jeffma (02/16/83)
The ability to detect "life energy" with bent coat-hangers does indeed
have something to do with Kirlian photography, but I'll avoid the temp-
tation of saying what that common element is. More seriously, however,
the ability to evoke mysterious deflection or other movements in objects
being grasped or touched, as is the case with the multitude of "detec-
tors" used by dowsers or Quija board enthusiasts, should be associated
with a physical phenomenon known as "ideomotor action" (a phrase coined
by William B. Carpenter in 1852). Roughly speaking, ideomotor action
involves the spontaneous generation of muscle movements in response to
internal suggestions. In the absence of inhibiting mental processes,
(often small) muscle impulses often result in an insidiously spontaneous
fashion in response to subtle suggestions. An experiment to try:
Tie a small weight, such as a ring, to a piece of string about ten
inches long. Holding the string between thumb and forefinger,
place your elbow on a table so that the weight acts as a pendulum.
Now try to keep the weight absolutely still. You will find this
exceedingly difficult. Now begin to concentrate on a circular
rotation of the weight while staring at it intensely, at the same
time still trying your best to keep the object still. The usual
result is that the object will begin to rotate in the manner you
are imagining. If you suddenly change your mental image to a pen-
dulum moving back and forth in a "planar" fashion (like a clock
pendulum), you will see the behavior of the object change accord-
ingly. For some people this effect takes more time than for oth-
ers, probably due to varying abilities to eliminate inhibiting men-
tal processes and subsequently become more prone to suggestibility.
Enterprising game manufacturers have even packaged this simple pen-
dulum device as a "psychic meter", to the joy of children of all
ages (not to mention the ever-popular Quija board).
If you want to learn more about this stuff, read "Water Witching U.S.A"
by Evon Z. Vogt and Ray Hyman (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1979). It's very readable, and provides the (to date) definitive skept-
ical analysis of the popular pseudoscience of dowsing (no doubt this
statement will evoke a plethora of "Uncle Harry used to...." anecdotes).
As a matter of fact, I've been considering squirting out a fairly large
annotated bibliography of skeptical books concerning pseudoscience on
the net. If anybody is interested, send me a note. I have a partial
one kicking around somewhere, and if I see enough interest on the net-
work I'll fill it out a little and post it. Popular books on the sub-
ject tend to be a cretinous mixture of deliberate exploitation and
misrepresentation; the skeptical books are usually harder to find (pub-
lishing houses tend to prefer the former, obviously because they
represent the more popular literary junkfood). Hence most people get a
rather biased exposure to pseudo-scientific subjects at the bookstore.
Let me know if you're interested.
Jeff Mayhew
Tektronix
ihnss!teklabs!jeffma