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

#361563

Dne 22/08/2015 v 22:28 James Birdy napsal(a):
> 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)
> 

All electrons are the same at the same conditions.
The point is, they are not at the same conditions.

They are at different potentials, depending where they are.

Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
and if we are well isolated,
we are exposed to more positive potential
due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

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

#361566

*/Poutnik/* wrote:

> Dne 22/08/2015 v 22:28 James Birdy napsal(a):
>> 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)
>> 
> All electrons are the same at the same conditions.
> The point is, they are not at the same conditions.
> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
> and if we are well isolated,
> we are exposed to more positive potential due atmospheric electrostatic
> gradient.

This has to be a correct observation Poutnik. Thank you for that.

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

#361590

Am 22.08.2015 23:15, schrieb Poutnik:

>> 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)
>>
>
> All electrons are the same at the same conditions.
> The point is, they are not at the same conditions.
>
> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
>
> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
> and if we are well isolated,
> we are exposed to more positive potential
> due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
>

Now the question:

does a negative charge or a positive charge provide more benefits for 
the human health?

As rough estimate, drawn from my own (not very systematic) observations, 
I would prefer positive charge.

So: insulation (by means of shoes) would actually enhance health. And 
walking barefoot would make you loose 'valuable' ions ;-)


TH

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

#361591

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 11:44:24 PM UTC-5, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 22.08.2015 23:15, schrieb Poutnik:
> 
> >> 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)
> >>
> >
> > All electrons are the same at the same conditions.
> > The point is, they are not at the same conditions.
> >
> > They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
> >
> > Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
> > and if we are well isolated,
> > we are exposed to more positive potential
> > due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
> >
> 
> Now the question:
> 
> does a negative charge or a positive charge provide more benefits for 
> the human health?
> 
> As rough estimate, drawn from my own (not very systematic) observations, 
> I would prefer positive charge.
> 
> So: insulation (by means of shoes) would actually enhance health. And 
> walking barefoot would make you loose 'valuable' ions ;-)
> 
> 
> TH

Public television has recently started to release these wonderful stories about the creation of early scientific instruments and their implications.

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

#361656

Am 23.08.2015 07:23, schrieb John Gogo:
..
>>> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
>>>
>>> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
>>> and if we are well isolated,
>>> we are exposed to more positive potential
>>> due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
>>>
>>
>> Now the question:
>>
>> does a negative charge or a positive charge provide more benefits for
>> the human health?
>>
>> As rough estimate, drawn from my own (not very systematic) observations,
>> I would prefer positive charge.
>>
>> So: insulation (by means of shoes) would actually enhance health. And
>> walking barefoot would make you loose 'valuable' ions ;-)
>>
>>
>> TH
>
> Public television has recently started to release these wonderful stories about the creation of early scientific instruments and their implications.

http://cryptohipster.blogspot.de/2012/02/bad-ideas-day-2-negative-ion-gun.html

Quote:

"Putting aside the very important point of whether "ionic fields" are 
actually bullsh-t or not,let's pretend that they aren't. According to 
current ionic theory, positive ions are, as they say in the academic 
community, "hella bad" for you, causing anything from general feelings 
of malaise and depression on up to suicidal ideation and actions or even 
death (though supposedly only in massive, theoretical or apocryphal 
amounts), while negative ions do good things, like lighten one's mood 
and sterilize the immediate environment."

Now I'm slightly insecure, what to believe...

I would be interested in other peoples opinions about the benefits of 
ions (upon human health) and whether positive or negative ions are more 
desirable.


TH

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

#361768

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 1:15:47 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 23.08.2015 07:23, schrieb John Gogo:
> ..
> >>> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
> >>>
> >>> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
> >>> and if we are well isolated,
> >>> we are exposed to more positive potential
> >>> due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Now the question:
> >>
> >> does a negative charge or a positive charge provide more benefits for
> >> the human health?
> >>
> >> As rough estimate, drawn from my own (not very systematic) observations,
> >> I would prefer positive charge.
> >>
> >> So: insulation (by means of shoes) would actually enhance health. And
> >> walking barefoot would make you loose 'valuable' ions ;-)
> >>
> >>
> >> TH
> >
> > Public television has recently started to release these wonderful stories about the creation of early scientific instruments and their implications.
> 
> http://cryptohipster.blogspot.de/2012/02/bad-ideas-day-2-negative-ion-gun.html
> 
> Quote:
> 
> "Putting aside the very important point of whether "ionic fields" are 
> actually bullsh-t or not,let's pretend that they aren't. According to 
> current ionic theory, positive ions are, as they say in the academic 
> community, "hella bad" for you, causing anything from general feelings 
> of malaise and depression on up to suicidal ideation and actions or even 
> death (though supposedly only in massive, theoretical or apocryphal 
> amounts), while negative ions do good things, like lighten one's mood 
> and sterilize the immediate environment."
> 
> Now I'm slightly insecure, what to believe...
> 
> I would be interested in other peoples opinions about the benefits of 
> ions (upon human health) and whether positive or negative ions are more 
> desirable.
> 
> 
> TH

I will put my two cents here, but it's off the cuff.  I am very aware of the cleaning solutions that I use to wash my cloths, dishes, etc., and am realizing that they are very caustic both to the touch and breath.  I must assume that these chemicals are a combination of ionic activity.  


Secondly, I distinguish substances as either and acid or base and realize that we need these perfect combination in order to make processes neutral.  This includes eating, and the general scale of what an acid and a base mean when they are combined.

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

#361770

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 10:59:38 PM UTC-5, John Gogo wrote:
> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 1:15:47 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > Am 23.08.2015 07:23, schrieb John Gogo:
> > ..
> > >>> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
> > >>>
> > >>> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
> > >>> and if we are well isolated,
> > >>> we are exposed to more positive potential
> > >>> due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Now the question:
> > >>
> > >> does a negative charge or a positive charge provide more benefits for
> > >> the human health?
> > >>
> > >> As rough estimate, drawn from my own (not very systematic) observations,
> > >> I would prefer positive charge.
> > >>
> > >> So: insulation (by means of shoes) would actually enhance health. And
> > >> walking barefoot would make you loose 'valuable' ions ;-)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> TH
> > >
> > > Public television has recently started to release these wonderful stories about the creation of early scientific instruments and their implications.
> > 
> > http://cryptohipster.blogspot.de/2012/02/bad-ideas-day-2-negative-ion-gun.html
> > 
> > Quote:
> > 
> > "Putting aside the very important point of whether "ionic fields" are 
> > actually bullsh-t or not,let's pretend that they aren't. According to 
> > current ionic theory, positive ions are, as they say in the academic 
> > community, "hella bad" for you, causing anything from general feelings 
> > of malaise and depression on up to suicidal ideation and actions or even 
> > death (though supposedly only in massive, theoretical or apocryphal 
> > amounts), while negative ions do good things, like lighten one's mood 
> > and sterilize the immediate environment."
> > 
> > Now I'm slightly insecure, what to believe...
> > 
> > I would be interested in other peoples opinions about the benefits of 
> > ions (upon human health) and whether positive or negative ions are more 
> > desirable.
> > 
> > 
> > TH
> 
> I will put my two cents here, but it's off the cuff.  I am very aware of the cleaning solutions that I use to wash my cloths, dishes, etc., and am realizing that they are very caustic both to the touch and breath.  I must assume that these chemicals are a combination of ionic activity.  
> 
> 
> Secondly, I distinguish substances as either and acid or base and realize that we need these perfect combination in order to make processes neutral.  This includes eating, and the general scale of what an acid and a base mean when they are combined.

Water is considered acidic.

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

#361772

Am 25.08.2015 06:14, schrieb John Gogo:

>>>
>>> "Putting aside the very important point of whether "ionic fields" are
>>> actually bullsh-t or not,let's pretend that they aren't. According to
>>> current ionic theory, positive ions are, as they say in the academic
>>> community, "hella bad" for you, causing anything from general feelings
>>> of malaise and depression on up to suicidal ideation and actions or even
>>> death (though supposedly only in massive, theoretical or apocryphal
>>> amounts), while negative ions do good things, like lighten one's mood
>>> and sterilize the immediate environment."
>>>
>>> Now I'm slightly insecure, what to believe...
>>>
>>> I would be interested in other peoples opinions about the benefits of
>>> ions (upon human health) and whether positive or negative ions are more
>>> desirable.
>>>
>>>
>>> TH
>>
>> I will put my two cents here, but it's off the cuff.  I am very aware of the cleaning solutions that I use to wash my cloths, dishes, etc., and am realizing that they are very caustic both to the touch and breath.  I must assume that these chemicals are a combination of ionic activity.
>>
>>
>> Secondly, I distinguish substances as either and acid or base and realize that we need these perfect combination in order to make processes neutral.  This includes eating, and the general scale of what an acid and a base mean when they are combined.
>
> Water is considered acidic.

No! Actually the water itself is not acidic, but dissolved substances 
could alter its characteristics.

H+ ions make it more acidic and those them from substances like HCl.

But we were talking about air and ions. The question was, whether 
positive or negative ions in air are better for human health.

If I put 'negative ions' in the search-mask of google, I get LOADS of 
links with the tendency, negative ions are healthy.

e.g.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_air_ionization_therapy

Counter test 'positive ions' produces no webpages, that believe in their 
benefit.

e.g.

"Positive Ions versus Negative Ions"
https://www.quantumbalancing.com/negative_ions.htm

Quote:

"Positive ions or the lack of negative ions may cause serotonin 
hyper-function syndrome or "irritation syndrome" involves sleeplessness, 
irritability, tension, migraine, nausea, heart palpitations, hot flashes 
with sweating or chills, tremor and dizziness. The elderly become 
depressed, apathetic and extremely fatigued."


This non-representative 'test' (by counting google results) of peoples 
opinions provides a strong preference of negative ions (among the 
practitioners of alternative medicine).

TH

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

#361774

On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 12:30:43 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 25.08.2015 06:14, schrieb John Gogo:
> 
> >>>
> >>> "Putting aside the very important point of whether "ionic fields" are
> >>> actually bullsh-t or not,let's pretend that they aren't. According to
> >>> current ionic theory, positive ions are, as they say in the academic
> >>> community, "hella bad" for you, causing anything from general feelings
> >>> of malaise and depression on up to suicidal ideation and actions or even
> >>> death (though supposedly only in massive, theoretical or apocryphal
> >>> amounts), while negative ions do good things, like lighten one's mood
> >>> and sterilize the immediate environment."
> >>>
> >>> Now I'm slightly insecure, what to believe...
> >>>
> >>> I would be interested in other peoples opinions about the benefits of
> >>> ions (upon human health) and whether positive or negative ions are more
> >>> desirable.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> TH
> >>
> >> I will put my two cents here, but it's off the cuff.  I am very aware of the cleaning solutions that I use to wash my cloths, dishes, etc., and am realizing that they are very caustic both to the touch and breath.  I must assume that these chemicals are a combination of ionic activity.
> >>
> >>
> >> Secondly, I distinguish substances as either and acid or base and realize that we need these perfect combination in order to make processes neutral.  This includes eating, and the general scale of what an acid and a base mean when they are combined.
> >
> > Water is considered acidic.
> 
> No! Actually the water itself is not acidic, but dissolved substances 
> could alter its characteristics.
> 
> H+ ions make it more acidic and those them from substances like HCl.
> 
> But we were talking about air and ions. The question was, whether 
> positive or negative ions in air are better for human health.
> 
> If I put 'negative ions' in the search-mask of google, I get LOADS of 
> links with the tendency, negative ions are healthy.
> 
> e.g.:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_air_ionization_therapy
> 
> Counter test 'positive ions' produces no webpages, that believe in their 
> benefit.
> 
> e.g.
> 
> "Positive Ions versus Negative Ions"
> https://www.quantumbalancing.com/negative_ions.htm
> 
> Quote:
> 
> "Positive ions or the lack of negative ions may cause serotonin 
> hyper-function syndrome or "irritation syndrome" involves sleeplessness, 
> irritability, tension, migraine, nausea, heart palpitations, hot flashes 
> with sweating or chills, tremor and dizziness. The elderly become 
> depressed, apathetic and extremely fatigued."
> 
> 
> This non-representative 'test' (by counting google results) of peoples 
> opinions provides a strong preference of negative ions (among the 
> practitioners of alternative medicine).
> 
> TH

I think that we might be onto something here.  On a college science test I answered zero for the acidity/base for water.  I got the question wrong.  He said that water was 1 on the acidity scale.

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

#361784

On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 6:46:43 AM UTC+1, John Gogo wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 12:30:43 AM UTC-5, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > Am 25.08.2015 06:14, schrieb John Gogo:
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>> "Putting aside the very important point of whether "ionic fields" are
> > >>> actually bullsh-t or not,let's pretend that they aren't. According to
> > >>> current ionic theory, positive ions are, as they say in the academic
> > >>> community, "hella bad" for you, causing anything from general feelings
> > >>> of malaise and depression on up to suicidal ideation and actions or even
> > >>> death (though supposedly only in massive, theoretical or apocryphal
> > >>> amounts), while negative ions do good things, like lighten one's mood
> > >>> and sterilize the immediate environment."
> > >>>
> > >>> Now I'm slightly insecure, what to believe...
> > >>>
> > >>> I would be interested in other peoples opinions about the benefits of
> > >>> ions (upon human health) and whether positive or negative ions are more
> > >>> desirable.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> TH
> > >>
> > >> I will put my two cents here, but it's off the cuff.  I am very aware of the cleaning solutions that I use to wash my cloths, dishes, etc., and am realizing that they are very caustic both to the touch and breath.  I must assume that these chemicals are a combination of ionic activity.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Secondly, I distinguish substances as either and acid or base and realize that we need these perfect combination in order to make processes neutral.  This includes eating, and the general scale of what an acid and a base mean when they are combined.
> > >
> > > Water is considered acidic.
> > 
> > No! Actually the water itself is not acidic, but dissolved substances 
> > could alter its characteristics.
> > 
> > H+ ions make it more acidic and those them from substances like HCl.
> > 
> > But we were talking about air and ions. The question was, whether 
> > positive or negative ions in air are better for human health.
> > 
> > If I put 'negative ions' in the search-mask of google, I get LOADS of 
> > links with the tendency, negative ions are healthy.
> > 
> > e.g.:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_air_ionization_therapy
> > 
> > Counter test 'positive ions' produces no webpages, that believe in their 
> > benefit.
> > 
> > e.g.
> > 
> > "Positive Ions versus Negative Ions"
> > https://www.quantumbalancing.com/negative_ions.htm
> > 
> > Quote:
> > 
> > "Positive ions or the lack of negative ions may cause serotonin 
> > hyper-function syndrome or "irritation syndrome" involves sleeplessness, 
> > irritability, tension, migraine, nausea, heart palpitations, hot flashes 
> > with sweating or chills, tremor and dizziness. The elderly become 
> > depressed, apathetic and extremely fatigued."
> > 
> > 
> > This non-representative 'test' (by counting google results) of peoples 
> > opinions provides a strong preference of negative ions (among the 
> > practitioners of alternative medicine).
> > 
> > TH
> 
> I think that we might be onto something here.  On a college science test I answered zero for the acidity/base for water.  I got the question wrong.  He said that water was 1 on the acidity scale.

what acidity scale is this? all we were ever introduced to was the pH scale with pure water at pH7

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

#361870

Am 25.08.2015 10:58, schrieb underante:
..
>>>> Water is considered acidic.
>>>
>>> No! Actually the water itself is not acidic, but dissolved substances
>>> could alter its characteristics.
>>>
>>> H+ ions make it more acidic and those them from substances like HCl.
>>>
>>> But we were talking about air and ions. The question was, whether
>>> positive or negative ions in air are better for human health.
...
>>>
>>> "Positive Ions versus Negative Ions"
>>> https://www.quantumbalancing.com/negative_ions.htm
>>>
>>> Quote:
>>>
>>> "Positive ions or the lack of negative ions may cause serotonin
>>> hyper-function syndrome or "irritation syndrome" involves sleeplessness,
>>> irritability, tension, migraine, nausea, heart palpitations, hot flashes
>>> with sweating or chills, tremor and dizziness. The elderly become
>>> depressed, apathetic and extremely fatigued."
>>>
>>>
>>> This non-representative 'test' (by counting google results) of peoples
>>> opinions provides a strong preference of negative ions (among the
>>> practitioners of alternative medicine).
>>>
>>> TH
>>
>> I think that we might be onto something here.  On a college science test I answered zero for the acidity/base for water.  I got the question wrong.  He said that water was 1 on the acidity scale.
>
> what acidity scale is this? all we were ever introduced to was the pH scale with pure water at pH7

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PH

quote:
" It is the negative of the logarithm to base 10 of the activity of the 
hydrogen ion. Solutions with a pH less than 7 are acidic and solutions 
with a pH greater than 7 are alkaline or basic. Pure water has a pH of 7 
and is neutral, being neither an acid nor a base. "


Since we had been talking about AIR, we should discuss acidity of air.

But to the best of my knowledge, the air has no pH-value. The equivalent 
is the distribution of positive and negative ions.

And more positive ions are similar to acid and more negative ions to basic.


TH

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

#361604

Dne 22/08/2015 v 23:15 Poutnik napsal(a):
> Dne 22/08/2015 v 22:28 James Birdy napsal(a):
>> 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)
>>
> 
> All electrons are the same at the same conditions.
> The point is, they are not at the same conditions.
> 
> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
> 
> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
> and if we are well isolated,
> we are exposed to more positive potential
> due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
> 
Of course, as Thomas said,
major factor in context of human body is friction.

There is also additional effect
of charge reversal near cumulonimbus at storms.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

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

#361609

Dne 23/08/2015 v 09:55 Poutnik napsal(a):
> Dne 22/08/2015 v 23:15 Poutnik napsal(a):
>> Dne 22/08/2015 v 22:28 James Birdy napsal(a):
>>> 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)
>>>
>>
>> All electrons are the same at the same conditions.
>> The point is, they are not at the same conditions.
>>
>> They are at different potentials, depending where they are.
>>
>> Earth surface is usually negatively charged,
>> and if we are well isolated,
>> we are exposed to more positive potential
>> due atmospheric electrostatic gradient.
>>
> Of course, as Thomas said,
> major factor in context of human body is friction.
> 
> There is also additional effect
> of charge reversal near cumulonimbus at storms.
> 
P.S.: There are large scale charge atmospheric patterns
superimposed by local friction patterns.

The former cause bigger differences,
but as the gradients are much weaker then at the latter,
the observed local effect is usually much weaker as well.
( with few exceptions like lightnings or St. Elmo's fire.)

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes great men humble,
but small men arrogant.

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

#361565

On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 20:28:44 +0000, James Birdy wrote:

> I hear stories that walking 
> barefoot has surprisingly health benefits.
>

Here is something they make just for asshole idiots like you:

http://www.amazon.com/Magnetic-Foot-Insoles-Magnet-Inserts/dp/B001B3PO3S

So get out your credit card, sucker, and buy 'em by the case.

Dumb-fuck fool.

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

#361567

*/Fabian Russell/* wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 20:28:44 +0000, James Birdy wrote:
> 
>> I hear stories that walking barefoot has surprisingly health benefits.
>>
> Here is something they make just for asshole idiots like you:
> http://www.amazon.com/Magnetic-Foot-Insoles-Magnet-Inserts/dp/B001B3PO3S
> So get out your credit card, sucker, and buy 'em by the case.

I see you bought yourself already that. Otherwise how would you possibly 
know. You must be a real cretin, not a one trying to just mimic one.

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

#361575

James Birdy wrote:

> Are there electrons that are different?

Yes.

> I hear stories that walking barefoot has surprisingly health benefits.

It does.  But non sequitur.

> As I understood, electrically, the insulator of the shoes taken away, the
> electrons from Earth are getting up into your system.

Not even wrong.  Now go away, 'nym-shifting troll.


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]

#361579

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 3:28:52 PM UTC-5, 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)

Don't put a good battery directly on the ground- it will discharge eventually becoming no good.

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

#361598

On 23/08/2015 6:28 AM, 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)
>

Even had it been the case that electrons got taken up by bare feet (a 
highly improbable scenario), they would have migrated to the surface of 
the skin [*], which consists of dead tissue. Apart from repelling the 
odd blood-sucking insect that had happened to have acquired a negative 
charge, it's hard to see what benefit could have accrued.

Sylvia.

[*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed on 
its surface because of electric repulsion.

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

#361682

*/Sylvia Else/* wrote:

> On 23/08/2015 6:28 AM, 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)
>>
>>
> Even had it been the case that electrons got taken up by bare feet (a
> highly improbable scenario), they would have migrated to the surface of
> the skin [*], which consists of dead tissue. Apart from repelling the
> odd blood-sucking insect that had happened to have acquired a negative
> charge, it's hard to see what benefit could have accrued.
> 
> Sylvia.

Dear Sylvia. You are severely uneducated. What you just said is just so 
wrong. Human body has a Resistance, which accordingly its adherent 
Resistivity decrease with the contact surface/area, say for now, in the 
region of 500kOhm. (the palm of two feet is a quite large contact area).

More over the Static positive Potential of the body may rise up to MANY 
kilovolts!

> [*] The net charge of any electrically conductive object is expressed on
> its surface because of electric repulsion.

Not sure. Or I can't understand.

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

#361685

*/James Birdy/* wrote:

> */Sylvia Else/* wrote:
> 
>> On 23/08/2015 6:28 AM, 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)
>>>
>>>
>> Even had it been the case that electrons got taken up by bare feet (a
>> highly improbable scenario), they would have migrated to the surface of
>> the skin [*], which consists of dead tissue. Apart from repelling the
>> odd blood-sucking insect that had happened to have acquired a negative
>> charge, it's hard to see what benefit could have accrued.
>> 
>> Sylvia.
> 
> Dear Sylvia. You are severely uneducated. What you just said is just so
> wrong. Human body has a Resistance, which accordingly its adherent
> Resistivity decrease with the contact surface/area, say for now, in the
> region of 500kOhm. (the palm of two feet is a quite large contact area).
> 
> More over the Static positive Potential of the body may rise up to MANY
> kilovolts!

(due to the electric insulation imposed by the wearing plastic shoes)

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

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

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

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

csiph-web