Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

  • Imagine you are sipping tea or coffee while discussing various issues with a broad and diverse network of students, colleagues, and friends brought together by the common bond of physics, graduate school, and the physics GRE.

DocQuack
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:15 pm

Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby DocQuack » Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:49 pm

The below post has been banned at two other "physics" forums without ever taking more than a quick glance. Hopefully, this forum is moderated by real scientists, not those of religious prejudice and pseudo-scientific arrogance? How can you have a free exchange of ideas and tickled imagination where sharp minds are not even allowed to consider and think for themselves? :roll: Moderator: Please be something other than the average idiot! :? Read and study before ye reject. That's what scientists do, right? :lol:

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 1:25 AM
Subject: [Defense science agencies] Defense Theoretical Physics Notes

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 1:15 AM
Subject: ATTN: [a university High Energy & Theoretical Physics group]

Dear [-------]:

I present for your contemplation, entertainment, and comment the following Theoretical Physics quackery on a great enigma of modern medical science.

Remember: "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. His eyes are closed." -- Albert Einstein

A Simple Mathematical Physics View to Homeopathy vs. Allopathy (http://excalibur.110mb.com/physics.htm)
This is my physics theory for your review.

Other:

Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications
Volume 323, 15 May 2003, Pages 67-74
Ultra-high dilutions of lithium chloride and sodium chloride (10-30 gcm-3) have been irradiated by X- and ?-rays at 77 K, then progressively rewarmed to room temperature. During that phase, their thermoluminescence has been studied and it was found that, despite their dilution beyond the Avogadro number, the emitted light was specific of the original salts dissolved initially.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... c9fe629f7a


Theory of High Dilutions & Experimental Aspects (by French theoretical physicists on homeopathy) http://www.high-dilutions.net/VersionAn/Theory/Exp.php


Yes, that ever "controversial" and blacklisted medical heresy that is Homeopathy! Said to be mere placebo effect by the brainwashed idiots of the world, but, for those with the honesty to look and explore on their own, it is always found not to be.

Think about it rather than what media tells you: with the hundreds of thousands of practitioners and millions of patients treated since her birth as a medical science and art, you think maybe something might be going on that is real and curative?! Whole government agencies and hospitals in foreign nations devoted to her research? Mother Teresa opening four dispensaries and practicing herself? U.S. Department of Defense studies on the matter? All for placebo voodoo nonsense?

Many scientific research references in her favor are attached below. Arguing over it is like beating a dead horse. The newsletter attached below also covers her Biological Warfare Defense implications, and so it is very important we come to better understand the physics of why it does work as medicine.

Do not get boggled down in the jabber of the world's idiots and biased "scientific" journals. What they argue about is century's old debate long since settled for the homeopath. Regardless of its efficacy and practice as a medical system (something often poorly done), in here truly does dwell a great enigma that should captivate your physics minds -- leading to many questions, theories, and new discoveries...if you dare look.

Materials Science & Engineering researchers have also started to put the mystery into a sound theory and model:

http://www.rustumroy.com/Roy_Structure%20of%20Water.pdf
The Structure of Liquid Water; Novel Insights From Materials Research; Potential Relevance to Homeopathy. Roy, Tiller, Bell, Hoover. 2 AUG 04. Materials Research Innovations Online

The medical world asks, "How can you make medicine increasingly powerful through serial dilution and succussion??!! It just defies laws of chemistry! Defies Avogadro's law!" Ah, yes, it does....if your view is that of the Newtonian classical physicist trapped in a world without particle / wave duality!

Some things we observe with the remedies:

1) They work in infants and animals -- negating any Placebo argument.
2) Microdilutes are possible to measure via many methods.
3) Indian scientists are observing temperature coefficients and signatures in the human body under remedy application.
4) Water itself is an odd substance with properties not fully understood to science.
5) Hammering (succussion) upon the liquid adds more medicinal power to the remedies.
6) Dilution to succussion ratios impact the strength, duration, and shape of the remedy action.
7)We also observe tremendous atmospheric pressures going on in the fluid under succussion.
8. The remedies, once transformed into a kind of written medicinal data in water, have gone on to hold their power over 200 years now. People have opened up Dr. Hahnemann's medical kit and used the same remedies from the same vials he once did -- all well preserved. Yet, how can that be "ice" within water? Ice that does not melt after 200 years at room temperature and variances? Succussion would have to be breaking and creating strong, new bonds in water molecules so that the remedy is not exactly water anymore. And yet the signature differences are very small.

These are the key clues which I have tried to resolve in my own fuzzy physics model. Some things I consider:

1) The problem of a microdilute is analogous to the issue of a little carbon solute diluted within the molten solution of iron. We have two substances which, when commingled in dilution, create a new material of vastly different properties -- depending upon succussion (forging) and dilution ratios of Carbon in Iron, cooling rates, grain structure formation, etc. So, if we see that in liquid metals -- a new material with new properties made from a solute and solution -- what is so crazy about our seeing that a solute in water does the same thing under succussion, dilution, and cooling?

2) There are also many wave mechanics analogies present in the problem. The realm of quantum mechanics being a little too beyond me while homeopaths often try to relate it all to New Agey notions -- casting "quantum" and "metaphysics" together in hokey dokey fashion -- I have sought to understand the macroscopic problem from a classical wave mechanics perspective. That is my: A Simple Mathematical Physics View to Homeopathy vs. Allopathy (http://excalibur.110mb.com/physics.htm)

3) Prior work by Dr. Lo: 1994 Shui-Yin Lo, photo microscopy. In this unusual and controversial experiment, the Lo team, according to Dana Ullman, used a still yet unknown technique to actually photograph hydrogen bonding in water, revealing the suggestion that homeopathic drugs are a type of liquid crystal ”Anomalous State of Ice,” Modern Physics Letters B, 10,19(1996):909-919. See also, “Physical Properties of Water with IE Structures,” Modern Physics Letters B, 10, 19(1996) : 921-930.

4) From there, seeing it all as an exothermic reaction likely leading to crystalline structures we don't fully understand, I generated this Theoretical Physics quackery:

(The below pages of math and physics cannot be directly linked to due to my server, but are available at: A Simple Mathematical Physics View to Homeopathy vs. Allopathy http://excalibur.110mb.com/physics.htm. Index below.)

phys2.jpg (Page 1; Basic QED physics setup with Classical Physics)
phys2b.jpg (P.2; original in error)
phys2bb.jpg (P.2; 10 MAY 07 correction; Succussion relation to a typical Quantum Oscillator)
phys2c.jpg (P.3; original in error)
phys2cc.jpg (P.3; 10 MAY 07 correction; Remedy energy statements, Emission, Spectral Radiance, Radiation Pressure & Momentum.)
phys2d.jpg (P.4; original in error)
phys2dd.jpg (P.4; 10 MAY 07 correction. Thermal Radiation Relation, Spectral Radiancy, Planck's Radiation Law, Dr. Quack's "Unified Theory" in the 4th Dimension)
phys2e.jpg (P.5; original in error)
phys2ee.jpg (P.5; 10 MAY 07 correction; Unified Theory Summary equations. Frequency of Homeopathic Remedy predictions. Equation #19 variables.)
phys2f.jpg (P.6; original; "sanity check")
phys2ff.jpg (P.6; 10 MAY 07 correction; First failed attempt at equation "crunching"; Error isolated. )
phys7.JPG (P.7, 10 MAY 07; Equation 7 sanity check. Alignment of scientific units. Joules/ Wattage error corrected. Redefinition of the Joule = kgxm^4 = Watt x time based on E=mc^2; Mass propagating over the space-time metric alongside energy distribution due to mass-energy relation).
phys8.JPG (P.8, 10 MAY 07; Definition of Joule = 8.99e16 kg x m^4)
phys9.JPG (P.9, 10 MAY 07; First attempt at Remedy Emission Energy equation "sanity check".)
phys10.JPG (P.10, 10 MAY 07; Continued Remedy Emission Energy equation "sanity checks". More thoughts on the redefinition of the Joule. Propagation distance = Time at t=0 or very small.)
phys11.JPG (P.11, 10 MAY 07; Equation #19 crunching with clinical observation data for homeopathic remedies. Mass-Energy substitution step. Prediction of VLF/ audio frequencies, UV-X-ray frequencies, and very energetic gamma rays. Possible meson, hyperon, neutron, boson, and other particle relations to succussion expected. Neutron binding energies exceeded. >10GeV prediction. Exothermic reaction among very energetic light emission as the basis for long-term structuring theorized.)

In evaluating my own mathematical and physics insanity there, the most sane conclusion I have come to is that I don't know what the hell I'm doing! I need people like you to double-check and poke holes in or confirm my thinking and math. Garbage in = garbage out. Have I put garbage in? Set it all up as garbage? Am I off in the math and physics due to pushing too far down into the statistical, lumpy, uncertain realm of quantum mechanics with cleaner classical mechanics setups?

I'm basically saying that, according to my screwy math and physics, as we shake up homeopathic remedies, tremendous interatomic pressures are possibly being created (according to my lensing theory proposed). With all that succussive force lensed down to atomic area (a hydraulic multiplier issue), some sort of fission or even fusion might be going on from just the impact of our shaking up the water! My math could be off there, but the guts of the theory is that, if you accelerate charged particles in any way, electromagnetic radiation is emitted. That radiation emission is an energy and temperature loss -- essentially an exothermic reaction which would facilitate microcrystalline structuring (just like making ice cream among rock salt and mechanical energy). But, my math -- which may be in error -- says that we perhaps haven't detected that yet because the emitted radiation could be far greater than we imagined (> 10 GeV). This would imply liberation of energy from the atom as a key factor in why homeopathic remedies are "frozen" and "iced" in ways we don't fully understand yet. Perhaps the drugs are nothing more than flopped nuclear reaction byproducts with some sort of radiative and crystalline salt half life we don't understand?

Thus, I am either nuts and a bad, bad mathematician and physicist (most likely case because only aerospace engineering is my background and I am somewhat bonkers) or I'm pretty damn good! No fuzzy possibility about it. Either / or. Either it's wild new theory and truth or my work there plain sucks! No mystery. To be science and a valid theory, it must make predictions that can be proven or disproven. And I don't have any detectors here in the 10 GeV range! I'm in way over my head now, too. Please help!

Just wondering what you all think? It'll either stump you, tickle your imagination and wonder while leading you in new directions, or it will give you a good laugh at my crappy theoretical physics. That's the best I can promise. [---------------------------------------------]

My less comical work is attached in the newsletter below. Enjoy the tour!

Doc Quack
http://www.MolecularDyne.com

--------------------
REFERENCES

1) Scientific Research References Validating Homeopathy. http://excalibur.110mb.com/HomeopathicResearch.htm

2) Scientific Research References Validating Homeopathy, Part II (expanded and ongoing list at http://www.Hpathy.com + other articles). http://www.hpathy.com/homeopathyforums/forum_posts.asp?TID=7796&PN=1

3) Homeopathy Research Center The Homeopathy Research Center at http://www.Hpathy.com is intended to provide information about all the historical and current research related to homeopathy and homeopathic medicines at one place. http://www.hpathy.com/research/

4) Dr. Quack's Laser Reflection Experiments in Proof of Homeopathy. http://excalibur.110mb.com/experiments.htm
---------
SOME OF DOC QUACK'S WORK & DISCOVERIES TO DATE

Tamoxifen Citrate involved in the turnaround of a canine, male, skin cancer case pointing to a strong Estrogen or other unknown relationship of the drug to cancer inhibition in general. Case "Bayou". http://excalibur.110mb.com/BAYOU.htm Stage 3 or 4 pushed to around Stage 1. Case hints at potential other oncology uses for Tamoxifen and similar drugs outside of just breast cancer.

Misc. Cancer Cases ongoing in the Human Case Studies archive: http://excalibur.110mb.com/hcases.html Multiple Myeloma Stage 3 to Stage 1 (Case "ML"; LW-12C vaccine protocol; Misc. trials and metrics); Aggressive Prostate Cancer earlier pushed into remission trend to bewilderment of Stanford Medical Center physicians. (Case "Mr. M"); Other.

Misc. Cancer Cases ongoing in the Animal Case Studies archive: http://excalibur.110mb.com/acases.html

General Medical R&D: Human & Animal experiments in reversal and relief of Arthritis, Diabetes, Internal Bleeding, Angina, Hepatitis, Polysystemic Candidiasis, Gall Bladder Disease, GI tract issues, Injuries, Chemical Weapons Defense, Influenzas, Bacterial Infection, Adrenal Insufficiency, general woes, etc. Scattered about among the http://www.MolecularDyne.compage. See: "Dr. Quack Performance Summary" for overall case statistics.

Upcoming Human Cancer Case: a disabled veteran and Lymphoma patient suffering from gagging, vomit, diarrhea, appetite loss, weakness/debility, aversion to all foods, dry mouth, metallic taste, perverted tastes, hypersensitivity to food odors, dizziness/dehydration/ resultant hypotension, and consumption during Radiology treatments of the mouth/ throat. Attempt to relieve symptoms in support of continued radiology while enhancing anti-cancer effects. Referral to existing M.D. for dehydration support. Prescribed Potassium & Magnesium + NaCl supplement or Miso soup + vitamin support until seen by physician. Need to get him eating again and curb emaciation / dehydration danger. Administered 2 doses of Arsenicum album 12C by single dilution glass methods with a fairly large dose for this heavy-set man. As of this writing, doses 1-3 and Miso soup have completely eliminated the diarrhea and fluid loss, alleviated weakness, helped a bit with the vomit, and aided appetite return for going on 3 days now. Update: Diarrhea eliminated over 2 weeks now on those few doses. Mental reservations in eating (taste) still. Weakness and rapid weight loss tax upon adrenal system, but doing okay otherwise. Now off radiology and starting to eat more.

Upcoming Animal Cases: 1) Elderly cat w/ cancer and emaciation (likely to die among any attempts to help, however, due to fragile, end-stage state. Overall palliation attempt.); 2) A "terminal" canine Bone Cancer case doing pretty well among a mixture of conventional D.V.M. oncology and now our kind of quackery. New case: Pit bull/ lab mix with Lymphoma and spleen cancer. Prescribed saliva and blood nosode + Arsenicum album + raw beef bone supplement to diet + other tactics. 1st dose of saliva nosode reported to have the animal more perky, active, more energetic, slept better at night, wet nose returned, stomach seems less swollen. Still too soon to say.

My Favorite Quackery's Cure of Cancer Statistics: http://excalibur.110mb.com/cancerstats.htm Foreign methods we're trying to improve upon because, in the weaker cases, the popular tactics are far too heavy-handed and need integration with other Conventional & Unconventional approaches.

....Why don't you ever hear of this stuff much? Because "peer-reviewed journal" editors and forum moderators tend to have unscientific, religious prejudice to radical heresy.

User avatar
quizivex
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:13 am

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby quizivex » Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:40 am

While this post may sound as outrageous as the classic post by tickets, we must not discard it from consideration... garden's 3rd commandment vehemently warns us not to overlook seemingly nonsensical garbage...

Commandment 1:
*** off the school with damn committee

Commandment 2:
Life is so short to waste time to hate anyone!

Commandment 3:
Ha ha ha, I did not realize that I have been hitting to the back door, thanks to crapy dude!


Commandment 4:
I have packing all of my book to a single box, it is weighted 200grm!

One of the many possible interpretations of the third commandment is the following lesson:
While sometimes, we may be confident that the explanation to some previously unexplained, mysterious phenomenon can be found in a particular area of theory, we must not ignore alternative explanations ("back doors") even if they appear to come from unqualified, insane "crappy dudes".

Indeed, in physics, plenty of historical examples reinforce the importance of this lesson, where mainstream physicists seeking to theoretically explain a new discovery as a consequence of some known theories dismissed an eccentric idea broached by a so-far unestablished physicist, who actually turned out to be correct.

We must thank these crappy dudes for the invaluable knowledge they have bestowed upon us! In fact, I feel DocQuack's explanation has promise because he identified himself as a crappy physicist dude!!! (no relationship to physicsdude)

DocQuack wrote:Just wondering what you all think? It'll either stump you, tickle your imagination and wonder while leading you in new directions, or it will give you a good laugh at my crappy theoretical physics.


When grae313 first listed garden's commandments, it was so hard to believe that there could be any meaning behind #3, which seemed like the most ludicrous combination of garbage words ever assembled since December 4th 2007. But finally, we have shed some light on the matter. The doctrine is even more remarkable if we recognize how garden made himself the subject of that commandment... meaning that even He, the impeccable deity, can learn useful things from mortal crappy dudes. This shouldn't be too much of a surprise, for garden has always been a kind, modest god... afterall, he didn't even capitalize his own name.

DocQuack
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:15 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby DocQuack » Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:57 pm

Thanks Quiz, :mrgreen:

As a crappy dude :wink: , I am humbled to be in such scientific wisdom! And actually I'm not really that snotty. I just take a lot of flak from half-wits out there while fishing the web for serious, intellectual comment and correction on these matters.

The straight scoop with no b.s. is that there is nobody in Homeopathy who can explain to the world exactly why it works. When you delete out the New Agey religious perspectives and metaphysical jive -- getting down to the guts of the problem -- there is captivating, elusive math and physics behind it. We have over 200 years experience with it and hundreds of thousands of physicians who have devoted their lives to the practice as an art and medical science, though the physics to the pharmacology remains elusive. We are, however, going down the right direction in general...if not going down the right track. That's all I can say regarding the serial dilution & succussion mystery.

As for the practice itself, the truth is that perhaps some 90% of homeopaths in the world practice at about 10% the power of the old masters. That's a dreary shop-talk matter I cover more in the lessons on my site, but that's one of the big, big reasons it tends to fail "scientific" testing -- particularly where you get biased testers from the start. The scientific references compiled and presented above show the true R&D history, however.

It would be a lie to say that I am an unbiased sort. No, I have fallen in love with her while I am still trying to understand and better harness this horse. I can tell you that I have healed with the power of these strange drugs, not just repeatedly, but without ever failing to render some form of action for better or worse. To date, there is not a cancer case I have touched in animals or humans for which I have not generated some form of remission trend using these drugs and ways, albeit cure still eludes me. Pushing things from Stage 3 to Stage 1 tends to be my present victory record.

Also, where dummy homeopaths often say no harm can be done with these drugs, I can tell you that is nonsense, lie, or lie to themselves; for I have also repeatedly killed animals with these drugs. Wild claims herein I'm always willing to prove on, too -- just not for every cyberspace twit out there who bashes the topic. I continue to try curing cancer in dogs. I will probably have to eventually leave the United States and work at curing cancer in some nation that actually allows it. Maybe someday you'll find my books blacklisted and buried among obscure libraries out there just as all the present best oncology stuff is at the moment.

But, all the same, the hokey dokey drugs do work. There's so much Big Pharma and nit-wit propaganda out there which tries to claim otherwise and shout us down so that people just don't ever hear the truth. You get all these professionally jealous M.D.'s and biologists pulling their know-it-all gig, yet, as I remember them in school, those were usually the guys who took the easier Math and Physics courses. Yet, the drunken sheep of the world let them tell ye Math and Physics people what true science is and isn't.

Somewhere along the way they missed the point that a theory is valid science IF IT CAN BE PROVEN OR DISPROVEN (And my crappy dude stuff can go only one way; either garbage or good stuff, and all the same probably mistakes to learn from; No metaphysical, unprovable, untestable, New Agey quackadelic jive.). If it holds up as a useful model -- albeit not fully understood -- that's what we call a scientific model. That's all homeopathy is as a medical science and art. Where it's very simple, elegant, and has withstood trial -- like E=mc^2 or Dr. Hahnemann's "Cessat effectus cessat causa!" (Cure the effects of disease and you can cure the cause, without even needing to know the name and classification of the disease pattern...only its symptom shape) -- that's a scientific law, physical or medical. Always subject to revision in light of new discoveries, better theories, models, and laws. Always happy to be stumped with the mysterious and inexplicable; for in there always dwells the pivotal stuff.

I ask only that the reader take the first step to consider that Homeopathy might actually be working out there. Forget efficacy of practice, but only consider if microdilutes are having positive or negative biological impact. You will find that history among the research reference cited and everywhere to my own work. You can feel it yourself next time you have a stuffy nose and take some Nux Vomica 6X for it (no more than a couple doses). To negate Placebo Effect, try it with animals. Study my laser reflection experimental setup for chemical weapons testing in fish. When you stand upon that first stepping stone, then the next question is: "Well, why the hell is this crappy crap actually working?" Answer: "Holy crap! There's something profound to Math and Physics going on deep in this realm. Damned most interesting thing I've seen as a scientist because it mystifies me. I can almost see it, and yet can't. "

As for the voodoo behind it, oh, there's plenty! And there's plenty of dark voodoo to its origins. Of course, we can say the same for Conventional Medicine's origins as our dark sibling in witchcraft and alchemy. But, that's all separate issue. Homeopathy can be understood by the atheist scientist once we just better understand the math and physics behind it. Talking about how the ancient mystical concepts on Ka, Chi, Prana, or the homeopath's Vital Force -- a Star Wars "Force" sorta thing -- relate to things we can make sense of in science...that's too far a stretch for the best math and physics in the world just yet. Rather scary what becomes of the world when men do make a science of religion rather than just the vile way of science as a religion, I'd say! In any case, that "back door" -- mostly likely straight to Hell for the future world -- dwells with understanding this enigma, but God requires that men seek out the truth all the same.

That's a crap load of crappy dude stuff to read I've posted in here, so the alternative and complimentary approach is the below 8 minute slide show:

The Emerging Science of Homeopathy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDZ2s4to_V0&eurl=http://excalibur.110mb.com/arc.htm

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby twistor » Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:02 pm

for I have also repeatedly killed animals with these drugs.


Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby grae313 » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:59 pm

DocQuack wrote:The below post has been banned at two other "physics" forums without ever taking more than a quick glance. Hopefully, this forum is moderated by real scientists, not those of religious prejudice and pseudo-scientific arrogance? How can you have a free exchange of ideas and tickled imagination where sharp minds are not even allowed to consider and think for themselves? :roll: Moderator: Please be something other than the average idiot! :? Read and study before ye reject. That's what scientists do, right? :lol:....

....Why don't you ever hear of this stuff much? Because "peer-reviewed journal" editors and forum moderators tend to have unscientific, religious prejudice to radical heresy.



::yawn:: of all the raving lunatic posts we've had on the board lately, this is by far the most boring.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby grae313 » Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:59 pm

twistor wrote:
for I have also repeatedly killed animals with these drugs.


Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh.


Oh, damn! Maybe it does get interesting... I just can't bring myself to read all of it.

DocQuack
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:15 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby DocQuack » Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:18 am

Yup, I know. I can barely stand to proofread my own stuff anymore, and so I rarely do.

As for the torture it has been for you to gaze upon it, I am tired of giving forum twits the honor of even communicating with me. One can turn this back and forth into a full-time job if not careful while it really does nothing much. The kind of people I'd like to have thinking on it are those who do have an interest in the subject, and so are able to read. But, that's nothing more than a matter of putting the sharpest minds on the payroll and demanding that they think. Ye volunteers are worth exactly what was paid for you.

I leave it here for you to drop down in the threads and vanish into forum oblivion; for anything useful you might have learned from it in keeping alive against germ warfare, in tending to your own health as you grow ill someday, or helping your loved ones in need, or in actually turning into better scientists....well, the truth is I could care less what becomes of you all. At least those other than Quiz who responded. :wink:

Someday, if you ever do manage to crank out anything more than the usual timid and boring drivel of scientists, I'll warn you that there's the foolishness of trying to share your ideas freely with the world and its dummies. The wiser course is often to just be greedy with your trade secrets and to hell with all the rest. Why the hell should I teach you our tricks?

Other than Quiz, I have yet to see one intelligent comment out of this place among all those views. We're at 61 views right now per 1 intelligent reply. That's about a 1% to 2% conscious rate on the forum, though not all of the 1097 members have passed through or even remain active. Most users ever on-line was 82, so that's about 1 to 2 conscious people at most ever on-line here -- which seems to be the present response rate.

I have better things to do than waste my time here with physics "lounge" lizards -- who look more like that drunken woman at a bar who nobody wants to take home at 5 a.m. The crappy ideas have infected Quiz at least, and so I leave it to him to keep the thread up for the remaining forum members or to let it fizzle out for all I care.

I was hoping to find intelligent people here with intelligent comments, criticisms, or questions but this is about normal for cyberspace forums. You get too many people and trolls. They say things they wouldn't dare say to your face because it's all so easy to be cowards at the keyboard.

There are better ways of infecting the minds of sharp scientists and getting them to actually read and think, but that also is somewhat counterproductive to our mission anyhow; for sharing anything with the world is not at all a requirement of my own mission. Was just fishing around to see if any intelligent life turned up here, but, so far, the pond is dead.

You go right ahead and go back to sleep. We have little use for the opinions of young physics students still preparing for a GRE anyhow. I was hoping to find a sharp professor lurking around at the doctorate level or maybe some really bright kid in here, but I doubt that the demographic to this place based on turnout so far.

Good luck in your highly productive careers, gentlemen. When you find yourself someday standing in front of sleeping high schoolers and drunken undergrads, just remember that what goes around comes around! :wink: It is you who have bored us and displayed yourselves as nothing more than ranting lunatics. If you ever manage to become anything more than mediocre scientists in life, look us up. In the meantime, maybe you can work really hard and get a cushy, tenured job teaching sleeping children your various ponderings and drivel someday. But, as you are now, never will you work in the realm of the radical or be anything other than trivial critics.

Lunacy, indeed, it was to think there would be anything worthwhile of opinion and thought from folks seeking a heads-up on the GRE. I suppose you're wondering still if there will be answers in the back of the book? If you can use a cheat sheet or not? Will it be multiple choice? How much time will you be given? A mere four years ago with your heads stuffed in books this whole time, most of you were still sucking on your thumbs in high school, huh? Yet, now you know so much of the world, don't you?

Read about it, write about it, calculate word problems, check your answers in the back of the book you can...but think for yourself, being wide awake, researching, developing, and checking your own crappy math and physics you cannot. Learned and marginally skilled you may become, but never scientists shall you be.

There are only two kinds of physics majors, gentlemen: 1) Yapping professors and has beens; 2) Physicists employed pumping gas and handing me my cheeseburger. The third and more rare category is reserved for those who do actually think for themselves and read. It's called R&D and, of that world, you are not fit to enter. Maybe try passing your exams first. Study up on humility when you've grown a little older.

- DQ

User avatar
will
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:26 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby will » Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:00 am

How long does it take you to write something like that?

Would that time not be better served in a lab, developing science, than whining about how dumb internet strangers are?

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby twistor » Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:42 pm

Ye volunteers are worth exactly what was paid for you.


The pseudo-Old English adds credibility to your argument and doesn't make you sound crazy at all.

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby twistor » Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:45 pm

If you ever manage to become anything more than mediocre scientists in life, look us up.


So.... are you one person... or many?

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby grae313 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:22 pm

DocQuack wrote: As for the torture it has been for you to gaze upon it, I am tired of giving forum twits the honor of even communicating with me. [...] The kind of people I'd like to have thinking on it are those who do have an interest in the subject, and so are able to read. But, that's nothing more than a matter of putting the sharpest minds on the payroll and demanding that they think. Ye volunteers are worth exactly what was paid for you.

Good. As the "sharpest minds" obviously gravitate towards this stuff, you should have no problem figuring out its mysteries. Why don't you travel to MIT and present your discoveries to the real scientists instead of posting online to us nitwits.

DocQuack wrote:....well, the truth is I could care less what becomes of you all. At least those other than Quiz who responded. :wink:

I hope that wink is sarcastic, and that you do realize that Quiz was making fun of you.

DocQuack wrote:Someday, if you ever do manage to crank out anything more than the usual timid and boring drivel of scientists, I'll warn you that there's the foolishness of trying to share your ideas freely with the world and its dummies.
You've shared your ideas very freely. Why are we idiots just because we choose not to agree with you?

DocQuack wrote:Other than Quiz, I have yet to see one intelligent comment out of this place among all those views.
Oh, snap! Maybe you don't realize that he was making fun of you...

DocQuack wrote:I was hoping to find intelligent people here with intelligent comments, criticisms, or questions but this is about normal for cyberspace forums. You get too many people and trolls. They say things they wouldn't dare say to your face because it's all so easy to be cowards at the keyboard.


Ooooh can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y?

Do a search on electron-positron pair production and take careful note of the energy at which it occurs. You've asked us to check your logic and numbers? Here you go: whether homeopathy is quackery or not, I don't really care and I'm not debating, but your numbers are ridiculous. If shaking water released energy like that, we'd all die of cancer by age three.

Check your numbers and try again.

User avatar
grae313
Posts: 2297
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 8:46 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby grae313 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:23 pm

twistor wrote:
Ye volunteers are worth exactly what was paid for you.


The pseudo-Old English adds credibility to your argument and doesn't make you sound crazy at all.


No no, Twistor, it's "olde" English. duh :roll:

digital19
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:40 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby digital19 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:03 pm

Ye... as in 'Oh Ye of Little Faith'

Ah.. one of my physics professors confided in me that he hates going to parties and saying he's a physicist... He's always backed in to a corner by somebody who wants to argue string theory or some metaphysical argument they've picked up somewhere.

I can see, through this website, that this is a real phenomena.

GCS
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:17 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby GCS » Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:34 pm

No need to argue back and forth...

If somebody wants to tally up the numbers, we'll have this straightened out soon enough :idea:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby twistor » Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:26 pm

Thus, I am either nuts and a bad, bad mathematician and physicist (most likely case because only aerospace engineering is my background and I am somewhat bonkers) or I'm pretty damn good!


No argument here....

User avatar
twistor
Posts: 1531
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:47 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby twistor » Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:38 pm

My new favorite quotes are:

Study my laser reflection experimental setup for chemical weapons testing in fish.


When you stand upon that first stepping stone, then the next question is: "Well, why the hell is this crappy crap actually working?"


I will probably have to eventually leave the United States and work at curing cancer in some nation that actually allows it.

vicente
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby vicente » Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:44 pm

I had no idea what homeopathy was until I read this guys stuff and looked it up on the Internet.

Basically, it has no scientific backing and makes no scientific sense.

Why?

- How is homeopathic mixing different from other mixing? Similar tremendous interatomic processes are present in all types of mixing.

- According to homeopathy, the more dilute a remedy is, the stronger it is. Let's say that I take a random cubic meter of interstellar space and mix it with a cubic meter of pure water. It will probably have the same concentration of certain homeopathic remedies deemed as "strong" or "very strong". Wouldn't everyone get cured of their illness by simply going into outer space?

digital19
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:40 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby digital19 » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:58 pm

vicente wrote:I had no idea what homeopathy was until I read this guys stuff and looked it up on the Internet.

Basically, it has no scientific backing and makes no scientific sense.

Why?

- How is homeopathic mixing different from other mixing? Similar tremendous interatomic processes are present in all types of mixing.

- According to homeopathy, the more dilute a remedy is, the stronger it is. Let's say that I take a random cubic meter of interstellar space and mix it with a cubic meter of pure water. It will probably have the same concentration of certain homeopathic remedies deemed as "strong" or "very strong". Wouldn't everyone get cured of their illness by simply going into outer space?



I like the smell of coffee, that's similar to a homeopathic dose... I guess.
Of course, then I ruin the experiment by drinking a cup of it.

User avatar
dlenmn
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby dlenmn » Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:40 pm

GCS wrote:No need to argue back and forth...

If somebody wants to tally up the numbers, we'll have this straightened out soon enough :idea:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html


Good call.

If only one of us had time to go through and do this...

excel
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:33 am

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby excel » Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:54 pm

:shock: :roll: :D
Off-topic, I like the bit about biologists taking the easier math and physics courses at school. :mrgreen:

User avatar
WontonBurritoMeals
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby WontonBurritoMeals » Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:26 pm

Hm... the crazy people on this site aren't as great as on other physics forums. My favorite so far is, "You can't see with your eyes. You have to see through them!"

Doc Quack, where do you practice this stuff? I live close to Berkeley so I have to be very carefull...

Why would you think that a bunch of random strangers on a physics board would support you, though? We're probably the last people in the world that would consider quantum mechanics magic that could arbitrarily enhance small effects because arbitrary measures are taken.

May the wind be always at your back,
-Wonton Burrito Meals
Last edited by WontonBurritoMeals on Wed Jul 09, 2008 2:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
will
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:26 pm

Re: Quackery or Quarkery? :-)

Postby will » Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:41 pm

It appears he isn't really checking back. Maybe he's smarter than he seems.




Return to “Physics Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest