Psychokinetic event-give me some plausible explanations

[ctamblyn]

That's a really good question. My impression was that since it was a minor thing, they just laughed it off, assuming some plausible yet unknown explanation existed. Kind of like if you are sitting alone in your room and a book falls off the shelf that's been there a long time. You just sort of scratch your head and put it back, not really knowing or caring too much about why it fell.

Something doesn't quite add up for me, but I can't put my finger on it. A curious event occurs, curious enough that your sister suspects your brother of playing a prank on her. She forms a hypothesis that a magnet is being used to move the queen (despite the fact, according to you, that your brother is not the type to resort to such trickery - maybe she doesn't know this at the time?). It's a reasonable guess, but it turns out to be wrong. Nevertheless, your sister is certain enough that some harmless natural cause is at play that she continues with her chess game, even concentrating on it deeply. Clearly she is relaxed, unperturbed and still wanting to win the game. Your brother feels likewise, and continues to play (and doesn't feel the need to investigate further, based on the OP).

Then it happens again. The same event with a slight embellishment, and for some reason this time she and your brother are "freaked out". Why? I don't get it. And why, if your brother and sister were freaked out enough that they - or at least she - became convinced that supernatural forces were at play, did they go to bed rather than, say, investigating further, calling someone or leaving the house?

I'm not saying anyone is being deliberately dishonest, I don't think they are, but it seems to me that the story has become distorted a little over time, as often happens. I have to question the idea that they were really freaked out that much (and so, the idea that they both really believed something supernatural had happened), and I have to also seriously question the idea that your brother was not playing a prank, as at this stage it seems at least as likely to me as the hypothesis that vibration or such like was responsible (and your sister clearly felt it was a possibility at the time). In short, I don't think the OP accurately describes what actually happened on that day. I know that's outside the scope of the discussion you wanted, my apologies, but that's my position based on the evidence so far.

Just my 2p-worth.

 

[sadhatter]

You know how i know people are at the very least embellishing stories like this ? The persons reactions. Whether we are talking about ghosts, superpowers, aliens, whatever, no one who would go through an event like that and not spend the great majority of their life focused upon it.

Seriously, " well the laws of physics just bent for me, but you know, no biggie, lets just forget about it, i have some angry birds to play" is not a logical reaction. But treating these kinds of things like they were about as special as getting an extra burger at burger king, is the standard for folks like this.

this alone tells me, at best the real story is about one tenth as spooky and convincing as the person claims, or, just as likely, the person in question is just making it up to gain some credibility in a debate.

 

[abaddon]

I don't know what the big deal is. Everyone's got a crazy relative. In your case, it's your sister. In my case it was Uncle Davey "The Axe" who took a business associate out on the Metarie Highway and used the object in his nickname to make him a former associate. See? Your sis is just remembering nonsense. It could be something more serious.

Show of hands. Who doesn't have a nutbar in the family?

Nutbars in the family? Too right. My own grandfather was an absolute genius when it came to woodcarving, as in the kind of stuff you put in a cathedral. Real world? good luck. He might have as well been looking up a trouser leg.

 

[Son of Rea]

Just heard back from my brother:
"cant even remember
but it would have been my power that moved the piece "
So there's that for what it's worth.

 

[PixyMisa]

That is absolutely correct, and is a running theme in this thread.

But is it more reasonable to 1) just assume she recalled the event wrongly, or 2) accept that her recollection could be fine and that there is an unknown, yet plausible explanation?

Most here seem to be biased toward #1 because it's an easy answer they can apply to any mystery.

People always recall events wrongly. That's just how memory works. The question is, how wrongly - has their recall changed or obscured critical information?

With only one report and no access to any direct evidence, we don't know.

Case closed.

No.

I am biased toward #2 because I know my sister, and believe her cognitive abilities deserve respect.

Is she human? If so, then her memory is faulty.

Imagine you told someone about a cool card trick you saw that you couldn't figure out. Would it be fair and respectful for them to tell you that you had not even seen the trick? That you can't trust your memory?

It would be correct of them to assume that your reporting of the details of the card trick was almost certainly flawed. Not only is memory unreliable, but card tricks are, well, tricks. They are designed with great care to fool people, and make them miss important details.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Something doesn't quite add up for me, but I can't put my finger on it. A curious event occurs, curious enough that your sister suspects your brother of playing a prank on her. She forms a hypothesis that a magnet is being used to move the queen (despite the fact, according to you, that your brother is not the type to resort to such trickery - maybe she doesn't know this at the time?). It's a reasonable guess, but it turns out to be wrong. Nevertheless, your sister is certain enough that some harmless natural cause is at play that she continues with her chess game, even concentrating on it deeply. Clearly she is relaxed, unperturbed and still wanting to win the game. Your brother feels likewise, and continues to play (and doesn't feel the need to investigate further, based on the OP).

Then it happens again. The same event with a slight embellishment, and for some reason this time she and your brother are "freaked out". Why? I don't get it. And why, if your brother and sister were freaked out enough that they - or at least she - became convinced that supernatural forces were at play, did they go to bed rather than, say, investigating further, calling someone or leaving the house?

This is just what I was thinking.

Spooky event plus unlikely reaction. Freak vibrations and water films may be possible explanations but a misremembered or purely created memory seems more likely, add the brother's lack of any memory of the event and I'm sold.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Imagine you told someone about a cool card trick you saw that you couldn't figure out. Would it be fair and respectful for them to tell you that you had not even seen the trick? That you can't trust your memory?

I don't claim to be any kind of expert at magic tricks, but I do know enough to know that it is not just about controlling what the audience see, but also what they think saw prior to the reveal. With the right trick, presentation and patter audience members will add false details to what they saw which can be the difference between a clever trick and having 'done the impossible'. Memory is far more fluid than most of us would like to admit.

 

[Garrette]

It would be correct of them to assume that your reporting of the details of the card trick was almost certainly flawed. Not only is memory unreliable, but card tricks are, well, tricks. They are designed with great care to fool people, and make them miss important details.

This.

I don't claim to be any kind of expert at magic tricks, but I do know enough to know that it is not just about controlling what the audience see, but also what they think saw prior to the reveal. With the right trick, presentation and patter audience members will add false details to what they saw which can be the difference between a clever trick and having 'done the impossible'. Memory is far more fluid than most of us would like to admit.

And this.

Getting people to misremember what they actually saw is a key component of many effects. What the magician says, how he says it, and when, are critical parts of it.

He never even touched the deck! is quite a common statement even immediately after the effect when in fact the magician did touch it, sometimes right in front of you and everybody else, but he did it in such a way and at the right off-beat moment that no one took notice, or if they did notice they mentally shrugged it off as something that couldn't possibly matter so he may as well not have touched it. Later, the apparently unimportant bit they noticed is forgotten altogether, and they will swear with all sincerity that their recollection is absolutely correct. They are, however, incredibly wrong.

 

[squealpiggy]

Your sister is a witch and she must be burned.

Or, you know, she made it up.

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

Just heard back from my brother:
"cant even remember
but it would have been my power that moved the piece "
So there's that for what it's worth.

While the posts about how memory works (or doesn't) are quite interesting and do have explanatory power, if your brother doesn't remember a queen moving by itself, follow a line, then turn to move in another direction, I hate to say it, but your sister is lying.

Unless of course he is serious about having a "power", and claims this sort of thing happens left and right. Then you're screwed. No logical explanation will suffice.

 

[Mister Earl]

You can discard this out of hand, pretty much. There's no mechanism.

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

That is absolutely correct, and is a running theme in this thread.

But is it more reasonable to 1) just assume she recalled the event wrongly, or 2) accept that her recollection could be fine and that there is an unknown, yet plausible explanation?

Most here seem to be biased toward #1 because it's an easy answer they can apply to any mystery. Case closed.

I am biased toward #2 because I know my sister, and believe her cognitive abilities deserve respect.

Imagine you told someone about a cool card trick you saw that you couldn't figure out. Would it be fair and respectful for them to tell you that you had not even seen the trick? That you can't trust your memory?

I doubt people lean toward #1 because it is an easy answer.

I lean toward #1 because when we happen to have more details of similar events, they usually turn out to be just that.

Cognitive abilities have nothing to do with anything. Smart people are just as easy to fool.

As to the "unknown yet plausible" explanation, your conditions seem to preclude them. We are quite familiar with he mechanisms that move objects. If we know those mechanisms were not operating, we are left with #1.


Anyway, your sister claims they were both freaked out and chose to go to bed. Your brother doesn't remember the event. What does that tell you?

 

[The Norseman]

I think the vibration explanation is the best. Perhaps a nervous leg bouncing the table imperceptibly. It would be very out of character for my brother to be tricking her, so while possible, it goes toward the bottom of the list.

I'm known for my humor; I'm not known for pulling pranks. If it's out of character for someone to pull a prank, that goes immediately to the top of my list.

I did read your later posts regarding your brother's response, but I still thought this part was important enough to suggest.

 

[The Norseman]

This.

And this.

Getting people to misremember what they actually saw is a key component of many effects. What the magician says, how he says it, and when, are critical parts of it.

He never even touched the deck! is quite a common statement even immediately after the effect when in fact the magician did touch it, sometimes right in front of you and everybody else, but he did it in such a way and at the right off-beat moment that no one took notice, or if they did notice they mentally shrugged it off as something that couldn't possibly matter so he may as well not have touched it. Later, the apparently unimportant bit they noticed is forgotten altogether, and they will swear with all sincerity that their recollection is absolutely correct. They are, however, incredibly wrong.

Interestingly enough, I'm reading a book which briefly describes one particular study done with memory and recall: apparently it's a technique often employed by scam artists and psychopaths and I wouldn't be surprised to find it a technique done by stage magicians as well.

 

[Ladewig]

I don't know what the big deal is. Everyone's got a crazy relative. In your case, it's your sister. In my case it was Uncle Davey "The Axe" who took a business associate out on the Metarie Highway and used the object in his nickname to make him a former associate. See? Your sis is just remembering nonsense. It could be something more serious.

Show of hands. Who doesn't have a nutbar in the family?

I just studied a list of all my relatives and not one displayed characteristics of a nutbar.


Back in Vaudeville, the straight man got paid more than the comedian because everyone wanted to tell the joke and not the set up.

 

[Garrette]

Interestingly enough, I'm reading a book which briefly describes one particular study done with memory and recall: apparently it's a technique often employed by scam artists and psychopaths and I wouldn't be surprised to find it a technique done by stage magicians as well.

Not just stage magicians. All magicians. It's not just that you don't remember the magician telling you he never touched the deck; it's that you don't remember in part because the magician lied to you and told you he never touched the deck.

 

[The Norseman]

Not just stage magicians. All magicians. It's not just that you don't remember the magician telling you he never touched the deck; it's that you don't remember in part because the magician lied to you and told you he never touched the deck.

Oops. Forgot to describe the trick I was reading.

Apparently you ask a question of the mark and directly after the answer, abruptly change the topic to something unrelated and continue in that vein. After about twenty seconds, the mark forgets what they had just said.

 

[EHocking]

...But is it more reasonable to 1) just assume she recalled the event wrongly, or 2) accept that her recollection could be fine and that there is an unknown, yet plausible explanation?
...
I am biased toward #2 because I know my sister, and believe her cognitive abilities deserve respect.
...

So it would seem that your sister's cognitive abilities deserve respect because they support your assertion that some psychokinetic event took place,
but you brother's cognitive abilities don't deserve the same respect because his abilities don't support your assertion...

Just heard back from my brother:
"cant even remember
but it would have been my power that moved the piece "
So there's that for what it's worth.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Need anyone mention that cognitive abilities and long-term memory are two totally different things?

 

[kblood]

So my sister and I had a long talk today on a 4 hour drive, much of which revolved around my disbelief in anything supernatural.

She agreed with most of what I said, but then said she has a hard time not believing in the paranormal because of the "chess incident". She thought I knew about it but she had never told me, and proceeded to relay the following.

Years ago she was playing chess against my older brother and was very determined to beat him, and focusing hard on her next move. Suddenly the captured queen slides forward a few inches. She thinks that she's being pranked, grabs it and turns it over to look for a magnet. They both then awkwardly laugh off the strange occurrence, and continue playing.

Moments later, again during a moment when she claims to be really concentrating, she said the queen moved along the edge of the board, then turned the corner and moved along the other edge for a few inches.

She said at that point they were both so freaked out that they just stopped playing and went to bed.

I believe wholeheartedly that she is not lying about the event, and I grilled her about it and mentioned that no matter how unlikely some other explanation was, that it would be more likely than breaking the laws of physics.

I don't expect you to believe this happened, I wouldn't from just reading it on the internet. But for the sake of argument, please assume it happened as described and give me some possible non-supernatural explanations.

Thanks!

Sounds like a very Psychokinetic event to me. Thank you for sharing