Psychokinesis , also referred to as telekinesis with respect to strictly describing mental movement or motion of solid matter, abbreviated as PK and TK respectively, is a term coined by publisher Henry Holt to refer to the direct influence of mind on a physical system that cannot be entirely accounted for by the mediation of any known physical energy. Examples of psychokinesis could include distorting or moving an object, and influencing the output of a random number generator.
The study of phenomena said to be psychokinetic is part of parapsychology. Some psychokinesis researchers claim psychokinesis exists and deserves further study, although the focus of research has shifted away from large-scale phenomena to attempts to influence dice and then to random number generators.
Most scientists believe that the existence of psychokinesis has not been convincingly demonstrated. A meta-analysis of 380 studies in 2006 found a "very small" effect which could possibly be explained by publication bias. PK experiments have historically been criticised for lack of proper controls and repeat ability. However, some experiments have created illusions of PK where none exists, and these illusions depend to an extent on the subject's prior belief in PK

Well as I see it there is no way to control or predict who has PK or TK and half the claims would be either a desperate cry for attention or a hoax, so it would be hard to find anybody who is legitimately has PK or TK. I think it could do with more research however it seems a little... more than difficult.

It is real and has been proven. A large group of people together all thinking about a cancel lighting on fire at the same time will make the cancel catch on fire

Something asserted with little to no evidence can be dismissed with little to no effort.-Christopher Hitchens. In Other words, until there is reputable proof, no I think it is a load of crap.

>>3
If that were the case, every fatass on that internet that goes "lelelele feels >noGF" would have one.

I disproved your theory with a theory.

I agree *Paraturtle* every instance in history shows us that wanting something is just not enough. Otherwise jews would have wanted there way out of the holocaust, smaller armies would have wanted their way to victory, and fat people would want their way to being skinny. but they dont. it takes real action, not sci fi mind powers.

I actually believed this for a long while, and tried it many a time. I even searched for Youtube tutorials (most of which, if not all, were fake in some way or another) to try it. I gave up quickly and gave up on the aspect of it as well.

Unlock 90% of your brain, Humans. Unlocking 90% of the brain is how you achieve the ability.
P.S.
>>1 you're neither alpha nor omega, never use that name again.

>>8 I agree with your alpha/omega comment, but you have no right to say something like that with "42" as your name.
>>5 Your theory is fail. It doesnt work that way, as much as you might want it to.
>>3 Candle.. Its Candle. I believe this is a possibility but it sounds like you just watched some video on the internet.

In my opinion, with enough "power of the mind" people can manipulate objects, if they really wanted to, but I dont think it would be as easy as just making the dice land on 6 and 1 just by thinking it.

>>9 Fyi, It is the ultimate answer to life, the universe, and everything. I do have the right to say whatever there is that's needed to be said.

maybe 42 is right because it is said that humans only use 30 percent of the brain

maybe 42 is right because it is said that humans only use 30 percent of the brain

>>11 it's actually 10%. every one starts with 10%, even Gods, they start out as humans also.

Leefan I love you. :D 42... Are you a troll or just a nutjob?

>>14 your inferiority bounds no limits, does it?

If it is real, it is highly unlikely that anyone here would ever beable to do it. if it takes more than 30% of the human brain, i find it hard to believe anyone could ever access it. this topic is kind of pointless because even if we came to a conclsion, we would not be able to perform the action.

psychokinesis* = the supposed ability to move objects by mental effort alone
telekinesis = the supposed ability to move objects at a distance by mental power or other nonphysical means
psionics = the practical use of psychic powers or paranormal phenomena

(*PK THUNDAH!!! PK Fire!)

/sage

>>15 Oh yeah you got me! What you just said was not only an exemplary demonstration of the English language, but it was totally accurate. Now one question. What the fuck were you trying to say? Don't answer that. I'm done with you now. I don't play with trolls.

>>18 I wasn't trolling; you must be new to this internet thing.

See, I was explaining a bit of what those words were, so people like you, meaning people with low comprehension levels and/or low intellect levels, can understand what is what and which is which...

Putting into terms that you can understand:

I explain something so you can understand it. You "dum-dum" learn the "smart words" from me. *slow and loud*

/sage

>>19 You really need to check the numbers on posts before starting fights with people. You keep getting offended at people's responses to your comments when they aren't actually responding to you, but to someone else instead.

So, to put it into terms you can understand:

Stop being a moron.

>>20 this guy gets it

That's my sister. She's not a guy.

Just saiyan.

>>22 Whatever, I don't really care if I'm called a guy on the internet. After all, it's not like they're looking at me to say it.

This is really interesting but like many have said there is no solid proof. for example a friend i know says he has physic powers/knows mind control and he, simply put, is a liar. :D

Hey, I've heard about this, but in my chemistry class my teacher described it as in people can "move things with their mind" but it has to be like a TON of people, and they all have to be looking at the same thing to make it move. I'm not sure if it is pk or not but hell it sounds cool and I like the whole subject of PK and TK!

>>22 and >>23
1. Take a compliment. I was only saying that I agreed with your sister.
2. How exactly am I supposed to know if someone is a boy or girl on here?
3. Some people call both girls and boys guys. It can be a neutral term if you are talking to a group or if, say, you are on the internet and cannot see if someone is a boy or a girl. Even if I knew beforehand that anubis was a girl, I still would have said "this guy gets it" because I thought that SHE made a good point. No offense meant

>>26
It all good.