Which laws of physics are violated here?

For that matter, what laws of physics would mind-reading or mediumship be violating?
 
thaiboxerken said:
This idiot at karateforums.com asked me what laws of physics he is violating with his claimed ability to feel injury by touch alone.

I'm not sure what to say.
Click to expand...
Law #42: you can't diagnose people's illnesses just by

(a) looking at them
(b) knowing karate

It's really more a negative problem --- it's not so much that it violates the known laws of physics as that it would require half-a-dozen new ones (see also homeopathy, crystal healing, everything Lucianarchy has ever said).
 
But to do what he claimed, wouldn't he have to sense an energy or matter wave? Wouldn't this violate conservation of energy?
 
thaiboxerken said:
This idiot at karateforums.com asked me what laws of physics he is violating with his claimed ability to feel injury by touch alone.

I'm not sure what to say.

http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=194494#194494

He is also using a shotgun, boulder approach to giving his "scientific" evidence of prayer being shown to work.

HELP!
Click to expand...

Transmitting information without moving energy or matter should be pretty much imposible.
 
Re: Re: Which laws of physics are violated here?

geni said:
Transmitting information without moving energy or matter should be pretty much imposible.
Click to expand...

Well, before he says it..... I'll say it.

What about quantum information?
 
thaiboxerken said:
But to do what he claimed, wouldn't he have to sense an energy or matter wave? Wouldn't this violate conservation of energy?
Click to expand...
NO. Vision involves sensing an "energy wave"...

But there has to be some means by which the information is transmitted. Electromagnetic force? Strong nuclear force? Weak nuclear force? Gravity? Or a new force detectable only by martial arts woos.

Never mind the explanations, though. If he can do as he claims, he wins $1,000,000. Then scientists can set about trying to understand how the "fifth force" actually works.
 
Well, of course, he made excuses about not taking the JREF challenge. He live in Florida too! But he is making claims that Randi's challenge is likely fraudulent and unfair. He says I'm gullible for believing that Randi's challenge is sincere and on the up-and-up.

Isn't it usually the case when believers are challenged?
 
Re: Re: Re: Which laws of physics are violated here?

thaiboxerken said:
Well, before he says it..... I'll say it.

What about quantum information?
Click to expand...
Even if he and his subject are two particles which have undergone quantum entanglement, and what he's diagnosing is not health problems, but quantum "spin", then Bell's theorem is still going to give him problems.

The weird thing about these people is they think anything they don't understand can be explained by wibbling about "quantum theory" (something else they don't understand) whereas the theory is very definite, precise, and predictive, and says nothing about the psychic abilities of woo-woos. "It's possible because of quantum theory." Ho yes? Show me the math, then.
 
Re: Re: Re: Which laws of physics are violated here?

thaiboxerken said:
Well, before he says it..... I'll say it.

What about quantum information?
Click to expand...

No frigging way is a human going to undgo quantum entanglement they conitan far too many particles.
 
Maybe it's just me, but I use this analogy. It's like arguing how dragons fly.

Some people will argue that dragons shift their matter into another dimension, and this allows them to fly using their wings (which they otherwise could not do, since their wings could not support their mass).

Others will argue that dragons use a system of leviation, which alllows them to use their wings to mainly propell motion.

Yet others will say that their bones are hallow like a bird, and while they seem large, they're actually quite light.

Me? I just want to see the dragon. I don't see much point in arguing how a dragon could theoretically fly, until we actually SEE the dragon. Then we can spend the time figuring that out. It's a moot point though if there are no dragons.
 
Did Pete's Dragon ever actually fly in that old Disney Studios documentary?

(Everyone at once now: "Quantum effects only operate at quantum level!")

This is about the time some bleever lobs this old chestnut over the left field wall and into the discussion:

"Well, according to science it's impossible for a bumblebee to fly, so science doesn't know everything!"
 
Grendel, they already have. Along with the misconception that "according to physics, movement at all is impossible".

Yes, I am dealing with idiots over there. Idiots with degrees, but idiots non-the-less.
 
I don't think it's a specific law of physics he's violating, so much as it appears to violate the known properties of biological organisms. He's describing some sort of diagnostic "sense" which is unknown to modern science.
 
Ask him why he's bothering to argue when he could be out there saving people's lives.
 
Take it from a degreed feller -it doesn't take a lot of common sense or intelligence to get a degree, especially an advanced degree, particularly in the US where 40 years of liberalism has led to such wonders of idiocy as post-modernism and the general notion that all truth is relative.

It seems you are dealing with a particularly odious species, the dreaded 'bleever', as opposed to plain ol' believer.

Believer: a person who believes on faith rather than evidence, but has insight into the difference, who is willing to at least consider the evidence, and is capable of changing beliefs. The believer simply lacks knowledge or understanding in pertinent areas and often displays gradual changes in belief as areas of ignorance are filled in with reliable knowledge.

Bleever: a person who believes on faith, disdains evidence that contradicts the belief, has no insight or awareness of this internal process, will not consider new evidence except to declare it irrelevant, and is incapable of changing beliefs once set. The bleever is oblivious to his lack of knowledge or understanding in those areas pertinent to his beliefs, yet considers his grasp well past sufficient to justify his beliefs. He will fight off new knowledge that may alter the belief or cause doubt as if on a personal jihad, with an almost religious fervor. Indeed, this resistance is part and parcel of the belief, a demonstration of faith and 'righteous' loyalty to the belief. A thousand dead mules will dance through God's bladder before the bleever will change a cherished belief once formed.

You'll have greater success arguing with a fence post. See my sig line below ;o).
 
Grendel said:

Bleever: a person who believes on faith, disdains evidence that contradicts the belief, has no insight or awareness of this internal process, will not consider new evidence except to declare it irrelevant, and is incapable of changing beliefs once set. The bleever is oblivious to his lack of knowledge or understanding in those areas pertinent to his beliefs, yet considers his grasp well past sufficient to justify his beliefs. He will fight off new knowledge that may alter the belief or cause doubt as if on a personal jihad, with an almost religious fervor. Indeed, this resistance is part and parcel of the belief, a demonstration of faith and 'righteous' loyalty to the belief. A thousand dead mules will dance through God's bladder before the bleever will change a cherished belief once formed.
Click to expand...

1inChrist probably thinks you're psychic now - he probably thinks you know what he's having for lunch today too?
 
Grendel said:
Take it from a degreed feller -it doesn't take a lot of common sense or intelligence to get a degree, especially an advanced degree, particularly in the US where 40 years of liberalism has led to such wonders of idiocy as post-modernism and the general notion that all truth is relative.
Click to expand...

That is weird other more liberal nations don't seem to be suffering from that.
 
thaiboxerken
This idiot at karateforums.com asked me what laws of physics he is violating with his claimed ability to feel injury by touch alone.

I'm not sure what to say.
Click to expand...
Kinetic energy – nerve reaction to it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom