control needed for testing? / my little story

[AlderMoore]

In order to test for the Randi Prize you would need to have a certain level of control and predictability.

For years now I have been able to move some very light objects with my mind (telekinesis). I read about an experiment in a physics review article, which surveyed experiments claiming to demonstrate psychic abilities, in which a small square piece of paper is folded in such a way that it can easily rest on the head of a pin and so can easily spin about its center. After intently trying to get the thing to spin I finally did after a week. I got it to spin about 6 times around. I soon switched from paper to foil since foil spins much more easily. At times I could go for more than an hour making the foil spin in one direction at a moderate speed. Eventually I put the setup in a glass jar, and although I had little faith that I could, eventually I was able to make the foil spin inside the jar. Now, there have been periods when I could hardly make the foil spin, and there were other times when I could make the foil spin quite quickly for minutes at a time (inside a jar). This is inside a glass jar, and I don't touch the jar or the table that it is resting on. I have made many observations about my ability, but the one observation most pertinent to the Randi Prize is that although there are some times when I seem to be very good at making the foil spin, there are some weeks when I seem to clam up and become very frustrated. I have absolutely no doubt of my ability, but my complete lack of understanding of how I am able to do what I do also leads me to have very little control. I certainly have no "handle" on this ability, and I have no physical sensory feedback to know what "muscles" to activate. It seems to me that the only way I could test for the Randi Prize is if I could somehow learn control, or if the people in charge of testing were very patient. If I have doubt of anything it's of the patience of testers. I only wish the Randi foundation could be as patient as I am, because I really do feel I'm onto something.

[Zep]

Try holding a lit cigarette lighter near one side of your jar instead, without touching it, of course. See if anything happens then.

Let us know the results, OK?

[T'ai Chi]

Alder,

I just wanted to check, but this is inside a glass jar with a lid on it?

The jar, with the spinner in it, should be placed where there are no known vibrations.

The testing should also be done with no other people/pets moving around in the house.

If possible, there should also be a control jar and spinner set up in another area that are being videotaped at the same time you are trying to get the other spinner to move, to be viewed at a later time to see if anything happened.

You need to clearly define 'effort periods', that is, a set time, say every 5 minutes, where you will try and make the spinner move. Just sitting there and waiting until or if the spinner moves and then saying it is moving because of telekinesis is probably not a good demonstration of telekinesis ability, because the spinner will probably move from very small environmental vibrations on its own.

[PurpleChipmunk]

Very interesting. Can you make it stop and then spin it in the other direction?

[AlderMoore]

Originally posted by Zep
Try holding a lit cigarette lighter near one side of your jar instead, without touching it, of course. See if anything happens then.

Let us know the results, OK?


I did try what you suggested. Surprisingly, nothing happened. The side of the jar just got really hot. I don't know what this little experiment could have revealed, though, even if the foil did move a bit. Large temperature gradients have absolutely nothing to do with my experiment.

[AlderMoore]

T'ai Chi,

You have a very good suggestion. I will create another setup as a control. Unfortunately, I don't have any equipment for vibration isolation. Since background vibrations would be essentially random, then the foil should only at most wobble a bit, and not spin quickly in one direction for an extended time. At least I can say that the foil does not move during times when I am not efforting to make it spin, such as when I'm just sitting in my room reading, etc. If there were any significant environmental forces then the foil should move in essentially the same manner throughout the day, regardless of my own efforts.

In my early days I did at one time have three different spinners, and I could get just one of them to spin. I had fun trying to get successive ones to spin. I haven't done that in years, though, since I have many times convinced myself of my ability. I don't worry much these days about trying to prove to myself my ability, since that can be a bit exhausting, always trying to rule out other possibilities.

[AlderMoore]

Purple Chipmunk,

There have been many days when I had almost complete control over the direction that the foil spinned in. Usually I don't have any control over the speed (slow or fast ...) but when I concentrate I can usually get the foil to spin either clockwise or counterclockwise, as I desire. And yes, I could get it to stop quickly and then spin in the other direction. In that case it seemed almost as though the foil just bounced off a hard wall. It's very interesting. I want to make it clear that often I must concentrate very hard to get the foil to keep spinining in the same direction, otherwise it will tend to spin back and forth, like a pendulum, but this is not always the case.

[Dancing David]

To control for vibratons you could float something in a pan of water and then set the jar on that.

I have a few suggestions:
1. Make a video of when you can get the foil to spin.
2. Track all sorts of non essential things in your day. Like are you relaxed, how much sleep, are there animals fats in you diet. You may find that there is something that you think is inconsequential to the foil spinning, like dring ing milk.
3. Tell us if you are just yanking our chains.

[LTC8K6]

Sounds a bit like one of those little radiometers.

[Brown]

Sounds to me like it could be a variation of Martin Gardner's famed "Ripoff Motor."

The Ripoff Motor is a paper cylinder suspended on a near frictionless bearing (such as a needle on top of a small glass bottle). If you put your hand next to it, the "motor" does indeed rotate as if by psychic power. It's spooky as can be.

As it turns out, the rotation of the "motor" has a perfectly natural explanation. You can read about the Ripoff Motor in Gardner's Colossal Book of Mathematics.

[AlderMoore]

David,

I have spent years trying to figure out what is different about the times when I can get the foil to spin and times when I can't. I can list some things:

When I can :
- I'm very relaxed.
- I have no doubt and I'm confident.
- I have a clear idea of what I want the foil to do, meaning I'm not just staring at it hoping it will do something.

When I can't:
- I'm in a bad mood or I'm tense.
- I have doubts about whether my ability is real.

I am almost always most successful late at night, although there have been a couple great mornings. I have had several different diets over the years (low fat, low carb, juicing), and I haven't noticed any difference. I can say that my diet would affect my performance if it made me feel uncomfortable. I have found that caffeine seems to help because I feel really jumpy and energetic and hopeful. Also, if I'm dead tired, as I can get at 5 in the morning, then at some point I just can't keep going. I give up, and the foil stops moving. I think this is because I have lost all ability to concentrate.

Lastly, I am not lying. What I have said here is true, as to my observations. I am truly curious about what I have seen, and what I would really like is to just figure out exactly what is happening. What is frustrating is that I just don't know. I don't care if it turns out that I have no ability, as long I can explain the exact physics of what is causing the foil to spin. This is my mission. I'm not out to prove the existence of telekinesis. I'm just trying to figure out what's going on.

[AlderMoore]

LTC8K6,

A radiometer has surfaces with drastically different absorption qualities. A single piece of paper or foil doesn't. I did actually get a radiometer once. I put it next to my setup, and in low light conditions the radiometer didn't spin, while my foil did.


Brown,

I will definitely look at that book. That sounds like a very interesting experiment, and I would like to learn how it works. I don't think it works like my experiment, though, since I don't need to put my hands near the foil in order to make it spin.

[CERDIP]

Originally posted by Brown

...
As it turns out, the rotation of the "motor" has a perfectly natural explanation. You can read about the Ripoff Motor in Gardner's Colossal Book of Mathematics.

Yeah, it was an April Fools joke by Gardner...

"Place it on a Bible and make your mind as blank as possible..."

[Hand Bent Spoon]

Self delusion is frustrating at best, dangerous at worst.

[Patricio Elicer]

I have a video recording from Discovery Channel of a guy who is able to make a dollar note to spin, inside of an up side down glass container, without touching it. It's quite amazing,... but,.... it is a trick.

[Liamo]

AlderMoore,

Eventually I put the setup in a glass jar, and although I had little faith that I could, eventually I was able to make the foil spin inside the jar.
and later
When I can :
- I'm very relaxed.
- I have no doubt and I'm confident.
- I have a clear idea of what I want the foil to do, meaning I'm not just staring at it hoping it will do something.
Isn't that contradictory?

liam

[LTC8K6]

I know what a radiometer is, thanks.

It is either a trick, or you are mistaken.

I have seen other similar demonstrations and all of them were tricks.

What other light objects have you been moving with your mind for years?

For years now I have been able to move some very light objects with my mind (telekinesis).

[Brown]

Originally posted by CERDIP
Yeah, it was an April Fools joke by Gardner...

"Place it on a Bible and make your mind as blank as possible..." Yes, it WAS an April Fool's joke, but the "motor" really does turn without being touched, and this is what surprised a lot of people. It's still a spooky thing to watch.

In other words, the joke part was that the "motor" turns by paranormal means. The "motor" actually turns by quite ordinary (but not widely known) mechanisms.

The same April Fool's "article" also included a "disproof" of the Four-Color Map Theorem, a "disproof" of certain principles of relativity, and "evidence" that Da Vinci invented the flush toilet.

[Zep]

Originally posted by AlderMoore
I did try what you suggested. Surprisingly, nothing happened. The side of the jar just got really hot. I don't know what this little experiment could have revealed, though, even if the foil did move a bit. Large temperature gradients have absolutely nothing to do with my experiment. How long did you leave it there for? What time of the day was it? When you are successful moving it is your head or any part of your body near the glass? Can you do your control from somewhere else in the room, from more than ten feet away but still in vision of your glass?

Even though you SAY temperature gradients have nothing to do with it (and isn't that a preconception of how this works anyway?), you have not demonstrated that you have indeed ruled this out.

Such is the nature of GOOD research!

[Graham]

Aldermoore,

You're not in any way associated with anyone calling themselves Kayimbo (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=18403) are you?

Graham

[AlderMoore]

Graham,

This is the only thread I have contributed to. I don't know anything about the thread you have asked about.

[geni]

Have you cheaked for static? The evening thing sugests humidity and tempertue changes as a posible cause.

[AlderMoore]

A General Reply:

I have 2 statements.

First, I don't care much about previous demonstrations that were in fact tricks. Just because there is someone somewhere who has demonstrated something similar to what I have done, and they had malicious motivations, doesn't mean that their methods have anything to do with how my experiment works. Afterall, there is only one of me, and I'm not out to trick myself.

Second, since I really am out to try to figure out what makes my spinnners spin (paper or foil) I have done many variations. This includes different locations, times of day, either inside or outside a glass jar, glass box, behind a solid partition, sitting in different locations relative to my setup (which includes sitting across the room), or sitting next to the setup, or putting my hands near the setup (but not moving or touching), etc., etc. I've tried holding my breath, breathing normally, intentionally breathing at the setup to see how it might move, etc. I have noticed that even having a fan going somewhere in the room doesn't cause the foil to spin continuously and at the same rate for long periods of time. In fact, any kind of large environmental effect can't seem to cause any kind of continuous movement, or even a large movement at all. What I have observed is not something random. And I do know a thing or two about scientific investigations. In case no one has bothered to look at my profile, I am actually a physics graduate student, although that means little in general. That does mean that I know a lot about forces of nature, and so I don't sit around thinking of forces in strange terms. And I have spent a great deal of effort trying to rule out possible non-paranormal effects.

What would be nice is if anyone here can tell me of any legitimate investigations that have been documented, or interesting experiments that have been explained, so that I can actually improve my knowledge of such things, instead of just sitting around philosophizing.

Thank you all for your input.

[CERDIP]

AlderMoore, perhaps you need to take it to the next level. If your own testing has pretty well convinced that you are on to something here, then you have at least a falsifiable theory: you can move light-weight objects by application of mental activity with no physical intermediary. Maybe you can refine that more.

As a physics grad, you'll know that once you have a falsifiable theory, then you need to attempt those tests that can prove your theory false. And it seems you've done that.

Now you need someone else to test you, replicating your experiments, and perhaps performing their own tests on your abilities. Any of your physics classmates should be willing and able to do that, or you could ask for volunteers from this site...but make sure you find someone who will be rigorous.

[LTC8K6]

a small square piece of paper is folded in such a way that it can easily rest on the head of a pin and so can easily spin about its center.

I soon switched from paper to foil since foil spins much more easily.

I have noticed that even having a fan going somewhere in the room doesn't cause the foil to spin continuously and at the same rate for long periods of time. In fact, any kind of large environmental effect can't seem to cause any kind of continuous movement, or even a large movement at all.

So, does the foil spin easily, or not? How about the paper?

How can a fan or a large environmental effect not cause the foil spinner to spin for a long time, if it spins easily, as you said? Or the paper one, for that matter? How can the fan or effect not cause a large movement of a spinner that is well balanced and spins easily?

Something is just not adding up, imo.

[PurpleChipmunk]

Originally posted by AlderMoore
What would be nice is if anyone here can tell me of any legitimate investigations that have been documented

There's the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research program conducted by Princeton University, which seems to have produced some interesting results -

http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/

[TheBoyPaj]

From your description of your own research it seems you have convinced yourself. I suggest you apply for the challenge and let Randi and his colleagues devise a protocol for you. I'm sure you'll be able to practise it at home before doing it under scrutiny.

[uneasy]

Originally posted by AlderMoore
When I can :
- I'm very relaxed.
- I have no doubt and I'm confident.
- I have a clear idea of what I want the foil to do, meaning I'm not just staring at it hoping it will do something.

When I can't:
- I'm in a bad mood or I'm tense.
- I have doubts about whether my ability is real.

It's interesting that abilities like these often don't work when some condition is present, and the condition is almost always not measurable in any way. In this case, it won't work when you are in a bad mood, or tense, or not relaxed, or having any doubts, or not having have a clear enough idea.

There are unmeasurable conditions that cause failure. As long as this situation exists, in any applicant's mind there can always be 3 possible outcomes for a test.

1. success
2. failure
3. would have been a success if it wasn't for something that no one can observe but the applicant that made it fail

If you are applying, think long and hard about it, because before you are tested you must agree to accept one of two results: success or failure.

...a long way of saying, don't delude yourself.

[TheBoyPaj]

Actually, it doesn't matter if the applicant accepts failure or not. If they feel that some condition outside of their control caused them to underperform they can simply apply again in 12 months, with a re-worked protocol if necessary. They never have to accept that they don't have the powers, though that will of course be the inference drawn by many other observers (including myself).

Also, the protocols seem to be designed so that the applicant can have a trial run before the real thing to test that their powers are "working".

[NoZed Avenger]

There have been a few thread on this type of experiement before, and a few posters gave links to other resources, IIRC. A fast search did not turn up anything for me, because I do not remember the terms beiong used - it was, perhaps, 9 mos-12 mos ago ?? (unsure)

The gist of the responses, though, point out that this is a system which can be affected through tiny, tiny changes. You've got to make a serious effort to eliminate vibration, air currents, and convection of heat (leading to air currents). In addition to problems with breathing or moving (even from across the room), the heat soiurce of a human body can affect these things, even behind glass (which surprised me when I first read it).

I think a vacuum chamber would be ideal -- you might try a university or look into cheap vacuum pumps; it would not have to be very efficient or good to eliminate 99.5 percent of the problem.

[Ted C]

AlderMoore,

To complete for the prize, you will need to be able to produce your effect fairly reliably. I don't think it's unreasonable to request in your application that you get to make multiple attempts over a fairly long period of time. Keep in mind that the testers will have to go to some expense to visit you for the preliminary test, and you'll probably have to pay your own way to the official test (which is reasonable, since you'll get a million bucks if you successfully demonstrate your ability).

Some other controls for your own testing:
- The object you intend to spin (the foil) should be uniform in color
- The lighting in the room should be from a consistent source

I mention these because light striking a dark surface will be absorbed and generate heat. That heat can warm the air above the surface, and the warmer air will expand. The expanding air will exert force against the surface. With low enough mass and friction, the energy from the light can be enough to move the surface. You can see models that demonstrate this effect in physics labs. You'll want to make sure that your own model isn't subject to a similar effect.

[ADD Boy]

Just out of curiousity, does anyone know if a very small gravitational force or electric charge (like NoZed mentioned) would be enough to move the paper? Because I think the charge idea might be what's going on.

Let's consider that it will take a very small amount of force to overcome the friction of the pin (or whatever you said the foil was resting on). From physics, you know that F = (kQ1Q2)/r^2, with k= 8.99E9. Okay. Now I am going to make a VERY rough estimate on charges, because I actually have no idea what the charges would actually be :p. Let's assume any object near the foil will have a charge of 1E-10 Coulombs. Let's assume that the foil has the same charge. Let's assume that the object nearest is .2 meters away. You'll get a force of 2.25E-9 Newtons (if I did the calculations right!). Now, since the surface is practically frictionless, this could account for the rotation (even though it's a very small force). On days when the weather is much drier, you could have an even higher charge on the objects, and therefore, a higher force and faster rotation. This would account for those "good days" and "bad days". Even the placement of nearby objects could account (the closer they are, the easier it is to move)?

Granted, I'm not a graduate physics professor, but I think it's still possible.

[deBergerac]

Originally posted by ADD Boy
J
Let's consider that it will take a very small amount of force to overcome the friction of the pin (or whatever you said the foil was resting on). From physics, you know that F = (kQ1Q2)/r^2, with k= 8.99E9. Okay. Now I am going to make a VERY rough estimate on charges, because I actually have no idea what the charges would actually be :p. Let's assume any object near the foil will have a charge of 1E-10 Coulombs. Let's assume that the foil has the same charge. Let's assume that the object nearest is .2 meters away. You'll get a force of 2.25E-9 Newtons (if I did the calculations right!). Now, since the surface is practically frictionless, this could account for the rotation (even though it's a very small force). On days when the weather is much drier, you could have an even higher charge on the objects, and therefore, a higher force and faster rotation. This would account for those "good days" and "bad days". Even the placement of nearby objects could account (the closer they are, the easier it is to move)?


Granted it was some time since my last course in Physics but how do you obtain the rotation? I can see that there would be an attraction even between small charges but if one charge is stationary outside the jar and the other one is on the paper, why does the paper rotate?

[ADD Boy]

Originally posted by deBergerac


Granted it was some time since my last course in Physics but how do you obtain the rotation? I can see that there would be an attraction even between small charges but if one charge is stationary outside the jar and the other one is on the paper, why does the paper rotate?

Let's assume that the paper is circular for a second, and that we are looking at the system from the top down. Let's assume there is an uneven balance of charges between the right side of the paper circle and an object below the paper. The uneven charges could cause that side to pull towards it, obtaining a rotation.

It's been about a year since I've done charges in Physics, so I'm not positive if I've got it right. However, it would seem to me that any force exerted on any part of the paper circle would cause it to wobble or rotate, regardless of what direction the force is in. I only gave the above example to illustrate how that force could rotate the paper circle.

Any physics people out there want to comment? Am I remembering all this stuff correctly?

[LFTKBS]

Unfortunately, AlderMoore, I have to disqualify you from the running because you sound lucid. Let me translate some of what you said into normal applicant-speak.

Originally posted by AlderMoore
For years now I have been able to move some very light objects with my mind (telekinesis). I read about an experiment in a physics review article, which surveyed experiments claiming to demonstrate psychic abilities, in which a small square piece of paper is folded in such a way that it can easily rest on the head of a pin and so can easily spin about its center.

Translated: hello i am interrested in the randi Challeng - i have noticed for many years that the disporrof of my pweors is flase. so can you not see the forces? give ample time for evidences and you will see all. because you can not see god is all that is to know. i demand one million dollars or is RANDI SCARED OF LOOSING HIS FUNDS for abortion? you are fools and i show on Russian porgrom "Zdyevets Oozheet final PROOF of my ability?

Do you not believe? it is well know by all who seelk TRUTH that i am right!!!!

[TheBoyPaj]

Regarding the charge hypothesis, does it move if you make the same gestures with your hands but don't concentrate on trying to move it with your mind?

[AlderMoore]

At this point I don't know what kind of force is involved, so it could very well be electro-magnetic in nature. As far as the physics goes, just having a static electric force won't cause a rotation. There will be an initial deflection, but that's all. You need to have an applied torque.

If you try to figure out what kind of force is involved, keep in mind that I can get the foil to spin in a direction for over an hour at a fairly good speed.

To answer that last question about hand gestures, I don't move my hands. I usually sit perfectly still. I have no need to move my hands around.

[Dane]

Try or think up another experiment that could be a little more stringent. Set something else up. Put a small piece of paper on the edge of a table so it is close to falling. Leave it there for several hours and come back and see if it's still there. That will mean that it is not going to fall off due to room conditions. Then stand several feet away, motionless to avoid vibrations. Do your concentrations, and see if you can direct the paper off the edge. That will be more convincing than the age-old pinwheel paper trick that I've seen done by a few people. Or just think up your own experiment. That way you can decide whether it is worth it to you to apply to win the 1 million.

Dane

[Kevin_Lowe]

Pinwheels are a popular way to delude oneself. Uri Geller flogs the things, I believe, and there are poor souls on his web forums determinedly "spinning" their pinwheels. Any disturbance of the air sets them going.

If you have access to a science lab, why not try exerting a force on some sensitive scales? Or a piece of foil suspended on a string in vacuum? Both of these would be very convincing demonstrations if they worked.