It's unfortunate that luches has driven away many long term members, I can certainly understand why though. And from the first forum I know him from, that's his goal their as well (at least the ones that don't agree). He want's to drive away all the strong opposition, silence any remaining members from speaking out (such as what you say he has done with you), and the ones that are defiant (like me) he tries to turn the forum upside down with to keep control of what he thinks is his. Because like a abnormally jealous boy/girl friend, his mentality is "if I cant have them, then nobody can." So he tries to ruin the forum in order to get the others to try to get luches opposition to become submissive (for fear of ruining more threads), that way he can retain control of his subjects. They don't realize the threads, and entire forum is ruined anyway when people are not allowed to freely share their ideas and opinions. I'm mot talking about speaking up for yourself, getting tired, and going away. That's pointless and has no good long term effects. All that does is for the people who are left, feel they just have no choice but put up with it, or just leave. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT LUCHES WANTS. That way he continues to control what's said in the forum. But had your long term members stuck it out and defended their rights of free speech, I have no doubt that the forum would be a much better place now and/or in the future. I respect your opinion grizz, although I completely disagree with it. That is, your thinking that bickering threads is worse than a forum where people are not allowed to have different ideas and opinions than luches, and be able to freely express them. That's why your long term members left, they didn't want to fight every time they spoke. That how luches got rid of the opposition. As I said before, a forum where your not allowed to have different opinions is a USELESS FORUM. You cant make a forum any worse than useless. Your long term members realize the forum was becoming useless, so they left. What they didn't realize was that they could have turned it around (likely by now) if they had continued defending their forum, and right of free speech (without being disrespected for it). Them giving up was the result of short term thinking, and that's unfortunate. I know this is the world wide web, but I grew up in the U.S.A., and here we have the right of free speech (within reason). I don't claim to be perfect, but I try to treat others with common courtesy and respect. In return I expect the same back. I don't think that's to hard to do, or to much to expect, plain and simple. I don't expect anybody to stand up for me, but I will stand up for myself. Even if nobody else wants to stand up for their self.

From what I've read it needs to be neither basic nor acidic; so ph neutral. I found Kiss My Face liquid hand soap and shower gel at our local health food store and the labels say ph balanced. I intended to get some litmus paper and test them, but I haven't. I've used both the hand soap and the shower gel and I don't notice any etching so far with this product, but I am careful. Looking forward to seeing what others may contribute. I'd like to find a ph balanced bar soap because I've heard they leave less residue than shower gels in general... My marble is all well sealed, but I noticed the KMF shower gel does have olive oil in the contents which doesn't sound like it would "mix" well with marble. Doing internet searches on this question has yeilded me little info (other than a few expensive webmail order items). I've run across info that Dove bar soap may be ph balanced, but I'm not sure whether that is true or not. I guess I'd better go find the litmus paper!

nancy_east -- thanks for your nice words! How exciting about your kitchen -- this will be fun to watch develop! The widest walkway we have is 36 1/2" (countertop to countertop), with it going down to 34 1/2" where our apron front sink "jumps" out. From our cooktop to the widest point of the bowed island countertop is 35 3/4". The only times (or rather, areas) our aisles feel tight are when the dishwasher door is open and there's only 12" of clearance (between the open door and the island cabinetry). But so far, no barked shins! We're careful and aware. The other area is our refrigerator (which is 30" wide, all refrigerator so it's a wide door): when it's open the only one who can sidle by (and then it's just barely) is our two year-old. But neither of those conditions are permanent (meaning, the dishwasher is mostly closed and the refrigerator door is mostly closed as well). While 36" for an aisle isn't "ideal," for us it's working out fine. Our only alternative would've been to give up the island and that wasn't an option! We need the storage space. Your aisles will work out fine; if it there's an impediment in the 36" aisle (like a dishwasher), then you all will learn the same careful two-step we and many others have as well! Good luck with your kitchen-in-progress! (and whole house, too!)

The comments about ten-power settings got me musing on the subject and about Amy's initial question about logarithmic power controls. Here's where that lead me. Nobody really has logarithmic power controls, but there can be power settings spaced to sort of approximate a logarithmic curve -- a number of settings at the low end with only a couple of additional points needed to define the steep side of the curve for really high heat. In theory, that can be done with a ten-step power curve and some folks do find 10 power settings fine for what and how they cook. Others do not. Is anybody else here old enough to remember the GE stoves and cooktops from 50's and 60's with ten mechanical pushbuttons for heat settings? Those pushbuttons were literally "digital" controls, meaning that you punched them with one of your digits. GE sold a lot of them for a couple of decades, so some people found them adequate. Some did not. For the current digital electronic ten-step controls, others here besides loonlakecamp have reported satisfaction with a ten step set-up. Others, like me, would find them inconvenient for my cooking with, say, my pressure cookers. With only ten heat level steps, I would have to be constantly switching settings to maintain the correct pressure. Power setting "1" might be too low, setting "2" might be too high. Switch to 1 for a while until the pressure drops a little too low, switch to 2 for a while until it gets a little too high, then back to 1, etc., etc. With in-between settings, I avoid that annoyance. You don't use pressure cookers? Then maybe having in-between steps won't matter to you. This is just one example of how cooking styles can differ and how more settings can matter to one cook and not to another. Much fuss is sometimes made about the supposedly infinite adjustablity of gas burners. As a practical matter, though, we mostly try to get the burner to the same relatively few settings. Searing is pretty much searing, isn't it? If you deep fat fry, how often would you care if if the oil were at 352° instead of 350°? But maybe somebody is working with sugar syrups where, say, it might matter if a syrup is at 325° and not 360° and then maybe it matters if the induction burner only has ten settings. That said, the subject of induction power settings and controls can be more complicated than just the number of settings. The need for finding "in-between" steps for induction cooking can reflect two different aspects of ways that manufacturers design induction burner controls. One consideration is the power cycling that all induction burners use for settings of less than full power. A technical term for this is "pulse width modulation. or "PWM." It is the same kind of thing a microwave does for low heat levels---momentary pulses of power that average out at a particular heat level. With most PICs as well as some brands of induction cooktops and ranges, the PWM is pretty crude. I've seen this somewhere described as firing up the burner for a second or two of omigosh hot and then switching totally off for three or four seconds. While these pulses average out at a certain heat level the timing can be problematic for, say, the srambled eggs that Amy mentioned at the outset. Combine that kind of "low frequency" PWM with the crude power controls found on many PICs, and you could have a reason that Amy would find herself wanting steps in-between power level "1" and "2" for scambling eggs. Some full size induction ranges and cooktops work this way. I noticed a lot of pulsing at the low heat settings on the Maytag induction range I saw demoed several years ago when I was stove shopping. From past threads on PWM, I gather than Whirlpool's induction ranges and cooktops (which include Maytag and Kitchenaid brands) have used crude PWM. For searching out past threads here on this subject try a search strings like "induction + pulsing + gardenweb" and "induction + cycling + gardenweb." A few of the expensive PICs (Cooktek, Garland, Vollrath) and many full size ranges and cooktops use much higher frequency PWM. Instead switching on and off for a second or more at time, the power switches on and off many times per second. The higher frequency of switching yields much finer power control that more closely approximates a steady heat level. The other design aspect that can lead to wanting "in-between" settings is in how the engineers program the electronic controllers to space the power settings on the appliance you are using --- that's the kind of logarithmic curve I thnk Amy may been thinking about when she posed her question in the original post. . For manufacturers, the least costly controls use simple linear spacing. Setting "1" would use the PWM to average 10% power, setting "2" would be 20%, etc. Even with a high quality PWM, though, 9 or 10 linear settings may be too crude, A thing most induction users discover pretty quickly is that they do most of their cooking in the low to medium range settings. The highest setting can be used for boiling. One or two medium high settings takes care of high heat applications like searing. There seem to be three strategies for induction manufacturers to address the crudeness. One is to add half-steps between the numbered power settings. The other is to program the stove's controllers to put more steps in the low to medium range and fewer in the high ranges. The third strategey combines the first two. Without using the particular induction stove or cooktop, it can be hard to find out whether the particular unit was designed to use one or the other or some combination of them. In my own somewhat limited experience, it seems that the GE induction appliances and Electrolux's Frigidaire/Kenmore ranges seemed to use a modified-half step approach with some concentration of steps but also using half steps for finer control. The Electrolux-branded models use a slightly different approach with quarter-steps at the lower power ends and fewer steps at the high end. Miele cooktops seem to use a similar kind of mix with the option of switching on more steps. I'm not sure how BSH (which includes Bosch) handles this except that their induction appliances manuals show that half-steps are available. The Samsung freeestanding induction ranges seemed to follow the GE model (19 half steps). The reports about Samsung's ten-step "Chef Collection" model seem to conflict, some seeming to say that stepping is linear, some hinting that the settings may be skewed to the lower end. There is a yet another strategy which is the near infinite stepping of of potentiometer-like controls. These control systems seem to be very expensive so, AFAIK, they are used only for the commercial Garland/Manitowiac PICS and maybe the new Miele induction range have this. I say "maybe" for the Miele because there is nothing about it in the product literature and the display shows only whole-number settings, but a couple of posters here -- livinginseattle is the name I recall -- have reported finding that the knobs can be turned to provide fine gradations of "in-between" settings. Some folks would find that ideal. Then the question becomes: how much are you willing to spend for the "ideal" (and are there other design compromises that have to accept in order to get that ideal function for the burners?)