Talk:Harold E. Puthoff

message: For the record: I just found out that User:Infrogmation deleted a previous wikibio, Hal Puthoff, on 24 June 2004; see this log.  The current article was apparently created by User:GangofOne on 2 October 2005, probably w/out knowing about the earlier version. ---CH 07:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Past biocruft

message: I have extensively edited previous verson and had been monitoring this for bad edits, but I am leaving the WP and am now abandoning this article to its fate.
Just wanted to provide notice that I am only responsible (in part) for the last version I edited;
see User:Hillman/Archive.  I emphatically do not vouch for anything you might see in more recent versions.  This article concerns a controversial topic.  Given past edits by the subject of this biography, who is a highly controversial figure who mainstream physicists regard as a fringe physicist (at best), and who has a wide following among laypersons with more enthusiasm than good scientific judgement, interested in topics including
* any of dozens of "low to no cost energy from the vacuum schemes" which would violate the laws of thermodynamics and consitute a perpetual motion machine,
* any of dozens of proposed spacecraft propulsion schemes, ranging from highly speculative fringe speculations to outright pseudoscience,
* devotees of various conspiracy theories and paranormal topics
I have reason to believe that at least some future versions of this article are likely to contain slanted information, misinformation, or disinformation.  Beware also of external links to other websites, which may attempt to portray pseudoscience or fringe science topics as notions regarded by mainstream physicists as scientific, which is often not the case.
Good luck in your search for information, regardless!---CH 00:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Puthoff's doctorate and research for the CIA and stuff is based on more than just his word isn't it?    I'm using him as a reference in remote viewing, It's not a hoax is it.  Can anyone add references to the actual (alleged?) FOIA documents?  Puddytang 00:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Students beware

message: I was just reading the experiments page(on the long un-updated earthtech site, where many broken links on this page lead) and in the the reports for both the LENR and ZPE devices he never comes to a definitive conclusion of over-unity operation or a confirmation of polarizable vacuum theory/stochastic electrodynamics in any of them. In fact on the fusor page(http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/fusor/bigsys3.html) he states, "Counting the heat power generated by this experiment, the observed ratio of Pout/Pin is therefore about 1.0000000001. Yes, EarthTech has finally observed the excess heat phenomenon!". You probably need a sense of humour in order to do the work he does and it makes you wonder how seriously he takes it. Maybe the article should be written a bit to reflect this. 98.154.22.134 (talk) 05:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone/Puthoff's actual beliefs

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: A user has raised concerns that Puthoff might not have a PhD. According to these references he does  and "Dr. Puthoff holds bachelor's and master's degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Florida and in 1967 was awarded a Ph.D. from Stanford University."  Goblin Face (talk) 00:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I too wondered about his PhD, as the sources given in the present article (as at March 23 2021) don't seem definitive.  Whether or not someone has a PhD from a named university is surely a matter of public record at the university itself.  In searching for 'Stanford, Puthoff' I found a webpage at stanford.academia.edu which describes him with the rubric 'Stanford University, Electrical Engineering, Alumnus' which appears to confirm a connection with the university, but does not specify a PhD. I did a few more searches but couldn't find anything definitive, i.e. demonstrably not derived from Hal Puthoff's own claims.  I would be surprised if they are false, as public figures don't usually make false claims that can be easily exposed, but it would be desirable to give a better source if one exists.  I don't know enough about American university records to do this myself.2A00:23C8:7906:1301:9559:88CB:6D2F:31FD (talk) 21:35, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: PhD Thesis: The stimulated Raman effect and its application as a tunable laser https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/775683 Not publicly accessible, but requestable from offsite through Stanford.Naraht (talk) 01:47, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: PhD

message: Puthoff has ongoing involvements with members of NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program that ought to be mentioned:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Breakthrough_Propulsion_Physics_Program#Hal_Puthoff.27s_involvement
Neuroscience325 (talk) 00:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Involvement with Anti-Gravity and NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program 

message: I added a short paragraph with references about the controversy and resolution of claims and counter claims in Puthoff's patent for information transmitted through a curl free potential. A much longer story is left out concerning the underlying science and disputes for or against the claims. The law school reference makes a firm statement that the patent appeal process was concluded in Puthoff's favor, and the topic is too advanced for most reviewers. Editors wanting more information can refer to the topic of Magnetic Potential which gets very technical. Puthoff's patent leaves a serious question unanswered about what form of energy is transmitted without electric or magnetic fields. It would make an interesting essay by suitable experts, but doesn't belong on this page. Astrojed (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments On Puthoff Patent and Curl Free Potential

message: Massimo Pigliucci has written Puthoff's research into zero-point energy is considered to be a pseudoscience.Massimo Pigliucci. (2010). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. University of Chicago Press. p. 90. "Harold Puthoff is the director of Austin's Institute for Advanced Studies, but is also a well-known parapsychologist and conducts research on so-called zero point energy, the idea that one can extract energy from empty space—a proposition, I should add, that violates basic principles of thermodynamics and that is considered pseudoscience by credentialed physicists."
I don't understand the apparently changing rationale of the ip that has been edit-warring over this.  Anyone have ideas? Is the material due weight in the article or not? 
--Ronz (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get it either. Pigliucci is relevant, whether the IP agrees with him or not. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

text: I have removed the claim. The claim is in conflict with the Wikipedia article on zero-point energy. int21h (talk · contribs · email) 17:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if it were in conflict with that, it would not matter. But it is not. I have reverted the removal. --Hob Gadling (talk) 17:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm I get your point, but this statement seems off. The zero-point article seems to indicate that this is a minority view, and should be worded to reflect as much. If needed, would a statement by someone else that Pigliucci is wrong be enough? It would keep Pigliucci and also point out his view is a minority view and conflicts with the state of the art. int21h (talk · contribs · email) 18:07, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Massimo Pigliucci viewpoint due or not?

message: Content cited to the Jahn reference has been added 
* here at 17:32, 14 March 2017 
* here at 16:27, 15 March 2017 
* here at 17:52, 16 March 2017 
I found that paper and read it, and it is.. fascinating and carefully written.  One of the things it pounds home is that these studies cannot be replicated.  The content being added that is cited to this source, misrepresents and dishonors the source.  Not happy. Jytdog (talk) 20:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jahn ref 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Harold E. Puthoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150925131935/http://hosted.law.wisc.edu/lawreview/issues/2006-4/rislove.pdf to http://hosted.law.wisc.edu/lawreview/issues/2006-4/rislove.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Harold E. Puthoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150811083616/http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/CIA-InitiatedRV.html to http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/CIA-InitiatedRV.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is there a consensus that Harold E. Puthoff is notable? I don't want to spend hours reading sources and writing a section in the article only to discover that it will be deleted. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I would argue, contra others, that he is actually most notable for his fringe claims especially the remote viewing stuff. jps (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Remote viewing yes. I might argue some for "Inertia as a zero-point-field force" for a bit of scifi trivia, pop sci, and a news item in Science. But less so the more i look, Sturrock is providing the complimentary quotes in the news items, and i initially took Levin as some continuing interest, but after looking at the paper and author i'm not so sure. Also unsure about Paul S. Wesson's criticism for which they invoke Sakharov, i see cosmological constant and 1994 and don't know what to say about that now.  fiveby(zero) 17:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: As a biography this page should reflect all significant aspects of the subject, not limited to those we endorse and may include aspects which would not be notable on their own. IMO 5 publications in Physical Review are notable aspects that should be included in the article, if there is an article at all. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I follow this argument. Physical Review papers are certainly interesting things to consider and report on, but these particular papers are pretty thinly cited and lacking independent notice seems to me that we may not have enough written about these papers to discuss them properly. Still, I look forward to any workshopping. jps (talk) 17:58, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: All content is subject to the same guidelines. My point is that are no extra guidelines involving our opinions once we agree that the subject itself is notable. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable? 

message: . I think this source should be used. Provides some good context. jps (talk) 12:22, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Yam

message: Not only does my security software object when I go to Preterhuman.net website, (I went to archive.org's storage of it), but the reference is to a copy of a personal page of Hambone. But that does show where he got the information.Naraht (talk) 15:05, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Some file hosting site, don't need it anyway i'll move the basic bio cites to the two Gale works. Will also nuke the rest of the links when i get a chance. fiveby(zero) 15:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preterhuman.net Source