[meteorite-list] Try divining rods over a large iron

From: Pete Pete <rsvp321_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:11:45 -0400
Message-ID: <BAY153-w4781D6BC557F77D30AE2E9F8560_at_phx.gbl>

>>I'd say Randi is a FAR better person to ask than Einstein, because unlike Einstein, Randi has actually looked at the matter closely, examined evidence, constructed and conducted well designed experiments.
 
Similar to the general unreliability of a geologist or astronomer identifying a meteorite?
 
Cheers,
 
Pete
 
----------------------------------------
> From: clp at alumni.caltech.edu
> To: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 23:14:35 -0600
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Try divining rods over a large iron
>
> I don't think Einstein's understanding of magnetic, electrical, or
> electromagnetic fields was appreciably greater than that of many other
> physicists. Nor his knowledge of the "physics of everything in the
> universe". Not that it matters, since he clearly isn't suggesting that
> "divining rods" work through ordinary field mechanisms, but through "factors
> that are unknown to us at this time". In other words, he has no idea. He is
> simply speculating on how such a device might work (if, in fact, it actually
> does). Why is Einstein a credible voice for something whose nature he can't
> even speculate on?
>
> Today, we know with a high degree of likelihood that they don't work,
> because they have actually been tested scientifically. And we are in a good
> position to say that if they were found to work, it would not be because of
> fields we understand. After all, we have exquisitely sensitive instruments
> for measuring those fields, and they certainly are not useful for detecting
> underground water. Underground metal, of course, is readily detected with
> instruments (as many here know!) And almost any physicist would be highly
> skeptical about any assertion of fields we know nothing about, and which the
> human nervous system responds to! That definitely falls into the
> extraordinary claim category (i.e., the sort of claim that requires
> extraordinary evidence).
>
> I'd say Randi is a FAR better person to ask than Einstein, because unlike
> Einstein, Randi has actually looked at the matter closely, examined
> evidence, constructed and conducted well designed experiments.
>
> Chris
>
> *****************************************
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Meteorites USA"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Try divining rods over a large iron
>
>
> > Hi Phil, I think Chris was referring to Einstein's knowledge of the
> > physiological makeup of the human nervous system. Which Einstein would
> > probably not in fact be qualified to answer on. I would think that a
> > theoretical physicist would know a "little" about the physical system of
> > the human body however.
> >
> > Einstein was a scientist, and must have studied something to that effect
> > during his long education. So yes I would agree that Joe down the street
> > "might" know more about physiology but that's highly unlikely.
> >
> > Einstein, early on, wrote "The Investigation of the State of Aether in
> > Magnetic Fields". And we all know and have probably read about the Special
> > Theory of Relativity which I will not pretend to understand fully. Some
> > might argue that Dowsing is possible "because" of electromagnetic fields
> > "somehow". Though I do not subscribe to the beliefs of dowsers, or dowsing
> > in general, I would say that Einstein was much more knowledgeable about
> > electromagnetic fields, gravitational fields, and physics of everything in
> > the universe, than almost anyone.
> >
> > Who better to ask about dowsing? Dowsing is arguable and there is no hard
> > scientific evidence it is real. However if Einstein were alive today this
> > might be an interesting question to ask. In fact I would venture to say
> > there is no better person to ask about the physics of it than a
> > theoretical physicist. Except maybe a theoretical physicist with an open
> > mind. Oh wait, that's doubly redundant.
> >
> > ;)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Eric
>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Thu 14 Oct 2010 10:11:45 AM PDT