PsiPog.net : Q&A Psychokinesis

# PsiPog.net

# Psychokinesis

415 questions in this category

< Back to Categories

Pages: First ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... Last

## Questions

JaHeat asks on June 27, 2004, 10:20pm:

Hey! i just want to know what are the differences between these words:
Psi
Psions
Psionics
Psionic
Thanx

Rainsong replies on June 27, 2004, 10:46pm:

Psi: second-to-last letter of the Greek alphabet, used as a variable to denote an unknown mechanism involved in telepathy and psychokinesis, in American research in the early-mid 20th century. By extension, it is also used to refer to the "stuff" used to accomplish pk and telepathy, and --by further extension-- other effects...and sometimes those who produce such effects.

Psions: from "psionics", unofficial. Denotes both people who use psionics, and a hypothetical particle which might be connected to the mechanism by which psionics is accomplished.

Psionics: Americanism coined in parallel with "electronics", "nucleonics", etc. Refers to deliberate use of the "mind" to affect physical reality. Both the set of skills, and the use thereof. By extension, it has come to include the perceptive "psychic" abilities, as well.

Psionic: adjectival derivative of "psionics"

No problem

JaHeat asks on June 27, 2004, 9:38pm:

Hey! I just read a formula reasearched by some Conrad guy who researched on telekinesis for 20 years...
TK = CFe + ZPE - SD - E+
It means that Telekinesis (TK) is the result of a sufficiently high amount of Iron in the brain (CFe), of a Zero Point Emotion (ZPE) state, not using energy on will power or imagination or anything, and it is reduced by any degree of Sleep Deprivation (SD), and reduced by any degree of excesss vitamin E (E+) as that reduces the iron.
~is this true?...thanks

Rainsong replies on June 27, 2004, 10:40pm:

There are enough "Questionable" parts of his paper to make the whole thing practically worthless. His formula, as presented, is without meaning. The sleep-deprivation bit is nonsense. Iron was based on a single subject; _far_ too small a sample. Zero Point Emotion was insufficiently defined.

Daryl asks on June 26, 2004, 5:25pm:

Rainsong,
I understand that you have done experiments on, and analysed, blood-chemical/ingredient (for lack of a better term?) levels before and after PK. Also, you've looked at research of the Soviets during their experiments with PK etc, i think?
So.. have you found there to be any significant hormonal changes in the blood? -And do nicotine and alcohol have any effect on the skill of someone doing PK?

Rainsong replies on June 27, 2004, 8:59pm:

My research has been on blood-sugar. The Soviets investigated rather more thoroughly. There are significant changes in the chemical balance of the blood, yes.

From what I've read, nicotine has no noticeable short-term effect on PK. Alcohol in any appreciable amount tends to mess up PK attempts; most tested depressants do, so it isn't overly surprising. It is "from what I've read", though. It is not impossible that some results of drug-tests may have been reported inaccurately, or simply that more than one variable was involved.

1 of 1 person found this question helpful

Psionic_Savant asks on June 26, 2004, 9:18pm:

I'm Just asking this as a newbie... Snce i don't know much,bt what exactly is a psiwheel, anyways?.... I just want to know, as i'm confused....

Rainsong replies on June 27, 2004, 8:55pm:

It's a folded piece of paper balanced on a verticle pin, so that the paper can spin around. The idea is to cause it to spin using pk. Further information can be found in the "Kinesis" section of "Articles".

hwoarang asks on June 25, 2004, 8:16pm:

have any of you started out with macro pk instead of practicing micro first?

i skipped micro and went straight to macro and i have had pretty good results.

i keep my hands nearly a foot away from the psi wheel and i make sure i dont breathe on it.i have taken a lot of precautions so i know i am not kidding myself.
could i be slightly talented with pk?

thanks for reading this.

Rainsong replies on June 25, 2004, 11:46pm:

It isn't unheard-of. Some people are better with macro than micro, rather than the other way around. If you can do either, it would imply that you are at least slightly "talented" with pk, yes.

mentalism asks on June 20, 2004, 9:14pm:

Dear Peebrain,

Can TK be performed in front of skeptics, by a TK practitioner that can succesfully spin the psi weel when in a room on his own?

I have heard this is not possible, personally i get put off when demonstrating my non-paranormal skills, but im still able to demonstrate them with a little focus.

I just started practicing TK regardless of wheather its real or not. Someones got to try, in my opinion, not enough people play with their mind enough, no wonder we only use a fraction of our brain power.

nice site

Rainsong replies on June 24, 2004, 12:51am:

Obviously, I'm not Peebrain, but I'll answer anyway....

TK can be performed in front of skeptics, even in front of pseudo-skeptic debunker types. There is a certain amount of "performance anxiety" that can interfere with your concentration, of course...same reason people sometimes forget easy stuff on exams.

Plasmid asks on June 20, 2004, 1:26pm:

Hi,
What's the hardest/most difficult [action] of TK:
Levitation, Rolling, or Sliding?
Thanks

Rainsong replies on June 24, 2004, 12:39am:

All else being equal, levitation is probably the hardest, because you need to support the entire weight of the object. Anecdotal evidence also leads in the direction of "levitation is harder than sliding" based on the relative frequency of occurances. Of course, for statistical purposes, anecdotal evidence poses a few problems.

The difficulty of sliding varies with the amount of friction between the object and whatever it is sliding on.

Rolling is easiest.

mATtT asks on June 21, 2004, 11:26am:

If i can move a flame is that pk or pyro-pk. I just think in my mind left and it goes left its like im communicating with it. I can make it spin around all kinds of stuff. No it is not the wind.

please help,
mattt

Rainsong replies on June 24, 2004, 12:33am:

Both.

1 of 1 person found this question helpful

SKainuiG asks on June 23, 2004, 2:24am:

If you are trying to do Pyro-PK can you absorb energy from the flame to manipulate it or is just absorbing it Pyro PK because it makes it smaller... I know I've taken in energy from the sun to make a psi ball so I'm not really sure...

Rainsong replies on June 23, 2004, 6:00pm:

"Absorbing energy" from the flame would not be pyroPK, no. Presuming that you're not referring to the heat or light produced, but rather to a method of "gathering" psi-stuff, the "absorbing" is only a convention, not literal. If you are in the habit of using the elemental-magic approach, there is no reason that you can't use the flame as your focal point. However, you will find it rather limiting: it's fine if you're playing with a flame that is already lit, but how will your sub-conscious react when you try to light a flame. "Hey! You always had me gather psi-stuff with the flame to do this....there is no flame to gather from. What do you think you are doing _this_ time?"

3 of 3 people found this question helpful

tameer asks on June 22, 2004, 2:04am:

Question for Rainsong:

How do you roll objects telekineticly?

Rainsong replies on June 22, 2004, 9:09pm:

Usually, I push them. Sometimes, I pull. Easiest approach is to swat them with a psi-tendril.

Pages: First ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... Last

< Back to Categories

All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2000-2006 PsiPog.net and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.

You must agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy to view this website. Click here to contact the webmaster.