talkmagic.co.uk

Hello,

My girlfriend went a a seance evening a few months ago and told me about a glass-moving experience she had there. I wish I'd been there now as it's intrigued me as to the method.

What she remembers was four participants resting their fingertips on an upturned glass and the glass moved around the table. That part I understand to be based on ide****** action. But then she says the glass spun under their fingers, and I'm stumped. Like I say, I wish I'd been there to experience exactly what happened. Is it really the same principle in action?

Sorry if I'm asking too much. This isn't really a magic-related question, and being honest I don't think I'll ever move into this area for my own performances, so you're perfectly within your rights to tell me to get stuffed and go fishing elsewhere.

Still, a clue or two would be appreciated

It is a phenomena that occurs all the time during glass moving. Its source is the same energy that makes the glass move. Whether that be spirits, ideo-motor, or wish fulfillment. It is an amazing thing to see and experience though. One of the many wonders of seance work.

Incredible. Well, thanks! Next time I get a chance I think I'll come along to the seance, sounds like a great experience!

Sometimes the glass stops and tilts up making it appear to spin round.
Some strange things happen during glass moving sessions...

Whether you're a believer or a skeptic, a seance evening such as those Paul does is something which needs to be seen to be truly appreciated. There's no need for explanation, it is what it is and it does what it does - a truly amazing experience. And I confess to being a miserable old skeptic so if it impressed me you can see how good it is!

One part of the evening which the performer probably won't know too much about first hand is/are the comments and conversations as people leave the building on their way home and discuss what just happened. You can hear the effect being built up larger than it was, some people will be discovering that they saw things which they thought might be, perhaps, a trick of the light but plenty of other people saw exactly the same thing and so on - the evening isn't over when it's over, if you know what I mean !

Mandrake wrote:Whether you're a believer or a skeptic, a seance evening such as those Paul does is something which needs to be seen to be truly appreciated. There's no need for explanation, it is what it is and it does what it does - a truly amazing experience. And I confess to being a miserable old skeptic so if it impressed me you can see how good it is!

One part of the evening which the performer probably won't know too much about first hand is/are the comments and conversations as people leave the building on their way home and discuss what just happened. You can hear the effect being built up larger than it was, some people will be discovering that they saw things which they thought might be, perhaps, a trick of the light but plenty of other people saw exactly the same thing and so on - the evening isn't over when it's over, if you know what I mean !

Yes indeed! Here's a little something I threw together. It's about the tarot, but it's also about how things grow and change in people's minds and become greater than the original events.

I've certainly had someone deliberately try to keep the planchette from moving by pressing down but all she did was to create a fulcrum around which it moved, and was immediately obvious to the other sitters, but when the thing is really flying, you can literally step back and let them take control over the questioning. I only step back in when the energy starts to drop and their imaginations need another little stir.

Prof. Richard Wiseman did some research on fake memories, and discovered that when people believe they are being invited to a real seance, their memories from the event are altered appropriately. In one fake (but very convincing) seance he conducted, about third of the people distinctly remembered the large table levitating up from the floor, just because the performer told them it was happening.

So I have no idea whether the glass rotated in fact (I believe Paul when he says Id*****or effect can do that), but certain memories from such events should be considered with care.

Yes, I was very careful to say "What she remembers was", rather than "What happened was"

I remember hearing in a Psychology lecture ages ago that police witness statements from several witnesses often have huge contradictions. I think I remember an experiment where someone's giving a lecture and half-way through some men run in fire a gun into the air and run out again, being chased by guards. Students are then quizzed about the number of men and number of shots and the answers are just all over the place. (but, I don't trust my memory on this!). A few sentences uttered at the right moment can sway the spectator's memory subtly. For instance giving them a choice from half the deck and later saying "You could have chosen any card, but you chose this one". That can be taken two ways. The spectator will agree because they could have chosen any card, of the cards they were offered. But later, they may well only remember what they were told, that they could have chosen any card.

Elizabeth Loftus has some great research on this that has really transformed (hopefully) the way witnesses are interviewed. She found out that biases in verb choice ("how fast was the vehicle going when it slammed into the bollard" vs "how fast was the vehicle going when it collided with the bollard") threw up massive inconsistencies between witness reports and what they had actually perceived at the time.

dup wrote:Prof. Richard Wiseman did some research on fake memories, and discovered that when people believe they are being invited to a real seance, their memories from the event are altered appropriately. In one fake (but very convincing) seance he conducted, about third of the people distinctly remembered the large table levitating up from the floor, just because the performer told them it was happening.

So I have no idea whether the glass rotated in fact (I believe Paul when he says Id*****or effect can do that), but certain memories from such events should be considered with care.

I can remember every glass seance ive done, and i have seen some very unusual things take place at them. Ive never been the motive power,and usualy i cant workout where it comes from.

Talking of things being strong in the spec's mind and them creating the 'effect', Dale can back me up on two amazing events: the baby and the lunatic and the wine glass.
If I related them, it would certainly sound like I was exagerating but maybe it's something more appropriate in The Dark Side.

I have a new glass moving routine I'll be performing in a couple of weeks; a mini-seance involving a billet that is dropped into the glass by the participant and covered. . . I don't touch the glass until it's covered and even then, only through the hank. Yet, the glass reveals the name of the deceased and a few other details (using a talking board) which is verified... the hank is removed the slip dumped, opened and shown to everyone present. It is then handed back to the sitter to hold as we continue with the "service" -- an attempt to get a written message from the spirits. . . a message that is ultimately found on the very billet they have marked and has been seen or "outside my control" throughout the 10-minute sequence.

I'm quite proud of the bit. There's a good deal more that goes to it, but this is more than enough to prime the psychological gear-work resting in the minds of other participants.

user24 wrote: I think I remember an experiment where someone's giving a lecture and half-way through some men run in fire a gun into the air and run out again, being chased by guards. Students are then quizzed about the number of men and number of shots and the answers are just all over the place. (but, I don't trust my memory on this!).

Yeah you're right, but lots of research has suggested that the reason for this is that when a gun is involved in an incident, people's recall of the details is reduced due to a phenomena known as 'weapon focus" because they are preoccupied with remaining safe from the gun they don't take in other details about the gunman

I've never come across this piece of research in my studies but there was a similar one (can't remember who it ws conducted by) where a man ran into a lecture in a university and stole a file/briefcase off the lecturer's desk. The students were interviewed about it afterwards. Again, the experimenters included leading questions and when asked "Did you see his white trainers?" often the students would say yes even if the theif was wearing black leather shoes. Just goes to show the power of words.

Edantes wrote:Yeah you're right, but lots of research has suggested that the reason for this is that when a gun is involved in an incident, people's recall of the details is reduced due to a phenomena known as 'weapon focus" because they are preoccupied with remaining safe from the gun they don't take in other details about the gunman

Fascinating! Misdirection at work. Thanks for the reply

Edantes wrote:Yeah you're right, but lots of research has suggested that the reason for this is that when a gun is involved in an incident, people's recall of the details is reduced due to a phenomena known as 'weapon focus" because they are preoccupied with remaining safe from the gun they don't take in other details about the gunman

I've never come across this piece of research in my studies but there was a similar one (can't remember who it ws conducted by) where a man ran into a lecture in a university and stole a file/briefcase off the lecturer's desk. The students were interviewed about it afterwards. Again, the experimenters included leading questions and when asked "Did you see his white trainers?" often the students would say yes even if the theif was wearing black leather shoes. Just goes to show the power of words.

Isn't this the fallacy of many questions?