Avogadro

[Carol S. Gunn]

Hello everyone,
Respectfully, I am new to this list and I am here to learn all I can about Homeopathy. Could you guys who are arguing about stuff that has more to do with egos than Homeopathy please take this discussion off list? I have had lots of Chemistry and some Physics and I GET IT. You cannot apply Avogadro's Law to homeopathic remedies because you cannot know the molecular weight of the substance you are using to make the remedy. This person who doesn't get it needs to take this whole argument off the list PLEASE. Thank you, very respectfully, Carol

minutus@yahoogroups.com wrote:

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Carol
If you lose interest in a topic, there is always the DELETE key available to you.
But as long as there are issues outstanding, there is room for exchanges until the point is crystal clear.
On the assumption you and Irene are correct and you know your Physics and Chemistry better than me - If I don't get it, then I am not alone as 100's of sceptics are asking the same questions - and if we cannot resolve simple Physics and Chemistry questions amongst ourselves then we have a big problem.
There has been an argument and you have repeated that we do not know the Molecular weight of something - so Avagadro's number does not apply.
This statement is not correct 100%
So let us start with NaCl as the basis of Nat-m.
(let us assume it is pure salt and therefore only contains Na & Cl atoms)
Mole of NaCl = 23 +35.5 = 58.5
So I would need to use the ratio of 58.5 g to 5791.5 g of water to get 1/100 solution
Please advise why Avagadro's number does not apply to this solution.

Rgds
Soroush

[Irene de Villiers]

Carol S. Gunn wrote:

That's nice - you'll find a lot to learn, interspersed with topics that
only others find interesting.

egos than Homeopathy please take this discussion off list?>

Is that supposed to come accross as "respectful" to "everyone"?
A little tolerance for those who ARE interested in the current
*on-topic* discussion would be nice (and you could make judicious use of
the delete button if not personally interested).
It's for the other more than 2000 people here to make their own
choice too, as to what they want to read.

>

Thanks for chipping in with that. Sometimes it is more easily believable
if there is more than one "voice in the wilderness" to say it:-)



That's not how we learn on the list, when as here the discussion is
still on topic and working towards greater understanding.
Oh???
In my view, respect would be using the delete button instead of telling
people in a serious and topical discussion to go away because you happen
to "already get it"!

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Carol,

wouldn't it be more respectful to leave the decision up to the list
manager?

Perhaps what YOU know or don't know is not the only criterion?

But since you are new you may not know the function of the delete key
for mails one does not care to read or keep.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========