PK abilities - real or imaginary?

[voidisyinyang]

21 minutes ago, Ilovecoffee said:

 

Wasn't Voidisyinyang the same person who claimed to do "love" at a distance, but converting his jing to electrochemical energy made him smell like poop?  Or was that a different guy?

 

Yes the O at a D (orgasm at a distance as mutual psychic climax) is definitely PK - and yes it does create real Love. Michael Winn discusses this also. The first time it happened - the young lady leapt up into the air in orgasmic bliss and cried out. Yes that was in McDonald's but that was just the first time. Then I had a female stalker at work. To build up the love requires at least 50 mutual psychic climaxes. See the energy has to stay in the vagus nerve and so converts from dopamine to serotonin and then from serotonin to oxytocin. It is a deep right side vagus nerve from the dorsal lower body - to the right side of the heart.

 

https://healingtaousa.com/articles/the-quest-for-spiritual-orgasm/

 

 

[Nungali]

8 hours ago, KuroShiro said:

 

Is an online random number generator a physical system?

 

Psychokinesis (from Greek ψυχή "mind" and κίνησις "movement"), or telekinesis (from τηλε- "far off" and κίνηση "movement" ), is an alleged psychic ability allowing a person to influence a physical system without physical interaction.

 

 

 

Belief/not belief is perhaps only in the mind. There seems to be a lot to discover outside the mind.

 

 

 

Why are scientists put on a pedestal?

How would a scientist prove the existence of LOVE?

 

2 minutes ago, KuroShiro said:

 

You don't seem to have understood my post.

I don't understand yours.

 

 

Because you were not following the conversation  in combination with the thread intent .  Not surprised , considering the disruptions .

 

 

[Ilovecoffee]

33 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

It's the believers that are wrecking this topic. I wouldn't have started this topic if I wasn't open to new evidence.

 

6 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

Yes the O at a D (orgasm at a distance as mutual psychic climax) is definitely PK - and yes it does create real Love. Michael Winn discusses this also. The first time it happened - the young lady leapt up into the air in orgasmic bliss and cried out. Yes that was in McDonald's but that was just the first time. Then I had a female stalker at work. To build up the love requires at least 50 mutual psychic climaxes. See the energy has to stay in the vagus nerve and so converts from dopamine to serotonin and then from serotonin to oxytocin. It is a deep right side vagus nerve from the dorsal lower body - to the right side of the heart.

 

https://healingtaousa.com/articles/the-quest-for-spiritual-orgasm/

 

 

 

 

[KuroShiro]

21 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

It's the believers that are wrecking this topic. I wouldn't have started this topic if I wasn't open to new evidence.

 

You want to believe?

 

Let me know if you are truly interested and I'll take some time to put together a well thought out post linking several topics with common sense, western science and medicine, society, conditioning... and why I think your search for evidence of abilities is not the Way to go.

[Nungali]

12 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

Yes the O at a D (orgasm at a distance as mutual psychic climax) is definitely PK - and yes it does create real Love. Michael Winn discusses this also. The first time it happened - the young lady leapt up into the air in orgasmic bliss and cried out. Yes that was in McDonald's but that was just the first time. Then I had a female stalker at work. To build up the love requires at least 50 mutual psychic climaxes. See the energy has to stay in the vagus nerve and so converts from dopamine to serotonin and then from serotonin to oxytocin. It is a deep right side vagus nerve from the dorsal lower body - to the right side of the heart.

 

https://healingtaousa.com/articles/the-quest-for-spiritual-orgasm/

 

 

 

Well, if people dont like the random number generator  experiment, we could try a random orgasm generator .  You send out the energy and we will fill out the forms  below

 

Spoiler

on 2nd thought  ... self censored  ....  it was a really funny form though crude  ;     'fap instructor'  

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by Nungali

[KuroShiro]

8 minutes ago, Nungali said:

Because you were not following the conversation  in combination with the thread intent .  Not surprised , considering the disruptions .

 

I certainly was!

Besides even if I wasn't, interesting conversation might arise when one slightly goes off on a tangent.

[Nungali]

3 minutes ago, KuroShiro said:

 

I certainly was!

Besides even if I wasn't, interesting conversation might arise when one slightly goes off on a tangent.

 

 

yes,  apparently  ordering one    cheeseburger   is   'awesome'   .

[doc benway]

2 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

The study is for "chronic pain" so you keep harping about the statistics as if not including the subject of not chronic pain then invalidates the study.

😆 

You’re a smart guy, you understand me, you’re just trying to hold on to your desire for this to be a good study. It’s not. If you remove the people with <3 months of pain, you need to redo all the calculations. In this small a sample size, removing a few subjects could make all the statistical significance disappear and completely change the results. That may well be why they were included... there’s no way to know without crunching the numbers. Bottom line, including people with acute pain is not even one of the serious flaws of this study. 

 

2 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

First you implied that 3 months was not enough to be chronic pain so I pointed out that about 95% or so were your standard of at least 6 months.

Now you are claiming that a study of chronic pain should include people who have pain that is not chronic? haha.

More obfuscation. You simply can’t remove any subjects unless you redo all calculations. The results and statistical significance don’t apply if you simply look at 95% of the subjects. That’s not how science works. See above.

 

2 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

Are you even a medical doctor?

Yes

 

2 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

Because the Mayo Clinic is considered possibly the top research medical hospital in the world. Dr. Ann Vincent is a Mayo Clinic doctor and she led the study. If she says the "results were especially impressive" at reducing chronic pain - I think she is accurate.

Yes, the Mayo clinic is a very big place and some very good science comes out of there. I’ve taken some courses there and it’s where my mentor trained. Unfortunately, this study is not one of them for all the reasons mentioned. You’re welcome to buy into it if you wish but it is the very junk science you like to ridicule. I would love to see some better research on the subject and I’m open to whatever conclusions come of it. 

 

Moral of this story - don’t ridicule the masses that are hypnotized by junk science and then offer a deeply flawed study as the “gold standard.” This is not a gold standard study no matter how much you want it to be. Weak studies are published all the time. After reading them for a few decades, it gets easy to pick them apart.

 

I’ll let it go now out of respect for Wandelaar.

[voidisyinyang]

29 minutes ago, steve said:

😆 

 

 

So you're saying that in a study of chronic pain - the eligibility requirement of a minimum of 3 months - means that the study is not valid?  Sorry but an M.D. is not the same as a Ph.D. research degree. Qigong, by definition, can not be "double blind."

It is completely fine to criticize the study but I think you are focused on precision rather than accuracy. I think Dr. Ann Vincent's analysis is accurate. So I am the one who called it a "gold standard" study - no one else did. I agree with you that such a label is highly debatable. https://academic.oup.com/ejo/article/37/5/457/2599978

 

Randomized controlled trial: the gold standard or an unobtainable fallacy?

Maybe you would like to critique this qigong study?

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582590/

 

Effects of External Qigong Therapy on Osteoarthritis of the Knee A Randomized Controlled Trial

Quote

Two therapists performed EQT individually, 5–6 sessions in 3 weeks. The sham healer mimicked EQT for the same number and duration of sessions

 

I happened to discover who the "2nd healer" is mentioned in the study. So in this case you have one qigong master who was an effective healer and another qigong master who did not have the skill level.

 

Does that make the study invalid? No - I just think it shows that the training is very difficult to do correctly for advanced healing abilities.

 

Quote

Patients treated by Healer 2 reported greater reduction in pain (mean improvement −25.7 ± 6.6 vs. −13.1 ± 3.0; p < .01) and more improvement in knee function (−28.1 ± 9.7 vs. −13.2 ± 3.4; p < .01) than those in the control group.

 

So how come this does not prove external qi healing?

 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by voidisyinyang

[doc benway]

9 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

So you're saying that in a study of chronic pain...

So how come this does not prove external qi healing?

 

38 minutes ago, steve said:

I’ll let it go now out of respect for Wandelaar.

 

Perhaps you can too?

Or maybe start another thread if it's important to you to carry on this discussion?

Peace

[Ilovecoffee]

52 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

 

So how come this does not prove external qi healing?

 

 

 

You would need some sort of demonstration that had macroscopic effects creating a voltage, registering on a gradiometer, powering an LED, etc.  Something that can be physically seen and demonstrated. Lots of people believe in faith healing, yet even if you brought us a double blind, placebo controlled study that shows faith healing worked even if it was done at the mayo clinic I don't think most here would accept it.

Edited May 28, 2018 by Ilovecoffee

[Ilovecoffee]

37 minutes ago, steve said:

 

 

Perhaps you can too?

Or maybe start another thread if it's important to you to carry on this discussion?

Peace

 

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/46822-pk-abilities-real-or-imaginary-continued/

 

Here is one for you.  VIYY is welcome to join in too. 

 

 

 

[Daemon]

42 minutes ago, steve said:

 

Perhaps you can too?

Or maybe start another thread if it's important to you to carry on this discussion?

Peace

 

 

That's a great suggestion! I'm guessing that it might also be quite entertaing viewing for any competent medical statisticians as well?

 

☮️

[Nungali]

Thankyou !

 

Now, can we get on with this experiment ?

[voidisyinyang]

5 hours ago, Ilovecoffee said:

 

You would need some sort of demonstration that had macroscopic effects creating a voltage, registering on a gradiometer, powering an LED, etc.  Something that can be physically seen and demonstrated. Lots of people believe in faith healing, yet even if you brought us a double blind, placebo controlled study that shows faith healing worked even if it was done at the mayo clinic I don't think most here would accept it.

 

According to Wiki (which is infamously biased):

Quote

Some phenomena – such as apports,^[6]levitation,^[6]materialization,^[6]psychic healing,^[6]pyrokinesis,^[62]retrocausality,^[63] telekinesis,^[22] and thoughtography^[6] – are considered to be examples of psychokinesis.

 

So that means external qigong healing is PK. Sorry. haha.

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

On 5/27/2018 at 9:38 PM, steve said:

 

 - very small sample size - 23 vs 20 subjects completed the study - statistical analysis of such small samples is meaningless, especially when evaluating something as subjective as pain

 

 

Quote

 

Occupational sitting behaviour and its relationship with back pain – A ...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003687016300515

by R Zemp - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 10 - ‎Related articles

Occupational sitting behaviour was quantified in 20 subjects

 

 

The size sample doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

You keep harping on "acute" versus "chronic" pain - but they are qualitatively different.

 

Quote

A 5 for someone in acute pain with no prior severe pain incidences may be truly significant pain whereas a patient with chronic pain, for instance patients with chronic pancreatitis, may live and be happy with a 5 and are only unhappy when the pain reaches a 7.

 

Abraham Aizer Brody

New York University

 

So yeah I think the Mayo Clinic doctor knows what she was doing. haha.

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

Quote

“What’s going on out there is a wave function that is progressing with time in a perfectly deterministic but incredibly complicated way,” Weinberg says. In this view, all possible outcomes of quantum processes (that is, everything) come to pass in one stream or another (even though nobody is aware of any of the other streams, or “histories”).

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/why-quantum-mechanics-might-need-overhaul

 

Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg disagrees with the OP.

[voidisyinyang]

Quote

 

In quantum mechanics, though, the electron is not really just a particle; it is actually a blob of probability. That blob of probability spreads out and contracts depending on the environment. In this case, it can spread out through the space between molecules. Now, because the probability blob extends across the barrier, the electron exists in both molecules. Under these circumstances, the electron might go from the odorant to the receptor, but afterward, it will just go back again. No net effect.

 

What we need is something that traps the electron in the receptor when it finds itself there. The solution is molecular vibrations. The idea is this: the electron is mostly in the odorant molecule, which is vibrating slightly. The electron gets kicked by the vibration, increasing its energy, which expands the probability blob deeper into the receptor molecule. The electron then jumps from the odorant to the receptor. In doing so, it also loses energy by exciting a vibration in the odorant molecule. That leaves the electron with very little energy, so its probability blob contracts, leaving it mostly in the receptor molecules. As a result, the chance of tunneling back to the odorant is very small.

The nice thing about this is that nearly every molecule, including molecules that have different isotopes, has different characteristic vibrational frequencies. That means the tunneling rate and the energy of the electrons that tunnel will be different for every molecule.

 

 

OUr sense of smell is teleportation! Apports are also considered PK therefore our sense of smell IS PK in action.

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/07/quantum-mechanics-cant-smell-my-unwashed-armpits-probably/

 

Quote

In general, many articles pertaining to the VTO have appeared within highly ranked journals; it is apparent that this conflict in vision—a conflict that neither side may win in the end—is one that the greater community would like to see resolved. Such a resolution will require far better communication between disciplines and a far more fair discussion between the entrenched camps on both sides of the debate.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphy.2018.00025/full

So it is a model still being tested but an equal-contender of scientific explanation.

 

I KNOW it is true since I could smell cancer nonlocally and the qigong masters can smell over the phone!! haha.

 

Just another example of how qigong is the "highest technology of all technologies" but glad to see that science has a "sniff of the trail"

Edited May 29, 2018 by voidisyinyang

[Mudfoot]

1 hour ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

The size sample doesn't seem to be a problem.

This is almost painful to read. 

You didn't even bother to read the article. 

 

1)They call it a pilot study, that is in the title. 

2)"A clear limitation of the current study is the low number of subjects analysed....." 

 

[Mudfoot]

21 hours ago, Daemon said:

 

As far as I know, science is unable to disprove the existence of Love and because (as a scientist) I'm not stupid enough to attempt to prove Its existence using the scientific method (which would be the wrong tool for the job), again you'll need to put that question to someone else.

 

☮️

Research on love: Does it measure up?

 

Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. S. (1989). Research on love: Does it measure up? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 784-794.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.5.784

---

Abstract

Assessed 5 measures of love: the Love Attitudes Scale, the Triangular Theory of Love Scale, the Passionate Love Scale, the Relationship Rating Form, and a measure of love and attachment (Shaver & Hazan, 1987). The measures were given to 391 unmarried college students. Correlations revealed predictable relations among the subscales; however, psychometric analyses revealed problems in some of the measures. Factor analysis yielded 6 factors for the Love Attitudes Scale and 1 for the Passionate Love Scale, similar to previous research. Results for the Triangular Theory of Love Scale and for the Relationship Rating Form suggest strong interdependency among each measure's subscales. Factors analysis of all subscales together yielded 5 distinct factors, reflecting themes of passionate love, closeness, ambivalence, secure attachment, and practicality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

[Mudfoot]

On 2018-05-28 at 1:11 PM, voidisyinyang said:

If you want to be scientific - first acknowledge that the foundation of reality is quantum nonlocal proto-consciousness. 

Why? 

[Mudfoot]

On 2018-05-28 at 2:20 PM, wandelaar said:

The few useful posts in this topic have by now been effectively drowned in irrelevant preaching by the believers....

 

Sorry! 

 

But it is promising to be another glorious summer on TDB, and this and similar threads are making me laugh out loud. 

Admit it, some of the comments in your yin-yang thread are over the top. 

Or is that just me? 

[voidisyinyang]

6 minutes ago, Mudfoot said:

Why? 

 

I've corresponded with this quantum physics professor - Basil J. Hiley. He collaborated with David Bohm.

He emphasizes that most quantum physicists are still in denial about the implications of quantum nonlocality.

So Hiley says at "time = zero" there is quantum proto-consciousness - this is the foundation of reality.

But as Hiley responded to me - he realizes that there is also noncommutative time-frequency.

 

So before space exists then at time = zero at a zero point in space there is also an "infinite" frequency - and this is what is found in black holes as Hawking Radiation - it is the quantum entanglement that goes from zero time, infinite frequency to the opposite of infinite frequency, zero time.

 

But since it's not a singularity - it is because of relativity that you have the speed of light as an invariance. This is relativistic quantum physics. So as a particle goes towards the speed of light - then its frequency increases but due to relativity it's time also slows down (i.e. gets bigger in wavelength). But Louis de Broglie realized this goes against the principle of Pythagoras that frequency is inverse to time. So he realized there has to be a superluminal wave from the future that guides the particle. This is called the pilot wave - at first he called it a phase wave. It is a noncommutative phase wave.

 

So before the particle even exists - light has relativistic mass despite having zero rest mass - due to time-frequency uncertainty then light is never at rest. This is now recognized as what happened before the Big Bang - it is a noncommutative phase shift as the 5th dimension.

 

So in the above video he mentions De Broglie - but what happened with de Broglie is that then Schroedinger took out the relativistic analysis of de Broglie. So then the foundation of reality got lost. Schroedinger realized that when light is emitted as an electron "jumps" as a probability non-local wave - this light emission is actually a "subharmonic." - but a subharmonic of what? De Broglie had already answered that question! It is the subharmonic from the future - as the superluminal momentum of the phase wave. In other words there are TWO TIMES - one from the future and one from the past at the same time.

 

So when we use light as a measurement - which is what science does - then we have the "measurement problem" because the order of the time changes the value of the momentum since momentum is directly proportion to frequency - and the position is the time as the wavelength. So frequency is to time as momentum is to wavelength.

 

But this assumes we HAVE to use light as the measurement. Science relies on an "external measurement" using light. But we can actually hear or listen faster than the time-frequency uncertainty - we can listen to the direct spin 1/2 of the delocalized electron that gets its charge directly from the virtual photons from the future. This is the secret of the Emptiness as the virtual information field.

 

Quotes from Astrophysicist Professor Paul S. Wesson

Quote

One characteristic property of de Broglie waves is that the product of their phase velocity and group velocity is equal to the square of the speed of light, where the group velocity is identified with the speed of the associated particle.

a “wavicle” is two simultaneous realizations of flat space, one with waves and one without.
From the viewpoint of 5D field theory, waves of de Broglie type have to be considered real.
 
So in 5D all particles behave like photons and everything in the universe is in causal contact with everything else.

an oscillatory phase, which might (if a person is so inclined) be identified with… spiritual modes of existence…separation between points is zero, so all of the events in the world are in (5D) causal contact. In other words, everything is occurring simultaneously.

There is no plausible way to avoid the conclusion that particles which can be seen moving at speeds less than c should be accompanied by waves which cannot be seen and are moving at speeds greater than c.

de Broglie waves are better understood in 5D

…characteristic of inflationary cosmology…its 5D complex generalization…as a model for de Broglie waves.

a null interval admits, in a formal sense, velocities in 3D which exceed lightspeed.

a particle not as a point but a tiny ball of trapped waves.

some of it verging on the mystical.

De Broglie waves follow automatically when the expressions for the energy of a particle [E=mc squared] and a wave [E=Planck’s Constant multipled by frequency] are combined.

This, admittedly, sounds strange.

Whether one believes in a model like this that straddles physics and spirituality is up to the individual…. However it is remarkable that such a model can even be formulated, bridging as it does realms of experience which traditionally have been viewed as immutably separate.

 

So what has to be realized is that this guiding field already knows what the "present" will be - from the future. This Emptiness then is the Dao - and is what some quantum physicists call "proto-consciousness" - like Basil J. Hiley's colleague and friend, Sir Roger Penrose.

 

So here is another collaborator of David Bohm:

 

Yakir Aharonov:
 

Quote

There is a non-local exchange that depends on the modular variable....I'm saying that I have now an intuitive picture to understand interference by saying that when a particle moves through two slits, it always goes through one slit or the other, but it knows which other slit, the slit through which it did not go, whether it is open or not, because there are nonlocal equations of motion.

Bernard d’Espagnat, “A tentative new approach to the Schroedinger cat problem,”

 

Quote

 

To sum up, within this conception it is considered that even microsystems can be endowed with “internal states of consciousness” (or “protoconsciousness”, whatever this may be) that are elements of a basic, not publicly accessible, reality, rather than of empirical reality.”

 

Robert J. and Marlan O. Scully, published by Wiley, 2010, 2nd edition

 

The Demon and the Quantum : From the Pythagorean Mystics to Maxwell's Demon and Quantum Mystery...

Quote

the seemingly spiritual nature of information, and even, perhaps, new insights into the existence of Mind! The common denominator of all this is the fact that information is a real physical quantity. Information is more than something just in our mind, it is the essence of, and in many ways more general than the concept of entropy.

 

Sir Roger Penrose:

 

Quote

What I'm saying is it's something much more subtle. Something that is not computable. It looks random but it's not necessarily random. It's a moment of proto-consciousness - it's the building block of what consciousness is made. I'm not saying this is conscious - it's just an element of what you need to build consciousness.

 

So then Basil J. Hiley says this is a "new energy" - the quantum potential energy is a newly discovered non-local energy based on relativistic quantum mechanics.

 

http://ecoechoinvasives.blogspot.com/2018/01/summarizing-de-broglie-pilot-wave-law.html

 

I have the references for the above quotes there.

 

 

 

 

[wandelaar]

39 minutes ago, Mudfoot said:

Sorry! 

 

But it is promising to be another glorious summer on TDB, and this and similar threads are making me laugh out loud. 

Admit it, some of the comments in your yin-yang thread are over the top. 

Or is that just me? 

 

I think it is a sad thing, and it doesn't make me laugh.

[Nungali]

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Thankyou !

 

Now, can we get on with this experiment ?

 

 

Apparently not Nungali ... and now VIYY is starting to swamp the thread with his typical  post bombing and the old red and yellow highlights  ..... refusing to take it to the new thread specifically designed for it ..

 

... and some of these people claim  they are 'advanced'  ....      HA!