D0wsery / General Chatting / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: General Chatting

« Previous topic | Next topic »

D0wsery

previous 1 2 3 next

Move Thread

LAN_403

Part Scavenger

Sun Apr 01 2007, 12:27AM

Registered Member #79 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 11:35AM
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 673

Firkragg wrote ...

I think this thread could be fixed into something productive and scientific, if it was rewritten, without altering it's point. (For example, 'what could be causing this effect?')

That is exactly the reason I started the thread. There is no doubt in my mind that they move without any consciousness on my part, whether or not it has anything to do with water. I have no claim to superpowers, and all I wanted to show off was the novelty, honest.

What I was calling d*wsing is as follows. The d*wser is usually looking for an underground water source to dig a well or trace a pipe. A person has two bent brass rods in an L shape. The long end is about as long as your arm, short end bent at a 90 deg angle long enough to serve as "handles." Mine happen to be 26.5"x9.75"x.155" dia. of common-hardware-store brass. Brass is said to have the best results, but apparently steel works OK. The rods are held parallel to each other and the ground and point outward. Hands are at chest level directly in front of the nipples. The person holding these rods in the described manner walks in a straight line across the grid where water is being searched out. The rods will stay parallel until they at once start to cross over the "spot." They will cross until they are at a 90 deg angle medially to where they were at first. If you continue to walk through or back out of the zone, whey will return to their original position. By my observations, there are varying strengths of fields, from very weak to very strong. Some say it is important to walk north-south because of the way underground streams often run (True?)

Another technique is using a Y-shaped green branch in which a freshly cut limber piece of vine, cherry, peach, dogwood, etc. is cut and held in hand. The "Y" is held, palms up with fingers curled over the branch, the bottom of the "Y" points outward and parallel to the ground. The twig is said to dip when over water. I couldn't get this to work. It is important that the twig is freshly cut.

This, by my definition, has absolutely nothing to do with "map" or "pendulum" dowsing in which one "asks" a dangling pendulum Yes/No questions and waits for it to move. I consider this either total crap or pure s0rcery, neither of which I am interested in. Furthermore, every scrap of research with actual numbers I could dig up regarded this to chance. Furthermore, research suggests d*wsing for lost objects doesn't work either.

I'm getting really tired of putting the "0" in there, and I would herefore after prefer to call it "hunting" unless someone has a better name.

I'm not sure the bucket thing is supposed to work, but I will definitely try it:
1st, the area will be "hunted" to make sure there are no pre-existing zones.
2nd a filled 5 gal bucket with lid on will be placed on the test area to determine if the rods will move.
3rd, if #2 succeeds, my assistant will either choose to fill or not fill the bucket, and I will test.
4th, I'll switch with the assistant who can also "hunt" and repeat the test, and results will be posted.

This test should show association with a small amount of standing water, and will not show association with large undergound reservoirs, pipes, streams, etc. I'm not sure I've got the time or creativity for all of that. This test will also give no insight into why the rods move.

I would prefer to do tests related to how and why the rods move, and I'm not thouroughly convinced it has much to do with water. Walking over our well (which I know has water in it) didn't do anything at all yesterday, and walking from the dry shop to the wet backyard this morning didn't do anything either. I do know that the rods are moving with some unknown force, whether it be me or something else, and that is what I would like to find out. So I guess to that extent I should find a zone that is strong and find out what keeps a reaction from occurring. I'm not sure how that rules out human error, I'll have to think about that one some more.

Oh, and Shawn, that sounds pretty cool. Just make sure that the handles are conductive to the hands and that they are not connected electrically. After reading the article I posted that might be important. Also consider that supposedly some people can't do it, although most "hunters" insist that everyone can and they just aren't doing it correctly. ...which throws another wrench into the mix... this is getting more complicated than my initial interest...

So... I know about " " that much about magnetic fields. "If" it was magnetic, what would it look like? Would a voltmeter be able to tell a difference? Also, how can I tell if I'm just subconsciously moving the rods?

Coyote Wilde

Sun Apr 01 2007, 02:12AM

Registered Member #175 Joined: Tue Feb 14 2006, 09:32PM
Location: Sudbury, ON
Posts: 111

Only double blind testing can tell you if you're doing it subconciously.
If you think it might be an EM phenomenon, then try and find someway to do it in a faraday cage. Or, to test CM's theroy, go barefoot so you're not isolating the rods from ground.

And CM, that's flirting pretty close to psudoscience, and we're being watched here. The e-field off an old TV or VDG is orders of magnitude higher than the tiny amount of charge that might possibly accumulate on those rods under most conditions (and not everyone is going to believe the highly anectodal evidence of your wife, either. I know a guy who swears his girlfriend is a verifiable telepath; otherwise a perfectly reasonable bloke, well versed in scientific meathod.) If force there be, we'd probably be talking micronewtons with the charges involved. Hardly fits with "in some cases you CANNOT keep them from moving not matter how hard you squeeze" (1st post)

Double-blind away, but repeated scientific testing has shown this phonomenon to be bunk many, many times over. Tossing up hand-wavy scientific-sounding explanations only adds fuel to a fire which actual science turned its back on years ago.

ShawnLG

Sun Apr 01 2007, 03:29AM

Registered Member #286 Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 04:52AM
Location:
Posts: 399

"I'm not sure how that rules out human error, I'll have to think about that one some more." Build the braced D0wser as I discribed above.

Part Scavenger

Sun Apr 01 2007, 03:35AM

Registered Member #79 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 11:35AM
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 673

OK guys. Look, I don't think the bucket thing is going to work because I just walked over my pond and nothing happened. I was hoping some of you guys would have fun with it, and I would learn a few things, but this whole thread is making me uneasy, people's posts disappearing and all; references to pseudoscience... I don't know why it worked yesterday, and now it does nothing today and I really don't care anymore! I'm embarassed I brought it up, and I won't be returning to this thread if that's okay with you guys.

Nothing is worth getting kicked off the forum!

Bjørn

Sun Apr 01 2007, 05:02AM

Registered Member #27 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 02:20AM
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 2058

A post disappeared because I clearly stated: "Any further posts to this thread that contains opinions or speculation will fall directly under pseudoscience and it may be the last post by that member on this forum."

The scientific method goes something like this:

1. Observations are made of certain phenomena.
2. Facts are established.
3. Patterns are looked for in data/observation.
4. Scientific principles are established, consistent with all of the evidence.
5. Predictions may be made based on the principles established.
6. Experiments are done to test the scientific principle.
7. Principle is refined/rejected depending on new observations. (This step implies iteration)

When the thread was started we were at step 1. Even after my very strong warning someone skipped steps 2-7, having a stab directly at the conclusion. Any conclusion or chain of logic is invalid unless we follow this roadmap.

In this case it is very important to follow this method strictly. The reason is that there is a lot of unknowns. The forces that affects the rods are of unknown source and type. It is not know for sure if water affects the force. It is not known if a human is needed at all. With all these and more unknowns it will be possible to fit a countless number of explanations to the observations. This means that for each explanation there is a limitless supply of other explanations that is just as likely, rendering the whole process pointless. In short the problem is not rigid enough to take any shortcuts.

Even if this thread has not developed well I would urge anyone to follow through with a double-blind experiment (Step 2 of the scientific method) and then continue with the next steps to explain the facts learned in step 2. I don't care what the conclusion is, I only care about every step being executed with enough care that the conclusion is scientifically valid.

Marko

Sun Apr 01 2007, 01:36PM

Registered Member #89 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145

Hello

So... I know about " " that much about magnetic fields. "If" it was magnetic, what would it look like? Would a voltmeter be able to tell a difference? Also, how can I tell if I'm just subconsciously moving the rods?

OK, I have read your post, and I basically have much more idea about all.

Regarding the question, ''what could be causing rods to move'', there is pretty surely nothing, except you.

Again to clarify all things, this is why I think why popular explanations like electromagnetic fields can by no way work:

- water is only slightly diamagnetic, and in this case, electrically neutral liquid. No matter if it is moving or standing, it simply can't produce any magnetic fields on it's own.
Wery few things around a common home could actually produce magnetic fields that would affect the rods in described manner.

- electric fields. Among already mentioned things, I think the way most important is that ground simply shields the water like a faraday cage. Water in the ground will promptly be on same potential as all other conductors in contact with it.
So even if our d0wser was charged at hundreds of kilovolts and expeirenced significant coulomb forces, he could by no way use them to find groundwater.

-rods. Brass rod, being not ferromagnetic, would need to be in changing magnetic flux in order for required eddy currents. Changing magnetic field isn't something likely to appear in ground. Rods moving in a strong static magnetic field would be subbjected to ''eddy drag'', but the field strength required is way off orders of magnitude.
Stell rod would align itself with a static magnetic field, but if you have ever played with magnets, just imagine the field strength required?! Wood rods??

- Orders of magnitude. The force required for the rods to behave the described way,

you CANNOT keep them from moving not matter how hard you squeeze

at distances 5 - 10 feet from the source, would require termedous field strengths usually acheivable only by huge superconducting and electro magnets.

This takes out not only the water but also practically all other possible magnetic field sources in regular home.

I guess this busts the ''electromagnetic theory of d0wsing'', but anyway I would be happy to be filled in or corrected by someone.

So, if we are on point 4, principles are established, but not consistend with evidence (rods moving) at all.

For 5, my prediction is that this must be and error, and likely a human factor.

So, controlled experiment needs to be done in order to confirm very unlikely facts such as these.

- do double blind tests, with as many possible different parameters.
- I also think ShawnLG's idea may be good, but I would refine it to point where I would use a completely mechanical measuring device wich would take human factor completely out.

It may look like completely silly mythbusters experiment, but would prove the point.

The d0wsery thing anyway looked silly to me from the beggining!

If it is done that way, I don't think it would be pseudoscience by any mean.

Cheers...

Sun Apr 01 2007, 03:52PM

Banned on April 7, 2007
Registered Member #277 Joined: Fri Mar 03 2006, 10:15AM
Location: Florida
Posts: 157

PartScavenger:

I don't know if dowsing is real or not, but I do know that in electrostatic science that opposite polarities attract. I've had a great deal of hands-on experience with electrostatically charged metals that sometimes are attracted to large ground planes at a distance under the right environmental conditions. I wrote up a several page paper in reply to you complete with outside scientific references and calculations showing how dowsing, if it exists, could be nothing more than simple electrostatics following accepted rules of science during periods of peak sky voltage and low humidity. Chris, the site owner, reviewed the paper and decided it best not to be posted here until, and if, someone does a double-blind test. He's the boss, so I agree with him. I don't have the time to do a double-blind test, but maybe you do. I've emailed the paper to you so you can understand how dowsing, IF it's real, could be nothing more than a simple interaction of electrostatics (sky voltage) being attracted (or finding the path of least resistance) to an enhanced ground plane such as underground water. Pure science, no voodo, or hocus pocus involved. Paper on its way to you. Let us know if you decide to do the double-blind test. CM

Coronafix

Tue Apr 03 2007, 03:17AM

Registered Member #160 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 02:07AM
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 938

I made some rods out of coat hangers once and found water pipes going to all the fruit trees in the backyard of a house I once lived in. Didn't know they were there, landlord confirmed it too. Interesting trick, no theory on it though.
A lot of old timers use to use it to find water in the outback here in Australia.
I don't think this can be objectivelly studied though because the human body is part of the circuit.

Tue Apr 03 2007, 04:45PM

Banned on April 7, 2007
Registered Member #277 Joined: Fri Mar 03 2006, 10:15AM
Location: Florida
Posts: 157

Goldspere:

Right you are, the human body is part of the circuit, but could be replaced with a simple insultated mechanical 'holder'. My paper on how dowsing utilizes electrostatics has vigorously been prevented from being posted here on this site, otherwise, any number of members could try to build an electrostatic device (without the human body as part of the circuit) that works as a dowser, which reacts when near the presence of enhanced ground planes, and then conduct a double-blind test. Over the years dowsing has been regarded as a mysterious subject, as has been the case with many events involving 'action-at-a-distance'. But modern science has explained most action-at-a-distance "phenomenons" as simply the application of known scientific principles, same is true with dowsing including the reason why sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. Dowsing utilizes simple electrostatic principles taught and accepted in any high-school classroom. Pity that a paper on basic electrostatics is censored from even being read, here at this haven of higher learning. But the decision has been made, so we've no choice in the matter. Probably time to move on to another topic that we are allowed to discuss. CM

Marko

Tue Apr 03 2007, 05:16PM

Registered Member #89 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145

CM: I don't see why you continue to ignore basic electrostatics theory you are just talking about. I tought I managed to explain it at least to a degree in my upper post.

Most important thing is than in practically static conditions where tiny currents are flowing, it's just impossible to use coulomb's force to measure conductivity of earth.
Earth is in overall pretty conductive and charge will just spread over it. All potential differences will tend to equalize across earth's surface and make any of those your proposed measurements impossible.
It doesn't matter if the dowser has been charged to few kilovolts or megavolts, the coulomb force between him and earth will be same in all places and only dependent on charges and distance from earth.

It doesn't follow ''high school principles'' you mentioned.

People just wanted you to clearly explain yourself clearly and scientiffically enough to be understood, wich you seem to have failed and that's why you got warnings. Repeating a speculation over and over really leads nowhere.

previous 1 2 3 next

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob