This study examines thought experiments as a classroom method for gifted learners, asking how student-generated designs can elicit transfer, model critique, and creative scientific reasoning. We adopted a qualitative, exploratory design with three formally identified gifted middle-school students. Semi-structured, open-ended interview prompts—built around canonical physics thought experiments (e.g., Galileo, Einstein, Schrödinger)—served as the data-collection instrument. Each 45–60-minute interview elicited an initial analogy, introduced a targeted counter-example, and required a revision; a subsequent small-group discussion enabled peer critique and co-construction. Using reflexive thematic analysis with iterative coding (open–axial–selective), we traced how learners interpreted and re-framed core ideas from mechanics and quantum theory. Findings show three student-authored thought experiments—“Coin and Ghost Cat” (superposition/observer effect), “Diving into a Pool” (free fall vs. motion in a fluid), and “Cooking and Uncertainty” (measurement–disturbance trade-off). Across cases, students tested conceptual boundaries, surfaced misconceptions, coordinated everyday reasoning with formal principles, and refined their designs following counter-examples. We conclude that a short, structured routine—prime with a canonical case, elicit an analogy, stress it with a counter-example, require revision, and compare designs with a simple rubric—renders thought experiments classroom-feasible. The approach is low-cost and inclusive, supporting higher-order explanation, cross-context transfer, and self-authored inquiry in gifted education.