buzsaw

Imo' date=' space is absolute nothing but existing boundless area in the universe in which everything in the universe exists. Space being boundless then makes the universe boundless. This is why I believe that space does not expand or end. It is boundless. I have debated on this in another forum with expansionists. In these debates I have focused on the definition of space, what it is and what it is not. My counterparts, for the most part end up with the only property of space being geometrics and they go about to show how via QM and light redshift space geometrics can be shown do do stuff like expand. This is my understanding of how their argument works. They go from this to argue that space is not boundless and ends. My counter to that is that geometrics are relative to [i']things in space[/i] and not space perse. For example, if the universe were nothing but space, there would be no geometrics and no QM. There would be nothing to relate to for measurement. Not until something is introduced into space do geometrics and QM become relevant, imo. Hopefully some folks apprised on QM and space cosmology will have comments in response to this.

There was an electroplating company which folks could take nickel plated over copper teapots and such which used reverse electrolysis to strip the plating off so as to have a copper piece. I don't know what the chemistry is for this process though, not understanding electrolysis and exactly how it works.

I've listened to a number of health programs on radio and watched on TV, so I don't have specifics on which ones said this. I've just done a search on google and I see it is quite a controversial viewpoint. It appears that the general concensus is that sipping a small amount of water with meals is no problem. One site said that older folks and folks who have weak digestion or a hiatal hernia would be the ones who should be most careful in this regard.

I've noticed that when I neglect to take time to drink water while working I get sluggish. After a prolonged time without water and I then drink a glass of water, the first thing that comes is the urge to uninate. This is indicative, imo, that the kidneys needed flushing but were conserving body liquid until fresh water came in to do the flushing/urinating. Dehydration is sometimes subtile and can be counter to health. I try to consiously remember to drink regularly so as to keep the kidneys functioning smoothly and to thus keep the body clean. It seems that habitually drinking too little water would contribute to the possibility of kidney stones. Likely water intake is also a factor in keeping the glands healty and to prevent them from overloading and becoming inflamed with toxins. Some of the holistic health advocates stress that the feeling of hunger is often due to dehydration. They suggest that when one feels hungry well before mealtime, drinking water will soften up the food in the digestive system so as for nutrients to assimilate into the bloodstream and energize body functions. Water, however should not be drank after a half hour before meals, with meals, or for 2 1/2 hours after meals. Why? Because it takes up to a half hour for water to assimilate and it takes about 2 to 2 1/2 hours for meals to digest. One does not want to dilute the enzymes which digest the food with water and other drinks during the meal, according to some health advocates. This seems to make sense to me.

Hotrodders Bulletin Board - Ways to Polish Aluminum rimsGet all of your tech questions answered on the net's largest community for hot rod and muscle car enthusiasts! http://www.hotrodders.com/t61425.html

Not much has been said here relative to the brain. It being the organ of thought and emotions, et al, it would seem that it would be the soulish organ of the body. The heart simply supplies the brain with the wherewithall to do functions. The word heart often refers to the inner being or maybe the soulish aspects of the mind/brain.

I see no connection with the heart muscle and the phenomenon of love. Love is a soulish aspect of the inner being of mankind. It is one of the evidences' date=' imo, of the [i']image of God[/i] portrayed in mankind as per the Genesis record of he Bible, relative to the creation of mankind by the creator. Then it gets more complicated in the Biblical New Testament with love being listed as one of the fruits of the Spirit of God, bestowed upon those who have been spiritually aroused/born. See Galations 5:22:23. I am aware that this is not science perse, but that if the supernatural does indeed exist in the universe, it, in a sense becomes, science, and regarded as some (myself included) as an alternative to natural selection. Cheers!

Maybe a motion enhancement machine? Would it be useful in improving on electric vehicles?

The quality of the water is very important, imo. Drinking clorinated water or flouridated water is rough on the kidneys and other which must deal with these poisons. Either good spring water or distilled water is best. We either buy our water or get it from friends who have sound tested wells.

Being an unbounded space ideologist and considering unbounded space as a property of the universe, something unbounded cannot expand. Having said that, from what I've heard from expansionists, I believe the earth's orbit around the sun would not involve enough area to observe cosmological expansion. Likely someone more apprised on cosmology will correct me if I'm wrong here. Cheers, and I guess I've been here long enough now to welcome you to SFN.

Likely most grains do have some. I may have this wrong, but I believe its the wheat gluten that some have problems with.

For sure, at the pace change is escalating, we'll see a lot of change in the next hundred years. Of course as an apocalyptic Biblical creationist, having been into the Biblical prophecies most of my life, I likely see the change in a different perspective than you. The prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 65:20) sees a day coming in the messianic millenium when a child shall die young being 100 years old, implicating, imo, a pre-flood like condition on earth. I have some hypotheses on some geographical and atmospheric changes that could come about to effect some of this but, of course, this forum and thread isn't the place for it as I understand the guidelines. I do appreciate that you have a pseudoscience forum to aire some alternative science thinking and assime that would be the place to talk about some of this some day.

I have a unique boundless apace and eternal universe Biblical creation hypothesis, but as I understand the guidelines, that would be for pseudoscience so I'll not get into it here, except to say that imo, it better fits the thermodynamic 1 law than BB, since no energy is ever introduced into the universe -- only changed, and the universe would have no singularity/beginning.

In your first statement, are you giving consideration to the way we're depleting the quality of much of our soil by chemical fertilizers and how we're processing much of our foods for longer shelf life, higher profits, et al? We no longer have animals ranging on much of our land to naturally fertilize it. Erosion also is taking it's toll on the soil. Poultry, beef, farm fish, et al are being treated with hormones and other stuff in production. I've heard that wire cage hens are so enimic that if their eggs were fertilized they'd not hatch. I don't have documentation on that, but having raised natural chickens, I do know the difference in quality. Farms are getting much larger and producing inferior products for the profit sheet. There are, however indeed some pluses in the food chain, in that with refrigerated transportation, we can get a larger variety of products from longer distances quickly. Also, the natural food industry is making some progress in bettering food quality. I haven't done a thorough study on this subject, so until I do, I'll concede that your points are well taken and I'll keep on searching out the facts on this. Do you have any links showing data on the past hundred years?

Pardon for getting logical here, but shouldn't it take a lot of plain old faith to think that somehow everything that exists, what is observable of the universe plus all else out there beyond our most powerful scopes -- ALL of this incomprehensible mass and energy could have once been compacted into a singularity area billions of times smaller than the proton of an atom, as Rich Gore of National Geographic once put it? Are creationists really the only people of faith, as to ideology about origins? After having read the posts of this thread so far, I see more questions than answers as to how this incredible BB theory has advanced to the status it has reached, dominating mainstream science.

Checking the charts, it appears there's roughly as many folks 1 to 34 as there are 35 to 70. After 70 there's maybe 10 to 15 percent more people to add to the older group (without doing the math.) I don't know how the cancer charts would come out with these groups. Suffice to say, likely enough of the young folks to make my point.

Well' date=' my friend, I've been in that world for about 70 years. Maybe [i']I[/i] should be welcoming you into it??

The point of my original statement was to the effect that diseases were the (cause and effect) product of un-natural and careless lifestyles, implying that it seemed to be related to NS negatively. You said that They are not a "product" of un-natural and careless lifestyle as such - disease is more visible in conjunction with those lifestyles because they provide more suitable conditions for pathogenic diseases to operate, while simultaneously reducing the natural ability to combat the diseases and repair the damage that they do. Then I said, Do you think a global prevalence of the deteriation of food quality over a long period would have any long term effect on NS? I was assuming what we eat as inclusive in un-natural and careless lifestyles, thus implicating NS to your statement about those lifestyles..........reducing the natural ability to combat the diseases....... Am I making sense to you here? Admittedly, sometimes I have some difficulty in communicating my thoughts clearly.

Thailand has a somewhat lower life expectancy than average, being age 69, but not enough to be all that significant, imo. As for your items 2 and 3, these appear to be lifestyle/diet, et al related as per my statements.

I guess my point in this is that since such a significant amount is not the elderly is indicative that lifestyle/diet/smoking, et al is a major factor with cancer. Holistic health practitioners have been saying this for a long time. The question remains as per this thread topic as to whether if a persistent un-natural lifestyle continues to prevail, will it be a negative NS factor. It is my personal opinion that if NS is happening, it has been prevalently negative from the Genesis creation account, with a significant negative spike beginning with the onset of the industrial revolution and escalating significantly the last 70 or so years. People, especially in nations of advanced technology live longer, but not healthier.