#Login Register


  • 6 Vote(s) - 1.67 Average
Home 


Confirmed science proves 5G will bring deadly doom to your home soon
Optimus Prime Show this Post
09-02-2018, 07:42 AM #16
Optimus Prime Incognito Anonymous
 
We cannot isolate a single molecule of ionic compound because Ions are electrostatically bound. One need only separate them with inegrated inverse squared distance work. If you mix multiple ionic compounds in solvent, a melt, gas phase, the original paired associations are spontaneously scrambled. Benzene plus xylene does not give you toluene. "Separating" benzene is not electrostatic attraction.

Quaternized glycine, + N(CH 3 ) 3 −CH 2 −C(=O)O −
X+X22+N(CHX3)X3−CHX2−C(=O)OX−
, is betaine. It is ionic, but the ions are covalently bound into a molecule. Where are the discrete formula units in alumina? You can draw lines to connect closest atoms, but those are not bonds. (Note fractional atom counts for atoms embedded in planes, edges, and corners.)
Queen of Diamonds Show this Post
09-02-2018, 07:47 AM #17
Queen of Diamonds Incognito Anonymous
 


A dog named Todd Show this Post
09-02-2018, 07:56 AM #18
A dog named Todd Incognito Anonymous
 
İmage
Mike Litorus Show this Post
09-02-2018, 08:17 AM #19
Mike Litorus Incognito Anonymous
 
Since the two strands of DNA are negatively charged because of the phosphate group, why don’t they they repel each other?

Keith Robison, studied at Ph.D. in Molecular & Cellular Biology

This is why counterion concentrations should be taken into account when calculating denaturation (“melting”) temperatures ™ for DNA in PCR or other experiments. Positively charged ions, typically Na+, also help shield the two strands from each other, so DNA will have a lower melting temperature in pure water than in a buffer with a significant concentration of Na+.

It is also notoriously what Linus Pauling, one of the greatest chemists of all time, got wrong in his proposed structure for DNA — he had the phosphate chains on the inside of the helix rather than outside. Watson and Crick also toyed with an inside-out structure, but the problem was pointed out to them.
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
09-02-2018, 08:33 AM #20
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
I see.
Na+ actually keeps the cell's ions from repelling
But the danger is that
Sodium attracts water. The excess of these ions increase blood pressure, cell water loss, increasing water intake. irritability. No ions to substitute.
09-02-2018, 08:46 AM #21
Below Average Genius Member
Posts:2,979 Threads:299 Joined:Apr 2013
(09-02-2018, 08:17 AM)Mike Litorus Wrote:  Since the two strands of DNA are negatively charged because of the phosphate group, why don’t they they repel each other?

Keith Robison, studied at Ph.D. in Molecular & Cellular Biology

This is why counterion concentrations should be taken into account when calculating denaturation (“melting”) temperatures ™ for DNA in PCR or other experiments. Positively charged ions, typically Na+, also help shield the two strands from each other, so DNA will have a lower melting temperature in pure water than in a buffer with a significant concentration of Na+.

It is also notoriously what Linus Pauling, one of the greatest chemists of all time, got wrong in his proposed structure for DNA — he had the phosphate chains on the inside of the helix rather than outside. Watson and Crick also toyed with an inside-out structure, but the problem was pointed out to them.

I would say you're hoping each person on this planet can draw an inside royal straight flush every second of every day in terms of two positively charged ions being able to avoid repelling each other in each of their 75 trillion cells at each of their Voltage gated channels each time one of the four electrolytes makes its trip.

Yet we have confirmed evidence that this is indeed not the case based on the research of Krueger and Smith at the University of Californa in the late 1950's. When they exposed cilia to positive ions, the cilia slowed down or stopped beating due to the effects on the VGCCs. The cilia sped up when exposed to negative ions.

Let me suggest that since the real risk is poorer health due to slowed and stopped cilia, which can produce extremely serious results including that it can kill a person, and in fact can kill all 350 million residents of the US in the next year, we should set aside poker cards and poker odds, and deal with reality.

This isn't a parlor game of theoretical chemistry. Confirmed science tells us we must stop going forward with 5G at least until it is tested with ceramic bricks attached to each cell mast, or better yet, until proven to be safe in addition to the cell masts being attached.

The evidence is overwhelmingly clear. There is no winning hand in this poker game.

Let's make 5G safe by installing zirconium ceramic bricks to the cell masts. It will save the providers billions of dollars quickly by reducing interference.

Can you ask yourself "Why do I love discovering how my protons can experience Loving Kindness?"



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com