On Dec 17, 1:56 pm, "D. C. Sessions" <d...@lumbercartel.com> wrote:

In message <1c68bc3b-c836-4eb8-bf3d-32efa5006...@w40g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Keith P Walsh wrote:

This sounds like guesswork to me.

Call it educated guesswork from someone who has both the education
and experience to make an *accurate* educated guess.


As with any other material, the principal physical property in
determining the thermoelectric behavior of a typical dental amalgam is
its seebeck coefficient (measured in volts per kelvin).

Do you think you would be able to guess that too?

(Well I think you'd have to, because it appears that no-one has ever
bothered to measure that either)

Keith P Walsh

As with any other material, the principal physical property in
determining the thermoelectric behavior of a typical dental amalgam is
its seebeck coefficient (measured in volts per kelvin).

Do you think you would be able to guess that too?

No need to guess. Silver is 6.5 mV/C, mercury is 0.6 mV/C
The difference is 5.9 mV/C

What would you advise to be the best method to determine the greatest
thermoelectric potential that such a construction could generate?

Carry out an experiment to measure it?

On Dec 18, 1:31 pm, "D. C. Sessions" <d...@lumbercartel.com> wrote:

No need to guess. Silver is 6.5 mV/C, mercury is 0.6 mV/C
The difference is 5.9 mV/C


Are you presuming that the seebeck coefficient of a typical dental
amalgam can be deduced simply by taking the difference between the
respective seebeck coefficients of elemental silver and elemental
mercury?

Because if you are then I should point out that, according to the
established principles of scientific endeavor, in the absence of any
corroborating experimental evidence that's just guesswork.

And it makes me wonder if you understand how to conduct a scientific
correspondence at all.

Where are your references?

It has been known for more than 160 years that metals, mixtures of
metals and dissimilar metals in contact with each other are able to
generate electrical potentials as a result of their thermoelectric
behavior.

Dental amalgam is an inhomogeneous mixture of dissimilar metals in its
own right, see:

http://book.boot.users.btopenworld.com/setting.htm

Not only that, but it has been common practice for dentists to screw
metal alloy retaining pins into the root sockets of patients' teeth
and encase the heads of the pins in amalgam.

What would you advise to be the best method to determine the greatest
thermoelectric potential that such a construction could generate?

Carry out an experiment to measure it?

Surely you cannot be so arrogant as to suggest that our scientific
understanding of this phenomenon should be satisfied by either your
own or anyone else's guesswork.

I ballpark much more complex stuff for a living, with millions of
dollars at stake. I'm still employed.

On Dec 19, 2:21 pm, "D. C. Sessions" <d...@lumbercartel.com> wrote:


I ballpark much more complex stuff for a living, with millions of
dollars at stake. I'm still employed.


Wow, that's fantastic.

But I for one would be more interested to know if you have any amalgam
fillings in your teeth.

Did you know that the widespread adoption of mercury amalgams for use
in restorative dentistry was quickly followed by the rise to
prominence of psychiatric "medicine" in our societies. Anyway I've
explained that already. My real point here is that the reason why
experimental evidence from scientifically conducted investigations is
essential in establishing an accurate understanding of any physical
phenomenon is because guesswork on its own is often (and probably
usually) influenced by the emotional priorites of the guesser.

And, as the Nobel prize-winning US physicist Richard P Feynman put it:

" ... we compare the consequences of the guess to see what would be
implied if this law that we guessed is right. Then we compare the
result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience,
compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it
disagrees with experiment it is wrong. In that simple statement is the
key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your
guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made
the guess, or what his name is - if it disagrees with experiment it is
wrong."

snip

Walsh, tell us, do you jack off while you post all this fucking shit?
Because it is obvious you have to get some sick pleasure from your
trolling.

At one time it was funny seeing your diahretic posted all over the
NG's but you have degenerated into a pathetic spamming troll and now
it is just plain boring.

Give us all an early Christmas present and fuck off will you.

I can't help but find it ironic that Mr Walsh will quote Feynman stating
how a hypothesis can only be validated through experiment, and yet Mr
Walsh has never made any attempt to validate his own hypothesis by
running experiments himself...

On Dec 20, 3:51 pm, Paul O <first.d.l...@company.com> wrote:

I can't help but find it ironic that Mr Walsh will quote Feynman stating
how a hypothesis can only be validated through experiment, and yet Mr
Walsh has never made any attempt to validate his own hypothesis by
running experiments himself...


"It's OK fellas. Mr Walsh is just as ignorant as we are!"

Is that what you're saying?

(And I expect you think you're a scientist.)

In recent years technologists have developed extremely sensitive
instruments which are able to measure neurological activity in the
human body.

However, as far as I know the results of experimental investigations
to determine whether any difference can be detected between
neurological activity in the vicinity of teeth with amalgam fillings
and neurological activity in the vicinity of teeth without are not
available.

I do not have access to the instruments required to carry out these
investigations myself.

However I feel sure that I should have access to those results.

Keith P Walsh

Before we go investigating the neurological activity in the vicinity of
teeth with amalgam fillings, why don't you just find out just how good a
thermoelectric battery a tooth with an amalgam filling really is. Until
you know much how much voltage and current can be produced by the
filling, then all this talk about neurological activity is just hand waving.

On Dec 20, 8:41 am, S.T.C. Adamson II <SamAd...@qmail.com
wrote:


Walsh, tell us, do you jack off while you post all this
fucking shit? Because it is obvious you have to get some
sick pleasure from your trolling.

At one time it was funny seeing your diahretic posted all
over the NG's but you have degenerated into a pathetic
spamming troll and now it is just plain boring.

Give us all an early Christmas present and fuck off will
you.


Perhaps the difference is that your earlier amusement was
due to the fact that you had simply presumed that my
arguments must be wrong, but now having assimilated with
them you're not so sure. And what you call "just plain
boring" is actually "rather worrying", but you're just not
honest enough to admit it, even to yourself.

Do I detect from the ridiculousness of your invective that
there may be amalgam fillings in your own teeth?

If so then I would suggest that the best Christmas present
you could give yourself might be to have them replaced with
something less distracting.

Keith P Walsh

PS, it has been demonstrated experimentally that amalgam
dental fillings generate electrical potentials with
magnitudes of up to 350 millivolts, see:

http://book.boot.users.btopenworld.com/dutch.htm

However, in spite of the fact that the resting potential of
the human neurological synapse is only 70 millivolts, it
appears that there isn't anyone anywhere in the world who
knows whether or not amalgam potentials are able to
dissipate electrical energy through the nerves in people's
heads, not even you.

You have no jurisdiction over these newsgroups. I should
feel easily justified in ignoring your suggestion that I
cease making contributions.

I've had the research done for free at the local University.

On Dec 25, 5:29 am, Greggie Gibson


I've had the research done for free at the local
University.


Professor L I Anatychuk of the Institute of
Thermoelectricity in the Ukraine appears to believe that
the thermoelectric behavior of a piece of metal is enough
on its own to stimulate neurological synapses in animal
tissue. (See: "Seebeck or Volta?", L.I.Anatychuk, Journal
of Thermoelectricity, No.1, 1994.)

Can you tell us whether or not the results of your research
confirm this?

Or are you keeping them a secret?

Keith P Walsh