Mental superpowers

This will begin as a departure from my usual theme(s) - quite a bit more nerdy - but bear with me as I am building toward a point that has relevance.

Last year I came up with a final exam question for my high school physics students that I thought might help them put all the complicated ideas associated with electromagnetism together to form a big picture. It's a tough and abstract topic, and my idea was to inject some fun and imagination into their studies (because imagination is required to think about something so abstract in the first place). Here is the question:

If you had absolute control over the electromagnetic force, what sorts of things could you do with your superpower? Justify your answer(s) based on your knowledge of electromagnetism.

That's a pretty hard question. I've been thinking about the answer for about 6 months (off and on). Here's a portion of what I came up with:

I could move objects at will by aligning or increasing the magnitude of like charges on objects' surfaces near one another. Air is such an object, which could be used to continue the propulsion if you don't want to fiddle with the fairly complicated task of increasing the repulsive force properly as the objects move apart from one another. The air trick would be tough, as with such low mass air particles would tend to be the things moving, but if an object were bombarded with sufficient air particles the conservation of momentum would continue the propulsion (though there would be a sort of "exhaust" wind that would result).
I could also change the physical structure of things by altering the positions and/or motions of electrons on and in those objects.
I could change the appearance of anything by altering the frequency and/or amplitude of the electromagnetic waves entering the eye (or emanating from an object(s)). This includes invisibility - from either mimicing the light from behind the object in front if it or by bending the light from the object around the viewer's eyes.
I could create super-dense projectiles by either: a) pressing the adjacent electron clouds of atoms together to create "electron degeneracy" such as is found in white dwarves, or b) crashing electrons of atoms into the protons to create chunks of neutrons and pressing the resulting nuclei together. The problem with the latter is that I couldn't propel a ball of neutrons with my power. It would just fall through the earth with this crazy density.
I could create powerful laser beams spontaneously (harmonized and directed electromagnetic waves)
I could produce nuclear explosions/radiation by increasing the positive charge on protons within a piece of very "heavy" matter flying the nuclei apart and potentially causing a chain reaction (if the nuclei are unstable enough to begin with).
I could fly apart anything at will by increasing the same type of charge on its various particles causing them to repel.
There's more, including tons with magnetic fields and electric currents, but I'll stop there to keep from boring you. Feel free to try to add to the list - I would very much enjoy that.

But there's a problem. All of these changes would require an input of energy, as they would work against the natural condition of things. In other words, you'd have to create oppositional situations from relatively balanced situations, or work against the tendencies of nature. In most cases, since we're talking about visible effects, we're dealing with macroscopic scales here, which means that a tremendous amount of energy would be required indeed. Where would this energy come from? I think you'd be pretty much impotent in the face of the conservation of energy unless you wanted to consume your body or something to perform one or two "amazing" acts.

Ok, this conclusion got me thinking about something more relevant for everyone. It seems like the problem is that making these things happen requires that aspects of nature be shifted into an oppositional arrangement. That is, you'd be altering nature's tendency to balance. This reminds me of one of my primary operating principles: conflict is universally destructive and draining. Nature is not designed for conflict, it is all about flow. Flow is collective action - cooperation.

This makes me think about what we currently do with our minds; our existing 'superpowers.' They are super, by the way. Think about it. We can conjure up thoughts and ideas, and even project them out into the universe, we can manipulate large objects (our bodies, and other things that our bodies interact with), we can imagine things that we've never experienced, we can even love.

What are the energy consequences of these things that we can do with our minds? Certainly, the motion stuff requires energy (just as it would with psychokinesis). We've all felt sweaty and exhausted after a hard day's labor. But what about thoughts and ideas? Does the generation of thoughts always require an input of energy, or are there some which seem to bring energy into us, to feed us? In my experience, there are certain mental exercises which seem to 'charge' me. I'm no expert, but it seems like the principles that govern the external world must apply internally: that energy is expended when thoughts are oppositional in nature, whereas when they're congruent with the flow - cooperative - they draw energy into us. Here's my hypothesis: conflict-oriented thoughts drain us, while mutualistic thoughts feed us. This applies to thoughts about the external world as well as about the internal world (both of which are really the same thing, if you ask me, but I won't get into that here). When we seek conflict, we are sapped of energy. When we attack or defend, we are drained. This is particularly true when we attack ourselves, as we must then defend at the same time.

Thoughts?