Date: Mon Apr 9 09:25:35 2007

Author: Bill Norwood

Subject: Re: Did you hear about this Microwave Oven...?

Post:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C77A88.4D304B20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Jerry,



Many thanks for your illumination.



One point that I had offered

was that sometimes it is the lone researcher who may be onto something,

despite his (selectable) professional limitations,

despite the economic and political unpopularity of his work,

and even despite his own poor performance in the arenas of economics and
politics.



(cc is to my daughter who has produced a raw foods documentary

and who has a great curiosity about the biophysics of microwave ovens)



Thanks,



Bill Norwood



_____

From: tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu [mailto:tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu] On
Behalf Of Jerry DiMarco
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 3:15 PM
To: tap-l@lists.ncsu.edu
Subject: Re: [tap-l] Did you hear about this Microwave Oven...?



There seemed to be two separate themes in that article. One was about
how microwave cooking can alter or destroy nutrients. The other was about
effects that are what I would term more mystical in nature. I have no
problem with the former, I'm sure those effects are well documented. I
don't think the same can be said about the latter. Does this invalidate
one's work? In terms of being persuasive, you certainly make things
difficult for yourself when you venture into undocumented territory. The
usual result is that you open the floodgates for all sorts of undocumented
claims, and then the discussion founders. What was the point you wanted us
to get?
The article you cited by the biophysicist was interesting. Around the
turn of the century, a popular notion was that the century of physics had
ended and this would be the century of biology. I think that article makes
it very clear that as biological knowledge advances, physics will be there,
right alongside, explaining how and why it happens...


Jerry


At 01:07 PM 4/6/2007, you wrote:




Hi Tappers,



Microwaves and Physiology



OK, so Hertel blew it when he strayed into physics as he sought to explain
part of his research regarding potential biological effects of microwave
ovens. And, perhaps he also got some of his biology wrong. But, then wouldnt
most researchers make fools of themselves if they were pressed into making
physics-based proclamations to support their work. Should this invalidate
their work?

And, about how many nuclear physicists dare say a whole lot about, say,
string theory?



Or - - should the artist who got the physics wrongnever have become an
artist?



Just how much of a dose of experimental microwaves would it take to impress
a physicist? Perhaps, if both a person and his food were placed into a
microwave oven, until all contents were burned to a crisp, then physicists
would agree that there had indeed been biological effects, even if a
non-physicist had been performing the experiment and originating the claims.
Or, would the physicist declare the experiment flawed because the person in
the microwave oven had not actually been a physicist?



Step 2: If a huge effect can be shown, then mustnt smaller effects exist?



Too bad about Marie Curie and some who have followed in their field of
research but at least a related, and probably also flawed, but nevertheless
somewhat protective, safety science has evolved.



The wheel continues to kill many of us each day, but I dont think we are
going to see a general recall. We strive to use it more sensibly. I say, the
same would apply to microwave ovens lets learn and list their caveats,
refine the design and use them sensibly. It will probably turn out that they
will not replace as many of the old methods of heating and cooking as we had
thought.

Take cars, for example we now have two reasons that it is often better to
just park them and walk.



When one begins to take in the great expansion of our knowledge about what
is actually going on within cells, it becomes (for me at least) harder to
believe that the relevantly high microwave energy level in the microwaves in
the ovens would not mess withthis complex system. Some of the newer
knowledge about the physics going on at the cellular level is in the
following description of the research of one of our U of MD biophysicists
from an article in our Dept Newsletter, the Photon, April 2007. Here is the
link.



http://www.physics.umd.edu/news/photon/iss55/research_spotlight.html



My general take on the general health care issue is that one can gauge the
vitality and forthrightness of the mainstream system by the prevalence and
success levels of the quacks and the kooks. If these levels are high, then
the mainstream system is not doing very well. (Not that I know enough at
this point to judge Hertel. )



Thanks,



Bill Norwood

Technician

Elementary Labs

U of MD, Physics Dept



<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Jerry DiMarco
Manager of Lecture Demonstrations and Instructional Labs
Montana State Univ., Physics Dept.

Bozeman, MT

Our Motto: "What would your mother do?"

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C77A88.4D304B20
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable




















Hi =
Jerry,



Many thanks for your =
illumination.



One point that I had offered =


was that sometimes it is the lone
researcher who may be onto something,

despite his (selectable) =
professional
limitations,

despite the economic and political =
unpopularity
of his work,

and even despite his own poor =
performance
in the arenas of economics and politics.



(cc is to my daughter who has =
produced a
raw foods documentary

and who has a great curiosity about =
the
biophysics of microwave ovens)



Thanks,=




Bill =
Norwood











From:
tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu [mailto:tap-l-owner@lists.ncsu.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry DiMarco
Sent: Friday, April 06, =
2007 3:15
PM
To: tap-l@lists.ncsu.edu
Subject: Re: [tap-l] Did =
you hear
about this Microwave Oven...?





There seemed to be two separate themes =
in that
article. One was about how microwave cooking can alter or destroy
nutrients. The other was about effects that are what I would term =
more
mystical in nature. I have no problem with
the former, I'm sure those effects are well documented. I don't =
think the
same can be said about the latter. Does this invalidate one's =
work?
In terms of being persuasive, you certainly make things difficult for =
yourself
when you venture into undocumented territory. The usual result is =
that
you open the floodgates for all sorts of undocumented claims, and then =
the
discussion founders. What was the point you wanted us to get?
The article you cited by the biophysicist was
interesting. Around the turn of the century, a popular notion was =
that
the century of physics had ended and this would be the century of
biology. I think that article makes it very clear that as =
biological
knowledge advances, physics will be there, right alongside, explaining =
how and
why it happens...

&=
nbsp; &n=
bsp; &nb=
sp; &nbs=
p; =
; =
&=
nbsp; &n=
bsp;
Jerry


At 01:07 PM 4/6/2007, you wrote:




Hi Tappers,



Microwaves and Physiology



OK, so Hertel blew it when he strayed into physics as he sought to =
explain part
of his research regarding potential biological effects of microwave =
ovens. And,
perhaps he also got some of his biology wrong. But, then wouldnt most
researchers make fools of themselves if they were pressed into making
physics-based proclamations to support their work. Should this =
invalidate their
work?

And, about how many nuclear physicists dare say a whole lot about, say, =
string
theory?



Or - - should the artist who got the physics wrongnever have become an =
artist?



Just how much of a dose of experimental microwaves would it take to =
impress a
physicist? Perhaps, if both a person and his food were placed into a =
microwave
oven, until all contents were burned to a crisp, then physicists would =
agree
that there had indeed been biological effects, even if a non-physicist =
had been
performing the experiment and originating the claims. Or, would the =
physicist
declare the experiment flawed because the person in the microwave oven =
had not
actually been a physicist?



Step 2: If a huge effect can be shown, then mustnt smaller effects =
exist?



Too bad about Marie Curie and some who have followed in their field of =
research
but at least a related, and probably also flawed, but nevertheless =
somewhat
protective, safety science has evolved.



The wheel continues to kill many of us each day, but I dont think we are =
going
to see a general recall. We strive to use it more sensibly. I say, the =
same
would apply to microwave ovens lets learn and list their caveats, refine =
the
design and use them sensibly. It will probably turn out that they will =
not
replace as many of the old methods of heating and cooking as we had =
thought.

Take cars, for example we now have two reasons that it is often better =
to just
park them and walk.



When one begins to take in the great expansion of our knowledge about =
what is
actually going on within =
cells, it
becomes (for me at least) harder to believe that the relevantly high =
microwave
energy level in the microwaves in the ovens would not mess =
withthis complex system. Some of the newer =
knowledge
about the physics going on at the cellular level is in the following
description of the research of one of our U of MD biophysicists from an =
article
in our Dept Newsletter, the Photon, April 2007. Here is the link.



http://www.physics.umd.edu/news/photon/iss55/research_spotlight.html=




My general take on the general health care issue is that one can gauge =
the
vitality and forthrightness of the mainstream system by the prevalence =
and
success levels of the quacks and the kooks. If these levels are high, =
then the
mainstream system is not doing very well. (Not that I know enough at =
this point
to judge Hertel. )



Thanks,



Bill Norwood

Technician

Elementary Labs

U of MD, Physics Dept







<><><><><><><><><=
><><><><><><><><><&=
gt;<><><><><><><><><&g=
t;<><>
&n=
bsp; &nb=
sp; &nbs=
p; =
; =


Jerry DiMarco
Manager of Lecture Demonstrations and Instructional
Labs
Montana State Univ., Physics
Dept. &nbs=
p; &n=
bsp; =
&nbs=
p; =


Bozeman, MT

Our Motto: "What would your mother do?"


------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C77A88.4D304B20--



Back