Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hounx.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!hounx!kort
From: kort@hounx.UUCP (B.KORT)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.sci
Subject: Re: Contempt prior to Investigation
Message-ID: <695@hounx.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 15-Mar-86 08:52:27 EST
Article-I.D.: hounx.695
Posted: Sat Mar 15 08:52:27 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Mar-86 08:48:53 EST
References: <435@ccivax.UUCP> <13400007@uiucdcsp> <12239@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <358@unirot.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 20
Xref: watmath net.philosophy:4465 net.sci:597

Conventional theories are *not* complete.  (If they were, there would
be no need for scientific research and theoretical studies.)

Claims of paranormal events are elusive to capture in repeatable experiments.
The events in question seem to have a stochastic nature to them.  Now
stochastic processes are among the most difficult to observe and analyze.
It takes a mind of the caliber of Norbert Wiener to construct a theory
of Brownian motion, that odd and unexplained kinesis seen in a cup of
really hot tea.  So while paranormal (i.e. wierd and previously unexplained)
events *do* occur, it takes a superscientist to tease an explanation out
of nature.  (She does not give up her secrets easily.)

So, dear reader, I leave it to you?  Are so-called paranormal events
illusions that never really happened, or are they manifestations of
a subtle and pervasive stochastic process which no one has yet elucidated?
Can you think of a way to find out?  In the meantime, care to join me in
a cup of really hot tea?

--Barry Kort   ...ihnp4!hounx!kort