KarateHiro on thu 12 mar 98
I have often been accused, by my spouse, of having no common sense, or, of no
inklings of scientific understandings in general and of food in particular.
Well, I disagree. I believe I have an exquisite sense for good things in life.
Look at my spouse as a starter. I also possess an earthy understanding of
everything around us, especially food. I am an excellent cook, a part time
professional. How fortunate, or unfortunate, depending on your viewpoints.
Giving this post may endorse my spouse's contention, however, since it's tax
time again. Maybe I should not. But, again, I simply present my "observations"
for fun. Does not matter if it pays or costs. I expect neither.
One thing I noted in the thread on ITC, bricks, fibers, coatings and
rigidifying sprays, off and on for the past year on this list, is this. For
some reason, people wish to talk about one small "scientific" fact on a little
bitty small thing. For pragmatic potters, such talks do not help. They may be
all true, but in a larger context, they quite often do not make sense.
On top of that, it could exacerbate the total picture, mislead us, and
aggravate the situation when one makes personal remarks based on the
scientific conviction as to what is true or not on small portion of the kiln
we use. It seems fruitless to denigrate another potter on the point of
science. It indicates the shallowness of the individual making such a post.
The scientific expertize may enhance a person's ego. Such a display often
cause resentment. Just human nature. It may enhance the person's self-image as
a scientifically literate at another potter's cost. But it should not enhance
your stature as a potter. To act like that is not reasonable. Just deplorable.
What good does it do?
Most scientific information on bricks, fibres, coatings and the like could be
found on or in publicly available data bases. If you know how to access, all
yours. That's it. If you need specifics, go for it. No need for a potter to
waste the time or space on such matters. Yes, we need to have good research
conducted with an edge. With use of personal computers. But if only one of us
could do it, that should suffice for all. Let's not toss the stuff around.
Well, I will come down from the soapbox, and give you specifics. Down to earth
stuff.
The ITC or its derivative, I have been led to believe, was initially developed
to shield the spacecraft upon reentry into the atmosphere. Gets red hot and
flakes off, eventually, but keeps the nosecone and other vital parts more or
less intact by its insulating, shielding, or other protective properties. The
exterior skin of spacecraft consist of metals or ceramics. So the cutting edge
technology bonds to these materials. The stuff we use is applied on bricks and
fibres by primitive methods. It is applied to two types of kiln materials,
i.e., hard or soft bricks, and compressed or soft fibers. From my observations
of the postings to this list, The ITC seems to work wonders on all of them.
This is amazing, isn't it? Let me digress a bit now. Just for fun.
Generally, I have observed that those who have used it, heartily endorse it.
Those who have not, quite skeptical. So, the situation reminded me of those
essential oils used in aroma therapy, commonly available in any health stores.
Both are applied to basic structures. One on kilns. The other on our bodies.
Both are spread on the surface of kiln or human skin. Those who have used it
swear by it. Those who have not, doubt the authenticity or veracity of the
beneficial claims, arguing that there are other things which could do the same
at less cost.
Well, the similarities do not end there. The essential oils are purported to
enhance vigor, vitality, and health. The other basically does the same to the
kiln. No arguing about the results obtained. Do wonders. Just try and see the
benefits.
The catch is that both cost a lot of money. Still, neither is out of our
reach. Priced just right. Hence, devotees abound. Another catch is that both
require care in applying them. If not properly administered, could bring a lot
of harm, or do nothing at all. One is organic and not subject to chemical
substitution, but easily adulterated. The other is not organic, being man-made
substances, but the chemical formula could be easily altered or changed
without any notice. Either way, you do not know exactly what you are getting
and why. But see the results. They do work, don't they?
The scientific proof or facts on before-and after-effects, under these
circumstances, are hard to come by. Not needed, basically, for those
beneficial claims, my common sense tells me. People like to use them, and
happy about it. Just shut up, and listen.
Such observations of mine reminds me of an itinerary snake oil salesman of a
century ago.
Do not misunderstand me. I like the smell of essential oils. A whiff of it
gives me a wonderful sense of well-being. I may go so far as to put a little
bit on my hand or vital organs. But I will never dream of putting it in my
mouth or drinking it. Lot of people do so. To me, that entails too much of a
risk. Too much of a good thing. Many natural substances are medicine, but they
turn into poison if takin in large dozes.
The same could be said of the ITC bit. I promise I shall elaborate on this
point further in succeeding posts on this matter. Please refrain from flaming
me till you hear the rest. After all, I am also having fun at your service.
Hiro Matsusaki
| |
|
