Dowsing

[drstitson]

"So, if I believe the Higgs Boson exists and I'm darn well going to spend a lot of money looking for it. And if the LHC doesn't find it, I doubt everyone will walk away and forget about it."

i can't remember which theoretical physicist it was (Feynman, Higgs or whoever) but there is the story about him being shown around CERN many years ago and asking how much X piece of massive apparatus cost. The answer was several hundred million dollars or whatever. to which he replied " you really believe that strongly that i'm wrong?"

BTW well put nose ma!!!

this is in all likelihood the end of this post.

 

[SixFooter]

Lets hope so. I didnt expect this intellectual level of discussion about it!

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Another great post Nose Ma - really insightful but quite easy to understand (I think?!?)

And don't worry about my hens - the fox will get to them long before I do

 

[Erichalfbee]

Another great post Nose Ma - really insightful but quite easy to understand (I think?!?)

..............I think?

I remember reading Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" and saying, "yeah yeah that's quite clear really, obvious, I understand that" and then getting to the end of the page and having no recall of reading any of it

 

[Storm™]

..............I think?

I remember reading Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" and saying, "yeah yeah that's quite clear really, obvious, I understand that" and then getting to the end of the page and having no recall of reading any of it

LMAO!! Been there done that.

 

[oliver90owner]

Just going back to the magnetic field changing.

Pretty regular - every 200 000years or so, if that is 'regular'.

What they found, when they (recently - late last century) started to explore the ocean bed, was 'sea floor spreading' which is pushing ours and the the North American continents apart by around 5mm(?) or so a year, and is caused by a whole chain of volcanoes along a line about 1500 miles long about half way between the continental masses at the techtonic plate edes. The rocks gain their magnetic properties as they cool in the Earth's magnetic field (lots of tiny magnets in effect). What they found when sampling/testing rock from either side of the vents was that there was a pattern mirrored on each side with both opposite poles being found equidistant, but swapped round at around this approx 200 000 year period.

We don't know what to expect when it changes - a rapid change or swings over several hundred years - all we know is it is about due, give or take possibly a few tens of thousands of years, maybe.

Good ennit? They sent a man to the Moon before being able to explore those deep waters of the Oceans.

RAB

 

[The Apprentices]

Just going back to the magnetic field changing.

Pretty regular - every 200 000years or so, if that is 'regular'.

What they found, when they (recently - late last century) started to explore the ocean bed, was 'sea floor spreading' which is pushing ours and the the North American continents apart by around 5mm(?) or so a year, and is caused by a whole chain of volcanoes along a line about 1500 miles long about half way between the continental masses at the techtonic plate edes. The rocks gain their magnetic properties as they cool in the Earth's magnetic field (lots of tiny magnets in effect). What they found when sampling/testing rock from either side of the vents was that there was a pattern mirrored on each side with both opposite poles being found equidistant, but swapped round at around this approx 200 000 year period.

We don't know what to expect when it changes - a rapid change or swings over several hundred years - all we know is it is about due, give or take possibly a few tens of thousands of years, maybe.

Good ennit? They sent a man to the Moon before being able to explore those deep waters of the Oceans.

RAB

There is the Pangea kneejerk theory that the earth well grew to get where it is today, there is a video called expanding earth on the tube which shows things in motion.

Then we have the Chandler wobble which changes the position of the poles over a period of a few thousand years in reaction from universal influences.

The ancients have all mapped these findings many times long before we did, so its all been done before.

So what kind of action does it take for the most intelligent species on earth to forget what came before.

 

[Hivemaker.]

So what kind of action does it take for the most intelligent species on earth to forget what came before.

Winning that football world cup in 66.

 

[The Apprentices]

Winning that football world cup in 66.

Heh, on a vibrational level I get your drift

This vehicle for the consciousness to experience say nice one man.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Winning that football world cup in 66.

Wow what a memory.
We had a sweep at school and when I drew England everybody laughed at me

 

[greatbritishhoney]

By total coincidence I came across the following article on another forum today...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jan/15/uncertainty-failure-edge-question

 

[Headnavigator]

Excellent, what a good article. The striving for some kind of 'absolute truth' is the greatest blindfold there is.

 

[MandF]

OK, it looks like no one is up for answering my question

So, another one....

Often, if a scientist seeks to prove something, they will devise and conduct an experiment. If the results do not show what they wanted to prove, they don't all automatically walk away, rather they will devise a new experiment using different methods / technology. They will often continue doing this until a) they prove their theory, or b) they run out of funding.
So, how can we be 100% sure we're using the right experiment for dowsing and that the "correct" method for testing it has not yet been devised?
The motive of the scientist is quite important in this isn't it? If I am attempting to disprove something I am unlikely to carry on experimenting in the same manner, but rather form a conclusion based on the initial findings.

So, if I believe the Higgs Boson exists and I'm darn well going to spend a lot of money looking for it. And if the LHC doesn't find it, I doubt everyone will walk away and forget about it.
But if I don't believe it exists I'm going to sit here and say "well, where is it?".

If you see what I mean.

Quite how you can equate dowsing to trying to produce and view dark matter or whatever is beyond me! You seem to be suggesting that as we do not necessarily understand how dowsing works, the experiment to determine if it works could be beyond our ken at the moment? If so that is ridiculous.

A 4yr old can perform an experiment to prove the existence of "gravity" or rather that gravity "works". They do not need to understand the laws of physics that explain how it works.

Lets put it another way so hopefully we can eliminate all this clouding of the issue.

One of the tests of something we might call gravity is to use an apple as a "gravity detector" - that if you release something it will drop towards the centre of the earth - it detects & confirms the presence of gravity. Thats not WHY gravity it is there, thats not all it is there for, but its effect on an apple is to draw it to the ground. So, the simple test to prove gravity has that effect on an apple, to make a gravity detector, is to hold one in your hand and drop it. That is all we are looking to see "work" in that test - the apple dropping which would or even could indicate the presence of gravity.

Dowsing. We dont need to know why it works or how it works, dowsing is the effect of whatever is going on, on 2 sticks. The 2 sticks are effectively "water detectors". So the simple test to see if dowsing works is to see if the sticks move (cross or whatever) when they pass over a water source. That MUST be the reliable/consistent effect of "dowsing" or else the activity we called dowsing would not work would it?! That test has been done and the sticks do NOT reliably move.

If they only move sometimes and as a result they are only as effective as a measure of water below as throwing a dice, then we can either say they do not detect water at all, or they are as effective at detecting water as any other randomiser, in which case they do not "work" in my book.

 

[Drew]

<The same rational arguments in different words for about the 3rd or 4th time>

Sorry Mate but as sound and reasoned as your arguments are - Those that don't want to "hear" them will keep on ignoring them!

 

[The Apprentices]

By total coincidence I came across the following article on another forum today...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jan/15/uncertainty-failure-edge-question

All such avenues of MSM are now controlled via a network of commom purpous opps, TV radio etc, we take with a pinch of salt what they say nowadays.

The electronic batton edges ever closer and with the all new IPV6 they will complete the brave new world on the horizon that they think we want.

Watch out for some real critical thinking taking place in both Libya and Syria very soon and wait for the money presses to really start working overtime.

 

[Hivemaker.]

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

 

[The Apprentices]

Quite how you can equate dowsing to trying to produce and view dark matter or whatever is beyond me! You seem to be suggesting that as we do not necessarily understand how dowsing works, the experiment to determine if it works could be beyond our ken at the moment? If so that is ridiculous.

A 4yr old can perform an experiment to prove the existence of "gravity" or rather that gravity "works". They do not need to understand the laws of physics that explain how it works.

Lets put it another way so hopefully we can eliminate all this clouding of the issue.

One of the tests of something we might call gravity is to use an apple as a "gravity detector" - that if you release something it will drop towards the centre of the earth - it detects & confirms the presence of gravity. Thats not WHY gravity it is there, thats not all it is there for, but its effect on an apple is to draw it to the ground. So, the simple test to prove gravity has that effect on an apple, to make a gravity detector, is to hold one in your hand and drop it. That is all we are looking to see "work" in that test - the apple dropping which would or even could indicate the presence of gravity.

Dowsing. We dont need to know why it works or how it works, dowsing is the effect of whatever is going on, on 2 sticks. The 2 sticks are effectively "water detectors". So the simple test to see if dowsing works is to see if the sticks move (cross or whatever) when they pass over a water source. That MUST be the reliable/consistent effect of "dowsing" or else the activity we called dowsing would not work would it?! That test has been done and the sticks do NOT reliably move.

If they only move sometimes and as a result they are only as effective as a measure of water below as throwing a dice, then we can either say they do not detect water at all, or they are as effective at detecting water as any other randomiser, in which case they do not "work" in my book.

Dowsers are real people they do what they do mostly in silence because of ridicule, there are amongst them pure charletons and idiots like Geller.
The sticks or wires are mearly pointers but its the person who asks the questions not the antler of piece of wood in their hands.
We today as did the ancients know that the energy lines exist, they can be see in the skies and on a compass.

Modern technology and our ever so caring institutionalised mind sets is where I would spend a fair amount of my energy looking into, before we are socially engineered any further.

 

[The Apprentices]

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Like the subject in hand, do we know that heaven really exists?, sweet dreams are often made of this, the wording says, create a problem to create a reaction and we all know who always provides a solution.

Philosophy is for really hard thinkers who never actually achieve anything physical

 

[Brosville]

When I was at school we were taught that the bumblebee couldn't fly, because aerodynamically, it was impossible - so the bumblebee shrugged it's shoulders and carried on flying regardless..........
Science is a tool, and in the right hands can do wonderful things, sadly, many people worship it as some sort of absolute source of truth - science is only as good as the questions asked of it, and the ability to ask ALL the right questions requires a deep understanding of the subject - often things are held up as being "proved (or disproved) by science", when in fact it has done nothing of the sort, just one of many questions may have given the "answer" desired, but neglected all the other experiments that need to be done to give the whole picture....
We have become very used to the abuse and misrepresentation of science by commerce, and we should be very careful to confirm that we can interpret what is giving a true picture, and what is "spin" - if you want a recent example, a few years ago a company called Swindlesave had a very clever ad campaign telling people that roof-mounted wind turbines would give them 30% of their electricity in a typical urban area, and cited such things as Betz' Law, and muttered about "Weibull Distributions", all designed to bamboozle a gullible public - this reached into the very heart of government, and at one time you could even get a grant on the damn things - teensie problemette, they just plain didn't work - they'd cited lots of "science", but overlooked the fact they'd need to have overturned several immutable laws of physics to "do what they said in the tin".......... (the windspeed and turbulence near a roof precludes it - if the power isn't there, you can't take it out!)

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Quite how you can equate dowsing to trying to produce and view dark matter or whatever is beyond me! You seem to be suggesting that as we do not necessarily understand how dowsing works, the experiment to determine if it works could be beyond our ken at the moment? If so that is ridiculous.

A 4yr old can perform an experiment to prove the existence of "gravity" or rather that gravity "works". They do not need to understand the laws of physics that explain how it works.

Lets put it another way so hopefully we can eliminate all this clouding of the issue.

One of the tests of something we might call gravity is to use an apple as a "gravity detector" - that if you release something it will drop towards the centre of the earth - it detects & confirms the presence of gravity. Thats not WHY gravity it is there, thats not all it is there for, but its effect on an apple is to draw it to the ground. So, the simple test to prove gravity has that effect on an apple, to make a gravity detector, is to hold one in your hand and drop it. That is all we are looking to see "work" in that test - the apple dropping which would or even could indicate the presence of gravity.

Dowsing. We dont need to know why it works or how it works, dowsing is the effect of whatever is going on, on 2 sticks. The 2 sticks are effectively "water detectors". So the simple test to see if dowsing works is to see if the sticks move (cross or whatever) when they pass over a water source. That MUST be the reliable/consistent effect of "dowsing" or else the activity we called dowsing would not work would it?! That test has been done and the sticks do NOT reliably move.

If they only move sometimes and as a result they are only as effective as a measure of water below as throwing a dice, then we can either say they do not detect water at all, or they are as effective at detecting water as any other randomiser, in which case they do not "work" in my book.

I think you are misunderstanding me. I'm not particularly talking about dowsing at all - I thought we had moved beyond that when we got to the big bang. I'm just interested in the concept of how science handles "doubt". I think Nose Ma's response covered it fairly well, and the article I linked to suggested that many well respected scientists are keen to admit that nothing is ever certain.

I guess I am playing devil's advocate here, my personal view on dowsing is that I doubt there is anything in it. BUT, I'd never go as far as to say I was 100% certain.