From: sol@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (chris s de voir)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: e-meter
Date: 19 Dec 92 22:43:13 GMT



Quotes are From: lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay)
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:32:40 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

"On alt.religion.scientology, the only relevant discussion is about
E-Meters. They have two leads. They measure one scalar quantity"

I respond: I understand E-Meters only measure resistance and that
it is scalar.  But auditors are taught that they are doing other
things, the results of which are being viewed upon the E-Meter.  
These other things are "getting charge off", "blowing mass" (changing
mass into free energy so that it leaves the person receiving
auditing).  Auditors are taught to identify a distinct needle
reaction and then find the subject by finding the needle reaction
again.  What auditors are taught to do and what the E-Meter actually
does is relevant to this news group.  I had written about this
to this news group because I had read that there were scientists
reading this group.  I was looking forward to any helpful response
from scientists reading about Scientology.  I'm getting it.  Thanks.

"A N-lead ECG can measure N-1 scalar values, and the *interpretation*
of those scalar values is done knowing *where* on the subject's body
the leads were placed." 

I respond: Well then where I have been insisting on three pairs of leads
this could be knocked down to four actual leads all 90 degrees apart to
completely describe a 3-D space and just multiplex the leads.
Thanks for the N-1 point.


Quotes are From: schafmei@fraser.sfu.ca (Chris Schafmeister)
Date: 17 Dec 92 07:43:25 GMT
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada

"If charge means to a Scientologist what it means to a physicist
then we have an objective test of at least one part of
scientology.  We could just measure the net charge on a person
before and after auditing to see if they lost anything."

I respond: This very subject was addressed by Hubbard.  He gave a
reason that as soon as part of the negative mind is erased releasing
charge, the rest of negative mind moves in [into the person receiving
auditing].  So a single measurement at the end of a session would
show no or little change.  One would have to constantly measure
charge throughout the session to see that any charge was leaving.
Hubbard used charge the same way a physicist does.  Whether charge
actually functions this way in the human body and whether the E-Meter
can actually measure it the way auditors are taught they do is
what I am working out here.

"The auditor can make the 'correct' decision about the needle
response partially because the auditor has been trained in
a form of psychoanalysis (they have learned how to ask questions), 
which doesn't need the E-meter to be effective.... 
The E-meter is a clever and expensive prop; clever because it
makes the whole process *look* different from standard therapy
and *look* more like a "science"."

I respond: Yes I was going to get to this.  But I thought maybe I
could prove it rationally, without testing and by placing the
principles of how the E-Meter is *supposed* to work against the
proven principles of physics and electronics.  In the Saint Hill
Special Briefing Course, an advanced level of auditor training,
there is a section where Hubbard told the auditors to audit
without E-Meters, saying they weren't really necessary if you
were good enough.  I've been wondering why the CoS can't just
get rid of E-Meters and quit straddling the fence between
science and religion.

"Does psychology/neurobiology/neuromedicine...
have any instruments that provide as much information
about a persons thoughts/feelings/personality as
an E-meter is supposed to?"

I respond: What I have read about PET and MRI is promising but at this
point provides only gross information.  There was a kind of attention
meter built by Westinghouse to make sure employees weren't daydreaming
on the job, but I just read a little blurb on it.

"Did L. Ron Hubbard use his incredible technical genius to construct a device
out of a few dollars worth of 1950's electronics that can 
almost read a persons mind, or did he use his incredible marketing
genius to construct a device out of a few dollars worth of
1950's electronics that he could sell to suckers at 300 times cost?"

I respond: Hubbard didn't invent the E-Meter.  Someone else did can't
remember his name now.  The little I found out about these prototypes
was that they had some pretty good ideas.  Somehow Hubbard took over
the E-Meter pared it down to what you see today.

By the way, I've noticed "vectors" and "dimensional units" over in
the "PV Equation" discussion.  This is cool.

Chris De Voir