Article View: sci.skeptic
Article #5944Re: Question about the theory of coherent domains
From: tadchem
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:00
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:00
39 lines
3311 bytes
3311 bytes
"David Walters" <dwalters@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message news:300720001449214268%dwalters@ihug.co.nz... > > Is there anyone here who knows enough about physics to be able to > usefully comment upon whether Emilio Del Giudice and Giuliano > Preparata's theory of coherent domains has much chance of being true, > and if it does, whether it can explain the phenomenon of the memory of > water studied by Jacques Benveniste? The theory of coherent domains is an attempt to rationalize the semi-religious belief of homeopaths in the ability of water molecules to retain an "imprint" of a molecule that was once present. This in turn is an elaborate rationalization of their belief that water, once exposed to a molecule, somehow carries the chemical effectiveness with regard to "healing properties" that the molecule has, without the damaging side effects. This in turn is an updated version of the ancient belief in "contact" magic - the belief that contact with something that has magical powers can somehow lead to a transfer of those powers. Look up the word "tabu" in the encyclopedia. To get back to the "theory", it amounts to the assertion that water molecules can respond to the presence of a solute molecule by forming a "coherent domain" that somehow persists after the solute molecule is removed, and that the "domain" is stabilized with respect to thermal motion of the water molecules through some unspecified "phase-locking" mechanism. The concept has no quantitative components (there is no prediction as to what temperatures are required to maintain the "phase-locking mechanism, for example), it has no credible empirical data to support it (a few years ago a French homeopathic "researcher" made some claims that were carefully investigated and found to result from biased selection of data, among other causes, and could not be reproduced, even by other homeopathic researchers), and does not propose a demonstrable mechanism for the asserted effects. In short, it is not a truly scientific theory. Tom Davidson Brighton, CO
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<x_Xg5.26122$ga2.735464@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<300720001449214268%dwalters@ihug.co.nz>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f44bc,d6253c581704a403,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf44bc,public X-Google-Thread: f8954,d6253c581704a403,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf8954,public X-Google-Thread: f442a,d6253c581704a403,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf442a,public X-Google-Thread: 106bde,20bd8c72bf92ff33 X-Google-Attributes: gid106bde,public X-Google-Thread: 1038c2,d6253c581704a403,start X-Google-Attributes: gid1038c2,public From: "tadchem" <tadchem@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Question about the theory of coherent domains Date: 2000/07/30 Message-ID: <x_Xg5.26122$ga2.735464@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> X-Deja-AN: 652454885 References: <300720001449214268%dwalters@ihug.co.nz> X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 964971549 63.211.242.61 (Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:39:09 PDT) Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Reply-To: "tadchem" <tadchem@nospam.com> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:39:09 PDT Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,bionet.biophysics,sci.med.physics