Psionics

Urizen

Psionics, the 'scientific' study of psychic phenomena, ranging from telepathy and remote viewing to psychokinesis. Anyone have any thoughts on this field? Does anyone else have an interest?

I myself have studied this, on and off, for the last 7 or so years. As a result, I'm either deluding myself into belief or parts of it actually does work. I also ran a couple of workshops for DCUPS that seemed to go well, at least as far as psi balls and shielding were concerned.

meryem

It ask for amazing psychic ability to move or mold things according to ones wishes. But the main thing is how many guys are there actually around the world with such a strong psychic power.

Urizen

I don't think any. All videos I've seen online of PK in action are easily explained by offscreen fans, magnets, string etc.

That said, the best way to know is by taking action yourself. But after 2 years of staring at a psi-wheel, I got bored. So I'm not a fan of PK or it's cousins. But manipulating psi and making small constructs does seem to work, or at least be convincing enough to the senses. It's an argument of thought over substance, really.

meryem

You seems to me right. We need to find someone really capable to do things likewise.

lolo62

how would you go about studying psionics scientifically? if physics is the study of matter in motion then wouldnt it take a quantum physicist to reach a scientific conclusion?

i have some experience working with similar methods, although coming from a different angle, and i just go by what i feel....much quicker than science and definitely quicker than becoming a quantum physicist

Urizen

lolo62 wrote: »

how would you go about studying psionics scientifically? if physics is the study of matter in motion then wouldnt it take a quantum physicist to reach a scientific conclusion?

There's actually been a good deal of thought on the quantum side of things. The theory I'd personally go with is that 'psi' could well be the fifth fundamental force of physics, which is so far just speculated on, but expected by some reputable physicists. The problem with this is that it would turn conventional physics into the conceptual equivalent Swiss cheese. And, since all scientific equipment is designed to measure known forces, it'd take either a colossal amount of funding or a freak accident before proper scientists even attempt any serious study or investigation.

And, to be fair, I'm not a physicist, I'm a chemist. But you could still apply the scientific method to anything you do (which I do) and essentially keep a record of what is going on (which I've done for the last few years).

Since at this stage I'm pretty sure no one else has been attempting this, or is simply unwilling to discuss it, I'll post a link to the site that got me started, PsiPog.net. There's some excellent information up there, and it's an easy place to get the basics of the field, both theory and practice, from people who didn't take themselves too seriously.

lolo62

I think youre right about this stuff turning conventional physics to 'swiss cheese' (nice metaphor!) and also its true most 'reputable scientists' dont want to touch this stuff as it makes the rest look like billiard ball mechanics and they would be ridiculed and ostracised by their peers as has happened countless times in the past...

thats great that youre keeping records...im not so organised but it might be something ill try in the future...im not a scientist and my method generally tends to be 'ok i felt that'

there are lots of people out there doing this stuff but i think theyd rather keep their experiences to themselves instead of have to try and explain to people who just dont want to understand

...great link thanks ill be putting that to use