Help needed for Reiki test

[dogjones]

My friend (let's call him A) - claims that he can tell if someone is a Reiki master by their proximity. He reports sensations of 'electrical energy', (eg pins and needles, tingling and heat), when in the presence of a Reiki master, whether knowing him previously or not.

We have agreed to do a controlled test and I need to design a protocol. We are thinking something like the following:

Procure a Reiki master and a completely opaque screen (maybe a black curtain of some kind). The screen is marked with two red circles on each side (for hands). Find a room with doors at each end. Myself and the reiki master will be behind one door, and A will be behind the other door. The screen will divide the room - no-one in one half will be able to see anything in the other half.

At our end, an officiator then tosses a coin to determine whether me or the Reiki master enters and holds our hands up to the red circles. The officiator also makes sure the screen is not touched.

A is then signalled to enter the room (with a bell?) and hold his hands to the red circles on his side of the screen; a second officiator his end ensures he does not touch the screen.

(The red circles ensure the closest proximity without touching - A says he is guaranteed to feel something if the hands are in close proximity.)

A then exits the room and indicates who he thinks is behind the screen. The officiator logs his results.

Repeat 20 times, then compare results.

Whatchyall think? As this is my first time doing this I am sure this is not airtight. Please help me with any suggestions/criticisms/better protocols. Many thanks!

[jimtron]

You sure your "skeptical vibe" isn't going to cause the "electrical energy" to dissipate? I have a feeling you might be hearing something like that after the test. You might want to ask if there's anything that could get in the way of A's ability (like the above) before going to the trouble.

[dogjones]

Yeah, we'll do a test without the screen first to make sure all is in working order.

I'm wondering if 20 times is enough to eliminate chance. Maybe 30 would be better?

[Zep]

I'd suggest making it simpler: Make it just like the tests for sensing auras and suchlike - simply determine if the Reiki master is present or absent behind the screen by having him there or not according to a fair coin-flip. It allows independent refrereeing, and no skeptics present to "influence" the tests.

At least 15 tests in a run are usually required for this binary style, and a number of runs done to get a good consistent rate of scoring (try not to vary too much of the environment between runs).

You will need to ensure there are no other clues of presence given - light, indirect sight (shadows, etc), noise, heat, announcements, etc. So maybe the single test process is to flip the coin, have the master take his place, "A" then comes in and does his "sensing", he leaves and reports his result, and the master leaves the room.

And yes, run the whole thing without the screen for approximately the same number of tests as the live run. And have "A" ensure that the test is fair, and that his sensing powers are "on song", and there is no interference from anything at all in the setup. You could even have a confederate of "A" check each single test to ensure it was fair. Check both before and after the testing (and in between each run?) that this remains the situation - leave no loophole for "I was robbed!"

[ospalh]

I'd do the calibration test with the screen in place, once with the reiki master and once with you on your side of the screen but telling A before he comes in who's on the other side. So he can't later claim that the screen, well, screened the reiki "vibes".

I think doing it with the reiki guy or nobody as alternatives could be dangerous. What if A detects the sound of berathing or some other hint that somebody is there? It's much simpler just to make somebody else take the place than to screen for all kinds of possible tells.

[Rasmus]

For the test without the screen, I would suggest that the screen is left in place. I.e. let the testee know what happens on the other side, but do not interfere with the setup of the situation. (Who knows, there might be traces of lead in the screen that could shield the aura. Damn curtain manufacturers, all they ever use is lead and cryptonite.)


It will be difficult to judge the "no touching part". I am not sure if it's feasible, but a double-screen seems like a better idea: either side can touch, but there remains a small insulation between the two screens.

In fact, since that might make things a lot easier: Just use a door between two rooms, or seal a doorframe (with the door open or removed) with a thin wooden panel. (or two, if you like the idea about the double screen)

Also, I would suggest that you explain how likely it is to get any number of trials right by pure chance. Make sure that it is understood that scoring one or two above 50% is not a good result at all.

I assume the main purpose here is to educate your friend, right? So the test should emphasize that your friend understands the results and that fooling oneself is ruled out. Outright cheating, however, seems to not be so much of an issue.

[Lothian]

A simpler set up.

Sensor sits at a table with a screen (Hanging cloth) in the middle. His hands go under the screen. Both you and the Reiki master sit opposite.

You throw a dice. If a 1,2 or 3 comes up you place your hands above the sensor and the adjudicator rings a bell. If it is a 4,5 or 6 the reiki master does..

This stops the sensor recognising your walk.

[Apathia]

I foresee an out for this individual when he doesn't perceive that a certain person is a Reiki Master. There are so many different schools of Reiki now, each with their own "source" of energy and atunements to such, that if an individual who claims to spot the Reiki Master, misses that a certain person is, he can say they aren't really a Reiki Master or their "energy" isn't that of the traditional school the spotter was attuned in. As usual with the "energy" thing. there are always extenuating and mitigating circumstances that complicate testing and leave the subject an excuse when the phenomenon fails to pan out.

[Rasmus]

Originally Posted by Hyparxis

I foresee an out for this individual when he doesn't perceive that a certain person is a Reiki Master. There are so many different schools of Reiki now, each with their own "source" of energy and atunements to such, that if an individual who claims to spot the Reiki Master, misses that a certain person is, he can say they aren't really a Reiki Master or their "energy" isn't that of the traditional school the spotter was attuned in. As usual with the "energy" thing. there are always extenuating and mitigating circumstances that complicate testing and leave the subject an excuse when the phenomenon fails to pan out.

Hence the unblinded trials, where the subject knows what they should perceive and have to confirm that all is well.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Lothian

A simpler set up.

Sensor sits at a table with a screen (Hanging cloth) in the middle. His hands go under the screen. Both you and the Reiki master sit opposite.

You throw a dice. If a 1,2 or 3 comes up you place your hands above the sensor and the adjudicator rings a bell. If it is a 4,5 or 6 the reiki master does..

This stops the sensor recognising your walk.

I think things like this could be a give-away, also breathing patterns, and what not. Perhaps you could have some sort of white-noise generator, to eliminate audible hints? Also, get subjects of similar body type and age, to reduce the possiblity of secondary distinguishing info.