https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_human_combustion
>In his 1995 book Ablaze!, Larry E. Arnold wrote that there had been about 200 cited reports of spontaneous human combustion worldwide over a period of around 300 years.
Like, nobody ever seems to give a fuck that people have literally burst into flames in the past for no apparent reason, and quite frankly it's pissing me off.
I heard once a long time ago that the Krebs cycle (that turns food to energy in our bodies) or whatever that thing's called occurs in short bursts as opposed to a drawn out cycle, and if it occurred continuously the huge amount of energy would make us literally explode. Please, for the love of god let's figure this shit out!
/x/ will figure something out about this when a majority of them have their masters/doctorates in human biology
>>17049290
in the mean time, uneducated contrivances and ad hominems will be the only thing we'll find.
>>17049252
>It happens sometimes. People just explode. >Natural causes.
>>17049252
Spontaneous human combustion is pretty fascinating. There's enough evidence of it that it's pretty difficult to totally shrug off, but how the fuck do people burn so fast and effectively that it hardly burns anything around them? I've never heard about that Krebs cycle bit, I'll have to look into it.
Definitely lurking, hope the thread kicks off.
>>17049487
>hope the thread kicks off
You and me both, buddy...
>>17049501
I would definitely like to learn more about it.
I think it's uncontrolled pyrokinesis.
>>17049290
> /x/
> education
> facts
GET OUT
>>17049487
The krebbs cycle is constantly going on to maintain energy in all cells for functionality and survival. It's ludicrous to claim it could cause enough energy to ignite fat or initiate any form of combustion.
>>17049574
lmfao
>I heard once a long time ago that the Krebs cycle (that turns food to energy in our bodies) or whatever that thing's called
What a great way to propose a revolutionary theory on a chemical process that entire careers are devoted to.
>>17049632
The thing I like most about your post is the fact it's relying on your own intuition that something you don't understand and haven't tried researching is just too "ludicrous" to work. No, the vocab word didn't help smooth things over, it really didn't.
>>17049641
Maybe contribute next time and then we'll talk?
>>17049647
>Maybe contribute next time and then we'll talk?
Exactly what I was thinking when I read the OP.
The Kreb's cycle is, as the name suggests, a cycle. It does not occur in "short bursts" - it is a continuous process of converting fuel into energy. And it IS occurring simultaneously, billions of times over, within our bodies. Every single mitochondria does it and does it constantly in order for every individual cell to function, and human cells can have up to 2,000 mitochondria per cell.
Adenosine triphosphate operates off a cycle. The human body has about 0.1 moles of ATP in it that are constantly cycled in order to produce enough energy for the body to function. There's about a half kilogram of ATP per mole (507.18 g/mol)
ATP produces, on average, about 30kJ of energy per mole. Since we have about 0.1 moles of ATP constantly cycling in our body, if every bit of ATP was expended simultaneously we would produce about 3kJ of energy.
A BTU is 1,055 joules, or about 1 kJ. It's the amount of energy required to increase the temperature of a pound of water by 1 degree fahrenheit. A single kitchen match burned from start to finish generates about this much energy.
So to complete the analogy, if the human body would produce 3kJ of energy if it expended all of it's ATP in a single moment, then it would produce the energy equivalent of 3 kitchen matches burning to completion.
The reason the human body can generate the force it can is not the result of just hydrolyzing ATP. The idea that ATP could be produced in enough quantity to cause an average sized person (made mostly of water, mind you) to actually burst into flames means there would need to be an amount of of kilograms of pure ATP stuffed in a human body, all hydrolyzed simultaneously and immediately, to rival the weight of their entire leg.
>>17049783
Damn then I guess you got me. Good work, though.
>>17049252
so-called-scientists believe they know everything
there is no acceptance for the unknown today
because it shows they do not know some things
and they do not want to admit this
it has always been like that
all new concepts faced strong opposition from ignorant and self-admiring scientific and technological establishment
see: quantum mechanics, Tesla's AC current
today many things that were granted in science break apart,
like evolution concept (created before the discovery of the DNA)
but no scientist is willing to admit they were wrong for whole their lives.
they are pathetic liars.
>>17050240
Are you saying that science is a bitch sometimes?
>>17050262
Perhaps this means bump for /x/ to discover a whole new branch of science :)
>>17050240
>willing to admit they were wrong for whole their lives.
>they are pathetic liars.
what about you? what have you ever been wrong about?
>be scientist
>get hated on by conspiracy theorists
>be conspiracy theorist
>get hated on by sceptics
>>17049783
Even if it wasn't his intention, he just made you make a productive post by being wrong.
>>17049313
Internal distention. Please look up.
>>17050240
>because it shows they do not know some things
>and they do not want to admit this
wat. That's literally the reason science exists, because people have realized that we don't know shit and that's unacceptable. No "scientists" I know IRL fall under any of your bullshit claims. You get into science to learn and garner information from the world around you, which is the opposite of what you're saying.
Fuckin' tool.
I was always told most of it were satellites being tested...some peoples nerves stay folding with intensity, so i can imagine that. Just relax.
I have the wick theory before. An alcoholic dies and gets slowly burned by a cigarette or something.
i blame those new blipvert advertisements channel 23 has been airing.
I'll say this, I don't know shit about human combustion or the functions of our cells, but I watched a documentary once on human combustion. Seemed cool, they mostly admitted that there really wasn't any reliable scientific explanation for it, but I think one guy talked about something called wicking? Implied that at cetian point the structure of the body can falter and super heat quickly while insulating certain parts where it acts as a candle wick? If what I'm saying is fucking retarded, I apologize but figured I'd bring it up.
>>17054096
This. The majority of the people that fall for this shit completely forget to look at the whole spectrum and just fill that in with silly bullshit that sounds good and works with their hypothesis. Because it's not a theory, just a half-assed idea.
>>17050262
