Help me understand more about the nature of Qi.

[Jakara]

Be careful with the physics here, whilst on top of a mountain, yes you have a greater mass immediately beneath you, but you are also further away from the general mass of the plant which is considerably more than that of a mountain. Proper calculations I think would be in order to determine the dominant effect.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Calculation for mount everest (the average place to meditate):

 

Radius of earth = 6380 km

Gravity at sea level = 9.81m/s2

Height of mount everest = 8.8km

g = 9.81

Average force on 80kg guy at sea level = mg = 80 * 9.81 = 785N

 

6388 / 6380 = 0.12% increase in height at mount everest

f = GMm/r2 so gravity decreases by (1.012 ^ 2) = 0.24%

Gravity at mountain top now = 9.79 m/s2

 

Force on guy now = 80 * 9.79 = 783.2N

 

However we now have mountain of 6380km tall 16km radius beneath us, so assuming a cone, we get 1/3 * pi * r2 * h which gives 2.4 x 10 ^12 cubic meters of rock. Density of rock = 3000kg/m3 giving mass of 7.2 x 10 ^15 kg

 

Now again f = GMm/r2, so average guy is 80kg, giving gravity of 2.4N from centre of mountain which is a total of 785.6N. That give 0.6N more on top of a mountain than valley.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So if thats correct (check for errors) then the gravity you feel at the top of a mount everest is 0.007% higher than at a sea level. But that might be within the errors of the numbers used to estimate the mountain's mass etc.

 

There's no evidence that gravity has anything to do with qi. Some more new-age examinations liken the effects of gravity with yin qi but its pure speculation. We can observe many temples and meditators at the top of mountains, mostly they say the qi is stronger there, but dont give a reason as to why.

[autopoetic]

Be careful with the physics here, whilst on top of a mountain, yes you have a greater mass immediately beneath you, but you are also further away from the general mass of the plant which is considerably more than that of a mountain. Proper calculations I think would be in order to determine the dominant effect.

 

 

So if thats correct (check for errors) then the gravity you feel at the top of a mount everest is 0.007% higher than at a sea level. But that might be within the errors of the numbers used to estimate the mountain's mass etc.

 

There's no evidence that gravity has anything to do with qi. Some more new-age examinations liken the effects of gravity with yin qi but its pure speculation. We can observe many temples and meditators at the top of mountains, mostly they say the qi is stronger there, but dont give a reason as to why.

 

I am happy to stand (somewhat) corrected on this point. Your calculations do seem to show that it is at least possible for the gravity at the top of a mountain to be higher than that at sea level. As daoian says though, the density of the mountain (and its root structure) would be important to the calculation. I would also point out the confounding factor that the earth is not a perfect sphere, but rather a lumpy ellipsoid, so gravity will (on average) be stronger at the poles than at the equator.

 

But the more important point, that both you and daoian have commented on, is the lack of a clear connection between what science calls gravity and what we're calling yin chi. It may be a decent metaphor, but it seems we all agree that the reality of the situation is much more complicated than that.

[guangping]

I'll take another stab at this.

 

Quantum physics says that matter is just energy vibrating at different frequencies. Your bones, muscles, blood, and organs also vibrate at different frequencies. The electromagnetic field that is created is what the Chinese call qi. You can cultivate it, manipulate it, and deplete it.

 

When you are practicing or standing meditation outside, the goal is to use your body to create a circuit between the Heavenly energy ( your head ) and the Earth energy ( your feet ). Rooting creates the connection with the earth, stopping the monkey mind gives you more awareness of your connection to Heaven. It's called by Mantak Chia the macrocosmic orbit.

 

Practicing standing among trees is icing on the cake. Trees produce oxygen which helps you to relax, and they are a good metaphor for the attitude you need in practice.

[Jakara]

Quantum physics says a lot of things that cannot be taken out of context and used in a general sense like this. The rules of quantum mechanics do not apply to everyday scale objects.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mysticism Explains the fashionable misuse of the term.

 

Ive also heard good things about trees, though it could be psychological.

 

The force felt by gravity does change non-uniformly across the planet, but I dont think they are major enough to explain the apparent increase in qi at higher altitudes. Perhaps another factor is in play here. But without knowing the specific properties of yin qi, i guess we cant accuratley come to any conclusion.

 

I think in this case we just have to trust the masters that qi is stronger up a mountain, or go sit on one for ourselves and see. Its either true or its not, regardless of us being able to explain why.

 

The most interesting pseudo-scientific explanation ive read so far is that yang qi is in the air, yin qi from the earth. It goes on to say the reason why yang qi is stronger higher up is becasue the sun's radiation charges the air (ionization) significantly more so at higher altitudes. At sea level there is less "charged" air because the radiation obviously travels through more atmosphere and gets absorbed. The higher level of charged air at the mountain top would then attract more yin qi upwards from the earth. This is again pure speculation though. Since we dont know what yin and yang qi really are, its hard to predict thier behaviour.

[guangping]

Jakara,

 

I agree that there is a problem trying to make equations from quantum physics to consciousness, and that is what the wikipedia article described.

 

I'm not talking about consciousness, merely describing the quantum level of matter. Your body is composed of matter. Physics also tells us that the human body gives off a weak electromagnetic current, and that we are good conductors of electricity... The Chinese have elected to call this field qi, the Japanese call it hara, and the Americans call it farting...;-)

 

 

Internal practice is not philosophical but pragmatic, based on exercises that work, or else they wouuld not still be taught. What do you practice?

[Jakara]

The human body does have an electromagnetic aspect to it. Our nerves work on electric impulses from the brain in order to move muscles etc. However, can we be so sure that this same electricity is what the chinese call qi? Its a good approximation, but can we be 100% confident that qi is electricity or electric field?

 

For example, in kosta's books, John Chang repeatedly states that although qi has properties like electricity, it isnt electricity - its qi. He re-iterates that point in the videos you can find on youtube. This man was one of few with the abilities and willingness to demonstrate the properties of qi.

 

Id agree that some practices are still around because they work. But theres also a lot of dogma in taoist practice, and a lot of "well if this excercise works then this one must work too". We could select a sample excercise from around 100 available exercises listed and find that it works, but that doesnt automatically mean the other 99 work. So i think we have to be careful in what we state as "fact" and what appears to be true but isn't quite 100%.

 

Electricity is well defined in terms of science, but qi is not, so I dont think we can state that they are the same thing, even if they have similar properties.

 

This might sound a bit over analytical, but because theres not enough money in pure science research, everything goes on a person's reputation, the person with the best rep. gets the money. If your scientific reputation is poor, you are unlikely to ever get funding and your career is over.

 

So if we make such a statement as "qi is electric field", we'd damn sure better be able to back up our claim. This is why scientists are so cautious, and often reluctant to do research on things like qi, when your family is dependent on your pay cheque and that pay cheque is dependent on your scientific reputation, you have to be accurate.

 

Though I do appreciate this is a general forum and not a scientific symposium, :-) its still nice to have proof of our claims in order to make progress and not fumble around with 100's of practices or theories that we are unsure of.

[guangping]

Yes, I do tend to over simplify, and I was trying to make a general overview that was easy to understand.

 

The word qi means energy and there are many definitions for the types of energies in our world. Besides the language translation problems ( I have a manuscript written in the style of Beijing at the turn of the century that no-one has been able to penetrate ), there are the problems of trying to put them into the scientific and physiological terms that we currently have knowledge. Also, I said that the body creates an electromagnetic field, which has been measured, not an electric one. Yes, I agree about the problems with western scientific research, but there has been a wealth of research done in China and Japan that has been published there and not here. I used to use the university library to help me back when I tried to research and follow other research in this field.

 

I don't know who John Chang is, I hope that he isn't the charlatan from Indonesia that was featured by Bill Moyers a few years back who supposedly lit a piece of newspaper from the heat of qi in his hands. I'd have to see him in person. There are lots of people who have demonstrated skills at manipulating qi, what types impress you? I have seen demonstrations in martial and medical qigongs, and a few sidewalk demonstrations in Shanghai...

 

It would be nice to have a discussion with you if you would stop being condescending.

[Jakara]

The misuse of scientific terminology bugs me, its an easy way to spot a fake. The number of teachers claiming that science supports their claims is ridiculous, only when you look at the claim its all fluff. Trying to blind followers with science to lend their teachings credibility, its disguisting.

 

Having said that, despite my deliberate debate, i never mean to sound condescending, so apologies for my tone, it wasnt intentional. In my line of work ripping people's theories apart is daily practice, its considered a favour to the person making the claim to help prevent them publishing something unsupported and having their credibility questioned. In the end its all for the same goal to further understanding. You will however be hard pushed to find anyone with even basic manners in science, so again apologies.

 

Im unfamiliar with the majority of chinese research on qi, i assume its published in chinese, which I cannot read. I would be interested in hearing about some of it if you are willing.

 

John Chang is the subject of a couple of books written by a greek author called kosta danaos. In these books many feats are described. The descriptions of qi are quite good in the sense that nothing is claimed, John Chang simply says this is qi, these are its properties, he makes no attempt to justify it with a scientific parallel. He is the guy from indonesia who lit a paper with his hands, though im not sure if this is the same one you are describing as I dont know who Bill Moyers is.

 

What impresses me is someone willing to step up and have their claims examined and justified, there are too many charlatans out there taking peoples money and hindering the progress of humanity in general. What impresses you?

[rain]

What impresses you?

 

 

 

people who are willing to put in 40-50 yrs of hard work and cooperation with the chinese government to be able to test some of their hypotheses scientifically.

[guangping]

Jakara,

 

What do you do for a living?

 

As for listings of qigong research, give me a few days to remember where I used to look for them. I'm retired and it will take me back a few years. I know that the International School for Medical Qigong has some research papers and articles on their web site. I think the url is http://www.medicalqigong.org. There have been studies done in the US but I don't know how valid they are ornot. States like California require a license to practice TCM, so they have to have been convinced somehow that it works.

 

The paper that caught on fire was chemically treated beforehand. Exposure to oxygen caused it to catch fire, it had more to do with magician's tricks than qigong.

 

I prefer to visit a teacher and see for myself if they are good and honest or making false claims. I've also been to China, but back right before the Tianemen Square incident happened.

[Jakara]

guangping,

 

Im a physicist by trade. Sure, I assume most the research is medicallly oriented? Im very much interested in qi-gong as a means to spiritual enlightenment/immortality, specifically what role it has to play in it.

 

Yes ive seen many tricks where people use chemicals and hidden devices to do the impossible :-) Its certainly a possibility that chemicals were used. What is more convincing about this story is the number of students who have visited this man and come back with verification and also his explanations of how qi works are quite technical, it certainly stands out above the rest. Of course it could all be fabricated, its possibility with any technique we see.

[doc benway]

I also find myself getting irritated by attempts to apply Western scientific terminology to a discussion of Qi.

Rather than actually get attached to that whole discussion and identify with the feeling of irritation, I think this provides a very useful opportunity to look at myself.

 

What is it about ourselves that makes us try to describe Qi in scientific terms? Is it our own discomfort with believing in something that does not lend itself to the scientific method? Are there other reasons?

The Qi concept developed from an entirely different paradigm than the Western scientific method. The Western and Eastern paradigms really don't mix - are we afraid that one is right and the other wrong? Do they need to be mutually exclusive or consistent? Why should they?

 

Why is it that I find it annoying that others like to use scientific terminology to discuss Qi? Is it a natural consequence of my conditioning? Is it that I have a lot invested in the scientific method as it relates to my profession? Perhaps I feel threatened by anything that compromises or misuses that method. Why should I feel threatened? What would it be like to be able to see through all that?

 

I personally find this avenue of inquiry much more illuminating than a debate about whether Qi is electromagnetic energy, gravity, snake oil, or angel dust...

[guangping]

Jakarta,

 

One of my best friends and fellow tai chi students was a professor of physics at University of California at Santa Cruz. He is where I came up with theories on qi, along with our access to Jerry Alan Johnson. Perhaps you knew him, he was Dr. William Burke, had a hand in developing chaos theory... If you came to his funeral then we might have even met...

 

As to John Chang, I only know about the paper trick. It was photographed for television a few years back for one of Bill Moyer's shows. I think he still has a show called Bill Moyer's Journal. Anyway, I remember watching it and being impressed and asked Jerry how it was done, and he told me about it being a trick.

 

 

xuesheng,

 

I make attempts at pigeonholing definition of qi into terms that are more comfortable and fit into the paradigm I know. The reason that scientific theory is good is that it's based on designing experiments that will produce the same results. I wasn't a scientist in college, my major was considered to be false science at the time, it was psychology, the most impure of sciences.

 

Even back at the turn of the century martial artists were describing what they did in terms of newtonian physics, what they understood in their day. The more complex, philosophical trappings were added on later to fit in with Chinese medical and Buddhist and Taoist theories. Remember that qigong as we know it was created for Western consumption by the Chinese government, much like designer outlets were created by merchants in Hong Kong to get the business of Western tourists who were looking for bargains.

 

OK, now let's talk about EMPTY FORCE ... heh heh heh.

[doc benway]

I make attempts at pigeonholing definition of qi into terms that are more comfortable and fit into the paradigm I know. The reason that scientific theory is good is that it's based on designing experiments that will produce the same results.

You're in good company - it's human nature.

But is it conducive to really learning and really living?

We have this tendency to compare everything new with the already known. That reduces the new to a preconceived and conditioned idea that makes it more managable. But what does that actually do for us? It's great when we encounter something threatening but how valuable is it when speaking of Qi?

 

When it comes to Qi, an hour of meditation, Qigong, or Taiji practice is worth a year of scholarly research, IMO. This is why the Chinese speak of cultivating Qi rather than studying and understanding it. Qi is a skill to be cultivated, not a quantity to be hoarded or measured. It is a process, not a substance. Just my $.02.

[daoian]

Agreed.

 

Yang Chi is supposedly from heaven (the sky) and Yin chi the Earth. Therefore the top of a mountain would be the best place to sit; its the highest in the sky but also has a lot of Earth beneath. Caves are a good form of shelter, but they are usually only used if on a mountain. This would suggest your height above sea level being the prime factor.

 

before we get too deep into the technicalities, everyone who wants to look into metaphysics and alchemy really would do well to read Huang Di Nei Ching.

 

Yang chi is heaven because it radiates outward.

Yin chi is earth because it is receptive like soil.

Yang chi is invisible because it is heavenly

Yin chi is visible because it is terrestrial.

 

A cave is yin because it receives and takes in. The easiest way to explain is the birds and bees 101. Female is yin. Yin takes. Male is Yang. Male projects forth.

 

In the I ching, Mountain is very yin because it is a LOT of earth. A cave is yin because it is a vagina. If you are in a cave in a dense earth mountain, you are in Yin of Yin. When you meditate, you become yin. So you are yin of yin of yin. Its THIS exponential yin nature that creates a celestial vortex of yang of yang of yang.

 

This is why you have San Shin.

 

___

 

Somebody said, "the difference in gravity between the top of a mountain and sea level is .000007%" is thinking in a linear newtonian paradigm. Yin is always on the other side of Yang. All you have to do is get out of equilibrium (no matter how small) and heaven will correct for the imbalance (generalized). BUT when you take yin and make it to the power of yin to the power of yin, you've got exponential yin creating exponential yang. But theory is mental mastrabation. Go. Try a few nights in a tall stone mountain cave facing east.

[daoian]

Gravity maps

 

do you guys notice that all the most mystical places have the highest gravity?

1. machu picchu

2. Hymalayas (india)

3. Java

3. IF the maps were higher resolution, you'd see suuuper hot red spots in Jae Ju south korea and kunlun / shaolin / wudan / hwa shan

 

Here. Lets do this. In the I-Ching, earth is

 

- -

- -

- -

 

heaven is

 

__

__

__

 

BUT actually, heaven is like this:

 

 

| | |

 

you notice that the straight lines can penetrate the perforated lines. This is cosmic mating. The three projecting lines fit into the three lines that are open. IF there was a man standing between heaven and the most massive earth.

 

Earth->Man->Heaven, then man would be the lightning rod between heaven and earth. Hence the 3 yin yang swirls. Think of man as a giant celestial lightning rod. IF you stand in the right place and become totally YIN (relaxed - passive) you will momentarily inherit the power of heaven - YANG Chi.

[Smile]

Ok, I found a better resolution gravity map.

Java gravity map

India gravity map

Edited August 26, 2008 by Smile

[Jakara]

 

Why is it that I find it annoying that others like to use scientific terminology to discuss Qi? Is it a natural consequence of my conditioning? Is it that I have a lot invested in the scientific method as it relates to my profession? Perhaps I feel threatened by anything that compromises or misuses that method. Why should I feel threatened? What would it be like to be able to see through all that?

 

 

My personal preference, opinion or mental shortcomings have no relevance to the analysis of qi as a subject. The reason we should use scientific methodology is because it never fails. Its a proven technique which relies on the laws of the universe. It has no bias or agenda, its just a tool for finding the truth.

 

If we could construct a theoretical framework regarding the peroperties of qi, we need not experiment to find out which qi-gong methods work. We would simply know which techniques work and why, and also discover new techniques that would also work. How many injuries or even lives would it save? Not to mention how much time would be saved. Not having to trial and error our way around the vast number of techniques available.

 

We could find a teacher and take thier word for it, but we know that humans are unreliable, how many people are out there trying to make money from this, or people who state their system is the best without any proof?

 

With a properly established theory we dont have to take anyone's word for it, we would know who were the frauds and who was teaching the real thing automatically and why. Which techniques to use for which application and why.

[Stigweard]

My personal preference, opinion or mental shortcomings have no relevance to the analysis of qi as a subject. The reason we should use scientific methodology is because it never fails. Its a proven technique which relies on the laws of the universe. It has no bias or agenda, its just a tool for finding the truth.

 

If we could construct a theoretical framework regarding the peroperties of qi, we need not experiment to find out which qi-gong methods work. We would simply know which techniques work and why, and also discover new techniques that would also work. How many injuries or even lives would it save? Not to mention how much time would be saved. Not having to trial and error our way around the vast number of techniques available.

 

We could find a teacher and take thier word for it, but we know that humans are unreliable, how many people are out there trying to make money from this, or people who state their system is the best without any proof?

 

With a properly established theory we dont have to take anyone's word for it, we would know who were the frauds and who was teaching the real thing automatically and why. Which techniques to use for which application and why.

 

OK then so lets do it!

 

We obviously have a couple of science heads on the forum who are adapt at using the scientific method. Lets not just talk about it bemoaning 'wouldn't it be good'. Lets just do it.

 

So where do we start?

 

I have a suggestion ...

 

Hypothesis # 001: I have Qi perception exercise that can be conducted right here across this forum where I estimate over 65% of all participants will experience a tangible sensation of Qi energy.

 

Ok then science heads ... where do we go from here?

[autopoetic]

Ok then science heads ... where do we go from here?

 

Assemble a team of psychologists, neurologists, qi-gong masters, doctors, physicists, biologists, and probably philosophers.

 

Gain access to EEG, fMRI, laboratory to study blood chemistry, etc.

 

Do extensive testing on masters, observe results. Develop metrics for evaluating chi levels, compare those to self or peer assessments by masters.

 

Do extensive longitudinal testing on new practitioners. That is, make repeated observations of people before starting a given practice, while they learn the practice, and as they develop. Repeat this process for each practice of interest.

 

Given all that data, try to come up with correlations between what people experience through practice, and what happens biologically.

 

Then, we may be in a position to start offering hypotheses about how to describe chi scientifically, and where to look to do more testing.

[Jakara]

Im game if you want a physicist.

 

The main thing to do is establish the crude properties of qi. We can get this from user's own experiences, and also a literature search from those already doing such investigations, such as the chinese literature guangping suggested earlier.

 

Then we cross reference different user's accounts and the literature and look for patterns. This should give an overview of what is mostly likley correct according to statistics.

 

We can then formulate a probable set of "rules" about qi, and cross reference them with basic physics, chemistry, biology, psychology and medicine to make sure no violations have occured with what we already know to be true, and also liken the properties to any already existing phenomena to check for something that has already been documented with science. My feeling is that the properties of qi will not completely match anything science has currently documented.

 

I can only help with the physics part, we need more volunteers for the other sciences, and also more volunteers to donate genuine experiences, and yet even more to do literature searches. It would be a big taobums team project.

 

 

Just a note, i was still writing whilst autopoetic had posted. I'd also agree with his biological approach. With a good literature search first though we might save some of the leg-work later on.

We know for example that Harvard University did such biological tests on gTummo masters. So we already have one set of results right there.

 

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.html

Edited August 26, 2008 by Jakara

[Stigweard]

Assemble a team of psychologists, neurologists, qi-gong masters, doctors, physicists, biologists, and probably philosophers.

 

Gain access to EEG, fMRI, laboratory to study blood chemistry, etc.

 

Do extensive testing on masters, observe results. Develop metrics for evaluating chi levels, compare those to self or peer assessments by masters.

 

Do extensive longitudinal testing on new practitioners. That is, make repeated observations of people before starting a given practice, while they learn the practice, and as they develop. Repeat this process for each practice of interest.

 

Given all that data, try to come up with correlations between what people experience through practice, and what happens biologically.

 

Then, we may be in a position to start offering hypotheses about how to describe chi scientifically, and where to look to do more testing.

 

Great that's the ultimate goal then. What can we do now though? What small step can we take right now to head us toward this goal.

 

Take my experiment idea for example. How would we go about organising a realistic and credible experiment to prove or disprove my hypothesis that, with simple online instructions and within only 10 minutes practice, at least 65% of participants would have their own tangible experience of Qi energy ?

 

Science is about accumulating a body of research yes? Well let's start with what we have right now and work toward the big goal.

 

Who's in?

[daoian]

How would we go about organising a realistic and credible experiment to prove or disprove my hypothesis that, with simple online instructions and within only 10 minutes practice, at least 65% of participants would have their own tangible experience of Qi energy ?

 

 

Wait, you've never experienced chi?

 

Have two people do a chi condensation meditation. the only part that is not publically explained is that you must internally feel your fingers meeting although your hands are holding a heavy ball of gold.

 

its called the chi fireball meditation. google chi... page 2

 

Then... have one person point to any part of the other person's left hand. middle of palm, toward pinky, draw circles, squares.. and the other person can feel it... have them tell you exactly what you are doing... with their eyes closed.

[Stigweard]

Wait, you've never experienced chi?

 

Have two people do a chi condensation meditation. the only part that is not publically explained is that you must internally feel your fingers meeting although your hands are holding a heavy ball of gold.

 

its called the chi fireball meditation. google chi... page 2

 

Then... have one person point to any part of the other person's left hand. middle of palm, toward pinky, draw circles, squares.. and the other person can feel it... have them tell you exactly what you are doing... with their eyes closed.

 

LOL mate! I was not saying I have never felt chi and it was a similar process I had in mind.

 

If we can wrap a scientific methodology around an exercise like this we can begin a body of tested procedures. For example we would be able to say, within the realms of statistical accuracy, that by undergoing such an exercise you have a 65% chance of experiencing chi for yourself.

 

Cheers for the website.

[Jakara]

Unfortunately I think if we did a "who felt qi?" test using the same experiment, even if 100% genuinly felt the qi from the experiment, the results could easily said to be psychological. We'd need harder proof to verify it was actually qi behind the feeling being felt.