Talk:Mystery Spot

Untitled
I changed some npov problems.

Siamang (talk) 05:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Wisconsin Dells has a similar attraction, but I don't remember enough about to be a source for information.

This is not the only one. This page either needs expanding or moved to a more specific title. Rmhermen 15:55, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)


 * This is Wikipedia, so if you know of the others, have at it! :-) I'd suggest moving this page to a more specific name ("Mystery Spot (Santa Cruz)" seems like the typical Wiki way) and creating a "Mystery Spot" disambiguation page.


 * Atlant 22:41, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

User:67.162.250.186 wrote on the article page:

''I have been a visitor to this place and while it is possible that it could be a extremely well conceived trick, I can't find an explanation for the physical effects that I felt while there. A lot of people feel light-headed as if about to faint, although in a mild form.''


 * I would suggest that you are experiencing a blood-pressure shift resulting from a sense of the "uncanny." The body is unable to fully integrate contradicting external stimuli and this results in an increase in blood-pressure and perhaps a release of adrenaline. I think this is great! It's like a mild but sustained hallucination. I get this whenever I go to the desert. Jackbox1971 02:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I've moved that comment here. And I'll suggest that autosuggestion and observer bias can be surprisingly powerful forces. Rest assured that there's nothing supernatural or even wierdly gravitic going on in Santa Cruz, even at the Mystery Spot.

Atlant 23:32, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, then how do you explain the fact that GPS' and Magnetic Compass' don't work correctly in the area of the Mystery Spot? I've visited twice, by the way, and I've taken my own compass, level, and a golf ball to run my own personal tests. I can believe the disorientation I felt was due in part to the slanted building messing with my mind, but visual anomalies cannot mess with a compass! 132.8.8.45 (talk) 17:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Briellecfarmer, FriskMadeline, Morstadm.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

on versus in
Today, I changed the article to read in the Upper Peninsula and Atlant changed it back so it reads on the Upper Peninsula. I am not angry, I just think he is wrong. I think this is just the way people talk about the Upper Peninsula. A comparable analogy would be the South Beach article, where it talks says "a renaissance began in South Beach." Technically, the renaissance happened on the beach, but since it's a region as well as a geographical feature, you can say you are in that region. Perhaps this is a linguistic/dialect thing, but it sounds wrong to say on the Upper Peninsula. A compromise would be to rephrase the whole sentence to eliminate the need for the in/on discussion. MPS 22:17, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't feel strongly about this. Why don't we wait to see if anyone else checks in on this, and if no one else does, then revert my change if you still feel like it. Rephrasing the sentence sounds fine also.


 * Atlant 22:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * FWIW, Google gives 67,800 results for "in the upper peninsula" and only 3,640 results for "on the upper peninsula". &mdash;Caesura(t) 19:05, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Spoiler warning
Is a spoiler warning really neccisary here? --192.203.136.254 16:05, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * No, "spoiler" warnings are never necessary at this site. Encyclopedias don't utilize "spoiler" warnings.  People should assume that if they read an encyclopedia article about something, they're going to find out about that topic. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 12:39, 25 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, that depends. Most of the fun of Mystery Spot is in playing along with the gag, so it would be a shame for people to have the mystery ruined inadvertently. Also, I think the inclusion of the warning is a bit of a joke; the description of any real mystery story should obviously include a spoiler warning!


 * Atlant 16:36, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not so sure the article namespace is the place for jokes. At the very least, I think we should reword the spoiler for this page (i.e., replace the template with an HTML message specifically for this page). "Plot and/or ending details" doesn't make sense in this context. Any suggestions for a better way to phrase the spoiler warning? &mdash;Caesura(t) 19:03, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm wondering why the article says Spoiler warning: Demystification follows. Demystification follows[hide]

The Mystery Spot is a gravity hill type of optical illusion. The phenomena that visitors to the attraction may experience result from the effects of forced perspective, optical adaptation, and certain optical illusions in combination with the steep gradient of the site. That is, the situation inside a Mystery Spot is arranged in some way so that the visitors don't feel that the site's gradient is actually steep (the site is actually tilted, that is), despite the fact that it is. Some of the effects are identical to those in an Ames Room.

As visitors travel through the site, they habituate to this gradient. The effects of this adaptation are then exploited, especially within closed structures, so that visitors may feel as though gravity does not operate as it should in the Mystery Spot. Spoilers end here. and there is nothing under the spoiler.

This should be mentioned (article also lists other spots across the US, which could be consolidated under a larger subject). http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070205/ap_on_fe_st/wonder_spot


 * The spoiler warning isn't appropriate here. This is an encyclopedia, people will expect to see an explanation of the "mystery" here. This article is part of the "Gravity hills" category, which itself is part of the "Optical illusions" category, which makes it obvious to anyone this is an optical illusion before they've even read the article. 172.207.24.36 16:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, the gravity hill article has no spoiler warning, and it's not very encyclopedic to have one here - I'm going to remove it. A heading with "Explanation" should be obvious enough that the explanation is going to follow. Croxley 18:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Personal account and different explanation
It needs to be fixed up or removed it is extremely POV and violates WP:NPOV.  Rgoodermote Not an admin  02:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

GPS
Can anyone explain, why GPS-devices are/seems to be distorted? --MrBurns (talk) 16:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they actually are.

Siamang (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps they employ a sort of jamming signal? KevinOKeeffe (talk) 12:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Gravity hills
Choppershox, your reference might be better placed on the gravity hill page. Cactus Wren (talk) 09:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Trees
I know this is an illusion, but what I can't figure out is how they got the redwood trees in the middle of the mystery spot to corkscrew or all the surrounding redwoods to bend and lean toward the center. I find that very unusual.

I think it is very odd that nobody can really tells us how old the trees are! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:9B03:5300:C1F1:EF1:5441:15E9 (talk) 01:54, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Bad Sentance in Illusion explanation
"For a detailed explanation of the "'Mystery Spot Illusion'", see Shimamura and Prinzmetal (1999)." ?? No link, no cite, and also, the point of wiki articles is a detailed explanation is it not? Why would we go elsewhere? Also, how many regular people like me know what the heck Shimamura and Prinzmetal is? I don't know what this is about so if someone does I think it could fixing. Thanks Eddie mars (talk) 15:52, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

BIG SCAM
First, I want to confirm that there are no “puzzling variations of gravity, perspective, and height” as the Mystery Spot (MS) claims. All of the constructions at MS were built for one purpose: illusion. The tilted cabin and fence were built in the background to heighten the illusory effects. The slanted road leading up to the hill and tilted cabin floor add to this effect by making it difficult for visitors to move about the area.

When I came to MS about 15 years ago, I sensed something fishy, but at that time but I had no tools to prove anything. Time went by and MS was pushed to the back of my mind, but I always knew that there something was not right about it. On Tue 8/09/11, my wife asked me to take the family (7 people) to visit MS. I had not planned to bring any tools to prove my theory, but as we approached Santa Cruz, I realized that my new Nikon D7000 camera came equipped with a leveler. At MS, using the same old trick, the guide also had a leveler with him. Close to the entrance, the guide showed us that the compass had changed the directions. Since I did not have a compass, I will not discuss this part of the visit. The guide asked the group to go up the hill. In front of the slanted cabin, he placed a three-foot wooden bar horizontally at the window. About one foot hung outside the window, the other end of the bar laid on the bench inside the cabin. He put the leveler on the wooden bar; he even carefully flipped the leveler a couple times to make sure the wooden bar was level. Then he placed a pool table cue ball on the wooden bar. The cue ball rolled from the cabin and out of the window. The guide poured a bottle of water on the wooden bar and the water ran in the same direction as the ball. He asked the visitors if they had anything they wanted to roll. My wife gave him a lipstick. He put it on the bar and the lipstick rolled the same direction as the other objects. As all of the objects rolled in one direction on a perfectly level bar, everybody stared in wide-eyed shock and wonder. I, however, was in doubt. After the tour, my wife and I walked back to the area where the guide demonstrated with the wooden bar. Nobody was there. I positioned the wooden bar the same way the guide had. I then placed my camera on top to check the level and discovered it was off about 10 degrees. I pulled the bar out about two feet and hung it outside the window. The camera showed that it was level at this position. I put the lipstick on the bar and there was no movement. This time, I was in shock. Thanks, Nikon. Thanks for the new technology. How has this scam lasted over 70 years? How many children believe in this scam? How much money has this business collected the last 70 years? This place is destroying the innocence of our children. At home, I told my children the truth about this place and they could not understand why people would scam the public like that. I had no answer. Do you? Where are the scientists and professionals? How would you explain if somebody asks you about MS? Where about the city of Santa Cruz? Where are the new papers TV stations? This spot has no mystery. The only mystery here is how this ruse has survived over 70 years. A few other things that made me suspicious: Only cash or debit for admission but there are NO TICKET. Visitors received receipts, which were later collected by the guide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hchcnguyen (talk • contribs) 06:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

> I think you're missing the point. Kids have believed in the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause for years as well. Its just a fun story. The part about the scientists and professionals not knowing what causes it is just a statement from the brochure, not to be interpreted as fact.--99.0.0.53 (talk) 04:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Fix for ad like tone
I think we just need to remove "However, despite thousands of visitors, university professors, and television crews, there have been no conclusive results as to the true cause of the effects.". This is just some fun text from the brochure. Its not objective fact.--99.0.0.53 (talk) 04:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Good source
The Blackwell Handbook of Sensation and Perception edited by E. Bruce Goldstein "and the internal room. This is the phenomenon of the alteration of perceived eye height (Matin & Li, 1992). We also notice that a freely rolling ball appears to move uphill, as does spilt water, appearing to defy gravity. Several of these examples have become well-known tourist attractions. The Mystery Spot in California’s Santa Cruz Mountains is a particularly good example (Murphy, 1986). Here and in more controlled laboratory situations, it is evident that we have a visually based module (with shallow outputs) which tells us about the direction of the upright. These “mandatory” mechanisms cannot be shut down and continue to give us false information even though we arc aware of the circumstances giving rise to the illusion. Under these circumstances, the perceptual module is so strong and ubiquitous that it cannot be ignored. Observers, including the proprietors of such establishments, not familiar with these phenomena of visual perception, explain the rather disparate array of phenomena as due to a “mysterious physical force” yet to be explained by physicists. For example, my tour guide in the Santa Cruz mountains assured us that the place was visited by America’s top rocket scientists, Werner von Braun and Albert Einstein, and that neither could explain it."

And which names the owner and dates it to 1941. Dougweller (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Article tone
This page has a really annoying gee whiz we sure dunno what causes the strange phenomena at the mystery spot durp durp tone to it. This is an encyclopedia, not a brochure for a tourist trap. There are no mysterious phenomena. I came here to read how these illusions are designed and what scientific principles they are based on and instead I get credulous wide eyed wonderment from the bumpkins of the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.32.24.140 (talk) 01:53, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I've removed a bit. There are two good paragraphs explaining this. Doug Weller  talk 10:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)