"Magic" Tai Chi Powers

[Wudang]

Oh and the stooge is pushing, right? So his legs are straightening so why do his legs suddenly contract unless he's jumping?

And there's material and teaching traditions on fajing going back many years, all well understood and publicly taught so why do so many people say it's a big secret? Doug Wile's books are available on Amazon.

 

[Wudang]

As regards the protocol - "within styles like Tai Chi Chuan fajin is regarded as a paranormal ability" - this demonstrably untrue. See any number of teaching materials by the Chen family(founders of tai chi but don't quote me to my teacher) , or Wile's books above. It is most definitely a physical biomechanical force based on the "ground strength". See http://ismag.iay.org.uk/peng-index.htm

 

[wardenclyffe]

Stigweard,

I suggest you to start a protocol negotiation with the "demonstrators." You can use what you've got as a starting point. You will soon discover whether they are taking you seriously or whether you should be taking them seriously. Are they interested in just being tested or being tested for the prize money? What is motivating them to agree (in principle) to a test? If they are after the prize money (and there's nothing wrong with that---if I could win the prize, I'd go for it) it might change your role in the negotiations.

Ward

 

[wardenclyffe]

As regards the protocol - "within styles like Tai Chi Chuan fajin is regarded as a paranormal ability" - this demonstrably untrue. See any number of teaching materials by the Chen family(founders of tai chi but don't quote me to my teacher) , or Wile's books above. It is most definitely a physical biomechanical force based on the "ground strength". See http://ismag.iay.org.uk/peng-index.htm

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the majority of practitioners think. It only really matters what an applicant claims. If the claim is that they are doing something paranormal and a protocol is developed that excludes other mundane causes for the effect, then it's go time. I agree though that that info in the protocol is unnecessary, but it opens an interesting discussion on a topic that I know very little about.

Ward

P.S. My prediction is that when Stigweard tries to pin them down to a real protocol, they will become far less interested in being tested.

 

[Lamuella]

Tai Chi is no more magical than Chai tea.

 

[rjh01]

Yellow bamboo anyone?

 

[Horatius]

Reading the protocol, I'm unclear as to the intent of this section:

If the coin flip result is ‘tails’ then the Demonstrator makes no attempt HOWEVER the test subject must still take up the test stance and touch the forearms of the Demonstrator as if a test was to take place. Only the Demonstrator will make NO attempt to demonstrate fajin.

After either an attempt or a non-attempt the test subject will be escorted from the room (via another door – i.e. the test subject will not be permitted to have any interaction with other possible test subjects) by an Adjudicator.

The test will be repeated with a different test subject until a total of 10 actual (i.e. the Demonstrator does attempt to physically move the test subject) attempts have been conducted.

What is the point of showing he can stand there doing nothing?

 

[SumDood]

What is the point of showing he can stand there doing nothing?

I believe to weed out any 'ringers' who will fake being pushed back by the Tai Chi master. My first idea was to have the test subjects blind folded so they won't know if its the master or someone else 'pushing' them back.

 

[crimresearch]

At first that’s what I thought he was trying to demonstrate. The principal makes sense. Image a wall, or just a big steel plate. It has some hydraulics behind it that will push the plate forward an inch or two. If you push lightly on the plate, then when it jumps forward, all that happens is that your arms bend and maybe your shoulders move back a bit. A worst you get a bit of a jarring bump on your wrists. But if you move and heave ho good and strong against the wall, then you have no flexibility to absorb the energy from the wall. When the wall moves forward, your whole body gets a jolt, and you might even get knocked back a step.

But you won’t get hoppy toads. To get a hoppy toad you need some kind of upward force, So the person would have to be pushing down. And with the stances in the video, it would be almost impossible. The force is being applied to hands or fists on out stretched arms. What would happen is that the arms would rotate at the shoulders. You would have to have a person pushing almost straight down and with incredible strength to keep the arms and shoulders locked in order to transfer the force up on the whole body and get even a little skip off the floor. I’m not sure if it would even be possible without tearing an arm out of the socket, although my hunch is that in the right conditions it would be possible to get a very small bump off the floor with minor or even no damage to the body.

But that is not what is in the video. Take, for example, the demonstration where the guy has his fist on his back. Think about that steel plate. Image a person with their fists out at chest level against a steel plate. The steel plate has hydraulics that can apply any amount of force, and amount many times that capable by any human being. No matter what angle you move that plate forward and no matter how much force you apply, you are not going to push that person up like it shows in the video. No hoppy toad.

I would tend to think that the students are creating or at least adding to, the 'upward force' themselves by hopping backwards to avoid the jolt, rather than that this particular person has gotten the results shown in the videos entirely through his 'power'.

 

[Horatius]

I believe to weed out any 'ringers' who will fake being pushed back by the Tai Chi master. My first idea was to have the test subjects blind folded so they won't know if its the master or someone else 'pushing' them back.

If that's the case, then the coin flip and decision should be made before the test subject enters the room, so they don't know what the flip was.

Also, if you're worried about ringers getting into the test pool, you'd need some way to prevent communication via the touching. I'm sure with practice I could come up with a subtle move that would tell someone touching me they should fake the jump, that wouldn't be readily apparent to an outside observer. Touch is much more sensitive than eyesight.

I'm not sure what you could do to detect that, though.

 

[crimresearch]

Wow ... great responses all ... breath of fresh air actually to get some critical thinking rather than the carry on the Tai Chi folks make about this.

I apologize in advance if I don't address your comments directly here...

OK so here is the "claim":

Michael Phillips, and those of the same persuasion, claim that through the "non-bio-mechanical" power of Fajin they can "bounce" opponents away (regardless of opponent size or environmental factors) with ONLY the lightest touch of the opponent's fingertips touching the forearms of the demonstrator (see 8:15 Mysteries of Tai Chi Chuan - Part 1 of 3).

To be clear this is Michael's description:

“The outward sign of fajin is that the wrists and elbows of the person issuing fa-jin do not follow the opponent, as they would if one were merely "pushing" with the muscles - in Chinese, this is called "The arrow is fired, but the bow remains." The real test is to stand with one's feet parallel with someone at least your own size facing you in a well-rooted bow-stance, and instantly shear him off his feet, both feet clear off the ground in a single moment, and send him backwards 3-4 feet with his feet ending in the same alignment. All of this done with the demonstrator having no discernible tension in one's shoulders, elbows, or wrists.

Whilst there may be a visible "pulse-wave" passing thru the body-system, if someones elbow accelerates forward and follows the trajectory of the opponent as he is thrown backwards, what has just occurred is definitely NOT [Tai Chi] fajin!"

Michael claims that this is NOT based on "normal" bio-mechanics (see 8:43 Mysteries of Tai Chi Chuan - Part 1 of 3) and that there is absolutely no muscular strength (commonly called "external strength" as opposed to the "internal strength" fajin that Michael claims to be proficient at) being used in the technique.

In conversation with Michael and other "believers" they claim repeatedly, and rather obtusely, that this fajin is beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding or explanation thus, at least in my mind, fulfilling the requirement of it being a claim of paranormal ability.

I would say do not let those who are claiming this isn't a purely bio-mechanical process, create the definitions.

Have them produce a force against a measuring device.

Get a mechanical source to produce the same levels of force.

Have both sources apply said force against test subjects and see if the claimed observable phenomenon occurs.

 

[Wudang]

may I suggest :
demonstrator weights shorts so leg motions can be seen
demonstrator does not get to pick who to work with from the pool (not sure if that was clear) as I know a couple of tai chi fakers who are very good at picking patsies from an audience.
And I'll see you yellow bamboo and raise you Pathgate

 

[Lanzy]

As a mental exercise I suppose this has some merit, but the fakers will never agree to be tested if the fake can be revealed. I suppose someone will agree just to "prove" he isn't faking and wants whatever publicity this will get them.

I really like the idea of using weights/dummies/inanimate objects to be the things being moved. In all my years of martial arts experience no one has ever done this.

As an irrelevant side note, I have over 25 years of Hapkido, Jujitsu, Judo, and general MMA training, coaching and in ring experience. I have also won one national breaking competetion.

 

[jsfisher]

Having the assistant stand on pressure sensors should do the trick. Heck, even the right sort of shock-absorbing foam could probably be used to eliminate fakery.

 

[Stigweard]

Great work folks, I am reading and taking notes ... I will edit the original draft shortly with some of your excellent suggestions

 

[wardenclyffe]

I'm glad you are excited about this, but I'm afraid you might be doing a lot of work for nothing. Ultimately, the testing protocol must be negotiated between the applicant (or demonstrator in your case) and the testing organization (JREF, IIG, whoever). At this point you are sort of a middle-man and your work could be rejected at any point by either side. It might be better for you to get one of the demonstrators to actually apply for one of the prizes. Then you can be in on the negotiations assuming one side or the other allows it. I would think if they were going for one of the prizes with finder's fee, you'd have more right to be involved. I still think your protocol is a good starting point for both sides, but ultimately those are the people who have to sign off on everything and I think it would be smart to get them involved sooner rather than later to avoid having a whole bunch of work potentially thrown out the window.

Ward

 

[Robrob]

The counterintuitive part is how can a smaller/older person make a slight twitch, and get such an explosive reaction from a larger/younger person?

Certainly would look like it. I've had some experience with martial arts demonstrations and tournaments.

My experience is presumably the same as used in the video. The opponent "cooperates" with the attack in a Hollywood style. In college I studied Yoshukai Karate. Because I had a previous background in Japanese Ju-Jitsu (more like Judo than what you see in MMA), I was everyone's favorite "Uke" (fall guy opponent) in tournament competitions. I could be thrown through the air with minimal effort (I didn't fight the move) and land with a resounding theatrical "SLAM!"

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I would tend to think that the students are creating or at least adding to, the 'upward force' themselves by hopping backwards to avoid the jolt, rather than that this particular person has gotten the results shown in the videos entirely through his 'power'.

What "jolt"? Watch part 2 at 0:46. When Phillips moves his back, the guys arms bend, then he jumps. If he had kept his feet flat on the floor, all that would have happened would have been that his arms would have bent a little bit. There is no “jolt” there to jump away from.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I see lots of problems with the protocol.

Why do 10 “actual” attempts? Does the Demonstrator have to successfully move all 10 in order to pass? So as soon as 1 “actual” attempt fails, the applicant fails? What about the “fake” attempts? If the Demonstrator moves the person on one of the fake attempts, does the applicant fail? What if the Demonstrator claims that he is such a powerful Tai Chi master that sometimes in that pose his Fa Jin goes off even when he doesn’t want it to?

Exactly how far back does a person have to be moved to count as a pass of a “actual” test? How is this measured? How is it determined whether or not both feet came off the ground? Do they have to be off the ground at the same time? What if the person is pushed back, but instead of hopping they sort of leap with one foot and then the other, but at some point both feet are off the ground; does that count?

How are the random subjects selected? If the subjects don’t know what it is that is expected to be done to them, how do you make sure none of them have health or physical issues that could cause them problems, whether the Fa Jin works or not? How do you make sure that none of the “randomly” selected subjects are not in cahoots with the Demonstrator?

And as Horatius pointed out, if any of the subjects are secretly in league with the Demonstrator, limiting noises that could be used as communication is pointless. They could easily come up with all kinds of complex methods of communication that could not be detected: looking in a certain direction, touching a certain place on the body, bending a finger in a certain way, placing the feet in a certain direction, moving an arm or a leg a certain way, or any combination of such things that could be different for each trial.

I appreciate the work you have done here, but it is better to keep it simple. All you need is one reliable subject who you know won’t cheat. Then the test is simple. Really all you need is a narrow cardboard box, a board, and a tape measure.

The box is placed between the Demonstrator and the Subject. The Demonstrator has to stay on his side of the box (and of course the Subject will stay on his side). The purpose is to limit the Demonstrator ‘s forward movement so that he does use any “illegal moves” such as just barreling into the Subject like a defensive lineman or trying to grab the Subject and pick him up and throw him backward. Any simple barrier would do: small table, stool, chair, trash can, fence, or even just a bar at about waist height.

The other element is the board. About 3/4 inch thick, 3 long, and 6 inches high. This is set up at, say, 6 inches behind the Subject’s feet. This little hurdle is our measuring device. The objective of the test is for the Demonstrator to stand on his side of the barrier and turn the Subject into a hoppy toad and bounce him up and over the hurdle. To pass the test, he must move the Subject’s feet to the other side of the hurdle without knocking the hurdle over.

That’s it. The Demonstrator could have maybe 3 tries at 30 seconds each. Maybe a couple minutes break between each try. And, of course, before the test the Demonstrator could work with one of his students to make sure the set up and his Fa Jin and life force energy and so forth is working properly.

And I still like my idea of getting the Subject’s toes off the ground. Maybe get another one of those 3/4 inch boards and have the Subject stand with his toes up on the board. That would make it very difficult to even involuntarily jump back over the hurdle.

 

[Stigweard]

I'm glad you are excited about this, but I'm afraid you might be doing a lot of work for nothing. Ultimately, the testing protocol must be negotiated between the applicant (or demonstrator in your case) and the testing organization (JREF, IIG, whoever). At this point you are sort of a middle-man and your work could be rejected at any point by either side. It might be better for you to get one of the demonstrators to actually apply for one of the prizes. Then you can be in on the negotiations assuming one side or the other allows it. I would think if they were going for one of the prizes with finder's fee, you'd have more right to be involved. I still think your protocol is a good starting point for both sides, but ultimately those are the people who have to sign off on everything and I think it would be smart to get them involved sooner rather than later to avoid having a whole bunch of work potentially thrown out the window.

Ward

Heya Ward, no risk of wasted work here. I have a long-term reason for this so all efforts here will be used in one way or another. At the moment I am very happy to work with you good folk first. You are independent of the issue and thus you are providing the objectivity I need for this stage of things. Once I have something that can pass judgement here as fair and effective, then I will move onto the next stage and get folks who want to give the test a go involved. Cheers