Peregrini
Member
Sorry if you thought I meant it was for me. Obviously, anything posted here is for everyone.
I don't think I have "ridiculed" anyone for believing that TT is possible. As I have stated several times, I have (in my opinion) valid reasons for why TT, into the past as it is contemplated by most believers in TT, is not possible, period. Anyone who comes here or anywhere else and claims to be a TT'er is IMHO misleading people. If I choose to challenge their claims, it is as much my prerogative as it is anyone else's to believe them. That you, or anyone else, wishes to research their validity is entirely your prerogative but, IMHO, it is a "fool's errand" ( That term is neither derogatory nor meant to ridicule, unless one "chooses" to take it that way. Look it up before I am chastised for it's use.)
You say;
I say; "Look before you leap."
I would do a stoiciometric equation to calculate the energy released from the equation 2K(s) + 2H2O(l) = 2KOH(aq) + H2(g) and find it to be 160kJ/m and say, Uh oh, that's enough heat to ignite the H2 gas and cause an explosion, avoiding "unnecessary" burns.
There is nothing wrong with avoiding or even eliminating "unnecessary risk". (or other unnecessary actions)
It is not only a valid method, it IS the preferred method in scientific experimentation.
We simply have a difference in methods as well as beliefs.
As I have stated, we disagree on TT. Perhaps we always will. I am not trying to change your mind. You will come to your own conclusions. I have already "done" my research.
I am not close-minded on this subject. As with all Laws of Physics, there are the accepted norms, based on all available evidence, until something comes along to make science reconsider it. That is true of my favorite Law, Entropy. It is of wide importance in both of my interests, Biology and Chemistry. It has undergone some revision as to "what it means" but the Law itself is still valid.
At this point someone says, "Then why are you even reading or reacting to these posts since you don't believe?"
The same reason the believers do... It's fun. It is interesting to see what some people come up with in their TT stories. I LOVE the fantasy of TT as much as anyone else. I just see the premise as science fiction... not science fact. I do try to not be "small-minded".
I don't think I have "ridiculed" anyone for believing that TT is possible. As I have stated several times, I have (in my opinion) valid reasons for why TT, into the past as it is contemplated by most believers in TT, is not possible, period. Anyone who comes here or anywhere else and claims to be a TT'er is IMHO misleading people. If I choose to challenge their claims, it is as much my prerogative as it is anyone else's to believe them. That you, or anyone else, wishes to research their validity is entirely your prerogative but, IMHO, it is a "fool's errand" ( That term is neither derogatory nor meant to ridicule, unless one "chooses" to take it that way. Look it up before I am chastised for it's use.)
You say;
You might drop a small piece of potassium in a beaker of water to see what will happen.
I would do a stoiciometric equation to calculate the energy released from the equation 2K(s) + 2H2O(l) = 2KOH(aq) + H2(g) and find it to be 160kJ/m and say, Uh oh, that's enough heat to ignite the H2 gas and cause an explosion, avoiding "unnecessary" burns.
There is nothing wrong with avoiding or even eliminating "unnecessary risk". (or other unnecessary actions)
It is not only a valid method, it IS the preferred method in scientific experimentation.
We simply have a difference in methods as well as beliefs.
As I have stated, we disagree on TT. Perhaps we always will. I am not trying to change your mind. You will come to your own conclusions. I have already "done" my research.
I am not close-minded on this subject. As with all Laws of Physics, there are the accepted norms, based on all available evidence, until something comes along to make science reconsider it. That is true of my favorite Law, Entropy. It is of wide importance in both of my interests, Biology and Chemistry. It has undergone some revision as to "what it means" but the Law itself is still valid.
At this point someone says, "Then why are you even reading or reacting to these posts since you don't believe?"
The same reason the believers do... It's fun. It is interesting to see what some people come up with in their TT stories. I LOVE the fantasy of TT as much as anyone else. I just see the premise as science fiction... not science fact. I do try to not be "small-minded".
