PeterC
-
Posts
1,252 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by PeterC
-
-
Spending a few pence per day might help. I'll leave it for you to trawl through the information on colon and prostate, I havent delved in myself.
https://vitamindwiki.com/Overview+Cancer+and+vitamin+D
Peter
-
2 hours ago, RogerH said:
Over the last 5 - 6 months I have had a white spot/dot on my left upper eye lid.
Last week it became itchy.
As Christmas was looming and the GP waiting time is 3 weeks I asked my local private hospital
for an appointment to see a dermatologist. That was Monday 12/12/22.
One day later I am with the dermatologist.
He took a few notes, had a look with a mag glass, laid me on the couch stabbed the spot with a pointy thing.
Then tugged it with tweezers and declared it done. (ouch)
He also looked at a rash on my left cheek and was happy with that.
He then looked at my back and was also happy with that.
It all took about 10 minutes. The invoice arrived the following day (yesterday) - £275
On its own that sounds like a lot of money for 10 minutes work - but he doesn't get all of it.
Was I happy - yes. Today there is no visible sign of the spot, and Christmas should come and go without
visiting A&E
Roger
Roger, bearing in mind your peace of mind its a bargain- about £15 per day for three weeks' less worrying. Peter
-
1 hour ago, RogerH said:
Where will it all end
Roger
Roger, A year ago I'd have said at death. Nowadays I am far from certain about that. Leslie Kean's book " Surviving Death" is a disturbing read, providing lots of evidence for time-related anomaliies such as precognition, reincarnation and other psi phenomena. Here she talks about it;
-
1 hour ago, RogerH said:
Over the last 5 -8 years I have found that my thigh muscles have got weaker and weaker
Mentioned it to the GP - blank look.
During the Summer I was in gardening mode. I need to e near something to help me stand.
On one occasion I ended up crawling across the garden on all fours to find a leaning pole.
In January 2022 I bought an exercise bike to help build the muscles.
But before I could use it my hip went silly.
Where will it all end
Roger
Roger, You could try D3: https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-12-vitamin-d-deficiency-older-people.html
and maybe Mg supplements; https://bmcgeriatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12877-022-03522-5
But as far as I can tell from much reading, the causes of age-related muscle weakening - sarcopenia- is not known with any confidence. Thigh muscles seem to go first ( "proximal muscle weakness")-as happened to me. But my PD confuses the picture.
Peter
-
Indoor-safe propane heaters should have a catalyst in the exhaust that converts CO to CO2. But the water vapour condensing on tools etc puts me off- my garage has no windows or other ventilation.
-
Its a mess, agreed. But we are at war, we cant blame Westminster for that. A bit of Churchillian spirit might help. Wake up and smell the Coffey.
-
Just as well the USA bought railways from Britain, they'd be well screwed trying to comprehend 1435mm.
https://www.simscale.com/blog/nasa-mars-climate-orbiter-metric/
-
13 hours ago, thebrookster said:
I think you may be confused here Iain? Nick's comment is about the relationship between "ZDDP" and viscosity, which is that the "ZDDP" content doesn't affect the viscosity. Or rather, adding an additive might have a slight effect, but not one to worry about.
Modern engines will take the oil into account for emissions, and the thinner the oil the more it is likely to affect what comes out the exhaust (ignoring whatever clearances/tolerances etc the engine is built to, I'm making a general observation). This, as mentioned above, is critical for catalytic converter operation, hence I suspect you have limits on modern oils. I'm not an expert on oil by any means, however you choose an oil to suit the application it is going for. Our classic engines require the higher "ZDDP" content to lubricate all the relevant parts correctly, and most modern oils don't have enough (even oils marketed for "classic cars" such as the Halfords oil). Generally 1000ppm is the minimum recommended requirement, 1500ppm the upper, so your oil meets that.
Given the duty of "ZDDP", I wouldn't expect it diminish with use, hence why you see the same values on testing.
Phil
Phil, The units used to define the ZDDP concentration are very important, "1000 ppm ZDDP" is not the same as "1000 ppm Zn ( or P) as ZDDP". The former has crept into use for commercial reasons, the ZDDP is low enough to use in cat engines. But the actual level may well be 5 to 10 times lower than "1000 ppm Zn as ZDDP".
see my link to TRR post above.
Peter
-
18 hours ago, spitfire6 said:
Hi Nick,
Surprised you did not know that only xW30 and numerically lower oils have a maximum allowable "ZDDP". Modern oils of xW40 and above do not have a limit.
Modern to me is API SN or ACEA A3B4 for example.
So, "ZDDP" content has a lot to do with viscosity?I use modern synthetic oils with => 1000PPM "ZDDP" and all my oil analyse shows that the amount does not significantly drop between oil changes proving that it is not being used up or the initial amount is too low for my 150 HP engine.
What do you consider too low for our Triumph engines & what available oil has zero "ZDDP"? Lowest I have seen was 500PPM.Adding additional "ZDDP" to an existing oil is not recommended.
Cheers,
Iain.
" 1000 ppm ZDDP" is not the same as "1000 ppm Zn as ZDDP", it is actually considerably lower. See my post above.
If ZDDP is working it should be used up . It deposits a glassy film on rubbing surfaces and that is a continual process of deposition and degradation. The ZDDP molecule is labile under pressure and temperature stress.
Any oil that is catalyst safe - and the vast majority of modern oils are - will be too low on ZDDP to work effectively in our old engines.
Peter
-
Yes a common activity. Maybe at night wasps are less aggressive? I once ran a finger bar mower through a nest and was forced to retreat pronto by the stings. Recovered the mower in the dark, no trouble. Peter
-
20 hours ago, rogerguzzi said:
From what I recall the spec of some oils can be different between USA and europe. Most of the list are racing oils where the type of ZDDP might not be suitable for road driving. I dont have an up to date list of ZDDP levels, but post on the other place suggests Millers have a suitable 20/50. But beware crafty labelling eg Duckhams. If the oil is catalyst safe it is low on ZDDP.
Peter
-
I am trying to see method in the Truss/Kwaseng madness in attracting the opprobium of the IMF and "the market". Keeping bankers on side with bonuses might be wise. The fall in sterling is worrying, but may only be temporary as other european nations succumb to Putins energy crisis. Germany is going to be hit hard, and Italy wobbling to the right ( and Italexit?) must hit the euro this winter. Perhaps Truss is banking on sterling then being seen as the safer bet? Its ironical that Germany's gas supply this winter might determine if UK interest rates remain high or plunge with a weakening euro.
-
2 minutes ago, PeterC said:
Rule of thumb, if it is safe to use with catalytic converter it does not have enough ZDDP antiscuff for our tappets.
ZDDP also comes in several types, and needs pressure and heat to form the glassy anti-scuff film, so racing engines will use a different molecule than for road engines, which may not reach activating pressure/temps.
There is a dubious (but not illegal or wrong) trick used to suggest an oil has more ZDDP than actual. I spotted it, and its in this looong thread...https://www.tr-register.co.uk/forums/index.php?/topic/64116-duckhams-is-back/
Peter
starts on Nov 11 th.............and goes on and on.....
-
Rule of thumb, if it is safe to use with catalytic converter it does not have enough ZDDP antiscuff for our tappets.
ZDDP also comes in several types, and needs pressure and heat to form the glassy anti-scuff film, so racing engines will use a different molecule than for road engines, which may not reach activating pressure/temps.
There is a dubious (but not illegal or wrong) trick used to suggest an oil has more ZDDP than actual. I spotted it, and its in this looong thread...https://www.tr-register.co.uk/forums/index.php?/topic/64116-duckhams-is-back/
Peter
-
5 hours ago, JohnD said:
Indeed, a HUGE body of observations, generating theories that, in your words, they are due to an "unknown intelligence". It is the weakest of arguments for those who believe the theories to say that there is "no use asking most scientists to suggest a testable hypothesis". We have techniques to investigate intelligence, as used in the Corvid Cognition Laboratory at Cambridge and other avian and mammal labs around the world. It is for those who have and have studied the data to theorise from it, and to use those and other techniques to test the emerging theories. The paranormal community have a duty to work out a theory, one that is not a black box of "little green men" but one that offers testable predictions.
The Scientific Method that has been so successful in other fields, demands this process. It is the lack of a testable theory, so that no experiment is possible, that has lost the confidence of main stream science in paranormal investigation.
John
John, Not in my experience, mainstream science has not the foggiest notion of the richness of the observations pointing to a non-human intelligence, and I am not talking ET, the evidence is mcuh more complex than pan galactic space travellers ! By ignoring high strangness observations across amny fields (UFOs, NDEs, mediums, crop formations and so forth) thhe scientifc study of "intelligence" has limited itself in the ways you describe. It may be that what appears to be non-human intelligence is human but in dimensions we dont know about. Vallee has long suspected that for UFOs the intelligence is extra-dimnesional not ET: https://www.academia.edu/36788970/Incommensurability_Orthodoxy_and_the_Physics_of_High_Strangeness_A_six_layer_model_for_Anomalous_Phenomena
Bernard Carr posits hyperspace as important for consciousness seen from his psychical perspective. Hawking was his PhD supervisor:
https://www.scientificexploration.org/docs/33/jse_33_4_Carr.pdf
However these scientists are overwhelmed by the ignorance of UFOs, psy etc by the vast majority of their colleagues.
Peter
-
3 hours ago, ed_h said:
Agreed, Peter, we do have a huge body of observation, and observation is of course crucial to any inquiry. But taken by itself, observation is a relatively weak tool for finding truth. Observation alone is error prone and open to misperception and misinterpretation.
I personally don't think that science intentionally ignores observations, but I think they do largely ignore interpretations that are not testable.
Ed
Ed, In a relatively short immersion in the classic UFO literature ( a few years) I have come across several simple observations of anomalous time-flows, which are devoid of relativistic consequences. Overall there is a ca 1 million-fold range of time flows. Time as the fourth diemnsion in Minkowski's continuum cannot be the sole explanation of "time". IF physicists had been keeeping up with the UFO observations thay may well by now be concernced that seeking a Dark Matter particle is a fool's errand. The galactic velocity anomalies that DM attmepts ot explain is ca 5-fold. I suspect that might reflect a time-flow anomaly, and am desigining expts to measure anomalous time-flows in accessible high strangeness events. The "scientific method" lives on !
Peter
-
22 minutes ago, ed_h said:
But why in the world would we want to do that, Peter?
Without replicable proof, what's left? Mythology? Folklore? Superstition?
Seems like going backwards.Ed
What we have is a huge body of observations that science ignores. That is backward thinking by scientists.
Peter
-
John, The problem is that 20-21C science in general has ignored observations of high strangeness phenomena: UFOs, the psychical field are all ignored, indeed rejected off-hand by almost all academics. They are ignorant of the large body of observations. "My" university has a building named after Oliver Lodge, and until recently I had no idea wahtsoever he made serious studies of the ability of spiritualist mediums to supply information from the discarnate. His approach with other eminent scientists of that early 20c era has been completely ignored by science at large. However modern researchers have continued the research, especially in NDEs and precognition. The evidence is excellent, but mainsteam science cannot offer experimental tests because they lack the background knowledge of the phenomena.
The UFO field is currently to avery limited extent receiving Congressional interest ( UAPs flying around US Navy aircraft and ships). Maybe tic-tac and go-fast might trigger wider interest amongst scientists, but decades of "little green men" ridicule by journalists is a barrier to joining in. However UFOs are a much richer phenomenon than mere UAPs; there seems tobe an unknown intelligence in play. Indeed balls-of-light with intelligent behaviours have been described by researschers in several fields: UFOs ( "foo fighters" of WW2), spiritualist seances, crop formations. But no use asking most scientists to suggest a testable hypothesis, most in my experience say "I'll believe when I see it"......Most UFO researchers had a UFO sighting at some point, and know thay are researching something really interesting.
Peter
-
3 hours ago, JohnD said:
Feynman quote: "When I would hear the rabbi tell about some miracle such as a bush whose leaves were shaking but there wasn't any wind, I would try to fit the miracle into the real world and explain it in terms of natural phenomena."
And so he invents a real world in which an electron going back in time becomes a positron. No-one has ever seen that happen.Positrons have been detected, but they were not going back in time.
Dr Jacques Vallee in "Passport to Magonia" describes similarities between folk tales and miracles to UFOs. All have a loong history, UFOs are not a modern occurrence.
Science needs a Faraday approach, observation-led, to start to unravel strange phenomena. When we know the supposed nature of only 5% of the mass-energy in the Universe, and need to explain the particle zoo of the Standard Model with ca 20 numbers put in by hand, trying to explain UFOs etc by current paradigms is not an approach likely to succeed. That said most scientists are simply not interested, preferring to inhabit thier own specilality, an approach that has become institutionalised.
Peter
Peter
-
9 hours ago, ed_h said:
Peter, if by "high strangeness phenomena" you mean supernatural powers, there is one thing that would get mainstream science's attention:
Proof.
I'd be the first to revel in finally seeing some replicable proof of some supernatural power. But in centuries of trying, we're still waiting.
Ed
Ed, Science does not seek to provide "proof", it is unattainable. We seek improved understanding. However the last hundred years have seen science reduced to next step incremental research to the exclusion of investigating the high strangeness unknowns. If you lower your ambition of seeing replicable proof you will find a host of inexplicable phenomena waiting to be investigated.
I got into high strangness events through UFOs. This documentary is an excellent introduction, and towards the end we see the late Prof John Mack, a Harvard psychologist, talking with Zimbabwe schoolkids who had a close encounter. Father William Gill also describes his sightings.
https://www.documentaryarea.tv/video/The Phenomenon/
watch it and you will be better informed than 99% of scientists.
Peter
-
6 hours ago, ed_h said:
Peter, it seems to me that there isn't anything to explain until it's demonstrated as real. To me, supernatural power phenomena all seem to be based on claims, anecdotes, and hearsay.
I fully accept that we don't understand what conciousness is, but lack of understanding isn't a very solid basis to support claims of supernatural powers.
Ed
Ed, I would have agreed a few years ago, but having read myself into the literature it is obvious that high strangeness phenomena have been ignored by the majority of scientists. They are far from hearsay, there is excellent and persuasive evidence for the reality of UFOs, precognition, spiritualist events, crop formations and so forth. The minority of scientists that study these events and are definitely on to something very strange. The super natural brain phenomena are the "that's odd" observations that show there is a deeper level to consciousness that conventional science approaches can reveal. The only way to get a handle on high strangeness is to read, read and read. But Leslie Kean's two books are a useful start. She is an investigative journalist and her first book covers some aspects of UFOs, her second a physical spiritualist medium.
As a test of their knowledge of UFOs I quiz fellow academics, asking them to outline the following classic UFO reports:
Valensole, Quarouble, Father William Gill, Burk's flat, Levelland, Socorro, Nash&Fortenberry, "tic-tac", "go-fast", Linda Cortile.
Test yourself !!
Peter
-
11 hours ago, ed_h said:
I'm with you on everything except the supernatural powers, Peter.
There are and have been at least dozens of cash prizes offered to anyone who could demonstrate such capabilities under scientifically controlled conditions. Many have tried, but I'm not aware of anyone taking home a prize.
Ed
Ed, There is a large body of literature describing "supernatural powers" going back a century, hence my interest. Studying the brain with scientifically controlled conditions hugely limits the scope of any research: we cannot sample it, record its activity in any detail, and so forth. Exisitng techniques eg EEG,fMRI are to crude to detect the neural correlates of a "thought". So next step science is not going to succeed in explaining telepathy, precognition, and other psy phenomena. We have to be more imaginative. Research into Consciousness largely ignores these psy phenomena but "consciousness" is widely regarded as requiring processes additional to known neuronal functions. For instance Penrose posits non-local influences involving quantum entanglement and mictrotubules ( and ignoring decohehrence it seems)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose#Consciousness.
The more adventurous psy researchers are making progress, often by simple observation. I suggest a good introduction is Mishlove's essay :
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/docs/1st.pdf
"Survival of human consciousness after bodily death" It won a $500,000 prize. There are examples in there of information that was not stored in the brain becoming known during a near death experience. The question I see is: where was that information stored and in what form? My working hypothesis is it arose from precognition. ie the information was gained convnetionally after recovery from the NDE and was "remembered earlier", during the NDE. That needs time to flow backwards. These "supernatural" phenomena may prove to be pivotal in uncovering fundamentally new understanding of time, and space dimensions.
Peter
-
Ramanudjan arrived at solutions without knowing, or being able to explain, his mathematical reasoning. Modern Artificial Intelligence does much the same.
The brain is a blacker box than we currently know. Some individuals exhibit "precognition" in which information travels back in time. If only Feynman, Wheeler and mid 20C physicists had read late 19C-early 20C physicists such as Sir Oliver Lodge FRS we might by now a better knowledge of "time". Oliver Lodge was a prominent mathematical physicist who lost a son to WW1, and went on to describe after-death communication: https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/oliver-lodge
Remote viewing, telepathy, clairvoyance are still neglected by science despite convincing evidence that some individuals possess , or have acquired unusual skills. Here is a woman who after being struck by lightning acquired an ability to precognise photos in news reports of aircraft crashes:
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/Winning_Essays/Elizabeth_Krohn.pdf
Backwards in time waves are proposed in Cramer's theory of QM that builds upon an ealier theory of Feynman and Wheeler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation
Something very strange is going on.............................
Peter
-
Lithium, similar to sodium.....reacts with water to liberate hydrogen. That should make fire-fighting fun.
Health.....
in General Discussions on anything
Posted
The research has continued apace and the target genes through which D3 acts against the various cancer stages are being defined, as Carlberg's 2022 paper reviews: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006295221003518
D3 likely is a magic bullet, but it is a huge threat to pharma profits and to academic researchers and their universities seeking to patent new drugs. Failed RCTs are commonplace, usually because they do not use a D3 dose that reflects our ancestral serum levels prior to human migration out of sun-soaked Africa ca 50,000 years ago.
My approach, the reason why I am not immersed in the latest D3 research ( 5000 papers annually) is because I supplement to give me that ancestral serum 25(OH)D level, 125 nmol/L ( I need 4000 IU per day). For me evolution and physiology trumps any amount of RCTs. I keep up with Parkinson's D3 research out of self-interest, but knowing that there is no sporadic PD in elederly rural-dwelling Kenyans, I am as certain as can be I am on the right track to stabilsing it.
Peter