I have this sad habit of replying to people who are apparently crazy as all hell... And then continue to debate with them even though they make no sense, or they get aggressive
I've been arguing with this guy for days now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE_UzmtUH7g
Perhaps I feel bad for people who believe in complete non-sense and get aggressive all the time. But, it just seems like people are hell bent on nonsense. This guy this real medicine should be dropped, and we should all be eating placebos.
...So which one's you? ^^;
Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on November 11, 2009, 10:22:59 PM
...So which one's you? ^^;
AisuSeijin, that's my youtube account name.
I'm going to side with the guy who was confident enough in his argument that he downed a whole pack of sleeping pills to show they don't do anything. ie: Randi
They were homeopathic, of course.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 12, 2009, 07:56:33 PM
They were homeopathic, of course.
So Shane, you're good at researching things. Banacheck just linked me an article online (a shady and not very thorough article) about how certain plants fair better when treated with homeopathic medicine. I did some research, and first off.. anyone can post whatever they wish on that website... It's like wikipedia.
Second, the person who conducted the study and the organization doesn't seem to exist. Well, I'm sure the person exists, but not the organization.
I personally believe that when you give plants more water, they tend to fair better.
http://www.thescientificworld.com/TSW/toc/TSWJ_ArticleLanding.asp?jid=141&FromPage=Main&ArticleId=3110&navFrom=Main&From=Result&toggleArticleCloud=1
If the homeopath claims were true, wouldn't our whole water supply be filled with drugs by now that would mess us up? I mean, water in nature gets mixed and dilluted constantly no?
Or better yet, since arsenic causes death, making homeopathic water using it would produce the reverse and...become the water of life! I have discovered immortality! Mwa ha ha ha!!
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on November 13, 2009, 02:36:00 AM
If the homeopath claims were true, wouldn't our whole water supply be filled with drugs by now that would mess us up? I mean, water in nature gets mixed and dilluted constantly no?
Or better yet, since arsenic causes death, making homeopathic water using it would produce the reverse and...become the water of life! I have discovered immortality! Mwa ha ha ha!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8-Y9pz14aU
[yt-wide]D8-Y9pz14aU[/yt-wide]
(Why the hell doesn't embedding youtube videos work for me?)
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on November 13, 2009, 02:36:00 AM
If the homeopath claims were true, wouldn't our whole water supply be filled with drugs by now that would mess us up? I mean, water in nature gets mixed and dilluted constantly no?
Ah, but it's not succussed! It has to be struck ten times each in each of the three dimensions! THAT'S IMPORTANT!
QuoteOr better yet, since arsenic causes death, making homeopathic water using it would produce the reverse and...become the water of life! I have discovered immortality! Mwa ha ha ha!!
Actually, they do use arsenic for several treatments--although, oddly enough, not longevity...
Quote from: Virgil0211 on November 13, 2009, 08:44:49 AM(Why the hell doesn't embedding youtube videos work for me?)
Don't put in the ?v=, just the garbage after it. Also, [yt-wide] works better for YouTube videos done in widescreen.
I questioned him about Randi's repeated demonstrations where he downs 32 sleeping pills with no visible effect. I got this as a response.
"For Randi, a man who evangelizes logic and critcal thinking, its disturbing to see him get up in front of an audience and pull a stunt like like that fornothing mroe than his self agrandizement, without any consideration as to who (a child for instance, or person of minimal intellect) might be encouraged to try something similar with a substance far more dangerous than what is touted as a homeopathic sleep aid.
There has already been at least one death of a child trying to imitate him."
And then adds another reply saying
"Although he may seem at first glance to be nothing more than a fool playing a twisted game for his own amusement, Randi is a very sick man, both mentally & phsyically, & rather than seeking proper & effective medical treatment , he has chosen to find company for his misery by spreading his illness to as many people as possible, to oppose modern science with his hallucinations, to draw children into his perverted traps & to wreak havoc on the sentiments of those who are seeking a higher truth."
I called him out on the fact that he didn't actually answer the real question: If homeopathy works, why is Randi able to take 10 times the normal dose with no visible effects?
I'm sure he'll say Randi used fake pills or some nonsense.
Does he have a source for the death of the child supposedly imitating Randi?
All of Randi's health problems seem to have been handled quite competently by proper and effective (read: NOT homeopathic) medical treatment.
And, of course, Randi DID use fake pills, because that's what homeopathic pills ARE.
QuoteHere's another way of looking at it. The strength of the remedy works in series, not in parrallel You can take 8 one & a half volt batteries, hook them in parrallel and you'll still get 1&1/2 volts. But if you hook them in serties, you get 12 volts. We see similar effects in homeopathy. If you dump 100 pills in your mouth, they're working in parrallel & you're getting the same "voltage" out of 100 as you would out of one. But if you take them in series, you're jolting your system 100 times.
This guy must think I was sleeping during science class in school.
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on November 13, 2009, 07:12:02 PM
This guy must think I was sleeping during science class in school.
Or that you and I both don't have a lick of common sense...
(On a side note, 400th post for me!!! :D)
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on November 13, 2009, 07:12:02 PM
This guy must think I was sleeping during science class in school.
Or he slept when they covered Ohm's Law. The batteries wired in parallel increase in amperage, not voltage; the batteries wired in series increase in voltage, not amperage. But you STILL have the same amount of power increase. It's just that in parallel, you burn through it faster. So he really shot himself in the foot with that one.
Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on November 13, 2009, 07:46:08 PM(On a side note, 400th post for me!!! :D)
So, what's so special about your 0x190th post? :P
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 13, 2009, 08:30:36 PM
So, what's so special about your 0x190th post? :P
Funny. :P
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 13, 2009, 08:29:17 PM
Or he slept when they covered Ohm's Law. The batteries wired in parallel increase in amperage, not voltage; the batteries wired in series increase in voltage, not amperage. But you STILL have the same amount of power increase. It's just that in parallel, you burn through it faster. So he really shot himself in the foot with that one.
If memory from my Physics class serves: connecting batteries in series doubles the voltage.
Connecting the batteries in parallel keeps the voltage constant and the current constant, however, the lifetime of the batteries (capacity in Amp Hours) is doubled http://www.zbattery.com/Connecting-Batteries-in-Series-or-Parallel
Well, okay, two batteries wired in parallel doubles the amperage IF the circuit draws it.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 13, 2009, 09:31:58 PM
Well, okay, two batteries wired in parallel doubles the amperage IF the circuit draws it.
...Also, Amperage?
You mean current, right?
If so, because I = V/R (total current equals applied voltage divided by the equivalent resistance of the circuit); if the voltage is still the same, wouldn't the only way to double the current be to half the equivalent resistance?
If not, never mind.
Regardless, the person's original point is a weak analogy.
If I take 100 pills (regardless of whether they're homeopathic, or not), that's the equivalent as a series circuit: the pills, like the current only have one path to take. Why does he think people are not supposed to exceed recommended dosages?
Or why people die from overdose?
I mean, come on!
This is common freaking sense...
Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on November 13, 2009, 09:38:22 PM
...Also, Amperage?
You mean current, right?
If so, because I = V/R (total current equals applied voltage divided by the equivalent resistance of the circuit); if the voltage is still the same, wouldn't the only way to double the current be to half the equivalent resistance?
If not, never mind.
Think of an old cassette player when the batteries are running low. It plays the tape slowly, and everyone on it sounds like Darth Vader, but you can flip it over to the radio and play it just fine. The radio circuit is set up to use the same number of volts as the cassette player, but it's far better at handling low-amp situations. The reason why is that the motor in the cassette player acts like a resistor in a way; it needs the electrical current to do work, but if the juice isn't there it can't do as much. So it'll pull more amps off of a full battery, whereas the radio will just keep pulling as much as it always does. At lower amps, the motor acts as if it's a larger resistor in the circuit.
Now wire up two batteries in parallel to the cassette player, and the radio will play just as it always has but take longer to run down the two batteries, but with the cassette player, it just might be the case that every song will be by The Chipmunks, and it'll drain the batteries at the same rate.
Make sense?
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 13, 2009, 10:39:42 PM
Think of an old cassette player when the batteries are running low. It plays the tape slowly, and everyone on it sounds like Darth Vader, but you can flip it over to the radio and play it just fine. The radio circuit is set up to use the same number of volts as the cassette player, but it's far better at handling low-amp situations. The reason why is that the motor in the cassette player acts like a resistor in a way; it needs the electrical current to do work, but if the juice isn't there it can't do as much. So it'll pull more amps off of a full battery, whereas the radio will just keep pulling as much as it always does. At lower amps, the motor acts as if it's a larger resistor in the circuit.
Now wire up two batteries in parallel to the cassette player, and the radio will play just as it always has but take longer to run down the two batteries, but with the cassette player, it just might be the case that every song will be by The Chipmunks, and it'll drain the batteries at the same rate.
Make sense?
Let me see if I get you:
Cassette player: p = v^2/R (electric power equation) small power from a small voltage because of a large resistance.
Radio: P = v^2/r normal power because of the smaller resistance (or something like that).
I got you on the radio part with two batteries in parallel; it sounds like what I said.
But WHY is it different for the cassette player?
Because the faster the motor for the cassette player runs, the more power it drains.
The same reasoning would apply to the current as well in my last post.
Also, would these be new batteries in parallel in your example?
OK, I'm currently (no pun intended. :P) reading this: http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_6/chpt_3/3.html
I'm so dang tired I can barely get it...
Though it sounds like it has to do with the internal resistance of the batteries, and because each battery when connected in parallel has half as much current going through it, so not as much power (and voltage) is wasted on the batteries; about half as much power if memory serves because of the square with current, coupled with the addition of the two powers.
I suppose the total resistance of the radio, because it doesn't need as much current (if I get you correctly) wouldn't make as big a difference...but then why wouldn't you get the same thing for the radio; of it being louder, or something.
I'm confused...
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 13, 2009, 11:35:38 PM
Because the faster the motor for the cassette player runs, the more power it drains.
Well I figured that.
And I also figured why. But now the problem has become why it doesn't have the same effect of more power delivered to the radio.
Because the circuits in the radio don't use as much power. They'll only draw what they're going to use.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 14, 2009, 12:18:26 AM
Because the circuits in the radio don't use as much power. They'll only draw what they're going to use.
Why do they only draw what they need?
How do they have that cut off?
Do they have a variable resistor for the detection of current or something?
No...you use as much power as the work you do. The more work, the more the power requirements, the more the batteries are drained.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 14, 2009, 08:30:01 AM
No...you use as much power as the work you do. The more work, the more the power requirements, the more the batteries are drained.
I know that.
I'm asking why from an Ohm's Law perspective.
Ohm's Law doesn't cover the use of power to do work; it only covers the relationship between potential, current, and resistance.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 14, 2009, 10:24:11 AM
Ohm's Law doesn't cover the use of power to do work; it only covers the relationship between potential, current, and resistance.
Eh? OK, then this:
P = i*V
P = V^2/R
P = i^2*R
In terms of this then.
I suspect the internal resistance of the batteries and the resistance of the radio might have something to do with the difference it.
Actually, you want to use P = W/t. The equations you posted are only valid if the component is a resistor. What you want is to use the formulas for motive power. In the case of a motor, it's driven by inductors.
Quote from: MrBogosity on November 14, 2009, 12:24:24 PM
Actually, you want to use P = W/t. The equations you posted are only valid if the component is a resistor. What you want is to use the formulas for motive power. In the case of a motor, it's driven by inductors.
So THAT's why the motor behaves differently.