Eldad Eshel Posted January 20, 2016 Author Posted January 20, 2016 My next step is getting the wheel to spin with the bowl placed over it, the thing is that this is harder, sort of like moving a metal spoon that is heavier. No one knows really how harder this is, it could be alot harder and could take me some time. Still, and in case this takes too much time, I believe academic testing even without the bowl will still yield positive results. I live close to a university and maybe soon I will contact them.
John Cuthber Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 My next step is getting the wheel to spin with the bowl placed over it, the thing is that this is harder, sort of like moving a metal spoon that is heavier. No one knows really how harder this is, it could be alot harder and could take me some time. Still, and in case this takes too much time, I believe academic testing even without the bowl will still yield positive results. I live close to a university and maybe soon I will contact them. Or it might be impossible because telekinesis doesn't exist.
Eldad Eshel Posted January 20, 2016 Author Posted January 20, 2016 Or it might be impossible because telekinesis doesn't exist. You know what, till my own recent experience with telekinesis I wouldn't know how to answer your "claim". I would probably say something like "You don't really know that, and I would like to believe that it does exist". But now with my personal experience I can say confidently that it does exist.
Robittybob1 Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 My next step is getting the wheel to spin with the bowl placed over it, the thing is that this is harder, sort of like moving a metal spoon that is heavier. No one knows really how harder this is, it could be alot harder and could take me some time. Still, and in case this takes too much time, I believe academic testing even without the bowl will still yield positive results. I live close to a university and maybe soon I will contact them. Why do say "harder"? Are you trying to do make it move by thinking about it? So what is the thought process?
kisai Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 (edited) You certainly are taking a roundabout trip to wealth and fame. Two weeks should have been more than enough for you to successfully proven your telekinesis in a controlled environment to scientists. Are you in contact with an academic or scientific institution yet? Edited January 20, 2016 by kisai
Strange Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 But now with my personal experience I can say confidently that it does exist. With things like this, evidence shows that "personal experience" is the worst possible evidence.
Eldad Eshel Posted January 20, 2016 Author Posted January 20, 2016 You certainly are taking a roundabout trip to wealth and fame. Two weeks should have been more than enough for you to successfully proven your telekinesis in a controlled environment to scientists. Are you in contact with an academic or scientific institution yet? Not yet. I am waiting for my "power" to "grow". And indeed I am getting better results these days. I still am not able to spin it with the glass bowl over it which might be an academic requisite and is also my next goal. If I do not get it to move with the bowl in the next week or 2 I will contact the university.
John Cuthber Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 How much effort are you going to put into this before you realise you have been fooling yourself? Incidentally, I don't think a university will take you seriously.
Phi for All Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 Incidentally, I don't think a university will take you seriously. Certainly not if he can't remove other possibilities. Tell them you can do it no matter how they set up the test, and they might bite. But give them results of your own tests, give them no reason to think you've faked it or misinterpreted it, show them some supportive evidence and you will probably get someone who will at least give you some more feedback. Which would most likely be more tests, but that's what he wants. Still, and in case this takes too much time, I believe academic testing even without the bowl will still yield positive results. Without the bowl, you can remove the word "academic" from this sentence. Any testing without removing outside influence will yield NO results. It won't support either option, true or false. It will just be flawed methodology.
Eldad Eshel Posted January 21, 2016 Author Posted January 21, 2016 Certainly not if he can't remove other possibilities. Tell them you can do it no matter how they set up the test, and they might bite. But give them results of your own tests, give them no reason to think you've faked it or misinterpreted it, show them some supportive evidence and you will probably get someone who will at least give you some more feedback. Which would most likely be more tests, but that's what he wants. Without the bowl, you can remove the word "academic" from this sentence. Any testing without removing outside influence will yield NO results. It won't support either option, true or false. It will just be flawed methodology. Can't they monitor the air and heat with machines ?
Phi for All Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 Can't they monitor the air and heat with machines ? Packing peanuts and thermometers.
StringJunky Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) ....Without the bowl, you can remove the word "academic" from this sentence. Any testing without removing outside influence will yield NO results. It won't support either option, true or false. It will just be flawed methodology. Yes, if telekinetic forces can pass out through the skull it should pass through clear glass... but maybe bone is telekinetically transparent and other materials are not? Edited January 22, 2016 by StringJunky
Robittybob1 Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) Yes, if telekinetic forces can pass out through the skull it should pass through clear glass... but maybe bone is telekinetically transparent and other materials are not? Having done a bit more discovery on the topic I have heard the "force" comes out from the hands. There is a series of videos by Darryl Sloan who also is trying to discover the science behind PSI and I believe he was able to get his PSI wheel to turn (a quarter turn only) under a glass bowl. There could be basic science behind it but check out this video yourself. Edited January 22, 2016 by Robittybob1
John Cuthber Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 Yes, if telekinetic forces can pass out through the skull it should pass through clear glass... but maybe bone is telekinetically transparent and other materials are not? Or maybe this force only works when nobody is watching.
Robittybob1 Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) Or maybe this force only works when nobody is watching. This was checked as well with a video camera repeatedly recording an unwatched psi-wheel and it was found it did not move when there was nobody watching. OK the two videos only recorded 1/4 and 1/2 turn but something is better than nothing I suppose. In fact the 1/4 turn was so slow it was really strange. It was faster (possibly about 6 times) than the minute hand of a clock, like it took a couple of minutes to do the 1/4 turn. I am still thinking it has something to do with gravity and the foil slipping around to a more negative potential energy state. If he got it to do more than a complete circulation I'd have to consider another cause. Edited January 22, 2016 by Robittybob1
ajb Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 I am surprised that this thread is still open! Three important points here. Telekinesis i) has no proposed mechanism; ii) would break several of the established laws of physics, (eg conservation of momentum); iii) has been investigated by scientists for over 130 years with not a single piece of creditable evidence that it exists. We can rather safely conclude that this thread is simply based on a hoax.
Robittybob1 Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 I am surprised that this thread is still open! Three important points here. Telekinesis i) has no proposed mechanism; ii) would break several of the established laws of physics, (eg conservation of momentum); iii) has been investigated by scientists for over 130 years with not a single piece of creditable evidence that it exists. We can rather safely conclude that this thread is simply based on a hoax. I did not see any sign of a hoax.
swansont Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 Can't they monitor the air and heat with machines ? What you have to consider is that you have to assuage outside skepticism (to some reasonable level), not your own. The easiest person to fool is yourself. If the people you are trying to convince think that mere monitoring is insufficient, then it's insufficient. Having done a bit more discovery on the topic I have heard the "force" comes out from the hands. There is a series of videos by Darryl Sloan who also is trying to discover the science behind PSI and I believe he was able to get his PSI wheel to turn (a quarter turn only) under a glass bowl. There could be basic science behind it but check out this video yourself. Two things: It's obviously settling in at the beginning, from residual air movement inside the bowl and/or gravity acting on asymmetries. He didn't wait very long before his attempt. Doesn't rule out further settling. When he blows, it moves. Therefore, air currents from outside are not ruled out.
Robittybob1 Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) What you have to consider is that you have to assuage outside skepticism (to some reasonable level), not your own. The easiest person to fool is yourself. If the people you are trying to convince think that mere monitoring is insufficient, then it's insufficient. Two things: It's obviously settling in at the beginning, from residual air movement inside the bowl and/or gravity acting on asymmetries. He didn't wait very long before his attempt. Doesn't rule out further settling. When he blows, it moves. Therefore, air currents from outside are not ruled out. Further settling is the only thing that I can suggest too. He can't get movement every time. Does that suggest sometimes the set up was perfectly balanced to begin with, yet in the discussion he said there were times when it rotated more than two revolutions but they weren't recorded, so that makes settling more difficult to accept but still not impossible. Air currents were ruled out. There was no way air could affect the wheel under the bowl. He demonstrated that the wheel didn't move when he walked around the table. I also viewed another video where he explores the reasons behind the movement, called Telekinesis does distance matter? Just about debunks the idea himself! Edited January 22, 2016 by Robittybob1
Endy0816 Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 I've seen similar setup's where a non-level table allowed air to pass under. Really need to seal it, let it settle and then try it.
swansont Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 Further settling is the only thing that I can suggest too. He can't get movement every time. Does that suggest sometimes the set up was perfectly balanced to begin with, yet in the discussion he said there were times when it rotated more than two revolutions but they weren't recorded, so that makes settling more difficult to accept but still not impossible. Air currents were ruled out. There was no way air could affect the wheel under the bowl. He demonstrated that the wheel didn't move when he walked around the table. And then he blew under one part, and it did move. Thus, air currents are not ruled out. Walking just shows that weak ambient currents are ruled out, not stronger, directed ones. We don't know if there was a bigger gap elsewhere. We don't see his face during the time the foil is moving.
John Cuthber Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 I did not see any sign of a hoax. There is none so blind as he who will not see. 2
Eldad Eshel Posted January 22, 2016 Author Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) There is none so blind as he who will not see. Hoax = scam, as in not my particular case. I have no intention to fool anyone. There was mentioned the breaking of the laws of physics. I think today's physics need a good slap in the face. Even if it means the breaking of the most strict rules. Physics have been there forever with it's strict rules, weighing down on us, not to "god forbid" be broken. I am sure alot of the laws of physics will be broken eventually, like the rule of the speed of light, which from my reading has already been scientifically broken. The current laws of physics prevent alot from us, like for example space travel. Man will have to leave planet earth one day and find a new home, hopefully physics' laws will be long broken by then. Edited January 22, 2016 by Eldad Eshel -2
Phi for All Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 I think today's physics need a good slap in the face. Even if it means the breaking of the most strict rules. Physics have been there forever with it's strict rules, weighing down on us, not to "god forbid" be broken. I am sure alot of the laws of physics will be broken eventually, like the rule of the speed of light, which from my reading has already been scientifically broken. The current laws of physics prevent alot from us, like for example space travel. Man will have to leave planet earth one day and find a new home, hopefully physic's laws will be long broken by then. Wow. I thought you were serious about this, but you're a complete crackpot. You have no idea what you're talking about. You should stop talking and go back to school. I can't believe you said this. 2
Recommended Posts