Is Telekinesis Real or Just a Myth?

[einsteinian77]

Telekinesis is it possible? Why or why not

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't believe it is possible. The reason would be that the human brain/body can't generate the right kind of force to move something, or enough of the right kind of force.

The notion of telekenesis probably arose from people hallucinating for one reason or another; psychosis or psychoactive plants. It has been fostered by charlatans who can do some very convincing magic tricks they pass off as real telekenisis. (Hint: there are very thin strings attached)

 

[einsteinian77]

Why not? The body generates plenty of force to move itself.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by einsteinian77
Why not? The body generates plenty of force to move itself.

Yes, but not telekinetically.

 

[Jonathan]

I have seen some 'evidence' that telekinesis, if a true case has ever occurred, is due to an abnormal ability to generate static electricity (at will, without shuffling your feet). however, I can't say much on this, I just don't know. I doubt it would be very strong static electricity, so I lean toward no.

 

[wasteofo2]

Maybe you could consider those cybernetic monkeys that play videogames with their thoughts telekinetic, but they're aided by technology.

 

[Jeebus]

Uri Geller claims he can bend spoons and stop watches using only his thoughts to control the external objects. Others claim to be able to make pencils roll across a table by a mere act of will. The variety of parlor tricks used to demonstrate psychokinetic powers is endless.

I once tried to move an ant with my mind once, all he did was sit there. My size 11 Nike got upset and smooshed him.

 

[Yahweh]

Jeebus,
Make sure you source your information. Your information came from Skepdic.com - telekinesis and psychokinesis.

Originally posted by einsteinian77
Telekinesis is it possible? Why or why not

Telekinesis is not possible.

1. There are no mechanisms in the human body that allow for controlling of objects with the human "mind".

2. Quite a few Laws of Physics (i.e. Thermodynamics and Laws of Motion) will be violated (keep in mind that "forces" are not a substance).

3. All instances of supposed telekinesis always have natural mundane causes (i.e. They are not telekinesis). Example of "telekinesis":
A 1" square of paper is balanced on the point of a needle. The psychic puts his hand next to the paper, and then it begins rotating.

Is that an example of telekinesis? No, just an example of heat from the "psychic's" hand producing convections currents that push the paper. It's an old trick and tends to fool those ignorant of the Laws of Physics. If that same trick were performed in a vacuum, the paper would not rotate (of course, the "psychic" might be killed by exposing himself in a vacuum).


Those a few reasons I can think off the top of my head.

Keep in mind, Uri Gellar's spoon bending is just a magic trick. Anyone can perform it. All it takes is a little preparation of the spoon (i.e. bending it to score a weak spot in the spoon, that allows you to merely use your fingers to wiggle the spoon, that creates a crack in the spoon, it begins to bend, eventually the spoon will snap in half... total time to snap the spoon is about 45 seconds...).

 

[einsteinian77]

why do you assume to know the laws of physics when there isn't even a unified field theory yet. I would assume that there is much to be discovered in what life is in relation to the actual universe. The human mind is too incompetent to even think that it knows what the universe actually is. Just my thoughts.

 

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by einsteinian77
why do you assume to know the laws of physics when there isn't even a unified field theory yet. I would assume that there is much to be discovered in what life is in relation to the actual universe.

While there is no Unified Field Theory yet, that doesn't make applying the Laws of Physics somehow inadequate.

There is still much to discover, however telepathy is not one of those things. In the 1000s of test performed in controlled environments, there has yet to be a single instance of even a smidgen of proof for the existence of telekinesis.

If there is no evidence that a certain thing exists, we can assume that it exists for the purposes of hypothesis and experimentation (such as Quark Theory), but if repeated experimentation and/or observation fails to show evidence that the thing exists, we can be fairly certain that it just ain't there.

One must be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking that because there is no evidence that something does not exist, that it might exist.

The James Randi Educational Foundation is willing to offer the first person US$1,000,000 if they can demonstrate any feat of the supernatural (i.e. dowsing, telekinesis, telepathy, anything of the sort...). Australian Skeptics offer AU$100,000. In fact, the combined offers skeptical organizations around the world yield a combined US$2,326,500. What a way to get rich quick!

The human mind is too incompetent to even think that it knows what the universe actually is.

That reasoning almost sounds like an Ad hoc fallacy.

I've heard often "humans are too ignorant to comprehend claim X, so claim X is true because so-and-so and it cannot be disproved! Hahahaha" many times (they don't really laugh at the end). Of course, the "human mind is too incompetent" puts itself in a position where you have a universal negative, or an unfalsifyable hypothesis. That puts the claim on a very shaky (or even non-existent) foundation. There's no substance to saying the human mind is too incompetent to understanding so-and-so.

Its not good reasoning at all to assume "Well we haven't found evidence against its existence, so there's a chance that it does exist".

If its any help, the gateway between the puny competence of the human mind and the nature of the universe is called "Science".

 

[Jonathan]

Some of the things you said were just stupid.

While there is no Unified Field Theory yet, that doesn't make applying the Laws of Physics somehow inadequate.

The first automatically disallows the use of a theoretical proof as an absolute proof. The laws of physics are certainly well tested, but we would be very pompous, stupid, and prideful indeed if we thought that given experiments done on Earth for a few thousand years we could know anything of any relevance about the working, past, and future of the universe. Also,

Its not good reasoning at all to assume "Well we haven't found evidence against its existence, so there's a chance that it does exist".

That 'quote' is good reasoning, though it would be slightly more correct if it said 'a small chance'. If I look for my cat in the three most likly rooms, and cannot find her, I can conclude that there is a small chance that she has gotten outside. I would not conclude that this must be what happened until I have checked the 4th, 5th, and 6th rooms, and then double checked them all, and then tried yelling 'kitty, kitty, kitty, eat!' to get her to come out from hiding. If those fail, then the most likly thing is that she has gotten away. But given the evidence I had since I started looking for her, that was a possiblility the whole time.

 

[Bunting]

maybe telekenesis is just a subject which has not yet been uncovered due to the evolution of the human body not being able to "refine it" yet. Technically its possible surely. Sound is a force, it travels as waves, and can be heard from all drirections by your ears, because they are rigged to decode the information. However telekenetic waves may not yet have a way of being interpreted. Because we can not observe something, it would be a lot harder to work out what that thing is. I.e. if we did not have ears, or a way of decoding sound, who could tell how the course of history would be changed?

Theres also theproblem that EVEN IF we do have this, we may have the way of decoding it down, just not the way of transmitting it. Transmit any old sound wave in any old form and you get noise, and that's all. If telekinetic transmission is not wel developed, then oit would problalbly be undirection, weak signal strength or uncontrolled (you don't know what you are transmitting). I would favour (if any), the weak signal strength, due to some people claiming they do have it. There belief may be well founded.

Just my 2 cents! I don't reckon things are done until totally disproved :P

 

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Jonathan
Some of the things you said were just stupid.

http://216.218.248.155/datastore/28/2c/b/282c27771fc5c69322de4ddeddda82ed.jpg

The first automatically disallows the use of a theoretical proof as an absolute proof. The laws of physics are certainly well tested, but we would be very pompous, stupid, and prideful indeed if we thought that given experiments done on Earth for a few thousand years we could know anything of any relevance about the working, past, and future of the universe. Also,

From my original post:

Quite a few Laws of Physics (i.e. Thermodynamics and Laws of Motion) will be violated

Thermodynamics and the Laws of Motion are some of the most profound and important Laws in Physics. Most would regard those 2 sets of laws as "impossible to violate", there are certainly no other laws I can think of that have been tested so thoroughly and shown to be true.

(Note: This story relating to how the Law Of Entropy was violated, of course it would help if the authors would note how shaking a system adds energy to, no such violation of Thermodyanamics occurred...)

You mention "if we thought that given experiments done on Earth for a few thousand years we could know anything of any relevance about the working, past, and future of the universe". You don't do much to support yourself, do you believe that the "Natural Laws" (for lack of better terminology) have changed? If you can demonstrate this, your point might have a bit more credence. (Note: There is an established difference between laws written in a book which are revisable, and "Natural Law" which is irrevisable.)

That 'quote' is good reasoning, though it would be slightly more correct if it said 'a small chance'. If I look for my cat in the three most likly rooms, and cannot find her, I can conclude that there is a small chance that she has gotten outside. I would not conclude that this must be what happened until I have checked the 4th, 5th, and 6th rooms, and then double checked them all, and then tried yelling 'kitty, kitty, kitty, eat!' to get her to come out from hiding. If those fail, then the most likly thing is that she has gotten away. But given the evidence I had since I started looking for her, that was a possiblility the whole time.

Neither "Possibilites", nor "Percent Chances", nor "Statistical Likelyhoods" are absolute formulas which govern the world we live in.

By reading your analogy a few times, I see you don't have much a semantics based (in the significance of the word "possibility") overliteralized analogy, make sure to always exercise common sense (unknown to how that may be defined) when making judgements. Also, your analogy (where's kitty?) isn't analogous to my comments (The Laws of Thermodynamics and Motion - and other Laws - nullify any expectation of Telekinesis).

And please, if you are going to make a criticism, do so constructively (see first line of your response).

 

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Bunting
Just my 2 cents! I don't reckon things are done until totally disproved :P

By technicality, it is quite impossible to find empirical evidence against the occurence or existence of anything. This is one of the areas where Science and Philosophy begin to intermingle with one another, its known as "universal doubt" in laymens terms (or Pyrrhoism in Philosophical Terms).

It is actually quite a paradox:
How can your disprove the existence of something which does not already exist?

To get beyond this, Science derives itself from a few basic axioms (i.e. the external world exists is an example).

If I told you I could morph into a tiger at the snap of my fingers, what would it take to disprove that I really don't have this ability?

Follow-up: If my tiger-morphing claim can't be disproved, is it still possible?


Note: Dont let common sense fly out the window, keep your Philosophy separate from Science whenever you can.

 

[Jonathan]

1)Certaintly true, but unless the universe is finite I can prove that you can't actually be 100% sure about anything: epistemological pessimism and Godel's incompleteness theorem.
2)About you comments on the second law, I'd guess you don't know about emergent phenomena and chaos theory.
3)No, the natural laws do not change, what we think they are do. If I ask you to name all the natural laws, you and anyone else can only name what they think they are and add that you're sure that's not all of them, we're not done researching yet. We don't have God's book with all the exact laws in it, so my point is again about epistemological pessimism, we will never really know for sure if the laws we have are the right ones. In fact, if the universe is finite then technically there can be more than one theory that holds, but they could be proven, by definition, to be mathematically identical, and of only trivial conceptual difference.
4)This sounds contradictory to QM:

Neither "Possibilites", nor "Percent Chances", nor "Statistical Likelyhoods" are absolute formulas which govern the world we live in.

do we not live in a world made of particles? If we have only part of the info necessary to make a sound conclusion, can't we only come to statistical possiblities for conclusions?
5)I don't know what you are saying in this part:

By reading your analogy a few times, I see you don't have much a semantics based (in the significance of the word "possibility") overliteralized analogy, make sure to always exercise common sense (unknown to how that may be defined) when making judgements.

But I was referring to this:

Its not good reasoning at all to assume "Well we haven't found evidence against its existence, so there's a chance that it does exist".

not this:

The Laws of Thermodynamics and Motion - and other Laws - nullify any expectation of Telekinesis.

Which I completely agree with. I don't even entirly understand our arguemnet here, because we both agree that telekinesis probably isn't real, what we disagree on is why.
6)You are right, that was mean, I'm sorry.
I find these quotes to be wise/funny:

"The more important fundamental laws and facts of physical science have all been discovered, and these are now so firmly established that the possibility of their ever being supplanted in consequence of new discoveries is exceedingly remote... Our future discoveries must be looked for in the sixth place of decimals."
- Albert. A. Michelson, speech given in 1894 at the dedication of Ryerson Physics Lab, Univ. of Chicago

"In real life, every field of science is incomplete, and most of them - whatever the record of accomplisment during the last 200 years - are still in their very earliest stages."
- Lewis Thomas

"Wisest is she who knows she does not know."
- Anonymous

 

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Jonathan
2)About you comments on the second law, I'd guess you don't know about emergent phenomena and chaos theory.

I can say that I honestly don't know what Emergent Phenomena and Chaos Theory are.

4)This sounds contradictory to QM: do we not live in a world made of particles? If we have only part of the info necessary to make a sound conclusion, can't we only come to statistical possiblities for conclusions?

The bit about "possibilities do not govern our lives" what in relation to:

But given the evidence I had since I started looking for her, that was a possiblility the whole time.

I often have a problem with stating that things cannot be disproven because they have a possibility of existing or occurring. Its just a pet peeve of mine. *twitch*

For instance its possible that you are really a vat in a jar, and all the sensations of you have ever experiences were really figments of your imagination.

Its possible nothing and no one really exists, your own consciousness represents reality, everything is merely a figment of your imagination.

Its also possible that atoms don't really exist.

Its also possible that the gravity on the Earth will suddenly invert (AHHHHHH!) and we'll all fly away.

Its also possible the world is balanced on the back of a giant invisible turtle, and a wolf will eventually eat the Earth.

Of course, as long as you accept a few axioms, things such as the gravity on Earth inverting don't worry you so much.

The story with the cat, in my opinion, misrepresented the relationship between things which are uknown yet possible and things which are unknown yet impossible. Unless I'm being paranoid, it seemed like you were suggesting things which are possible, are actual (a philosophy called Actualism) until disproved. This is how some people legitimately justify saying "Precognition exists, we just don't know about yet". The general difference is of course the issue regarding metaphysical paradoxes (such as described above, where things are actual until disproved). I think I'm beginning to ramble now...

5)I don't know what you are saying in this part: But I was referring to this: not this: Which I completely agree with. I don't even entirly understand our arguemnet here, because we both agree that telekinesis probably isn't real, what we disagree on is why.

I wrote the post at 3:21 AM. Right now, its about 7:15 AM. I have an usual sleeping cycle, sometimes I decide not to go to bed. When I do that, I usually have more than one thought occurring inside my head at once... I have no idea what I was trying to say either.

6)You are right, that was mean, I'm sorry.
I find these quotes to be wise/funny:

:)

 

[einsteinian77]

There are already things in that scientist have found that do violate the current laws of physics such as dark matter and energy. They only violate laws of physics because the laws of physics, as we know it, aren't correct yet. That alone is proof that without a successful unified theory, we may be seeing the universe in a backwards view. To insist that what we call an absolute today will also be tomorrow is just dumb and goes against the natural progress of science in every way.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I have seen no good evidence for it, and not much anecdotal evidence.

 

[master_coda]

Originally posted by einsteinian77
There are already things in that scientist have found that do violate the current laws of physics such as dark matter and energy. They only violate laws of physics because the laws of physics, as we know it, aren't correct yet. That alone is proof that without a successful unified theory, we may be seeing the universe in a backwards view. To insist that what we call an absolute today will also be tomorrow is just dumb and goes against the natural progress of science in every way.

First of all, the examples you provided do not violate the laws of physics. And they never did.

As for a unified theory, if one is discovered, it will not significantly change many of the predictions that physics currently makes. Since many of the pedictions of our current model of physics are correct, and even if we get a completely new model it will have to make the same correct predictions.

Besides, simply saying "what we know today may be wrong" isn't really meaningful. No matter how much we know, you can always say that. Usually when people say "what we know today may be wrong" they forget to append "until what we know agrees with the way I think the universe should be".

 

[Dissident Dan]

For any kind of force to be applied, there needs to be a mechanism to communicate that force. This force would have to affect other objects along its path to the item you are trying to telekinetically move. As there is no mechanism to communicate directly from your brain to another object across the room, telekinesis is not possible.

 

[DJL]

telepathy, telekenesis

Well it is possible wether you choose to believe or not to believe, anything is possible the imagination is the key to the mind. you could ask me a question you felt there was no answer to an i shall give a valid and possible answer to your question.

"It is not that people know not what to say, its just they know not how"- Telepathy.

At the beginning of time the human mind was capable of all kinds of things but due to the advancing technology we have forgoton the gifts that our elders were born with: telekenises, telepathy, teleportation, levitation etc the human race choose not to believe the truth as they are incapable of dealing with it.
We know not of why we are here anymore or how it is that we came to be, the big bang? i don't think. the so called scientists can't admit they are wrong or have no idea so they create a reason that could be true, and in a way they are not so far from the truth.
But the truth is only known to the five and the five will never tell this is the most information the general public shall ever read and i doubt i will remain here to answer any questions anyone may have on this post.
If you believe you are capable of controlling or using your own mind properly then please contact me as i am looking for some people, my purpose in life was another but now that is not possible so i am searching for others they know who they are but may not believe their visions thoughts dreams feelings... if you are reading this and it makes sense then please reply if you have no idea what I'm talkin about then please do not contact me.
sri cun shamna si cuns shirat of the moons stars sun /an the Earth the power u behold is the power above

 

[einsteinian77]

I share the same beliefs as you somewhat, but I'm confused when say "the truth belongs to the five". could you maybe be more specific about what you said?

 

[DJL]

I believe there are five people alive at any time who know the true capabilities of the mind and the truth of the existence of the human mind, how or why i believe this i don't know yet i feel and know i was born with strange knowledge, knowledge which to other people makes no sense maybe I'm crazy or maybe i know. but who is to know? there are only two ways to find out one way i choose not to take and the other i am waiting for.
I will understand if you have no idea as to what I'm talking about or do not share the thoughts i have, i have theories for everything although they may be my own and personal to me i believe there are people out there who share them.
I cannot go into detail as to my beliefs as i feel the people i am looking for could tell me what i already know, and will understand my code and meaning

 

[Viendin]

Hello, I'm sorry I can't speak now, as I have to leave. I just wanted to say this before I go.

What if I have a theory which fits fairly well within the boundaries of physical and thermodynamical laws, that allows Telepathy, Telekinesis, and a fair amount of psionic phenomena in general?

Well, I'm fairly sure I do.

Anyrate, I will be back, Sorry I can't say anything now.

EDIT: As no one has posted since, I'll put this here now.

Telekinesis is something which has a basically undefined amount of power. There seem to be those that say if it were possible, it would only be enough to, say, have a paper move a particular direction while falling. Three times out of ten.

Others say that there's no physics involved, it's simply beyond what we know, anyone can do anything. They just have to believe.

Well, be glad I'm not here to spew crap about 'believing', or anything particularly wondramazing.

A well established and known fact is that Electricity is tied quite closely with Magnetism, of course, forming Electromagnetism! Both sides of this wonderful force have wonderful and grand qualities, Magnetism being able to affect non-ferride objects when placed in the proper arrays* and Electricity allowing communications, not being really bound into gravity in any significant** way, and being able to exert rather extreme amounts of force on objects when used properly.

Now, we, as humans, generate quite a bit of electricity. This is also well known and established; that our synapses fire electric pulses many times a second, sending these along conductive pathways to neurons inside clusters in our spine, respectively splitting off and traveling to the required smaller clusters, down and down until they actually hit the receiver they are intended for, causing a chemical production, the tissue tightens, and your finger moves. Blah blah, we know it from basic biology.

Next, We have magnetism. If you gather magnets in a pattern similar to a hollow sphere around an object, a displacement will occur, the object's particles will space out a bit, and the object will begin to float. By moving the sphere, you move the object. It's been exhibited by NASA a number of times.

Back to Electromagnetism. We have electric current causing magnetic fields, and magnetic fields causing electric currents, it's quite a fancy little setup used in generators these days, no?

Now we have humans generating electricity, magnets moving non-ferride objects in the right patterns, and electric currents acting as magnets. I'm sure you see the connection, but here's the kink in the theory.

In order to have this work beyond a doubt, the neurotransmitters would have to be fired to a position outside of the body, in rather complex formations, and in high concentrations for extended periods of time. Told you it was a kink, eh?

This is where Biofeedbacking enters the picture. Through a large amount of time spent 'visualizing' a 'third arm' extending from your chest, and constantly imagining moving that arm, extending it, flexing it, concentrating as much as possible on what it would actually feel like, really acting like it is there, you end up 'tricking' your synapses into firing off course with the neural pathways when you need to. This is the big hike that is hardest to believe, and it is where the most problems in the idea lie. However, Biofeedbacking is at times accepted as a proven concept/method, and I believe this is where it is truly tested.

Through biofeedbacking, and yet more intense concentration, the firing rate of your synapses increases dramatically, and the control over which direction the pulses they fire go in also increases. After much practice and testing, it is definitely theoretically possible that any human being could use Telekinesis.

Tying Telepathy into this isn't as hard as you would think. Were two individuals to actively send neurotransmitters back and forth, their brains would be likely to interpret them as signals of some sort. Here is yet another hazy area which all skeptics would love to avoid, but ah well, the Subconscious. It is generally accepted that when these work, it is mainly through the accidents and hidden abilities of one's subconscious, that if you have enough 'want', or enough stress on the need to get a message to someone, then the neurotransmitters sent will be intercepted in the proper area in their brains, and they will know what you are thinking. Much more difficult would be reception of signals from an unintending individual, in which case you would have to remotely issue commands for them to send neurotransmitters.

I don't expect you to jump right in and yell 'OKAY!', but I do expect you to realize that, despite the holes in this theory, there is at least moderate evidence for the possibility of Telekinesis within the range of physics.

I intend to do extensive tests on the subject, and were someone found who claimed to do Telekinesis, I would ask them to perform it on or near a compass, the slight magnetic fields would disrupt the subtle fields of the earth, and spin the needle, even slightly. After I find my compass which I have so conveniently misplaced, I will test this theory myself, and more than 80% certainly prove myself wrong. Until that day, I stand by this possibility, and I ask you to knock it to pieces, so that I may combat it, and strengthen my own case for the day I present it will full sources and backup.

*, **: I know I used these, but I think I explained my sources during the text, and I'm in a rush, I apologise.

 

[Viendin]

Any replies in the works?

 

[zoobyshoe]

One major flaw in the information your reasoning is based upon is the notion that humans generate alot of electricity. Humans generate a tiny, tiny amount of electricity:

The voltage generated by brain cells and picked up by EEG is extremely small – between 20 and 100 microvolts after amplification on the order of ten thousand times. The signal is so small that electrical interference, called artifacts, from outside sources – for example, motors, overhead lights, even an eye blink – is often as strong as the signal that the EEG is trying to detect. When reading EEG charts, physicians need skill and experience to distinguish artifacts from brain activity and to decode the brain's electrical rhythms into diagnostic information.
The skull is a poor conductor of electricity that interferes with the transmission of electrical charges to the scalp. Although the brain and the scalp are separated by only a few millimetres, the distance is an enormous chasm in EEG terms.

Neuromontréal EEG
Address:http://www.mni.mcgill.ca/nm/1998s/en/EEG.html

 

[einsteinian77]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
One major flaw in the information your reasoning is based upon is the notion that humans generate alot of electricity. Humans generate a tiny, tiny amount of electricity:



Neuromontréal EEG
Address:http://www.mni.mcgill.ca/nm/1998s/en/EEG.html

But isn't that electricity that was tested used for only telling the body what to do and was not a full potential.

 

[skywise]

What if you attached conductors to the head? *giggle* I'm reminded of Professor Xavier hooked up to 'Cerebro'.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by einsteinian77
But isn't that electricity that was tested used for only telling the body what to do and was not a full potential.

Hmmmm. I'm only aware of what "electricity" is generated in the brain and nerves. (This is an extremely different thing than the way it is generated in a battery or a generator, incidently. In nerves it's all a matter of positive ions moving from outside the neurons into the neurons and back out again. The "flow" is actually more like a wave of ions going from outside to inside the cell, rather than free electrons traveling along it.)

You may have to post in the biology section to find out if the body produces any electricity stronger than what is generated in the brain and nerves. If there is, I'm pretty confident it is also quite tiny.

 

[Daggath]

not quite Telekinesis but...

Well, I had a concept that maby you guys might want to mull over, or rapidly disprove.

It is establised that humans generate infer-red light energy right?

also that people, like all objects, have a electromagetic field to some extent.

And considering that the human mind (not nessicarly the conscoius mind) has a great deal of control over the body,

is it possible that humans could learn to manipulate the radiating energys that naturaly are emmited, to a productive end? Or perhaps temporarly realigning some iron or something in their body to create an abnormaly larger energy field(electromagnetic or whatever)?

I used to have a friend that if she got near anything electronic, it would fritz out like the TV. Digital watches would really get messed up when she wore them. I have lost contact with her though, she moved.

Was this due to a magnetic field, or something else? like the radio would get all staticy too... could she be emitting radio waves? i doubt it but, we could never figuare it out.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Even if we could somehow control our "output" as you suggest, there is just not enough energy involved to be significant - only a small fraction of a fraction of the energy and momentum needed for any real world, macroscopic objects.

In short, we don't know of any way that something like this could be possible; even in principle.

 

[Daggath]

Well, i think there may be enough energy... because of my experiances with my friend (what explanation would you come up with to explain her unusual 'ability', if not a significant magnetic field?), and the other possibility that i was thinking about was perhaps with the energy we do have we might somehow control or influency how eisen-states collapse (Quantum mechanics and the superposition of states)

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Maybe she had static electricity in her clothes...another victim of the great Cling Free shortage?

I have heard many such claims but I don't know of any legitimate evidence that certain persons really have such an influence on electronics. If there are such people this would be very interesting. Could you tell us exactly what you actually saw?

Also, to influence a radio signal, for example, may not be amazing. People make really good antenna's. To make the radio move by using one's mind would be amazing.

 

[Daggath]

... static electrity? Can that cause the T.V. to get all static like when she entered the room? ... hmm let's see what i can remember, when she was at school we found a room whose lights would flicker when she entered the room... um, digital watches were usually ok a couple of minutes after we took them away from her. The lcd screen would put out garbage, or sometimes time would 'stop', unually it would just make garbage though. As far as i know she didn't have any telekinetic powers to move things, just the ability to make electronics screwy. Oh i just remembered, she could use the big flashlights without a problem but the small ones would flicker when she held it.

dang i wish i was still in contact with her, Jackie was really cool...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

If there is any way to contact her, you should. I am quite sure that nearly any Physicist would love to see a demonstration. To the best of my knowledge, such documented abilities would be quite a revelation.

The problem here is that this would seemingly be so amazing, it is hard to believe that it could have been missed. Anyone who truly has this ability should run, not walk, to the nearest physics department.

 

[SanguineHorizon]

The natural laws, firstly, are just that - natural. We have no control over them, and limited understanding of them. Why could they not change? The universe is far from coherent, and if memory serves me, the scientific community is -still- trying to validate the 'big bang' theory - one that remains unproven. Fundamental 'laws' are changed every day in order to have this idea or that theory work. That is the process of science, and the scientific community would do well to remember it's past and it's fallibility.

Telekinesis is not possible.

1. There are no mechanisms in the human body that allow for controlling of objects with the human "mind". - Incorrect. The abnomoly know as 'crop circles' has been attributed to sound, of incredibly high pitch - which by rights should incinerate the plants, yet all it does is create a couple of tiny little holes to let the evaporated water out of the (now bent and elongated) stems. There is no such mechanism that science has yet determined to account for this. The cellular structure of the soil below these warped plants is changed - something that takes thousands of years and incredible pressure - still no mechanism described by science. Why is that? Oh yeah, that's right, we don't know everything.

2. Quite a few Laws of Physics (i.e. Thermodynamics and Laws of Motion) will be violated (keep in mind that "forces" are not a substance). - The laws of physics are only employed when it is to science's advantage. Consider the Creation of the universe. How can an effect manifest without a cause? So too the vibration of every tiny piece of matter in existence. What is the cause to the effect? Again the incompetency of our explanations of the working universe is made clear.

3. All instances of supposed telekinesis always have natural mundane causes (i.e. They are not telekinesis). Example of "telekinesis": In 1974, members of the Toronto Society for Psychical Research decided to 'create' a ghost. 'Philip' they named him, and gave him a history, image and filled in the gaps. Much to their delight, 'Philip' began to manifest as various phenomena associated with Telekinisis/Poltergeist activity. This was recorded on tape, on television, and in the prescence of 'orthodox' testers and large crowds. 'Philip's' behaviour changed depending on those 'calling' him. For example, when a non smoker was in the group, 'Philip' became agitated and aggressive if someone smoked.

It's all very easy to say 'there is no evidence' of such-and-such an anomoly, but ask yourself this - have you looked?

 

[SanguineHorizon]

Here's the main problem

- 'Believers' refuse to allow scientific theory to be applied to their ideas, which they see as something of a secret trust. No matter what experiment we do, the context and motivation are critical in analysis, and the simple fact of the matter is, many 'psychics' (I can't be bothered coming up with an elegant, scientific psuedonym) simply don't want to be proven correct, and many others are badgered so incessantly by the scientificcommunity that it can screw with their focus, thus throwing out of whack everything they try and achieve. All "Psi Factor" anomolies are dependent on the subjcts state of conciousness, and interference with that is paramount in distorting correct results.

Secondly, the Scientific community is determined to refuse even the possibility of a force that we are yet incapable of measuring or understanding completely, despite the fact that we ARE STANDING IN A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF IMPOSSIBILITY, OUR OWN UNIVERSE.
A scientific analysis will in no way differentiate between 'standard' and 'gourmet' food. The difference can mean volumes to the refined palate, (and the bill) and yet the analytical aspect can in no way define between the two. Welcome to our world. Instead of trying to reduce it to mere numbers, how about living it, and let your palate become learned...

 

[Michaelpol]

You might want to reconcider not believing because telekinesis is indeed real i can do it a little so can my friend but he was born with the ability already knowing how to do it.I had to learn how to do it but i asure you Telekinesis is real.Believe what you want but i assure you it is real. People have done this.I didnt believe it at first until i tried doing it for 2 months when i was about to give up i tried it one last time and to my surprise it moved.So do not doubt physics because telekinesis isn't denying physics it is just matter of mind gravity is still acting on the object but the gravity is not strong enough to defy the minds powers.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

You might want to reconcider not believing because telekinesis is indeed real i can do it a little so can my friend but he was born with the ability already knowing how to do it.I had to learn how to do it but i asure you Telekinesis is real.Believe what you want but i assure you it is real. People have done this.I didnt believe it at first until i tried doing it for 2 months when i was about to give up i tried it one last time and to my surprise it moved.So do not doubt physics because telekinesis isn't denying physics it is just matter of mind gravity is still acting on the object but the gravity is not strong enough to defy the minds powers.

What is it that you do?

 

[Michaelpol]

Plus you haven't tried this.it takes time to learn TK so don't doubt the powers of the mind.

 

[Michaelpol]

I can move paper clips and move small objects around the table

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I can move paper clips and move small objects around the table

Can you do this in front of other people?

 

[Michaelpol]

Infact i can

 

[Michaelpol]

Do not doubt the minds powers i mean if its smart enough to learn can't it learn other things

 

[JohnDubYa]

RE: "Sound is a force, it travels as waves, and can be heard from all drirections by your ears, because they are rigged to decode the information. However telekenetic waves may not yet have a way of being interpreted."

But if they exist they would be detectable. After all, those that claim telekenesis exists discuss examples where material objects are moved. Any force that can move an object of appreciable mass can be detected. If you can bend a spoon, you can bend a gauge needle. And so you could not only demonstrate the effect, you could measure it. And you could replicate it.

But all attempts have failed. No evidence exists that telekensis exists, and there is no good reason to believe that it exists. So why believe in its existence? Why even entertain the notion?

Let me give you an example: Suppose I claimed that I could take a ball bearing and crush it to the size of an atom. I put a ball bearing in my palm, close my fist, and open it to show an empty palm. I explain my ability in tems of supernatural forces that have yet to be discovered. Suppose I demonstrate this effect to passerbys on a street corner. When asked by people to demonstrate the effect under close scrutiny, I am unable. On one occasion a passerby catches me sliding the ball bearing up my shirt sleeve (remember that Uri Geller was caught using sleight-of-hand as well.)

Should people entertain the notion that I have this power?

There isn't a lick of difference between my supposed power and telekenesis. Both make no reasonable sense. Both have plenty of anecdotal evidence, but no scientific evidence, to support them.

The conclusion is simple: Telekenesis doesn't exist except as a magic trick.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Infact i can

So you are the living proof of telekinesis; how about that.

Why don't we see you on TV?

 

[Michaelpol]

Telekinetics are not freaks to be seen on tv like clowns in a circus. We are not some magic act. As i said before do not doubt powers of the mind. The mind is the ultimate tool. you have a conscious and a sub conscious the sub conscious is the one that does telekinesis. By telekinesis you can learn to control your sub conscious plus If one gets nervous doing this your sub conscious will not be able to be controlled. I am no freak. I am a born human and i learned Telekinesis by training.

 

[Michaelpol]

RE: "Sound is a force, it travels as waves, and can be heard from all drirections by your ears, because they are rigged to decode the information. However telekenetic waves may not yet have a way of being interpreted."

But if they exist they would be detectable. After all, those that claim telekenesis exists discuss examples where material objects are moved. Any force that can move an object of appreciable mass can be detected. If you can bend a spoon, you can bend a gauge needle. And so you could not only demonstrate the effect, you could measure it. And you could replicate it.

But all attempts have failed. No evidence exists that telekensis exists, and there is no good reason to believe that it exists. So why believe in its existence? Why even entertain the notion?

Let me give you an example: Suppose I claimed that I could take a ball bearing and crush it to the size of an atom. I put a ball bearing in my palm, close my fist, and open it to show an empty palm. I explain my ability in tems of supernatural forces that have yet to be discovered. Suppose I demonstrate this effect to passerbys on a street corner. When asked by people to demonstrate the effect under close scrutiny, I am unable. On one occasion a passerby catches me sliding the ball bearing up my shirt sleeve (remember that Uri Geller was caught using sleight-of-hand as well.)

Should people entertain the notion that I have this power?

There isn't a lick of difference between my supposed power and telekenesis. Both make no reasonable sense. Both have plenty of anecdotal evidence, but no scientific evidence, to support them.

The conclusion is simple: Telekenesis doesn't exist except as a magic trick.

How would you know this have you spent 10 years trying it? I didnt think so . Dont go and doubt anything you have not tried.

 

[Michaelpol]

Crushing a ball is not Telekinesis. Making someone sick is not Telekinesis. Einstein explained it could be done by strong minds that believe in it. This is a known fact.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Can you give a citation for this Einstein claim?