In a message dated 1/15/03 7:38:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Does this mean anything to you? This is not static work. It is not only work that is being refined but it is also work in which, perhaps, problems have been detected and corrections offered. (e-coli) this is an evolving work. How does one know how to evaluate a piece of archival data if they are operating in a vacuum. (Reading the archive without working with the BD Now! group)
Why avoid the living organization? I really don't understand. >> The tea is really a facinating thing. In my preliminary studies of it last year we looked under a Nikon Phase Contrast microscope capable of flourescence, dark phase, phase contrast and compound microscopy. The first day took me four hours to look over 1/4 inch of a microscope slide. A few weeks later I went back and the sample with the same exact inoculants and brew time, and brewer were identical. The samples were completely different. Totally different biology, I was baffled. In speaking with a brewer in California who was having the folks at UC Davis analyze samples, said that they gave up because each sample brought hundreds of previously unidentified species to the plate. They could not afford the time to analyze the dataand biology. It is my hope that through working with my Alma Mater, Southampton College, we can use some Marine Biological methods to analyze the teas. One such test will be the diurnal sampling. Here a sample is drawn and tested every hour four 24 hours. I would like to modify it to extend for 36-48 hours to get a good picture of vitality and decline in the teas. It was alluded to in another conversation that populations shift on a 28 day lunar cycle, affected by cosmic events...sstorch
