Magic Is Real

[turnwrite]

OK, I was just completely astounded by some stuff I saw on YouTube by a magician named Chris Angel.

If anyone has ANY ideas at ALL on how he might DO any of these tricks, I would LOVE to hear your thoughts...

I'm posting the links to the videos here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=K8vo88TZdTY&mode=related&search=Chris%20Angel
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bdGdXJhXdpM&search=Chris%20Angel
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tbNLFUi7C7I&search=Chris%20Angel
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XbiPtC0-CyU&search=Chris%20Angel
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4IwcBADkz3w&search=Chris%20Angel
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Nc9uAsdqMmc&search=Chris%20Angel


The walking on water one and the one where he cuts the girl in half are especially baffling.

Any thoughts, anyone?

[BRussell]

I only looked at the first one, and he must simply be switching the piece of paper with the prediction on it. They might not have shown the moment it happened on TV, but notice that he did touch it. Why did he have to touch it? Why didn't he just let her open it and look at it herself?

Good stuff though.

[segovius]

Neuro Linguistic Programming.

Derren Brown also does a lot of it and is even more impressive.

[Gilsch]

Cool stuff. What happened to the woman he "cut" in half though? Would've liked to see him putting her back together. I don't know. I'd have to watch this stuff in person.

If he can do all of those things, he wouldn't have a problem predicting the winning powerball numbers and donating the money??:D

[dac0nvu]

Um, I think they are all a bunch of staged events with actors...And bad actors in the case of him walking through glass.

[rufusswan]

turnwhite,

My niece, LeAnn, has for several years been a part of the Kirby VanBirch magic show in Branson, MO. She dances, participates in some tricks, and according to Kirby is one of the best when it comes to getting "sawn in half".

There is a serious sort of "honor among magicians" and unfortunately she will NOT reveal any of the tricks, damn! However, I can at least tell you this much. She can and does fit only in the top half of the box as the saw LITERALLY does saw thru it. Now, how someone(she?) twinkles the toes & feet that protrude from the bottom portion of the box, I do not know. LeAnn only gives that goofy smile of hers.

I saw the show a couple of years ago and was amazed and totally impressed. Most tricks work because of distraction, smoke, mirrors, and light vs shadow vs dead black. Still, knowing how a trick 'might' be done, is no help when that full size chopper with 40' rotor magically appears on the stage.

Paz

[BRussell]

In the shadow one, doesn't he just tap her as soon as the other woman picks the card?

The one where the woman splits in half was f-ing hilarious. :lol: It was a midget I guess?? Notice how he picked someone else first and then said she was too short.

[turnwrite]

Well I am confounded.

Yes, I agree with you guys, some of the tricks seem like just normal magic tricks, and easy to figure out.

But some of them are IMPOSSIBLE.

Like this one:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Z6gR1ItdxGg&mode=related&search=Criss%20Angel%20saw

And this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CYc36RipYXk&mode=related&search=Criss%20Angel%20saw

I mean, there is no possible explanation. It HAS to be digitally edited film. How else could he do that one with the coin?

I mean, walking on water is easy, he must have something floaty hidden in his pant legs, note how they hang down over his feet. Or he's just walking on Plexiglass.... The audience would notice but maybe their all in on it?

But the coin one.... I mean, even with a fake arm, how would he make a lump move down his arm?

TV magic is so much harder to guess than live magic, I like live way better.......

Can anybody think of how he does the one sawing the girl in half though?

[turnwrite]

And segovius, what is this "Neuro Linguistic Programming?"

[giant]

this one (http://youtube.com/watch?v=XbiPtC0-CyU&search=Chris%20Angel), for instance, is just a woman with no legs. He misdirects you by first laying the girl down. He lightly holds the back of the girls head as if he's making sure she doesn't bump it or something, but really he's just making it so you don't notice him actually lower the no-legged lady down.

Chris Angel is also notorious for having a good chunk of the "spectators" actually be assistants.

Personally, I don't find him very entertaining because it borders on, or arguably is, just trick photography with some actors and props.

[segovius]

Originally posted by turnwrite
And segovius, what is this "Neuro Linguistic Programming?"

It's a blend of psychology, therapy and hypnotism. Many stage magicians (and 'real' magicians) use it as well as salespeople. It has many 'magical' effects but can border on manipulation imo.

You can definitely 'read minds' through certain techniques it has though and I have done this myself in a sales context. you need to find out certain things from the subject though which you do by seemingly innocuous questions and then you 'lead' them to the thoughts you want them to have.

I won't go into great depth. Here is the Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming).

[Kickaha]

Oh come on... you really can't figure out the coin one? It's a nice trick, but it's not that hard to replicate in theory.

A thin flesh colored latex/silicone sleeve.

A receptacle at the top for inserting the coin.

A magnet to shuttle the coin.

A magnet in the other hand to pull the first one along.

See?

Note the heavy wristband on the arm that he cuts. (Hides the terminus of the fake layer.) Note also the relative lack of bleeding.

[Voxapps]

Meh. This guy's OK, but others are *much* better. For example, from 10 feet away (live), I've seen Teller (of Penn & Teller) swallow about 20 individual sewing needles, followed by a ball of dental floss, followed by an entire apple. Then he has a member of the audience inspect his mouth with a dental mirror to ensure his mouth is empty. He then regurgitates the sewing needles, all strung together on the dental floss. Of course it's a trick, but it's a lot more impressive live than on a video of cell-phone camera quality!

A "saw in half" trick is almost always dependent on a cleverly built compartmented stage rig, with one contortionist playing the "head" end and another playing the "leg" end. The trick depends on the audience not realizing just how compactly and quickly a flexible person can "fold" themselves, plus a rig that looks a lot less spacious than it really is. Of course, there's the occasional horrible accident when someone's a little slow.:lol:

If you ever have the chance to visit an exceptional magic club (like the Magic Castle in Los Angeles), you will be astounded at the skill of great sleight-of-hand magicians, even when they're literally right in front of you.

[bergz]

Originally posted by Voxapps
Penn & Teller

There exists no better live act.

--B

[turnwrite]

Oh, I TOTALLY agree.

Penn & Teller are the BEST magicians ever.

They're WAY more entertaining than Chris Angel because they have great jokes and stuff to go along with their tricks.

I was amazed by this Chris Angel stuff at first, but watching them again, you guys are right. I see that is how they did the coin one, and giant's explanation makes sense for the one where he saws a girl in half. The walking on water one confounded me, but if he does have most of the audience be in on it, then that one is pretty simple too.

Penn & Teller are still tops in my book.

[Mac_Doll]

I love you guys, so delightfully skeptical and cynical, which isn't a bad thing, but Criss Angel is the real deal. I love it when people try to apply scientific reasoning to every aspect of this world. Needless to say, I fully support Criss Angel. You all should catch his show at night on A&E. I'm sorry, but faith can be a good thing, and some things in life can't be rationally explained. Most things are, but some aren't. But then, I'm just a silly woman.

I'd like to see Penn or Teller levitate and float over to one rooftop to another.

[Placebo]

So you're saying Chris Angel is able to command real magic, simply for the entertainment of the masses.

[Outsider]

What a fucking bastard. If I had real magic, I'd be curing limp kids and turning water into beer.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by Outsider
What a fucking bastard. If I had real magic, I'd be curing limp kids and turning water into beer. You are such a good man. Me, I'd use my powers to make coins come out of kids' ears for tips at the Restaurant of Magic.

[Placebo]

In the first video it look like there's a sticky note near the sweet peas...?

[Splinemodel]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
I love you guys, so delightfully skeptical and cynical, which isn't a bad thing, but Criss Angel is the real deal. I love it when people try to apply scientific reasoning to every aspect of this world.

That's because, by definition, the universe is governed by science. If Mr. Angel does legitimately have the power to fly, then it's because he has control over gravity, or at least knows someone who does.

You're into the occult stuff... wiki the Coral Castle.

[Kickaha]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
I'm sorry, but faith can be a good thing,

Yes.

and some things in life can't be rationally explained. Most things are, but some aren't.

I vehemently disagree. Leaving it at blind faith is just accepting ignorance.

Lightning was once the realm of the gods, but now almost anyone can channel it on demand out of our walls.

Just because something doesn't *currently* have an explanation, doesn't mean it *never* will. To think so is to really trivialize how far we've come from painting on cave walls to influence the hunt.

But then, I'm just a silly woman.

Wow, as a *man* I find that last comment sexist and offensive. Jeez.

[JimDreamworx]

As Penn & Teller said on their show Bullshit!:

"TV magic is just so lame."

"And people call us magicians, like that's a good thing."

[Kickaha]

Originally posted by Splinemodel
You're into the occult stuff... wiki the Coral Castle.

You know, I remember reading about that as a kid, and figuring that he *did* use the same techniques as the Egyptians.

Something like: http://www.exn.ca/news/video/exn2003/10/21/exn20031021-stonehenge.asx

That's just brilliant. So *SIMPLE*.

[Mac_Doll]

If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics? If anything, a lot of the crazier things he does require the manipulation of atoms and molecules, thus manipulating matter and time itself. Sorry, but I like to think outside the box. This is more than "magic." It's more like what we are capable of doing if only we expand our horizons and mental capability. I'll leave it at that.

[giant]

How about this (http://youtube.com/watch?v=SIXudhVzYTs&search=copperfield%20flying)? Do you think David Copperfield is manipulating atoms?

[Placebo]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics? If anything, a lot of the crazier things he does require the manipulation of atoms and molecules, thus manipulating matter and time itself. Sorry, but I like to think outside the box. This is more than "magic." It's more like what we are capable of doing if only we expand our horizons and mental capability. I'll leave it at that.
I dearly hope you're kidding around.

[Splinemodel]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics?

The basis of scientific theory is observation of the universe. So saying that science doesn't completely govern the universe would imply that we live in the Matrix. If you want to believe that, I suppose that's fine, but it's foolish to make that leap without actually studying what Criss Angel is doing.

As for quantum physics, it's well documented and there are plenty of books you can get. I'll also mention that the adjunct that is (was) quantum physics began because observations did not match extrapolated hypotheses. In other words, the study of science adapted to meet new discoveries.

[shetline]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics?
This is the old "if science can't 100% explain and 100% prove every single thing I can think of to ask, why isn't [fill in favorite pseudoscientific/mystical thing here] just as valid?" argument. Surely you can see where this might have an easy emotional, rhetotical appeal (hence its all-too-common usage), but if you think about it much, this argument doesn't hold much water.

Besides, science doesn't govern anything in the way the universe works, it's a systematic way of trying to understand what does govern the universe. That understanding is incomplete, and probably always will be incomplete, but that doesn't justify wild extrapolations about magical abilities to fill in the blanks. We've gained far more understanding, verifiable understanding, of the way things work in this universe we live in via the scientific method than centuries of mysticism have ever produced.

"The man who invented the telescope found out more about heaven than the closed eyes of prayer ever discovered." -- Robert G. Ingersoll

[shetline]

Other than these video clips, I haven't watched Chris Angel before. Does he routinely provide a disclaimer that he's not using video special effects, or that all of his apparent volunteers aren't in fact in on the tricks?

Either or both of those things make a lot of this stuff trivial to explain. Add the fact that he no doubt has a lot of real talent for the more traditional stage magic trickery, and I don't see much here to a "wow, magic is REAL!" convert out of anyone.

[burningwheel]

Cris Angel is cool. never seen that much of Penn and Teller, but what i have seen is good

[giant]

Spoilers...

Kickaha explained the arm. It seems that the "walking on water" is nothing more than a plexiglass structure with breaks in it. The split woman is a legless woman on top of a midget and it's an old trick used by multiple magicians. The walking through glass is a pane of glass with an U cut out of it. The open end is on the bottom, they put the paper up, the glass slides up, he goes through and the glass slides back down as he briefly stands in front of the hole. The open sign is not actually on the window. I don't know how he did the building float, but he has explained one of his other levitation tricks (http://youtube.com/watch?v=pRMHmnr4b60&search=chris%20angel%20revealed).

I think the thing that bugs me the most about him, though, is that everyone on camera is an actor (and none are very good). I DVRed a bunch not knowing who he was and deleted them after watching the first one.

[Outsider]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics? If anything, a lot of the crazier things he does require the manipulation of atoms and molecules, thus manipulating matter and time itself. Sorry, but I like to think outside the box. This is more than "magic." It's more like what we are capable of doing if only we expand our horizons and mental capability. I'll leave it at that. It's parlor tricks. With practice, any of us can do it. I can make light spill from something as simple as a glass globe with some tungsten inside it. MAJIX!!!@#

[benzene]

Originally posted by Splinemodel
The basis of scientific theory is observation of the universe. So saying that science doesn't completely govern the universe would imply that we live in the Matrix. If you want to believe that, I suppose that's fine, but it's foolish to make that leap without actually studying what Criss Angel is doing.

As for quantum physics, it's well documented and there are plenty of books you can get. I'll also mention that the adjunct that is (was) quantum physics began because observations did not match extrapolated hypotheses. In other words, the study of science adapted to meet new discoveries.

A colleague and I were discussing this very thing over lunch.
One of the reasons all of these "naturopathic" cures, "psychic" shows, and other pseudoscientific oddities seem to be so popular is because the average individual can't distinguish between real research-driven science and wacky voodoo. To the average joe, the only reason his bottle of asprin or his television set isn't "magical" is because they're commonplace.

Instead of blindly accepting statements at face value, consumers should try as best they can to validate any grandiose claims. (Extraordinary statements require extraordinary proof). Whether it be medicine, God, or parlor tricks, simply swallowing what you're presented without critical thought is mental laziness, pure and simple.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by benzene
and other pseudoscientific oddities seem to be so popular is because the average individual can't distinguish between real research-driven science and wacky voodoo.


I think you've just explained perfectly why Intelligent Design is so popular. :D

[bergz]

I think that Q P is an interesting example for 2 reasons:

1. Science has very few "quantum leaps." It is mostly just millimetric drudgery, advancing knowledge bit by bit. Quantum physics is merely, at this point, the front end of the progressing glacier of science, which, before being assimilated into the body of the glacier, is still a murky, unsolid mixture of evidence, hypothesis and limited experimental capabilities. The unknown is not necessarily mysterious. All we know for now is that it's unknown.

2. Science gobbles up mysteries. Think of all of the spiritual debunking that it has done. Took lightning from the gods and disease from the demons. Quantum Physics, once explained, has the potential to debunk the idea of consciousness itself. Free will could become an archaic idea. The word "chance" might be dropped from the lexicon.

Q P has the potential to destroy the very idea of "magic."

--B

[benzene]

Originally posted by MarcUK
I think you've just explained perfectly why Intelligent Design is so popular. :D

Unfortunately, the few people that want to actually explore/develop ID are drowned out by all the rabid "can't-have-my-dogma-threatened" boneheads who just see it as a convenient vehicle to protect their ignorance and foist it on others.

So yeah...plenty of people seem to thrive on remaining stupid.

bergz: Right on.

[Placebo]

Originally posted by bergz

2. Science gobbles up mysteries. Think of all of the spiritual debunking that it has done. Took lightning from the gods and disease from the demons. Quantum Physics, once explained, has the potential to debunk the idea of consciousness itself. Free will could become an archaic idea. The word "chance" might be dropped from the lexicon.
--B
How can consciousness be "debunked" when I'm experiencing it right now?

[Kickaha]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics?

Why yes, yes I can, if you have the time. It's not difficult. Seriously. I took my first QM class and could *not* figure out what all the fuss was about. Now, start tying it together with wacky theories like holographic universes or m-branes, and it gets fun, but plain QM? A couple hours of easy chatter, and you'd be proficient at the concepts, no matter what your background.

And as shetline said, science doesn't 'govern' anything at all. It's not like a mass consciousness of scientists dictates that the universe act according to their whims. Science is the journalism of nature - reporting what happens, what events preceded it, what events followed it, and drawing rational relationships to form predictive theories that can be tested with other events. That's all.

Sorry, but I like to think outside the box.

There's thinking outside, the box, then there's not thinking. This is definitely in the latter group.

This is more than "magic." It's more like what we are capable of doing if only we expand our horizons and mental capability. I'll leave it at that.

Funny, I call that 'intelligent thought'.

Punting the unknown into a scary box labeled 'magic' is just insulting to all humanity, a belief that there are realms that, no matter how much we work, no matter how much we try, *we will never understand*. Bollocks. We're better than that. Just because *you* don't understand it, don't be so arrogant as to put everyone at your level.

[benzene]

Originally posted by Kickaha
Punting the unknown into a scary box labeled 'magic' is just insulting to all humanity, a belief that there are realms that, no matter how much we work, no matter how much we try, *we will never understand*. Bollocks. We're better than that. Just because *you* don't understand it, don't be so arrogant as to put everyone at your level.

Worse than that, however, is those who deny reality because they don't understand it. This is the problem many have with quantum mechanics, due to the fact that many of the predictions/observations of QM are completely contrary to what we're used to (on a macroscopic level at least).

I can understand some putting QM phenomena into a "magical" box, even though a great deal of it is fairly accessible given a modicum of effort. It's the people that scoff at the finer points of physics simply because they don't want to make the effort that piss me off.

[Mac_Doll]

Pick up a copy of "What The Bleep Do We Know?"

I will bid you gentlemen adieu.

[Kickaha]

Seen it. Wasn't impressed, sorry.

It just took the edge of science, where the questions lie, and then went oogedy-boogedy, and claimed it was therefore mystical.

Um, no.

[benzene]

Originally posted by Kickaha
Seen it. Wasn't impressed, sorry.

It just took the edge of science, where the questions lie, and then went oogedy-boogedy, and claimed it was therefore mystical.

Um, no.

Yeah, although it's depiction of the double-slit experiment concerning the particle/wave duality was well done, it faltered right at the end when it went all magical about the observer effect. No discussion about uncertainty principle or anything, they just sort of chalked it up as magical.

That said, I haven't seen all of the film. Insultingly Bad Movie Physics, however, had all sorts of problems (http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/bleep.html) with it.

[bergz]

Originally posted by Placebo
How can consciousness be "debunked" when I'm experiencing it right now?

Here's (http://meaningoflife.tv/video.php?speaker=dyson&topic=conscious) Freeman Dyson talking about it.

There are a lot of academic papers on these internets (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=consciousness+quantum&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)about it. Little evidence yet, though.

--B

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by benzene
Unfortunately, the few people that want to actually explore/develop ID are drowned out by all the rabid "can't-have-my-dogma-threatened" boneheads who just see it as a convenient vehicle to protect their ignorance and foist it on others.

So yeah...plenty of people seem to thrive on remaining stupid.



Yep, those stupid people have built a whole industry around overthrowing scientific theory by replacing it with pseudoscientific hyphothesis based on a literal reading of astrology. And then only manage to pull it off because average-joe doesn't know the difference between an allele from an Apollonius. Boneheads indeed, throw 'em to the lions - perhaps thats a metaphor for the constellation Leo!

[MarcUK]

Sometime ago I read some books on QM, and following on from previous quirky ideas I have had about the universe - I propose an answer to the question of why time always seems to flow forward when the equasions of time are symettric forward and backwards, its the problem of entropy, why do eggs fall from the counter and smash on the floor, and not from a smashed egg on the floor rebuilding itself on the counter.

MarcUK crazy theory #117

Time doesn't flow in either direction. Time is a 'static' we flow through. We exist permanently in each slice of time as a feature of the universe while we are alive- and the reason it always appears to flow forwards is because we have experienced some of these slices of time we belong to and our memories of previous 'timeslices' do not allow us to revisit those time slices (although we are permanently existing as part of that slice) , because we do not recognise them as anything new once we have experienced them once and have memory of that slice.

It is the passage from constructed memories of events to new events we have not experienced that gives us the impression that time flows forward.

[shetline]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
Pick up a copy of "What The Bleep Do We Know?"

I will bid you gentlemen adieu.
Ah, yes, you're so bored to tears over our sad, narrow-minded inability to see the magic you so clearly see with your wise and open mind, you must quickly escape this place! :rolleyes: :D

If Bleep is where you're getting your ideas from, no wonder you're confused. The movie is flashy special effects, wrapped around wishful thinking and fantasy, woven around a tiny kernel of truth, with a lot of misunderstanding of that kernel of truth and outright misrepresentation thrown into the mix.

From the Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_bleep_do_we_know): (emphasis mine)
...The film has received widespread criticism from physicists. Physicists claim that the movie grossly misrepresents the meaning of quantum mechanics, and in fact is pseudoscience...

...David Albert, a philosopher of physics and professor at Columbia University, speaks frequently throughout the movie. While it may appear as though he supports the ideas that are presented in the movie, according to a Popular Science article, he is "outraged at the final product." [6] The article states that Albert granted the filmmakers a near-four hour interview about quantum mechanics being unrelated to consciousness or spirituality. His interview was then edited and incorporated into the film in a way that misrepresented his views. In the article, Albert also expresses his feelings of gullibility after having been "taken" by the filmmakers.
I'm sorry, QM doesn't "explain", nor make any less a hoax, things like, oh, "channeling" the alledged spirits of 35,000 year-old warrior sages from the age of Atlantis so that they can speak to us through white American women using perfect English, albeit in comic opera accents, for the grand purpose of spreading banal platitudes as "wisdom".

[Splinemodel]

Originally posted by benzene
Yeah, although it's depiction of the double-slit experiment concerning the particle/wave duality was well done. . .
Being an electrical engineer by degree, I don't see how there's anything mystical about the slit experiments. You get similar phenomena when you take any kind of bounded, real-world entity and pass energy through it (take, for example, a gated transistor). The mathematics behind it are in fact very sensical.

[Placebo]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
Pick up a copy of "What The Bleep Do We Know?"

I will bid you gentlemen adieu.
I'd rather not witness a largely speculative branch of science be compressed into sensationalistic animation featuring anthropomorphized hormones, among other atrocities, a second time.

Originally posted by Splinemodel
Being an electrical engineer by degree, I don't see how there's anything mystical about the slit experiments. You get similar phenomena when you take any kind of bounded, real-world entity and pass energy through it (take, for example, a gated transistor). The mathematics behind it are in fact very sensical.
NO IT'S BECAUSE THE ELECTRONS ARE SELF-CONSCIOUS

[bergz]

Placebo is an excelent example of Q P in action. Is he a Mac-head? Is he a PC-drone? Stop! He's both AT THE SAME TIME!!

;) ;)

--B

[benzene]

Originally posted by Splinemodel
Being an electrical engineer by degree, I don't see how there's anything mystical about the slit experiments. You get similar phenomena when you take any kind of bounded, real-world entity and pass energy through it (take, for example, a gated transistor). The mathematics behind it are in fact very sensical.

I was just pointing out that they did a good job explaining/depicting the experiment itself (i.e. showed how simple it really was), but then got all bizarro at the end with electrons "perceiving" the observer and other foolishness.

Originally posted by Placebo
NO IT'S BECAUSE THE ELECTRONS ARE SELF-CONSCIOUS

:lol: That explains (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory) it all!

[Placebo]

Originally posted by bergz
Placebo is an excelent example of Q P in action. Is he a Mac-head? Is he a PC-drone? Stop! He's both AT THE SAME TIME!!

;) ;)

--B
I treat my computers like I treat my women: indiscriminately.


Oh god, I thought that would make sense...

[rufusswan]

I just got home, and as I was turning off the road into my driveway, I felt some sort of a 'thump' under a tire. My neighbor's cat likes to chase fireflies at dusk.

I hope I didn't run over Schroedinger's cat tomorrow when I might go to town the other day.

Paz

[Placebo]

I don't understand why people find Schroedinger's cat so thought provoking.

[benzene]

Originally posted by Placebo
I don't understand why people find Schroedinger's cat so thought provoking.

One word: metastate.

It's like the word "quark". If you're smooth, you come across sounding like a genius. If not, you just sound like an idiot.

Everybody likes to be profound.

[shetline]

Originally posted by benzene
Everybody likes to be profound.
Everybody wants a rock to tie a piece of string around.

[bergz]

Originally posted by shetline
Everybody wants a rock to tie a piece of string around.

I believe "prosthetic foreheads" is more germane.

--B

[dstranathan]

Originally posted by BRussell
In the shadow one, doesn't he just tap her as soon as the other woman picks the card?

The one where the woman splits in half was f-ing hilarious. :lol: It was a midget I guess?? Notice how he picked someone else first and then said she was too short.

Good things DO come in little packages.

[skatman]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
I'm sorry, but faith can be a good thing, and some things in life can't be rationally explained.


Why not?

Even if they can not be rationally explains, there are other ways to explain.
Saying that it's magic is not rational, nor irrational explanation since "magic", by definition, means that one doesn't know how something works and can't explain... be it rational or not.

This is very cheap magic... yet many people fall for it.
Consider, for example, the ability to fit 100+ million discrete parts into an area of less than a square inch (aka the microchip in your PC)... how many people can explain exactly how that is possible or even comprehend how the electron tunnels through a P-N junction in a transistor and yet not many consider it magic sitting behind their PCs?

Strange...

[skatman]

Originally posted by Mac_Doll
If science governs everything, can anyone here explain or describe Quantum Physics?


Science doesn't govern anything. Science is a method for going about trying to build a model based on physical observation and interaction with the natural world in order to take advantage of it for the betterment of life for humans. Nothing more than that.

Quantum physics is the study of interactions and laws that govern the behavior very small things. Incidently we find more and more that similar laws govern very large things as well.


Sorry, but I like to think outside the box.


While one may like to be able to do that, in order to be able to think outside of the box effectively, one must have a good idea of what constitutes this "box" in the first place. This is why it doesn't hurt to study physical sciences when you're young.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by dstranathan
Good things DO come in little packages. It's not the size of the package, it's how many legs it has.

[Outsider]

t3h maj1x (http://www.lebonze.com/v2/flash/wallwalk.htm)!!@

[Placebo]

Some of those are disturbing on some fundamental level...

[user23]

Originally posted by Placebo
I don't understand why people find Schroedinger's cat so thought provoking.

I believe one answer to your query could be that the paradox of Schrödinger's cat illustrates the observer of an event...or an instrument measuring the event affects the outcome of the event.

In non-quantum terms, this could be restated, "What the thinker thinks, the prover proves." In quantum terms, it illustrates the differences between what occurs in matter on a micro- & macroscopic level...and how they don't necessarily sync up so nicely. Therefore:

further, Schrödinger's cat is a departure from the ominous (& tedious) church of Aristotelian/Descartian logic; ie, binary thinking. It introduces further "options" into an equation. Instead of a simple "is" or "isn't", we also get "maybe" "maybe yes" "maybe no" "sometimes", etc.


Placebo, for a somewhat radical, yet interesting, exploration of the possibilities of why Schrödinger's cat is such a thought provoker...I suggest you acquire a book by Robert Anton Wilson entitled,
Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0440500702/sr=8-3/qid=1153273213/ref=pd_bbs_3/103-8967244-2811003?ie=UTF8)