Essential Oils, It's Not All About The Chemistry

originally posted by: Bedlam

Science, which have nothing to do with 'vibrations' as you're using the term.

EM doesn't vibrate. Nothing's vibrating in a photon.

Ok. So, maybe you know more science than I do. I'll grant you that.

Please then, tell me what is meant by "frequency" the "v" in the equation. K.E. = h.v - W

If "frequency" doesn't mean "vibration", what is it?

originally posted by: angelchemuel
a reply to: Bedlam

We are talking about using Essential Oils as they have been extracted, and bottled for the public to use.

So is he, although he's using scientific principles instead of anecdote to evaluate its efficacy.

Quite a few doctors use 50/50 tto/macadamia for treatment of rosacea. You can even use it on your eyelid margins to kill the demodex mites that cause rosacea. Although,frankly, it takes getting used to. But for me, it's more effective than terpineol, although the terpineol is supposed to be the active ingredient.

Have you used any Essential oils in your home?
I don't know why I am even bothering to ask you this question seeing as you haven't bothered to answer any of my other others
I now chose to totally ignore you and your ill informed machinations.

My machinations have published science behind them, typically.

a reply to: AMPTAH

Im pretty much a dumb ass and im sure im wrong but look at a photons frequency like this.

Here goes nothing.

Say you have a distance ten units long. The more energy a photon has the "larger" it will be. Say "large" energetic photon is 5 units in size(wavelength aka lambda). It will have a frequency of 2. In that 10 unit distance two photons can fit in there.

If the photon has less energy it will be "smaller". say only 2 units in size. it can fit in that 10 unit space 5 times. It has a freqency of 5.

Got nothing to do with vibrations. Never has. Gots to do with planck's constant.

But dont listen to me. I understand and know very little and thats my attempt to explain frequency in regatds to EM.

But your emited em frequecy from brain waves has nothing to do with physical vibrations. It cant alter matter to be coherent or disorganized.

And im still trying to figure out what abu if the above has to do with essential oils

originally posted by: BASSPLYR

Got nothing to do with vibrations. Never has. Gots to do with planck's constant.

But dont listen to me. I understand and know very little and thats my attempt to explain frequency in regatds to EM.

This is very interesting. I'm beginning to see part of the problem.

But, let me ask one more question, about antennas.

When a radio station broadcasts an EM signal, how does the charged electrons in the receiving antenna respond?

I mean, we usually "tune" the dial on the radio to a "frequency" right?

But, as you say, "frequency" has nothing to to with EM.

So, how does the radio transmit and receive work?

What on earth is the "frequency" people keep talking about for radio stations?

a reply to: AMPTAH

I never said frequency has nothing to do with EM. It certainly does. Im saying EM frequency isnt a vibration.

As for antennas id direct that question to Bedlam. Hes much more knowledgable in that stuff than me. Im just a dumbass who understands little of the mystery of EM propigation.

originally posted by: angelchemuel
a reply to: texasgirl

Hi there.
Thank you for taking the time to respond.
I love spearmint as an alternative to peppermint in many cases. I've also found clary-sage to be a perfect remedy for migraine.
As to clove. Yes that age old remedy is good for toothache, and as you rightly said is good for numbing the pain, however it doesn't get to the 'root' of the problem, please excuse the pun

I don't have clove in my kit, neither do I encourage my students to have it in theirs. Recently I had really bad toothache, it started on a client Retreat to Spain. The 'root' problem was infact sinus trouble and the flight just made it worse to the point I could not chew, and the tooth had become loose. When I returned to the UK, even though there was an improvement, the dentist just wanted to remove it. Thankfully I disagreed and continued to treat my sinuses. It is no longer painful, a bit wobbly still, but at least I have saved my tooth.

Rainbows
Jane

I had tried many other remedies for my toothache before settling on clove bud. The others, like peppermit oil, didn't work (but was surprised at how well it worked for tension headaches!). I used the clove bud to numb the pain until the advil kicked in.

BTW...I still have my tooth.

a reply to: AMPTAH

sent you a pm yesterday to keep it off the thread, since it's really off topic. Go check.

Eta: conversely, re-ask over on the ask any question about physics thread.

a reply to: AMPTAH

Id strongly recommend reading his PM. Bedlams extremly, extremly knowledgeable regarding this topic. I wont say why but its a good bet that there is nobody on ats whos better suited to explain EM to you. If you are interested in learning about this topic than you couldnt ask for a better person to learn from than him. Plus hes funny too once you get to know him.

a reply to: Bedlam

Thank you Bedlam, I really appreciate that
Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: AMPTAH

sent you a pm yesterday to keep it off the thread, since it's really off topic. Go check.

Eta: conversely, re-ask over on the ask any question about physics thread.

Thanks, Bedlam.

I didn't see that as off topic, since the OP said,

What also affects the oil's chemistry is the vibration around it. Just like us humans, if we live in a 'negative' environment, then we become negative, subdued and eventually ill. if we live in a 'positive' environment we are happy and well. Our 'vibration' rises. This is very fundamental physics which all of us can relate to.

The OP made an assertion that "vibration" around the environment affects the "oil's chemistry." And claimed very clearly that this is "very fundamental physics" that we can relate to. Maybe the OP is wrong. But, I think it was very on topic to discuss the "physics of vibration" in the context of the OP hypothesis.

As you probably know, but bears repeating, all vibrations are "in place motions", that is "kinetic activity", where the average center of mass of the moving phenomena remains fixed, while it nevertheless exhibits movement; and all such "vibrations" can be represented as a superposition of simple "sine" or "cosine" functions, which are the basic waves in physics. This is referred to Fourier's Theorem, from J.B.J.Fourier who discovered this some time in the 1700s.

Usually, the "vibration" is made up of one main simple "frequency," which has most of the energy, and a number of smaller "harmonics", which have smaller energy. So, a guitar string, for example, when plucked, vibrates, at one particular "tone", but also at a number of "overtones", and the distribution of these overtones determines the quality of sound in that particular guitar, and enable the listener to distinguish between guitars, and between different instruments like violin, cello, piano, etc.. even while they all play the same fundamental tone.

When it comes to photons, we again have one main "frequency", and a number of nearby frequencies that make up a "packet" of energy for the EM wave. It is usual to talk of the "frequency" of a photon, even though, by Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, dt x dv > h, it can never be known, since it would take "infinite time" to determine the frequency exactly. So, a photon is always a packet of energy, with a range of frequencies, but it does have one dominant frequency in that packet, the central frequency, which is what scientists refer to when they write, E = hv.

So, the photon is like the plucked string on a guitar, one main frequency, by which we reference this "vibration", and a bunch of other frequencies that actually make up the total energy involved.

I get the impression, that you have some different interpretation of the word "vibration", than that of physics. Or rather, you think perhaps there are "two" different interpretations of the word, one valid for "physics," and one that "mystics" use.

That could be the source of the confusion. But, I'm just guessing here, since I only have one definition of vibration myself, and it's the same one used in physics. I don't know if new agers have a "special" definition for vibration.

So, I'm limited by the little physics I know.

Once something in the environment is "vibrating" it tends to "influence" other things in the environment to vibrate in sync. This "induction" is a basic observation in physics. Two old fashion grandfather clocks placed side by side, for example, with all moving mechanical parts, will be found to "beat" at exactly the same phase, after sitting near each other for a sufficiently long period of time. This happens even though the clocks may have initially started out completely "out of sync" with each other when first placed there. Over the long period of time, little chunks of energy is exchanged between the clocks, until they begin to act in the same way.


When it comes to "chemistry", most chemistry is studied under "thermal environments", where the key parameter is the temperature, which governs the rate of reactions between chemical molecules. That thermal environment involves "random motions", and there isn't a lot of understanding yet about the effects of "harmonic motions" on chemical processes, where molecules are moving or vibrating in sync. But we do know that some vibrations, or photons at specific frequencies, can break chemical bonds, or weaken chemical bonds so that reactions occur faster etc... So, there's some impact of vibrations on the chemistry.

The question then arises, can we consider the human brain to be an antenna, sending and receiving EM waves, causing an influence on the environment, affecting chemical molecules in the neighborhood. We already know that thought affects the chemistry of the brain, influencing the chemical molecules inside the skull. But, what about outside the skull, in the neighboring environment. That's the OP's assertion.

We know that we can pick up the EM waves from the brain using scientific instruments, and measure this activity. But, is the strength of these EM waves strong enough to affect chemical molecules "out there" ?

I think, that's what the OP is getting at. So, this is definitely all on topic.

a reply to: angelchemuel

Guess what I got for xmas? Besides all the other wonderful things my Sister gave me, she gave me a bottle of lavender essential oil and a bottle that is really awesome with lavender, grapefruit and yang yang!