A few chi question

What is chi? Is it real and can it be proven? I had read one time that some one offered $10,000 to anyone who could prove it's real. Has anyone collected on that? I'm not looking to debate anybody, I just do not know what it really is. No one I know can tell me either. I hope to get a real answer on here.

Qi/Chi?

Life energy, the force that gives us being, that which enables us to act and function, the universal energy which incorporates all living creatures...

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

but can it be proven?

It all ready has been.





It's customary to make an introduction in the newcomers forum and introduce yourself, what brings you here, and what martial arts you practice...

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

how? i really would like to know.

“	Originally Posted By: worf how? i really would like to know.	”

Here, knock yourself out

Now that all the junk is cleared up, I would like to know the real facts about chi.

What is Chi?

What is Chi (Revisited)

Chi - Is it Real?

There's more where that came from in the "archives" (scroll down to the bottom of this page to find the link, then go to "qi lounge")

__________________

thank you, i will now look at your links

Another way is to do 100 jumping jacks, 100 windmills, a 100 arm cirlces (your choice) and then put your hands together, tell me what you feel...

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

“	Originally Posted By: Mei Hua Another way is to do 100 jumping jacks, 100 windmills, a 100 arm cirlces (your choice) and then put your hands together, tell me what you feel...	”

Tired?

“	Originally Posted By: djstatika Tired?	”

No, it's a way to teach beginners about what Qi feels like, doing those exercises draws Qi to the hands...

__________________
Oh THAT'S how that works!

Actually you can see on a chart of meridians of the Ming dynasty (~14th century) that it tightly correlates to one of the lymph channels "our" medicine discovered from slicing bodies. So it wouldn't be far fetched that "Qi" in a tight meaning is a group name for stuff that flows in those channels (actually ~300.000 chemical agents of which "our" medicine has pinned down just 3000 to a certain function).

Now the money question - can YOU prove that your muscles work using ATP ? I mean not refering to lots of printouts, but SHOWING that it's inside you ?

If you do that stunt, I show how Qi is in mine.

__________________
"Fawning, but proud!" - (at least sometimes, in rare cases)
"Killing them all didn't make it any better..." - "Are you a freak or something ???" - Max Payne
"Theft is a crime, even in Iraq." - Me.

nice answer nik

but ATP can be tested for

empirically

tests have been done to show its effect

as far as i am aware

western science still has not isolated chi

unless your a wilhelm riech fan

__________________
"...any theory that satisfies the facts demands assumptions which are completely absurd."

Aleister Crowley

these sort of things always go in circles. What would satisfy the questioner as proof? Is that going to be the same for everyone? I don't think so.

We are fed on scientific and pseudo-scientific accounts of what proof would look like, but most of the time we are not even looking for the right things.

T

Western science cannot "isolate Qi" because a) NOONE is doing a serious research on it using appropriate analytics based on *original* descriptions of the understanding of qi of TCM, and b) because it maybe is too obvious to isolate it as a plain CHEMICAL AGENT the western medicine simply has a DIFFERENT name for. Duh!

I repeat again, for the very slow readers:

YOU, as in YOU personal, the man reading this, CANNOT, as in cannot credibly and solely based on your understanding and experience, SHOW that ATP works in your muscles. Full stop. I don't accept referring to study 47/11 that is based on study 14/75a that is based on study XYZ/gamma that is based on lots of research over more than 100 years. I mean that YOU are going based solely of what you can SHOW to PROVE that it is ATP, not BCT, or KTU (funny when other fools make up names that don't relate to anything, no ?). All you can do is refer to a sh*tload of apparatus medicine and chemistry and their researches over 100s of years that make us believe that what you shoot IV into your muscle making it wiggle contains something that is named "ATP". How do you prove it ? Showing me the label on the bottle saying "ATP 0.05%" ? Using another pharmaceutical product test liquid that turns green on applying ATP containing other liquids because the packaging tells you ? If there wouldn't be that much BABBLING of Qi, based on plain and pure speculation and fantasy of what it "could" be, there would be simple pharmaceutical research with mass spectrometric analysis of chemical processes going on when someone "uses Qi", and you would arrive at differential results of what was in the body before and after. This, and not some pseudo-scientific fools attempt at "disproving a myth", would be science. If I am going to rule out any existing chemical or physical agent as "Qi" and insist on it HAVING to be some mysterious fifth/seventh/666th "force", prior to defining a set of sane assumptions how to sample results on what is going on, you are making a fool out of you regarding true scientific approaches. This is like trying to measure the activities of a brain by ramming two needles into it and using a car electric voltmeter to "sample data".

__________________
"Fawning, but proud!" - (at least sometimes, in rare cases)
"Killing them all didn't make it any better..." - "Are you a freak or something ???" - Max Payne
"Theft is a crime, even in Iraq." - Me.

there are some riechian researchers that claim to be able to record orgone levels in a scientific manner

orgone and chi to me are the same

i have been researching muscular action for the past year now

and am happy to accept the ATP thing

if you are not then thats your choice

but i feel that you are missing out on an interseting scientific find

__________________
"...any theory that satisfies the facts demands assumptions which are completely absurd."

Aleister Crowley