Bienvenue, Invité
Merci de vous identifier ou de vous inscrire.    Mot de passe perdu?
signifie que ce forum est verrouillé; pas de nouveaux messages possibles.
Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal signifie que ce forum est verrouillé; pas de nouveaux messages possibles.
(1 lecteur(s)) (1) Invité(s)
Aller en basPage: 12345678...20
SUJET: Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
   16/10/10 à 20:22 #16384
nikoteen
Administrateur
Messages: 972
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
Sexe: Masculin Date anniversaire: 30/07
 Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
Je vais essayer de reproduire cette expérience que Jean-Pierre Girard n'a pas inventé mais qu'il utilise systématiquement dans les stages de psychokinèse qu'il propose. M'est avis que l'explication est triviale. Reste à la trouver. Si vous voulez tenter aussi, go go go.



nikoteen
 
"La nature, lorsqu'elle s'égare, produit beaucoup d'imbéciles,quelques rares génies, mais aucun surhomme."
-- C. Navis, fr.sci.zetetique, Août 2009
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 20:33 #16386
Roberte
Contributeur important
Messages: 128
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
Je connais la reponse, deux trous dans la table, avec des tuyau et une personne qui soufle dedans pour faire tourner la pyramide a gauche ou a droite.
On m'avais deja propose ce genre de enigme.
 
Dernière édition: 16/10/10 à 20:36 Par Roberte.
Quand on a elimine tout ce qui est impossible, ce qui reste, aussi improbable soit-il, ne peut etre que la verite.
Sherlock Holmes
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 20:34 #16387
saxncat
Contributeur extraordinaire !
Messages: 1575
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
Sexe: Masculin Lieu: 33
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
nikoteen écrit:
Je vais essayer de reproduire cette expérience que Jean-Pierre Girard n'a pas inventé mais qu'il utilise systématiquement dans les stages de psychokinèse qu'il propose. M'est avis que l'explication est triviale. Reste à la trouver. Si vous voulez tenter aussi, go go go.



nikoteen


La boussole est censée démontrer quoi ?
 

La terre porte deux sortes d'hommes, des hommes intelligents sans religion et des hommes religieux sans intelligence. - [Abu’l Ala al Ma’arri]

Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 20:38 #16388
Roberte
Contributeur important
Messages: 128
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
que ce n'est pas un jeu d'aimant. Ou un truk du genre.
 
Dernière édition: 16/10/10 à 20:40 Par Roberte.
Quand on a elimine tout ce qui est impossible, ce qui reste, aussi improbable soit-il, ne peut etre que la verite.
Sherlock Holmes
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 20:50 #16389
Roberte
Contributeur important
Messages: 128
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
J'aime les enigmes, j'en veux d'autres, encore, si il vous plait !
 
Dernière édition: 16/10/10 à 20:51 Par Roberte.
Quand on a elimine tout ce qui est impossible, ce qui reste, aussi improbable soit-il, ne peut etre que la verite.
Sherlock Holmes
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 21:27 #16390
Roberte
Contributeur important
Messages: 128
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
mince, j'ai pourrite l'enigme, non ?
 
Quand on a elimine tout ce qui est impossible, ce qui reste, aussi improbable soit-il, ne peut etre que la verite.
Sherlock Holmes
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 22:13 #16391
Roberte
Contributeur important
Messages: 128
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
Et la, c'est quoi le secret ?

 
Dernière édition: 16/10/10 à 22:18 Par Roberte.
Quand on a elimine tout ce qui est impossible, ce qui reste, aussi improbable soit-il, ne peut etre que la verite.
Sherlock Holmes
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 22:21 #16392
Tazman
Guillaume d'Occam, quel rasoir !
Contributeur extraordinaire !
Messages: 456
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
Sexe: Masculin Lieu: Montréal, Québec
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
Salutations,


Roberte écrit:
Je connais la reponse, deux trous dans la table, avec des tuyau et une personne qui soufle dedans pour faire tourner la pyramide a gauche ou a droite.
On m'avais deja propose ce genre de enigme.


Où plutôt, comme ça avait déjà été dit par René, je crois, sur l'interminable fil de discussion concernant les «pypy» de Sh...a, à moin que ça ne soit le même phénomène que pour le radiomètre de Crookes :

fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiom%C3%A8tre_de_Crookes

Question qui porte à réfléchir, ou qui pète - s'cuzez - prête à flan, c'est selon : pourquoi J.-P. G doit-il faire «l'imposition des mains»* pour obtenir des résultats, puisqu'il est supposé faire appel à la seule force de sa pensée ? ... ÉNIGUE, comme disait Michel Rivard !



À+

Tazman.


* Le radiomètre de Crookes en question réagit tant à la lumière qu'à la chaleur des mains (lumière infra-rouges.)... cocasse, non ?
 
Guillaume d'Occam, quel rasoir !(;-))
«On rit, mais c'est pas drole !!!»
Professeur Mandibule, La Ribouledingue, troupe clounesque

«Imagine there's no countries...
...
And no religions too...» John Lennon
Image réservée aux membres.
Veuillez vous connecter ou vous enregistrer.
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   16/10/10 à 22:47 #16393
Tazman
Guillaume d'Occam, quel rasoir !
Contributeur extraordinaire !
Messages: 456
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
Sexe: Masculin Lieu: Montréal, Québec
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
Re-allo,

Compléments :

À voir :

«pypy débunkée»

Voir également www.scienceofscams.com/ pour d'autres phénoménes du même accabit qui ont été expliqués par des notions élémentaires de physique...

Onnefortiounète... hit his hinne innegliche

Re-À+

Tazman
 
Guillaume d'Occam, quel rasoir !(;-))
«On rit, mais c'est pas drole !!!»
Professeur Mandibule, La Ribouledingue, troupe clounesque

«Imagine there's no countries...
...
And no religions too...» John Lennon
Image réservée aux membres.
Veuillez vous connecter ou vous enregistrer.
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
   17/10/10 à 13:03 #16397
nikoteen
Administrateur
Messages: 972
Personne n'est hors ligne Cliquez ici pour voir le profil de cet utilisateur
Sexe: Masculin Date anniversaire: 30/07
 Re:Un classique : une pyramide, un bocal
Roberte, effectivement ce trucage existe. Voir par exemple ces 2 vidéos :

Celle-ci, tout d'abord :



Et puis celle-ci avec, dans la description, l'explication en anglais (que je reproduis ci-dessous et qu'il est trop long de traduire, utilisez un outil de traduction en ligne si vous le souhaitez) :



L'explication :
Mattman's followup regarding his videos:

Hello everybody, this is the moment you all have been patiently waiting for, and I thank you all for that. To be honest, I'm finding hard to articulate my thoughts at the moment, so I have decided to throw caution to the wind and just start talking. PSIWheel under a glass container and The best psi wheel video: PSIWheel under a glass container were both social experiments, and both illusions. But before deciding how to react to this, I have good reasons behind my actions, and it's important that you hear me out.

Though I have had my doubts about telekinesis for a long time now, this whole idea of making videos began roughly 18 months ago. I don't recall exactly what made me decided to make the first video, but somehow I got the idea in my head to make a telekinesis video as a means to show that, despite what people may think, these videos are absolutely worthless as 'evidence' for the phenomenon known as telekinesis. In reality, it was half for entertainment, half for making a point.

The idea was to make the most convincing (amateur) psi wheel video on the internet, have people rally their support around it as a result, and then when the moment was right, to confess that this video was an illusion, and make the point that no matter how convincing these videos may seem, to always see things like this with a *healthy* level of skepticism, even if you are otherwise a believer in such things. I say a "healthy" level of skepticism because, contrary to my initial expectations, the most ignorant people of this whole experiment where the hardened skeptics. But ill get into that later on, trust me.

I'm a bit hesitant to share the secrets behind my illusions because the last thing I want is for people to use them to make more fake telekinesis videos. But then again, not explaining how I did it could jeopardize the original purpose of urging people to be level-headed, specifically (and ironically) when it come to being skeptical. After weighing the two concerns, I have come to the conclusion that it's better to expose this information so that people can be aware of it, as opposed to hiding it so that others would have a harder time replicating videos similar to my own. But before I get into how I did it, I would like to clarify how I didn't do it.

In no way, shape, or form did I use the following:

-Magnets
-Heat/Convection currents
-Electronics (of any sort)
-Video Editing
-Static
-Strings
-My left hand (lol)
-Or anything else people "knew" I was using...

And because of this, every single one of the hard-headed skeptics who blatantly talked sh** about the video were just as "stupid", "ignorant", and "gullible" as the believers they labeled as such, and perhaps even more so because at least the believers had a video on their side (a relatively convincing one at that), where as the skeptics had nothing but this unfounded arrogance in themselves by thinking, without question, that they "just knew" it was fake AND HOW it was faked. Like I had said many times in the midst of these debates, I was in a unique position to know just how full of sh** these people really were. They all thought they were so smart lol.


I would now like to take this opportunity to expose the names and locations of the 2 most ignorant skeptics I have run across during this whole experiment.

Jj Breen

Keith Mayes


Moving on, the trick was very simple. Both videos made use of the same gimmick, a trick table. That being said, however, still none of those things I listed above were used in this trick table. In the first video, a pin sized hole was drilled in both the surface of the table as well as the plastic bowl the set up was sitting on. From there, a person off camera was blowing into a tube that was connected to this hole (under the table) which cause the wheel to spin. The second video used this same principle, but in a more sophisticated fashion. The surface of the table is hollow, with two separate air channels going to two different pin holes. Two tubes could "plug in" to each hole on the hollowed legs, which were hidden by thin layer of laminate that could pop on and off. This is why you can't see the bottoms of the two front legs on the video when the wheel is spinning. And again, I used an "associate" to plug and unplug the tubes as well as to blow into them for a more convincing illusion.

Kinda sucks now that you know how it's done, huh?

In closing, the initial goal of the video was to urge a healthy sense of skepticism for believers when viewing such videos because they are just videos. They are suspect by nature; too foul play can be going on off camera. However, after fighting numerous skeptics as part of the role I needed to play, I was exposed to just how ignorant these skeptics could be. Even knowing that my video was fake, still...these people were so sure of themselves (sure of things they just couldn't be sure of given what they had seen) that they were borderline delusional. Seriously. I began getting caught up in the debates because *I knew* they didn't know this video was fake, simply because there is no way to know for sure based on what the video allowed people to see. And yet, I couldn't expose them for the "frauds" they were because I was too busy being the fraud I was lmao. (Of course, I have been saying all along that this video isn't proof and shouldn't be seen as proof)

But now it's different. I've been waiting for this for a loooong time. Little did I know that this experiment would go from teaching believers something about being level-headed to teaching skeptics something about being level-headed. And please don't mistake this as an attack on telekinesis. Personally I don't believe in it, but I'm not foolish enough to think it's impossible. For those that do, you're ignorant and arrogant. For all you knew, or should I say "didn't know", I could have been the real deal. And that's the point. You just can't know, one way or the other, unless you have the first hand experience.


(and another follow up on UM forums)

But here's the things. I get why you all were so skeptical, but I had a role to play. If any of you had actually done any research on me, like going to astral soceity and reading some of my posts, youd know that I too am very much a skeptic of telekinsis, and am an advocate of the randi challenge...believe it or not. Like i said before, I made the videos specifically to reach the people who fall for these videos, and to show them why its not such a wise thing to do.

But then I came here and realized that, as bad all that was, some of the skeptics I have run across, were so skeptical that it was no longer a virute, with this website being the prime example. And thats saying something coming from me, because im quite the skeptic. In fact, now that im able to "break character", id like to say that a lot of you have you heads up your asses because of your skepticism. I actually began to get mad at some of you because of how idiotic you have made skeptics out to be. But I dont even want to get back into it, im biting my tounge as we speak.

A lot of you are no more "wise of the world" then those you criticize, you just happen to be on opposite ends of the same scale. Its like Theism's relationship to Atheism; both like require faith in something that can't possible be known.

And before you can say "I knew it!!1!", let me stop you. You didnt know, thats the point. You could have suspected, and hell, you could have even forumated a way i could have pulled it off, but there is a world's difference between that and "knowing". And even if you were ultimately right, its this mistake in thinking we "know" that cause both problems; that of thse stupid tk videos and that of these stupid skeptics who actually think they know what is and isnt possible.

And, JJ you say you leave room open for the possibility, but its obvious that this is more of a figure of speech than an actual creed. Its clear how you really feel by the way you handled this discussion. Those who really leave themselves open the possibility are not cyncial as you are, and would most likely see no point in participating in such a discussion, to such an extent, because of the utter futlity of it all. I have run into many level-headed, well-balanced skeptics and these types seem to be unanimously indifferent about the video. But you aren't, and neither are you circle-jerk buddies.

You give sceince and reason a bad name because of your wonton skepticism and cyncality.


Mais dans le cas qui me préoccupe (Jean-Pierre Girard), je ne suis pas sûr que ce soit le truc utilisé.

nikoteen
 
"La nature, lorsqu'elle s'égare, produit beaucoup d'imbéciles,quelques rares génies, mais aucun surhomme."
-- C. Navis, fr.sci.zetetique, Août 2009
Le sujet a été verrouillé.
Revenir en hautPage: 12345678...20
Modérateur: Bobby, Jerem
Développé par KunenaObtenir les derniers messages directement sur votre PC - Version française:SFK