate made earlier that "typically" one player or
    the other in a game gets a Yahtzee during the game then the "maximize
    the number of Yahtzee" (is the plural "Yahtzee" or "Yahtzees", anyway?)
    is not too different from the result of typical play.  The max-Yahtzee
    strategy results in three games out of four with at least one Yahtzee,
    and no other strategy can result in fewer Yahtzee free games.

    The assumption here throughout is that there is no unconscious
    manipulation of the dice (quite possible, surprisingly enough).  Is
    a dice cup or the equivalent used?  If a cup is used vigorously it
    makes conventional physical effects very unlikely.

				Topher

   Okay, here are some more things to consider.

   I used to play Yahtzee a lot with my mother and younger sister while
   growing up.  Often, we'd combine it with housework -- play a round, we'd
   all go do a task, etc.

   I noticed that our overall scores improved over time *and* when we played
   Triple Yahtzee instead of single/regular Yahtzee.  The improvement over
   time could attributed to experience, I suppose, but throwing should be
   random, right?

   Triple Yahtzee is the same as regular Yahtzee, only three times as much. 
   Seriously, the only advantage is being able to make more choices at each
   round.  However, all of us got more Yahtzees when we played Triple
   Yantzee than when we played single Yahtzee.  The only differenc I can
   think of here is that we were all less tense about achieving Yahtzee. 
   So, perhaps we weren't actively trying to move the dice, we were actively
   allowing the dice to move more randomly.  In other words, there was an
   absence of negative forces instead of the application of positive forces.

   Your thoughts?


   							Terza

    Topher -- I'll give it a try, but I'm going to postpone it until either
    Thanksgiving week or Christmas week.  I'm taking one or both of those
    weeks off, and I need some time to rest and also to practice.
    
    Mary
    
    ps  I haven't played for at least 10 years.  Anybody up for some
    yahtzee?  The motivation of playing to win might help get me in gear...

RE: .32 (Mary)

>              -< oh man, now my credibility is on the line...;-) >-

    Despite the smiley face, I thought I'd respond to this.  You might
    fail on this "test" on for any number of reasons without it meaning
    that you original successes were not real.  You never said that you
    could do this now under these conditions so there is no "credibility"
    at risk.  If you can do it then that would be real "neat", that's all.

>    Topher -- I'll give it a try, but I'm going to postpone it until either
>    Thanksgiving week or Christmas week.

    That's fine, there's no time limit -- just as long as you decide in
    advance which rounds are going to count towards the 100, the offer
    remains open indefinitely.

				    Topher

    I'll give it a try this weekend and Topher needn't send
    a dime to anyone!
    
    Double-check on understanding: Each of the 100 trials will consist
    of up to three rolls of five dice.  I will use the "maximize
    yahtzee" strategy.  A trial is over when I have either gotten
    a yahtzee or done the three rolls.
    
    I'll report back on Monday.
    
    Joel
    

    That's correct, Joel, but whether or not you use the "maximize yahtzee"
    strategy is up to you.  It will probably give you the best chance of
    getting excess yahtzee by chance (I say "probably" because of some
    subtlties in probability theory.  The maximize yahtzee strategy gives
    you the largest average number of yahtzee.  There may be other
    strategies that balance out a greater probability of a larger number of
    yahtzee with a greater probability of a much smaller number of yahtzee
    and which therefore has a smaller average number of yahtzee.  I don't
    think that this is the case here, but it might be since I haven't
    checked).

    Whether or not it gives you the best opportunity to get yahtzees by psi
    is something I can't answer.  One argument is that if psi is going to
    manifest it will act to add extra yahtzee to those you get be chance
    and therefore anything other than the maximize yahtzee strategy will
    simply act as a prior handicap.  On the other hand, it could be argued
    that part of the psi process would be ESP suggesting which dice should
    be rolled to obtain a yahtzee.  In that case, any rigid strategy would
    be counterproductive and the right strategy would be to simply hang
    loose and do whatever intuition suggests.  Another argument for the
    same "non-strategy strategy" is that attempting to follow a rigid set
    of rules for rolling might produce the wrong mind-set for using psi.

    So -- its up to you.  Good luck.

				    Topher

    Results of the weekend yahtzee-roll: seven yahtzees, one
    sore wrist!
    
    Joel