All light skinned people are of caucus descent, feel free to ban me for a day for that one too ... 

 "We cannot begin to make that same assertion for the nuclear realm. There are people who will defend QCD far more ferociously and unscrupulously than I have ever seen anyone defend general relativity. They will tell you that “QCD has been confirmed endless times, and of course it has predicted everything correctly.”

But in reality, it has only managed to fit a relatively meager set of things it has tried to predict, and there are major empirical indications which cast doubt even on the things we do know how to test with QCD. Following the scientific method, we should be giving top priority to exactly those kinds of experiments which cast the most doubt, and would pave the way either to greater certainty or to an improved theory.

(One thing is for sure. We know from the existence of dark matter and dark energy that there is something out there beyond the scope of the standard model. How else could we hope to find out what it is, if we do not probe our areas of weakness and doubt first?) But this is not being done.

 

Even though I had taken a graduate course in nuclear physics at Harvard, I was still quite surprised years ago when I read a then-new book by Makhankov et al (The Skyrme Model) describing the present realities of nuclear physics.

(Makhankov was then director of a crucial piece of the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR, Dubna, one of the world’s very top centers.) He explained how QCD was utterly useless for predicting or explaining the wide range of nuclear phenomena they focused on there. These included “low and medium energy” scattering, where “low energy” includes what we would see in an H bomb or a fusion reactor. We are all obliged to start with a prayer to QCD, insallah, and prove that we are among the faithful before our work can be published, but many empirical researchers really wonder if there is any connection at all between the world we actually live in and that mythical paradise.

 

More concretely, the challenge of predicting and explaining the masses and lifetimes of the hadrons is a central challenge in physics today, as important as the challenge of explaining atomic spectra (colors) was at the start of the twentieth century. Some thought that this was a minor part of physics at the time, but it is what really led to quantum mechanics. But could it be that we are offered a similar revolution in understanding, and will never achieve it, because we are now too jaded to take that kind of empirical challenge seriously enough? Why has the careful empirical work of Palazzi and MacGregor not received the level of deep appreciation, respect and follow-up that it deserves from people trying to formulate general theories of physics? "


"But here are the weird things, which I tend to despair of orthodox physics of accepting.

            First, the time-forwards dynamics implied by the classical fields and the P mapping (the free space master equations derived in the most recent paper  at arXiv.org by myself and Ludmilla) are not really relevant to the statistics we observe

macroscopically

in experiments. That is because the conventional notion of time-forwards causality simply does not work at that level.

(Our notion of time & cause & effect... if it doesnt work on the sub-microscopic level, or the sub macroscopic, as this article states, how can we assume it to work on the macroscopic, or in our reality ?
Once you go past the curvature of space, either sub-microscopically, or sub macroscopically, time forwards causality ceases to exist, it also ceases to exist outer macroscopically, it's only when it is distorted within a narrow range by the curvature of space we get the illusion of time & causality - Roony)


            Second, what does work is the quantum Boltzmann equation. For any pure classical state, {p, j} across all space, we know that Tr(r(p,j)H) equals its energy. Thus the classical Boltzmann equation is exactly the same as the grand ensemble quantum Boltzmann equation.

If we consider what patterns of correlation, causality, and scattering networks occur within a periodic space of volume V, and let V go to infinity, we can see that all the scattering predictions and spectral predictions of quantum field theory are embedded in the quantum statistical mechanics.

Consideration of the eigenfunctions of H is essentially just a calculating device for characterizing the properties of the quantum Boltzmann equation, which are exactly equivalent to the classical one here. (Caveat: the usual invariant measures do happen to be equivalent, as noted in the earlier paper by Ludmilla and myself. However, the set of density matrices considered allowable in quantum theory is more than just the set which are reachable as P transforms of allowable classical probability distributions; see my arXiv paper on the Q hypothesis. This may or may not have important implications here, where the Boltzmann density is itself P-reachable; this is a question I need to look into more.). What is most exciting here is that a purely bosonic theory with a small h(¶mQa)2 term added may give us what we need for a completely valid quantum field theory on the one hand, and that a quantum Boltzmann distribution based on that same Hamiltonian may be exactly equivalent to the same statistical distribution we expect for the corresponding classical PDE;

thus a full “return to reality” may well be possible, not just at the level of philosophical possibilities, but at the level of specific well-posed PDE which fit empirical reality better than today’s “standard model of physics.”

Unfortunately – this is the conclusion which emerges from combining the various threads I have been exploring, each one of which already stretches the present fabric of physics because it connects areas that are not often connected in today’s overspecialized world."

    Coconut kefir?  The bubbly stuff that comes from culturing liver just right?

    I agree, straight milk is good for mammal babies.

    Does KD have to go ketogenic?  I'm not sure of that.

Culturing liver to make kefir?

Havent heard of that one, how do you culture liver to make kefir?


He doesnt have to no, its upto him at the end of the day, if he's terminally ill, or plain sick, he might have to

Please, stop with the absolute blanket statements.
If I had done this "absolutely necessary" course of action when I started I'd have gotten much worse much quicker.
If you feel the need to push something like raw dairy please do so in a properly tempered way such as "In my experience raw cream & butter are great ways for a beginner to transition". It's not hard to take the extra two seconds.

I explained why it was necessary

Obviously if you cant tolerate dairy dont take it ...


You need animal fats to transition to a ketogenic diet, raw cream contains a good mixture of high fats & carbs, i dont recommend milk for reasons in my main post above

Kefir is even better & highly recommended over raw dairy

Whaaat? The low fat guru has seen the light, and gone high fat?
He does push carbs.

You need a url for that whopper.

All his interviews on Mercola, are low carb

I also have acidic urine (around 6).  However, like you and Lex I have so far not suffered any bone or tooth problems.  In fact, my teeth have become less sensitive since I started eating more meat.  I have tried to find scientific papers on PubMed and the like that validate the Acid/Alkaline theory but so far have found none.  I'm beginning to think it's probably pseudoscience.  The body very tightly regulates the ph of the blood and other important things as part of its homeostasis.  The idea of the body being acidified by a certain type of diet doesn't make immediate sense to me, and as long as you are getting enough raw materials for it to maintain homeostasis I don't see how anything could disturb it one way or another.

The acid/alkaline theory is barely pseudo, its completely wrong, all the organs & different parts of the body have different types of acidity & alkalinity, there is no uniform acidity or alkanity in the body as a whole ...

    Hi KD.  Good to see you posting. 

    I haven't tried charcoal or clay, but if it was me I might give it a shot.  I don't know if you've tried them.  It's not me anyway. 

    I've never been treated for cancer nor been treated with steroids or any of your meds, so I don't know from my own experience what may work for that.  I did take a medication at a fairly high dose that is typically used for depression, anxiety, OCD, panic disorder, PTSD, PMDD and/or anxiety disorder.  I was also taking (at first natural and then) synthetic thyroid hormone at the same time of the antidepressant.  The natural I did not take very high of a dose, but the synthetic was slightly high, but still was according to what they found worked for me.  I was able to get off all medication fairly quickly.  I did have other medical conditions, but I refused treatment for them before the doctor even got the words out of the mouth to prescribe. 

    I have to hand it to you.  I would have felt too bad psychically to accept any more than I did from them.  It can take bravery to accept these helps that are so drastic.  I didn't have the guts.  I also had behind me knowledge of raw and health etc, so I felt a surety in avoiding medication.  I guess I was always trained against chemo and steroids to some extents from a very young age, or I trained myself from what was shared with me. 

    In my situation, one thing that has helped me from reabsorbing my toxins, is totally raw and grassfed unsalted (kind of hard textured) cheese before each thing I eat or drink every time.  I don't know if you have tried this, but if you have not, it may be worth a try.  If you need an additional source, I can try to help you.

I recommend charcoal, as its the first thing used for poisoning, even chronic poisoning, short of stomach pumping ... all pharmaceuticals are poisons, as theyre synthetic or extracted from their natural state

Clay is also good

Easily the best way to to go off medications, without the side effects, & withdrawl symptoms of ingesting toxic pharmaceutical poisons

Next time I want to buy fish I will ask the fishmonger and find out for us.  (But that might be a long time off, as even the thought of it makes my stomach turnover.  The poor man might have lost a customer for life.  :lol:)

Yes, salmon is often farmed.  Maybe because they have a freshwater phase and it can easily be done in rivers and estuaries, but as I say I'm no expert.

lol, you have to be crafty with most fishmongers & farmers, they shoot farmed pheasants too ... I normally ask the origin & ask what they were fed

Yes of course. Evolution is first of all just a fact, whether one likes it or not. Period.

Darwin's natural selection and more recently complex systems theory is a theory that may explain or explains yet a good deal of the characteristic features of evolution, whether one likes it or not. Period.



  

Go & prove it in a lab, experimentally unprovable theories, only a fundamentalist would ever refer to an experimentally unprovable theory as fact


Which spells out the type of people, irrational & fundamentalist, who'd consider an unprovable science such as evolution as fact, fundamentalists, fanatics, extremists

Pretty much sums most people who believe in something as racist & eugenic as evolution, with its roots in aryanism & supremacy

It may be what you consider killing the host.  Try going to a medical library and look at the books on parasitology and look at some of the infested organs of humans.   It may change your opinion.

Only if they're diseased & suffering from toxecimia, in which case those very same parasites repair & clean up, if the person continues to eat toxic foods, such as cooked foods


If the person is so far gone, & toxic, ie eating cooked foods for long periods of time, he will get extreme virulent parasitical infestations, especially designed to clean & repair toxic environments, created from eating cooked foods, or vegan & other nutrional regimes


Extreme parasitical infestations, are also the result of toxic buildings & sick buildings & toxic city urban environments, they like rodents & insects & bacteria, keep toxic environments in check & extreme bacterial mutations from reproducing

Thanks for the tip William.  I'll certainly not be trying them (even dried) until they stop giving me the "dry heaves" just to look at! :lol:

They were probably farmed, or at least not wild, wild sardines & herring, are hard to come by & expensive, after researching them ....

It is a well-known fact that frutarian are all obese 
Fructose does not exist alone in natural food. In fruits, fructose naturally form a good balance with glucose and each follows a different metabolic pathway. So it is a non sens to talk about fructose alone.
Carbs, like protein, can make your blood sugar skyrocket only if you overeat them.

Non sens

Depends on your body chemistry make up, as Cordain points out, ALL fructose & carbs will raise your blood sugar levels, how high depends on how poor your immune system functions, ie your insulin response & your resistance


How effectively you dampen or absorb the results of those blood sugar levels, is down to the individual