| RETURN TO TELEKINESIS PAGE - TELEKINESIS -> A problem with your 'proof' | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: A problem with your 'proof' |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 3, 2006 Views: 698 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' I didn't bother to reply to your question about the compass because it seems such a pointless task. Why should we be able to detect magnetic force with our bodies? You may as well ask why we can only see a fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum or why we cant see electricity. These questions are pointless and off subject. You say electricity is electromagnetism. I disagree. Electricity neeeds a conductor to travel, such as a wire. Electromagentism is transmitted freeely through the air. I think we will have to leave it at that as it will lead us nowhere anyway. You would need to prove that the human body can manipulate it to move objects that are not affected by it anyway. We can easily detect electromagnetism so if it were used in TK we would detect it. Its never been detected and that is my point. |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jul 4, 2006 Views: 696 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' You (Keith) seem to have a real problem with people who disagree with you. As soon as we'd replied, you responded by trying to shut down the topic rather than continue the discussion. Seems a bit rude to me. Secondly, why are you so hung up on the idea that tk would have to use electromagnetic waves? |
| Posted By: mordak Posted On: Jul 4, 2006 Views: 695 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Electricity an electromagnetic waves seems pretty similars to me. Everything is conductor at a certain degree. Every atom as electric charges. Every atom as a moving polarity. Every electric current as a magnetic field. Lightning dosen't need a bridge of metal to strike the earth. Again, with the compass question you simply reply it's pointless. Wow, what an argument. I'am impressed. Ciao Mordak |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 4, 2006 Views: 691 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Woodpecker, What on earth leads you to suggest I am trying to close down the topic? Try reading what I have said again. I am trying to keep it on topic, not close it. Arguing about what is and what isn't electromagetic waves gets us nowhere. My point, yet again, is that if it were EMWs it would be easily detected and yet never has been. Defining what EMWs are is neither here nor there in this context. The fact is they have not been detected in demonstrating TK. Why you think that is me trying to close a topic is totally beyond me. BTW, again try reading the posts before commenting. It isn't me suggesting that EMWs have anything to do with TK. I give up! |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 4, 2006 Views: 688 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Mordak, you said. "...Again, with the compass question you simply reply it's pointless. Wow, what an argument. I'am impressed..." I replied and explained why it is pointless. What more can I say? If you fail to understand why its pointless after reading my reply then I am afraid that is your problem. Can't make it any clearer. I have stated the bleeding obvious! |
| Posted By: Mordak Posted On: Jul 5, 2006 Views: 679 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Its funny to see that you stick on the little part of the message that goes with your interest. Are we supposed to interpret this as a no answer for the rest ? You said that you told why you think its pointless to talk about the compass phenomenon. Well all you wrote is : « Why should we be able to detect magnetic force with our bodies? » You answer by a question !? Here are the answers to both questions you ask in one : We could be able to detect magnetic force to do TK. Some animals already can detect magnetic forces, why not us? Its probably a long forgotten ability of our brain. Ciao Mordak |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 5, 2006 Views: 675 | RE: RE: A problem with your 'proof' Mordak, Okay, just for the sake of argument, and so I am not accused of trying to close down the topic, let us assume that we may be able to detect EMWs. Right. So what possible use do you think that would be in moving objects by TK? We KNOW we ARE surrounded by them. So what? |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jul 6, 2006 Views: 661 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' I hang my head in shame. Electricity is the exchange of electrons, not electromagnetic waves. Sorry everyone. |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 6, 2006 Views: 660 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Woodpecker, Thank you for your honesty. No one is pefect. I think people sometimes get confused because the flow of electricity (electrons) generates an electromagnetic field around the carrier. Sometimes this gets confused with electromagnetic waves, which is an entirely different thing. Anyway, as I said, the definition of what is and what isn't electromagnetic waves does not affect this argument. There is no corralation between EMWs and TK, and that is what Mordak is suggesting. He thinks that tkers may be able to not only detect EMWs (so what?) but use them to move objects. My argument is how could that possibly work? How could it be done? How could EMWs move an object that is not affected by EMWs? So far there has not been a reply to those questions. Not surprising really. Watch this space. That's it really. |
| Posted By: Mordak Posted On: Jul 7, 2006 Views: 652 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Hi, very interesting debate evolution. What is an electron ? Well, stop thinking it looks like the model in the old books of physics. An electron is a particule-wave all around a nucleus when « stable ». It has in fact no stable shape! Electricity is a physical phenomenon that is a part of electromagnetism. Its a kind of movement of electron depending on charges and on frequency of the waves. In electricity, the electron is moving like a particle, by charges. When electrons move in a particle way, they produce a « force » that is called magnetism. The magnetism is influencing other particle-waves by « attracting / repulsing » them. Magnetism is the interaction of charges of electrons. So, electrons, when stable around a nucleus produce a tiny magnetic field that push /attract other electrons keeping atoms stable, thus forming objects. Why does a air atoms cannot mix-up with atoms of a pen. Because the electrons are repulsing. You made my theory evolved! What i suggest now is that we can emit electromagnetic waves of electrons. Those waves are infinit ( not finit) strings that move in wave like manner. Electrons witch were particles in your body are now propulsed in space. Then you let the string go and the electron is becoming a particle again at a new place. Thoses new electrons are particles and perturbate the charges at this new place, creating new electro-magnetic forces. The object moves. Mordak |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 7, 2006 Views: 649 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Mordak, So, according to your amazing new theory, the human body strips electrons from the atoms of our body and sends these electrons in a wave like manner to the object to be moved. When they arrive they revert to being a particle and cause a magnetic disturbance that moves the object. Have I got that right? |
| Posted By: Mordak Posted On: Jul 7, 2006 Views: 646 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Yes that's it. And maybe they revert again and come back as electromagnetic waves again. It's like extending your arm (wave) touching something (particle) and retracting your arm (wave again) Mordak |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jul 7, 2006 Views: 643 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Any idea how this is actually done. Or is this just pure speculation? |
| Posted By: Woodpecker Posted On: Jul 7, 2006 Views: 641 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' Yes I'd like to know that too, although if it is speculation that does not mean it's incorrect by default. |
| Posted By: Mordak Posted On: Jul 10, 2006 Views: 632 | RE: A problem with your 'proof' I have some ideas but unfortunately i have to quit this foum for a while. Thanks Mordak |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next Page -> |