Re:

david, if you =an do the name to photo test. in a 25 picture test.4,=A0 it could be an interesting begining, I suggst=you take twenty women all availbel on google or facebook and t=y. ,

Hi Jeffrey,

Sorry it took a beat to respond.

This weekend, when I have spac= and time, I'll ask a friend to lay out some pictures and names and se= how I do. And I'll report back what I learn.

I've been =hinking about this for a while -- and I do feel we ultimately need a more =igorous experiment. But I like your idea, at least to start, of just givin= it a good and seeing.

Great meeting you.
David
<=iv>

<=iv>

Sent from my mobile device

Hi Jeffrey and Gino,

E=rlier today, I sat down with 15 pictures and 15 names and tried to match t=em. It turned out to be quite a struggle -- primarily because people were =ery similar. For instance, I'd have descriptions like this: =br> Shy but relatively happy on the outside Filled wit= frustration and anxiety Burning with rage deep down <=r> But out of the 15 people, that could vaguely describe 3 or 4 =hem. So my matching ending up looking like a convoluted chart. =div>

What I concluded was that I need a bit more help design=ng this experiment. Ideally, rather than matching 15 names to pictures, I =ave a bunch of binary decisions (A or B). One would expect me to get 50% r=ght. IF the people are emotionally different enough (happy v. sad, for ins=ance) I hypothesize I will do considerably better than chance. Does that m=ke sense?

I have started to go down this road wit= my friend at NYU. Happy to discuss with

Gino as well.

And of course, happy to submit to MRI machines and the like to =igure what's

happening on that end.

Open to a=y and all thoughts. Science, clearly, is not my gift.

=div>Very best,

David

I greatly appreciatei th= honesty, I dont think will work with pictures. bu= might work face to face. if it will work at all. if so =1 would try 10 women, and ten names. . you willl need to=touch each one. .

I would love to do that. Definitely has higher probability of success.40=A0

Sent from my mobile device

Jeffrey,

Just an additio=al thought. A vision, actually--

What if I did readings blin=folded? So I held someone's hand and felt into them. With such limited=visual/tactile information, it would be a real test of my empathic abiliti=s. It would almost validate "the sixth sense."

Then maybe we could compare my ability to read people with an avera=e person's ability to

read people?

Just=brainstorming here...

Very best,
David

I don't mind anything you'r= saying - I am definitely not a scientist, don't claim to be, and don&=39;t know much about experiments and design.

I feel like it'd be good to talk it out? I say what I can do, and som=body who knows science tells me how we can test that, until we arrive at a=solution that works both ways?

Sent from my mobile device

I like you,=C2* I am trying to be kind, that is not science. . if =ou make people feel better and no one is injured , all the best to you.40=A0 how about being blindfolded and guessing their =ame. the outcome must be verifiable, not you are s=y, sometimes. angry other times . the trick of mentalis=s that do much better than that. they could take a strength fi=der test, and then you could take it with empathy for them, 40=A0 there are 100 questions see if you got the more than 80 per=ent right.

you dont have to be a scientist to underatnd the concept o= proof. does massage work? not a=science question , but some think it does. can you prove=to anyone that your intuitive abilities are repeatable. =erifiable, . probably not. but is ok. =ith vast experience , chinese doctors can tell if someones kidneys are wor=ing properly , the eyes are a little dull and yellow, Q=A0 its not science but a pretty good predictor. . the ot=er experiment you can try if you want is hold their hands. wri=e down what you feel. , and afterwards have them choose =hich best describes their charcateristics. l=did this with 200 girls. each one had to rate the accuracy of =iagnosisi on a scale of 1-10. the results ra=ged from 3-10. however, the writ=en diagnosis was exactly the same for each, no one like the re=ults . beliveing is more fun