Friday, about midnight, a pipe carrying DHMO (DiHydrogen MonOxide) to a location used for cleaning burst inside the wall. The DHMO was released into the room, an adjacent bedroom on the same floor, and three rooms on the floor below.
It took about 35 minutes for the DFD to respond and shut of the supply line. They actually did not totally close off the line, and DHMO leaked until Saturday morning about 9am. The repair technician closed off the main supply completely, show us where the interior shutoff was (in a corner of a utility closet) and repaired the pipe.
Two of the downstairs rooms lost portions of their ceilings, and hundreds of items in a storage room were damaged and soaked by the universal solvent spill.
Fortunately, a DHMO cleanup group was available Saturday afternoon to begin the process of cleanup. They had a number of specialized tools for removing and storing the DHMO that I hadn't known of. There are some amazing advances in DHMO handling and removal developed since I last had to deal with such a spill.
So, here on Sunday afternoon, most of the DHMO is removed and the structure is dried and secure. The downstairs storage room is still being subject to forced ventilation and precipitation of the DHMO from the salvageable and unsalvageable items that are there.
I am grateful to my roommates for their promt reactions to this crisis. Without their assistance I would not have been able to deal with the flood. As I write, a fan is still drying the carpet in my room.
We still have to deal with repairs to the ceilings and walls in the downstairs rooms, but all leaks have been stopped and the main supply has been restored.
DHMO is a solvent used widely in the world for such applications as cleaning, waste removal and chemical reactions in food preparation. It isn't toxic in reasonable doses, but in sufficiently large volumes it can kill you or cause severe health effects. For more information, see http://dhmo.org
I should be okay, the only victim in this case is my mental equilibrium.
Sunday, June 15, 2014
Monday, April 14, 2014
Mystical Atheism Explained
I have called myself a "Mystical Atheist" for some time, and lately some folks asked my what can be mystical about atheism? I'll endeavor to explain.
Atheism is a claim that there is no God. I do not believe in a hyper intelligent, omnibenevolent and omniscient creator being. There is no rational reason for doing so, such a being is just not necessary to explain the operations of the cosmos. That is not to say that there is not some unknown impelling force that drives creation in a forward direction.
This impelling force is, so far, imperceptible to science. There are quite a few unknown answers in terms of why things happen the way they do. I think of this as a "divine principle" that humans can occasionally perceive as the numinous. Some may even be able to interact with this force.
Just what this "force" is, is similar to the problem of consciousness. We don't know (yet) and may never figure it out.
I can, myself, perceive the numinous in quite a few aspects of experiencing the beauty of the cosmos. I feel it when viewing a magnificent sunset, when I see an old friend after a long absence, and when contemplating the wonders of the physical rules that guide the universe. I know I am not alone in sensing this feeling of wonder and love. (Traditionally, the word used is "awe", but since is doesn't inspire fear of any kind, I can't agree with that usage.) This feeling is also at the core of the "mystical" experience treasured by spiritual and religious folk for ages.
As far as mystical experience goes, I have to say that the dichotomy between perennialism and constructionism is a false one. We humans are a conscious mind embedded in a vehicle of flesh. We don't know how or what consciousness is, but it is embedded in the chemistry of the neural circuits of the brain. This implies that the mystical experience will have a mechanical manifestation in the flesh that will be practically the same for all humans; but this will have to be expressed in verbal form (if possible) via the circuitry of language trained by the culture in which a person is embedded.
I don't care for the current direction of scientific philosophy that leans more and more to a purely mechanistic (or robotic) explanation of life. For example, it was not until this year (2014) that additional signaling methods were detected in the inner ear (via proton flow) to explain some of the continuous proprioception of spatial orientation. I don't see that a purely mechanistic model will ever be able to explain consciousness or free will. It will be a bad day for humanity if science declares with certainty that we have no choices in life.
Atheism is a claim that there is no God. I do not believe in a hyper intelligent, omnibenevolent and omniscient creator being. There is no rational reason for doing so, such a being is just not necessary to explain the operations of the cosmos. That is not to say that there is not some unknown impelling force that drives creation in a forward direction.
This impelling force is, so far, imperceptible to science. There are quite a few unknown answers in terms of why things happen the way they do. I think of this as a "divine principle" that humans can occasionally perceive as the numinous. Some may even be able to interact with this force.
Just what this "force" is, is similar to the problem of consciousness. We don't know (yet) and may never figure it out.
I can, myself, perceive the numinous in quite a few aspects of experiencing the beauty of the cosmos. I feel it when viewing a magnificent sunset, when I see an old friend after a long absence, and when contemplating the wonders of the physical rules that guide the universe. I know I am not alone in sensing this feeling of wonder and love. (Traditionally, the word used is "awe", but since is doesn't inspire fear of any kind, I can't agree with that usage.) This feeling is also at the core of the "mystical" experience treasured by spiritual and religious folk for ages.
As far as mystical experience goes, I have to say that the dichotomy between perennialism and constructionism is a false one. We humans are a conscious mind embedded in a vehicle of flesh. We don't know how or what consciousness is, but it is embedded in the chemistry of the neural circuits of the brain. This implies that the mystical experience will have a mechanical manifestation in the flesh that will be practically the same for all humans; but this will have to be expressed in verbal form (if possible) via the circuitry of language trained by the culture in which a person is embedded.
I don't care for the current direction of scientific philosophy that leans more and more to a purely mechanistic (or robotic) explanation of life. For example, it was not until this year (2014) that additional signaling methods were detected in the inner ear (via proton flow) to explain some of the continuous proprioception of spatial orientation. I don't see that a purely mechanistic model will ever be able to explain consciousness or free will. It will be a bad day for humanity if science declares with certainty that we have no choices in life.
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Hope on the Horizon for Bedbug Sufferers
Suffering from an infestation of Cimex Lemicularis (AKA the Bedbug)? This ancient scourge of human sleepers has made a massive resurgence in some places in the US and Europe (and the rest of the world) in recent decades. This is mostly because it is no longer kept in check by pesticides. DDT, the most effective at controlling them, is now illegal to use in most of the world, and the critters are mostly tolerant and resistant to the pyrethrins that are the most used "over the counter" insecticides in the Americas.
A report out of Penn State in 2012 reports that a biological control agent in current use - Beauveria bassiana, a soil derived fungus - has some (!) effectiveness against C.Lemicularis. The insecticide is actually one of the more benign products available (there is a certified for "organic" use version) even though the MSDSs (Material Safety Data Sheets) carry all the familiar insecticide warnings.
It is a highly tempting prospect to get some of the product and see if if works against ones own infestations, but the way the laws for pesticides in the US work, it is illegal to do that outside of an accredited research laboratory. [There is some anecdotal evidence from folks who have done so anyway.]
Meanwhile, we suffer along, waiting for a truly effective anti-bedbug product to be developed.
Beauveria bassiana is an interesting fungus. It occurs worldwide in various soil conditions and is one of the "clean-up" organisms that remove insect bodies from the environment. The spores come in contact with an insects chitinous cuticle and secrete an enzyme that penetrates the shell. It then grows on the inner flesh of the insect, and completes the cycle by forming sporing bodies on the cadaver.
It is approved for use on aphids, thrips, white fly and certain other insect pests, and in the organic formulation, may be used to protect organic produce from these pests in a "certified organic" manner. In the Penn State report it seems clear that they were using the organic formulation - talking about oil with and without spores in suspension - and the use of an airbrush applicator. Apparently the bedbugs pick up the fungus and carry it back to their "harborages" (nests) before succumbing (at >90% effectiveness) to the fungus which will then attack and kill the other bedbugs in the group.
If it can be shown that bedbugs cannot develop an immunity to the fungus, it may be that the old adage: "Sleep tight and don't let the bedbugs bite" will once again become a legendary warning.
A report out of Penn State in 2012 reports that a biological control agent in current use - Beauveria bassiana, a soil derived fungus - has some (!) effectiveness against C.Lemicularis. The insecticide is actually one of the more benign products available (there is a certified for "organic" use version) even though the MSDSs (Material Safety Data Sheets) carry all the familiar insecticide warnings.
It is a highly tempting prospect to get some of the product and see if if works against ones own infestations, but the way the laws for pesticides in the US work, it is illegal to do that outside of an accredited research laboratory. [There is some anecdotal evidence from folks who have done so anyway.]
Meanwhile, we suffer along, waiting for a truly effective anti-bedbug product to be developed.
Beauveria bassiana is an interesting fungus. It occurs worldwide in various soil conditions and is one of the "clean-up" organisms that remove insect bodies from the environment. The spores come in contact with an insects chitinous cuticle and secrete an enzyme that penetrates the shell. It then grows on the inner flesh of the insect, and completes the cycle by forming sporing bodies on the cadaver.
It is approved for use on aphids, thrips, white fly and certain other insect pests, and in the organic formulation, may be used to protect organic produce from these pests in a "certified organic" manner. In the Penn State report it seems clear that they were using the organic formulation - talking about oil with and without spores in suspension - and the use of an airbrush applicator. Apparently the bedbugs pick up the fungus and carry it back to their "harborages" (nests) before succumbing (at >90% effectiveness) to the fungus which will then attack and kill the other bedbugs in the group.
If it can be shown that bedbugs cannot develop an immunity to the fungus, it may be that the old adage: "Sleep tight and don't let the bedbugs bite" will once again become a legendary warning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)