Is there some "psi-wheel debunking for dummies" I could use?

[davefoc]

I did a few simple experiments:

I wasn't able to duplicate the videos to my satisfaction but these were my results:
1. At first I thought I was able to control spin with static electricity. I wiped the paper on my skin several times and I was apparently successful at getting the paper to spin. However after more experimentation I decided that the effect wasn't strong enough to convince me that something else wasn't controlling the spinning. I tried wiping the paper on a teflon pan and I tried wiping my hands on my clothes and the paper on my clothes. Nothing seemed to build up enough charge so that a clear effect was detectable. However it's night and rain is predicted around here and it just might be too humid for the triboelectric effect to work.

2. I was moderately successful at getting the paper to spin with very small amounts of blown air. The amount was easily small enough that it would not have been detectable in the video. The principal problem that I had was that the paper had a preferred direction of rotation and I just couldn't get it to change well enough to look like my chi was in control of anything.

3. I had some success at controlling and possibly producing air currents with my hands in that I had some success at getting the paper to spin by just moving my hands near the paper. Once again there was too much randomness to make me feel comfortable that I could duplicate the effect reliably. Sometimes it seemed like I could really get it moving and I could even stop it with just the appropriate positioning of my hands, but again I just couldn't do it reliably enough to make me sure whether I was causing movement by convection caused by my hands or just deflecting small air currents that happened to be around or the paper was just in a mood to spin.

4. I tried the paper under glass demonstration on a surface that was rough enough to allow some air currents to pass under the glass. I had the least success at causing an effect similar to the one in the videos with this. I could definitely cause some fluttering and occasionally a little rotation with very small air currents but I was far from demonstrating a significant spin.

My thoughts at this point:
Subtle air currents seem the most likely explanation, but I couldn't prove that this was a possible explanation. If several videos were taken of my experiments there was enough random rotation of the paper that I could have created a video that was someplace near the first one. But I never got to the point that I could reliably produce an effect. Perhaps with more practice or experimentation I could have figured out how to reliably control the paper.

I still lean to the idea that static electricity might work but you might need to do it on a dry day.

I don't think anything I did could have adequately created the under glass demonstration. I don't know how that was done, but I can't rule out air currents, but I don't think I could do it with just air currents.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

My thoughts at this point:
Subtle air currents seem the most likely explanation, but I couldn't prove that this was a possible explanation. If several videos were taken of my experiments there was enough random rotation of the paper that I could have created a video that was someplace near the first one. But I never got to the point that I could reliably produce an effect.

I don't think the first video was reliably producing rotation. (See Steven Howard's post near the beginning of the thread.)

I just made one. The paper was much heavier than I would have liked. (Something like cigarette rolling paper would be best.) It took me a couple of tries--and it seemed like a smaller, lighter one was better than a larger heavier one (the paper, that is--I used the same pin).

It looked to me like minute air currents made it rotate and jiggle randomly. The direction changed now and then by itself, but I could do it at will by putting my hand in the right spot (probably blocking or changing the air current).

 

[m_huber]

Note that these are videos. In the first one, we see a guy put the paper on the pin and wave his hands around it. Is there a guy behind the camera? No way to know.

Also note that these are incredibly unstable systems. A similar trick (possibly in the phone book debunk Randi did) is to put a pencil on the edge of a table, then psychicly move it with your mind. You can blow on it, if you want an instant effect, but if you want to draw it out, you can just wait for the air conditioner to come on. Pretty much anything will suffice to move the pencil because it is in such an unstable condition.

 

[Cavemonster]

The wheel under glass was actually created by a skeptic as an example of how to approach this kind of claim. His full description of the trick is here

 

[JFrankA]

Derren Brown revealed this completely in his first video on the "The Science of Scams" website:

http://www.scienceofscams.com/

He and Katt explain it exactly and perfectly.

 

[Dr.Sid]

Science of scams explains only the 'open air' variant .. which is rather clear. The heat effect is in fact is very hard to demonstrate, because you must avoid blowing on the thing by normal breathing first.

Anyway thanks for the links about the jar variant. I'm kinda disappointed. Not that I hoped for telekinesis .. but I hoped for some smart trick. This is techno trick. Still really nicely done.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

The wheel under glass was actually created by a skeptic as an example of how to approach this kind of claim. His full description of the trick is here

You mean the specific video of a wheel under glass, right? Because it's an old trick of the psi-crowd, as mentioned earlier.

I remember reading a description of a magician's trick that used a similar principle: it was that the magician could cause an extremely sensitive balance scale to move around like crazy even when it's under glass. In this trick, the secret took advantage of the glass as well, and made the trick easier to do. (As per davefoc's concern, I won't reveal the secret to this trick! I can say that it was nothing to do with air currents or secretly blowing or anything. This one would actually work even if the glass were sealed down with caulk.)

Also, the magician wouldn't describe the scale as "so very unstable that even the tiniest of forces acting on it will register as big movement" but rather as a "an extremely accurate and precise scientific instrument used for the measurements in cases where a high degree of accuracy is most important".

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Anyway thanks for the links about the jar variant. I'm kinda disappointed. Not that I hoped for telekinesis .. but I hoped for some smart trick. This is techno trick. Still really nicely done.

You consider this a "techno trick"?

At any rate, there are other ways of doing it that don't rely on being seen only by video. The phone book page turner, as mentioned, did his trick with an aquarium placed over the book. The big "secret" there is what I already said: two hard surfaces like that don't make a good seal--that's why your car door has some kind of rubbery weather strip along the seal.

 

[rain]

Darryl Sloan recently made another video. In this one he actually attempts to debunk the most common claims of his skeptics. The effect he creates might be tubes with an assistant blowing in them like in one of the more well-known telekinesis hoax videos.. But barring intentional scamming with the use of video editing, I don't know what else it could be. After watching his long series of videos and following his blog for quite a while, he just doesn't seem like the scammer type (although obviously it's just my guess and it doesn't mean much of anything.)

 

[JFrankA]

Darryl Sloan recently made another video. In this one he actually attempts to debunk the most common claims of his skeptics. The effect he creates might be tubes with an assistant blowing in them like in one of the more well-known telekinesis hoax videos.. But barring intentional scamming with the use of video editing, I don't know what else it could be. After watching his long series of videos and following his blog for quite a while, he just doesn't seem like the scammer type (although obviously it's just my guess and it doesn't mean much of anything.)

I might be wrong in this, but I say it's still hot air rising up under the tin foil. The heater he used to heat up the glass bowl in an attempt to debunk the heat rising theory doesn't prove a thing. It heated up the glass bowl, thereby making the air above the tin foil (and mostly all around inside the bowl), hot enough so that the heat didn't rise.

I might be wrong and if I am, someone smarter than me in physics can explain it, but that seems to me to be the most likely explanation.

 

[rain]

@JFrankA

He put the heater to the side because in an earlier video skeptics were claiming that the wheel movement was likely due to heat from his hands because he put them very close to the side of the bowl. However, you might be right (if I understand what you are saying) that some sort of heat from under the table is what is moving the wheel. I guess if he would have put the heater under the table that would have addressed that concern.

I'm thinking about setting up a control test by filming one of those covered wheels throughout the day without anybody around to see just how much they move on their own. Seems possible that variances in temperature and unseen drafts might cause them to move on their own quite a bit.

 

[JFrankA]

@JFrankA

He put the heater to the side because in an earlier video skeptics were claiming that the wheel movement was likely due to heat from his hands because he put them very close to the side of the bowl. However, you might be right (if I understand what you are saying) that some sort of heat from under the table is what is moving the wheel. I guess if he would have put the heater under the table that would have addressed that concern.

I'm thinking about setting up a control test by filming one of those covered wheels throughout the day without anybody around to see just how much they move on their own. Seems possible that variances in temperature and unseen drafts might cause them to move on their own quite a bit.

You got what I was saying.

I was thinking the same thing. I was thinking of setting up the exact same test but act like I agree with the guy, claiming "look it works for me" type of thing, then at the end, look at the camera at say straight out that I didn't use telekinesis, and don't believe in it at all.

I noticed though that he did have the heater on some distance away during the first part of the video. It leads me to believe that there was some kind of temperature variance going on inside the bowl. Again, once he brought the heat source right up to the bowl, he pretty much killed any kind of temperature variance inside it.

My theory anyway.

 

[Rogue1stclass]

To me, this kind of thing just serves as a reminder that even if psi powers were real, they'd be so weak that they might as well not be.

Ok, so, you can spin a bit of paper on a pin. When you can levitate a remote to the couch, let me know.

 

[JFrankA]

To me, this kind of thing just serves as a reminder that even if psi powers were real, they'd be so weak that they might as well not be.

Ok, so, you can spin a bit of paper on a pin. When you can levitate a remote to the couch, let me know.

I can see it now:

"Dude, you the guy who can levitate a remote? Could you come by my place on Saturday? I'm moving so I need some help, k? Thanks!"

 

[Drudgewire]

Uri Gellar did this trick on the Tonight Show (circa 1980) with an aquarium placed over the setup. Randi then came out and sprinkled the styrofoam shavings around the base of the aquarium. Suddenly Gellar's powers were absent.

Steve S.

Clearly that wasn't styrofoam. It was "bad juju powder."

Randi's such a meanie.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

When you can levitate a remote to the couch, let me know.

But why would someone with PK need a remote control?

 

[Paul2]

I'd like to see him

1. Show the set-up *before* he does the trick, and

2. Show what's happening under and around the table as the trick is done.

The camera doesn't show if anyone enters or leaves the room while the trick is done.

 

[Rogue1stclass]

But why would someone with PK need a remote control?

Because it's lazier that way. Duh.

 

[dlorde]

This interested me. I stuck a pin through piece of Blu-Tac and balanced a 2.5in square aluminium foil 'psi-hat' on its point.

The result is amazing - these things are exquisitely sensitive, and respond to the tiniest influences - the tiniest air currents, and, apparently, static electricity. I tried to very slowly put a clear plastic (polycarbonate) salad bowl over it, to eliminate air currents, and when the bowl rim came within about 6 inches, the psi-hat tilted down until one side touched the worktop and it unbalanced. Leaving the bowl off, it was hard to do anything in the room that didn't affect it, and it could be unpredictably knocked off balance by nearby movement. If I cup my hands around it with about 3" clearance, it rotates quite strongly for several seconds, slows, stops, then reverses. But not always...

I find I can put a polythene bowl over the psi-wheel without disturbing it, and once covered, it doesn't respond to anything I can do short of direct mechanical disturbance. This supports the idea that static charges strongly affect the foil as well as air movement (sometimes one causes the other). Polythene doesn't seem to hold a static charge like polycarbonate...

These gizmos are so unpredictable that they're really unsuitable for measuring elusive and unpredictable phenomena.

 

[dlorde]

I just tried the polycarbonate bowl over the psi-wheel again, and it went on without major problems. I can now move the foil dramatically just by moving my hand slowly towards the bowl - at about two inches away, it starts rocking or spinning. As expected, electrostatic charge seems the best explanation.