I'm wondering because all my science teachers say that it's physically impossible to waterbend, because you can't send your brain's electrical wave through the air to control the water's movement. They say that hydrokinesis is term used in those sci-fi movie.
126123
You can bend the flow of water from the hose by swinging it on the air.\nIn fact you cannot bend its properties called H2O. \nYou cannot bend it either using your hand or vice grip.\n\nWater is not compressible either.\n\nHydrokinesis on only a fiction it could not be true.
656740
I used to be a competitive swimmer, and during some training sessions we had to wear multiple layers. They essentially create "drag" which increases resistance. Weight is offset by buoyancy, so to increase the resistance in water, you add clothes. Sweatpants/shirts absorb a lot of water, thus add a fair amount of resistance to a work out. While I'll admit, I haven't seen the aquacise classes apply this technique, it does come from sound water based training principles.
566540
The flying that they do in those movies is an exaggeration of the truth.  There is a type of training that used to be done called "light-body" training, that starts when you're very young, like 3-4 years old.  There are many things they do, but one of the main things they focused on was keeping the spinal column soft.\n\nMost land mammals can't jump out of the water, like fish do, mostly because the spine has become hard/rigid.  At the same time some snakes can strike more than half they body length, because of their flexible body and a firm base.\n\nWhen people with this training would jump, they would "spring" with their legs and their spine giving them 2-3 times the height and 3-4 times the distance of the people without the training, that could only jump with their legs.\n\nEven doing this, couldn't make you "fly".  But, not unlike some monkeys and flying squirrels, if you simply bound, glide, and jump from point to point, through the woods/forest/jungle, going from object to object, it does give the appearance of "flying".  \n\nAnd YES, of course this could be done, very easily, through the city, running across roof tops, jumping an occasional alley way, and scaling larger buildings to "fly" from. \n\nBut, what goes up, most come down too.  Long story short, like Buzz Lightyear said "It's not flying, it's falling with style"
57732
No.  It is scientifically impossible.  To move an object you must apply an unbalenced force.  What force is telekinesis?
632977
No basis for this one other than after you eat, your body typically shunts blood to the digestive tract and away from the brain and skeletal muscle.  With physical activity this shunting would be over ridden, POSSIBLY, MAYBE precipitating a cramp.  I have never heard of it actually playing a role in any water accident.
673498
No not really, but you do have a point... at least I think you do, I kinda only skimmed the question; find it hard to take bender seriously...\nI think you can go back before that.\nExperimental physics (and the scientific method) was founded on two axioms that many choose to ignore.\n1) observability: if you can't observe it, then you can't perform an experiment on it. Kinda obvious that one.\n2) repeatability: e.g. I punch Kostya Tzu, he says ow, why'd you do that. The next couple of times yield similar results. I begin to formulate a hypothesis linking the word ow with punching. I punch him again he ducks out of the way and... where am I? I could swear I was standing up a moment ago. You can't experiment on the behaviour of people as there is no hard and fast rules linking cause and effect. Science is restricted to investigate only those things that do have such a link (There is such a thing as behavioural science but it is not actually scientific).\nMathematicians also work with limits to their knowledge. Some spend decades trying to prove that you can't prove whether a certain statement is provable. I don't know what this would be - The quest for absolute uncertainty?\nAnyway there are limits to understanding that are beyond us mortal beings but just because the total amount of knowledge out there up for grabs is limited does not mean it's necessarily finite (There are many different kinds of infinity, an infinite amount of them in fact). There's a lot to discover either way. Sometimes you do get the scientific megalomaniac who's after "Asolute" knowledge but generally most of us are just along for the ride; fascinated by the way things have been put together.
530925
Think about the relative concentration gradients of specific solutes. You clearly wouldn't infuse something that would cause water to move out of the vasculature into the brain, you would want something that would do the opposite.
412912
I've never heard of any such thing, and neither "fluffy waterballs" nor "fluffy water balls" returns a single result on Google.  ("Waterballs" and "water balls" do, but the results are mostly about snow globes and such.)  The only "balls" of water commonly known to hit the ground are raindrops.\n\nThat being said, there's no reason to assume that water would exist on any particular planet.
185452
Hi Steve, I had the same idea when I was about 8 years old and I can tell you from experience - it doesn't work!!  The increased pressure from the water pushing on your body makes it impossible to inhale from the hose.  Your lungs are designed to work at 1 atmosphere of pressure and they just are not efficient enough to suck in air like that while underwater.  It could also be very dangerous for someone who is not properly trained to breath off any air supply while submerged, if you were to hold your breath and ascend, your lungs would burst from the increased volume of air which would cause an injury called an Embolism - not a good thing!
49071
Excellent question. It is possible. I assume you mean the solid form of water (ice). It is theoretically possible. At this time finacially impossible. You would lose a percentage of the surface area of the ice by sublimation. How do you propose to freeze the water to begin with? How will you keep it frozen (remove absorbed heat energy)? Where will your source of water be? If you are taking water from Earth, how will you get it into space?
585810
Water, when heated from a solid to liquid state, but ultimately in a gaseous state it again expands.  It still obeys all the laws of chemistry, but the bonds just arrange themselves in a more space efficient manner in liquid than in solid form.\n\nAnd moses with a P, no metals exist with the properties you say.  It is physically impossible, sorry man, but I'm a biochem major and it's my job to know what stuff does under different stresses, and nothing does what you claim.  However, if you do have a material that does this, get in touch with me, we'll talk to the patent office, and we'll license it out to companies for billions of dollars.
224352
Those 'oxygen enriched water' machines a scam. They are a way to take money off stupid people.\n\nNo, the human body can not absorb the oxygen present in water. Well, that's not quite true. You could absorb the oxygen in water if you breathed it in. Then you would drown. But if you are just drinking the water or bathing in it you can never absorb the oxygen in it.
58510
>>>Can gravity be used as a means of propultion?\n\nIt can and it is. Have you ever seen a flying squirrel? Or a petrel diving on a fish? They are using gravity as a means of propulsion. \n\n>>>>>For instance if it is possible to create a device which "bounces" off of gravity. \n\nYou can’t ‘bounce off’ gravity. Gravity is an attractive force, not a repulsive. \n\nThe suggestion is nonsense. You might just as well ask whether you can stand at the top of a well and use the hole to fall up to the sky. \n\nOr maybe ask whether you can use the negative speed of a stationary vehicle to get back where you came from. \n\nIt makes no sense in a  ‘sunbeams trapped in a jar as a nightlight’ kind of way.\n\n\n>>>>>somebody said "gravity is an attractive force"\n>>>>> therefore it is a force... so what about the concept >>>>> of anti-gravity?\n\nThat's way outside my ability to comment on. Anti-gravity depends on the production of anti-gravitons. We don't even know if gravity is caused by gravitons yet, we've never seen one. We've ceratinly never been able toproduce an anti graviton. It's all science fiction stuff. I gather it's possible in theory if certain theories are correct, but in practice.....
557982
Telekinesis, by definition the ability to move objects with your mind. Aside from it being very misunderstood, the effect is extraordinarily difficult. I have had moderate success at bending a flame to my will but not for reasons of telekinesis. The focus of a person on their objective would have to be absolute and unshaken. The power output would also need to be enormous. I doubt any large scale telekinetic power can ever be done, not in this day yet, the powers have not fully reawakened yet. No easy answers here.
235444
No it does not. Takes more energy to twist them. If it was the same you would have a perpetual motion machine. No such thing. You are not creating energy you are only transforming it.
650606
Telekinesis, or Phycokinesis, is a phenomenon in which a person can move an object using nothing but the power of the mind by manipulating the magnetic field around that object.\n\nThere is, in fact, a machine that has been built to harness telekinetic abilities by creating a powerful magnetic field that is easier to manipulate (saw this on Discovery Science Channel a few months back).\n\nYou can check out on Discovery.com about the research into prosthetics that work on telekinesis.  Monkeys are capable of using the prosthetics with nothing but there minds.  I believe that this subject will be touched upon during a special on the Science Channel called Robo-sapiens.
306669
It looked like the hover boards worked with some sort of magnet on the bottom that probably conteracted with the earth's magnetic force. Since, water isn't magnetic, the hoverboard wouldn't work on water. Thats what I thought at least.