I don't think you can dismiss studies like these so readily. In this particular case, as Radin stated, there is a current replication study in progress which may verify Radin's findings. Other than that, one other original set of controlled experiments to demonstrate non-locality of brain function done back in 1994 at the University of Mexico has since been replicated in other variants of the original. Quantum physicist Amit Goswami helped set up the experiment, and still supports its findings today.
http://www.deanradin.com/FOC2014/Grinberg1994.pdf
Here is a
falsification of the idea that consciousness is involved in determining the results of a quantum experiment. I am quoting the relevant parts of the paper below,
[1009.2404] Quantum mechanics needs no consciousness (and the other way around)
The event of forming, in the observer’s mind, an explicit phenomenal representation of the result of a quantum measurement is necessary for the wave function (superposition state) of the system to collapse into a single eigenstate.
This also means that,
the collapse of wave function should never occur if the corresponding result of measurement has not been registered by a conscious observer.
This means that,
The interference pattern should be visible if “which-path” information has not been registered in consciousness of the observer (i.e., the experimenter).
Specifically, we expect to find an interference pattern in the following conditions:
i) No actual attempt to measure the “which-path” information was made,
ii) The “which-path” information was measured . However, no results were
recorded by a macroscopic device and hence are not visible or accessible to a human observer in any way.
The experimental results that falsify predictions i) and ii) already exist. Firstly, in experiments similar to that proposed here (e.g., [11,20,33]), it was shown that if “which-path” information was in principle obtainable, then even though no actual attempt was made to extract this information (i.e., to measure it), no interference pattern was found. For example, in the experiment carried out by Zou et al. [33],
the interference pattern formed by the signal photons could only be observed when the paths of idler photons were aligned, i.e., the “which-path” information was destroyed. If the idlers were misaligned to allow the source of the signal photons to become distinguishable, the interference pattern disappeared.
Interestingly, under such conditions, it is not important whether a detector is actually in place ready to make the measurement of “which-path” or not. As long as such measurement could be made, i.e., the photon path is in principle identifiable, the interference is wiped out [33].
Thus, the first prediction of
consciousness hypothesis is false.
Secondly, in another set of experiments, “which-path” information was measured but was not recorded by a macroscopic device and, therefore,was not accessible to a conscious observer.Under such conditions, also no interference pattern was found. For example, in the experiments reported by Eichmann et al. [34] and D¨ urr et al. [35], the “which-path” information was only stored in the state of a single atom. Results demonstrated unambiguously that even if such microscopically stored information was not actually read out, the mere fact that it could be read out ensured the absence of the interference pattern. Therefore
, the existing evidence indicates that the second prediction is also false.
Given this direct falsification, there is no reason to attach much weight to the results of these fringe parapsychologists.Currently all these studies giving positive results are reported by the usual suspects within a small fringe of quantum mystics and parapsychologists. They can't be reproduced by other, makes absolute no sense given our success in using quantum mechanics objectively in software technology, cryptography and quantum computing , and hence are politely ignored by the physics community.
What is worse, it comes from a semi-literate understanding if Hindu and Buddhist metaphysics and philosophy. Both Hindu and Buddhist religions, as they were classically practiced in India, Tibet etc. is absolutely committed to an objective world in the realm of phenomena ruled by inviolable laws that cannot be altered by thinking about it. Hinduism especially have three orthodox schools of thought devoted to the explication of this objectively grounded world of phenomena. Vaiseshika, the atomist school that investigates the world as composed of interacting atoms having properties, the Nyaya school that deals with the elucidation of scientific inference and epistemology based on objective user independent observation of the world, and the Mimansa school that deals with philosophy of language and abstract mathematical logic. That's three of the six orthodox schools of Hindu metaphysics devoted to rational and objective inquiry into the world that is observed. These are balanced by three mystical and introspective schools: Yoga, Samkhya and Vedanta. The six schools
together deliver the complete picture of the Hindu view of the world which says that
both the objective, rational and scientific understanding of the observed world and the essential monistic introspective understanding of the Self and the World as experienced by mystical insight
are simultaneously true. How this synoptic picture of the world where apparently contradictory ways are true can be expressed and conceived is the heart of Hindu creative thought in religion, art, culture and literature.
Ékaṃ sád víprā bahudhā́ vadanty (Rig Veda)
Existence is One, though the sages speak of it in multiple ways.
Now that's out of the way. Let's see what is wrong with these quantum consciousness experiments. See here a discussion on the paper you originally cited,
A Physicist Investigates
This should give you a sense of how horribly shoddy these experiments really are.
If a physics or engineering undergrad try to pass off such badly run experiments as data, he would flunk the class, pure and simple.
Hope this was helpful.
