There is no paranormal things in homeopathic potencies

[Dr. A Sheikh]

I believe that skeptics are not aware of the method of preparation of homeopahtic potencies that is why they call it a paranormal phenomenon. I am quoting Dr. MAS article here for their understanding.

I express my gratitude for Hans. He has changed his mind and came up with YES/NO reply to my questions. This has given a new turning to our ongoing discussion. At this stage I can say, the discussion is near to end. It is easier to understand homeopathic mystery now. I have no plan to catch anyone, neither I can. If you follow me than you can easily understand the actual practice of homeopathy. You have book knowledge while I have spent my life in practical work. A very few homeopath knows how does a potency is prepared in actual practice.

For discussing more, few points should be clearly understood. Hans has no idea about what actually a belladonna plant contains. The same situation is with me. I also have no idea what kind of ingredients or how many types of compounds are there in belladonna plants from which bell 30c is prepared.

We are aware of methods of potency preparations but Hans admitted that he never involved in practical applications. But this is not the case with me. I have worked in so many pharmacies as scientific research officer. The preparation method written in pharmacy books or in homeopathic pharmacopoeia is different with what we adopt in actually practice when we prepare potencies.

Lets take an example of preparation of belladonna cm. Three years ago, the figure which was disclosed to me in a meeting by a representative of International homeopathic pharmacy who based at Karachi Pakistan by a foreign country. He said, about 10 million belladonna 30c, 5 million belladonna 200c, 2 million belladonna 1m and 1 million belladonna cm were marketed through out the world including Pakistan, India, Bungladesh, UK, Germany, France, Australia, USA and Canada etc. These include in Q, 10 ml, 30 ml, 100 ml, 250 ml, 500 ml and 1000 ml packing. I have belladonna in all potencies in Q, 10 ml, 30ml and 100 ml bottles at my clinic. More or less same is the case with other polychrest and frequent remedies.

There are about 33 polychrest and 150 frequent remedies. In safe words, each pharmacy is making 200 different varieties of potencies, if the same pharmacy is manufacturing other potencies as well then these pharmacies are using BACKUP potencies, in real sense these are not manufacture by them.

Few pharmacies manufacture all types of medicines. But most of them manufacture only running medicines. I am talking on world scenario. What is the position in Pakistan? I will discuss it later on.

Let’s perform little calculation to understand the real situation / practice. If you could understand what I am going to write then your queries will be answered in advance and you will not ask any more question.


As I said earlier, an international company marketed 10 million belladonna 30c, 5 million belladonna 200c, 2 million belladonna 1m and 1 million belladonna cm through out the world. On safe ground, lets assume ¼ of the figure is true. This means,

50,000,00 --30c
25,000,00 --200c
10,000,00 --1m c
05,000,00 --cm c

Total Potencies: 90,000,00 bottles (10 million approx on safe ground)

How much dilution (alcohol+water 70 %) these 10 million bottles contain?

(Q (20ml) + 10 ml + 30 ml + 100ml + 250ml + 500ml + 1000ml) = 1910 ml
Approx 02 liters. The mean value is 2000/7= 285 ml per bottle

This means in actual practice, pharmacy required 285 x 10,000,000 = 2,850,000,000 ml of dilution i.e 285,00,00 liters.

For storing this amount, one needs 2850 Jerricane (drums / containers / dolls / Jars) These containers covers 3 x 2850 = 8550 square yard area.

That was the figure of storing dilutions and containers. The figure of small bottle required to fill potencies are still to come.

For making belladonna cm you need 1,00,000 of bottles and for preparing and filling belladonna 1m you required 1,000 bottles so that serial dilution could be possible in one go.

This is very important step to understand. If you ever wish to prepare belladonna cm at home in 10 ml of dilution then you need 100,000 glass bottles for making serial process possible. This is the figure you required at home for preparation of 1 belladonna cm and for manufacturing million of cm belladonnas how many glass jars / bottles you required?

1. At this stage I take sigh (I am tired of typing the post) to please give me feed back, could it possible at home to make cm potency, if yes how and if No then why not?

2. Can a pharmacy have space to place 1,00,000 Drums (containers) of 1000 liter capacity each? (Remember you need to prepare cm potency in a drum that has the capacity of containing 1000 liter of dilution then you can fill 10 ml of glass bottles from it otherwise you can market the product). Yes, or No

If you want to carry this discussion forward and wants to understand what is the mystery involve in homeopathic potencies and how you can find molecules in cm (whether cm contain atoms / ions / molecules of belladonna starting material or not?) then answer the above-mentioned questions first.

Ref of the post: http://www.nch.ipbfree.com/index.php?showtopic=212

First Question: Have you (yourself) ever tried to find the molecules practically in 13c of Homeopathic belladonna potency and failed to locate any molecules of belladonna in it? (YES or NO)

Question No 2: If your answer is in Yes, then definitely you used some technique or method for analysis? Did you use electron microscope in search of molecules of belladonna ingredients in homeopathic preparation of belladonna 13c dilution? (YES or No)

Question No 3: If your answer is No, then have you ever used some chemical analysis method practically for observing change / effect in homeopathic dilution of belladonna 13c? (YES or No)

Question No 4: If the answer of the above question is in yes, then would you like to confirm that no chemical change was made to dilution? (yes or no)

Question No 5: If yes, Do you know all the ingredients (elements - Compounds) a belladonna plant contain? (Yes or No)

Question No 6: If the answer of question no 4 is in no. Did you ever use any other technique in studying the graphical structure or picture of homeopathic dilution of belladonna 13c? (Yes or No)

[Z]

So what you're basically saying is, either the pharmacies are lying / false advertising, or the idea of serial dilution to that degree is ludicrous to begin with...

[Dr. A Sheikh]

http://img490.imageshack.us/img490/5418/whcc5wj.jpg

Succession machine. Understand mas post with reference to this picture.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

So what you're basically saying is, either the pharmacies are lying / false advertising, or the idea of serial dilution to that degree is ludicrous to begin with...

Exactly, now you got my point. it is your understanding about dilutions not ours. we homeopaths are preparing dilutions entirely in the different ways and our dilutions have molecules in them.

[anor277]

Exactly, now you got my point. it is your understanding about dilutions not ours. we homeopaths are preparing dilutions entirely in the different ways and our dilutions have molecules in them.

So how milligrams (approximately) belladonna are there in a 30C preparation of belladonna?

[Z]

Exactly, now you got my point. it is your understanding about dilutions not ours. we homeopaths are preparing dilutions entirely in the different ways and our dilutions have molecules in them.

If this is the case, the FDA needs to be notified at once that you are selling potentially toxic substances to the public, and that all homeopathic remedies are prepared by methods other than those reported to the FDA, and that this blatant fraud needs to result in the immediate ban of homeopathic remedies pending further investigation!

[Dr. A Sheikh]

So how milligrams (approximately) belladonna are there in a 30C preparation of belladonna?

A very good question. This also means that you are convinced that belladonna 30c could have molecules. ;) Thanks God, you step down a little. Now I will explain it further.

In order to give you reply of your specific question, I would like to recall your memory. Belladonna is not an element or a compound it is the name of a plant that have hundred to thousands of chemicals. When you used belladonna plant in first potency then actually you poured hundred to thousand of chemicals in the solvent. For identification purpose, the name was given as belladonna otherwise that 1 potency have so many chemical names eg. A, B, C, D, E, F, …… and so on. So you cannot call 1st potency belladonna potency rather you can call a potency of 1c strength with many chemicals of belladonna plant. When you move to 2nd potency again that potency have chemicals of belladonna plants. But in simple form belladonna 2c is written on the label for simple understanding. If you carry this procedure forward then you reach at 30c that is again the bottle having chemicals related with belladonna plant. From this explanation, you can draw your answer. This is very simple chemistry.

[anor277]

A very good question. This also means that you are convinced that belladonna 30c could have molecules. ;) Thanks God, you step down a little. Now I will explain it further.

In order to give you reply of your specific question, I would like to recall your memory. Belladonna is not an element or a compound it is the name of a plant that have hundred to thousands of chemicals. When you used belladonna plant in first potency then actually you poured hundred to thousand of chemicals in the solvent. For identification purpose, the name was given as belladonna otherwise that 1 potency have so many chemical names eg. A, B, C, D, E, F, …… and so on. So you cannot call 1st potency belladonna potency rather you can call a potency of 1c strength with many chemicals of belladonna plant. When you move to 2nd potency again that potency have chemicals of belladonna plants. But in simple form belladonna 2c is written on the label for simple understanding. If you carry this procedure forward then you reach at 30c that is again the bottle having chemicals related with belladonna plant. From this explanation, you can draw your answer. This is very simple chemistry.

I am well aware that belladonna is a mixture of chemicals. A cake mix is also a mixture of chemicals and yet I can measure a definite mass of cake mix. The question is simple, how many milligrams of belladonna is in a belladona 30C preparation? The answer I derive from your explanation above means perhaps that a belladonna 30C preparation has about 10-30 grams of substance. That mass is not consistent with any atom, let alone any molecule. So therefore on the one hand belladonna 30C contains molecules, however, the belladonna weighs less than a standard alkaloid molecule, about 10-22 grams. Your argument is highly suspect; would you explain?

edited for further clarification

[Mojo]

OK, it looks like we're going to have to go through it again.

Dr. Sheikh, do you accept that matter is composed of atoms?

[PixyMisa]

I am well aware that belladonna is a mixture of chemicals. A cake mix is also a mixture of chemicals and yet I can measure a definite mass of cake mix. The question is simple, how many milligrams of belladonna is in a belladona 30C preparation? The answer I derive from your explanation above means perhaps that a belladonna 30C preparation has about 10-30 grams of substance. That mass is not consistent with any atom, let alone any molecule. So therefore on the one hand belladonna 30C contains molecules, however, the belladonna weighs less than a standard alkaloid molecule, about 10-22 grams. Your argument is highly suspect; would you explain?

edited for further clarification
Isn't a C dilution a factor of 100? So 30C would have 10-60 grams of substance.

[Zep]

After reading over at that other site, it's patently obvious that Dr. Sheikh has NO understanding of chemistry at all.

I am getting the strong impression that he thinks that these homeopathic remedies, and indeed the solvents, are not made of molecules at all, but of some infinitely divisible substances. Certainly the concept of molecules of solvent don't seem to figure strongly in their thinking... As for their ability with simple mathematics, they seem to have been dodging that subject for some time! ;)

[Danivon]

I would suggest that homeopathy is completely paranormal, seeing as it defies what we believe currently to be the natural laws on the nature and behaviour of matter.

With a belladonna-based homeopathic remedy you are expecting us to believe:

a) That there is not enough belladonna in there to have any detrimental effect (which multiple dilutions would appear to provide), and
b) That there is enough belladonna, or enough of the memory of belladonna to have a beneficial effect

At the same time. This runs contrary to known science - especially as belladonna is not really known to have many beneficial effects on humans. Given the lack of evidence that it works (repeated failures in double-blind testing to do more than replicate a placebo effect), why do people believe that it does?

Whatever homeopathy is (and it sure is a money-spinner), it is not 'normal'. It's medicine that doesn't work, doesn't have a basis in clinical trial and doesn't contain any measurable active ingredient. The touchy-feely consultation DOES make more of a difference, and if proper doctors had the time to do this, conventional medicine would probably see better results, but to apply that across the board would mean having a lot more doctors (costing more money), or doctors treating less patients.

[vbloke]

Can either Dr Sheikh or Dr MAS explain to me how they can derive an absolutely pure solvent?

Water, as we all know has many dissolved impurities (as we constantly are pumping waste into the sea and waterways) and the tides and underwater volcanic / tectonic activities are surely succussing it to homoeopathic dilutions. This, according to homoeopathic thinking means that every glass of water we drink should either cure us of everything or kill us.

Can you explain why this hasn't happened?

Which solvents are you using and how do you guarantee that they are absolutely, 100%, without any doubt, free of contaminates from their manufacturing process?

If even 1 atom of impurity is present on the inside in any of your 100,000 glass bottles, would it render the mixture contaminated and potentially lethal or ineffective.

How can you guarantee that this does not happen?

Are homoeopaths stuck on the old acting adage of "less is more"?

Would diluting one cancer cell to 30c cure cancer? If not, why not if like cures like?

Why aren't the apparent effects of homoeopathic medicine negated / amplified by the impurities in the water we drink / air we breathe?

Why do these not have an effect on the body, but a massively dilute (to the point of it being just solvent) mixture has an effect? Can you demonstrate the chemical formulae necessary for this to happen in the body?

[anor277]

Isn't a C dilution a factor of 100? So 30C would have 10-60 grams of substance.

You are right of course, my mistake. Too much arithmetic for me, I am trying to deal in gram quantities not fictional potencies. Dr Sheikh is possibly going to come back and tell us if he adds 10-60 g of belladonna to the solution then how can we deny the presence of belladonna? How indeed!

[Zep]

Vbloke, about your description of naturally contaminated water, etc...

Some months ago, it was discovered that MAS was perfectly happy to do trials on homeopathic remedies that were made up using diluted tap-water from the sink! He claimed they would work just as well as those made up from demineralised or even fully distilled water. The other dissolved compounds would supposedly have no effect on the action of the remedy!

THIS is the kind of nonsense "science" these "doctors of homeopathy" subscribe to!

:dl:

[vbloke]

Some months ago, it was discovered that MAS was perfectly happy to do trials on homeopathic remedies that were made up using diluted tap-water from the sink! He claimed they would work just as well as those made up from demineralised or even fully distilled water. The other dissolved compounds would supposedly have no effect on the action of the remedy!
I suppose I should be surprised, but I'm not.

[MRC_Hans]

Exactly, now you got my point. it is your understanding about dilutions not ours. we homeopaths are preparing dilutions entirely in the different ways and our dilutions have molecules in them.No you do not. Well Pakistani homeopaths may, I have coem to the point where I'm ready to believe anything about Pakistani homeopaths. However, real hoemopaths prepare their remedies in the proper way.

MAS' explanation about amounts of water etc. is ridiculous doe one simple reason: No pharmacy in their right mind would even dream of potentizing every single vial up from the MT.

They make master solutions, and split them a little below the target potency.

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

I have a little more time, so let me elaborate on the above:

Suppose you are to make a 200C of something. Let's assume you want to make one million vials of that remedy (Somethingus 200C).

Le'ts figure backwards. Since there are 100 parts of remedy in a vial (you need 1/100 vial for the next step), you can make 1 million 200C vials from 10,000 199C vials. To prepare your 10,000 199C vials, you need 100 198C vials, and to prepare those, you need ONE 197C vial. After that it is one vial per potency all the way from the MT. So to prepare 1,000,000 vials of Somethingus 200C you need: 1,000,000 + 10,000, + 100 + 197 vials. Hardly a tall order for a professional pharmacy. And in real life, that is not even how it is done. The base potencies are not prepared in vials, they are prepared in litres at a time.

MAS' figures are based on the absurd notion that a pharmacy starts with 1,000,000 vials of MT and builds each up to 200C, which is, of course, a totally ridiculous proposition.

So, we can now conclude that not only do MAS and Sheikh not understand simple chemistry, they also don't know the first thing about mass production methods. :rolleyes:

Hans

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Let's keep this simple.


If you carry this procedure forward then you reach at 30c that is again the bottle having chemicals related with belladonna plant. Are there any molecules of any of the chemicals left in that 30c preparation? Check one:

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

[Anti_Hypeman]

Will you go to the dance with me?

Check one:

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Let's keep this simple.

Are there any molecules of any of the chemicals left in that 30c preparation? Check one:

[ ] Yes

[ ] No

yes molecules of ethyle alcohol, molecules of water, molecules of compounds formed after reaction, molecule of o2 added during shaking.

[Z]

yes molecules of ethyle alcohol, molecules of water,

The solvent, I presume... so yes.

molecules of compounds formed after reaction,

Ummm... nope.

molecule of o2 added during shaking.

You forgot CO2, N, etc... i.e. air. Though it's quite likely that all gaseous particles after shaking will 'settle out' after a VERY short time.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Even if there were remaining molecules of compounds formed during the initial reaction, which there aren't, are you sure this is a good thing? Are those the compounds that do the good stuff? How would you know? Did you ever purify each compound and test it independently for safety and efficacy, assuming you did any testing at all? Did you then test to make sure there were no negative reactions between all the compounds? What do you do with all the intermediate waste products?

Let's start with a simple question: Name one of the compounds formed during the initial reaction.

~~ Paul

[Dr. A Sheikh]

hans you never used homeopathy, you never seen how homeopathic potencies are prepared and you are commenting like a scholar, I think you are the professor of homeopathy. :D

[RandFan]

hans you never used homeopathy, you never seen how homeopathic potencies are prepared and you are commenting like a scholar, I think you are the professor of homeopathy. :D Fallacious reasoning. I don't need to leave cookies out for Santa to know that he doesn't exist.

[Bone_Vulture]

Fallacious reasoning. I don't need to leave cookies out for Santa to know that he doesn't exist.

Well if you did leave the damn cookies, you'd know that Santa exists. The only reason he doesn't visit you is because you lack faith. ;)

[Aepervius]

In the following keep in mind I will soon go into mumbai, so I need to convert some cash to rupee at the airport or ... Get some rupee in advance:).

Somebody correct me if i am wrong, my speciality was Quantum physic, not Chemie.

There is 55 mole of water per liter (if I recall correctly). If we assume a saturated solution this go into complex operation, but as I understand the mother tincture principle, this is rather a diluted solution.
If you have n compound named M1...Mn in a solvant S, Each of those compound having a concentration [M1]...[Mn]. EAch will roughly due to the assumption of diluted solution rather inferior to 55. But for the sake of the argument let us all assume that any solute concentration is 10 mole.liter-1 (which is wrong this would already be beyond saturation but I do not want to go into chemical activity and perfect gas equations).

Let us notice the {Mx,j} the number of molecules for solute Mx AFTER Dilution number j. {Mx,0} is the initial number of molecule, so {Mx,0}=[Mx]*6.02.10^23. So for the sake of the argument this would be {Mx,0}=6.02.10^24.
Now since we are working in dilution and concetration we can consider every compound independant.

After Dilution 1, FROM THE DEFINITION of dilution itself, no matter how much you succuss , if you really dilute you will have {Mx,j+1}=0.01*{Mx,j}.

So, {Mx,1}=0.01{Mx,0}=6.02.10^24*0,01=6.02.10^22
{Mx,2}=0.01{Mx,1}=0.01*0.01*{Mx,0}=6.02.10^20
{Mx,3}=0.01{Mx,2}=0.01*0.01*0.01*6.02.10^24=6.02.1 0^18
{Mx,n+1}=0.01{Mx,n}=(0,01)^n*6.02.10^24

Still following me Mr Scheick ?

So now we have a number of molecule x in solvent for n=20 (20C) equal to :
{Mx,20}==(0,01)^20*6.02.10^24=10^-40*6.02*10^24=6,02*10^-16.

10^-16 is an extremly small number of molecules. This is impossible. Molecule cannot be fractionned they are integer (?) entity. So After 12C you have nothing more in your dilution.

Even if you consider saturated solution, you won't be able to go much more than 55 moles of componant in your 55 moles of water (else you can't call that a solution anymore) and any those step for saturated solution only apply for the first 1C, or 2C dilution. Afterward you have diluted solution, see above.

I will now stand on a leg and I will assume you PROPERLY do your dilution and properly clean up your apparatus between dilution, unlike a certain team of bad scientist I won't citate
If you say that any physical activity of the solute is present in your solution after a dilution of 12C this can ONLY means that you have a PARANORMAL effect of a coumpound which is NOT PRESENT (normal effect as forseen by science : is no physical activity related to the solute since it does not exist anymore beyond 12C). Homeopathy just say that : at 30C there is still an effect (example : basophile still react). Thus homeopathy is paranormal.

Do I get my million rupee please ?

PS: I assume it has already been talked about before in the 90+ page those cumulated homeopathic thread but that would be nice to see mr sheick answer to the above.

[Grundar]

Nicely put Aepervius, but you first have to get some homeopats to admit that atoms exist and have a minimum weight :) .

Hans

[Rolfe]

I think Sheikh or at least one of the collective did agree that atoms exist. I don't think it ever got further than that. Of course, he may have changed his mind, he seems to do that quite often.

Rolfe.

[Mojo]

I think Sheikh or at least one of the collective did agree that atoms exist. I don't think it ever got further than that. Of course, he may have changed his mind, he seems to do that quite often. He did. But he seems to need to be reminded.

[Mojo]

In fact, he did it here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1110612#post1110612).

[Rolfe]

Go on then, ask him if he accepts that atoms have finite mass.

Rolfe.

[Zep]

hans you never used homeopathy, you never seen how homeopathic potencies are prepared and you are commenting like a scholar, I think you are the professor of homeopathy. :DWell OK, Mr Smarty-pants! YOU tell us how they are made in real life. In full detail, please.

[Ladewig]

yes molecules of ethyle alcohol, molecules of water, molecules of compounds formed after reaction, molecule of o2 added during shaking.

One quick question, Dr. Sheikh. If there are molecules of compound in 30C, is it ever possible to dilute a solution to the point that there are no molecules of compound left?
40C ? 100C ? 1000C ? 10,000C ? Do all these dilutions still have compound molecules in them?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Is there some sort of atomic cloning thing going on?

~~ Paul

[PixyMisa]

No. It's just that the procedure is sufficiently sloppy that there are always contaminants. So 30C means we diluted it thirty times, but we have no idea by how much, or whether there is any of the original substance left, or whether something else might have crept in, and we don't care either.

Or so says the estimable Dr. Sheikh.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Are you sure there's no cloning of molecules. Maybe in China?

~~ Paul

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Go on then, ask him if he accepts that atoms have finite mass.

Rolfe.
this finitive mass can also react and form another mass and when you add more things then it can react and change to another mass.

[clarsct]

So...

In chemical reactions mass is created?

[AnotherSillyAlias]

this finitive mass can also react and form another mass and when you add more things then it can react and change to another mass.


And now we have something from nothing. Homeopathy sure is wonderful stuff!

[Aepervius]

this finitive mass can also react and form another mass and when you add more things then it can react and change to another mass.

Do you understand what a dilution is ? What a solvent is ?
OK let us admit we are all wrong here. Just for a second.

Let us all think your belladona react. And those final product are what heal/cure
symptom/is the homeopathic effect.

Do you understand that reaction are , per definition a finite process ?
Let us assume you are not speaking of autodissociation for obvious reason.
So you have chemical A and solvent S (H2O here). Let us assume just for a second
you are right there is a reaction. Fine. n*A+H2O->m*B+l*C what ever B+C are.
Now since the solvent is in great quantity *all* reaction of those type
EITHER A is completly *GONE* or if the reaction is slower until you start your dilution.
(I won't go into the fact that this MUST be an endothermic reaction
and other nastyness about reaction enthalpie and mass conservation law
you will probably not udnerstand it. Read lavoisier work).

If you start your dilution before the reaction is finished then at the moment when
you dilute the quantity of A, B , C and all product are "finished" (not infinite)
and will diminute by a factor 1/100.

If the reaction is finished and B and C are stable product THEN you will
have a concentration of m/n or l/n in the final solution. THAT MEANS you go back
to my post above witha set of {Mx,j} hwich are only slightly different
by a factor m/n and l/n than before. It means that you will have less molecule at a slightly higher
j than before {Mx,14} for example instead of {Mx,13}.

EVEN if your B and C are not final product, if you dilute before they react they will
get their concentration AGAIN lower by 1/100. And AGAIN. Until nothing is there.
Or you leave them react fact is, EVEN if l>>n and m>>n THEY ARE FINITE. Even
for big macro molecule, and even if that dissociation process exploded an organic molecule into
its single consitutent atoms you would only get at MOST l~1000*n in the best case.
So even if there was an INFINITE set of reaction due to the fact you DILUTE each time
at the very end you will get nothing for {Mx,15}.

EVEN if your reaction are catalityc, exothermic and quick, and transform
water into something else, that something else will have to use some of your atom
of your original molecules of belladon. BUT due to that Bastard Lavoisier (sic) you will,
sooner or later at 15C or 16C, have the Problem that you will RUN OUT OF ATOM/MOLECULES
coming from your original belladona sample.

And since nothing is created, nothing is lost in chemical reaction well you are S.O.L.
The only way to enable your homeopathic dilution to have something at the very end would be either :
1) to be a fraud 2) to badly , very badly, and wrongly clean your equipement bewteen dilution
3) have a PARANORMAL spontaneous creation of material

If your answer is 3) then please I have jsut proved you homeopathy is paranormal. Where is my million rupee ?

I propose we leave this thread DEAD Until mr Sheick admit he understood
the above comment. Naturally feel free to correct any error above in the logic.

[Mojo]

Go on then, ask him if he accepts that atoms have finite mass. Did that too. He accepted it here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1112529#post1112529). He also accepted (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1113462#post1113462) that if you divide a finite number by a larger finite number you will get an answer that is less than 1.

He then accepted (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1113652#post1113652) that: Yes, I admit according to your calculation which is correct, we can say, homeopathic potency cannot have any effect above avogadros number limit. Then, of course, he immediately said that this meant that we needed to address the question of how homoeopathic remedies above the limit can have an effect.
:hb:

[steenkh]

Maybe somebody should explain what the term finite means. Everytime somebody uses this term, Dr. Sheikh seems not to notice.

OK, I will try: Finite is the opposite of infinite. It is used to make clear that you cannot make serial dilutions forever and ever without losing whatever you were diluting. That is why it does not matter if we are talking about suspended grains, molecules, atoms or even quarks: Even though there would be huge numbers of them in the original mother tincture, and even though they may react with another or with the solvent, they are finite and can therefore be diluted away. And the stage where they are diluted away is well below 20C.

Let us see if that helps.

[cyborg]

this finitive mass can also react and form another mass and when you add more things then it can react and change to another mass.

The minimum mass for an atom in a stable compound is an ionised hydrogen atom - a single proton and another mass isn't formed, the original masses just rearrange.

If you propose anything that would require something with a smaller mass then you're talking about subatomic particles.

A lot of physicists would be very interested to hear about that because generally they need to smash electrons at near light-speed requiring masses of energy to examine such particles but you've got something to do it umch simply and cheaply.

That would make this process paranormal.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Maybe somebody should explain what the term finite means. Everytime somebody uses this term, Dr. Sheikh seems not to notice.

OK, I will try: Finite is the opposite of infinite. It is used to make clear that you cannot make serial dilutions forever and ever without losing whatever you were diluting. That is why it does not matter if we are talking about suspended grains, molecules, atoms or even quarks: Even though there would be huge numbers of them in the original mother tincture, and even though they may react with another or with the solvent, they are finite and can therefore be diluted away. And the stage where they are diluted away is well below 20C.

Let us see if that helps.

I have no objection that serial dilutions cannot make forever. But you are not following that during serial dilution you cannot stop chemicals not to react with each other or with freshly pouring water and alcohol.

[anor277]

I have no objection that serial dilutions cannot make forever. But you are not following that during serial dilution you cannot stop chemicals not to react with each other or with freshly pouring water and alcohol.

And again you have not proferred a single example of a plant component that could react with ethyl alcohol at room temperature.

[Mojo]

I have no objection that serial dilutions cannot make forever. But you are not following that during serial dilution you cannot stop chemicals not to react with each other or with freshly pouring water and alcohol.Whatever happens, though, if you start with a finite mass of solute you will only have a finite number of atoms, so sooner or later you will get to the point where your preparation contains less than one atom from the mother tincture. Less than one atom means no atoms at all.

[Belz...]

hans you never used homeopathy, you never seen how homeopathic potencies are prepared and you are commenting like a scholar, I think you are the professor of homeopathy. :D

It isn't complicated. When you dilute, you have less of the active ingredient left. Doesn't take such a big brain to understand. 30C is ludicrous.

Exactly, now you got my point. it is your understanding about dilutions not ours. we homeopaths are preparing dilutions entirely in the different ways and our dilutions have molecules in them.

Do they ? Then I submit that your dilution notations are wrong and potentially criminal.

[Rolfe]

Whatever happens, though, if you start with a finite mass of solute you will only have a finite number of atoms, so sooner or later you will get to the point where your preparation contains less than one atom from the mother tincture. Less than one atom means no atoms at all.And this point is, under all practical circumstances, before 13C. Given the fact that real mother tinctures don't usually start with as much as a kg of anything, the likelihood is that it may happen a stage or even two earlier.

Sheikh, get this. If we know the exact composition of the mother tincture, we can calculate exactly when you run out of anything. However, you are very carefully not allowing us to have any real idea of the composition of the mother tincture. You specify a herbal preparation, which of course will have a great many different compounds in it, and you refuse to tell us what weight of the plant goes into the mother tincture. Thus, the exact calculation cannot be made. Hence we try to allow for extreme situations, but find that even there, the point where substance of the solute runs out isn't much different from our original estimate.

Now, if you'd like to go back to the original proposition, which dealt with the remedy sodium sulphate, and tell us how much sodium sulphate chemical you are going to weigh out to make the mother tincture, then we can tell you exact figures.

You can't say, because I refuse to tell you what is in the mother tincture, and you thus can't show the complete calculation, the result can be anything I want it to be. Or you can say it, but nobody will pay any attention.

If you want to stretch this to 30C any way at all, let's see your working.

Let's see your working with sodium sulphate. And tell us how much sodium sulphate you're going to put in your mother tincture.

Oh yes, and how much belladonna plant will you use to make your belladonna mother tincture.

You can't complain of inexact answers when you refuse to state exact conditions.

Rolfe.

[steenkh]

I have no objection that serial dilutions cannot make forever. But you are not following that during serial dilution you cannot stop chemicals not to react with each other or with freshly pouring water and alcohol.
Yes, during the first dilution all possible reactions will happen, and nothing more happens when you make the number of original atoms more and more scarce by continuing the dilutions. In any case, even if the reactions would continue, you cannot avoid having the original MT atoms diluted away, even though they are now part of entirely new molecules. Think of it in this way: there are a finite number of atoms in the MT. It does not matter for the argument which molecules they form. When you dilute it, you may or may not get a reaction that produces new molecules, but the number of original MT atoms are the same! When you discard 99 parts out of hundred, you will also discard 99% of the original MT atoms, no matter what molecules they now form. And so on: the number of original MT atoms disappear, and only solvent atoms will be present. So, any new molecules that may be present will be formed by solvent only.

If that solvent is water, I would like you to reflect on how many kinds of molecules they can form that they would not have formed anyway!

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Yes, during the first dilution all possible reactions will happen (steen)

Thanks God, you given them courage to accept certain facts.

Now please accept it that in 2nd potency too a possible reaction can occur because you still have lot of molecules of chemicals of a plant.

[anor277]

Thanks God, you given them courage to accept certain facts.

Now please accept it that in 2nd potency too a possible reaction can occur because you still have lot of molecules of a plant.


Would you kindly give us an example of such a possible reaction? Your continued evasions of simple questions do not help your argument.

edited for spelling

[Dr. A Sheikh]

when you deny my statement then I will explain. you just deny that a chemical reaction cannot possible in 2nd potency.

[anor277]

when you deny my statement then I will explain. you just deny that a chemical reaction cannot possible in 2nd potency.


You have been asked courteously to provide an example of a room temperature reaction between ethanol and a plant component. Either you know or you don't know. Which is it?

[Z]

It is highly unlikely, though not impossible, that any new reactions will occur at second potency. For one, 90% of your reagents are gone. For two, most chemicals will have undergone their reactions in the first mixing and stabilized; or, will continuously form and dissolve into the same compounds in a homogeneous fashion, until sufficient amounts of these atoms are diluted away.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Locked up point. anor sent you here. lets wait for anor

[anor277]

Locked up point. anor sent you here. lets wait for anor

If you don't respond to polite enquiry, then what would be the point? I can assure that no one is criticizing your argument at my behest.

[Metullus]

I don't need to leave cookies out for Santa to know that he doesn't exist.
:eek:

[Aepervius]

when you deny my statement then I will explain. you just deny that a chemical reaction cannot possible in 2nd potency.

Mr Sheikh read my statement about those reaction above. It DOES NOT MATTER how many reaction you will have. You do not understand what lavoisier princple is, isn't it ? You do not udnerstand simple arythmetic of dilution, isn't it ? I think it is time to give up on this hopeless thread. My cat is asking for attention (food and play) and I think he won't be happy if I dilute my attention to the computer, he wants me fine and concentrated on him. Have fun trying to bring Sisyphus's stone up the hill guys... Sorry, I mean, have fun trying to have a rational discussion with mr Sheikh, I have given up.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Now please accept it that in 2nd potency too a possible reaction can occur because you still have lot of molecules of chemicals of a plant. Accepted. But do you have as many molecules of the plant as you did on the previous dilution?

[ ] yes

[ ] no


~~ Paul

[Ducky]

Hmm.

I see nothing paranormal about homeopathy.

Fraud is very much non-paranormal.

"Dr." Sheikh: prove me wrong. Tell me how to cure Multiple Myeloma with homeopathy.




(edited to clarify statement)

[steenkh]

Thanks God, you given them courage to accept certain facts.

Now please accept it that in 2nd potency too a possible reaction can occur because you still have lot of molecules of chemicals of a plant.
Probably no reactions with the solvent is taking place at all: Anor277 can tell you that. But please understand that even if such reactions take place at the second stage, there are only 1% left of the original MT, no matter if it has reacted with the solvent and formed entirely new molecules. And at the third stage, there are only 0.01% of the original MT left. Possible new molecules formed by reactions with the solvent have no bearing on the situation: They will all disappear the more you dilute!

If I sound exasperated, it is because you apparently only read what you want to hear, and not what we actually write! At one point you seemed to start to grasp some of the concepts, but now you just repeat the faulty reasoning.

Why not admit, along with most other homoeopaths in the world, that there are no MT molecules left in the high dilutions, and that the homoeopathic effect is pure magic (if it existed)?

[Z]

I wouldn't have near as many problems with homeopathy if the practicioners would just admit that the entire process works via faith or magic. THAT, at least, I can believe in.

This nonsense is ridiculous... a scam targetting the average idiot, not the educated JREF poster.

[steenkh]

Same here. It irritates me that homoeopaths try to present their magic as science, and that ordinary people do not see through this ruse. I also think it is no coincidence that the whole issue about the serial dilutions is usually hidden away when homoeopaths explain what they do. Instead they focus on the equally magic concept of 'like cures like'.

And that is by the way one reason why Sheikh seems to misunderstand skeptics: he thinks that if he can defend the idea that there are MT molecules left in the dilution, then homoeopathy is suddenly a valid concept! But actually homoeopathy just runs into the next magical concept that cannot be defended!

[Mojo]

Now please accept it that in 2nd potency too a possible reaction can occur because you still have lot of molecules of chemicals of a plant.Er, nope. Assuming that your solute actually does react with the solvent, in your first dilution you add one hundred times as much solvent as you have mother tincture. The solute reacts with the solvent until it produces a compound that is stable in the remaining solvent. Therefore, when you add more solvent in the second dilution, the solute has already reacted; there will be no further reaction.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Probably no reactions with the solvent is taking place at all: Anor277 can tell you that. But please understand that even if such reactions take place at the second stage, there are only 1% left of the original MT, no matter if it has reacted with the solvent and formed entirely new molecules. And at the third stage, there are only 0.01% of the original MT left. Possible new molecules formed by reactions with the solvent have no bearing on the situation: They will all disappear the more you dilute!

If I sound exasperated, it is because you apparently only read what you want to hear, and not what we actually write! At one point you seemed to start to grasp some of the concepts, but now you just repeat the faulty reasoning.

Why not admit, along with most other homoeopaths in the world, that there are no MT molecules left in the high dilutions, and that the homoeopathic effect is pure magic (if it existed)?

When a new compound has formed as you admitted here then you cannot take 1mole of old starting material. you have to take one mole of the new compound (now we will called it new starting material). In this way, BSM avogadros equation can be improved further. right?

[steenkh]

When a new compound has formed as you admitted here then you cannot take 1mole of old starting material. you have to take one mole of the new compound (now we will called it new starting material). In this way, BSM avogadros equation can be improved further. right?
Not right!

You forget that there is a finite number of atoms in the MT to start with! How many new molecules can be formed through reactions with the solvent? The extreme case must be 1 new molecule per atom in the MT. If there was not an atom from the original MT present in the new molecule, it would be a molecule that had resulted from reactions among solvent molecules, right? So if there was X atoms in the MT, you can now at most have X new molecules after reactions with the solvent. And these X molecules cannot turn into more molecules after more dilutions, because then you would have some molecules without a single atom from the original MT.

The X new molecules will eventually be diluted away just as when no reaction had taken place.

[Rolfe]

When a new compound has formed as you admitted here then you cannot take 1mole of old starting material. you have to take one mole of the new compound (now we will called it new starting material). In this way, BSM avogadros equation can be improved further. right?Doesn't matter. You still only have one mole of solute. So when you make the dilution, then you only have 0.01 moles. It doesn't matter in what form the substance exists, the minute you do a 1:100 dilution you only have a hundredth of the quantity.

Rolfe.

[petre]

I believe his hope is that through reaction, at some point x molecules will result in y > x molecules of non-solvent. It is also his arguement that there could be a series of reactions that are so slow that the process can progress many (or even all) stages before all the reactions are complete. These are possible scenarios, so let us examine them.

So, let me start by making an assumption up front to prevent a ton of confusing variables running around. It is perfectly valid to argue it is incorrect, but be prepared to explain why you believe that is so.

Assumption: No molecules with effect (homeopathic or otherwise) can be made entirely from solvent. That means that there is no catalyst which turns solvent into something useful without adding any atoms to any of the products. If you wish to debate this assumption, name one solvent molecule and the resulting molecules that have a homeopathic effect. He often argues from ignorance, claiming that though he knows of no such substance that he believes one exists, and leaves it for others to disprove such. I will also leave that matter in more capable hands (perhaps it would suffice to demonstrate that any stable by-product of homeopathic solvents already occurs naturally in the body, or that solvents used in homeopathy react chemically at all at room temperature, etc).

Based on that assumption, let me continue.

Is it possible for a solute molecule A to run into a solvent molecule B and produce multiple molecules? What would be the greatest number of molecules produced? My chemical knowledge is incomplete, but I suspect it is quite possible to have A and B combine, and result in C, D, E, F, and G (or more), especially if A is a very large and complex structure. This seems to be the basis of his continued arguement. Of course, if A is a very large and complex structure, it will be very heavy.

Now, work backwards from the final result. Let us suppose that a single non-solvent molecule in the 30C preparation has magical homeopathic properties, so that's our target result. Maybe it could still react with the solvent to produce more molecules, I don't care. The important thing is, you need at least one molecule, because zero just isn't going to do anything obviously. So, statistically, you'll want about 100 of those molecules to appear in the 29C preparation for a good chance at ending up with just 1 in the 30C.

Because of the assumption above, each of those 100 molecules must contain at least one atom from the original solute (if they do not, then they are composed purely of atoms from solvent, and violate the assumption above). Therefore, there must be at least 100 such atoms. Maybe they came into the 29C solution as a single 500-atom molecule (100 of which were from the original solute, and 400 of which were from solute) and reacted with solvent to produce 100 different molecules. Maybe they showed up as 100 30-atom molecules (1 atom from the original solute, 29 from solvent). It doesn't matter in the slightest how these molecules react with one another, no amount of chemical reaction is going to change the number of total atoms. In the end all that is important is that 100 atoms from the original solute ended up in the 29C preparation somehow.

In order for that to happen with good statistical chance, you'd want an evenly-mixed 28C solution that contained about 10,000 atoms of original solute in some combination of molecules. And by the same resoning, for the 27C solution you'd need 1,000,000 such atoms and so on. The only way to break this chain of reasoning is to argue against the assumption above and claim some derived-only-from-solvent molecule will have some homeopathic effect.

If you continue this back to the first preparation, you find that you need to have started with 10^58 atoms of solute in the 1x solution. Even if it were the lightest atoms in the universe (hydrogen) that's still going to be a mass of around 1.66 x 10^31 Kg, which is a little more than the mass of the sun (and that's not counting all the mass of the solute that isn't useful in the end).

Therefore, since he obviously uses less solute than that, one of the following must be true:

1. Statistically, there is not one single useful molecule in a 30C preparation.
2. A useful molecule can be constructed purely from solvent (since I've not yet conclusively proved that assumption to the contrary).

ETA: More consistent use of pronouns.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

I believe his hope is that through reaction, at some point x molecules will result in y > x molecules of non-solvent. It is also his arguement that there could be a series of reactions that are so slow that the process can progress many (or even all) stages before all the reactions are complete. These are possible scenarios, so let us examine them.

So, let me start by making an assumption up front to prevent a ton of confusing variables running around. It is perfectly valid to argue it is incorrect, but be prepared to explain why you believe that is so.

Assumption: No molecules with effect (homeopathic or otherwise) can be made entirely from solvent. That means that there is no catalyst which turns solvent into something useful without adding any atoms to any of the products. If you wish to debate this assumption, name one solvent molecule and the resulting molecules that have a homeopathic effect. He often argues from ignorance, claiming that though he knows of no such substance that he believes one exists, and leaves it for others to disprove such. I will also leave that matter in more capable hands (perhaps it would suffice to demonstrate that any stable by-product of homeopathic solvents already occurs naturally in the body, or that solvents used in homeopathy react chemically at all at room temperature, etc).

Based on that assumption, let me continue.

Is it possible for a solute molecule A to run into a solvent molecule B and produce multiple molecules? What would be the greatest number of molecules produced? My chemical knowledge is incomplete, but I suspect it is quite possible to have A and B combine, and result in C, D, E, F, and G (or more), especially if A is a very large and complex structure. This seems to be the basis of his continued arguement. Of course, if A is a very large and complex structure, it will be very heavy.

Now, work backwards from the final result. Let us suppose that a single non-solvent molecule in the 30C preparation has magical homeopathic properties, so that's our target result. Maybe it could still react with the solvent to produce more molecules, I don't care. The important thing is, you need at least one molecule, because zero just isn't going to do anything obviously. So, statistically, you'll want about 100 of those molecules to appear in the 29C preparation for a good chance at ending up with just 1 in the 30C.

Because of the assumption above, each of those 100 molecules must contain at least one atom from the original solute (if they do not, then they are composed purely of atoms from solvent, and violate the assumption above). Therefore, there must be at least 100 such atoms. Maybe they came into the 29C solution as a single 500-atom molecule (100 of which were from the original solute, and 400 of which were from solute) and reacted with solvent to produce 100 different molecules. Maybe they showed up as 100 30-atom molecules (1 atom from the original solute, 29 from solvent). It doesn't matter in the slightest how these molecules react with one another, no amount of chemical reaction is going to change the number of total atoms. In the end all that is important is that 100 atoms from the original solute ended up in the 29C preparation somehow.

In order for that to happen with good statistical chance, you'd want an evenly-mixed 28C solution that contained about 10,000 atoms of original solute in some combination of molecules. And by the same resoning, for the 27C solution you'd need 1,000,000 such atoms and so on. The only way to break this chain of reasoning is to argue against the assumption above and claim some derived-only-from-solvent molecule will have some homeopathic effect.

If you continue this back to the first preparation, you find that you need to have started with 10^58 atoms of solute in the 1x solution. Even if it were the lightest atoms in the universe (hydrogen) that's still going to be a mass of around 1.66 x 10^31 Kg, which is a little more than the mass of the sun (and that's not counting all the mass of the solute that isn't useful in the end).

Therefore, since he obviously uses less solute than that, one of the following must be true:

1. Statistically, there is not one single useful molecule in a 30C preparation.
2. A useful molecule can be constructed purely from solvent (since I've not yet conclusively proved that assumption to the contrary).

ETA: More consistent use of pronouns.

Thanks petre. You are the only new comer (new guest for one single post) have understood my point with slight misunderstanding.

I am going to correct you. when you add more water and more alcohol then those chemicals which have been splitted into their parts or have been changed into new compounds react with each other and also with new solvent which you are adding time to time and gain more quantity and in this way the quantity never comes down. Except that in higher potencies these molecules are very less in numbers but have more area to vibrate.

[chrisjeans]

Except that in higher potencies these molecules are very less in numbers but have more area to vibrate.

Ah. Vibration.

Please please please go and read a chemistry textbook.

[Rolfe]

Sheikh, are you proposing that new molecules are made from the solvent alone? If your original remedy has atoms in it other than hydrogen, oxygen and carbon, then how is this possible?

Take the sodium sulphate remedy. You add a finite amount of sodium sulphate at the start. There is no sodium and no sulphur in the solvent. How then can you derive more sodium sulphate, or any compound arising from sodium sulphate?

Rolfe.

[petre]

Thanks petre. You are the only new comer (new guest for one single post) have understood my point with slight misunderstanding.

I am going to correct you. when you add more water and more alcohol then those chemicals which have been splitted into their parts or have been changed into new compounds react with each other and also with new solvent which you are adding time to time and gain more quantity and in this way the quantity never comes down. Except that in higher potencies these molecules are very less in numbers but have more area to vibrate.

I'm hoping for further clarification on your description I've bolded here. Assuming you mean only chemical reactions, those are not capable of creating any new atoms, only rearanging the atoms in the molecules present. Do you mean that these repeated reactions create new molecules composed entirely of atoms that originated only in solvent, that then have an effect? If this is not the case, I've already demonstrated that any atoms in the original solute cannot occur with any likelyhood in the final preparation.

Or perhaps you mean to say that some non-chemical reaction takes place that will alter the atoms themselves, fusion of two atoms into one, or splitting one atom into two perhaps? That would be the only way to increase the number of atoms (or at least change them) that originated with the solute. Some here may soon bring up the difficulty of such non-chemical reactions, but first I would like to know if you believe these do occur.

While I await clarification, let me add a new analogy to the mix. It appears that the repeated dilution could be simulated in a single step. As I understand it, one normally takes a solute, dilutes it into 1 litre of solvent, takes 1/100 of a litre of that, and further dilutes it into 1 litre of solvent, and repeats 30 times to arrive at a 30C solution. That would appear to be analogus to taking the same solute and diluting it in one step into a large vat of 100^29 litres of solvent, mixing it completely, and then allowing it to react a sufficient length of time with all of that solvent. Then for each dose, simply tap 1/100 of a litre. Would such a hypothetical process result in the same product as the normal one?

[Rolfe]

It's quite entertaining that Sheikh entitled this thread "There is no paranormal things in homeopathic potencies" (sic), and yet he seems hell-bent on maintaining that there are indeed very paranormal things in homoeopathic potencies.

Sheikh, these things you're trying to evoke don't exist. If you could demonstrate them, you would be showing that there are paranormal things in homoeopathic potencies.

Do homoeopaths use sodium sulphate at 30C? (Answer is yes.) So, explain what is there (apart from the simple, unchanged solvent) in that potency, and how it gets there.

Rolfe.

[steenkh]

I am going to correct you. when you add more water and more alcohol then those chemicals which have been splitted into their parts or have been changed into new compounds react with each other and also with new solvent which you are adding time to time and gain more quantity and in this way the quantity never comes down.
The number of original MT atoms are not going to grow even though you add lots of solvent. Can you please explain how you can get more new molecules than there are atoms in the MT?
Except that in higher potencies these molecules are very less in numbers but have more area to vibrate.
So you have a theory about how homeopathy works? (If it worked)

[Nucular]

It's quite entertaining that Sheikh entitled this thread "There is no paranormal things in homeopathic potencies" (sic), and yet he seems hell-bent on maintaining that there are indeed very paranormal things in homoeopathic potencies.

Sheikh, these things you're trying to evoke don't exist. If you could demonstrate them, you would be showing that there are paranormal things in homoeopathic potencies.
If I was feeling unkind (and I usually am) I might suggest to Sheikh that he apply to the homeopathy prize, and win 1,000,000 rupees (or 10,000,000, or "hundred of prizes"), from www.drmas.tk.org.com.fict

Sheikh, simply email MAS to obtain details. I dare you.

[Belz...]

I am going to correct you. when you add more water and more alcohol then those chemicals which have been splitted into their parts or have been changed into new compounds react with each other and also with new solvent which you are adding time to time and gain more quantity and in this way the quantity never comes down. Except that in higher potencies these molecules are very less in numbers but have more area to vibrate.

Creation ex nihilo ? WOW! I've got to learn homeopathy, now.

Can you make plutonium with that ?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I am going to correct you. when you add more water and more alcohol then those chemicals which have been splitted into their parts or have been changed into new compounds react with each other and also with new solvent which you are adding time to time and gain more quantity and in this way the quantity never comes down. Except that in higher potencies these molecules are very less in numbers but have more area to vibrate.
In another thread you agreed that eventually there would be no molecules of the good stuff left. After how many dilutions does this occur?

~~ Paul

[Rolfe]

And what vibration would this be? Brownian motion? If you are implying that homoeopathic preparations "vibrate" more than identical preparations at the same temperature, explain how.

Rolfe.

[petre]

The number of original MT atoms are not going to grow even though you add lots of solvent. Can you please explain how you can get more new molecules than there are atoms in the MT?

So you have a theory about how homeopathy works? (If it worked)

I've suggested a number of ways you might end up with more new molecules than there are atoms in the MT, likely or unlikely as they may be. I'm waiting for clarification on whether or not any of these occur.

[Mojo]

I've suggested a number of ways you might end up with more new molecules than there are atoms in the MT, likely or unlikely as they may be. I'm waiting for clarification on whether or not any of these occur.Never mind "clarification"! What about some evidence, Sheikh?

[petre]

Never mind "clarification"! What about some evidence, Sheikh?

Now, now, don't go jumping the gun. It's polite to wait for people to clearly make their unlikely claim before declaring it BS and requesting evidence. I just plan to continue requesting clarification until:

1. How one could end up with non-solvent molecules at 30C becomes clear.
2. He states something as fact which violates known laws of science
3. He stops offering clarification

If 1 happens, then I can accept it is possible, and we could move on to discussing whether or not those molecules could have any effect.

If 2 happens, perhaps he will learn something useful and revise his thinking in some way. Maybe he could even take his new learning to his peers and they could all become more educated, yay!

If 3 happens...well, 3 always seems to happen in the end *sigh*

[Mojo]

when you add more water and more alcohol then those chemicals which have been splitted into their parts or have been changed into new compounds react with each other and also with new solvent which you are adding time to time and gain more quantity and in this way the quantity never comes down. The problem you have here is that, as I have already mentioned, you are adding much more solvent than you can possibly have of the "remedy" substances (in the case of a "c" preparation, 100 times as much), so that, even if the solute reacts with the solvent, the end result of the reaction will still be in solution in the solvent, and therefore must be stable with respect to that solvent. So even if your solute reacts with the solvent at the first dilution, the result of that reaction will be something that will not react further with the solvent. There can be no further reaction after the first dilution.

Of course, if your mother tincture is made up using the same solvent as that used for the dilutions (as you have indicated here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1383343#post1383343), where you describe preparing the MT using water and alcohol) you will not have any reaction even at the first dilution: any possible reaction will already have taken place when you prepared the mother tincture.

[H'ethetheth]

...except when you make a homeopathic medicine of fungus by diluting it with lukewarm gravy (mmmm gravy).

[Dr. A Sheikh]

The problem you have here is that, as I have already mentioned, you are adding much more solvent than you can possibly have of the "remedy" substances (in the case of a "c" preparation, 100 times as much), so that, even if the solute reacts with the solvent, the end result of the reaction will still be in solution in the solvent, and therefore must be stable with respect to that solvent. So even if your solute reacts with the solvent at the first dilution, the result of that reaction will be something that will not react further with the solvent. There can be no further reaction after the first dilution.

Of course, if your mother tincture is made up using the same solvent as that used for the dilutions (as you have indicated here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1383343#post1383343), where you describe preparing the MT using water and alcohol) you will not have any reaction even at the first dilution: any possible reaction will already have taken place when you prepared the mother tincture.

Solute also react with each other too (this you are missing)

[Mojo]

Solute also react with each other too (this you are missing)They will react with each other until the system reaches equilibrium, i.e. until there is no further reaction. This will most likely happen in the MT, or possibly in the first dilution if you manage to find a solvent in which they behave differently than they do in the solvent used for the MT.

[anor277]

Solute also react with each other too (this you are missing)

This is also quite fallacious. The solutes derived from plant tissues were in solution already, i.e. as part of the plant's biochemistry. The suggestion that they undergo reaction after (and not before) extraction is unreasonable.

Please would you turn off the blue colouring; it's hard on the eyes.

[steenkh]

Solute also react with each other too (this you are missing)
But what is the connection to the MT. The solute has plenty of time to react with itself in the bottle before it is added to the MT.

[petre]

1. How one could end up with non-solvent molecules at 30C becomes clear.
2. He states something as fact which violates known laws of science
3. He stops offering clarification

If 1 happens, then I can accept it is possible, and we could move on to discussing whether or not those molecules could have any effect.

If 2 happens, perhaps he will learn something useful and revise his thinking in some way. Maybe he could even take his new learning to his peers and they could all become more educated, yay!

If 3 happens...well, 3 always seems to happen in the end *sigh*

Perhaps #3 has come already, sad to have happened so soon.

[flume]

One way to get ethanol to change to acetic acid is to grow an acetobacter colony in it. What would it take for THAT to happen? I think oxygen is needed, and the alcohol level might have to be below a certain point. So - save money by using a weaker alcohol to water mixture, leave the lid off occasionally so that O2 gets in and more EtOH evaporates off ....
Dr. A Sheikh, do you ever smell vinegar from your 200C dilutions? Do you ever see a strange floating translucent layer on the top?

(only partly joking)

[StoatBringer]

What I want to know is how is it possible to ensure that the homeopathic preparation only contains "memory" (or whatever) of the intended active ingredient? How do you prevent molecules of other substances from "polluting" the solution when it comes into contact with its container, or the air, or the equipment used to prepare it?

Surely even a single bacterium or speck of dust would contain all sorts of molecules. How does the preparation magically know which molecule is the important one and to somehow ignore all the others which might get into it?

[MRC_Hans]

What I want to know is how is it possible to ensure that the homeopathic preparation only contains "memory" (or whatever) of the intended active ingredient? How do you prevent molecules of other substances from "polluting" the solution when it comes into contact with its container, or the air, or the equipment used to prepare it?

Surely even a single bacterium or speck of dust would contain all sorts of molecules. How does the preparation magically know which molecule is the important one and to somehow ignore all the others which might get into it?Actually, a logically feasible thesis for this was fielded by ... wait for it .... Kumar! I don't know if it was his own making or if he just copied it from somewhere, but it goes something like this:

In the first solution steps, the MT is dominating, so the sovent in these steps is thropughly "imprinted" with it. Now, in each step, as long as such contaminants are considerably below 1% (in a C series), the "imprinted" solvent from the previous step is dominant and this takes precedence over what contaminants are in the solvent. Also, the "imprint" is potentized, and thus stronger than the "crude" contaminants.

Makes a certain amount of sense, actually.

Hans

[Anders W. Bonde]

Originally posted by MRC Hans:
Makes a certain amount of sense, actually.

Hans, this remark of yours is going to be misrepresented by the homeopathetics - so please provide evidence for the existence of the suggested mechanism...


;)

[Stitch]

Actually, a logically feasible thesis for this was fielded by ... wait for it .... Kumar! I don't know if it was his own making or if he just copied it from somewhere, but it goes something like this:

In the first solution steps, the MT is dominating, so the sovent in these steps is thropughly "imprinted" with it. Now, in each step, as long as such contaminants are considerably below 1% (in a C series), the "imprinted" solvent from the previous step is dominant and this takes precedence over what contaminants are in the solvent. Also, the "imprint" is potentized, and thus stronger than the "crude" contaminants.

Makes a certain amount of sense, actually.

Hans
Hmm - it sounds vaguely plausible IF you are prepared to accept a load of things such a "potentization" and "imprinting", personally I'd like some evidence.

[MRC_Hans]

It only makes sense in the way that it is logically consistent within the premises suggested by homeopahty (but since this is the only time I remember I have seen Kumar being logically contistent, that is something in itself ;) ).

Hans

[Dr. MAS]

You will accept many things but you need some time to understand the practical applications of homeopathy.

[Mojo]

You will accept many things but you need some time to understand the practical applications of homeopathy.It's already been done by these guys (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16125589&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum).

[Dr. MAS]

I am going to invite you and your all family members (aliases you have). :D

[sionep]

hans you never used homeopathy, you never seen how homeopathic potencies are prepared and you are commenting like a scholar, I think you are the professor of homeopathy. :D

Dr. Sheik, I posted a message to Dr. Mas and any homeopathy practitioner who would be keen to do some 'proving' using my homeopathy grass-juice that I have invented. I have not had any response from Dr. Mas, so I am asking you if you are interested in this juice. I basically cut some grass from my backyard and make juice with it. I have given the juice to eleven elderly people at a rest home, which they each took half a glass of juice and all of them reported to their residents nurse-in-charge that they feel young again after drinking this stuff. Would you be interested, to take a look at my grass-juice, perhaps you can distribute them to needy patients of yours free of charge. Of course , you can charge fees for your consultations but not the juice. May be you and me can win a nobel prize for this revolution invention in homeopathy. If you are interested in further discussion, then perhaps send me a private forum mail, so that I can send you information of how it is prepared (type of grass to cut).

[sionep]

The number of original MT atoms are not going to grow even though you add lots of solvent. Can you please explain how you can get more new molecules than there are atoms in the MT?

So you have a theory about how homeopathy works? (If it worked)

I think, that the atoms in Dr. Sheik's preparations in the second, third, fourth, and so on ... round of dilution's get pregnant and produce more atoms out of thin air. In that way, the solutions become paranormal.

[Dr. MAS]

we are not interested in winning any prize we are in a position to award prizes. You can win a prize if you could justify yourself what you are saying.

[MRC_Hans]

I am going to invite you and your all family members (aliases you have). :DWasn't it you who asked, in another thread, if people accusing others of having aliases without providing evidence, could be banned for it?

Hans :rolleyes:

[MRC_Hans]

we are not interested in winning any prize we are in a position to award prizes. You can win a prize if you could justify yourself what you are saying.

Fine:

I am saying that you cannot distinguish a remedy of 12C or higher from a blank that is prepared in the same way, but without starting substance.

I am also saying that if you make a double blind placebo controlled test of homeopatic treatment, you will not be able to distinguish it from placebo.

....
Where's me prize?

Want more?

I am also saying that you will not be able to defend the theortical idea of homeopathic remedies on a dose-dependent basis.

I am also saying that you will not be able to present a viable theory on how remedies are able to have other effects than those of chemically identical controls (whether they contain MT or not).

Hans

[petre]

we are not interested in winning any prize we are in a position to award prizes. You can win a prize if you could justify yourself what you are saying.

Do you speak for all homeopaths when you say 'we', or some specific subset that are willing to be represented by you?

[Mojo]

Do you speak for all homeopaths when you say 'we', or some specific subset that are willing to be represented by you?Interestingly, this slightly odd use of "we" is shared by Sheikh. I'm still wondering who else Sheikh was including when he said: We will prove it with double blind test. if we will fail then we will leave homeopathic practice for ever.

[petre]

Interestingly, this slightly odd use of "we" is shared by Sheikh. I'm still wondering who else Sheikh was including when he said:

That's what I was trying to clear up. I was allowing for the fact that with a less-solid grasp of English, one might use 'we' in different ways than would normally be considered acceptable. Perhaps a clarification is forthcoming.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Fine:

I am saying that you cannot distinguish a remedy of 12C or higher from a blank that is prepared in the same way, but without starting substance.

I am also saying that if you make a double blind placebo controlled test of homeopatic treatment, you will not be able to distinguish it from placebo.

....
Where's me prize?

Want more?

I am also saying that you will not be able to defend the theortical idea of homeopathic remedies on a dose-dependent basis.

I am also saying that you will not be able to present a viable theory on how remedies are able to have other effects than those of chemically identical controls (whether they contain MT or not).

Hans

You are eligible and qualified in preliminary test now provide the justification of your challenge / demand as MAS pointed out and win your prize. Easy job no problem. No filin of application too.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

We means mas and drmas.org members.

[Nucular]

We means mas and drmas.org members.
Ah yes, I do love the drmas.org motto, it's so pithy and profound. What is it again? Ah yes...

This is the placeholder for domain hostingcare.net. If you see this page after uploading site content you probably have not replaced the index.html file.

This page has been automatically generated by Plesk.

Superb.

[Mojo]

We means mas and drmas.org members.You posted: Originally posted by Dr. A. Sheikh:
We will prove it with double blind test. if we will fail then we will leave homeopathic practice for ever.So Dr. MAS is included in the promise to prove that homoeopathy works in a double blinded test or quit homoeopathic practice.

[Dr. A Sheikh]

Ask to him

[Ririon]

Ask to him
You can speak for him and you can't speak for him... How convenient.

[Mojo]

Ask to himYou have already stated that he is included. We would only need to ask him if we thought that it was likely that you were not telling the truth.

[Mojo]

MAS, when Sheikh said "we means mas and drmas.org members", was he telling the truth?

[Dr. MAS]

Ask to him

Not only I will quit but the whole MAS organization. :)

[petre]

Not only I will quit but the whole MAS organization. :)

I would think it would be so much more exciting with a time limit. How about something generous like 5 years?

[Mojo]

How about 7 days? ;)

[petre]

How about 7 days? ;)

Just something finite was good with me. An open-ended duration promise is kind of weak:

I vow I will prove god exists before I die, or I will stop posting.

See, I'm pretty likely to stop posting anyway when I die, so it's not much of a statement.

ETA: Really, a more responsible duration would be, "We will prove homeopathy works in a double-blind test before we treat another patient"

[Rasmus]

Just something finite was good with me. An open-ended duration promise is kind of weak:

I vow I will prove god exists before I die, or I will stop posting.

See, I'm pretty likely to stop posting anyway when I die, so it's not much of a statement.

ETA: Really, a more responsible duration would be, "We will prove homeopathy works in a double-blind test before we treat another patient"

If you don't, where should we send the one million dollars?

[petre]

If you don't, where should we send the one million dollars?

Well, assuming I can find someone willing to notarize an application from the deceased, I'd consider investing heavily in any research in returning spirits to corporeal form :)

[Nucular]

oops, wrong thread

[MRC_Hans]

Not only I will quit but the whole MAS organization. :)Ehh? Does that mean you and the horse that pulls your carriage?

Hans

[Rasmus]

Well, assuming I can find someone willing to notarize an application from the deceased, I'd consider investing heavily in any research in returning spirits to corporeal form :)

Good luck with that! Mind you, you can only have my body wen you prey it... oh, nevermind ...

Rasmus.