Healing Cancer from the Inside Out

[stateofmind]

Have you had so much as a basic middle school science class? In the vacuum of space, there is perfect silence as there is no atmosphere for sound waves to travel through.

Untrue. There is still matter in space - but it's very little. Because there's such little matter there is consequently more silence - or less noise.

 

[Oli]

The intent of someone or something can come from an infinite variety of causes. Someone may have the intent to kill another because that person wronged them somehow.

You're STILL missing the point: I specifically stated - excluding human motives.
What is the motive for everything?
Why are we the way we are?
Back to example of the little girl in the photo: it's facile to say "there's a reason for her being in that state, that reason being: her plight brings an awareness that makes us help the world get better" since if she wasn't in that state in the first place there'd BE no reason for the world to improve.
There are human motives, granted.
But "everything happens for a reason" is wrong.

The opposite would depend on where you pick your middle.

So it's arbitary?
QED. Opposites are a human perception and not actual.

If you wanted the middle to be 0 then the opposite of 500 deg C (if you could isolate heat from the particles that create it) would be -500 deg C (and this is all assuming the metric system itself is equal and balanced, ie. 1 deg C cancels out -1 deg C.)

Really?
And if I told you that -500 Deg C is impossible...
-273 Deg C is absolute zero.
There is no lower temperature available...

Wow... you try to twist your arguments whenever you can! Don't you remember we were talking about completely eliminating the existence of an opposite?

The idea that opposites are "required" is an assumption.
In your case verging on religion.

In this case I was talking about noise and silence. If silence DID NOT EXIST then there would be no varying levels of the buzzing.

Speculation.
Unfounded and unproven.
And, going by your (flawed) temperature example: where's the balance point?
How do you get "negative sound"?

If there were varying levels then there were be sounds closer to and further from absolute silence - but since that pole isn't there, there can be no varying levels.

Again, speculation with no factual basis.

In reality there isn't any such thing as absolute silence or absolute sound. You can look at the phenomena of sound two ways. You could say at a noisy concert that there is very little silence there - or - you could say there is a lot of sound - and both would be correct.

You could say, but only one statement is physically correct - there is a lot of sound or there is very little sound.
"Silence" is a lack of sound.

 

[Repo Man]

Untrue. There is still matter in space - but it's very little. Because there's such little matter there is consequently more silence - or less noise.

This borders on flat out stupid. Yes, there is matter in space. There are planets and stars, nebulae, on and on. Even in intergalactic space there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. But it is well established that there is not nearly enough for sound waves to travel through.

 

[Oli]

Even in intergalactic space there are a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter.

Just a small point: I was under the impression (from my classes many years ago) that the figure is around 1 hydrogen atom per very many cubic metres.
I have 1 per 10[sup]9[/sup]m[sup]3[/sup] in my head, but I'm not sure if that's right.

 

[stateofmind]

You're STILL missing the point: I specifically stated - excluding human motives.
What is the motive for everything?
Why are we the way we are?
Back to example of the little girl in the photo: it's facile to say "there's a reason for her being in that state, that reason being: her plight brings an awareness that makes us help the world get better" since if she wasn't in that state in the first place there'd BE no reason for the world to improve.
There are human motives, granted.
But "everything happens for a reason" is wrong.

I see the problem here. You're imbuing that quote with something that it doesn't actually contain. Look at it at face value. What it's saying is that there are no coincidences. I take it one step further and say that every action gets EXACTLY what it deserves - an equal and opposite reaction.

You follow?

So it's arbitary?
QED. Opposites are a human perception and not actual.

What does QED mean? And just to play devil's nit-picking skeptic here...

Speculation.
Unfounded and unproven.

Really?
And if I told you that -500 Deg C is impossible...
-273 Deg C is absolute zero.
There is no lower temperature available...

Like I said - where you pick the middle is arbitrary. From what I know about absolute zero - it's a theory, a concept - like the color black. Pure black doesn't exist in reality - it can only be approached. Likewise I'm guessing that absolute zero (assuming they have the number correct) is only approachable.

And, going by your (flawed) temperature example: where's the balance point?
How do you get "negative sound"?

The balance point is where you arbitrarily decide for it to be. The only reason we have "negative temperature" is because there's a common agreement (the metric system) which everyone uses - but it still picks a random middle, one that's convenient for us humans.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there -dB in sound theory?

You could say, but only one statement is physically correct - there is a lot of sound or there is very little sound.
"Silence" is a lack of sound.

We keep coming back to this point - so I guess it's our main point of divergence.

You attribute a lot of importance to "something" and no importance to "nothing" - but both are required to form reality. An atom is made of 99.9% space - mostly nothing.

Can you imagine if there was no space in the universe? We wouldn't be able to move - or form for that matter - because there would be no form. Form (something) requires space (nothing) in order to exist. Without space matter can't separate itself - it would be reduced to a point of infinite density (the Big Bang?)

You get what I'm trying to say?

 

[Repo Man]

Just a small point: I was under the impression (from my classes many years ago) that the figure is around 1 hydrogen atom per very many cubic metres.
I have 1 per 10[sup]9[/sup]m[sup]3[/sup] in my head, but I'm not sure if that's right.

I was going by Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space . Your source may be more accurate. At any rate, there is so little matter that there is no sound in space. Too great of a distance between atoms and molecules doesn't mean very little sound, it means none.

 

[stateofmind]

I was going by Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space . Your source may be more accurate. At any rate, there is so little matter that there is no sound in space. Too great of a distance between atoms and molecules doesn't mean very little sound, it means none.

If even one of those hydrogen atoms vibrated there would be a sound - imperceptible to the human ear, but a sound nonetheless.

 

[Oli]

I see the problem here. You're imbuing that quote with something that it doesn't actually contain. Look at it at face value.

I'm taking the statement at face value.
If that's not what is meant then it should be rephrased to state its meaning more clearly.

What it's saying is that there are no coincidences.

That is itself a supposition.
And only a supposition.

I take it one step further and say that every action gets EXACTLY what it deserves - an equal and opposite reaction.

Really?
And what "controls" this reaction?
Again, supposition.

You follow?

I think I take your meaning.
And disagree vehemently.

What does QED mean? And just to play devil's nit-picking skeptic here...

Literally: Quod Erat Demonstrandum, used after a mathematical formula to indicate that what was intended to be proved, has been.
I.e. QED means "as stated, so proven"

Like I said - where you pick the middle is arbitrary.

If the middle point is arbtitrary then any "opposites" are also arbitary.

From what I know about absolute zero - it's a theory, a concept - like the color black. Pure black doesn't exist in reality - it can only be approached. Likewise I'm guessing that absolute zero (assuming they have the number correct) is only approachable.

it's a fact.
It's approachable, certainly.
And most definitely not passable.
Therefore -500 C is impossible.

The balance point is where you arbitrarily decide for it to be. The only reason we have "negative temperature" is because there's a common agreement (the metric system) which everyone uses - but it still picks a random middle, one that's convenient for us humans.

No, it's not random, it's based on physical properties.
That of water.
And it's also not a middle point.
Absolute zero (-273) is fixed point, where the upper limit is has yet to established AFAIK. Regardless, it's far far higher than +273.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there -dB in sound theory?

There's a system of "measurement" that works in negative, but that's based on an arbitrarily chosen level.
E.g. if you pick 100 dB as your baseline then 25 dB is read as -75.
(Just to add to the confusion, a friend of mine who works in electronics regularly uses +0 and -0 for voltages...)

We keep coming back to this point - so I guess it's our main point of divergence.
You attribute a lot of importance to "something" and no importance to "nothing" - but both are required to form reality. An atom is made of 99.9% space - mostly nothing.

Unfortunately, there is no "nothing".
Everywhere is filled with something - quantum foam for example...

Can you imagine if there was no space in the universe? We wouldn't be able to move

Hmmm sort of, if there was air all around us we wouldn't be able to move?
If we went swimming in water we wouldn't be able to move?

Form (something) requires space (nothing) in order to exist. Without space matter can't separate itself - it would be reduced to a point of infinite density (the Big Bang?)

There's no such thing as "nothing".

 

[Roman]

I just got finished watching half of this movie (I downloaded a torrent of it) and it confirmed my beliefs of the corruption of the AMA (American Medical Association) and the ACS (American Cancer Society.)

Homeopathic medicine has been demonized and branded as "quackery" for the sole reason of eliminating competition and maximizing profits. Their tactics are eerily familiar to some of the "scientific skeptics" that frequent this forum.

What do you think about chemotherapy and its effectiveness in treating cancer?

Homeopathic "medicine" has been branded quackery because it is by definition. Proponents of homeopathy have all of the credibility of young Earth creationists.

Not true.
Homeopathy works, just like any other placebo "works", which, in many cases, is quite well. However, due to the litigatious nature of our society, lying to a patient for his own good can end up costing a doctor a fortune in law suits.

 

[stateofmind]

Really?
And what "controls" this reaction?
Again, supposition.

This is just a phenomena that I've noticed in my own life and in others. As for bad things happening to good people - I can't prove that reincarnation exists but it is a possibility that they are carrying karma over from another lifetime.

If the middle point is arbtitrary then any "opposites" are also arbitary.

That's not true. At every middle point you choose you have the relative opposites for that middle point. Since no absolute can be achieved, there are an infinite amount of middle points and likewise an infinite amount of relative opposites. Also, there are absolute opposites ie. absolute noise and absolute silence or absolute white and absolute black, absolute hot and absolute cold - but we could never achieve them in reality.

it's a fact.
It's approachable, certainly.
And most definitely not passable.
Therefore -500 C is impossible.

When I said that theoretically -500 C would be the opposite of 500 C I also said that I was assuming that the metric system was calibrated so that -1 C would cancel out 1 C. Since this not the case and you conveniently ignored this point, this renders your point here moot.

No, it's not random, it's based on physical properties.
That of water.
And it's also not a middle point.
Absolute zero (-273) is fixed point, where the upper limit is has yet to established AFAIK. Regardless, it's far far higher than +273.

Yes, I understand that - but the freezing point of water is only "0" in some people's book. We could have made the freezing point 5,000,061 degrees if we wanted to and all the other temperatures would follow suit. We made it "0" for simplicity and ease of calculation. There's no rule in the universe that says you have to make the freezing point of water "0 degrees." In the Fahrenheit system (which I'm sure you're aware of) the freezing point of water is 32 degrees.

Unfortunately, there is no "nothing".
Everywhere is filled with something - quantum foam for example...

What's that stuff in between the photons and electrons and nuclei in atoms?

Hmmm sort of, if there was air all around us we wouldn't be able to move?
If we went swimming in water we wouldn't be able to move?

In air there is more space than there is in water. In outer space there is more space than there is in air. If there's no such thing as nothing then how could we have varying densities of matter?

This goes back to that black and white argument. If we have grey then we must have both black and white.

 

[Oli]

This is just a phenomena that I've noticed in my own life and in others. As for bad things happening to good people - I can't prove that reincarnation exists but it is a possibility that they are carrying karma over from another lifetime.]/quote]
You've "observed" it.
You are aware that what the human brain does best is pattern fitting?
And if no actual pattern exists it invents one?
Observe: record: hypothesise.

That's not true. At every middle point you choose you have the relative opposites for that middle point. Since no absolute can be achieved, there are an infinite amount of middle points and likewise an infinite amount of relative opposites.

Already shown to be false.

Also, there are absolute opposites ie. absolute noise and absolute silence

Absolute noise? Nonsense.

absolute hot and absolute cold

Pure nonsense.

When I said that theoretically -500 C would be the opposite of 500 C I also said that I was assuming that the metric system was calibrated so that -1 C would cancel out 1 C. Since this not the case and you conveniently ignored this point, this renders your point here moot.

No, it demonstrated that you have no idea as to what you're talking about.
The "calibration" and "cancellation" is based on YOUR prejudices, not reality.

Yes, I understand that - but the freezing point of water is only "0" in some people's book.

"Some people" er, the entire world of science and by extension the rest of the world.

We could have made the freezing point 5,000,061 degrees if we wanted to and all the other temperatures would follow suit. We made it "0" for simplicity and ease of calculation. There's no rule in the universe that says you have to make the freezing point of water "0 degrees." In the Fahrenheit system (which I'm sure you're aware of) the freezing point of water is 32 degrees.

Okay, use Fahrenheit: what's the opposite of 2000 deg F?

What's that stuff in between the photons and electrons and nuclei in atoms?

In between?
You do know that electrons, for example, aren't in any one place?
They don't have a fixed location.

In air there is more space than there is in water. In outer space there is more space than there is in air. If there's no such thing as nothing then how could we have varying densities of matter?

Good question.
Once we've worked out a ToE we might know.

This goes back to that black and white argument. If we have grey then we must have both black and white.

And if we don't have black and white we still have red, green and blue.

 

[Algernon]

I actually have a bit of experience in this field... but I'll refrain from participating for the time being. This topic seems to have deterred from the original discussion.

 

[Oli]

Deterred?
Algernon, EVERY thread diverts off topic, unless the mods impose severe restrictions.
It's part of the fun.

 

[spidergoat]

How is yin/yang metaphysical? Can black exist without white? Can a front exist without a back? Male without female? It's a principle of the order of nature - it can be seen in all things.

None of those exist in nature, they are the product of human definitions.

 

[stateofmind]

None of those exist in nature, they are the product of human definitions.

Okay so the next time you want to have sex with your girlfriend just swap her with a male prostitute since male and female don't exist and there's no difference.

 

[stateofmind]

I actually have a bit of experience in this field... but I'll refrain from participating for the time being. This topic seems to have deterred from the original discussion.

You're right algernon - this thread has deterred from its original focus. Oli and I should have debated evidence for yin/yang elsewhere - from now on if Oli wishes to continue this debate one of us will make a yin/yang thread and we'll post there. I'm interested to hear what you have to say about this thread topic, please continue.

 

[spidergoat]

Okay so the next time you want to have sex with your girlfriend just swap her with a male prostitute since male and female don't exist and there's no difference.

There is no universal polarization of the sexes in nature, some creatures come in as many as 6 different sexes!

 

[Repo Man]

You're right algernon - this thread has deterred from its original focus. Oli and I should have debated evidence for yin/yang elsewhere - from now on if Oli wishes to continue this debate one of us will make a yin/yang thread and we'll post there. I'm interested to hear what you have to say about this thread topic, please continue.

It hasn't been much of a debate. You've yet to provide anything that could be considered credible evidence for the concept of yin/yang. Everything you've asserted has been effortlessly rebutted.

 

[spidergoat]

I'm extremely skeptical of the effectiveness of a drug that is watered down so much it is as good as absent.

 

[stateofmind]

I'm extremely skeptical of the effectiveness of a drug that is watered down so much it is as good as absent.

It wouldn't be a drug - it would most likely be an evaluation and reconstitution of a person's input (food and beverages) and output (exercise.)