Derived Avogadros Equation for:

That's interesting, Sheikh. What conclusion have you reached?

I'd be interested to know: do you agree with my simple maths above, showing that a 200C dilution is equivalent to 1 part in 10^400? Do you understand how mind-bendingly huge that number is? You must surely agree that, if homeopathic remedies have an effect at all, it must qualify as "paranormal"?
 
when Homeos 1 and 2 punch him in the face and tell him to get back to his books while they go to the pub.

Somehow, this whole homeopathy thingamajingy doesn't appear to be the kind of idea that people would devise outide the boundaries of a pub...

Rasmus.
 
Do they still call these "X" and "C" prepatations? How can they get the one tenth, or one hundredth, dilution accurately?


Sometimes labled K. They are gerneraly considered equiverlent to C
 
I've always wondered just what, exactly, is proved by showing that there are molecules of the original remedy left.

This would, actually, detroy the whole basis of homeopathy. If they are relying on the properties of the MT, the molecules of it left in the final solution, then why bother with the diluting and such? And what happens to the "like cures like" idea? It all gets tossed out the window.

The only thing homeopathy can cling to and still maintain any simblence of internal consistency is the idea of some ethereal, undetectable force. Any attempt to "scientize" it will shoot it in it's own foot.

All these attempts to prove "water memory" or that molecules of solute are left pretty well undermine every other principle of homeopathy; so, Sheikhy, I don't think you're helping your cause any here.
 
It's been sounding to me for quite a long time like the(se) homeopath(s) from Pakistan has/have been thinking up an idiosyncratic 'mechanism' for homeopathy - one which most homeopaths in the rest of the world would vehemently disagree with (and which is sounding less and less coherent the more it's hinted at).

Definitely sounds like they need MT molecules left in the preparation, doesn't it. Sheikh's also mentioned something about few molecules having more room to 'vibrate' in a homeopathic preparation. I wonder where all this is heading.
 
Sheikh's also mentioned something about few molecules having more room to 'vibrate' in a homeopathic preparation. I wonder where all this is heading.
I do not think it is leading anywhere. In desperate need of anything that sound "scientific" they just grab anything that somebody with a flair for words has floated.

It is interesting that homeopaths are very loath of criticising each other on scientific grounds. They can freely complain that Hahnemann's procedure is not used, or that somebody has committed the lesser sin of isopathy, but nobody would protest against a ridiculous scientific sounding method of working for homoeopathy.
 
Stupid question, but out of curiosity, what if we went the other way with the calculations:

Start with 1L of 20C potion and assume that it has exactly one single molecule of whatever. What amount of the "whatever" (i.e. how many molecules) would be needed at the start of the process to achieve this result?

I'd try to figure it out myself, but my math skills ain't that great.

If it's been detailed elsewhere, never mind...there are a lot of these threads floating around...
 
It is interesting that homeopaths are very loath of criticising each other on scientific grounds. They can freely complain that Hahnemann's procedure is not used, or that somebody has committed the lesser sin of isopathy, but nobody would protest against a ridiculous scientific sounding method of working for homoeopathy.
Hmmm I just typed a lengthy post disagreeing with you, but in the process talked myself around. You're probably right - whether Sheikh et al.'s 'mechanism' contradicts fundamental homeopathic philosophies or not, homeopaths will stroke their beards and agree.
 
Stupid question, but out of curiosity, what if we went the other way with the calculations:

Start with 1L of 20C potion and assume that it has exactly one single molecule of whatever. What amount of the "whatever" (i.e. how many molecules) would be needed at the start of the process to achieve this result?

I'd try to figure it out myself, but my math skills ain't that great.

If it's been detailed elsewhere, never mind...there are a lot of these threads floating around...
Assuming.... Lots of things...

There would be 100 molecules in one liter of 19C, 100 x 100 molecules in 18C, 1003 in a liter of 17C and.... 10019 in 1C and 10020 molecules in one liter of mother tincture or whatever you call what you start with. Or 1040 molecules. Or 1.6E16 mol. Or at the very least that many grams. At least 16 000 000 000 metric tons, if you wish. Long story short: A LOT more than any human being could possibly stuff into a liter...
 
That's what I was expecting. I was hoping that my little word problem would somehow show that it wouldn't matter WHAT the "whatever" is - hydrogen, lead, Aspartame, etc, if 1.6x10^16 moles of it is what is needed to guarantee one molecule of it in the final mixture, that's more than is feasably possible and homeopathy is bunk.

Back to lurking...
 
It is applicable. That most dilutions will reach the noise floor of contamination before they reach Avogadro's limit does not change that. When either happens, you have no longer any knowledge or control over the content of your preparation.

MAS, are you contemplating to provide even a wisp of explanation of how you expect to see a medicinal effect of a few molecules of anything. do you realize how little substance a few molecules are?

Hans
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom