4 ms·

This is a pretty good summation of the issue. Well said. From a strictly scientific standpoint, designing the tests around the claims of the participants is on

by TrevorJ 17y ago

This is a pretty good summation of the issue. Well said. From a strictly scientific standpoint, designing the tests around the claims of the participants is only useful so far. The anecdotal claims of people who claim to suffer from this condition would be suspect at best. What is know is that electromagnetic energy can and does effect the human body, it is just a question of what thresholds we are talking about. It would stand to reason that some people are effected at different levels than others for various reasons. (Hydration, PH balance, even height could be a factor when talking about specific wavelengths). All that is to say, the wifi thing may very well be bollocks, but I still would love to see more rigorous research done.

Locke1689 17y ago
Why don't you just do that math? E=hf -- you know the frequency of the radiation, so you know the energy. Go ahead and assume that people are all water, you will be mostly correct. Then, when you're done, compare E to the +2 NAD+ + 2 ADP + 2 Pi -> + 2 NADH + 2 H+ + 2 ATP + 2 H2O (simple glycolysis reaction and synthesis of NADH and ATP). Hint: The amount of ionizing energy of a 5GHz signal is noise in the amount of energy created by normal biological processes. Ars is careful not to say "it can't happen," but I'm going to come out and say -- it can't happen.
- dejb 17y ago
  I haven't done the math but I'm prepared to bet that when it actually comes to the crunch you aren't as confident as you say. 'it can't happen' implies 0% probability. Well I'll go you one better as I'm prepared to bet on it at 0.01% for $1. I'll even send you the dollar as long as you agree to the bet. So that's my $1 vs your $10K. Talk is cheap. What I'm trying to demonstrate is how certainty can vanish when faced with actual consequences.
  - scott_s 17y ago
    When someone says "it can't happen" in a scientific context, I don't take it to mean "I believe it is impossible to happen." I take it to mean "according to our current understanding, it's not possible." The implication being that while it's possible, if it were true it would require fundamental changes in our understanding. This is so unlikely to be incalculable.
    - dejb 17y ago
      Well according to the constructs of the English language and logic, "it can't happen" does actually mean "I believe it is impossible to happen.". (Can't == can not == impossible). Your statement implies the 'scientific context' is bullshit which I certainly do not agree with. So in your alternative world of logical meaning what does "it can't happen" equate to anyway? Does it simply mean less than 50% probability or what? If you aren't prepared to put an actual mathematical meaning to probabilistic statements then they are worthless. I certainly am and I am prepared to back them up with cash. What about you? Do your statements mean anything or are they just worthless oratory?
      - scott_s 17y ago
        The intended meaning always depends on context. People are rarely precise with their words; it's takes too much time and doesn't improve communication if all parties have a shared understanding. At the start of my thermal physics class, my professor spent a lecture to define what a thermal physicist means when they say "never." We spent time calculating things like the likelihood of Hamlet emerging from 6 billion monkeys banging on keyboards for 13 billions years. This sort of understanding is important when talking about entropy and the laws of thermal dynamics. For example, a thermal physicist would be comfortable saying all of the molecules in a room will never spontaneously exist on only one side of that room. With simplifying assumptions, we can calculate the probability of that happening. While it's non-zero, it's so infinitesimal that physicists are comfortable saying "never", and we have the second law of thermodynamics. Your insistence on putting a dollar number on my confidence is strange, since even in your case it's rhetorical. No one is asking you to put money up, nor does the infrastructure or even rules exist for how to handle it. Further, my entire point was to demonstrate that certainty in science is impossible. All we have is confidence in something.
        dejb 17y ago
        > All we have is confidence in something. Yes but if you can't define what confidence is what does it mean? When I studied physics we learned to provide confidence intervals for each measurement and subsequent calculation so every variable was of the form X +/- Y. From memory the confidence was a specific number of deviations from the mean. That meant something. Saying 'roughly X' doesn't. All the examples you provided are so improbable that 'never' is of course appropriate in most contexts. But what do you think 'it can't happen' means in a case like the existence of a phenomena like EM-sensitivity? 10% probability, 1%, 0.1%, 0.01%, 0.001%? None of these are at all appropriate to describe as 'it can't happen' in this context. I think that in your heart of hearts you know that chances of EM-sensitivity existing could well be better than 1%. > No one is asking you to put money up, nor does the infrastructure or even rules exist for how to handle it. Check out http://longbets.org http://longbets.org . Otherwise I'd settle for a proof of ID from whomever wants to take the bet and a public and signed statement to the effect that they'll pay up if the conditions are met within a certain time period. I'm pretty sure this type of bet is legal in most jurisdictions.

by TrevorJ 17y ago

Locke1689 17y ago

Why don't you just do that math? E=hf -- you know the frequency of the radiation, so you know the energy. Go ahead and assume that people are all water, you will be mostly correct. Then, when you're done, compare E to the +2 NAD+ + 2 ADP + 2 Pi -> + 2 NADH + 2 H+ + 2 ATP + 2 H2O (simple glycolysis reaction and synthesis of NADH and ATP). Hint: The amount of ionizing energy of a 5GHz signal is noise in the amount of energy created by normal biological processes. Ars is careful not to say "it can't happen," but I'm going to come out and say -- it can't happen.

dejb 17y ago
I haven't done the math but I'm prepared to bet that when it actually comes to the crunch you aren't as confident as you say. 'it can't happen' implies 0% probability. Well I'll go you one better as I'm prepared to bet on it at 0.01% for $1. I'll even send you the dollar as long as you agree to the bet. So that's my $1 vs your $10K. Talk is cheap. What I'm trying to demonstrate is how certainty can vanish when faced with actual consequences.
- scott_s 17y ago
  When someone says "it can't happen" in a scientific context, I don't take it to mean "I believe it is impossible to happen." I take it to mean "according to our current understanding, it's not possible." The implication being that while it's possible, if it were true it would require fundamental changes in our understanding. This is so unlikely to be incalculable.
  - dejb 17y ago
    Well according to the constructs of the English language and logic, "it can't happen" does actually mean "I believe it is impossible to happen.". (Can't == can not == impossible). Your statement implies the 'scientific context' is bullshit which I certainly do not agree with. So in your alternative world of logical meaning what does "it can't happen" equate to anyway? Does it simply mean less than 50% probability or what? If you aren't prepared to put an actual mathematical meaning to probabilistic statements then they are worthless. I certainly am and I am prepared to back them up with cash. What about you? Do your statements mean anything or are they just worthless oratory?
    - scott_s 17y ago
      The intended meaning always depends on context. People are rarely precise with their words; it's takes too much time and doesn't improve communication if all parties have a shared understanding. At the start of my thermal physics class, my professor spent a lecture to define what a thermal physicist means when they say "never." We spent time calculating things like the likelihood of Hamlet emerging from 6 billion monkeys banging on keyboards for 13 billions years. This sort of understanding is important when talking about entropy and the laws of thermal dynamics. For example, a thermal physicist would be comfortable saying all of the molecules in a room will never spontaneously exist on only one side of that room. With simplifying assumptions, we can calculate the probability of that happening. While it's non-zero, it's so infinitesimal that physicists are comfortable saying "never", and we have the second law of thermodynamics. Your insistence on putting a dollar number on my confidence is strange, since even in your case it's rhetorical. No one is asking you to put money up, nor does the infrastructure or even rules exist for how to handle it. Further, my entire point was to demonstrate that certainty in science is impossible. All we have is confidence in something.
      - dejb 17y ago
        > All we have is confidence in something. Yes but if you can't define what confidence is what does it mean? When I studied physics we learned to provide confidence intervals for each measurement and subsequent calculation so every variable was of the form X +/- Y. From memory the confidence was a specific number of deviations from the mean. That meant something. Saying 'roughly X' doesn't. All the examples you provided are so improbable that 'never' is of course appropriate in most contexts. But what do you think 'it can't happen' means in a case like the existence of a phenomena like EM-sensitivity? 10% probability, 1%, 0.1%, 0.01%, 0.001%? None of these are at all appropriate to describe as 'it can't happen' in this context. I think that in your heart of hearts you know that chances of EM-sensitivity existing could well be better than 1%. > No one is asking you to put money up, nor does the infrastructure or even rules exist for how to handle it. Check out http://longbets.org http://longbets.org . Otherwise I'd settle for a proof of ID from whomever wants to take the bet and a public and signed statement to the effect that they'll pay up if the conditions are met within a certain time period. I'm pretty sure this type of bet is legal in most jurisdictions.