wrote:
> Up to the person cooking to leave out the salt. I think recipes are
> guidelines anyway. But I once had a sandwich at a "healthy"
> restaurant on Cape Cod and it was inedible (to me anyway) because it
> was served on unsalted bread. My Aunt made an Easter Bread with no
> salt, and it tasted like garbage even made into French toast. We
> ended up salting the French Toast.

Would you please quote at least part of what you're replying to? Unless I'd
been following this thread I'd have absolutely no idea what you're talking
about. Thank you.

Jill

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:15:39 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
> >
> >
> >"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:39:55 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
> >> > scribbled some thoughts:
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Andrew H. Carter" > wrote in message
> >> >>
> >> >> Tell, you what, how about going into a oxygen rich room and
> >> >> then striking a match then come back if possible and report
> >> >> your findings.
> >> >
> >> >It is still not considered a flammable gas, but an oxidant. It support
> >> >combustion but does not cause it. FWIW, a portion of my income is from
> >> >handling oxygen so I took the time to learn a little about it.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I should think the definition needs to be changed.
> >>
> >> http://www.bocindustrial.com/safety/..._of_oxygen.asp
> >>
> >> Smoking
> >>
> >> Many burning accidents which occur are triggered off by the
> >> lighting of a cigarette, therefore it is impossible to
> >> over-emphasise the danger of smoking in oxygen enriched
> >> atmospheres or where oxygen enrichment can occur. In such
> >> areas smoking must be forbidden.
> >>
> >> So it's okay to strike up a match in an oxygen rich room?
> >
> >No because oxygen *supports* combustion even though it isn't flammable
> >itself. That's basic chemistry.
> >>
> >> If you cannot have a fire without oxygen, then what praytell
> >> is oxygen, a fire retardant? Will hydrogen burn in the
> >> absence of oxygen?
> >
> >Yes certainly. We did that experiment in high school chemistry; hydrogen
> >collected from the electrolysis of pure water and ignited by a spark.
> >>
>
> We did that too!, but it was in a room where oxygen was
> present.

We did it in a sealed system. No oxygen present.


I'm not talking cold fusion, I'm talking absolute
> 100% hydrogen combustion in a vacuum at least where there is
> no Oxygen present at all, no other gas present except
> hydrogen. I bet that did not happen.

It did. Simple system of otherwise evacuated glass tubing. Pretty
standard stuff.

At the same time in
> space where there is no oxygen due to the lack of gravity,
> it would be curious to solve that riddle.

Stars burn hydrogen.

>
> While burning hydrogen "produces" water and Oxygen, it
> doesn't really, the combustion of such accumulates those
> molecules/atoms.

Burning hydrogen produces water in the presence of oxygen, as in H2O. No
oxygen, no water produced.

But this isn't the place to discuss this anyway LOL!


> Anyway, back to the point. Sodium and Salt are not the same
> things.


True, but common table salt is sodium chloride. In the presence of
water, it dissociates into Na+ and Cl- ions. When someone needs to cut
back on sodium (in certain medical conditions), it doesn't matter from
where the Na+ originates. It can come from table salt or foods
containing relatively large amounts of sodium (such as raw celery or raw
carrots).

If such are, then one could say (like the marketers
> do when they say: Sodium/Salt needs to be cut back):
>
> "Oxygen/Water needs to be cut back, we consume too much of
> it."
>
>
You must not live in a desert. It's very easy to consume too much water
And there is such a thing as water intoxication, which is consumption
of too much water.
Too much oxygen is also unhealthy in the long term. You did know the
atmosphere you breathe is about 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent
oxygen?

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:15:39 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
> >
> >
> >"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:39:55 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
> >> > scribbled some thoughts:
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Andrew H. Carter" > wrote in message
> >> >>
> >> >> Tell, you what, how about going into a oxygen rich room and
> >> >> then striking a match then come back if possible and report
> >> >> your findings.
> >> >
> >> >It is still not considered a flammable gas, but an oxidant. It support
> >> >combustion but does not cause it. FWIW, a portion of my income is from
> >> >handling oxygen so I took the time to learn a little about it.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I should think the definition needs to be changed.
> >>
> >> http://www.bocindustrial.com/safety/..._of_oxygen.asp
> >>
> >> Smoking
> >>
> >> Many burning accidents which occur are triggered off by the
> >> lighting of a cigarette, therefore it is impossible to
> >> over-emphasise the danger of smoking in oxygen enriched
> >> atmospheres or where oxygen enrichment can occur. In such
> >> areas smoking must be forbidden.
> >>
> >> So it's okay to strike up a match in an oxygen rich room?
> >
> >No because oxygen *supports* combustion even though it isn't flammable
> >itself. That's basic chemistry.
> >>
> >> If you cannot have a fire without oxygen, then what praytell
> >> is oxygen, a fire retardant? Will hydrogen burn in the
> >> absence of oxygen?
> >
> >Yes certainly. We did that experiment in high school chemistry; hydrogen
> >collected from the electrolysis of pure water and ignited by a spark.
> >>
>
> We did that too!, but it was in a room where oxygen was
> present.

We did it in a sealed system. No oxygen present.


I'm not talking cold fusion, I'm talking absolute
> 100% hydrogen combustion in a vacuum at least where there is
> no Oxygen present at all, no other gas present except
> hydrogen. I bet that did not happen.

It did. Simple system of otherwise evacuated glass tubing. Pretty
standard stuff.

At the same time in
> space where there is no oxygen due to the lack of gravity,
> it would be curious to solve that riddle.

Stars burn hydrogen.

>
> While burning hydrogen "produces" water and Oxygen, it
> doesn't really, the combustion of such accumulates those
> molecules/atoms.

Burning hydrogen produces water in the presence of oxygen, as in H2O. No
oxygen, no water produced.

But this isn't the place to discuss this anyway LOL!


> Anyway, back to the point. Sodium and Salt are not the same
> things.


True, but common table salt is sodium chloride. In the presence of
water, it dissociates into Na+ and Cl- ions. When someone needs to cut
back on sodium (in certain medical conditions), it doesn't matter from
where the Na+ originates. It can come from table salt or foods
containing relatively large amounts of sodium (such as raw celery or raw
carrots).

If such are, then one could say (like the marketers
> do when they say: Sodium/Salt needs to be cut back):
>
> "Oxygen/Water needs to be cut back, we consume too much of
> it."
>
>
You must not live in a desert. It's very easy to consume too much water
And there is such a thing as water intoxication, which is consumption
of too much water.
Too much oxygen is also unhealthy in the long term. You did know the
atmosphere you breathe is about 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent
oxygen?

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:47:55 -0700, Arri London
> scribbled some thoughts:



>
>We did it in a sealed system. No oxygen present.
>
>

Sealed system? So all the air was sucked out? Cool.


>
>Stars burn hydrogen.

We surmise they do from the photographic evidence, but could
not the atmosphere (Earth's and space dust) alter the
evidence? Even the Sun, our closest star is guessed that it
is hydrogen being burned, but it is so big that at best it
is mere speculation. Kinda a bummer that the satellite bit
the dust which could have given definite proof of the Sun's
nature, at least the solar flares.


>
>Burning hydrogen produces water in the presence of oxygen, as in H2O. No
>oxygen, no water produced.
>
>But this isn't the place to discuss this anyway LOL!


True.

>> Anyway, back to the point. Sodium and Salt are not the same
>> things.
>
>
>True, but common table salt is sodium chloride. In the presence of
>water, it dissociates into Na+ and Cl- ions. When someone needs to cut
>back on sodium (in certain medical conditions), it doesn't matter from
>where the Na+ originates. It can come from table salt or foods
>containing relatively large amounts of sodium (such as raw celery or raw
>carrots).
>
>If such are, then one could say (like the marketers
>> do when they say: Sodium/Salt needs to be cut back):
>>
>> "Oxygen/Water needs to be cut back, we consume too much of
>> it."
>>
>>
>You must not live in a desert. It's very easy to consume too much water
> And there is such a thing as water intoxication, which is consumption
>of too much water.
>Too much oxygen is also unhealthy in the long term. You did know the
>atmosphere you breathe is about 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent
>oxygen?


Yeah, pure oxygen is sort of sweet smelling. Like
everything, too much of a good thing can be as bad as not
enough: Vitamin C, Vitamin A, Selenium, the necessary
poison.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:47:55 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
>
> >
> >We did it in a sealed system. No oxygen present.
> >
> >
>
> Sealed system? So all the air was sucked out? Cool.

It was. All hand-blown etc. Only dragged out once a year and the teacher
did the demo; we students weren't allowed to touch it.


> >
> >Stars burn hydrogen.
>
> We surmise they do from the photographic evidence, but could
> not the atmosphere (Earth's and space dust) alter the
> evidence?

No. Easy enough to subtract spectroscopically.


>Even the Sun, our closest star is guessed that it
> is hydrogen being burned, but it is so big that at best it
> is mere speculation. Kinda a bummer that the satellite bit
> the dust which could have given definite proof of the Sun's
> nature, at least the solar flares.

Why is it speculation? The spectroscopy is fairly straightforward.
>
> >
> >Burning hydrogen produces water in the presence of oxygen, as in H2O. No
> >oxygen, no water produced.
> >
> >But this isn't the place to discuss this anyway LOL!
>
>
> True.
>
> >> Anyway, back to the point. Sodium and Salt are not the same
> >> things.
> >
> >
> >True, but common table salt is sodium chloride. In the presence of
> >water, it dissociates into Na+ and Cl- ions. When someone needs to cut
> >back on sodium (in certain medical conditions), it doesn't matter from
> >where the Na+ originates. It can come from table salt or foods
> >containing relatively large amounts of sodium (such as raw celery or raw
> >carrots).
> >
> >If such are, then one could say (like the marketers
> >> do when they say: Sodium/Salt needs to be cut back):
> >>
> >> "Oxygen/Water needs to be cut back, we consume too much of
> >> it."
> >>
> >>
> >You must not live in a desert. It's very easy to consume too much water
> > And there is such a thing as water intoxication, which is consumption
> >of too much water.
> >Too much oxygen is also unhealthy in the long term. You did know the
> >atmosphere you breathe is about 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent
> >oxygen?
>
> Yeah, pure oxygen is sort of sweet smelling. Like
> everything, too much of a good thing can be as bad as not
> enough: Vitamin C, Vitamin A, Selenium, the necessary
> poison.
>

Dunno about sweet smelling; the word oxygen means acid former

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 16:47:55 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
>
> >
> >We did it in a sealed system. No oxygen present.
> >
> >
>
> Sealed system? So all the air was sucked out? Cool.

It was. All hand-blown etc. Only dragged out once a year and the teacher
did the demo; we students weren't allowed to touch it.


> >
> >Stars burn hydrogen.
>
> We surmise they do from the photographic evidence, but could
> not the atmosphere (Earth's and space dust) alter the
> evidence?

No. Easy enough to subtract spectroscopically.


>Even the Sun, our closest star is guessed that it
> is hydrogen being burned, but it is so big that at best it
> is mere speculation. Kinda a bummer that the satellite bit
> the dust which could have given definite proof of the Sun's
> nature, at least the solar flares.

Why is it speculation? The spectroscopy is fairly straightforward.
>
> >
> >Burning hydrogen produces water in the presence of oxygen, as in H2O. No
> >oxygen, no water produced.
> >
> >But this isn't the place to discuss this anyway LOL!
>
>
> True.
>
> >> Anyway, back to the point. Sodium and Salt are not the same
> >> things.
> >
> >
> >True, but common table salt is sodium chloride. In the presence of
> >water, it dissociates into Na+ and Cl- ions. When someone needs to cut
> >back on sodium (in certain medical conditions), it doesn't matter from
> >where the Na+ originates. It can come from table salt or foods
> >containing relatively large amounts of sodium (such as raw celery or raw
> >carrots).
> >
> >If such are, then one could say (like the marketers
> >> do when they say: Sodium/Salt needs to be cut back):
> >>
> >> "Oxygen/Water needs to be cut back, we consume too much of
> >> it."
> >>
> >>
> >You must not live in a desert. It's very easy to consume too much water
> > And there is such a thing as water intoxication, which is consumption
> >of too much water.
> >Too much oxygen is also unhealthy in the long term. You did know the
> >atmosphere you breathe is about 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent
> >oxygen?
>
> Yeah, pure oxygen is sort of sweet smelling. Like
> everything, too much of a good thing can be as bad as not
> enough: Vitamin C, Vitamin A, Selenium, the necessary
> poison.
>

Dunno about sweet smelling; the word oxygen means acid former

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:38:41 -0700, Arri London
> scribbled some thoughts:


>Why is it speculation? The spectroscopy is fairly straightforward.


Just like cholesterol (bad type) is said to be bad, now
studies have shown it to be necessary for proper brain
function. So one could say, and I will always hold true,
man at best is a moron. Were it not so, then why is it
that:

* The helmets of the US military and German military have
been swapped after the war, each believing the other to be
better at stopping bullets.

* Product fashions have gone in circles: cars went from
electric, to round corners, to square corners, to angular
corners, to roundish corners and now to electric cars again.

As soon as an idea/theory is formed, someone later forms
another one to debunk it, or to shed light on another
possibility. Case in point the Clovis point people being
thought t9o have come from the Bering land bridge, but an
older site (Topper Site in Aiken, S. Carolina) has an
identical point, as does one in France IIRC.

The only truths: death and taxes, all else is speculation.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

"Phred" > schreef in bericht
...
> So, is there any truth in the story that Belgians reckon copper wire
> was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny?
>
> Cheers, Phred.

As much truth as in the story of the extra pedal to inflate the air bag in a
Belgian car

"Phred" > schreef in bericht
...
> So, is there any truth in the story that Belgians reckon copper wire
> was invented by two Dutchmen fighting over a penny?
>
> Cheers, Phred.

As much truth as in the story of the extra pedal to inflate the air bag in a
Belgian car

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:38:41 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
> >Why is it speculation? The spectroscopy is fairly straightforward.
>
> Just like cholesterol (bad type) is said to be bad, now
> studies have shown it to be necessary for proper brain
> function.

That's always been known; I learnt that in first year biochemistry some
time ago. NOthing new there. It is the excess that is bad, not the
molecule.

So one could say, and I will always hold true,
> man at best is a moron. Were it not so, then why is it
> that:
>
> * The helmets of the US military and German military have
> been swapped after the war, each believing the other to be
> better at stopping bullets.

Superstition.

>
> * Product fashions have gone in circles: cars went from
> electric, to round corners, to square corners, to angular
> corners, to roundish corners and now to electric cars again.

Because there is nothing new under the sun? Something to that effect is
found in many if not all of the ancient scriptures.

>
> As soon as an idea/theory is formed, someone later forms
> another one to debunk it, or to shed light on another
> possibility.

Yes. That is the way science works.

Case in point the Clovis point people being
> thought t9o have come from the Bering land bridge, but an
> older site (Topper Site in Aiken, S. Carolina) has an
> identical point, as does one in France IIRC.

A.) There is nothing new under the sun.
B.) Great minds think alike.
>
> The only truths: death and taxes, all else is speculation.

No no no. You have it all wrong. It's: Nothing exists except atoms and
empty space; everything else is opinion.
(Diogenes Laertius, although often attributed to Democritus)
>
> --
>
> Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
> | (©) (©)
> Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
> d(-_-)b | /// \\\

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:38:41 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
> >Why is it speculation? The spectroscopy is fairly straightforward.
>
> Just like cholesterol (bad type) is said to be bad, now
> studies have shown it to be necessary for proper brain
> function.

That's always been known; I learnt that in first year biochemistry some
time ago. NOthing new there. It is the excess that is bad, not the
molecule.

So one could say, and I will always hold true,
> man at best is a moron. Were it not so, then why is it
> that:
>
> * The helmets of the US military and German military have
> been swapped after the war, each believing the other to be
> better at stopping bullets.

Superstition.

>
> * Product fashions have gone in circles: cars went from
> electric, to round corners, to square corners, to angular
> corners, to roundish corners and now to electric cars again.

Because there is nothing new under the sun? Something to that effect is
found in many if not all of the ancient scriptures.

>
> As soon as an idea/theory is formed, someone later forms
> another one to debunk it, or to shed light on another
> possibility.

Yes. That is the way science works.

Case in point the Clovis point people being
> thought t9o have come from the Bering land bridge, but an
> older site (Topper Site in Aiken, S. Carolina) has an
> identical point, as does one in France IIRC.

A.) There is nothing new under the sun.
B.) Great minds think alike.
>
> The only truths: death and taxes, all else is speculation.

No no no. You have it all wrong. It's: Nothing exists except atoms and
empty space; everything else is opinion.
(Diogenes Laertius, although often attributed to Democritus)
>
> --
>
> Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
> | (©) (©)
> Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
> d(-_-)b | /// \\\

"Arri London" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:15:39 -0700, Arri London
>> > scribbled some thoughts:
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 05:39:55 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
>> >> > scribbled some thoughts:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Andrew H. Carter" > wrote in message
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Tell, you what, how about going into a oxygen rich room and
>> >> >> then striking a match then come back if possible and report
>> >> >> your findings.
>> >> >
>> >> >It is still not considered a flammable gas, but an oxidant. It
>> >> >support
>> >> >combustion but does not cause it. FWIW, a portion of my income is
>> >> >from
>> >> >handling oxygen so I took the time to learn a little about it.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I should think the definition needs to be changed.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.bocindustrial.com/safety/..._of_oxygen.asp
>> >>
>> >> Smoking
>> >>
>> >> Many burning accidents which occur are triggered off by the
>> >> lighting of a cigarette, therefore it is impossible to
>> >> over-emphasise the danger of smoking in oxygen enriched
>> >> atmospheres or where oxygen enrichment can occur. In such
>> >> areas smoking must be forbidden.
>> >>
>> >> So it's okay to strike up a match in an oxygen rich room?
>> >
>> >No because oxygen *supports* combustion even though it isn't flammable
>> >itself. That's basic chemistry.
>> >>
>> >> If you cannot have a fire without oxygen, then what praytell
>> >> is oxygen, a fire retardant? Will hydrogen burn in the
>> >> absence of oxygen?
>> >
>> >Yes certainly. We did that experiment in high school chemistry; hydrogen
>> >collected from the electrolysis of pure water and ignited by a spark.
>> >>
>>
>> We did that too!, but it was in a room where oxygen was
>> present.
>
> We did it in a sealed system. No oxygen present.

No, you didn't.

> > I'm not talking cold fusion, I'm talking absolute
>> 100% hydrogen combustion in a vacuum at least where there is
>> no Oxygen present at all, no other gas present except
>> hydrogen. I bet that did not happen.
>
> It did. Simple system of otherwise evacuated glass tubing. Pretty
> standard stuff.
>
> At the same time in
>> space where there is no oxygen due to the lack of gravity,
>> it would be curious to solve that riddle.
>
> Stars burn hydrogen.

No they don't. It's called fusion.


>> While burning hydrogen "produces" water and Oxygen, it
>> doesn't really, the combustion of such accumulates those
>> molecules/atoms.
>
> Burning hydrogen produces water in the presence of oxygen, as in H2O. No
> oxygen, no water produced.

No oxygen, no combustion.

Scott.