Psychic Void

[Maybis]

I have been a silent observer for some time here, But now I have an issue I am hoping someone can help me with.

I have no personal experience with psychic or paranormal phenomenae, yet I do tend to draw people who are "sensitive" to such things towards my life. An Amateur parapsychologist friend of mine had a theory that I was a psychic void. I have been doing some casual reading and studying in my spare time, but I may be a bit imprecise with my terminology, since my friend laid out the theory with analogies instead of acronyms and labels I am unfamiliar with.

His theory is based on speculation, and goes something like this: Every living thing emits a certain amount of 'psychic influence', either in the form of energy or some type of field. Those who 'emit' more energy tend to have stronger psychic abilities, and those Who emit less energy tend to be less sensitive. In my case, he theorized that my 'psychic emissions level' was zero, or less than zero. I was a "Psychic Black Hole" which just absorbed the psychic energy around me, emitting nothing. He believes that the Universe requires Balance, but since Nearly everyone has some small amount of Psychic energy, any people with an 'absence of energy' would have to be very powerful "Black holes".

I was wondering if anyone knew anything that could test this theory? Personal forays into "Psychic hotspots", such as hauntings, have shown no activity while i was present, but I don't know if "Absence of proof" can serve as "Proof of absence". After browsing many different forums, I find that this one offers a well rounded pool of individuals from a variety of fields, and so I thought I would put the question here.

Is anyone else familiar with a Similar Theory? Is there any conclusive test to determine if I actually am some type of psychic void? It is kind of nice to walk around completely immune from harm from any supernatural source, but I would still like more than just a vague theory to go on. Any help or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks.

[fadinginnocence]

Hello maybis!!!!

I too have had a simialr experience although the person told me pretty Much the opposite i did some digging but couldn`t really find much as for a test maybe go see a psychic they may be able to tell you if they sense something like that and just as a sort of contorl have a friend go in before you and see if the psychic gets anything off that person.... sorry i cant be more help

FI

[Maybis]

Hello maybis!!!!

I too have had a simialr experience although the person told me pretty Much the opposite i did some digging but couldn`t really find much as for a test maybe go see a psychic they may be able to tell you if they sense something like that and just as a sort of contorl have a friend go in before you and see if the psychic gets anything off that person.... sorry i cant be more help

FI

Ok, well, here's how it went: I eventually managed to contact a psychic who would be willing to participate in a little experiment (this isn't a well known psychic, but I have limited means to hire a a professional.

With a standard deck of playing cards, We ran a series of tests, along the line of what the next would be. We first went with 'is the next card red or black?' With me in the room, and with me out of the building.

Now, random guessing should give a success rate of about 50% successful preditions (or so we figured; someone correct me if my statistics are off) and we flipped over 25 cards (to eliminate the possibility of card counting). We then pulled the sevens out of the deck, and ran a High card/low card test in the same manner. We went through five repetitions of each test.

When I was present, the accuracy averaged out to 41% correct. When I was not present, the average went up to 68% correct.

Now as I said, this was conducted with an amateur psychic, as the few legitimate ones I contacted were either busy or too expensive. Still, there was a variance of almost 30%. Now, this might support the theory that I am a psychic void, but 70% accuracy when I am not there, while better than average, could still be an odd statistical fluke, which would not be enough proof to convince a skeptic.

Any other Ideas?

[eight bits]

Hello, Maybis

Good for you to try to get some evidence about all of this.

I would be happy to help you with the statistical part, except that I am unsure what you did. Depending upon what you did, there might not be much point in a statistical analysis, or even much real possibility of performing one.

Methods: I didn't understand

we flipped over 25 cards (to eliminate the possibility of card counting).

So, is this with feedback or not (does the caller know the history of the cards or not at each guess)?

If the caller knew the history, the probability of red or black (and presumably you did the same thing with A-6 and 8-K?) would not be a constant 50% on each trial.

Sample size: I also didn't understand

We went through five repetitions of each test.

So, is that 125 red-black and 125 high-low trials with you inside, plus another 125 red-black and 125 high-low trials with you outside? For a grand total of 500 trials?

If only 250 trials overall, then how were they divided between inside and outside?

Limits of statistics: A statistical test can only say that a difference in performance was unlikely to arise by chance. It cannot say why it happened if not by chance. That is a matter of careful design and execution.

Was there some alternation of trials when you were inside versus trials when you were outside? Or were all the inside tests done in one sitting, then you left, and all the outside tests done in another block?

Maybe the person got tired, or alternatively, got into the task (e.g. figuring out that he or she could "count the cards" after all). Maybe your presence was a factor, but in a social sense (you made the person nervous, or distracted them).

And, it sounds like you have no continuing relationship with this person. So, how do you know what the results were when you were not present? Did the person know what results you expected?

If there was feedback, when you were present, would you have noticed if the person consistently guessed against the ways the cards had run so far? (For example, after 20 cards, 12 red and 8 black, guess red... maybe a little laugh, red again ... darn, I'm going to stay with red ...).

And which of you contributed the idea that using only half the deck would prevent "card counting"? Who supplied the cards? Who shuffled?

As you can see, there's a lot more to this than algebra.

[Maybis]

Hello, Maybis

Good for you to try to get some evidence about all of this.

I would be happy to help you with the statistical part, except that I am unsure what you did. Depending upon what you did, there might not be much point in a statistical analysis, or even much real possibility of performing one.

Methods: I didn't understand

So, is this with feedback or not (does the caller know the history of the cards or not at each guess)?

If the caller knew the history, the probability of red or black (and presumably you did the same thing with A-6 and 8-K?) would not be a constant 50% on each trial.

Sample size: I also didn't understand

So, is that 125 red-black and 125 high-low trials with you inside, plus another 125 red-black and 125 high-low trials with you outside? For a grand total of 500 trials?

If only 250 trials overall, then how were they divided between inside and outside?

And which of you contributed the idea that using only half the deck would prevent "card counting"? Who supplied the cards? Who shuffled?

As you can see, there's a lot more to this than algebra.

See, that's the kind of feedback I'm looking for. I have pretty much a shoestring budget on this (currently looking for a new job, so not a lot of spare money at the moment,) so I have to use what's on hand, such as a deck of ordinary playing cards. Myself and two friends, and the psychic, (who was brought in by a friend,) met on a saturday evening, and spent a few minutes brainstorming. One of my friends was a skeptic, who believes all psychic phenomenae are just clever tricks, and the other friend is (and I mean no offense to anyone with this stereotype,) A crystal-collecting, new-age hippie-type who is a hardcore believer in all things paranormal. I do not recall exactly who came up with what idea, after maybe fifteen minutes, we had a plan everyone agreed on.

The entire deck would be shuffled, but only twenty-five cards would be revealed. This would, while not eliminating card counting, still reduce the accuracy. Turns alternated, First with me as the person who shuffled the deck and revealed cards, with my two friends present as witnesses. It took maybe five minutes to conduct the test. Then, I took a walk around the block, coming back after my friends conducted the test. There would be a few minutes between each round, where results were tallied (unfortunatley, just using basic algebra...no statisticians among us). So, figure ten or fifteen minutes for one round of testing ( two trials per round.) It was a little over an hour to complete the red/black test, then we took a break for dinner, removed the sevens, and did the high/low test.

As for the shuffling, I shuffled and dealt when I was present, and I believe it was the skeptic who shuffled and dealt during my absences. Since we alternated back and forth, I think that canceled out any fatigue over time, or at least balanced it between the two different 'control groups'.

So, yes, a total of 500 cards were flipped. (I did look around for my notes from that night, but I am in the middle of moving out of my apartment, so I can't find them to review.) We just had a simple 2 column tally system to record outcomes, so It isnt exactly a precise log of each individual card's results. We figured the percentage out as we went along, then at the end of the night we added up everything for the final answer (that is, after I flipped 25 cards, we had a number like 10 out of 25 right, then at the end of the nightwe had something like 51 out of 125 *not the exact numbers, mind you, but hopefully it gives you an idea of our system.)

It will be a few weeks before I might find time to a similar trial with cards (talking my friends into killing a saturday night again with the same thing will be tough.) But if you had suggestions on how to refine the test, or even a different type of test altogether, I will gladly try to get more refined results. I just started with playing cards since they were handy.

[Set the Fallen]

I have been a silent observer for some time here, But now I have an issue I am hoping someone can help me with.

I have no personal experience with psychic or paranormal phenomenae, yet I do tend to draw people who are "sensitive" to such things towards my life. An Amateur parapsychologist friend of mine had a theory that I was a psychic void. I have been doing some casual reading and studying in my spare time, but I may be a bit imprecise with my terminology, since my friend laid out the theory with analogies instead of acronyms and labels I am unfamiliar with.

His theory is based on speculation, and goes something like this: Every living thing emits a certain amount of 'psychic influence', either in the form of energy or some type of field. Those who 'emit' more energy tend to have stronger psychic abilities, and those Who emit less energy tend to be less sensitive. In my case, he theorized that my 'psychic emissions level' was zero, or less than zero. I was a "Psychic Black Hole" which just absorbed the psychic energy around me, emitting nothing. He believes that the Universe requires Balance, but since Nearly everyone has some small amount of Psychic energy, any people with an 'absence of energy' would have to be very powerful "Black holes".

I was wondering if anyone knew anything that could test this theory? Personal forays into "Psychic hotspots", such as hauntings, have shown no activity while i was present, but I don't know if "Absence of proof" can serve as "Proof of absence". After browsing many different forums, I find that this one offers a well rounded pool of individuals from a variety of fields, and so I thought I would put the question here.

Is anyone else familiar with a Similar Theory? Is there any conclusive test to determine if I actually am some type of psychic void? It is kind of nice to walk around completely immune from harm from any supernatural source, but I would still like more than just a vague theory to go on. Any help or advice would be appreciated.

Thanks.

At the wery least interesting. (kinda logic)

I think I understand your theory yet there is many kinds of "auras" around us. Like for exsample your a black hole drawing energy like a magnet.

My type is a teribel overprodusing of energy. Like magnets you can say...

One draws people, like you, or reject every living contact, like me and those between are drawn to one of them. Something like that.

It's at leat my kind of theory that we are kinda like the pols on earth.

[eight bits]

Hello, again

There was a lot there that is good. I would suggest going through with that do-over in a few weeks to plug up a few of the problems. But the basic idea or type of test seems good, and with a few precautions 500 trials (250 present plus 250 absent) should be enough if the contrast is anywhere near 41% versus 68%.

As you're thinking about the do-over, you have to take to heart that the only thing the statistical test at the end can tell you is yes-or-no, is chance alone a plausible reason for the result? So, it is not enough to "reduce the accuracy" of card counting, it must be eliminated.

Even if hobbled card-counting by itself couldn't produce the result, maybe hobbled card-counting and chance could. And "chance plus" is not "chance alone," so a "no" from the test (chance alone cannot explain the result) doesn't help you.

I'd like to think a little more about the "best" way to use a deck of cards, or maybe other readers have ideas. Saying "red" 26 times and "black" 26 times in the right order is not the same thing as 52 independent 50-50 calls. Almost, but not the same.

In any case, you want to be careful about the shuffles. And under no circumstances should you personally be doing any shuffling. Your hypothesis is that your presence affects the outcome, so you doing anything besides being present should be avoided.

You're definitely on the right track, going about this thing in the right way. It's just a matter of thinking through the details to get a solid test. It doesn't have to be a lot different, nor more expensive.

[Insight]

Well, unless you can clearly find a definition for the word "psychic" which applies to all metaphysical phenomena, you can't begin to define what a "psychic void" would be.

Also, guessing cards correctly doesn't mean you have "Psychic" powers unless you get it right ever single time. The law of averages states that some people will tend to guess correctly more than others, but it is nothing more than a mathematical formula.

In fact, even if you guess 100% right all the time, there is still the chance that is is a random happenstance. Logically, you may very well be the 1 in a trillion people who has that happen to them.

It's like winning the lottery on the very first ticket you buy. You have a 1 in 16 million chance of getting all 6 numbers right. Yet, if you choose each of them correctly on your first try, it doesn't mean you're "psychic".

[Maybis]

Well, thanks to everyone for the input so far. Today is the big day for my relocation move, so it will be a few weeks until i can try any other experiment.

Eight bits: i look forward to any ideas you have to refine the test.

Insight: as far as defining what a 'psychic void' is, well, in my case, it seems to prevent ANY type of paranormal or metaphysical activity in my immediate presence. As far as testing whether someone is 'psychic', well, that's why I started this post: to see if anyone knew of a fairly accurate test to determine if someone is psychic, then condust the test in 2 stages: one with me gone to measure "how psychic someone is" then with me present to see if i 'prevent or interfere with the tested results.' If you have any suggestions on tests, or can point me in the right direction, it would be appreciated.

once again, thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. I'll check back in a few weeks, once things have stabilized at my end.

[Insight]

Well, thanks to everyone for the input so far. Today is the big day for my relocation move, so it will be a few weeks until i can try any other experiment.

Eight bits: i look forward to any ideas you have to refine the test.

Insight: as far as defining what a 'psychic void' is, well, in my case, it seems to prevent ANY type of paranormal or metaphysical activity in my immediate presence. As far as testing whether someone is 'psychic', well, that's why I started this post: to see if anyone knew of a fairly accurate test to determine if someone is psychic, then condust the test in 2 stages: one with me gone to measure "how psychic someone is" then with me present to see if i 'prevent or interfere with the tested results.' If you have any suggestions on tests, or can point me in the right direction, it would be appreciated.

once again, thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. I'll check back in a few weeks, once things have stabilized at my end.

Did you know that James Randi has a 1million dollar reward for anyone who can prove psychic powers exist in front of him? No one has claimed it yet. People have tried, but they have all been debunked as con-artists.

Your theory of being a "psychic void" is nothing more than just some creative imagination, and has no real world substance to it. How do I know this? Well, you have not yet been around anyone who has the ability to conclusively prove that they have a psychic ability.

If you meet somebody who is able to perform remote viewing, for instance, and is able to accurate see object 100% of the time, then a simple test would be to allow them to attempt this while in your presence. If they fail 100% of the time in your presence, then there is a 100% chance that you are in fact some sort of psychic void, or block.

Not that I fault you for this, but it's obvious to me that you are simply digging around for something which makes you "special", or "different" from everyone. Most people who come here are. But this whole business about being a "psychic void" is nonsense.

If you want to truly become different, or special, in a mystical way, I suggest you study martial arts heavily. Once you begin to reach the higher levels of training, you begin to learn how to focus your body's internal energy to affect the world around you. But this only comes with years and years of strict discipline.

I suggest you google a TV show called "Mind Body and Kickass Moves". It's a show about martial arts, where the host travels around the world to visit the great masters of the arts, and many of them are able to perform feats of supernatural power.

The human being does have incredible potential inside of it. But it only comes through strict training in the arts. Anything else is just a childish fantasy.

Edited October 1, 2008 by Insight

[eight bits]

Insight, the OP does not claim to be psychic. He claims that his presence affects the performance of somebody else who claims to be psychic.

This is a testable claim. The Op is not only willing to test it, he has already made some considerable effort in that direction.

You talk a good game of scientific rationality, how about playing a round or two?

[Insight]

Insight, the OP does not claim to be psychic.

I never said he did.

He claims that his presence affects the performance of somebody else who claims to be psychic.

This is a testable claim.

This claim is testable under one circumstance: To conduct a test, one must first find a person who can conclusively and consistently perform a psychic feat. Unless you find somebody who can prove conclusively that they are psychic, his claim can never be tested.

The Op is not only willing to test it, he has already made some considerable effort in that direction.

Effort is not the same as results. For decades, we have been making an effort to cure cancer. But as of yet, it has not resulted in a cure.

You talk a good game of scientific rationality, how about playing a round or two?

I believe in the spiritual realm, and acknowledge a metaphysical aspect of our existence. That said, unless we have a firm understanding of the physical, we can never hope to understand the metaphysical. Since humans function primarily in the physical, it's only reasonable to pursue science to the fullest extent before we attempt to delve into the spiritual. Otherwise, we will confuse the non-physical with the physical, just as many kids think the Chris Angel actually has supernatural powers because they do not understand the art of illusion.

[eight bits]

To conduct a test, one must first find a person who can conclusively and consistently perform a psychic feat. Unless you find somebody who can prove conclusively that they are psychic, his claim can never be tested.

Bull ticky. The person gets X% with the Maybis present, Y% with the Maybis absent.

The test is whether or not Y is greater than X by at least an amount established by generally accepted statistical standards.

The only issue in this thread is whether Maybis' presence affects a guesser's performance. Y can be 50 on a 50-50 task, so what? If X is 20, and the sample size warrants, then there is something to investigate further.

Effort is not the same as results.

True. And so Maybis comes to us for advice about how to improve upon the preliminary, pilot, proof-of-concept tests which he has already done.

it's only reasonable to pursue science to the fullest extent before we attempt to delve into the spiritual.

It's Maybis' dime. He decides what the research he is paying for delves into. You get to decide on the research you sponsor.

I agree with you that it is regrettable that some children confuse Chris Angel's stagecraft with something supernatural. That has nothing to do with this thread, however.

[Maybis]

Well, thank you for the feedback, gentlemen. For the record, I never enjoyed chris Angel's shows. I always preferred the guys who did the up-close, sleight-of-hand stuff.

I just want to add that I don't think science and spirituality are separate or exclusive of each other. I think that there can be a rational explanation for most metaphysical phenomenae, and though there are the "True believers, no matter what" and the "It's all fake, No matter what" types, there are also the "let's find out" types.

Admittedly, my highschool science is pretty far behind me, but I remember that the scientific method works vaguely along the lines of: Form a hypothesis, come up with a way to test it, keep an eye on the variables and controls, analyze the results, then do it all again, only better. (I am paraphrasing a bit, sorry about that.) In the scientific world, there is so much we do not know, but we always seek more knowledge. Science does not have all the answers at this moment, but it is getting more each day. Right now, almost all the 'hard evidence' regarding psychic phenomenae comes from amateur sources, so 'legitimate' scientists ignore it, or look at the evidence through their own biased belief system.

All I am trying to do is find out if anyone had ever looked at the psychic thing from the other angle: I am pretty sure there are lots of people out there who are 'psychic voids', after all, with a population of six billion, there has to be a lot of just about every demographic you could think of. If we figure out what makes a void a void, we are a little closer to figuring out the actual source of paranormal phenomenae.

Insight, for a moment, please, stop being a skeptic and start being a scientist. Given the preponderance of people who believe and accept that certain psychic phenomenae exist, it is possible that something, currently unknown and misunderstood, exists. (They may not know exactly what it is, but they see something, and jump to a conclusion.) Instead of dismissing it, I ask you to figure out a test to try and find what that 'something' is, and a rational explanation for it. Blithely dismissing the whole shebang because there is no successful test so far does a disservice to science. (Remember Edison's light bulbs...) There is no end to getting new knowledge.

If you dont like the wording of the results, then come up with a test that can show the probability or likelyhood that a person may be psychic, then help me figure out a way to compare statistics. Like I said, my first test, with the result range it had, seems to indicate that either my presence or something i did threw off the accuracy of the person's random guesses. This is not a definite answer, so if you can come up with some other test or tests that can give us stronger indications, I'd be glad to hear it.

And thanks to eight bits for looking at the problem seriously. (Still hoping you can come up with a decent, low budget test )

[Nathanyoung22]

I've just been looking and came across this post. And had to sign up just to reply. I too am a psychic void, I thought I was the only person who was one.

My ex partner and mother of my two children is a powerful medium, people just have to touch her and she sees the past, future, relatives, secrets, etc. hence she doesn't allow many people to touch her, especially strangers, she has to prepare herself. To her, the world was always noisy. Now, she always said I was psychic too, although I never really believed her, untill we started to read each others minds, there were nights when we never spoke, but had conversations together. I still doubted, and would always ask "did we just have 'THAT' conversation?" And she would smile and say yes. Now, the reason I called myself a void, is that she loved being around me. I was quiet. No psychic, no spirit, no feedback could affect when I was next to her. There were times when I had to hold her and envelop her to wrap her in this void. I started to affect her so much that she started to loose her psychic strength, like an athlete who stops training. However, I learned that I could expand my void bubble. We both wanted to see just how powerful my void was, wanting to go to a spiritualist church and see how I affected it. I havnt thought of this in years, but reading your post, I just had to reply. I would still like to do some kind of test of my void bubble.

[The Exodia]

that's interesting. honestly,if i put you into a void system. would you be scared of the surroundings of the infinite silence and empty or you will just walk around there and think a way to find the door out?

void system or portals are dangerous if you wanna know. that is the reason for souls who got lost in it have the guider to lead em back. well usually for those who in need it. those who lose their senses are very difficult to handle in void, they usually became insane and swallow by it.

oh well.

[FreeZoner]

Perhaps you psychic voids may find this definition of a spirit of interest. A spirit can be considered to be an awareness of awareness unit which has all

potentialities but having no mass, no wave-length, no energy and no time or location in space except by consideration or postulate. The spirit is never actually in the physical universe.

Edited April 29, 2013 by FreeZoner