This is syntactically meaningless. A wave is, by definition, the transfer or propogation of energy without the transfer of matter, like a water wave, or a slinky, or an EM wave. The phrase "energy wave" is therefore meaningless. Therefore, your sentence could simply be flipped to read:

"I have discovered that all life originated as energy propogation of energy"

Which is meaningless gibberish. However, when you start a post with "I have read a book on magic power"...this is usually a  sign that the information following is not going to be factual.

No. We say there is an equivalence between mass and energy called the mass-energy equivalence given by E=mc^2. But again, your claim is meaningless. Energy is a scalar property of a thing. We say that a macroscopic gas container has an internal energy, we say that electrons in shells possess a certain energy level, etc. ad infinitum. But it is not meaningful to say that matter is "made up" of energy. Energy is simply a measure.

These are called physical states, not different "forms" of energy as an innate property of the particles under discussion per se. These states in turn are macroscopic properties, measured in terms of bonds being formed and broken within a system, into which energy can be transferred, or removed. But, again, your statement is meaningless. When we speak of energy as a scalar unit in physics, it is not as if to say that energy is some sort of "substance". For example, suppose an exothermic chemical reaction inside a box which transfers heat energy outside the box into the surroundings. In this case, the mechanism by which this occurs is merely that increase in the kinetics of the particles, better known as raising the temperature, a transfer mechanism which eventually reaches outside the box (presuming it is a conducter). Here again, it is simply demonstrated that energy constitutes a scalar property of these particles which constitute the reactants per se, which is conserved as it is transferred from chemical bonds, into the form of increased kinetics of the particles within the system itself. With respect to state changes, it's more or less the same, depending on which direction you go, of course.

No! "Contain energy" is not meaningful. It's akin to saying "contains temperature". Energy is a scalar property of the particles per se.

Again...same syntactical problem. It's like saying one is constituted of temperature.

Our what?

See above. More syntactical nonsense. Refer to the following defintions henceforth:

Wave: A wave is the propogation of energy without propogation of matter

Energy: A scalar, conserved, transferable property of matter, equivalent to mass via the Einsten equations

The only thing that will happen when two waves "conflict" is superposition. Waves, being the transfer of energy, can be represented in terms of point-density graphs, where the scalar property of energy is different at different points along the medium of transfer. Sometimes, this medium might be a vacuum (only for EM). Most of the time, however, the medium will be particles per se and the transfer produces a distinctive pattern, depending on the method of transfer, which is different for different wave-forms. It can be longitudinal (the direction of propogation of energy is parallel with the direction of whatever oscillation is inducing the wave) or transverse (perpendicular relationship between the propogation and oscillation). In either case, this results in a set of distinctive patterns called peaks and troughs. THe "conflict" of two waves results either in the superimposing of one on the other (depending on whether two troughs, two peaks, or one or the other meet) or cancellation. The same principle applies if the propogation is hitting a boundary (or, more usually, simply transferring to a much denser medium). At any rate, how on Earth you are supposed to move from "conflict between waves produces superposition" to "conflict between waves is responsible for miracles" is anyone's bloody guess, but I tell you this: your explanation better be damn well pretty good (you should include the appropriate equations).

 

 

Right about here I knew it wouldn't end well.

 

Oh hey I was right

After reading a book on Magic Power, I discovered everything was made of midichlorians.

Then I read another book on Magic Power and discovered everything was made of thought.

Then I read another book on Magic Power and discovered that the universe is a manifestation of love.

Then I read another book on Magic Power and discovered that the Goddess grants power to us through her Eternal Empathy.

Then I read another book on Magic and discovered how to do some really neat card tricks.

The last book has served me well.

 

If I would see, I wouldn't write this.
Anyway, about 40% of humanity is deluded and that number is rapidly increasing. If we won't stop this, all of us will once be deluded. I willingly infected myself with delusion, so I can observe symptoms and perform tests on myself, in order to find the cure. So far, my work was unsuccesful, and the symptoms are getting more intense. Soon, I won't be able to think, to oppose, to seek for the cure against the delusion, I won't have a will to. The longer it takes, the more I think of the others as deluded. Maybe they really are. Maybe I was deluded before, and now I really see. Why don't they see, when it's so simple? I have to help them. All of them, show them, how deluded they are. My skin is getting green.  Eyes fill with blood. My steps (towards the deluded people) gets slow, diffcult, and limpy. My fingernails grows longer and sharp. Thoughts almost stops. And the only thing on my mind is...,,braaaAAAAINS!!!!

 

[

That type of thinking is a cluster fuck!

If 1,000 people apply for a job and there is only one position, what are the odds that the 999 other people WONT get that job? Ok, so how is it "negative" to be PRACTICAL?

Don't stick your head in Disney Land thinking. It is ok to dream, it is stupid to drowned yourself so far in to a dream that you bury reality and other options in case your first choice doesn't pan out.

"Negative thinking"

Me, " Um, I think you should wear your seatbelt"

You, " I haven't had an accident in years"

Me, " So, you could be the safest driver on the planet, but that doesn't mean others or safe drivers"

POINTING OUT THE FLAW in someone's logic or claim is NOT NEGITIVE. It is PRODUCTIVE!

The moron shouts, "YOU HATE ME"

When the reality is the person offering the advice is merely saying, "You might do better with this".

 

 

I think a couple people are trying to reenter the dream-like state of our distant ancestors.  Next thing you know they will be painting pictures of animals deep in caves.

...actually that sounds like a fun time to me.  I'll bring the acid.

So... hypathetically speaking...

 

if i wanted to shoot lightning from my finger tips or amass an army of skeletal warriors... would i need positive or negative thinking to influence the energy, that would enable me to do so?

I think these "waves", with the help of Holy, fought off Meteor which Jenova was going to use to destroy the planet.

Shooting lightning from your fingers requires "negative" energy. That doesn't make it bad, just negative. Sucking lightning into your fingers requires positive energy.

Amassing an army of skeltal warriors is a bit more difficult. First, you'll need some skeletons that stay together. The ligaments must be in particularly good shape. Then, since they have no eyes and so can't see your enemy, you must pretty much defeat your foe using some other means, such as sucking their negative energy from their bodies as lightning. Since they have no ears, you'll have to use sign language; but since they still can't see, you'll need to sign against their skin, such as the method pioneered by Hellen Keller. Since they have no skin, this won't work, either.

In general, an army of skeletal warriors is useless. They have no eyes or ears, and often have no mouth, but must scream. They make a lot of noise rattling around and banging into stuff, so a stealthy attack is way out. They usually just end up wandering around looking for something to bone. (ba-da-BING.)

Well, after I googled up the film, I'd say, maybe. It's not so simple at all, the world is big, has it's dynamics and these often doesn't allow expectations to come true. Whenever you want to get things moving, there's a big delay and inertia, so you hardly can influence something, what is already fully in progress.
Such a tactics, when being persistent enough, can be succesful, but even better is "going with the flow of life", consciously recognizing opportunities, using them, and not expecting to gain anything more than is necessary just for the next step, while keeping the plan in mind all the time.
World is really not so simple, that a desire changes the universe. If it would be, everyone would do it and everyone would be rich and happy. Things works very slowly, here. As far as I can say, a non-material, or rather soft-material energy of psi-sphere obeys a thought immediately and precisely, but the more material the universe is, the greater inertia it has.

There should be also some caution, for what does people wish for.
There once was a cowboy, who rode on a horse across the desert, and he encountered a snake. He wanted to shoot the snake, so his horse wouldn't get startled and won't throw him down. But the snake said in human speech:
"Please, don't shoot me! If you let me live, I'll make one your wish come true."
The cowboy recognized the opportunity, got down and responded. "Yeah? So make my dick be long down to the ground!"
Suddenly, there was a thunder, the cowboy fell unconscious and after some time, he woke with two inch high legs.

 

Well.... yeah.

You were asking the OP how to do those things. I thought maybe.... After all, it's not many people who realize you can't just read up on magic. You have to learn magic.

And, to learn magic, you have to kill a practicing magician, and eat his brains.

I'm goin' after David Copperfield, myself. He's annoying as fuck.

 IMO, the "all is ONE philosophy", sometimes called a spiritual concept, is often distorted and romanticized.  "All is simply connected" in the sense of equating what the changing cosmos IS at any point in time.

In this sense YES, our changing thoughts are part of the ever changing cosmos. But to think our thoughts could change the suns decay is a romantic religious leap. To say, "We are the changing cosmos, all is god", is simply abandoning the hocus pocus God concepts of most religions .....

That is all I mean, as I often say "all is ONE" ..... Could say it's the "religion" of my Occam's Razor; I am god as you as all is god, and progressive science is my only dogma .....         and smilelys are my only magical friends ....