Psychokinesis - discussion

[spiritnl]

There were some posts about this subject before. But I want to take the debate to another level. I am not looking for dumb posts like 'Crap, it's total bullshit'

 

The reason I am posting this is to find out what people on science forums think about this subject. And to make it more interesting, I state psychokinesis is real. This topic contains a poll too.

 

Please give your opinion.

 

Psychokinesis

Moving/affecting matter with the power of thoughts.

 

Edit: before typing any more, please note my primary language isn't English. I'll try to type proper English.

[insane_alien]

Your english is fine. As long as sombody understands it you will be fine.

 

I do think its a load of rubbish just now. BUT, this does not mean that if it is true that i will continue thinking this.

 

The reason i think it is rubbish is that all the explanations i have heard for it involve a 'metaphysical plane' of which there is no evidence and cannot be observed. If it can't be observed, how do these people know about it and how can it affect our universe.

[Mokele]

Think of it in an evolutionary context: the ability to affect physical objects with the mind alone would be a *phenomenally* useful trait. If it were possible, why hasn't it arrisen in others species and become the norm? Or even just in the 500,000 years of human evolution?

 

The fact that, in all of the incredible biological diversity in the world, not a single species has ever developed the ability to use psychokinesis to me indicates that there's nothing there to use.

 

Mokele

[YT2095]

I`m voting "I don`t know" quite simply because I Don`t.

 

what I DO KNOW is that it`s never a good idea to be TOO Certain with things such as this, as they can have a nasty way of bitting you in the ass later.

it Does seem rather unlikely though.

[spiritnl]

Your english is fine. As long as sombody understands it you will be fine.

 

Thanx, I've encountered some people that had a problem with it, so that's why.

 

I do think its a load of rubbish just now. BUT, this does not mean that if it is true that i will continue thinking this.

 

The reason i think it is rubbish is that all the explanations i have heard for it involve a 'metaphysical plane' of which there is no evidence and cannot be observed. If it can't be observed, how do these people know about it and how can it affect our universe.[/

 

Well, I've been doing psychokinesis for aprox. a year. And I have never heard theories that psychokinesis is due to a 'methaphysical plane' (other psychic abilities, like astral projection include that). This is a little theorie I wrote on another forum and this is the most commen one:

 

Psi: The unknown mechanism behind various psychic skills. Considered to be an energy.

Psychokinesis: "Mind over Matter" - Affecting/moving matter with the mind.

Psionics: The practice of psychic abilities, like psychokinesis.

Psion: A practicioner of psionics.

 

I will call PK-force (psychokinetic-force) the thing that makes objects move to clarify my theorie. It might be the same as psi, but that is not certain yet. The link between thoughts from the human brain and PK-force is also not certain yet. We do know that thoughts are the key behind psychokinesis.

 

By 'becoming one' with an object (focusing your attention on an object), you'll be able to move it with the power of the mind. There must be something/a force, to make movement possible, because in theorie, something will not move unless there is some sort of force. So, PK-force must be sómething, something we can 'touch' and has a mass. Something that has a mass would be messurable. Lets assume psi (or PK-force) has been messured. Some psions have had results by trying to create it nearby a geiger counter. This would suggest it has a mass.

 

But what is the link between this 'product' and thoughts? How do thoughts coordinate this 'energy' to make objects move? How does this energy forms?

 

Since somebody who practices psychokinesis can't exactly explain how an object moves - except saying that he sends energy to it in some cases - it is assumeable that your subconsciousness deals with this process.

 

So basicly we have:

 

Thoughts (attention/focus) -> energy -> force -> sub-c -> movement.

 

It's a bit of a crappy explanation, I know.

 

Think of it in an evolutionary context: the ability to affect physical objects with the mind alone would be a *phenomenally* useful trait. If it were possible' date=' why hasn't it arrisen in others species and become the norm? Or even just in the 500,000 years of human evolution?

 

The fact that, in all of the incredible biological diversity in the world, not a single species has ever developed the ability to use psychokinesis to me indicates that there's nothing there to use.

 

Mokele[/quote]

 

Your excluding a little thing here. You didn't include us, humans. We are a species too right?

 

I`m voting "I don`t know" quite simply because I Don`t.

 

what I DO KNOW is that it`s never a good idea to be TOO Certain with things such as this' date=' as they can have a nasty way of bitting you in the ass later.

it Does seem rather unlikely though.[/quote']

 

Good vote, If I may say so.

 

Yep, keep the healthy sceptisism alive. Never be too certain with anything.

[Mokele]

Your excluding a little thing here. You didn't include us, humans. We are a species too right?

 

Read it again: I specifically mention humans. If psychokinesis were possible for modern humans, why not for ancient ones? Why would they have not honed this ability? Since such individuals would have a huge advantage, why hasn't the genetic basis for this talent spread so that *all* humans are highly telekinetic?

 

Furthermore, human brains are no different than other species brains; ours is just bigger and more complicated. Any sort of 'force', 'energy' or what-have-you must be produced by some physical mechanism. Since our brains are made of the same components as other species, there's no reason to assume they would be unable to tap into this force as well, with the right configuration brain cells.

 

Even if you claim it's a learned skill, all learning is is changing the neural connections, so it's possible that, via mutation, some human or animal would be born with the right pattern already in their brain. From there, evolution takes over.

 

That goes for all 'psychic' abilities, too: if the capacity exists, why haven't other animals developed it, and why haven't earlier humans developed it?

 

It's all about the mechanism. In this case, we *know* there would have to be physical force involved, because an object moves. Therefore that force has to come from somewhere, and if it's a person, there must be a biological mechanism to generate that force. A biological mechanism must be part of the structure of the organism. No structure, no function, simple as that.

 

 

Oh, and by the way, anything with 'psion' that isn't science fiction automatically has no credibility with me, since the only other person I know who uses that term is some batshit-insane moron who thinks she sucked an 'energy vampire parasite' out of her body and imprisoned it between a pair of speaker magnets. But of course she can't take pictures of this 'psychic snotball' (her words), for some bullshit reason or another.

 

Mokele

[ecoli]

In the metaphysical sense, defiantely not. Perhaps psychokenesis may one day exist on a scientific princible we don't know about yet? Maybe, though I'm not going to hold my breath about it.

 

I mean, there are examples of people being able to control objects that run on electrical singals with their mind. I saw a video of a guy steer his boat, with just some electrodes attached to his head, and motors to control the helm. Perhaps, if there was some way to send those signals without wires, then we can develop technology that could allow us to control the movement of certain object with our minds. But, of course, this has nothing to do with the psuedoscience.

[spiritnl]

Read it again: I specifically mention humans. If psychokinesis were possible for modern humans, why not for ancient ones? Why would they have not honed this ability? Since such individuals would have a huge advantage, why hasn't the genetic basis for this talent spread so that *all* humans are highly telekinetic?

 

Yes, you mentioned humans. But you mentioned it with 'the fact' that we don't have telekinetic abilities. That's why I mentioned it. Mabye we are all telekinetic but don't use the ability from the day we are born. Maybe we are all telepathic but we regard incidents as 'coincidence'. This is another subject, but don't you have those feelings that you know that specific someone will call you, or that you just know what somebody is going to say, word by word.

 

Furthermore, human brains are no different than other species brains; ours is just bigger and more complicated. Any sort of 'force', 'energy' or what-have-you must be produced by some physical mechanism. Since our brains are made of the same components as other species, there's no reason to assume they would be unable to tap into this force as well, with the right configuration brain cells.

 

Maybe they can, but don't use it. Not going onto the psychokinetic-aspect of animals. But, it is accepted that dogs can 'sense' when your coming home. I was watching a documentary on discovery, I think. They put normall cells in 7 pots. And in one of them some cancer cells. The dog was capable to search the one with cancer cells and sit next to that one. And calculations showed that it was beyond the smell perception of the dog.

 

Even if you claim it's a learned skill, all learning is is changing the neural connections, so it's possible that, via mutation, some human or animal would be born with the right pattern already in their brain. From there, evolution takes over.

 

That goes for all 'psychic' abilities, too: if the capacity exists, why haven't other animals developed it, and why haven't earlier humans developed it?

 

It's all about the mechanism. In this case, we *know* there would have to be physical force involved, because an object moves. Therefore that force has to come from somewhere, and if it's a person, there must be a biological mechanism to generate that force. A biological mechanism must be part of the structure of the organism. No structure, no function, simple as that.

 

Maybe the 'force' doesn't come from within the human. That mechanism is pretty much unknown, although 'the force' has been messured. I am currently working on the aspect of messuring this specific force.

 

Oh, and by the way, anything with 'psion' that isn't science fiction automatically has no credibility with me, since the only other person I know who uses that term is some batshit-insane moron who thinks she sucked an 'energy vampire parasite' out of her body and imprisoned it between a pair of speaker magnets. But of course she can't take pictures of this 'psychic snotball' (her words), for some bullshit reason or another.

 

I know, anything with that word in it will be regarded as fluff instantly. That's because of the terrible image psionics has been givin by science and media. That girl may not have been able to give you a picture of that specific skill, real or not. But I can give you something of me.

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=P2Wy9_9RJ8M

 

And of a friend:

 

http://www.psistudies.net/_media/Lassenissen-levitation-paper-19nov-2006.JPG

 

- Me

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I suggest you talk to this guy.

[spiritnl]

Well, I could have expected him popping up in this discussion.

 

Yep, this will sound lame: but I am not interested in Randi's million. But who knows, maybe I will someday.

 

http://www.psipog.net/show.php?cmd=wp&id=14

 

VS.

 

http://www.skepticreport.com/skepticism/topjref.htm

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Okay, fine. But I'm not likely to believe you until you can prove yourself under controlled conditions.

[insane_alien]

hey whaddya know i can do the same thing to a can as well, just involves the disassembly of a speaker and the right positioning of a magnet.

 

lifting paper is even easier as you can use static charge to do it. totally not PK though.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I think the key point is this: Nobody, ever has ever managed to prove that they have psychic powers. If you think that you do, get yourself an experimental setup, some unbiased outsiders, and some recording equipment.

[Mokele]

Yes, you mentioned humans. But you mentioned it with 'the fact' that we don't have telekinetic abilities.

 

Prove me wrong. Real tests, not badly faked clips on youtube.

 

Mabye we are all telekinetic but don't use the ability from the day we are born.

 

And maybe we can all shapeshift into giant dinosaurs and fight crime, but nobody's learned how to do it yet.

 

This is another subject, but don't you have those feelings that you know that specific someone will call you, or that you just know what somebody is going to say, word by word.

 

No.

 

Maybe they can, but don't use it. Not going onto the psychokinetic-aspect of animals.

 

Oh, please, what a crappy dodge. Is there any reason why not? It would be a *huge* survival advantage, and *any* advantage would rapidly be selected for and spread through the population.

 

But, it is accepted that dogs can 'sense' when your coming home. I was watching a documentary on discovery, I think.

 

You are aware that dogs have an excellent sense of hearing, right?

 

They put normall cells in 7 pots. And in one of them some cancer cells. The dog was capable to search the one with cancer cells and sit next to that one. And calculations showed that it was beyond the smell perception of the dog.

 

Bullshit. Show me the source for this, and it had better be a peer-reviewed article.

 

Even if it is, it's a shitty experimental design. They "calculated" that the dog couldn't smell them? How, precisely, did they do that? We don't have anywhere *near* the understanding of olfaction necessary to pull that off, not to mention the chaotic and turbulent air currents in a room.

 

Maybe the 'force' doesn't come from within the human.

 

It still needs to be controlled, even if it originates from outside. And that still requires a mechanism.

 

although 'the force' has been messured

 

Sources? And crappy websites containing unverified claims are not sources.

 

But I can give you something of me.

 

You can blow on an empty soda can! Congratulations, you have the power of respiration!

 

And of a friend:

 

I've seen a pic just like that on Deviantart, only much higher quality, with an apple.

 

Trick photography is neat, but not proof.

 

Yep, this will sound lame: but I am not interested in Randi's million.

 

It's not lame, it's a cheap dodge to get around why you have no proof whatsoever.

 

I think the key point is this: Nobody, ever has ever managed to prove that they have psychic powers. If you think that you do, get yourself an experimental setup, some unbiased outsiders, and some recording equipment.

 

Seconded, strongly. Science is based around skepticism, and until you can prove your abilities, we will remain unconvinced and write you off as either a liar or delusional. After all, both are more common than real psychics (who, numbering a total of zero, are pretty easy to outnumber).

 

 

 

Look at it this way. Say I approached you and told you that I'd made a functional nuclear weapon in my garage, in spite of the fact I've got next to no knowledge of nuclear physics. Would you just assume I was telling the truth? Or would you demand proof? And how do you know I didn't just make a big, bomb-shaped exterior, hollow on the inside? You'd need to look inside it, of course. You get the drift.

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far no 'psychic' of any stripe has even been able to provide ordinary evidence.

 

Mokele

[spiritnl]

I think the key point is this: Nobody, ever has ever managed to prove that they have psychic powers. If you think that you do, get yourself an experimental setup, some unbiased outsiders, and some recording equipment.

 

Oh I will, give me some time here. I am currently experimenting with a former science teacher.

 

hey whaddya know i can do the same thing to a can as well, just involves the disassembly of a speaker and the right positioning of a magnet.

 

Yup, whatever you want to believe.

 

Prove me wrong. Real tests, not badly faked clips on youtube.

 

You should really watch your words there. I am not a faker and definitly not a liar. So don’t spred it around like it is a ‘fact’. And maybe one day I will prove you wrong without a video on Youtube.

 

Maybe they can, but don't use it. Not going onto the psychokinetic-aspect of animals.

 

Oh, please, what a crappy dodge. Is there any reason why not? It would be a *huge* survival advantage, and *any* advantage would rapidly be selected for and spread through the population.

 

What do you want me to say about it. You are right on that part, I guess.

 

You are aware that dogs have an excellent sense of hearing, right?

 

I think they were smart enough to ban that outside factor.

 

 

Even if it is, it's a shitty experimental design. They "calculated" that the dog couldn't smell them? How, precisely, did they do that? We don't have anywhere *near* the understanding of olfaction necessary to pull that off, not to mention the chaotic and turbulent air currents in a room.

 

They did not use that word, I used it. I think the only thing they mentioned was that it was beyond the smell perception of that dog.

 

 

It still needs to be controlled, even if it originates from outside. And that still requires a mechanism.

 

Yes it sure does, and that’s why it is either fake, or unknown.

 

 

 

 

 

Sources? And crappy websites containing unverified claims are not sources.

 

http://www.psipog.net/blog/2006/06/reproducible-results.html

 

You can blow on an empty soda can! Congratulations, you have the power of respiration!

 

I can’t blame you.

 

I've seen a pic just like that on Deviantart' date=' only much higher quality, with an apple.

 

Trick photography is neat, but not proof. [/quote']

 

I am aware that non of this is actual scientific proof. But don’t dismiss something you don’t know as false. I have the knowlegde over this material, you only have an opinion.

 

It's not lame, it's a cheap dodge to get around why you have no proof whatsoever.

 

Dude, what do you want me to do. I don’t think Randi will be to impressed seeing a can roll. And besides, I am 16 years, still at school. Do you wan’t me to step up to my parents: Hi mom, dad, can I do the Randi challenge?

 

Seconded, strongly. Science is based around skepticism, and until you can prove your abilities, we will remain unconvinced and write you off as either a liar or delusional. After all, both are more common than real psychics (who, numbering a total of zero, are pretty easy to outnumber).

 

Indeed, it ís based on scepticism. But healthy sceptisim. That includes; writing me off as either a liar, or a delusional, but also: maybe a kid who isn’t lying.

 

 

Look at it this way. Say I approached you and told you that I'd made a functional nuclear weapon in my garage, in spite of the fact I've got next to no knowledge of nuclear physics. Would you just assume I was telling the truth? Or would you demand proof? And how do you know I didn't just make a big, bomb-shaped exterior, hollow on the inside? You'd need to look inside it, of course. You get the drift.

 

There is one difference, you have next to no knowlegde of nuclear physics. I have knowlegde over this matter. I get your point. This ís an extraordinary claim. But you also have to understand why it is one. Because of the image your currently have. What if it wasn’t extraordinary.

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far no 'psychic' of any stripe has even been able to provide ordinary evidence.

 

Well, that is a matter that can be discussed though.

 

Okay, fine. But I'm not likely to believe you until you can prove yourself under controlled conditions.

 

Not asking you to. Only asking you to consider the fact psychokinesis might be real.

[the tree]

Not asking you to. Only asking you to consider the fact psychokinesis might be real.

Note what Mokele said:

And maybe we can all shapeshift into giant dinosaurs and fight crime, but nobody's learned how to do it yet.

What, prey tell, is the gain in considering that everything that could be possible, from the Universe's age being twenty seconds to the white house being held under hostage secretly by an army of pixies, might be real?

The scientific method does not go "hey, this could be possible, and it would be really cool, so let's work with the idea that it actually happens".

[spiritnl]

True. But without the 'hey, this could be possible' - people will not start realizing and this unique gift, if I may call it that, will be forgotten and go in the books as 'false'.

 

Nontheless, I was and am a sceptic too. So I am not asking you to just believe me either.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Sources? And crappy websites containing unverified claims are not sources.

http://www.psipog.net/blog/2006/06/reproducible-results.html

 

Oh, the irony.

 

My position is not that of "you're a moron and wrong." My position is "show me the evidence."

 

Also, one useful thing for you to do would be to take a probability class. Often times results from psychics are easily explained by probability - anybody with a bit of luck could do it. (Although probability doesn't explain moving soda cans, it can explain divining rods and such.)

[spiritnl]

Oh, the irony.

 

My position is not that of "you're a moron and wrong." My position is "show me the evidence."

 

Also, one useful thing for you to do would be to take a probability class. Often times results from psychics are easily explained by probability - anybody with a bit of luck could do it. (Although probability doesn't explain moving soda cans, it can explain divining rods and such.)

 

And why should I have to take a probability class.

 

It's a pretty irrelevant post. Why do you assume I don't know enough about probability. And besides, you are refering to micro-psychokinesis and other skills that could include probability. I am talking about macro-psychokinesis.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I am pointing out that the vast majority of "psychics" use simple probability and some tricks to achieve what they claim.

 

Any magician could do psychokinesis.

[Genjo]

Oh, the irony.

 

My position is not that of "you're a moron and wrong." My position is "show me the evidence."

 

Also, one useful thing for you to do would be to take a probability class. Often times results from psychics are easily explained by probability - anybody with a bit of luck could do it. (Although probability doesn't explain moving soda cans, it can explain divining rods and such.)

 

 

*sigh*....

 

Introduction to Dean Radin's (leading parapsychologist) Book

 

"Excerpt from Chapter 1

 

In science, the acceptance of new ideas follows a predictable, four-stage sequence. In Stage 1, skeptics confidently proclaim that the idea is impossible because it violates the Laws of Science. This stage can last from years to centuries, depending on how much the idea challenges conventional wisdom. In Stage 2, skeptics reluctantly concede that the idea is possible, but it is not very interesting and the claimed effects are extremely weak. Stage 3 begins when the mainstream realizes that the idea is not only important, but its effects are much stronger and more pervasive than previously imagined. Stage 4 is achieved when the same critics who used to disavow any interest in the idea begin to proclaim that they thought of it first. Eventually, no one remembers that the idea was once considered a dangerous heresy.

 

The idea discussed in this book is in the midst of the most important and the most difficult of the four transitions – from Stage 1 into Stage 2. While the idea itself is ancient, it has taken more than a century to conclusively demonstrate it in accordance with rigorous, scientific standards. This demonstration has accelerated Stage 2 acceptance, and Stage 3 can already be glimpsed on the horizon.

 

The idea is that those compelling, perplexing and sometimes profound human experiences known as "psychic phenomena" are real.

 

This will come as no surprise to most of the world’s population, because the majority already believes in psychic phenomena. But over the past few years, something new has propelled us beyond old debates over personal beliefs. The reality of psychic phenomena is now no longer based solely upon faith, or wishful thinking, or absorbing anecdotes. It is not even based upon the results of a few scientific experiments. Instead, we know that these phenomena exist because of new ways of evaluating massive amounts of scientific evidence collected over a century by scores of researchers.

 

Psychic, or "psi" phenomena fall into two general categories. The first is perception of objects or events beyond the range of the ordinary senses. The second is mentally causing action at a distance. In both categories, it seems that intention, the mind’s will, can do things that – according to prevailing scientific theories – it isn’t supposed to be able to do. We wish to know what is happening to loved ones, and somehow, sometimes, that information is available even over large distances. We wish to speed the recovery of a loved one’s illness, and somehow they get better quicker, even at a distance. Mind willing, many interesting things appear to be possible.

 

Understanding such experiences requires an expanded view of human consciousness. Is the mind merely a mechanistic, information-processing bundle of neurons? Is it a "computer made of meat" as some cognitive scientists and neuroscientists believe? Or is it something more? The evidence suggests that while many aspects of mental functioning are undoubtedly related to brain structure and electrochemical activity, there is also something else happening, something very interesting.

 

This is for real?

 

When discussing the reality of psi phenomena, especially from the scientific perspective, one question always hovers in the background: You mean this is for real? In the midst of all the nonsense and excessive silliness proclaimed in the name of psychic phenomena, the misinformed use of the term parapsychology by self-proclaimed "paranormal investigators," the perennial laughing stock of magicians and conjurers … this is for real?

 

The short answer is, Yes.

 

A more elaborate answer is, psi has been shown to exist in thousands of experiments. There are disagreements over to how to interpret the evidence, but the fact is that virtually all scientists who have studied the evidence, including the hard-nosed skeptics, now agree that there is something interesting going on that merits serious scientific attention. "

 

taken from

 

http://www.deanradin.com/NewWeb/TCUindex.html

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Alpha

 

That should tell you about the "research" conducted by scientists about "psi."

[spiritnl]

I am pointing out that the vast majority of "psychics" use simple probability and some tricks to achieve what they claim.

 

Any magician could do psychokinesis.

 

No, your pointing out that I suck ass at probability because I am 'one of those psychics'. Besides, I am not a psychic. I am a scientist (or a scientific person) who practices and researches psychic phenomena. I see a difference.

 

Any magician could do psychokinesis? Not really, any magician could do fake psychokinesis. But I get your point.

[Genjo]

Another thing while im on the subject...

 

According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumblebee should be incapable of flight, as it does not have the capacity (in terms of wing size or beat per second) to achieve flight with the degree of wing loading necessary, and yet, not being aware of scientists proving it cannot fly, the bumblebee succeeds.

 

simple things as nature go against common placed laws.

[Genjo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Alpha

 

That should tell you about the "research" conducted by scientists about "psi."

 

 

this has also been performed by Derren Brown. i suggest reading his book, its great

 

not the point.

 

it can easily be faked.

 

i think alot of psychicism is cold reading and NLP/ sub-concious techniques. thats a different matter.

 

psychokinesis... it can be faked. its either faked or its not. its not like "readings" where you can make the same assumption for everyone, or it can be "nearly correct". theres only 2 varibales. real and fake. i think most/all commercial psychics are fake. its incredibly easy to read someone.

 

but like i keep saying, Pk is different completely. i challenge you to try it.