Wikipedia

Telekinesis

(Redirected fromPsychokinetic)
"Psychokinesis" redirects here. For the film, seePsychokinesis (film).For other uses, seeTelekinesis (disambiguation).

Telekinesis(fromAncient Greekτηλε-'far off' and-κίνησις'motion'[1]) is a purportedpsychic abilityallowing an individual to influence aphysical systemwithout physical interaction.[2][3]Experiments to prove the existence of telekinesis have historically been criticized for lack of propercontrolsandrepeatability.[4][5][6][7]There is no reliable evidence that telekinesis is a real phenomenon, and the topic is generally regarded aspseudoscience.[4][8][9][10]

An artist's conception of spontaneous telekinesis from a 1911 issue of the French magazineLa Vie Mysterieuse

Reception

edit

Evaluation

edit

There is a broad scientific consensus that telekinetic research has not produced a reliable demonstration of the phenomenon.[6][7][9][11]: 149–161 [12][13]

A panel commissioned in 1988 by theUnited States National Research Councilto study paranormal claims concluded that:[12]

despite a 130-year record of scientific research on such matters, our committee could find no scientific justification for the existence of phenomena such as extrasensory perception, mental telepathy or "mind over matter" exercises... Evaluation of a large body of the best available evidence simply does not support the contention that these phenomena exist.

In 1984, theNational Academy of Sciences,at the request of the US Army Research Institute, formed a scientific panel to assess the best evidence for telekinesis. Part of its purpose was to investigate military applications of telekinesis, for example to remotely jam or disrupt enemy weaponry. The panel heard from a variety of military staff who believed in telekinesis and made visits to thePEAR laboratoryand two other laboratories that had claimed positive results from micro-telekinesis experiments. The panel criticized macro-telekinesis experiments for being open to deception by conjurors, and said that virtually all micro-telekinesis experiments "depart from good scientific practice in a variety of ways". Their conclusion, published in a 1987 report, was that there was no scientific evidence for the existence of telekinesis.[11]: 149–161 

Carl Saganincluded telekinesis in a long list of "offerings of pseudoscience and superstition" which "it would be foolish to accept... without solid scientific data".[14]Nobel Prize laureateRichard Feynmanadvocated a similar position.[15]

Felix Planer, a professor ofelectrical engineering,has written that if telekinesis were real then it would be easy to demonstrate by getting subjects to depress a scale on a sensitive balance, raise the temperature of a waterbath which could be measured with an accuracy of a hundredth of a degreecentigrade,or affect an element in an electrical circuit such as a resistor, which could be monitored to better than a millionth of an ampere.[16]Planer writes that such experiments are extremely sensitive and easy to monitor but are not utilized by parapsychologists as they "do not hold out the remotest hope of demonstrating even a minute trace of [telekinesis]" because the alleged phenomenon is non-existent. Planer has written that parapsychologists have to fall back on studies that involve only statistics that are unrepeatable, owing their results to poor experimental methods, recording mistakes and faulty statistical mathematics.[16]

According to Planer, "All research in medicine and other sciences would become illusionary, if the existence of [telekinesis] had to be taken seriously; for no experiment could be relied upon to furnish objective results, since all measurements would become falsified to a greater or lesser degree, according to his [telekinetic] ability, by the experimenter's wishes." Planer concluded that the concept of telekinesis is absurd and has no scientific basis.[17]

Telekinesis hypotheses have also been considered in a number of contexts outside parapsychological experiments.C. E. M. Hanselhas written that a general objection against the claim for the existence of telekinesis is that, if it were a real process, its effects would be expected to manifest in situations in everyday life; but no such effects have been observed.[18]

Science writersMartin GardnerandTerence Hinesand the philosopherTheodore Schickhave written that if telekinesis were possible, one would expect casino incomes to be affected, but the earnings are exactly as the laws of chance predict.[19][20][21][22][23]: 309 

PsychologistNicholas Humphreyargues that many experiments inpsychology,biologyorphysicsassume that the intentions of the subjects or experimenter do not physically distort the apparatus. Humphrey counts them as implicit replications of telekinesis experiments in which telekinesis fails to appear.[7]

Physics

edit

The ideas of telekinesis violates several well-established laws of physics, including theinverse-square law,[which?]thesecond law of thermodynamics,and theconservation of momentum.[12][24]Because of this, scientists have demanded a high standard of evidence for telekinesis, in line withMarcello Truzzi's dictum "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof".[7][25]TheOccam's razorlaw of parsimony in scientific explanations of phenomena suggests that the explanation of telekinesis in terms of ordinary ways—by trickery, special effects or by poor experimental design—is preferable to accepting that thelaws of physicsshould be rewritten.[6][10]

Philosopher and physicistMario Bungehas written that:[26]

[telekinesis] violates the principle that mind cannot act directly on matter. (If it did, no experimenter could trust his readings of measuring instruments.) It also violates the principles of conservation of energy and momentum. The claim that quantum mechanics allows for the possibility of mental power influencing randomizers—an alleged case of micro-[telekinesis]—is ludicrous since that theory respects the said conservation principles, and it deals exclusively with physical things.

PhysicistJohn Taylor,who has investigated parapsychological claims, has written that an unknown fifth force causing telekinesis would have to transmit a great deal of energy. The energy would have to overcome theelectromagnetic forcesbinding the atoms together, because the atoms would need to respond more strongly to the fifth force than to electric forces. Such an additional force between atoms should therefore exist all the time and not during only alleged paranormal occurrences. Taylor wrote there is no scientific trace of such a force in physics, down to many orders of magnitude; thus, if a scientific viewpoint is to be preserved, the idea of any fifth force must be discarded. Taylor concluded that there is no possible physical mechanism for telekinesis, and it is in complete contradiction to established science.[27]: 27–30 

In 1979,Evan Harris Walkerand Richard Mattuck published a parapsychology paper proposing a quantum explanation for telekinesis. PhysicistVictor J. Stengerwrote that their explanation contained assumptions not supported by any scientific evidence. According to Stenger their paper is "filled with impressive looking equations and calculations that give the appearance of placing [telekinesis] on a firm scientific footing... Yet look what they have done. They have found the value of one unknown number (wavefunction steps) that gives one measured number (the supposed speed of [telekinesis]-induced motion). This is numerology, not science."[28]

PhysicistSean M. Carrollhas written that spoons, like all matter, are made up ofatomsand that any movement of a spoon with the mind would involve the manipulation of those atoms through the fourforces of nature:thestrong nuclear force,theweak nuclear force,electromagnetism, andgravitation.Telekinesis would have to be either some form of one of these four forces, or a new force that has a billionth the strength of gravity, for otherwise it would have been captured in experiments already done. This leaves no physical force that could possibly account for telekinesis.[29]

PhysicistRobert L. Parkhas found it suspicious that a phenomenon should only ever appear at the limits of detectability of questionable statistical techniques. He cites this feature as one ofIrving Langmuir's indicators ofpathological science.[13]Park pointed out that if mind really could influence matter, it would be easy for parapsychologists to measure such a phenomenon by using the alleged telekinetic power to deflect amicrobalance,which would not require any dubious statistics. "[T]he reason, of course, is that the microbalance stubbornly refuses to budge." He has suggested that the reason statistical studies are so popular in parapsychology is that they introduce opportunities for uncertainty and error, which are used to support the experimenter's biases.[13]

Explanations in terms of bias

edit

Cognitive biasresearch has suggested that people are susceptible to illusions of telekinesis. These include both the illusion that they themselves have the power, and that the events they witness are real demonstrations of telekinesis.[30]For example, theillusion of controlis anillusory correlationbetween intention and external events, and believers in the paranormal have been shown to be more susceptible to this illusion than others.[31][32]PsychologistThomas Gilovichexplains this as a biased interpretation of personal experience. For example, someone in a dice game wishing for a high score can interpret high numbers as "success" and low numbers as "not enough concentration".[12]Bias towards belief in telekinesis may be an example of the human tendency to see patterns where none exist, called theclustering illusion,which believers are also more susceptible to.[30]

A 1952 study tested forexperimenter's biaswith respect to telekinesis. Richard Kaufman ofYale Universitygave subjects the task of trying to influence eight dice and allowed them to record their own scores. They were secretly filmed, so their records could be checked for errors. Believers in telekinesis made errors that favored its existence, while disbelievers made opposite errors. A similar pattern of errors was found inJ. B. Rhine's dice experiments, which were considered the strongest evidence for telekinesis at that time.[23]: 306 

In 1995, Wiseman and Morris showed subjects an unedited videotape of a magician's performance in which a fork bent and eventually broke. Believers in the paranormal were significantly more likely to misinterpret the tape as a demonstration of telekinesis, and were more likely to misremember crucial details of the presentation. This suggests thatconfirmation biasaffects people's interpretation of telekinesis demonstrations.[33]PsychologistRobert Sternbergcites confirmation bias as an explanation of why belief in psychic phenomena persists, despite the lack of evidence:[34]

Some of the worst examples of confirmation bias are in research on parapsychology... Arguably, there is a whole field here with no powerful confirming data at all. But people want to believe, and so they find ways to believe.

PsychologistDaniel Wegnerhas argued that anintrospection illusioncontributes to belief in telekinesis.[35]He observes that in everyday experience, intention (such as wanting to turn on a light) is followed by action (such as flicking a light switch) in a reliable way, but the underlying neural mechanisms are outside awareness. Hence, though subjects may feel that they directly introspect their ownfree will,the experience of control is actually inferred from relations between the thought and the action. This theory ofapparent mental causationacknowledges the influence ofDavid Hume's view of the mind.[35]This process for detecting when one is responsible for an action is not totally reliable, and when it goes wrong there can be an illusion of control. This can happen when an external event follows, and is congruent with, a thought in someone's mind, without an actual causal link.[35]As evidence, Wegner cites a series of experiments onmagical thinkingin which subjects were induced to think they had influenced external events. In one experiment, subjects watched abasketballplayer taking a series offree throws.When they were instructed to visualize him making his shots, they felt that they had contributed to his success.[36]Other experiments designed to create an illusion of telekinesis have demonstrated that this depends, to some extent, on the subject's prior belief in telekinesis.[31][33][37]

A 2006 meta-analysis of 380 studies found a small positive effect that can be explained bypublication bias.[38]

Magic and special effects

edit
An advertising poster depicting magicianHarry Kellarperforming the "Levitation of Princess Karnac" illusion, 1894, U.S. Library of Congress
See also:Mentalism

Magicians have successfully simulated some of the specialized abilities of telekinesis, such as object movement,spoon bending,levitation and teleportation.[39]According toRobert Todd Carroll,there are many impressive magic tricks available to amateurs and professionals to simulate telekinetic powers.[40]Metal objects such as keys or cutlery can be bent using a number of different techniques, even if the performer has not had access to the items beforehand.[41]: 127–131 

According toRichard Wisemanthere are a number of ways for faking telekinetic metal bending. These include switching straight objects for pre-bent duplicates, the concealed application of force, and secretly inducing metallic fractures.[42]Research has also suggested that telekinetic metal bending effects can be created byverbal suggestion.On this subject the magician Ben Harris wrote:[43]

If you are doing a really convincing job, then you should be able to put a bent key on the table and comment, "Look, it is still bending", and have your spectators really believe that it is. This may sound the height of boldness; however, the effect is astounding – and combined with suggestion, it does work.

Between 1979 and 1981, the McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research atWashington University in St. Louisreported a series of experiments they namedProject Alpha,in which two teenaged male subjects had demonstrated telekinesis phenomena (including metal-bending and causing images to appear on film) under less than stringent laboratory conditions.James Randieventually revealed that the subjects were two of his associates, amateur conjurersSteve Shawand Michael Edwards. The pair had created the effects by standard trickery, but the researchers, being unfamiliar with magic techniques, interpreted them as proof of telekinesis.[44]

A 2014 study that utilized a magic trick to investigate paranormal belief on eyewitness testimony revealed that believers in telekinesis were more likely to report a key continued to bend than non-believers.[37]

Prize money for proof of telekinesis

edit
Main article:List of prizes for evidence of the paranormal

Internationally, there are individual skeptics of the paranormal andskeptics' organizationswho offer cash prize money for demonstration of the existence of an extraordinary psychic power, such as telekinesis.[45]Prizes have been offered specifically for telekinesis demonstrations: for example, businessman Gerald Fleming promised to offer £250,000 toUri Gellerif he could bend a spoon under controlled conditions.[46]TheJames Randi Educational Foundationoffered theOne Million Dollar Paranormal Challengeto any accepted candidate who managed to produce a paranormal event in a controlled, mutually agreed upon experiment.[47][48]Currently, theCenter for Inquiryoffers a prize of $250,000, the largest in the world, for proof of the paranormal.[49][50]

Belief

edit

Between 1979 and 1981, a survey on belief in various religious and paranormal topics conducted by phone and mail-in questionnairepolled1,721 Americans on their belief in telekinesis. Of these participants, 28% of male participants and 31% of female participants selected "agree" or "strongly agree" with the statement, "It is possible to influence the world through the mind alone."[51]

Subsets of telekinesis

edit

Parapsychologists divide telekinetic phenomena into two categories:macro-telekinesis,large-scale telekinetic effects that can be seen with the naked eye; andmicro-telekinesis,small-scale telekinetic effects that require the use of statistics to be detected.[3]Some phenomena—such asapports,[3]levitation,[3]materialization,[3]psychic healing,[3]pyrokinesis,[52]retrocausality,[53]andthoughtography[3]—are considered examples of telekinesis.

In 2016,Caroline Wattstated "Overall, the majority of academic parapsychologists do not find the evidence compelling in favour of macro-[telekinesis]".[54]

Notable claimants of telekinetic abilities

edit
Eusapia Palladino "levitates" a table while researcherAlexander Aksakof(right) monitors for fraud, Milan, 1892.
Spirit photographyhoaxerÉdouard Isidore Buguet[55](1840–1901) of France fakes telekinesis in this 1875cabinet cardphotograph titledFluidic Effect.

There have been claimants of telekinetic ability throughout history. Angelique Cottin (ca. 1846) known as the "Electric Girl" of France was an alleged generator of telekinetic activity. Cottin and her family claimed that she produced electric emanations that allowed her to move pieces of furniture and scissors across a room.[56]Frank Podmorewrote there were many observations which were "suggestive of fraud" such as the contact of the girl's garments to produce any of the alleged phenomena and the observations from several witnesses that noticed there was a double movement on the part of Cottin, a movement in the direction of the object thrown and afterwards away from it, but the movements so rapid they were not usually detected.[56]

Spiritualistmediumshave also claimed telekinetic abilities.Eusapia Palladino,an Italian medium, could allegedly cause objects to move during séances. However, she was caught levitating a table with her foot by magicianJoseph Rinn,and using tricks to move objects by psychologistHugo Münsterberg.[57][58]Other alleged telekinetic mediums exposed as frauds includeAnna RasmussenandMaria Silbert.[59][60]

Polish mediumStanisława Tomczyk,active in the early 20th century, claimed to be able to perform acts of telekinetic levitation by way of an entity she called "Little Stasia".[61]A 1909 photograph of her, showing a pair of scissors "floating" between her hands, is often found in books and other publications as an example of telekinesis.[62][63]Scientists suspected Tomczyk performed her feats by the use of a finethreador hair between her hands. This was confirmed when psychical researchers who tested Tomczyk occasionally observed the thread.[63][64][65]

Many of India's "godmen"have claimed macro-telekinetic abilities and demonstrated apparently miraculous phenomena in public, although as more controls are put in place to prevent trickery, fewer phenomena are produced.[66]

Magician William Marriott reveals the trick of the medium Stanisława Tomczyk's levitation of a glass tumbler.Pearson's Magazine,June 1910.

Annemarie Schaberl,a 19-year-old secretary, was said to have telekinetic powers by parapsychologistHans Benderin theRosenheim Poltergeistcase in the 1960s. Magicians and scientists who investigated the case suspected the phenomena were produced by trickery.[27]: 107–108 [67]

Swami Rama,ayogiskilled in controlling his heart functions, was studied at theMenninger Foundationin the spring and fall of 1970 and was alleged by some observers at the foundation to have telekinetically moved a knitting needle twice from a distance of five feet.[68]Although he wore a face-mask and gown to prevent allegations that he moved the needle with his breath or body movements, and air vents in the room were covered, at least one physician observer who was present was not convinced and expressed the opinion that air movement was somehow the cause.[69]

Psychics

edit

Russian psychicNina Kulaginacame to wide public attention following the publication of Sheila Ostrander and Lynn Schroeder's bestsellerPsychic Discoveries Behind The Iron Curtain.The alleged Soviet psychic of the late 1960s and early 1970s was shown apparently performing telekinesis while seated in numerous black-and-white short films,[70]and was also mentioned in theU.S. Defense Intelligence Agencyreport from 1978.[71][ISBN missing]Magicians and skeptics have argued that Kulagina's feats could easily be performed by one practiced in sleight of hand, or through means such as cleverly concealed or disguised threads, small pieces of magnetic metal, or mirrors.[72][73][74][75]

James Hydrick,an Americanmartial artsexpert and psychic, was famous for his alleged telekinetic ability to turn the pages of books and make pencils spin while placed on the edge of a desk. It was later revealed by magicians that he achieved his feats by air currents.[76]PsychologistRichard Wisemanwrote that Hydrick learnt to move objects by blowing in a "highly deceptive" and skillful way.[77]Hydrick confessed toDan Koremthat his feats were tricks: "My whole idea behind this in the first place was to see how dumb America was. How dumb the world is."[78]In the late 1970s, British psychicMatthew Manningwas the subject of laboratory research in the United States and England, and today claims healing powers.[70][79]MagiciansJohn BoothandHenry Gordonhave suspected Manning used trickery to perform his feats.[80][81]

In 1971, an American psychic named Felicia Parise allegedly moved a pill bottle across a kitchen counter by telekinesis. Her feats were endorsed by parapsychologistCharles Honorton.Science writerMartin Gardnerwrote that Parise had "bamboozled" Honorton by moving the bottle with an invisible thread stretched between her hands.[75][11]: 163 

Boris Ermolaev, a Russian psychic, was known for levitating small objects. His methods were exposed on the World of Discovery documentarySecrets of the Russian Psychics(1992). He would sit on a chair and allegedly move the objects between his knees; but when filmed, lighting conditions revealed a fine thread fixed between his knees, suspending the objects.[73]

Russian psychic Alla Vinogradova was said to be able to move objects without touching them on transparent acrylic plastic or a plexiglass sheet. ParapsychologistStanley Krippnerobserved Vinogradova rub an aluminum tube before moving it allegedly by telekinesis. He suggested that the effect was produced by anelectrostatic charge.Vinogradova was featured in the Nova documentarySecrets of the Psychics(1993) which followed thedebunkingwork ofJames Randi.[73]She demonstrated her alleged telekinetic abilities on-camera for Randi and other investigators. Before the experiments, she was observed combing her hair and rubbing the surface of the acrylic plastic.Massimo Polidorohas replicated Vinogradova's feats with acrylic surface, showing how easy it is to move any kind of object on it when it is charged with static electricity by rubbing a towel or hand on it.[73]PhysicistJohn Taylorwrote, "It is very likely that electrostatics is all that is needed to explain Alla Vinogradova's apparently paranormal feats."[27]: 103 

Metal bending

edit
See also:Spoon bending
Uri Gellerwas famous for his spoon bending demonstrations.

Psychics have also claimed the telekinetic ability to bend metal.Uri Gellerwas famous for hisspoon bendingdemonstrations, allegedly by telekinesis.[70]He has been caught many times usingsleight of hand.According to science writerTerence Hines,all of Geller's effects have been recreated using conjuring tricks.[82][41]: 126–130 

The French psychic Jean-Pierre Girard has claimed he can bend metal bars by telekinesis. He was tested in the 1970s but failed to produce any paranormal effects in scientifically controlled conditions.[83]He was tested on January 19, 1977, during a two-hour experiment in aParislaboratory, directed by physicist Yves Farge. A magician was also present. Girard failed to make any objects move paranormally. He failed two tests inGrenoblein June 1977 with magician James Randi.[83]He was also tested on September 24, 1977, at a laboratory at the Nuclear Research Centre, and failed to bend any bars or change the metals' structure. Other experiments into spoon-bending were also negative, and witnesses described his feats as fraudulent. Girard later admitted he sometimes cheated to avoid disappointing the public, but insisted he had genuine psychic power.[83]Magicians and scientists have written that he produced all his alleged telekinetic feats through fraudulent means.[82][84]

Stephen North, a British psychic in the late 1970s, was known for his alleged telekinetic ability to bend spoons andteleportobjects in and out of sealed containers. British physicistJohn Hastedtested North in a series of experiments which he claimed had demonstrated telekinesis, though his experiments were criticized for lack of scientific controls.[85][page needed][86]North was tested in Grenoble on December 19, 1977, in scientific conditions and the results were negative.[83]According to James Randi, during a test atBirkbeck College,North was observed to have bent a metal sample with his bare hands. Randi wrote "I find it unfortunate that [Hasted] never had an epiphany in which he was able to recognize just how thoughtless, cruel, and predatory were the acts perpetrated on him by fakers who took advantage of his naivety and trust."[87]

"Telekinesis parties" were a cultural fad in the 1980s, begun by Jack Houck,[88]where groups of people were guided through rituals and chants to awaken metal-bending powers. They were encouraged to shout at the items of cutlery they had brought and to jump and scream to create an atmosphere of pandemonium (or what scientific investigators called heightenedsuggestibility). Critics were excluded and participants were told to avoid looking at their hands. Thousands of people attended these emotionally charged parties, and many were convinced they had bent the objects by paranormal means.[11]: 149–161 

Telekinesis parties have been described as a campaign by paranormal believers to convince people of the existence of telekinesis, on the basis of nonscientific data from personal experience and testimony. TheUnited States National Academy of Scienceshas criticized telekinesis parties on the grounds that conditions are not reliable for obtaining scientific results and "are just those which psychologists and others have described as creating states of heightened suggestibility."[11]: 149–161 

Ronnie Marcus, an Israeli psychic and claimant of telekinetic metal-bending, was tested in 1994 in scientifically controlled conditions and failed to produce any paranormal phenomena.[89]According to magicians, his alleged telekinetic feats were sleight of hand tricks. Marcus bent a letter opener by the concealed application of force and a frame-by-frame analysis of video showed that he bent a spoon from pressure from his thumb by ordinary, physical means.[90][91]

edit

Telekinesis has commonly been portrayed as asuperpower abilityin comic books, movies, television, video games, literature, and other forms of popular culture.[92][93][94]

Notable portrayals of telekinetic characters include the Teleks in the 1952Jack VancenovellaTelek;[95]Carrie Whitein theStephen Kingnovel and itsthreefilmadaptations,Carrie;[96]Ellen Burstynin the 1980 healer-themed filmResurrection;[97]theJediandSithin theStar Warsfranchise;[98]the Psychic-type Pokémon in thePokémonfranchise,[citation needed]the Scanners in the 1981 filmScanners;[99],George Malley in John Travolta’s 1996 moviePhenomenon,Matilda Wormwoodin the 1988 children's novelMatildaand its1996 film adaptation;[100]three high school seniors in the 2012 filmChronicle;[101]Elevenas well as Vecna and various lab children from theNetflixseriesStranger Things;[102]Silver the Hedgehogin theSonic the Hedgehoggame and series franchise;[103]Nessfrom theMotherfranchise[citation needed]andShin Seok-heonin the 2018 filmPsychokinesis.[citation needed]

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^"telekinesis".Oxford English Dictionary(Online ed.).Oxford University Press.doi:10.1093/OED/9521134478.(Subscription orparticipating institution membershiprequired.)
  2. ^Xiong, Jesse Hong (2010).The Outline of Parapsychology(Revised ed.). Lanham: University Press of America. p. 141.ISBN978-0761849452.RetrievedJuly 24,2015.
  3. ^abcdefgIrwin, Harvey J. (2007).An Introduction to Parapsychology.McFarland. pp. 94–112.ISBN9780786451388.RetrievedJuly 24,2015.
  4. ^ab"Psychokinesis (PK)".The Skeptic's Dictionary. January 15, 2014.RetrievedFebruary 2,2014.
  5. ^Girden, Edward (1962). "A review of psychokinesis (PK)".Psychological Bulletin.59(5): 353–388.doi:10.1037/h0048209.PMID13898904.
  6. ^abcKurtz, Paul (1985).A Skeptic's Handbook of Parapsychology.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. pp. 129–146.ISBN978-0879753009.
  7. ^abcdHumphrey, Nicholas K. (1995).Soul Searching: Human Nature and Supernatural Belief.Chatto & Windus. pp. 160–217.ISBN9780701159634.
  8. ^Bunge, Mario(1983).Treatise on Basic Philosophy: Volume 6: Epistemology & Methodology II: Understanding the World.Springer. p. 226. "Despite being several thousand years old, and having attracted a large number of researchers over the past hundred years, we owe no single firm finding to parapsychology: no hard data on telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, or psychokinesis."
  9. ^abVyse, Stuart (2000).Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition(1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 129.ISBN9780195136340.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.[M]ost scientists, both psychologists and physicists, agree that it has yet to be convincingly demonstrated.
  10. ^abSternberg, Robert J.; Roediger III, Henry J.; Halpern, Diane F. (2007).Critical Thinking in Psychology(1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 216–231.ISBN9780521608343.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  11. ^abcdeFrazier, Kendrick (1991).The Hundredth Monkey: and other Paradigms of the Paranormal.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.ISBN9780879756550.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  12. ^abcdGilovich, Thomas(1993).How We Know What Isn't So(1st ed.). New York: Free Press. pp. 160, 169, 174–175.ISBN9780029117064.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  13. ^abcPark, Robert L.(2000).Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud(Reprint ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 198–200.ISBN9780198604433.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  14. ^Sagan, Carl (1996).The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.New York: Headline. pp. 208–212.ISBN9780747277453.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  15. ^Feynman, Richard P.(1999).The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist.London: Penguin. pp. 68–71.ISBN9780140276350.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  16. ^abPlaner, Felix E. (1988).Superstition.London: Cassell. p. 242.ISBN978-0304306916.
  17. ^Planer, Felix E. (1988).Superstition.London: Cassell. p. 254.ISBN978-0304306916.
  18. ^Hansel, C.E.M. (1980).ESP and Parapsychology: A Critical Reevaluation(1st ed.). Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. pp.196–198.ISBN978-0879751197.
  19. ^Hurley, Patrick J. (2012).A Concise Introduction to Logic(11th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 635.ISBN978-0840034175.
  20. ^Schick, Theodore Jr. (2010).How to Think about Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age(6th ed.). Dubuque, Iowa: McGraw-Hill. p. 222.ISBN978-0073535777.
  21. ^Schaff, Robert (1968).The Las Vegas Experts' Gambling Guide.Grosset & Dunlap.p. 26.
  22. ^Neher, Andrew (1990).The Psychology of Transcendence(2nd ed.). New York: Dover. p.171.ISBN978-0486261676.
  23. ^abGardner, Martin (1986).Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science(2nd ed.). New York: Dover Publications.ISBN9780486203942.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  24. ^Frazier, Kendrick (1981).Paranormal Borderlands of Science.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. pp. 60–65.ISBN9780879751487.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  25. ^Sutherland, Stuart (1994).Irrationality: The Enemy Within.London: Penguin Books. p. 309.ISBN9780140167269.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.[T]he movement of objects without the application of physical force would, if proven, require a complete revision of the laws of physics. (...) [T]he more improbable something is, the better the evidence needed to accept it
  26. ^Bunge, Mario (2001).Philosophy in Crisis: The Need for Reconstruction.Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. p.176.ISBN978-1573928434.
  27. ^abcTaylor, John (1980).Science and the Supernatural: An Investigation of Paranormal Phenomena Including Psychic Healing, Clairvoyance, Telepathy, and Precognition by a Distinguished Physicist and Mathematician.London: T. Smith.ISBN978-0851171913.
  28. ^Stenger, Victor J. (1990).Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Senses.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. pp. 248–250.ISBN9780879755751.
  29. ^"Telekinesis and Quantum Field Theory: Cosmic Variance".Discover Magazine. February 18, 2008.RetrievedMarch 11,2014.
  30. ^abBlackmore, Susan J. (1992). "Psychic Experiences: Psychic Illusions".Skeptical Inquirer.16:367–376.
  31. ^abBenassi, Victor A.; Sweeney, Paul D.; Drevno, Gregg E. (1979). "Mind over matter: Perceived success at psychokinesis".Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.37(8): 1377–1386.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.8.1377.
  32. ^Blackmore, Susan; Trościanko, Tom (November 1985). "Belief in the paranormal: Probability judgements, illusory control, and the 'chance baseline shift'".British Journal of Psychology.76(4): 459–468.doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1985.tb01969.x.
  33. ^abWiseman, Richard;Morris, Robert L.(February 1995)."Recalling pseudo-psychic demonstrations"(PDF).British Journal of Psychology.86(1): 113–125.doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1995.tb02549.x.hdl:2299/2288.
  34. ^Sternberg, Robert J.;Roediger III, Henry J.; Halpern, Diane F. (2007).Critical Thinking in Psychology(1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 292.ISBN9780521608343.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.Some of the worst examples of confirmation bias are in research on parapsychology (...) Arguably, there is a whole field here with no powerful confirming data at all. But people want to believe, and so they find ways to believe.
  35. ^abcBaer, John; Kaufman, James C.; Baumeister, Roy F. (2008).Are We Free? Psychology and Free Will(PDF).Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. Self is Magic.ISBN9780195189636.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  36. ^Pronin, Emily; Wegner, Daniel M.; McCarthy, Kimberly; Rodriguez, Sylvia (2006)."Everyday magical powers: The role of apparent mental causation in the overestimation of personal influence"(PDF).Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.91(2): 218–231.CiteSeerX10.1.1.405.3118.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.218.ISSN0022-3514.PMID16881760.Archived fromthe original(PDF)on January 5, 2011.RetrievedJuly 3,2009.
  37. ^abWilson, Krissy; French, Christopher C. (November 13, 2014)."Magic and memory: using conjuring to explore the effects of suggestion, social influence, and paranormal belief on eyewitness testimony for an ostensibly paranormal event".Frontiers in Psychology.5:1289.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01289.PMC4230037.PMID25431565.
  38. ^Bösch, Holger; Steinkamp, Fiona; Boller, Emil (2006). "Examining psychokinesis: The interaction of human intention with random number generators--A meta-analysis".Psychological Bulletin.132(4): 497–523.doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.4.497.PMID16822162.
  39. ^Carruthers, Peter.(2004).The Nature of the Mind: An Introduction.Routledge. 135-136.
  40. ^Carroll, Robert Todd(2003).The Skeptic's Dictionary: A Collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions, and Dangerous Delusions.Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. p. 316.ISBN9780471272427.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  41. ^abHines, Terence(2002).Pseudoscience and the Paranormal(2nd ed.). Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.ISBN9781573929790.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  42. ^Wiseman, Richard;Greening, Emma (February 2005)."It's still bending: Verbal suggestion and alleged psychokinetic ability"(PDF).British Journal of Psychology.96(1): 115–127.doi:10.1348/000712604x15428.PMID15826327.
  43. ^Harris, Ben (1985).Gellerism Revealed: the Psychology and Methodology Behind the Geller Effect.Calgary: M. Hades International. pp. 195–196.ISBN9780919230927.
  44. ^Colman, Andrew M. (1987).Facts, Fallacies and Frauds in Psychology.London: Hutchinson. pp. 195–185.ISBN9780091730413.
  45. ^"Randi $1,000,000 paranormal challenge".The Skeptic's Dictionary.RetrievedApril 12,2014.
  46. ^Hutchinson, Mike (1988). "A Thorn in Geller's Side".British and Irish Skeptic(July/August): 2–4.
  47. ^"James Randi, Famed Magician and Paranormal Skeptic, Dead at 92".Rolling Stone.October 22, 2020.
  48. ^Higginbotham, Adam (November 7, 2014)."The Unbelievable Skepticism of the Amazing Randi".The New York Times.
  49. ^"Prove Your Paranormal Powers and Win $250,000 from the CFI Investigations Group".centerforinquiry.org.Center For Inquiry. June 26, 2020.RetrievedJune 14,2022.
  50. ^Underdown, Jim; Hillman, Lou (April 30, 2021)."$250,000 Remains Unclaimed: CFI Investigators Recount a Year of Applicants".skepticalinquirer.org.Skeptical Inquirer.RetrievedJune 14,2022.
  51. ^"American Piety in the 21st Century: New Insights to the Depth and Complexity of Religion in the US"(PDF).RetrievedApril 21,2014.Study conducted by the Gallup Organization between October 8, 2005 and December 12, 2005 on behalf of the Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion, Baylor University, of Waco, Texas, in the United States.
  52. ^"Themes: Psi Powers".Science Fiction Encyclopedia.RetrievedMarch 12,2016.Fire-raising, alias pyrolysis or pyrokinesis, can be considered as a fine-tuned variant of Telekinesis – feeding kinetic energy to the target's individual molecules to increase its temperature rather than move it as a unit.
  53. ^Smith, Jonathan C. (2010).Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker's Toolkit.Malden, Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell. p. 246.ISBN978-1444310139.
  54. ^Watt, Caroline (2016).Parapsychology: A Beginner's Guide.Oneworld Publications. p. 37.ISBN9781780748870.
  55. ^"New exhibit looks at occult photography".East Valley Tribune.September 27, 2005.RetrievedApril 18,2014.
  56. ^abPodmore, Frank(2011).Modern Spiritualism: A History and a Criticism.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 41–42.ISBN978-1108072588.
  57. ^Christopher, Milbourne(1979).Search for the Soul(1st ed.). New York: Crowell. p.47.ISBN9780690017601.
  58. ^Hansel, C.E.M.(1989).The Search for Psychic Power: ESP and Parapsychology Revisited.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. p. 240.ISBN9780879755164.
  59. ^Moreman, Christopher M. (2013).The Spiritualist Movement: Speaking with the Dead in America and around the World.Santa Barbara: Praeger. pp. 77–78.ISBN9780313399473.
  60. ^Polidoro, Massimo(2001).Final Séance: The Strange Friendship Between Houdini and Conan Doyle.Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. p.103.ISBN9781573928960.
  61. ^Fodor, Nandor.(1934).These Mysterious People.Rider. Chapter 21.
  62. ^"Stanisława Tomczyk photo description at Diomedia".Archived fromthe originalon January 2, 2014.RetrievedNovember 18,2013.Description page at a stock photo agency representing the Mary Evans Picture Library, where the date is also given as 1909. She visited the researcher in 1908 and 1909; hence, the exact year is uncertain and reported as 1908 elsewhere.
  63. ^abJinks, Tony (2012).An Introduction to the Psychology of Paranormal Belief and Experience.Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland. p. 11.ISBN9780786465446.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  64. ^Carrington, Hereward (1990).The Story of Psychic Science (psychical research).Kila, Montana: Kessinger Publishing. p. 136.ISBN9781564592590.
  65. ^Wolman, Benjamin B. (1977).Handbook of Parapsychology.New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. p. 320.ISBN9780442295769.
  66. ^Wiseman, Richard(1997).Deception & Self-deception: Investigating Psychics.Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. pp. 182–196.ISBN9781573921213.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.
  67. ^Kendrick Frazier (1986).Science Confronts the Paranormal.Prometheus Books. pp. 35–.ISBN9781615926190.
  68. ^Green, Elmer; Green, Alyce (1977).Beyond Biofeedback(2nd ed.). New York: Delacorte Press/S. Lawrence. pp.197–218.ISBN9780440005834.
  69. ^"Beyond Biofeedback (chapter" Swami Rama ")"(PDF).pp. 12–16.RetrievedJuly 24,2007.Elmer Green's description of Swami Rama's alleged psychokinetic demonstration (with illustrations).
  70. ^abcBerger, Arthur S.; Berger, Joyce (1991).The Encyclopedia of Parapsychology and Psychical Research(1st ed.). New York: Paragon House. pp.326, 341, 430.ISBN9781557780430.
  71. ^Paraphysics R&D – Warsaw Pact (U). Prepared by U.S. Air Force, Air Force Systems Command Foreign Technology Division. DST-1810S-202-78, Nr. DIA TASK NO. PT-1810-18-76.Defense Intelligence Agency. March 30, 1978. pp. 7–8.G.A. Sergevev is known to have studied Nina Kulagina, a well-known psychic from Leningrad. Although no detailed results are available, Sergevev's inferences are that she was successful in repeating psychokinetic phenomena under controlled conditions. G.A. Sergevev is a well-respected researcher and has been active in paraphysics research since the early 1960s.
  72. ^"James Randi Educational Foundation — An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural".Randi.org. Archived fromthe originalon May 3, 2006.RetrievedMarch 17,2014.
  73. ^abcd"Secrets of a Russian Psychic".Cicap.org.RetrievedMarch 14,2014.
  74. ^Couttie, Bob (1988).Forbidden Knowledge: The Paranormal Paradox.Cambridge: Lutterworth. p. 141.ISBN9780718826864.
  75. ^abStein, Gordon (1996).The Encyclopedia of the Paranormal(2nd ed.). Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. p. 384.ISBN9781573920216.
  76. ^Regal, Brian (2009).Pseudoscience: A Critical Encyclopedia.Santa Barbara, California: Greenwood Press. p.89.ISBN9780313355073.
  77. ^Wiseman, Richard(2011).Paranormality: Why We See What Isn't There.London: Macmillan. pp. 81–95.ISBN9780230752986.
  78. ^Korem, Dan (1988).Powers: Testing the Psychic & Supernatural.Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. p.149.ISBN978-0830812776.
  79. ^Cavendish, Richard (1995).Man, Myth & Magic: The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Mythology, Religion and the Unknown(New ed.). New York: M. Cavendish. p. 2442.ISBN9781854357311.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.Spiritualism aroused violent antagonism and criticism concentrating particularly on the physical phenomena occurring at seances, which opponents claimed were faked.
  80. ^Booth, John (1986).Psychic Paradoxes.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. pp. 12–57.ISBN978-0879753580.
  81. ^Gordon, Henry (1988).Extrasensory Deception: ESP, Psychics, Shirley MacLaine, Ghosts, UFOs(Canadian ed.). Toronto: Macmillan of Canada. pp.101–102.ISBN978-0771595394.
  82. ^abRandi, James (1982).The Truth About Uri Geller(Revised ed.). Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.ISBN978-0879751999.
  83. ^abcdBlanc, Marcel (February 16, 1978)."Fading spoon bender".New Scientist.77(1090): 431.ISSN0262-4079.RetrievedFebruary 17,2017.
  84. ^Jones, Warren H.; Zusne, Leonard (1989).Anomalistic Psychology: A Study of Magical Thinking(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: L. Erlbaum.ISBN978-0805805086.
  85. ^Hasted, John (1981).The Metal-Benders.London: Routledge & Paul.ISBN978-0710005977.
  86. ^Gardner, Martin(1991).The New Age: Notes of a Fringe watcher.Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books. pp.28–29.ISBN978-0879756444.
  87. ^Randi, James (1987).Flim-Flam!: Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions(9th ed.). Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.ISBN978-0879751982.
  88. ^"George Houck Obituary".Los Angeles Times.RetrievedApril 18,2014.
  89. ^"The Song Remains the Same".James Randi Educational Foundation.RetrievedMarch 13,2014.
  90. ^Nickell, Joe(July 2013)."Mind Over Metal".Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.RetrievedMarch 13,2014.
  91. ^"Randi's Geller Hotline for 1994: Ronnie at Berkeley".Mindspring.com. April 5, 1994.RetrievedMarch 13,2014.
  92. ^"Twenty Technologies That Can Give You Super Powers: Super Power: Psychokinesis".BusinessWeek. Archived fromthe originalon January 11, 2014.RetrievedApril 11,2014.
  93. ^Gresh, Lois; Weinberg, Robert (2002).The Science of Superheroes.Hoboken, New Jersey: J. Wiley. p.131.ISBN9780471024606.RetrievedDecember 11,2015.Every member of the X-Men had a code name that matched his or her super power. Thus, Archangel, Warren Worthington III, had wings and could fly. Cyclops, Scott Summers, shot deadly power beams from his eyes. Jean Grey, Marvel Girl, was a telekinetic and also a telepath....
  94. ^"CellFactor®: Psychokinetic Wars".Playstation.January 22, 2014.RetrievedApril 11,2014.
  95. ^Vance, Jack (January 1952)."Telek".Astounding Science Fiction.
  96. ^"Carrie (1976) – Overview".MSN Movies. Archived fromthe originalon April 10, 2013.RetrievedApril 11,2014.
  97. ^"Resurrection (1980) – Awards & Nominations".MSN Movies. Archived fromthe originalon January 2, 2014.RetrievedApril 11,2014.
  98. ^Windham, Ryder; Wallace, Dan (2012).Star Wars: The Ultimate Visual Guide(Updated and expanded. ed.). London, England: Dorling Kindersley Publishing. pp. 19, 21.ISBN9780756692483.Page 19 "Object Movement": "Although such ability is commonly known as aJedi'object movement' power, it is more accurately described as a manipulation ofthe Force— the energy field that surrounds and binds everything — to control the direction of objects through space. Jedi utilize this talent not only to push, pull, and lift objects, but also to redirect projectiles and guide their starships through combat. "Page 21"SithPowers "[illustration caption]:" Levitating his adversary and choking him in a telekinetic stranglehold,Dookusimultaneously relieves Vos of his lightsaber. "
  99. ^"Scanners".Rotten Tomatoes.RetrievedApril 11,2014.
  100. ^Serena Allott (November 26, 2010)."Waltzing Matilda: Dahl's classic dances on to the stage".Daily Telegraph.RetrievedAugust 9,2016.
  101. ^Sharkey, Betsy (February 3, 2012)."Review: 'Chronicle' is smart about its telekinetic teens".Los Angeles Times.RetrievedApril 11,2014.
  102. ^Chaney, Jen (July 18, 2016)."Stranger Things' Millie Bobby Brown on Playing Eleven, Her Love-Hate Relationship With Scary Movies, and Acting Without Speaking".Vulture.RetrievedOctober 16,2016.
  103. ^Amaike, Yoshinari (September 26, 2006)."Creating Silver the Hedgehog".IGN.RetrievedApril 4,2021.

Further reading

edit
edit
Wikimedia Commons has media related toPsychokinesis.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Telekinesis&oldid=1258068080"