From moret@far.ruu.nl Thu Oct 8 04:30:31 1992 From: Ed Moret Subject: RE: BIOLOGICAL ALCHEMY: start your own discussion list! To: chemistry@ruucmc.far.ruu.nl Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 9:22:24 MET Dear netters, For those who missed it: the Biological Alchemy contribution of mr. McElwaine is included at the bottom of this reply. I would like to ask him to start his own platform for discussion. He clearly has no respect for the computational chemistry, or chemistry, or even the science most of us believe in. To illustrate this, I send you a message of the same person to a pharmacy mailing list. I would like to stress that all of this is nonsense in my opinion and even hurting to those people looking for hope: the terminally and chronically ill! Regards Ed Moret -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- E.E. Moret @more@ Computational Medicinal Chemistry/Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry Faculty of Pharmacy/Utrecht University/the Netherlands Mail Address P.O.Box 80082 3508 TB Utrecht Telephone (31-30)536979/536958 Telefax (31-30)516674 E-mail moret@far.ruu.nl, moret@cc.ruu.nl ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >From pharm-request@de-montfort.ac.uk Wed Oct 7 01:45 MET 1992 Content-Identifier: NATURAL ANTI-... From: "NAME Robert E. McElwaine" Sender: pharm-request@de-montfort.ac.uk Message-Id: <01GPN1XZKWAS002FEK@cnsvax.uwec.edu> To: pharmex@de-montfort.ac.uk Subject: NATURAL ANTI-cancer Remedies X-Vms-To: IN%"pharmex@leicester-poly.ac.uk" Status: RO NATURAL ANTI-CANCER REMEDIES A 3RD OPINION DISCLAIMER: This list was compiled from unorthodox sources that have shown themselves to be reliable. The compiler of this list is NOT a doctor of any kind, but is exercising his First Amendment Constitutional RIGHT of FREE SPEECH on the subjects of his choice. ( MOST of these Remedies can be found in ANY Grocery Store. MOST of the rest of them can be found in ANY Health Food Store. What is important is HOW they are used, and what else is EXCLUDED DURING their use. ) (1) THE 7-DAY FAST. 1st day: Eat as much fresh fruit as you want, one kind at a time, preferably grapes. 2nd day: Eat all the vegetables you want, at least half raw, including GARLIC; also, whole kernel corn to help scrape clean the intestinal linings. 3rd day: Drink all the fresh fruit and vegetable juice you want. Preferably start with 16 to 32 ounces of prune juice WITH PULP, followed by a gallon of pure (NOT from concentrate) apple juice, then grape juice. (Stay close to your home bathroom.) 4th day: Eat all the UN-salted nuts (NO peanuts) and dried fruit you want, preferably raisins and almonds (ALMONDS CONTAIN LAETRILE.). 5th day: ONE GALLON OF LEMONADE. Squeeze the juice from two lemons into a gallon of water (preferably distilled), and add 2 to 4 tablespoons of locally-made honey, (NO sugar). Drink one glass per hour. [EVERYone, including healthy people, should do this one day every week, preceded by a large glass of prune juice WITH PULP.] 6th day: Same as 5th day. 7th day: Same as 6th day. All 7 days, eat ONLY the foods listed above for each day, along with your usual vitamin and mineral supplements, plus as much DISTILLED WATER as you want. (2) THE GRAPE DIET. Eat 2 to 3 ounces of fresh grapes every 2 hours, 8 AM to 8 PM, every day for six days. Eat NOTHING else during the six days, but drink as much DISTILLED WATER as you want. (3) APPLE CIDER VINEGAR. Mix a teaspoon of pure apple cider vinegar (NOT apple cider "flavored" vinegar. Regular vinegar is HARMFUL.) in a glass of water (preferably distilled) and drink all of it. Do this 3 or 4 times per day, for 3 weeks; then stop for a week. Repeat if desired. Do this along with a normal healthy diet of natural foods. This remedy is especially effective against those types of cancer that resemble a FUNGUS, as well as against other kinds of fungus infections. (4) THE SEA-SALT & SODA BATH. [Please keep an OPEN MIND.] Fill a bathtub with moderately warm water so the level comes up almost to the overflow drain when you get in. Immerse yourself in it for a minute, and then completely dissolve in the bath water 1 pound of SUN-evaporated SEA-salt (regular salt won't work.) and 1 pound of fresh baking-soda. Soak in this bath for 10 to 20 minutes, while exercising your fingers, toes, and limbs, turning sideways and onto your stomach, dunking your head, sitting up and laying back down, chomping your teeth together, etc.. Among other things, the SEA-salt & Soda Bath neutralizes the accumulated effects of X-rays, etc., as described in the book "Born To Be Magnetic, Vol. 2", by Frances Nixon, 1973. PRECAUTIONS: Only the ONE person using each bath should prepare it and drain it. For at least 30 minutes after taking the bath, stay away from, and even out of sight of, other people. (Your greatly expanded Aura energy-field during that time could disrupt other people's fields.) Two hours after the bath, eat at least 8 ounces of yogurt containing ACTIVE Yogurt Cultures. (The bath may kill FRIENDLY bacteria also.) Better yet, take a 2-Billion-bacteria "Acidophilus" capsule, which is also an EXCELLENT DAILY REMEDY AGAINST THE EFFECTS OF "A.I.D.S." (because it kills all kinds of harmful bacteria in the digestive tract, taking a big load off the remaining immune system). [Because this external bath can kill IN-ternal bacteria, it may also be a CURE for "Lyme disease".] Do NOT take this bath within a few hundred miles of a thunder storm, within 3 days of a full moon, nor during "Major" or "Minor Periods" as listed in the "Solunar Tables" published bimonthly in "Field & Stream" Magazine, (because of the measurable disruptive ambient environmental energy-fields present at those times). Do NOT take this bath more than four times per year. (5) MISCELLANEOUS NATURAL ANTI-CANCER REMEDIES: For skin cancer, apply STABILIZED Aloe Vera Jel to the affected skin twice daily, and take 2 to 4 tablespoons per day of STABILIZED Aloe Vera Juice internally, for about 2 months. D.M.S.O. (Dimethyl Sulfoxide) causes cancer cells to perform NORMAL cell functions. ALMONDS (UN-blanched, UN-roasted) CONTAIN LAETRILE. To help prevent cancer, eat several almonds every day. To help cure cancer, eat several OUNCES of almonds per day. [NEVER take large concentrated doses of Laetrile orally. IT WILL KILL YOU! Take it INTRAVENOUSLY ONLY. (Cancer cells contain a certain enzyme which converts Laetrile into cyanide, which then kills the cell. This enzyme is ALSO present in the digestive system.)] ANTI-OXIDANTS are FREE-RADICAL SCAVENGERS, and include Vitamin E, Selenium (200 mcg. per day is safe for most people.), Chromium (up to 100 mcg. per day), Vitamin A (25,000 IU per day is safe for most people.), Superoxide Dismutase (up to 4,000,000 Units per day), Vitamin C (up to 3000 mg. per day), and BHT (Butylated Hydroxy- toluene), [1 to 4 capsules of BHT every night at bedtime will also MAKE ONE IMMUNE AGAINST HERPES (BOTH types), suppress herpes symptoms if one already has herpes, prevent spreading herpes to other people, but will not cure herpes. BHT MIGHT ALSO DO THESE THINGS AGAINST "A.I.D.S.", which is really a form of cancer similar to leukemia.] (See the book "Life Extension", by Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw.) HYDROGEN-PEROXIDE. Dilute twelve(12) drops of 3% hydrogen-peroxide in a glass of pure water (preferably DISTILLED) and drink it. Do this once or twice per day, hours before or after eating or drinking anything else. Apply 3% hydrogen-peroxide directly to skin cancers several times per day. Use hydrogen-peroxide ONLY if you are taking a good daily dose of some of the various anti-oxidants described above. VITAMIN & MINERAL SUPPLEMENTS are more effective, and much less expensive, when COMBINED together in MEGA doses into SINGLE tablets made from NATURAL sources. Cancer cells can NOT live in a strong (100,000 Maxwell) NORTH MAGNETIC FIELD, especially if it is pulsating on and off. [A strong south magnetic field is an aphrodisiac.] In my opinion, ALL types of ionizing- radiation treatments for cancer should be REPLACED with daily 30-minute doses of pulsating 100,000-Maxwell NORTH magnetic fields. Properly made and operated RADIONICS/PSIONICS MACHINES can both diagnose and cure all forms of cancer, as well as most other medical problems. Some Radionics/Psionics Machines can even take cross-sectional X-ray-like photos of cancer tumors, etc., with-OUT X-rays! INTERFERON tablets. TAHEEBO TEA, (Lapacho). HOMEOPATHY can cure cancer, and many other medical problems (even drug addiction!). 50 mg. per day of CHELATED ZINC can help prevent or cure prostate trouble. This list is NOT exhaustive. The above NATURAL Remedies can CURE both diagnosed AND UN- DIAGNOSED cancers, as well as PREVENT them, and also prevent and cure many other medical problems including heart- diseases. They are NOT too simple and inexpensive to work effectively. Besides acting on a person biologically and chemically, these remedies, especially The 7-Day Fast and The Grape Diet, send a strong message to one's subconscious mind, PROGRAMMING it to CURE the cancer. In my opinion, if a person finds out that s/he has cancer, then s/he should promptly try at least the first 4 remedies described above, in sequence (starting with The 7-Day Fast), BEFORE resorting to the UN-natural and expensive mutilations and agonies [POISON, BURN, and MUTILATE!] of orthodox cancer treatment [organi$ed-CRIME!]. DISCLAIMER: This list was compiled from unorthodox sources that have shown themselves to be reliable. The compiler of this list is NOT a doctor of any kind, but is exercising his First Amendment Constitutional RIGHT of FREE SPEECH on the subjects of his choice. FOR MORE INFORMATION, contact Cancer Control Society, 2043 N. Berendo St., Los Angeles, CA 90027, and/or other organiza- tions listed in the "Alternative Medicine" and "Holistic Medicine" portions of the "Health and Medical Organizations" Section (Section 8) of the latest edition of the "Encyclope- dia of Associations" reference book in your local public or university library. UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED. Robert E. McElwaine >From chemistry-request@ccl.net Thu Oct 8 05:19 MET 1992 From: "NAME \"Robert E. McElwaine\"" Subject: BIOLOGICAL ALCHEMY To: chemistry@ccl.net Message-Id: <01GPOH34BV7C002LCZ@cnsvax.uwec.edu> X-Vms-To: IN%"chemistry@ccl.net" Sender: chemistry-request@ccl.net Errors-To: owner-chemistry@ccl.net Precedence: bulk Status: RO BIOLOGICAL TRANSMUTATIONS A very simple experiment can demonstrate (PROVE) the FACT of "BIOLOGICAL TRANSMUTATIONS" (reactions like Mg + O --> Ca, Si + C --> Ca, K + H --> Ca, N2 --> CO, etc.), as described in the BOOK "Biological Transmutations" by Louis Kervran, [1972 Edition is BEST.], and in Chapter 17 of the book "THE SECRET LIFE OF PLANTS" [see Footnote] by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird, 1973: (1) Obtain a good sample of plant seeds, all of the same kind. [Some kinds might work better that others.] (2) Divide the sample into two groups of equal weight and number. (3) Sprout one group in distilled water on filter paper for three or four weeks. (4) Separately incinerate both groups. (5) Weigh the residue from each group. [The residue of the sprouted group will usually weigh at least SEVERAL PERCENT MORE than the other group.] (6) Analyze quantitatively the residue of each group for mineral content. [Some of the mineral atoms of the sprouted group have been TRANSMUTED into heavier mineral elements by FUSING with atoms of oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, etc..] BIOLOGICAL TRANSMUTATIONS occur ROUTINELY, even in our own bodies. Ingesting a source of organic silicon (silicon with carbon, such as "horsetail" extract, or radishes) can SPEED HEALING OF BROKEN BONES via the reaction Si + C --> Ca, (much faster than by merely ingesting the calcium directly). Some MINERAL DEPOSITS in the ground are formed by micro- organisms FUSING together atoms of silicon, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, etc.. The two reactions Si + C <--> Ca, by micro-organisms, cause "STONE SICKNESS" in statues, building bricks, etc.. The reaction N2 --> CO, catalysed by very hot iron, creates a CARBON-MONOXIDE POISON HAZARD for welder operators and people near woodstoves (even properly sealed ones). Some bacteria can even NEUTRALIZE RADIOACTIVITY! ALL OF THESE THINGS AND MORE HAPPEN, IN SPITE OF the currently accepted "laws" of physics. Footnote: Chapters 19 and 20 are about "RADIONICS". ENTIRE BOOK is FASCINATING! UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED. Robert E. McElwaine B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC From feyer@truk.cray.com Thu Oct 8 01:37:48 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 06:37:48 CDT From: feyer@truk.cray.com (Martin Feyereisen) To: CHEMISTRY@ccl.net Subject: math is hard Given the choice of briefly finding out about the features of new commercial applications, or hearing about toys and their connection to all social ills is a hard call for me. The only reason i write is that if people choose to discuss nonchemical issues, they should do so intelligently. In regards to the barbie phrase probability, Bob formula was: 1/270 + 1/269 + 1/268 + 1/267 I think the correct formula should be: 1 - (1-1/270)(1-1/269)(1-1/268)(1-1/267) As a simple example, suppose barbie could say 3 phrases out of a possibility of 4. the possibilities would be: 123 124 134 234 Simple inspection suggest that the probability of any given phrase is 0.75, yet using bob's formula yields: 1/4 + 1/3 + 1/2 {or 1.0833} the correct formula yields: 1 - (1-1/4)(1-1/3)(1-1/2) {or 0.7500} Gee, 'MATH IS HARD!!!!' Martin Feyereisen, feyer@cray.com From fredvc@esvax.dnet.dupont.com Thu Oct 8 04:34:50 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 08:34:50 -0400 From: fredvc@esvax.dnet.dupont.com To: ,chem@chem Subject: ROTATIONAL INVARIANCE - XYZ PRECISION A common source of difficulty in preserving rotational invariance is failure to carry enough significant figures in the input coordinates. I encountered this problem with an input generator program for CNINDO some years ago. For historical reasons, the generator only preserved 4 significant figures to the right of the decimal, e.g., 1.4142. As a consequence, results for sulfur compounds were dependent on the intial orientation!! As you can imagine, this caused a lot of consternation, since CNDO was formulated to avoid just such problems!! We tracked things down pretty quickly and revised the generator to (a) work in double precision, and (b) write out 7 significant figures, e.g., 1.4142136. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ FREDERIC A. VAN-CATLEDGE Scientific Computing Division || Office: (302) 695-1187 Central Research & Development Dept. || FAX: (302) 695-9658 The Du Pont company || P. O. Box 80320 || Internet: fredvc@esvax.dnet.dupont.com Wiilmington DE 19880-0320 || ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From tudor@wucmd.wustl.edu Thu Oct 8 03:33:22 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 08:33:22 -0500 From: tudor@wucmd.wustl.edu (Tudor Oprea) To: CHEMISTRY@ccl.net Subject: Pseudo-science Dear netters, In response to the Email of RE McElwaine, I can only say that this kind of information - the sort of myths that we try to believe every day - is indeed part of a widespread phenomenon, and is encouraged by REMcE himself > UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is all I can say, but my mind is filled with anger. Not only this sort of information is doing harm to real science, but it distorts the minds of average people who are not trained to judge critically - all these being covered by a " B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC" - thus some would BELIEVE this stuff! Even is 'cold fusion' is possible, even if elements transmute, how comes no laboratory since Bequerel and Sklodowska-Curie has not published anything on this? Were the Seaborg and Fermi teams BLIND? Or is wishful (to use a gentle word) thinking involved? And with respect to the pharmacy-mail list message of REMcE, provided by Dr. Moret, message which I find most ILLUMINATING with respect to the future of cancer research, I can only say that these advices should be first experimented on those who recommend them. Let Robert E. McElwaine, B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC cure his on cancer - it is most probably a brain-tumor generated by transmuted Gold accumulation. I am sorry if my Email seems offensive to some, but I think the Email of REMcE should be definitively stopped - unless he comes with SCIENTIFIC proofs! - then I shall be excused for my CLOSED mind and ignorance. Disclaimer: this Email allows REMcE to sue me in the court of law only if he proves the above mentioned observations to be correct. These opinions are entirely my own. ================================================================================ = Tudor Ionel OPREA = Tel. (1-314) 935 4672 = = Research Associate = Fax. (1-314) 935 4979 = = Washington University Center for Molecular Design = Email: = = Lopata Hall, Box 1099, One Brookings Drive = tudor@wucmd.wustl.edu = = St.Louis MO 63130 = = ================================================================================ From DSMITH@uoft02.utoledo.edu Thu Oct 8 09:36:18 1992 Date: 08 Oct 1992 09:35:56 -0400 (EDT) From: "DR. DOUGLAS A. SMITH, UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO" Subject: Re: BIOLOGICAL ALCHEMY To: MCELWRE@cnsvax.uwec.edu Can we keep this kind of ridiculous garbage off of the chemistry mail exploder? Doug Smith From harbowy@CHEMRES.TN.CORNELL.EDU Thu Oct 8 07:42:20 1992 From: m.e. Subject: BIOLOGICAL ALCHEMY (yep....) To: CHEMISTRY@ccl.net (computational chemists) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 11:42:20 EDT Organization: Cornell Chem Grad Student Talk location:ikf@eagle.tc.cornell.edu harbowy@silicon.tn.cornell.edu Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25] > BIOLOGICAL TRANSMUTATIONS > > A very simple experiment can demonstrate (PROVE) the > FACT of "BIOLOGICAL TRANSMUTATIONS" (reactions like Mg + O > --> Ca, Si + C --> Ca, K + H --> Ca, N2 --> CO, etc.), as > described in the BOOK "Biological Transmutations" by Louis > Kervran, [1972 Edition is BEST.], and in Chapter 17 of the > book "THE SECRET LIFE OF PLANTS" [see Footnote] by Peter > Tompkins and Christopher Bird, 1973: gee, first semester went fast... is it april already? :-). -- matt ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- /\ Matthew E. Harbowy Cornell U Chemistry Department Ithaca NY 14853 /__\ harbowy@chemres.tn.cornell.edu (or) ikf@eagle.tc.cornell.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From jkl@ccl.net Thu Oct 8 07:48:25 1992 From: jkl@ccl.net (Jan Labanowski) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 11:48:25 -0400 To: chemistry@ccl.net Subject: Vote on Comp-Chem-List Dear Computational Chemistry List, The list is drifting from its original mission... Many of you suggest that I moderate (censor) the list. No, I will not do it! Why: 1) It would make my institution legally liable for the material being posted. 2) It would make administration of the list a full time job for me. 3) I do not feel qualified to do it. 4) I do not like to be a censor even if it is for the most noble causes. In my naivette, I thought that the list can "moderate" itself. That people who post inappropriate material will be swamped with hundreds of protest messages going only to their personal mailbox. Instead, I am getting most of the "hate" mail, and some of it goes also to the general distribution. This is admitting that I failed in my job as a coordinator of the Computational Chemistry List, and that I have no resources at my disposal to do it right. On the other hand, I think that a real Computational Chemistry List is a nice idea. I presume that a person of much higher stature and resources should take the responsibility of administering the list. Last but not least, running a list, which so many of you consider useless, is a waste of your and my time. Please, do not discuss the topic of the list existence on the list. It will only raise the level of noise to those of us, who are interested in the list's original intent. Instead, I ask you to vote. Please, choose one answer from the following set: A) I want the list to be moved from Ohio Supercomputer Center. B) I want the list to stay at the Ohio Supercomputer Center under current management. Send A or B to jkl@ccl.net or JKL@OHSTPY.BITNET. Please, no comments, just a letter A or B. Your votes will be known only to me and I will protect the anonymity of your votes. Now, voting rules. If I obtain votes from more than 500 of you, I will consider this a quorum. With less than 500 votes, I will keep the list as is and discard the results. In the case of quorum, and the majority of A votes, I will announce the results and we will have another vote on the format of the list and the search of candidates for the List Administrator. Please think (you have over a week) and then vote... Jan Labanowski Still a Computational Chemistry List "Coordinator" jkl@ccl.net Dr. Jan K. Labanowski, Senior Research/Supercomputer Scientist/Specialist, etc. Ohio Supercomputer Center, 1224 Kinnear Rd, Columbus, OH 43212-1163 ph:(614)-292-9279, FAX:(614)-292-7168, E-mail: jkl@ccl.net JKL@OHSTPY.BITNET From omar@malena.crs4.it Thu Oct 8 18:04:46 1992 To: chemistry@ccl.net Subject: Chem. Phys. Lett. who's the Editor ? Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 17:04:46 +0100 From: Omar G. Stradella Hi, Sorry for the silly question, but I don't have any current issue of Chemical Physics Letters to look up the name and address of the Editor (I think is someone called Buckingham, or something like that ?) Thank you all in advance and sorry for taking bandwith for this. Omar (omar@crs4.it) From cramer@chemsun.chem.umn.edu Mon Oct 8 07:29:16 1992 Date: 08 Oct 1992 12:29:16 -0500 (CDT) From: Christopher Cramer Subject: Probability and the benefit of the doubt To: chemistry@ccl.net Martin points out: > The only reason i write is that if people choose > to discuss nonchemical issues, they should do so intelligently. In regards > to the barbie phrase probability, Bob formula was: > 1/270 + 1/269 + 1/268 + 1/267 > I think the correct formula should be: > 1 - (1-1/270)(1-1/269)(1-1/268)(1-1/267) > As a simple example, suppose barbie could say 3 phrases out of a possibility of > 4. the possibilities would be: > 123 124 134 234 > Simple inspection suggest that the probability of any given phrase is 0.75, yet > using bob's formula yields: > 1/4 + 1/3 + 1/2 {or 1.0833} > the correct formula yields: > 1 - (1-1/4)(1-1/3)(1-1/2) {or 0.7500} > Gee, 'MATH IS HARD!!!!' Let's give Bob the benefit of the doubt! Expressed generally, the probability of selecting one specific item in four tries from E total items is: 1 - (1-1/E)[1-1/(E-1)][1-1/(E-2)][1-1/(E-3)] which expands to 1 - {1-(1/E)-[1/(E-1)]-[1/(E-2)]-[1/(E-3)] + terms of order(1/E**2) + terms of order(1/E**3) + term of order(1/E**4)} assuming E is large, we may ignore the second line and come up with Bob's answer. I think we should just assume Bob meant "approximately" -- it's the gracious thing to do. Listen, I started this Barbie thing, and Jan has chastised me, and so he doesn't send me punish me further, have a heart and let's go back to arguing the evils of capitalist hardware and software companies! Chris -- Christopher J. Cramer University of Minnesota Department of Chemistry 207 Pleasant St. SE Minneapolis, MN 55455-0431 From tripos!capella!vandyke@uunet.UU.NET Thu Oct 8 07:57:36 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 12:57:36 CDT From: tripos!capella!vandyke@uunet.UU.NET (Chris Van Dyke) To: CHEMISTRY@!uunet!ccl.net Subject: Objectivity Dear netters, I am quite disturbed at the hostility of the responses to the recent "Biological Alchemy" posting. What bothers me most is closed-mindedness of these responses- not to what the poster had to say, but to his right to say this, without being the subject of sarcastic (...Let [him] cure his own cancer...) or judgemental (...ridiculous garbage...) retorts. I think we all agree that science should be fundamentally objective, i.e., open to presentation of diverse ideas, which can be evaluted each on its own merit. If the proposals put forth do not stand up to scrutiny of evidence, then they are discounted. Otherwise, we accept these as "fact" until such time as further evidence causes us to modify our views of what is "factual". (As an example, remember that the "raisins-in-pudding" picture was once the preferred model of the atom. Our present concept of electrons orbiting a nucleus may have been called "ridiculous garbage" before the evidence was available to support this idea.) The important point to remember is that we must not pre-judge what others have to say, that they must be allowed to express their ideas, and be given the respect of being listened to (please do not equate "listen to" to "agree with"). When we offer inappropriate responses to the presentation of ideas, this is unfair not only to the presentor, but to those of us who wish to judge critically for ourselves, rather than have someone else tell us what is "right" or "wrong". While the ideas offered in the original posting seem to fly in the face of our scientific sensibilities, the real transgressions of the author are 1. Inappropriate subject material for this board. 2. Lack of evidence to support the statements made. Attacks on the author's ability to make critical judgements or attempts to discredit him are just as inflammatory as the material which started this uproar. For the sake of objectivity, wouldn't a more appropriate response address the lack of evidence or innapropriate use of this board, rather than trying to degrade the author or his ideas? Jan has said many times in the past that he will not censor the board, and that "hate mail" (which is what the sarcasm and judgemental remarks are, ladies and gentlemen) should be sent directly to the poster, not to the entire board. If you don't agree with what's being said, why can't you just say that? There really is no reason to be hostile, is there? I welcome your responses, which you may mail directly to me. Regards, Chris Van Dyke From jk@iris68.biosym.com Thu Oct 8 05:20:59 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 12:20:59 -0700 From: jk@iris68.biosym.com (Kottalam) To: chemistry@ccl.net Subject: probability of math-phobic Barbie Both approaches posted earlier seem wrong to me. The correct answer is simply r/N where N is the total number of statements any Barbie can make and r is the number (4) of statements made by any individual Barbie. Yes, I mean that seriously. I may be wrong, but that is what I get. Number of combinations with the mathaphobic statement p = ----------------------------------------------------- Total number of ways to choose r statements out of N The numerator is obtained as follows: First choose the mathaphobic statement. Now choose another (r-1) statements from the remaining (N-1) statements. (N-1)! N! P = --------------------- / --------- (r-1)! [(N-1)-(r-1)]! r! (N-r)! All Stat. Mech. professors note: Give them this problem with the Barbie doll anecdote. That would really turn them off. Kottalam jk@biosym.com (619) 546 5366 \ | / - O - Scientists are objective; / | \ The Earth sucks and they call it gravity. From ross@cgl.ucsf.EDU Thu Oct 8 08:17:05 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 15:17:05 -0700 From: ross@cgl.ucsf.edu (Bill Ross) To: chemistry@ccl.net Subject: water placement I am looking for comment & references on algorithmic water placement around a solute molecule. For example, the simplest method I know of (indeed the only one I have seen implemented) involves superposing a canonical volume of water (or an array of such volumes) on the solute and subtracting waters that overlap with solute atoms. This leads to vdw voids: in the case of a DNA hexamer with counterions in a periodic water box extending ~10 angstroms from the ions, the volume shrinks by about 10% under constant pressure equilibration. Care must be taken in equilibrating such an ensemble to ensure that the initial environment does not have unwanted effects (strategies for this are also solicited). Some of this effort might be alleviated by a better packing strategy, which would lower a hurdle for newcomers to the technology. Ideas/references? Bill Ross From ross@cgl.ucsf.EDU Thu Oct 8 08:17:05 1992 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 15:17:05 -0700 From: ross@cgl.ucsf.edu (Bill Ross) To: chemistry@ccl.net Subject: water placement I am looking for comment & references on algorithmic water placement around a solute molecule. For example, the simplest method I know of (indeed the only one I have seen implemented) involves superposing a canonical volume of water (or an array of such volumes) on the solute and subtracting waters that overlap with solute atoms. This leads to vdw voids: in the case of a DNA hexamer with counterions in a periodic water box extending ~10 angstroms from the ions, the volume shrinks by about 10% under constant pressure equilibration. Care must be taken in equilibrating such an ensemble to ensure that the initial environment does not have unwanted effects (strategies for this are also solicited). Some of this effort might be alleviated by a better packing strategy, which would lower a hurdle for newcomers to the technology. Ideas/references? Bill Ross