Research Program / Claims / psychometry-4
It is pointed out that a certain experiment (sitting on the floor, hands on a coffee table and holding) was 'poor experimental methodology', although suggested in session 125, no phenomena appeared.
指出某次实验（围坐地板、手放咖啡桌并握持）是“糟糕的实验方法”，虽为第125节所建议但未现现象。
Concept psychometry · Domain Extended Perception and Consciousness Transduction · methodological suggestion · interface 3/3 · testability 3/3 · status untested · ★ fundable
This program treats the Seth Material as a source of hypotheses, not as doctrine to be validated. Lead dossiers are AI-compiled from the corpus with a book-and-session citation after every statement; literature reviews are AI web-search summaries whose references were all DOI-verified against Crossref; the agenda draft is an AI synthesis. None of it is Seth's original text, and none of it represents scientific consensus. English fields are machine-translated; the Chinese text is authoritative.
Seth sources (book §session)
Adjudicating experiment
Corresponding to supplementary question 5: approximately 120 groups of four, randomly assigned to three conditions: sitting on floor touching a coffee table with repeated speech, envelope on forehead, or a matched neutral procedure; each group performs 4 sessions, project about 6 months. All three groups use the same pre-registered endpoint, e.g., identical four-alternative hidden-target recognition, with analysis treating group as the clustering unit. If studying table movement, a separate experiment is set up using force plates, table accelerometers, synchronized video, and contact/non-contact controls, with pre-specified criteria for events exceeding instrument noise and not explainable by measured contact forces; do not conflate different phenomena from two different procedures into a single success rate.
Suggested paper title
Procedural Effects on Blinded Target Identification in Group Sessions: A Cluster-Randomized Trial
What it would overturn
Ordinary performance differences between the two procedures would not overturn existing theory; only if table movement stably occurs after excluding contact, vibration, and instrument error would this challenge the specific assumption that movement is explained by measurable external forces.
Candidate labs / funders
Christine Anne Simmonds-Moore，西佐治亚大学; BIAL Foundation
Specificity of Seth's formulation
It identifies a specific procedure but does not predict failure in advance or explain which step caused failure; the post-hoc evaluation lacks predictions that can discriminate competing explanations.
Note
No direct comparative study of these two procedures was found; 'envelope on forehead' cannot be treated as a valid positive control merely because it is called a standard procedure, and a single historical failure cannot estimate method success rate.
Cite: Future Mind Institute, Seth Material Research Agenda, claim psychometry-4, https://www.seth.org.cn/en/research/claims/psychometry-4