|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
QuickSearch
|
|
| LamarkNewAge (1 member, 39 visitors)
| ||||||
| Chatting now: | Chat room empty | ||||||
| WookieeB | |||||||
|
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Is there a life energy? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
celestialGyoud Member  Posts: 554 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
Recent definitions being reloaded, quote: - Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 7xs Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 7xs Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 7xs Brief Summarized Signature Real life vs too pessimistic archeological-surrealism As certain as my pet kangoroo rat has always an ace in the sleeve, [ whether 'Die Hard', the kangoroo rat, bluffs or not ], it's only with a timeline that equates to 4,750 years without multiplying, per every 5,000 years interval, that it would be possible for Humanity to have taken 49,000 years to reach 1 million people. If the number of children would always be the same from the beginning to the end of every 4,750 years interval within the rows of 5,000 years from 55,000 years ago then there's still the option of stop thinking by the head of an archeo-surrealist, which equates to stop drifting on numbers as if man is a beast and as if everything that happened in life was a disgrace. – That kind of chronological basis surpasses far beyond Hardy Har Har, a depressed, gloomy pessimistic hyena, always saying, 'Oh dear, oh my, I just know it's all going to go wrong'.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taq Member  Posts: 7670 Joined: Member Rating: 4.6 |
So the length of time it takes for a chemical reaction to occur is the length of time it takes for a chemical reaction to occur. Seems rather redundant.
Just as an explosion of hydrocarbons (e.g. gasoline) is terminated when oxygen is removed, such as with the introduction of carbon dioxide found in extinguishers. In every case, life energy is no different than energy. They are one in the same. All of our nerve impulses are energy. It is no different than the energy in any any other physical or chemical reaction.
What is this quivering? What is quivering and how is it produced?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
celestialGyoud Member Posts: 554 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
- Taq, the answer was given to you twice, by three different forms of explanation. - quote: - Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 7xs Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 7xs
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
celestialGyoud Member Posts: 554 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
- Why can't one see that the length of time it takes for a fuel to be consumed does change whenever the fuel is poured from a bottle to a wide and open surface ? - One might keep on believing that the explosion [ of the fuel ] would occur because of a chemical reaction. That's not true. Because you know that after the fuel is poured on the floor then that fuel can be consumed by fire naturally, without any explosion. A scientist would verify and know that the explosion of fuel occurs because of the relation between time and space: the more room one gives for a fuel to be consumed the more time that fuel will have to be naturally consumed without explosion. - Whether firm believing in 'explosion of fuel by chemical reaction' or in 'Humanity taking 49 thousand years to reach 1 million people'; there is no remedy nor elixir that could make one abandon a belief since 'believing' is a persistent plague. - quote: -
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Percy Member  Posts: 18246 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
--Percy
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Coragyps Member Posts: 5375 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Contrary to observation, CD7. If I put 990 milliliters of gasoline in a 1000 milliliter whisky bottle and light it at the neck, it will burn quietly like an oil lamp. If I pour that gasoline out, leaving half a milliliter in the bottom, and then light it, I will have tiny shards of glass all in my skin and probably third-degree burns, besides being near-deafened by the explosion. Quivering: what is that?
Mick Jagger you aren't.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taq Member Posts: 7670 Joined: Member Rating: 4.6 |
I can see that, and it has nothing to do with trepidations or quiverings. It has to do with contact between the fuel and the source of oxidation, namely the atmosphere. Of course the rate of a reaction depends on environmental conditions. That is Chem 101. You will also notice that burning goes even quicker if the fuel is atomized into tiny droplets. This, again, is due to the mixture of air and fuel. It is basic, basic chemistry. You should have learned this in 7th grade.
Huh? Fire is a chemical reaction. It is the oxidation of hydrocarbons which can be seen by the incadescence of the reaction products. Are you really unaware that fire is a chemical reaction?
It is not a belief. It is a fact. It is a demonstrable and verifiable fact. Fire is a chemical reaction. The burning of fuel is a chemical reaction. Period.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
celestialGyoud Member Posts: 554 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
Fire is a chemical reaction. However, the point was that there is no chemical reaction without appropriate conditions for that reaction to occur. And those conditions are sequences of time, whether a continuous sequence that terminates or an explosion [time of impact] occurring because that sequence has terminated. If one sees a primary cause that goes before the reaction itself then a person will see the environmental conditions. And if one sees what goes before those conditions then a person will consider that a relation between time and space is that will make those conditions for the reaction to occur. -
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
celestialGyoud Member Posts: 554 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
- The fuel that was mentioned in Message 34 is not gasoline since liquid gasoline does not explode. Fuels that burn are very common indeed, but fuels that explode are rather unusual. - Message 34 is referring to fuels that explode. Liquid gasoline does not explode. It does not even burn. Only gasoline vapor when mixed with a proper amount of air in a fairly narrow range of air fuel mixtures will burn. To get it to detonate you have to raise the pressure/temperature past the point of where the anti-knock agent are effective. Here in the real world, cars do not explode. They don't explode when hit by gunfire, they don't explode in mid air after going off a cliff, and the don't explode in mid-roll after an accident, as it was quoted before from Movie Physics question. -
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taq Member Posts: 7670 Joined: Member Rating: 4.6 |
An explosion is still a continuous sequence. The difference between an explosion and burning is completely arbitrary. One just happens faster than the other one.
What does this have to do with anything? Wow, we observe that different conditions result in different rates of reaction. That is basic chemistry. You are just adding woo to an already well understood concept.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Coragyps Member Posts: 5375 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
dwise1 Member  Posts: 3282 Joined: Member Rating: 8.4 |
It's not that I really consider Ki to be the supernatural at work, but rather it was the manner in which we thought of what we were doing and visualizing it. And that does most definitely work. Ki was essential to the language that we used in our techniques and so it is how we communicate about those techniques, even to ourselves. Does not necessarily mean that it's some actual supernatural thing, but that is the language, no less than we speak of the sun rising and setting even though what's actually happening is that the earth is rotating as it goes around the sun.
Not something that we did. Our style, which in the early 1970's was one of two styles (and Aikido has since then split off into several different styles, some of them much rougher than others; ours was and is one of the most gentle styles). Founded by Koichi Tohei Sensei in 1971, the style is called Shin Shin Toitsu Aikido Kai ("meaning 'the way of realizing the [original] unity of mind and body', but the martial discipline of the art is frequently isolated and referred to as Ki-Aikido, particularly in the Western world") and is run by the Ki Society. In my own training and, as I understand it to still be done 40 years later, the emphasis was on Ki development. Besides the unarmed techniques, we also worked with the bo (a 4-foot staff) and the boken (a practice sword carved out of wood; Aikido's origins was grounded in sword training). But the only punching was as an attack to defend against. Rather, our basic practice with extending Ki (the fourth of the Four Principles) was to have someone hold their arm out very strong and by extending our mind (one of the translations of Ki) past them they presented no obstacle for us. Another more challenging exercise was for the nage ("attacker") to very strongly clamp both his hands on our (the uke) wrist, holding it fast and immovable. If you think of moving your wrist, then you remain trapped. If you think of moving the tip of your finger, the nage cannot stop you. That is an example of thinking past the obstacle.
Not part of our style.
Yes, we can shift our center of gravity at will. Indeed, in our exercises where our center actually was was completely mental. Though from your description, one would think that the lower we place our center, the heavier we would be. Doesn't work that way. To be centered, our center must be around where the knot of our belt is (your belt buckle, if you aren't wearing a gi). Anywhere else, it doesn't work. For example, we'd center ourselves and sensei would touch our forehead to shift our center there and we'd lose it (remember, have one of the four principles and you have all four; lose one and you lose them all). However, the exact same thing would happen if he touched our toe. Our center had to be centered; a lower center did nothing for us.
Actually, what we did was to blend with the nage's motion and redirect it while moving us both our own (ie, the uke's) center, which by definition meant that the nage was being moved outside his own center. Not only did that mean that we would lead the nage into a fall, but also we would allow him to fall.
I only mentioned that to inform you that it is Ki (or Qi in Chinese) that the Chinese are talking about in acupuncture. The Japanese Ki version of that is Kiatsu, which uses finger pressure instead of needles.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
dwise1 Member Posts: 3282 Joined: Member Rating: 8.4 |
Actually, no. For one thing, you might be confusing "relaxed" with "limp". Our techniques required us to be relaxed, but we were never limp. If you have ever been able to learn partner dancing, then you would know the difference; if you haven't, then you are so much poorer for that lack. Just going completely limp is for Ralphie's younger brother when they're being attacked by the yellow-eyed bully: "Randy lay there like a slug! It was his only defense!" That is not in the least bit what we were doing. Again, the four principles are: relaxed, centered, weight on the underside, extending Ki. We had to maintain all four all the time throughout our techniques. While standing motionless. While moving. While turning. While rolling. All the time. Going limp as you propose would make everything else we did impossible. IOW, you do not know what you are talking about here. Also, cases where the teacher is pulling tricks is one thing. What I have describe is what all the students would do as a matter of course. We weren't using any tricks. OK, we did have a few tricks. One exercise was to stand stable and difficult to move when being pushed against, and once enough force is applied we could be moved, but we would maintain our balance and control. To help the student achieve that state, we would add a slight downward force to the pushing of our hand to promote weight-underside. And, conversely, we could also apply a slight upward force that would wipe out the student's weight-underside and thus destroy all the other four principles. Similarly, in a common one-hand hold that leads to flipping the nage over in the air with no physical effort on the uke's part (I and many others have done it too many times to count), if the nage simply runs his finger along the top of the uke's arm, that shifts his mind (AKA "Ki") to the upper-side and wipes out his maintaining the four principles. Again, these are things that all Aikido students have used and experienced. And have nothing to do with what you are talking about. Here's another situation that I personally experienced. When we rolled, we would extend our Ki by extending our arm (not locking the joints, which would not be extending the arm) and blend with the floor as we went into our shoulder roll. During that time, while I was in college, every day I wasn't in school I was working construction for my father. One day, I was standing astride my El Camino and our dumpster unloading from the El Camino to the dumpster. When I had completed that task, I jumped down to the ground, an asphalt surface. But I caught my pants leg on the dumpster and suddenly I found myself falling head-long towards the ground. This was the kind of fall where both wrists and forearms are shattered as the victim panics and tries to break his fall with his hands. I did not panic during that fall, but rather remained calm. Then as I was about to reach the ground (asphalt surface, in case you have forgotten), I extended my Ki through my arm, blended with the ground, and went into a shoulder roll out of which I emerged without injury. OK, so just what "trick" that my sensei had staged accounts for that? In another situation, I was practicing an Aikido move when I accidentally brought my elbow crashing down on a bed post, right on my "funny bone". Instead of hopping around in pain, I remained centered and relaxed and calmly sat down and massaged the injury site. So which one of his "tricks" was my sensai applying there? Similarly, decades after my Aikido training, I was being treated for shin splints with a diabolical torture device, a kind of plastic rolling pin with multiple rings on it that she would roll along the length of my shin. As she was about to start, I centered myself and relaxed and moved my weight to the underside. And as I sat there calmly (OK, I was also using a breathing exercise I had learned in Aikido), the therapist was looking at me puzzled because I wasn't screaming in pain. Again, what was the trick that my sensei was using here, a decade or two after he had died in a car accident?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
dwise1 Member Posts: 3282 Joined: Member Rating: 8.4 |
Yeah, I've heard about that. Though my sole source is Ian Fleming's You Only Live Twice, which I read as soon as it came out in paperback (hey! I was on a kid's budget, so hardcover books were out of the question.). As he described it, sumo wrestlers would practice pulling their testicles back up into their body, though as he described it it took a hot bath and a massage to coax them back out again. Now, how self-aware are you? Because of the range of temperatures that are needed for the formation of sperm, the male body automatically regulates how far down the testicles are allowed to dangle. When it's hotter, the testicles dangle lower down and when it's colder, they're held closer to the body. The sumo wrestler training that Ian Fleming mentioned appears to be a conscious control over that same physical mechanism. Though what he described does belie that kung fu master's claim, in that coaxing the boys back out takes more than willing it to happen. Unless kung fu masters know something that sumo wrestlers don't. As for your
You have no idea what you're talking about. At least when it comes to Ki.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Percy Member Posts: 18246 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.2 |
--Percy
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019
