There was at least no doubt as to this point for von Franz:
It grew out of observations and out of reflections upon these observations. Of course, as every principle, so also this one has its exceptions. Some authors will concentrate on what confirms the principle, some other will pay special attention to exceptions. Nevertheless the very fact that the principle is so often stressed by eminent experts can not be simply dismissed.
Since these experts emphasize it so strongly, that means that the principle is in some way useful in their creative research - and I mean the research in the domain of physics. Let us therefore consider the consequences of assuming the validity of the principle "What is not forbidden is mandatory", at least when dealing with natural phenomena.
In my article about 'Feeling the future' I was stressing the fact that premonitions and presentiments are not in contradiction with what we know about physics. Moreover, I was proposing one particular possible mechanism - even if at a somewhat abstract level.
I am not aware of any legitimate argument forbidding such phenomena, even though I know many arguments that do not stand up to scrutiny. If so, and if we assume that what is not forbidden is mandatory, then, with some legitimacy, we should look for such phenomena taking place in nature.
And if so, we should do it through scientific research, and then such research is not a waste of taxpayer's money. To the contrary, it is a legitimate extension of the scope of research.
Other scientists got busy checking these theories. And that is how it is. There are those that are discovering the new paths, there are those who make them wider, those who lay down the asphalt, and those who drive their trucks on the ready-made highways.
In a January 20, issue of a the scientific periodical Nature, an article was published with the title "Preplay of future place cell sequences by hippocampal cellular assemblies". The two authors of the article are: George Dragoi and Susumu Tonegawa.
Tonegawa is a Nobel prize winner in the domain of physiology. In their article, the two authors present and discuss a new phenomenon that they noticed. They give this new phenomenon the name 'preplay'.
So what's it all about? It's about mice, and what goes on in the brain of a mouse when he is sleeping or just resting before undertaking a new task. See also the editorial "Seeing Into the Future" in the same issue of Nature.
The editorial is written by Edward I. Mser and May-Britt Moser. The authors are very careful with their wording. They do not use the term 'premonition', instead they concocted a new term - "preplay".
Nature's neuroscience podcast reporter Kerri Smith interviewed via telephone one of the authors of the paper, George Dragoi, regarding his research. To which Dragoi replies that indeed, they do, but predicting future events is a natural phenomenon.
In our brains we play predicting sequences that may have some value in dealing with possible future events. This preplay is important for creativity and may be connected to something that Dragoi calls "preexisting knowledge" - knowledge that exists even before the experience.
In their paper, Dragoi and Tonegawa are not concerned with calculating the probability of to what extent the observed preplay sequences may be attributed to a pure chance. Other scientists will probably discuss these questions in the future.
To some extent the phenomena of preplay are similar to those reported by Dean Radin: His original career track as a concert violinist shifted into science after earning a BSEE degree in electrical engineering, magna cum laude and with honors in physics, from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and then an MS in electrical engineering and a PhD in psychology from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
For over two decades he has been engaged in consciousness research.The Nature of the Relation Between Psychology and Physics: An Argument for a Central Role of Electromagnetism in Thought and Behavior This paper hypothesizes key physical principles underlying human psychology fundamental to thought and social behavior.
Jun 19, · Physics and psychology are not at all mutually exclusive. In fact many of the more quantitative branches of psychology are populated by many people with degrees in physics as well as people from math, electrical engineering and computer science.
The connection between physics and psychology is an active field, though not all physicists (or realists who believe the world is fundamentally matter) would agree that there is more work to be done. There is a breach between the fields of physics and psychology.
Indeed, between physics and psychology there is a whole abyss. That is understandable if we take into account the different histories and different goals of each of these disciplines. ABSTRACT: This paper begins with a review of developments in the modern Western worldview, especially as they relate to the relationships between psyche and matter, with particular emphasis on certain trends in psychology and physics in the early 20th century.
In the sciences generally, time is simply what a clock reads, but this hides a whole host of different conceptions of time used in physics.
Physics is the only science that explicitly studies time, but even physicists agree that time is one of the most difficult properties of our universe to understand. Even in the most modern and complex physical models, .