| Author
|
528 Hz
|
Colin OOOD
OOOD/Voice of Cod
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Feb 11, 2011 23:10
|
|
willsanquil
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
93
Posts :
2822
Posted : Feb 11, 2011 23:18
|
Good sir, surely you jest? Clearly, the logarhythmic difference in the astro-plasmic tendencies of the hyper-quantum-fluctuative state of the isotopical formulaeaeas are inconsistent with your analysis.
OH OH OH! and crystals. they opened all 13 of my chakras, like woah.  If you want to make an apple pie from scratch...you must first invent the universe
www.soundcloud.com/tasp
www.soundcloud.com/kinematic-records |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Feb 11, 2011 23:27
|
Quote:
| What do you know what moki knows or comprehends? This would be such a good and solid evidence of human assumption that is used by everyone, Even Mike A, he is no god damn super human, he is a student, i dont know his degree, sure he come off as very confident, and i guess he knows a thing or two, probably more than me and you, at least about chemic and mathematics, |
|
Sorry! I forgot to introduce myself. I just finished my first years in university in the field of geology, with emphasis on chemistry and mathematics. I will soon start my Ph.D project. And yes, my confidence is high because I see the theory and I see the world around us, and it all works. So if something tells you it's a duck, and it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it is a duck. You can't call it an elephant. This is where my confidence is at. I'm not afraid to say that there is stuff that I don't know (otherwise, why would I do a phd if everything is known?).
Quote:
| but this dont mean he has all the answers and that the science he learned is 100% fact, things change you know, a science evolve and find new things, even old science is not solid proof for anything.
|
|
Yes, science changes. But when science changes, only rarely it means that the previous science was wrong. I mean, even though Einstein found that Newtonian mechanics are not that accurate, things still fall to the ground and we can still send people to the moon based on Newton's equations.
Now, you have to make the distinction between "right", "right but could be more", and "wrong".
Most of science today is "right but could be more". We know about isotopes, we know about water clusters and we know about DNA. We know enough about them to predict stuff which actually works. Quantum mechanics is like this. It doesn't explain everything perfectly, but it does work. Your computer, based on this theory, works. No arguement here. Because we know some stuff which is "right", we can identify what is "wrong". We can identify this because the "wrong" claims are based on foundations which haven't worked in experiments, or could not be predicted by theory. What "moki" says here, is in the "wrong" domain. She is not wrong because science hasn't yet predicted that what she says is right or wrong and still need to experiment, she is wrong because science has proved that she is wrong. Simple as that.
Quote:
| I think Mike has a good point about belief, I think i have a little grudge with Mike A sometimes, hehe he is so damn confident |
|
Yea, it's easy to hate the smartass know-it-all. I can understand you 
Quote:
| science is not done your way. science is done with hypothesis and proves |
|
Exactly! This is not what Mr. Emoto and Glen Rein are doing.
Quote:
| most of them dont develop a single hypothesis in their whole life and only repeat what others say |
|
You can ask my teachers - I keep asking them stuff, to find holes in their theories. It's a hobby. I don't do this only to you, I do this also to my professors. But usually they have good answers ("I don't know" is also a common answer). You don't.
Quote:
| and placebo btw is also a subject of statistics. if i can prove scientifically by means of statistics that placebo is significant for my body, then i have proved a hypothesis. no matter how weird it is. |
|
Then you proved that a placebo works. It doesn't change the fact that it's a placebo.
Quote:
| second mike, you wrote three pages about certain things... |
|
I won't discuss science with you anymore. No point in it.
Quote:
| it is easy to impress a forum community with false facts. do this with real scientist communities which is another world. |
|
Yea. This is why real scientists say he is wrong, and you say he is right.
|
|
|
|
willsanquil
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
93
Posts :
2822
Posted : Feb 11, 2011 23:46
|
Sigh of satisfaction. Here I am at work thinking to myself...hm...enough time has passed...maybe mike will chime in with a great post that will hopefully put all this crap to rest. I <3 you.
Wonder how long it'll take for someone *cough* to fuck it all up. If you want to make an apple pie from scratch...you must first invent the universe
www.soundcloud.com/tasp
www.soundcloud.com/kinematic-records |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 00:17
|
Thought of more stuff to say while I was washing the dishes (with water, unfortunately it wasn't hexagonal water).
First of all, moki.
What is, as far as you know, an isotope? Don't look it up. Just give me your definition of an isotope.
Now, what is an isotope of water?
That thing about huge cluster of water was new to me. I didn't know about it before (one of those things I can say without problem). It is very interesting and it may indeed explain some of the properties of liquid water, but how is this related to "hexagonal" water? And it certainly does not prove that you can form clusters like that by talking to the water.
Let me answer your questions. You asked, how can I explain the fact that the water (ice actually) looks like preety snowflakes when "exposed to positive thoughts". Because ice looks like this. I would have still looked like this even if it wasn't. Snow falls and looks exactly like this even when there is no one around to see. You know what? Remember WW2? Lots of people killing each other - and it still snowed! There were still beautiful hexagonal ice crystals!
So how do I explain the ugly ice? Well, ice also looks like this. Go to your kitchen and open your freezer. Now look under that happy positive tasty ice cream you got there. Eww! Ugly un-hexagonal ice!
And since you say your field is statistics, let's talk statistics. Mr. Emoto gave only one photo of each samples (as you say). There can be no statistical analysis of this. For statistics you need at least 2 measurements (or pictures). The more photos, the lower your standard deviation is, and in plain English - the better your results are. Medical trials are done on hunderds of subjects, and are still controvorsial sometimes. So how can you consider Emoto's experiment to be any indication of anything? You can't even discuss whether he is right or wrong, the experiment itself wasn't done properly. So Emoto did a proper experiment, which failed to prove his theory. You keep ignoring this fact, for some unknown reason.
|
|
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 01:11
|
Quote:
|
Bridges falling apart are causing by mechanical resonance of waves. So is glass breaking. Spectral series are related to electromagnetic waves.
Mechanical waves and electromagnetic waves are different things. The fact that we call them, in our language, "waves" (which is why they have the physical properties of frequency and resonane etc) does not mean they are the same and have any relation.
|
|
this is what is most important to me - to clear the effects of resonance on molecular level and on the level of astronomy and electromagnetism ( and gravity). to establish this resonance mathematically. to find out resonance that is common to both acoustic phenomenon and electromagnetic phenomenon. simple- i am looking for the numbers or series of numbers which are the common pattern of vibration on all levels..
and if you can prove in any way my hypothesis wrong, i will be greatly thankful for your hints.
lets take the atom. even wikipedia tells me:
Quote:
|
"Wave-like properties
The electrons do not orbit the nucleus in the sense of a planet orbiting the sun, but instead exist as standing waves. The lowest possible energy an electron can take is therefore analogous to the fundamental frequency of a wave on a string. Higher energy states are then similar to harmonics of the fundamental frequency." |
|
i apprehend things in simple logic, which is the advantage of someone who has no expert knowledge of these phenomena. and this sentence above tells me, aha, higher energy states of an atom are similar to harmonics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Moodswingerscale.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Harmonic_partials_on_strings.svg
and harmonic series of a string
another place in wikipedia about acoustic resonance:
Quote:
|
Acoustic resonance is the tendency of an acoustic system to absorb more energy when it is forced or driven at a frequency that matches one of its own natural frequencies of vibration (its resonance frequency) than it does at other frequencies. As such, acoustic resonance is a branch of mechanical resonance that is concerned with the mechanical vibrations in the frequency range of human hearing, in other words sound" |
|
and last. then i ask what is mechanical resonance and resonance desaster.
Quote:
|
"Mechanical resonance is the tendency of a mechanical system to absorb more energy when the frequency of its oscillations matches the system's natural frequency of vibration (its resonance frequency or resonant frequency) than it does at other frequencies" |
|
so the connection between mechanical and acoustic resonance and thus the wave like properties of an atom a re clear. at least the first step.
electromagnetic resonance:
Quote:
|
Because energy of an EM interaction is quantized, EM waves are emitted and absorbed as discrete packets of energy, or quanta, called photons.[3] Because photons are emitted and absorbed by charged particles, they act as transporters of energy, and are associated with waves with frequency proportional to the energy carried. The energy per photon can be related to the frequency via the Planck–Einstein equation:[4] |
|
+
Quote:
|
As a photon is absorbed by an atom, it excites the atom, elevating an electron to a higher energy level. If the energy is great enough, so that the electron jumps to a high enough energy level, it may escape the positive pull of the nucleus and be liberated from the atom in a process called photoionisation. Conversely, an electron that descends to a lower energy level in an atom emits a photon of light equal to the energy difference. Since the energy levels of electrons in atoms are discrete, each element emits and absorbs its own characteristic frequencies.
Together, these effects explain the emission and absorption spectra of light" |
|
So Mike, you tell me these things are not related. Then i say, prove it wrong, because i obviously establish a connection. all way through it is a question of harmonics, overtone series and even stronger harmonics. if the numbers have similar patterns, which i am sure they do, then a connection would be very clear in numbers on all levels. and i start with the spectrum that i can hear and play. all other levels will follow the resonance.
p.s. and i dont ignore the fact with emoto. i told you ten thousend times that i am aware of his poor statistical method and i would not call it science unless i see ALL photos. but you keep ignoring this and persuade me in things i know well already. i wish him to find a person who can deal with statistics though. would be a great to humanity to prove this experiment right.
|
|
|
|
willsanquil
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
93
Posts :
2822
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 02:14
|
Quote:
|
i apprehend things in simple logic, which is the advantage of someone who has no expert knowledge of these phenomena
|
|
I have never in all of my days seen someone say that them knowing LESS about something is advantageous. These things you are talking about have a high degree of complexity. You having a novice understanding of them is not beneficial to you - and certainly not beneficial to the person or people that you are attempting to converse about them with. Wronger than wrong indeed.
Quote:
|
So Mike, you tell me these things are not related. Then i say, prove it wrong, because i obviously establish a connection.
|
|
Just because you establish a connection does not mean that it is true. This shit hurts my brain. I also like how you conveniently ignore Mike's questions about isotopes. If you want to make an apple pie from scratch...you must first invent the universe
www.soundcloud.com/tasp
www.soundcloud.com/kinematic-records |
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
OOOD/Voice of Cod
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 05:12
|
|
oggabogga
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
62
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 05:35
|
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-12 05:12, Colin OOOD wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-12 01:11, Moki.Time.Wave.Zero wrote:
i wish him to find a person who can deal with statistics though. would be a great to humanity to prove this experiment right.
|
|
He did; this is what his triple-blind study was all about, from what I've read here. And from what I've read here, it proved his theory wrong. Please tell me if I misunderstand.
|
|
If is just for what you are reading there… then you are not misunderstanding; you are jumping to conclusions. Its proven wrong is an assumption.
|
|
|
|
mk47
Inactive User
Started Topics :
118
Posts :
4444
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 07:23
|
|
moki
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
38
Posts :
1931
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 10:48
|
Colin OOOD
according to my understanding of statistics, it was either proven wrong nor right. it is because the numbers are insufficient.
here is an example with one of the triple experiments.
there are 300 photos, 2579 people judging the photos, each person judges about 50 photos. each photo got about 430 ratings. to me these numbers re not enough because if i take into consideration the effect of biased intention, and try to clear it out from the numbers, then i will not have a significance that is enough to say, this hypothesis is for sure right. the effect shows that there is a high possibility that it is right though. much higher number are needed.
http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_22_4_radin.pdf
willsanquil, i am still polite enough to answer your comments, but this status quo will not continue too long, if you dont change the way you talk. yes, it is sometimes an advantage to think in simple logic. i have studied not only mathematics but philosophy too btw, which is not only metaphysics and meaning of life but also hard logics. it is the beginning of known science. and it is the reason why i question everything i think by means of very simple logic. in the school i had problems with applied science because i was amazed how people so easily accept theories they never proved for themselves. what if the theories are wrong. i cant accept complex theories if i dont understand them at their very basic idea. so i stopped going to school to chemstry.
about the isotopes, i dont ignore it. i talked enough about it for now. if Mike gives me an explanation about the hiugher energy of an etom and the harmonics there and the basic frequency, i will say more.
i could a definition what is isotope to me, copy pasting it from somewhere, but whats the point. we talked about it for a while. mike mixes the idea of water isotope and clusters, coming from russian scientists, biologists and physicians, with the idea of emoto and talking to the water. two different things.... besides i just believe that i need to improve my technical english to explain this. at the present time , the only time i can do is to give some terms for a search in an library, in case someone need to know more. isotopes are not at all the basics of our topic here. the atoms are.
|
|
|
|
Outolintu
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
63
Posts :
1477
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 11:53
|
it's ironic how both sides of the camp here,
the "believers" and the "knowers" seem from a distance quite the same:
fa·nat·ic (f-ntk)
n.
A person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, as for a cause.
fun·da·men·tal·ism (fnd-mntl-zm)
n.
1. A point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
"no one ever sweats on a plug-in" -moby |
|
|
|
oggabogga
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
62
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 14:34
|
This thread is not of 528Hz.
========================= Mike A. ==========================
Let’s look at this closer; you could ask rather if the sound could stimulate your brain to create changes in your body? And is this effect only going to take place for those who believe?
You could also ask if sound frequencies, are affecting the cells directly?
And here is where isotopes play a role. But in essence is not the main subject.
As you can see your main subject is Isotopes.
Isotopes have their own wonders; only when questioning if crystals, voices or prayers for that matter, change anything on the water and how much of that would affect us; that the relation to 528HZ will appear in the topic of isotopes.
But as you can see in this thread, you knowledge has not allowed the 528HZ subject be explored with questions, since you are constantly throwing your knowledge before people could even contemplate the wonders of the field.
So professor Simplisio, when you consider your purpose in this thread… is not enlightenment what you are giving; is facts that anyone with internet can copy paste from wiki, not to mention the inclination in the fragile and logical equations. You would understand better if you would have read what I posted in page 8.
I was hoping that a person that is starting a PhD wouldn’t have much trouble reading this text without loosing track.
And Mikes A fans; you are going immediately with critics and accusations, when you side in this is as week as the one you claim to dislike.
|
|
|
|
Beat Agency
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
53
Posts :
1752
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 14:56
|
Ok I will jump in with my experience regarding "Brainwave Entrainment"
I have a new and very small company with a good friend where we at the moment are developing a program for children with ADHD where we compose ambient music using two techniques called Binural Beats and Isochronic tones within the music.
Without getting too technical we tested the music on 100 Children who all suffer from ADHD. In the example of Binural Beats the cycles per minute (the pulse) or hertz need to be exactly 3.9 in order to have an effect on the Theta/Delta brainwave range (causing calmness).
Now back to the 100 children we tested the music on (all found via the ADHD Organization in Denmark). All parents to these children have a very hard time getting the children to relax and especially to fall asleep. In some extreme cases it takes up to 3 hours to get their children to fall asleep. The normal was between 1-1.5 hour. In the test we had the children listening to the music (via headphones) and in 92% of the cases the children fell asleep within 20-30 minutes. A few children took longer but all children reacted to the music and became calm.
It's evident that with music (Music. especially classical music, is also used under surgery at Hospitals to calm people) and in this case special techniques did stimulate the kids brainwaves with visible positive results.
I am not into New-age and other mumbo jumbo. To me this is strictly technique and science.
The techniques has been misused by Flashy New-age composers with their usual cosmic energies etc. Those composers should be avoided as they are only out to milk yet another market.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8179111/Binaural-Beats-Complete-with-ALL-info-about-Each-Brainstate-and-links-to-Programs-and-Cracks
www.beatagency.dk |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Feb 12, 2011 16:01
|
Quote:
|
On 2011-02-12 01:11, Moki.Time.Wave.Zero wrote:
to establish this resonance mathematically. to find out resonance that is common to both acoustic phenomenon and electromagnetic phenomenon. simple- i am looking for the numbers or series of numbers which are the common pattern of vibration on all levels..
|
|
It has already been done before you.
See all the equations here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function
?
Some of them even got a nobel prize for this.
Quote:
|
i apprehend things in simple logic, which is the advantage of someone who has no expert knowledge of these phenomena. and this sentence above tells me, aha, higher energy states of an atom are similar to harmonics. |
|
Ok, so it's like harmonics? And your point is? This is a widely recognized phenomena, constrained by the wave function from before. How does it relate to 528hz and how does it relate hexagonal water?
Quote:
| so the connection between mechanical and acoustic resonance and thus the wave like properties of an atom a re clear. |
|
Yes, both are waves and you can describe them with wave functions in mathematics.
Quote:
| So Mike, you tell me these things are not related. Then i say, prove it wrong, because i obviously establish a connection. |
|
The only connection is that it is described by the same mathematics. This isn't even accurate, because quantum mechanics won't work on guitar strings, and the wave description of EM is only partial. But let's assume it is. Does it mean it is related? No.
Let's say you are a teacher and you count how much pupils you have in your class. And let's say you go to the shop to buy bread and butter for breakfast. For both operations you are using the same mathematical method of addition (i.e. adding the number of pupils on each table or adding the price of each item). Does it mean it's the same? No. Your logic is wrong.
Quote:
| and if you can prove in any way my hypothesis wrong, i will be greatly thankful for your hints. |
|
Quote:
| mike mixes the idea of water isotope and clusters, coming from russian scientists, biologists and physicians, with the idea of emoto and talking to the water. two different things |
|
I didn't mix it. I said that water clusters is good science,and Emoto is bad science. Two differnet things, as you said.
Quote:
| It's evident that with music (Music. especially classical music, is also used under surgery at Hospitals to calm people) and in this case special techniques did stimulate the kids brainwaves with visible positive results. |
|
That's good news But I guess that it didn't change their DNA, right?
Quote:
| would be a great to humanity to prove this experiment right. |
|
So you are assuming that his experiment is right, before it was proved? That's some bias.
Quote:
| in the school i had problems with applied science because i was amazed how people so easily accept theories they never proved for themselves. |
|
First of all, chemistry students are doing experiments for themselves. Much of math studying is based on proving. A very fundamental part of science in university is proving stuff for yourself.Quote:
| what if the theories are wrong. |
|
If the theories are wrong, then you not be able to sit at your computer and pollute this thread, since it works on the basics of science. I guess this proof is good enough, no?
Quote:
| i cant accept complex theories if i dont understand them at their very basic idea. so i stopped going to school to chemstry. |
|
So you are accepting Emoto's theory without an understanding of the basic idea? |
|
|
|
|
