R.
Junior Member
Posts: 85
|
Fields
Oct 2, 2006 2:39:23 GMT -5
Post by R. on Oct 2, 2006 2:39:23 GMT -5
I was wondering if fields can be condensed or their size manipulated, and if it can does having a field too stretched out have any negative effects.
On the side, does spatial awareness fall into psi abilities and, do you have "awareness" of objects in your field?
Also, what would be smallest to largest field you know of?
|
|
The Devil's Advocate
Author
Respected Member I will deflate your theories and claims with ye olde pointy stick of logic.
Est autem fides credere quod nondum vides; cuius fidei merces est videre quod credis.
Posts: 1,552
|
Fields
Oct 2, 2006 11:47:51 GMT -5
Post by The Devil's Advocate on Oct 2, 2006 11:47:51 GMT -5
So much to discuss in such a small post. I will be going point by point so I don't miss anything. I was wondering if fields can be condensed or their size manipulated, Breaking it up for ease of discussion. Some fields can be. I’ve heard of people directly manipulating their own fields. (Frozen Flames and Peebrain from Psipog being two whose claims in that I would trust.) The most common reason I’ve heard of for this is a cloak: Making you look like you’re not there, psionically (You can still be physically seen.) or making your signature appear like one other than yours. (Not necessarily another individual’s. I am not going into that version of the cloak. It’s not a tactic that has many, if any honest applications. Where as simply having a sig that is not-you can be an effective way to hide.) and if it can does having a field too stretched out have any negative effects. The one I have heard of is simply a factor of most fields: The more ‘stretched’ it gets the more dispersed it is and the less effect it has. There seems to be, as with many things an ‘optimum’ density that varies from individual to individual. On the side, does spatial awareness fall into psi abilities and, do you have “awareness” of objects in your field? Theoretically, yes. It is not something that comes naturally to me. I have an awareness of PEOPLE in my field, but not objects. Again it would be theoretically possible, but I don’t know of anyone who does so naturally. Also, what would be smallest to largest field you know of? The largest ‘field’ I have been subjected to was the one over Honolulu. Most cities have an ‘emotional field’ if you will. Think of it like the glow they put off at night on a psionic level. You can pick them up at large distances. I wasn’t aware enough of fields on that level to compare Honolulu to DC or Seoul for the size of this ‘field’. If I ever make it back to those cities I will do the comparison, given that both cities have much higher populations. I’m not even 100% certain it qualifies as a traditional field; however, that is the largest example that might apply, that I can think of. ~The Devil's Advocate
|
|
|
Fields
Oct 2, 2006 12:36:40 GMT -5
Post by wolfdancer on Oct 2, 2006 12:36:40 GMT -5
Theoretically, yes. It is not something that comes naturally to me. I have an awareness of PEOPLE in my field, but not objects. Again it would be theoretically possible, but I don’t know of anyone who does so naturally. Also, what would be smallest to largest field you know of? The largest ‘field’ I have been subjected to was the one over Honolulu. Most cities have an ‘emotional field’ if you will. Think of it like the glow they put off at night on a psionic level. You can pick them up at large distances. I wasn’t aware enough of fields on that level to compare Honolulu to DC or Seoul for the size of this ‘field’. If I ever make it back to those cities I will do the comparison, given that both cities have much higher populations. I’m not even 100% certain it qualifies as a traditional field; however, that is the largest example that might apply, that I can think of. ~The Devil's Advocate I don't know of anyone who is a natural at sensing objects through psionics, but I do know others who have done so in addition to myself. It is not a skill I feel I have practiced adequately. As for the largest field. The largest I've encountered has had about a six foot diameter (which really isn't that large). I assume you were referring to an individuals personal field, not that of a group or a city, yes?
|
|
innerfire
Author
Respected Member
--Unknown--
Posts: 399
|
Fields
Oct 2, 2006 17:20:42 GMT -5
Post by innerfire on Oct 2, 2006 17:20:42 GMT -5
I was wondering if fields can be condensed or their size manipulated, and if it can does having a field too stretched out have any negative effects. On the side, does spatial awareness fall into psi abilities and, do you have "awareness" of objects in your field? Also, what would be smallest to largest field you know of? From what I've heard an experienced the field can change size after a particularly intense energy manipulation/management session, myself and other people can prob at least indirectly manipulate field size through this way. Spatial awareness yes, but even with a lot of work the capacity of it is very basic, I've worked on developing that as a side project and albeit I could probably tweak some more accuracy out of it with an actual practice schedule, its really limited to a short range perception of very large objects that are fairly slow moving or stationary. The range of vision is really limited as well (the site range what you could see with one eye and your hand cupped around it its probably pretty accurate comparison). To DA's and Wolf's comments I'm not to sure what you mean by natural, if natural in that I could always do this the answer is no, if you mean doing it without trying yes that happens quite often, its nothing substantial though since like I said the effect is incredibly limited (its improved accuracy-wise pretty significantly but its still to weak to be proven in any testing situation that I have been able to divise. Not much experience as to the last question so I'll leave it to people with more knowledge as to that.
|
|
R.
Junior Member
Posts: 85
|
Fields
Oct 2, 2006 18:48:08 GMT -5
Post by R. on Oct 2, 2006 18:48:08 GMT -5
Hmm, I guess awareness doesn't depend on field size since person can't have 200m field. The awareness is a natural thing for me, but i cant feel living things for some reason, maybe because I dislike certain things. As awareness I mean like when you enter a room without any light but can still feel that something occupies the space there. Also i find it easier to sense heavy things, while something like balloon i go right through.
|
|
The Devil's Advocate
Author
Respected Member I will deflate your theories and claims with ye olde pointy stick of logic.
Est autem fides credere quod nondum vides; cuius fidei merces est videre quod credis.
Posts: 1,552
|
Fields
Oct 3, 2006 7:43:58 GMT -5
Post by The Devil's Advocate on Oct 3, 2006 7:43:58 GMT -5
Awareness might correlate to field size in some manner, but the area your field covers is not neccissarily the limit of your passive range. (It certainly isn't for me!)
~The Devil's Advocate, who does not have a several mile personal field even though she has a several mile passive range.
|
|
|
Fields
Oct 3, 2006 14:14:12 GMT -5
Post by wolfdancer on Oct 3, 2006 14:14:12 GMT -5
Hmm, I guess awareness doesn't depend on field size since person can't have 200m field. The awareness is a natural thing for me, but i cant feel living things for some reason, maybe because I dislike certain things. As awareness I mean like when you enter a room without any light but can still feel that something occupies the space there. Also i find it easier to sense heavy things, while something like balloon i go right through. Right. That fits with what I thought and correlates with the limited experimenting I have done in that field.
|
|