/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5415529]

Hey, /sci/. I have a scientific hypothesis about a subject that would normally be discussed in /x/, that is Telekinesis. I have heard countless explanations on how telekinesis would work, mostly involving quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and some other bullshit. However when I was in high school I came up with an idea for how telekinesis worked that involved one of the four fundamental forces in physics: electromagnetism.

It works like this. Try pressing your hand against a table. Notice your hand did not move past the table? This is because the electrons orbiting the atoms that make up your body are producing an electromagnetic field that repels the electromagnetic field generated by the electrons in the atom of that table much like how magnets repel each other when you try to force the identical poles together. That said, these forces are in play when you use your hand to exert force on a solid object like say a cardboard box. So in other words, electromagnetism is necessary in order for an individual to physically affect the world around them. Hell, it's the very thing that is keeping gravity from pulling you through the ground towards the Earth's core.

Based on this, my hypothesis is that Telekinesis is simply this same electromagnetic force, except projected over a distance like radio waves (which are also electromagnetic waves). What I want to know is, is there any validity to this hypothesis?

Also, inb4 FUCKING MAGNETS

[Anonymous No.5415543]

>The effects of EM in the context of 'physical contact'
>hypothesis dependent on similar effects in a completely different context (ie one lacking such 'contact').

So...no.

[mbp No.5415552]

I'm not an expert but do tend to ruminate on subjects such as this. I actually speculate a lot on telekinesis and the ability to fly. Anyway, that's an interesting hypothesis, however, that still implies a person would have to be able to consciously control the exertion and attraction of the electromagnetism pertaining to their body. Another thing to point out, since we only use a minimal percentage of our brain power, this might be possible if we increased the usable capacity of the brain power, increasing intellect and such. I think this hypothesis or idea has already been considered, I do believe it has been in a couple of movies. The protagonist attains inhuman like intelligence, brain power increases, and then has the ability to manipulate objects, i.e. Telekinesis.


tl:dr: The key, in my opinion is in increased usability of the brains full capacity. Also increased intellect.

[Anonymous No.5415558]

>>5415552
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_percent_of_brain_myth

[mbp No.5415572]

>>5415558
That certain myth might not be true but, I still do believe the brain is complex and areas aren't being used. People with accidents, brain damage, who become socially inept yet attain exceptional intelligence/processing ability in whatever subject: math, memorization, cognitive senses...etc.

[Anonymous No.5415575]

>>5415552
OP here. As >>5415558 pointed out, that is a myth. We don't use only ten percent of our brains, we just only use ten percent at a time but we use ten percent of every singly part of the brain at any one time. That is, we use 100% of our brains, just not all at once. There is a medical condition in which more than ten percent of the brain is active at one time. It's called Epilepsy. A much better biological explanation for telekinesis is that a telekinetic individual's brain is wired in such a way that it can generate the electromagnetic wave I described.

[Anonymous No.5415584]

>>5415572
>>5415575
>Neurologist Barry Gordon describes the myth as laughably false, adding, "we use virtually every part of the brain, and that [most of] the brain is active almost all the time".
>In the October 27, 2010 episode of MythBusters, the hosts used magnetoencephalography and functional magnetic resonance imaging to scan the brain of someone attempting a complicated mental task. Finding that well over 10% was active at once, they declared the myth "busted".
lrn2read faggots

[mbp No.5415594]

>>5415584
>mythbusters

[Anonymous No.5415599]

>>5415584
Okay, sorry I haven't read that article in a long time and so I probably remembered it wrong. I didn't want to bother reading it again because I am a lazyass. Still, my idea sounds more plausible than that outdated ten percent myth.

[Anonymous No.5415609]

>>5415594
>Neurologist Barry Gordon