Telepathy or OBE TEST
what are the chances statistically of guessing both a playing card and one of four shapes together
The probability of correctly guessing both a specific playing card from a standard deck and one of four shapes together is 1 in 208, or approximately 0.48%.
This is because these are two independent events: the outcome of the card draw does not affect the outcome of the shape selection. In probability, when two events are independent, you find the total probability by multiplying their individual chances together.
1. Calculate the Card Probability
In a standard deck of 52 playing cards, there is only one specific card (e.g., the Ace of Spades).
Reddit +4
Assuming you are guessing one shape from a set of four distinct options (like a circle, square, triangle, and star).
To find the chance of both happening at the same time, multiply the two fractions:
To express this as a percentage:
💡 Visual Context
To put this in perspective, imagine a grid of 208 squares. Correcty guessing both is like throwing a single dart and hitting one specific "bullseye" square out of that entire grid.
✅ Final Result
The probability of guessing both the card and the shape correctly is
.
If you'd like to dive deeper, I can help you calculate the odds for other scenarios, such as:
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
17 sites
no. a playing card, eg one of 52 AND one of four shapes eg square, triangle that it has been paired with, together correctly
The probability of correctly guessing a specific playing card (e.g., the Ace of Spades) that has been paired with one of four specific shapes (e.g., a square) is 1 in 208, which is approximately 0.48%.
This calculation assumes you are trying to guess a single pair—one specific card matched with one specific shape—from all possible combinations.
1. Identify the Sample Space for Cards
In a standard deck, there are 52 unique cards. If you are guessing a specific card, your chance of being correct is:
You mentioned four shapes (e.g., square, triangle, circle, star). If each card is paired with one of these four shapes, your chance of guessing the shape correctly is:
Since the card and the shape are independent variables in this pairing, you multiply their individual probabilities to find the chance of guessing the "card + shape" pair correctly:
To convert this to a percentage:
📊 Visualising the Outcome
Imagine you have 208 cards on a table. Only one of those cards is the "correct" combination (e.g., the 7 of Diamonds with a Triangle).
✅ Final Result
The statistical chance of correctly guessing both the playing card and its paired shape together is 1 in 208.
If you're interested in how these odds change with different factors, we could look at:
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
1 site
rgis would be a telepathy test. is one in 208 a good ration to use for this
Whether 1 in 208 is a "good" ratio for a telepathy test depends on your goals for the experiment. In the world of parapsychology and statistical testing, this ratio is considered high-stringency.
Here is a breakdown of why this ratio works well and the challenges it presents:
🟢 The Pros: High Statistical Significance
⚖️ How it Compares to Famous Tests
Most famous telepathy experiments use much lower ratios to keep the participant engaged:
Test TypeOdds of Guessing RightDifficulty
Zener Cards (Square, Circle, etc.)1 in 5Low
Playing Card Suit1 in 4Low
Standard Playing Card1 in 52Medium
Your Test (Card + Shape)1 in 208High
🛠️ Recommendations for Your Test
If you want to use this 1 in 208 ratio, consider these adjustments to make it a better experiment:
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
if the subject doesnot know it is only onsuit the odds are still the same at 208 to one?
No, the odds change based on the actual size of the target pool, not what the subject thinks it is.
In probability, the "odds" are determined by the number of successful outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes. If the actual deck being used only contains one suit (13 cards) and four shapes, the math changes significantly.
🧮 The New Calculation
If you are only using 13 cards (one suit) and 4 shapes:
🧠 Why Subject Knowledge Doesn't Change the Odds
Statistics measures the likelihood of a "hit" occurring by pure chance.
⚠️ The "Psychic Bias" Problem
If you are running a telepathy test, using a secret "one-suit only" deck creates a flaw in the experiment:
💡 Recommendation
To keep the test scientifically "clean," you have two options:
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
but they will be wrong just as often
You are absolutely right. From a practical standpoint, the person will fail just as often (or even more often) because they are searching for a "needle" in a much larger mental haystack than the one that actually exists.
However, in a scientific or statistical sense, there is a major difference between Subjective Odds and Objective Odds.
1. The Subjective Experience (The Guessing)
If the subject believes there are 208 possibilities, they will scatter their guesses across all 52 cards and 4 suits.
Statisticians look at the Actual Outcomes. If you are only using 13 cards and 4 shapes, there are only 52 possible "Winning Pairs" in the room.
🚩 Why this is a "Trap" for a Telepathy Test
If your goal is to prove telepathy, this setup actually makes the subject look less psychic than they might be.
If you want to use the 1 in 208 ratio as your "Gold Standard," you have two choices to make the test fair:
💡 The Big Takeaway:
If they don't know it's only one suit, they are essentially playing a game where three-quarters of the board is invisible. They will be "wrong just as often" as if it were a full deck, but you won't be able to tell if they are failing because they aren't psychic, or failing because they are guessing "Spades" when only "Hearts" exist.
Would you like me to calculate the "Success Threshold" (how many hits they need) for a specific number of trials to prove it isn't just luck?
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
better to just use 13 numbers without any playing cards
That is a much cleaner way to run the experiment. Moving to 13 numbers and 4 shapes removes the confusion of "suits" and ensures the subject's mental "search space" perfectly matches the actual targets.
Here is the statistical breakdown for this refined setup:
🎲 The New Probability
When you pair 13 numbers (1–13) with 4 shapes (e.g., Square, Circle, Triangle, Star), you create a total of 52 unique combinations.
Using a 1 in 52 ratio is often considered the "sweet spot" for telepathy tests because:
🧪 How to Determine "Success"
To prove the results aren't just luck, you need to run multiple trials. Here is what "beating the odds" looks like over 50 attempts:
Results in 50 TrialsStatistical SignificanceConclusion
0–1 HitsExpected by chanceNo evidence of telepathy.
3 HitsSlight anomalyCould be a "hot streak" or luck.
5 HitsStrong significanceThe odds of this happening by luck are ~0.3%.
8+ HitsExtreme significanceExtremely unlikely to be luck (<0.001%).
🛠️ Quick Tips for your Test
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
only one chance per subject
With only one chance per subject, you are dealing with a "binary" outcome: they are either right or they are wrong.
From a statistical standpoint, here is how you interpret a single trial with 1 in 52 odds:
🎯 The Interpretation of a "Hit"
If a subject gets the 1-in-52 guess correct on their very first try:
If you test multiple subjects only once each, you have to look at the group results:
🛠️ How to make a "One-Shot" test better
Since you only have one chance, you can gain more data by looking at "Near Misses":
If you test 100 people and nobody gets the "Full Hit," but 60% of them get the shape right (where only 25% is expected), you have actually found much stronger evidence of telepathy than if one single person got the 1-in-52 guess right by a fluke.
💡 Summary for your Experiment
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
large group
Since you are testing a large group with only one attempt each, your experiment becomes a study of "Group Probability." You aren't looking for one "super psychic"; you are looking to see if the group, as a whole, performs better than a computer would.
Using 13 numbers and 4 shapes (1 in 52 odds), here is how you evaluate your results based on different group sizes:
📊 The "Significance" Table
This table shows how many Full Hits (both number and shape) you need to see in a group to suggest that something more than "luck" is happening.
Group Size (Subjects)Hits expected by Luck"Interesting" Result"Scientific Proof" (
)
50 people~1 hit3 hits5+ hits
100 people~2 hits5 hits7+ hits
200 people~4 hits8 hits11+ hits
500 people~10 hits16 hits21+ hits
🔍 Why this is a powerful experiment
Because you are using 1-in-52 odds, your "baseline" for luck is very low. This makes any deviation very easy to spot.
1. The "Frequency" Advantage
In a group of 100 people, if you use a simple 1-in-2 (coin flip) test, you expect 50 hits. To prove telepathy, you’d need 65+ hits, which feels like a small "nudge."
With your 1-in-52 test, seeing 7 or 8 hits instead of the expected 2 is a massive visual and statistical difference.
2. Capturing "Partial" Telepathy
Even if no one gets the "Full Hit," a large group allows you to check if the group is leaning toward the right answer:
⚠️ Critical Rule for "One-Shot" Tests
To make this data valid, you must ensure Independence.
🛠️ How to Record the Data
Create a simple sheet for each person with two blanks:
How many subjects do you have in mind?
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
how about numbers 1 to 9 to keep confusion away - eg the number 12 could be seen as a 1 or a 2 or both
That is a very smart adjustment for a telepathy test. Using 1 to 9 eliminates "visual noise" and the risk of a subject's mind splitting a two-digit number into separate pieces.
By using 9 numbers and 4 shapes, your total combinations drop from 52 down to 36.
🎲 The New Probability
With 9 numbers and 4 shapes, the odds for a single subject are:
📈 Success Thresholds for a Large Group
Since the odds are now 1 in 36, you will see more "natural" hits than before. To prove telepathy, you need to exceed these luck-based targets:
Group SizeHits Expected by LuckSignificant Result (Possible Telepathy)Highly Significant (Scientific Proof)
50 people~1 to 2 hits5 hits7+ hits
100 people~3 hits7 hits10+ hits
200 people~5 to 6 hits11 hits15+ hits
🧠 Why 1–9 is Psychologically Better
In parapsychology, "clarity of the target" is everything.
🛠️ Pro-Tips for Your 1–36 Test
1. Avoid the "Lucky 7"
Humans have a strong subconscious bias toward the number 7 and the shape Circle.
If you are testing a group, keep an eye out for Displacement. This is when people correctly guess the target for the person before or after them in line. It’s a common phenomenon in these tests that still suggests a "signal" is being picked up, just at the wrong time.
3. Record "Hits" Separately
When you tally the results, create three columns:
How many people do you think you'll be able to get for this test? I can help you create a grading scale specifically for that number.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
how about having more shapes
Increasing the number of shapes is a great way to "tighten" the test. It forces the subject to be more specific, which makes a correct guess much more impressive.
If you use 9 numbers and increase the shapes to 6 (e.g., Square, Circle, Triangle, Star, Cross, Heart), your total combinations jump to 54.
🎲 The 9-Number / 6-Shape Probability
With 54 possible outcomes, the math is almost identical to a standard deck of cards (which is 52), but without the confusion of suits and face cards.
📊 Group Success Thresholds (1 in 54)
Here is how many "Full Hits" you would need in a large group to beat the odds of pure luck:
Group SizeExpected by LuckSignificant (Strong Evidence)Highly Significant (Scientific Proof)
50 people~1 hit4 hits6+ hits
100 people~2 hits6 hits9+ hits
200 people~4 hits10 hits14+ hits
⚖️ The "Sweet Spot" for Shapes
While you could use 10 or 20 shapes, there is a "sweet spot" for telepathy testing. If there are too many options, the subject’s mind becomes cluttered, and they might start "inventing" shapes rather than receiving them.
Why 6 Shapes is a "Good" Number:
⚠️ A Note on Human Error
When you have more shapes, you must ensure the subject knows exactly what the 6 options are before the test starts.
💡 Recommendation
If you go with 9 numbers and 6 shapes, you have a very professional, high-stringency test.
To help you finalize the plan, I can:
The probability of correctly guessing both a specific playing card from a standard deck and one of four shapes together is 1 in 208, or approximately 0.48%.
This is because these are two independent events: the outcome of the card draw does not affect the outcome of the shape selection. In probability, when two events are independent, you find the total probability by multiplying their individual chances together.
1. Calculate the Card Probability
In a standard deck of 52 playing cards, there is only one specific card (e.g., the Ace of Spades).
Reddit +4
- Total cards =
- Probability of guessing correctly =
Assuming you are guessing one shape from a set of four distinct options (like a circle, square, triangle, and star).
- Total shapes =
- Probability of guessing correctly =
To find the chance of both happening at the same time, multiply the two fractions:
To express this as a percentage:
💡 Visual Context
To put this in perspective, imagine a grid of 208 squares. Correcty guessing both is like throwing a single dart and hitting one specific "bullseye" square out of that entire grid.
✅ Final Result
The probability of guessing both the card and the shape correctly is
.
If you'd like to dive deeper, I can help you calculate the odds for other scenarios, such as:
- Guessing just the suit or colour of the card plus the shape.
- The odds if you have multiple attempts.
- The probability if the "shapes" are actually the four suits of the deck.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
17 sites
- [Request] probability of correctly guessing the suit, color, and value ...
13 Nov 2023 — Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns. * heardWorse. • 2y ago. Nope - it's still 1...
Reddit·r/theydidthemath - [Request] what are the chances someone guesses the right card ...
7 Aug 2023 — Assuming it's a regular deck of playing cards, no jokers, then it depends on a few things. Is it a full deck? If it's a full deck,
Reddit·r/theydidthemath - 2026 CFA Level I Exam: Learning Outcome Statements
Since there is only one ace of clubs in the deck, the probability of the first event is 1/52. Since 13/52 = 1/4 of the deck is com...
AnalystNotes
no. a playing card, eg one of 52 AND one of four shapes eg square, triangle that it has been paired with, together correctly
The probability of correctly guessing a specific playing card (e.g., the Ace of Spades) that has been paired with one of four specific shapes (e.g., a square) is 1 in 208, which is approximately 0.48%.
This calculation assumes you are trying to guess a single pair—one specific card matched with one specific shape—from all possible combinations.
1. Identify the Sample Space for Cards
In a standard deck, there are 52 unique cards. If you are guessing a specific card, your chance of being correct is:
You mentioned four shapes (e.g., square, triangle, circle, star). If each card is paired with one of these four shapes, your chance of guessing the shape correctly is:
Since the card and the shape are independent variables in this pairing, you multiply their individual probabilities to find the chance of guessing the "card + shape" pair correctly:
To convert this to a percentage:
📊 Visualising the Outcome
Imagine you have 208 cards on a table. Only one of those cards is the "correct" combination (e.g., the 7 of Diamonds with a Triangle).
✅ Final Result
The statistical chance of correctly guessing both the playing card and its paired shape together is 1 in 208.
If you're interested in how these odds change with different factors, we could look at:
- What happens if you have two guesses instead of one?
- The odds if you only need to guess the suit (1 in 4) and the shape (1 in 4), which would be much higher (1 in 16).
- The probability if the shapes are not equally distributed across the deck.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
1 site
- [Request] probability of correctly guessing the suit, color, and value ...
13 Nov 2023 — Comments Section * heardWorse. • 2y ago. Nope - it's still 1 in 52. There are 52 cards, of which only one will match any suit/valu...
Reddit·r/theydidthemath
rgis would be a telepathy test. is one in 208 a good ration to use for this
Whether 1 in 208 is a "good" ratio for a telepathy test depends on your goals for the experiment. In the world of parapsychology and statistical testing, this ratio is considered high-stringency.
Here is a breakdown of why this ratio works well and the challenges it presents:
🟢 The Pros: High Statistical Significance
- Impossible to "Fluke": A 1 in 208 chance (0.48%) is well below the standard scientific threshold for "significance" (
or 5%). - Clear Results: If a participant correctly guesses the pair even twice in a row, the odds of that being luck become 1 in 43,264. This makes "hits" very compelling.
- Prevents Guessing Bias: With 52 cards and 4 shapes, it is much harder for a participant to use "mental patterns" (like always picking the Ace of Spades) to skew the results compared to a simple coin flip.
- Boredom and Frustration: Because the odds are so low, a participant might go 100+ rounds without a single "hit." In psychic research, this often leads to "decline effect," where the participant loses focus or becomes discouraged, potentially masking any "ability" they might have.
- Sample Size: To prove the results aren't just luck, you need a lot of trials. If someone gets 1 correct in 208, that is exactly what chance predicts. You would need them to get perhaps 3 or 4 correct in 200 trials to show a statistically interesting anomaly.
⚖️ How it Compares to Famous Tests
Most famous telepathy experiments use much lower ratios to keep the participant engaged:
Test TypeOdds of Guessing RightDifficulty
Zener Cards (Square, Circle, etc.)1 in 5Low
Playing Card Suit1 in 4Low
Standard Playing Card1 in 52Medium
Your Test (Card + Shape)1 in 208High
🛠️ Recommendations for Your Test
If you want to use this 1 in 208 ratio, consider these adjustments to make it a better experiment:
- The "Near Miss" Rule: Track if they got the card right but the shape wrong (1 in 52) or the shape right but the card wrong (1 in 4). This gives you more data to see if they are "close" even if they miss the 1-in-208 bullseye.
- Use a Smaller Deck: If 1 in 208 feels too hard, you could use just the Face Cards (J, Q, K of all suits). That’s 12 cards
4 shapes = 1 in 48. This is still scientifically significant but allows for more frequent "wins." - Trial Runs: Decide beforehand how many attempts the person gets (e.g., a "run" of 20 or 50 guesses).
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
if the subject doesnot know it is only onsuit the odds are still the same at 208 to one?
No, the odds change based on the actual size of the target pool, not what the subject thinks it is.
In probability, the "odds" are determined by the number of successful outcomes divided by the total number of possible outcomes. If the actual deck being used only contains one suit (13 cards) and four shapes, the math changes significantly.
🧮 The New Calculation
If you are only using 13 cards (one suit) and 4 shapes:
- Card Probability:
- Shape Probability:
- Combined Probability:
🧠 Why Subject Knowledge Doesn't Change the Odds
Statistics measures the likelihood of a "hit" occurring by pure chance.
- The Reality: There are only 52 possible combinations physically available to be picked.
- The Subject's Mind: Even if the subject believes they are picking from 208 options, they can only ever be "right" by matching one of the 52 actual pairs.
- The "Illusion" Factor: If the subject guesses a card from a suit that isn't even in your pile (e.g., they guess the Ace of Spades but you are only using Hearts), they have a 0% chance of being right for that specific guess. This actually makes it harder for them to get a hit, but it doesn't change the fact that the "winning" pool is only 52 combinations large.
⚠️ The "Psychic Bias" Problem
If you are running a telepathy test, using a secret "one-suit only" deck creates a flaw in the experiment:
- Mismatched Search Space: If the subject guesses "King of Spades" and you only have Hearts, they were doomed to fail before they started.
- Statistical Validation: If they beat the 1 in 52 odds, skeptics will argue the test was invalid because the "target" (the deck) didn't match the "prompt" given to the subject.
💡 Recommendation
To keep the test scientifically "clean," you have two options:
- Match the Deck to the Guess: If you want 1 in 208 odds, use a full 52-card deck.
- Be Transparent: Tell them it is only one suit. 1 in 52 is still a very strong statistical ratio for a telepathy test. For comparison, the famous Zener cards (used by J.B. Rhine) only have odds of 1 in 5.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
but they will be wrong just as often
You are absolutely right. From a practical standpoint, the person will fail just as often (or even more often) because they are searching for a "needle" in a much larger mental haystack than the one that actually exists.
However, in a scientific or statistical sense, there is a major difference between Subjective Odds and Objective Odds.
1. The Subjective Experience (The Guessing)
If the subject believes there are 208 possibilities, they will scatter their guesses across all 52 cards and 4 suits.
- The "Impossible" Guess: If they guess the 7 of Clubs but you are only using Hearts, they have a 0% chance of being right.
- The "Blind" Penalty: Because they don't know you’ve narrowed the deck, they will waste roughly 75% of their guesses on suits that aren't even there.
Statisticians look at the Actual Outcomes. If you are only using 13 cards and 4 shapes, there are only 52 possible "Winning Pairs" in the room.
- Even if the subject thinks the odds are 1 in 208, a mathematician will say: "There were only 52 possible targets. By pure luck, they should hit one every 52 tries."
- If they hit more than 1 in 52, it’s interesting.
- If they hit 1 in 208, it’s exactly what you’d expect from someone guessing blindly against a 208-count mental list.
🚩 Why this is a "Trap" for a Telepathy Test
If your goal is to prove telepathy, this setup actually makes the subject look less psychic than they might be.
- The Filter Effect: Imagine the subject actually has a "weak signal" and can sense the card is a 7. If they don't know it's only Hearts, they might guess "7 of Spades." In your test, that is a Total Fail.
- The Result: You have filtered out a "correct" intuition (the number 7) by making them guess a suit that wasn't there.
If you want to use the 1 in 208 ratio as your "Gold Standard," you have two choices to make the test fair:
- Use the full 52-card deck: This makes the math and the subject's "mental map" match.
- Score for "Partial Hits": If you use one suit but they guess a different suit, record the Rank (e.g., they guessed a King and it was a King). This allows you to find patterns even if the "Full Hit" (1 in 208) is too hard to achieve.
💡 The Big Takeaway:
If they don't know it's only one suit, they are essentially playing a game where three-quarters of the board is invisible. They will be "wrong just as often" as if it were a full deck, but you won't be able to tell if they are failing because they aren't psychic, or failing because they are guessing "Spades" when only "Hearts" exist.
Would you like me to calculate the "Success Threshold" (how many hits they need) for a specific number of trials to prove it isn't just luck?
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
better to just use 13 numbers without any playing cards
That is a much cleaner way to run the experiment. Moving to 13 numbers and 4 shapes removes the confusion of "suits" and ensures the subject's mental "search space" perfectly matches the actual targets.
Here is the statistical breakdown for this refined setup:
🎲 The New Probability
When you pair 13 numbers (1–13) with 4 shapes (e.g., Square, Circle, Triangle, Star), you create a total of 52 unique combinations.
- Odds of a "Full Hit": 1 in 52 (approx. 1.92%)
- Odds of a "Number Hit" only: 1 in 13 (approx. 7.69%)
- Odds of a "Shape Hit" only: 1 in 4 (25%)
Using a 1 in 52 ratio is often considered the "sweet spot" for telepathy tests because:
- Engagement: The subject will get a "hit" much more often than in a 1-in-208 test. This keeps their confidence and focus high.
- Statistical Strength: While 1 in 52 is easier than 1 in 208, it is still very difficult to achieve by luck.
- Layered Data: You can track if they are "tuning in" to just the numbers or just the shapes. For example, if they miss the full combination but get the shape right 50% of the time (instead of 25%), you still have evidence of a statistical anomaly.
🧪 How to Determine "Success"
To prove the results aren't just luck, you need to run multiple trials. Here is what "beating the odds" looks like over 50 attempts:
Results in 50 TrialsStatistical SignificanceConclusion
0–1 HitsExpected by chanceNo evidence of telepathy.
3 HitsSlight anomalyCould be a "hot streak" or luck.
5 HitsStrong significanceThe odds of this happening by luck are ~0.3%.
8+ HitsExtreme significanceExtremely unlikely to be luck (<0.001%).
🛠️ Quick Tips for your Test
- Randomization: Ensure the combinations are truly random (use a random number generator or physical tokens in a bag) so you don't accidentally create a human pattern.
- Double-Blind: Ideally, the person "sending" the image shouldn't be the one recording the "hits" to avoid subconscious cues.
- Consistency: Use the same 4 shapes and the same 13 numbers every time.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
only one chance per subject
With only one chance per subject, you are dealing with a "binary" outcome: they are either right or they are wrong.
From a statistical standpoint, here is how you interpret a single trial with 1 in 52 odds:
🎯 The Interpretation of a "Hit"
If a subject gets the 1-in-52 guess correct on their very first try:
- Significance: It is statistically significant (
). - The Threshold: In most scientific research, any result with a probability of less than 5% (
) is considered "statistically significant." - The Caveat: While impressive, a single hit is usually seen as "suggestive" rather than "proof." To a skeptic, a 1.9% chance is rare, but it still happens to 1 out of every 52 people just by pure luck.
If you test multiple subjects only once each, you have to look at the group results:
- 10 Subjects: If one person gets it right, it's still likely just luck.
- 50 Subjects: If one person gets it right, that is exactly what the math predicts.
- 50 Subjects: If four or five people get it right, you have a massive statistical anomaly. The odds of 5 people out of 50 guessing a 1-in-52 chance correctly are very low (roughly 1 in 500).
🛠️ How to make a "One-Shot" test better
Since you only have one chance, you can gain more data by looking at "Near Misses":
- The Full Hit (1 in 52): They get both the number and the shape.
- The Partial Hit (1 in 13): They get the number right but the shape wrong.
- The Partial Hit (1 in 4): They get the shape right but the number wrong.
If you test 100 people and nobody gets the "Full Hit," but 60% of them get the shape right (where only 25% is expected), you have actually found much stronger evidence of telepathy than if one single person got the 1-in-52 guess right by a fluke.
💡 Summary for your Experiment
- Individual Success: A single subject being right is a 0.019 probability.
- Scientific Value: High, but requires a large "N" (number of subjects) to prove it wasn't just the one person who got lucky that day.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
large group
Since you are testing a large group with only one attempt each, your experiment becomes a study of "Group Probability." You aren't looking for one "super psychic"; you are looking to see if the group, as a whole, performs better than a computer would.
Using 13 numbers and 4 shapes (1 in 52 odds), here is how you evaluate your results based on different group sizes:
📊 The "Significance" Table
This table shows how many Full Hits (both number and shape) you need to see in a group to suggest that something more than "luck" is happening.
Group Size (Subjects)Hits expected by Luck"Interesting" Result"Scientific Proof" (
)
50 people~1 hit3 hits5+ hits
100 people~2 hits5 hits7+ hits
200 people~4 hits8 hits11+ hits
500 people~10 hits16 hits21+ hits
🔍 Why this is a powerful experiment
Because you are using 1-in-52 odds, your "baseline" for luck is very low. This makes any deviation very easy to spot.
1. The "Frequency" Advantage
In a group of 100 people, if you use a simple 1-in-2 (coin flip) test, you expect 50 hits. To prove telepathy, you’d need 65+ hits, which feels like a small "nudge."
With your 1-in-52 test, seeing 7 or 8 hits instead of the expected 2 is a massive visual and statistical difference.
2. Capturing "Partial" Telepathy
Even if no one gets the "Full Hit," a large group allows you to check if the group is leaning toward the right answer:
- Shape Bias: If 40% of the group gets the shape right (expected: 25%), the group is "sensing" the shape.
- Number Bias: If 15% gets the number right (expected: 7.7%), the group is "sensing" the number.
⚠️ Critical Rule for "One-Shot" Tests
To make this data valid, you must ensure Independence.
- No "Influencing": Subjects must not be able to see or hear each other's guesses.
- No "Common Bias": Humans often default to "lucky" numbers (like 7) or "common" shapes (like a heart or star).
- Pro Tip: Do not use the number 7 or a "Star" shape as your target. Use something "boring" like the Number 11 and a Square. If the group hits those, it's much more impressive than if they hit a "popular" choice.
🛠️ How to Record the Data
Create a simple sheet for each person with two blanks:
- Number (1-13): _______
- Shape: _______
How many subjects do you have in mind?
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
how about numbers 1 to 9 to keep confusion away - eg the number 12 could be seen as a 1 or a 2 or both
That is a very smart adjustment for a telepathy test. Using 1 to 9 eliminates "visual noise" and the risk of a subject's mind splitting a two-digit number into separate pieces.
By using 9 numbers and 4 shapes, your total combinations drop from 52 down to 36.
🎲 The New Probability
With 9 numbers and 4 shapes, the odds for a single subject are:
- Full Hit (Number + Shape): 1 in 36 (approx. 2.78%)
- Number Only: 1 in 9 (approx. 11.11%)
- Shape Only: 1 in 4 (25%)
📈 Success Thresholds for a Large Group
Since the odds are now 1 in 36, you will see more "natural" hits than before. To prove telepathy, you need to exceed these luck-based targets:
Group SizeHits Expected by LuckSignificant Result (Possible Telepathy)Highly Significant (Scientific Proof)
50 people~1 to 2 hits5 hits7+ hits
100 people~3 hits7 hits10+ hits
200 people~5 to 6 hits11 hits15+ hits
🧠 Why 1–9 is Psychologically Better
In parapsychology, "clarity of the target" is everything.
- Simplicity: Single digits (1, 2, 3...) have distinct "shapes" in the mind.
- Reduced Bias: People are less likely to overthink a single digit.
- Easier Visualisation: It is much easier for a "sender" to mentally project a "9" than a "12."
🛠️ Pro-Tips for Your 1–36 Test
1. Avoid the "Lucky 7"
Humans have a strong subconscious bias toward the number 7 and the shape Circle.
- The Risk: If your target is "7 and Circle," and 10 people get it right, skeptics will say they weren't being psychic—they were just picking common "lucky" options.
- The Fix: Use a "neutral" number like 4 or 8 and a "sharper" shape like Triangle or Square.
If you are testing a group, keep an eye out for Displacement. This is when people correctly guess the target for the person before or after them in line. It’s a common phenomenon in these tests that still suggests a "signal" is being picked up, just at the wrong time.
3. Record "Hits" Separately
When you tally the results, create three columns:
- Total Correct (Full 1-in-36 hit)
- Number Only (Correct number, wrong shape)
- Shape Only (Correct shape, wrong number)
How many people do you think you'll be able to get for this test? I can help you create a grading scale specifically for that number.
AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
how about having more shapes
Increasing the number of shapes is a great way to "tighten" the test. It forces the subject to be more specific, which makes a correct guess much more impressive.
If you use 9 numbers and increase the shapes to 6 (e.g., Square, Circle, Triangle, Star, Cross, Heart), your total combinations jump to 54.
🎲 The 9-Number / 6-Shape Probability
With 54 possible outcomes, the math is almost identical to a standard deck of cards (which is 52), but without the confusion of suits and face cards.
- Full Hit (Number + Shape): 1 in 54 (approx. 1.85%)
- Number Only: 1 in 9 (approx. 11.1%)
- Shape Only: 1 in 6 (approx. 16.6%)
📊 Group Success Thresholds (1 in 54)
Here is how many "Full Hits" you would need in a large group to beat the odds of pure luck:
Group SizeExpected by LuckSignificant (Strong Evidence)Highly Significant (Scientific Proof)
50 people~1 hit4 hits6+ hits
100 people~2 hits6 hits9+ hits
200 people~4 hits10 hits14+ hits
⚖️ The "Sweet Spot" for Shapes
While you could use 10 or 20 shapes, there is a "sweet spot" for telepathy testing. If there are too many options, the subject’s mind becomes cluttered, and they might start "inventing" shapes rather than receiving them.
Why 6 Shapes is a "Good" Number:
- Visual Distinction: You can use highly distinct shapes:
- Square 🟦
- Circle ⭕
- Triangle 🔺
- Star ⭐
- Cross ➕
- Heart ❤️
- Memory: It is easy for the "sender" to hold one of these clearly in their mind without it blurring into another shape.
- Statistical Weight: A 1-in-54 chance is widely accepted in probability as a "strong" test. It’s the same difficulty level as someone correctly naming a card from a shuffled deck.
⚠️ A Note on Human Error
When you have more shapes, you must ensure the subject knows exactly what the 6 options are before the test starts.
- Show them a "Menu": Give them a card showing all 6 shapes and the numbers 1–9.
- Why? If they don't know "Heart" is an option, they will never guess it. If they think "Diamond" is an option but it isn't, they waste their guess.
💡 Recommendation
If you go with 9 numbers and 6 shapes, you have a very professional, high-stringency test.
To help you finalize the plan, I can:
- Calculate the exact probability for a specific group size (e.g., 75 or 120 people).
- Help you choose a target combination that avoids common human guessing biases.