Conference hydra::dejavu

Whether the good doctor claimed it was paranormal or otherwise, he surely
deserved the $10,000 cashiers' check Randi always (supposedly) carries on 
his pwerson, but he did not get it.

This was alluded to briefly in the "Who is Randini?" note.

Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Supposedly, Randi made it clear at the outset that since success would
    not convince Randi of truth of any paranormal phenomenon (the prize
    money depends on convincing Randi rather on passing his tests -- at
    least in the older versions of Randi's challenge-contract), the money
    would not be forthcoming.  I have my suspicions, but will never know
    for sure, since anyone taking the challenge signs away all rights to
    challenging Randi's decisions in court, ownership and access to all
    relevant evidence, and all rights to discuss the test in public.

				    Topher

    Help me out, guys.
    
    I thought Randi would hand over the money upon proof, to his
    satisfaction (and, as I understand it, per pre-agreed terms)
    of paranormal powers.  The story in .0 doesn't seem clear to
    me on whether or not Randi and/or the subject believed,
    prior to Randi's test, that paranormal phenomena were involved.
    
    If remarkable knowledge of recorded classical music is at issue,
    we have a pass with flying colors.  But since no paranormal claims
    were involved, why would Randi be obliged to pay the man?
    
    And let's not forget that Randi is first and foremost a showman,
    not a "serious" paranormal researcher.  Randi might huff and
    puff to the contrary, but (speaking as a rather skeptical sort)
    I personally look to Randi for entertainment, not science.
    
    Interesting comment on the Alice Cooper record!  Wonder what he
    would make of such groups as "Anthrax" and other "heavy metal"
    bands?   ;^)
    
    Joel
    

    re: .3 (Joel)
    
         "Anthrax"
               threatening the sheep again, Joel?  ;-)
    
    Frederick
    

Re .3 (Joel):

    >I thought Randi would hand over the money upon proof, to his
    >satisfaction (and, as I understand it, per pre-agreed terms)
    >of paranormal powers.  The story in .0 doesn't seem clear to
    >me on whether or not Randi and/or the subject believed,
    >prior to Randi's test, that paranormal phenomena were involved.

Not that I consider the good doctor's talent "hard paranormal" (as I would
classify, oh, poltergeisten, real magic, clairaudience, et al.), but one could
quibble successfully that it's "soft paranormal" and something that Randi could
not duplicate by prestidigitation, according to his own reaction.

    >If remarkable knowledge of recorded classical music is at issue,
    >we have a pass with flying colors.  But since no paranormal claims
    >were involved, why would Randi be obliged to pay the man?

Define "remarkable knowledge."  In this instance, I suaspect it goes into
terra incognita.  The initial reports, which appeared in _Fate_ many months
ago, merely indicated that the doctor could differentiate between classical
and nonclassical music; what's reported here, by contrast, is an order-of-
magnitude greater level of ability.  According to the "letter of the deal,"
Randi might not be "obliged" to pay him; however, to the "spirit of the
deal," there's a certain aesthetic imperative.

Steve Kallis, Jr.

I just want to know how many hours this doctor spent staring at his records for
his brain to make the connection between the small patterns on the record and
the sounds that generated them. (I am making the assumption that what he did is
possible because similar sounds will generate similar patterns when recorded.  
So, he can tell it is not a recording he owns because it isn't 100% duplicate,
but has some slight differences)

Beth

RE: .5 (Steve)

    I really don't think so, Steve.  As much as I would like to see Randi
    "socked" for $10000, I don't think that he was under any obligation --
    in either the letter or the spirit of the test -- to hand over the
    money.  The money was/is for a "convincing" (slippery word that)
    demonstration of paranormal phenomena, and this was not that by any
    means.  The subject simply demonstrated that he could demonstrate
    a "conventional" ability which Randi did not think existed -- but Randi
    never claimed that he was un-astonishable.

    My concern is as to whether or not the "subject" really did know that
    he was not in line for the $10,000 when he signed Randi's 1-sided
    contract.  Randi says he did know -- but we haven't heard from him, and
    the contract leaves him open to lawsuit if we do (at least publically).

					Topher

      If, on the other hand, the guy can do it with CD's, *then* we
    might consider something pretty far out...
    
    :-)
    Frederick
    

    re: (Steve)
    
    I tend to agree with Topher.
    
    But to answer your question about what I consider to be "remarkable"
    I would say, first - wish I could give a hard and fast answer!  ;^)
    
    At the very least, what is remarkable is what, literally, can be
    remarked upon as unusual or out of the ordinary.  To provide a
    little contrast, we wouldn't even notice someone who could, by
    listening to a piece of music, identify composer or even perhaps
    conductor, orchestra, whatever.  This is a good skill but not
    one that tends to generate publicity.
    
    In the present case, though, we have encountered an ability/talent
    (?) that isn't something we encounter very often.  If others with
    this ability exist (a very distinct possibility) I have not 
    personally been made aware of them.  This a/t is very much
    out-of-the-ordinary and in that sense remarkable.
    
    It would be interesting to discuss this at length with the subject
    to see if he could verbalize some of the differences he perceives
    or if his awareness is at a non-verbal level.  I confess I cannot
    myself visualize how looking at record grooves could reveal so
    much information.  But, clearly, one way or another, for this
    gentleman, a clear view of a record is worth a thousand or
    so words!  ;^)
    
    re: (Frederick)
    
    I think even sheep would rather not have to listen to such
    groups as "Anthrax."   ;^)
    
    Joel
    

> I just want to know how many hours this doctor spent staring at his records

Not too many, I suspect. Most audio dweebs (such as myself) noticed a
long time ago that you can pick out the loud and soft passages very
easily by looking at a record. Getting from that point to recognizing
more detail in the passages should be pretty simple if you spend any
time at it at all. The good doctor's real accomplishment is in knowing
the music that intimately, not in being able to read the record and
correlate it with what he knows.

    It's just another form of pattern recognition... same principle anyway.

Another example of pattern recognition.

A couple of months ago on a TV programme here in the UK called "You Bet", two 
german teenagers bet that they could recognise what record was playing from 
the effect the sound had on a candle flame. A lit candle was put in front of a 
speaker in a sound proofed room, and the record played through the speaker. 
All that they could see was the speaker and the candle. They got all of the 
records, (6 I think) right first time. The selection was random from a large 
collection of records.

Martin

    Re .0, .10, etc
    
    I'm impressed. I wouldn't have done so well even if I could listen
    to the LP's!!
    
    Brian