What is paranormal in Homeopathy
- Thread starter Dr. MAS
- Start date
-
- Tags
- homeopathy
No, it appears he has no idea...Dr. MAS said:Rolfe you may reply for others .....So for you have been failed in qualifying prelimnary test for admission in understanding homeopathy...
2nd question has been floated...
WHAT are you talking about, please, Dr MAS?
Rolfe
Adult human female
God knows. He seems to be saying, at different points, thatZep said:
- mixing cannot be relied upon despite all the succussion, therefore there is reasonable probability that the aliquot taken to make the next dilution stage may be extremely unrepresentative
- remedy molecules may break down (apparently to their component atoms) during the process
- remedy molecules may catalyse the formation of more identical moleculs from the added solvent
- remedy molecules may catalyse the formation of completely different now molecules from the added solvent (I'm not 100% sure about this last one).[/list=1]I really don't see how he expects to get anywhere with these wild and unsubstantiated speculations.
First, we observe that the amount of shaking involved in succussion usually seems to be enough to provide sufficient mixing. However, even if it did not, there would be no way of controlling whether many more or many fewer remedy molecules were taken at each step. Unless there is some sort of magic spell involved, which forces most of the molecules into the aspirated aliquot at each step, fluctuations of probability during the 30 dilution steps would ensure that there was nothing left by 30C anyway. Usually. This is really only a claim of diabolical quality control, and (again in the absence of magic control of the molecules) simply implies that the very occasional bottle might have something in it. So how come absolutely every bottle is expected to work, again?
For the second two, perhaps for simplicity we could concentrate on simple atomic or ionic remedies, so that Dr. Mas may explain himself more clearly.
Let us consider sodium sulphate, Dr. Mas's alleged cure for hepatitis, Na<SUB>2</SUB>SO<SUB>4</SUB>. There are seven atoms in this formula. Even if it were possible to split the thing down to separate component molecules or ions, you can only multiply the number of particles of your original salt by seven. So how come you can still have anything left by 30C?
And again, Na<SUB>2</SUB>SO<SUB>4</SUB>. The atoms involved are Na, S and O. The solvent, as it's been explained to us, contains H and O (and possibly C if alcohol is involved). How are you proposing to postulate the formation of more Na and S atoms when there were only a finite number in the mixture to begin with and no more are being added?
If you are suggesting that the presence of Na<SUB>2</SUB>SO<SUB>4</SUB> in the solution can actually cause the formation of a completely different molecule from the material of the added solvent, please give formulae for the chemical reactions involved, and remember that Geni will be there to calculate bond energies for anything you suggest.
Rolfe.
Vikram said:
YES
How stupid you are!
When I will demonstrate then you will demand scientific explanation. oh oh oh what you said, (not listened....) you will not demand? .... ok okLet's see, I am going to demonstrate..... here I go.....
A patient was came, he was gasteroenteritis patient. I just gave him a dose of Arsenic Alb 200 and he was cured in no time, he is still living happy life and never complaint his gastro complaints again.
Ok This is has been done... Have you seen it?
An anectdote. No reference, no case history, nothing. That's what you think of when asked for evidence? Homeopaths really live in a fantasy land...Dr. MAS said:Let's see, I am going to demonstrate..... here I go.....
A patient was came, he was gasteroenteritis patient. I just gave him a dose of Arsenic Alb 200 and he was cured in no time, he is still living happy life and never complaint his gastro complaints again.
Ok This is has been done... Have you seen it?
Hey, Dr MAS - this is MY fairy-story for today.Dr. MAS said:YES
How stupid you are!
Let's see, I am going to demonstrate..... here I go.....
A patient was came, he was gasteroenteritis patient. I just gave him a dose of Arsenic Alb 200 and he was cured in no time, he is still living happy life and never complaint his gastro complaints again.
Ok This is has been done... Have you seen it?
A patient was came, he was gasteroenteritis patient. I just gave him a glass of saline water and he was cured in a day or two, he is still living happy life and never complaint his gastro complaints again until the next time he drinks out of the dog's water-bowl..
What do you think? Sounds reasonable, doesn't it. But do you believe it really happened? Yes or no.
I have NO idea what you are talking about here. It makes no sense at all. Maybe it's a language thing, so please explain more clearly - do you have any scientific proof of homeopathy working? Yes or no.Dr. MAS said:Dear Zep and Donks
You already said, you don't need explanation....
And now you wants explanation... ok
Reply correctly my 2nd question in red above. If you will reply correctly, I will expalin the case further.
In my contention, the assertions about the practical effect of diluting past Avogadro's limit do in fact require some form of succussion (note spelling, Dr. Mas) to apply.
**************************************
Sorry Gues, for poor spellings... I am not english speaker. I am punjabi who knows 11 (eleven) languages, because our founder of homeopathy also knew 11. We are following him.
**************************************
Sorry Gues, for poor spellings... I am not english speaker. I am punjabi who knows 11 (eleven) languages, because our founder of homeopathy also knew 11. We are following him.
Whoosh! Splat!Dr. MAS said:The only difference is he came to you after taking my medicine.
Hear that noise?
That's the point of this argument, going straight over your head and into a brick wall.
Really, are we going to have a serious conversation from you, are are you going to continue to roll out what looks to be plain and obvious nonsense. You say you have a degree in mass communication - so how about you START COMMUNICATING for a change?
Do you have any scientific proof that homeopathy works? Yes or no.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
No, I haven't seen it. I only have your unsubstantiated word for it. And, of course, even if every word of your nice little story is true, there is no indication of:Dr. MAS said:A patient was came, he was gasteroenteritis patient. I just gave him a dose of Arsenic Alb 200 and he was cured in no time, he is still living happy life and never complaint his gastro complaints again.
Ok This is has been done... Have you seen it?
Exactly what the patient was actually suffering from;
Whether this condition was likely to resolve spontaneously;
What other treatments he may have received either before, during or after your treatment;
Etc.
In other words, there's no evidence whatsoever in what you have posted that your treatment actually cured this alleged patient.
Please try to understand what you are being told.
If you have not followed then this does not matter. Atleast you did not deny the fact. You may please ask this question from your near by scientific community. Please.
When a person says, I have not followed then I will explain the principle again and again and will not pass disgusting remarks but when you say, I have followed and then deny then you have to get admission somewhere for understanding basic chemistry.
I will wait. This is very simple to understand. I fully support your will of understanding.
When a single drop from 1st potency (which was prepared according to the ratio 1/99) was taken into 2nd bottle for preparing 2nd dilution, can you confirm that the exact ratio of "starting material" in the drop was transfered in 2nd diltution?
Remember, 1st potency was prepared with the ratio 1/99 i.e one drop of starting material was taken and 99 drops of fresh pure any solvent (alcohol) was added and then it was jerked 10 times. The "lonly" drop of 1st starting material was got mixed and now you have to take one drop from the previous potency as "new starting material" for preparing 2nd potency. Clear?
Can you confirm that this new drop which was taken as new starting material contains 1/99 ratio of 1st starting material (Refer to probablity law)?
Remember, according to probality law, it is quite possible that the 2nd starting material "drop" may not contain any molecule of 1st starting material (because that drop was picked up blindly from the 1st bottle) and it may or may not contain 50% of the 1st starting material or may contain 99% of the starting material. Hence, avogadro's law can be applied in the same manner as it was demonstrated by you (member) earlier.
Have you follewed my new clear and robust wording. I can't explain in more simple way.
What is your claim?
When a person says, I have not followed then I will explain the principle again and again and will not pass disgusting remarks but when you say, I have followed and then deny then you have to get admission somewhere for understanding basic chemistry.
I will wait. This is very simple to understand. I fully support your will of understanding.
When a single drop from 1st potency (which was prepared according to the ratio 1/99) was taken into 2nd bottle for preparing 2nd dilution, can you confirm that the exact ratio of "starting material" in the drop was transfered in 2nd diltution?
Remember, 1st potency was prepared with the ratio 1/99 i.e one drop of starting material was taken and 99 drops of fresh pure any solvent (alcohol) was added and then it was jerked 10 times. The "lonly" drop of 1st starting material was got mixed and now you have to take one drop from the previous potency as "new starting material" for preparing 2nd potency. Clear?
Can you confirm that this new drop which was taken as new starting material contains 1/99 ratio of 1st starting material (Refer to probablity law)?
Remember, according to probality law, it is quite possible that the 2nd starting material "drop" may not contain any molecule of 1st starting material (because that drop was picked up blindly from the 1st bottle) and it may or may not contain 50% of the 1st starting material or may contain 99% of the starting material. Hence, avogadro's law can be applied in the same manner as it was demonstrated by you (member) earlier.
Have you follewed my new clear and robust wording. I can't explain in more simple way.
What is your claim?
Rolfe
Adult human female
No criticism intended. I would perform very badly I'm afraid if I had to discuss with you in Punjabi! Merely a point of information.Dr. MAS said:Sorry Gues, for poor spellings... I am not english speaker. I am punjabi who knows 11 (eleven) languages, because our founder of homeopathy also knew 11. We are following him.
However, criticism is intended for your constant failure to come to the point. You keep offering to prove, scientifically, either that homoeopathy works, or that there is actual remedy substance present in 30C potencies. As I understand it, you imply in all the bottles, of every type of remedy. But you never do either.
Realise that we have had many people here who have said, I saw a sick person. I gave them a homoeopathic remedy. Something happened. (Usually they got better, although sometimes it's been that they aggravated.) Therefore homoeopathy works.
That is scientific proof of nothing more than that you know how to type, and the Internet works.
Your attempts to explain how you think there can be remedy substance present in all bottles of 30C potency preparation of all types of remedy have so far been utterly pathetic. To call them wild speculation would be to insult wild speculations. Don't just declare I don't understand you, explain yourself in detail, with all the chemical reactions, for sodium sulphate, please.
Rolfe.
Rolfe
Adult human female
What is your claim? As I recall, it was that there was remedy substance in every bottle of every potency of every type of remedy. Not that there might be some remedy in a few bottles of a few preparations somewhere.Dr. MAS said:
So, please confirm. Are you saying that no matter which bottle of which remedy of whch potency we buy, there will always be remedy material in it?
If this is the case, remember you said this. ".... it is quite possible that the 2nd starting material "drop" may not contain any molecule of 1st starting material." How do you propose to ensure that this never happens at any time during any homoeopathic preparation?
Rolfe.
Forgive me, but I’m not following your argument.
Suppose I had (i) 1 mol L-1 HCl, (ii) 0.1 mol L-1 HCl, and (iii) 0.01 mol L-1 HCl, solutions (ii) prepared from (i) and (iii) from (ii). I use the example of HCl because one can easily determine how much HCl is present by titration with NaOH.
Are you saying that the same volume of NaOH is used to titrate each solution no matter the differing concentration?
(PS Was Afridi’s knock yesterday televized ? How I wish I’d seen it)
OK, I'll try to make some sense of this.
OK, you have made one dilution (1st potency?) of 1:100, and are using that to create a 1:10000 solution, being the second dilution (2nd potency?). Standard stuff, so we are following so far...Dr. MAS said:
Can I just confirm with you: THIS is your proof of homeopathic remedies having active components at high dilutions? You are really sure this is what you want to say?Dr. MAS said:
No, you were applying avogadro law and your entire discussion is based on that law and the question was floated in order to educate you how the avogadro law can not be applied in the same manner as it was expalained by ATkins or others. Just reply my simple question. "When a single drop from 1st potency (which was prepared according to the ratio 1/99) was taken into 2nd bottle for preparing 2nd dilution, can you confirm that the exact ratio of "starting material" in the drop was transfered in 2nd diltution?"
Just reply my simple question. "When a single drop from 1st potency (which was prepared according to the ratio 1/99) was taken into 2nd bottle for preparing 2nd dilution, can you confirm that the exact ratio of "starting material" in the drop was transfered in 2nd diltution?"