I just ordered one of these babies: link removed - do not link to vendors
This is a pendant which increases the strength of the body’s own energy field. This is no BS, it is a scientifically and medically approved non-invasive device for the energy meridians to aid stress relief. It uses the latest advancements in technology, and quantum physics. Many different scientific studies and tests have been performed on the device, and it has produced some amazing results.
I found a few blogs from people (rather nerds) with a ‘scientific’ background who have taken this thing apart, and reported that “our devices couldn’t record any readings, and the parts dont even connect together”. All these blogs always get slammed, all you have to do is go to the qlink site, they have all the information there about the scientific studies that were carried out on it. I don’t think the bloggers realise there is all this scientific data backing it up, the parts may not look like they connect as a traditional electrical device would, because it uses something called an oscilator that is covered in a fine crystaline powder (which essentially connects it all up together), with an induction coil, resonator, and circuit board. The entire device acts as a sort of tuning fork powered by your own energy, which intensifies and strengthens your field. Also, some of the top athletes in the world wear this technology.
What amazes me (besides this awesome device), is two things:
1.) that science is finally starting to see the light, that what these chinese guys have been sayin all this time about chakra’s, meridians, aura’s is all true. By scientifcally approving a device as being able to strengthen the bodies energy field, is like saying “yes its true folks, we have aura’s”
2.) how ignorant people are and can be. “oh… has to do with energy fields must be ‘new agey’ bogus junk”
I’m not trying to sell you this item or anything, but i thought a bit of explanation was in order. If you are going to buy one, i’d suggest not getting it through the main qlink site because they charge more for it (due to warranty). I got mine through ebay for half the price. I can’t wait to get it… gonna be so good!
The link you provided doesn’t work, and when you copy/paste the full one it says it is not implemented. I am curious about these. Would you mind sharing the price that you got yours for? (or the average retail price)
i got the new black type for $100 USD
you can find the older classic type for about $80 USD
and even the nicer silver and gold ones are a lot cheaper elsewhere.
no links to sellers… please read the guidelines is a pretty good site to get from, i was going to use them but they wouldn’t accept paypal echeques so i ended up using this guy called nmai on ebay who is a certified dealer.
anyone else think it’s funny that it’s called the Qlink pendent?
anyway this all seems very interesting but i don’t know how quantum mechanics can explain chi and such, though i am quick to admit… i don’t know quantum mechanics
Q must be loving the fact that now protection amulets come with her sign engraved.
Hahaha, I couldn’t believe it when I saw the product description (first link from google search to “qlink pendant” as of this posting). Quantum physics is our modern Pandora, oh it sure is. Scientists wanted to loosen the barriers imposed by logics, so we consented they used statistics. But was it enough? No. They needed to go further, so they started speculating on the metaphysical implications of their statistics—and now what do we get? Scientists selling us some theory which is no more valid, solid or relevant than any religion or cult or philosophy—but hell, they’re scientists, so we believe them.
So what happens then? Then people start mixing it all in a big bowl, and come up with new age and whatnot, and now this: amulets, that is, magick, with scientific foundations and a market–oriented selling strategy. And what can we do but nod along and buy those, huh? After all, it was designed from scratch based in scientific foundations, wasn’t it.
If I may quote Amazon.com’s “Tags Customers Associate With This Product” section on the Q-link;
Now I’m not going to be placed into this category of “ignorant people who disregard energy feilds”, becasue I believe in them, and probably have more far-fetched(seemingly) beliefs on them than you do. But this is obviously some silly marketing scheme. Eonnn, this scientific research that is on the site and that you speak of so highly, can you explain any of it to me?
What tests were done? Do you expect me to believe a conclusive scientific study was preformed, with no other information to go on other than a paragraph stating nothing more than; “This study happened, and trust us, it came out in our favor.”
And what exactly is accupuncture imbalance? All these studies seem like…well…quackery.
i saw all those tags on amazon, which is why i investigated it further, finding that there are a lot of people (not just the scientists and testimonals on the site) who have tested this thing and concur with what they are saying.
Bruno, thats the great thing about quantum physics, they accept that they don’t know or have all the answers, and that this reality is so complex, anything is possible, there are infinite numbers of outcomes and possibilities, infinite timelines, etc, etc. You can’t put a simple equation on everything. Physics is about physicality, yet we know at the deepest level everything is made of energy fluctuating at different frequencies, there is a metaphysical aspect to this reality and until physicists realise that our science and technology will be stuck at a dead end. Take our thinking for example, they still don’t know where, what or how to explain consciousness, they have theories but even with all the technology we have, all the scientific knowledge we have, they still can’t explain it correctly in scientific terms. And i think it would be pretty difficult to put an equation on what the next thing somebody is about to think is going to be. Or an equation on what dream i’m going to have tonight or if its going to be a lucid dream, don’t you think?
They really are finding out some incredible things in the area of quantum physics, and some amazing technology is being produced from it. Things like teleporting objects, making light travel faster than the speed of light, nanotechnology, etc, etc.
well this was going to be a quickreply… but yeah im really not trying to push you to believe one thing or another, so take what you will from what i post, ultimately its up to yourself to chose what you believe.
I’d love to see those ([size=100]PM[/size] if they’re links to vendors).
Now, Eonnn, stop right there for a moment. With that sentence, you have, without realising, made two understatements.
First, that you have absolutely not studied quantum mechanics and don’t know its propositions; and that you furthermore have probably no knowledge about it beyond a “brief mention during ‘current trends in Physics’ exposition” level. This is rather serious, as it means you have been bluffing your understanding of quantum mechanics, which makes you both a bad judge for the experiments you have cited, and an unreliable source of information. Don’t pretend to know more than you do. It doesn’t help you make your point, takes away your credibility and makes the overall discussion become downright cheesy.
Second, perhaps more serious than the first, was that you have little understanding of what science is to begin with. By emphasizing how extraordinary it is that quantum physics “accepts it doesn’t have all the answers” you imply it is ordinary in sciences to “pretend to have answers”, or even to “strive to reach answers” to begin with. Both are wrong. Science is not about reaching the Truth, and whatever scientist who claims to have answers because they have used the scientific method to reach whatever conclusion is committing a grave logical fallacy, that is, they’re bluffing their understanding of science altogether just like you were bluffing your knowledge of quantum mechanics.
So perhaps I should take a step back from this discussion and review some basic concepts. First of all, you’ll probably be surprised at this point to know I have little faith in science myself, and that I’m mostly a man of my own spirituality, which isn’t even a solid, organized belief system. You’ll probably want to know, then, why am I being as scientifically strict as possible in this discussion. Well, truth be told, it’s because I do like to play devil’s advocate. But also because, from where I stand, your attitude towards science and quantum physics has become epidemic, and I’m quite horrified about the consequences there are to so many people having the same understanding of science you do.
So, what’s so cool about science anyway. You’d be tempted to say it seeks to find the truth, but that I already said not to be true. You might then want to say it’s so cool in that “it shows you how things work” or something like that. Well, then. But “showing you how things work,” I’ll tell you, is essentially the definition of something else, which we call languages. A language is, in essence, a bunch of signs, which represent things, connected by a bunch of other signs, which represent how things relate to each other: for instance, the English sentence “this apple fell on the ground” is just as capable of explaining a fact (the falling of a specific apple on the ground) as the Law of Gravity.
Fair well, then, science is a language. But what makes it different from English, or genetics, or art, which are all languages as well? You’ll look at the English sentence I used in the last paragraph, then you’ll look at the Law of Gravity, and point out the later is an abstraction (that is, a model), whilst the former could only explain a single occurrence of apple–fall (in logics, we call that an ad–hoc). And I’ll say you’re once again right, and point out that, however, philosophy, religion and some forms of art share that prerogative. At this point, you’re probably starting to get mad at me for writing so much and not arriving at any conclusion, especially after calling you a bluffer. So I better just cut short to why is science so cool.
Science is cool in that it follows a strict methodology—first constrained to the strictest circles of logics, then later on broadened by statistics—which assures its models are solid. A solid model is logically valid, relevant and falsifiable. Validity means that, hypothetically speaking, if the model’s premises are indeed true, then the conclusions must always be true, no matter what. Relevance, quite an arcane concept in logics, means, basically speaking, that the theory can stand on its own feet to explain facts, so that it can be even expected to make predictions. And there’s falsifiability.
Falsifiability is the most important concept of science. It means models must be so that they can be tested and proved wrong if necessary. The core concept of the scientific method lies in the idea that, if a model is logically sound (valid and relevant)—that is, if the model is plausible and has no flaws hypothetically speaking, then any exception you find for it tells you one thing: the model is wrong. This, Eonnn, is what’s so cool about science and here’s why: whilst all other languages are able to express your understanding of things, science is the only one that can grasp truth; not in that it tells you how the world works (as most people think, promoting science to some weird sort of fanatic cult), but in that it is able to tell you a couple of ways the world does not work (that is, the theories that have been proved false) and is furthermore capable of telling you which ways of explaining the world seem to work well—even though they might be wrong.
As far as science is concerned, it might be that the reason behind all this is a god driven by their ineffable designs, or by their self–interest, or by their need for amusement, or by their higher sense of dark humour. It might be that the explanation for the world is neither logical nor relevant. And any scientist will have to give you that—in fact, they must give you that. Science is fantastic in that it reaches the truth about wrong models being wrong, but that’s all as far as science is concerned.
So, back to quantum mechanics and your pendant. What’s the matter with quantum physics? It is valid (weak validity, to be specific, as its conclusions are statistic), most of it is valid (except the stuff derived from the principle of uncertainty—while the principle itself is perfectly scientific, anything which is derived from it will explain the occurrence of any event, and won’t be able to make its own predictions, that is, any derivation of the principle of uncertainty can’t stand on its own feet), and surely the core of theory is falsifiable. So at least a big chunk of quantum mechanics is scientific. Right?
Wrong. Two basic problems arise from that theory. The first one is: it is supposed to explain the punctual behaviour of very small particles. It does not intend to, and therefore cannot, explain “macro” events. Trying to expand the quantum theory to the big world of particle aggregates is like creating a new model which, surprise surprise, is neither valid, nor relevant, and finally not at all falsifiable (try to come up with a way to measure how well quantum mechanics predicts your mood shifts, you’ll be surprised at how impossible that is). Which means quantum physics applied to the big world we know, like it was done to assemble your pendant, is not scientific—in fact, it’s just as scientific as deciding to have a crucifix dangling around your neck for protection.
I forgot what I was going to point out as the second problem, so never mind it. Consider there’s just one problem, it is enough. The thing is, the use of quantum physics to invent a pendant supposed to bring you good vibes, that’s not science, that’s barely allegory—it’s religion. So you chose to believe in that if you want. To each one the right to their own views, I say. I believe in Anarchy and spirits, you believe in your necklace.
As a student of social sciences, I’m well aware of that, but thanks for pointing out. I also do believe you can’t put a simple sentence on everything. Perhaps some things just can’t be expressed—and what are we going to do about it, huh?
Oh! Thanks! You reminded me of the second problem with quantum physics! See, the thing is, like I said, in order to be scientific, you’ve got to be relevant, which means you cannot be metaphysical. You just can’t—if you want to ramble about the behaviour of energy, you have to define it so as other people can see it. If you want to relate it to stuff, you’ve gotta be able to measure it first. And, once again, as far a the theory of quantum mechanics is concerned, there is no problem with that.
The problem is: you turn on the [size=100]TV[/size] and there’s this guy, in a lab coat. There’s a subtext in the screen saying he’s got a post–doc in Physics and lectures at the [size=100]MIT[/size] when he’s not working at the [size=100]NASA[/size]. And the man starts rambling about the metaphysical implications of the statistical nature of quantum physics. There are not such metaphysical implications! What the man is selling right there, to you, no matter how scientific he may seem, are his beliefs: complex and nifty, yet just as based in faith. Science cannot raise metaphysical implications. It’s already glared upon to use metaphysics in your premises, using it in your conclusions is a definite must–not. It’s ideological. Same reason why the mainstream economic theory, albeit very useful for making predictions, isn’t scientific: because it’s charged to the point of tears with silly ideological noise.
Be careful with what you choose to believe, and why.
Although thought has been tackled and completely explained philosophically already. It might be a tough read, and it might not be scientific (in that its hypothetically tautological—always true—and at the same can’t be tested), but [size=100]CS[/size] Peirce’s “1, 2, 3” phenomenology is an awesome read in that it does explain thought. But as you’re used to scientific reasoning, though, I bet the explanation he provides—philosophical—will be at the very least frustrating, in that you’ll think “but wait a minute, he didn’t explain anything here! What’s that in aid of, anyways?”. That’s because it is an explanation (and you’ll be surprised to agree with all he says in his papers about “1, 2, 3” and not even be able to come up with exceptions) but not, as you say, a bunch of equations. Like I said, it is scientifically irrelevant.
Teleporting objects is, in fact, currently more feasible by means of electromagnetic theory (Tesla, the Da Vinci of electricity, has some awesome conjectures on the subject), but still hasn’t quite yet been done. Making light travel faster than the speed of light, you lost me here, what are you making a reference to? And, nanotechnology has absolutely nothing to do with quantum physics! It’s just good old plain chemistry.
i really don’t want to go into a big discussion on science and quantum physics. Especially not quantum physics because we will get no where fast… i doubt we have any quantum physicists here so theres no point. i’d rather keep this topic relating to the qlink pendant.
The reason for this topic was mainly to inform others of this pendant and to see if anyone else has any more information about it, specfically first hand experience. There have been scientific tests and studies done on it, it is a scientifically approved and medically approved device. If that statement alone is not enough to convince you it actually works as they say, then obviously this isn’t for you and you should not even bother participating in this topic. You shouldn’t need to see the actual results, because you can’t just lie like that about your product. If it weren’t true, they’d be sued for fraud, it would be on the news as a big scam and they wouldn’t be allowed to even have the website up on the internet.
It isnt sooo easy to be sued for fraud 1.
and second i strongly assume that they have a paragraph on there product somewhere holding them free of any claims /not granteeing for ANY result …
just my two cents…
My reply was only in regards to it, or rather, in regards to what you said about it.
Only, like I said and did my best in order to prove, it’s not.
Sure, I promise not to check its replies anymore ; sorry for interrupting.
Yes you can. And that’s what I think they are doing—to begin with because, if it really worked that well, it would have broken into the mainstream news at some point, and these guys would be investing in some healthy marketing campaign (rather than asking you to please believe in them because oh look how many nice experiments were done about it—experiments which are not properly cited and, I would bet, were either disregarded or dismissed by the scientific community).
Like I said in the other post, I do believe in some, uh, not very orthodox stuff, like good vibes and whatnot; and I would only be a hypocrite if I didn’t consider you entitled to have your own not–very–orthodox beliefs—but if all reason you have to believe in them is because they claim to be scientific, I recommend you do dive into the big “science and quantum physics” discussion you have dismissed, because I’m telling you and I have just proved it in the other post: they are lying about that.
I’d love to see you find me one example of that actually having happened; or at least the law you imply to exist that states such things would have to happen. Then again, it’d be useless, as you politely asked me not to come back to this discussion, a suggestion I’m definitely inclined to follow.
Even though bruno probably isn’t coming back, i will say this anyway… i also have my own unorthodox beliefs… i don’t believe this qlink works purely because its quantum physics based on science. I believe it works because i believe in the existence of god, the soul, aura’s, chakra’s, etc. and because it actually sounds like a device that would actually do what it says it does. I have falled for a lot of gimmicks in the past, none of which have ever incorporated electronic technology like this does and even if this is just another gimmick, then at least it will be a good gimmick at that.
P.S. there have been a few scams pulled from the net, you wont find them because they get filtered out no matter what search engine you use.
P.P.S i hate it when people make a comment based on each sentence, without taking the entire statement into account.
So basically the inside is full of powedered crystal?
Yeah, right. If they want to use science to prove something, make sure it is actually POSSSIBLE TO PROVE FIRST. If they sold it as something purely spirtual, then I might not have this complaint, but to me, it does not look physically possible.
its some type of circuit board, connected to a resonator, coil and oscilator. The oscilator is coated in some kind of substance which allows for these separate parts to be interconnected without using wire to connect them all up.
I’m assuming that the coil gathers the energy, the circuit board tunes it into the best possible energy, the resonator sends this new tuned energy into the oscilator which intensifies this new tuned energy.
So, assuming that the coil could even gather enough energy to make anything work, it is not connected to anything. It only has a strange substance on it which they claim connects it. Now i’m no expert on electricity or energy, but this sound like a complete scam. They say that the test results were in their favor, but everyone else, all the independent testers, say that this does not work and could never work. And there are no connections (other then this mystery substance). Basically, it’s a swindle. Unless you happen to discount the opinions of everybody else that has tested this. And even then, let us look at the price. $80 for a circuit board, a little coil, and two other doohickeys. The sticks of RAM in my computer are far more advanced then this. They are making pure profit off a non-functional device. And coating something with a substance, wouldn’t that make the electricity spread everywhere instead of into a single object? I would like a PM link for this, because I’d like to see how they compensate for this.
Quantum physics is our modern Pandora, oh it sure is. Scientists wanted to loosen the barriers imposed by logics, so we consented they used statistics. But was it enough? No. They needed to go further, so they started speculating on the metaphysical implications of their statistics—and now what do we get? Scientists selling us some theory which is no more valid, solid or relevant than any religion or cult or philosophy—but hell, they’re scientists, so we believe them.
Consider there’s just one problem, it is enough. The thing is, the use of quantum physics to invent a pendant supposed to bring you good vibes, that’s not science, that’s barely allegory—it’s religion. So you chose to believe in that if you want. To each one the right to their own views, I say. I believe in Anarchy and spirits, you believe in your necklace.
It’s just good old plain chemistry.
im confused 