Quote:
Originally Posted by Angry American
I don't know, I'm just a college drop out.
1. I should have said electrical energy.
2. Gravity may not be magnetic, but it is a force which attracts mass, similar to a magnet.
3. I didn't say magnetic flux necessarily influences electrical currents in our brains, but more like it may influence the molecular structure of our neural networks or other such structures.
4. I didn't say anything about sound changing the "wiring" in our minds.  More like sounds may illicit primal responses, or emotions. Try communicating with your significant other without words, but with emotive sounds.
|
Not sure if you want to continue in this vein, but my interest is in the idea that it is quiet common for people to happen upon a well supported theoretical explanation for a phenomena. Unfortunately charlatans have a habit of seizing on such not fully investigated theories and claim an absolute truth. This leads to discrediting the original findings and precluding further rigorous investigation. By example attempts at developing cold fusion have suffered this retarding effect.
1. Not even electricity has polarity. Polarity is a simple convention used (and not required) to make practical application of a large number of phenomena we call "electricity". These phenomena are many and interacting in a wide variety of ways converting energy sometimes in one direction, sometimes another and sometimes in both directions at the same time. Often you can use one direction or both to get the exact same results as the other two. There are two hundred years of misformation and misleading analogies about so called "electricity" that even the engineers get it wrong.
2. Magnets do not attract mass. They attract and repel other magnets and electromagnetic fields which may or may not be attached to a mass. The source of the force is easily identified as the movement of charge in materials.
This is different to gravity which is the direct interaction of two masses. By Newtown the factors at play are mass and distance or seperation yet he couldn't put his finger on the source of the force. Enter Einsteins field equations and curved space-time as the source which makes it a very different beast to simple electomagnetism indeed.
3. Well the magnetic forces required to shift molecules and stimulate chemical reactions would be much the same as that to shift charges (electrical activity) in the simplest cases (salts in solution) and more for larger molecules. Other than Earth the planets with a significant magnetosphere are Jupiter, Neptune, Saturn and Uranus (the giants). The closest is Jupiter with a field 20,000 more energetic than Earth's. At closest approach Jupiter is about 500 million kms away. If the field intensity reduces by the cube of the distance then I make it at 0.000000000000000000000012 times smaller than Earth's if I counted the zeros right. Not a big contributor.
4. OK. I would just about assume that sounds have a nurturing effect on children but suggest that the overall effect of language and tone would have a far greater impact than a single rarely used word between parent and child. I seem to remember using names like "buttons" and "angel" more frequently than Stephanie during my daughter's early years. And "Steph" would be the most prevalent since then. Gee, I've probably rarely called her Stephanie. Matthew is almost always, Matty or Matt. Is the first syllable enough - do very differnent sounding translations produce a different result.