# The Existence of Chi



## Jade Tigress (Jan 15, 2006)

Ok - Chi/Qi/Ki is a popular theme in martial arts. Some people believe in it, some think it's a bunch of hooey, and some don't care either way.

I personally believe in the concept of chi, but not in a mystical, magical sort of way. I believe chi is our biological energy. Everyone knows the body has electrical impulses. Can biological energy - or chi - be physically developed by training, just as muscles and cardio stamina can be developed by training? If we can learn the proper excercises to develop those parts of our body, then why would we not also be able to develop the bio-energy we all have? 

I think we can through qigong exercises, tai chi training, and by practicing a myriad of other martial arts that can develop chi as a by-product of training, to a certain extent,  just by learning how to relax and breath properly.

What are your thoughts on chi, it's existence, and the ability to develop it?


----------



## AlwaysTraining (Jan 15, 2006)

The existence of ki/chi is something I believe in.  But, the form in which it exists is something I'm not so sure about.  Just yesterday I asked my sensei how one develops strength of ki.  She said it was developed through practicing kata as well as emphasis placed on breathing and perhaps meditation.  As an off-shoot from the meditation suggestion, MA such as tai chi would also be effective in developing such strength of ki.  

I am primarily a Japanese MA practitioner, however, I believe ki and chi exist as one and the same.  I think it's interesting that through the study and practice of kata/forms that MA practitioners strengthen their ki/chi.  On a personal note, after a good kata session I can really feel my ki strength increased.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 15, 2006)

I have always belived in it.
I have seen some things done that i have no other explanation for
I think that breathing  has much to due with the flow but am not an expert on the subject ( so i've been told)


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 15, 2006)

I honestly don't know. IMO, you are closer to the truth by defining it as a biological energy (that could eventually have a scientific explanation) than many self-styled Martial Arts experts who use it to shroud normal, everyday newtonian physical principles in eastern mysticism in order to mislead the gullible.

Good question - I wish I had some sort of answer for besides "don't know". :idunno:


----------



## Jade Tigress (Jan 16, 2006)

I am in no way an expert on chi either. I actually know very little about it but I am learning. One thing I can say is I've seen it used and I've felt it so I know it's there. 




> On a personal note, after a good kata session I can really feel my ki strength increased.



Me too. I think learning to breathe properly is a huge component of chi development. Qigong exercises and practicing tai chi both focus on proper breathing, as do many other martial arts. I also believe working in circular instead of linear patterns heightens chi development.


----------



## jujutsu_indonesia (Jan 16, 2006)

Sil Lum TigerLady said:
			
		

> Ok - Chi/Qi/Ki is a popular theme in martial arts. Some people believe in it, some think it's a bunch of hooey, and some don't care either way.


 
Not sure I understand about Chi and Qi, but Ki in the martial art that I learn (jujutsu) simply means energy, and aiki is the energy that is being created when two opposing forces meet. thus the art of aiki jujutsu is the art of self-defense using that energy that is being released when the attack of the attacker is moving towards the body of the defender.

not very deep or metaphysical, i know, please don't shoot me I am just a 3rd kyu


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 16, 2006)

I don't believe that chi is some mystical force that ties us all together and makes us one with the universe.  I don't see it as some fifth universal force that we know nothing about.  Chi is not magic.  If chi exists, then it must be measurable in some way and it must have a physical explanation.

Defining chi as electromagnetic energy makes some sense.  One can detect bioelectric currents with a sensative voltmeter and these currents intensify around accupuncture points and along meridians.  When points are manipulated, the bioelectric flow is also altered.  The effects of these altered currents are still being debated.


----------



## Shirt Ripper (Jan 16, 2006)

Sil Lum TigerLady said:
			
		

> I believe chi is our biological energy.


 
Agreed.  I would also go so far as to say it's included in the subjective sense of things, when people reference being "emotionally drained."  Are your emotions fed directly by sugar as the body is?  No, but still so often do we hear of people being, as stated, emotionally drained.  This is where I qualify chi (ki).  Involving the main energy systems of the body, the CNS, and the mind (mood).

I, of course, am hardly an authority on the subject.


----------



## AlwaysTraining (Jan 16, 2006)

Beware of a line of thought that would suggest that all with regard to the existence of ki/chi would be revealed once it is simply quantized.  If there is any relation between ki/chi and quantum mechincs (as is the case in electro-magnetism) then the secrets of ki/chi may prove to be every bit as elusive as they are now.  It may not be as simple as measuring volts and amps.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jan 16, 2006)

AlwaysTraining said:
			
		

> Beware of a line of thought that would suggest that all with regard to the existence of ki/chi would be revealed once it is simply quantized. If there is any relation between ki/chi and quantum mechincs (as is the case in electro-magnetism) then the secrets of ki/chi may prove to be every bit as elusive as they are now. It may not be as simple as measuring volts and amps.


 
Good point. I do think there is something there (ki/chi), but I don't think our generation, or even the next, will be able to totally define or quantify it.


----------



## Lisa (Jan 16, 2006)

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> Good point. I do think there is something there (ki/chi), but I don't think our generation, or even the next, will be able to totally define or quantify it.



I agree.  We don't use our human minds to their capabilities yet.  I think I read somewhere once we only use 2-3%, something like that.  Anyways, it makes me wonder what our brains are capable of and perhaps ki/chi is part of that.  I am a bit of a skeptic about things that can't be scientifically proven, however, the one thing that has always kept me having an open mind is the fact that we haven't finished evolving yet.  

It will be many generations down the line before it is quantified.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 17, 2006)

AlwaysTraining said:
			
		

> Beware of a line of thought that would suggest that all with regard to the existence of ki/chi would be revealed once it is simply quantized. If there is any relation between ki/chi and quantum mechincs (as is the case in electro-magnetism) then the secrets of ki/chi may prove to be every bit as elusive as they are now. It may not be as simple as measuring volts and amps.


 
I think we are well on the way of scientifically unlocking the secrets regarding what "chi" can do and what it can't do.  There is a lot of resistence to this kind of research...but I think that most of it comes in the form of people who are trying to keep the subject mystical and ambiguous.  Chi, for many people, has become part of a psuedo-religion and whenever science tackles and defines topics in peoplse spiritual, information that runs counter to the dogma is resisted.  My personal feelings regarding "chi" lead me to wait until an ability can be repeated/studied by anyone, including skeptics, before I'll accept it as true.  I find that I am able to ward off charletenry with this approach...


----------



## heretic888 (Jan 17, 2006)

Like others, I accept the existence of ch'i as prana, elan vital, or biological-sexual energy. This is by far its most common conception in both traditional Chinese medicine and martial arts. This also shares a resonance with certain aspects of Indian pranayama and Tibetan kundalini yoga.

I am also extremely skeptical about attempts to collapse the concept of ch'i with both theoretical physics and contemplative spirituality. The three compose ontologically and epistemologicall discrete domains, in my opinion. There is correlation a plenty, but you "know" and "experience" these three phenomena in fundamentally different ways.

I would also like to point out that, outside of aikido and reiki, it is somewhat disingenous to equate the Chinese concept of ch'i with the Japanese concept of ki. In most forms of traditional budo, ki is imagined more along the lines of something as "spirit" (with a similar meaning as shin), as opposed to some internal "force" or "energy" you can manipulate.

Laterz.


----------



## mwelch (Jan 17, 2006)

Prana, pneuma (Greek), chi, ki, spiritus (Latin) -- They all mean breath.  The reason a basketball bounces is because it is full of air.  Life force has always been equated to breath.  To say that chi is air is not to diminish its meaning but to point out that air or breath is much deeper and more mysterious than we think.  We discount such "simple" explanations because of their familiarity.  No, it can't be that.  Chi or ki must be "electromagnetic energy" or "spiritual energy" or whatever.  People talk about chi transference and all sorts of things.  The key to anything like this is actual experience.  Too many people PREFER to think about or talk about such phenomena without actually testing these concepts for themselves.

We are taught, for example, that chi cannot stop, that it must flow or "circulate."  So there is the "large" circulation and the "small"... The small circulation is practiced and observed during simple sitting meditation.  The chi or breath circulates from the crown of the head to the point between the genitals and the anus,with the respirational movement controlled through the lower abdomen.  This is the "quiet sitting" meditation.  How simple!  How difficult!

The large circulation is felt and observed during the slow and diligently performed movement of the traditional t'ai chi ch'uan form and other similar disciplines.  At first, for a beginner, my teacher says "You must follow the Form.  Later, the Form will follow you."  And when you reach a better level of understanding and completeness in your adherence to the Form, you begin to feel the flow of chi manifest itself.

But everyone who is alive "has" chi.  It is as intimate and indispensable as our very breath.  Not something distant and unfamiliar at all.  Maybe that is the reason people seem to mystify it.


----------



## Shirt Ripper (Jan 17, 2006)

mwelch said:
			
		

> The reason a basketball bounces is because it is full of air.


Well, there's air in this room.  Why isn't this room bouncing?


----------



## Laoshi77 (Jan 19, 2006)

Hello.

Qi (Chi) is the source of vitality in the body, when it is present in abundance one is healthy, if absent one is dead.

'heretic', whatever language is used it still means the same thing - energy. In Chinese, Qi is related to the concept of spirit: Kan and Li.

Jingluo, channels (jing) and collaterals (luo), are pathways in which the energies of the body circulates. They penetrate the organs (zangfu) interiorly and extend over the body exteriorly, forming a network of linking tissues and organs into an organic whole. 

And that seems to be the easy part as the mind (wuxing) should be used to focus the energy. This is the part which takes a great deal of patience and dedication, something many people cannot find time for, and then usually go on to dismiss the very existence of Qi.


----------



## heretic888 (Jan 19, 2006)

Laoshi77 said:
			
		

> 'heretic', whatever language is used it still means the same thing - energy. In Chinese, Qi is related to the concept of spirit: Kan and Li.


 
In Chinese, ch'i is also distinguished from both jing and shen.

The three concepts are related, of course, but they are also different.

Additionally, when practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine and martial artists refer to ch'i as "energy" they do not have the same meaning as what a physicist would refer to as "energy". Unless, of course, its the handful that are part of the popular pseudoscientific New Age trend to collapse aspects of Western theoretical physics with aspects of Eastern mysticism.

The closest equivalent to ch'i in Western science is, in my opinion, ATP energy. This is the fuel source for all living cells and, when any cell runs out of it, its metabolism breaks down and it eventually dies. However, it should be further emphasized that ATP is an _objective_ occurence that we observe through the natural sciences. Ch'i, properly understood, is a _subjective_ occurence that is experienced phenomenologically from "within". So, even then, the two only have a correlational connection.

This is all just my perspective on the matter, mind you.

Laterz.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> The closest equivalent to ch'i in Western science is, in my opinion, ATP energy. This is the fuel source for all living cells and, when any cell runs out of it, its metabolism breaks down and it eventually dies. However, it should be further emphasized that ATP is an _objective_ occurence that we observe through the natural sciences. Ch'i, properly understood, is a _subjective_ occurence that is experienced phenomenologically from "within". So, even then, the two only have a correlational connection.


 
IMO, chi is a blanket term for a number of different phenomenon ranging from the one listed above to bioelectricity to the "placebo effect" which is another blanket term in itself.  There is no common thread that ties them together.


----------



## heretic888 (Jan 19, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> IMO, chi is a blanket term for a number of different phenomenon ranging from the one listed above to bioelectricity to the "placebo effect" which is another blanket term in itself. There is no common thread that ties them together.


 
I would agree with this characterization.

The only real problems I have with all this talk about "ch'i" is:

1) It is sometimes mistakenly collapsed with "energy" in the sense that it is understood in theoretical physics. In physics, energy is completely insentient, non-living, and doesn't keep you "alive" or "vital" any more than it does an atom.

2) It is treated as an _objective_ "force" when its experience is entirely phenomenological and _subjective_.

3) There are numerous charlatans, frauds, and New Age nutjobs that make claims about what they can "do" with ch'i that, very simply, are absurd.

Laterz.


----------



## mwelch (Jan 19, 2006)

It would if force from the outside were applied in the right way.  A basketball doesn't move until that happens.  Compression of air or breath and its movement is more what is meant.  There is air still elft inside a corpse, but it is not compressed by the lungs and the movement of the body, so it stagnates.  I mean, this is not a hugely mysterious deal here, unless people want to make it something esoteric.  It is as common as dirt or water...or air.


----------



## Laoshi77 (Jan 19, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> energy is... non-living, and doesn't keep you "alive" or "vital" any more than it does an atom.


 
All living things are charged by Qi or 'life-force' according to the Chinese perspective.

Qi can also refer to energy, as represented by the Chinese character for the word, and the reason why one translation for Qi Gong is 'energy work'.

Qi is distinguished from just one definition hence the reason i included 'Kan' and 'Li'.

But that is of course just a theory, a theory of Classical Chinese Medicine dating back a few thousand years!


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 19, 2006)

> 3) There are numerous charlatans, frauds, and New Age nutjobs that make claims about what they can "do" with ch'i that, very simply, are absurd.


and that is one of the reasons that it is misunderstood and considered a bunch of bolony by so many (to many fakes trying to make belive they  can ""control"" something the  have no idea how to use


----------



## Laoshi77 (Jan 22, 2006)

3) There are numerous charlatans, frauds, and New Age nutjobs that make claims about what they can "do" with ch'i that, very simply, are absurd.


> I for one, certainly would not dare to call the masters of Wudang charlatans!


----------



## Brother John (Jan 22, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> I would also like to point out that, outside of aikido and reiki, it is somewhat disingenous to equate the Chinese concept of ch'i with the Japanese concept of ki. In most forms of traditional budo, ki is imagined more along the lines of something as "spirit" (with a similar meaning as shin), as opposed to some internal "force" or "energy" you can manipulate.
> Laterz.


 
I really liked the first couple of paragraphs, as the positive rep point I sent you says, but I'd like to comment on this last one. 

Both the Japanese Ki and Chinese Chi are said to be energy. Calling energy a "Force" is the same thing, different terms. (Like: Magnetism can be described as both a force and an energy) 

Also: In much of the Japanese study of what might be called "KI-work" the mind and breath play a roll in manipulating Ki, just like in it's Chinese counterpart of Chi-Kung. Both systems use meditation to help become sensitive to this energy and breathwork in manipulating it. So with the mind manipulating it consider this, the Japanese word "Shin" is used interchangably for either the concept of "mind" or "spirit". Likewise, the Japanese term spirit (as used in the Koryu Budo/Bujutsu) is Not a direct correlation to the use of the term in western thinking.. but probably has more to do with mental focus and exertion of a directed will as well as a stoic harnessing of emotion. 

So: In Japanese the term for mind can equate to 'spirit'. Both the Japanese and Chinese Chi/Ki systems have a good deal of breathwork and meditation, along with a specific type of movement, to aquire the ability to make use of or "manipulate" this energy/force. 

All of this comes from a very similar source: Traditional Chinese Medicine (AKA: TCM), the oldest form of medicine still in active use. Both the Japanese and Chinese martial traditions have many of the same theories as TCM such as meridian theory, exact points of entry to these meridians, the use of breathwork, mental work and movement/exercise to influence/control the energy that runs through these meridians, and the physical accessing of these meridians to elicit physical results in the recipient; wether for healing, subduing or harming. The two cultures have their own systems of healing based on these theories and practices: in the Japanese culture they have Shiatsu and secondarily Reiki (a very new field to a very old approach).... their correlation in the Chinese culture? Accupuncture and Tui-na and accupuncture. (Tui-na is the process of the diagnosis and treatment of physical issues through massage that activates certain patterns throughout the recipient's meridians to cause specific effects....it's pretty much a direct correlation to the much bettern known "Shiatsu".) The two cultures also have their own martial traditions that address these theories, both are repleat with them. Often the practitioner is ignorant that they are infact activating the attackers Kyusho or "Pressure Points"....a term that falls woefully short of what it really is by the way. For instance: the traditional Koryu-Bugei (traditional Warrior systems) of Japan have a study called "Kyushojutsu", which is the study of using/accessing the body's meridians through specific points that can be struck, poked, rubbed, grabed, brushed, scratched, stabbed, twisted...etc. all to elicit anything from added pain to their strike to abrupt debilitating pain, to numbness, to energy drain (like an instant fatigue), inhibitting breath, inhibiting the regular flow of blood, unconsciousness (short and long term), blindness or other sensory disruption(primarily short term), muscle spasms/cramps, loss of use of a limb, severe disorientation or death. The process to do this uses these "points" of access into the body's meridians to effect the flow of Chi and effect the body's neurological system. 

The oldest systems of Karate-Do are proven to be founded upon a deep knowledge of this practice. The ancient texts known as the "Bubishi" show that the men recognized as the great masters of Okinawa founded their kata and technical practices on this knowledge and skill that they aquired from martial arts masters and texts in Fuchow China. Gichin Funakoshi is quoted (if memory serves) as saying that all strikes should be directed at "Kyusho"...these points of access. To this day if a traditional Karateka were to take this knowledge of Kyushojutsu and apply it to their Kata-Bunkai (interpretation of their forms) they unfold a WEALTH of information that the masters imbedded within, some that many....Many....for decades never knew was a facet of their art. Chojun Miyagi Sensei, the founder of Goju Ryu Karate-Do, drew the name of his system (Goju = hard/soft) from a line in the Bubishi, showing he had this knowledge. The Bubishi came from masters in the area of Fuchow China... which is exactly where Master Miyagi returned to study martial arts well after he'd alredy founded his style, been awarded the title of "Hanshi" (sort of a 'teacher of teachers' according to the Budokukai, the organizing board for traditional martial arts in Japan) and made The representative OF the Budokukai for the RyuKyu Islands (Okinawan archipelago).... after ALL that........where did the master return 3 times to train, to finish off his art and create the main Kata for his system?  Fuchow China, the same place that the "Bubishi" came from. Miyagi's Kata are also known for their imbedded breathwork....which correlates to the breathwork of Chi-Kung. Anko Itosu and Azato Itosu (two of Funakoshi's primary instructors) also demonstrated a replete knowledge of the Bubishi and it's principles. I put all of this forward to show... the teachings that later split and divided like a protazoa ....and became the MANY systems that are now lumped into the catagory of "Karate-Do" were in many regards founded on these systems of "Manipulating" Chi, through accessing the paths through which Chi/Ki flows...the "meridians" of Traditional Chinese Medicine. 

The Chinese systems??? _WOW_.... many of them were founded on this knowledge and a good deal of those still contain the "know HOW", both of cultivating the ability to control/manipulate the Chi in themselves as well as using the knowledge as a part of their martial art to overcome any attacker efficiently. The breathwork, the postures, the motion, the meditative exercises, the knowledge of the access points and HOW to access them......... it's pretty much "IN THERE" in the Chinese arts. 

In all of these systems, the Chi/Ki can be called "Spirit" or "Mind" with equal accuracy.....same with "Energy" or "Force". 

wow.....didn't know I'd written THIS much. Hope yall stayed with me.
thanks if you did.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 22, 2006)

Traditional Chinese Medicine view of Chi. 

Internal Chi
"No one knows what it is, because there is no way to detect it" 
"You can feel something flowing inside the body and you can feel that flow increase if you train, however there is currently no way to prove its existence."

There is a professor and Beijing University of TCM who is working on developing equipment that can sense internal Qi. Currently he feels that the majority of people that claim they have strong internal Qi are lying. He does however believe that Qi exists.

External Qi
"This can be demonstrated by people" 
Example, Practitioners of Iron Shirt Chi gong, or other forms of external Qi training. 

Many Chinese martial artists are trained in external Qi in China. If you see a Shaolin monk demo were they bend spears and staffs that are between the ground and their body, this is external Qi. Or a Chen stylist that can crush a rock with his heal and feel no pain and receive no injury, this is external Qi.


----------



## Brother John (Jan 22, 2006)

Laoshi77 said:
			
		

> 3) There are numerous charlatans, frauds, and New Age nutjobs that make claims about what they can "do" with ch'i that, very simply, are absurd.


 
Charlatans abound!!!
Your statement is VERY VERY true! ...and is a word of warning to anyone that looks into this matter.  Take a HEFTY grain of salt and a pound of good sense when investigating.....but keep an open mind and most of all:
FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF.

Infact one of the reasons that the study of these "Pressure Point" arts/systems, as they are commonly called today, is looked down upon, skowled at or even dirisively laughed at is because some of the Loudest spokespeople for this study are *very laughable/gimicky* people.... wether or not they _have _this knowledge/know-how........that's beside the point:::mostly because in OTHER ways they usually disqualify themselves as people I'd want to listen too or especially emulate. As with so many things they tend to have LOW moral/ethical standards and see this very interesting study to be a martial arts GOLD MINE...which they exploit to their financial gain an notorious reputation. (and man DO they) So...in their exploitation they EXAGERATE or fabricate in order to keep the hoards coming back for MORE and paying what they must pay to gain this "rare knowledge". 
....*very frustrating*....

...but it doesn't negate the validity or historical evidence/import of the grain of truth (a significant grain) that they base their suppositions and exagerations on.
...but they sure can be the Fly in the ointment.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Brother John (Jan 22, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> when practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine and martial artists refer to ch'i as "energy" they do not have the same meaning as what a physicist would refer to as "energy".


 
*Good point!* The two uses of the term don't really correlate that well, it's more of an aproximation. It's MORE than difficult (some say impossible, but I'm not a big fan of the concept of "impossible") to approach TCM or the systems based on it through the paradigms of traditional empirical science. There are many who are MUCH MUCH more knowledgable/experienced than myself in either field who try to reconcile them. Some seem to get closer, others........are really reaching.

I personally think that if you want to avail yourself of the knowledge/know-how you don't NEED to approach it through anything it didn't originally come with. 
That's where an open mind comes in.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2006)

Brother John said:
			
		

> Charlatans abound!!!
> 
> Infact one of the reasons that the study of these "Pressure Point" arts/systems, as they are commonly called today, is looked down upon, skowled at or even dirisively laughed at is because some of the Loudest spokespeople for this study are *very laughable/gimicky* people.... Your Brother
> John


 
Pressure point systems in TCM is Tui Na and studied quiet extensively in Beijing University of TCM and practiced in the Traditional Chinese Medicine Dept of Beijing Hospital (the government hospital)


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2006)

Brother John said:
			
		

> *Good point!* The two uses of the term don't really correlate that well, it's more of an aproximation. It's MORE than difficult (some say impossible, but I'm not a big fan of the concept of "impossible") to approach TCM or the systems based on it through the paradigms of traditional empirical science.
> Your Brother
> John


 
I was amazed at how a TCM doctor trained in China and practicing in China thinks about medicine the same way Western MDs thinks about medicine. There is no mysticism, just what is accepted and Chinese Scientific fact. 

They also know that there are things that are best treated by western medicine and things treated better by eastern medicine. The 2 work together not against each other. However it is when TCM gets to the west they tend to be at odds. 

As for Chi, it is also accepted in China as fact, however there are two general headings, Internal and External. External is easy to prove or disprove, internal is near impossible to prove or disprove.


----------



## Brother John (Jan 23, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Pressure point systems in TCM is Tui Na and studied quiet extensively in Beijing University of TCM and practiced in the Traditional Chinese Medicine Dept of Beijing Hospital (the government hospital)


 
Please, please don't think I'm indicating that all practitioners of "Pressure Point" work are hucksters. Not by any stretch. Especially those trained in actual TCM and Tui-Na. I have a Great deal of respect for this system and only regret that there's not a school for the study near me. 

No, what I was indicating were mostly martial arts persons.... predominantly in the USA (unfortunately, but not exclusively) who market their mystical 'secrets' to the masses in order to make money. Their claims are very exagerated or often outright lies. 
No: I won't name names. That's rude. But I think it's important to know that these types are out there so that we can discern the quality from the bunk.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 23, 2006)

I personally don't believe in it.  I have asked several people to demonstrate it to me and they can't.  I have a good friend that believes in it and there isn't anything he can do that I can't WRT CHI.  Once someone shows me I will beleve and start developing my CHI.



V/R

Rick


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2006)

Agreed.

There are many in the US, China and world wide that are not entirely honest about their Qi.

As I mentioned in a previous post, there is a professor of Qi Gong at Beijing  University for traditional Chinese medicine that also agrees.

He is trying to make something that can detect internal Chi, because although he feels it is a real thing, he also feels that many who claim they have it are not entirely honest.

I was once told a story about one of these less than honest people that went to a Chinese martial arts school to demonstrate his Martial Qi. To make a long story short the Sifu of the school (trained in Taiwan, Kung fu, Tai Chi & Qi Gong) kicked the supposed Qi master, and his students, out of his school, because the Qi master was a fake.


----------



## Laoshi77 (Jan 23, 2006)

I think this debate considers what your experiences have been, and is ultimately dependent on having trained in Qi Gong. 

Personally, when i first started practising Qi Gong i was told specifically that i would get nowhere without training every day. *'Iron is full of impurities that weaken it; through forging, it becomes steel and is transformed into a razor-sharp sword. Human beings develop in the same* *fashion'* - Morihei Ueshiba, _The Art of Peace._

One thing i know for sure is that there are many cynics out there who base their opinions on insufficient practice. 

Best wishes.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2006)

Laoshi77

First, My previous post was in response to Brother John, not Mr Wade.

I agree with what you are saying, I use to train Ba Duann Gin and Tai Chi Qi Gong everyday and I felt very different. I was less concerned about hot or cold and I generally felt healthier. Great Qi revelations....no.

I just recently started the practice again, (Tai Chi Qi Gong and Post training) but it is to soon to tell. 

Like a TCM OMD I know very well once said, "you can feel something is there, you just have no way to proving it. "

In response to Mr Wade, As I previously posted there is currently no way of proving internal Qi. However there is a way to prove external Qi, and External Qi is not something I would be able to demonstrate. It takes a very long time and a lot of training to have it. We are not talking the run of the mill or even the dedicated practioner, we are talking monks such as Shaolin, Quanzhen sect Daoist or Zhengyi Daoists.

Qi Gong training although it appears simple, is not. It takes a lot of dedication over a long period of time.


----------



## Laoshi77 (Jan 23, 2006)

Xue Sheng, my post was due to the one by Rick; in which he commented about not believing in Qi, which suggests merely that and implies no more.

Also...



			
				Rick Wade said:
			
		

> Once someone shows me I will believe and start developing my CHI.


 
...on this statement i would say that you cannot be shown anything that you are subjective about, you must simply do the practice, thus experiencing it for yourself objectively.

And yes, Xue Sheng, i would agree with you, that Qi Gong meditation appears simple but is also very complicated for some people.

Best wishes.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2006)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> Once someone shows me I will beleve and start developing my CHI.
> V/R
> 
> Rick


 
Everyone is entitled to believe what he or she wishes, and who is to say what is right. But There are a lot of things in science that cannot be seen that are excepted as scientific fact, dark matter, cosmic strings, heavy matter, etc. And there are things now that are accepted by science that were once thought to be bunk, Plate tectonics, Quantum Physics, flight, and the Earth rotating around the sun, black holes, etc. 

Equally there are now things that are known to be wrong that were once thought of a scientific fact, the earth as the center of the universe, phlogiston, the starry sphere, etc.

As mentioned there are people working to developed equipment to sense QI. Or as Dr Yang compares Qi to Ohms law, energy and nerve impulses, which are electric. 

I have seen a lot of things I cannot explain, but that does not mean they are not real, or did not happen. Nor does it mean I am going to devote large amounts of time and money to prove or disprove them. However I tend to believe there is something to Qi, although I cannot prove it.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 23, 2006)

My 0.02 

I don't think there is anything mystical or magical about Chi. 

Chi is the result of bringing all 3 aspects of your being into sync. Mind, Body, and Spirit. Like cogs in a machine, when all 3 are in sync you operate at maximum efficiency. 

Mind: Means you know what you need to do in your head. You understand the concept or principle behind the technique and know how to execute it. 

Body: Your body mechanics are solid. Your movement is effecient and executed to maximum potential. You execute a technique physically correct. 

Spirit: This area has the largest "gray" area and means different things to different people. To me, it's being focused, staying relaxed, and breathing properly. It's knowing the correct principles behind the technique. 

When you tie all 3 together and they are in sync, you reach maximum efficiency. 

I explained this concept to a student. Afterwards, he concentrated on a heavy bag. He was to execute a reverse punch. Simple enough right? He was focused on the target, he utilized proper body mechanics, and exhaled correctly upon execution. The bag came off the chain and hit the wall behind it. The student jumped back, startled by the effect. I just stood back clutching my gut 'cause I was laughin' my butt off at his discovery! LOL.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 25, 2006)

Well said.


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 25, 2006)

Not to change topics here but here is something weird about me.

I believe in God. but I have never been proven that there is a god.

I do have an open mind about Chi but when I think about Chi I think about no touch knock outs and Sholin Monks doing great feats of strength. 

What is an example of chi and what has it done to improve your Martial Arts or everyday life?

V/R

Rick


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 25, 2006)

Mr Wade

That&#8217;s a very good question and Qi gong has made me feel better and made my martial arts better. Although I do not rule out the possibility that you can achieve the same results in a different manner.

The martial arts I have practiced over the last 14 years have been internal. The 16 years prior to that I trained Jujitsu and Taekwondo. But I switched to Tai Chi, Xingyi and Bagua. Currently all I practice are internal arts, Tai Chi is soft, Xingyi is soft-hard and I believe Bagua is soft-hard as well, but I could be wrong about Bagua, currently I only do Tai Chi.

When I practiced Qi Gong I did notice that I was not bothered by very hot days or very cold days. I also was more relaxed, slept better and I was able to generate more explosive power, I was able to root better and had better balance. I did not get sick, even when everyone I knew had some sort of illness. I do not consider any of mystical, I was able to concentrate better, relax easier and I was breathing better, all of which would make me healthier. 

If you read anything, or know anything about Yiquan, it is big on post training, also not for mystical reasons. It is to train you to be able to relax. This type of relaxation is needed immediately before and immediately after a defensive move or attack. It allows you to move faster, generate power faster, generate greater power and reduces the chance of injury. 

As for the large and small circle circulation of Qi Gong, all I can tell you is I feel something, or should say I felt something. I am not at that level anymore. And even when I did much more Qi Gong, I was just starting to understand large circulation. 

Currently I am starting Tai Chi Qi Gong again and I am doing standing post training. I must admit I have neglected the Qi Gong side for a few years now, and I regret it. 
But since I have been doing Qi Gong, lately my form has gotten better, and my legs are stronger. This could be Qi, or it could be the movements strengthen my legs, or both. I tend to believe both. 

I am currently practicing Post, Rocking Qi Gong, Stance training and moving (walking) Qi Gong, and a Qi Gong my Tai Chi teacher (Sifu Chu) learned from his Teacher (Tung Ying Chieh). And I am starting to feel better, even though I get up at 5:30 in the morning to do Qi Gong.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 25, 2006)

Mr. Wade

As if I haven't already typed enough.

You mentioned Shaolin. They are capable of amazing things; some are from just constant hard training some are from Qi training. You can also see amazing things done by Chinese Daoist Priest as well. However this level I do not think is attainable by myself or any other part time practitioner. These people train martial arts and meditation (Qi) virtually 24/7 to attain that level. As I mentioned previously what is very impressive is Shaolin demonstration of external Qi. Put a spear point against their throat and push, and watch the spear bend and the spear point NOT pierce the throat. This is external Qi Gong at a very high level. And any martial artist can attain it, if they train as hard and as long. External Qi is easy to prove and demonstrate, internal is almost impossible to prove an hard to demonstrate

Now I am fairly certain I will never attain that level of Qi by training an hour or 2 a day 5 to 6 days a week and training Tai Chi forms and applications 1 to 2 hours a day 5 to 6 days a week Like everyone else I have a job, family and responsibilities, all of which take much concentration all by themselves. 

OK, I think I'm done rambling on and on and on now.


----------



## Laoshi77 (Jan 27, 2006)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> What is an example of chi and what has it done to improve your Martial Arts or everyday life?


I would echo the sentiments by Xue Sheng. 

The martial arts are to balance the individual, both physically and spiritually, in this sense they should be holistic. 

If you spend too much time working on the physical techniques of martial arts one will expend too much energy. Internal work or Qi Gong meditation is a way to accumulate energy and revitalise. It is thought best to spend 40% of your time training and 60% in cultivation.

Personally, the benefits i have received from Qi Gong practice are that: i never feel tired, i never catch colds, and in reference to martial arts; techniques become so much more powerful. A common proverb states that nurturing the qi is for health; manipulating the qi is for martial arts.

Best wishes,


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 27, 2006)

Laoshi77 said:
			
		

> Personally, the benefits i have received from Qi Gong practice are that: i never feel tired, i never catch colds,


 
These are incredible statements are you saying that you *NEVER* feel tired 
never catch a cold. If that is the case please tell me where in Honolulu, HI I can find an instructor.

R/

Rick


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 27, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Mr Wade
> 
> 
> When I practiced Qi Gong I did notice that I was not bothered by very hot days or very cold days. I also was more relaxed, slept better and I was able to generate more explosive power, I was able to root better and had better balance. I did not get sick, even when everyone I knew had some sort of illness. I do not consider any of mystical, I was able to concentrate better, relax easier and I was breathing better, all of which would make me healthier.


 
Kenpo has improved my Basketball ( I can box out better with proper stance) and just everyday living.  But I still get sick.  I am not buying it.  Are you guys saying you don't get sick at all no colds, coughs or anything?  That is just simply amazing to me  I just don't understand it.  In *my* mind that is superhuman.




			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> If you read anything, or know anything about Yiquan, it is big on post training, also not for mystical reasons. It is to train you to be able to relax. This type of relaxation is needed immediately before and immediately after a defensive move or attack. It allows you to move faster, generate power faster, generate greater power and reduces the chance of injury.


 
Which I don't that why I am engaging in this disgusion.  What is post training?


I agree that you will not convince me over the net about CHI, KI or QI  please let me know of a Master in Honolulu, HI that can help.  We have a huge Asian influence here it shouldn't be hard to find one.  However I haven't been able to find one yet that could convince me.  Maybe I haven't looked hard enough who knows?

V/R

Rick


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 28, 2006)

Mr. Wade

Of course you don&#8217;t believe in Qi, you&#8217;re in Honolulu what on earth would you need it for ;^)

As for being superman, I am not faster than a speeding bullet. I am not more powerful than a locomotive. I am not able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. And if you ever do see me in the sky it would be in a plane or I truly hope I am wearing a parachute. And finally, I am not impervious to bullets. 

 I am not surprised that because you do Kenpo that it affects other things in your life. Any martial art practiced by a good martial artist would. 

Do you have to learn to coordinate your breathing with punch and kicks? Are there katas you need to learn which also include breath training? If you are sparing and hold your breath would it affect your performance? If you breath completely out of sync with your martial arts training or basketball does you think it would make you feel run down, exhausted, weaker and thereby make you more susceptible to infections such as cold and flu? If you have a lot of nights of interrupted sleep do you think that would make your immune system weaker and make you more susceptible to infections?

I believe no matter what you want to call it (Chi, Ki, Qi, Focus or breath training), if you are truly practicing a martial art, you are already training Qi. Where do you think the yelling before a strike in most Japanese systems of martial arts comes from? 

I am not saying Qi Gong training is some sort of magical or mystical thing. I am saying it can help. As for getting or not getting sick, let me reword that. I did not get as sick as compared to before I trained Qi Gong (ergo not Superman). If someone got a bad cold or the flu, and I was around them a lot, I would not get sick, I might get a scratchy throat and a cough, but I it would only last a day or two as opposed to them being very sick for a week. Was this because of Qi Gong training and moving energy, maybe? Was this because Qi Gong training trained me how to breath better, concentrate better, and relax more, most definitely.

As for Yiquan, it comes from Xingyi and post training is, (in the beginning), standing quietly and using visualization to become more relaxed and aware of what you are physically feeling. It is for all intensive purposes, standing Qi Gong training. Basically the premise is to start training your body to stay relaxed so when needed, you respond and then relaxing almost immediately. 

&#8220;A Master in Honolulu&#8221;, I live on the right coast (as opposed to the left) where it is currently cold, cloudy and possibly going to snow. The only person I know of in Hawaii, and I am not sure if they are in Honolulu, that would know about Qi is a member of the Tung family. That would be a Tai Chi school either teaching Yang or Dong style. Master Tung Ying Chieh&#8217;s son opened a school there and his grandson may still teach there. But I am sure there are others, Chinese that are very good at such things, martial arts included, rarely advertise it.

But I doubt you will find the proof you claim to seek; you are already thoroughly convinced it does not exist. But I applaud you effort, although I feel you are just looking for additional proof to support what you already believe to be fact.

Believe it or not, this is the short version of my original response.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 28, 2006)

My understanding is that Qi Gong, as well as other chi/ki/etc training will help keep your body in balance, thereby helping to keep the cobwebs away, the immune system running at peak levels, etc.

Why is it easier to get sick if one is out of shape, than when one is in shape? I recently read an article that stated 40 minutes of quality meditation a day can keep your stress levels down, and your energy levels up. It might also help keep you healthier during cold seasons. It makes sense, as if you're stressed and worn out, you are more prone to injury.

To me, it's like warming up before a work out, and stretching afterwards. It's all the 'little things' that add up to keep you fitter, faster, and functional.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 28, 2006)

I must not have any Chi 'cause I feel like crap right now! LOL. 

In all seriousness though, meditation is effective. Taking 15-30 minutes a day to sit quitely and visualize things you want to accomplish (whether it's MA related or just day-to-day stuff like performing your job or school related) can drastically improve your performance.


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 28, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Mr. Wade
> 
> Of course you dont believe in Qi, youre in Honolulu what on earth would you need it for ;^)


 Believe me I could use some chi in my life right now.






			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> I believe no matter what you want to call it (Chi, Ki, Qi, Focus or breath training), if you are truly practicing a martial art, you are already training Qi. Where do you think the yelling before a strike in most Japanese systems of martial arts comes from?



I agree some thing have been carried over from the old dys and have lost their meaning through time.






			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> I am not saying Qi Gong training is some sort of magical or mystical thing. I am saying it can help. As for getting or not getting sick, let me reword that. I did not get as sick as compared to before I trained Qi Gong (ergo not Superman). If someone got a bad cold or the flu, and I was around them a lot, I would not get sick, I might get a scratchy throat and a cough, but I it would only last a day or two as opposed to them being very sick for a week. Was this because of Qi Gong training and moving energy, maybe? Was this because Qi Gong training trained me how to breath better, concentrate better, and relax more, most definitely.


THAT I can wrap my head around.  




			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> As for Yiquan, it comes from Xingyi and post training is, (in the beginning), standing quietly and using visualization to become more relaxed and aware of what you are physically feeling. It is for all intensive purposes, standing Qi Gong training. Basically the premise is to start training your body to stay relaxed so when needed, you respond and then relaxing almost immediately.


Intresting it sounds like You and I are not that far apart you concentrate on internal and I concentrate on brutality.






			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> A





			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Master in Honolulu, I live on the right coast (as opposed to the left) where it is currently cold, cloudy and possibly going to snow. The only person I know of in Hawaii, and I am not sure if they are in Honolulu, that would know about Qi is a member of the Tung family. That would be a Tai Chi school either teaching Yang or Dong style. Master Tung Ying Chiehs son opened a school there and his grandson may still teach there. But I am sure there are others, Chinese that are very good at such things, martial arts included, rarely advertise it.


  I will definately check it out.





			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> But I doubt you will find the proof you claim to seek; you are already thoroughly convinced it does not exist. But I applaud you effort, although I feel you are just looking for additional proof to support what you already believe to be fact.





			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> I am not convinved that it doesn't exist.  I just haven't found anyone to convince me of it's existance.  I believe in pressure points.  I don't believe in no touch knockouts.
> 
> Not directed to you but here is another point:  I don't like mystic stuff If a person has a logical explination just tell me "I don't want to tell you" don't say it is chi.  because there are three types of people that practice chi.
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 28, 2006)

Rick Wade said:
			
		

> I am not convinved that it doesn't exist. I just haven't found anyone to convince me of it's existance. I believe in pressure points. I don't believe in no touch knockouts. Rick




Mr. Wade
I resend my following statement and I apologize for it.

"But I doubt you will find the proof you claim to seek; you are already thoroughly convinced it does not exist."

I hope you find what you are looking for. 

I practice Qi Gong, I am not sure I fully understand it, but there is something there, or at least I believe there is something there I am trying to figure out.

As previously mentioned a professor of Qi Gong at Beijing University is trying to develop some sort of equipment to measure internal Qi because he too believes that most people that claim they have high levels of it are lying. 

I have been involved in many a conversation about Qi and I have walked away form most of them. Once it crosses the line into mysticism, I leave. I do not believe in no touch knockouts either. 1-inch punch yes, boot to the head ok, Qin na lock certainly, those can knock a person out. And most unfortunately I also discovered, many years ago, walking head on into a hydraulic lift can do the same thing.

Shaolin Priests (the life time version not the 7 year monk, although either could easily knock me out) are very versed in Qi training. Taoist priests are as well, but I have never heard either claim they can knock you out by looking at you, at least not from a reliable source. 

I have read several books and articles on Qi and the two points of view I seem to like best compare it to either the firing of neurons in the bodys nervous system or the endocrine system. I like these comparisons; they are a bit more concrete. Also not to get weird, Quantum Physics and Tibetan Buddhism also share similarities in much the same way as Qi and these body systems do.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 28, 2006)

It is entirely possible that chi is not real in the physical sense.  It may only exist in our minds...which is another type of existence entirely.  Thus it would be completely untestable by scientific methods (this, incidentally, is also how I view the concept of God).  

The fact that someone believes in this concept gives it power.  Chi as an internal/mental phenomenon and its effects via biofeedback are definitely plausible.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 28, 2006)

upnorthkyosa
Once you name something it changes.

Mr. Wade 

I do not know if it is still there, but if it was they might be able to give you a better definition of Qi or Ki in this case, assuming they have stayed with tradition.

"Daihonzan Chozen-ji/International Zen Dojo in Honolulu" 

But this is Zen and Zen practitioners are very good at answering questions with questions.

Also I just found

Dong Tai Chi Chuan School - Oahu Classes
http://www.dongtaichi.com/Grand_Master_Dong/oahu/

This is Master Tung's Grandson, I do not know him, but my tai chi teacher was a student of Master Tung and he knew master Tungs son very well. My teacher treats Qi in a very matter of fact way, no mysticism involved.


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 28, 2006)

I will be there this week and i will give you guys feed back I will hold true to my promise and keep an open mind.

I LOVE MT  who knows I might be on a new path.

V/R

Rick


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 28, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Once you name something it changes.


 
Perhaps, perhaps not.  The name is what makes something like chi _some*thing*_.  I would wager that there is absolutely no evidence that chi existed before it was named.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 28, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Perhaps, perhaps not. The name is what makes something like chi _some*thing*_. I would wager that there is absolutely no evidence that chi existed before it was named.


 
True, as for the wager, I will have to research that one a bit and get back to you. What little I know about the Chinese Language suggests that it may have had a different name in ancient times. It certainly had a different character to represent it. 
Also just to clarify, I am talking about what is referred to as internal Qi in Chinese martial arts not external Qi.

However my point was that once you name something, some else, usually a whole bunch of someone elses try and define it. 
That is what has been going on in this discussion for the most part. 

And different people have different definitions based on their experience, not uncommon in something such as internal Qi. Also once defined emotion get attsched to the meaning. "Qi Gong" the words can either make you relax or enrage you or have no effect what so ever. etc. This is what I mean by it changes.  

There is a quote somewhere from Taoism, Buddhism or Bruce Lee that says basically the same thing, but I currently cannot locate it. However that concept is talking about the emotion attached to a word.


----------



## bignick (Jan 28, 2006)

Gozo Shioda defined Ki in his book, Aikido: The Master Course.  I can't remember it off the top of my head but it's an explanation I do buy.  If you get a chance, look through the book, I'll see if I can't get ahold of it and post a snippet.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 29, 2006)

bignick

Thank You, I would be very interested in see his definition. 

Also there is a discussion of it from a western point of view in book by Forrest E. Morgan.

And if you are looking for a virtual text book on the subject look at Yang Jwing Ming's book on Qi

I shall have to look for Gozo Shioda book.

Happy Chinese New Year
T


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 29, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> The name is what makes something like chi _some*thing*_. I would wager that there is absolutely no evidence that chi existed before it was named.


 
By that logic things only exist if they possess a name. If man had not named the wind would that mean it did/does not exist?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 29, 2006)

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> By that logic things only exist if they possess a name. If man had not named the wind would that mean it did/does not exist?


 
Very nice response, very Zen, very Taoist, very appropriate.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 29, 2006)

Mr Wade i hope you go to th school mentioned and take the tim to stay there a while (studying for a period of time)  to see if you are able to find what you seem to be seeking. If you enter with an open mind and give it a chance I feel you may discover something new to you.  Please let us know how it goes 

Happy New Year  to All


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 29, 2006)

celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> By that logic things only exist if they possess a name. If man had not named the wind would that mean it did/does not exist?


 
Yes it would have existed, because wind is a physical thing.  Unless you can somehow show that chi is a physical thing that is testable in some way then it remains a subjective idea...formless until defined...exactly as I said.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 29, 2006)

upnorthkyosa

Per Chinese Studies

Internal Qi is not testable
External Qi is testable.

Is time a physical thing?

Mr Wade
Good luck and Happy New Year


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 29, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Internal Qi is not testable


 
This is as I suspected from my studies.



> External Qi is testable.


 
How?  What are the results?



> Is time a physical thing?


 
Yes.  As in spacetime...the Einsteinian concept.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 30, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Yes. As in spacetime...the Einsteinian concept.


 
Space-time is not time. If you are basing this assumption on Einstein, Space-time is a 4-point coordinate system that is 3 points in space and one of time. Basically where a specific object is located in space at a given point in time. 

Time is a nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.

And although this is off the subject of QI it is on the subject of your previous statement abut naming a physical thing, therefore my question still stands, Is time a physical thing. It has no physical length, no physical width and no physical mass, so is it a physical thing.

As for external Tai Chi, this is for reasons of, I simply do not want to type a lot. Qi gong training such as Iron Shirt Qi Gong. It is demonstrable via physical testing such as when a spear is placed against the throat of a shaolin monk and he bends it by pushing and there is no penetration. This is one example and it is an example excepted by Beijing University of TCM as proof of the existence of external Qi


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 30, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Space-time is not time.


 

There is no such thing as a separate concept of time in the physical sense.




> If you are basing this assumption on Einstein, Space-time is a 4-point coordinate system that is 3 points in space and one of time. Basically where a specific object is located in space at a given point in time.


 
If one says that time is a dimension, then it has to be quantified.





> Time is a nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.
> 
> 
> And although this is off the subject of QI it is on the subject of your previous statement abut naming a physical thing, therefore my question still stands, Is time a physical thing. It has no physical length, no physical width and no physical mass, so is it a physical thing?


 
Actually, spacetime comes in units that derive from Plancks constant.  Units of spacetime are one of the weirder things that come from quantum physics.  Thus, time is a physical thing...totally dissimilar to chi.
 





> As for external Tai Chi, this is for reasons of, I simply do not want to type a lot. Qi gong training such as Iron Shirt Qi Gong. It is demonstrable via physical testing such as when a spear is placed against the throat of a shaolin monk and he bends it by pushing and there is no penetration. This is one example and it is an example excepted by Beijing University of TCM as proof of the existence of external Qi.


 
Has this experiment been properly controlled?  Could a skeptic make the spear and hold it?


----------



## arnisador (Jan 30, 2006)

Physicists usually speak of 3+1 coordinates/dimensions (or for planar motion, 2+1) to emphasize that the 1, time, is different. (E.g., gradients are taken only w.r.t. spatial coordinates.) As to time (and information) being physical...well, I think this amounts to a definition of 'physical'.


----------



## Rick Wade (Jan 30, 2006)

arnisador said:
			
		

> Physicists usually speak of 3+1 coordinates/dimensions (or for planar motion, 2+1) to emphasize that the 1, time, is different. (E.g., gradients are taken only w.r.t. spatial coordinates.) As to time (and information) being physical...well, I think this amounts to a definition of 'physical'.


 
Ouch :whip: that hurts can you warn me before before you make me think?

Thanks

Rick


----------



## Shirt Ripper (Jan 30, 2006)

What the crap are you people talking about?!:idunno:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 30, 2006)

First Quantum physics and Einstein are not the same, Einstein did not agree with Quantum Physics God doesnt play dice  Albert Einstein

Second, I could get into Einsteins definition of time, separate from space-time, but I am not going to

Third, OK, I give up, can we get back to the topic of Qi? I was not attempting to compare time to Qi, I am entirely sorry I tried to make the point in that matter.

Sorry about the physics folks.


----------



## heretic888 (Jan 30, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> It is entirely possible that chi is not real in the physical sense. It may only exist in our minds...which is another type of existence entirely. Thus it would be completely untestable by scientific methods....


 
Tell that to the social sciences. They seem to find ways to test 'non-physical' hypotheses all the time. 

In any event, I would be extremly skeptical of any rigid matter/mind dichotomy in the first place (as I also am of a rigid nature/nurture dichotomy). Any subjective experience we have (such as, say, a thought) has objective correlates in the material organism (usually the brain) that help to bring it 'down to earth'. Conversely, any objective observation we make (such as reading the instruments that tell us about those material correlates) are inevitably filtered, distorted, and interpreted by our own subjective biases and a background intersubjective cultural worldview (such as, say, the language we speak), thus eradicating any fanciful appeal to the Myth of the Given.

As for myself, I would argue that ch'i is primarily a subjective experience. Simply recording the material spectacles that can supposedly be accomplished through manipulating ch'i constitutes no more "evidence" for this phenomena than recording brainwave patterns on an EEG constitutes "evidence" for hopes, dreams, and aspirations. They are fundamentally different (but interdependent) knowledge domains.



			
				celtic_crippler said:
			
		

> By that logic things only exist if they possess a name. If man had not named the wind would that mean it did/does not exist?



In part.

What you have to understand is that the phenomena you refer to as "wind" is an objective reality that has been subsequently filtered and interpreted through a series of subjective and intersubjective structures and biases, several of which you may be completely unconscious of. We do not observe objective reality in some sort of pristine, non-filtered, state of empirical purity. Never have.

Reality is not pregiven. It is, in part, a construction of our minds and cultures. To not acknowledge this is to invoke the fallacious Myth of the Given. In this particular context, even the language we speak can have a very powerful impact on what we do and do not "see" in the world.



			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Very nice response, very Zen, very Taoist, very appropriate.



Eh?? :idunno: 

Laterz.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 30, 2006)

I give up


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 30, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> First Quantum physics and Einstein are not the same, Einstein did not agree with Quantum Physics God doesnt play dice  Albert Einstein
> 
> 
> Second, I could get into Einsteins definition of time, separate from space-time, but I am not going to
> ...


 
The physics is kind of off topic, but I believe that it does differentiate between physical concepts and concept of chi.  Time, while it seems insubstantial and indefinable, is, in fact, at really small scales, an actual thing.  Chi is not this way.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 30, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Tell that to the social sciences. They seem to find ways to test 'non-physical' hypotheses all the time.


 
There may even be ways to study chi as a non-physical/mental concept.



> In any event, I would be extremly skeptical of any rigid matter/mind dichotomy in the first place (as I also am of a rigid nature/nurture dichotomy). Any subjective experience we have (such as, say, a thought) has objective correlates in the material organism (usually the brain) that help to bring it 'down to earth'. Conversely, any objective observation we make (such as reading the instruments that tell us about those material correlates) are inevitably filtered, distorted, and interpreted by our own subjective biases and a background intersubjective cultural worldview (such as, say, the language we speak), thus eradicating any fanciful appeal to the Myth of the Given.


 
At the risk of dragging this discussion horridly off topic, I have to say that I think that an objective reality exists outside of our senses.  It is not a two way street in the sense that the objective reality overpowers the effects of bias on our senses.  Our minds do not imagine the universe, it exists all by itself.  

The thought that our minds bring ideas "down to earth" is provacative, but I think it has little merit given the fact that we have no evidence that anything came "down" at all.  We do, however, have evidence that biologic structures "create" these ideas and that altering the biology can change things.  

Prozac anyone?

In regards to chi, I think that a number of physical and biological phenomenon have been given a totally artificial and primitive label.  The concept of chi that we learn is merely a blanket term that describes these phenomenons' effects.  It is a useful simplification...a hallmark of the human mind.  In the end, chi is an idea inspired by our objective biology.



> As for myself, I would argue that ch'i is primarily a subjective experience. Simply recording the material spectacles that can supposedly be accomplished through manipulating ch'i constitutes no more "evidence" for this phenomena than recording brainwave patterns on an EEG constitutes "evidence" for hopes, dreams, and aspirations. They are fundamentally different (but interdependent) knowledge domains.


 
I'm not sure I agree here, because when people talk about chi and about using it, real things happen in the real world.  It is not just an event that takes place in a closed system.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 30, 2006)

Qi, is very important in Traditional Chinese Medicine. It is also applicable in Martial Arts and health.

There are several types of Qi in Traditional Chinese medicine, Stomach, liver, etc. 

If your Qi is strong you are healthy if it is weak you are sick if it is gone you are dead. That is the over simplified TCM view of Qi from the Chinese medical standpoint. 

I will have to get out my copy of the Yellow emperor and ask a couple of Chinese TCM doctors I know, from Beijing and Hong Kong, and my tai chi teacher to describe it to me better. Once that is done, I will let you know what I find.

Until then, I will just say if your talking physics or social sciences those classes were taken a long time ago, roughly around the time of the dinosaurs. I will happily leave that debate to heretic888 and upnorthkyosa.


----------



## heretic888 (Jan 30, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> There may even be ways to study chi as a non-physical/mental concept.



Yeah, I think it's called ch'i kung. 



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> At the risk of dragging this discussion horridly off topic....



We can start another thread for this topic, if you wish.



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> .... I have to say that I think that an objective reality exists outside of our senses. It is not a two way street in the sense that the objective reality overpowers the effects of bias on our senses. Our minds do not imagine the universe, it exists all by itself.



I would argue that reality is fundamentally psychophysical. 

While objective and subjective phenomena are in a sense epistemologically separate, it is in my opinion a mistake to consider the two to be mutually independent (such as with the Cartesian dualism or with Stephen Jay Gould's non-overlapping magisteria). The objective co-creates the subjective and the subjective co-creates the objective. They seem to be interdependent in rather subtle and complicated ways. 

Furthermore, to claim that reality exists independently of subjective observation, "all by itself", is a form of _a priori_ speculation. It may very well be true, but no evidence exists to support such conjecture. Nor can such evidence exist, since it is an untestable assertion.



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> The thought that our minds bring ideas "down to earth" is provacative, but I think it has little merit given the fact that we have no evidence that anything came "down" at all.



I think you're confusing metaphors here. My previous post stated that objective correlates in the material brain bring our thoughts "down to earth" (i.e., allow us to empirically quantify them in an indirect fashion).

I never claimed it was subjective minds that bring thoughts "down to earth" (nor does such a claim make much sense).



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> We do, however, have evidence that biologic structures "create" these ideas and that altering the biology can change things.
> 
> Prozac anyone?



We also have evidence that both subjective and intersubjective (cultural) structures "create" (in part) our supposedly "objective" realities and that altering one's psychology can change our biology.

Long-term potentiation, anyone?



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> In regards to chi, I think that a number of physical and biological phenomenon have been given a totally artificial and primitive label. The concept of chi that we learn is merely a blanket term that describes these phenomenons' effects. It is a useful simplification...a hallmark of the human mind. In the end, chi is an idea inspired by our objective biology.



I would argue that since ch'i is experienced as a primarily subjective reality, that any objective reference is simply a correlation.



			
				upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> I'm not sure I agree here, because when people talk about chi and about using it, real things happen in the real world. It is not just an event that takes place in a closed system.



That might have been a poor analogy on my part.

A better example would be when your "mind" commands your "body" to move, such as when you decide to move your arm. The fact that you move your arm doesn't somehow constitute evidence that a "mind" exists or that it caused your "body" to move, it merely shows a correlation between your subjective thought and your objective behavior.

Laterz.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 1, 2006)

Is it safe to come out now.

I was doing some research on Qi today and I found something I thought was interesting that I though others may be interested in.

This is from Answers.com
"In the 1980s and 1990s, the increasing popularity of qigong and related practices led to the  establishment of many groups and methods in China and elsewhere which have been viewed in a critical light by more traditional qigong practitioners as well as skeptical outside observers. In this view, a large number of people started studying qigong under inadequate  supervision, indeed, perhaps the majority of people today who study qigong study from books  or video tapes and DVDs without supervision by a teacher. This can lead to several problems, according to those who view themselves as representative of orthodox schools. 

Most  traditional training takes many years of practice under the supervision of someone who has also learned over years, someone who can guide and prevent the student from taking an unbalanced approach to qigong practice. The theory is that unbalanced circulation of inner energies eventually leads to unbalanced effects on the various systems of the body, both mental and physical. Stories of unguided practitioners or inexpertly guided students developing chronic mental and physical health problems as a result of such training are not uncommon. 

A term used by English speaking practitioners and teachers for one example of this  syndrome is "Qigong Psychosis" (Now included in the DSM-IV as a culture-bound syndrome:  Qi-Gong Psychotic Reaction: DSM-IV General Information: Appendix I, Outline for Cultural  Formulation and Glossary of Culture-Bound Syndromes). Another function of improper training  involves frauds and deliberate charlatans who promote themselves as qigong "healers"  promising miracle cures of any conceivable affliction for the right amount of money.  

_Traditionally, qigong is considered more of a health maintenance regimen, and any promises  of miracle cures should be viewed with suspicion, according to traditional teachers and  practitioners."_

Also the conversation that I had with the OMD From Beijing Hospital confirms this. Also, she does not understand how so many people here and in China claim to do Qi Gong and have strong Qi in such a short time. And she does not believe it is possible to knock someone out with Qi. She also believes most people that teach Qi Gong lack the proper training. And to shorten the rest of the view of Chi, There are different types of Qi, liver, kidney, lung, etc. If you have strong Qi in the body you are health, if you have weak Qi in your body you are sick, if you have no Qi in your body you are dead. This is the abbreviated Readers Digest version of the conversation that I had.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 1, 2006)

Sil Lum TigerLady said:
			
		

> Can biological energy - or chi - be physically developed by training, just as muscles and cardio stamina can be developed by training? What are your thoughts on chi, it's existence, and the ability to develop it?


I beleive we all have chi but many don't understand it or know how to effectively access it. Through martial arts, some better than others, we gain access to it.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 1, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> peoplse spiritual, information that runs counter to the dogma is resisted. My personal feelings regarding "chi" lead me to wait until an ability can be repeated/studied by anyone, including skeptics, before I'll accept it as true. I find that I am able to ward off charletenry with this approach...


 
It sounds that your system dosen't involve chi. It not mystical at all. There are many things about our bodies that can't be explained by science. Chi is and isn't. I think for you it isn't. 

I think that it's easy to "discount" that which we don't understand. But that dosn't mean it can't exist. If your system used it you should know it.


----------



## green man (Mar 2, 2006)

Sil Lum TigerLady said:
			
		

> One thing I can say is I've seen it used and I've felt it so I know it's there.



I agree, and personal philosophy aside, this is the only reason I have to believe in ki.  I've seen some neat tricks from aikido using ki, but my strongest experience with what I call ki was from sensing attacks coming, and being aware of my body warning me before I got hit.  Apart from the softer styles of ki development, for me, this was the key to drawing a connection between the feeling and the understanding.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 2, 2006)

akja said:
			
		

> There are many things about our bodies that can't be explained by science.


 
Such as??


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 2, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Such as??


How and why we get multiple sclerosis.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 2, 2006)

akja said:
			
		

> How and why we get multiple sclerosis.


 
Why Multiple Sclerosis Occurs

Also, there's a difference between "cannot explain" and "has not fully explained yet".

Laterz.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 2, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Why Multiple Sclerosis Occurs
> 
> Also, there's a difference between "cannot explain" and "has not fully explained yet".
> 
> Laterz.


I wouldn't trust that site for the "complete" truth. But you are right and my point was still made. MS is mysterious. My wifes had it for 15 years and she's not that bad while others are not that lucky.

I would look at a site with better info. like this.
http://www.mossresourcenet.org/ms.htm#whatis

*What Causes MS?*
Scientists have learned a great deal about MS in recent years; *still, its cause remains elusive.* Many investigators *believe* MS to be an _autoimmune disease_--one in which the body, through its immune system, launches a defensive attack against its own tissues. In the case of MS, it is the nerve-insulating myelin that comes under assault. Such assaults *may be linked* to an unknown environmental trigger, perhaps a virus.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 2, 2006)

While this may be getting off-topic....

The general consensus seems to be that multiple sclerosis, like schizophrenia, probably has no one _definitive cause_ and is most likely the product of a number of both genetic and environmental variables.

Of course, qi can be explained quite easily be science if we jettison the mystical mumbo-jumbo that gets attributed to it by New Age writers (t'would be better to go with the traditional Chinese medicinal paradigm, methinks). A lot of people have gotten the weird idea in their skulls that qi is something like "the force" in the _Star Wars_ films, which is definitely not how I was taught the concept in my taiji and chigung classes.

Laterz.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 2, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> Of course, qi can be explained quite easily be science if we jettison the mystical mumbo-jumbo that gets attributed to it by New Age writers (t'would be better to go with the traditional Chinese medicinal paradigm, methinks). A lot of people have gotten the weird idea in their skulls that qi is something like "the force" in the _Star Wars_ films, which is definitely not how I was taught the concept in my taiji and chigung classes.
> 
> Laterz.


I see Qi as being simple also. It just is and it comes to the surface through our methods of training.


----------



## KenpoTess (Mar 3, 2006)

Assist. Admin Note:

Thread moved to new Chi-Ki-Qi Area.

~Tess
-MT Assist. Admin


----------



## Brother John (Mar 3, 2006)

KenpoTess said:
			
		

> Assist. Admin Note:
> 
> Thread moved to new Chi-Ki-Qi Area.
> 
> ...



Isn't that the 'locker room'?? the "Cheeky" area?


hahaha...

Your Brother
John


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 23, 2006)

Well, This guy obviously has KI.   http://www.kyusho.be/Daochiamac.wmv


----------



## stickarts (Mar 23, 2006)

I think our body has an electrical system and chi is some component of that. I am not into the magical mystical stories you hear about it but it has it's place in martial arts and is an interesting study.


----------



## RoninPimp (Mar 23, 2006)

LOL the existance of chi. No scientific evidence for its existance at all.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 24, 2006)

RoninPimp said:
			
		

> LOL the existance of chi. No scientific evidence for its existance at all.


 
That depends entirely on how you define "scientific evidence".

As important as they are, there is more to science than biology and chemistry.

Laterz.


----------



## RoninPimp (Mar 24, 2006)

> That depends entirely on how you define "scientific evidence".
> 
> As important as they are, there is more to science than biology and chemistry.


-Huh? I don't follow you at all...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Mar 24, 2006)

For what its worth

Dr Yang gives a fairly good description of what he believes Qi is in his Qi Gong Books. And to be honest its bad and it is based on electric current and electrical conductivity. And I am not surprised, he is an Engineer as well as a CMA teacher and author.

I would not call it scientific proof, but it is a believable description.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 24, 2006)

RoninPimp said:
			
		

> LOL the existance of chi. No scientific evidence for its existance at all.


 
Scientific evidence isn't needed for anything in the martial arts. Chi exists. You don't understand it becuase you either don't have it or you're style dosen't use it. 

Many people "deny" that which they don't understand. Yes the clip was outrageous but it would be ignorant to think that someone dosen't have chi and it can't exist because "ones" fighting style does not use or understand it.

Either you have it or you don't.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 27, 2006)

RoninPimp said:
			
		

> -Huh? I don't follow you at all...


 
My point is that "science" is specifically characterized by certain principles of inquiry and validation/rejection. It is _not_ the special property of a few select fields (such as physics, biology, chemistry, etc). You're not just doing "science" in the test tubes of a laboratory.

In other words, even _if there were no physiological correlate to "qi" whatsoever_ --- and there most assuredly is --- then if a body of practitioners can demonstrate reproducible practices or methodologies for generating "qi" that can be replicated, can point to a relatively stable or consistent body of results or data gathered from these procedures, and can demonstrate a fair degree of agreement or consistency _among those that have undergone the aforementioned procedures_ (i.e., "peer review"), then there is more than ample "scientific evidence" for this subject's existence.

And, it just so happens, this is exactly the case in traditional Chinese disciplines.

Laterz.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 27, 2006)

akja said:
			
		

> Scientific evidence isn't needed for anything in the martial arts.


 
I would argue vehemently against this point. Martial arts, whatever their particular purpose, are _nothing_ without "scientific evidence".

As I stated previously, the characteristic features of "science" are a set of principles related to experiential inquiry and communal validation/rejection. If, for example, a martial art whose purpose was self-protection consistently produced practitioners who died violent deaths in the field, street, or warzone, then it most clearly has _not_ passed the test of validating its theories of combat. To put it in scientific terms, we would then "reject the hypothesis" offered by said martial art system.

If this martial art were produced during, say, the Warring States period in feudal Japan, then it is highly unlikely its adherents would have survived to pass on the system to their descendents.

To give another example, if a martial art whose stated purpose was health and longevity consistently produced practitioners who lived slovenly, unhealthy lives and died prematurely due to health hazards, then it most clearly has _not_ passed the test of validating its theories of health and longevity. To put it once again in scientific terms, we would then "reject the hypothesis" offered by said martial art system.

So, yes, "scientific evidence" is very important to the martial arts. It is the only way of testing and subsequently improving upon the methodologies that we practice. Without such criteria, the martial arts are nothing short of lifeless dogma, practiced for the sole purpose that "my sensei said so".

Laterz.


----------



## James Kovacich (Mar 28, 2006)

heretic888 said:
			
		

> I would argue vehemently against this point. Martial arts, whatever their particular purpose, are _nothing_ without "scientific evidence".
> 
> As I stated previously, the characteristic features of "science" are a set of principles related to experiential inquiry and communal validation/rejection. If, for example, a martial art whose purpose was self-protection consistently produced practitioners who died violent deaths in the field, street, or warzone, then it most clearly has _not_ passed the test of validating its theories of combat. To put it in scientific terms, we would then "reject the hypothesis" offered by said martial art system.
> 
> ...


You're points are "acceptable" BUT saying it is the "only way of testing" would be implying that all training is scientific.

If the systems fails in battle it does not take away from the system. One would have to take in to account the actuall situation and who the combatants were before failing the system.


----------



## heretic888 (Mar 28, 2006)

akja said:
			
		

> You're points are "acceptable" BUT saying it is the "only way of testing" would be implying that all training is scientific.


 
All_ good_ training _is_ "scientific".

Look at it this way: what I specifically mean by "scientific", in this context, is a truth-claim that _anybody_ can "experiment", or test out, for themselves. In all true science, a methodology or paradigm must be _replicable_; it must be repeatable (for either confirmation or rejection) by a communal body of adequately-trained "peers".

If your martial arts training does _not_ contain this "scientific" quality to it, then it is little more than lifeless dogma. In many significant ways, your teacher would closely resemble a cult leader.



			
				akja said:
			
		

> If the systems fails in battle it does not take away from the system. One would have to take in to account the actuall situation and who the combatants were before failing the system.


 
Absolutely. One negative result doesn't suddenly "disprove" a theory. It's a bit more complicated than that.

What I am talking about, however, is a_ consistent_ body of data (i.e., practitioners dying "in the field") that has been gathered over a somewhat _substantial stretch of time_. This is not a one-time deal (accidents and/or anomalies happen in science all the time, after all). Rather, this would be the case of an enduring rejection of the theory's premises that has bared the test of time.

At which point, you would either modify the theory (i.e., the martial art system) to fit the incoming "data" --- or your would reject the theory altogether. Science is self-correcting.

Laterz.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 14, 2006)

Chi Machine in a health expo story.



> Flat on her back, feet up and eyes covered, Janice Mensah tried a Chi machine for the first time at the Indiana Black Expo Black and Minority Health Fair on Thursday.
> 
> The New Jersey woman's legs rocked back and forth from the power of the device, which was supposed to relieve stress and give her a centered feeling. She was skeptical at first. She wouldn't sit still, but after 10 minutes, she was a believer.
> 
> ...


----------



## pstarr (Jul 14, 2006)

I think I'd have trouble with the idea of a machine that produces chi.  ???  

Also, I have to agree with Heretic's statements about testing the validity of a given martial art system, technique, and so forth.  The failure or outright refusal of many teachers and even entire systems to present their systems, techniques (and the principles upon which they are based) to scientific scrutiny has led to the development of various ineffective systems that often tout themselves as "lethal" and even "traditional"...

A good instructor should not only be able to teach a student HOW to perform a given technique or whatever, but he should be able to explain, in detail, exactly _how and why it works_.


----------



## ech33 (Nov 5, 2006)

agree on that part of teacher must be able to explain first before teaching the technique.


----------



## ech33 (Nov 5, 2006)

one part is there's no way a ki/chi can be generated by a machine. as chi only exist within human body as well nature-universe.

it cannot be scientifically created, as if some of you may know that chi is the life force for human being. it's born when you were born, and die along you as well.


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 5, 2006)

ech33 said:


> one part is there's no way a ki/chi can be generated by a machine. as chi only exist within human body as well nature-universe.


 
So, how exactly is a machine not a part of "nature-universe"??


----------



## ech33 (Nov 16, 2006)

caouse machine is a machine, not a living being. the machine would seem like
n ogawa massage machine instead.


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 16, 2006)

ech33 said:


> caouse machine is a machine, not a living being. the machine would seem like
> n ogawa massage machine instead.


 
I fail to grasp the logic behind this reasoning.

Are only "living beings" part of this "nature-universe"?? How so??


----------



## ech33 (Nov 20, 2006)

the being that breath life is part of the nature-universe. machine is something that was created by human, and it don`t have that "xtra".


----------



## heretic888 (Nov 21, 2006)

ech33 said:


> the being that breath life is part of the nature-universe. machine is something that was created by human, and it don`t have that "xtra".


 
Macromolecules don't "breath life" and they are still part of the "nature-universe".

I still fail to grasp your logic here.


----------



## ech33 (Nov 23, 2006)

so is it macro-molecules are a machine then?


----------



## Kensai (Dec 2, 2006)

Jonathan Randall said:


> I honestly don't know. IMO, you are closer to the truth by defining it as a biological energy (that could eventually have a scientific explanation) than many self-styled Martial Arts experts who use it to shroud normal, everyday newtonian physical principles in eastern mysticism in order to mislead the gullible.
> 
> Good question - I wish I had some sort of answer for besides "don't know". :idunno:



I think Chi could be the ancient Chinese interpretation of something that could be bio-electrical energy? With early MA being simple, yet effective exercises that strenghtened the body while simultaneously having the effect of increasing energy resulting in a fitter, healthier person? It's a big guess, obviously. I "believe" in chi. I've had some bizarre experiences with it. It's only hokey if you want it to be in my view.


----------



## edwardcloud (Dec 22, 2006)

How do we use Chi in daily life?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 23, 2006)

edwardcloud said:


> How do we use Chi in daily life?


 
Traditional Chinese medicine views it this way; if you have strong Qi you are healthy, if you have week qi you are sick, if you have no qi you are dead. 

So from a TCM point of view that is like asking how do we use air in daily life?

Although air and qi are not the same.


----------



## Ninjamom (Dec 23, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:


> ........Although air and qi are not the same.


Actually, there's a good chance they are!!!  (At least in part).  The word for 'weather' in Chinese is (I think, please correct me if I have this wrong) 'breath of heaven', and the characters for breath and chi are the same.  The concepts of 'breath', 'air', 'wind', and 'chi' are all related.  And if you think about it, that makes sense: if you have good, strong, deep breathing (chi) you have life.  If you do not have strong breathing (chi), you are not healthy, and if you have no breathing (chi), you are dead.

I put some notes together on what I found while researching the connection between 'chi' and deep breathing. If anyone's interested, I can try to dust off my notes and find some of the references.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 23, 2006)

Ninjamom said:


> Actually, there's a good chance they are!!! (At least in part). The word for 'weather' in Chinese is (I think, please correct me if I have this wrong) 'breath of heaven', and the characters for breath and chi are the same. The concepts of 'breath', 'air', 'wind', and 'chi' are all related. And if you think about it, that makes sense: if you have good, strong, deep breathing (chi) you have life. If you do not have strong breathing (chi), you are not healthy, and if you have no breathing (chi), you are dead.
> 
> I put some notes together on what I found while researching the connection between 'chi' and deep breathing. If anyone's interested, I can try to dust off my notes and find some of the references.


 
I will have to look into the characters (meaning ask my wife) but Qi and air are not the same to TCM however I believe air can affect Qi. And both are necessary for life. 

And I am interested in looking at your notes.


----------



## lhommedieu (Dec 29, 2006)

For an excellent discussion about Qi (and its relationship to air and weather) cf. A Brief History of Qi, by Yu Huan Zhang, Zhang Yu Huan, and Ken Rose.

Best,

Steve Lamade


----------



## DMartialArtist (Jan 3, 2007)

Here's what i think every one uses energy to move and talk. Everyone has it or else we couldn't move. Its said that most of the time its stored in your hara or abdomen. There are other places but adomen works for me. Which is true in most cases because you really do breathe in with your stomach expanding in and out. I think if you focus your mind and understand the true meaning of mind and body as one it is possible to understand the truth of ki. you may be able to actually use it. Its nothing mystical its just basically using your own energy your life force as a weapon the same energy you use to talk and walk its just instead of using it like you do for everyday stuff it takes a bit more effort and concentration. The point is i think it is possibel somehow to use your own energy and i mean when you think about it there's energy flowing all around us especially from the sun. When i look outside and the suns up or even when its not sometimes i can see the little transparent particles they go through my hand when i try and reach out for it but its like there molecules or particles of energy that for some reaosn you can't harness


----------

