Dark Mind Posted August 17, 2005 Report Posted August 17, 2005 Hmmm, I don't own a piano...sorry...and kids? Don't have those ether...maybe you have me confused with another Openmind... :) LOl Op5Oooooh, you know what, I think I do. You see there's this other OpenMind just around the corner, and I guess I got him confused with you... My bad :evil:. Quote
popfly Posted August 17, 2005 Report Posted August 17, 2005 its not that hard to do. get a Terminally ill patient, hook him up to a scuba and EKG, put him in water, and wait. Use intravenous nutrition. Everything is on a platform that is above him, and still on the scale. Now, unless you pull some people's ethics, that would work Quote
Buffy Posted August 17, 2005 Report Posted August 17, 2005 Now, unless you pull some people's ethics, that would workThank you, Dr. Mengele... :evil: Cheers,Buffy Quote
nkt Posted August 17, 2005 Report Posted August 17, 2005 Might be a bit dull, since a lot of terminally ill people take a long, long time to die. I'd go for something like using a sealed system. We will know in a few years once people start going to the planets, as someone is bound to die at some point, in the sealed system. If they are out a bit when they get there, we will know for sure. I suspect that it is rubbish, and all that was measured was a lung full of air and some evaporation, on a slightly iffy balance system that was affected by the torque interaction of the circulation in the body. Quote
Dark Mind Posted August 17, 2005 Report Posted August 17, 2005 Uhhh.... Yeah... that's what I was about to post... ...maybe. :eek2: Quote
OpenMind5 Posted August 19, 2005 Report Posted August 19, 2005 I would says its just Oxygen and otehr gas leaving the system. Quote
Dark Mind Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 ...If it happens at all. I would agree though, a soul isn't supposed to have any mass anyway, right? Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 If you don't know the answer, don't bother to reply! You say "I suspect that any rigorous testing would be in direct conflict with the Hippocratic Oath." Why? I see no contradiction, and in the single experiment that has been done there seem to be no evidence that that oath was viiolated. You also say that "It would probably require immersing the person in a fluid..." This is just a bad surmise and not required for a valid experiment. Lastly, the statement "cessation of fluid functions such as circulation which generate pressure and could affect the measurements" begs the question as to how either cessation of fluid functions or pressure per se could affect a weight measurement. This all just musings and totally non-helpful to answering the question. Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 If you don't know, why reply?Urination at death is easily accounted for and indeed was accounted for in the single experiment that was performed. Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 A good response, but it has (IMHO) a couple of flaws.You say that "Normal lung dynamics result in about +-5 g of mass loss." This would be true of the total or vital) volume were expelled. However, the tidal volume, the volume normally expressis is only about a tenth of that, and amounts to a gram or less. The rest of that paragraph (jet effects, blood flow, musculoskeletal movement) involve effects which are much smaller and transient. Thus, there is no need for a "sealed chamber". Quote
Tormod Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 Maybe you should try to beat horses that are slightly younger than a year, raw bits. This thread is from last September. Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 If you don't know, why answer?You reply indicates that you do not have a grasp of the weight of air or of the effects of "torque interaction " on balances. Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 Does that make it any less relevant? And why employ an ad hominem argument? Were my comments incorrect or objectionable? Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 First, get a spell checker.Second, learn about the composition of air (mostly nitrogen) and its weight. Quote
RAW Bits Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 Sorry that I'm just now seeing this thread.The best response is to check out the "reprint" of the paper at ghostweb.com/soul.html. To my knowledge, no other scientific experiment has been performed to corroborate this result. Quote
InfiniteNow Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 I would also suggest the following: 1) Quote those responses which you are addressing2) Spend some time learning the general disposition of the site and the poster before slapping them with your righteous tone. We know very little about you so far RB. Are you sure this is the impression you want to make? :) Quote
Boerseun Posted August 21, 2006 Report Posted August 21, 2006 First, get a spell checker.Second, learn about the composition of air (mostly nitrogen) and its weight.First, try to quote something so that we at least have some kind of idea what post you're referring to.Second, maybe you should follow Tormod's advice here and beat horses that at least show a pulse. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.