Surprising Developements

[vIQleS]

Split from:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=64917

(Carrying on the derailment, on page 7)



At one stage scientists didn't believe that rocks could fall from the sky, that was a pretty preposterous idea.

Until someone demonstrated that they could. And then replicated it.

Has anyone replicated a PMM?

It's OK to postulate an absurd hypothesis (although I'd try and keep it mostly to myself) - but you have to make it work before anyone will take you seriously. Especially if it destroys the basic and well-tested rules of the universe...

ETA: Try this - think of something that has been invented in the last, i don't know, 50 years that when people looked at it didn't say - "Oh, yeah... That's a really obvious progression of what we already know."

In other words how surprising is the technology that we're inventing 'now' on a day to day basis?

ETA2:I'm actually interested to know if anybody can think of anything... I'm trying - I'll let you know.

[vIQleS]

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?

[Darat]

LEDs?

[Darat]

Just found this article from 2005 that list the "Top 50 inventions of the last 50 years" http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/upgrade/2078467.html

[Enlightenment]

Well, I'm not sure I understand your logical progression. There wasn't an invention that actually led to the understanding that rocks fell from the sky, rather direct and indirect evidence led to the "discovery".

Maybe a more appropriate question is to ask what invention over the last 50 years led to a discovery that made a radical departure from scientific understanding.

In this case, there are many. Off the top of my head, the hubble telescope.

Any invention is going to derive from known scientific theory. Maybe it is I who is unclear of your meaning. I haven't followed the thread from which you split this topic from, so maybe I am being ignorant.

[The Atheist]

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?I was asking this very question a couple of weeks ago - I'll try to find a link to it.

Laser was the last really new field, as far as I can see.

[Cuddles]

Well, I'm not sure I understand your logical progression. There wasn't an invention that actually led to the understanding that rocks fell from the sky, rather direct and indirect evidence led to the "discovery".

Maybe a more appropriate question is to ask what invention over the last 50 years led to a discovery that made a radical departure from scientific understanding.

In this case, there are many. Off the top of my head, the hubble telescope.

Any invention is going to derive from known scientific theory. Maybe it is I who is unclear of your meaning. I haven't followed the thread from which you split this topic from, so maybe I am being ignorant.

In the other thread, one poster appeared to be claiming that no discoveries were made by normal people or processes, only by unreasonable people. I believe vIQleS is asking if anyone can think of anything that has been invented that was completely out of the blue and not based on previous scientific knowledge. For example, both LEDs, LASERs and the Hubble telescope were predicted and designed on purpose based on theory. Said poster is currently working on a perpetual motion machine, and this would be considered completely revolutionary since it is contradicted by known science. The question is less relevant now, since he has clarified that the claim is based on some legal jargon about reasonable people and is in fact completely meaningless.

[Capsid]

The major use for Viagra was discovered by serendipity; does that count?

[AgingYoung]

Hello vIQleS,

People used to think that a 4 minute mile was physically impossible. There is some of the essence of what your asking in that example in this sense:

Can people do what is 'known' to be impossible?
Where I think the example differs from your point is that we are sure we can run and we're sure there's a limit to the rate, we just aren't exactly sure where the limit is. We admit that today. Before the 4 minute mile, a lot of people believed that was the boundary.

If I'm correct, that example is close to what you're asking but it isn't at the heart of it. I think you're asking, 'After so many intelligent people exhaustively examined an idea, is it possible they missed something; something that would be the opposite conclusion that they originally came to?'

Did I hit the nail on the head?

Gene

[robinson]

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?

Somehow I missed this topic and its creation.

[robinson]

I was following it on the other thread, and the first thing I thought of was computers, and the software/websites that the Net enabled.

[robinson]

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?

While it might seem pedantic, a definition of "accepted scientific understanding of the universe" really is required to answer the question. Because the term 'accepted scientific understanding of the universe' is a fluid, dynamic, changing sort of concept, and certainly not anything that one can pin down and say "here it is", the question really isn't valid at all.

In the last 50 years, as in the last 500, the "accepted scientific understanding of the universe" has changed. It will change in the time you read this. Because science allows new discoveries, new research, and surprising revelations, all the time.

The best examples of late would be cancer research, and small comet bombardment. In medicine and astronomy, new stuff is common, and ANYTHING that goes against the "accepted scientific understanding of the universe" seems to be greeted by some with derision and doubt by some.

Even the stuff that is really really cool, and later will come to be part of the "accepted scientific understanding of the universe".

The Milky Sea is another example.

Whoa! And right here in this very forum -
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2195099#post2195099

How surprising!

And here-
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2193892#post2193892

Another surprise!

[Thinking in CT]

The most amazing development in technology of the present era has been the development of the personal computer. When computers were first developed and durring the first decades of their development, the universal understanding as to how this tech. would progress was that computes would get larger and larger, more expensive, and that only huge governmental and corporate entiteis would ever posses them. They would only be understood by a very small cohort of genius programmers. In the 1970's novelist Ira Levin (of Rosemary's Baby fame) wrote a distopian novel "This Perfect Day" where the whole world was controlled by a giant computer called "Omni" that was controlled by a ruling elite of about five people. The concept did not seem overly outlandish at all, today the story would seem comical. My son, a freshman in college, has his hands on more computing power than NASA had in the 60's, and god knows what he is doing with it!

[robinson]

Indeed. The transistor is a good example of an invention that was considered impossible. And even after it was patented, and being produced, reasonable men said it was worthless. The Japanese, being unreasonable, used it to make small portable radios. Another device that was considered by reasonable men to be worthless.

While that sounds ridiculous, it is a historic fact. Remember that a transistor is the same as a tube that produces electron transfer while not being hot. I think it was 1924 or so when it was first demonstrated. Scientist of the time claimed the inventor was a crackpot, and didn't believe this was possible.

[Gr8wight]

Indeed. The transistor is a good example of an invention that was considered impossible. And even after it was patented, and being produced, reasonable men said it was worthless. The Japanese, being unreasonable, used it to make small portable radios. Another device that was considered by reasonable men to be worthless.

While that sounds ridiculous, it is a historic fact. Remember that a transistor is the same as a tube that produces electron transfer while not being hot. I think it was 1924 or so when it was first demonstrated. Scientist of the time claimed the inventor was a crackpot, and didn't believe this was possible.

Yes. So?

I fail to see your point.

[robinson]

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?

Yes. The point is simple. The question is, "Can anyone think...", and I made a simple point, that yes, yes most people can think of something. That you don't get the point, makes it seem you are a reasonable man.
:wackywink:

[The Atheist]

The major use for Viagra was discovered by serendipity; does that count?The scary part about that is that the same point was raised in the other thread I mentioned. Amazing what a bit of advertising can do.

[robinson]

Ah... serendipity. What a wonderful thing.

From the MDC changes thread:

I don't understand your point, robinson. Are airplanes scoffed at now by any "reasonable" people? Sure, new things take time to become widely accepted. That does not change the fact that all of the things you have mentioned have become widely accepted. Therefore, your argument that sound, solid evidence does not convince reasonable men is disproven by your own examples.

I was speaking to when new things are discovered, that seem to contradict current understanding of the universe and science and stuff. Of course after it is in use, most people don't question stuff. I understood the query being about new stuff when it was new.

Obviously not everything is like this. Usually it is the out there stuff that gets the reaction, the dismissal.

[robinson]

Another example. Leeches. While the reasonable man scoffed and mocked the oldtime idiots who used them, and even used them as an insult to medical Doctors who claimed stuff that sounded crazy, the unreasonable men who actually did the research, and dared to publish, brought leeches back. Now, once again, they are considered invaluable, and it turns out them leech Doctors were right about a lot of stuff. They weren't quacks. Leeches are amazing. And FDA approved!

Funny isn't it? But not in 1980. Then the statement that leeches are a wonderful medical tool would have brought reasonable men howling to attack. Before they even looked at the data, the research, the science.

[Gr8wight]

Another example. Leeches. While the reasonable man scoffed and mocked the oldtime idiots who used them, and even used them as an insult to medical Doctors who claimed stuff that sounded crazy, the unreasonable men who actually did the research, and dared to publish, brought leeches back. Now, once again, they are considered invaluable, and it turns out them leech Doctors were right about a lot of stuff. They weren't quacks. Leeches are amazing. And FDA approved!

Funny isn't it? But not in 1980. Then the statement that leeches are a wonderful medical tool would have brought reasonable men howling to attack. Before they even looked at the data, the research, the science.

Yes, but robinson, you're missing the whole point. The research was done. The evidence was provided, and now leeches are accepted by the scientific establishment as an effective treatment for some things. Once again, reasonable men have been convinced by sound and solid evidence. You keep making my argument for me.

Here, this is the way you are supposed to play it. Give us an example of something for which sound and solid evidence has been provided but has not been accepted.

[patnray]

How about the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). I read a story by the inventor about how he thought of it and how many of his co-workers were sceptical when he explained the idea. But he made it work and it revolutionized DNA analysis in a very short time. I believe he received a Nobel Prize for it. It is now used in automated equipment that is bringing the cost of gene sequencing down radically.

[TheBoyPaj]

Yes, but robinson, you're missing the whole point. The research was done. The evidence was provided, and now leeches are accepted by the scientific establishment as an effective treatment for some things. Once again, reasonable men have been convinced by sound and solid evidence. You keep making my argument for me.

Here, this is the way you are supposed to play it. Give us an example of something for which sound and solid evidence has been provided but has not been accepted.

I think robinson's argument is more along the lines of "here are some examples of things which were rejected when there was no evidence, but which became accepted once evidence was found.

Therefore all things with no evidence should be taken seriously"

[skullerello]

Cloning?
Doesn't cloning work just the way it's not supposed to?
I once recall reading that to clone a more clomplex organism (like a sheep), we'd first have to learn to clone separate types of organs, and then figure out how to put them all together.
But, then, voila! Hello, Dolly.
Maybe I'm way off.

[skullerello]

BTW, vIQleS
I'm curious as to the origin of your chosen screen name.
tlhIngan Hol DajatlhlaH
And why ghawran for your avatar?

[vIQleS]

How about the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). I read a story by the inventor about how he thought of it and how many of his co-workers were sceptical when he explained the idea. But he made it work and it revolutionized DNA analysis in a very short time. I believe he received a Nobel Prize for it. It is now used in automated equipment that is bringing the cost of gene sequencing down radically.

I don't know what this is, but it sounds like the sort of thing i was looking for (wondering about)...

But what came immediately before it? Was it a logical progression from another peice of technology, or did it come completely out of the blue?

The LED... Was it immediately preceeded by a non-light emiting diode?

Cloning a sheep seems a logical progression from cloning organs (i assume they were doing that first...) (although I might have started a litle smaller...)

I'm talking about the sort of "oh my god, if i connect this to that, i get unlimited energy and antigravity, and i can read minds..." sort of discoveries...

Or to put it a little more realisticly - playing around with, say, a cassette tape, and inventing DVD. Or jumping from punch cards to plasma screens...

[vIQleS]

BTW, vIQleS
I'm curious as to the origin of your chosen screen name.
tlhIngan Hol DajatlhlaH
And why ghawran for your avatar?


nuqneH skullerello

I was working for a client one day and their login name was viclesh (Victor and Elizabeth i think). I mentioned that it sounded like tlhIngan Hol, and they said i could use it.

Best picture of a Klingon I could find at short notice...

[robinson]

I think robinson's argument is more along the lines of "here are some examples of things which were rejected when there was no evidence, but which became accepted once evidence was found.

Therefore all things with no evidence should be taken seriously"

Well, you can think whatever you like, but that is dumb. One of the cool things about writing stuff down, and doing it in a way that is easy to understand, is anyone reading it can see what you are saying. Obviously, nobody but you is saying something like, "Therefore all things with no evidence should be taken seriously". See? Its easy. You said that, and it is dumb.

What I am writing about here are things that seemed dumb, and even when evidence was shown, produced, researched, people still didn't believe it. It happens all the time. It always has. It is almost a built in thing. It is so common, so everyday, we don't even have a word for it.

It is quite easy to understand. I feel the same way when someone says they have found a way to levitate, without any technology. I don't believe it. I don't want to even hear anymore after that. End of story.

[robinson]

How about the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). I read a story by the inventor about how he thought of it and how many of his co-workers were sceptical when he explained the idea. But he made it work and it revolutionized DNA analysis in a very short time. I believe he received a Nobel Prize for it. It is now used in automated equipment that is bringing the cost of gene sequencing down radically.

Excellent example. That would be Kary Mullis, who is still doing stuff and saying stuff that gets skeptics riled up, as well as other researchers and scientist. He publicly states that there is no evidence that HIV causes AIDS, or in his own words"
I’m one of the few outspoken people who say that there’s no good scientific evidence that the diseases that are called AIDS are really caused by the retrovirus called HIV—in spite of its name. I’ve had a lot of trouble from people over that issue, because many are convinced that it does. But my assessment is that it is an unsupported and unsubstantiated belief.

And he is working on a project that right now that will no doubt get him another Nobel prize, (Altermune). A project that probably no one would fund or even consider, if he hadn't won the Nobel prize, the Thomas A. Edison Award, the Japan Prize, and the California Scientist of the Year Award. As well as being in the National Inventors Hall of Fame. So when he says unreasonable things, sometimes people still listen to him.

[Gr8wight]

What I am writing about here are things that seemed dumb, and even when evidence was shown, produced, researched, people still didn't believe it.

So, why don't you provide us an example of something like that?

[Capsid]

The scary part about that is that the same point was raised in the other thread I mentioned. Amazing what a bit of advertising can do.
I missed that; which thread?

[robinson]

So, why don't you provide us an example of something like that?

Don't be dumb. This thread is now an example of what I am talking about. I give you examples, post links to hard evidence, and you ask a dumb question like that. See? Its like you are helping me make the point.

[a_unique_person]

LEDs?

LEDS? They were just trivial. Far more exciting was the integrated circuit. A mainframe was now possible on a chip the size of your fingernail.

[robinson]

I'm talking about the sort of "oh my god, if i connect this to that, i get unlimited energy and antigravity, and i can read minds..." sort of discoveries...

Or to put it a little more realisticly - playing around with, say, a cassette tape, and inventing DVD. Or jumping from punch cards to plasma screens...

The first thing I thought of was Tesla when he said he had invented a brushless electric motor (induction motor). The other scientist at the time (Edison was particularly virulent), claimed he was trying to make a PMM, and that it would never work. Of course now nobody thinks that, but at the time it earned him a reputation as a crackpot. His response to the skeptics was telling;

"... The present is theirs. The future, for which I really worked, is mine."

Small comet bombardment is another really good example.

[personable]

Don't be dumb. This thread is now an example of what I am talking about. I give you examples, post links to hard evidence, and you ask a dumb question like that. See? Its like you are helping me make the point.

You haven't given an example of anything that has hard evidence that it works, that is not accepted by the reasonable community.

I agree with theboypaj, it looks to me like you are saying that because some currently accepted scientific discoveries drew laughter and derision in the beginning, that all claims without evidence should be treated seriously.

You said he was dumb to think that, I don't think he was dumb at all, he read what was in front of him.

Having read several of your posts and observed the patterns, I suspect you are trolling. Would I be correct?

[ponderingturtle]

Hello vIQleS,

People used to think that a 4 minute mile was physically impossible. There is some of the essence of what your asking in that example in this sense:

No they did not think a human could do it, not that it was impossible. That is an example of an engeneering challange not a discovery. It is like saying you can't build a bridge over X length. Doing it is an accomplishment not a discovery.

[ponderingturtle]

Another example. Leeches. While the reasonable man scoffed and mocked the oldtime idiots who used them, and even used them as an insult to medical Doctors who claimed stuff that sounded crazy, the unreasonable men who actually did the research, and dared to publish, brought leeches back. Now, once again, they are considered invaluable, and it turns out them leech Doctors were right about a lot of stuff. They weren't quacks. Leeches are amazing. And FDA approved!


This is so wrong. You are claiming that the FDA has aproved the use of leaches for ballancing humors. That is complete crap. Their current use has nothing to do with their historic use, or you would see a real rise in bloodletting.

They had no medical use for a long them, then surgery advanced to the point that its very abilities created a problem that the leach was a good solution for.

Funny isn't it? But not in 1980. Then the statement that leeches are a wonderful medical tool would have brought reasonable men howling to attack. Before they even looked at the data, the research, the science.

Well, connecting their current use to thier historic use is pretty funny.

[ponderingturtle]

The most amazing development in technology of the present era has been the development of the personal computer. When computers were first developed and durring the first decades of their development, the universal understanding as to how this tech. would progress was that computes would get larger and larger, more expensive, and that only huge governmental and corporate entiteis would ever posses them. They would only be understood by a very small cohort of genius programmers. In the 1970's novelist Ira Levin (of Rosemary's Baby fame) wrote a distopian novel "This Perfect Day" where the whole world was controlled by a giant computer called "Omni" that was controlled by a ruling elite of about five people. The concept did not seem overly outlandish at all, today the story would seem comical. My son, a freshman in college, has his hands on more computing power than NASA had in the 60's, and god knows what he is doing with it!

The thing here is that there was a failure of imagination of what they could be used for, not a failure in understanding how they worked. Especially after the invention of the silicon chip, which covers a fair amount of the period that you are talking about.

The difference here is when a scientist says something is impossible they are often right, but when they are depending on what is practical and useful, that is a different situation entirely. They did not think of the applications of the technology, but that does not mean that they would have thought it violated physical laws.

For example I will say that no one will ever build a bridge from New York to London. That is not saying that such a bridge violates physical laws, but it is still impossible because it does not fit into any kind of reasonable cost benefit analysis that I can imagine.

Or to look at a real suggested project, building a dam across the straights of Gibraltar and emptying the Mediterranean for farm land. This will never happen, but it is possible.

[ponderingturtle]

How about the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). I read a story by the inventor about how he thought of it and how many of his co-workers were sceptical when he explained the idea. But he made it work and it revolutionized DNA analysis in a very short time. I believe he received a Nobel Prize for it. It is now used in automated equipment that is bringing the cost of gene sequencing down radically.

The problem is that people are confusing engeneering challanges and scientific impossibilities.

I will say that a family car will never get 500 miles to a galon of gas, but that does not mean that it violates the laws of physics if someone built one.

[robinson]

This is so wrong. You are claiming that the FDA has aproved the use of leaches for ballancing humors. That is complete crap.

No, you said that, and it is crap. Nobody said anything like that, except you.

Their current use has nothing to do with their historic use, or you would see a real rise in bloodletting.


Obviously you know nothing about leeches, or you wouldn't say dumb stuff like that.

They had no medical use for a long them, then surgery advanced to the point that its very abilities created a problem that the leach was a good solution for.


I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say, "They had no medical use for a long them,"??? Is English not your primary language?


Well, connecting their current use to thier historic use is pretty funny.

Almost as funny as your spelling.

[robinson]

You haven't given an example of anything that has hard evidence that it works, that is not accepted by the reasonable community.

Several people have posted good examples. Are you being dumb or funny?

[robinson]

Give us an example of something for which sound and solid evidence has been provided but has not been accepted.

Oh, you mean right now, at this very minute?

[ponderingturtle]

The first thing I thought of was Tesla when he said he had invented a brushless electric motor (induction motor). The other scientist at the time (Edison was particularly virulent), claimed he was trying to make a PMM, and that it would never work. Of course now nobody thinks that, but at the time it earned him a reputation as a crackpot. His response to the skeptics was telling;

"... The present is theirs. The future, for which I really worked, is mine."

Small comet bombardment is another really good example.

The problem here is that edison never really had a good understanding of electricity, could you find a number of noted physicists who at the time said it would be impossible, you know someone who understood maxwells equations?

[robinson]

Lets stick to the leeches then.

Indications for treatment with medicinal leeches:

- cardiovascular diseases, including essential hypertension and ischemia disease, phlebogene diseases of the lower extremities;
- chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, bronchial asthma;
- gastrointestinal tract diseases (hepatitis, cholecystitis, pancreatitis, stomach ulcer);
- ENT diseases;
- paradontosis and other teeth diseases;
- urological diseases;
- male sterility;
- skin diseases (neurodermatitis, psoriasis, eczema, herpes);
- gynaecological disorders (commissural processes in the small pelvis, female sterility, chronic adnexitis, parametritis, endometriosis, fibromastopathy);
- systemic diseases (rheumatic arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma);
- osteochondrosis and radiculitis;
- eyes diseases, including glaucoma;
- infantile cerebral paralysis (ICP) and other diseases.

[robinson]

The problem here is that edison never really had a good understanding of electricity, could you find a number of noted physicists who at the time said it would be impossible, you know someone who understood maxwells equations?

Its hard to find good data back then, but from what I have read, everyone who was working with motors or electricity slammed Tesla.

[ponderingturtle]

No, you said that, and it is crap. Nobody said anything like that, except you.

Then why are you comparing two things that have no connection other than that leaches are involved? Before micro surgery there was no use for leaches, it is not that their traditional use was shown to be effective.

As such making any connection between there past use that you will not find any doctors supporting and their current use is totally wrong.

And it represents a misunderstanding of the different meanings of impossible that you have made repeatedly. One is that it violates known science, the other is that it is not an engineering problem that can be solved.


Obviously you know nothing about leeches, or you wouldn't say dumb stuff like that.

???

What property of leaches am I missing? The use of leaches before microsurgery that everyone was talking about was balancing the four humors, the current one is to remove excess blood from an area to let in new blood and permit healing.

[ponderingturtle]

Oh, you mean right now, at this very minute?

How about just supporting any of the many claims about impossiblity that you have already made.

Please show the understood theory that PCR violated in organic chemistry.

[ponderingturtle]

Lets stick to the leeches then.

Indications for treatment with medicinal leeches:

- cardiovascular diseases, including essential hypertension and ischemia disease, phlebogene diseases of the lower extremities;
- chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, bronchial asthma;
- gastrointestinal tract diseases (hepatitis, cholecystitis, pancreatitis, stomach ulcer);
- ENT diseases;
- paradontosis and other teeth diseases;
- urological diseases;
- male sterility;
- skin diseases (neurodermatitis, psoriasis, eczema, herpes);
- gynaecological disorders (commissural processes in the small pelvis, female sterility, chronic adnexitis, parametritis, endometriosis, fibromastopathy);
- systemic diseases (rheumatic arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma);
- osteochondrosis and radiculitis;
- eyes diseases, including glaucoma;
- infantile cerebral paralysis (ICP) and other diseases.

Please provide some evidince for any of those.

[ponderingturtle]

Its hard to find good data back then, but from what I have read, everyone who was working with motors or electricity slammed Tesla.

So in other words you can not support your statement then.

Just because they where working with electricity did not mean they knew and understood Maxwell's equations and so had any idea what they where talking about. So if you can show the part of Maxwell's equations that was missing then and has been discovered as a result, that would support your argument.

[Gr8wight]

Lets stick to the leeches then.

Indications for treatment with medicinal leeches:

- cardiovascular diseases, including essential hypertension and ischemia disease, phlebogene diseases of the lower extremities;
- chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, bronchial asthma;
- gastrointestinal tract diseases (hepatitis, cholecystitis, pancreatitis, stomach ulcer);
- ENT diseases;
- paradontosis and other teeth diseases;
- urological diseases;
- male sterility;
- skin diseases (neurodermatitis, psoriasis, eczema, herpes);
- gynaecological disorders (commissural processes in the small pelvis, female sterility, chronic adnexitis, parametritis, endometriosis, fibromastopathy);
- systemic diseases (rheumatic arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma);
- osteochondrosis and radiculitis;
- eyes diseases, including glaucoma;
- infantile cerebral paralysis (ICP) and other diseases.

But...but...didn't you just tell us that studies had been done, and leeches had become accepted as effective treatment for some conditions? Are these those conditions, or are these conditions for which the use of leeches is not accepted?

[robinson]

But...but...didn't you just tell us that studies had been done, and leeches had become accepted as effective treatment for some conditions? Are these those conditions, or are these conditions for which the use of leeches is not accepted?

That is a good question. And to tell you the truth, I have no idea. And neither do you. Which gets to the crux of the matter. There seems to be some sort of belief that there is a general "currently accepted as true by reasonable men" that you can look these things up and find out.

There isn't. In fact, what is accepted as true is not universal, and it certainly is not static. So not only is there no consensus on some matters, the many varied concepts that people have, also change, sometimes daily.

Now of course I am not talking about everyday common sense stuff, nor would anyone be interested in that. Unless somebody showed that the laws of physics could be broken. But then, if that happened, (it has happened many times before), we just change the theory to match the new data.

:wackywink:

[robinson]

So in other words you can not support your statement then.

No, that isn't what I said at all. Learn to read and understand stuff, then you won't ask dumb questions. Now go back and read it again. Its not rocket science.

[AgingYoung]

This is a very sarcastic assertion with not just a few flaws in it.

Yeah, they laughed at Newton when he invented gravity, Einstein when he made it better, everyone who did quantum, Maxwell, Boyle, Kelvin, the discoverers of new planets, Hubble, Shcrodinger, Feynman, Fermat, etc.. Oh, wait, no they didn't.

A lot could be said about all of it but I'll begin with just a look at Newton and his ideas on optics...

The roots of these unconventional ideas were with Newton by about 1668; when first expressed (tersely and partially) in public in 1672 and 1675, they provoked hostile criticism, mainly because colours were thought to be modified forms of homogeneous white light. Doubts, and Newton's rejoinders, were printed in the learned journals.

I didn't find any thing on how people responded when Newton 'invented' gravity but it seems his 'invention of light' wasn't too well received.

Gene

[robinson]

This is a very sarcastic assertion with not just a few flaws in it.

Yeah, but I try to ignore obvious trolls.

[ponderingturtle]

No, that isn't what I said at all. Learn to read and understand stuff, then you won't ask dumb questions. Now go back and read it again. Its not rocket science.

I know, I have done rocket science. You claim that Tesla's motor was thought to be impossible by the science of the time. I want your evidence and now supporting statements is too much to ask for?

[robinson]

Before micro surgery there was no use for leaches, it is not that their traditional use was shown to be effective.


Wrong.

What property of leaches am I missing? The use of leaches before microsurgery that everyone was talking about was balancing the four humors, the current one is to remove excess blood from an area to let in new blood and permit healing.

Wrong. That isn't how leeches work. This points to the crux of the matter. What leeches do, have always done, isn't just about sucking blood. That is the sort of simpleminded misunderstanding that led to leeches being considered on the same level as killing a chicken to read its entrails.

And if you think the researchers who discovered how and why leeches work were greeted with admiration and joy, boy have you got a good imagination.

All over the world however, Medical men and patients are glad that the unreasonable men who raise the leeches that are used, never stopped raising them. Several have been raising them for over 150 years.

That seems to me about as unreasonable as it gets. Raising leeches. All those years. When everybody knew that leeches were as useful in medicine as killing a goat.

Now in the US, it seems leeches are only considered for post-op surgery. But that isn't the case in most countries. It seems that the ancients who used leeches (at least 2500 years of leeches), knew a lot about the unique properties of these disgusting little animals. And even knowing that they really do work, I still find the idea of leeches a bit disturbing. It seems to violate a law of physics or something.

One can only imagine what this could lead to. Next thing you know they will use wasp to detect diseases.

Oh wait... they already do.

[AgingYoung]

As I read a little further down in this article on Newton I found that his 'invention' of gravity took a little while to catch on also...

Newton's work in mechanics was accepted at once in Britain, and universally after half a century. Since then it has been ranked among humanity's greatest achievements in abstract thought. It was extended and perfected by others, notably Pierre Simon de Laplace, without changing its basis and it survived into the late 19th century before it began to show signs of failing. See Quantum Theory; Relativity.

Gene

[robinson]

I know, I have done rocket science. You claim that Tesla's motor was thought to be impossible by the science of the time. I want your evidence and now supporting statements is too much to ask for?

Actually it isn't too much to ask. But you are going to have to wait, or do your own research. I will amend my statement, (at the time I was using memory, not the best tool).

Crookes and Lord Kelvin both supported Tesla.

[ponderingturtle]

Actually it isn't too much to ask. But you are going to have to wait, or do your own research. I will amend my statement, (at the time I was using memory, not the best tool).

Crookes and Lord Kelvin both supported Tesla.

So then it looks rather like people did not regard it as a violation of physical laws and thus not impossible, but rather as an engineering challenge that they did not feel was doable. That is an entirely different class of effect there.

I am not making claims of items being invented that where thought to be impossible, I don't think that has happened since the birth of science. Meaning that the effect gets notices and understood in a scientific setting first before any application of it gets used.

[ponderingturtle]

Wrong.

Why? Please provide something on all your claims here.

Wrong. That isn't how leeches work. This points to the crux of the matter. What leeches do, have always done, isn't just about sucking blood. That is the sort of simpleminded misunderstanding that led to leeches being considered on the same level as killing a chicken to read its entrails.

So the anti coagulating saliva helps with pneumonia? Evidence?

And if you think the researchers who discovered how and why leeches work were greeted with admiration and joy, boy have you got a good imagination.

What on earth do you mean by work?

All over the world however, Medical men and patients are glad that the unreasonable men who raise the leeches that are used, never stopped raising them. Several have been raising them for over 150 years.

And people have been practicing homeopathy for 200 years, it must work right?

That seems to me about as unreasonable as it gets. Raising leeches. All those years. When everybody knew that leeches were as useful in medicine as killing a goat.

And at the time they where, removing blood from a post operative site while waiting for blood vessels to reattach was not important then. When you start sewing fingers back on it becomes more needed.

Now in the US, it seems leeches are only considered for post-op surgery. But that isn't the case in most countries. It seems that the ancients who used leeches (at least 2500 years of leeches), knew a lot about the unique properties of these disgusting little animals. And even knowing that they really do work, I still find the idea of leeches a bit disturbing. It seems to violate a law of physics or something.


Yes they are most effective at adjusting the body humors, that is what they where used for for most of that time. The ancients knew more than us right? What next you will suggest that the geocentric model is not preferable to current models

One can only imagine what this could lead to. Next thing you know they will use wasp to detect diseases.

Oh wait... they already do.

And bombs.

[robinson]

So then it looks rather like people did not regard it as a violation of physical laws and thus not impossible, but rather as an engineering challenge that they did not feel was doable. That is an entirely different class of effect there.


Tesla, Crooke and Kelvin wrote some of the laws of physics. They were unreasonable men. Reasonable men knew that they had to be wrong. Despite inventing radio, the AC motor, and dozens of other things we take for granted now, Tesla died broke and alone. Reasonable men knew he was crazy, until it was obvious he was not, then reasonable men stole his ideas. Its hard to imagine now, but at the time, he really was considered crazy by reasonable men. He was bouncing energy off the atmosphere, measuring thunderstorms around the globe, and people just knew he had lost it. You can't bounce energy around the world, and you sure as hell can't detect the energy of thunderstorms on the other side of the world! Reasonable men knew this.

[Psiload]

Lets stick to the leeches then.

Indications for treatment with medicinal leeches:

- cardiovascular diseases, including essential hypertension and ischemia disease, phlebogene diseases of the lower extremities;
- chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, bronchial asthma;
- gastrointestinal tract diseases (hepatitis, cholecystitis, pancreatitis, stomach ulcer);
- ENT diseases;
- paradontosis and other teeth diseases;
- urological diseases;
- male sterility;
- skin diseases (neurodermatitis, psoriasis, eczema, herpes);
- gynaecological disorders (commissural processes in the small pelvis, female sterility, chronic adnexitis, parametritis, endometriosis, fibromastopathy);
- systemic diseases (rheumatic arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma);
- osteochondrosis and radiculitis;
- eyes diseases, including glaucoma;
- infantile cerebral paralysis (ICP) and other diseases.

Is this the source where you found this info?

http://www.leeches.biz/leech-hirudotherapy.htm

Kinda looks like a woo woo farm to me.

The way of leech secret injection is very simple: being placed on the skin it bites the skin, then the secret of the leech saliva falls into the blood channel and goes to the disease focus through vessels. In the treatment we use hirudoreflexotherapy placing the leeches on the reflexogenic points as a "Life needle".

Ooooo Kay. :con2:

The existence of skin-visceral connections with the definite organs is well known. Biologically active substances act to organs during the blood-sicking work of medicinal leeches through viens. It promotes the improvement of blood circulation in the concrete organ,renders trombolitic,antiinflammatory,immunostimulating action,raises nutrition of tissues, strengthens tissues immunity. It’s impossible to name all diseases which can be treated with using of hirudotherapy

Concrete organ? :confused:

Ahhh.... and now we come to it:

http://www.leeches.biz/leech-powder.htm

Leech Powder

Biologically active substances in leech saliva help the cells to absorb the necessary nutrition and to eliminate toxic waste.

We supply leech powder in capsules. This 100% pure leech extract is derived from laboratory bred Hirudo Medicinalis. The effect of application of the Hirudo powder is similar to the alive leech application. The anticoagulant effect of Hirudo powder encourages the natural process of regeneration of blood vessels.

Snake oil.

In the future, you may want to take a closer look at the sources you're quoting.

[robinson]

I was in error. Unreasonable men have been using leeches for at least 4000 years. And modern science has found exactly why they worked, just as the ancients recorded it. Damn. This is some whack stuff them leeches.

Here are the modern terms for what the ancients were observing, when they used leeches.

general reflexogenic
hypotensive
bloodletting
immunopotentiating
internal decongestion
bacteriostatic
anticoagulant
anti-inflammatory
protective antithrombotic
local anti-edematous
thrombolytic
analgesic
removal of microcirculation disorders
antiatherosclerotic
anti-ischemic
removal of abnormal intersystem interactions

Damn, I don't know what half that stuff means. I will bet you money that leeches doing that is considered woo by reasonable men.

[robinson]

You slipped in! But proved my point beyond all doubt. Reasonable men don't want to even look at any research that shows ANY of that crap to be true. After all, we all know leeches is snake oil. Except for surgery. And some other stuff. But them leeches, they can't do anything else. 4000 years of leeching people was woo man. Leeches. Ick.

[patnray]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. You miss the point about leeches. Most of the traditional uses are bunk. Because the anti-coagulating effects have found a use in recovery from some surgeries does not validate any of the other uses, but con men are ever willing to promote it for dozens of other uses.

Here's another example: the discovery that H. Pylorii bacteria "cause" some forms of ulcers. The initial report was greeted sceptically, and rightfully so, because there was a lot of work that had to be done to prove the concept. Nevertheless, the scientific community jumped on it and began the hard work of proving the connection, which took many years and multiple studies. Many cases of ulcers are now cured with antibiotics. But it is an evolving story. I put "cause" in quotes because it is still an open question. H. Pylorii is common, and not everyone with it gets ulcers. There is some indication that H. Pylorii protects against stomach cancer. The relationship between H. Pylorii and humans is an area of active research today.

Some proponents of SCAM try to claim that the initial scepticism that ulcers could be cured with antibiotics proves that traditional doctors are close minded. But they are wrong. The initial report showed that there was likely a connection between H. Pylorii and ulcers, but it did not, by a long shot, prove the connection. That took years of research by multiple groups (some of whom made huge profits selling antacids, a market drastically reduced by this discovery). The vindication of the theory proves exactly the opposite - that science is open to testing new ideas.

[robinson]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. You miss the point about leeches. Most of the traditional uses are bunk.

You help me make my point. Current research and evidence on OTHER uses in medicine for leeches is current and ongoing. There is a vast amount of data on leeches, and overwhelming evidence that they can and are used to treat many conditions. But the reasonable man won't even look at the data. It takes an unreasonable man to investigate such an absurd concept.

Which is my perception of what this topic is about. While there are other issues on the table, leeches seem to be one of the most obvious examples. Most reasonable Doctors and skeptics won't even look at research on this. It would be silly. Claims that leeches can restore infertile men is unreasonable. And no matter how many test are done, no matter how much research is available, it is unreasonable to even discuss such a thing.

:wackywink:

[robinson]

Is this the source where you found this info?

http://www.leeches.biz/leech-hirudotherapy.htm

Kinda looks like a woo woo farm to me.


It looked that way to me as well. So I did some research. It seems that leeches (and maggots) are a hot research item, as well as common in use. I had no idea. I picked that source because it was the most woo sounding site I could find. But there is a lot of hard science on this. Most strange. Most unreasonable.

[robinson]

In a related thread, I myself am experiencing the reasonable problem of accepting that acupuncture can work. It seems unreasonable. I don't like all these scientist doing research that shows something we all know is woo, may not be all woo. It is most unreasonable. They even use rats! And double blind experiments.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2200712#post2200712

[robinson]

Well, this is a surprise.

[Boo]

Leeches, lovely little buggers...dated a few.

Seriously, leeches do have multiple medical uses and have been accepted, standard of care treatment for at least 20 years.

http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~mcbstaff/graf/AvHm/MedUsemain.htm

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3867/is_199806/ai_n8807297

http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/139/9/I-22

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/050419_maggots.html

http://www.biotechnologyhealthcare.com/journal/fulltext/3/1/BH0301014.pdf


The study of medicine often leads researchers in places they weren't expecting. One of the first medications for regrowing hair was initially a blood pressure medication, low and behold these patients started noticing that the hair on the scalp started filling in. Side effects are interesting things.


As far as something today not thought of 50 years ago, HIPPA laws. *shudder*



Boo

[luchog]

My son, a freshman in college, has his hands on more computing power than NASA had in the 60's, and god knows what he is doing with it!

"Modern computers can hold, in something a little larger than a breadbox, more computing power than computers that used to fill rooms. They're capable of doing work orders of magnitude more complex than the earliest supercomputers could. I can use that computer to link to the Internet, a network of thousands of similar computers, and transfer more data in a minute than the entire ARPANET did in it's first decade. And what do we use all that amazing power for? Video games and porn." -- attribution lost, and quote somewhat paraphrased.

[robinson]

Leeches, lovely little buggers...dated a few.

Seriously, leeches do have multiple medical uses and have been accepted, standard of care treatment for at least 20 years.


Thanks for the links. I'm trying to imagine what it was like for the first researchers who started testing leeches, and actually published the data. Over the holiday I talked to someone about leeches, and was surprised to find that people never stopped using them. Even when Modern Medicine advocates insisted they were woo as woo can be. Leeches were one example used to show how stupid and backward our ancestors were about medicine.

After considering this twist of reality, and if you accept that leeches, (a most unreasonable idea), actually have huge health benefits, and always did, one might wonder what research was done that led to leeches becoming quackery of the highest sort?

Was there any research at all? Or did somebody just declare them on a par with witchdoctors and ban them from all modern medical work?

[Boo]

The following is speculation on my part.....

With the rise of modern chemistry, pharmaceutical manufacturing, modern medicine and increased availability of university trained physicians; many treatments that relied on 'traditional cures' fell out of disfavor. It's only fairly recently (last 50 years or so) that research began re-evaluating or testing treatments that had been discarded in favor of 'modern medicine'. Some of the practices continued to be used in remote parts of the world and cultures that were isolated from modern technology.

Something that needs to be kept in mind before older traditions or treatments are discarded out of hand; if a treatment has been in continued use over many generations and across many cultures, it should be investigated.




Boo

[El_Spectre]

As far as something today not thought of 50 years ago, HIPPA laws. *shudder*

Boo

You think the laws are complex... try writing applications that follow them :)

[ponderingturtle]

You slipped in! But proved my point beyond all doubt. Reasonable men don't want to even look at any research that shows ANY of that crap to be true. After all, we all know leeches is snake oil. Except for surgery. And some other stuff. But them leeches, they can't do anything else. 4000 years of leeching people was woo man. Leeches. Ick.

Yea, and what about the purgatives? We need more poison in our medicinces to properly purge our bodies?

It was woo. And you have not provided any support for the successful use of leaches in non microsurgical situations.

[ponderingturtle]

In a related thread, I myself am experiencing the reasonable problem of accepting that acupuncture can work. It seems unreasonable. I don't like all these scientist doing research that shows something we all know is woo, may not be all woo. It is most unreasonable. They even use rats! And double blind experiments.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2200712#post2200712

So does homeopathy, but that doesn't mean the study is valid.

To quote you in that thread

Using that study to conclude "acupuncture works" would be dumb. And I would like to know how they determine acupuncture points for rats, or any other animal as well. That sounds woo to me, and excuse me for being more than a little skeptical about the entire procedure as well. Just assuming there ARE acupuncture points for rats, or any other animal, sounds fookin nuts to me.link ("http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2220844&postcount=95)

You do not seem to be having a consistent view of that study.

[ponderingturtle]

Leeches, lovely little buggers...dated a few.

Seriously, leeches do have multiple medical uses and have been accepted, standard of care treatment for at least 20 years.

http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~mcbstaff/graf/AvHm/MedUsemain.htm

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3867/is_199806/ai_n8807297

http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/139/9/I-22

http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/050419_maggots.html

http://www.biotechnologyhealthcare.com/journal/fulltext/3/1/BH0301014.pdf


The study of medicine often leads researchers in places they weren't expecting. One of the first medications for regrowing hair was initially a blood pressure medication, low and behold these patients started noticing that the hair on the scalp started filling in. Side effects are interesting things.


As far as something today not thought of 50 years ago, HIPPA laws. *shudder*



Boo

The leech ones seem to be all about circulation, except the knee OA one, and that made statements that did not fit with my mothers experince(she had a variety of treatments for years then a double knee replacement about 3 years ago) The treatments do work depending on the dammage to the knee and once you get them replaced they don't hurt anymore(the holes needed to get to your knees do hurt until they heal)

[ponderingturtle]

The following is speculation on my part.....

With the rise of modern chemistry, pharmaceutical manufacturing, modern medicine and increased availability of university trained physicians; many treatments that relied on 'traditional cures' fell out of disfavor. It's only fairly recently (last 50 years or so) that research began re-evaluating or testing treatments that had been discarded in favor of 'modern medicine'. Some of the practices continued to be used in remote parts of the world and cultures that were isolated from modern technology.

Something that needs to be kept in mind before older traditions or treatments are discarded out of hand; if a treatment has been in continued use over many generations and across many cultures, it should be investigated.


Yea where the the psychaitrists using bleeding to treat Sanguine personality problems? It is tradition after all.

[robinson]

There are several issues here.

I don't need to do your homework for you. If you want to see the research on leeches, nobody will stop you. There is a lot of it, but if you won't accept the results, what can anyone do?

As to "acupuncture", what a whack situation. I don't believe in it, yet scientist are doing research that shows there is something to it. What to do, what to do ...

[robinson]

I mean, cmon already. Leeches, acupuncture, maggots. All we need is somebody to prove snake oil really works for something, and we are back in the dark ages again. Next thing you know, we will be using Vitamins or antineoplastons to cure cancer, or some other woo idea.

Most unreasonable.

[DavidS]

The LED... Was it immediately preceeded by a non-light emiting diode?


Sort of... I believe the first LED was a transitory byproduct of converting an ordinary rectifier diode to SED. Subsequent developments permitted producing photons directly from electron energy transitions induced electronically rather than from thermal effects in the early smoke-emitting-diode models.

Sorry, couldn't resist ;)

[ponderingturtle]

There are several issues here.

I don't need to do your homework for you. If you want to see the research on leeches, nobody will stop you. There is a lot of it, but if you won't accept the results, what can anyone do?

Way to go, the support my claims of use yourself arguement. So in other words you refuse to support your claims.

As to "acupuncture", what a whack situation. I don't believe in it, yet scientist are doing research that shows there is something to it. What to do, what to do ...

And then you say "what that can't possibly be right" when you find out the details.

[ponderingturtle]

I mean, cmon already. Leeches, acupuncture, maggots. All we need is somebody to prove snake oil really works for something, and we are back in the dark ages again. Next thing you know, we will be using Vitamins or antineoplastons to cure cancer, or some other woo idea.

Most unreasonable.

And and strong purgatives have to be good for something to, that doesn't mean the anchients where right to be taking poison with the idea the taking something so bad your body rejects it and makes you vomit is a good thing.

[ponderingturtle]

Hey this is the number one entry in Google for "Leeches Male Sterility"

Looks like something Robinson made up.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

To drag the thread away from leaches and back toward I understood the original topic was, can I propose noble gas compounds and "high" temperature superconductivity?

To quote Wikipedia on the latter, One of the top unsolved problems in modern physics is the question of how superconductivity arises in these materials, that is, what mechanism causes the electrons in these crystals to form pairs.

So it is a demonstratable effect for which science still does not have a total explanation. :shocked: :shocked:

[ponderingturtle]

To drag the thread away from leaches and back toward I understood the original topic was, can I propose noble gas compounds and "high" temperature superconductivity?

To quote Wikipedia on the latter, One of the top unsolved problems in modern physics is the question of how superconductivity arises in these materials, that is, what mechanism causes the electrons in these crystals to form pairs.

So it is a demonstratable effect for which science still does not have a total explanation. :shocked: :shocked:

There is plenty that science doesn't know, it is how much inovation is suprising to science.

[robinson]

To drag the thread away from leaches and back toward I understood the original topic was, can I propose noble gas compounds and "high" temperature superconductivity?


Good example.

More fun than leeches at least.

PT, Google doesn't show this thread at the top when I tried your terms. But I did find this. How surprising!
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4817273

[Doubt]

Tesla, Crooke and Kelvin wrote some of the laws of physics. They were unreasonable men. Reasonable men knew that they had to be wrong. Despite inventing radio, the AC motor, and dozens of other things we take for granted now, Tesla died broke and alone. Reasonable men knew he was crazy, until it was obvious he was not, then reasonable men stole his ideas. Its hard to imagine now, but at the time, he really was considered crazy by reasonable men. He was bouncing energy off the atmosphere, measuring thunderstorms around the globe, and people just knew he had lost it. You can't bounce energy around the world, and you sure as hell can't detect the energy of thunderstorms on the other side of the world! Reasonable men knew this.


Interesting thread.

Robinson, you have a problem or two.

Tesla is one person where your notion of reasonable and unreasonable men falls apart. Most of Tesla’s opposition came from Tomas Edison (backed by Morgan and other investors), who would be on your list of unreasonable men. Edison was unreasonable for quite a bit more than that his own inventions. He did everything he could to undermine Tesla (who was backed by Westinghouse, another person who could be seen as quite unreasonable.)

One quick and short page on Tesla:

http://flyingmoose.org/truthfic/tesla.htm

I have done some reading up on the man other than using the internet.

The typical response of most people to Tesla’s ideas was:

Huh?

There were few people around who understood anything about what he was doing. Edison wanted DC as a standard and was willing to work hard to stop Tesla. He had personal investment (both psychological and financial) in DC and is considered by many to have been unable to understand the math behind AC. There was very little resistance to Tesla by anybody else.

Another “unreasonable” man was Henry Ford. Ford was friends with Edison and went right along with the DC idea. The Ford Rouge complex power plant was originally equipped with large DC generators. (I have yet to find out when those generators were replaced. I also used to work on the Rouge complex for another company.)

As for Tesla’s ideas being stolen, that is bit of an overgeneralization. Some ideas were copied. Tesla deferred many payments from the Westinghouse Company. Eventually he signed over the rights for nothing.

I would suggest you drop the “reasonable” and “unreasonable” man rhetoric. Humans cling to their biases. That is our nature. Your unreasonable men just have a slightly different set of biases that still tend to come back and bite them in the rear at some point.

As for leaches, I would like to see you provide evidence. Don’t tell me to do my homework. The burden of proof rests on those who make the claim.

The fact that leaches are used today does not mean past uses or ideas on their use were correct. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/25/health/25fda.html?ex=1167886800&en=61c865312b0b7284&ei=5070


For centuries, doctors used leeches in the mistaken view that they would help balance a patient's body fluids, or "humors." Doctors are said to have drained quarts of blood from an ailing George Washington before he died.

[robinson]

I never claimed leeches work. I find the idea repulsive. It is most unreasonable that scientist are claiming they do. I can accept the use for surgery, but all this stuff about arthritis and infertility and other stuff sounds woo to me. I didn't even know about leeches until this topic got me searching for unreasonable ideas.

I agree about the reasonable/unreasonable terms. It is confusing.

[kalen]

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?

I like Enlightenment's answer of the Hubble Telescope. Who in the world would have thought about "dark" energy and matter? But the telescope itself wasn't a real radical departure.

Here's something that, at the time, blew people away. In seeming definance of Earnshaw's theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem), a guy named Roy Harrigan invented the Levitron. A permanent magnet that levitates above another permanent magnet. See one in action here. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=grArZPJbils)

But of course, it was explained (http://www.physics.ucla.edu/marty/levitron/) using physics.

[robinson]

The fact that leaches are used today does not mean past uses or ideas on their use were correct.

I agree. I was surprised to learn that the morphine-like substance leeches produce stops pain better than drugs. And that they produce anti-clotting substances, and that they can analyze and change blood chemistry. While I doubt the ancients knew why they worked, I don't doubt that leeches do work. Exactly what they help with, seems to be still under investigation.

I don't find anyone claiming they work by woo means. It seems to be science based research being done. There are many substances the leech produces, and there is a feedback loop between the leech and the blood supply. I don't want to say this is unreasonable, but what other word works?

[vIQleS]

I like Enlightenment's answer of the Hubble Telescope. Who in the world would have thought about "dark" energy and matter? But the telescope itself wasn't a real radical departure.

Here's something that, at the time, blew people away. In seeming definance of Earnshaw's theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw%27s_theorem), a guy named Roy Harrigan invented the Levitron. A permanent magnet that levitates above another permanent magnet. See one in action here. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=grArZPJbils)

But of course, it was explained (http://www.physics.ucla.edu/marty/levitron/) using physics.

Yeah - i've got one of those, it looks really spooky, but it doesn't seem terribly outragous to think that a magnet might 'levitate' over another magnet... Maybe that's hindsight :shrug:

[vIQleS]

To drag the thread away from leaches and back toward I understood the original topic was, can I propose noble gas compounds and "high" temperature superconductivity?

To quote Wikipedia on the latter, One of the top unsolved problems in modern physics is the question of how superconductivity arises in these materials, that is, what mechanism causes the electrons in these crystals to form pairs.

So it is a demonstratable effect for which science still does not have a total explanation. :shocked: :shocked:

Good stuff - so we don't know how its done? Therefore no one would have predicted superconductors? Anyone know more about this sort of thing?

Edit: I just read it again, you're talking about non-cooled superconductors? Is this a huge leap from the type that needs to be cold? I'm not really conversant re superconductivity...

[robinson]

http://www.physorg.com/news66994182.html

Science explains it. Looks to me like it is a matter of time fluctuating.

[robinson]

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2245996#post2245996

I'm surprised. Infrared can activate nerves?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2245991#post2245991

Even more surprising, microwaves can be heard?? The stuff I learn from these forums. Amazing.

[Schneibster]

I think the most surprising thing I've heard of in the last 50 years is that Hawking lost his bet with Kip Thorne. In other words, you CAN get some information out of a black hole. They're still arguing over whether you can get it ALL out, if I understand correctly.

[Indolent Wretch]

Good stuff - so we don't know how its done? Therefore no one would have predicted superconductors? Anyone know more about this sort of thing?

Edit: I just read it again, you're talking about non-cooled superconductors? Is this a huge leap from the type that needs to be cold? I'm not really conversant re superconductivity...

The term "High" temperature superconductivity is a little misleading. It really means relatively high. Previously superconductivity could only be done by cooling things close to absolute zero. Then a breakthrough occurred with certain complicated ceramics (such as Y-Ba2-Cu3-O7)that could superconduct at temperatures easily achieved with liquid nitrogen rather than with liquid helium.

"High" temperature or not I still wouldn't want to stick my hand in there. We are still talking around 150K.

I am unsure as to the highest temperature where superconductivity has been achieved. Obviously room temperature is the holy grail.

[robinson]

As for leaches, I would like to see you provide evidence. Don’t tell me to do my homework. The burden of proof rests on those who make the claim.

:deadhorse

Ack, the damn leeches. Ever since I used them as an example, they seem to have stuck with me, trailing goo around various topics. I agree that the burden is on the claimant. I didn't claim leeches worked, I pointed to scientific studies, and one sort of woo site about them.

I don't like leeches, or maggots for that matter, yet my scientific mind can accept that they are probably the best option for some medical issues. Medical history is replete with organic, natural methods of healing, most of which were dropped when the germ theory came into acceptance. While some would make great additions to the topic, the cutoff of 50 years puts most of them out of the picture.

Yet, a few have re-emerged of late. Or, upon investigation, have re-emerged in the Western view, having never fell out of favor in the outer reaches of the world.

The fact that leaches are used today does not mean past uses or ideas on their use were correct. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.


One could put it another way, if you accept that sort of reasoning. "The fact that leeches were considered quackery does not mean they did not have medical value".

Or,

"That one use of leeches is found to be worthless, does not mean all uses of leeches are worthless".

Or something like that. The link I provided showing scientific evidence that leeches help with arthritis was a surprise to me. YMMV

[robinson]

Damn the leeches. Moving on...

Recent news: Virgin Olive Oil, claimed for centuries to have health benefits, including treating ulcers, is shown in scientific experiments, (surprise), to actually help, at least in the lab.

In the study, published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, researchers used laboratory experiments to simulate conditions found in the human stomach in order to evaluate olive oil’s ability to fight H. pylori bacteria.

Researcher Conception Romero and colleagues of the University Hospital of Valme, in Seville, Spain, found that the healthy phenolic compounds in virgin olive oil remained stable for hours in simulated acidic conditions of the stomach.

These phenolic compounds also had a strong antibacterial effect. The results of the lab studies showed olive oil’s phenolic compounds were effective against eight strains of H. pylori, including three that are resistant to some antibiotics.

The surprise, to me, is that it actually acts on the pathogen thought to cause many ulcers, which was a previous surprising discovery. In fact, without the discovery of H. pylori, the Olive Oil couldn't have been verified, at least scientifically.

While it may seem trite to some, with millions of people suffering from ulcers, and H. pylori becoming resistant to drugs, a possible treatment, especially one that is safe and cheap, might seem like big news.

Now you woos, please don't jump on this as proof that all natural time tested remedies work. Until science shows it to be true, it isn't.

[robinson]

http://www.bloggingwv.com/the-worlds-most-amazing-fishtank/

I don't think it is worth starting a topic about, but can someone here explain how in the hell this is possible?

[RecoveringYuppy]

The tank must be sealed against air entering. (assuming it's real)

[vIQleS]

That is so cool...

ETA: Based on the fact that the 'holes' face upward, I'm guessing it has something to do with air pressure. Would the downward air pressure (equal non the top and on the holes) keep the water in?

[robinson]

DURHAM, N.C., April 9 -- A common herbal extract may alleviate the pain of a recurrent bladder infection, suggest experiments on mice.

http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/GeneralInfectiousDisease/tb/5404

[RecoveringYuppy]

That is so cool...

ETA: Based on the fact that the 'holes' face upward, I'm guessing it has something to do with air pressure. Would the downward air pressure (equal non the top and on the holes) keep the water in?
It's similar to holding water in a straw by holding your finger over the top hole of the straw. Since water can't expand (much) no water can leave without being replaced by air (or something) to fill the vacant space. As long as there is no way for air to get in, no water can leave.

The air pressure doesn't hold the water in. But all the feeding holes have to be at the same height or else there would a difference in the water pressure between the two holes and then water would flow between the two holes.

[ponderingturtle]

http://www.bloggingwv.com/the-worlds-most-amazing-fishtank/

I don't think it is worth starting a topic about, but can someone here explain how in the hell this is possible?

It is just a basic siphon. Nothing remarkable about it in the least.

[RecoveringYuppy]

It is just a basic siphon. Nothing remarkable about it in the least.
The current picture is just a siphon. The picture at the link has changed and the earlier photo showed an aquarium with feeding portals in the side of the tank below the surface of the water.

[blutoski]

My impression is that the examples being sought are not just 'surprising' discoveries, but discoveries that contradict known laws. There is a difference.

An example of a surprising discovery in the last 50 years in my field of study: retrotransposons. aka: "jumping genes". These are dna segments that migrate from place to place in the genome, and replicate independently.

Their existence was proposed, but not accepted until research demonstrated their existence beyond a doubt. However, there is nothing about them that violates a law of physics: they were rejected because there was no evidence for them at the time. The proposal did not conflict with what we knew - it was just undemonstrated. Once their existence was demonstrated, a Nobel Prize was awarded.

Free energy machines are different - the principle contradicts existing findings. A priori rejection is appropriate due to the conservative nature of science, but - as always - the claimant is welcome and invited to prove the rest of science wrong. Failure to do so over a long timeframe is relevant to the claimant's ongoing credibility and ultimately, his academic currency.



Cryptozoology is similar: there is no scientific reason that Loch Ness doesn't harbour a large aquatic animal - the ocean is filled with whales, giant squid, &c. We find large primitive fish in deep ocean trenches that resemble animals thought to be extinct for millions of years. The reason it's rejected is that the claimants haven't produced persuasive evidence, despite great effort and abundant opportunity.

[CapelDodger]

The major use for Viagra was discovered by serendipity ...

I was wondering why serendipity isn't posting these days.

[robinson]

The current picture is just a siphon. The picture at the link has changed and the earlier photo showed an aquarium with feeding portals in the side of the tank below the surface of the water.

I just noticed that as well. And now I can't find any page with the fish feeding holes. Damn Internet. Stuff changes.

[robinson]

My impression is that the examples being sought are not just 'surprising' discoveries, but discoveries that contradict known laws. There is a difference.

Yep. But the original question got burned out long ago.

So - the question is:

Can anyone think of anything that's been invented in the last 50 years or so, that's been really surprising, and/or a radical departure from the accepted scientific understanding of the universe?

The real question might be, what is the "accepted scientific understanding of the universe" ? And how often does it change?

Some people think they know it all, and they are always wrong. Because they don't.

[ponderingturtle]

The current picture is just a siphon. The picture at the link has changed and the earlier photo showed an aquarium with feeding portals in the side of the tank below the surface of the water.

That does not make it less a siphon. THe same principle applies, it just has some air traped in it. Now if they had two open feeding portals at different hights then it would be an example of photoshop.

[RecoveringYuppy]

That does not make it less a siphon. THe same principle applies, it just has some air traped in it. Now if they had two open feeding portals at different hights then it would be an example of photoshop.
Well, I don't think the original photo quite meets the definition of a siphon (since a siphon is defined as a device for moving water over a barrier). But, I would agree that the imcompressibility of water is important in both the siphon and the feeding portals.

Came across some links though. This dictionary entry is a bit confused on the role of atmospheric pressure in a siphon:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/siphon

But the wikipedia seems to have the major points correct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphon

[Skeptic Ginger]

Well, I'm not sure I understand your logical progression. There wasn't an invention that actually led to the understanding that rocks fell from the sky, rather direct and indirect evidence led to the "discovery".

Maybe a more appropriate question is to ask what invention over the last 50 years led to a discovery that made a radical departure from scientific understanding.

In this case, there are many. Off the top of my head, the hubble telescope.

Any invention is going to derive from known scientific theory. Maybe it is I who is unclear of your meaning. I haven't followed the thread from which you split this topic from, so maybe I am being ignorant.

If we are just counting discoveries, the fact there are giant black holes in the centers of galaxies was a departure from previous thought, I think. But I take it you are looking for something more 'out there' such as countering previous physics or something?

[ponderingturtle]

Well, I don't think the original photo quite meets the definition of a siphon (since a siphon is defined as a device for moving water over a barrier). But, I would agree that the imcompressibility of water is important in both the siphon and the feeding portals.

Came across some links though. This dictionary entry is a bit confused on the role of atmospheric pressure in a siphon:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/siphon

But the wikipedia seems to have the major points correct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphon


A Siphon makes the fluid level even between two(or more) areas of water. If you added water to one tank then it becomes a siphon, the same thing if you take water out. It is just a siphon that has reached equilibrium.

[Capsid]

A Siphon makes the fluid level even between two(or more) areas of water. If you added water to one tank then it becomes a siphon, the same thing if you take water out. It is just a siphon that has reached equilibrium.
The article says that water is pumped from one tank to the other (not through the siphon tube) which will generate a difference in water pressure to maintain a flow of water through the siphon. I had a similar set up for a small fish tank in which water is pumped from a sump into the main tank with a siphon return. The water in the sump is slightly lower than the main tank. It's not clear from the pictures but the two tanks might be on slightly different levels to generate a good siphon effect.

[ponderingturtle]

The article says that water is pumped from one tank to the other (not through the siphon tube) which will generate a difference in water pressure to maintain a flow of water through the siphon. I had a similar set up for a small fish tank in which water is pumped from a sump into the main tank with a siphon return. The water in the sump is slightly lower than the main tank. It's not clear from the pictures but the two tanks might be on slightly different levels to generate a good siphon effect.

Probably is like that to keep the water clean in the siphon.

It's cool, but it is basic plumbing and water management.

[RecoveringYuppy]

A Siphon makes the fluid level even between two(or more) areas of water. If you added water to one tank then it becomes a siphon, the same thing if you take water out. It is just a siphon that has reached equilibrium.
Yes, I know, the current photo of a "fish highway" is a siphon. The original photo wasn't.

[bruto]

LEDS? They were just trivial. Far more exciting was the integrated circuit. A mainframe was now possible on a chip the size of your fingernail. Exciting, yes, but not a very good example, I think, because the integrated circuit evolved in a pretty orderly way from the transistor. Granted, it was a stroke of genius, and won Jack Kilby a Nobel prize, but nobody challenged his physics when he presented it. If you'd predicted in 1960 that this technology would end up with cell phone cameras and pentium processors, and so on, you'd probably have been dismissed as a science fiction nut, but I don't think there's ever been a stage in the development of IC's at which somebody came up with something that seemed to violate the laws of physics, or that was believed impossible when it actually occurred.

[vIQleS]

If we are just counting discoveries, the fact there are giant black holes in the centers of galaxies was a departure from previous thought, I think. But I take it you are looking for something more 'out there' such as countering previous physics or something?

Well, that too, but mostly stuff like - "Wow - compact disks" or "OMG - a machine that flies"

A DVD wouldn't count, but a microwave might. What _new_ technology has been invented in the last 50 odd years. (we've a few good examples, but not many everyday things)

[Skeptic Ginger]

A tad more than 50 years ago antibiotics were discovered.

Antivirals came with genetic science and proliferated with money for HIV research.

It took a little less than 10 years to find the HIV in the late 70s-early 80s. It took only a few months to find the SARS virus in this decade.

There was a lab breakthrough which made studying DNA faster, cheaper, and easier. That opened the floodgates in genetic research and designer drugs.