Gyroscopes and the Magic 8 ball

[jb7487]

I'm new to the concept of dowsing and I'll tell you up front that I'm a skeptic for full disclosure. However, I did make myself a set of simple dowsing rods today to investigate the phenomenon and five straight times the rods crossed when I passed over a specific area of my basement. I wasn't "looking for something" and I wasn't wearing a magnet in my shoe or hat. I can't explain it but I intend to try if possible. Now that I've gotten that out of the way, here is the real crux of the thread.

1) It seems to me that part of the doubt related to dowsing is the idea that dowsers are consciously or subconciously applying some sort of force to the rods to get them to move. All of the pictures I've seen of dowsing rods seems to show them with handles that would be almost impossible to hold consitently without impacting the rods' movement in some way. It occurred to me that if you could remove this possibility you would be taking a positive step in the direction of removing doubt. Would it make sense to create rods based on the theory of a gyroscope or other contraption such that the handle position has no bearing on the levelness of the rods? Do such rods already exist? And no Mike, your RLR does not fit the description based on what I've seen in the pictures.

2) I've seen some dowsers say that it doesn't matter what you use for dowsing. They go on to talk about using pendulums and other such devices to "ask questions" and get yes/no/maybe answers. That sounds exactly like that toy called the "magic 8 ball" where you shake it up and get a response to a question. Just curious, to those that advocate this type of "dowsing", would there be any reason why a pendullum would work better than a magic 8 ball? Do you feel that using a magic 8 ball is feasible or would you consider it to be just a toy and not a worthy indicator? If you would not consider using a magic 8 ball to be a valid method of dowsing, why not?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[aarthrj3811]

Hey jb7487……..Try the frame at http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,19537.0.html post #9 and see if it will answer your questions….Art

 

[jb7487]

aarthrj3811, the device shown in the picture only keeps the rods parallel with each other. It does not keep them vertical to the ground at all times. Still, it would have to provide some protection against the user moving their hands independently.

 

[jb7487]

I was thinking more about this last night and I wonder if the simple answer is to use a liquid in the handle. The dowsing rod itself is shaped like a T with a float at the top and a large weight at the bottom. The handle is filled with water so that the rod floats in it and is not impacted by small movements of the handle. Depending on the shape of the container holding the water the user could move the handle up to say 10 degrees in any direction without impacting the rotation of the rod significantly. Of course, jostling the rod will cause the water to splash and the rod to bounce. But I think most accomplished dowsers are able to hold the rod steady enough so that this doesn't happen. With a water filled container I think the likelihood of accidentally or intentionally impacting the movement of the rod would be significantly less than it would be if you were holding the dowsing rod directly.

Here is a picture of what I'm proposing. Anyone care to build it and test it out?

 

[jb7487]

Mike, I can see how the stabilizers on the RLR would be a big help in keeping the device vertical. But in the end, the user is sill able to consciously, subconsciously, or even accidentally impart motion on the rod. This is what the skeptics seem to latch onto. As I've said before, I'm a skeptic. But I'm willing to believe that this works for some people. I would even be willing to believe that it works for me. But I would need to know that it wasn't my own tiny "micromovements" that were responsible for the readouts I was getting.

I'm just proposing an alternative. I'm not saying that I think it is foolproof or even better than the RLR rod that you build. I'm just saying that if I was a dowser I'd want to be able to show and know that my own movements are not responsible for the movement of the rods. And I'd strive to create a system that helped to ensure that. Maybe the water or gyroscope ideas just aren't practical at all. If not, then so be it. But if they are I'd like to see some dowsers give them a try and report back. Maybe I'll try building the water device myself. It seems simple enough.

 

[jb7487]

By the way, I haven't seen anyone comment yet on the idea of using a magic 8 ball. However, I didn't really expect much feedback on that notion.

 

[txkickergirl]

I love the magic 8 ball , I have caught my kids lying about something using it,

but then again that was a mother wise intuition more than what the 8 ball really said...they just thought it said it. You know shortly after that their toy went missing...hummmmm wonder why they got rid of it

I actually have one that sits on my desk at work and customers love to come in and play it.

 

[jb7487]

You can try it and see for yourself that will not work because you get no feedback.

Already have tried a simple one. As you say it needs to be completely counterbalanced which is very, very difficult. I've already abandoned the idea of using water. Getting it to float would involve some pretty tricky weighting. I can appreciate what you are saying about the RLR, but I'm still skeptical that it removes the ability for the user to impart a force on it that will make it do what he/she wants it to do. I have a few other thoughts I'll try out over the next week and see if I can come up with a design that I'm comfortable with.

As a side note, I just did another test with my homemade L-rods. I placed a bag of coins on the floor and walked over it and sure enough the L-rods crossed just about every time. Again, I'm a skeptic so I'm looking for an answer and right now the most probable answer is that I already knew it was there and therefore put some sort of force on the rods to make them cross. If I can come up with a rod system that I am assured does not allow me to impart forces on the rods and I still can locate the coins then I'll go to the next step which is a double blind test.

 

[aarthrj3811]

I

am hesitant to even comment on Art's device, but I will say if both rod axles are not perfectly aligned parallel to each other with perfectly the same amount of resistance the rods will swing at different rates.

Yes they will swing at differnt rates...The thing that they should do is cross and lock.

The frame is just a simple device that is used to prove one thing. It is impossible to cross the rod using your wrist, hands or arms.
When using the frame when the rods cross you will know one of two things has happened.
1….An external signal has caused them to cross.
2….Your body energy has made them cross.
My old man gave me some information some 50 years ago…..Keep it simple and it will work better…..Art

 

[aussie 1]

Eh Max

 

[jb7487]

jb do you understand what I am saying about the balance issue?

Yes I do. I've been trying various designs and they all have issues with balance. I've decided to scrap the idea of trying to reduce my ability to impact the results. I'm going to stick with simple L-rods made out of copper for now. Thanks for the info.