Hi,

I was wondering something... this might seem far fetched, but what isn't? Has anyone looked or bought or had the chance to read *snip* - removed spam link The Secret of Invisibility I bought it, but I want to know if it's a waste of time to try. It was only 24.99 and it's still a somewhat interesting read at work.

It has to do with OBE with the "mirror" trick.

Example for those that are familiar: You look at yourself in the mirror, then close your eyes and project that image in your mind... then you try to view yourself from that image (basically looking back at yourself) and "detach" your mind from your body, to become one with the "double".

If you need further explanation, please ask, I will gladly google up an article for you.

You know, I have a baby on the way. I could have really used that 24.99. Next time, would you mind sending it to me? I'll tell you my secret for making other people invisible.

Here is the secret of how too make everyone and everthing invisible....














....close your eyes.

That's nice, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic in any sense.

Please only contribute useful comments. Refrain from stupidities.

my my, what an ironic post

first off it had EVERYTHING to do with this topic, just because it was a joke doesn't make it off topic.
and second, you tell him to "refrain from stupidities." although you spent 24.99 on a book which is obviously NOT going to tell you how to become invisible!!
iiiiiiiironyyyyy.

yes, I smiled when I read that too, Meltus

Seriously, you spent actual money on a book that tells you how to become one with a reflection in order to become invisible??


Well, in that case, I also have a book. It's titled The Secret to Spontaneously Generating Money out of Thin Air, and for only $24.99, you too can learn how people make money off of other people's gullibility.

I agree... 24.00 = A LOT of tater tots.

Actually, whilst it is a funny remark, it doesn't have a place in this thread because closing your eyes does not, of course, make anything invisible, it just means that you are looking at the inside of your eyelids, rather than the thing you want to be invisible......

Though I do agree making that remark after spending $24.99 on a book to make yourself invisible by concentration is ironic.... LOL

AJ

Ok... so let me get this right...

You posted a comment that obviously had nothing to do with the subject, yet you claim it does, but not only I had to point that out to you... the fact is, although it was funny, it was also stupid, and it had nothing to do with the original post. If you want anyone (aside for "friends" here in UM) to take you seriously, please be constructive. Because the rest of the world would see this type of behavior as unintelligent attention seeking babble... I'm a new poster, I don't know you, I've never had a conversation with you, but first impressions are lasting, and now I know that your posts are not to be taken seriously... ever.

Secondly, 24.99 is pocket change, it's NOT a lot of money.

Thirdly, you claim this book will "NOT" "tell" you how to become invisible... so I ask you, Mr. or Ms. Expert (whatever sex you are, I really don't care), have you read this book? Are you sure? If you have, why didn't you state this in your first post?

Fourth, if you even bothered clicking the link I provided, it specifically informs you about a book which you can purchase that will show you how to turn yourself invisible... so this tells me that you didn't even bother doing that. Another reason to simply ignore anything you have to say about any subject, weather you know anything about it or not. Because you'll obviously comment on anything without getting any information about it.

Fifth, if you like red socks, and then you call me stupid... but I believe that people that wear red socks are stupid, does that make factual irony? No. It doesn't. So if you think I'm stupid for spending 24.99 on this, and I called you stupid for saying something that is factually stupid, is that ironic? No. It isn't. It's an opinion, not irony.


Irony is looking for a spoon, but all you can find are forks... That's factual irony. Not opinionized, such as your comment.


Maybe you should look up the definition of Irony. Because you obviously haven't the faintest idea of what it means and when it should be used.

So... did you become invisible, mindpurge?


Oh wait, sorry, misread your OP...

So you wasted the $24.99 on the book, but you're checking here first to make sure you don't end up wasting your time reading the book that you wasted your money on?

What a conundrum. You obviously wish to cut your losses here in some way, whether that be the value of the book or your potential loss time.

My suggestion is to try a yard sale.

That's the thing, I haven't tried anything yet.

I mean, I believe in OBE, but I don't know about this. I wanted to know if anyone had ever heard of this before.

Oh, so it's just OBE in general. Being able to float around without others seeing you? There are several threads here addressing this topic, they seem quite popular. Just search for Astral Projection on the forums. You'll probably find all the information in that book and then some... as well as many stories of personal experiences.

I haven't - not in that fashion.

Keep us updated. (if you can find yourself once you've dissapeared). I jest.

This is a rather bizzare theory on this though... it's not really invisibility. Maybe the title to the book is throwing everyone off. When I think of invisibility all I can picture is Harry Potter running around with that stupid little cloak like 'Epic Movie' did a spoof of.... sorry.

In a way yes...

But that does make make this next vomit of a post sound like you have split personalities...



Why didn't you just post nicely in the first place?

Kids...

I believe mindpurge just pwnd you.

Well you see, it wasn't the next post, it was the previous one. Before you mentioned OBE.

I still feel you should try to recover your monetary waste. If you're offended by that sentiment and the way I presented it, then I guess I'm just a kid.

This.


In my first post, still unedited.


Lets just drop this now...

I'm sorry I came here and asked a question.

I answered your question to the best of my ability. Sorry I made fun of your gullibility, welcome to UM.

About the whole irony statement: your post was ironic. There is not only one type of irony. The examply you supplied was situational irony. In many of our minds your "please refrain from stupidities" was very ironic. Many of us think it was stupid you bought a book on how to make yourself invisible. Let's look at it from a logical standpoint. If this book really did teach invisibility, don't you think far more people would be practicing it. And don't say "well, you wouldn't see them". Of course I wouldn't; but I'm sure I would hear all about it from countless people.

And the "closing your eyes argument" is a valid one. Let's break down invisible. The prefix "in" means (in basic terms) "the opposite/negative". The root "visible" means "to see/view". Invisible, therefore, means "to not see". If you close your eyes, do you see yourself? I'm pretty sure you don't.

Back on topic. No, I have not read the book. Personally, I would much rather come to these forums. Members of these forums can supply far more resources and views on any subject than a single book can. I've learned far more on these forums than I have from any book.

i believe not.
theomegacode beat me to explaining why

oh, and i'll take back everything i said, get down on my knees and lick your feet if you can turn invisible using that book.
i would willingly bet any amount of money against it.
do you accept the challenge?

You could also try contacting Ziggy Stardust, he is an avid OBE/Astral Traveler.

I love the semantic banter that pops up on these threads.... The dictionary definition of 'invisible' is as you say, but does not mean 'to not see' in the context in which it is being used on this thread. It is erroneous to use any word or definition of a word out of context. The context of this conversation is that 'invisibility' means unable to be seen when looked at.... so to believe that simply closing your eyes enables anothers invisibility is as much of an error as believing man cannot fly because you havn't been on a plane...

AJ

hm.... I was just browsing through some topics and found this one. Doesn't it seem like you guys are taking this "I must have the last word about something as stupid as irony instead of letting it go that way these people halfway across the world won't know i live in my mom's basement" thing a LITTLE too seriously?

Just an opinion.

The semantic banter was simply brought up due to the OP's attack. And, since this whole second page has been nothing but attacking, defending, and subtle insults, it should probably be locked. No progress has really been made, and I really can't see it going any further on topic.

Wise words from someone who contributed to the banter himself.

AJ

Are you really keeping this up?

Anyone reading this thread know what 'hypocrite' means ?

AJ

Anyone reading this thread would see that I know I was part of the banter, and also would see I attempted to stop it. I'm also willing to bet they would realize immaturity as the banter kept going.

They say confession is good for the soul.

AJ

Well, I'll give you a constructive comment . Most people on this thread are far to interested in what they know and don't take the time to consider what they don't know in any great depth but the first answer that comes to mind.

First of all, ask yourself what would have to happen for yourself to become invisible. No light rays can reflect off, no light rays can eminate from you and more importantly they'll all have to pass through you with no refraction effect. (Bending of light closer or further away from the normal of the surface of an object.)

The particles which make up your being would have to allign themselves in such a way that every angle your being viewed from is at 90 degrees. Every surface a light beam strikes you has to be at 90 degrees to pass perfectly through with no interference to the beam. The allignment of the particles which make you up would have to allow for the light to pass through you.

Basically the question you need to ask yourself is will imagening yourself as being invisible change your general biological make up. It would seem extremely unlikely, however developing some kind of body suit may be possible.

Things the suit will have to include will be intelligible 'mirrors' size of pixels which allows light to enter at certain angles but no escape until the light reaches a certain point (this is how lazers work by the way.) The mirrors would have to be able to adjust themselves accordingly to where light enters and would have to tell when someone is trying to look at you. The processes for such a thing could become incredibly complicated should many people view you from many sides. Light enters you from the front, it is reflected around you and allowed to exit directly behind you.

I think it will be a fiew more years before we have the technology to be able to do something like this . The speed at which accurate calculations are made would be be fairly phinominal compared to today's standards and the system in itself would require a great amount of programming ingenuity.

Just a quick addition. There would have to be a system which is able to tell which way the head's of people or systems by which the collection of information via visual input is facing. If someone was viewing you from a distance however it would look very weird.

Rofl, there is no doubt, well said dude.

Therefore, if no light is being received by the eyes, not only would the person be invisible, but the world would appear completely black to that person, making true invisibility totally useless. Unless anyone has a theory on the probability of light being focused on the retina not being probably visible to the subject and therefore the lack of light probably being visible to an observer probably behind (relatively) to the subject.

It seems that no one ....

... is immune to jumping to conclusions.

AJ

You get mirrors that allow you to see through them. (Like from behind the actual mirror.) The light can still be redirected, it doesn't have to pass completely through the eye section in order for the person to see, a lot of it can still be reflected. If the region where the eyes were were closely observed the only slight fault would be everything would appear to be a little darker. Keep in mind I'm theorising over technology that obviously hasn't been invented yet. (Or maybe it has, who knows.)

Mmm.. All I'm saying is just don't drag people down because you think they must be wrong. Atleast consider possibilites.

London, Nov.3 (ANI): Britain’s Ministry of Defence has said that secret trials of an invisble tank have passed off successfully, and predicted that it would be ready for service by 2012.

According to The Herald Sun, the new technology uses cameras and projectors to beam images of the surrounding landscape onto a tank. The result is that anyone looking in the direction of the vehicle only sees what is beyond it and not the tank itself.

A soldier who was at the trials said, "This technology is incredible. If I hadn't been present I wouldn't have believed it. I looked across the fields and just saw grass and trees - but in reality I was staring down the barrel of a tank gun."

Awsome Nanotech.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKPVQal851U

THIS THREAD DELIVERS A++++++++++ WOULD READ AGAIN!!!!

@ mindpurge

This is the first lesson for you to make the inconvenient comments invisible - LOL. Just purge them from your mind.

Cheers,
djohan.

Rofl, that was sweet. There was still a refraction effect I didn't like. Using light from the outside to build the image instead of projected light would still be better imo.

I've heard much dumber sh** come from a lot of people on this site...Such as This guy So give the dude a break.

Sorry I didn't waste my time reading through all the posts as most seemed to be mocking you.

But as I understand, basically you got a book about astral projection? If so, that is something that is not only possible but quite interesting indeed and can lead you to great journeys and self-discovery.

Check out some of my own articles/posts on this subject, just search my nick and see through my posts.

What I understood from your first post, is that you have bought a book describing a method of astral projecting (having an out of body experience)

I'm glad to tell you that I have an article here somewhere on at least 7 different methods on how to achieve astral projection, with some bonuses added. (It's called "increasing your astral abilities" or something along those lines in the metaphysics forums, if I remember correctly)

And I'm working on a book on this too so I'll let you know when that is done as well and it will be cheaper and hopefully more useful than the one you got now

Cheers

*Sigh* you silly froot loops chased the guy away. Shame on you, I should give you all a spanking. WITH MY MACHINE GUNS!

Ok, I'm back, only because I've read some very useful comments from certain people.

I'd like to ask the following members to either stay out of this topic, or contribute something useful: Meltus, SunDogDayze, crtbud, theomegacode. Neither of you contributed anything but wrongful statements from the definition of irony, to the subject of this type of invisibility. Please I ask, stay out. For the sake of keeping your own decency, every post you write makes you look more and more ignorant to the real topic.



Darkbreed:

Thanks for your post, I'll check out your stuff. I've always wondered, does this "invisibility" thing really work? Or when you go OBE, are you just in a different realm altogether. Haven't been successful yet... but I'm working out my "picturing" part of my brain, practicing it to show me an object, then add and remove things from it, clearly with no distractions, for 20 mins straight. It's much harder than it sounds...

I stand by what i said on page one. Anything i type is IMOHO and any imagined stupidity is simply that. Peace.

p.s. whenever i've had OBE's, the last thing on my mind was the thought of whether or not i was visible to anyone or anything.

edited for afterthought.

Well I got some value from the link. I'm going to use the two ads with my high school english class.

Reading them both is interesting. The one about animal control sounds like magic, and sells it self like magic, but reads like animal training techniques which are obviously proven to be workable.

Thus, I suspect that this is a very o;d scamming technique. The book will indeed do all it says it can in the claims (otherwise it would be false advertising) The trick will be in the way words can be interpreted/ have different meanings. So I will set my class the task of imagining they are the writer of the ad and ask how they could rationally justify all the claims of invisibility, using manipulation of the english language to justify/defend their advertising.

It is quite possible that the actual content of the book is just as real, and achievable, as that of the animal "control"(training) book, but that it has nothing to do with the concepts/visualisations of invisibilty which form in the reader's mind when they see the ad. It all depends on what definitions of invisibility you use.

In other words the seller might have a legitimate product, just not the one you were expecting.

For example, one creative student might come up with an answer like this, "You can meet alll the criteria/advertised benefits by only moving about in complete darkness"

Another logical possibility which meets some of the criteria is remote surveillance (not remote viewing but the use of devices to track and surveil people while you remain "invisible" to them)

I am sure there are many other logical, if imaginative, posssibilities.

well, you asked if you were wasting your time buying that book, and i said (in a way that i probably could have worded better and i appologise for) that you were.
i believe i have contributed to this thread as much as you asked.
and what do you mean "Wrongfull statements from the definition of irony"?
didn't you agree with me?

Why would he agree with you if your way of telling him that he is wrong includes a "your are stupid" kind of approach? The reason why he is wrong is more important than your opinion that he's an idiot.

I have heard of a way to make things, not people, seemingly invisible. You can still see them but they cant be detected by scanners or anything (its kind of hard to explain). Supposedly it uses alternating and intersecting magnetic fields around the object and its being looked at by the millitary as an improvment on stealth technology.

instant success gaurateed for invisibility.

dont get seen.

why are you still reading my post thats all go shoo.