originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: AMPTAH
sent you a pm yesterday to keep it off the thread, since it's really off topic. Go check.
Eta: conversely, re-ask over on the ask any question about physics thread.
I didn't see that as off topic, since the OP said,
What also affects the oil's chemistry is the vibration around it. Just like us humans, if we live in a 'negative' environment, then we become
negative, subdued and eventually ill. if we live in a 'positive' environment we are happy and well. Our 'vibration' rises. This is very
fundamental physics which all of us can relate to.
The OP made an assertion that "vibration" around the environment affects the "oil's chemistry." And claimed very clearly that this is "very
fundamental physics" that we can relate to. Maybe the OP is wrong. But, I think it was very on topic to discuss the "physics of vibration" in the
context of the OP hypothesis.
As you probably know, but bears repeating, all vibrations are "in place motions", that is "kinetic activity", where the average center of mass of the
moving phenomena remains fixed, while it nevertheless exhibits movement; and all such "vibrations" can be represented as a superposition of simple
"sine" or "cosine" functions, which are the basic waves in physics. This is referred to Fourier's Theorem, from J.B.J.Fourier who discovered this some
time in the 1700s.
Usually, the "vibration" is made up of one main simple "frequency," which has most of the energy, and a number of smaller "harmonics", which have
smaller energy. So, a guitar string, for example, when plucked, vibrates, at one particular "tone", but also at a number of "overtones", and the
distribution of these overtones determines the quality of sound in that particular guitar, and enable the listener to distinguish between guitars, and
between different instruments like violin, cello, piano, etc.. even while they all play the same fundamental tone.
When it comes to photons, we again have one main "frequency", and a number of nearby frequencies that make up a "packet" of energy for the EM wave. It
is usual to talk of the "frequency" of a photon, even though, by Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, dt x dv > h, it can never be known, since it would
take "infinite time" to determine the frequency exactly. So, a photon is always a packet of energy, with a range of frequencies, but it does have one
dominant frequency in that packet, the central frequency, which is what scientists refer to when they write, E = hv.
So, the photon is like the plucked string on a guitar, one main frequency, by which we reference this "vibration", and a bunch of other frequencies
that actually make up the total energy involved.
I get the impression, that you have some different interpretation of the word "vibration
", than that of physics. Or rather, you think perhaps
there are "two" different interpretations of the word, one valid for "physics," and one that "mystics" use.
That could be the source of the confusion. But, I'm just guessing here, since I only have one definition of vibration myself, and it's the same one
used in physics. I don't know if new agers have a "special" definition for vibration.
So, I'm limited by the little physics I know.
Once something in the environment is "vibrating" it tends to "influence" other things in the environment to vibrate in sync. This "induction" is a
basic observation in physics. Two old fashion grandfather clocks placed side by side, for example, with all moving mechanical parts, will be found to
"beat" at exactly the same phase, after sitting near each other for a sufficiently long period of time. This happens even though the clocks may have
initially started out completely "out of sync" with each other when first placed there. Over the long period of time, little chunks of energy is
exchanged between the clocks, until they begin to act in the same way.
When it comes to "chemistry", most chemistry is studied under "thermal environments", where the key parameter is the temperature, which governs the
rate of reactions between chemical molecules. That thermal environment involves "random motions", and there isn't a lot of understanding yet about the
effects of "harmonic motions" on chemical processes, where molecules are moving or vibrating in sync. But we do know that some vibrations, or photons
at specific frequencies, can break chemical bonds, or weaken chemical bonds so that reactions occur faster etc... So, there's some impact of
vibrations on the chemistry.
The question then arises, can we consider the human brain to be an antenna, sending and receiving EM waves, causing an influence on the environment,
affecting chemical molecules in the neighborhood. We already know that thought affects the chemistry of the brain, influencing the chemical molecules
inside the skull. But, what about outside the skull, in the neighboring environment. That's the OP's assertion.
We know that we can pick up the EM waves from the brain using scientific instruments, and measure this activity. But, is the strength of these EM
waves strong enough to affect chemical molecules "out there" ?
I think, that's what the OP is getting at. So, this is definitely all on topic.