What is paranormal in Homeopathy

[Dr. MAS]

First follow last five pages and then come to this page. I am going to home. Bye.

Take care. and win the prize if you can.

 

[Rolfe]

Why do you not reply to me? This is a very important question.

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?

 

[Zep]

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?"

We've got past that bit. Now we are up to this bit.

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 (remember) earlier.

Is this your claim that you want to put forward that supports homeopathic remedies? A simple yes or no will be fine.

 

[Rolfe]

Zep, I think he's bailed.

Do you think he's trying to claim that probability can be influenced to ensure that greater than 1% of the solute is picked up in the relevant aliquot every time a homoeopathic dilution is made? Because if he is, that's as paranormal as it gets.

Do you think he'll ever answer my question about there being remedy substance in any bottle of any remedy potency I care to buy?

Rolfe.

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Just for fun, let's teach Mr MAS some simple physical chemistry.

Syed, you might want to read this, it will help you do your homework. I'm still waiting for you to hand it in.

Right. Here we go.

MAS, let's say you have a 1ml of 1 molar solution of Na₂SO₄ solution. In 1 litre you would have 6.022 x 10²³ of each of the component moieties of Na₂SO₄. In 100ml you will have 6.022 x 10²².

If you want to use this as the basis for your next 1 in 100 dilution you will draw 1ml into a pipette and add 99ml water.

If the solution was well-mixed when you drew up that 1ml it will contain 6.022 x 10²⁰ of each of the components of Na₂SO₄.

You are suggesting that there may be some other number drawn up.

Originally posted by Dr. MAS 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

Edited to add this quote so as to stuff his own words back down his throat and remove his scope for claiming I have misunderstood him

How many? What are the chances that the aspirate will conatin a number substantially different from 6.022 x 10²⁰?

Now here is the bit to help Mr Syed. Let me remind you that 6.022 x 10²⁰ can be written fully as 602,200,000,000,000,000,000.

Syed, you need to do a simple piece of arithmetic.

Divide 602,200,000,000,000,000,000 by 800,352,112.676.
What is the answer? How many atoms or molecules are there in the epinephrine solution you mentioned?

I would expect a bright 10 year old to do these sums accurately and have a feel for the size of the numbers. You seem to be struggling badly.

 

[Zep]

Real quick reply, Rolfe, as it's after midnight.

I'm waiting to see what Dr MAS has to say about the "probability" of low potencies selecting wildly varying numbers of molecules in each "drop" for the next potency. I suspect he thinks molecules are just slightly smaller than golf-balls...

 

[Badly Shaved Monkey]

Real quick reply, Rolfe, as it's after midnight.

I'm waiting to see what Dr MAS has to say about the "probability" of low potencies selecting wildly varying numbers of molecules in each "drop" for the next potency. I suspect he thinks molecules are just slightly smaller than golf-balls...

Yes, well last time I played golf, my score was depressingly close to Avogadro's number.

I prefer blood sports anyway. I love the look of confused panic and pain in the eyes of your quarry. I just hope no one campaigns to stop us being cruel to homeopaths.

 

[Homeopath Syed]

Beware

Darat,

Can you please clarify what you mean by "Spondylitis" and by cure?e.g.
1) are you talking about a specific disease or all diseases that are called "Spondylitis"
2) by cure do you mean there are no more symptoms, the damage already done is reversed and there will never be a further recurrence of the disease?
-------------------------------------------

Now if we are at a level where we start to re-invent the wheel whats all the fuss about ? Spondylitis means Spondilitis ...whether cervical or Sacral. I wrote Spondylitis and you read it right...whats the confusions ?

By cure .. what do you mean by Cure ? Cure means CURE and thats it. Ofcourse the the disease is reversed or else there is no cure.

Do we need to share a dictionary for every word ?
--------------------------------------------
Dr.MAS
No one here have read the Probability...! They wont answer...they are busy searching for their Teachers.
-------------------------------------------
Rolfe,
Thanks for the very long post. There is a line in the last that they might flee away from direct medical experimentation upon human body. Ofcourse living. By the way thats my attorney's remarks... I still did not read it.

Thanks

 

[Homeopath Syed]

Beware

BSM...Go Shave Right !

you think there is no molecule in say 30th potency of homeopathic drug of the Solute ?

You are right about it ...?

Who say there is ???

 

[Rolfe]

I'm waiting to see what Dr MAS has to say about the "probability" of low potencies selecting wildly varying numbers of molecules in each "drop" for the next potency. I suspect he thinks molecules are just slightly smaller than golf-balls...

I can tell it's late with you. BSM and I are in the same time zone together, mid-afternoon, we can take over.

This is starting to remeind me of a physics class when I was in first year at university. The lecturer took a wooden-handled blackboard duster and held it out. He told us he was going to let go and did so. It fell to the floor. He said, "why did you all look down? Why did nobody look up?"

He then said, think about the atoms and molecules of nitrogen and oxygen in the air. They are all in Brownian motion, right? And all moving independently? So, it's theoretically possible that all the gas particles above the duster might have been moving up just at the moment I let go, and likewise all the particles below the duster might also have been moving upwards. And if that had happened, the duster would have fallen upwards, correct?

So why did you not look up?

He then went on to explain how, although the behaviour of one particle might be completely impossible to predict, when the numbers are sufficiently large, probability law works in such a way as to even out the random variations. And the object falls downwards, because all the air-particle collisions on all sides even out.

I suppose a great gust of wind could have come out of the floor!

I think Mas might be trying some pretty clumsy sophistry here. A bit like saying, you agree the duster might have fallen upwards. So, you haven't been there to watch every time any object has fallen, in the entire history of the universe? And you won't be there to watch every time any object falls, in the entire future of the universe? Therefore, you can't say either that is has never happened, or that it never will happen, that an object will fall upwards. Therefore, objects fall upwards. Give me the money.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

Re: Beware

BSM...Go Shave Right !

you think there is no molecule in say 30th potency of homeopathic drug of the Solute ?

You are right about it ...?

Who say there is ???

Dr. Mas, apparently.

Rolfe.

 

[Mojo]

Re: Beware

BSM...Go Shave Right !

you think there is no molecule in say 30th potency of homeopathic drug of the Solute ?

You are right about it ...?

Who say there is ???

For one, Dr. MAS seems to be saying it:

Originally posted by Dr. MAS
Why are you applying Avogadro's law here? And what is the hitch in not applying “probability law”? Somebody told you about Avogadro's law and you blindly started writing comments that the dilution does not contain any molecule in above 18c potency and never thought that there are so many chemistry rules which can be applied other than Avogadro's law.

First you declare and verify on this forum that according to you “the paranormal part of homeopathy is, its dilution has no molecule in above 30c potency” then a protocol can be built to prove that “yes”, the molecules are present in 31c potency. Ok come forward and verify your statement.

And:

Originally posted by Dr. MAS
Yes, I as a pure scientific research officer and real homeopath (qualified in all respect and in all categories, 11 years of continuous and regular study and having all homeopathic certifications) wants to tell you that your information is absolutely WRONG.

Please tell me, why do you believe so “Any remedy of higher potency than 12C or 24X will have a mean concentration of less than one molecule per remedy”, who told you that there is no molecule in above 24X potency? Any strong reason to believe?

 

[Homeopath Syed]

Beware

Ohh....

Let me get this straight...!

What about material impressions ???

Say if we drop a ball on floor... Would ther be any impression made by it ?

Can there be electromegnatic impressions upon the molecules of a solvent by the solute...if repeatedly jerked ?

Or is it a jerky statement for you ?

 

[Rolfe]

Re: Beware

Ohh....

Let me get this straight...!

What about material impressions ???

Say if we drop a ball on floor... Would ther be any impression made by it ?

Can there be electromegnatic impressions upon the molecules of a solvent by the solute...if repeatedly jerked ?

Or is it a jerky statement for you ?

Oh God, the Kumarbot has a sock!

Rolfe.

 

[geni]

Re: Beware

Can there be electromegnatic impressions upon the molecules of a solvent by the solute...if repeatedly jerked ?

Nope. Water doesn't form ordered structures for any useful lengths of time

 

[Homeopath Syed]

Beware

Geni,

Fine what about Alcohol ?

How long can Alcohol retain a megnetic impression ?

...........

 

[andycal]

Who is the more trollish? The troll or the fools who keep feeding the troll? - Obi-Wan Kenobi (taken from his little known blog - "Once were Jedi".)

 

[geni]

Re: Beware

Geni,

Fine what about Alcohol ?

How long can Alcohol retain a megnetic impression ?

...........

Even less long since it is less polar than water.

 

[flume]

Originally posted by Zep I'm waiting to see what Dr MAS has to say about the "probability" of low potencies selecting wildly varying numbers of molecules in each "drop" for the next potency. I suspect he thinks molecules are just slightly smaller than golf-balls...

With the sodium sulfate example, and other soluble materials, we're talking about molecules. But maybe they make remedies using insoluble materials: in that case it might be more like golf balls. I wonder if they make preparations with things like oils. I'm also thinking about insoluble minerals, although for them the first dilutions apparently are triturations with lactose rather than succussions with water or alcohol. But if they start with materials that are insoluble, then maybe they could pull up zero or 50% of their starting material depending on where they pipet from the tube. If someone always pipetted from the top in the case of oil, or always from the bottom in the case of insoluble particles, it might skew the ratios. But in this case, they would not be diluting the material, just transferring it.

 

[Rolfe]

Well, there are so many different things. Salt, various plants, mashed-up honey bees, antimatter, a latex condom, blood from various sources (including an AIDS patient and several species of bird), hydrogen, gold.... Soluble or insoluble, elements, compounds, salts, mixtures, small molecules, macromolecules - you can make a remedy from anything, they say, and it's true that nothing has ever been tried of which they said, no, that doesn't seem to do anything. (Wow, Pfizer would kill for a system like that!)

They seem to grind up the insoluble things till they're in fine suspension, and that's about it. Sure there must be times when mixing isn't complete for some preparations, but others are very soluble. Mas seems to be saying that his theorising applies to all of them. If he thinks at all, that is, which I sort of doubt.

Rolfe.