Vaporizor

Here is a great article on vaporising marijuana for medical purposes. Vaporizers are great and I recommend any regular user should try it out. Besides the added medical benefit of not getting all that tar and combustion products (emphysema and bronchitis) and carbon monoxide (coronary heart desease). Here is a like to a great little vaporizer that is small portable and uses a lighter as a heat source: The Ubie

New Studies Destroy the Last Objection to Medical Marijuana
By Bruce Mirken, AlterNet

Anyone who advocates for medical marijuana sooner or later runs into arguments about smoking: "No real medicine is smoked." "Smoking is bad for the lungs; why would any doctor recommend something so harmful?" It's a line of reasoning that medical marijuana opponents have used to great effect in Congress, state legislatures, and elsewhere. Indeed, the FDA's controversial 2006 statement opposing medical marijuana was couched in repeated references to "smoked marijuana."
But new research demonstrates that all those fears of "smoked marijuana" as medicine are 100 percent obsolete.
The smoking argument was the closest thing to a scientifically meaningful objection to medical marijuana. While marijuana smoke, unlike tobacco, has never been shown to cause lung cancer, heavy marijuana smoking has been associated with assorted respiratory symptoms and a potentially increased risk of bronchitis. That's because burning any plant material produces a whole lot of substances such as tars, and carbon monoxide that are not good for the lungs.
Nevertheless, inhalation is clearly the best method for administering marijuana's active components, called cannabinoids. Cannabinoids such as THC are fat-soluble molecules that are absorbed slowly and unevenly when taken orally, as in the prescription THC pill Marinol. This means that Marinol typically takes an hour to two hours to work, and dose adjustment is nearly impossible. Patients often report that when it finally kicks in, it hits like a ton of bricks, leaving them too stoned to function.
For that reason, The Lancet Neurology noted a few years ago, "Smoking has been the route of choice for many cannabis users because it delivers a more rapid 'hit' and allows more accurate dose titration." Because the effect is nearly instantaneous, patients can simply take as many puffs as they need, stopping when they've achieved the needed effect without excessive intoxication.
So far, no pharmaceutical product -- not even Sativex, the much-touted marijuana spray now marketed in Canada -- achieves this combination of rapid action and simple, accurate dose adjustment.
Back in 1999, the Institute of Medicine's White House-commissioned report on medical marijuana conceded marijuana's medical benefits, saying that what is needed is "a nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid drug delivery system."
The new studies -- one from the University of California, San Francisco, and the other from the University at Albany, State University of New York -- confirm that such a system is here. It's called vaporization, and has been familiar to medical marijuana patients for many years, but few outside the medical marijuana community know it exists. Unlike smoking, a vaporizer does not burn the plant material, but heats it just to the point at which the THC and the other cannabinoids vaporize. In the Volcano vaporizer tested at UCSF, the vapors are collected in a detachable plastic bag with a mouthpiece for inhalation.

The UCSF study, conducted by Dr. Donald Abrams and colleagues and just published online by the journal Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (to appear in the journal's print edition on May) compared a commercially available vaporizer called the Volcano to smoking in 18 volunteers. The subjects inhaled three different strengths of marijuana either as smoked cigarettes or vaporized using the Volcano.
The researchers then measured the volunteers' plasma THC levels and the amount of expired carbon monoxide, which is considered a reliable marker for the unwanted combustion products contained in smoke.
The two methods produced similar THC levels, with vaporization producing somewhat higher levels, and were judged equally efficient for administration of cannabinoids. The big difference was in expired carbon monoxide. As expected, there was a sharp increase in carbon monoxide levels after smoking, while "little if any" increase was detected after vaporization. "This indicates little or no exposure to gaseous combustion toxins," the researchers wrote. "Vaporization of marijuana does not result in exposure to combustion gases, and therefore is expected to be much safer than smoking marijuana cigarettes."
A second study, by Dr. Mitch Earleywine at the University at Albany, State University of New York, involved an Internet survey of nearly 7,000 marijuana users. Participants were asked to identify their primary method of using marijuana (joints, pipe, vaporizer, edibles, etc.) and were asked six questions about respiratory symptoms. After adjusting for variables such as age and cigarette use, vaporizer users were 60 percent less likely than smokers to report respiratory symptoms such as cough, chest tightness or phlegm. The effect of vaporizer use was more pronounced the larger the amount of marijuana used.
"Our study clearly suggests that the respiratory effects of marijuana use can be decreased by use of a vaporizer," Earleywine commented. "In fact, because we only asked participants about their primary means of using marijuana, it's likely that people who exclusively use vaporizers will get even more benefit than our results indicate, because no doubt some in our study used vaporizers most of the time but not all of the time."
In a rational world, the government officials objecting to medical marijuana based on the health risks of smoking would greet this research with open arms. They would join with groups like the Marijuana Policy Project in spreading the word about this important, health-enhancing technology.
Don't hold your breath.

Nitrogen Triiodide

Feeling the itching urge to blow something up? Here's a great method for making a little innocuous high yield explosive, Nitrogen Triiodide (Ammonium Triiodide). Don't forget your safty goggles!

1. The first step is to prepare the NI3. One method is to simply pour up to a gram of iodine crystals into a a small volume of concentrated aqueous ammonia, allow the contents to sit for 5 minutes, then pour the liquid over a filter paper to collect the NI3, which will be a dark brown/black solid. However, if you grind the pre-weighed iodine with a mortar/pestle beforehand a larger surface area will be available for the iodine to react with the ammonia, giving a significantly larger yield.

2. The reaction for producing the nitrogen triiodide from iodine and ammonia is:
3I2 + NH3 -> NI3 + 3HI

3. You want to avoid handling the NI3 at all, so my recommendation would be to set up the demonstration in advance of pouring off the ammonia. Traditionally, the demonstration uses a ring stand on which a wet filter paper with NI3 is placed with a second filter paper of damp NI3 sitting above the first. The force of the decomposition reaction on one paper will cause decomposition to occur on the other paper as well.

4. For optimal safety, set up the ring stand with filter paper and pour the reacted solution over the paper where the demonstration is to occur. A fume hood is the preferred location. The demonstration location should be free of traffic and vibrations. The decomposition is touch-sensitive and will be activated by the slightest vibration.
zSB(3,3)

5. To activate the decomposition, tickle the dry NI3 solid with a feather attached to a long stick. The decomposition occurs according to this reaction:
2NI3 (s) --> N2 (g) + 3I2 (g)

6. In its simplest form, the demonstration is performed by pouring the damp solid onto a paper towel in a fume hood, letting it dry, and activating it with a meter stick.

Tips:

1. Caution: This demonstration should only be performed by an instructor, using proper safety precautions. Wet NI3 is more stable than the dry compound, but still should be handled with care. Iodine will stain clothing and surfaces purple or orange. The stain can be removed using a sodium thiosulfate solution. Eye and ear protection are recommended. Iodine is a respiratory and eye irritant; the decomposition reaction is loud.

2. NI3 in the ammonia is very stable and can be transported, if the demonstration is to be performed at a remote location.

3. How it works: NI3 is highly unstable because of the size difference between the nitrogen and iodine atoms. There is not enough room around the central nitrogen to keep the iodine atoms stable. The bonds between the nuclei are under stress and therefore weakened. The outside electrons of the iodine atoms are forced into close proximity, which increases the instability of the molecule.

4. The amount of energy released upon detonating NI3 exceeds that required to form the compound, which is the definition of a high yield explosive.

Microwave Mayham

Got an old microwave oven laying around? Here are some fun things to put in it for hours of amusement.

Info from We-Man

1.
Take an old CD or CD-R and put it in the oven, standing up. Put it against a glass cup or so. Don't use any metal as a holder. It will look like the image shown below. Notice the difference in the pattern that will show up in the metal layer in the CD between a normal silver CD and a green or gold or blue CD-R. Make sure you don't inhale the gas that comes out of the CD. It's not too good for your health, so they say ;-] Note that the CD will be unusable afterwards !
This is actually what you see when you put a CD in your microwave oven. A closer look.

2.
Place a wooden tooth pick standing up in your oven and light the top so it burns slowly. I placed mine between the clip of a plastic pencil top. A cork will do fine too I guess. Matches instead of the tooth pick will also do but they will produce less spectacular effects. Now close the door and see what happens. You didn't expect that eh? Nice yellow / orange / green / blue fireballs going up from the stick. Uh,.... yes as you might suspect, your oven will become a bit black inside here and there. But I had no problems cleaning it up. Take care that the plastic inside your oven won't melt because of the burning stick (the plastic on the top of my oven hangs down a bit now ;-}. I also tried pieces of burning charcole and a burning piece of a beer-mat. Materials like that also work (they only need to glow, not nurn) but the tooth pick works best. The actual flame doesn't have to be big for good effects.
Fire balls like this one shoot up out of the tooth pick. 2 fire balls with a long shutter time. 1 very nice fire ball with a long shutter time. 1 fire ball with a long shutter time.

3.
The light bulb in the microwave oven. You can take an old one, it doesn't have to function anymore to give the desired effect. However, the glas has to be intact so the gas is still inside. I noticed that small bulbs won't work. I used a 230 V / 60 W one. Again you won't believe what you see ! All kinds of colors coming out of the bulb. But you should take care here. Sooner or later your bulb will explode. I tried mine for 10 seconds, let it cool down (probably not enough) then I tried it for another 10 seconds, let it cool down (probably not enough again) and then after 2 seconds after turning it on again it exploded inside the oven. The door of my oven was way thick enough, so all glass stayed inside. It's quite easy to clean up the glass and I don't think it will do much harm to your oven. However, my second lightbulb never exploded! The glas gets very hot but it won't blow up! From 2 people I received the tip to put the bulb in a bowl of water in the microwave oven to cool it down so it won't explode. It works but the bulb might receive too little energy to light as brightly as it does without water around it. I haven't tried small fluorescent lamps and flash bulbs from a photo flasher yet (because I don't have them) but I expect them to be very nice, too. If you try one, please let me know the results.
glowing light bulb (this is just a short sight; if you watch it for a few seconds you will see almost all possible colors.

4.
You got 3 minutes left? Maybe this experiment is one of the most useful ones listed here. Go visit the Amnesty International website, click "take action" and sign with your name and email address. If you also leave your phone number you will receive an SMS message every now and then to which you can reply, to sign a petition against torture. Thank you.

5.
For this experiment you need some tinfoil. I advise you to put an old glass plate or so on the bottom of your oven because the foil will get very hot. In fact, it gets so hot that it melted right into the glass plate that belongs to my oven... Now cut out a piece of about 22 x 1 cm and fold it like shown below. Wrap the two ends tight into each other.
Again, make sure not to turn on the oven for more than 10-20 seconds. Especially experiments with tinfoil will ask a lot of power from your oven and it might get hot, so let it cool down between your sessions or you might damage your oven. I didn't get my eyes hurt but I don't think looking too much into the light is good for your eyes. I expected to have welding eyes in the evening but I was lucky. As with welding, a lot of UV light (you don't see light of this short wavelength) comes free which can damage your eyes.
Burning and crackling tinfoil. Put some old glass plate or so underneath it because it will melt the glass.

6.
In the U.S. used to be a program called "Mr. Wizard's World", in which this old guy would do all sorts of scientific nonsense... And one of the programs, he put a flourescent in the microwave... Although it sounds like fun, the results aren't really that exciting.. It just lights up, like a flourescent light is supposed to. Of course, this makes sense, since the material on the inside of the glass is there to turn the ultraviolet light into visible light in normal operation, and placing it in a microwave just makes this material act in its normal way, lighting up... (emailed by Michael Parker) I can tell you a bit how it works, I think. In a microwave there's no ultraviolet light. Just radio waves at 2.4 GHz. Normally the flourescent light will transmit ultraviolet light and the white powder will make this visible light. This happens because electrons of the atoms in the powder will get excited because of the exact amount of energy (or: the exact wavelength) they receive from the ultraviolet light. When (after a short while) these electrons fall back into their lower orbit, they also transmit light, but then in the visible range, but only 1 color. So they put several different kinds of atoms in the powder, that will transmit different colors so we will see white light. Appearently, in a microwave the gas in the tube gets energy from the microwave waves (probably because the gas is conducting) and starts transmitting ultraviolet light and the powder will transmit light. Easy.

7.
This one is a little less exciting, too, but it prodices a lot of light. I took a small old neon lamp (like the ones in swithes, electrician's screwdrivers etc.). They are ment for use at 60 to 90 Volts. Normally they are used with a large series resistor. For this you just need the glass lamp. I experimented a bit with it and it seems to go best if you twist the wires into eachother and put it in (again) tinfoil. If you do not put it in tinfoil, the ends of the wires will burn up and will shorten the wires. See the left picture.
This is how I did it.
See how much light comes out of such a small lamp. Mine didn't explode, not even after 20 seconds !

8.
Last week I demolished an old laserprinter. Most laserprinters and photo copiers have a lamp inside which is not there for the light but only for the warmth. Usually they are hudreths of watts and very long and thin and located inside the drum (a rubber roller). This is how mine looks like:
This is what the lamp looks like. So I thought, hey, why not put it in the microwave and see what happens (something a real fan of this page should think this too whenever he/she gets his/her hands on something that might do something funny inside of a microwave). Well, this is what it does:
It gives a bright light. And later on the left end of the wire (lower left) starts to burn (inside the glass).

9.
My former student flat fellows discovered the Christmas tree ornament in the microwave ! It's pretty much like a CD but then it's not flat but a 3D glowing ball. Simon Oosthoek made this picture with his new digital camera:
Christmas tree ornament in the microwave, a beauty, isn't it?

10.
A former student flat fellow (Simon Oosthoek) tried a small TL tube in the microwave and it looks nice:
This is what the setup looks like. And this shows how nice it burns :-)

11.
A lot of people wrote me to put a bar of soap in the microwave. And I did :-) After 3 minutes the thing was about 5 times it's original size!
This is what the several "larval stages" look like.

Lock Picking 101

Have you ever just really wanted to get into something and/or have an insatiable urge to see whats behind a door only to have your dreams quashed by and annoying lock? Well, if so then this post is for you. Follow the link below to the MIT guide to picking pesky little locks and never let your curiosity be disappointed again!

http://www.lysator.liu.se/mit-guide/MITLockGuide.pdf

Capitalism 3.0

Here's a very good artical lifted from GNN.com about a recently published book called Capitalism 3.0 by Peter Barnes. It is available for free download trough the link below. Enjoy.

By Gus diZerega
The most important book of the 21st Century?
For many of us who are deeply concerned with environmental issues the most frustrating part of our struggle is that while public opinion is largely in our favor, the modern world’s basic institutions are biased against us. They dance to a different, and from an ecological perspective, often malevolent, drummer. Neither government nor the market are at all concerned with environmental sustainability when either ballots or bucks get in the way, as they so often do. Worse, the ballots and the bucks often come from people who themselves value ecological well-being, but have no institutional means for making their desires effective.
Peter Barnes’ new book Capitalism 3.0 [download the book for free here] offers a clear vision through this catch-22 dilemma. As a consequence, this slim volume may turn out to be the most important book of the 21st century, even though the century has barely begun.
Democracies have done wonderful jobs at ending the worst of political repression and the threat of war, at least between other democracies. These are achievements of the highest order. Markets have made the poor a minority group, even world wide, and brought goods and services once unimagined by even the elite of the past into reach of countless millions of middle class Americans, Europeans, Japanese, and now Indians, Chinese, and increasingly others. These are epochal achievements. But they have come at a price.
Whereas the emergent orders of the natural world produce essentially no waste, recycling all their achievements back into their systems to create and sustain more life, human emergent systems parasitize natural ones. They take, but on balance do not give back. When human impact was small, this was a price the earth could easily pay. But the impact is no longer small and the price no longer affordable.
The basic problems are well known and are taken increasingly by the human community, yet we have so far been unable to mount an effective response. We seem well attuned to respond to acute crises that suddenly arise, and present fairly clear cut strategies in response. We are far more poorly suited to cope with crises that may be far more serious, but develop piecemeal, and take on serious proportions only when they have built up such momentum that effective responses are difficult or impossible. The earth is more like the Titanic in this respect than it is a speed boat.
Initially a progressive journalist before entering the business world to co-found Working Assets, Peter Barnes combines a rare set of skills to make a powerful argument for constructive and effective change virtually anyone with a brain can understand. Only ideologues will find his arguments opaque.
For the rest of us, his basic argument is deceptively simple. Our private well-being is rooted in a foundation of common values, our common-wealth. This takes on three dimensions: nature, community, and culture. This commonwealth is “the dark matter of the economic universe – it’s everywhere, but we don’t see it.” (66) Taken together, these are the commons, the ecological and cultural water within which we human fish swim.
But modern institutions are blind to these values and so unintentionally parasitize them, weakening their vitality and turning them into private values where they can no longer perform the functions needed ultimately to guarantee even private well-being.
Corporations in particular, but other modern institutions as well, are gradually destroying our common-wealth. To inject my own comment, in the modern world what is not visible theoretically does not exist. We are taught not to notice what does not fit our preconceptions. What does not exist is of course unimportant. There is no sense of humility, modesty, or mystery in this attitude, and the price we have paid for our arrogance and egoism is high and promises to get much higher.
Barnes initially illustrates his point by examining how trust and liquidity, both essential for economic success, are not properties of businesspeople, but of the culture within which they operate. For example, when a business goes public its share value grows 30% simply from increased liquidity, constituting a “socially created bonus.” (68) Throughout Capitalism 3.0 Barnes gives many more examples taken from nature, our communities, and our culture.
Unfortunately, in our present system of ‘Capitalism 2.0,’ the rights of capital trump all other values. To give an example of my own, while there is enormous concern among so-called “property rights defenders” over ‘takings,’ where regulation in the service of common values reduces the monetary income a person might make from land, there is a deafening silence over ‘givings’ where public effort or even the simple growth of society leads to increased financial value for these people. ‘Givings” are invisible to these people.
Barnes illustrates corporate capital’s parasitical relationship to our common-wealth in a chart comparing Disney stories taken from the public domain and turned into enormous profit, and stories Disney has added to the public domain. There are 17 of the former, ranging from Aladdin to The Wind in the Willows. There are none of the latter, for whenever enough time elapses so a Disney story might enter the public domain, they get the law changed to protect their monopoly. Disney takes but never gives.
To preserve a long term environment good for both our common-wealth and our private-wealth, the commons should trump capital. But how?
Trusts
The answer is in expanding and deepening the role of trusts in our society. Barnes recognizes the importance of institutionalized property rights in making a complex society possible and is wisely skeptical of politicians’ and bureaucratic administrators’ capacity to look out for the common good. But, as he points out, “Nothing requires them to be locked in profit-maximizing hands.” (72) “Propertization” he emphasizes, need not be privatization.
Trusts are already designed to protect different kinds of commons, and have long proven their worth. But their full implications have not been explored. Among private citizens different kinds of trusts have been developed and perfected for beneficiaries where trustees are responsible for their protection. I myself am a trustee for education trusts for my nieces and nephew. At the government level Barnes describes the Alaska Permanent Fund as a successful state trust institution channeling a portion of Alaska’s petroleum income to all state residents.
As a key example, Barnes describes the Trebah Garden Trust in Great Britain. Trebah Garden is a wonderful beauty spot governed by a trust with over 1000 voting members. The photo at the top of this post is from the Trebah Trust. About it, he writes:
“If we think of the world as an assemblage of gardens – that is, of ecosystems in which humans play active roles – the Trebah model becomes extremely interesting. It illuminates both a process by which natural gifts can shift from private to common ownership, and an institutional model – the trust – for managing such gifts as permanent parts of the commons.” (83)
Trust managers must give their primary loyalty to beneficiaries, and are obligated to preserve the trust’s principal, even if they can disburse income derived from that principal. They are required to operate with full transparency so that beneficiaries can easily see what decisions are made, and why. In this respect they differ radically from both corporations and government, both of which generally fear transparency. In the case of trusts charged with preserving values indefinitely, each generation is obligated to pass them on undiminished to the next. These principles are enforceable by law.
There are many such trusts. The National Trust of England, Wales and Northern Ireland governs over 600,000 acres with a voting membership of over 3 million. It is over 100 years old. Scotland has a similar trust of its own. In the US there are over 1500 Trebah-like units. The Nature Conservancy, America’s largest, while not democratically run like Trebah, is responsible for over 15 million acres (over 23,000 square miles). Common property trusts can cover a wide range of values, and Barnes describes two very successful ones near his home in northern California: the Marin Agricultural Land Trust and the Pacific Forest Trust. For more general information on land trusts in the US, see The Trust for Public Land.
I was particularly delighted by this section because Barnes had independently hit upon a model I had developed as a reform proposal for our grievously mismanaged national forests. See for example here and here.
But for Barnes, trusts are more than simply ways to preserve natural values, important as that is. They also offer a way to keep the commonwealth of a society, or of humanity as a whole, from being siphoned off into corporate coffers, or simply dissipated because it is not valued. Barnes thus picks up a challenge first addressed long ago by Henry George, that much of the value of land often has nothing to do with the owner’s actions and everything to do with the society wherein it is situated. Why, then, should the owner get all the gain and society pay all the price?
Economically efficient use of the commons for private purposes requires paying rent. Rent paid for use of the commons can be paid as dividends to members of society as a whole, which while benefiting all, would disproportionately benefit the poor who are most taken advantage of in this time of rampant crony capitalism and national kleptocracy. (97) As I read this part of Barnes’ analysis I was again surprised and delighted because I had explored similar themes in my own book Persuasion Power and Polity especially in Part III, a Theory of Contractual Federalism (249-359). Alas, for both myself and the ideas therein, the book was never reviewed. Barnes’ discussion will be reviewed many times. Maybe my own efforts will finally get some attention? A man can always hope.
But Barnes sees the implications of this model more broadly than I have, applying it across the board as an institutional alternative to the most troublesome ecological, social, and cultural challenges of our time. He has made what I regard as the vital conceptual breakthrough, freeing us from being trapped trying to solve serious problems while encased within institutions and ways of thinking that prevent us from doing so.
Indeed, one of the most ambitious implications of his model is a way to create a truly long term institutional framework able to address the most frightening ecological issue of our time, global warming. That alone is enough to make the book valuable. But as I hope I have shown, there is even more there.
Buy it as soon as you can, and read it. Then give it to a friend.

Look Ma, No Prints

Tired of the same old finger prints day in and day out? Well no more! This shiney new guide to removing your finger prints can be yours for 6 easy payments of .......NOTHING!
I wonder if it works on toes too?

HOW TO CHANGE YOUR FINGERPRINTS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by Wolf J. Flywheel

Okay, you're probably thinking "But it's impossible to change your fingerprints!Everyone knows that!" Most people (including various flavors of cops) blindlybelieve that, but it just ain't true. So shake that particular bit of societalprogramming out of your head and read on.

DISCLAIMERS~~~~~~~~~~~Be sure to read through this entire file before attempting anything!This file is for informational purposes only. The author (that's me) doesn'tever do anything wrong (heh) and is not responsible for any consequencesresulting from anybody actually following the procedures in this file, includingbut not limited to bodily harm, legal trouble, world destruction, and/or spilledbeverages.I haven't personally done this, but have been assured by someone who has as toits reliability. This individual, in order to elude the law, did successfullychange his fingerprints. While at large for a number of years he was arrestedand fingerprinted six times, both in the United States and Canada, for offensesranging from bank robbery to attempted murder. Computers always returned theresponse "Unknown" when requested to search for a criminal record.If you've been printed by authorities before, and they should get a hold of youagain sometime in the future, it may just be better for you if they didn't knowthat you just happen to be, say, the "unknown accomplice" in the Okie CityBombing. Or Nicole Brown Simpson's "real killer." Or Kevin M!tn!ck.Whatever.If you're going to change your prints, it's best if you first research all youcan find about fingerprints and their applications in forensics. Here are thecliff notes for you lazy types, but if you are serious about doing this youshould at least take the trouble to hit your local library and crack a book ortwo.

FINGERPRINTS~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fingerprints are classified according to ridge line patterns. These patternsare divided into three main groups; the arch, the loop, and the whorl. Theseare further divided anto eight subgroups; the plain arch, tented arch, radialloop, ulnar loop, central pocket loop, double loop, plain whorl, and accidentalwhorl.Prints are filed and classified by "ridge counts." The ridge count is thenumber of ridges between the core (the center of the fingerprint pattern) andthe delta (the formation in front or near the center). The delta is a pointon the first fork, a meeting of two ridges, an abrupt ridge ending, a dot, apiece of a ridge or any point upon the ridge at or nearest to the center ofdivergence of the type lines. It is the position used as the starting point forridge counting.Each ridge that crosses or touches an imaginary straight line drawn from thecore to the delta is counted. A different count is made for each finger. Thisis because while one right index finger may register a count of 7 ridges, theleft index finger may only count 3. A fingerprint point identification is basedon 12 to 15 distinct characteristics, such as dots, ridge endings, crevices,bending lines, formations of islands (hollow circles and ovals), comparativelyshort ridges, and bifurcations (Y-shaped forks-in-the-road). The average fingerhas from 30 to 40 such markings.The police use computers to evaluate finger and hand prints (Well, DUH). Thedata on known persons is stored as numerical formulas. For ID purposes, printsare compared with the data stored in the computer, which delivers a report ofthe specifics and formulas required to identify a given person.

YOU'LL NEED:~~~~~~~~~~~~
* an indelible extra-fine tip marking pen, the finer the better
* a magnifying glass, at least 10 power
* a double-edge razor blade
* a pair of tweezers (pointed-tip is best)
* a pair of nail clippers
* ordinary Drano (The powder, not the liquid shit.)
* healing salve or ointment
* lots of gauze

OVERVIEW~~~~~~~~
Skin is basically made up of two layers. The outer layer of the skin is calledthe epidermis, and the sensitive vascular meaty portion of the skin below theepidermis is called the dermis. The shapes of the blood vessels in your dermisdetermine the shape of your epidermis.Drano is basically composed of four parts;50% is small, various-sized white granules of sodium hydroxide, also known ascaustic soda, or lye.35% is sodium nitrate.15% is filler made up of sodium chloride (salt) and aluminum powder.For your purposes, you only need the smallest white granules of lye.(If you can somehow get hold of pure lye instead of Drano, all the easier. Butdon't expect to find it at your friendly neighborhood drugstore.)

THE PROCESS~~~~~~~~~~~
1) Using the magnifying glass and the fine-tip pen, dot the core and delta, aswell as any outstanding groups of characteristics, on one of your fingertips.
2) Take the double-edged razor blade and snap it in half lengthwise. Twist onepiece lengthwise again and break it in half. You should now have one quarterof the blade, with a scalpel-like edge.
3) Taking the edged piece, carefully cut a straight line 3/32 of an inch througheach dot right into the epidermis, but NOT into the dermis, which would drawquite a noticeable amount of blood. Think "papercut."
4) Using the tweezers, pick up a small pellet of lye and insert it into one cut.As soon as the lye combines with your bodily fluids, a chemical reaction willresult that will last approximately one minute. And yes, this will hurt. Itwill, in fact, hurt like fucking hell. You may want something to bite downon.
5) The lye will burn a dark circle 3/32 of an inch in diameter into the dermiswith little or no damage to the epidermis. Repeat the procedure with eachdot.
6) Taking the nail clippers, carefully clip the epidermis around the edge ofeach circle. This will expose concave cavities filled with semiclear jelly.(In case you're wondering, this jelly is burnt skin.)
7) Clean the cavities with ordinary soap and water and apply your salve. Tryto get yourself a salve with what they call "three-way" healing properties.This means it'll have an antibiotic, a local analgesic, and an enzyme (whichwill dissolve the burnt connective tissue lining the cavities). One brand-name for this stuff is Elase. Shop around, read ingredients, etc.
8) Wrap your finger in gauze, then repeat the entire procedure on all finger andthumb pattern areas as well as any significant palm print characteristics.

Within about a month your fingers will have healed. You should have obliterated(or at least seriously altered) any outstanding groups of characteristics. Thetotal count on any one finger will now probably number around 10 - 15 points orless. As an added bonus, you'll have destroyed your cores and deltas, therebymaking an accurate classification and ridge count impossible as well as changingthe corresponding specifics and formulas. This makes it a bit harder to get anaccurate file of your prints back into a computer should you ever be unfortunateor stupid enough to get printed again.The healing process of severely damaged tissue, especially burnt tissue,permanently scars the epidermis, causing the misalignment of the ridge lines inthe pattern area. Therefore, a before-and-after visual examination would showthe fingerprints are similar but couldn't prove conclusively they are identical.And a before-and-after computer evaluation would indicate the fingerprints donot match and conclusively are not identical.Congratulations. And wear gloves next time.

Deep Water Culture

Ok, this first expeditionary post outlines an excellent process for producing some fine cannabis. It's a technique called deep water culture, a.k.a. aeroponics or "bubbling buckets". It is an very good method, especially if you are low on funds (as I usually am) or limited by space (that's me too). The concept is simple. You plant your youngins' in an inert adsorbent media such as grow rocks (I've found that equal parts aquarium gravel, perlite and vermiculite work just as well) in a plastic basket that sits over a reservoir with your nutrient solutions in it. For beginners, the poor or lazy people I recommend the water soluble Miracle-Gro products at 1/4 to 1/3 the recommended dilutions (tomatoes for veg and booster for flower) just make sure that your flush the crap out of the plants with fresh water for 2-3 weeks before harvest. You should defo use RO water for everything or else you'll get some nasty fungus and bacterial growth. I usually just buy it by the gallon, most grocery stores sell it (but make sure it says "reverse osmosis" on it, not distilled). As far as lighting goes, the sky is he limit. If your going small scale, like one personal use plant I like to go with a singe 50 watt high pressure sodium. It wont put put out as much bud but it's cheap, it doesn't put out much heat, its easily found at any chain style hardware store and it's easy on the electric bill. One way that I have increased yield is through creative pruning methods. I recommend a little scrog (screen of green) modification. Get one of those round trellises used for tomatoes and cut the bottom legs off and cut the top rings off after about 1.5 feet. Attach chicken wire over the top ring. Once your plant reaches 1 foot tall, cut off the grow tip (tiny budding leaves at the very top of the stalk). This will disrupt the release of a hormone that prevents the side branches from growing at a fast rate. You should then see a growth explosion and your plant will start to "bush" out. Once it gets to about 3 inches from the screen switch your lighting cycles over to 12 hours on and 12 hours off (flowering). Now the stems will elongate. Start to weave the young pliable stems in and out of the screen until you notice buds forming. Then let nature take its course. An oscillating fan is a necessity through out the entire length of the process and if growing on a small scale with lower light levels it is also important to trim away any excess foliage, especially if it is covering bud sites. After I get a good canopy going on the screen I actually remove all leaves on the stems beneath it. Well thats that. be sure to check back periodically for more useful information on subverting the government, staying informed and stickin' "IT" to tha Man.

Here is a good guide that outlines the process (thanks to BCseeds.com):

Hydroponics is the science of growing plants in a sterile medium.For the roots to flourish in a hydro system, there must be adequate water, nutrients, and oxygen. One of the easiest ways to start with hydroponics is simply to submerge the roots in a light nutrient solution and provide air in the solution with a small motorized pump. When done correctly, this method also is one of the most productive, capable of turning your average pot plants into monster indoor trees!

Deep Water Culture: from start to finish
In this how-to article, I will give you the plans, a workable nute ratio, and a schedule to complete a grow with the bubbling buckets. This is what has worked for me as of late-- there will always be variables from one garden to another which will require minor adjustments. These adjustments should be made gently! With DWC (deep water culture), the plants will react to any change much faster and the changes seem to affect the plants in a greater way. Your mileage will very depending on strain, lighting, nutes, etc. As for strain differences, it appears that no matter what the strain, there will be increased growth rates including the root mass! Therefore I would recommend that you maintain a sterile condition in both the buckets themselves as well as in the grow areas. Lack of diligence here will guarantee failure.

Selecting the bucket
This is a 3-gallon bucket that was found behind a hospital and previously contained fruit cocktail. Try to avoid any buckets which contained harmful chemicals, they may not come completely clean! Wash the bucket in a 10% bleach solution to ensure a sterile start. I also like to remove the handles. They're still easily picked up without them and they did tend to get in the way when left on. 3-gallons should be considered the minimum for bringing a plant to harvest with 5-gallons or more being preferable. Larger plastic tubs like those from Rubbermaid can be used but special attention should be paid to reinforcing them-- they're not meant to hold water. Double them up, one inside the other, or use a thicker container like a hydro reservoir.

Getting started with the lids
Cut the center of the lid out so a 6" net pot will drop in the opening. At the 3-o'clock position you will see a 1/4" hole towards the edge. That's for the airline. The net pots are available at most hydro stores, but you won't find them at Wal-Mart or Home Depot. Buy the heaviest-duty ones you can find. The reason I suggest the 6" is for plant stability when larger. You will need it, trust me! If you do choose to use smaller net pots you must secure them to the bucket so the plant does not tip over. Later you'll see a bucket with three 3.5" net pots in the lid. This is great for starting seedlings or clones in! 1-gallon per plant vs 3-gallons so you'll save on nutes and the number of buckets you

Preventing unwanted growth
You have to block the light or the buckets will fill with algae, and fast! Algae will choke the roots of necessary oxygen-- growth will slow and the roots will turn brown. You must make it light tight! I have used duct tape, but unless you used three wraps the light would still penetrate. I've since switched to using anti-corrosion pipe wrap tape purchased at a hardware store. The roll cost $8 US and will cover four 3-gallon buckets and lids. It's a vinyl tape that light can't pentrate and sticks well.

"I prefer the dual-outlet pumps for two reasons"
First, you have the ability to run two buckets in the early stages. I've heard of people using gang valves and running four to six buckets off of one pump. This may or not work, I'm no expert on exactly how much O2 is required in the solution for a healthy root system and plant. Second, I use a T so the dual outlet pump becomes a single outlet pump. I use one pump per bucket to insure plenty of O2 for the large root mass. At $14 US it will last for many grows and pay for itself in time. What's that equal to now, about 1 gr worth of product? Spend the money for a successful grow! The airstone I prefer to use are the small ones from Wal-Mart that run $.88 US. The reason being is the fine bubbles they produce. Sam Sara posted an article in referrence to fine bubbles suppling the most O2 to the solution vs powerheads or surface disturbance methods. Buy a couple extra as this is probably the most vulnerable part in the system. I've tried one of the 6" Bubble Curtains and didn't get as good of results. Also, there is a small lead fishing weight tied to the line at the stone to keep it on the bottom and in place. I'm sure I'll catch hell for using lead!

Medium or mediumless clones? My preference is rockwool starter cubes and gro-rocks or geolite. You could experiment with aeroponic rooting and ignore the rockwool altogether.

Nutrients and General Hydro ratios
This section is where the most testing and variations will be done by others! I use the GH Flora Series 3-part nutes. I also use the Pro-Tekt silcon additve and epsom salt in the solution. I start with distilled water due to water quality from a well that might not even be good for human consumption. I have tried RO water with no bad experiences and do plan on installing a RO filtering system soon. Either way, the ppm of the starting water is near 0. For seedlings and clones I use a 33% strength 1-1-1 solution. What I do is mix 1gal with 5ml Grow, 5ml Micro, and 5ml Bloom. Not in this order, as you have to add the micro first, but they list the solutions as G-M-B. I also add 5ml of Pro-Tekt and 1/4tsp of epsom salt. This goes into the bucket and an additional two gals of distilled are added. 10 drops of 70% Reagent Grade Nitric Acid bring the ph to 5.6 which is fine for me. I try and keep the ph in the 5.5-5.8 range and it will drift from the low 4s to the high 6s between changes depending on the plants useage of what nutes. For veg stage I use the same procedure for mixing to obtain the 33% solution strength. The difference being the ratio of the 3 parts. In veg stage I use the 3-2-1 mix which equals 15ml Grow, 10ml Micro and 5ml Bloom. The Pro-Tekt and epsom salt remain the same. Combine with 2 gals of distilled and adjust the ph to range. For the flowering stage it's the same routine and 33% solution strength. The ratio of the 3 parts are 5ml Grow, 10ml Micro and 15ml Bloom. The Pro-Tekt and epsom salt remain constant. Add two gals of distilled and adjust for ph range.
Keeping the water level

In my experience, the number one cause of failure was due to the nutrient levels maintained too high, at a level that allowed the rockwool cubes to contact the solution. What has worked well is to maintain the level about 1" above the bottom of the pot when using 6" net pots. In the triple 3.5" net pot buckets the level was about 1/2" above the bottom of the pot. There's no reason for concern when the levels drop below this point. I've had the level drop to a point that it took 2gals to bring it up to par. The air roots most likely thrive when the level drops in the bucket. For topping off the buckets I use the same solution as in the bucket at the same 33% solution strength. In the transition period from veg to flower I used a mix of 2-2-2 and in latter flower stages I have tried an aggressive formula of 0-2-4, both again at 33%. This is the area that will see the most changes by others. Everyone has their opinion on which nutes are the best and others will consider organics only. The most problems in the future will be with organics... These will take considerable monitoring and pre-bubbling to break down the organic nutes. Hope this has clarified the bubbling bucket for you. Get cracking and have fun