Avogadro's number and homeopathy

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Irene
What you are implying is that the original contact of Radium in the glass and water, caused the glass and that water to exhibit radioactivity.
I put it to you that the short duration would cause very little interaction between radium and the surrounding materials.

Then one drop of this taken and added to 99 drops of fresh water in a fresh glass and so on - Therefore the surrounding interaction is minimal and would go through the same dilution process.
What I am saying is that for there to be any detectable radioactivity at C60, there must be radium decay and this is the issue that throws the Avogadro's number out of the window.
Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Irene de Villiers
Sent: 10 September 2013 15:55
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
It does not apply to homeopathy.
That is relatively unrelated to dilution and is related to radioactivity.
It will be radoactive because it dissolves readily in water and makes the dilution water radioactive.
The radium does not keep itself to itself - it breaks down continuously into other elements (plural) plus radiation particles (multiple) - which goes in all directions. All isotopes of radium are radioactive. As they decay, they emit radiation and split to form new (and unstable) radioactive elements, plus a lot of radiation particles - then split and emit radiation again...and so on until they reach stable lead. (It is a nuclear reaction not a chemical one, and the number of particles increases greatly.)
SO you are not starting with a specific number of elements as in a normal remedy, and the starting numer of elements in the soluton for radium *grows* as the radiation occurs.
SInce radium emits gamma rays (as well as alpha ones) these go through many materials and are not easy to contain.
Plutonium emits mainly alpha radiation which does NOT go through skin unlike beta and gamma rays. I'd be more worried about the radium remedy.
BUT if plutonuim is swallowed and gets INSIDE cells, it does 1000 times the damage to DNA that gamma and beta rays do.
In what way?
Depends how you make it.

If you dilute 1 ml in 99 ml for each dilution you will need (100x30=) 3000 ml = 3 liters of water.

TO make it with only 105 ml, you would have to dilute each C potency using 0.035 ml of starting remedy (wich by the way is only 7/10 of a drop!) plus 3.4 ml water and succuss. I do not know anyione who makes 30C in such small quantities.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: > only
--
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."

[Roger B]

Soroush,

Do they always use the same glass for each potentization step? Just asking, since I am with you on this one.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: finrod@finrod.co.uk
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:59:47 +0100
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
Dear Irene
What you are implying is that the original contact of Radium in the glass and water, caused the glass and that water to exhibit radioactivity.
I put it to you that the short duration would cause very little interaction between radium and the surrounding materials.

Then one drop of this taken and added to 99 drops of fresh water in a fresh glass and so on - Therefore the surrounding interaction is minimal and would go through the same dilution process.
What I am saying is that for there to be any detectable radioactivity at C60, there must be radium decay and this is the issue that throws the Avogadro's number out of the window.
Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Irene de Villiers
Sent: 10 September 2013 15:55
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
It does not apply to homeopathy.
That is relatively unrelated to dilution and is related to radioactivity.
It will be radoactive because it dissolves readily in water and makes the dilution water radioactive.
The radium does not keep itself to itself - it breaks down continuously into other elements (plural) plus radiation particles (multiple) - which goes in all directions. All isotopes of radium are radioactive. As they decay, they emit radiation and split to form new (and unstable) radioactive elements, plus a lot of radiation particles - then split and emit radiation again...and so on until they reach stable lead. (It is a nuclear reaction not a chemical one, and the number of particles increases greatly.)
SO you are not starting with a specific number of elements as in a normal remedy, and the starting numer of elements in the soluton for radium *grows* as the radiation occurs.
SInce radium emits gamma rays (as well as alpha ones) these go through many materials and are not easy to contain.
Plutonium emits mainly alpha radiation which does NOT go through skin unlike beta and gamma rays. I'd be more worried about the radium remedy.
BUT if plutonuim is swallowed and gets INSIDE cells, it does 1000 times the damage to DNA that gamma and beta rays do.
In what way?
Depends how you make it.

If you dilute 1 ml in 99 ml for each dilution you will need (100x30=) 3000 ml = 3 liters of water.

TO make it with only 105 ml, you would have to dilute each C potency using 0.035 ml of starting remedy (wich by the way is only 7/10 of a drop!) plus 3.4 ml water and succuss. I do not know anyione who makes 30C in such small quantities.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: > only
--
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."

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Roger,

If you think about it, you HAVE to use a fresh glass every time else you would contaminate a higher potency with a lower one.
Best wishes

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger B
Sent: 11 September 2013 12:26
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
Soroush,

Do they always use the same glass for each potentization step? Just asking, since I am with you on this one.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: finrod@finrod.co.uk
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:59:47 +0100
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
Dear Irene
What you are implying is that the original contact of Radium in the glass and water, caused the glass and that water to exhibit radioactivity.
I put it to you that the short duration would cause very little interaction between radium and the surrounding materials.

Then one drop of this taken and added to 99 drops of fresh water in a fresh glass and so on - Therefore the surrounding interaction is minimal and would go through the same dilution process.
What I am saying is that for there to be any detectable radioactivity at C60, there must be radium decay and this is the issue that throws the Avogadro's number out of the window.
Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Irene de Villiers
Sent: 10 September 2013 15:55
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
It does not apply to homeopathy.
That is relatively unrelated to dilution and is related to radioactivity.
It will be radoactive because it dissolves readily in water and makes the dilution water radioactive.
The radium does not keep itself to itself - it breaks down continuously into other elements (plural) plus radiation particles (multiple) - which goes in all directions. All isotopes of radium are radioactive. As they decay, they emit radiation and split to form new (and unstable) radioactive elements, plus a lot of radiation particles - then split and emit radiation again...and so on until they reach stable lead. (It is a nuclear reaction not a chemical one, and the number of particles increases greatly.)
SO you are not starting with a specific number of elements as in a normal remedy, and the starting numer of elements in the soluton for radium *grows* as the radiation occurs.
SInce radium emits gamma rays (as well as alpha ones) these go through many materials and are not easy to contain.
Plutonium emits mainly alpha radiation which does NOT go through skin unlike beta and gamma rays. I'd be more worried about the radium remedy.
BUT if plutonuim is swallowed and gets INSIDE cells, it does 1000 times the damage to DNA that gamma and beta rays do.
In what way?
Depends how you make it.

If you dilute 1 ml in 99 ml for each dilution you will need (100x30=) 3000 ml = 3 liters of water.

TO make it with only 105 ml, you would have to dilute each C potency using 0.035 ml of starting remedy (wich by the way is only 7/10 of a drop!) plus 3.4 ml water and succuss. I do not know anyione who makes 30C in such small quantities.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: > only
--
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."

[Irene de Villiers]

Yes due to alpha radiation from Radium and its breakdown components - can't know the rate withotu knowing the isotopes etc used. One radium atom makes a LOT of other particles/entities.
SO unlike a normal remedy it is not just ONE unit of sustance, but becomes more of them.
What short duration? I'm not with you on that?
Once an alpha particle is emitted due to radioactivity, it boings around knocking bits out of other atoms all over the place, nonstop till it runs out of (very considerable) energy. That is how radiation works. So now there are radim breakdown atoms plus alpha particles plus however many damaged other atoms the alpha articles caused.
Now cotaining far more particles than it used to contain......
All the whiile with radoactve activity ongoing with more and more multiplication of radioactive components. It s VERY different from a normal remedy which is static in terms of number of starting items.
in what way?
There is radoactivty happening - why do you call that minimal?
The atoms are not just sitting there doing nothing when the sustace is radoacte. ANd those partcle move at the speed of light, it's not like they have no time to act. Like an xray - it is instantaneous when a radoactive event takes place.
It is not comparable to a normal homeopathic dilution process because there is not a finite number of starting particles as in a normal remedy.
Yes, but that has a high chance of being true becasue of the increasing particle number due to radioactivity - where a normal remedy only has a decreasinig number due to dilution.
Avogadro's number is not part of homeopathy due to the need to use a molecular weight of a substance (caleld a "mole") for it to have any meaning.
To give an example:
One mole of water is about three teaspoons of water.
One mole of a protein is about three metric tons of protein.
They do not compare too well

It is parts per million, billion, etc that are the correct way to descrie homeoapthic dilutions.

However the PARTS in radium are not a given amount - as they increase due to radioactivity.
SO - by the time you go from 1C to 2C, etc to 30C or so - who knows how many extra parts you are working wth than you measured in your drop to start with. In addition radioactivity is not readily contained so if you toss out some radioactive water during the process, it may be close enough to still be radioactively affecting the homeopath and his remedy in progress.

There are a lot of unknowns for the radium at Helios. We do not even know the isotope/s used.
They are radioactive at very different rates.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: only
--
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."

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Irene
What you are implying is that the original contact of Radium in the glass and water, caused the glass and that water to exhibit radioactivity.
I put it to you that the short duration would cause very little interaction between radium and the surrounding materials.

Then one drop of this taken and added to 99 drops of fresh water in a fresh glass and so on - Therefore the surrounding interaction is minimal and would go through the same dilution process.
What I am saying is that for there to be any detectable radioactivity at C60, there must be radium decay and this is the issue that throws the Avogadro's number out of the window.
Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Irene de Villiers
Sent: 10 September 2013 15:55
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
It does not apply to homeopathy.
That is relatively unrelated to dilution and is related to radioactivity.
It will be radoactive because it dissolves readily in water and makes the dilution water radioactive.
The radium does not keep itself to itself - it breaks down continuously into other elements (plural) plus radiation particles (multiple) - which goes in all directions. All isotopes of radium are radioactive. As they decay, they emit radiation and split to form new (and unstable) radioactive elements, plus a lot of radiation particles - then split and emit radiation again...and so on until they reach stable lead. (It is a nuclear reaction not a chemical one, and the number of particles increases greatly.)
SO you are not starting with a specific number of elements as in a normal remedy, and the starting numer of elements in the soluton for radium *grows* as the radiation occurs.
SInce radium emits gamma rays (as well as alpha ones) these go through many materials and are not easy to contain.
Plutonium emits mainly alpha radiation which does NOT go through skin unlike beta and gamma rays. I'd be more worried about the radium remedy.
BUT if plutonuim is swallowed and gets INSIDE cells, it does 1000 times the damage to DNA that gamma and beta rays do.
In what way?
Depends how you make it.

If you dilute 1 ml in 99 ml for each dilution you will need (100x30=) 3000 ml = 3 liters of water.

TO make it with only 105 ml, you would have to dilute each C potency using 0.035 ml of starting remedy (wich by the way is only 7/10 of a drop!) plus 3.4 ml water and succuss. I do not know anyione who makes 30C in such small quantities.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: > only
--
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."

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

How about the Korsakov method then? Do you imply that all remedies done with this technique contain all the previous potencies used to reach the actual one?
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD. "The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind". www.naturamedica.webs.com
________________________________

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

How about the Korsakov method then? Do you imply that all remedies done with this technique contain all the previous potencies used to reach the actual one?
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD. "The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind". www.naturamedica.webs.com
________________________________

[John Harvey]

Joe's point is a good one. Korsakov potencies evidently aren't less predictable than others, and there seems no reason to suppose that the portion of water left in the bottle remains fixed at a previous potency, any more than there is to suppose that a portion decanted for potentisation in a fresh bottle does. They're symmetrical operations except for the continued use of the same glass and stopper. It's credible that some liquid in that container -- say, caught in a crevice between glass and stopper -- escapes contact with the rest. But it clearly appears to be the case that when fresh water comes into contact with a potency and is succussed, it acquires a potency higher (not lower) than the one with which it's now come into contact.

So let's look at the worst-case scenario. A drop of, say, first-potency is caught in the stopper and remains out of the potency loop till the 30th potency has been created, and somehow is not removed in the process of disposing of the unwanted bulk of liquid at each stage till then. The 30th potency is finally poured out for use, and this time does remove that drop of early-potency liquid. What is going to happen the next time the liquid that's been decanted for use is succussed or stirred? It's going to be pretty much what would happen if that drop of had been zero-potency: it will simply become part of the 30+ potency.

That conclusion doesn't, of course, address the implications of that first-potency drop's containing something material. In this scenario, unlikely as it is, the 30th potency would not after all be ultramolecular; it would contain a little of the starting material.

More pertinently to this discussion, it doesn't address the continuing effect, if any, of a radioactive starting material on the substance of the glass and the substance of the drop of water. Small pieces of the glass itself, in further succussions of that same bottle, will to some extent loosen, break off from the bottle's surface, and enter into the medicine in each dynamisation stage. So the Korsakov method could, theoretically, result in potencies that -- though they should comprise unaffected pure water and a little unaffected silica -- in fact contain also a little irradiated glass; and, if radium or plutonium nitrate is capable of seeding radioactivity in the glass or embedding itself there for some time, then it's potentially problematic.

Radioactive medicines are therefore ones that I'd be steering away from Korsakov in potentising. When you create each potency using only fresh glass for that step -- and, by "fresh", I do not include a bottle that has previously stored other medicines and not been properly treated, a surefire way to end up prescribing mixtures unawares -- you know without a doubt that the substances entering into that step have been diluted by at least the theoretical factor; more, if some has become attached to or embedded in the previous container. So no such contamination of later potencies by the starting material can occur.

Cheers --

John
________________________________

[Roger B]

No, no, what I mean is that let's say you are on 17C and you pour your 17C water into a clean, fresh glass, 1/100 full. Then fill your new glass up with distilled water. Then you shake it thoroughly and roughly 40 times, and toss 99/100 of your now 18C water. Et Cetra. This is how I envisioned how they made homeopathy long ago just before I visited a "factory" where some guy under Roger Morrison's direction had made a machine to make homeopathic remedies. Silly me, there would be no need to use a new glass every time one went from one potency to the next potency. But, in this situation of the making radium 60C, one might make the radium 60C this way in order to get rid of any radioactivity in the glass. That is what I meant.

But, of course, the glass used for making the radium 60C could be tested for radioactivity. And as you say, there isn't a lot of time for the glass to acquire much in the way of radioactivity.

I am up for (or as some people say "down for") the idea that atoms are not the ultimate physical "thing". I was already up for the idea that the physical is not the ultimate thing. Notice that the potency goes UP, not down, so even if we posit some physical thing smaller and more numerous than atoms, then at some point beyond 12C, those smaller, more numerous sub-atoms are going to become non-existent. 200C is a LONG way from 12C. One could do the math to figure out just how small and numerous these alleged sub-atoms would have to be in order for any to still be present. I am going to bet that we are looking at string theory or even more weird than that. My inner Occam is tossing and turning. And this could prove to be unprovable, other than by homeopathy, which would not be considered proof in the scientific world.

Roger Bird
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: finrod@finrod.co.uk
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 12:34:51 +0100
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
Dear Roger,

If you think about it, you HAVE to use a fresh glass every time else you would contaminate a higher potency with a lower one.
Best wishes

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Roger B
Sent: 11 September 2013 12:26
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
Soroush,

Do they always use the same glass for each potentization step? Just asking, since I am with you on this one.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: finrod@finrod.co.uk
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 10:59:47 +0100
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
Dear Irene
What you are implying is that the original contact of Radium in the glass and water, caused the glass and that water to exhibit radioactivity.
I put it to you that the short duration would cause very little interaction between radium and the surrounding materials.

Then one drop of this taken and added to 99 drops of fresh water in a fresh glass and so on - Therefore the surrounding interaction is minimal and would go through the same dilution process.
What I am saying is that for there to be any detectable radioactivity at C60, there must be radium decay and this is the issue that throws the Avogadro's number out of the window.
Rgds

Soroush
From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Irene de Villiers
Sent: 10 September 2013 15:55
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Avogadro's number and homeopathy
It does not apply to homeopathy.
That is relatively unrelated to dilution and is related to radioactivity.
It will be radoactive because it dissolves readily in water and makes the dilution water radioactive.
The radium does not keep itself to itself - it breaks down continuously into other elements (plural) plus radiation particles (multiple) - which goes in all directions. All isotopes of radium are radioactive. As they decay, they emit radiation and split to form new (and unstable) radioactive elements, plus a lot of radiation particles - then split and emit radiation again...and so on until they reach stable lead. (It is a nuclear reaction not a chemical one, and the number of particles increases greatly.)
SO you are not starting with a specific number of elements as in a normal remedy, and the starting numer of elements in the soluton for radium *grows* as the radiation occurs.
SInce radium emits gamma rays (as well as alpha ones) these go through many materials and are not easy to contain.
Plutonium emits mainly alpha radiation which does NOT go through skin unlike beta and gamma rays. I'd be more worried about the radium remedy.
BUT if plutonuim is swallowed and gets INSIDE cells, it does 1000 times the damage to DNA that gamma and beta rays do.
In what way?
Depends how you make it.

If you dilute 1 ml in 99 ml for each dilution you will need (100x30=) 3000 ml = 3 liters of water.

TO make it with only 105 ml, you would have to dilute each C potency using 0.035 ml of starting remedy (wich by the way is only 7/10 of a drop!) plus 3.4 ml water and succuss. I do not know anyione who makes 30C in such small quantities.

Namaste,
Irene

REPLY TO: > only
--
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."

[John R. Benneth]

In a message dated 9/12/2013 1:57:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, John.P.Harvey@gmail.com writes:
I seriously doubt Plut- nit. is made from molecular Plutonium. Isn't it simply exposed to Plutonium radiation? Phil Eyre was part of the proving, maybe Phil would know. Does anybody have Phil's email?
BTW, it appears Boiron is marketing Korsakov remedies as 200 CK and selling them OTC. Can anyone correct me if I'm wrong that the K means Korsakov? If so, it's a handy shortcut around the HPUS for selling ultra 30 C remedies OTC.
John Benneth