Smoking Teeth

[Guest guest]

> >

> > I'm really surprised that so much mercury vapor can actually be

> > visible with the right lighting. This is an amazing video.

> >

> >

> >

>

> Sorry, the gas in this video is most likely water or even water

> condensation.

>

TK---- http://www.iaomt.org/ --- this is in the links section and

has been for many years.

Monday, April 2, 2007

Smoking Teeth Confusion

Dr. Laidler's criticism, Response to: " Smoking Teeth " - the truth

gets " smoked out " , reduces to the following propositions. First, he

contends that what is actually being seen is water vapor; and second,

since mercury is a heavier molecule than the other constituents of

air (i.e. oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, etc) the mercury vapor

could not rise, but would fall toward the floor. This analysis does

is not consistent with the Laws of Physics and Chemistry for the

following reasons.

First, atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AAS) is a well

substantiated scientific analytical technique used to measure a wide

range of elements in various materials such as metals, pottery and

glass. It is based on the simple fact that some elements in the

Periodic Table absorb specific wavelengths of light. This constitutes

that materials fingerprint. In the case of mercury vapor the

absorbance wavelength is 253.7nm.

Thus, when a pure material is vaporized by the application of heat,

while specific wavelengths are sequentially shone at it, the

wavelength absorbed tells one the element making up the sample. In it

simplest form, gold miners employ this principle when mining for

gold. In the natural state, gold has a very high attraction for

mercury; the miner heats his ore sample in a dark container, while

shining an ultraviolet light. If a vaporizing shadow is cast, then

mercury is present and the sample is likely gold. The amount of light

absorbed is proportional to the concentration of the mercury.

The video " Smoking Teeth = Poison Gas " is simply an application of

this Miner's Test, using an amalgam filling, containing approximately

50% mercury, as the sample. Water vapor will not absorb the

wavelength from the Miner's light; and, it will not cast a shadow.

Therefore, for Dr. Laidler to suggest it will is unfounded. In the

video, the vaporizing shadow is caused by mercury atoms absorbing the

spectrum from the Miner's light. A light, scientifically designed to

identify the presence of mercury, not water. Water vapor cannot be

visualized with a 254 mm light.

Secondly, Dr. Laidler is correct when he states, " When molecules

vaporize, the volume they fill depends on the number of molecules and

their temperature " . This is called the partial pressure and the

partial pressure for mercury in air is 0.00185 mm at 250 C. However,

Dr. Laidler fails to report that the vapor pressure of mercury

doubles for every 100 C increase in temperature. Employing dubious

calculations, Dr. Laidler concludes that because mercury is heavier

than the other components of air, if what we saw was actually mercury

vapor coming off those teeth, and not just water vapor, it should

have been SINKING rather than rising - even at 370 degrees C. " This

of course is false, since the mercury in the amalgam is being is

heated, causing the mercury molecules to become more active and

vaporize. Thus, the mercury vapor rises from the amalgam and spreads

into the environment in accordance with Boyles Law of Gases, the Guy-

Lussac Law, and Avogadro's Law and the Law of Entropy. These laws

indicate that gas molecules by natural law move away from each other.

Therefore, concentrated mercury atoms near the tooth naturally move

to a location where less mercury atoms reside. These laws of the

behavior of gas have nothing to do with gravity as Dr. Laidler

improperly assumes.

In conclusion, Dr. Laidler reports that " ever since (he) saw the

video, (he) felt that there was something wrong with it. " Indeed, he

is absolutely correct! It is wrong to place materials containing 50%

poisonous elemental mercury into humans, while calling them " silver "

fillings. It is wrong to promote such materials as safe, when there

is no level of mercury exposure considered to be " safe " .

Dr. Laidler has tried to " Manufacture Uncertainty " where none

actually exists