Psychokinesis
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /x/ - Paranormal
You are currently reading a thread in /x/ - Paranormal
Sup /x/. I've been hearing lots about Psychokinesis lately. What's your opinion guys? Personally I think that it's a load of shit.
Not true. You can move some objects with your mind or even start a fire.
I "trained" a lot when I was younger. One thing I can tell you, the phenomenon is real. At one point I was able to slightly move a pencil on my desk. I don't have any proof tho. Shit does take a toll though, it's exhausting. If you're interested start with psiwheels. Google it.
>>15860309
Replying to my own post. I had solid proof, recorded with my laptop webcam, but that shit was lost when the laptop pepsi'd (do not buy a HP product, ever). I used to film my success and shit got real numerous times. At the time a site like PsiPog existed, dunno if it is still around, but that was centered around psychic powers pretty much.
it's real but entirely pointless and takes forever to improve at
train every day for 50 years and maybe you can move a cup
pretty much anything in the world is a more useful and rewarding skill
Yeah, interest in it has spiked since the holographic principle came into play, because it inadvertently explains all "paranormal" phenomena(faith healing, psychokinesis, people that can get run through with swords without bleeding, fire immunity, spectral apparitions, teleportation etc.). It's still very far-fetched, but eh, who knows. I makes a little bit of sense if you realize the brain's bioelectromagnetic properties link into standing quantum wave fronts, assuming the universe really is a two-dimensional information structure painted on the cosmological horizon. that would also reconcile quantum gravity and string theory somewhat.
>>15860434
English, motherfucker, do you speak it?
>>15858447
a good watch about this topic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh8gaGu-dKY
>>15860445
Yeah, sorry. Look, if you want a really simple version of it, michael talbot wrote a book called the holographic universe. it's mostly pseudoscience and has some factual errors, but it's very entertaining and has some merit
>>15860448
Classic. Kulagina was amazing, and the video suggests attempting such things is highly exhausting. >>15860344 me again
>>15860468
you think if you had an adrenaline rush it would be stronger?
>>15860483
Nope, tried in all states of mind, including drunk and after sex, calm is best.
>>15860513
guess if I ever try this I need to get my emotions under control first. sucks that I have too much emotions
>>15860513
Nah, emotions would be better.
The early experiments in quantum teleportation worked by producing entangled pairs of photons and teleporting one of the pair, or the complete quantum state of that proton while transmitting the Bell-state analysis of the second photon through regular subliminal chhannels. Now obviously this would violate Heisenberg's principle and Einstein's speed-of-light restrictions, but they carried no information, even about their own quantum state. Useless, no? No. By a one-in-four chance of guessing it's quantum state, you can utilize quantum bits of data. These are called Qubits. Now, if reality is a standing quantum wavefront collapsing through probability states, the human mind works as a sort of interferometer perceiving and collapsing those wavefronts. It's fascinating and horryfing at the same time. I mean you see what I'm saying, right?
>>15860663
I'm not too bright with science, so some of what you are saying I had to google it. sorry
>>15860681
It's like that old anecdote with a glass and a table. At any given moment, you put a glass on a table, there's a one septillion chance of it falling through the table. but since the chance is always one in a septillion, and never increases the longer the glass is on the table, reality keeps together. so it might mildly collapse on rare occassions for an instant, which is where you get "paranormal phenomena"
>>15860712
ohhhh ok now i get it thanks
>>15860378
It's not true. It can't be done. Multiple peer reviewed studies confirm bs
>>15859810
[Citation needed]
[Undoctored video evidence is required]
>>15860309
huh, I dunno if I believe any of this but it's definitely interesting to read and think about. What do you think of when doing this exactly? Has it benefited you in other ways i.e mental quickness / discipline / spiritual context?
>>15858447
Its totally possible. What law can you prove that says otherwise? Now, the stipulation is obviously genetic in nature, as if we had the ability we would clearly use it.
>>15860309
>psiwheels
Any video with a psiwheel on it is a fake or a parody/social experiment to search for dumbasses. That thing is purposely designed to cheat.
Do you move objects without touching them? Ok, put a pencil in a closed bottle, for example.
About trainings, I tried too, I love to experiment. Problem is those trainings and excercises are done by people who want to believe, and they are not rigorous at all.
The one I tried was a pendulum, which I could move in any direction after a few days. But I became critical then: What if I´m moving my hand or trembling without notice it?
I tried to eliminate this possibility in several ways (i.e.supporting the thread in a fixed bar) and the pendulum didn´t move.
Also, even if all this remotely worked for someone, is just useless. You can´t call something "ability" or "power" if you need to train a lot to slightly move a fucking pencil.
If psychokinesis is somewhere in nature or us, all we know and are doing related to it is completely wrong.
tl;dr: The idea is interesting, but that doesn´t make it work. At least not with the typical excercises there are on the internet.
