Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #361552 > unrolled thread

Are there electrons that are different?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <dwuih2ht@djh3jg3ugh08.org> - 2015-08-22 20:28 +0000
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 20:34 +0000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 20:41 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 21:16 -0500
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:23 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 16:29 +0200
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:31 +0000
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 16:37 +0200
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-24 11:17 -0400
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 20:46 +0200
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-22 20:44 +0000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 20:54 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:11 -0500
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:22 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:29 -0500
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:33 +0000
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:35 -0500
                  Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:38 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 07:11 -0400
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 23:54 -0400
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-22 23:41 +0000
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:28 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:17 +0200
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:25 +0000
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 16:40 +0000
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:51 +0200
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 17:03 +0000
                  Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 18:50 +0000
                    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 14:07 -0500
                      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 19:10 +0000
                    Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 19:24 +0000
                      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 19:59 +0000
                        Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 20:35 +0000
                          Re: Are there electrons that are different? Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-25 15:54 +0000
                            Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 16:45 +0000
                              Re: Are there electrons that are different? Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-25 19:08 +0000
                                Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 20:18 +0000
                                  Re: Are there electrons that are different? Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-25 20:46 +0000
                                    Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 21:10 +0000
                                      Re: Are there electrons that are different? Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-25 21:53 +0000
                                        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-25 21:58 +0000
                                          Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 23:45 +0000
                                        Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-25 23:43 +0000
                          Re: Are there electrons that are different? Margarita Cibulkova <margac@terraspace.au> - 2015-08-25 16:13 +0000
                            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-26 02:20 +0200
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-22 20:55 +0000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:02 +0000
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:08 -0500
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:11 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:13 -0500
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-22 23:43 +0000
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:43 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 16:29 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-23 01:54 +0200
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:47 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 17:35 +0200
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 15:51 +0000
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:08 +0200
                  Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 16:30 +0000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-22 18:34 -0700
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 23:15 +0200
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:24 +0000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-23 06:44 +0200
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-22 22:23 -0700
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-24 08:15 +0200
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-24 20:59 -0700
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-24 21:14 -0700
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-25 07:30 +0200
                  Re: Are there electrons that are different? John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-24 22:46 -0700
                    Re: Are there electrons that are different? underante <underante@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-25 01:58 -0700
                      Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-26 06:20 +0200
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 09:55 +0200
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 11:18 +0200
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-22 21:24 +0000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-22 21:27 +0000
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-23 01:40 +0200
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-22 18:28 -0700
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-08-23 17:06 +1000
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:53 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:55 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 19:27 +0200
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 18:44 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-08-24 19:25 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-24 16:18 -0400
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 20:40 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 22:20 +0200
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-08-23 12:53 -0400
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:54 +0000
    Re: Are there electrons that are different? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 09:11 -0500
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 14:18 +0000
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 17:24 +0200
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 18:33 +0000
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 21:59 +0200
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 20:06 +0000
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 22:06 +0200
      Re: Are there electrons that are different? HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 12:02 -0400
        Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 16:09 +0000
          Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:16 +0200
            Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 16:37 +0000
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 18:50 +0200
                Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 18:46 +0000
                  Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 21:52 +0200
                    Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 20:03 +0000
                      Re: Are there electrons that are different? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-24 22:04 +0200
                        Re: Are there electrons that are different? James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> - 2015-08-24 20:21 +0000
              Re: Are there electrons that are different? kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-24 13:48 -0400

Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →

#361713

The ’nym-shifting troll calling themselves "James Birdy" amok-crossposted:

> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
>> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed on
>> its surface because of electric repulsion.
> 
> Not sure. Or I can't understand.

Given your evidentially low understanding of English and physics, which one 
do you think is more likely?  And if you were a logical being, should that 
determination not cause a considerable degree of humility in yourself, 
preventing you from issuing further statements such as “you are severely 
uneducated” and from further haunting these newsgroups with your obnoxious-
nonsensical behavior?


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361725

*/Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:

> The ’nym-shifting troll calling themselves "James Birdy"
> amok-crossposted:
> 
>> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
>>> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed
>>> on its surface because of electric repulsion.
>> 
>> Not sure. Or I can't understand.
> 
> Given your evidentially low understanding of English and physics, which
> one do you think is more likely?

I do Models in Physics since you wore diaper. Can you code a model using 
what he said? I guess not, then stop trolling this group and shut the 
bleep up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361737

In sci.physics James Birdy <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> wrote:
> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
> 
>> The ’nym-shifting troll calling themselves "James Birdy"
>> amok-crossposted:
>> 
>>> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
>>>> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed
>>>> on its surface because of electric repulsion.
>>> 
>>> Not sure. Or I can't understand.
>> 
>> Given your evidentially low understanding of English and physics, which
>> one do you think is more likely?
> 
> I do Models in Physics since you wore diaper. Can you code a model using 
> what he said? I guess not, then stop trolling this group and shut the 
> bleep up.

You are apparently still wearing diapers, kook.

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361746

On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:44:05 +0000 (UTC), James Birdy
<jamesb@barefootwalking.org> wrote:

>*/Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>
>> The ’nym-shifting troll calling themselves "James Birdy"
>> amok-crossposted:
>> 
>>> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
>>>> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed
>>>> on its surface because of electric repulsion.
>>> 
>>> Not sure. Or I can't understand.
>> 
>> Given your evidentially low understanding of English and physics, which
>> one do you think is more likely?
>
>I do Models in Physics since you wore diaper. 

       What you do, FILLS diapers.


>Can you code a model using 
>what he said? I guess not, then stop trolling this group and shut the 
>bleep up.

      You shut your beak, birdy, and change your name again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361749

*/kefischer/* wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:44:05 +0000 (UTC), James Birdy
> <jamesb@barefootwalking.org> wrote:
> 
>>*/Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>
>>> The ’nym-shifting troll calling themselves "James Birdy"
>>> amok-crossposted:
>>> 
>>>> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
>>>>> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is
>>>>> expressed on its surface because of electric repulsion.
>>>> 
>>>> Not sure. Or I can't understand.
>>> 
>>> Given your evidentially low understanding of English and physics,
>>> which one do you think is more likely?
>>
>>I do Models in Physics since you wore diaper.
> 
>        What you do, FILLS diapers.

Okay smart guy. Can you model, for instance, a three quarters of a 
vibrating membrane, smart guy? What governing equations do you have to use 
modelling vibrating membranes, smart guy? This must sound entirely greek 
to you, as it does probably for your friends and the many others.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361748

"James Birdy" amok-crossposted:

> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>> The ’nym-shifting troll calling themselves "James Birdy"
>> amok-crossposted:
>>> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
>>>> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed
>>>> on its surface because of electric repulsion.
>>> Not sure. Or I can't understand.
>> Given your evidentially low understanding of English and physics, which
>> one do you think is more likely?
> 
> I do Models in Physics since you wore diaper.

First of all, you do not know my age, so this is pure speculation.

Second, if a real person named “James Birdy” exists, it is most certainly 
not you as you are merely misusing that name for (futilely) escaping 
killfiles because you only want to troll.  So it will be hard, if not 
impossible, for you to prove your claim.

Since I doubt that you are actually interested in doing that, and since at 
this point virtually nobody cares about your reply, F'up2 where it and you 
belong.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361620

On 22/08/2015 4:28 PM, James Birdy wrote:
> Are there electrons that are different?

Yes, there a bigger brothers to the electrons known as Muons and Taons 
(Mu leptons, and Tau leptons). These are heavier versions of the 
electron, and not as stable as the electron. They have the same electric 
charge as the electron, but much more mass. They also come in the 
antimatter versions which are the same as the antimatter electron, known 
as the positron, but only heavier: anti-Muon & anti-Taon. In either 
case, their lifespans are measured in the millionths of billionths of 
seconds before they decay into electrons or into nothingness.

> I hear stories that walking
> barefoot has surprisingly health benefits. As I understood, electrically,
> the insulator of the shoes taken away, the electrons from Earth are
> getting up into your system. Performing whatever beneficial as they did in
> old ages (millions of years). I mean, only humans are using shoes, which
> might be seen as a barrier for the free natural electrons (charge carriers)

Oh, I see you're an airy-fairy new-ager, my mistake, I though you were 
here asking a serious question. You shouldn't be asking this in the 
physics newsgroups then.

	Yousuf Khan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361683

*/Yousuf Khan/* wrote:

> On 22/08/2015 4:28 PM, James Birdy wrote:
>> Are there electrons that are different?
> 
> Yes, there a bigger brothers to the electrons known as Muons and Taons
> (Mu leptons, and Tau leptons). These are heavier versions of the
> electron, and

Those are NOT electrons. Next.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361667

On 8/22/2015 3:28 PM, James Birdy wrote:
> Are there electrons that are different? I hear stories that walking
> barefoot has surprisingly health benefits. As I understood, electrically,
> the insulator of the shoes taken away, the electrons from Earth are
> getting up into your system. Performing whatever beneficial as they did in
> old ages (millions of years). I mean, only humans are using shoes, which
> might be seen as a barrier for the free natural electrons (charge carriers)
>

First of all, there is no evidence AFAIK that electrons passing from the 
earth to the body have any health benefits. Secondly, skin is moist and 
charge likes to remain on the surface of a conductor. Third, electrons 
only travel if there is a voltage difference between the earth and the 
body, and I don't believe that walking barefoot establishes any voltage 
difference.

So it sounds like some pseudo-scientific babbler has made a pitch for 
going barefoot by guessing what might be different if an insulator is 
removed, and then jumping to all sorts of crazy conclusions. You might 
as well argue that drinking cups should be metallic and that coasters 
should be avoided, so electricity can travel from your desk to your 
coffee, providing mystical energy.

Walking barefoot does work muscles that you don't normally work, 
including core muscles in the pelvis and midsection. This is always good 
for health.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361668

*/Odd Bodkin/* wrote:

> On 8/22/2015 3:28 PM, James Birdy wrote:
>> Are there electrons that are different? I hear stories that walking
>> barefoot has surprisingly health benefits. As I understood,
>> electrically, the insulator of the shoes taken away, the electrons from
>> Earth are getting up into your system. Performing whatever beneficial
>> as they did in old ages (millions of years). I mean, only humans are
>> using shoes, which might be seen as a barrier for the free natural
>> electrons (charge carriers)
>>
>>
> First of all, there is no evidence AFAIK that electrons passing from the
> earth to the body have any health benefits. Secondly, skin is moist and
> charge likes to remain on the surface of a conductor. Third, electrons
> only travel if there is a voltage difference between the earth and the
> body, and I don't believe that walking barefoot establishes any voltage
> difference.

That's the whole idea with phenomenon. I can't believe only Poutnik saw 
the problem.

> So it sounds like some pseudo-scientific babbler has made a pitch for

No, you just proved insufficient and inadequate. The thing is that humans 
are living under an offset/excess of positive charges and polarisation. 
Might be not much, but nevertheless existent and measurable.

> going barefoot by guessing what might be different if an insulator is
> removed, and then jumping to all sorts of crazy conclusions. You might
> as well argue that drinking cups should be metallic and that coasters
> should be avoided, so electricity can travel from your desk to your
> coffee, providing mystical energy.
> 
> Walking barefoot does work muscles that you don't normally work,
> including core muscles in the pelvis and midsection. This is always good
> for health.

Buy a brain, then repost.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361690

[F'up2 sci.physics]

"James Birdy" wrote:

> */Odd Bodkin/* wrote:
>> On 8/22/2015 3:28 PM, James Birdy wrote:
>>> Are there electrons that are different? I hear stories that walking
>>> barefoot has surprisingly health benefits. As I understood,
>>> electrically, the insulator of the shoes taken away, the electrons from
>>> Earth are getting up into your system. Performing whatever beneficial
>>> as they did in old ages (millions of years). I mean, only humans are
>>> using shoes, which might be seen as a barrier for the free natural
>>> electrons (charge carriers)
>>
>> First of all, there is no evidence AFAIK that electrons passing from the
>> earth to the body have any health benefits. Secondly, skin is moist
>> and charge likes to remain on the surface of a conductor.

A common misconception.  The (human) skin would conduct electricity even if 
it were not moist (i.e., would not have inclusions of liquids) because it 
consists of other conductive materials.

>> Third, electrons only travel if there is a voltage difference between the
>> earth and the body,

This sentence becomes true if one replaces “voltage” with “charge” or 
“electric potential”.  Voltage is a measure of the energy required to move 
an electric charge in an electric field; it already *is* “the difference in 
electric potential energy between two points per unit electric charge.”
It is _not_ the cause of the motion; the difference in electric charge is.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage>

>> and I don't believe that walking barefoot establishes any voltage
>> difference.
> 
> That's the whole idea with phenomenon. I can't believe only Poutnik saw
> the problem.

Of course, walking barefoot also establishes a separation of charges between 
body and ground, i.e. static electricity.  But the subsequent discharge is 
easier and more effective because of the electrical conductivity of the 
skin.  Therefore, the resulting static electricity after a few barefoot 
steps is lower than with shoes with rubber soles on, if not zero.
 
>> So it sounds like some pseudo-scientific babbler has made a pitch for
> 
> No, you just proved insufficient and inadequate. The thing is that humans
> are living under an offset/excess of positive charges and polarisation.

No, humans that wear (rubber) shoes build up a deficiency of negatively 
charged particles; contrary to common belief (and simplification in 
electrical engineering), the positive charge(s) in a nucleus of an atom/ion 
bound in a molecule/crystal (that which human tissue consists of) is _not_ 
the moving charge (in a classical sense).

> Might be not much, but nevertheless existent and measurable.

And quite irrelevant to the health benefits of walking barefoot.  “Odd” had 
that part right, ’nym-shifting troll.

I would add that not only walking barefoot causes muscles, tendons and 
ligaments to be used that would otherwise not be used, but it also 
stimulates nerve cells that would otherwise not be stimulated (in the same 
way); this is why humans usually find walking barefoot (or a foot massage, 
or prolonged running) pleasant, as endorphins are being produced to have 
that effect as result of that stimulation.  So apart from the physical 
exercise, there is also a psychological health benefit.

[As with everything, with not too much of it.  But if you think about it, 
this may have been an evolutionary advantage once.  Walking barefoot can 
also be painful depending on the terrain (e.g. pointed or hot stones, 
animals that sting or bite you, icy land, and the physical wear), but if the 
pain were offset by production of endorphins you could bear all that and 
walk longer distances, reach food and land that less adaptive members of 
your species could not reach, which improved your chance to procreate.]

Also, but less significant considering the area involved, exposing the skin 
of the foot (and maybe the leg) to sunlight increases the chance for 
significant UVB exposure which allows the dermal synthesis of vitamin D.
 
> Buy a brain, then repost.

Same to you.  And get *one* *real* name while you are at it.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361724

*/Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:

> "James Birdy" wrote:
> 
>> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>>> As for the second, voltage IS synonymous with difference in
>>>> electrical potential.
>>> 
>>> AISB.  But you were talking about a *voltage* difference instead.
>> 
>> There is no such thing as "voltage difference",
> 
> There is.  But it is not relevant here.

Not in this context. Allow me to try to prove you wrong, ans probably a 
lot more than that.

Once we agree that a Voltage is a Potential Difference, your Voltage 
Difference becomes Potential Difference Difference. Which is nonsense. How 
do you like it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361742

[F'up2 sci.physics]

"James Birdy" posted to sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity:

> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>> "James Birdy" wrote:
>>> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>>>> As for the second, voltage IS synonymous with difference in
>>>>> electrical potential.
>>>> AISB.  But you were talking about a *voltage* difference instead.
>>> There is no such thing as "voltage difference",
>> There is.  But it is not relevant here.
> 
> Not in this context.

It is acceptable that you are able to agree, and that you are agreeing in 
this case.

If you would also skip this anti-social ’nym-shifting, address-munging and 
amok-crossposting (and probably I forgot something), there would be a chance 
that something you say could be taken seriously.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361743

*/Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:

> [F'up2 sci.physics]
> 
> "James Birdy" posted to sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity:
> 
>> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>> "James Birdy" wrote:
>>>> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>>>>> As for the second, voltage IS synonymous with difference in
>>>>>> electrical potential.
>>>>> AISB.  But you were talking about a *voltage* difference instead.
>>>> There is no such thing as "voltage difference",
>>> There is.  But it is not relevant here.
>> 
>> Not in this context.
> 
> It is acceptable that you are able to agree, and that you are agreeing
> in this case.

You're a shameless piece of bleep, by snipping the juicy part proving you 
unemployable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361745

The ’nym-shifting troll amok-crossposted as "James Birdy":

> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>> [F'up2 sci.physics]
>> "James Birdy" posted to sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity:
>>> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>>> "James Birdy" wrote:
>>>>> There is no such thing as "voltage difference",
>>>> There is.  But it is not relevant here.
>>> Not in this context.
>> It is acceptable that you are able to agree, and that you are agreeing
>> in this case.
> You're a shameless piece of bleep, by snipping the juicy part proving you
> unemployable.

I rest my case.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361695

On 8/24/2015 10:11 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 8/22/2015 3:28 PM, James Birdy wrote:
>> Are there electrons that are different? I hear stories that walking
>> barefoot has surprisingly health benefits. As I understood, electrically,
>> the insulator of the shoes taken away, the electrons from Earth are
>> getting up into your system. Performing whatever beneficial as they
>> did in
>> old ages (millions of years). I mean, only humans are using shoes, which
>> might be seen as a barrier for the free natural electrons (charge
>> carriers)
>>
>
> First of all, there is no evidence AFAIK that electrons passing from the
> earth to the body have any health benefits. Secondly, skin is moist and
> charge likes to remain on the surface of a conductor. Third, electrons
> only travel if there is a voltage difference between the earth and the
> body, and I don't believe that walking barefoot establishes any voltage
> difference.
>
> So it sounds like some pseudo-scientific babbler has made a pitch for
> going barefoot by guessing what might be different if an insulator is
> removed, and then jumping to all sorts of crazy conclusions. You might
> as well argue that drinking cups should be metallic and that coasters
> should be avoided, so electricity can travel from your desk to your
> coffee, providing mystical energy.
>
> Walking barefoot does work muscles that you don't normally work,
> including core muscles in the pelvis and midsection. This is always good
> for health.


I am always barefoot at home. I see no reason to wear footgear here.
Plus it's way more comfortable.


-- 
"Are we going to fight or are we going to stand around all day?"
https://goo.gl/TU0Xr6

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361696

*/HVAC/* wrote:

>> Walking barefoot does work muscles that you don't normally work,
>> including core muscles in the pelvis and midsection. This is always
>> good for health.
> 
> I am always barefoot at home. I see no reason to wear footgear here.
> Plus it's way more comfortable.

I'm not interested hvac, it was about the ground electrons only. You have 
no free ground electrons in your home. You are not covered by the 
phenomenon.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361698

"James Birdy" amok-crossposted:

> */HVAC/* wrote:
>>> Walking barefoot does work muscles that you don't normally work,
>>> including core muscles in the pelvis and midsection. This is always
>>> good for health.
>> I am always barefoot at home. I see no reason to wear footgear here.
>> Plus it's way more comfortable.
> 
> I'm not interested hvac, it was about the ground electrons only. You have
> no free ground electrons in your home.

Most certainly he has.  One does not need to see his home for that, as 
*everyone* has.  That is what you (pretend to) do not understand.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361703

*/Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:

>> I'm not interested hvac, it was about the ground electrons only. You
>> have no free ground electrons in your home.
> 
> Most certainly he has.  One does not need to see his home for that, as
> *everyone* has.  That is what you (pretend to) do not understand.

So he has no many-layered surfaces as ceramics, wood, bamboo, or plastic 
as his floor? What do you have?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361705

James Birdy wrote:

> */Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn/* wrote:
>>> I'm not interested hvac, it was about the ground electrons only. You
>>> have no free ground electrons in your home.
>> Most certainly he has.  One does not need to see his home for that, as
>> *everyone* has.  That is what you (pretend to) do not understand.
> 
> So he has no many-layered surfaces as ceramics, wood, bamboo, or plastic
> as his floor?

I do not know.  It does not matter.

> What do you have?

Irrelevant.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web