Re: [H] Combos and complexes

Hi, Joe --

Yes, as you've no doubt detected, I enjoy new words, and *antergy* rather
takes my fancy. :-)

What you've said here about chemistry is both commonsense and interesting,
though as far as I'm aware it's simply not true that dilution lowers the
chemical affinity between ions that meet in solution or even prevents them
from meeting. It slows the process down, certainly; but even a single ion
permitted (by normal ion channels) into an entire cell eventually (at a
pace sufficient to keep the cell functioning) fulfils its destined
function, and -- again, as far as I'm aware -- there's no way on earth to
depend on dilution to absolutely prevent the normal reaction from taking
place eventually.

In that sense, the range of possible chemical interactions in the bottle --
and possibilities are of prime importance here, as they are what undermine
certainties -- is not diminished by dilution.

Naturally, of course, no such chemical interactions in the bottle take
place at ultramolecular potencies.

That still leaves us with further unknowns. Most obviously, these include
the synergies and antergies (antagonisms, if you prefer) of
*dynamic*action that even Hahnemann found to be unpredictable. The
example of Rhus
tox. and Bryonia is a nice one because the effect of motion in the
pathogenesis of the two is of opposite consquence; but that single
contrariety is also one of the few examples that is potentially
predictable. What other antagonisms exist between the two, and what
synergies, and which of them are entirely predictable from a good knowledge
of both? If these things are known, then they must have been also
confirmed in provings rather than in the blithering "experience" of
overconfident practitioners.

But they also include the rarely discussed uncertainties arising from the
dynamic effects of one medicine on the other and vice versa -- and from the
factorial increase in the number of such interactions that occurs in
increasing the number of medicines: just 2 relationships to consider with
two medicines, but 6 to consider with three, 24 to consider with four, 120
to consider with five, and 720 to consider with six. To simply sweep aside
all these difficulties that Hahnemann himself raised is to adopt a position
of certainty that surely is at best tenuous.

Nevertheless, it's an approach with evidently a lot of potential, and one
that undoubtedly will find its feet as it proceeds; and I appreciate that
it at least is not posing as homoeopathy and may well do much good
alongside (or more likely preceding) homoeopathic treatment.

I hope you're enjoying a festive morning across the ditch.

Kind regards,

John

--

"And if care became the ethical basis of citizenship? Our parliaments,
guided by such ideas, would be very different places."

—Paul Ginsborg, *Democracy: Crisis and Renewal*, London: Profile, 2008.
_______________________________________________
Homeopathy Mailing List
homeopathy@homeolist.com
http://lists.homeolist.com/mailman/listinfo/homeopathy