So your dictionary definition was not helpful. The difference between physical and mental is not cut and dried.
It's an inappropriate use of the word, part of the scam used to separate fools and their money created by P. T. Barnum, et. al.
I'd say it's the only appropriate use of the word: magic = scam. (Of course, we do enjoy being scammed for entertainment purposes.)
I would say the magic used in LOTR would be the only appropriate use of the term. A fictional power found in fantasies. Seeing live humans doing what is billed as "magic" should be chargeable as fraud.
Well, I personally believe there is no such thing as the supernatural type of magic, but to assert so in this thread would be begging the question. I assume even the most fervent of believers don't think of card tricks as the pinnacle of what they think is magic. So I think we need to define what kind of magic those believers insist is "real" magic. That would start with the OP. What examples of magic, exactly, is he thinking?
That's overly simplistic. We need to separate fraud from entertainment in a lot of areas. Do you want to charge the producers of Lord of the Rings with fraud?
1. You said that, "Seeing live humans doing what is billed as 'magic' should be chargeable as fraud." 2. Have you ever heard of movie magic? If not, you can Google it. 3. So, what's the difference between Penn and Teller saying, "We're going to entertain you by pretending to pull a rabbit out of a hat, predicting what card you will pick, etc." and Peter Jackson saying, "I'm going to entertain you by pretending to show you orcs, dragons, etc."? How is a movie different from a "magic" show? How can you charge "live humans doing what is billed as 'magic'" with fraud unless you charge every movie-maker too? Do you not understand the difference between entertainment and fraud?
Lord of the Rings portrays magic as real, too. But everyone knows it's not, just like everyone knows that David Copperfield doesn't really make airplanes vanish, just like Santa doesn't really exist, and just like everyone knows that _any_ magic show is a show of clever illusions.
How is the thought of your wife a chemical process? You could introspect the thought of your wife all day and never turn up anything about a chemical process. You could also examine the chemical process all day and never turn up anything about the thought of your wife. How are they the same thing?
I guess I thought that was just a poor example. So, the only question on the table then is: is the OP in any doubt as to whether card tricks are real magic? If he thinks so, that's gob-smackingly naive. If he does not, what is this thread about?