Thread: Pyrokinesis: Possible or impossible?

I'm outta here lol

Originally Posted by MindGames

Well, even so, you do have a lot of knowledge (4 years worth) in Quantum Physics. However, I still don't understand the processes by which an electron splits into infinite electrons when it is passed through the double slit. Do you happen to know by chance? It does seem to be a rather fundamental concept.

I could've swore you explained it in your last post but okay lol.

Well it'd be hard to word, but what quantum physicists have found is that the electron splits into infinite electrons when an observer isn't present, however, when the observer is present it goes back to behaving like a normal electron - which basically proved when your not around everything is everywhere but when your around it snaps back into place. Thoughts have been shown to have influence over these objects too. Like the experiment with water molecules when they brought in a monk to bless it and it had different shapes based on the mood, which Xei has said was a fraud but failed to deliver a source.

Of course, it's okay for you not to give sources, and tell people to be open minded, but when other people do it isn't evidence that they're being open minded, it's evidence that they're wrong. ._.

Here you can read about some of the lies in that film:

What the Bleep Do We Know!? - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You appear to have gotten a lot of your misinformation that you stick to, such as the 10% brain thing, from this source. Apparently having an open mind means 'having an open mind to stuff you want to hear'. You have clearly done zero research into the possibility that the information might be wrong. This is called 'confirmation bias', and their strict avoidance of this is what makes a scientist infinitely more open minded than you'll ever be.

There's lots of stuff here that shows that Emoto's results were nonsense.

Masaru Emoto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He also sells water which is supposedly magical or whatever, so he's also a con-artist. A good person to learn from.

By his own admission his results were nonsense. What he said he did was make people focus various emotions on water, then take pictures of the water, and then publish those pictures if they seemed to match the emotion and throwing out any that did not aesthetically match it. If you can't see how ridiculous this is then you are lost.

Originally Posted by Xei

Of course, it's okay for you not to give sources, and tell people to be open minded, but when other people do it isn't evidence that they're being open minded, it's evidence that they're wrong. ._.

Your the one disputing what we're saying, you should've expected to give sources.

Originally Posted by Xei

Here you can read about some of the lies in that film:

What the Bleep Do We Know!? - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Those were academic responses and claims they have made against the film, no proof against it. (Though I don't dispute that their claims are incorrect)

Originally Posted by Xei

You appear to have gotten a lot of your misinformation that you stick to, such as the 10% brain thing, from this source. Apparently having an open mind means 'having an open mind to stuff you want to hear'. You have clearly done zero research into the possibility that the information might be wrong. This is called 'confirmation bias', and their strict avoidance of this is what makes a scientist infinitely more open minded than you'll ever be.

There you go again with purposely targeting me. You dare use the word "infinite" when you tried to dispute that it exists earlier?
And I've already responded to the 10% myth, you'll have to go back a few posts. Quick question, do you think your using your full potential regardless of what the statistics say?
As I said, modern day scientists are the most close minded people in the world, quit looking at them through rose-tinted glasses. You think Einstein had it easy when he was introducing his theories to the world? No, scientists gave him crap for it and guess what? He was right. Don't talk to me about scientists being open minded.

Originally Posted by Xei

There's lots of stuff here that shows that Emoto's results were nonsense.

Masaru Emoto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He also sells water which is supposedly magical or whatever, so he's also a con-artist. A good person to learn from.

I never heard of that man in my life, and I don't know where you found him. Do you get all your info from Wikipedia by the way?

Originally Posted by Xei

By his own admission his results were nonsense. What he said he did was make people focus various emotions on water, then take pictures of the water, and then publish those pictures if they seemed to match the emotion and throwing out any that did not aesthetically match it. If you can't see how ridiculous this is then you are lost.

It was a minor sector of "What the Bleep Do We Know", I didn't pay attention to it nearly as much as everything else.

I'd appreciate if you all stop trying to do the personal attacks, trolling, and few worded posts just to offend anyone with a different opinion. It's not cool, and you only make yourself look immature. Don't quote my previous posts and say "Well, you were trolling", because I was only defending myself/case.

No, I'll repost this,

Originally Posted by Xei

I'm not sure there've been serious 'threats' as such. It's hard to take somebody seriously when they say "I don't bluff" and a few minutes later claim to have studied quantum physics for four years. I will make it clear though that any more threatening hacking (which I didn't notice till now) will result in an infraction: that is not acceptable forum behaviour regardless of the (lack of) credibility.

Any thread inviting scepticism in the Inner Sanctum is bound to get a bit heated, but it's still, albeit very roughly, on topic at the moment. If Juggalo would like it locked then he can request that. Also I'll repeat what I said earlier: if you can't think of how to respond to something, then don't respond to it; do not accuse people of trolling or flaming in public, especially when they're clearly not.

Call me a troll all you like, but know that the next time you ignore the above with anybody else you will be infracted.

To respond to your post: you called me out on not giving a source for the water thing. I linked you directly to a source but you're so willingly close minded you couldn't even read the first line of the article to find out that Emoto's results were the results you were talking about. -_-

How can you possibly say Einstein was ignored? Einstein was a scientist for chrissakes, you can't invoke him as an example of the close mindedness of scientists! And his ideas are universally accepted by scientists? Do you have a mote of evidence for what you said, or are you making it up on the spot? The scientific evidence that special relativity was required was found and accepted before Einstein. As you're an expert, no doubt you'll be able to recall the basic facts, such as what this experiment was? Yeah, right.

Originally Posted by Xei

No, I'll repost this,

All you did is personally attack me again.

Originally Posted by Xei

Call me a troll all you like, but know that the next time you ignore the above with anybody else you will be infracted.

You fail to see how your trolling and now your trying to threatening and singling me out with your mod powers? I see...

Originally Posted by Xei

To respond to your post: you called me out on not giving a source for the water thing. I linked you directly to a source but you're so willingly close minded you couldn't even read the first line of the article to find out that Emoto's results were the results you were talking about. -_-

That's not close minded, that's me overhearing the name - I assumed that was who you were talking about, but for the sake of simplicity I worded it the way I did.

Originally Posted by Xei

How can you possibly say Einstein was ignored? Einstein was a scientist for chrissakes, you can't invoke him as an example of the close mindedness of scientists! And his ideas are universally accepted by scientists? Do you have a mote of evidence for what you said, or are you making it up on the spot? The scientific evidence that special relativity was required was found and accepted before Einstein. As you're an expert, no doubt you'll be able to recall the basic facts, such as what this experiment was? Yeah, right.

Another personal assault, and you're wrong and you're giving me crap on how much I don't know?

Albert Einstein was the laughing stalk of all scientists, and he was threatened on multiple occasions because close minded moron scientists who don't like change didn't like what he was doing.

cracked.com/article_18822_5-famous-scientists-dismissed-as-morons-in-their-time_p2.html

In fact, look at those 5 famous scientists who were dismissed as crackpots in their time by the close minded science community, the very community you called open minded. It's highly laughable you tried to antagonize me and you don't have your basic facts right.

Now, would you like to keep the peace or would you like to continue your personal assaults and I inform another staff member of your actions? Your actions from the very beginning weren't right, and ever since you been in this thread your goal was to troll us.

I tried to keep the peace, and all you and your friends did is try to destroy it with personal insults and harmful remarks.

It's okay, I've already informed another staff member for you.

It's pretty funny you think Cracked.com is a reliable source. It's a humour website which regularly makes stuff up to try to be funny. Did you even read the article though!? Because it doesn't support anything you said! It's talking about the cosmological constant, which was indeed introduced for mistaken reasons and Einstein himself called it the biggest blunder of his career.

Originally Posted by Xei

It's okay, I've already informed another staff member for you.

Thank you, sir.

Originally Posted by Xei

It's pretty funny you think Cracked.com is a reliable source. It's a humour website which regularly makes stuff up to try to be funny. Did you even read the article though!? Because it doesn't support anything you said! It's talking about the cosmological constant, which was indeed introduced for mistaken reasons and Einstein himself called it the biggest blunder of his career.

Does that take away from what I said? I was still correct that Einstein's was heckled for being different, and wasn't accepted into the community for a long time due to close minded scientists. The very people you called open minded.

I would like to thank you for contacting another staff member, I would like them to see...

Originally Posted by Xei

That'd be a bit easier to believe if he'd actually provided some evidence instead of linking to an unrelated video, wouldn't it?

// Trolling

Originally Posted by Xei

And the 10% figure comes frommm...


...why are you now lying to me? We both know that what you said isn't true, so what possible motive could you have? Please don't tell me you're convincing yourself by knocking down these blatant strawmen.

Apparently you don't understand the basics of scientific investigation.


You've clearly shown yourself to have no good idea what scientific investigation actually is. Can you even delineate for me a general picture of the scientific method?

And you have such an incredible lack of understanding that you call these people 'closed minded'!? It's such a hilariously weak defence, it doesn't even bear thinking about.

All in one post, surprisingly.

Originally Posted by Xei

Leaving thread due to excess stupid, gullible, ignorant, and lack of reading skills.

5 minutes after trolling us... \/\/

Originally Posted by Xei

When somebody claims that a bunch of dudes who thought the Sun went round the Earth and thought there were five planets knew vastly more than scientists today, I think I'm allowed to draw a line.

You trolled us some more! Why not add some icing to the cake, Scotty?

Originally Posted by Xei

This is the bit where the train crashes and explodes.

Whoo! Now we're getting it baking.

Originally Posted by Xei

I'd ask if you have any evidence but I think at this point that'd be extremely blockheaded of me.

Indeed, Scotty, indeed.

Originally Posted by Xei

You appear to have gotten a lot of your misinformation that you stick to, such as the 10% brain thing, from this source. Apparently having an open mind means 'having an open mind to stuff you want to hear'. You have clearly done zero research into the possibility that the information might be wrong. This is called 'confirmation bias', and their strict avoidance of this is what makes a scientist infinitely more open minded than you'll ever be.

You can't see me! (Waving hands in front of face)

Originally Posted by Xei

No, I'll repost this,


Call me a troll all you like, but know that the next time you ignore the above with anybody else you will be infracted.

How can you possibly say Einstein was ignored? Einstein was a scientist for chrissakes, you can't invoke him as an example of the close mindedness of scientists! And his ideas are universally accepted by scientists? Do you have a mote of evidence for what you said, or are you making it up on the spot? The scientific evidence that special relativity was required was found and accepted before Einstein. As you're an expert, no doubt you'll be able to recall the basic facts, such as what this experiment was? Yeah, right.

Personally threatening me and trolling me all in one post! Bravo. That was brilliant, I must admit.

Originally Posted by Xei

That'd be a bit easier to believe if he'd actually provided some evidence instead of linking to an unrelated video, wouldn't it?

Scotty, quick, grab the camera!

Originally Posted by Xei

I'm not sure there've been serious 'threats' as such. It's hard to take somebody seriously when they say "I don't bluff" and a few minutes later claim to have studied quantum physics for four years. I will make it clear though that any more threatening hacking (which I didn't notice till now) will result in an infraction: that is not acceptable forum behaviour regardless of the (lack of) credibility.

Whoo! Antagonize someone who claims to have a background in computer security, you better hope you were right or that's your ass.

Originally Posted by Xei

Any thread inviting scepticism in the Inner Sanctum is bound to get a bit heated, but it's still, albeit very roughly, on topic at the moment. If Juggalo would like it locked then he can request that. Also I'll repeat what I said earlier: if you can't think of how to respond to something, then don't respond to it; do not accuse people of trolling or flaming in public, especially when they're clearly not.

Oh... All the above was clearly not trolling, and your buddies certainly didn't troll me either, eh? Even when Artelis was practically bragging about how well you trolled me?

Xei, you were right and I was wrong, your a super genius in quantum physics

What would you say if people with genuine qualifications on the subject told you that you were talking nonsense, I wonder.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

What would you say if people with genuine qualifications on the subject told you that you were talking nonsense, I wonder.

Then I wouldn't care because I would be learning instead of getting trolled.
I graciously accept advice/information, but trolling is unacceptable in my view.

If you have a problem, then post it in the "Talk to Staff" forum. A thread is for discussing the topic of the thread. Normally I'd infract you as you're now threatening to hack me despite my warning that threatening to hack anybody again wouldn't be tolerated, but honestly I have no idea if I'm allowed to do that.

Originally Posted by Will1

… what quantum physicists have found is that the electron splits into infinite electrons when an observer isn't present, however, when the observer is present it goes back to behaving like a normal electron - which basically proved when your not around everything is everywhere but when your around it snaps back into place.

See, Xei? Quantum physics allows particles to TRANSCEND the law of conservation of energy. Quantum physics says "fuck you, general relativity!" Clearly you do not know what you are up against.

One thing I know is that the conservation of energy isn't actually violated by quantum physics. Can you define energy?

Originally Posted by Xei

If you have a problem, then post it in the "Talk to Staff" forum. A thread is for discussing the topic of the thread.

That's not what you were saying when I was getting trolled and was peaceful about things.

Originally Posted by Xei

Normally I'd infract you as you're now threatening to hack me despite my warning that threatening to hack anybody again wouldn't be tolerated, but honestly I have no idea if I'm allowed to do that.

I never threatened you, you twisted the words around. I may have implied it, but what the hell did you expect when you antagonize someone despite the hint? And you certainly implied how you were gonna infraction me all while trolling me, only for playing the game you created.

Originally Posted by Xei

One thing I know is that the conservation of energy isn't actually violated by quantum physics. Can you define energy?

Indestructible, impossible to create, simply 'exists', infinite, constantly changes form, no real definition to it I suppose.

Then I wouldn't care because I would be learning instead of getting trolled.
I graciously accept advice/information, but trolling is unacceptable in my view.

Alright. First: my qualifications. I studied degree level Chemistry, which covers the interactions of matter and energy, and chemical changes they undergo. That places fire right in my domain. Additionally, I also had to study quantum mechanics as part of the course (along with many other things).

How do you know the thing that sets things on fire is in the physical plane?

A fire is what happens when a fuel combusts in the presence of an oxidiser. These various reactions are extensively studied through a variety of techniques.

Every single chemical reaction involves the transfer of energy, a physical phenomenon, which is measurable. Even if the source if the energy is unknown, it is possible to detect, and it would be trivial to design an experiment to do this. It's also nonsensical to suggest that a physical phenomenon is a result of stuff 'not on the physical plane' (whatever the hell that means).

For Pyrokinesis to be possible, it would have to involve the energy transfer from the mind to an external object. Regardless of the mechanism, this would be easy to observe.

Originally Posted by Xei

One thing I know is that the conservation of energy isn't actually violated by quantum physics. Can you define energy?

Well according to Will's explanation, the double slit experiment has CLEARLY shown that it is in violation of this law, since the electron splits into infinite electrons for the amount of time that you are not consciously looking at the experiment. Since there are infinite electrons creared from one, the electron screen shows that the electron impacted the screen at every possible point from shooting just one electron, which is seen in any basic double slit demonstration. As I'm sure Will is aware of with his extensive experience.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

It's also nonsensical to suggest that a physical phenomenon is a result of stuff 'not on the physical plane' (whatever the hell that means).

Ah, you couldn't go through a whole post without insulting me, eh?
Well I have one question for you, what do you think happens when you die?

I advise you to look into the "Rosicrucians" - Their society utilizes Telekinesis in their courses (It's just a natural thing, nothing magical about it), and if you believe it's nonsensical to believe in these things maybe you should take a step back and look again. The Rosicrucians, they are made up of some of the most scholarly people in the world, and use telekinesis in their studies. You may continue believing it's false, but just know these people have done more studying than you ever have and still believe/use it. They are such an ancient society they date all the way back to Pythagoras and ancient Egypt. (Mystery Schools.)

If you think I'm fibbing, look them up, many of the U.S. founding fathers were Rosicrucian's also. (And/or freemasons.)

I probably should've started out with them, but I figured I shouldn't put too many eggs in one basket

Originally Posted by MindGames

Well according to Will's explanation, the double slit experiment has CLEARLY shown that it is in violation of this law, since the electron splits into infinite electrons for the amount of time that you are not consciously looking at the experiment. Since there are infinite electrons creared from one, the electron screen shows that the electron impacted the screen at every possible point from shooting just one electron, which is seen in any basic double slit demonstration. As I'm sure Will is aware of with his extensive experience.

Thermodynamics aside, the fact that if this were true would mean the creation of an infinite amount of mass would have destroyed the planet by creating a black hole. I think it's pretty safe to say this hasn't happened...

Even with a massless particle like a photon, that would still result in an infinite amount of energy.

If you think the double slit experiment allows the creation of an infinite number of particles, then frankly you have no idea what you're on about. Wave-particle duality makes no such claims.

Well I have one question for you, what do you think happens when you die?

Irrelevant to the topic.

I advise you to look into the "Rosicrucians" [...] they are made up of some of the most scholarly people in the world, and use telekinesis in their studies.

Ah, appeal to authority at its finest. Peer reviewed scientific evidence please, not telling me to look up about secret societies.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

Ah, appeal to authority at its finest. Peer reviewed scientific evidence please, not telling me to look up about secret societies.

When you've thoroughly investigated what he's actually on about, you can dismiss his claims. Until then, you're just ignoring something which could be legit.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

Thermodynamics aside, the fact that if this were true would mean the creation of an infinite amount of mass would have destroyed the planet by creating a black hole. I think it's pretty safe to say this hasn't happened...

Ah yes, but obviously that is based on general relativity. Quantum physics clearly states that it does not apply to classical black hole physics. Also you are forgetting that QM transcends general relativity.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

Even with a massless particle like a photon, that would still result in an infinite amount of energy.

Simple. Consciousness prevents this.

Originally Posted by Photolysis

If you think the double slit experiment allows the creation of an infinite number of particles, then frankly you have no idea what you're on about. Wave-particle duality makes no such claims.

Take a look at the electron screen in the double slit experiment. It shows that an infinite number electrons appear on the screen, as Will explained.



Disprove this all you want, but at least I can shoot flames out of my hands.

Your interpretation of the double slit experiment is completely wrong. The idea that an electron can split into infinite electrons is completely made up. The double slit experiment proves an electron can act as a wave, and thus go through both slits at the same time, but it is still only one electron. Stop trying to use an experiment you don't even understand to try to prove something as ridiculous as telekinesis...

Seriously. Stop referring to some theories here and just provide the proof that it is possible. We don't need no theories yet.

First, you prove that you can do it. Then, we eliminate all other possible causes. Then we decide to find out how it works.

Originally Posted by LikesToTrip

Your interpretation of the double slit experiment is completely wrong. The idea that an electron can split into infinite electrons is completely made up. The double slit experiment proves an electron can act as a wave, and thus go through both slits at the same time, but it is still only one electron. Stop trying to use an experiment you don't even understand to try to prove something as ridiculous as telekinesis...

Can you prove this absurd claim?

This thread just continues to bring out the worst in members even after deleted posts. It's a wrap guys.