Notices
Results 1 to 97 of 97
Like Tree27Likes
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 1 Post By jocular
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 1 Post By Neverfly
  • 3 Post By jacate
  • 1 Post By adelady
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By wegs
  • 1 Post By wegs
  • 1 Post By wegs
  • 1 Post By KALSTER
  • 2 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By wegs
  • 4 Post By Lynx_Fox
  • 1 Post By Daecon
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By MacGyver1968
  • 1 Post By Daecon

Thread: Psychokinesis

  1. #1 Psychokinesis 
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    I am not sure whether to post this in general discussion, pseudoscience or hyopthesises, so i decided here instead since i guess most won't accept this idea.

    We don't really use all our brain power, however there is an article : Telekinesis exists: scientific evidence that suggest they do however only under extreme personal stress and by deduction would be due to the fact that maybe their brain was being stimulated enough to consume more energy and oddly enough it is able to affect the surrounding.

    However sadly the chances of us (in this era) utilizing this amount of power to exercise it and use it as "superpowers" may seem to be impossible due to the fact that the brain in humans are in what some other articles claim to be its peak evolution. Simply put the brain hogs 20% of the energy we use to work and without more oxygen or blood going to the brain, the brain would most likely not grow any bigger unless we can somehow induce that.

    On the other hand i decided to ask one of my teacher and some friends on ways to improve ones oxygen count in the blood and blood flow to the head. Typical answers were to have your head be placed upside down and let the blood rush that area sadly which is outside the desired wishes to preserve my live to see this idea bear fruit. What my teacher said was that there are runners who run in the marathon that would train in the mountainous areas for months (2 - 3) and during the event they would go to the run after their training.

    She said this is because there is a reduced amount of oxygen content in the higher up areas that since the body can't excrete hemoglobin except going to the loo, the body would try to recycle and efficiently use all the iron content to increase oxygen supply to the body muscles. However she also said that once the runners finish their bodies would later regulate to the current city oxygen requirement.

    So if this was true i was wondering would it be possible to do the same thing of 2 - 3 months or mental training in mountains before coming into say an area with so much plants producing oxygen that it can become toxic for the body and do as much mental workouts and taking enough food so that the brain would not go back it is regulated self but adapt to become an even stronger brain that would consume more energy and its activeness more than most people now. If so it could prove a small step towards psychokinesis.

    Thus i decided to post this here, because it sounds pretty absurd, even to myself it sounds abit of a crazy thing to do (1 year for any probably qualitative result). So what do you think? Is this in any way possible?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Just more nonsense.


    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Just more nonsense.
    Thus pseudoscience
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    It's
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    impossible
    and
    absurd
    Psychokinesis is bunk.
    And IF it were in any way possible for the brain to produce sufficient energy to move objects it would fry itself from the generated heat.

    Avoid woo woo sites, they rot your mind.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I am not sure whether to post this in general discussion, pseudoscience or hyopthesises, so i decided here instead since i guess most won't accept this idea

    Go on.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    We don't really use all our brain power, however there is an article : Telekinesis exists: scientific evidence that suggest they do however only under extreme personal stress and by deduction would be due to the fact that maybe their brain was being stimulated enough to consume more energy and oddly enough it is able to affect the surrounding.

    There are two problems with these statements:
    1. The article does not mention that subjects used all the sections of their brain.
    2. The article does not cite peer-reviewed papers.
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However sadly the chances of us (in this era) utilizing this amount of power to exercise it and use it as "superpowers" may seem to be impossible due to the fact that the brain in humans are in what some other articles claim to be its peak evolution. Simply put the brain hogs 20% of the energy we use to work and without more oxygen or blood going to the brain, the brain would most likely not grow any bigger unless we can somehow induce that.

    There are no "peaks" in evolution.
    Yet, feel free to provide the articles which mention this claim if you feel that my counterargument is invalid.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    On the other hand i decided to ask one of my teacher and some friends on ways to improve ones oxygen count in the blood and blood flow to the head. Typical answers were to have your head be placed upside down and let the blood rush that area sadly which is outside the desired wishes to preserve my live to see this idea bear fruit. What my teacher said was that there are runners who run in the marathon that would train in the mountainous areas for months (2 - 3) and during the event they would go to the run after their training. She said this is because there is a reduced amount of oxygen content in the higher up areas that since the body can't excrete hemoglobin except going to the loo, the body would try to recycle and efficiently use all the iron content to increase oxygen supply to the body muscles. However she also said that once the runners finish their bodies would later regulate to the current city oxygen requirement.

    So if this was true i was wondering would it be possible to do the same thing of 2 - 3 months or mental training in mountains before coming into say an area with so much plants producing oxygen that it can become toxic for the body and do as much mental workouts and taking enough food so that the brain would not go back it is regulated self but adapt to become an even stronger brain that would consume more energy and its activeness more than most people now. If so it could prove a small step towards psychokinesis.

    No. You could demonstrate that you have increased the O2 flow to your brain via specialized diets and 'mental workouts',
    but you cannot prove that you have undertaken small steps towards psychokinesis.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Thus i decided to post this here, because it sounds pretty absurd, even to myself it sounds abit of a crazy thing to do (1 year for any probably qualitative result). So what do you think? Is this in any way possible?

    Before we can discuss the possibility and the design of your experiment, you must provide two things:
    1. At least one peer-reviewed article that indicates that psychokinesis exists and that this phenomenon is quantifiable, testable and moreover, falsifiable.
    2. At least one peer-reviewed article that indicates that brain power is directly proportional to the oxygen flow towards your brain.
    Last edited by Cogito Ergo Sum; August 17th, 2013 at 01:30 PM. Reason: Spelling error.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Hmmm. This is not even really pseudoscience, since there seems to be no science component to the OP or the link.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I am not sure whether to post this in general discussion, pseudoscience or hyopthesises, so i decided here instead since i guess most won't accept this idea

    Go on.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    We don't really use all our brain power, however there is an article : Telekinesis exists: scientific evidence that suggest they do however only under extreme personal stress and by deduction would be due to the fact that maybe their brain was being stimulated enough to consume more energy and oddly enough it is able to affect the surrounding.

    There are two problems with these statements:
    1. The article does not mention that subjects used all the sections of their brain.
    2. The article does not cite peer-reviewed papers.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However sadly the chances of us (in this era) utilizing this amount of power to exercise it and use it as "superpowers" may seem to be impossible due to the fact that the brain in humans are in what some other articles claim to be its peak evolution. Simply put the brain hogs 20% of the energy we use to work and without more oxygen or blood going to the brain, the brain would most likely not grow any bigger unless we can somehow induce that.

    There are no "peaks" in evolution.
    Yet, feel free to provide the articles which mention this claim if you feel that my counterargument is invalid.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    On the other hand i decided to ask one of my teacher and some friends on ways to improve ones oxygen count in the blood and blood flow to the head. Typical answers were to have your head be placed upside down and let the blood rush that area sadly which is outside the desired wishes to preserve my live to see this idea bear fruit. What my teacher said was that there are runners who run in the marathon that would train in the mountainous areas for months (2 - 3) and during the event they would go to the run after their training. She said this is because there is a reduced amount of oxygen content in the higher up areas that since the body can't excrete hemoglobin except going to the loo, the body would try to recycle and efficiently use all the iron content to increase oxygen supply to the body muscles. However she also said that once the runners finish their bodies would later regulate to the current city oxygen requirement.

    So if this was true i was wondering would it be possible to do the same thing of 2 - 3 months or mental training in mountains before coming into say an area with so much plants producing oxygen that it can become toxic for the body and do as much mental workouts and taking enough food so that the brain would not go back it is regulated self but adapt to become an even stronger brain that would consume more energy and its activeness more than most people now. If so it could prove a small step towards psychokinesis.

    No. You could demonstrate that you have increased the O2 flow to your brain via specialized diets and 'mental workouts',
    but you cannot prove that you have undertaken small steps towards psychokinesis.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Thus i decided to post this here, because it sounds pretty absurd, even to myself it sounds abit of a crazy thing to do (1 year for any probably qualitative result). So what do you think? Is this in any way possible?

    Before we can discuss the possibility and the design of your experiment, you must provide two things:
    1. At least one peer-reviewed article that indicates that psychokinesis exists and that this phenomenon is quantifiable, testable and moreover, falsifiable.
    2. At least one peer-reviewed article that indicates that brain power is directly proportional to the oxygen flow towards your brain.
    Full to the brim: Scientists claim the human brain is at capacity and is too tiring to get smarter | Mail Online
    There are also other articles claiming the same thing. This is one of the few that is.

    Also on your last point, that is why i refused to post this on the hypothesis page because not of this can be backed by any actual evidence and proof.
    Overall i am keen to finding a way to actually allow the mind to achieve psychokinesis (even if machine aided).
    Though the overall implications may actually be dire if it was proven true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Hmmm. This is not even really pseudoscience, since there seems to be no science component to the OP or the link.
    There are parts of biology if you didn't read carefully. such as reference to oxygen carrying capacity of the blood cells and blood flow to the brain.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    You started out assuming the old myth that we use 10% of our brains was a true statement. It's been shown to you to be a myth.

    What you're doing now appears to be a stubborn and desperate attempt to save your claims.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    You started out assuming the old myth that we use 10% of our brains was a true statement. It's been shown to you to be a myth.

    What you're doing now appears to be a stubborn and desperate attempt to save your claims.
    Sorry i fail see why you call me stubborn or desperate? I am not in anyways frustrated but keen on actually finding a way to get this done.

    If it is truely impossible (which is neither backed by science as well) then overall all i can do is think what can be done on the situation.
    Thus this post i am testing this idea and see how much loopholes are in it before i can try to construct a new one with better grounds, mostly around biology.

    Also i don't really count the 10% of the brain to be true. I only know that at a relax state (or normal state) our brains activity would be at minimal, how much is unknown.
    However during a stress/pressured state i would also assume that the opposite is true that our brains activity would be more stimulated, seen mostly from the release of adrenalin to the body during such moments.

    However all of this is based assumptions, similar to how many theories are based on some assumptions. Too much then it would obviously be questionable as i have stated in my original post.

    Overall i hope to have some constructive discussion on this topic even if majority of the community may not agree on it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Was there not some guy, Geller or something, who could bend silverware and make doorknobs turn? jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Was there not some guy, Geller or something, who could bend silverware and make doorknobs turn? jocular
    Haven't heard of such a person to be honest. All i know is there is a skeptics community that would pay $250,000 euros to anyone who could bend a spoon but since no one can no one received the prize money.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Overall i am keen to finding a way to actually allow the mind to achieve psychokinesis (even if machine aided).
    There is: it's called a Zippo.

    If it is truely impossible (which is neither backed by science as well)
    Actually it is "backed by science" that it's impossible.

    Also i don't really count the 10% of the brain to be true. I only know that at a relax state (or normal state) our brains activity would be at minimal, how much is unknown.
    Then perhaps you're not aware that the brain is actually more active and consumes more oxygen while you're asleep?
    So much for what you know...
    Lostnoob likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Overall i am keen to finding a way to actually allow the mind to achieve psychokinesis (even if machine aided).
    There is: it's called a Zippo.

    If it is truely impossible (which is neither backed by science as well)
    Actually it is "backed by science" that it's impossible.

    Also i don't really count the 10% of the brain to be true. I only know that at a relax state (or normal state) our brains activity would be at minimal, how much is unknown.
    Then perhaps you're not aware that the brain is actually more active and consumes more oxygen while you're asleep?
    So much for what you know...
    I thought during dreams our brain isn't in a relaxed state?

    Also backed by science part, please fill me in on it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Sorry i fail see why you call me stubborn or desperate?
    Because you were shown the evidence and decided to ignore it and instead, claim that no one really knows- therefor not knowing 'validates possibility.'
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I am not in anyways frustrated but keen on actually finding a way to get this done.
    To get what done?

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    If it is truely impossible (which is neither backed by science as well)
    It is backed by science in that the claim is in contradiction with what IS known and there is No evidence, none, that people can move objects using their "mind."
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also i don't really count the 10% of the brain to be true. I only know that at a relax state (or normal state) our brains activity would be at minimal, how much is unknown.
    So what? Your muscle activity is minimal in a relaxed state, too. What does that have to do with anything?
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However during a stress/pressured state i would also assume that the opposite is true that our brains activity would be more stimulated, seen mostly from the release of adrenalin to the body during such moments.
    Again- So What?
    How does that validate telekinesis?
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    similar to how many theories are based on some assumptions.
    Wrong.
    A theory is supported by testing and observation. A hypothesis is based on assumptions.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Overall i hope to have some constructive discussion on this topic even if majority of the community may not agree on it.
    If you want it to be constructive- stop ignoring evidence.
    Lostnoob likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Sorry i fail see why you call me stubborn or desperate?
    Because you were shown the evidence and decided to ignore it and instead, claim that no one really knows- therefor not knowing 'validates possibility.'
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I am not in anyways frustrated but keen on actually finding a way to get this done.
    To get what done?

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    If it is truely impossible (which is neither backed by science as well)
    It is backed by science in that the claim is in contradiction with what IS known and there is No evidence, none, that people can move objects using their "mind."
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also i don't really count the 10% of the brain to be true. I only know that at a relax state (or normal state) our brains activity would be at minimal, how much is unknown.
    So what? Your muscle activity is minimal in a relaxed state, too. What does that have to do with anything?
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However during a stress/pressured state i would also assume that the opposite is true that our brains activity would be more stimulated, seen mostly from the release of adrenalin to the body during such moments.
    Again- So What?
    How does that validate telekinesis?
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    similar to how many theories are based on some assumptions.
    Wrong.
    A theory is supported by testing and observation. A hypothesis is based on assumptions.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Overall i hope to have some constructive discussion on this topic even if majority of the community may not agree on it.
    If you want it to be constructive- stop ignoring evidence.
    I wasn't linked to any evidence throughout the post but a zippo. The evidence i get is my link provided rots your brains and so does pyschokinesis.

    Also thank you for correcting my vocabulary on hypothesis.

    Also again, i don't see any evidence so far but a zippo. Also if you are trying to use the 10% theory as evidence, i don't see how it relates when brain activity is known to vary.

    Also to get what done? That question would be answered with, to know how dangerous it can get. Sorry for going abstract but that is how i see it.
    Last edited by jacate; August 17th, 2013 at 10:20 PM. Reason: To get what done
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I thought during dreams our brain isn't in a relaxed state?
    Depends how you define "relaxed" doesn't it?
    Given that you contrasted it with stress situations and adrenaline in the body then I'd say that when you're asleep you're pretty much relaxed by the "definition" you used...

    Also backed by science part, please fill me in on it.
    To ignite an object requires the application of energy - energy that supposedly comes from the brain.
    Since there is no directional control of that "energy", should it even exist, (i.e. there is no directional focussing lens located anywhere inside the skull) then that "energy" must be omnidirectional.
    Given that this "energy" would decrease as the inverse square law dictates (unless, of course you have any evidence whatsoever that this law no longer applies) it must be exponentially greater at the source than at the target.
    Given, also, that the claim is that this "energy" causes fires to break out - ergo at least "Fahrenheit 451" at the target - how much hotter is the source (brain) going to be?
    Is that steam coming out of your ears?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I thought during dreams our brain isn't in a relaxed state?
    Depends how you define "relaxed" doesn't it?
    Given that you contrasted it with stress situations and adrenaline in the body then I'd say that when you're asleep you're pretty much relaxed by the "definition" you used...

    Also backed by science part, please fill me in on it.
    To ignite an object requires the application of energy - energy that supposedly comes from the brain.
    Since there is no directional control of that "energy", should it even exist, (i.e. there is no directional focussing lens located anywhere inside the skull) then that "energy" must be omnidirectional.
    Given that this "energy" would decrease as the inverse square law dictates (unless, of course you have any evidence whatsoever that this law no longer applies) it must be exponentially greater at the source than at the target.
    Given, also, that the claim is that this "energy" causes fires to break out - ergo at least "Fahrenheit 451" at the target - how much hotter is the source (brain) going to be?
    Is that steam coming out of your ears?
    I agree, i loosely used relax. However i hope atleast we come to an understanding that brain activity is known to "fluctuate"

    Thank you for the evidence too. =D That is true.
    However that is assuming that we are talking that the energy being released from our brains now. I would aim for something like a future % of our brains used = 100% or more that is being used now.
    Also if the brain were to increase in volume and mass, wouldn't the specific heat capacity of the brain too increase, thus making it able to withstand more energy in it. Just suggesting.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Was there not some guy, Geller or something, who could bend silverware and make doorknobs turn? jocular
    Haven't heard of such a person to be honest. All i know is there is a skeptics community that would pay $250,000 euros to anyone who could bend a spoon but since no one can no one received the prize money.

    Uri Geller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Cogito Ergo Sum likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Was there not some guy, Geller or something, who could bend silverware and make doorknobs turn? jocular
    Haven't heard of such a person to be honest. All i know is there is a skeptics community that would pay $250,000 euros to anyone who could bend a spoon but since no one can no one received the prize money.

    Uri Geller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Thank you for the read =D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I wasn't linked to any evidence throughout the post but a zippo. The evidence i get is my link provided rots your brains and so does pyschokinesis.
    I was referring to the link debunking the 10% myth which you then moved tactics to, "But there's stuff we MAY not know..."
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also if you are trying to use the 10% theory as evidence, i don't see how it relates when brain activity is known to vary.
    What does all this talk of fluctuation or variance signify- What does it have to do with telekinesis?
    Again, your muscle activity fluctuates, as well. River flow fluctuates. Fluctuation does not provide evidence for nor support telekinesis. You're going to need to do a lot better than saying it fluctuates.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also to get what done? That question would be answered with, to know how dangerous it can get. Sorry for going abstract but that is how i see it.
    I don't understand what you're saying, here. You said you wanted to "get it done." I asked, "To get what done." It seems pretty straightforward to me...
    Lostnoob likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However that is assuming that we are talking that the energy being released from our brains now. I would aim for something like a future % of our brains used = 100% or more that is being used now.
    We do use 100% of our brain - just not all at the same time 1.
    The fact that we do use 100% is a pretty good indicator that there are no hidden "psychic" capabilities.

    Also if the brain were to increase in volume and mass, wouldn't the specific heat capacity of the brain too increase, thus making it able to withstand more energy in it. Just suggesting.
    No.
    "The specific heat is the amount of heat per unit mass required to raise the temperature by one degree Celsius" - that's why it's called specific.
    Regardless of size the SHC remains constant.
    And you're forgetting, or ignoring, that regardless of the SHC, it only requires an increase of a few degrees to cause damage to the brain - not to mention the effects of that temperature on the rest of the head and body.


    1 Which is not to say that some parts of the brain aren't functioning some of the time.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    I wasn't linked to any evidence throughout the post but a zippo. The evidence i get is my link provided rots your brains and so does pyschokinesis.
    I was referring to the link debunking the 10% myth which you then moved tactics to, "But there's stuff we MAY not know..."
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also if you are trying to use the 10% theory as evidence, i don't see how it relates when brain activity is known to vary.
    What does all this talk of fluctuation or variance signify- What does it have to do with telekinesis?
    Again, your muscle activity fluctuates, as well. River flow fluctuates. Fluctuation does not provide evidence for nor support telekinesis. You're going to need to do a lot better than saying it fluctuates.

    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also to get what done? That question would be answered with, to know how dangerous it can get. Sorry for going abstract but that is how i see it.
    I don't understand what you're saying, here. You said you wanted to "get it done." I asked, "To get what done." It seems pretty straightforward to me...
    For fluctuates it like saying we can sprint but choose the walk most of the time.
    For the get what is done part is abstract i said it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However that is assuming that we are talking that the energy being released from our brains now. I would aim for something like a future % of our brains used = 100% or more that is being used now.
    We do use 100% of our brain - just not all at the same time 1.
    The fact that we do use 100% is a pretty good indicator that there are no hidden "psychic" capabilities.

    Also if the brain were to increase in volume and mass, wouldn't the specific heat capacity of the brain too increase, thus making it able to withstand more energy in it. Just suggesting.
    No.
    "The specific heat is the amount of heat per unit mass required to raise the temperature by one degree Celsius" - that's why it's called specific.
    Regardless of size the SHC remains constant.
    And you're forgetting, or ignoring, that regardless of the SHC, it only requires an increase of a few degrees to cause damage to the brain - not to mention the effects of that temperature on the rest of the head and body.


    1 Which is not to say that some parts of the brain aren't functioning some of the time.
    I agree that it doesn't mean of any psychic capabilities may be present. However it can also be assumed the brain won't need it if it required too much energy to sustain. Like what you suggested on heating the object.
    Also for C = Mass x Temperature change / Q. Thus i supposed for M to increase, C would also increase.However this isn't true, i mistaken it with HC

    Also what you say is true that even a small degree in change can be dangerous to the body and brain.
    Last edited by jacate; August 17th, 2013 at 11:32 PM. Reason: SHC and HC
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However it can also be assumed the brain won't need it if it required too much energy to sustain.
    Rather, the brain wouldn't develop it in the first place.

    Also for C = Mass x Temperature change / Q. Thus i supposed for M to increase, C would also increase.
    But that's not specific heat capacity increasing.
    That's the consequence of SHC - for a given SHC it will require more input as the mass increases to achieve the same temp rise.
    Maybe you just mis-phrased your question.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However it can also be assumed the brain won't need it if it required too much energy to sustain.
    Rather, the brain wouldn't develop it in the first place.

    Also for C = Mass x Temperature change / Q. Thus i supposed for M to increase, C would also increase.
    But that's not specific heat capacity increasing.
    That's the consequence of SHC - for a given SHC it will require more input as the mass increases to achieve the same temp rise.
    Maybe you just mis-phrased your question.
    I agree with what you said for both. However i hope we can "force" our brains to develop the need to consume more energy XD Just think how much more intelligent we could become. Hopefully though.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However i hope we can "force" our brains to develop the need to consume more energy XD Just think how much more intelligent we could become. Hopefully though.
    Huh?
    Is there ANY evidence that energy use is related to intelligence?
    (I'm completely ignoring the "learning to force our brains to develop..." thing).
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    However i hope we can "force" our brains to develop the need to consume more energy XD Just think how much more intelligent we could become. Hopefully though.
    Huh?
    Is there ANY evidence that energy use is related to intelligence?
    (I'm completely ignoring the "learning to force our brains to develop..." thing).
    Well it really depends on what we would use that energy for. Would be weird if we considered it could turn to fat which sounds nonsensical. Overall it would be like more neural pathways and larger memory capacity(which the latter is unneeded since we pretty much won't use it all in one life time). Thus i guess neural pathways would be the only guess. If not i am basically bulling around now since i am tired and restless.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Jacate, I think you need to do some research and learn about the topic before doing all of this speculation.
    Lostnoob likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Jacate, I think you need to do some research and learn about the topic before doing all of this speculation.
    I did what i "think" is needed for me to know. Although that means i am quite narrow minded on this hypothesis/speculation. Thus i decided to ask and since the general consensus is no, not to mention Dywyddyr suggested an actual flaw of too much energy would just fry your brain it is indeed going back to the drawing board to do more thinking and researching.
    Neverfly, Dywyddyr and Lostnoob like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Would be weird if we considered it could turn to fat which sounds nonsensical.
    The brain is already the fattiest part of your body. About 60%.
    jacate likes this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Would be weird if we considered it could turn to fat which sounds nonsensical.
    The brain is already the fattiest part of your body. About 60%.
    So i wasn't wrong after all =/ Weird.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Would be weird if we considered it could turn to fat which sounds nonsensical.
    The brain is already the fattiest part of your body. About 60%.
    So i wasn't wrong after all =/ Weird.
    Can't be wrong all the time.

    Even so, research and study trumps guesswork hands down.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Jacate, I think you need to do some research and learn about the topic before doing all of this speculation.
    I did what i "think" is needed for me to know. Although that means i am quite narrow minded on this hypothesis/speculation. Thus i decided to ask and since the general consensus is no, not to mention Dywyddyr suggested an actual flaw of too much energy would just fry your brain it is indeed going back to the drawing board to do more thinking and researching.
    I must offer you kudos for this attitude.
    Yes, you appeared with a crazy idea, but you have listened and taken on board the objections.
    That's not "normal" for most that start the way you did.
    (Just for that I'm not gonna pick holes in your zombies thread post).
    Last edited by Dywyddyr; August 18th, 2013 at 07:14 AM. Reason: Syntax.
    Neverfly likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Would be weird if we considered it could turn to fat which sounds nonsensical.
    The brain is already the fattiest part of your body. About 60%.
    So i wasn't wrong after all =/ Weird.
    Can't be wrong all the time.

    Even so, research and study trumps guesswork hands down.
    Sometimes i wish i wasn't so committed to some many other activities though. Then more research could be done.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post

    There are no "peaks" in evolution.
    Yet, feel free to provide the articles which mention this claim if you feel that my counterargument is invalid.
    Full to the brim: Scientists claim the human brain is at capacity and is too tiring to get smarter | Mail Online
    There are also other articles claiming the same thing. This is one of the few that is.

    Also on your last point, that is why i refused to post this on the hypothesis page because not of this can be backed by any actual evidence and proof.
    Overall i am keen to finding a way to actually allow the mind to achieve psychokinesis (even if machine aided).
    Though the overall implications may actually be dire if it was proven true.

    The Daily Mail is, according to some members, not known for its credibility concerning reporting science-related news.
    As such, I went for a search to find the story and I found that the article is also on the websites of The Times of India and The Sunday Times (the primary source for the story). However, none of the three sources provided a link to the article. Thus I went to Google Scholar.

    The result of my search is odd. Although the story was first published in July 2011,
    the only relevant study was published in 2008: Energy limitation as a selective pressure on the evolution of sensory systems

    Is this the study you are referring to?
    Last edited by Cogito Ergo Sum; August 18th, 2013 at 11:51 AM. Reason: Spelling error.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post

    There are no "peaks" in evolution.
    Yet, feel free to provide the articles which mention this claim if you feel that my counterargument is invalid.
    Full to the brim: Scientists claim the human brain is at capacity and is too tiring to get smarter | Mail Online
    There are also other articles claiming the same thing. This is one of the few that is.

    Also on your last point, that is why i refused to post this on the hypothesis page because not of this can be backed by any actual evidence and proof.
    Overall i am keen to finding a way to actually allow the mind to achieve psychokinesis (even if machine aided).
    Though the overall implications may actually be dire if it was proven true.

    The Daily Mail is, according to some members, not known for its credibility concerning reporting science-related news.
    As such, I went a search for the story and I found that the article is also on the websites of The Times of India and The Sunday Times (the primary source for the story). However, none of the three sources provided a link to the article. Thus I went to Google Scholar.

    The result of my search is odd. Although the story was first published in July 2011,
    the only relevant study was published in 2008: Energy limitation as a selective pressure on the evolution of sensory systems

    Is this the study you are referring to?
    It is along that line with the brain being the subject in question that is evolving. Overall in human terms of figures (wiki based) is that 20% of the energy is being used by the brain when it is only 2% of the body weight.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Also what you say is true that even a small degree in change can be dangerous to the body and brain.
    Especially if it is change in the serum (blood) Ph; a very small excursion away from normal, especially downwards and in a couple of minutes, zip, you are dead! jocular
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Some random thoughts:

    1. Part of the hostility you encountered, jacate, probably arose from the reference to the brain being under utilised. this, as others have pointed out, is probably not the case.
    2. There is an interesting idea in Alastair Reynolds' science fiction wherein some humans have been genetically altered to have 'fins' on their head through which blood circulates for cooling purposes when they engage in an intense period of brain activity selectively induced by chemicals. (That's a crude paraphrase of what he describes.) Such a process might evolve, so I don't think I buy Dywyddyr's absolute declaration that this would fry the brain. It would today, but who knows about tomorrow.
    3. I don't see why having more brain power would logically support the possibility of telekinesis.
    4. There is a seriously flawed objection being made by the naysayers: to move an object remotely does not require that one provide the work. If NASA would allow me then I can move a large rocket simply by pressing a button. If telekinesis exists - which I rather doubt - then it might arise through enabling some other processes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    2. There is an interesting idea in Alastair Reynolds' science fiction wherein some humans have been genetically altered to have 'fins' on their head through which blood circulates for cooling purposes when they engage in an intense period of brain activity selectively induced by chemicals. (That's a crude paraphrase of what he describes.) Such a process might evolve, so I don't think I buy Dywyddyr's absolute declaration that this would fry the brain. It would today, but who knows about tomorrow.
    Asimov's "Foundation" series has a 'species' of humans (Solarians) that genetically altered themselves to have lobes on their heads that transfer heat energy into work. Of course, in the storyline, this is about 20,000 years from now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Some random thoughts:

    1. Part of the hostility you encountered, jacate, probably arose from the reference to the brain being under utilised. this, as others have pointed out, is probably not the case.
    2. There is an interesting idea in Alastair Reynolds' science fiction wherein some humans have been genetically altered to have 'fins' on their head through which blood circulates for cooling purposes when they engage in an intense period of brain activity selectively induced by chemicals. (That's a crude paraphrase of what he describes.) Such a process might evolve, so I don't think I buy Dywyddyr's absolute declaration that this would fry the brain. It would today, but who knows about tomorrow.
    3. I don't see why having more brain power would logically support the possibility of telekinesis.
    4. There is a seriously flawed objection being made by the naysayers: to move an object remotely does not require that one provide the work. If NASA would allow me then I can move a large rocket simply by pressing a button. If telekinesis exists - which I rather doubt - then it might arise through enabling some other processes.
    Thank you for being a kind soul to do your best to answer my query in a non-aggressive manner =D This hostility to be honest isn't as bad as those in gaming forums that i have been so i am glad there is a rather mature community here(which should be an expected i guess =D)

    Also for point 3, the reason why i associate the idea of more brain power to have possibility of telekinesis would be following that of the idea which is similar to the common activities we do everyday. Example we can do two types of each activities where one is more relaxed while to assume the other is strenuous. An example would be the relax activity of walk and the strenuous version of it being running, while jogging goes mid way. Next we have lifting of objects that are within our capacity (our phone) or lifting heavy weights that are near the boundaries of our physical capacity(100kg dumbells, i can't even lift 15kg pathetic me).

    For thinking we have the normal things we think about that are not complex and the times we stress out for an exam thinking for 2 to 3 hours straight without rest, racking your brains and after that feeling exhausted from the activity. Therefore by assuming this premise should hold true for all activities, i assume that if we are able to have unexplained mental feedback which occur even during the advanced modern era, it is the relaxed state of psychokinesis, even intuition and guessing/predicting is already part of it and even then it is already strenuous to some lazy brains. Therefore the possible strenuous variant for one to be able to use their minds to exert direct real world results without having to use their limbs or other parts of their body, one would assume psychokinesis has to be true. This may also vary to even telepathic communication but not psychokinetic powers to change the physical enviroment.

    However this argument which is as sound as it seem is invalid by the simple pretext that all activities should have a strenuous and relaxed variant. If this were proven true, then maybe psychokinesis maybe true, but for now this conclusion/argument is based on little grounds but as neverfly say "guesswork".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Originally, telekinesis was thought to be a paranormal phenomenon. While I believe in the possibility of the paranormal, it can't be substantiated through scientific means. So, the information you are sharing or perhaps sharing from another site, looks to be trying to fit this "phenomenon" into the science box. Unfortunately, it will always be met with skepticism barring no evidence to support it. I'm open minded, but telekinesis sounds like a side show act at a bad carnival.
    jacate likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Originally, telekinesis was thought to be a paranormal phenomenon. While I believe in the possibility of the paranormal, it can't be substantiated through scientific means. So, the information you are sharing or perhaps sharing from another site, looks to be trying to fit this "phenomenon" into the science box. Unfortunately, it will always be met with skepticism barring no evidence to support it. I'm open minded, but telekinesis sounds like a side show act at a bad carnival.
    Yes i am indeed trying to fit this phenomenon into the science box sadly with little success. Hopefully once it psychokinesis can be made real (whether with the support of technology or genetic modification) it could the next grand finale
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Some random thoughts:1. Part of the hostility you encountered, jacate, probably arose from the reference to the brain being under utilised. this, as others have pointed out, is probably not the case.2. There is an interesting idea in Alastair Reynolds' science fiction wherein some humans have been genetically altered to have 'fins' on their head through which blood circulates for cooling purposes when they engage in an intense period of brain activity selectively induced by chemicals. (That's a crude paraphrase of what he describes.) Such a process might evolve, so I don't think I buy Dywyddyr's absolute declaration that this would fry the brain. It would today, but who knows about tomorrow.3. I don't see why having more brain power would logically support the possibility of telekinesis.4. There is a seriously flawed objection being made by the naysayers: to move an object remotely does not require that one provide the work. If NASA would allow me then I can move a large rocket simply by pressing a button. If telekinesis exists - which I rather doubt - then it might arise through enabling some other processes.
    Thank you for being a kind soul to do your best to answer my query in a non-aggressive manner =D This hostility to be honest isn't as bad as those in gaming forums that i have been so i am glad there is a rather mature community here(which should be an expected i guess =D)Also for point 3, the reason why i associate the idea of more brain power to have possibility of telekinesis would be following that of the idea which is similar to the common activities we do everyday. Example we can do two types of each activities where one is more relaxed while to assume the other is strenuous. An example would be the relax activity of walk and the strenuous version of it being running, while jogging goes mid way. Next we have lifting of objects that are within our capacity (our phone) or lifting heavy weights that are near the boundaries of our physical capacity(100kg dumbells, i can't even lift 15kg pathetic me).For thinking we have the normal things we think about that are not complex and the times we stress out for an exam thinking for 2 to 3 hours straight without rest, racking your brains and after that feeling exhausted from the activity. Therefore by assuming this premise should hold true for all activities, i assume that if we are able to have unexplained mental feedback which occur even during the advanced modern era, it is the relaxed state of psychokinesis, even intuition and guessing/predicting is already part of it and even then it is already strenuous to some lazy brains. Therefore the possible strenuous variant for one to be able to use their minds to exert direct real world results without having to use their limbs or other parts of their body, one would assume psychokinesis has to be true. This may also vary to even telepathic communication but not psychokinetic powers to change the physical enviroment. However this argument which is as sound as it seem is invalid by the simple pretext that all activities should have a strenuous and relaxed variant. If this were proven true, then maybe psychokinesis maybe true, but for now this conclusion/argument is based on little grounds but as neverfly say "guesswork".
    There really can't be an argument for it against something that simply isn't true.People cannot move objects through "strenuous brain function" ...there is no evidence that even convincingly demonstrates it.I'm open minded to how the subconscious mind works, but we can't change matter or move it through brain activity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Originally, telekinesis was thought to be a paranormal phenomenon. While I believe in the possibility of the paranormal, it can't be substantiated through scientific means. So, the information you are sharing or perhaps sharing from another site, looks to be trying to fit this "phenomenon" into the science box. Unfortunately, it will always be met with skepticism barring no evidence to support it. I'm open minded, but telekinesis sounds like a side show act at a bad carnival.
    Yes i am indeed trying to fit this phenomenon into the science box sadly with little success. Hopefully once it psychokinesis can be made real (whether with the support of technology or genetic modification) it could the next grand finale
    LolI applaud your zeal but the problem you will undoubtedly run up against is with the history of telekinesis.You can't undo the fact that it is thought or was largely thought to be a paranormal "activity."Science can't explain the paranormal and many ppl don't believe in the paranormal to begin with.It is probably not a hill worth dying on. Lol :-)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    There really can't be an argument for it against something that simply isn't true.People cannot move objects through "strenuous brain function" ...there is no evidence that even convincingly demonstrates it.I'm open minded to how the subconscious mind works, but we can't change matter or move it through brain activity.
    Didn't i state at the last part that what i presented which is an argument/conclusion is invalid as mostly based on guesswork without any evidence. So are you trying to reiterate what i just said o.O

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    LolI applaud your zeal but the problem you will undoubtedly run up against is with the history of telekinesis.You can't undo the fact that it is thought or was largely thought to be a paranormal "activity."Science can't explain the paranormal and many ppl don't believe in the paranormal to begin with.It is probably not a hill worth dying on. Lol :-)
    How would we know that it is not worth a hill dying for? I don't think true discovers look at how deep the rabbit hole goes and give up when they can't see the bottom. For all you may know is that deep down there hold the real understanding of it, and even if we can't do it mentally unaided, what is there to say that machines can't aid us in fulfilling the same task? Not to mention atleast there is a secondary goal of prize money that are up for grabs by many skeptics around the world. If we never try i guess we would never know.

    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    even if we can't do it mentally unaided, what is there to say that machines can't aid us in fulfilling the same task?
    Well currently we do.
    Want something moving?
    Use a robot arm, or a wheelbarrow.
    If we manage to perfect thought control and apply that to motorised wheelbarrows with a robot arm would that class as PK?
    Or would we just say "Yup, technology does it again"?

    those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist
    Huh?
    Science doesn't "prove things don't exist", it shows that particular claims don't hold up.
    But what, practically speaking, is the difference between showing that each and every claim made that PK exists is wrong and showing that it doesn't exist? Especially as there is no known mechanism for such a thing?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post

    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    There is no known mechanism that could possibly account for any kind of psychokinetic phenomenon, no matter how large our brains get. It is as simple as that.

    When you mean machine aided, do you mean brain implants only or do you mean the manufacture of brain implant and specific product combos? Because there are already example of the latter, but again, no known mechanism exists for the former.

    Do you have questions regarding the lack of known mechanisms or do you already understand as much, and if you do, what exactly do you mean then?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    There really can't be an argument for it against something that simply isn't true.People cannot move objects through "strenuous brain function" ...there is no evidence that even convincingly demonstrates it.I'm open minded to how the subconscious mind works, but we can't change matter or move it through brain activity.
    Didn't i state at the last part that what i presented which is an argument/conclusion is invalid as mostly based on guesswork without any evidence. So are you trying to reiterate what i just said o.O

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    LolI applaud your zeal but the problem you will undoubtedly run up against is with the history of telekinesis.You can't undo the fact that it is thought or was largely thought to be a paranormal "activity."Science can't explain the paranormal and many ppl don't believe in the paranormal to begin with.It is probably not a hill worth dying on. Lol :-)
    How would we know that it is not worth a hill dying for? I don't think true discovers look at how deep the rabbit hole goes and give up when they can't see the bottom. For all you may know is that deep down there hold the real understanding of it, and even if we can't do it mentally unaided, what is there to say that machines can't aid us in fulfilling the same task? Not to mention atleast there is a secondary goal of prize money that are up for grabs by many skeptics around the world. If we never try i guess we would never know.

    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I agree. If there a rabbit hole to begin with. There's no rabbit hole, here. So, there is nothing to look 'deep into.'
    John Galt likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.



    That said, before we continue… what do you mean by that? Idon’t put words into people’s mouths during debates, I’d rather ask them outright,to clarify what they mean.



    As an aside, I didn’t mean to derail your thread into adiscussion about the paranormal, but we can’t ‘logically’ discuss telekinesiswithout also discussing the paranormal, since the concept of TK is said to haveoriginated in a belief of the paranormal.




    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    I apologize for my posts looking messed up, in format. Think it's posting from my phone that causes it.:/
    jacate likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    even if we can't do it mentally unaided, what is there to say that machines can't aid us in fulfilling the same task?
    Well currently we do.
    Want something moving?
    Use a robot arm, or a wheelbarrow.
    If we manage to perfect thought control and apply that to motorised wheelbarrows with a robot arm would that class as PK?
    Or would we just say "Yup, technology does it again"?

    those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist
    Huh?
    Science doesn't "prove things don't exist", it shows that particular claims don't hold up.
    But what, practically speaking, is the difference between showing that each and every claim made that PK exists is wrong and showing that it doesn't exist? Especially as there is no known mechanism for such a thing?
    That would be assuming that every case presented that can't be explained or is proven wrong should mean that the concept shouldn't exist. Until certain mechanisms for it can be defined it i guess it can be said to not exist within the present time.

    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post

    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    There is no known mechanism that could possibly account for any kind of psychokinetic phenomenon, no matter how large our brains get. It is as simple as that.

    When you mean machine aided, do you mean brain implants only or do you mean the manufacture of brain implant and specific product combos? Because there are already example of the latter, but again, no known mechanism exists for the former.

    Do you have questions regarding the lack of known mechanisms or do you already understand as much, and if you do, what exactly do you mean then?
    Brain implants with specific product combos are one, another would be the newest design on "neural dust" and the problem is as expected that too much heat from the chips would fry the brain(as they send signals, ultrasound if i am not wrong, to the outside of the skull to manipulate mostly technical products). However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design. Also for psychokinesis it has been established by the rest there are no known mechanics for them, unless proven otherwise, for this time being.

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.



    That said, before we continue… what do you mean by that? Idon’t put words into people’s mouths during debates, I’d rather ask them outright,to clarify what they mean.



    As an aside, I didn’t mean to derail your thread into adiscussion about the paranormal, but we can’t ‘logically’ discuss telekinesiswithout also discussing the paranormal, since the concept of TK is said to haveoriginated in a belief of the paranormal.



    I will try to look up examples of science explaining past paranormals activities and succeeding since i can't get any at the top of my head for now. However it is fine to talk about paranormal but as long as TK or PK is inside, then the topic would still hold for me. Also when did i say you put your words in peoples mouth o.O I asked whether are you reiterating what i just said.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate
    However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design.
    You mean normal, everyday objects? Because like I said, there is no known mechanism for that. If someone were to come up with something like that, the world would be in an uproar, but since there are no possibility for something like that given current science, then there is really no point in discussing it, no? If you wanted to discuss possibilities given known science, then this wouldn't belong in the pseudoscience section.
    wegs likes this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    even if we can't do it mentally unaided, what is there to say that machines can't aid us in fulfilling the same task?
    Well currently we do.
    Want something moving?
    Use a robot arm, or a wheelbarrow.
    If we manage to perfect thought control and apply that to motorised wheelbarrows with a robot arm would that class as PK?
    Or would we just say "Yup, technology does it again"?

    those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist
    Huh?
    Science doesn't "prove things don't exist", it shows that particular claims don't hold up.
    But what, practically speaking, is the difference between showing that each and every claim made that PK exists is wrong and showing that it doesn't exist? Especially as there is no known mechanism for such a thing?
    That would be assuming that every case presented that can't be explained or is proven wrong should mean that the concept shouldn't exist. Until certain mechanisms for it can be defined it i guess it can be said to not exist within the present time.

    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post

    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    There is no known mechanism that could possibly account for any kind of psychokinetic phenomenon, no matter how large our brains get. It is as simple as that.

    When you mean machine aided, do you mean brain implants only or do you mean the manufacture of brain implant and specific product combos? Because there are already example of the latter, but again, no known mechanism exists for the former.

    Do you have questions regarding the lack of known mechanisms or do you already understand as much, and if you do, what exactly do you mean then?
    Brain implants with specific product combos are one, another would be the newest design on "neural dust" and the problem is as expected that too much heat from the chips would fry the brain(as they send signals, ultrasound if i am not wrong, to the outside of the skull to manipulate mostly technical products). However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design. Also for psychokinesis it has been established by the rest there are no known mechanics for them, unless proven otherwise, for this time being.

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.



    That said, before we continue… what do you mean by that? Idon’t put words into people’s mouths during debates, I’d rather ask them outright,to clarify what they mean.



    As an aside, I didn’t mean to derail your thread into adiscussion about the paranormal, but we can’t ‘logically’ discuss telekinesiswithout also discussing the paranormal, since the concept of TK is said to haveoriginated in a belief of the paranormal.



    I will try to look up examples of science explaining past paranormals activities and succeeding since i can't get any at the top of my head for now. However it is fine to talk about paranormal but as long as TK or PK is inside, then the topic would still hold for me. Also when did i say you put your words in peoples mouth o.O I asked whether are you reiterating what i just said.
    Oh, I know...lol I'm just saying I didn't want to assume what you meant by science proving paranormal. I know of the ways that those who follow the paranormal, determine if it is indeed paranormal of which they are dealing with; but they aren't scientists. I'm open minded to the idea of the paranormal, but it just can't be proven scientifically. With respect to you talking about brain implants...as kalster states, it's a moot subject because anything that would help the brain to achieve what is being proposed in TK, wouldn't be considered TK, anymore. lol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.
    To be more precise, science has never observed it either. No point in trying to explain observations that can't even be verified to actually exist, other than to explore what was going on in the heads of those who think they saw something.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.
    To be more precise, science has never observed it either. No point in trying to explain observations that can't even be verified to actually exist, other than to explore what was going on in the heads of those who think they saw something.
    eggsactly...

    i would like to know though what jacate meant in terms of 'scientific' evidence. I didn't want to assume he meant certain things, so I posed the question. But, I'm thinking what is meant by scientific evidence is radio frequency, and other technology devised to 'pick up' voices and paranormal movements, etc. (and has been shown to be proof amongst those who follow the paranormal) That's not science. But, before I leap to that...I hope jacate comes back to share what was meant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate
    However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design.
    You mean normal, everyday objects? Because like I said, there is no known mechanism for that. If someone were to come up with something like that, the world would be in an uproar, but since there are no possibility for something like that given current science, then there is really no point in discussing it, no? If you wanted to discuss possibilities given known science, then this wouldn't belong in the pseudoscience section.
    Please look up the section this post belongs too before assuming that it is not in the pseudoscience.

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.
    To be more precise, science has never observed it either. No point in trying to explain observations that can't even be verified to actually exist, other than to explore what was going on in the heads of those who think they saw something.
    eggsactly...

    i would like to know though what jacate meant in terms of 'scientific' evidence. I didn't want to assume he meant certain things, so I posed the question. But, I'm thinking what is meant by scientific evidence is radio frequency, and other technology devised to 'pick up' voices and paranormal movements, etc. (and has been shown to be proof amongst those who follow the paranormal) That's not science. But, before I leap to that...I hope jacate comes back to share what was meant.
    As to science explaining paranormals would be that of the ball lighting where much has been done to actual explain it. Well the 2007 explanation of ball lighting that shows what it could be and how this phenomenon occurs. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...ghtning_2.html

    Or those rocks that move unknowingly in the desert. It was explained with a video but not an actual demonstration of the rock moving. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1hoi...layer_embedded

    Another is the scientific explanation of ghost which has be seen as coherent . http://www.hauntmastersclub.com/file...in-machine.pdf
    Abstract: "In this paper we outline an as yet undocumented natural cause for some cases of ostensible haunting. Using the first author’s own experience as an example, we show how a 19hz standing air wave may under certain conditions create sensory phenomena suggestive of a ghost. The mechanics and physiology of this ‘ghost in the machine’ effect is outlined. Spontaneous case researchers are encouraged to rule out this potential natural explanation for paranormal experience in future cases of the haunting or poltergeistic type."

    These are just some examples to explained paranormals using science, or basically from paranormals becoming phenomenons. I guess it will take some time for all paranormals to be a phenomenon if not they would all stay as paranormals.
    Last edited by jacate; August 20th, 2013 at 05:47 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate
    However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design.
    You mean normal, everyday objects? Because like I said, there is no known mechanism for that. If someone were to come up with something like that, the world would be in an uproar, but since there are no possibility for something like that given current science, then there is really no point in discussing it, no? If you wanted to discuss possibilities given known science, then this wouldn't belong in the pseudoscience section.
    Please look up the section this post belongs too before assuming that it is not in the pseudoscience.
    I didn't assume anything. You'll notice I asked you a question?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate
    However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design.
    You mean normal, everyday objects? Because like I said, there is no known mechanism for that. If someone were to come up with something like that, the world would be in an uproar, but since there are no possibility for something like that given current science, then there is really no point in discussing it, no? If you wanted to discuss possibilities given known science, then this wouldn't belong in the pseudoscience section.
    Please look up the section this post belongs too before assuming that it is not in the pseudoscience.
    I didn't assume anything. You'll notice I asked you a question?
    Sorry i misread you post X( sorry! the reason i considered this in pseudoscience section because there is no real theory on this paranormal event. Unless someone with a science degree or a better background than me can work an idea around having the brain do mental workouts with possible effects on the body which even i have a problem explaining. However i do fear that if i didn't post this here, well the feedback would be like the other psychokinesis thread that was derailed quite badly and i would try to avoid that from happening unless someone can back me up on this hypothesis with good enough proof that it can be worth an actual experiment. I may try to post this in the bio-chem section to see if i can get responses on the feasbility but for now i have other things to attend to which includes my graded extended essay. So sorry for the misinterpretation on my side again and that i am also not very free or confident in this hypothesis.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    No worries.

    You won't get any more answers in other sections though. The simple answer is that there is no mechanism for something like this. Any answer more than that will have zero value, as it will necessarily have to be made up fantasy.

    The best machines have been able to do is the famous suspended frog experiment, but that required VERY strong magnets. Magnetic levitation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    No worries.

    You won't get any more answers in other sections though. The simple answer is that there is no mechanism for something like this. Any answer more than that will have zero value, as it will necessarily have to be made up fantasy.

    The best machines have been able to do is the famous suspended frog experiment, but that required VERY strong magnets. Magnetic levitation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    That is only the brain exerting force in the real world mechanic that doesn't exist yet. But providing the body with more oxygen and blood are existing mechanisms.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    No worries.

    You won't get any more answers in other sections though. The simple answer is that there is no mechanism for something like this. Any answer more than that will have zero value, as it will necessarily have to be made up fantasy.

    The best machines have been able to do is the famous suspended frog experiment, but that required VERY strong magnets. Magnetic levitation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    That is only the brain exerting force in the real world mechanic that doesn't exist yet. But providing the body with more oxygen and blood are existing mechanisms.
    Yes, but the actual physics of manipulating everyday objects at a distance is the problem, it doesn't matter how powerful the brain is. You are basically ignoring the physical impossibility of it and going by a fantasy. That is fine for fiction, but in the real world there is little utility in that.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    No worries.

    You won't get any more answers in other sections though. The simple answer is that there is no mechanism for something like this. Any answer more than that will have zero value, as it will necessarily have to be made up fantasy.

    The best machines have been able to do is the famous suspended frog experiment, but that required VERY strong magnets. Magnetic levitation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    That is only the brain exerting force in the real world mechanic that doesn't exist yet. But providing the body with more oxygen and blood are existing mechanisms.
    Yes, but the actual physics of manipulating everyday objects at a distance is the problem, it doesn't matter how powerful the brain is. You are basically ignoring the physical impossibility of it and going by a fantasy. That is fine for fiction, but in the real world there is little utility in that.
    We never know how far would it branch out, as in the mechanism if it was developed. Overall we won't know how it would even be applied to reality since we can only speculate its effects but the usefulness will not be truly known. Overall it would be like saying the light bulb is only useful to replace candles and the problem was that the bulb wasn't that portable or reliable, but given time it has advanced way past that form of limited utility. Even if the brain is the limiting factor, technology that is to be developed if such a mechanism is able to be proven would be the one that pushes it beyond its technical capabilities.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    But providing the body with more oxygen and blood are existing mechanisms.
    No they aren't.
    They're not even close to being the mechanism.
    At best they'd could be classed as enablers for the mechanism (should one exist).
    If you seriously think that oxygen and blood flow are mechanisms please give examples of oxygen moving objects. Or blood.
    And, by the way, flow of these items transporting anything (e.g. wind/ current) doesn't count.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    We never know how far would it branch out, as in the mechanism if it was developed. Overall we won't know how it would even be applied to reality since we can only speculate its effects but the usefulness will not be truly known. Overall it would be like saying the light bulb is only useful to replace candles and the problem was that the bulb wasn't that portable or reliable, but given time it has advanced way past that form of limited utility. Even if the brain is the limiting factor, technology that is to be developed if such a mechanism is able to be proven would be the one that pushes it beyond its technical capabilities.
    This is a silly comparison, in the case of light builbs a known mechanism/device was improved and proved to be more versatile than originally envisaged. In the case of psychokinesis there is no mechanism to develop or even any evidence it exists. You are wasitng your time speculating about it. What is the encore? Debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or what unicorns eat?
    There is no encore to be honest. I am not even fully supporting the fact that Psychokinesis can exist just that it is without proof we try to assume it can exist. Therefore my silly comparison, i couldn't think of a better one to be honest and what you wrote that it was more versatile, it is in response to Kalster that he says that i am ignoring the fact that it is not only physically impossible and saying it has little real world utility which i am addressing. Yes i am admitting we are assuming it exist but to assume psychokinesis has little real world use even before it really being a concept or mechanic that is existence is what my main concern is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    But providing the body with more oxygen and blood are existing mechanisms.
    No they aren't.
    They're not even close to being the mechanism.
    At best they'd could be classed as enablers for the mechanism (should one exist).
    If you seriously think that oxygen and blood flow are mechanisms please give examples of oxygen moving objects. Or blood.
    And, by the way, flow of these items transporting anything (e.g. wind/ current) doesn't count.
    Yes when we talk about hemoglobin and increasing blood flow around the body is part of a large scheme of frame of the body, pardon my phrasing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    There is no rational argument let alone an encore, you will get nowhere in science if "without proof we try to assume it can exist". This is not how science works. If there is no evidence it is assumed it DOES NOT exist until evidence is provided. The sort of woolly thinking you are espousing in my quote is indicative of cranks and crackpots everywhere. Don't be that guy...
    I don't understand, did you read neverfly's post. I am back at the drawing board instead of defending this hypothesis. Also this is in pseudoscience section, it won't conform to all scientific methods for now because this isn't really science. I am trying to as kalster said earlier fit the science frame of mind onto something non-scientific and have admitted psychokinesis is not true and based on loosely assumed outcomes. None of this is even meant to say anything but discuss about the possibilities of psychokinesis and even Dywyddr pointed a flaw that is present that the brain would fry itself before it can even manipulate an object's temperature if we try to put things into perspective. If you are trying to prove me "wrong" i admitted to it earlier, its just i am explaining to kalster Psychokinesis if assumed useless is being narrow-minded.
    Last edited by jacate; August 20th, 2013 at 07:47 AM. Reason: grammatical errors
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Fine, I just think you'd be better of spending your time learning real science
    Yep i have been, mostly focused on my EE topic about the different types apatites with relation to acid erosion, mostly based on tooth decay as it is my graded assignment. Overall i haven't been putting much thought into this(psychokiensis) topic as of late because studies come first followed by research in university/college.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    So just to get things straight: you assume that telekinesis is possible and that increased brain activity will make it so. So you are asking how we can increase the utilisation of our brains? Because another problem would be that our brains are not just a mass of neurons, it has specialised sections that perform various functions, the total of which comes to 100%. Using all of the sections at once would be like running all the programs on your computer at once, i.e. the result on your screen is chaos. The programs won't somehow together be able to brew you a pot of coffee.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    So just to get things straight: you assume that telekinesis is possible and that increased brain activity will make it so. So you are asking how we can increase the utilisation of our brains? Because another problem would be that our brains are not just a mass of neurons, it has specialised sections that perform various functions, the total of which comes to 100%. Using all of the sections at once would be like running all the programs on your computer at once, i.e. the result on your screen is chaos. The programs won't somehow together be able to brew you a pot of coffee.
    Yes that is it. Stability of the mind would be another limiting factor but i don't have the stomach to discuss about it now, it is dinner time for me soon XD. Overall the basis of this whole thread is to assume that number one and most important is that psychokinesis/telekinesis is true which is not (yet) by any proven/scientific method.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Stability of the mind would be another limiting factor
    That's certainly possible.
    It tends to be mentally unstable people that support the idea.

    Overall the basis of this whole thread is to assume that number one and most important is that psychokinesis/telekinesis is true which is not (yet) by any proven/scientific method.
    To paraphrase a reply from a different thread on a different topic: what you're asking for is a scientific answer to something that already assumes science doesn't doesn't work the way it actually does.
    So "viable" suggestions would be, in no particular order:
    1) The mind creates invisible slave penguins that do the moving for you.
    2) The power of your mind stops (or reverses the direction of) the entire universe except for the object. Thus, the object moves due to inertia, while everything else remains stationary.
    3) You actually turn yourself into the Flash, run across the room so fast that no one sees you, move the object and return to your original position. Then you completely forget that it was really you that did it.
    Last edited by Dywyddyr; August 20th, 2013 at 09:28 AM.
    Lynx_Fox and KALSTER like this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Stability of the mind would be another limiting factor
    That's certainly possible.
    It tends to be mentally unstable people that support the idea.

    Overall the basis of this whole thread is to assume that number one and most important is that psychokinesis/telekinesis is true which is not (yet) by any proven/scientific method.
    To paraphrase a reply from a different thread on a different topic: what you're asking for is a scientific answer to something that already assumes science doens't doesn't work the way it actually does.
    So "viable" suggestions would be, in no particular order:
    1) The mind creates invisible slave penguins that do the moving for you.
    2) The power of your mind stops (or reverses the direction of) the entire universe except for the object. Thus, the object moves due to inertia, while everythinge else remains stationary.
    3) You actually turn yourself into the Flash, run across the room so fast that no one sees you, move the object and return to your original position. Then you completely forget that it was really you that did it.
    I think invisible slave penguins sounds more viable =D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    ...matter and pixie dust wegs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate
    However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design.
    You mean normal, everyday objects? Because like I said, there is no known mechanism for that. If someone were to come up with something like that, the world would be in an uproar, but since there are no possibility for something like that given current science, then there is really no point in discussing it, no? If you wanted to discuss possibilities given known science, then this wouldn't belong in the pseudoscience section.
    Please look up the section this post belongs too before assuming that it is not in the pseudoscience.

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.
    To be more precise, science has never observed it either. No point in trying to explain observations that can't even be verified to actually exist, other than to explore what was going on in the heads of those who think they saw something.
    eggsactly...

    i would like to know though what jacate meant in terms of 'scientific' evidence. I didn't want to assume he meant certain things, so I posed the question. But, I'm thinking what is meant by scientific evidence is radio frequency, and other technology devised to 'pick up' voices and paranormal movements, etc. (and has been shown to be proof amongst those who follow the paranormal) That's not science. But, before I leap to that...I hope jacate comes back to share what was meant.
    As to science explaining paranormals would be that of the ball lighting where much has been done to actual explain it. Well the 2007 explanation of ball lighting that shows what it could be and how this phenomenon occurs. Ball Lightning Mystery Solved? Electrical Phenomenon Created in Lab

    Or those rocks that move unknowingly in the desert. It was explained with a video but not an actual demonstration of the rock moving. Moving Rocks of Death Valley's Racetrack Playa - YouTube

    Another is the scientific explanation of ghost which has be seen as coherent . http://www.hauntmastersclub.com/file...in-machine.pdf
    Abstract: "In this paper we outline an as yet undocumented natural cause for some cases of ostensible haunting. Using the first author’s own experience as an example, we show how a 19hz standing air wave may under certain conditions create sensory phenomena suggestive of a ghost. The mechanics and physiology of this ‘ghost in the machine’ effect is outlined. Spontaneous case researchers are encouraged to rule out this potential natural explanation for paranormal experience in future cases of the haunting or poltergeistic type."

    These are just some examples to explained paranormals using science, or basically from paranormals becoming phenomenons. I guess it will take some time for all paranormals to be a phenomenon if not they would all stay as paranormals.
    Hi jacate—I read a good portion of the third link youprovide (masters club)…and I’m adding a link here, that argues against thenotion that being ‘in the room’ with a ‘low frequency standing wave’ does notremotely point to the paranormal. I am open minded to the paranormal, but thelink is very sketchy. It will be hard to prove the paranormal using science,but one can work to rule out all natural phenomena in order to support theexistence of a ghost, each case taken individually. The study would have itsreaders believe that all natural causes were ruled out, and they really weren’t.(thus my attached link)

    It’s a very informative site, check it out when you can.

    I believe it successfully explains the phenomenon of a lowfrequency standing wave. Standing Waves - The Physics Hypertextbook
    jacate likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate
    However brain implants, or machines that can allow for humans to exert control on any real world object over distances would be an interesting design.
    You mean normal, everyday objects? Because like I said, there is no known mechanism for that. If someone were to come up with something like that, the world would be in an uproar, but since there are no possibility for something like that given current science, then there is really no point in discussing it, no? If you wanted to discuss possibilities given known science, then this wouldn't belong in the pseudoscience section.
    Please look up the section this post belongs too before assuming that it is not in the pseudoscience.

    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by wegs View Post
    Not to mention most paranormals have been explained by science while those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist, so we would never know yet anyways.
    I'm open minded to the possibility of the paranormal, but SCIENCE HAS NEVER explained it.
    To be more precise, science has never observed it either. No point in trying to explain observations that can't even be verified to actually exist, other than to explore what was going on in the heads of those who think they saw something.
    eggsactly...

    i would like to know though what jacate meant in terms of 'scientific' evidence. I didn't want to assume he meant certain things, so I posed the question. But, I'm thinking what is meant by scientific evidence is radio frequency, and other technology devised to 'pick up' voices and paranormal movements, etc. (and has been shown to be proof amongst those who follow the paranormal) That's not science. But, before I leap to that...I hope jacate comes back to share what was meant.
    As to science explaining paranormals would be that of the ball lighting where much has been done to actual explain it. Well the 2007 explanation of ball lighting that shows what it could be and how this phenomenon occurs. Ball Lightning Mystery Solved? Electrical Phenomenon Created in Lab

    Or those rocks that move unknowingly in the desert. It was explained with a video but not an actual demonstration of the rock moving. Moving Rocks of Death Valley's Racetrack Playa - YouTube

    Another is the scientific explanation of ghost which has be seen as coherent . http://www.hauntmastersclub.com/file...in-machine.pdf
    Abstract: "In this paper we outline an as yet undocumented natural cause for some cases of ostensible haunting. Using the first author’s own experience as an example, we show how a 19hz standing air wave may under certain conditions create sensory phenomena suggestive of a ghost. The mechanics and physiology of this ‘ghost in the machine’ effect is outlined. Spontaneous case researchers are encouraged to rule out this potential natural explanation for paranormal experience in future cases of the haunting or poltergeistic type."

    These are just some examples to explained paranormals using science, or basically from paranormals becoming phenomenons. I guess it will take some time for all paranormals to be a phenomenon if not they would all stay as paranormals.
    Hi jacate—I read a good portion of the third link youprovide (masters club)…and I’m adding a link here, that argues against thenotion that being ‘in the room’ with a ‘low frequency standing wave’ does notremotely point to the paranormal. I am open minded to the paranormal, but thelink is very sketchy. It will be hard to prove the paranormal using science,but one can work to rule out all natural phenomena in order to support theexistence of a ghost, each case taken individually. The study would have itsreaders believe that all natural causes were ruled out, and they really weren’t.(thus my attached link)

    It’s a very informative site, check it out when you can.

    I believe it successfully explains the phenomenon of a lowfrequency standing wave. Standing Waves - The Physics Hypertextbook
    Will do when i have the time, thank you for the read =D
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Based on the foregoing, jacate, you should focus your attention on how we can acquire slave Emperor penguins, rather than the gentoos most people seem to come equipped with. Overtime, with good breeding techniques, we shold be able to increase their size substantially and thus their efficiency at moving remote objects. Let us know how that works out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    [QUOTE=wegs;452992]
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    It will be hard to prove the paranormal using science,but one can work to rule out all natural phenomena in order to support theexistence of a ghost, each case taken individually.
    That is an similar to the "god of gaps" argument and less than great reasoning.
    Ruling out natural phenomena doesn't in anyway support the existence of ghost--all it does is eliminate those natural phenomena that were checked and leave to possibility that there are some natural phenomena, perhaps not even understood, that haven't been tested yet.
    scoobydoo1, adelady, tk421 and 1 others like this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,157
    Personally, from all superhuman abilities I would prefer clairvoyance and future-telling. If I would have them I would play in casinos or stock market and always win. I would be perfect in money investing. Telekinesis as ability to move small objects around is not as attractive. I do not see how would I make money on it beside making cheap tricks in circus for money. Or at least how would I make money in a legal way.
    Antislavery
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Lover of Ideas jacate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    On a dot, blue in the universe, miniature on Earth
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Stanley514 View Post
    Personally, from all superhuman abilities I would prefer clairvoyance and future-telling. If I would have them I would play in casinos or stock market and always win. I would be perfect in money investing. Telekinesis as ability to move small objects around is not as attractive. I do not see how would I make money on it beside making cheap tricks in circus for money. Or at least how would I make money in a legal way.
    A power as simple as this can endanger the entire world if you knew of how destructive it can be become.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7
    Now to shed some light, Psychokinesis and psionics are indeed possible. Because of the faith in the world today, not many people believe in Psionic abilities. We all are born with all of them, some people have them more naturally than others. Your mind is an incredible instrument to be used to do amazing things. Your subconsious is very powerful, and with enough programming, you can bring your dreams to life. I know some of you are thinking: you're crazy. Maybe, but i studied and practice psionics for 3 years, 4 years coming soon. Believe within yourself you can do this because i know you can, it's difficult to get around that doubt. How it is related to science is we are affecting energy from a sub atomic level, to a level with a unaided eye. We are affecting molecules to increase or decrease temperature's, to move the wind, to change the spectrum of light, to charge and make electricity, even to affect our own genes to make ourselves superhuman. I think we were blessed with these abilities because i think we have a purpose on why we have them. That is all
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,504
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    Now to shed some light, Psychokinesis and psionics are indeed possible.
    No they aren't.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    I know some of you are thinking: you're crazy.
    Did you know that because of your psionics?
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    If tele/psychokinesis was real, what would be the mechanism for transferring the kinetic energy?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Honestly? If you'd said you'd spent a couple of years, or even more, learning how to do magic (or special effects for stage or film) I'd actually be really impressed. I'd have lots and lots of questions to find out how you do certain things.

    But for psychokinesis. Meh.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Honestly? If you'd said you'd spent a couple of years, or even more, learning how to do magic (or special effects for stage or film) I'd actually be really impressed. I'd have lots and lots of questions to find out how you do certain things.

    But for psychokinesis. Meh.
    Unless you meant learning how to do Harry Potter magic, of course...

    "Killing Curse! Avada Kedavra!"

    "Dancing Curse! Banana Rama!"
    Dywyddyr likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    If tele/psychokinesis was real, what would be the mechanism for transferring the kinetic energy?
    Antimatter-powered neutronium pistons elves.
    Daecon likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7
    How do you know?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    How do you know?
    Because there has never, ever, at any point in human history, been any kind of even remotely convincing demonstration of anything that could even potentially be best described as something even resembling psychokinetic powers.

    Being a self-described man of science, surely you understand the need to rule out the absurd when forming hypotheses.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    I simply don't have a cat picture crazy enough for this one.

    "Implied facepalm cat" will have to do.

    Strange likes this.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGyver1968 View Post
    I simply don't have a cat picture crazy enough for this one.

    "Implied facepalm cat" will have to do.

    That cat looks like Tommy Lee Jones with that newspaper.
    RedPanda likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7
    That's where you're wrong. I've done some research and found out that One person, a Russian housewife name Nina Kulagina has this ability recorded.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    That's where you're wrong. I've done some research and found out that One person, a Russian housewife name Nina Kulagina has this ability recorded.
    And here's a video of others moving an object with their mind....

    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    That's where you're wrong. I've done some research and found out that One person, a Russian housewife name Nina Kulagina has this ability recorded.
    I've seen a guy named Chris Angel tear people in half with his powers. It's nothing to laugh at.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    211
    One thing I don't miss about the 1970's was all the UFO and ESP crap. Actually that's two things....a third was disco.

    Speaking of the 70's, the cat's expression is akin to Archie Bunker about to ask Edith why it's taking her so long to bring him his beer.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    That's where you're wrong. I've done some research and found out that One person, a Russian housewife name Nina Kulagina has this ability recorded.

    From Wikipedia:
    Skeptics have argued that many of Kulagina's feats could easily be performed by one practiced in sleight of hand, through means such as cleverly concealed or disguised threads, small pieces of magnetic metal, or mirrors. Also, no sleight of hand experts appear to have ever been present during experiments, and that the Cold War-era Soviet Union had an obvious motive for falsifying or exaggerating results in the potential propaganda value in appearing to win a "Psi Race" analogous to the concurrent Space Race or arms race.
    (Bold mine)


    I am not truly impressed by your research.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #92  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Personally, I didn't need to go any further than Soviet claims of psionic powers during the Cold War...
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #93  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Personally, I didn't need to go any further than Soviet claims of psionic powers during the Cold War...

    It is indeed a signal that urges us to remain skeptical.
    Yet, no amount of (scientific) evidence will cause member Superpsi to challenge his/her own ideas, due to the statement here (# 238):

    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    I'm never giving up on psionics. Never!!!
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #94  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    2,301
    A psi battle would settle this!
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #95  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Superpsi View Post
    That's where you're wrong. I've done some research and found out that One person, a Russian housewife name Nina Kulagina has this ability recorded.
    Kulagina's alleged "powers" where never independently verified, or tested under controlled conditions ( contrary to what many claim ); there is not even a peer-reviewed publication about her in any scientific journal. All the sources I can find are pop-sci or pseudo journals, as well as the original articles in the Pravda ( a newspaper ! ). Interestingly enough Kulagina was a senior sergeant in tank battalion T-34, and an ideologically committed party member.

    Given the context of the Cold War, it doesn't take any psychic abilities to tell just what went on there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #96  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by GiantEvil View Post
    A psi battle would settle this!
    Challenged accepted! Prepare to ...

    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #97  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jacate View Post
    even if we can't do it mentally unaided, what is there to say that machines can't aid us in fulfilling the same task?
    Well currently we do.
    Want something moving?
    Use a robot arm, or a wheelbarrow.
    If we manage to perfect thought control and apply that to motorised wheelbarrows with a robot arm would that class as PK?
    Or would we just say "Yup, technology does it again"?

    those against PK usually direct their efforts to prove PK wrong, not to prove that it doesn't exist
    Huh?
    Science doesn't "prove things don't exist", it shows that particular claims don't hold up.
    But what, practically speaking, is the difference between showing that each and every claim made that PK exists is wrong and showing that it doesn't exist? Especially as there is no known mechanism for such a thing?
    There's the potential for moving objects with your mind, Jacate! A wireless control system could be interfaced directly to the cerebellum, and you could control all manner of machines with your brain! I realize I'm restating what you just said, Dywyddyr, but it's just so awesome.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Telekinesis/Psychokinesis Possible or not?
    By in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 242
    Last Post: December 19th, 2013, 11:46 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •