Re: On Determinism

<alex.j.k@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Peter Ashby wrote:
<alex.j.k@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We are talking about the movement of molecules
that interact with each other, and there doesn't seem to be any
sensible reason to eliminate the influence of internal vibrations on
the result of the collision of two or more such molecules -- there's
just your assertion to the contrary.

If I cause a bell to resonate or a crystal neither will move while they
do so. Neither will a violin string, in fact a string will only vibrate
while it is held so it cannot move. Sure if something sitting on a hard
surface vibrates hard enough it will rock around, but here's the rub:
molecules in solution don't sit on surfaces so have nothing to gain
purchase on for their internal vibrations to move them.


To repeat -- we are not talking about molecules in isolation or
crystals, we are talking about molecules that interact with each other.
You've still failed to provide any single good reason as to why the
vibration of the molecules --among other things-- does not influence
the movement of interacting molecules.

You are the one postulating these things, trawling the web grasping at
these straws and hypothesising wildly from them. Why is it up to me to
both attempt to correct your misunderstandings and provide you with the
evidence you want? You want to posit that vibrations matter, and can
exist in solutions, you go find it.

Indeed, you can't provide any
such reason, as the claim that at the molecular level QM effects don't
exist is preposterous.

You are the one saying that in warm, salty, solutions in electrical
fields some molecule might move randomly and thus contribute to neuronal
noise. You have still not given us any evidence that they so move, let
alone how they might impinge on huge neurons. So don't your try and
wriggle out of things by pretending I am the one who has to back up the
opposite of your desperate grabbings and ravings.

And I am still fed up with teaching a deliberately obtuse and ungrateful
person who clearly needs teaching. If you wish me to continue then you
can change your bloody ways or I will keep my knowledge to myself. I
don't have to teach you anything.

Peter

--
Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: On Determinism
    ... the result of the collision of two or more such molecules -- there's ... purchase on for their internal vibrations to move them. ... we are talking about molecules that interact with each other. ... You've still failed to provide any single good reason as to why the ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)
  • Re: "Frohlich Coherence", how coherent?
    ... The vibrational modes of molecules with localized dipole mements are ... Any given vibration (such as would be excited by electromagnetic energy ... Molecular vibrations are exquisitely sensitive to perturbations such as ... frequencies, each of which is capable of continuing without interaction ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: "Frohlich Coherence", how coherent?
    ... Anyone familiar with the work of Dr. Herbert Frohlich? ... of giant dipole vibrations at certain frequencies and if the mediums ... even if the molecules are far apart. ... tend to continue to vibrate because it cannot lose energy by emitting ...
    (sci.physics)
  • "Frohlich Coherence", how coherent?
    ... Anyone familiar with the work of Dr. Herbert Frohlich? ... What's the rationale for the so called Frohlich Coherence? ... of giant dipole vibrations at certain frequencies and if the mediums ... even if the molecules are far apart. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Rationale for Frohlich Oscillations
    ... Anyone familiar with the work of Dr. Herbert Frohlich? ... What's the rationale for the so called Frohlich Coherence? ... of giant dipole vibrations at certain frequencies and if the mediums ... even if the molecules are far apart. ...
    (sci.physics.electromag)