Osmosis produces water from external oxygen

[crawler]

I have carried out EZ experiments all day every day for almost 2 yrs now. My left eye has been bleeding, & vision has been 1% for 6 months. But during past 6 weeks bleeding has stopped & vision has improved to 30%, & i expect it to improve by say 1% per day.

EZ water forms around each dead red blood cell, & the other blood cells. They look hazy, like a dust storm.
When there are lots of dead cells the vision is blurry, due to EZ water, actually due to EZ water having a refractive index 10% different to bulk water.

When i open my eyes, or when i walk from light to dark or vice versa, etc, i see a light show as the thickness of the layers of EZ water increase or decrease. All in accord with Pollack.

[jimmcginn]

For the record, since there was some slander in responses to this thread, Gerald Pollack's work is incredibly good.

Pollack has failed.
Pollack did not address the current paradigm (which is a deeply flawed paradigm) he just ignores it. He just avoids the confusion. And he also avoided the issue. This whole subject has been a mess ever since Linus Pauling made a major conceptual error way back in the 1950s. This error has resulted in a plethora of unavoidable anomalies, which Pollack has avoided.

There is no such thing as Proton transfer. That is just silly speculation.

The problem with the science of water has always been the mischaracterization of polarity as being a static or constant force when in reality, as I have explained, it is highly variable.
Mechanism of H2O High Heat Capacity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MUoFF121kQ

[Cargo]

Can I get 1 Proton transferred please? It would mean the world.

I love it though when Ph of water is mentioned. It's a highly electrical construct to the medium. Despite the acute definition of debated things, I still don't doubt that the 4th phase of water is a real phenomenon. Something between the other 3 phases. Unless you're counting Higgs phases, in which case there are hundreds of phases of matter, and it should be no surprise a simple 4th phase of water exists. Despite the penchant for perfect math knowledge.

[jimmcginn]

Can I get 1 Proton transferred please? It would mean the world.

I love it though when Ph of water is mentioned. It's a highly electrical construct to the medium. Despite the acute definition of debated things, I still don't doubt that the 4th phase of water is a real phenomenon. Something between the other 3 phases. Unless you're counting Higgs phases, in which case there are hundreds of phases of matter, and it should be no surprise a simple 4th phase of water exists. Despite the penchant for perfect math knowledge.

Pollack has completely failed to understand hydrogen bonding between water molecules. Pollack is completely ignorant that the mechanism of hydrogen bonding between water molecules involves electromagnetic tetrahedral asymmetry and that hydrogen bonds bring additional electrical gradients that contradict asymmetry by way of achieving electromagnetic symmetry (as I've explained in my videos) thereby neutralizing a portion of the electromagnetic force (this "force" is generally referred to as polarity) that is keeping the water molecules together (at ambient temps). Consequently the force of polarity are very distinctive from the forces that are typical to intermolecular bonding. Science has failed to understand this distinction and its larger implications. Pollack has failed to understand this distinction and its larger implications. EU has failed to understand this distinction and its larger implications. I did not fail. I figured it out. The first step is to stop pretending understand what you don't understand and start being rigorous and reductive about uncovering the truth. If you are not lazy you can eventually piece together the puzzle of hydrogen bonding and begin to resolve all of the anomalies that science is currently pretending not to notice. Polarity is not a static or constant force that has always been imagined by unimaginative dolts like Linus Pauling. It is a variable force and the mechanism of variation is the inverse of connectedness, as I have explicated in my videos:
Solving Tornadoes
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXRbzU ... opg/videos

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

[paladin17]

I figured it out.

Does it lead to any falsifiable predictions that would contradict whatever you're trying to disprove?

[jimmcginn]

I figured it out.

Does it lead to any falsifiable predictions that would contradict whatever you're trying to disprove?

I don't know if I understand the last part of your questions. But, to answer the first part, yes, it predicts/explains all of the anomalies of H2O. For example, it predicts/explains the low viscosity of liquid H2O, the high heat capacity of liquid H2O, and surface tension. It also explains why the current paradigm is such an abject failure--it is the result of a blatant failure on the part of Linus Pauling in regard to misapplication of the concept of electronegativity.

At the end of your question you indicate that you think I'm trying to disprove something. I have no need to disprove the standard model on hydrogen bonding because there is a plethora of evidence, called the anomalies of H2O, that shows that the standard model is nonsense.

Progress in science takes place when people stop pretending they understand and start addressing the contradictions that we already know exist.

I am the number one expert in the world on the topic of intermolecular bonding between water molecules. Most people cannot make progress because they lack to intellectual honesty to admit that they are confused. Do you admit you are confused?

James McGinn / Genius

[paladin17]

I don't know if I understand the last part of your questions.

The last part is about predicting something that other models don't but that can be experimentally measured.

[jimmcginn]

I don't know if I understand the last part of your questions.

The last part is about predicting something that other models don't but that can be experimentally measured.

The anomalies are measurable.

James McGinn / Genius

[BipedalJoe]

Despite the acute definition of debated things, I still don't doubt that the 4th phase of water is a real phenomenon.

I think it is even simpler that people get. Simple pressure when water touches against surfaces forces it into a solid phase. As is predicted for any liquid when pressure is applied. Nothing strange. The reason it is electrically polarized is just to get higher density than water, generated from the pressure. So gravity is ultimately the force. I also see it more as a solid phase than "gel phase" because I have not seen why it is so much more gel-like. Using the term "dense solid phase" for it at the moment. A common critique of the "fourth phase" is "it would be unstable", and, yes it is, this is why a shit load of pressure is applied to force water into it, provided by gravity.

[BipedalJoe]

Pollack has failed.

You seem to see him as a competitor with your own career, like the content you have published here, but his focus isn't that. The "surface phase" is easily seen since you can see it excluding solutes, because it is a solid phase similar to ice. The only difference from ice is that the molecular sheets are pushed together, also causing the electrical polarization. This is simple and he popularized it really well. He also popularized and continued on Gilbert Ling's work, Ling was a genius I think and I don't think Gilbert Ling failed at all either, I think he succeeded with what he wanted to do, promote the bulk-phase theory of cell biology.

There is no such thing as Proton transfer.

This still seems to come from a place of seeing Gerald Pollack as a personal competitor. The proton transfer model of osmosis has strong evidence. Have you looked at the evidence they presented in 2009, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf? The pH changes in the exosmotic and endosmotic compartments are there, and they are predicted from the "surface phase" of water, that is also observable in a simple microscope as the "exclusion zone". So it is not silly speculation if speculation is defined as what people do before they have concrete proof, and even then before 2009 or so it wasn't silly because the model is sound and does not make any absurd claims. The "surface phase" is just "compressed ice", from pressure applied towards surface from the water itself acted on by gravity.

[jimmcginn]

it more as a solid phase than "gel phase" because I have not seen why it is so much more gel-like.

Due to the flat geometry of a surface it, surface tension, involves molecules along the surface being more gel-like (higher viscosity) on the surface and less gel-like (lower viscosity) below the surface because (as I describe in my videos--see link below) the H2O molecules along the surface are less interconnected (having three out of a possible four hydrogen bonds with adjacent H2O molecules) than those below the surface which have four out of four.

Strangely, as I explain in my videos, with water the strength of connectedness is the inverse of the comprehesiveness of connectedness. Consequently structural properties exist only in situations in which connectedness is reduced.

The Mechanism of H2O Polarity Neutralization
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs73A9mSvQo

James McGinn / Genius

[jimmcginn]

but his focus isn't that.

He has the wrong focus. If you don't understand the mechanism it is pointless to start speculating about the effect of the mechanism. It would appear that Pollack does not grasp this simple notion. First things first. First understand the mechanism. Then attempt to resolve the observations/anomalies. The biggest mistake you can make is to just assume that the thinking in the standard model is well considered. It isn't well considered. Linus Pauling made a huge error. And like the sheep they are, all of academia just followed along.

The "surface phase" is easily seen since you can see it excluding solutes, because it is a solid phase similar to ice.

Well, this realization (that surface tension is similar to ice) is true but it won't do you any good if you don't understand the the inverse nature of the mechanism of H2O polarity because only then can you understand why/how it's true. With the current paradigm ice is considered the result of the emergence of a lattice phase, which is a plainly absurd explanation.

James McGinn / Genius

[Cargo]

the mechanism of hydrogen bonding between water molecules involves electromagnetic tetrahedral asymmetry and that hydrogen bonds bring additional electrical gradients that contradict asymmetry by way of achieving electromagnetic symmetry thereby neutralizing a portion of the electromagnetic force (this "force" is generally referred to as polarity) that is keeping the water molecules together.

Well this surely deserves a a little more look'see.

[paladin17]

The anomalies are measurable.

Which anomalies?
I repeat my question: have you predicted anything that other theories do not?

[jimmcginn]

The anomalies are measurable.

Which anomalies?
I repeat my question: have you predicted anything that other theories do not?

Try searching Google, Wikipedia, etc.

James McGinn / Genius