Horius Parry

Static electricity

There is no such thing as static electricity as commonly imagined and even descriptions from mainstream science are self-contradictory. All electromagnetic fields are composed of ‘living’ filaments of spiral field vortices which propagate at the speed of light and contain their own ‘energy’.

‘Movement’, i.e. field movement is intrinsic to electromagnetic fields, the vortices want to go somewhere, meaning nothing is ever truly static and the field itself can act as an energy source.

Field propagation is at the speed of light as with photons, but the propagation speed of a field vortex will depend upon the pitch of the vortex or the exact characteristics of the ring structure.

A conventional static field is a conglomeration of moving vortices. However, this fine grained structure has been missed owing to the crude nature of the measuring instruments and the unquestioning acceptance of an over simplified and inconsistent theory.

Classical theory

The classical model of an electrostatic field is based upon the idea of a ‘charge’ (an electron) and an associated ‘force field’ which adopts a radial configuration (right) and obeys an inverse square law out to an infinite distance: Coulomb’s law

For most practical purposes this seems to work but consider what happens if a shield of lead (Pb) is applied to eliminate the field and then removed; the field disappears immediately and is then instantly renewed. Coulomb’s law should still hold but this means that the field should come into existence again all the way to infinity in no time at all!

Physicists know this and know that it is impossible but seem to think that when the shield is removed, what happens is that the field somehow repairs itself from the charge outwards, radiating to infinity at the speed of light, whereupon it knows to stop and stabilise in order to re-establish Coulomb’s Law.

So the field has ‘moved’ outwards (i.e. it is not static) and it has originated from a small charge which never seems to run out of ‘field substance’, never runs out of energy to renew an infinite field in an instant and maintain it indefinitely.

Similar concerns apply to what happens if an electron is moved. In this case, in order for Coulomb’s law to hold, the entire field all the way out to infinity must also move with it.

This is inconceivable to sane people and Newton had similar concerns about the nature of gravity. Any instantaneous action at a distance is in any case a contradiction of the principles of special relativity and so classical physics and relativity are at odds with each other. They cannot both be true at once and the absurdity of the standard description means that classical electrostatic theory at least is flawed and even inconsistent with Newton:

“This form of solutions need not obey Newton’s third law as is the case in the framework of special relativity (yet without violating relativistic-energy momentum conservation)” – Wikipedia

No charge!

Classical theory relies heavily upon the idea of ‘charge’ as being the source of electric fields, but charge as such does not exist and attachment to this concept has proved to have a stifling effect upon improving electrostatic theory.

How is charge measured? How do we know it exists? It has not been described directly but we ‘know’ it exists because we can measure the forces exerted by it and then use Coulomb’s law to calculate the amount of charge that must have created such force.

This is very obviously a circular argument: “Charge creates force so any observation of a force is proof of the existence of charge”. Clear bunk.

Vortex theory: the electron

According to the vortex theory of Konstantin Meyl, an electron is merely the ‘vortex radius’ of a spherical-toroidal shaped electromagnetic field. The vortex was created from an extended field of an arbitrarily large size which continues to morph, mutate and expand throughout the cosmos.

The field has energy of its own and is self-maintaining by itself but in practice will interact with the local field structure, whether this be within an atom or in the ‘void’ of space. Measurements of the field around a particle will imply a spherical structure and lead physicists to infer the existence of ‘charge’ because that is what their theory says.

Within this framework, the whole of ‘matter’ is described as field structures and the only ‘forces’ available are electromagnetic forces. Therefore, the only way to move an electron is by the application of a motivational field. Such field will interact with the field surrounding the electron and the effects will spiral inwards towards the vortex centre of the little ‘particle’ thereby causing movement of the vortex.

So here it is the deformation of the field that leads to the movement of the ‘charge’ and not the other way around.

In vortex physics, the field is the primal cause and the illusion of matter is a downstream effect. Classical physics tries to have all this inverted, with ‘matter’ or the ‘properties of matter’ (charge) as the origin of force . This just leads to confusion.

Charged objects

A single electron takes the form of a single spherical vortex structure but a charged object such as a balloon or a charged metal sphere is a different matter.

The top of a Van de Graaff generator is a conductive ‘sphere’ filled with electrical eddy currents. These are field vortices that are not stabilised into electrons or positrons and are free to mutate into different configurations as conditions allow.

Vortices move and propagate, they move to the surface of the metal via mutual repulsion and form a ‘layer’ owing to the difference in conductivity between the metal and the surrounding air. The fields act as accumulators and gather sufficient energy to propagate into the atmosphere, possibly taking on a slightly different configuration appropriate to the ambient conditions.

A radial field of electrical filaments emanates from the sphere and propagates outwards to infinity. Measuring devices will take an average over a relatively large area of this field and conclude a ‘potential’ that diminishes according to an inverse square law.

The sphere is distributing energy and so the field is diminishing accordingly. This is interpreted in the mainstream as ‘charge loss’ i.e. the loss of actual matter (electrons or ions) from the object! A pattern to look for in physics is the offhand dismissal of ‘losses’ and ‘noise’ as if these things need no explanation, as if the laws of physics do not apply here. By ignoring inconveniences, the impression is created of a consistent theoretical framework when nothing of the sort exists.

Coulomb’s law (vortex interpretation)

So measurement of field strength (electrical potential) is really an average of the effects of field vortices and this will approximate an inverse square law according to geometric considerations alone; the filaments spread out over a greater volume of space and this is sufficient to produce the law.

Now consider shielding with a lead cage and then removing it suddenly. The eddy currents propagate outwards at close to the speed of light depending upon helical pitch and the field is renewed in due course.

Theoretically the propagation is out to infinity, but it doesn’t ever stop as infinity is never reached and in any case the field in this case is emphatically not static but in a state of continuous radiation with continual concomitant ‘losses’ from the charged sphere.

If the sphere is moved suddenly, then field effects will propagate outwards similar to the way that waves and eddies spread from a stone tossed into a whirlpool. Field propagation itself is at the speed of light but emergent effects will move at different speeds according to their dynamic geometry. The field ‘travels’ it is never static.

Friction

If two substances are rubbed against each other, the atoms do not actually ‘touch’ each other as such an idea does not make sense in either classical or vortex physics. Do atoms ‘touch’?

Instead what happens is that the vortex radii of many electrons will come very close together, creating very strong field interference. The kinetic energy of rubbing is converted to vortex energy in the atomic structure and the associated ‘field drag’ is experienced as a resistance to movement, i.e. ‘friction’.

We now have an excess of vortex energy over baseline and eventual destabilisation will lead to several phenomena:

Transfer of vortex energy throughout the medium is known as heat diffusion
The reconfiguring of a vortex into a plain old photon in the infrared range
The dissipation of electric eddy currents away from the material

The third of these being what is called the triboelectric effect . A ‘static’ electric field has been created without the need to rip an atom apart by stripping electrons from the outer shell.

The Van de Graaff generator

We are now ready to tackle this complex subject. This is simply not understood by the mainstream even according to their own account.

In their version, positive ‘charge’ is created either by extracting protons from the centre of atoms or by stripping off electrons to leave a positive ion. Both these are ‘matter’ and they move obligingly around the circuit, are recreated at (2) by field induction and gather on the outside of the metal shell where they create the infinite field in an instant and then leak away to the surrounding air. The metal dome is continually losing material substances but never seems to shrink, run out of ions or develop an sort of film at the surface. Very suspicious.

Eventual spark discharge is via ionisation of the surrounding air in accordance with an enormous ‘voltage’; yet another breaking down of atomic structure.

The explanation from vortex physics is still not simple but really only involves a single process, which is to say the transformation of field vortices from one semi-stable structure to another depending upon the local conditions.

The rubber band is an insulator and so favours, (via the triboelectric effect) a vortex of magnetic potential over a vortex of electrical movement. Movement is intrinsic to field vortices which aids in self-organisation of self-similar structures.

The field structures from the band will form particularly around the top of the wheel where there is elastic deformation of the rubber. They will transmute into positive electrical vortices at the surface and propagate through the air to the graphite brushes.

More propagation is guided by the strong conductivity of the metal dome and eventually field propagation occurs from the dome to the outside atmosphere as described above. No flying matter is needed and no ‘field induction’.

Spark discharge may well be accompanied by ionisation but this may not necessarily be the cause. If the field is uniform then why is the discharge so localised and why does it often take on a vortex shape (right). Discharge is via field vortex and the centre of the vortex increases field intensity which leads to ionisation.

So it is the field vortex that precedes and therefore causes the ionisation and not the ionisation that somehow forms vortices as it breaks down the air molecules.

The huge voltages claimed therefore may not be real but may be local effects combined with measurement artefacts. In any case, a ‘voltage’ is the result of averaging over millions of smaller field phenomena. It may even be that vortex filaments are attracted towards the measurement instrument!

The Earth’s electric field

The Earth’s electric field is likewise not static nor uniform. Discharge from the ionosphere is in the form of field vortices and it is these that can affect the electromagnetic bio-field of organic life forms, having some beneficial effects in maintaining bio-rhythms and some detrimental effects in promoting disease. See: Influenza and weather

Wikipedia

Coulomb’s law is described by Wikipedia both as ’empirical’ and as ‘fundamental’ at the same time which does rather highlight the confusion over the whole idea.

Concluding remarks

The idea of a static field and the requirement that it must come from ‘charge’, that it is inextricably dependent upon ‘matter’ may be good enough for many practical purposes, but is not theoretically tenable and therefore unsuitable as a foundational concept in physics.

It may be framed as merely ’empirical’ but is invariably regarded as ‘fundamental’ and immutable in the absence of anything better. This attitude has proved quite crippling in terms of making any sort of advancement in a wide area of theoretical physics and has resulted in the workings of biological systems seeming utterly incomprehensible.

This has led to many serious researchers concluding the existence some sort of vitalistic force in living systems. They are not wrong. The élan vital is nothing more or less than the organised movement of field vortices as they impact upon biological tissue. The tissue guides the field movement and the field energy ‘enlivens’ the tissue.

The idea of a field that is static, uniform and dependent upon charge should be cast aside in favour of a field that is moving, vortex-like and independent of a material source.

The vortex theories of Konstantin Meyl are not just a speculative adjunct to contemporary science but a necessary replacement for many areas.

Vortex physics volume 1: https://meyl.eu/go/indexcbbc.html

Related pages:

Earth’s variable rotation

The rate of the Earth’s rotation varies over time and sometimes on a very short time frame. There seems to be some correspondence with both solar and lunar activity.

Hypothesis: Giant electromagnetic filaments exist between the Earth and sun and also freely floating in empty space. The movement of Earth, moon and sun combine to disturb these and cause variations in the activity of all three bodies causing all sorts of interesting correlations. If the edge of the Earth passes near a vortex then the rotation speed may be altered, the Earth may wobble on its axis and there may be disturbances of the Earth’s weather patterns.

Remarks about External Forces Acting on Earth’s Rotation Axis – Ciobanu
https://www.scirp.org/%28S%28351jmbnt-vnsjt1aadkozje%29%29/journal/paperinformation?paperid=123799

The language in this paper is difficult but there are some hints that support the above hypothesis:

“If the time interval is very short, then a sudden change in direction of tangential forces may cause the appearance of a vortex. Often in communications of airplane paranormal disasters, a sudden vortex is mentioned. When a paranormal ship disaster happens, due to turbulence, very cold air is sometimes noticed”

Film footage of plane disappearances often show what appear to be field vortices following the plane although some claim they are photoshopped. Disappearances in the Bermuda triangle were associated with compass anomalies. The Bermuda triangle is at a latitude of exceptional field vortex activity as reflected by large measurable ground currents induced by atmospheric electricity.

“Searching through a list of disasters, believed to be paranormal, involving airplanes and ships, one can find some cases that happened when the Moon crosses the turning points. Could it be a mere coincidence?”

“It must be also noted that the Bermuda Triangle and the Pacific Devil Triangle are situated between 18˚ to 30˚ latitude, the correspondence of 18˚ to 30˚ celestial declination. May it be also a simple coincidence?”

“It must be admitted that the great influence of the Moon and Sun in the formation of ocean and land tides has always been readily accepted; but, naturally, there are also other dynamic perturbations submitted by our planet from these celestial bodies.“

Q: Are the tides on Earth solely the result of the moon’s gravitational field or are they also influenced by ‘space-energy’.

A: The energy exists in space and is harnessed to the moon meaning that its influence is statistically almost indistinguishable from that of the moon’s gravity.

Related pages:

How does ‘grounding’ work?

There seems to be plenty of evidence to suggest that connecting with the Earth has beneficial effects on health and in particular is efficacious in resolving many inflammatory conditions. However, the exact mechanism by which this happens is unclear and claims of electrons flowing into the body are unsupported by either experiment or theory.

More likely is the idea that some sort of flow of ‘field vortices’ (scalar waves) is responsible for the effects we are seeing.

The standard explanation

Shown below, a 200 volt difference is claimed between head and feet and this is said to drive electrons up into the body through the feet to relieve some electron deficit in the body.

The 200 volts is the bottom end of a 200,000 – 500,000 volt difference stretching up into the ionosphere.

A cloud of electrons covers the Earth’s surface. It doesn’t dissipate into the atmosphere and doesn’t creep up our positively charged shoes and doesn’t drift to our positively charged bodies through the air. The electrons wait until we walk barefoot and then suddenly enter our bodies and somehow are guided to where they are needed.

Problems with this idea:

None of this has been demonstrated
Why don’t the electrons at the Earth’s surface repel each other and dissipate?
Are the ground based electrons the cause or the result of the field?
How do the electrons move against the field gradient to our head?
How do the electrons move to the interiors of our cells?
Where did the electrons come from?
Why am I still alive?

Measuring the field

Fair weather atmospheric electricity – R.G. Harrison

Field gradient at Reading Observatory was measured using a field mill and the results are shown in the chart below.

Field gradient (PG) measured at Reading observatory using a ‘field mill’.

The field gradient varies considerably and even becomes negative during rain. Does this mean that the entire field up to the ionosphere has inverted or is it just a local change?

If the field is really caused by a potential difference between the ionosphere and the ground then how do local variations occur?

What happened to all the electrons during the rain and how did they return afterwards?

Field mills

A home made field mill is pictured, consisting of two capacitor plates, the top one spinning around like a windmill to create an alternating current from an assumed ambient field. [video] The measurements are calibrated against some laboratory experiment and measurements from the mill are then interpreted as ‘field gradient’.

Concerns

The device only ever measures effects within a gap of a millimetre or so. Any field gradients outside that are calculated rather than measured. It is assumed that the field gradient will be more or less uniform over the range required and so the result for local measurements are simply multiplied up to the desired height.

Effects near to the ground are surely dominated by the presence of the electron cloud? They are not necessarily representative of what happens further up in the atmosphere or even towards the top of the body.

It seems unlikely anyone has explicitly measured the 200kV difference between 10,000 feet and the ground. I didn’t find evidence that a 200 volt difference has been measured between a person’s head and feet.

If only local effects have been measured then the possibility should be considered that only local effects are present.

We have two metal plates in close proximity moving at speed and driven by a motor! How much voltage is induced by the machine itself?

If a field mill is calibrated in a laboratory then there is an implicit assumption that its behaviour within laboratory conditions is somehow representative of what happens outside the laboratory and under the influence of different weather conditions.

Other instruments give similar results to a field mill but that still doesn’t mean much other than that possibly the same artefacts are being created by slightly different techniques.

The central problem of ‘charge physics’

Standard texts on physics will describe an electric ‘field’ as being created by charge separation, with ‘charge’ being synonymous with ‘electrons’.

To create an electric field between the Earth’s surface and the ionosphere then, we need to separate out a great deal of electrons and move them towards the Earth somehow.

The problem now is that the field thereby created has a gradient that promotes the movement of electrons upwards, away from the Earth, and since it is the electrons themselves that are the actual cause of the field we find that the field gradient is constantly diminishing and destined to disappear altogether.

The electron gradient is seemingly both the cause and the result of the field at the same time!

We therefore are looking for some method of somehow pushing the electrons back to the Earth’s surface against the field gradient caused by their own accumulated charge.

The most common explanation for this is that lightning strikes bring the electrons back down to ground level where they spread out and distribute themselves fairly evenly over the ground.

This is becoming a typical theme of classical physics whereby anomalous phenomena are ‘explained’ by some sudden violent outburst such as a Big Bang, electrical ‘discharge’ or atomic deterioration.

This approach is particularly unsatisfactory in this case as:

We are still assuming charge move against a field gradient – how?
Lightning can go upwards and even sideways as well as downwards
Electric currents themselves do not consist of moving electrons: What is electricity?
A better explanation is given for lightning by Konstantin Meyl here: Ozone Engine

Vortex physics

Field discharge in the atmosphere is not uniform but instead in the form of vortices. The image shows helical discharge of an electric field which has somehow become visible as condensed water molecules. Similar patterns arise from the ‘corona’ discharge of power lines.

A field mill then is a device for catching field vortices of whatever configuration. The vortices enter the metal plates and spread out to form smaller eddy currents within the conductive environment. The moving plates create further electric turbulence which will find the propitious environment of the output wires and thence to the measuring device.

‘Current’ forms out of the melee and some pointer device is coerced into moving. These phenomena as a whole are interpreted as ‘field gradient’.

What happens if a few field mills are placed vertically one above the other? If a uniform field is present then they should all measure the same gradient. If the theory of vortex discharge is true then the top mill will harvest most of the crop and the lower ones will register progressively less ‘voltage’ as less vortex energy is available.

If it is claimed that a field does exist but that the mill is somehow distorting the gradient then what guarantee is there that what is being measured is what was actually there in reality and not simply an artefact of whizzing capacitor plates?

‘Voltage’ itself is an averaged measurement of field activity: What is electricity?

Static electricity is really just a collection of field vortices: Static electricity

Scalar waves in biology

Scalar waves (field vortices) are the medium of choice for the transport of both energy and information within biological systems:

Nerves are ideally constructed as scalar wave transmitters: Scalar waves and nerves
The brain is a scalar wave computer: What is the brain?
Antipathetic atmospheric vortices cause disease: Influenza and weather
Scalar waves from 5G towers are said to cause disease: Influenza and field vortices
Various vortex constructs are instrumental in circulation: Blood flow and scalar waves

Grounding is said to be a cure for many inflammatory conditions and there are papers on curing even ‘covid’ which is arguably a result of the excessive energy or informational ‘noise’ on seasonal vortex discharge.

Most people do not require grounding to maintain good health.

Many diseases are the result of bad regulation: Bio-regulatory medicine and regulation is via a scalar wave bio-field.

Eclipses

The solar neutrino stream increases in density during an eclipse causing possible ill health and making grounding essential:

“In the case of an eclipse of the sun effects on the biology, like problems with the heart among affected, at least can’t be excluded. If the scalar wave density increases above the density which is normal, then this has a positive effect on the economy of energy, as long as the body is capable to regulate the amount taken up. If the regulatory process however should fail . then the risk of a self-inflammation exists. Also straw bales and other organic and inflammable materials could thus go up in flames.” – Konstantin Meyl (Scalar Waves)

How does grounding work?

Many inflammatory conditions then are the result of energy mis-management. Energy is stored in various forms in the body but scalar waves are one of the more versatile. Too much of this energy however leads to imbalance, fatigue and inflammation.

Grounding provides a direct connection to the Earth which dissipates the excess energy and enables healing, often resulting in instant cures. So grounding is not the result of any energetic or charged input but instead the release of accumulated energy.

No need for vast voltage differences or wading through electron puddles.

References:

Fair weather atmospheric electricity – R.G. Harrison
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682618301299

Electrostatic Field Mill — MAE 535 Demo Project – Oskar Wolff
https://youtu.be/Tkvh-dpq6iw

Prevention and treatment of COVID-19 infection by earthing – Mousa
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346734751_Prevention_and_treatment_of_COVID-19_infection_by_earthing

Integrative and lifestyle medicine strategies should include Earthing (grounding): Review of research evidence and clinical observations.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1550830719305476?via%3Dihub

The effects of grounding (earthing) on inflammation, the immune response, wound healing, and prevention and treatment of chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases – Oschman J, Chevalier G, Brown R.
https://www.dovepress.com/the-effects-of-grounding-earthing-on-inflammation-the-immune-response–peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-JIR#F10

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/index92d2.html

Water engine with ozone – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357448687_water_engine_with_ozone

What causes pneumonia?

Legacy biology claims that aggressively reproducing bacteria are responsible for cell death in the lung tissue. The body tries to frantically repair the damage whilst the immune system is responsible for killing off the bacteria at the same time.

The New Biology paradigm is happier with the idea that it is the tissue that dies first and that the bacteria are not causal in the process but are merely opportunist scavengers that live off dead tissue.

But what causes the tissue necrosis in the first place and why is the lung tissue seemingly more susceptible to this type of disorder than other parts of the body? Why is pneumonia common in hospitals with supposedly strict hygiene protocols and why does it seem to be a progression of other respiratory conditions such as influenza. Why don’t the nurses ‘catch’ it?

First consider that the lung tissue needs a continuous supply of energy in order to maintain it. This is assumed to come from oxygen in the blood delivered via the capillary system. The job of the lungs though is to absorb oxygen from the lung cavities and deliver it to the rest of the body and this is achieved via a separate capillary system, the pulmonary capillaries.

The coexistence of two such systems is a complexity not seen in the rest of the body and I will guess that this restricts the number of maintenance capillaries somewhat thereby making the whole system a little delicate and meaning that any extra input of energy in this area would be most welcome.

Konstantin Meyl has stated that such an additional input exists in the form of electromagnetic field vortices which are transferred from fresh air through the lung tissue directly to the bloodstream. Air that has been breathed and had insufficient time to recover is depleted of vortices and depleted of energy.

Gerald Pollack has written a paper going a step further, claiming that there is no exchange of oxygen at all in the lungs and that all energy input is via electrical energy.

Hypothesis: This energy is not merely necessary as an input to the bloodstream, but is vital for the maintenance of local lung tissue. These vortices will be absorbed directly into the lining of the lungs and assist in maintaining healthy cells. Exercise will increase breathing and proportionately increase energy intake. The inhalation of stale air will reduce energy intake.

We can see now the possibility of necrosis prior to bacterial proliferation.

An already weakened patient is confined to bed and immediately suffers a decrease in energy input to the lung tissue and in due course the intake of stale air further reduces available vortex energy.

Nurses and carers do not succumb as they are walking around, breathing more air and not spending 24 hours a day inhaling ‘dead’ gases.

The disease seems to be a progression of a viral infection but it is a consequence of bad treatment instead.

Treatment

If the cause is a lack of energy in the air then we should expect that the treatment should consist of .. exposure to fresh air!

The open air treatment of pneumonia – W P Northrup
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/460480

“Our systematic practice was to put all pneumonia patients during the day, for six hours, on the roof, in the open air, in all weather in which harsh high winds, rain and snow did not prohibit. Indeed, the patients were not always brought in for little sprinkling rains or trivial snowfalls, and many times were out when high snow banks formed a corral about the space in which the beds were grouped” – Northrup (1906)

“Gradually, after most careful precautions and constant watching, it became the firm conviction of all observers that such patients were decidedly benefitted thereby.”

References:

Is it oxygen, or electrons, that our respiratory system delivers? – Gerald Pollack
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S030698772400210X

The open air treatment of pneumonia – W P Northrup
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/460480

Homing pigeons

A couple of videos from Rupert Sheldrake concerning the abilities of homing pigeons provide convincing evidence of our ignorance of this phenomenon. It isn’t just that nobody has any idea how it happens but that there doesn’t seem to be any chance at all that we could describe it in terms of any currently known scientific theories.

Points of interest:

Released pigeons typically fly straight home
A pigeon separated from the flock can still get home eventually
They can be blindfolded and put on a rotating table and still get home
They can navigate on a completely overcast day
Connection to the environs of the loft as opposed to the construct itself
A flock can, however, find its way to a moving loft on a ship at sea
Trans-generational communication of migratory patterns
All ‘reasonable’ mechanisms have been ruled out

There appears to be no explanation for these phenomena in terms of conventional science so we need to look further afield:

Theoretical constructs from vortex physics (Konstantin Meyl)
Evidence showing effects derived from the theory
Similar ‘patterns’ of geomagnetic awareness from Frank Brown
Multiple experiments demonstrating extra-sensory communication

Scalar wave connections

In videos such as the one below, Konstantin Meyl has demonstrated the transmission of power via Scalar Waves, also know as Tesla Waves, and theorised that this set up can be used also to transmit information.

The waves are electromagnetic in nature
Connection is one-to-one between the metal spheres
Once a connection is made there is no power loss
There is no inverse square attenuation of the signal
Such signals are unaffected by ‘matter’ and can tunnel through the Earth
The connection itself can absorb energy from solar neutrinos leading to more power arriving than was originally sent

So an obvious hypothesis then is that the pigeons are somehow communicating with each other at least via this system. A connection, once established, is robust and distance is not an issue as the field itself is self-maintaining via the absorption of external energy.

Pigeons will be able to communicate over the horizon easily enough. The signal does not bend around the Earth however but simply tunnels through it; any pigeons left at home will act as a beacon for the displaced flock.

The brain

Meyl has stated simply that “The brain is a scalar wave computer” and that the nerves are scalar wave conductors. The waves are magnetic in nature and travel in the insulating myelin sheath around the nerve, with an electrical component travelling down the conductive body of the nerve.

This electrical component is a pale reflection of the true nature of the signal but it is this ‘current’ that has been assumed to be the only relevance to the functionality of the nerve by modern science. The structure of the magnetic part is the actual carrier of the information.

No transduction of energy or information is therefore required for this kind of telepathy as the electromagnetic activity of the brain is transmitted unmodified through the air using the same medium as the brain itself.

The phantom leaf effect

A leaf placed between two layers of plastic will leave behind some sort of ‘imprint’ that can later be photographed under a strong magnetic field.

What has happened is that vortex energy from the living leaf has moved to the plastic sheet, which, being an insulator will favour the stabilisation of such energy into magnetic scalar waves. The electrical component has been minimised owing to the poor conductivity and a magnetic vortex system remains.

My suggestion is then, that something similar happens with pigeons, that a whole flock will leave some sort of trace upon their environment and it is with this imprint that a connection is maintained thereby enabling an accurate homing navigation.

Connection to ‘place’

Pigeons whose loft was moved whilst they were away, first returned to the original location of the loft and not the loft itself, which suggests that the connection was maintained, not with the dead material substance of the loft but with the living ‘field’ of the forest surroundings.

Other snippets, however, have lofts on the roofs of high rise flats or on a ship at sea. Different materials have different conductive properties and different structures of scalar waves may form. Since the connection itself is absorbing neutrino power, it is conceivable that the integrity of the transmission be maintained in such a fashion.

The nature of the connection

The connection is that of one electromagnetic field to another. The brain works via a set of nested toroidal vortex fields and directly absorbs similar energies from the environment.

In one video it is suggested that magnetic particles (i.e. ‘matter’) are required in order to detect the Earth’s field but this is not necessary; magnetic vortices will enter the field of the brain and have a direct effect on its operations. If there are any magnetic particles that are coerced into movement by magnetic forces then the only way that the body can detect such movement is via its effect on an electromagnetic field anyhow – so why did we need particles in the first place?

Field information is absorbed directly into the brain with little need for translation or interpretation.

So the whole of brain field itself is the antenna for the reception of electromagnetic field activity and no specific organ is needed for this function. How would it work anyhow? It would still need to have some means of collecting information and this will be an electromagnetic field complex.

There is no need to interpolate ‘matter’ in the middle of electromagnetic field interactions and in any case it is too crude a substance to play any part in conscious activity.

An extended consciousness?

The energy field of the physical brain is said to be measurable several feet away from the head and since this field is now almost synonymous with the ‘etheric’ brain itself, it maybe isn’t too fanciful to ask if this extension of the energy field might have some practical purpose.

The physics espoused by Konstantin Meyl allows for far more complex behaviour in electromagnetic fields than that of classical science. ‘Movement’ is intrinsic and the field structure has a tendency to form spiral structures. Energy and information are guided towards a vortex centre and the second law of thermodynamics is inverted. A concentration of energy takes place alongside the more familiar dissipative structures and all of this is highly propitious for the formation and maintenance of living systems.

Consider then that information external to a pigeon’s physical brain is caught in its brain vortex and will then spiral inwards towards the physical bird. We than have an antenna that is considerably larger than a tiny bird brain and the whole concept is starting to sound more likely.

A tadpole had its eyes taken out and grafted onto its hindquarters (mentioned in a paper by Michael Levin) and after recovering from the shock could navigate its surroundings quite happily. So it doesn’t seem to matter how the information gets into the body; it will be processed correctly nevertheless.

The bio-field of the heart is much larger than that of the brain so we can maybe think of this also as a receiver of scalar waves. Energy can radiate outwards at the same time as information spirals inwards; the whole of a pigeon can be considered as a scalar wave antenna.

Watch a single celled organism find its way around a microscope slide in order to chase down food. It has no sensory organs no brain and not even a nervous system but is still aware of what is going on and manages to coordinate its movements accordingly.

A hive mind?

If a whole pigeon is a sensory system and pigeons are in constant communication with each other via scalar waves then what happens when they all gather together?

Is it in any way possible that the flock as a whole now forms a collective bio-field? A ‘hive mind’? Such a thing would surely increase both the power and sensitivity of the field. Being spread out over a greater volume it would have the capacity to receive a much weaker signal simply by collecting more of it.

In one study the behaviour of a termite colony differed depending upon whether or not it was separated from another colony by an aluminium sheet, suggesting some electromagnetic connection between the two groups. See: Distant cellular interaction

What happens within a murmuration of starlings? Are they merely exercising their wings prior to migration or are they creating a semi-permanent hive mind in preparation for navigation? A coherent field is formed that connects all the birds and this not only acts as an antenna but also a collective memory and possibly even has its own independent computational capacity.

The idea that this sort of disembodied mind could even exist will cause some to recoil I know, but the actual mind is disembodied, in a sense, anyhow as it is really just an electromagnetic field whose machinations are decoupled from the physical structures of the brain.

Again, if anyone thinks that the idea of a ‘consciousness’ emerging from the mere proximity of bird brains should reflect that the mainstream concept of consciousness is just this: an emergent property of the proximity of cells! If electrified jelly can make decisions then so can a connected set of pigeon brains.

Pigeons don’t need murmurations as they all live in close proximity anyhow.

Classical physics

Note that the above speculations are not even possible with classical electromagnetism. Here electric fields are either static, meaning they have no movement and don’t go anywhere, or they are photons which means they must necessarily shoot off at the speed of light in a straight line.

Neither of these configurations suggests the possibility of a self stabilising complex of vortex fields that can retain information whilst renewing its energy from external sources.

Again, the classical concept of electric currents is that of moving charge (electrons), which relies upon the idea of a voltage to push the tiny particles around as they have no motive energy of themselves.

This idea is just not very useful in any area of biology. Better is to think of circuits comprised of ‘field movement’ forming closed loop and helical vortex structures according to the updated Maxwell-Heaviside equations of Konstantin Meyl.

Vortex energy

Where do migrating birds get all their energy from? It does sound incredible that sufficient energy is stored as fat in a small bird and so we should consider Meyl’s idea that they are breathing in electromagnetic vortices along with the usual oxygen supply and that this is being somehow being used in mechanical action to aid flight.

Gerald Pollack has written a paper giving credible arguments to suggest that breathing has not much to do with oxygen anyhow and that in fact there is no gaseous exchange in the lungs at all! Pollack is suggesting an input of electrical energy in the form of electrons. However replacing ‘electron’ with ‘field vortex’ makes for easier reading.

Questions: Can this vortex energy enter the body via any other means than the breath? Is it possible that the general discharge from the ionosphere could be gathered by the collective flock vortex? Could this help to maintain the field and could some of that energy enter the body of a migrating bird to help it in its flight?

Inheritance of migratory paths

Inheritance of acquired characteristics does exist and has been demonstrated in laboratory experiments.

In one example, rats were made to fear the smell of cherry blossom and their offspring inherited the fear. In another, a caterpillar was trained to crawl towards a red circle and the behaviour was inherited by the emergent moth. Behavioural pattern such as this have been transferred from one snail to another simply by injecting material from one animal to another (Michael Levin).

This all works because inheritance has nothing to do with DNA (See: The DNA delusion) but everything to do with the transference of a scalar wave complex from one generation to the next (See: Telegony and Evolution and Inheritance).

The rapid ‘evolution’ of bird migration paths is therefore no surprise from this point of view. Memories, intents and complete behavioural patterns are codified into scalar waves and these are precisely the format that is needed for inheritance, persistence and communication between individuals or groups of individuals.

These wave vortices are a biological Theory of Everything.

Navigation by scent

In one video, the idea of navigation via smell is mentioned but discarded because of the observed fact of pigeons homing with the wind behind them. Maybe, maybe not. Most people will assume that ‘scent’ consists of a chemical discharge but evidence and argument suggest otherwise: Scalar waves and nerves.

Scent is conveyed via scalar waves and is absorbed directly into the olfactory nerve conduit. The possibility now exists of a direct scalar wave connection between scent detector and target, with reduced attenuation, enhanced sensitivity and magnification via neutrino absorption.

Consider the abilities of certain moths to detect a mate several miles away. Can they really detect the direction at this distance by the sampling of molecules or is it rather the case that an essentially electric connection has been formed and that it is this that provides the necessary information? Is it just the physical antenna that are receiving the information or the whole of a bio-field?

Scents can easily leach through a plastic bag. Is this really caused by molecule leakage or by scalar waves tunnelling through an insulator?

The intensity of a small clearly varies with wind direction which does rather indicate that it is emanating from freely floating molecules. However, that does not preclude the possibility of an additional, semi-permanent connection with a fixed source of the scent vortices.

A global navigational map?

Stunning work from Frank Brown demonstrates the ability of various animals, shellfish, plants and bacteria to synchronise to cosmic rhythms.

Organisms seem to know the time of year, day and position within the lunar cycle. They are aware of latitude and seemingly respond to external pressure changes even when kept at constant pressure within a laboratory. Storm conditions are predicted two days in advance using precisely this ability.

Faraday cages reduce these abilities and so the effects are assumed to be electromagnetic in nature. It is quite credible then that a pigeon or a flock of pigeons know quite well what is going on in their locale and exactly how it relates to solar, lunar and weather conditions. This isn’t quite the same as having a static map though and it isn’t obvious that navigation is possible from local information alone.

The point here though is that the Earth’s magnetic field is not just something that points North or South but has local geographic and temporal refinements that carry a large amount of information that has functional interpretations by every organism on the planet.

Scientific instruments are just fancy compasses and do not possess the refinements necessary to interpret such field information. Theories of electromagnetism inevitably reflect the crudity of the measurements that support them and are therefore themselves necessarily oversimplified. The result then is a science that effectively rules out half of the things it is trying to explain!

Connection to what?

Birds whose loft has been moved will initially return to the precise spot where the loft used to be – so what is it about this spot that is so special?

On the other hand, birds released from a ship at sea will return to the current position of the ship – so, again, where is the source of the connection?

The phantom leaf experiment showed a precise imprint of a leaf in some polymer sheets that persisted for only a few seconds, which doesn’t sound like a very good candidate.

Several considerations may be pertinent:

Plastic polymers are electrical insulators which would therefore encourage the formation of scalar waves where the electrical component in minimised and hence the magnetic activity maximised. These are described by Meyl as magnetic potential vortices and are of great biological significance.

Electrical conductors such as the steel of a ship will form electrical eddy currents by a similar mechanism to the above.

Biological systems prefer the magnetic versions of the waves for both internal regulation and the conjectured extra sensory communication. Internal vortices are friction free (no energy loss) and will in any case absorb energy from heat and other sources within the body.

Once a connection has been established, the connection itself will absorb energy along its length from solar neutrinos to maintain itself and will therefore grow proportionally stronger as the endpoints become further apart. (Sheldrake’s elastic band analogy is accurate in this respect).

So it seems likely then that a connection is made with some biological activity in or around the loft. In the case of pigeons released from a rural location this might be the grass and trees of a forest and in the case of birds accustomed to living in a ship or at the top of a block of flats it is the crew of the ship or the pigeon handlers themselves that are utilised as a useful anchor.

Related pages:

Do atoms ‘touch’?

The answer to the question of whether atoms (or even objects) actually touch each other is dependent upon what framework is being considered, whether it be classical, quantum or particle physics. The only consistent framework is one that regards the entire universe as modulations of a single continuum, a ‘vector field’.

Classical physics

In classical (Newtonian) physics, space is well behaved and objects occupy well defined volumes, with the gaps in between filled with either ‘gas’ or ‘vacuum’. Things are made of different substances, e.g. glass, metal ,air, water etc. No object can be in two places at once and we cannot have two different solid objects occupying the same position in space. There is no real sense of the objects being made of ‘atoms’ nor what those atoms might consist of.

So imagine a metal ball falling onto a glass table, for example. The table top is at height zero and the ball is at some height, a metre, say.

Now at what point does the ball bounce? What is the height above the table at which the downward speed is zero and it starts to move upwards again? At what point do they ‘touch’?

Does the lowest point of the ball ever reach a height of zero? If the answer is ‘yes’ then the point where the ball touches the table is occupied by both metal and glass at the same time. This is a contradiction of the whole idea of solid, separately defined objects and it is not relevant that it is only one ‘point’ that these objects have in common. The Laws of Physics must apply everywhere or why are we bothering?

So the ball must come to rest at some finite distance above the table and this is the point at which the velocity reverses direction. The two objects never touch; they cannot. A finite distance is maintained between the two materials at all times.

How then does the ball reverse direction?

Energy transfer

Kinetic energy is transferred from ball to table and then transported back to the ball to make it go in the opposite direction. This seems fine but it means that the energy is transferred without contact between the objects, meaning that it must, at some non-zero height, leave the ball and enter the table; it must pass through a finite amount of air (or vacuum) all by itself.

A force field?

The ball is moving in one direction and then turns around before touching the table top and starts to go in the other direction. This is enough to deduce some force of repulsion even without knowing how it should arise. Some kinetic influence is maybe emanating from the table top that repels other objects before they reach it, before they make contact.

This surely implies the spooky action at a distance that both Einstein and Newton disliked.

Classical mechanics is busted?

The idea of classical mechanics arose from an attempt to formulate simple everyday observations in terms of fairly basic mathematical formulae, but as the above shows, we can’t describe ‘bouncing’ or even the idea of ‘contact’ in even a half-sensible manner!

Either classical physics is wrong, the mathematical formulation is wrong, or maybe it is simply not possible to describe reality in terms of familiar mathematics. We don’t even need to try anything ‘fancy’, we get into trouble simply attempting to define the boundaries of everyday objects.

Mathematics

The problem has arisen from defining objects as closed subsets of the continuum, that is to say, as spaces that incorporate their own boundaries. We can try defining objects as ‘open intervals’ whose boundaries are not part of the objects themselves, but this doesn’t really help.

We still can’t have two objects ‘touching’ as they will now always be separated by a single point at least and this point will never be part of either object nor can it be part of any other object. We have ended up with a universe containing an infinite number of empty points which physically separate the objects within it.

Maybe we can do some calculations with this model but it is highly unsatisfactory as a description of the nature of reality. I would contend that this is on a par with quantum physics for boggling the mind.

Field physics

The observation or maybe ‘deduction’ that the ball is repelled before it even reaches the table gives a clue to a better formulation of space and matter.

Even without doing any clever physics we can say that the objects are not separate in space but are part of, or embedded within, some omnipresent force field that controls the movements of even the largest objects and ensures that they conform to some universal organisational principle.

The idea that this force should ’emanate’ from the objects themselves and should affect other objects at a distance is, as Newton himself put it: “so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it.” – Newton 1692 – Wikipedia

Vortex physics

The vortex physics of Konstantin Meyl formulates single atoms as spherical vortices in an electromagnetic field. Negatively charged field structures will repel each other, with the force of repulsion increasing with proximity. This force reaches a maximum at the vortex ‘radius’ (shown) and effectively gives the impression of solid matter.

It isn’t quite clear what is meant by ‘touching’ in this respect. Two vortices will repel each other so much that it is unlikely their radii will overlap but if they do then that is fine as the respective fields will simply add together; we do not have separate substances as with classical physics and do not have discrete ‘solid’ particles to worry about as with particle physics.

The whole of the universe is simply a shifting field continuum which is given form by the field structure itself, with the behaviour of vortices giving the impression of solid objects making contact, exchanging energy and bouncing off each other.

To ask if two vortices make contact is to ask whether two eddies in a river will ‘touch’ each other. They can come close and bounce off each other but the idea of touching is somewhat nebulous as neither has a well defined boundary at all and the vortex influence associated with each will conceptually extend to infinity.

A self-consistent physics

Classical physics arose from the attempt to describe everyday observations such as ‘bouncing’ in terms of mathematical formulae but as we see, these attempts have resulted in a lack of consistency in the theory and a mathematical model that makes no sense with respect to reality.

The field physics formulation is counter-intuitive to start with but is self-consistent and in accordance with reality.

Try thinking of this in terms of particle physics or quantum waveforms and the explanations become positively surreal. What does it mean to even ask if two quantum particles are touching each other? Presumably they are and they aren’t, both at the same time!

Empiricism vs aestheticism

Part of the impetus for this post was the question of ‘Do atoms touch?’ and part was a discussion on the question of whether theories should be ‘beautiful’ or whether empirical observations should rule the day. There seemed to be something of a consensus that experiment should overrule theory and that beauty is a mere bonus and then only if you are lucky.

This is all wrong and has resulted in physics that resembles a patchwork quilt, which although agreeing with a large body of experimental data, nevertheless has no proper foundations, a tenuous relationship to reality, multiple of contradictions and really consists of a collection of isolated and inconsistent theories held together with empirically determined ‘adapter’ constants to hold the whole thing together.

The idea that observation and deduction alone are sufficient to formulate a theory is incorrect. Observations are always made with respect to the framework and are interpreted within it so for example the idea that the universe is full of discrete ‘objects’ is already a sort of theory deriving from intuition and observation – but it is wrong!

Any assertion that discrete objects exists needs proving somehow. There needs to be some testable framework that describes these objects and classical physics has failed to provide this at the outset. Any observation of an ‘object’ is now misleading and any science that uses such an ill defined concept is eventually doomed.

Similar considerations apply to modern physics. Observations (data) are interpreted with respect to the model, which itself is held to be correct and can never really be disproved. All that happens is that some ‘fix’ is put in and we end up with something like quantum entanglement and information coming backwards in time from the future.

There is more to a theory than mere aesthetics. It should be self-consistent within itself and consistent with its own predictions, and if it isn’t then it is just wrong and needs to be discarded. In addition to this, it must have some degree of ‘reasonableness’, some relationship to some presumed nature of reality which sounds ‘viable’ at least.

A theory such as quantum mechanics which allows multiple and outlandish interpretations regardless of whether or not they make any sense, surely has no place in scientific discourse.

Newton’s statement deserves reiteration: “That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one another, is to me so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it.”

This is not theory and not observation and so not really ‘science’ – but it has proved to be correct!

So do they touch?

No. Quite surprisingly, the whole concept of ‘contact’ is not supported by any theoretical framework; it isn’t even possible to define it let alone test for it.

Related pages:

References:

The website of Konstantin Meyl: http://meyl.eu

What is electricity?

“These are the lies you were taught about electricity: That the electrons themselves have potential energy, that they are pushed or pulled through a continuous conducting loop and that they dissipate their energy in the device. My claim is that all of this is false.” – Derek Muller (Veritasium)

The quotation above is taken from the video below from the Veritasium YouTube channel. This, and the follow up video are proof that electricity does not consist of a flow of electrons. Moreover, they give some clues at least as to what is actually happening. Ideas from the vortex physics of Konstantin Meyl will complete the picture to give a credible explanation for the phenomenon.

At 2:12 we have: “There is no continuous conducting wire that runs all the way from a power station to your house. No, there are physical gaps, there are breaks in the line such as in transformers [..] Electrons cannot possibly flow from one to the other.“

Furthermore, with respect to alternating current: “If the electron flow is in two directions then why does the energy only flow in one direction?“

At 8:20: “People seem to think that you are pumping electrons and that you are ‘buying electrons‘ (from a power company) which is just so wrong. [..] It’s quite counter-intuitive to think that the energy is flowing in the space around the conductor, but the energy which is travelling through the field is going quite fast” – Dr. Bruce Hunt

“It’s the fields and not the electrons that carry the energy” – Muller

11:07 – Under-sea cables that were coated in an insulator and then encased in an iron sheath (for protection) did not perform well.

A transformer (right) consists of two coils of wire separated by a gap. Electricity (whatever it may be) flows through the coil on the left and radiates a field shown as two straight(!) lines which then induces a current by somehow interacting with the wire on the right.

Well the only thing a ‘field’ can interact with is another field. People will say that an electric field can set a charge in motion but a charge is only characterised by its own field and any interaction is totally dependent upon that field.

Assertion: Electricity is some sort of ‘field movement’ within the wire and surrounding insulator. This field extends beyond the wire in some form or other and is able to induce similar movements in the other half of the transformer.

Vortex physics

In the vortex physics of Konstantin Meyl, field movement is described by some slightly modified versions of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations and can adopt several interesting shapes. Helical fields (right) are common, as are ring vortices (smoke rings) and spherical vortices (electrons).

Electric and magnetic fields are inextricably entwined via ‘movement’ at right angles and ‘movement’ is innate to both types of field; ‘static’ fields are an illusion.

Electric fields will propagate easily within a conductor and insulating material will favour the movement of the magnetic component, leading to characteristic patterns of field movement.

The image below is from Viktor Schauberger and depicts the flow of water in a wooden pipe but will serve to illustrate the flow of an electromagnetic field in an insulated wire.

The wire is conductive and favours a helical flow of an electric field whereas the insulating cable favours the construction of magnetic ring vortices. The field vectors for the electric and magnetic fields are at right angles to each other as required.

Similar patterns are observed in the flow of blood (a partially ionised fluid) in the arteries, in vast ‘plasma’ clouds in space (Thunderbolts project) and in weather patterns in our atmosphere (Birkeland currents). These currents are self organising along the lines of a least energy principle and highly efficient, losing very little energy.

So what is electric current?

Forget about electrons for minute and imagine all manner of field turbulence within a battery as various chemicals react. All this activity amounts to a sort of electromagnetic ‘pressure’ the energy wants to go somewhere.

Now attach an insulated wire and an inviting conduit has appeared. The turbulence enters the wire and begins to self-organise according to local conditions. A helical electrical component forms down the conductor and a magnetic ring vortex proceeds down the insulating sheath.

When these formations get to the light bulb, the ambient conditions have changed and are less favourable for the maintenance of the structures that have been hitherto so stable. The lack of a proper insulator and a less conductive filament cause the whole structure to break up and reformat as an altered field geometry, releasing, in the process field structures that are interpreted as ‘energy’.

Some structures are transmuted directly to photons and emitted with a characteristic spectrum whilst others are caught up in existing field vortices and will manifest as ‘heat’ (vortex gains and losses) . Some of the energy in ‘hot’ vortices will reconfigure as infra-red photons and fly away at the speed of light.

Note that within this formulation, there is no transmutation from electron to charge to force to matter and back to energy as all of energy, charge and matter are really the same thing, namely field activity.

The video comments explained

Transformers

There is no need for electrons here. Field movement travels along a wire and its surroundings. Vortices are discharged from the wire and travel towards the receptor coils. They enter these structures and begin to self-organise in a way that is encouraged by the geometry of the coil.

Movement is intrinsic to electromagnetic fields and somehow a ‘current’ is formed.

The structure of the field in between the transformer coils is almost irrelevant as the flow will reformat within the wires anyhow. This ‘must’ happen as the laws of physics must be obeyed and the current must flow according to local conditions.

Think of pumping water into a hose pipe and waving it around. Whatever the state of the water when it was outside the hose and whatever the nature of the waving, the water will form its own flow profile and can really only go one way or the other along the pipe.

Mainstream physics will talk about the field ‘inducing’ a current in the receptor coil but here the field literally flows from one wire to another. Like water.

How do fields carry energy?

They are not static but literally flow from one place to another.

Watch videos of ring vortices in water to see that they can clearly carry a lot of energy. Similarly a magnetic ring vortex will contain a great deal of electrical energy and this will be made available for use at the other end of the wire somehow.

So it is very likely true that the bulk of the energy is carried in the insulating cable as speculated in the video.

The imagining that fields are either static or vibrating entities does make it hard to consider that energy is transmitted and that it is transmitted in one direction only but the image of a moving ring vortex is surely compelling.

Electrons cannot possibly flow..

No, but field vortices can as they are not tied to ‘matter’.

Undersea cables

The magnetic ring vortices are an integral part of the flow geometry and they perform better in an insulator.

A big current needs a big cable and proportionally sized vortices are required which means a proportionally larger insulator sheath. It is no good just spraying a coating on the cables. The insulation isn’t to stop the electrons falling out but to allow an enclosing vortex structure to form which lends stability and efficiency to the whole flow.

A thin insulator does not allow the rings to form properly; the signal is distorted and the flow starts to break up and dissipate into the salt water.

“If the electron flow is in two directions (alternating current) then why does the energy only flow in one direction?“

Conjecture: With alternating current, the ring vortices are of alternating polarity (direction of spin) but still travel in the same direction. The electrical field vector within the conductor alternates between the forward and backward direction but this is not where most of the energy is held.

The ‘energy’ is contained within the vortex and not in it’s speed of travel or the direction of spin. For most purposes, the transmutation from vortex to energy is a crude breakdown of structure and is agnostic of the spin direction.

Why is alternating current more efficient than direct current?

It is claimed that this is because it is transmitted at a higher voltage and that this voltage is created via transformers.

Guessing now: The transformer somehow translates between a high rate of low energy vortices to a lower rate of high energy vortices. Energy transmission is related to energy content of vortices whilst energy loss is proportional to the number of vortices. Energy loss is via ‘surface loss’ from the rings.

The idea of ‘voltage’ is of limited use here.

What is discharge?

Several mentions of discharge (of electrons) or charge loss are made along with suggestions of field induction (the capacity to move electrons); these are a standard part of the vocabulary of physics and electronics and all no doubt have different laws to help quantify their behaviour.

Within the framework of vortex physics, however, these are all the same phenomenon, that is to say, the movement of field vortices:

Discharge: Field Vortices going where you don’t want them to.
Charge loss: Electrons cannot disappear completely but vortex structures can
Induction: The change in geometry of a field structure caused by a different conductive environment

None of this has anything to do with electrons.

The second video

The diagram shows part of the experimental setup. A battery (capacitor) is placed in a circuit with a light bulb and the connecting wires stretch out to a distance of one light-second (actually much smaller) so that the ‘electricity’ is assumed to take one second to complete the circuit. See here: How electricity actually works

When the experiment is performed and the current switched on however the light comes on almost immediately and at least much sooner than it takes for light to travel around the circuit.

How does this happen? The answer is that as field currents start to flow around the circuit they will discharge into the air around the wire and form a de facto field which expands radially at close to the speed of light and eventually impacts upon the supply wire to the light bulb.

These vortices enter the wire and start to flow according to local conditions thereby creating a ‘current’, that is to say a structured flow of field energy.

Several commentators remark that this current should be infinitesimal, however, it turns out in practice to be strong enough to illuminate the light bulb.

What is going on?

Envisaged by classical physics is an electric field such as illustrated here, possibly coupled with an accompanying magnetic field that similarly decreases in field strength in proportion to the distance from the wire. The impact on the receiver wire will be small.

As soon as this field impacts the wire however, current flows in the wire and produces its own field which starts to interact with the first (transmitter) . Ignore the plus and minus signs here, the point is that the two fields are interacting over a region that is much larger than just the second wire itself.

Consider then this possibility: The electric and magnetic fields together form a helical vortex structure around the wires with the transmitter forming an outward spiralling vortex and the receiver hosting an inward spiral.

Energy then flows from one vortex to the other, the inverse square law is not appropriate and sufficient energy flows to light the bulb.

The vortex from the transmitter expands at close to the speed of light and impacts the second conduit. The current is small first but it creates its own vortex which expands at a similar speed, harvesting more and more energy as it does so.

At first, a doubled radius of the second vortex means a rough doubling of the energy gathered and hence a doubling of the current formed.

A unified field forms with a simplified form shown right and the rate of energy transport from one wire to another is .. anybody’s guess! It is likely that ultimately the ‘induced’ current drops off in approximate proportion to the distance purely on geometrical grounds.

This isn’t a ‘law’ though but a general principle as what is measured is always some sort of average which has been interpreted via a measuring instrument.

Note the contra-rotation of the helical fields and imagine what this would look like when extended over the whole circuit. The rotation is always the same way with respect to the current. An extended ring vortex is formed around the whole circuit and this is already known to be a highly stable structure.

Ok, now consider the screenshot from the second video:

The green line shows the current in the transmitter wire and the yellow shows the current in the receiver. The green arrow points to the time that the switch was turned on; the transmitter current shoots up almost instantaneously.

The current in the receiver though shows a linear increase up to the point of the yellow arrow which represents the current that initially drives the light bulb. Thereafter there is a sharp increase as the current completes the entire circuit.

The vortex model can be said to predict the linear increase but the classical model cannot. What would be expected by established theory is a sudden but ‘infinitesimal’ current which would then remain stable at a very low point.

Conduction within nerves

If conduction within wires is largely by means of ring vortices then maybe the same is for the transmission of nerve impulses?

Many papers find that there is a relationship between the speed of propagation of nerve impulses and the thickness of the insulating sheath surrounding a nerve; the thicker the myelin sheath, the faster the signal propagation:

Local modulation of neurofilament phosphorylation, axonal caliber, and slow axonal transport by myelinating Schwann cells – de Waegh, Brady
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1371237/

As with the undersea cables, a thicker sheath allows the free and unconstrained development of ring vortices whilst a thin sheath necessitates a deformation or stretching of the vortex to fit within the sheath, Additional surface area means additional ‘field drag’ (also known as friction) which leads to energy loss and slower propagation.

Summary

Electricity is the continuous flow and transmutation of energy fields from one environment to another. The geometry and conductive properties of that environment in conjunction with the principles of vortex physics characterise the flow.

Within this landscape, various patterns emerge and the simplest of these such as voltage, current and field ‘induction’ have been adopted as standard but none of them have a particularly sound basis in reality, being largely artefacts of the measuring instruments themselves.

Other patterns such as ring or helical vortices on the other hand are theoretical constructs that have not been measured and yet give a greater and more consistent understanding of the phenomena that we actually observe.

Related pages:

References:

The website of Konstantin Meyl – http://meyl.eu

About vortex physics and vortex losses – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/About_Vortex_Physics_and_Vortex_Losses.pdf

Scalar waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.amazon.com/Scalar-Waves-Konstantin-Meyl/dp/3980254240

Interview with Konstantin Meyl – YouTube
https://youtu.be/tKTkpC-DHZ8

The big misconception about electricity – Derek Muller (Veritasium YouTube)
https://youtu.be/bHIhgxav9LY

How electricity actually works – Derek Muller (Veritasium YouTube)
https://youtu.be/oI_X2cMHNe0

Local modulation of neurofilament phosphorylation, axonal caliber, and slow axonal transport by myelinating Schwann cells – de Waegh, Brady
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1371237/

What is the sun?

The sun is the centre of a giant cosmic energy vortex. Field energy spirals inwards and condenses at the centre to produce the hydrogen ball described by astronomers. All energy is supplied from the outside and input energy equals output energy. The nuclear reactor described by mainstream science leads to too many anomalies.

Several odd but well documented characteristics of the sun need explanation:

The sun maintains a spherical shape despite rapid rotation
The hottest part of the sun is outside of the sun (coronal heating problem)
Comets can accelerate away from the sun
There is no bow wave as the sun moves through space
Solar output has been fairly constant over several billion years
The atomic composition is consistent with transmutation of elements

Hypothesis

The sun is not to be considered as a stand-alone object that is burning its own fuel and radiating the resulting energy into space, but as part of a much larger system of energy taking on the form of a vortex and with the sun at the centre as an integral part of that vortex.

Electromagnetic field energy spirals inwards towards the sun where it can materialise as matter, first as electrons and then hydrogen, with further elements produced by transmutation.

Much of the energy will be manifest as photons or other energetic particles which will then radiate outwards as ‘sunlight’. A constant supply of energy means that the sun is not getting any bigger or smaller on average, thereby providing a stable platform for life to evolve and flourish over the millennia.

Vortex physics

The diagram, taken from Konstantin Meyl’s book Vortex Physics shows the general structure of a vortex whether it be composed of water, air or an electromagnetic field. Intensity is zero at the centre, increases to a maximum at the vortex radius and thereafter drops off towards infinity.

Shown is how the velocity of, for example air in a tornado, will vary according to distance from the vortex centre. Rotational movement within the vortex radius is described by Meyl as increasing linearly as shown; this is identical to the rotation of a solid body.

Compare this with this description of the sun: “The radiative interior exhibits solid-body rotation” – Wikipedia

Cosmologists have simply missed the idea that energy can come from outside the sun and as a consequence imagine that all the complex behaviour they see around the sun comes not from local causes but from complex activity inside of the star itself. ‘Stellar dynamos’ are thought to exist which wind up some electrical energy and beam it outside of the sun:

“The geometry and width of the tachocline are thought to play an important role in models of the stellar dynamos by winding up the weaker poloidal field to create a much stronger toroidal field” – Wikipedia

Maybe, but how did these dynamos come into existence and what powers them? Each answer begs another question.

The laws of electromagnetism favour the appearance of toroidal vortex structures at all scales from that of the electron up to that of an entire galaxy and this is all the explanation that is needed to understand the general structure of the cosmos.

The Coronal Heating Problem

“The coronal heating problem in solar physics relates to the question of why the temperature of the Sun’s corona is millions of kelvins greater than the thousands of kelvins of the surface” – Wikipedia

This is simply not surprising from the point of view of vortex physics; they are describing a ‘heat vortex’. Energy is spiralling inwards from the solar system and continues to intensify until its inward movement is balanced by the outward radial ‘pressure’ of the energy from the centre.

A vortex radius is formed and is measured as a heat-energy maximum.

“The high temperatures require energy to be carried from the solar interior to the corona by non-thermal processes, because the second law of thermodynamics prevents heat from flowing directly from the solar photosphere (surface), which is at about 5800K, to the much hotter corona at about 1 to 3 MK (parts of the corona can even reach 10MK).” – Wikipedia

This is the problem then. The second law of thermodynamics is said to ‘prevent’ heat flowing from cold to hot, but everywhere in vortex systems we see precisely the opposite, i.e. an organised flow of energy or matter from low intensity to high.

Consider the huge amounts of energy present at the centre of a hurricane. The spiral activity begins many miles from the centre of the structure itself, moving slowly at first but increasing in speed as the radius of movement decreases. The wind reaches its maximum velocity at the visible vortex radius, the ‘wall’ of the hurricane.

The energy for the spiral did not ‘build up’ all of its own accord. It did not come out of nothing, it was guided inwards from the environs by the vortex structure. We are not seeing the usual radiative (dissipative) flow of energy mandated by the laws of thermodynamics but an inward moving compression of energy.

The heliosphere

The image below left is the expected shape of the sun’s heliosphere as it moves through space. The sun is imagined as a solid body that cleaves its way through a cluttered medium forming a distinctive bow wave of space debris and having a heliosphere that it not spherical but deformed by some sort of cosmic viscosity.

The image on the right shows the model derived from measurements. The heliosphere is nearly spherical without deformity and the whole moves with space instead of through it. The sun is not pushing its way through the interstellar medium but flowing along with it or even pulled by it.

This is because the whole vortex system is not separate from the interstellar medium but instead arises from movements within it it. It is one and the same thing as space itself and moves in complete harmony with it.

The heliosphere is not maintained by the sun but the sun by the heliosphere and the heliosphere by its own wider environment.

The external energy supply to the Sun is overwhelmingly obvious.. – Jamal Shrair
www.journalcra.com/sites/default/files/issue-pdf/23817_0.pdf

The solar constant

The solar constant is a measure of the power output of the sun, the irradiance. Naively one might expect that since the sun was created billions of years ago and has been burning up ever since, that the irradiance would diminish over time. However:

” The solar constant is an average of a varying value. In the past 400 years it has varied less than 0.2 percent. Billions of years ago, it was significantly lower.” – Wikipedia

So the irradiance is increasing over time. This is open to interpretation but is certainly not inconsistent with the idea that the sun is receiving energy from the cosmos and then radiating it back out to the solar system.

‘Oumuamua

‘Oumuamua is an odd comet-like object that accelerated towards the sun, looped around it and then accelerated away again. In other words its orbit was not entirely governed by conventional gravitational laws. Hypotheses have been put forward as to how this might happen but the matter is far from settled:

“Further, it exhibited non‑gravitational acceleration, potentially due to outgassing or a push from solar radiation pressure.” – Wikipedia

Comets are said to have an exceptionally low density of about half a gram per cubic centimetre. One possibility then is that comets are largely electrical phenomena whose movements are governed more by the ambient electromagnetic field than the ‘gravitational’.

An electrical vortex itself moving in the strong vortex field near the sun is capable of quite complex behaviour. It is quite conceivable that such an entity could interact with the ambient field in such a way as to accelerate away from the sun, against the gravitational gradient. It is even conceivable that it could absorb energy from such a field in order to power itself and even to transmute some of that energy to matter and thus expand in size.

Maintenance of spherical aspect

“The Sun is a near-perfect sphere with an oblateness estimated at 9 millionths, which means that its polar diameter differs from its equatorial diameter by only 10 kilometres” – Wikipedia

Wow! This is not just a spinning mass of gas held in place by gravity. It just isn’t. The sun is largely an electrical phenomenon and is shaped by electromagnetic forces.

If the sun were a spinning mass of hydrogen then we would expect to see a large swelling at the equator much as is the case in the rather solid Earth and other planets.

What we are seeing is the small centre of a much larger vortex structure; the heliosphere. Electromagnetic field activity spirals inwards and organises itself into a turbulent sphere of field energy.

Energy is concentrated at the centre and it is here that we can expect some of that energy to materialise as electrons or hydrogen ions. Maybe the small bulge at the equator is indicative of the amount of matter that is created; in other words the ‘mass’ of the sun.

Transmutation of elements

Wikipedia gives the elemental composition of the sun as follows:

Hydrogen: 73.46%
Helium: 24.85%
Oxygen: 0.77%
Carbon: 0.29%
Iron: 0.16%
Neon: 0.12%
Nitrogen: 0.09%
Silicon: 0.07%
Magnesium: 0.05%
Sulphur: 0.04%

So there is an abundance of the most simplest elements and the others are largely those elements described by Louis Kervran as being capable of transmutation (even within biological systems) from the simpler ones.

The simplest interpretation then is that energy enters the Sun and the field conditions thus created are propitious for first, the materialisation into the simplest form of matter and second for the transmutation of these elements into more complex atoms.

There is therefore no need to assume a Big Bang in which all matter was created at once, rather matter is in a continual cycle of creation and transmutation, sometimes to other elements and sometimes back to photons to be radiated outwards into the solar system as light.

Earth sun connection

The Sun as an Extremely Sensitively Interconnected and Regulated System – Attila Grandpierre
https://old.konkoly.hu/staff/grandpierre/Sun_Sensitive.pdf

The rotation rate of the Earth is not constant and sometimes varies over the course of a day:

“Not only the minimums of the Earth’s rotation show connections with the solar activity period, but also, as Currie (1973) showed, the rotation rate of the Earth actually correlates with the solar activity!” – Attila Grandpierre

Grandpierre notes that sometimes the change in solar activity comes first and at others it is the Earth’s variations that seem to initiate activity in the sun!

“Trying to understand what do these coincidences mean, it is important to note, that within the third time-range of coincidences in 1969-1971, at first the Earth produced the jump in 1969 (Le Mouel, Gire, Madden, 1985), and the Sun followed it only afterwards, in late 1971! In a time-linear causal sequence this circumstance would involve that the Earth was more sensitive to the global conditions of solar system at that time, and that the core changes of the Earth induced changes in the solar core! This circumstance points to a mutuality in the core-core interactions, since it seems to be clear that at other occasions the Sun was the initiator of correspondence.”

To be considered though is that the initial cause of all these phenomena is a surge in activity of the solar energy field. Sun-Earth connections exist in the form of large electromagnetic filaments (Thunderbolts Project) which can accumulate energy from the cosmic field and transmit it to both Sun and Earth, making it seem that one or other of these bodies is the origin of the effect, depending upon where the effect is first observed.

Slight digression

The idea of matter and thence mass appeared quite early on in scientific thought and were followed closely by the idea of a gravitational force that emanated from the observed matter and exerted an effect upon distant masses.

So matter is considered primal in terms of causality; it is matter that gives rise to force fields and not the other way around. Things that are visible and tangible are given a special place in this ideology despite all evidence to the contrary.

This way of thinking has is not approved of either by Einstein or even Newton himself, both decrying the idea of action at a distance as not worthy of consideration. However, despite advocating field physics in the form of General Relativity, scientists still persist in thinking according to the old patterns, often whilst pretending otherwise.

Gravity

So the sun is at the centre of a cosmic (electromagnetic) field vortex which spirals inwards and gives rise to the warm shiny ‘object’ we see.

Purely geometric considerations mean that the field strength varies with the inverse square of the distance from the vortex centre, becoming stronger nearer to that centre.

Note that the inverse square law of gravity is always expressed as weakening as the distance increases which only serves to give the (erroneous) impression that the field is somehow ‘broadcast’ outwards from the massive object, that some insubstantial energy is radiating i.e. moving away from the source.

Now according to Meyl (Scalar Waves: A First Tesla Physics Handbook) a strengthening field gives rise to a contraction of matter and hence a smaller distance (rulers literally shrink) and a weakening field gives the opposite: Tamarack mines experiment. A planet orbiting the sun then will expand slightly on the night-time side and distances here are slightly longer.

The size of the Earth on its outer side then is larger in accordance with a square law and a circular orbit is therefore the default mode of movement. This has nothing to do with any sort of force acting at a distance. This is like trying to drive a car whose wheels on the left have been made slightly larger than the ones on the right. A steering wheel is not necessary to drive in a circle.

This arrangement will behave, because of the inverse square aspect, in a similar fashion to the assumed gravitational force of Newton although nothing of the sort is going on. Comets are therefore free to move according to local field conditions and are not so constrained in their paths as previously imagined. In the case of the Earth we can add some velocity and inertia to recover the elliptic orbit we are familiar with.

Superimposed upon this system are variations caused by genuine gravitational effects produced by the Earth itself and whatever ‘matter’ there is in the Sun. Attempts to calculate the mass of the sun from the perceived effects of its gravitational field are therefore fraught with risk as most of those effects are not in fact gravitational in nature.

A genuine gravitational effect does exist and is undoubtedly what we measure at the surface of the Earth, but according to the above, this is just not the same mechanism as happens with respect to the Earth moving in the field of the Sun. They have similar measurable effects and the presence of the inverse square effect gives the impression that they are the same phenomenon.

The Sun’s field is not the same as the Earth’s; it isn’t ‘gravity’!

Related pages:

Influenza is not contagious

Sir Charles Herbert Stuart-Harris (1909-1996) wrote a book: Influenza and other viruses of the respiratory tract. Stuart-Harris believed that influenza was caused by a virus but Chapter 6. Epidemiology of influenza is extremely interesting and provides plenty of evidence that it is not even contagious let alone caused by a ‘virus’.

The page Influenza and weather puts forth the hypothesis that influenza is not caused by a virus at all but instead is the result of a destabilised bio-regulation which is in turn caused by electromagnetic disturbances in the atmosphere. The data and arguments presented by Stuart-Harris were not collected with this hypothesis in mind and so cannot be said to be biased towards it.

It is interesting therefore to compare this hypothesis with the comments from Sir Charles concerning the observed epidemiology.

Chapter 6: The epidemiology of influenza

“Historically, influenza has been recognised by its power of rapid dispersion throughout the population of whole countries and by the explosive character of its epidemics. Yet, small localised outbreaks with little tendency to spread outside of the affected community have long been known to occur, nor has the individual epidemic feature of influenza invariably been explosive.”

This is the opening paragraph of the chapter, the words chosen by the author himself to summarise his findings. Although he still believes in a viral cause, his priority is to emphasise the puzzling nature of the epidemiology with respect to the idea of contagion.

Sudden increase in 1890

“.. there was an apparent lull amounting almost to extinction of the disease in the period just before 1890. Then in 1890, the pandemic caused a sharp rise in the level of prevalence, and incidence has remained ever since at a higher level than before 1890. Super-imposed on the base-line of inter-epidemic incidence, periodic outbreaks have occurred every two to three years and this periodicity has continued up to the present.“

Almost extinction

Time and again we hear from researchers that influenza ‘vanishes’ from the population at least in certain areas (whole cities!) and always needs to be replenished from ‘elsewhere’.

Fortunate for the virus that it never really disappears from ‘elsewhere’ or it would surely go extinct. Also fortunate that once it gets going again there is always someone to infect all of a sudden or else, again, extinction.

We are asked to believe that the survival of the virus is a matter of chance, a statistical coincidence. Maybe this is credible in the modern world of travel and high population density, but a hundred and fifty years ago? Really?

Q: Why does the virus frequently become almost extinct but never in human history has become actually extinct?

A: Because influenza is caused by field disturbances in the atmosphere. The nature and strength of these disturbances vary slightly from year to year and even if the whole world went a year without flu, it would surely return the following season or the next.

Sudden rise in 1890

This has been attributed by Arthur Firstenburg in his book The Invisible Rainbow to the effects of the installation of domestic electricity, with power lines initially laid out over the roofs of terraced houses.

Very possibly. Flu seems to be caused by disturbances from the atmosphere to an electromagnetic bio-field that serves as the master regulatory system for the human body. One possibility is that the electric field from the power cables is affecting this on a long term basis and adding a chronic weakness to the system and another is that the electric field is somehow modulating the annual flu influence, making it more lethal.

Two to three year cycles

“Super-imposed on the base-line of inter-epidemic incidence, periodic outbreaks have occurred every two to three years and this periodicity has continued up to the present.“

This is similar to the epidemiology of measles. See: Measles.

It is not obvious how this happens on a global scale with an infectious pathogen. The disease is seasonal but with variations. This certainly does not rule out the hypothesis that it is the Earth’s magnetic field that is the cause but does not prove it either.

Watching YouTube videos from the Thunderbolts project (Solar filaments and you) it seems that electromagnetic disturbances on Earth are caused by spiral filaments extending all the way from the Sun and these are measurable to a certain degree.

The filaments end at the surface of the Earth where they are manifest in the topsoil as telluric currents. In between the Sun and Earth they are subject to the influences of all of the other planets thereby resulting in all sorts of odd rhythms and synchrony with other planetary orbits.

There is something to test here, if the correct measurements are made there should be some correlation between influenza outbreaks and the activity associated with these filaments.

Disappearance and sporadic outbreaks

“The pattern of prevalence which has emerged from these national statistics has been that of somewhat irregular periodicity both of influenza A and B, with almost complete disappearance of the virus in between outbreaks.“

“Sufficient evidence of sporadic case occurrences exists, however, for it to be said that the virus is not entirely extinct. But, from an incidence only detected by large-scale surveys, the virus infection develops into an explosive outbreak, without any apparent increasing steps of increasing prevalence“

So again the disappearance of the disease is noted and yet it still returns. Use of the word ‘sporadic’ only serves to highlight the fact that these outbreaks are without and apparent cause. Where was the virus dwelling before it became sporadic?

The virus seems to survive between outbreaks but this is almost by definition a time when there is no obvious chain of infection; the incidence of disease is so low (“almost complete disappearance”) that there is little chance of a diseased person meeting a ‘susceptible’.

An explosive outbreak occurs without any obvious preamble and then disappears equally abruptly.

All this is explained by encounters with field filaments which are abundant during flu season but are restricted geographically and with a random element super-imposed upon these patterns to target individuals in or out of season.

The origin and spread of epidemics.

“The second theory concerning the persistence and spread of human influenza is that the virus exists by a continual case-to-case transmission. This presupposes that there is always an outbreak of influenza somewhere in the world and that as influenza dies out in one country, it develops anew in another area.”

Why this presupposition and why does it wait to die out in one place before developing anew in another area? This phenomenon is better described by the idea of an external influence that sweeps across the face of the planet, leaving a trail of sick people in its wake.

Again and again we see that the evidence is not suggestive of a continually transmitting virus and that extra assumptions must to be made to accommodate the idea.

“Yet the major outbreak of influenza A in the USA, Canada and Great Britain in November 1943 appeared to involve geographically remote areas almost simultaneously, and too rapidly for any chain of infection to have occurred”

This is because no infection has occurred and instead the disease is caused by a global collective of field currents that switch on and off according to season, latitude and geographical location.

“One fact established already is that spread of infection from one area or country to another often appears to occur by direct geographical contiguity rather than along lines of communication such as afford a more rapid chance of infection. Yet in rural areas the importance of infection can often be attributed to a particular individual. Pickles quotes the case of the school in Wensleydale which in 1937 suffered an explosive outbreak of influenza forty-eight hours after a schoolmistress returned from a town. No other cases were present in the town at the time. The schoolmistress herself suffered only a mild attack but it was highly probable (Why?) that she was responsible for introducing the virus into the school.”

Again, not suggestive of infection but instead consistent with a moving field vortex that does not respect lines of communication but descends upon the planet according to its own whims, sometimes moving across the surface and at others disappearing from one location only to pop up a hundred miles distant.

Disease as a distinctive regulatory ‘state’

On a severe local outbreak: “Secondly, the infection appeared to exhaust the capacity of the human herd to respond clinically to other ailments and the epidemiological record carries no instance of any other infectious disease during a period of weeks.”

A truly astonishing sentence. Flu seems to confer immunity (of diseases other than flu) not only upon those who suffer from it but also everybody else in the vicinity!

My assertion is that the disease called influenza is the result of an altered regulatory pattern that mainstream medicine identifies as the ‘immune response’. This regulatory disturbance encompasses the whole of the organism and orchestrates all the symptoms experienced for about five days before returning to normal homeostasis.

There is evidence (Measles) that other ‘infectious’ diseases are of a similar nature, showing typical seasonal and geographic patterns.

From this point of view then it seems obvious that a person cannot be in two different regulatory states at the same time and therefore that they are unlikely to display symptoms of two different regulatory diseases simultaneously.

The paragraph quoted goes much further than this though, asserting that even those who escaped the ravages of the disease are somehow not succumbing to other disturbances.

Now this makes sense if there is a close correspondence between disease states and magnetic conditions. The precise conditions needed for each distinct disease are also distinct and hence if it is flu season then it is not measles season; the magnetic field itself cannot be in two different states at once.

‘Immunity‘

“Both these villages suffered relatively more severely from influenza during the previous influenza A outbreak in 1933.“

Reading literature on ‘immunity’ it seems that in general, the regulatory system will recognise antipathetic stimuli and remember them. Quite often we see that upon a second exposure to a field disturbance, the body will respond differently, sometimes with more resilience and sometimes with an increased sensitivity; a disease takes on the aspect of an ‘allergy’.

Reference is made to the “variable incidence of influenza during one and the same epidemic in similar but separated isolated communities” such as boarding schools and army barracks. “There is no apparent reason why a particular school should suffer intensely and a neighbouring one should escape lightly..”

Because the ‘strength’ of the field disturbance is different at each locale and because the local populations have been exposed to slightly different stimuli over the past few years; they have had different immunological training.

Even the individuals who did not get ill were exposed to the disturbances and have therefor had an opportunity to adapt somewhat.

Associations with other diseases

“Apart, however, from the mortality of pneumonia, which may frequently be ascribed to influenza as the primary cause, deaths from all causes rise during an influenza epidemic. Thus deaths attributed to heart disease and to pulmonary tuberculosis both increase if the influenza epidemic is severe.“

Although other so called infectious diseases seem to disappear, there are many correlations in modern literature between influenza and heart attacks, with researchers invariably concluding that a heart attack is somehow a caused by the influenza virus or of the consequent bio-chemical changes within the body.

To be considered though is the possibility that both flu and heart attacks have the same root cause, which is to say a dysfunction of the bio-field triggered by the magnetic field conditions.

The heart may look like a large robust muscle which is not going to be too upset at a change in the weather, but the heart is not a pump and the blood largely flows by itself, controlled by an electromagnetic bio-field. The power for the flow begins in the capillary beds and is fuelled ultimately by electro-magnetism.

The whole system therefore is arguably susceptible to destabilisation by any similar disturbances from the atmosphere or from man made electro-smog. A heart attack here is not a problem of blockage but a problem of an altered regulation; this time of blood flow.

‘Sporadic’ cases and testing failures

“It is true that among the cases of acute respiratory disease occurring endemically in the population at all seasons of the year and in years when outbreaks of influenza do not occur, there are always some cases which could be diagnosed clinically as cases of influenza. Yet these almost invariably give negative results when tested either directly or serologically for evidence of influenza virus.”

If we can only have positive tests during an electromagnetic disturbance then the idea that the tests themselves are affected directly by such field changes should surely be considered at least?

“Moreover, an occasional case of influenza A or B is detected during an outbreak in which nearly all the other cases are serologically positive for the other virus infection. Such experiences have frequently been recorded and are again evidence that influenza can exist as a sporadic case. However, the occurrence of a series of sporadic cases is no presage of an outbreak within a short space of time.“

This is not really indicative of a viral cause. However, Harris continues: “Its meaning is that the virus is still alive in lean times, when the level of immunity is too high for rapid transfer of infection from one susceptible to another.“

Ok, so how did the virus create the sporadic case? It must have come from somewhere! Viruses need to spread in order to survive and if they aren’t spreading then they are becoming extinct.

Consider the famous ‘R’ number, the average infection rate. What value does this number have out of season when there is no epidemic activity? A value greater than 1 implies a spreading disease, an increase in the number of cases and an increase in the ‘R’ number itself. However a value of less than 1 implies imminent extinction for the virus; cases are diminishing and they are diminishing at an increasing rate. To have an ‘R’ number of exactly 1 throughout summer is just not credible.

Viruses cannot survive the summer period, ergo they do not exist.

Summary

All of the observations cited tend to support the idea that influenza is not contagious but that it ‘descends’ upon the population every winter in stereotypical patterns, both seasonal and geographical.

I had not read this paper when I formulated the hypothesis of field vortices so it is a somewhat independent test of the idea. Stuart-Harris himself clearly is a believer in viruses and so is not cherry-picking his facts in my favour.

References:

Influenza and other viruses of the respiratory tract – Charles Stuart-Harris
Chapter 6. Epidemiology of influenza (p. 107 in the PDF)
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.549293/page/n107/mode/2up?view=theater

R number – New Scientist
https://www.newscientist.com/definition/r-number/

Seasonal variations in coronary heart disease – J P Pell
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10581331/

Frank Brown

Frank Arthur Brown Jr. (1908–1983) looked at the connection between biological activity and ‘cosmic events’. Correlations were found in all manner of organisms between a variety of metrics and a variety of cyclic events such as diurnal rhythms, lunar cycles and the variations in temperature and light.

Synchronisation between organisms and cosmic events
Synchronisation between organisms a great distance apart
Cosmic cycles entrain endogenous phase-setters
The main drivers are temperature and light
Some cycles have no obvious physical cause
Phase correlation with amplitude inversion is seen
Correlation with atmospheric pressure even when kept at constant pressure
Independence of metabolic rate and clock mechanism
‘Horizontal’ communication between organisms (maybe..)
Recognition of geographical location
External clocks trigger inherited behavioural patterns
Laboratory experiments confirm the electromagnetic nature of stimuli
Internal clock mechanisms rely on external input for pace setting

“A zeitgeber is an external or environmental cue that synchronizes an organism’s biological rhythms with its environment. The word comes from German and literally means ‘time giver’“. – Science direct

No internal clocks

It has long been known that the body maintains a collection of very precise rhythms by which it regulates biological processes. The assumption being that it is the body itself that powers a set of clock-like processes which merely need to be entrained to external triggers to ensure synchrony with the environment.

Frank Concluded that this simply isn’t true. What is happening is that the body maintains a set of phase-responders which respond to external stimuli, producing the cycles which are observed. The difference is that with this setup, the influence of external events is necessary for the continuation of the bio-rhythms and without this influence there would be no cyclic activity and presumably no ‘life’.

“The usual concept of the organism within its rhythmic physical environment must now be supplemented by a concept of the rhythmic physical environment steadily contributing to the internal environment of the organism.

No clear boundary exists between the organism’s metabolically maintained electromagnetic fields and those of its geophysical environment. In terms of the hypothesis for biological clocks that has been presented here, the clocks themselves, being environmentally dependent, possess high mean precision.

It is suggested that the peculiar properties and activities of the organism’s natural phase-shifting mechanism have been responsible for the long held but probably erroneous notion that an independent internal clock system is present.” – Frank Brown

So there is no active clock as such within living organisms, but a set of passive internal pacemakers which entrain to external stimuli in a resonant fashion and the resulting cycles are used to trigger inherited behavioural programs such as feeding, mating hibernating etc.

“Indeed, from this start, it seems quite probable that every other property of the rhythms, known or still unknown, can be accounted for by the appropriate elaboration of the external timer hypothesis.” – Brown

Independence of metabolism

Surely one of the more important discoveries of Frank Brown is the apparent fact that the frequency of the internal cycles is independent of the metabolic rate of the organism.

The main drivers of bio-rhythms are variations in temperature and light but the heating of subjects or the administration of drugs to speed up metabolism did nothing to alter the rate at which the internal pacemakers operated.

“Organisms behave as if they were accurate, or moderately accurate, clocks or tremendous batteries of clocks whose rhythmic cycles are normally integrated into a characteristic phase-map complex. The periods of the clock-timed rhythms appear to be heavily compensated for, or independent of, temperature and to virtually every chemical substance that can influence reaction rates in organisms.” – Brown

So there is a component of biological activity that is independent of biochemistry, independent of what we can physically observe happening in the body.

Conclusion: The ’cause’ of a clock-like process is not a chemical reaction or mechanical process but the interplay between the environmental cycles and some electromagnetic bio-field acting as an antenna. There are no other plausible candidates known to science.

Disease as a regulatory disorder

“No clear boundary exists between the organism’s metabolically maintained electromagnetic fields and those of its geophysical environment.” – Brown

So Frank thinks that the electromagnetic fields are maintained by metabolic processes and yet function independently of them. Possibly, but we can also consider that there exists an almost self-sustaining etheric body that is not only regulated but also powered to some degree by energy from the environment. This would include solar neutrinos and electrical (vortex) discharge from the ionosphere.

With this setup then, it is easy to conceive of diseases such as flu and measles as temporary regulatory disorders produced by either a weakening of, or a disturbance in, the external pace-setters.

Evidence for this is provided by: a strong statistical correlation between weather events and the onset of such diseases, a documented relationship between both physical and electrical ‘weather’, the close coupling of organism and environment described above and the obvious regulatory nature of these disease processes: Influenza and weather – Measles

Water absorption of beans

A handful of beans was placed in a jar of water and the amount of water remaining was measured at timed intervals to give a record of the rate of water uptake. Different strains of beans were used and different spatial arrangements were tried, with some jars placed at a distance and some placed in pairs etc.

The results were extremely interesting indeed.

The top chart shows the water absorption rate of two bean collections at 70 cm apart. There is clearly a synchrony between the two; either they are both subject to the same external influence, they are communicating with each other or both at the same time.

The second chart shows results from a bean sample in a separate laboratory. A near identical pattern is observed thereby suggesting that all these samples are dancing to the same tune, they are driven by some unseen cosmic orchestration which is ultimately controlling the rate of uptake of water.

The bottom line of the chart shows the uptake rate for two groups of beans in close proximity on rotating tables, first clockwise (solid line) and next anti-clockwise (dotted line).

The overall trend is similar to the earlier experiments but Brown notes an interesting feature; there are frequent and temporary inversions of activity whereby a sudden increase in activity of one set of beans is accompanied by a decrease in activity of the other sample that matches the first in both timing and magnitude.

What could account for this? It is almost as if there were competition for a limited resource and it is first one and then the other of the bean pots that is the recipient of the necessary impulse.

Odd phase relationships

Another chart from the book compares the deviation from the mean uptake of water of two bean groups separated by some distance from each other.

In the top graph we see that the two samples are positively correlated, meaning that the higher the uptake of one, the higher the uptake of the other. This gain suggests that the two samples are somehow synchronised across time.

But look at the second chart!

The greater the deviation from the mean of one sample the less the deviation from the other sample. This again suggests that there is perhaps some stream of regulatory information which is of limited supply and that the more it is accessed by one beanpot then the less accessible it becomes for the other.

The sudden ‘flipping’ of the chart above suggesting either that the information stream is not shared evenly between the beans or that the beans themselves are behaving differently in a way that is coordinated both within and between samples.

The interpretation from Frank Brown involves actual communication between the bean samples: “If this sign-changing capacity exists for an organism and, in this instance, for a small cluster of beans then it would appear from the present observations that each of the members of the paired samples of beans, even when present in separate glass or plastic containers, can somehow be influenced by a very weak electromagnetic field produced by the other. By some means, the adoption of a ‘positive’ state in one member of a pair must under some circumstances bias the other member of the pair within their mutual field to adopt the ‘negative’ state.” – Page 457

Possibly, but consider the patterns created by plasma discharge in the video below.

The discharge stream flows from the centre to the surrounding sphere where it entrains somewhat to a particular spot which shows up as a glowing circle. The exact location of discharge varies locally and the spot itself will move slowly across the sphere. The discharge position is stable to the spot location but ‘random’ within the spot radius.

Consider then that the source of the Earth’s electric discharge comes ultimately from the sun, impacts our ionosphere and discharges to the ground in similar patterns to what we see in the video. The overall patterns are regular and seasonal and will also correlate with latitude.

This corresponds with the patterns we see in the experiments of Frank Brown but also with the epidemiology of influenza as studied by various researchers: Influenza and weather

Bearing this in mind then we can imagine a terrestrial magnetic field that exerts a top-down causality on biological systems, that is correlated with the seasons and is able to modulate fine grained influences down to the scale of a pot of beans. If this is so then direct ‘communication’ between beans may not be a necessary assumption. Instead, the state of a bean colony may trigger a phase change in the local magnetic field itself, causing it to flip to an adjacent pot or something similar.

Rather than regarding the external timing mechanism as immutably periodic, the addition of attractor-like properties may explain complexity we see. Some of the assumed complexity attributed to the organism is now apportioned to the environment itself.

Influenza epidemiology

The behaviour of the beans is reminiscent of the epidemiology of influenza. It may be imagined that individuals living in a densely populated area will be more susceptible to influenza during an outbreak but in fact the opposite is true, with those living in rural areas more likely to succumb to the disease.

Influenza is likely caused by electromagnetic discharge from the atmosphere (Influenza and weather) and it is as if there is a limited amount of energy to go around so that if you are in a large city it may well be that somebody else is the recipient of the ‘lightning’ strike and you are given a free pass for the year.

Global synchronisation

“Parallel and concurrent variations in bean samples as widely separated as
Woods Hole, Massachusetts and Evanston, Illinois, suggest wide geographic scope
of at least one of the major effective subtle parameters.” – Frank Brown

Correlation with atmospheric pressure

The metabolism of all living things (Brown) will fluctuate in synchrony with barometric pressure even when they are kept in a pressure controlled environment:

“It should be emphasized that while exhibiting their pressure correlations the organisms themselves are being maintained under constant pressure, and hence that pressure and the well-known solar and lunar tides of the atmosphere cannot be the immediately effective factor for the organisms. But of tremendous import for the clock problem is the fact that of the several species of plants and animals already studied in our laboratory, all exhibit the same kind of metabolic correlation with the same specific barometric pressure parameters. This has been shown to be true throughout the gamut of living things, from algae to vertebrates.” – Frank Brown

The oyster experiment

Oysters moved from the coast to an inland station still synchronised to the phases of the moon even in the absence of tide or visible light:

“Oysters transported in light-proof containers from their habitat in New Haven harbour to pans of sea water in a photographic darkroom in Evanston, Ill., gradually re-phased their rhythm of shell-opening over a 2-week period from the exact lunar-day time of high tide in New Haven harbour to the exact times of lunar zenith and nadir at Evanston, Ill, the theoretical time of high tides in Illinois were there a coastline. This new phase relationship then remained unchanged through a full month during which the study was continued.” – Frank Brown

Phase inversions

There are many cases of phase inversions within or between species. An organism may display maximum activity at full moon and minimal activity during a new moon, giving a good statistical correlation between activity and visible light.

This may change however with maximum activity now being displayed at new moon and vice-versa thus leading to a negative correlation.

These phenomena cannot therefore be studied by simple statistical correlation as the correlation shifts with time and between colonies of animals. This is further evidence should any be needed that what is on display is some coupling of resonant systems, both biological and meteorological.

“The mean monthly patterns of the snails through the five-year span of this
study tended significantly to display a common bimodal form with minima occurring
between new moon and first quarter and between full moon and third quarter,
However, for some measured parameters, or at certain times, a monthly pattern
for the snails was registered which was negatively correlated, with high statistical
significance, with the more typical one, Minima and maxima had exchanged places.

“Inversion of geo-physically dependent patterns including both lunar day and
monthly ones has been reported between different species, within a single species
at different times, and even concurrently within ,a single species under slightly
different experimental conditions (Brown, 1960; Brown and Chow, 1973, 1976),
Such inversions comprise a phenomenon which is probably commonplace, It is
postulated that the inverting tendency reflects the organisms’ sign and strength of
response to an effective atmospheric factor which is capable of being altered,
even tipped between positive and negative. with changing physiological state of the
organism and by effects of other uncontrolled, or imposed, environmental conditions.

“Indeed the sign has been described to differ between one portion of a lunar or solar
cycle and another” – Frank Brown

So what is going on?

We have, in the most abstract form:

Some sort of rhythmic influence in the atmosphere
A selection of internal pace-setters or resonators
A mechanism for entrainment (synchrony) between the two
Inherited behavioural patterns (e.g. feeding) that are triggered by the pace setters (not by the atmospheric influences directly)

Or, as Frank Brown puts it:

First, there is the development of inherited recurring patterns linked to one or another of the geophysical cycles.
Second, there is the development of a phase-response system and adaptive resettability of the rhythms by relevant environmental stimuli, including dominantly the light and temperature cycles.
Third, with the phase lability of the rhythms and their peculiar phase-response
activity complex, free-running cycles slightly modified in period by differing light and temperature levels, as well as influences of genetics and some chemicals, are rationally explained as effects on auto-phasing or of systematic phase drifting relative to the natural exogenous cycles.
The inherited rhythms, once developed in the individual, adaptively become capable of a labile phase relationship with the publicly timed clock cycles. They can be phase displaced to any degree in response to light cycles or other zeitgeber. Such changes follow geographical translocations, or altered artificial light-dark schedules in the
laboratory.

Phase shifting by light

Once a rhythm is established it can be fine tuned or phase shifted by alterations in visible light:

“Under the hypothesis of auto-phasing it is postulated that the organism uses its daily rhythmic fluctuation in sensitivity to light to effect a daily shift in its phase relations relative to its environmentally imposed 24-hour periodicity. The manner of action, in general terms, would be as follows: The organism reaching a “light-sensitive” phase in its daily cycle, and encountering the illumination of a constantly luminated environment, would be given a shifting stimulus whose strength, within limits, would be a function of the level of the illumination. Though physically the light is held constant, in stimulative effectiveness for the organism it is rhythmic as a consequence of rhythms in the organism’s own responsiveness.”

New science is needed

Classical science cannot explain the observations:

“Indeed, major concepts of biology have commonly arisen from observation and induction, rather than by deduction from what is known. Efforts in postulation of hypotheses and deducing tests for them may never lead to the correct answers if the hypotheses are rooted in established ones which are not relevant to the problem at
hand. The clocks of life appear to demand an admission of ignorance about a lower level of organization of life.” – Frank Brown

The problem of ‘measurement’

If the precise mechanisms are unknown then how can we be sure that our (often rhythmic) laboratory conditions are not responsible for some of the effects we see?

“The quantitative, and often even qualitative, character of results may be in part determined by uncontrolled factors even as subtle as the proximity of other individuals of the same, or possibly even different species as well as by time within the not widely acknowledged relatively predictable solar and lunar circadian cycles, and monthly and annual ones. Less predictable variations associated with movements of weather systems, and fluctuations in solar activity may also be expected to impose significant influences.

“And not least, the existence of the phenomenon indicates that we are operating
within the range of a biological “uncertainty principle.” There is now clear reason
to presume that the uses of modern methods, facilities and equipment for making
precise measurement of diverse parameters in living systems exert of themselves
an influence upon the system being measured. an influence effected by the invariable and characteristic weak accompanying alterations in electromagnetic fields produced by these. Biological processes will reflect in their measured values the methods and conditions under which the measurements are made, and the differences may be substantial.” – Brown

The bean controls its own rate of water absorption

“The nature of the phenomenon for beans is of such character that it appears
probable that the living embryo within the dried seed possesses the capacity to
regulate to a substantial degree the rate of water absorption by the seed upon its
submergence.“- Frank Brown

[We should not rule out the possibility that it is the seed itself that controls its own water supply at the cellular level. How would the embryo exert control over what happens at a billion molecules distance?]

Summary

Frank Brown discovered that a large part of the information that is essential for healthy regulation lies outside of the Human body in the form of some sort of electromagnetic field. The pace-setters within the body adopt a flexible coupling with this field and are therefore of an electromagnetic nature themselves.

The resulting rhythms are independent of metabolic rate and so ultimately independent of the physical substance of the body. An effective bio-field therefore acts as a receiver and interpreter for the cosmic rhythms, each of which will be assigned an inherited pattern of behaviour.

The response of biology to these influences is all pervasive, complex and meaningful., and transcends mere ‘correlation’. These results give plausibility to the idea that disease is a result of cosmic influences whilst adding confounding factors to laboratory ‘control’ experiments.

Related pages:

References:

External factors in the mechanisms on biological clocks – Frank A Brown

The blood can circulate by itself

Matthew Joseph Rodermund (1854-1919) performed many gruesome experiments on anaesthetised pigs and summarised them in his booklet: “Positive proofs that the blood can circulate without the aid of the heart”. Arterial blood flow is self-driven and flow in the pulmonary vein gets its power from inhaled oxygen.

A pig was anaesthetised and the aorta was drawn out and clamped so as to disconnect it from the pumping of the heart. The blood drained from the artery in no time at all which is proof enough in itself that the blood flow was not driven by the ‘pumping’ of the heart.

Sections of the aorta were clamped off and it was found that blood moved downstream, away from the second clamping, but remained in the clamped of section. When the lower clamp was removed, blood again drained away but less vigorously than before.

Hypothesis

A proposed mechanism for blood flow in the large arteries is that the blood is formed into a compact vortex structure by the heart and that the resulting ring vortices, charged with kinetic energy, will unroll and propel the blood along the artery. Very possibly these vortices can accumulate some energy from the ambient electromagnetic field structure, from heat transfer and from the ever present solar neutrino stream.

The blood is shaped by the heart into an extremely efficient geometrical structure which loses very little energy and will continue to self-organise and self-propel even when outside of the body if an artery should be ruptured; blood will spurt a long way!

See: Blood flow and scalar waves

In the case of the clamped off section of artery, the ring vortices are still spinning, still trying to move along and expending energy in the process. When the clamp is released they continue along their way but some energy has been lost.

These effects are not seen in the veins because the vortices do not make it past the capillary bed and so a different mechanism is at work here.

Action of the lungs

If the lungs are allowed to collapse the heart rate slows and the arteries will empty themselves of blood whilst the veins will become distended. When the lung function is restored, circulation s renewed and the heart in invigorated.

Breathing is somehow necessary in order for adequate circulation.

“I have demonstrated it on many animals of various kinds, and it accords so well with the ideas of men who find that force acting upon matter bestows life and motion upon matter. Call this force what you will — call it electricity, call it oxygen or ozone, it is this element of so-called force without which all matter is lifeless, and without any power to move or alter itself” – Rodermund

Hypothesis

The necessary energy to propel the blood from the lungs to the heart is in the form of ‘field vortices’ in the air breathed. These electromagnetic packets of energy are incorporated into the fluids of the blood and work against the ambient bio-field to propel the blood along to the heart.

The blood at this point is charged with energy but does not have the same vortex structure as that in the aorta as it has been a while since it passed through the heart. Blood flow here will not be as vigorous.

“In the pulmonary veins, there is no pulsation as is found in the rest of the arterial system, but in puncturing the pulmonary vein the blood will spurt out with a force nearly equal to that of the arteries.” – Rodermund

The heart is not a pump

“Another point that demonstrates positively that the heart is not the real propelling power of the blood, is the fact known to the ancients, that after death the arteries are empty; it was from this phenomena that the belief arose that the arteries contained no blood, but air; hence the name artery (which means air-pipe). Now if the heart were a pump it would be impossible for the arteries to be empty after death, for when a pump ceases to do its work, the fluid pumped would cease to flow, consequently, the blood would remain in the arterial system” – Rodermund

Galen

“Galen thought that the object of breathing was to take into the lungs what is termed pneuma or spirits. That air breathed underwent in the lung tissue a change which resulted in the production of vital spirits. The spirits according to Galen, was not the substance of atmospheric air, but something produced from it by the transforming agency of the lung“

Galen is clearly talking about field vortices even if he couldn’t describe them as such. These vortices are taken up by the blood and very possibly assist with the circulation. See: Blood flow and scalar waves. In addition, such energy is delivered directly to the ATP/ADP in the blood for transport to every cell in the body. See: Do we breathe oxygen?

“Again Galen says that the mechanical force of the heart was not the only one by which the animal fluids were drawn or impelled in the needful direction. He thought there was a physiological force which he compared with that of a magnet, by which the tissue attracted the ingredients for its nourishment, as we would express it to-day, that the electrical power has something to do with the circulation.”

Astonishing. The physical force compared to that of a magnet is the inward spiralling of a magnetic vortex structure. Energy is drawn inwards by the laws of physics to supply the tissues and blood with essential energy. The alveoli of the lungs play host to an electromagnetic field which is under the control of the lungs themselves and when the air enters during breathing, this vortex structure will attract the field energy in the air and transfer it to the bloodstream; no material exchange is necessary for this.

See: The bio-field of the heart

The lungs and heart

“One strong feature can be noticed when watching the lungs and heart under experiment for hours — that the heart so to speak — “dances to the music of the lungs” This means that when the lungs are taking in pure air, and the blood normal, just as an engine responds to the steam from the boiler.

“Another point is always certain that whenever breathing is aroused, the heart action is also increased.

“As already stated that the difference noticed in the action of the blood in the pulmonary veins and arteries, that the heart in its churning and contractile action agitates the blood, so as to give increased molecular activity to the charged blood-cells, and thereby give increased activity to the blood to circulate alone throughout the system. This accords well with the difference noticed when puncturing a large artery — the blood spurts out like a fluid that had been agitated, while puncturing the pulmonary vein, such phenomena is not noticed.” – Rodermund

The blood spurts from an artery because the vortex geometry and energy flow has been optimised by the heart to self-propel vigorously in a large open vessel whereas the blood in the pulmonary vein is instead the accumulation of smaller vortex energies from the capillaries and may be assisted by an electromagnetic filed within the lungs.

“As already stated that the difference noticed in the action of the blood in the pulmonary veins and arteries, that the heart in its churning and contractile action agitates the blood, so as to give increased molecular activity to the charged blood-cells, and thereby give increased activity to the blood to circulate alone throughout the system.” – Rodermund

Fresh air and health

“This particular phenomenon I think the most important of all when considered in the light of health and disease, its result upon the nutrition of the body and the action of such blood upon the chyle, and and the inactivity of such circulation upon carrying off the necessary waste products, debilitating all systemic functions, so that the same food eaten to-day, making us happy, as well as giving good nourishment to the body, to-morrow, the same food when taken without sufficient quantity and quality of oxygen in the air breathed, would produce results all the way from a dull feeling to some severe form of dis¬ ease. Poor food and good air will do so the same, but not so readily.”

What is meant by “quality of oxygen”? Surely all oxygen is the same? Not necessarily. Air that has already been breathed has been depleted of some of its energy; it is low on electromagnetic vortices. This will be invisible to and unmeasurable by scientists but may be true nevertheless.

Konstantin Meyl has claimed that the field vortices breathed in make a significant contribution to overall energy intake, citing two examples where they are actually necessary.

One is the ability of migrating birds to make huge journeys without eating much and the other is the phenomenon of endurance athletes who reportedly train for extended periods (months) at a measurable calorie deficit.

Conjecture: Pneumonia is primarily caused by the breathing of stale air. Already sick patients are confined to bed and forced to breathe second-hand air, depleted of vortex energy. They are missing energy but more to the point there are insufficient vortices to produce a decent flow of blood within the capillaries of the lungs. The tissues of the lungs are similarly deprived and infection sets in.

Related pages:

References:

Positive proofs that the blood can circulate without the aid of the heart – Matthew Joseph Rodermund
https://archive.org/details/101211053.nlm.nih.gov/page/6/mode/2up

Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport: Many athletes at risk due to prolonged, severe calorie mismatch – Adam Ward
https://healthsci.mcmaster.ca/relative-energy-deficiency-in-sport-many-athletes-at-risk-due-to-prolonged-severe-calorie-mismatch/

The bio-field of the heart

The heart is at the centre of a rather large electromagnetic field (depicted) that is measurable several feet from the human body, but nobody seems to know much of its structure or function. This page makes some speculations based upon vortex physics.

Assertion: The heart is at the centre of an inward spiralling energy vortex generated in the muscles and other tissues and it is an extension of this field that is measurable outside the body. Energy accumulates at the vortex centre to drive the physical processes of the heart and to provide power for a fully developed cognitive system (a heart-brain) that monitors and controls the entire of the circulatory processes including blood pressure at every point and even the movement of blood in each section of artery and capillary.

Absolute proof of this is not to be found but we can:

Demonstrate a need for such a field
Give a geometrical argument for a toroidal arrangement
Suggest a mechanism for such a system
Argue that the field is ‘cognitive’ in nature
Give some ideas as to its functioning

Energy conservation

The usual description of the heart’s field is of an electromagnetic field generated by the heart itself, which then radiates outwards from the heart, passing through the bodily tissues largely unscathed to radiate outwards beyond the body for several feet before dissipating into the electromagnetic wasteland of the Earth’s magnetosphere.

This is a monstrous waste of energy from the Human body and gives little clue as to the function of the field. What is it for? What is the effect of the field passing through the bodily tissues?

The heart is already at a temperature whereby it might ‘cook’, so how does it cope with fluctuations in energy requirements? Where does the extra energy come from and how is excess energy dissipated? If excess energy is simply carried away by the blood stream then it is highly fortuitous that the quantities match; that the extra blood flow produced during exercise exactly corresponds to the extra heat produced by the heart.

This is a general problem in biology, that energy in must exactly match energy out in order to avoid a dangerous accumulation of waste (heat). Moreover, this must happen at every physical scale from the whole organism down to the individual cell.

The heart field of a horse is five times more powerful than that of a human despite having to make its way through considerably more tissue – so again, why doesn’t it overheat? Where is the huge power line that supplies the heart with energy?

Toroidal energy flow

Many researchers have identified circular (electric) currents within organisms and these exist at all scales. An electric circuit is easy to imagine but not a 3-dimensional object full of such circuits. The requirements are that each circuit must be complete, that no circuit may cross over another and that there may be no singularities or infinities in the system.

A spherical arrangement is not possible according to the hairy ball theorem of topology, with the only sustainable arrangement for continuous flow in three dimensions being the torus (shown).

Electrical currents flow from the heart to the periphery (Beraia) where they are said to be ‘earthed’ – but what does this mean? Where does the current go to? Electricity likes to flow in complete circuits.

Consider an alternative whereby the field energy is recycled back through the bodily tissues, eventually returning to the heart after receiving a boost from energy generated in almost every cell in the body.

The overall flow then would be some sort of torus with the heart at the centre. This is precisely what is measured outside of the body and is consistent with what is measured inside the body.

The Chakras

A multi-hole torus with the heart, brain and solar plexus would give us a system that naturally creates energy centres analogous to the Chakra system of Eastern medicines.

Field energy is created in every cell of he body and moves inwards to wards the chakras.

Increased physical activity results in an increased energy production. Sufficient energy is guided inwards towards the heart and any excess is diverted outwards where it is measurable as the external bio-field. In this scheme, the excess energy is never allowed to accumulate and is diverted from the heart before it gets anywhere near it.

The power system is therefore distributed and needs no cable to supply it. Supply is highly flexible and maximum intensity is only reached at the vortex radius which coincides with the heart itself.

People with a weak bio-field have little surplus energy.

Physical exercise enhances the ability of the body to direct energy inwards towards the heart, increases heart activity and promotes extra muscle mass.

An athlete is someone who can create and sustain a strong inward spiralling vortex and whose heart can withstand this pressure in the short term and adapt to it over the long term. This doesn’t do them much good though as they don’t live as long as the rest of us on average and suffer from both long and short term cardiac problems.

The heart is not a pump and so a strong heart is not a pre-requisite for pumping but rather a result of a strong circulation. The heart is very likely having to do a lot of work to actually slow down the blood flow and regulate the pressure. (The Heart and Circulation)

Moderate ‘movement’ develops harmony in the energetic circulatory system whilst hard exercise puts strain on the heart.

The bio-field as a regulatory system

So far, all that has been described is a distributed power supply centred at the heart. This may serve to drive the electrical system of the heart as described above but also acts as an infrastructure for a distributed communication system.

Such a system is clearly a necessity for regulation of blood pressure at least.

The heart and circulation – Branko Furst

The heart is not a pressure pump
The blood propels itself around the circulatory system
Responses to change in posture and activity are global and instantaneous

One overwhelming impression after reading this book is that there is a constant and very reliable maintenance of functional blood pressure no matter what the circumstances:

On moving from seated to standing posture, the heart rate will increase to compensate in the space of one heartbeat
If a giraffe were to lift its head from drinking position to vertical then it will not faint (even in an emergency) owing to low blood pressure in the head
Attempts in a laboratory to impede blood flow by blocking an artery in one place will result in an immediate compensatory mechanism somewhere else

Any local disturbance to the blood pressure results in an immediate global adaptation to the flow; the whole system ‘knows’ what it is wants and will instigate changes in pursuance of that teleological aim.

By the time you have stood up, your whole system has already adapted to the new situation. This suggests that the changes are actually pre-empting the action and are somehow triggered by the knowledge that you are intending to stand up.

Without this idea we are stuck with the notion that the circulatory system simply makes local adjustments to itself according to micro-changes in its own pressure system. Moreover, without some sort of ‘computation’ we will have to believe that all this happens according to the laws of fluid dynamics alone!

An independent ‘cognitive’ system?

As described above, changes to circulation are coordinated globally which immediately implies a distributed information system or ‘field’ with almost instantaneous communication speed.

Each part of the system is apprised of happenings elsewhere and adapts accordingly. This suggests complex computation comprising an abstract map of the entire circulatory system somewhere and an implicit ‘aim’ in the sense of an engineering control system.

These are all characteristics of a fully developed ‘cognitive’ system. That is to say, a biological control system every bit as sophisticated as the brain and analogous to the proprioceptive system that ‘knows’ exactly what is going on everywhere all the time and is in full control of all meaningful parameters.

Information concerning pressure from every section of artery or grouping of capillaries is produced from baroreceptors and synthesised into a coherent cognitive map in a format for further computation. Similarly formatted ‘data’ from the brain is integrated into the whole and a decision is made (in the heart itself?) and action taken.

Action signals travel back to the capillary system and to the heart and as a result the existing flow parameters are updated to form a new dynamic state appropriate to the new circumstances or even to anticipated circumstances.

The reaction of the heart rate to the cognition of fear is proof of a meaningful connection between the computational systems of both brain and heart. Both systems are now of a cognitive nature which makes communication between them natural and ensures correct interpretation of even high level constructs such as emotions.

We can think of the phenomenon of fear as an emergent product of the firing of neurons, a mere side effect of the laws of physics, and we can think of the speeding up of the heart as being triggered by a similar set of neuronal firing, but surely simpler to admit that the heart forms its own ‘intelligence’ that is able to communicate with the brain on its own terms, which is to say, thoughts, requirements, intentions and feelings?

Brain says “I feel fear” and heart responds “Ok I will beat faster”.

This happens instantly, surely faster than a gland can manufacture adrenaline and transport it to the heart itself? What sort of messenger is adrenaline? How many dimensions of information can a single chemical carry? What are all the nerves connecting the brain and the heart for if all we need are one-dimensional chemical messengers?

The executive functions of the bio-field

Energy accumulation and distribution
Collation of distributed information
Liaison with the brain
Management of blood pressure
Management of heart rate
Control of dynamic vaso-dilation
Energisation of blood cells in the heart
Direct control of blood flow in capillaries
Synchronisation of pulse between individuals

Post mortem blood flow dynamics

On the driver of blood circulation beyond the heart– Zheng Li, Gerald H. Pollack
This paper has some interesting videos of blood flow after the heart has been stopped.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0289652

Postmortem arterial blood flow dynamics: video
In this video (screenshot below) the heart is stopped and an instantaneous reaction is seen in the arterial blood flow. First the blood stops flowing and then it begins to resume but in a haphazard fashion.

Flow seems to be independent of any overall scheme and different sections of artery exhibit different flow rates and even direction. The system seems to first go into shock and then to recalibrate in the absence of a pulse before an overall flow is eventually organised and circulation will then continue for some time without a pulse.

An outstanding feature is the apparent independence of flow in different sections of artery. Blood is almost inert in the main branch whilst a narrower section develops a rapid flow, seemingly sucking the blood from the larger vessel at will.

At one point there is clearly pulsatile flow in the thick branches whilst the narrow tubes maintain a continuous flow.

Crucially, flow seems to resume in the small vessels first, before resuming in the larger ones (the ones closer to the heart). Flow then is clearly not driven by the heart and is not driven by pressure.

How and why is the blood behaving in this way?

A hypothesis

The blood contains the energy required for movement
The bio-field gives the direction of the blood flow

The energy is in various forms of vortex energy:

Fluid vortices
Ring currents in the red blood cells
Heat
‘Other’ field vortices (?)

These are given a good boost of mechanical and electrical energy when passing through the heart and may also accumulate additional energy whilst circulating from heat transfer (vortex transfer), infra-red photons and possibly solar neutrinos.

The bio-field provides an enclosing electromagnetic field of some structure, possibly contained within the arterial walls, which is sufficient to drive the vortices one way or the other and at a desired flow rate.

The following video is not the same mechanism as blood flow but has some similarities and might make the idea sound more plausible. The battery is the energy supply, it does not need an external energy source to push itself around. Here the battery itself produces the spiral electric field it needs to gain momentum.

In the case of the circulatory system it is envisaged that it is the bio-field itself that has complete control of the enclosing electric (magnetic?) field and hence complete control over the movement of every single section of artery in the entire body.

The system is mapped and codified into a single functional system similar to the proprioceptive system whereby the brain has complete knowledge of, and control over, almost every individual cell in the body – but without having to know about any of the individual cells in the body.

In films of blood flow through the smallest capillaries, the red blood cells are seen to form an orderly queue in the blood vessels. This is because the cells themselves contain circular (orbital) electric currents and necessarily form magnetic dipoles with north south alignment along the length of the blood vessel. The magnetic aspect of the cells amounts to a long range attractive force between the RBC whilst the negative electric charge (zeta potential) creates a short range repulsive force thus maintaining the spacing between the cells.

Capture of microparticles by bolus flow of red blood cells in capillaries – Takeishi, Imai
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-05924-7

The organisation of blood cells is clearly depicted in this paper. Note also the vortex movement of nano-particles.

The mechanism

Both information and energy are transferred around the system by means of electromagnetic ring vortices (water vortex shown). These rings will conduct in the myelin sheath surrounding the nerves (Scalar waves and nerves) and create an electrical current within the conductive tissues of the nerves.

The electrical ‘current’ within the nerves is assumed by most to contain the information necessary for cognition but electricity is a crude communicator compared with the possibilities afforded by the ring vortices.

The pattern of flow is that magnetic ring currents will form in the insulating material round the nerves and these will give rise to an induced electric field in the conductive environment within the nerves. The electric current is measured and imagined to be paramount but it is a side effect of the ring vortices.

“Information is the structure of a scalar wave” – Konstantin Meyl

Energy transfer is also via ring vortices. A ring is formed from available field energy and is transmitted along a conduit (nerve, wire, microtubule). Energy loss is minimal and is largely independent of the amount of energy or information being transferred (desirable), unlike traditional ‘current’. When the ring vortex reaches its destination, the energy is unwrapped in accordance with the nature of the ambient electromagnetic field at that location and thereby transformed into useful ‘work’.

Power supply for the brain?

The brain is a scalar wave (ring vortex) computer according to Meyl (What is the brain?) and so information travels from the heart up to the brain via this means.

There are said to be many more nerves conducting information from heart to brain than the other way around (Heart Math) and this has led to the claim that there is more information travelling from heart to brain than the other way around.

But where is the proof for this? Does ‘information’ really take up lots of space? Why do our brains not fill up then? Time to consider that the nerves may be used for energy transfer as well as information transfer.

The brain itself radiates a significant electromagnetic field and surgeons operating near the crown will see sparks fly between the soft tissues and their metal instruments. So where does all this power come from? The brain is not a chemical battery as there is not vast amounts of waste product and nor is it a dynamo as there are no moving parts.

The brain is not at the centre of a large vortex like the heart and so it is getting its energy from somewhere else. Vortex energy spirals inwards toward the heart where it is used to regulate heartbeat etc. Some of this energy then moves into the blood to energise the corpuscles and some moves up the conduit of the nervous system to the brain in order to maintain the necessary electrical function.

A moving field in the brain gives rise to an external toroidal field and this is what is measured.

The measured field outside the brain is still smaller than that of the heart even though there is little tissue to absorb it, thus giving further support to the idea that the measured heart field does not come from the heart at all but the surrounding tissues of the torso.

The cognitive torus

Energy is created in the torso; some spirals inwards to the heart to form a strong vortex field whilst some is directed outwards as ‘waste’ and this forms the measurable bio-field. Physical exertion produces more energy and this is carefully managed to avoid overload on the heart and circulatory system.

How likely does this sound? How does it happen?

First note that the idea of vortex field is completely in tune with electromagnetic theory. Electric fields have a natural tendency to produce this sort of pattern so we are already halfway there and the body just needs to gain some finer degree of control over the field in order to produce the effects that are observed.

Nobody knows how this works but to see that it is at least plausible, consider the video below from David Rogers of a white blood cell chasing a bacterium.

The blood cell is acutely aware if its surroundings and responds instantly to the movement of the bacterium. It is managing its own energy supply (whatever that consists of!) and information is clearly distributed across the whole organism in order to coordinate movement.

The neutrophil behaves with intelligence and ‘intent’ and all this with no heart, brain circulatory system or even nerves!

The human amoeba

Time then, to start thinking of a human being, not so much as a machine comprised of smaller ‘parts’ but rather as a very large blob of intelligent jelly that has accrued some extra organs to manage and a few ‘super-highways’ to expedite the transmission of power to energy hungry parts of the organism.

Energy is produced globally, the heart does not ‘pump’ but directs accumulated electrical energy away from the vortex centre and somehow the blood flow is managed on a circulation-wide basis. How or where are such computations performed is up for grabs but obvious candidates are the brain or the heart itself.

An alternative idea is to simply say that the computation is distributed around the entire network somehow. Many will find this fantastical – but why? It seems natural to suppose that something like a brain is capable of this but that is only because we have allowed ourselves to become comfortable with the idea and not because it makes any sense.

It is easy to imagine a brain as doing all the computing but a brain is still just a lump of electrified jelly and so simply delegating all computational duties to this organ isn’t really solving the problem but merely shifting it from a large bunch of jelly to a slightly smaller bunch of jelly!

If you don’t believe the body can have intelligence then how can you think a brain can have intelligence?

Self-organisation

Heart cells are seen beating in a tissue culture. They are not part of a working heart and are not connected to a brain and yet seems to have organised themselves into a coordinated beating system which propagates in a wave from left to right.

Imagine that these cells had formed, not a hemisphere, but the shape of a heart and that the contraction wave propagated along the spiral muscle of the heart. The whole thing is pretty much working already and there is not much more to do other than supply it with sufficient energy and enough information to control the pulse rate.

The effect we are seeing is an emergent effect created from bottom-up organisation of the individual cells, but a functional heartbeat is controlled by a top-down influx of information from a distributed control system. Information is collected from the organism as a whole and condensed down to simple instructions for the heart.

In biological systems we have a consistent pattern of: bottom up emergence, top down control.

If we don’t have the top down information flow then we are left with lots of interesting effects but not a viable life form. Mainstream texts seem to ignore the organisational aspect and regard a human simply as a collection of interesting effects; they seem ok with this!

Note that the seemingly intractable problem of complexity in biological function is always understood in these terms: low level activities are more ordered and sympathetic to life than most people imagine and so higher level control systems have less ‘work’ to do. The instructions from top to bottom are not in any way digital and do not necessarily reflect the underlying physical (molecular) reality but instead are ‘cognitive’ representations of the ‘state’ of the system as a whole or parts thereof.

Top down causation

Mainstream science from physics to biology is fixated on a view of causation that is ‘bottom-up’ in terms of scale, radiative in terms of causation and downhill in terms of organisation (2nd ‘Law’ of Thermodynamics).

However, the laws of electromagnetism support the idea of vortex formation and everywhere in nature we see an inward spiralling of energy and an accumulation of ‘information’ at smaller scales:

Blood flow starts in the periphery and moves towards the heart
Energy moves from the torso to the heart in a vortex pattern
Information flows from the extremities to the heart and back again
A distributed bio-field modulates local activity

Related pages:

The cosmic origins of Life

The necessary conditions for the development of complex organisms from the basic ‘stuff’ of the universe are provided for by a complex electromagnetic field structure that has its origins far from the Earth and whose behaviour is rooted firmly in the laws of physics.

The cosmic ‘field’ flows around the Universe much the same as water flows in a river
Field energy spirals inwards to form galactic whirlpools
Energy concentrates to form stars which emit all manner of emergent energies
Solar output is given fine grained structure via impact with the Earth’s ionosphere
Electric discharge from the ionosphere is instrumental in the formation of complex molecules
Rhythmic patterns in the magnetosphere provide a regulatory basis for life which precedes complex biology
Geographical variation allows for a diversity of primordial soups

The nature of the Cosmos

Mainstream cosmology will have us believe that the Universe consists essentially of a large amount of fairly uninteresting ‘space’, within which exists discrete blobs of uninteresting ‘matter’. The blobs of matter emit strictly radial forces in the form of gravity which influence other objects and it is this collection of connected atoms and forces that will somehow organise itself into galaxies, planets and eventually, organic life forms.

New theories of physics and recent observations by astronomers create a very different impression. Slight modifications of Maxwell’s equations predict a ‘living sea’ of electromagnetic activity that forms a self-sustaining energy field which is full of complex activity and these predictions are confirmed in the spiral patterns of galaxies.

Start to imagine it as a river flowing downstream where eddies and vortices form and interact with each other. So does the cosmic field form spiral patterns which compress the field structures towards the centre of the vortex leading to a great concentration of energy. Compressed field structures morph into a variety of shapes, some of which will adopt the familiar stable configurations that we call ‘matter’

The result is the creation of entire galaxies and the stars within them. A nice example at the top of a page is a barred galaxy showing a textbook formation of a vortex structure. (Vortex physics- Konstantin Meyl)

Formation of the sun

Energy flows towards the centre of a vortex and a star is formed. As the field disturbances are compressed, they are forced into a multitude of different configurations, including matter, light, heat, neutrinos and other components of the solar wind.

Radiative energy streams out of the sun in the above forms whilst at the same time our star is replenished by the inward spiralling cosmic energy.

Electric filament currents form and connect with the ionosphere of the Earth round about the equator. These form a persistent one-to-one connection, feeding the Earth with both energy and information.

The Earthly connection

The broad shape of a solar filament will survive past the ionosphere and will penetrate the Earth’s surface, creating ‘telluric’ currents, large circular or spiral movements of electricity that are easily measurable in the topsoil. These field vortices are highly influential in causing the large scale weather patterns that we see.

The interaction of these currents with the Earth’s magnetosphere creates additional fine-grained structures within this field and it is these magnetic field vortices that are associated with local weather patterns and have a strong influence on the biological regulation of all life on Earth.

Disease and the weather

Strong and undeniable relationships exist between outbreaks of disease and distinctive weather patterns, with specific diseases being triggered at specific times of the year and at specific places on the planet. The disease is caused by the associated disturbance in the Earth’s magnetic field which disrupts the (largely electromagnetic) regulatory processes within the body. See: Influenza and weather

The pacemakers of Life

The work of Frank Brown (External factors in the mechanisms of biological clocks) shows very clearly that terrestrial magnetic activity is heavily rhythmic and is instrumental in the regulation of Life on Earth. Cycles are apparent coinciding with day length, year length and lunar month at least.

Brown concluded that there are no internal clocks in the body and that therefore existing bio-rhythms must be set from the outside, they are fixed by the magnetic activity on Earth and it is the job of biological organisms to attune themselves to these cosmic patterns; to use them as pacemakers.

The rhythms and energies needed to organise and regulate Life therefore precede the genesis of life.

Discharge from the ionosphere

Life evolved between the twin capacitor plates of the ionosphere and the surface of the Earth. This provides a voltage difference to be used by living organisms and also a source of discharge current.

Mainstream science really assumes that this discharge is of no particular interest, consisting of a steady and small current obeying Ohm’s law. Slight adjustments of Maxwell’s equations though, allow for spiral discharge through the atmosphere, making available a continuous flow of vortex energy which in turn will be modified by seasonal and geographical variation.

Primordial ‘soup’

We have arrived at some sort of a description of the environment within which life began.

A continually moving stream of electro-magnetic field energy pervades the atmosphere, representing discharge from the ionosphere to the Earth’s surface. This is modulated by the rotation of the Earth, the orbit of the moon and the passing of the seasons to create a pulsing, rhythmic field, helping to coordinate and regulate the emerging organisms.

The field is right-handed according to the laws of electromagnetism and this no doubt explains the chiral bias in many bio-molecules.

Vortices within the water are said to be capable of energy absorption (from solar neutrinos), frequency conversion (Meyl) and energy transduction. Transmutation of elements is possible under such conditions with calcium being a common product of such activity (Louis Kervran).

We therefore have a regulatory framework, a mechanism for energy transduction and a machine for mineral production already set up in anticipation of Life processes and it is within this electro-magnetic ‘cradle’ that the first biomolecules emerged.

Top-down causation vs Big Bangs

So far we have energy from the cosmos moving spirally inwards to form stars which transmute the energy into vortex filaments whence they are transported to our planet and refined by local conditions into formative forces. These energies will ultimately be absorbed into cellular structures that interpret them in a cognitive fashion and incorporate them into an organised biological system.

There is a plausible transmutation of energy, a refinement of structure at each stage of the process and a continual downscaling of energy from cosmos to cell, all in tune with the laws of physics. We have ‘top-down’ causation.

Compare with the mainstream version:

Universe begins in a big explosion
Stars are ‘matter’ crashing together
The sun works like an atomic bomb
Life started with a big lightning bolt
Molecules bond by bumping into each other
Randomness creates DNA

In other words, the laws of physics are fine until you can’t explain something and then you just invent some kind of explosion where those laws are temporarily suspended and some ‘chance’ process takes over and: “Behold .. Life!”

An explanation is attempted largely in terms of dissipative processes (explosions) and bottom up causation (molecular interactions). This is in tune with ideas such as entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics but is clearly at odds with the requirement to create an organised self-sustaining life form that exists ‘far from thermodynamic equilibrium’.

Any appeal to some sort of molecular Darwinism will not rescue this. You can only select for a sensible molecular arrangement if a sensible molecular arrangement has been created in the first place. This is hardly provided for by a hypothesis based upon randomness and explosions!

Explosions are going the wrong way and randomness is not formative.

The idea of top-down causation presents a pattern altogether more consistent with the observed outcomes: Instead of dissipative explosions and randomness we have a concentration of energy and increase in complexity.

The production of the first bio-molecules

The conditions within which the first complex molecules are to be formed is a mineral-steeped aqueous environment host to a variety of vibratory energies and already subject to diurnal, lunar and annual rhythms.

The Miller-Urey experiment demonstrated the spontaneous formation of amino acids. These then are to be regarded as biological ‘fundamentals’, molecular organisations that arise spontaneously according to the laws of physics. No additional input of information is needed for them to form.

Amino acids fall into various classes according to their characteristic resonant frequency and it is this property that enables assembly of the acids into a protein chain. All amino acids contributing to a functional protein will have the same resonant frequency (Cosic 1990) and a water complex vibrating at this frequency will tend to collect together all the necessary parts of the intended protein chain via ‘cymatic’ resonance.

Somehow the chain is assembled and it is time to ‘fold’. Again the vibratory environment is essential for this. The protein chain is pushed around by predominantly electromagnetic forces from one ‘attractor well’ to the next until it reaches the desired conformation. A series of maximal likelihood outcomes add up to a stable least energy solution.

This seems to be how proteins are assembled within the controlled environment of a cell but it is not inconceivable that something like this should occur in a pre-biotic environment as all it needs is the laws of physics.

The mainstream view from evolutionary theorists is that all this simply happens through random kinetic encounters of molecules coupled with the idea of ‘millions of years to get it right’; another typical brute force solution.

Self-replicating molecules

Many evolutionary theorists have stated plainly that a prerequisite for biological evolution is the (happenstance) creation of a self-replicating molecule.

No! Just .. no!

Molecules cannot replicate themselves, they generate no energy, can create no new matter, cannot assemble existing matter and have no self-knowledge, no internal map of themselves to use as a design template for the new molecule.

Bio-molecules are the product of the vibratory water-environment within which they exist. It is this environment that organises the necessary energy, matter and electro-kinetic infrastructure needed to create a new molecule.

A pre-requisite then for the continuance of biological structures is the persistence, not of the molecule itself, but of the environment that was instrumental in creating that molecule in the first place. Here lies the energy, the structure and the information necessary to reproduce molecules sympathetic to the construction of future life forms. Causality in this respect is again not from the molecule itself, not from the bottom up, but rather top-down, with energy, matter and information coming from the cosmos to the local environment and thence to the molecule itself.

Bio-molecules are not the initial cause of Life itself but a visibly manifest end product.

Pre-biotic evolution

The requirement for evolution then is for a persistent electromagnetic field environment within which to construct bio-molecules; a self-replicating protein factory to put it briefly.

This seems a tall order but a large part of the power source and regulatory structure is ever present in the form of the cosmic cycles that originate in the Sun coupled with the resonant properties of water. These are never going away.

This will all be managed by a stable, self-sustaining electromagnetic bio-field taking the form of a closed loop feedback system. See: The origins of life

Mainstream ‘theory’ of evolution

Evolutionary theorists say that the initial construction of self-replicating molecules is by random chance and that this works because there are several million years available.

Note that the invocation of randomness obviates the need to provide an actual mechanism for this process. The construction of these molecules clearly must be in accordance with the laws of Nature but this formulation is actually independent of the specific laws involved, merely needing millions of years to come about.

The suggestion of randomness as a causal means is highly misleading as ‘randomness’ is a statistical outcome pattern, not a generative mechanism.

The use of the term ‘self-replicating’ is likewise deceptive, effectively wallpapering over the inadequacies of the theory by presenting as a de facto solution something which is actually meaningless. The term is easily accepted by a lazy cognitive system and repetition of the phrase by ‘experts’ cements it in place as an unchallenged ‘fact’.
Instead of a convenient (though inaccurate) metaphor, it has become a foundational axiom.

References:

Vortex physics – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274120453_About_Vortex_Physics_and_Vortex_Losses

The Folding of Life Proteins: On the role of long-and short range electromagnetic pilot mechanisms – Dirk Meijer, Hans Geesink
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315706536_The_Folding_of_a_Life_Proteins_On_the_role_of_long-and_short_range_electromagnetic_pilot_mechanisms

Miller-Urey experiment – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

Do we underestimate the importance of water in cell biology? – Martin Chaplin
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16955076/

Cosic, Irena. (1995). Macromolecular bioactivity: Is it resonant interaction between macromolecules? – Theory and applications. IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering. 41. 1101-14. 10.1109/10.335859.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/15347139_Macromolecular_bioactivity_Is_it_resonant_interaction_between_macromolecules_-_Theory_and_applications

Study provides evidence for externally powered Sun – Jamal Shrair
https://watchers.news/2017/08/01/study-provides-evidence-for-externally-powered-sun/

Michael Clarage: Solar filaments and you! | Thunderbolts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JA38XKOVpA

Cosmic influences on humans – J T Burns

External factors in the mechanisms on biological clocks – Frank A Brown

Birth date, lifespan and disease

There is a large body of research showing correlations between date of birth and subsequent health outcomes, with one paper showing a dramatically reduced lifespan (by nearly 10 years!) for those born during high sunspot activity.

For people born at certain times in history, susceptibility to chronic disease increases significantly and life expectancy is reduced:

Schizophrenia
Bipolar disorder
Cancer
Multiple sclerosis
Autism

Correlation exists with several factors:

Year of birth
Time of year
Latitude
Sunspot activity
Local weather conditions

Sensitivity of foetal development is suspected with assumed mechanisms of altered bio-chemistry and disrupted gene expression. Several causal factors have been proposed:

Ultraviolet light
Temperature
Seasonal toxins
Infection from the mother
Vitamin D deficiency

Autism is very clearly linked to the (seasonal) vaccine schedule and it seems that the younger the patient at time of injection the greater the likelihood of injury. An association is therefore expected with both date of vaccination and month of birth.

This no doubt plays some role in the cause of other conditions as well but there does seem to be some other contributory factor at work. Correlations are reported with both latitude and solar activity and life expectancy is measured in mostly older subjects who would not have been subjected to such a ‘rigorous’ vaccine schedule as today’s infants.

This page will make a case for the direct influence of cosmological factors via electromagnetic field disturbances.

Hypothesis: These problems are caused by dramatic changes in the Earths magnetic field which propagate to the surface via discrete currents and affect gene expression. The origin of these changes is ultimately the sun and this explains the correlations with season, latitude and solar activity.

*Credit: Michael Shay and University of Delaware*

The hypothesis:

Fits the general ‘pattern’ of available evidence
The idea of solar filaments is described by Michael Clarage here
Mainstream science is starting to investigate the idea of magnetic disturbances here
Electromagnetic activity is correlated with weather here
Similar correlations are found between weather and assumed ‘infectious’ diseases – Influenza and weather – Measles – Influenza and field vortices
Similar diseases are found to be associated with man-made disturbances of the Earth’s electromagnetic field arising from radio masts and cell-phone towers – 5G and Covid
Electromagnetic fields have been found to affect gene-expression in many laboratory experiments
Vortices in the form of Tesla waves can penetrate deeper into biological tissue than ultra-violet light

So electromagnetic filaments emerge from the sun and make their way to the Earth where they impact our magnetosphere, causing local disturbances which can affect the general regulatory system and morphological gene expression of both the mother and the developing foetus.

The sun’s magnetosphere is subject to influences from other bodies in the solar system and these disturbances add a fine grained structure to the rhythmic variations coming from the sun. We should therefore expect correlations with:

Season and latitude
Solar flares and sunspots
Localised geographic clusters
Lunar cycles
Other planetary orbits and alignments

For scientific evidence for the general effect of these phenomena on biological systems read:

Cosmic influences on humans – J T Burns
External factors in the mechanisms on biological clocks – Frank A Brown

In the J T Burns book, both the brain and foetus seem particularly susceptible to ‘cosmic’ influences and so psychological and developmental disorders should be expected.

Genetic imprinting and biological information

Once established, schizophrenia was exacerbated by lunar cycles with different types of the disease responding to different phases of the moon. A tentative hypothesis might be that the magnetic irregularities might form stereotypical patterns and that developing embryos are ‘imprinted’ or ‘sensitised’ with this information and will recognise it later on in life and respond with corresponding symptoms.

Support for the idea that magnetic disturbances carry biological ‘information’ may be found in the epidemiology of influenza and measles where we have two seasonal diseases breaking out in a predictable fashion in different places on the planet at slightly different times. Both, I think, are caused by ‘field vortices’, which begs the question: “How is it determined which disease is produced?”

The obvious inference here is that the atmospheric signals are not just ‘noise’ but contain some distinguishing features, i.e. information.

This may sound far fetched but it isn’t so different from the (admittedly refuted) theory of viruses whereby a small package of field information wreaks havoc with the body. DNA is composed of ‘matter’ for sure but it is only recognised by its radiant field structure (there is nothing else!) so a direct comparison is appropriate.

Much of the observations of virologists are therefore accurate but they didn’t need to have the information in RNA and didn’t need to assume transmission, as the information comes straight from the magnetosphere at the appropriate times of year and at the appointed latitude.

The major problems with virology are therefore circumvented. There is now no need to explain the lack of human to human transmission for there is none and there is no need to explain the failure to isolate a physical particle as no such thing is necessary; we are dealing with pure ‘energy’ as the cause of disease and it is delivered in exact accordance with the observed epidemiology.

The evidence

Lifespan

Solar energy at birth and human lifespan – George E Davis Jr, Walter Lowell
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30015061/

Methods: The data used 78 million death records from the National Centre for Health Statistics (NCHS) from 1979 to 2013 with accidents, suicides, and war casualties deleted resulted in ~63 million records

Results: Males of all races born with a UVR intensity as estimated by sunspot number (SSN) ≤ 90 had an average lifespan of 74.4 years, for females of all races, 78.1 years; males born with >90 had an average lifespan of 66.3 years, for females of all races, 70.2 years, resulting in a lifespan decrease of 8.1 years for males and 8.5 years for females (!)

For African-American males born ≤ 90 SSN, 70.8 years and for >90 SSN, 62.5 years, an 8.3-year decrease; similarly, for African-American females ≤ 90 SSN, 75.0, for >90 SSN, 65.4 years, a 9.6-year decrease.

We also found that there were twice as many persons with MS born in >80-90 SSN as in the general population. – Davis, Lowell

Month of Birth and Mortality in Sweden: A Nation-Wide Population-Based Cohort Study – Ueda et al

Over 6,000,000 records examined.

“Month of birth was a significant predictor of mortality in the age-spans >30, >50 to 80, and >80 years. In models adjusted for gender and education for ages >30 and >50 to 80 years, the lowest mortality was seen for people born in November and the highest mortality in those born in the spring/summer, peaking in May for mortality >30 years” -Ueda et al

Cancer

Seasonal variation in the month of birth in patients with skin cancer – La Rosa et al
https://www.nature.com/articles/bjc2014522

“Month of birth influences the risk of developing several diseases. We investigated the influence of date of birth on melanoma skin cancer (MSC) and non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) incidence.” – La Rosa et al

“People born in February to April showed significantly elevated risks of NMSC compared with those born in summertime.”

“Neonatal UV exposure may explain this finding.”

Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression

Challenging the Hypothesized Link to Season of Birth in Patients with Schizophrenia – Tammi Lee Demier

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3196325/

“The cause of schizophrenia is unknown; however, one hypothesis is that seasonality of birth contributes to its development, with an excess of winter-spring births observed in those with schizophrenia. There are over 200 studies exploring this issue at the writing of this article with most of the studies revealing a decrease in late summer births and an increase number of winter-spring births of those individuals with the disease.”

“Though season of birth has been considered as a potential link to schizophrenia, seasonality has also been demonstrated in other mental health disorders, such as bipolar disorder and major depression. Torrey et al found that that there was a significant coherence found between schizophrenia, paranoid type, and bipolar disorder, both of which were found to have an excess of winter births, whereas depression had an excess of spring births.”

The role of latitude and infections in the month-of-birth effect linked to schizophrenia
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9287767

This largest study to date identified an excess of schizophrenia births in December, January and February.
There was no association between latitude and the magnitude of this month-of-birth effect in schizophrenia.
There was a negative correlation between monthly severe enterovirus cases and schizophrenia births.
These findings carry implications for disease prevention strategies in schizophrenia.

Exacerbation by lunar cycles

Lunar cycle and psychiatric hospital admissions for schizophrenia: new findings from Henan province, China – RanRan Wang et al
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32252567/

Conclusions: Psychiatric admissions for schizophrenia show lunar periodicities. People with schizophrenia tend to be stable in the new moon, but their condition is easily aggravated during the first quarter and full moon. Patients with paranoid schizophrenia are more susceptible to deterioration at the full moon, so merit more attention and care from communities, families, and hospitals. – Wang et al

Multiple sclerosis

The month of birth effect in multiple sclerosis: systematic review, meta-analysis and effect of latitude – Dobson et al
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23152637/

“A significant relationship between latitude and observed:expected ratio was demonstrated in December, and borderline significant relationships in May and August.“

“Month of birth has a significant effect on subsequent MS risk. This is likely to be due to ultraviolet light exposure and maternal vitamin D levels, as demonstrated by the relationship between risk and latitude.” – Dobson et al

Related pages:

References:

Andrew Hall: Extreme Earthly Weather in an Electric Universe | Space News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PvoIi_4JiU

Michael Clarage: Solar Filaments and You! | Thunderbolts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JA38XKOVpA

UD researcher involved in discovery of magnetic explosion in turbulent space
https://www.delawarepublic.org/science-health-tech/2018-05-20/ud-researcher-involved-in-discovery-of-magnetic-explosion-in-turbulent-space

Seasonality and autoimmune diseases: the contribution of the four seasons to the mosaic of autoimmunity – A. Watad et al.

Understanding the connection between platelet-activating factor, a UV-induced lipid mediator of inflammation, immune suppression and skin – E. Damiani et al.

The effect of solar cycles on human lifespan in the 50 United States: variation in light affects the human genome – W.E. Lowell et al.

Early-life origin of adult disease: evidence from natural experiments – A. Vaiserman

The sun determines human longevity: teratogenic effects of chaotic solar radiation – G.E. Davis et al.

Mutations induced by ultraviolet light – G.P. Pfeifer et al.

Solar cycles and their relationship to human disease and adaptability – G.E. Davis et al.

Indirect evidence that ultraviolet-B radiation mitigates multiple sclerosis in the United States – G.E. Davis et al.

Mutation load and human longevity – L.A. Gavrilov et al.

Problems with physics

The science of physics has a good quantitative agreement with a wide range of experimental data, but as noted by David Bohm, falls short of an even half-comprehensible description of the nature of reality.

This page lists but a few quirks, anomalies and shortfalls of contemporary physics, some of which have bothered me for years and others that have only recently become apparent. All of these are clarified by the Theory of Objectivity from Konstantin Meyl in his book: “Scalar waves: a first Tesla physics textbook”.

The kinetic theory of gases
Quantum wave function nonsense
Covalent bonding
Too many ‘stuffs’ and fundamental constants
What is ‘heat’?
What is ‘time’?
Proton radius puzzle
Avogadro’s number
Electric charge is a redundant concept
‘Mass’ and ‘energy’ are not fundamental to physics

The kinetic theory of gases

Mainstream science posits that the molecules in a gas are whizzing around all over the place and bouncing off each other and that this is responsible for the phenomena of Heat and Pressure. The vibration of specks of dust in sunlight (Brownian motion) is said to be caused by this.

Molecules are conceived as having finite size, hard boundaries and bounciness. They move around in an otherwise empty vacuum and can somehow transmute energy from infra-red radiation to kinetic energy and back again. None of this is true as usual but physicists prefer to not think about it too much.

Heat (temperature) and pressure are described as almost synonymous with speed of motion of molecules and equations from Einstein give some credence to this.

Ok, but how do molecules fly around in a liquid such as water and what about solids? Steel or quartz for example will certainly get hot but the molecules are not flying around but maintain a regular lattice structure. How is temperature then independent of pressure?

If I hold a cup of hot coffee, the molecules bounce around the liquid, make the cup molecules vibrate and then somehow convert the vibrations to infra red radiation so that the heat can be felt at a distance. The heat makes the molecules in my hand whizz around but not so much that it disrupts cellular activity.

I think this is nonsense and Konstantin Meyl and Gerald Pollack at least are in agreement with this.

This is important, as descriptions of DNA construction for example rely upon the random movement of molecules to drive the replication process and if none of this is true then they need to rethink. Similar concerns apply to the functioning of ion channels; diagrams and animations show molecules randomly hurling themselves at the channels and being selected on a statistical basis to achieve the required balance. The equations seem to work but that does not mean that the mechanism is correct.

Further reading: “The Fourth Phase of Water” – Gerald Pollack

What is heat? (Meyl)

Atoms are complicated vortex structures within electromagnetic fields and the ‘vortex radius’ is what is taken to be the size of the atom.

The vortex structure theoretically extends to infinity and so the ‘space’ between atoms is not empty but consists of an extended field structure which serves to keep atoms at a distance from each other and is the basis of ‘pressure’.

A photon of light or infra-red is a sort of linear vortex that can roll up into a spherical vortex at any time or become absorbed into an existing atomic vortex. In this way, gases, liquids and solids can absorb arbitrary amounts of energy, there is no ‘quantum’ of energy needed.

As vortices increase their energy they can expand meaning the liquid or solid may also expand owing to increased repulsive forces. This stored energy is latent heat. Heat transfer is by vortex gains and losses as field energy moves from one vortex to the next.

Vortices can ‘oscillate’, they can expand and contract rhythmically. Whole domains of the substance can vibrate in synchrony and form large areas of coherent oscillations. In gases and liquids this can give rise to Brownian motion.

This is not the same as the kinetic theory if gases where long distance movement of molecules is assumed. Vortex may account for Brownian motors if they exist but not suitable as an explanation for ion channel function or the DNA replication cartoons.

Measured temperature is ‘rate’ of heat loss and is via vortex losses. Stirring water reputedly makes it cooler which means that although there is greater energy stored, it is losing energy more slowly as the vortices somehow retain the energy on a semi-permanent basis. Again, energy is stored as a field structure and not as the kinetic energy described by mainstream physics.

Shining light into a liquid may have a similar effect if a single wavelength causes coherent oscillations on a macro scale and retains the extra energy instead of dissipating it.

High energy vortices can lose energy in the form of quanta which can unroll into photons and be measured as infra-red radiation. The point here is that matter, energy, light, vortices are all the same substance; there is no need to wonder how kinetic energy can be converted to a photon for example.

Meyl uses the term ‘heat’ to describe the amplitude of vortex oscillation and the term ‘temperature’ to refer to the frequency of oscillation. The two are quite different.

A spinning vortex can absorb a photon of a particular frequency but emit one of a different frequency (and energy), thereby acting as a transducer. This is used in biological systems according to quantum physicists.

Further reading: “Scalar waves: a first Tesla physics textbook” – Konstantin Meyl

Covalent bonding

Shown is the covalent bonding between Carbon and Hydrogen atoms to form a larger molecule. Each atom ‘shares’ an electron with the other and those electrons share a common orbit pair.

A electron is claimed to be a small particle that orbits a nucleus according to an attractive force pulling it inwards balanced by centrifugal force pushing it outwards, much like planets and gravity.

This may seem to be plausible until you try to imagine the electrons ‘orbiting’. How do they move? What keeps them to their orbits? How can an electron be in two orbits at the same time? The elephant in the room: In what way does a shared orbit constitute a ‘bond’? – How is a mutually attractive force created in this way?

A supposed explanation arises from quantum mechanics whereby an electron has no defined position, does not move around an orbit and isn’t really a particle.

An electron ‘cloud’ exists and part of it is shared with another atom but it isn’t ‘real’ and is only a distribution of probabilities until measured. But of this is so then again: How is an attractive force generated from a theoretical probability field?

The model proposed by Konstantin Meyl is much simpler, requires no shared orbits, weak atomic forces or quantum probability fields, Atoms are described by electromagnetic vortices having enclosing electron shells of spinning electric fields. The spinning field creates a magnetic dipole and atoms will stick together attracted by their dipole fields. The negatively charged electron fields will repel each other to maintain a distance between the atoms and give them a characteristic size and ‘shape’. Atomic structure: Meyl The atom

No forces are needed apart from electromagnetism and Meyl makes quantitative predictions about the size of atoms which agree with experimental evidence.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics

The laws of thermodynamics are based upon the notion that atoms are a bit like billiard balls, bouncing around all over the place at random and that, left to themselves, they will eventually spread out all over the universe in a uniform ‘heat death’ with no real energy left and no possibility of organising themselves into a coherent structure.

They are, at best, hypotheses and not laws by any stretch of the imagination. They are in any case refuted by the field equations of Konstantin Meyl and by observations of actual reality.

“One of the simplest (formulations of the second law) is the Clausius statement, that heat does not spontaneously pass from a colder to a hotter body.” – Wikipedia

Meyl proposes a simple experiment whereby two metal spheres are placed near to each other, one being warm and one being hot. A parabolic mirror behind the warm sphere will focus the radiated heat towards the hotter sphere which immediately refutes the postulate. Random heat fluctuations have become directed and structured by a simple geometric arrangement of matter.

Complaints will be made that this arrangement is somehow ‘cheating’ but it seems allowed by the definitions from Wikipedia:

“Heat can never pass from a colder to a warmer body without some other change, connected therewith, occurring at the same time.” – Clausius

“It is impossible for a self-acting machine, unaided by any external agency, to convey heat from one body to another at a higher temperature.” – Kelvin

Entropy

The second law is closely related to the concept of entropy as a measure of disorder which is said to increase with time, with the Universe becoming increasingly disordered and chaotic as time proceeds. If this were to be true then it would mean that if we look back in time, the Universe would appear more and more orderly, with everything perfectly arranged somehow just after the big bang and slowly deteriorating ever since.

This is contradicted by mainstream theory that sees galaxies and stars constructed out of almost nothing and life emerging from ‘soup’. Living things become more complex whilst the orbits of the planets synchronise via the phenomenon of resonance.

The Laws of Thermodynamics seem reasonable according to the billiard ball model so the observations we make should lead us to question that model. The Newtonian view of the Universe is essentially one of a flat featureless space inhabited by rather dull objects whose main interaction is via the radial forces of gravity. It is hard to imagine matter organising itself under these circumstances.

So the model is wrong and the theories of Meyl should be considered. Space is filled with a living and energetic field which has ‘movement’ built into it. Basic matter consists of forces that are ‘moving’, ‘spinning’ and are long range attractive but short range repulsive. Magnetic type forces and electrical forces act at right angles to each other and the natural and inevitable result is the formation of complex vortex structures with built in ‘energy’.

With this being the fundamental fabric of Reality there is little chance of anything fizzling out to any sort of heat death, the main characteristics are going to be continual cycles of movement, change, creation, organisation and reorganisation.

All movement is controlled by the Laws of Physics and there is no ‘randomness’ here, no true ‘disorder’.

Proton radius puzzle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_radius_puzzle

Scientists tried measuring the radius of the proton but get a different answer depending upon which element or isotope they use as the source of the protons. One obvious inference is that the proton is a different size within each element.

Konstantin Meyl has a model of an atom which is a bit like a bunch of nested soap bubbles (electron shells). The outer bubble is always the same size (fixed by the speed of light) and everything else squashes up to fit within the nesting arrangement. So in particular, a proton will shrink according to the number of electron shells or the type of particle eg muon) that sits in there adjacent to it.

Avogadro’s law

Avogadro’s law states that “equal volumes of all gases, at the same temperature and pressure, have the same number of molecules.”

Another way of writing this is “The same number of molecules of each gas has the same volume”. Or, setting the number of molecules (atoms) to one: “All atoms are the same size”.

So if the size of an atom is the radius of the outer electron shell, then everything else must be squashed up inside. This is consistent with the atomic model of Konstantin Meyl: Atomic structure: Meyl

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avogadro%27s_law

Electrical ‘charge’ is superfluous

The idea of electrical charge is surplus to requirements as far as the field physics of Konstantin Meyl is concerned. It is only a theoretical ‘convenience’ in classical physics and even there is an unnecessary distraction as to what is actually happening.

Objects possessing an electrical charge are said to attract or repel other charged objects by virtue of a static electrical field emanating from that charge which in turn affects the charge on the other objects. The charges are attracted and somehow drag their host ‘matter’ along with them. See: Static electricity

We know that charge exists by the field it creates and we can measure the strength of that field by the effect it has on other charges. So we don’t measure the charge directly, only via the field it has ‘created’. We don’t ever see the charge or the creation of the field.

The effect of one charged particle on another is only ever observed when the particles are a distance apart so that the two charges never interact with each other directly and always use a field to somehow transmit the effect over a distance.

A particle, charged or otherwise is never really acting in accordance with another distant object but only as a consequence of local field conditions. Moreover, the substance of the ‘object’ itself does not seem to be of any relevance to any of these interactions with ‘matter’ itself seeming to exist merely as a vehicle for ‘charge,’ with ‘charge’ acting as a sort of intermediary to justify the presence of a field.

This is all starting to sound very circular and we should be starting to think that if charge and matter don’t really do anything within our theoretical framework then they shouldn’t really be there at all and all that is required is some rules for an electromagnetic field theory.

The whole thing is sounding like ‘sticky-plaster’ science whereby, one by one, concepts have been added to an existing framework as and when required, or as is fashionable.

How did this come about?

‘Charge’, as a ‘property’ of the familiar ‘matter’ was sufficiently ‘matter-like’ for the existing materialists to stomach and certainly something is needed to explain the observed effects. This new ‘property’ of matter (charge) seems to have effects at remote distances so it must somehow be responsible for creating a force-field.

Better to have ditched the idea of ‘matter’ and gone straight for a field theory.

Electrical torsion fields stabilise into spherical vortices which have the impression of solidity via their stability and propensity to bounce off each other owing to the repulsive forces generated by a field-negative vortex radius.

Mass

The concept of ‘mass’ is similarly redundant and attempts to define it just result in a confused mess. Newtonian physics has three types of mass which are all the same somehow, whilst relativity tries to define mass as the degree to which space is bent by an object but also at the same time as the degree to which an object will accelerate when placed in space that was bent by the some other object.

Mass is not coincident with matter but a property of it somehow in Newtonian physics and in relativity it is some complex interaction between objects and ‘space’ which is itself somewhat undefined.

Mass cannot be measured directly but can only be calculated from it’s imagined gravitational effect on other masses or from the gravitational effects exerted upon it by those other masses.

Mass is therefore a theoretical construct derived from observations and measurements made concerning other quantities. The concept of a ‘field’ is necessary to explain the behaviour of objects in space but not mass or charge.

The idea that there is something that is radiating gravity out into space is fanciful nonsense and at odds with observations. See: The nature of gravity Newton’s gravity

Energy

The idea of energy is even more confused. There are units to quantify it but, as with charge and mass, there is no way of measuring it directly and it must be calculated from other quantities.

The principle of conservation of energy lies at the heart of physics for many: “The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant; it is said to be conserved over time” – Wikipedia

But according to other physicists there is no such thing as ‘absolute’ energy and nor is it conserved: [video].

To see this in a simple way, imagine you are out in space and I fly past in a spaceship. I am travelling fast relative to you and so have great kinetic energy. Now imagine you turn on your rocket engines and catch up with me We are now stationary relative to each other, stationary relative to local ‘space’ and therefore have no kinetic energy – so where did the energy go to?

Something which has no absolute value surely cannot be ‘conserved’ in any sensible way.

Potential energy

Energy is said to be of different ‘types’: kinetic, potential, gravitational, heat, chemical electrical etc. It is said to transmute from one sort to another and be conserved along the way, but what is it that is ‘conserved’ exactly? If energy is always of one specific ‘type’ or another then what exactly is ‘energy’ itself? Why is the same word used for lots of different things?

If I hold an apple 10 feet above the ground it will have a certain quantity of potential energy and if I move it to 100 feet above the ground it will have considerably more potential energy. However, if I now move it all the way to the neutral point between the Earth and the moon it suddenly has no potential energy at all – so again, where did the energy go?

The concept of energy is a useful tool under specific circumstances but it is not absolute, not conserved, not directly measurable. It is not ‘a thing’ and therefore cannot be considered fundamental in any sense.

Photon absorption

Heat transfer is said to happen via various mechanisms including the following: A photon of light will fly close to an atom and the energy will be absorbed by an orbiting electron. The electron will make a discrete jump from one orbital to another with the difference in energy levels matching the energy of the original photon. The photon disappears from the universe.

Questions:

How close does the photon need to go and why?
Where does the photon go to after being absorbed?
How is one form of energy converted to another? What is the mechanism?
What if the photon has too much energy for the orbit? Where does this extra energy go to?
What if the energy of a photon does not precisely match any electron orbital? Does it simply pass through the material?
What does it mean to say a photon has ‘energy’?
What laws of physics control this procedure?

Electromagnetic radiation such as light is described by a wave equation and that is all. There is nothing in the equation to say how this wave turns into the ‘velocity’ of a nearby electron or how the wave itself might disappear. Similarly the orbital of an electron is described in terms of atomic forces (or now in terms of a probability cloud) and there is nothing in these laws that say how a probability cloud can be enhanced by, or absorb, a portion of electromagnetic field.

If I drop an apple to the ground, it does not deplete, or cause to vanish, the gravitational field that drew it there; so why should an electron cause a magnetic field to vanish? Where are the laws of physics that describe this?

This phenomenon and others are always described in terms of energy transfer instead of the basic equations of electromagnetism or gravity.

What is Energy?

We therefore have a physics that consists of a set of seemingly incompatible equations for electromagnetism, gravity, atomic forces etc. each providing a ‘law’ for a different physical ‘stuff’ and these are all somehow glued together by the concept of ‘energy’ and the conservation of energy. A set of fundamental constants allows for the theoretical conversion of different measurement units but there seems to be no description of how different energies are converted to each other or even what ‘energy’ consists of.

How does a magnet lift a weight off the Earth? Do we use the laws of gravity or the laws of magnetism? Both laws are clearly in play but are separate theories with neither theory compatible with the other. The two are somehow welded together via some fundamental constant, but where is the theory describing how this fundamental constant acquired the value that it did?

Think again of letting an apple fall to the ground. The increase in speed seems reasonable as we have equations relating the force of gravity to the acceleration and mass of the apple – but try to think of this in terms of energy conservation and the math gets easier but the understanding gets harder! The apple falls by having its potential energy converted to kinetic energy! How? What process performs this magical alchemy? Are the two energies the same thing or not? Why does it need ‘converting’?

The idea of energy seems to work for practical purposes but as an aid to actually understanding what is going on it is really just a sleight of hand technique, a universal wallpaper to cover the cracks in the plaster veneer that is theoretical physics.

Quantum wave function

At the heart of quantum physics is the Schrödinger wave equation. This describes ‘matter’ as a continuous wave function in a physical ‘field’ but physicist were still stuck on the idea of matter as consisting of particles and so they interpreted a perfectly good theoretical construct accordingly.

A wave is just a wave but it seems now universally accepted that the wave function represents a probability function who’s value at any point is the probability of finding a particle at that particular position in space. We therefore have both particles and field quantities described by the same construct. Fair enough, maybe, as long as it is recognised that this is just a theoretical construct.

However, it seems to be commonly accepted now by many people that the wave function is a ‘real’ thing and that the particle ‘exists’ as both a wave and particle at the same time, that it exists in several places at once and that it is brought into physical being by a physical ‘collapse’ of such a function. We even have people saying that the act of collapsing is instrumental in the creation of consciousness.

And all this this despite the obvious facts that:

Nobody has directly measured such a function and nor can they can ever do so
The mechanism of collapse is not described
Such a collapse would violate the principle of causality (spooky action at a distance)
It is not related what is meant by something being two different things at once, existing in two different places at the same time or being alive and dead at the same time. This is just linguistic trickery.
There is no description of how a probability function turns into ‘matter’

A probability function is a mathematical construct and was never posited to correspond to anything real, it was just a means of describing the aggregated output of multiple events. The quantum physicists have put the idea of randomness at the heart of physics. They have, without justification, created the notion of a random process at the heart of reality, thereby destroying any hope of a deterministic description of the universe.

‘Randomness’ in mathematics is a description of an outcome, not the means of generating that outcome. However this is what it seems we are asked to believe, that a completely fictitious process with no defined mechanism and unfettered by any sensible or realistic laws, is in fact at the root cause of everything that happens in the Universe.

This is surely a complete abrogation of all intellectual acuity.

See: Random events.

What is time?

We have no direct way of measuring time and the best we can do is to count the number of oscillations of an atomic clock and declare the result to be representative of elapsed time. A big problem with this is the following chart taken from Meyl’s book: “Scalar Waves..”, which shows that two atomic clocks in the same room but oriented differently will keep very good time with each other – except during an eclipse!

We do not therefore have a direct way of measuring time independently from all the other variables of physics such as length, energy frequency etc. All we have of Reality is a collection of observations of instrument readings and from this we induce various quantities according to a theoretical model.

‘Time’ is no different and the exact nature this ‘entity’ will depend upon the model used to interpret the measurements.

Try to imagine that time were to ‘speed up’ and all the workings of the universe, including our perceptions were to speed up accordingly. In this case we simply would not notice what had happened and would carry on regardless. What then is the purpose of ‘time’?

Too many ‘stuffs’

The basic problem here is that there are far too many fundamental ‘stuffs’ in physics, too many basic ‘entities’ such as matter, charge, energy etc., too many different ‘forces’ (gravity, electric, magnetic..) and no single unified theory. Each of these entities needs some constants to enable integration into the system but these constants have also been declared ‘fundamental’ as they must, since they connect together ‘fundamental’ quantities.

The declaration of everything as fundamental and irreducible obviates the necessity for further research and so physics as it is currently formulated can never progress in this regard.

Thinking that mere ‘artefacts’ (theoretical constructs) of the system really represent ‘real’ entities further confuses the issue and leads to speculations that are beyond absurd.

The Theory of Objectivity from Konstantin Meyl assumes only one type of ‘stuff’ and that is a Field quantity of electromagnetic nature; everything else is an emergent property of that field and no fundamental constants are needed.

Fundamental particles are calculated as field vortices and their sizes and weights can be calculated directly with no additional information. See: Atomic structure: Meyl

Gravity is an emergent property of the field and so are mass and charge; there is no need for these extra concepts and no need for hand-waving arguments to show how the one might affect the other.

The case of the photon lifting an electron to a higher orbit is a good example. A photon is a ripple in the field structure but so is an electron or a whole atom a more complex vortex structure in the same medium. Both obey the same laws of physics.

Imagine a ripple in a river encountering a whirlpool and becoming absorbed by it. The whole activity happens according to the laws of fluid dynamics and there is no need to suppose an intermediary of ‘energy’ conservation to explain the phenomenon. There is no transmutation between electricity, energy and matter as everything is made of the same ‘stuff’; all we witness is water behaving according to the fundamental laws of water.

In this case, nobody imagines that the ripple is made of a different fundamental substance to the whirlpool and nobody seeks to add a new law to the lexicon of physics. It is acknowledged that the laws of fluids should either suffice or be discarded.

A larger, more vigorous whirlpool will have a greater effect, a greater persistence and this can be quantified (simplified) as ‘energy’ but that doesn’t mean that there is a separate substance called ‘energy’ or that it is conserved. A vortex has a certain identity’ or character of its own and will demonstrate distinctive and repeatable behaviour which can no doubt be studied in its own right, but it is still made of water and must ultimately obey the same laws as the rest of the river.

Certain behaviours will appear random and difficult to predict but that doesn’t mean that there exists a fundamental uncertainty concerning rivers and there is absolutely no need to invent an infinite number of alternative rivers in order to ‘explain away’ any constants that might arise as simple artefacts of the theory.

Related pages

References:

The website of Konstantin Meyl – http://meyl.eu

Scalar waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.amazon.com/Scalar-Waves-Konstantin-Meyl/dp/3980254240

Vaccine shedding

The essay “What We’ve Learned from Over a Thousand Vaccine Shedding Reports” by ‘A Midwestern Doctor’ asserts that the phenomenon of ‘vaccine shedding’ is real and asks what the mechanism could be. This page proposes a possible mechanism involving information transfer via electromagnetic signalling.

From the article:

Shedding is very real.
We have seen numerous patient cases which can only be explained by mRNA shedding.
Most of the people who are highly sensitive to shedding have already figured it out, so if you do not already believe it is an issue for you, you probably don’t need to worry about it.
There is still no agreed upon mechanism to explain why it happens.
In theory, shedding with the mRNA vaccines should be “impossible.”

Largely anecdotal evidence

Accepting evidence of this type is fraught with risk as it is likely interpreted and distorted by the subject and can be considered neither objective nor quantitative. However, in this case, the anecdotes demonstrate distinctive patterns which help suggest a specific mechanism: that of of information transfer via an electromagnetic bio-field. The subjects do not know about this mechanism and so cannot be biasing heir reports in favour of it.

Patients may demonstrate symptoms only in the presence of another particular (vaccinated) person and symptoms typically vanish when they separate
The vaccinated person may test high for certain bio-markers (antibodies)
Treatment of the shedder significantly helps the unvaccinated partner
Menstrual abnormalities are high on the list of symptoms
‘Secondary’ shedding is recorded
People vary highly in their sensitivity
A distinct smell is reported from vaccinated individuals
Young and apparently healthy people are stronger shedders than the old and frail

Routes of exposure

General proximity to the vaccinated person
Through skin to skin contact.
Transfer of secretions

The bystander effect

The radiation-induced bystander effect is the phenomenon in which unirradiated cells exhibit irradiated effects as a result of signals received from nearby irradiated cells. Wikipedia. The effect has been seen on not only cells but entire organisms.

Rainbow trout were exposed to low doses of ionising radiation and then placed in a tank with other healthy fish for two hours after which they were killed and dissected. The organs showed damage typical of exposure to ionising radiation even though no such exposure had taken place. A chemical messenger in the water is suggested as the mechanism in the paper but some sort of electromagnetic influence was not ruled out. – Mothersill et al.

This seems to be an almost exact parallel of the shedding phenomenon.

The bio-field hypothesis

Organisms are regulated by a system of electromagnetic scalar waves which organise together to form a de facto bio-field. The field is scarcely measurable by scientific instruments but connections via resonant scalar waves can form between individuals and can have a meaningful biological effect upon the recipient.

Disruption of this field by an external impulse or chemical insult will lead to dis-regulation and a variety of disease states.

External impulses may include:

Seasonal disturbances of the ionosphere causing influenza: Influenza and weather
Similar phenomenon resulting in, for example, measles: Measles
Scalar waves produced as an artefact of radio waves: 5G and Covid
Resonant connection with other life forms: Distant cellular interaction
Other cosmic factors: Neutrinos, eclipses and plagues
Healing energy from e.g. Reiki practitioners

All these disturbances lead to similar biological mechanisms (e.g. calcium dis-regulation) that in turn manifest as a typical grouping of symptoms and characteristic epidemiology which have been attributed to the spread of ‘viruses’.

The ability of shedding to reproduce flu-like symptoms is proof enough that a virus is not necessary.

The mechanism

The body is regulated by a system of electromagnetic scalar waves that is driven by the brain (What is the brain?) and propagates along the myelin sheath of nerves (Scalar waves and nerves) and thence into the cells and along the microtubules.

Scalar waves were described by Tesla and are a theoretical construct of physicist Konstantin Meyl who has asserted that: “(Biological) information is the structure of a scalar wave”. Resonant connections between transmitter and receiver have been demonstrated in a laboratory and Meyl has proposed that connections between humans is an explanation for transmission of biological information.

Connection between individuals is initially via a scatter approach but once a suitable recipient has been found, the connection becomes one-to-one and may persist over long time periods and spatial separations.

Does this hypothesis fit the pattern of observations?

General proximity: Initial connection is via a scatter approach which diminishes with the square of the distance between transmitter and receiver so we would expect proximity to a vaccinated individual to be almost a necessity.

Skin contact: James Oschman, in his book ‘Energy medicine’ suggests a similar mechanism for Healing Energy and claims increased effectiveness if actual physical contact is made.

Individual sensitivity: Meyl has propose that some individuals may be better transmitters (strong bio-field) whilst others will be better at receiving. This pattern is thought to exist in ESP ‘adepts’ and Meyl suggests that the mechanism could theoretically be used for telepathy and other ‘paranormal’ activities.

EMF hypersensitivity: Some individuals are said to be hypersensitive to EMF from mobile phones etc. These produce scalar waves as an artefact so the mechanism is identical and the existence of ‘sensitives’ in both areas lends a little more support to both phenomena. Symptoms include nausea, brain fog, fatigue, rash, temperature etc.

Transfer of secretions: A small amount of biological material can play host to a stable and semi-permanent scalar wave complex and it is this that is causing the trouble; there is no need for actual absorption of any physical substance. This is reminiscent of the phenomenon of Telegony whereby phenotypical information can be inherited without the need for the transfer of DNA.

Shedding should be impossible: This is because the possibility of an invisible and almost unmeasurable bio-field has not been considered, with all disease effects being blamed on viruses, bio-chemistry and gene expression, i.e. ‘material’ and ‘mechanistic’ descriptions.

Secondary shedding: The original disturbance whether it be a weather condition or a vaccine causes a reaction of the regulatory system and leading to a change in the expressible bio-field and it is this information emanating from this new ‘state’ that is transmitted by means of airborne scalar waves.

In the case of the irradiated fish (above), they do not emanate the original ionising radiation but instead broadcast the new disease state that has been induced by the original radiation. This information is received by other fish and creates a ‘mirror’ disease state in the recipients that in turn can be passed on as secondary shedding.

Young people are vigorous shedders: They have a stronger, more vigorous bio-field? Bio-field strength and integrity wane as we get older. Michael Levin has stated that the ageing process is essentially a loss of bio-field information.

Bio-markers and antibodies: Antibody production is not by the unmodulated laws of chemistry but is mediated by some sort of regulatory mechanism and the same holds for all bio markers. Measurements of such are therefore a reflection of the regulatory state and it is the means of production of this state rather than the original cause that is transmitted from person to person.

A ‘distinct smell’: Conventional wisdom is that smells are the transfer and detection of the chemical structure of a molecule. Konstantin Meyl begs to differ (Scalar waves and nerves) and has a good argument. A smell is simply a scalar wave that can be detected by the nose somehow.

Signals along the olfactory nerve are scalar waves anyhow and to store the information in the brain which is already a large scalar wave complex requires little processing. Regulation, disease, smell, cognition and memories are now all the same thing: scalar-wave bio-information.

Dogs can smell diseases such as cancer and Parkinson’s so they are now smelling the disease regulation directly. They are detecting some electromagnetic representation of the disease state itself.

Is the smell alone capable of producing the symptoms?

When sufferers report a metallic taste, are they in fact monitoring their own regulatory state?

Menstruation

Interesting that disruptions of the menstrual cycle feature heavily in the reports. During the outbreak of 2019/2020 this was a very prominent feature of conversation coming from unvaccinated women, some of whom had succumbed to disease and others who had not.

Women temporarily synchronize their menstrual cycles with the luminance and gravimetric cycles of the Moon [paper]

I don’t think anyone believes that women are synchronising directly with the luminance of the moon (or even gravity for that matter) so the effect is produced by something else that correlates with both these cycles of the moon.

Space in the solar system is not empty but filled with electromagnetic filaments stretching between the sun and the planets. The orbiting moon disrupts these filaments and the knock-on effects are used to synchronise biological processes on Earth. Some effects are beneficial and others cause trouble. See: Neutrinos, eclipses and plagues, Influenza and field vortices, Influenza and weather, Measles, The nature of gravity

Cosmic influences on humans, animals and plants – JT Burns This book is an annotated list of studies on the correlations between planetary movements and biological events on Earth. Several hundred papers and books are summarised.

Cosmic events include solar flares, lunar tides, eclipses, strength of Earth’s magnetic field, planetary orbits, planetary alignments and oppositions.

Biological events range from measured chemical reactions to behaviours of individuals including epidemics, admissions to mental hospitals, car accidents, metabolite levels, birth defects, the shape of leaf buds, rate of water uptake in seedlings, blood clotting parameters, blot tests etc.

The brain, nervous system and embryo seem to particularly sensitive to such influences with personalities seemingly affected by the month of conception (more likely than birth date surely?).

A lot of the correlations seem crazy (the thyroid activity of cats is related to the orbit of Mercury for example) and some have been ‘debunked’.

Many researchers tried experiments in Faraday cages or in deep underground caverns. Often some reduction of effect was observed but rarely was it eliminated. Both electric eddy currents and magnetic potential currents seem implicated then with a Faraday cage providing some protection from the former but not the latter.

Summary

The same mechanism (scalar waves) is used for:

Bio-regulation
Nerve conduction
Disease induction
Distant cellular interaction
Cognition and memory
The sense of smell
Synchronisation of biological cycles
Inheritance
Shedding by proximity
Shedding by contact
Shedding by secretion

No complicated biochemistry needed at this stage. Biochemical reactions are downstream of bio-field activity.

Why is this not already known?

Fixation on physically observable and measurable phenomena
Attachment to existing knowledge and imagining it to be ‘complete’
Fear of accusations of vitalism
Lack of understanding of electromagnetic field phenomena
The required physics (scalar waves) is relatively new and still not known to most physicists let alone those in the area of biology

References:

What We’ve Learned from Over a Thousand Vaccine Shedding Reports
Author: A Midwestern Doctor
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/covid-19-vaccine-shedding-experiences

Communication of Radiation-Induced Stress or Bystander Signals between Fish in Vivo – Carmel Mothersill et al
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es061099y

Women temporarily synchronize their menstrual cycles with the luminance and gravimetric cycles of the Moon
C. Helfrich-Förster, S. Monecke2, I. Spiousas3, T. Hovestadt4, O. Mitesser5, T. A. Wehr
https://www.science.org/doi/epdf/10.1126/sciadv.abe1358

Vitamin D and rickets

Papers showing a correlation between vitamin D ‘deficiency’ and cases of rickets in children are being used to promote supplementation. However there appears to be no evidence that supplementation cures or prevents rickets. The purported correlations are just that: correlations.

Dietary modifications that increase intake of the substance are likely effective because they necessarily decrease the intake of other substances which interfere with calcium regulation.

Vitamin D deficiency among northern Native Peoples: a real or apparent problem? – Peter Frost
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3417586/pdf/IJCH-71-18001.pdf

“a high meat diet seems to reduce the risk of rickets independently of vitamin D intake“

“Modern diets also contain substances that react with calcium or phosphorus to form insoluble salts, thereby depleting the body’s supply of usable calcium and phosphorus. Such substances include phytic acids in commercially processed cereals, sodium bicarbonate in baking soda, and aluminium hydroxide in antacids. Cereal induced rickets has been reported by several authors”

“Thus, among northern peoples, the purported association between rickets and low vitamin D levels may be more apparent than real.”

Louis Kervran was adamant that there is no calcium transport from the gut to the bones and that all bone calcium is manufactured on site via transmutation of other elements such as magnesium or potassium. Calcium is stored in the bones and then transmuted back to magnesium should there be a need to do so.

Almost all studies neglect the possibility of transmutation and so will invariably equate a low level of something with insufficient intake and consequentially recommend supplementation as the solution.

Treatment of rickets and tetany with a single massive dose of vitamin D: Vitamin D shock therapy – H Vollmer
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022347639801676

What is claimed: “Rickets and tetany can be cured by peroral administration of one single dose of 600,000 international units of vitamin D.”

What they actually observed:

Levels of calcium and phosphorus in the blood became normal
X-ray evidence of calcification (of bone) shows within one week
Muscle spasms and irritability ceased within two days

“The most impressive effect is the rapid rise of serum calcium“
“Hyper-normal values of serum phosphorus may occur after vitamin D shock therapy. They usually decline to a normal level in from two to four weeks after the treatment.”

What they didn’t do: Cure rickets
Rickets is a chronic problem of regulation and a (temporary?) deposition of calcium is surely not a cure for this?

Other studies have shown that a large dose of vitamin D3 will cause a sudden and dramatic drop in the concentration of storage D. An excretory pathway has been opened in response to what even the authors of the paper describe as ‘shock therapy‘

Questions to be asked:

Did they measure the levels of storage D after 600,000 units of D3 were administered?
Did they measure the effect on Active D concentrations?
If the answer is ‘no’ then they may not attribute the results to changes in those concentrations.

They were impressed with the rise of concentrations in the blood of Ca and P.

Where did all the calcium come from?
Why is there too much phosphorous and where did it come from?

99% of all calcium in the body is stored in the bones
Similarly almost all of the phosphorous is in the bones.
Apatite is identified by the chemical formula Ca5(PO4)

Irritability and muscle spasms are associated with Magnesium deficiency. Kervran gives good arguments to show that Ca and P are transmuted from Mg in about equal amounts. Modern diets seem to result in low magnesium levels.

A steady supply of of calcium in the blood is needed for various functions in the body. Too much calcium can calcify kidneys and cause heart and brain problems.
The bones act as storage and regulator for calcium.

Interpretation of the study.

A sudden change (decrease?) in storage D results in a sudden deficiency of active D causing calcium production to cease and a compensatory release of Calcium and Phosphorous into the bloodstream from the bones.

Calcium is now supplied from the bones rather than transmutation so there is no need to use up Magnesium. Magnesium levels are now restored and cramps and irritability disappear.

This will deplete the bones in the long term and actually cause rickets instead of preventing or curing. The correct cure here is more Magnesium.

Related pages:

Measles

This page looks at several interesting papers on the epidemiology of measles and influenza and tries to make sense of them. Cases dramatically decreased before the vaccine rollout. Modern measles is not a childhood disease and outbreaks are correlated with weather conditions.

Travelling waves and spatial hierarchies in measles epidemics – Grenfell, Bjornstad
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11615103_Travelling_waves_and_spatial_hierarchies_in_measles_epidemics

This paper from epidemiologist Bryan Grenfell shows some very interesting features in the epidemiology of measles, A ‘wavelet’ model is created that characterises the UK data as a series of wave-packets that originate from the large cities and spread out over the rest of the country,

Further computer modelling shows how various features of the wave model can be explained by human-to-human transmission driven by population dynamics and seasonal forcing.

The wave patterns are quite surprising, are not obviously connected to the seasons and are not consistent with the idea that measles is the immediate result of a poisoning event.

This paper is a good example of why mathematical modelling is sometimes necessary and how it can give insights into the underlying structure of noisy data.

London measles cases 1944 – 2000

The chart shows the “Wavelet time series analysis for the log-transformed weekly London measles time series” – so the data has already been manipulated somehow.

Several interesting and surprising features are immediately apparent.

The chart starts with an apparent seasonal variation which, by 1950, has transformed into a biennial pattern with strong peaks every two years and a ‘mini’ peak in between the main peaks. The peaks are very well defined.

After 1970 the absolute number of cases declines and the biennial pattern degenerates into just ‘noise’.

Varying time period

Somewhat surprisingly for such a sharply defined pattern, the period is not actually tied to the seasons and is not precisely biennial. Instead, mathematical analysis suggests a period of slightly larger than two years that, even so, varies as time progresses; see the blue line below.

The red line shows the onset of vaccination programs and this is assumed to somehow affect the biennial rhythm.

Phase differences between cities

The modified data from three cities, London, Norwich and Lincoln are plotted on the same chart and we immediately see that measles in the three cities peaks in different years and at different times of the year.

In addition to this, the blue peaks (Lincoln), at first out of step with the other cities, are perfectly synchronised by 1990.

Modelling the data as a flexible wave function

Data such as the above are not expressible as a single mathematical equation and so are not amenable to statistical analysis. What is needed is a further abstraction of the data in order to somehow obtain a quantitative analysis of these phenomena.

The illustration below shows (top chart) the data modelled as a set of ‘flexible’ waves and we can now clearly see a striking pattern, that of three wave functions having no initial phase relation gradually and smoothly attaining a perfect synchrony.

Note that in 1951 the black and red have perfect phase-alignment with each other but are completely in opposition to the blue line of Norwich.

The bottom chart shows the calculated phase difference between Cambridge and Norwich and between Cambridge and London. The averages are non-zero and differ from each other but eventually achieve synchrony in 1962 before starting to diverge again.

Spreading from major cities

The illustration shows the phase difference of disease incidence relative to London.

Measles outbreaks that start in London will radiate outwards from the capital city at a rate of about 5km per week, with the rate of travel depending upon local population densities. The pattern is clear for a radius of about 30km around London with ‘randomness’ in rural areas eventually dominating.

Similar ‘spreading’ patterns exist with all the major cities with things being less clear in the North-East where the proximity of several large cities leads to interference patterns in the spreading waves.

A transmission model

Grenfell does not make the claim that these data prove contagion, rather contagion is assumed and the task of the paper is to try to explain the characteristics of the data in terms of transmission parameters.

Measles epidemics are self-limiting and will subside when all ‘susceptibles’ (children) gain immunity
‘Extinction’ events occur in rural areas when the disease dies out for lack of new victims
Disease remains ‘endemic’ in larger cities and replenishes the surroundings with virus on an approximately biennial basis when there are enough new children
What is effectively random transmission between individuals will form stable attractor patterns at the population level and it is these that are manifest in the data
Phase-locking between attractors along with seasonal forcing gives rise to synchrony between cities and an apparent underlying rhythm
The decline of measles after the introduction of vaccine programs is assumed to be because of those vaccination programs

Concerns and questions

Seasonal forcing

The stated importance of seasonal forcing seems at odds with the model which at no time shows a precise biennial pattern, which varies across time and is different for each city.

“Because epidemics do not suffer local extinction, and because all the cities experience the same seasonal forcing, no lags are generated.” – Grenfell

“The task is aided by epidemiological models, which capture both the nonlinear dynamics of childhood epidemics as a function of local population size and the impact of significant environmental forcing. This forcing mainly comprises seasonality in transmission, due to schooling patterns, and longer-term variations in susceptible recruitment, due to birth-rate variations and the onset of vaccination” – Grenfell et al

The saw-tooth shape of an epidemic

The paper concentrates on modelling epidemics as waves and therefore does not address the issue of the characteristic ‘saw-tooth’ shape of the epidemics.

Other authors have commented upon this with respect to influenza. We expect from an epidemic that the initial increase in cases is rapid and follows an exponential curve and that thereafter a rounded peak will be reached and a long decline will ensue. The tail end of the curve is expected to stretch out as the disease finds fewer and fewer people to infect.

What we see instead is a very sharp peak that is followed by a decline that is much faster than the initial rise in cases.

Extinction events

The virus is said to disappear from rural areas in between epidemics but to be replenished from the big cities in time for a new outbreak, meaning the survival of the virus depends upon the specific population densities and behaviours. The question then arises: “How did measles survive before modern population densities, primary schools and contemporary commuter habits?”

Measles is ‘endemic’ in large cities

“In the large town, measles is endemic throughout the interepidemic trough, so that a new epidemic occurs as soon as the effective reproductive ratio of infection exceeds unity; this threshold is determined by the accumulation of susceptible children, modified by seasonally varying transmission rates associated with the school year.

“By contrast, in the small town, infection goes extinct locally after an epidemic; therefore, another epidemic cannot happen until an infective `spark’ is received, generally originating in a larger (endemic) community.” – Grenfell

What does it mean to say that measles is ‘endemic’?

Standard transmission models

The graph below shows the outcome of a basic epidemiological model.

Cases (red) initially show a rapid (exponential) increase in numbers as the infection spreads to more and more susceptible individuals. As the number of susceptible individuals reduces so the increase diminishes but still infections remain high as there are still plenty of ‘spreaders’ around.

As the number of spreaders starts to wane and the number of susceptibles continues to diminish, the curve takes a steeper downturn and infections decline rapidly.

In computer models such as this a long ‘tail’ is produced as, although new infections are declining rapidly, there is a large pool of infected individuals remaining.

This hides what is really happening which is that contact with an affected individual is becoming increasingly and rapidly unlikely. Take a look at the number of susceptibles; it declines rapidly as soon as the epidemic starts and reaches almost zero even whilst cases are still near their peak.

We have, at peak number of infections, only 0.2 infected people per 1000 which means 2 cases per 10,000 – and the disease is still being passed on somehow!

Even so, the model is assuming a perfect mixing of the population and within this model there is always a non zero probability of a sick person making a transmission to a healthy. In practice I think this would not be the case and that instead there would be a very sharp decline in new cases once the proportion of infected individuals reached some threshold, below which transmission simply did not occur.

‘Non-epidemic’ activity

This then is a glaring weakness in the transmission theory, that the number of susceptible individuals decreases to almost zero during an epidemic and yet must somehow remain above zero for another two years to spark off the next epidemic.

A spreading virus is only able to stay alive by actually spreading and once the effective reproduction rate is below one, it is declining rapidly.

To make any sense of this, modellers must somehow keep the virus alive and yet not spreading during interim periods and so will add some other mode of survival to allow for this:

“We then fit a seasonal regression model to the truncated series to estimate the expected baseline number of deaths in the absence of epidemic activity. A nonepidemic threshold was defined by the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval derived from the seasonal regression model. Only influenza activities that remained above the threshold for >2 consecutive weeks were included in the analysis” – Viboud et al

So there is now something called ‘non-epidemic’ activity for influenza which keeps the virus alive somehow even though there is no measurable spread. In the case of measles, lifetime immunity is claimed which further reduces the possibility of spread in between epidemics.

Without this ‘fix’ to the models there would surely be very many extinction events even in population dense areas.

The decline in measles

The chart shows measles deaths from 1900 to 1960. A strong rhythmic pattern with a period of about 3 years is seen, along with a marked decline, almost to the point of extinction, before vaccines were introduced after 1960.

The vaccines therefore cannot be the cause of the decline in deaths.

Note that these data are averaged over a whole nation so we don’t have the geographical refinement of the Grenfell paper but if we take all these results at face value we have a disease showing an approximate three year cycle that, as global incidence declines, diminishes to a two year cycle, followed by a one year cycle and eventual disintegration of structure into mere ‘noise’.

What produces this? Do Bruce Grenfell’s attractor patterns extend to the whole of the United States as well?

Modern measles age distribution

The chart below from Muscat et al suggests that measles can no longer be considered a disease of childhood.

Seasonality

Measles is seasonal in many countries particularly in the spring:

Modelling seasonal measles transmission in China – Bai, Liu

Measles and the weather

The effects of weather conditions on measles incidence in Guangzhou, Southern China – Yang et al

“The morbidity of measles shows a seasonal variation. In temperate climates, measles outbreaks typically occur in the late winter and early spring every year, whereas in the tropics, measles outbreaks have irregular associations with rainy seasons, which suggests that climatic factors partly underlie the seasonality of measles virus infections.” – Yang et al

Compare with the epidemiology of influenza:

“Influenza seasonality indicates that New Delhi would likely benefit from springtime vaccination (May–June), whereas vaccination in the fall (October–November) would be better for Srinagar. We recently illustrated that India and most other tropical countries in Asia exhibit influenza seasonality that coincides with the monsoon season, June–October” – Koul et al

The charts from Yang et. al. show an increase in measles cases correlated with:

Low humidity
High sunshine
Moderate temperatures

Other researchers have found correlations with both season and specific local weather events:

“Specific meteorological conditions increased the risk of measles, including lower relative humidity, temperature, and atmospheric pressure; higher wind velocity, sunshine duration, and diurnal temperature variation” – Jia et al

“The team discovered a strong and consistent annual pattern of measles outbreaks that was associated with rainfall. Specifically, they found that the rainy season was associated with a lower risk of measles case reporting, whereas measles cases were higher during the dry season.” – Blake et al

“The analysis revealed that there is a statistically significant relationship between weather parameters (Temperature and Rainfall) and the occurrence of measles in the study area.” – Alhaji et al

Cosmic events include solar flares, lunar tides, eclipses, strength of Earth’s magnetic field, planetary orbits, planetary alignments and oppositions.

Biological events range from measured chemical reactions to behaviours of individuals include epidemics, admissions to mental hospitals, car accidents, metabolite levels, birth defects, the shape of leaf buds, rate of water uptake in seedlings, blood clotting parameters, blot tests etc.

The brain, nervous system and embryo seem to particularly sensitive to such influences with personalities seemingly affected by the month of conception (more likely than birth date surely?).

A lot of the correlations seem crazy (the thyroid activity of cats is related to the orbit of Mercury for example) and some have been ‘debunked’.

So what are the causes?

Viral transmission?

Unlikely:

Attempts to transmit any disease in a clinical trial invariably fail
Isolation techniques are highly contested
Computer models need ‘tweaking’ to get plausible results
The need to add a seasonal factor to models suggests a seasonal influence
The possibility of extinction events seems too high for virus survival
The characteristics of the epidemiology seem too structured for random transmission

Poisoning?

Again unlikely: How to explain the epidemiology?

Annual crop spraying or vaccination schedules might just explain how toxin administration is coordinated over a whole country but it isn’t strictly seasonal and ‘drifts’ from year to year. The epidemiology is complex and has patterns that are both local and global.

Cosmic influences?

To most people this will seem the most unlikely of all, but what else is left?

The epidemiology needs explaining and here we at least have a chance of correlating disease with ‘something’ although at the moment it isn’t even clear what that ‘something’ is.

I doesn’t seem credible that the planet Saturn can have a direct influence on biological processes but more likely that various electrical events in the cosmos can and do have an influence and that these phenomena may well correlate with planetary alignments and solar activity.

These patterns, with seasonal variation and local coincidences with weather events are similar to those seen in the epidemiology of influenza. See here: Influenza and weather

Hypothesis

Population wide biological events are triggered by electromagnetic activity as opposed to gravity and that filaments of such energy pervade the solar system, emanate largely from the sun, connect the sun, planets and moons and will move, interact and intertwine as the planets orbit the sun.

If this is true then certain events and patterns are explained that are not expected from gravitational influence alone. Filament interaction will be roughly rhythmic but with various deviations.

We could expect:

Roughly seasonal effects but with various ‘harmonics’.
The observed ‘effect’ on Earth may precede the supposed ’cause’ (eg solar flare) because both of these are caused by a third and unsuspected phenomenon.
‘Influences’ of two or more planetary orbits may interact in a complicated way.
Odd phase shifting phenomena may be seen
Correlations may appear consistent for decades and then disappear, either suddenly or gradually.
Random and sudden events seemingly unrelated to planetary motion.
Absent or inverted dose-response relationship (weak stimulus seems to give strong response etc.)
Relationships which seem outstanding to the eye but disappear upon statistical analysis.

The last above is because it is the wrong things that they are trying to correlate and because the ’causes’ themselves may be only quasi-periodic. The Earth’s rotation speed is not quite constant and solar cycles also vary in length in an unpredictable fashion. Many periodic influences from the solar system are in any case filtered through our ionosphere and weather system which have local rhythms of their own.

All these patterns above are described in the book by J.T. Burns and many are seen in the epidemiology of measles and flu. Many cannot be explained by conventional means so the idea of electromagnetic filaments stands as the most likely explanation for now.

It sounds like almost any pattern of disease outbreak may be possible and that the hypothesis is therefore unfalsifiable. This may well be true at the moment but the hope is that a more detailed understanding of the electromagnetic nature of biology and the electromagnetic activity in the cosmos will some day give something concrete to test against.

Related pages:

References:

Travelling waves and spatial hierarchies in measles epidemics – Grenfell, Bjornstad
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11615103_Travelling_waves_and_spatial_hierarchies_in_measles_epidemics

Modelling a modern day pandemic — Developing the SIR model – Benji Tigg
https://medium.com/geekculture/modelling-a-modern-day-pandemic-developing-the-sir-model-8d77599050ce

Influenza Epidemics in the United States, France, and Australia, 1972–1997 – Viboud et. al.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/10/1/02-0705_article

The State of Measles and Rubella in the WHO European region – Muscat et al
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26580789/

The effects of weather conditions on measles incidence in Guangzhou, Southern China – Yang et al
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4896574/

Estimation of the relationship between meteorological factors and measles using spatiotemporal Bayesian model in Shandong Province, China – Jia et al
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-023-16350-y

Measles outbreaks in Niger linked to rainfall and temperature, study finds – Blake et al
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/08/200825110805.htm

Impact of Climatic Variables on the Prevalence of Measles in Wudil Local Government, Kano State, Nigeria – Aljhaji, Nasir
https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1701750.pdf

Differences in Influenza Seasonality by Latitude, Northern India – Parvaiz A. Koul et. al.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/20/10/pdfs/14-0431-combined.pdf

Cosmic influences on humans – JT Burns
https://www.amazon.com/Cosmic-Influences-Humans-Animals-Plants/dp/0810833131

Modelling seasonal measles transmission in China – Bai, Liu
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1007570415000088

Measles again, this time from the WHO – peaking in spring
https://vaxopedia.org/2019/07/08/when-is-measles-season/

Intracellular water

Martin Chaplin (right) gives a clear description of the nature and behaviour of water within biological systems. The difference in density between intra-cellular and extra-cellular water is explained along with the problem of the maintenance of ion gradients across cellular boundaries.

Information Exchange within Intracellular Water – Martin Chaplin [paper]

Various observations demand explanations:

‘Biological’ water is said to be far denser than ‘bulk’ water and this is not explained by the additional mineral content
Water inside a cell forms a thick gel-like substance
Cells maintain an ion imbalance with typically more Na+ outside a cell and more K+ within
The ion balance can be maintained without the presence of a cell membrane and so without the presence of ion channels
Diffusion is often given as an explanation for various cellular processes but diffusion seems to be reduced in cellular environments

A two-state solution

A two-state solution is proposed. Water within living environments can adopt one of two semi-stable dynamic arrangements of molecules. One is more dense than the other, with the denser type accounting for water outside of the cell and the less dense but more mobile arrangement being used inside the cell.

The density state is managed by proteins and mineral content.

The two arrangements are depicted in the diagram below:

State A: High density, weaker bonds but more of them Extra-cellular.
State B: Low density, stronger bonds but fewer. More mobile. Intracellular.

Each state is semi-stable but can be transformed to the other via a small input of energy.

The diagram below shows the two states existing in adjacent ‘potential energy’ wells. The curve shows how the potential energy of the system varies with respect to the distance apart ‘r’ of the molecules.

State ‘b’ (low density) is shown to be the more stable state, needing the least energy for stability but requiring the most energy to lift it out of it’s current ‘well’.

This is a little surprising maybe, that it is the arrangement with the strongest bonds that is the most mobile and that maintains the least density arrangement. The strong bonds do not result in a drawing together of the molecules but in the maintenance of a distance between them via a more rigid geometry.

Least energy solutions

The diagram is a nice illustration of the least energy principle in physics which no doubt is responsible for a great deal of biological organisation, although rarely credited with it. The molecules of water adopt a conformity that is at the bottom of a potential well which leads to a naturally stable state, in the sense that a certain amount of energy is needed to permanently disrupt the organisation. Small perturbations to the system will never result in catastrophic chain reactions but will simply absorb the shock and re-stabilise as a matter of teleological inevitability.

State change

The state of the water within cells can change between low-density and high:

“Cell water has been found to possess reduced density consequent upon greater hydrogen bonding (Clegg, 1986) and this structuring changes with the metabolic state of the cell (Hazlewood, 2001); low density water (LDW) predominating in the resting cell converting to higher density water (HDW) in the active cell (Wiggins, 1996).” – Chaplin

Minerals and structuring

The presence of minerals within the cell is partly responsible for the ow density arrangement. The charge structure of an on will accumulate a hydration shell of structured water whose properties encourage further low density structuring:

“The different characteristics of the intracellular and extracellular environments manifest themselves particularly in terms of restricted diffusion inside cells and a high intracellular concentration of solutes that further promote the low-density clustering of water. This tendency towards a low density structuring is reinforced by the confined space within the cell stretching the hydrogen-bonded water. Additionally, the extensive surface effects of the membranes (e.g., liver cells contain ∼100,000 μm² membrane surface area) help create the tendency towards low density water inside cells as their lipids contain mainly hydrophilic kosmotropic head groups with structures that encourage this organization for the associated interfacial water.” – Martin Chaplin

Ion gradients and sodium pumps

“..studies confirm this preference of K+ ions towards, and Na+ ions away from, low-density water (Collins, 1995). The ions partition according to their preferred aqueous environment; in particular, the K+ ions are preferred within the intracellular environment and naturally accumulate inside the cells at the expense of Na+ ions. This process will occur simply as a result of the water structuring and the machinations of the membrane ion-pumps and/or membrane potential are not required, although they speed the process.” – Chaplin

“It is worth noting that the cellular membrane ion-pumps cannot produce the large differences in ionic composition observed in the absence of other mechanisms (Conway, 1957), simply as the (ATP) energy required far exceeds the energy that is available to the cell (Ling, 1962; Ling, 1997; Hazlewood, 2001). Also, in contrast to that written in several undergraduate textbooks, many studies show that cells do not need an intact membrane or active energy (i.e., ATP) production to maintain their concentration gradients (Pollack, 2001; Ling, 2001).” – Chaplin

Sodium potassium pump (Konstantin Meyl)

“In the absence of technical solutions, nature is once again the prime example for the successful utilization of cold fusion. Take the ‘sodium-potassium-pump’, which moves ionized molecules in opposition to the electric resting potential of a cell membrane as well as the predominant concentration gradient. After all, the concentration of K+ within a cell is more than 100 times that of Na+ on the opposite side of the membrane. How is this supposed to work?

“Suppose a sodium ion (11²³Na+) comes into contact with monoatomic oxygen (8¹⁶0): the nuclei, mutually attracted through magnetism, will fuse into a potassium ion (19³⁹K+). The 8 ring electrons of the oxygen will be decelerated in the process and form a new M-shell around the already occupied L-shell of the Na+..

“Of course, there is more to the whole picture. This is merely an attempt to describe the basic process in order to provide a physical explanation free from contradictions. How the body supplies the oxygen and energy required, as well as the role played by ATP (adenosine triphosphate) are another story altogether.”

Potential Vortex vol. 4 – From Nuclear Physics and Fusion to Nanotechnology (Page 104)

Protein effects on water structuring

Proteins structure the water in a similar way to minerals, with the water molecules closest to the protein adopting a low or high density structure according to the nature of the protein:

“The degree of density lowering of the intracellular water is determined by the solutes, their concentration and the state of motion of intracellular protein; mobile proteins creating more disorder in the clustering compared with more static proteins.” – Chaplin

See the paper for more details on this.

Information exchange

The water can switch between two distinct states and this is considered to constitute a de facto transfer of information within and between cells:

“This low density water structuring cooperatively influences and reinforces the low density character of neighbouring sites’ water structuring. In this way information may be passed from site to site within the cell. Na+ and Ca2+ ions can destroy this low density structuring in a cooperative manner.” – Chaplin

Related pages:

Resources:

Information Exchange within Intracellular Water – Martin Chaplin
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226916102_Information_Exchange_within_Intracellular_Water

Martin Chaplin – website
https://water.lsbu.ac.uk/water/martin_chaplin.html

Koch’s postulates

Koch’s postulates seem to be an attempt to formalise to some degree the scientific investigation of the relationship between microbes and the effect they may or may not have on living organisms. There are many pitfalls in attempting to formalise the scientific process and these postulates serve as a good example of a few of them.

The postulates themselves were formulated with respect to the scientific knowledge of the time. The term ‘microorganism’ obviously means ‘bacterium’ and the term ‘isolation’ refers to established methods of optical microscopy. The postulates are intended to establish the pattern or otherwise of bacterial infection, multiplication and transmission.

Attempts to extend this methodology to purported ‘viral’ particles fails for lack of well-defined isolation procedures.

Claims that the postulates can determine causality are deeply flawed.

Establishment of ‘causation’

The postulates are said to be useful in establishing a ‘causal relationship’ between a suspected ‘pathogen’ and a ‘disease state’, but ‘causation’ itself is a term with no precise meaning. Wikipedia falls into this trap:

“Koch’s postulates are four criteria designed to establish a causal relationship between a microbe and a disease.” – Wikipedia

“Causality is an abstraction that indicates how the world progresses As such a basic concept, it is more apt as an explanation of other concepts of progression than as something to be explained by others more basic. The concept is like those of agency and efficacy For this reason, a leap of intuition may be needed to grasp it” – Wikipedia

So causation’ is a matter of intuition, with no precise definition and yet Wikipedia is claiming it as the raison d’être of the postulates; they exist in this form only to justify something less well-defined than themselves.

Thought-crime

This is obviously a major thought-crime and ought not be allowed in scientific circles.

The idea of causation here is completely superfluous. It would be simple and informative to say something like “Our experiment passed all of Koch’s postulates” or “One to five of the Bradford-Hill criteria were satisfied“, but there is no need to bring in the additional concept, from philosophy, of ‘causation’.

‘Causation’ was not observed, was not measured and was never defined in scientific terms – so why mention it? Is life not difficult enough as it is? No scientific training is needed to work this out.

What is happening is that scientists themselves still think in primitive and imprecise layman terms and despite all their terminology and discoveries, nevertheless want to reduce their scientific findings to something that is regarded as more ‘fundamental’ and ‘basic’.

Ideas such as causation, existence, reality, proof, these ideas are not fundamental, are not basic and do not belong here; they are an old coat that needs discarding. Assessment according to the postulates should be enough by itself or what is the point of them?

Adding unnecessary and ill defined concepts into a scientific framework do not an can not improve it in any way.

The postulates as a definition of causality

Better, then, would be to try and use the postulates as an actual definition of biological causality in the specific case of bacteria. At least then we know what words actually mean!

The current situation is that the well defined postulates of Koch which have been devised for a specific usage are being used to support a far more general and woolly concept that even philosophers can’t define properly. Why?

Better to refer to ‘Koch causation’ or ‘Bradford Hill causation’ as at least then the terms used have well-defined meanings and their inadequacies are clearly on display for all to see. The word ‘causality’ should not be used without some sort of qualification.

Policy makers and snake-oil salesmen will no doubt want to simplify the language to ‘this causes that’ or whatever, but that doesn’t mean that scientists are obliged to play the same game.

Koch’s postulates

The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease but should not be found in healthy organisms.
The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.
The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.

Causation .. again!

The postulates are to determine causation according to Wikipedia but clause 3 above says that microorganism can only be said to cause disease if .. the microorganism causes disease!

The definition is circular and therefore the postulates are not fit for purpose..

What is meant by “The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.”? How long do you have to wait for the disease to appear? How much of the microorganism is required and how is it introduced? What is meant by ‘healthy’? At what point has ‘causation’ failed?

Bacteria. Koch repeatedly refers to ‘finding’, ‘isolating’ and ‘introducing’ the organism and so it is clear that he is taking it for granted that these things are feasible and he is therefore referring to bacteria when he says ‘microorganisms’.

The postulates then are not a general description of how to determine whether or not some invisible agent is causing disease, but are a description of typical behaviour we might expect from bacteria if they were in fact capable of causing disease. We don’t see this behaviour and so the theory can be scrapped.

This is important as some are trying to apply Koch’s postulates to so called ‘viruses’ .They are finding that isolation in the normal sense of the word is not possible and are saying that viruses do not exist for this reason.

Virus ‘isolation’ techniques however are long and tortuous procedures involving purported genome sequencing. Koch clearly did not intend this meaning and so his postulates do not apply. Just because the same word, ‘isolation’ is used it doesn’t mean that the same reasoning applies.

Key assumptions:

That the microorganism can exist in an isolated state
That the microorganism in vivo is identical to that in vitro
That the microorganism can be unambiguously characterised
That the microorganism can be reliably cultured
That the state of the host is irrelevant – that there is no ‘immunity’ or adaptation
That after infection a disease will manifest in a predictable amount of time
That diseases themselves are unambiguously characterised and identified
That experiments are repeatable in a meaningful way
That the microorganism will not mutate significantly during the experiment
That the transmissible agent is the same as the disease-causing agent

There is a great deal of doubt concerning all of these statements

The ViroLIEgy website comments “As for the third postulate, insisting that the same exact disease is established when a healthy host is subjected to a pure source of the presumed pathogen is entirely rational and should be the expected outcome. If no disease is produced or different symptoms are observed, then the presumed pathogen can hardly be the cause of the specific disease being investigated. “

The author has had to use the phrases “disease is established” and “disease is produced” to avoid using the word “cause”. The postulates themselves use the phrase “should cause disease”.

World Health Organisation

“The 13 laboratories have been working on meeting Koch’s postulates, necessary to prove disease causation. These postulates stipulate that to be the causal agent, a pathogen must meet four conditions: it must be found in all cases of the disease, it must be isolated from the host and grown in pure culture, it must reproduce the original disease when introduced into a susceptible host, and it must be found in the experimental host so infected.”

The word ‘reproduce‘ here means ‘causes‘ – what else can it mean?

The point is that if you are reproducing (causing) the disease already then why did you need the other postulates? What is their meaning?

So what do the postulates mean?

They are, by their own description, intended to test for a specific pattern of association between bacteria and disease where the transmissible agent is easily identifiable outside of the host, is identified as the disease causing agent and will unfailingly cause disease in any organism to which it is introduced and, moreover, will multiply within that host.

The idea of ’cause’ is taken as a given within the postulates and therefore cannot be determined by them. The idea of isolation is also taken as a given and must be properly defined before assessment by the same postulates. If no sensible isolation is possible then Koch’s postulates cannot be applied.

To clarify, maybe, consider the ‘virion’ theory of Hoyle et al:

Viruses from space and other matters – Hoyle et al [here]

Hoyle, Wickramasinghe and Watkins conceived the idea that some particles they called ‘virions’ came from space at certain times of the year and were inhaled by the population. These particles would promote the production of the flu virus within the body and disease would follow.

The person to person transmission of influenza as a disease was ruled out by their data and so they did not consider that the virus could be passed between people but remained within the host organism.

If we suppose all this is true then we have causation by a microorganism but the whole thing fails Koch’s postulates whatever we try.

The primary cause of disease is the introduction of a ‘virion’ but we don’t know what they look like, they do not replicate within the body and cannot be isolated from a sick person. The virions will not be found in abundance and cannot be cultured; they only come from space. Maybe it is possible to isolate an actual virus but the re-introduction into a new host will not produce disease because in this scenario, the production of virus particles is triggered by the virions and not other viral particles.

Conclusions

Koch’s test fails with the original intended microorganisms and is unsuitable for what is claimed to be a virus because of the undefined isolation procedure.

The postulates are too restrictive for general investigative work since they necessarily assume a particular mode of infection and therefore rule out other patterns a priori. To somehow claim that they can be used to determine ‘causation’ when clause 3 specifically uses the word ‘causation’ is about as confused as it gets.

These postulates should be consigned to history.

The no-virus debate: Steve Kirsch

These are my thoughts on the debate as to whether viruses exist or not, taking as ‘inspiration’ the video debate between Steve Kirsch and Andrew Kaufman [here] and Steve’s Substack article: here.

I have no qualifications in biology and am certainly no expert in isolation or gene sequencing techniques but these are not the only perspectives.

Priorities:

The laws of Physics must be obeyed
Statistical principles must given due prominence
Theoretical frameworks must be self-consistent
Arguments must be logically sound
Language should not be ambiguous or misleading
Epidemiology needs an explanation
Attempts should be made to quantify observations and statements
Philosophical musings concerning the nature of existence are irrelevant
Arguments should not be rejected for failing to adhere to The Scientific Method.

“Over 130 years of data; none of it inconsistent with virology“

What?! Almost nothing that happens is consistent with virology. The industry just adapts the ideology to fit the data

Not everybody gets ill so the idea of immunity was conceived with no proof
Genomes are inconsistent thereby giving rise to the (fuzzy) concept of a variant
People don’t get sick immediately after contact so an incubation period is assumed but never proven
People get ill without contact with other sick people so .. asymptomatic transmission!
Flu disappears in winter. Latency is proposed but not proven.
Novel behaviours or symptoms are not deemed inconsistent but immediately assigned to a new variant without justification

The biggest inconsistencies are with the epidemiology:

Clinical trials consistently fail, eg Rosenau – this needs an explanation
Doctors, for example, see ten times as many sick people as the rest of us but don’t get ill ten times as often
Sickness within families does not seem to increase the likelihood of becoming ill
In situations where the population density is high we would expect an increase likelihood of becoming ill but it is in fact slightly reduced
Disease is seasonal and correlated with latitude and changes in the weather – Why?
‘Transmission’ of influenza has historically happened faster than the common mode of transport and has not followed the usual travel infrastructure
Conjoined twins do not catch flu off each other
Lockdowns don’t work

None of these points require any expertise at all in virology to understand or even the idea of a small particle. They are all inconsistent the idea of transmission per se regardless of any assumptions concerning the mechanism.

A common argument is that doctors somehow acquire immunity by constant contact with sick people and without getting ill. This brings their infection rate down to the precise value it was if they didn’t have the immunity but avoided contact with patients. There is no evidence for this apart from the actual data which we are trying to explain in the first place.

This is clear bunk but circular arguments such as this seems to be sufficient for those who are already invested in the idea of viruses and so the contagion myth continues.

“No virus has ever been isolated!”

“We never say that fire and gravity cannot exist because you cannot ‘isolate’ them.” Kirsch

We hear this a lot from those in the medical profession with gravity, photons and electrons being common examples. This therefore needs addressing.

Gravity is known by its effect on real physical objects and the concept of gravity is verified by quantitative predictions. The speed of falling objects can be measured precisely and its future trajectory can be accurately computed. Same goes for electricity.

The idea of a ‘force’ is a theoretical concept and I am not sure what it means to say that a theoretical concept ‘exists’. Certainly its existence is not qualitatively the same as the existence of an apple, say. The word ‘existence’ needs to be qualified if the context is not clear. The conflation used above is a distraction.

A virus is supposed to be a real thing consisting of real physical material and so the idea of physical existence is pertinent. Viruses are assumed to be too small to see but being part of the physical world they should be amenable to investigation by physical means, they should leave some sort of physical ‘footprint’.

Some method of characterisation and classification is needed and the virologists seem to have decided upon the result of genome sequencing as a way of doing this. As far as I can understand, they are therefore defining a ‘virus’ as the outcome of a series of chemical reactions.

This is fine as far as it goes but these sequences must be shown to have some biological significance or else what is the point? There needs to be some credible model that relates genome sequence to biological action but it seems that none is available. ‘Association’ is not good enough as, given long enough sequence, there will always be some sort of association to be found somewhere.

Koch’s postulates

These are often suggested as being appropriate to ascertain whether or not an organism causes a disease. Postulate 3, however, reads “The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.”. So in order to determine if an organism causes disease we must first see if it causes a disease in addition to the other three postulates!

Clearly the postulates are not fit for purpose. This was not their original intent.

In addition to this, the Postulates clearly take the process of ‘isolation’ as a given. They were formulated to deal with bacteria which are easily visible and characterised by outward form.

Koch’s postulates are therefore not suitable for virology.

Replication of the sequence in millions of people who were diagnosed with COVID

“Each lab is given a sample from an infected person and asked to identify any novel pathogen that has not been seen before using only the data in the sample. In over 100 countries, the genome sequences (which are nearly 30,000 nucleotides long) came back that were virtually identical. This can’t happen by chance. AFAIK, there is only one way it can happen: the same base pathogen is infecting people all over the world” – Steve Kirsch

So on the information we have here:

The labs were only given data from sick people
There was therefore no control
They were specifically told to ignore influenza ‘virus’
The sequenced genomes were not identical

Saying that the samples were ‘virtually identical’ is surely persuasive language as opposed to scientific. What is required is some way of quantifying the similarity of two sequences.

Some sort of meaningful, well defined metric is required if we are to compare different genome sequences. To simply give a percentage match is wholly inadequate as we don’t know what the percentage means in biological terms.

A early sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 sequence gave an 89% match to some bat-sequence. Are these genomes sufficiently similar? Why?

Is the total percentage all that matters?
Are some pairs more important than others?
Are all sub-sequences equally likely?
Does the genome have random characteristics or is there necessarily some structure?
Are there critical areas in the genome? Is there chaotic behaviour?
Do similar sequences necessarily have similar biological function and if so how do we measure similarity of biological function?
What are the criteria that determine whether a sequence is a variant or not?

If these issues have been addressed then they are not in common circulation.

“This can’t happen by chance. AFAIK, there is only one way it can happen: the same base pathogen is infecting people all over the world.” – Kirsch

But transmission by breath, say, has never been established and so cannot be cited as a cause. This result is being cited as both evidence and cause at the same time.

‘AFAIK’ is clearly subjective and will change with further knowledge. If we only ever explain things in terms of things we already know then we will never progress, ever.

Our knowledge of biology and even physics is far from being complete and results such as this may be indications of such. To say “I have a fixed and finite set of ideas and I am determined to explain everything in terms of these” is clearly short sighted to put it mildly.

“If viruses don’t exist, how would you explain this?” Transmission was not demonstrated and nor was the ability to cause disease and nor was the actual existence of a particle, merely similar genome sequences.

Universal agreement on the structure of SARS-CoV-2

“So if a virus doesn’t exist, how can there be such universal agreement among all researchers with no dissent whatsoever?” – SK

Agreement has been reached on the structure of something but that thing was never shown to be infectious and was never shown to cause disease and so it cannot be called a ‘virus’.

This is frustrating. The issue here is whether a small piece of RNA can actually cause a disease in a living human being but all that is happening is that geneticists are finding interesting patterns in RNA and agreeing with each other. They are, as Christine Massey would put it, just “doing stuff with cells“.

All this is tangential to the main contention. There is no point on determining the structure of something if it has nothing to do with causing a disease.

Quantitative PCR (qPCR)

“Viruses replicate” – SK

Triggering language again. No particle has been shown to cause disease and therefore no particle can be said to be a virus. This is not pedantry. The constant use of such language tends to bypass cognitive censorship and establish the notion of a virus within the mind of the listener without evidence or argument. We are thus left with an entire planet full of people who believe in viruses – but they don’t know why.

Try: “RNA replicates“. No, it doesn’t. Cells replicate and cells manufacture RNA. However, RNA itself does not and cannot replicate. Again, this might seem picky but the constant use of sloppy language reinforces sloppy (and incorrect) ideas.

The claim that RNA replicates enforces the notion of precision and omits the suggestion that there is any other influence on the sequence other than that of the original sample. This is of course not true and the technology of gene-editing is testament to that.

Again, the notion of replication is a sleight of hand, a useful ‘wallpaper’ to cover the cracks in the narrative. It gives the impression that the same thing happens in vitro as happens in vivo. If this is what virologists are claiming them we would like to see proof of this please.

Similarly, the idea of ‘mutation’ strongly suggests the existence of a stable sequence with minor variations from that sequence but if what we end up with is essentially lots of constantly changing sequences then nothing is really stable and so nothing is really a ‘variant’.

“You can lock these people in a room right after they are sick and the qPCR results will increase by 2 to 3 orders of magnitude. That means it is replicating.”

So the people are in a diseased state and for some reason are producing more and more of these particles whatever you want to call them. We have an association here between disease and gene sequence but no proof that it is the RNA that is causing the disease as opposed to the other way around. There was no proof of transmission here either.

“AFAIK, the rise and fall of the amount of genetic material can only explained by foreign (i.e., non-host) genetic material that is capable, either on its own or with the help of a host cell, of replication.”

The claim here is that RNA can replicate all by itself with no help of a host cell! So it is somehow pro-active in manufacturing or assembling sufficient molecular material and before generating enough energy all but itself to stick them together in the correct order?

Why is this only explained by foreign material? Why cannot the ‘host’ itself manufacture it? Human beings are quite capable of creating and folding precision molecules as in the case of proteins. A million people have similar, if not identical, proteins but it doesn’t mean that it was the proteins that made the sick.

Proteins and indeed RNA are not assembled according to a set of digital instructions but by the laws of physics and chemistry. Proteins likely assembled via resonance (Resonant recognition model) and then folded by the adoption of successive attractor states to achieve the final form.

According to Denis Noble and others, new DNA is only vaguely similar to its ‘template’ but becomes to resemble it more closely post-creation. It is therefore a teleological process whose final aim is determined by the cell itself. So the more cycles or whatever, the closer the gene sequence moves to some ‘least-energy’ attractor state.

Antibodies

“A virus can cause antibodies to be created and we can measure that.” – You have not established that it is a virus yet.

“If it isn’t a virus but is simply a reaction to external stress, then why are antibodies being created?”

I don’t know but the ‘word’ in the no-virus community is that antibodies are not antigen specific and that they are some sort of repair mechanism.

What exactly were they working on in the Wuhan Institute of Virology for the past decade?

They were doing stuff with cells the same as everybody else. They are good lab technicians who accurately report their results but just interpret them incorrectly.

Humanised mice are not humans and if no human was made sick by inhaling the breath of another person then no virus was created.

Barnstable County: how did all these people have the same sequence that replicated inside of them?

” Basically, over 1,000 healthy people congregated, and 469 then developed COVID.”

“Virology explains this. It spread between people who were congregating in close quarters, exactly as we’d expect a virus to spread.“

No. This is monster silliness now.

It is stated as a fact that it spread but spreading was not observed, it never is.

Nearly 50% of people got disease but this is not normal. There were rallies that were larger than this which, by the laws of probability, would have certainly contained sick or sickening people and yet nowhere near the same number of people succumbed. Why not?

What happened after the sick people went home to their families? Did 50% of their kin get sick? No, this never happens on this scale.

This is not consistent with virus theory but rather refutes it somewhat.

Attacks of influenza are overwhelmingly related to changes in the weather and are restricted in time and space – Influenza and weather If many people are assembled underneath some antipathetic atmospheric disturbance then many of them will get sick, yes, but there is no spreading and relatives are safe because the causal factor is localised and temporary.

The spread

“If it is a toxin, how do we explain this diagram? Is there evidence that on a certain day that thousands of communities all conspired to release a toxin?”

Influenza is seasonal and travels along latitudes. It has something to do with weather patterns, pressure fronts and downdrafts. It is not inconceivable that toxins accumulate in the air and are concentrated at certain locations.

Other viruses: what are they and why do they match their associated diseases?

No virus has yet been demonstrated and correlation is not causation.

Causation is top down in biological systems and a disease state will lead to very precise changes in the way that RNA is constructed. The drinking of alcohol will alter DNA in a precise fashion, various metabolic patterns can be induced in mice. These traits are codified at the molecular level and passed on to the next generation.

Precise disease states will produce, somehow and for some reason, precise changes in RNA production.

The Washburne paper shows it is HIGHLY unlikely the virus is of natural origin. The genome is consistent with a man-made virus because it has certain genetic fingerprints that have never been found in nature before.

The mere fact of something being man made in no way adds to the likelihood that it is a virus.

The measles virus

“The measles virus is one of the most infectious viruses known to man. An infected person can spread the virus to up to nine out of ten susceptible people who are close contacts.”

Nine out of ten sounds like a lot but it only applies to susceptible people! People who are susceptible get ill – by definition of susceptible!

Again and again: spreading is never directly observed, always assumed. This is why we are in such a mess.

Measles, like many other diseases is seasonal: Seasonal disease. Seasonal and localised incidence has been mistaken for contagion.

Science is about using all available evidence

Yes, so the epidemiology, the seasonality and correlation with the weather, all need some explanation.

The correlation between genome sequences and disease is interesting but is so far just a load of correlations and lack of an explanation does not in any way prove germ theory.

Influenza and weather

Influenza and many other diseases show a strong seasonal and latitudinal pattern with fine grained correlation between seemingly unrelated weather events, with outbreaks being correlated sometimes with the onset of cold dry weather and sometimes with the start of an annual rainy season.

This page argues that influenza is caused by metabolic dis-regulation arising from encounters with distortions of the Earth’s magnetic field which in turn are caused by the typical seasonal and latitudinal patterns of atmospheric disturbances.

We need to account for a characteristic epidemiology:

Flu seems to be ‘seasonal’ but the season depends upon latitude
The precise onset of outbreaks is correlated to the weather
The absolute temperature does not appear to be relevant to the timing of the outbreak
Sometimes temperate regions have more severe outbreaks than colder
In the United States, onset correlates with low humidity but a different value for each state
Outbreaks near the tropics coincide with the onset of the rainy season
Outbreaks can be highly localised. down to the size of a hospital ward even
There are reported links to the orbits of comets and solar activity

Pressure fronts and vortices

What happens when a cold front meets a warm front? Both systems form circular or spiral flow and in the Northern hemisphere, high pressure systems will move anti-clockwise, with low pressure systems moving clockwise.

So whenever cold air meets warm air, there will be a sharp change in both pressure and wind direction. The change in wind direction surely produces ‘shear’ stress and will lead to the formation of local wind vortices.

The hypothesis is that the physical wind vortices produce as a consequence, a torsion of the Earth’s magnetic field and it is this that is causing outbreaks and epidemics at ground level.

Low pressure is caused by rising air and is associated with the creation of rainfall, whilst high pressure is the result of a downward stream and is characterised by very dry air and the absence of clouds. [ABC science]

Monsoons

The patterns of pressure with respect to land masses and oceans are seasonally inverted, with more high pressure in winter over land masses and the opposite for oceans. Upward or downward columns of air will always form helical flows owing to the influence of Coriolis forces driven by the spin of the Earth.

In this case, it looks like the seasonal effect may not be due to temperature changes but to a predictable difference in the summer and winter weather patterns.

Spatial Variation in Humidity and the Onset of Seasonal Influenza Across the Contiguous United States – [paper]

Serman et al found a strong correlation between influenza cases and humidity. See below for the weekly figures for Arkansas. Influenza cases rise slowly with decreasing humidity up to a specific ‘breakpoint’ whereupon there is a sharper increase in cases relative to humidity.

Weekly influenza cases for Arkansas – Serman et al

Similar and very striking charts were produced for other states but with the ‘breakpoint’ (here at about 0.05) being different for each state.

The correlation with humidity makes it seem at first that dry air is somehow a cause of influenza but the fact that the critical humidity levels are different for each state pretty much settles the matter: humidity is not the cause but some other phenomenon that correlates with it and is the cause of both.

Humidity levels (see above) are coincident with pressure and temperature and so changes in humidity are necessarily coincident with changes in both these phenomena. To put it another way, flu outbreaks look like they are correlated with the appearance with a pressure front.

The pressure, temperature and humidity all change but so does the wind direction, which leads to vortex structures in the wind. Charged particles in the air drag the magnetic field into vortices (speculation) and it is these structures which persists after the wind has died down (energy dissipation by friction) and are responsible for the disturbances of the bio-regulatory system that lead to influenza.

Differences in Influenza Seasonality by Latitude, Northern India – [paper]

A separate season exists for populations living at 30°N , just north of the tropics. In this case the season starts at the same time as the rainy season, so again we have a change in pressure with downdrafts of air surely causing local atmospheric and magnetic field disturbances.

Parvaiz et al found that influenza was heavily ‘seasonal’ but that the season depended upon latitude, with a single season encompassing all of northern India and Europe but a different season for southern India.

Again, fine grained predictions could be made by looking at weather patterns.

The latitudes of 30° north and south are the limits of the Hadley convection cells. If flu seasons are regular and predictable at these latitudes then it is by now, no surprise.

Dengue in Myanmar: Spatiotemporal epidemiology, association with climate and short-term prediction – [paper]

Zaw et al again found that sickness was predicted by the onset of a rainy season, with the disease this time being Dengue Fever. Note that northern Myanmar is at 29°N, the’ top’ end of the Hadley cell.

Viruses from space and other matters – [paper]

Hoyle, Wickramasinghe and Watkins looked at the correlation between influenza and weather patterns, concentrating particularly on atmospheric down-drafts. They were thinking that flu is caused by the inhalation of physical particles that come either from space or from the tails of comets. These particles would drift downwards through the Earth’s atmosphere and cause epidemics on Earth.

Of course such atmospheric currents are what we are supposing causes field vortices and so their argument is in large part supportive of the suggested hypothesis. It goes without saying perhaps that no such particles have ever been found.

The Black Death

Take a look at the diagram below from ‘Viruses from Space..’. showing the spread of the Black Death.

It looks like a weather map!

What it doesn’t show is transmission along trade routes or between major cities. The lines look like weather fronts but instead of travelling across the continent in a matter of days or weeks, they appear to take months or even years.

I don’t think that this is happening though, it seems more likely that similar weather patterns recur year after year but in slightly different places.

Temperature is not causal

Sweden has very cold winters and Melbourne has milder winters but this is not reflected in either the incidence or date of onset of influenza:

“We have chosen to show the data for Sweden rather than Britain, not because there is any important difference between Sweden and Britain, but to bring out the point that the simple physical cold of winter is not a relevant factor. Sweden has a really cold winter, whereas Australia has a clement winter not much cooler than a Swedish summer. If simple exposure to cold were important, the effect would long ago have been demonstrated under controlled conditions in the laboratory, which it has not been.” – Hoyle et al

Source: Viruses from space and other matters

Latitudinal effect in the Northern hemisphere

Edgar Hope-Simpson noticed coincidences in both the timing and severity of flu outbreaks in Prague (52°N ) and Cirencester (51°N ). Something appears to be having an effect at a distance, but is the latitude really the relevant factor?

The attack rate of influenza from Hope-Simpson

Hoyle et. al. write that there is a seasonal downdraft of air at this latitude that may be responsible for the effect we are seeing:

“A direct demonstration that the general winter downdraft in the stratosphere occurs strongly over the latitude range 40° to 60° was given by Kalkstein. The observed incidence of a radioactive tracer agrees closely with the well-known winter season of the viruses responsible for the majority of upper respiratory infections, including
influenza”

“How we wonder is the almost clockwork regularity of respiratory infections to be explained otherwise? Unfortunately so little has been understood of the mode of attack of so-called infectious diseases that almost any form of hypothesis has come to be accepted in the past as an answer to questions of this sort. The truth is that, although the world may be extremely complex it is nevertheless extremely precise.“

How to explain these results?

They are a complete coincidence – the result of cherry-picked random data amongst hundreds of charts that show no such correlations. Possibly..
The towns are connected via some hidden meteorological feature, some electromagnetic filament that affects both towns to the same degree at the same time each year. The feature may manifest along a line of latitude by some causal means or it may be a coincidence. If this is the case then such correlations may be found between towns of different latitudes.
A vortex moves from one town to another. The vortex has a magnetic component which somehow keeps it on the same latitude, maybe tracking along a magnetic filament again. The adherence to a latitude line may still be something of a coincidence in this case.
A vortex filament is fixed in space It ‘grounds’ itself at one particular spot on our planet and then the Earth turns beneath it and so it stays at one specific latitude. In this case there should be predictable timings of just a few hours between outbreaks.

Comets and Contagion: Evolution, Plague, and Diseases From Space – Joseph and Wickramasinghe put forth the hypothesis that some sort of viral particles originate from comets and filter down through our atmosphere to cause disease. In support of this they cite various historical references to the links between comet sightings and subsequent epidemics.

In order to re-purpose their arguments to fit the Field Vortex Hypothesis we need to somehow convince ourselves that it is at least possible for a comet either to cause meaningful magnetic disturbances at the surface of the Earth or for the appearance of a comet to be otherwise associated with such disturbances.

The Nature of Man-Universe connections [paper] – Attila Grandpierre

Grandpierre notes many correlations between solar and terrestrial activity from many different sources. Small variations in the rotational speed of the Earth or wobbles of the Earth’s axis are reflected in changes deep within the core of the sun:

“In a time-linear causal sequence this circumstance would involve that the Earth was more sensitive to the global conditions of solar system at that time, and that the core changes of the Earth induced changes in the solar core. This circumstance points to a mutuality in the core-core interactions, since it seems to be clear that at other occasions the Sun was the initiator of correspondence.” – Grandpierre

Now if events on Earth can affect the core of the sun then it is quite feasible that the passing of a comet should cause disturbances in the weather system of our planet and that some increase in biological disturbances would result.

Field vortices in space

A better way to think about the Earth-Sun connection is consider that space is not empty but filled with a dynamic, ‘living’ field of an electromagnetic nature that self-organises into giant current loops whose size can be comparable to that of a solar system or even an entire galaxy. [video]

Currents flow and vortices form where two ‘fronts’ meet as in our weather systems. Long helical filaments form which connect various bodies in our solar system and cause various ‘events’. This makes it seem that one body is somehow affecting another whereas in reality it is the field that is affecting both.

In the case of the Earth and Sun, sometimes the effect is seen first in the Earth and sometimes the Sun. This gives the impression of the one affecting the other but it is the field that initiates the changes.

Comets as field vortices

Consider that a spherical vortex field should form in our solar system. Energy spirals inwards towards the vortex centre giving rise to very strong torsion fields. Together with neutrino input from the sun, there is enough energy to manifest as actual matter. Electrons come first followed by protons and a complete hydrogen atom. Helium and oxygen soon follow and the first water molecules begin to appear with increasingly exotic elements being formed in due course.

The material that forms the comet is not therefore scooped up space dust but the physical manifestation of the field energy.

The comet looks like a solid object but it arose from a wider energy structure which is still very much present and forming stable helical filaments with the comet at the epicentre. It is this field and these filaments that make connections with the Earth’s atmosphere and that are affecting the planet’s weather system and causing disease.

The page Sunspots and influenza discarded some data as it appeared that in some cases the influenza appeared before the sunspots and therefore could not have been caused by them. This assumption now needs re-evaluating as it may well be the case that sunspots are linked to influenza, not in the causal sense proposed but by a third party cosmic filament that is the cause of both the sunspots themselves and the epidemics on Earth.

This video from See the Pattern shows the extent of electromagnetic circuitry in space:

Weather from space?

If it is the case that events such as the passing of a comet or the appearance of a sunspot can meaningfully affect events in the Earth’s atmosphere then the weather system itself is not completely closed and we can wonder about the extent of external influences and what they might be.

Conventional wisdom says that the spiralling of cyclones etc. is entirely due to the mechanical forces of convection and Coriolis. Possibly, but there are still cyclones close to the equator where Coriolis forces are minimal and there are tornadoes that spin the ‘wrong’ way around. Tornadoes will build up over a period of time when maybe early dissipation due to frictional forces may be more expected.

Seasonal patterns are highly predictable and stable and occur when the Earth is passing through a specific part of the solar system. It isn’t too hard to imagine long electromagnetic filaments attaching themselves to our ionosphere and affecting our weather as we move through space.

This video from Andrew Hall and the Thunderbolts project will make all this seem more likely. “All weather is driven by electric circuitry“.

Vortices in the atmosphere?

The image of the helical ‘cloud’ at the top of the page needs explaining. Is the shape really formed by the movement of air? It looks like a clear winter’s day with very little wind so it seems that the shape has been formed by forces other than mechanical and can therefore exist independently of the physical structure of the air.

Vortex imaging

Images of magnetic vortices have now been created from data produced by radio telescopes.

In this video, Cleo Loi explains the process and shows what appear to be the upper half of magnetic ring vortices in the atmosphere which organise ionised gas particles (plasma) into the shapes seen.

Now if these magnetic field patterns show some seasonal variation and latitudinal affinity then they are surely a good candidate for the initial cause of the processes described above.

To be determined:

Is flu actually correlated with pressure fronts? An argument has been made that the general shape and seasonal patterns are similar but is there an accurate correspondence?
Are weather patterns correlated to magnetic field disturbances? ‘Weather’ is physical movement of matter but field vortices are magnetic energy structures.
Does the weather cause the field or does the field cause the weather? A possibility suggested above is that charged particles are dragged around by the weather and that this affects the Earth’s magnetic field. The Thunderbolts video claims that it is the other way around, that electromagnetic forces are the main driver of weather.
Do field vortices really cause flu? Studies show correlations between EMF and many disease processes and most man made EMF is accompanied by scalar waves, also known as field vortices – EMF and Biology – 5G and Covid

Summary

Thinking about this problem in terms of the movement of fragments of matter is just confusing whereas considering it in terms of field interactions is illuminating.

The causality of atoms bumping into each other is always going to be local and so any action at a distance is going to be frowned upon. ‘Field causality’ is globally organised and will inevitably give rise to coordinated actions at great distances apart. However, this is not causality as normally thought of but the manifestation of similar field characteristics at widely separated parts of the Universe.

It is fields that organise and fields that provide the energy for movement. Matter is just inert lumps of stuff that wait around and do nothing until a force appears.

The regulation of the human body is performed by an open system of field forces that forms a continuum with the rest of the Universe and whose operation cannot be considered as entirely separate from the external influences impacting upon it.

Related pages:

References:

Viruses from space and other matters – Hoyle, Wickramasinghe, Watkins
https://www.hoyle.org.uk/resources/virusesfromspaceCompressed.pdf

The role of season in the epidemiology of influenza – R E Hope-Simpson
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2134066/pdf/jhyg00034-0042.pdf

NASA Finds Each State Has Its Own Climatic Threshold for Flu Outbreaks
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasa-finds-each-state-has-its-own-climatic-threshold-for-flu-outbreaks

Differences in Influenza Seasonality by Latitude, Northern India – Parvaiz A. Koul et. al.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/20/10/pdfs/14-0431-combined.pdf

Spatial Variation in Humidity and the Onset of Seasonal Influenza Across the Contiguous United States – Serman, Thrastarson, Franklin, Teixeira
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GH000469

Dengue in Myanmar: Spatiotemporal epidemiology, association with climate and short-term prediction – Win Zaw, Chawarat Rotejanaprasert
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371312510_Dengue_in_Myanmar_Spatiotemporal_epidemiology_association_with_climate_and_short-term_prediction

How do high and low weather systems work? – ABC Science
https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2013/01/31/3679358.htm

Atmospheric Pressure and Wind – Libre texts
https://geo.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Geography_%28Physical%29/Physical_Geography_Lab_Manual_%28Ray_et_al.%29/01%3A_Labs/1.05%3A_Lab_5_-_Atmospheric_Pressure_and_Wind

Comets and Contagion: Evolution, Plague, and Diseases From Space
Authors: Rhawn Joseph, Chandra Wickramasinghe
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326160954_Comets_and_Contagion_Evolution_Plague_and_Diseases_From_Space

The Sun as an Extremely Sensitively Interconnected and Regulated System
Author: Attila Grandpierre
https://old.konkoly.hu/staff/grandpierre/Sun_Sensitive.pdf

The Nature of Man-Universe connections
Author: Attila Grandpierre
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234106920_The_Nature_of_Man-Universe_connections

Tropical cyclone facts – Met Office
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/weather/tropical-cyclones/facts#How%20do%20TCs%20form

Milky Way’s Magnetic Mystery: What Powers This Immense Torus? – See the Pattern
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18Olmd184uM

The atom

The image that most people have of an atom is similar to that shown here with tiny electrons whizzing around a larger nucleus comprising an assortment of protons and neutrons. This makes it easy to imagine many of the things we are asked to believe about atoms. However, the atom does not look like this even according to mainstream science!

We can imagine electrons becoming detached from an atom and flowing along a wire to become an electric current or we can picture one of them dropping from a higher orbit to a lower one to release a photon, but the atom does not look like this and an electron is not as depicted in the diagram and so all our imaginings are in vain.

The Electron Cloud model

Science articles and YouTube lectures by physicists all depict something like the images below representing electron clouds or atomic orbitals.

Each diagram is supposed to represent the probability of finding an electron at a particular place, with darker shading representing a higher probability.

These are the electron orbitals but the electrons do not actually move along an orbital path, all we know is that we might measure one somewhere if we use the correct instruments.

So electrons:

Have an orbital but do not orbit
Have a property called ‘spin’ but they do not spin
Have angular momentum which appears to be unrelated to spin
Have mass and charge (fictional qualities anyhow)
Have a position which is only specified by a probability function
Have energy and linear momentum

Recommended is to watch this short video from the Science Asylum to see how mind bending the whole thing is even for the commentator himself.

This is certainly confusing, with the Wikipedia entry on Electron Clouds even proclaiming “The electron cloud is not really a thing.”!

The idea of a probability cloud comes from quantum mechanics but it doesn’t really explain anything. It doesn’t explain why the cloud is this particular shape or where the electron is when it is not being measured.

Quantum mechanics seems to work fine as a theoretical construct for some applications but that does not mean that the ideas can be automatically ported across to other areas of physics or that abstract concepts such as probability functions have any meaningful interpretation in the Real World.

The new version of the atom is clearly quite different from the traditional Bohr Model and should supplant it completely but what has happened is that scientists have continued to express it in terms of existing and familiar concepts such as charge, mass, probability, energy etc. when they should have scrapped the whole lot and started from scratch.

How to resolve this?

The atom as a Field Vortex (Konstantin Meyl)

The diagrams shown below are taken from Konstantin Meyl (Potential Vortex – Volume 4). Compare with the electron clouds above.

The resemblance is quite remarkable.

These are drawings of the theoretical construct of atoms consisting of field vortices. Think of these for now as electrically charged soap bubbles. The charges on the bubbles will repel each other, leading to deformation of the usually spherical bubbles into shapes such as the ones shown.

In actuality, these apparently solid constructs are stable states of a continually moving field structure which has a tendency to form spherical vortex structures consisting of spinning electric fields with associated magnetic dipoles.

We can now resolve some of the conceptual problems associated with the electron cloud model.

Orbitals but no orbiting. Movement around the orbital is field movement as opposed to movement of a charged particle.
Spin but not spinning. Spin comes from the field and creates a magnetic dipole but no mass is moving and so there is no spinning as usually thought of.
Angular momentum. This is now unrelated to the spin as the spin is field movement and not the orbiting of a charged particle with mass.
Charge is an illusion created by the presence of a field but it is not of a particulate nature and is not necessarily associated with a mass.
Indeterminate position. The field constitutes the entire electron orbital and so the ‘position’ is distributed over the whole orbital. The imagining that there is a small charged article whizzing around has caused confusion. Probably the assumption of a particle together with the measuring technique and some unusual mathematics is what is causing this illusion. The field is not quantised until it is measured.
Fuzziness of cloud. The field is not strictly confined to an infinitely thin shell but extends beyond it with decreasing field strength thereby giving the impression of a ‘probability cloud’.

Summary

The resemblance between contemporary visualisations of electron clouds and the almost hand drawn diagrams of Konstantin Meyl is too great to ignore. There must be something of worth here.

The vortex model of Meyl needs wider publicity and the Bohr model is now a misleading fantasy. The current model of mainstream science is a horrible mash-up of classical ideas (particles, mass, charge etc.) together with the quantum weirdness of probability wave functions which have no reasonable interpretation in the physical world.

The field equations of Meyl give a self-consistent theoretical explanation for the shapes and phenomena we see and allow for quantitative predictions to be made without the need for a multiplicity of ‘properties’.

References:

Potential Vortex – Volume 4
Author: Knstantin Meyl
Website: http://meyl.eu

Electron cloud – Wikipedia
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_cloud

Atomic orbitals – Wikipedia
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital

What is quantum spin? – The science asylum
https://youtu.be/sB1EPGmpzyg

Gravity v electromagnetism

We are hearing often now that the electromagnetic force is many times greater than the gravitational force and that therefore the dominant force in nature is the electromagnetic. This assertion is then used to support the notion of the Electric Universe or even Flat Earth. The initial assertion is nonsense and so to draw conclusions from it is not valid.

Gravity and electromagnetism in classical physics are completely different entities and are expressed in different units. They are incommensurate quantities and cannot be compared to each other.

The idea of expressing them both as the same thing, a force, is a sleight of hand which makes for good practical physics but obscures the fact that they are different entities with different mechanisms.

The idea that the one is stronger than the other comes from the choice of units used and the fundamental constants that enable the transformation of the one into the other.

The Gravitational force between two objects depends upon the masses of the two objects and the distance between them and is calculated via the formula shown.

The ‘units’ of gravitational force are therefore ‘mass squared divided by distance squared multiplied by the gravitational constant G‘.

The absolute value of the force will depend upon choice of units for both mass (kilogram, pounds or ounces) and distance (metre, mile, Angstrom) and also the value of the constant G.

Electrostatic force is determined by the amount of charge on the objects together with the distance between them and a completely different constant ‘k’. The units of electrostatic attraction are therefore charge squared divided by distance squared multiplied by a constant, ‘k’.

The absolute values of each force again depends upon the choice of all units involved with the values constants k and G being chosen, not entirely arbitrarily, but with specific reference to each other in order that two different quantities with completely different mechanisms may both be expressed via the same vocabulary (‘force’) and may attain comparable values in order that physical comparisons should make sense.

A toy magnet will stick to a fridge whilst it is very close or touching but will fall to the ground due to gravity as soon as it moves even a short distance away from the metal. Try lifting a granite boulder against gravity with even a large magnet and you will fail.

The practical strength of the two fields therefore depends upon specific circumstances and the numbers used depends upon the units chosen.

The idea of a ‘force’ in physics is a clever artifice to enable comparison between two qualitatively different entities. The comparison is possible because of a shared behaviour (attraction); the construct of a force allows description of behaviour to be studied as separate from mechanism. One could go go further and say that it allows behaviour to be studied as if it were a mechanism.

The fact that this is even possible is indicative of some sort of unity between gravity and electromagnetism. It may seem natural that a magnetic force could cancel out an electrostatic or gravitational force .. but why? Nobody imagines that the colour blue for example could cancel out an E minor chord or, for that matter, an avocado pear. Frequencies do not cancel out vegetables so why should it be possible for mass and charge?

The eventual answer is that there is a unified field of an electromagnetic nature that in certain circumstances can manifest as the force we call gravity. The field is as described by Konstantin Meyl in his book ‘Scalar Waves – a first Tesla physics handbook’. meyl.eu

The manifestation as gravity is described here: The nature of gravity

The confusion of electromagnetism and gravity has arisen partly because of the physical scale of human beings. If we were the size of galaxies we probably wouldn’t worry too much about electric or subatomic forces and if we were the size of an atom we would probably not care about, or even notice, the force of gravity.

The effects of gravity became apparent long before electromagnetic field theory and so the assumption of gravitational force was taken to be fundamental and as arising from something even more fundamental namely the idea of ‘matter’. Both of these however are emergent properties of the Universal Field and humanity will prefer to cling to that which is familiar for some time yet: Does gravity exist?

Summary

To say that electromagnetism stronger than gravity is equivalent to saying that charge is stronger than mass, i.e. it is nonsense.

Related pages:

The nature of gravity

The idea of gravity as consisting of attractive forces emanating objects with ‘mass’ is easy enough to understand but leads to problems as explained in a paper by Tom Van Flandern. Anomalies can be resolved by thinking about gravity in a slightly different way and by analogy with the flow of water in a river.

Key anomaly

The Earth is said to orbit the sun but the position of the sun is not fixed – it is displaced by a distance of over a million kilometres by the gravitational fields of the Earth and other planets. Despite this, the gravitational pull on the Earth seems to be always towards the sun at the present and never where it was a few minutes ago,

Some scientists are expecting that the gravitational field of the sun will radiate out from the sun at the speed of light. It takes 8.3 minutes for the light to travel from the Sun to the Earth and so the light we see always comes from a position where the sun was 8.3 minutes ago. It is expected then that we should always experience on Earth a gravitational pull that was generated 8.3 minutes in the past.

This gravity vector travels towards us and will exert a pull towards the place from which it was created 8.3 minutes ago. This never happens and the pull is always towards the ‘present’ position of the sun thereby giving the impression that the gravitational field has travelled almost instantaneously from the sun to the Earth.

“Standard experimental techniques exist to determine the propagation speed of forces. When we apply these techniques to gravity, they all yield propagation speeds too great to measure, substantially faster than lightspeed.” – Van Flandern

Newton’s law: “Every particle attracts every other particle in the universe with a force that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centres. Separated objects attract and are attracted as if all their mass were concentrated at their centres.” – Wikipedia

Newton did not like this: “That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one another, is to me so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it.” – Newton 1692 – Wikipedia

Tom Van Flandern: “The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous. This seemed unacceptable.. “

Confusing, certainly, but acceptable nevertheless if viewed from a slightly different viewpoint. Gravitational interactions are not actually between bodies at all but between a body and its local gravitational field even according to Newton. The interaction is in fact instantaneous but is local rather than distant; there is no need for it to ‘travel’ Moreover, cause can be said to flow from the force to the body and not the other way around.

There is no need to suppose that the bodies ‘know’ about each other, only that they are both subject to some sort of coordinated influence that will tend to move them closer together.

There is equally no need to assume that the force is caused by either object, only that it exists and has certain properties, will form certain patterns. Superfluous assumptions lead to confusion.

Such a cause is never observed directly and nor is a distant influence of one body upon another. Neither of these assumptions is necessary to make effective predictions about how the bodies will behave.

All we really observe is two objects coming together according to certain ‘laws’. The inverse square law is easily observed but the dependence upon mass is problematic.

Mass is never observed and is only ever measured by the degree to which attraction occurs and so strictly speaking we have no such thing as ‘mass’, only observed acceleration of objects towards each other.

Objects falling to the ground will accelerate towards the Earth at a rate that is independent of their mass.

Mass is merely a computational convenience. The idea of ‘force’ likewise is a fictitious construct to mediate between gravity, inertia, electromagnetism and mechanics.

A water vortex analogy. The substance of water is analogous to an all pervasive ‘field’ in space that influences the motion of the planets and stars, In the image, right, nobody imagines that it is the vortex that is causing its own little whirlpool, rather that it is the global vortex activity that gives rise to the sink at its own centre..

Similarly, the galactic centre is not creating and directing its own spiral arms via gravity, instead all the matter in the galaxy moves according to local field forces that organise the solar systems and have a tendency spiral inwards much as the water in the whirlpool.

Similar forces organise our solar system and will concentrate energy towards the sun where it is converted to photons and ejected at the speed of light to form sunshine. The Sun will therefore never run out as it is an energy transducer rather than a big bonfire.

In the image above the vortex is happy to conform with the general flow of the river and flow hither and thither with the rest of the stream. The centre of the vortex will not usually be out of step with the main vortex as it is caused by the vortex and part of it.

Similarly our sun will not be out of step with the gravitational fields of its own planets as its movements are determined by them, It has no motive force of its own.

If the water were to encounter an obstacle such as a rock, there would be an adaptive change to the vortex shape and its internal forces and this change would in due course lead to and altered trajectory of the vortex centre. The change would take some time to have an effect and this time would depend upon the precise evolution of the vortex geometry. Effects spiral inwards.

With no external influences, the flow would move in stereotypical patterns that would, after some investigation, be amenable to scientific description, with stories of forces and inertia being sufficient to make quantitative predictions. Big vortices have a large ‘mass’ and hence ‘momentum’ and this allows them to push smaller vortices out of the way but in reality this is due to the large field forces surrounding the vortex as opposed to any innate property of the vortex centre itself.

The motion of a speck of dust on the surface of the water can be described with a radial and a tangential component and this can be interpreted as free movement (inertia) around the orbital with some sort of ‘force’ pulling the speck (mass) towards the centre of the spiral. What is observed however is motion, not forces.

Similar considerations then apply to our solar system. Space is permeated by a ‘living’ field which influences all the celestial bodies and is ultimately responsible for their movement and indeed creation. It is not the case that the stars are sending out radiative fields to pull other bodies towards them; the Universal Field instead oversees all cosmological organisation.

Is space really permeated by an infinite unseen force field?
Well this is what Newtonian theory says and most people seem content to think so.

Is it really the case that a weak disembodied force can influence the movement of the sun or entire galaxy?
See answer above.

If the force is not radiative then what is the inverse square law?
See the image of the whirlpool. Energy spirals inwards here and forces become stronger towards the centre. The inverse square law is solely a consequence of geometry whatever the nature of the actual force

What would happen if there were an explosion on the Sun?
This is similar to what would happen if a firework were tossed into a water vortex. The vortex field would be disturbed and the effect would propagate outwards from the centre at a speed we call the speed of sound in water. This is analogous to speed-of-light effects propagating out from the sun. This is not, however, the same as the sun radiating out gravity waves on a daily basis to keep the Earth in orbit.

Just because some gravitational effects propagate out from the Sun it doesn’t mean all of them do. The formulation of a gravitational field supposedly emanating from mass together with the inverse square law has caused scientists to attribute all of the effects they see as being caused by the same radiative force called gravity all coming from a centralised source.

Laws are formulated under this assumption and because they seem to make good predictions they are then accepted as some fundamental truth.

Does a Gravitational Field Continuously Regenerate, or is it “Frozen?”
The field does not need to regenerate as it is not produced by anything let alone the sun. It is self-generating and operates according to its own laws with the inverse square law being a simplified observation of something that happens near planets. The field is in a constant state of ‘movement’, it contains its own ‘energy’.

What is this ‘Law’ you speak of?
The field equation of Konstantin Meyl.

What is fundamental?
The field equation is fundamental. This is analogous to the field equations that describe the flow in water: the Navier-Stokes equations.

What is not fundamental?
Everything else; everything that happens that we actually observe. Ripples travel through a whirlpool with some consistency but this doesn’t mean that they form a separate fundamental entity called ‘photons’ or whatever; they are an emergent phenomenon dependent upon the underlying properties of water.

Two small sticks move closer together on a pond via a resonant ripple effect. They are both emitting gravity waves which attract each other? No! This is just an illusion; it is the water, the substrate, that is causal here, not an inert bit of wood. Planets do not attract each other it is just that space moves them together.

What is the field ‘like’?
The field is dynamic version of Maxwell’s equations where electricity and magnetism are merely different aspects of the same thing. Constant movement of the field makes it ‘alive’ and enables propagation of emergent effects such as light. Other effects contribute to the concept of ‘energy’ which again is not fundamental but a way of expressing observations of specific patterns in field movements.

How does light propagate?
As ripples moving across a pond may traverse a water vortex so is light merely a modulation of the ambient field and so will its trajectory be determined by that field. The field itself is the substrate for field modulations.

“There is only the Field” – Meyl

Ripples will follow a vortex and move at the speed of light (sound) within that vortex and as a consequence its speed is added to that of the vortex moving through space. Two vortices moving towards each other may therefore view light in the opposite vortex as moving faster than Einstein’s ‘c’.

Where does the energy come from to move massive objects?
All objects are just manifestations of the Field themselves and will operate according to local field conditions. There is no matter or even mass as distinct from field configurations and so no need for any transfer of ‘energy’ between different type of fundamental stuff.

An object in a gravitation field is moving under its own ‘steam’ . The local field is propagating according to local conditions. Propagation is on a point by point basis and each point has no concept of the total ‘mass’ of the object. This makes it obvious that the acceleration under gravity is independent of the mass of the object.

Precession of the equinox. The Earth is said to undergo ‘precession’, to rotate in the sky in synchrony with the Pleiades star cluster, Sirius and the whole of our Solar System. The whole cycle takes about 26,000 years. Nobody believes that all these bodies are somehow dragging each other around by means of a radiative force. [video]

What is happening is that all these ‘masses’ are caught up in the same galactic helical field vortex which spans several light years and is responsible for the rotation of all bodies within its sphere of influence.

To try to imagine this as a collection of radiative forces is just too difficult but to picture it as a giant eddy current in a flowing galactic ‘river’ gives a nice idea of what is going on.

Newton’s concerns: “That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one another, is to me so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it.”

Newton’s basic view of the Universe, which is reinforced by his mathematical theories, is therefore one where a collection of solid objects called ‘matter’ float about in an all pervading ‘vacuum’ that by definition has no properties or useful qualities of its own.

This world view pretty much rules out the development of any theory of gravity acceptable to Newton himself!

Matter is regarded as basic and fundamental but again has no ‘qualities’ as such and needs additional properties such as ‘mass’ and ‘charge’ to somehow allow it to interact with the rest of the universe. The rest of the universe meaning other chunks of matter separated by a lifeless vacuum.

The idea of gravity is an embryonic field theory but Newton was trying to graft it on to a system already overloaded with unnecessary concepts. He was trying at the same time to regard matter and space as being at the heart of reality whilst denying them the possibility of distant communication.

He needed to discard these ideas and start from scratch with Field Theory as fundamental and to then add matter and space back in as being subservient to the field, as emerging from it rather than somehow creating it.

General Relativity. Einstein was on the right track with the idea of an all pervasive universal field but in the rubber sheet concept (right), space and matter are still fundamentally different concepts and the idea of a force arises from the interaction between two such different ‘stuffs’.

“Matter tells spacetime how to curve, and curved spacetime tells matter how to move” – J.A, Wheeler

This is circular and mind-bending with causality being shifted from pillar to post and back. Moreover, it doesn’t say how these things communicate with each other. In our example, the Sun would be the cause of a large dimple in space-time, with movement of the Sun registering as further deformations of the field which propagate at light speed.

This doesn’t help our case as no light speed propagation is observed and the data suggests ‘synchrony’ of Sun and Earth rather than distant ‘influence’.

Einstein was still bewitched by the illusion of ‘matter’ as being solid, real, fundamental and indeed causal in somehow orchestrating cosmic events.

Imagine the diagram above but without the mass. We do not need the mass itself as we can easily detect its ‘presence’ by the distortion of space with which it is now synonymous. No mass ‘moves’ as now the rubber sheet itself is endowed with the properties which will cause movement of the dimple i.e. movement within the field itself. Movement which is consistent with the observed laws of physics.

David Bohm, like everybody else, saw separate objects moving around independently of each other and yet at the same time seemingly in step to produce what he called the Explicate Order. Since inanimate objects are not normally capable of organising themselves there must be an unseen Implicate Order responsible for these patterns. [page]

The Implicate Order then is the field equation of Meyl (above) and the Explicate Order is everything else that we see and measure, from the movement of galaxies to the double-slit experiment of quantum mechanics.

The equation specifies the evolution of the field at every point in space and time with field propagation at light-speeds giving the impression of conventional causality.

This evolution, it is to be stressed, is local and confined to an infinitesimally small point, meaning there is no influence from one point to another over any distance at all, even a trillionth of an an angstrom; there is no granularity to reality.

Global order is maintained by a finite propagation speed with the solutions to the equation leading to the large scale patterns we observe, as with the water vortex.

This is the seeming paradox of field equations, that the rules are strictly local but the solutions global. The Implicate order is not a global plan but a local description of field properties, whilst the Explicate Order is the emergent patterns that we actually observe and measure and have mistaken for the Fundamental Laws of Nature.

Related pages:

References:

The Speed of Gravity – What the Experiments Say
Author: Tom Van Flandern
https://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/TheSpeedofGravity-WhattheExperimentsSay.htm

The speed of gravity: A conversation with Rupert Sheldrake
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmbaqmX016M

Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation

Precession is one of the biggest failures in the mainstream gravity only model! What is it hiding? – See the Pattern
https://youtu.be/-oPE3l5E8uk

The website of Konstantin Meyl: http://meyl.eu

Stefan Lanka on DNA

DNA is not a solid complex molecule which contains so much data that it serves as a blueprint for Life and nor is it self-replicating in any way. Instead is is a spontaneous materialisation and dynamic organisation of matter that arises from the needs and energy flows of the parent cell.

This page contains transcribed material from Stefan’s lecture followed by some comments that try to resolve his descriptions with the laws of contemporary physics.

Stefan Lanka: What biology IS – body and soul biology and the substance life is made of.

Stefan on RNA: “Here we have a typical diagram of DNA. As soon as a small amount of organic material has accumulated along with a few minerals they form themselves and whatever is beneficial for the metabolism stays there longer and is integrated into the chromosomes. This enables our body to learn how to deal with toxins such as alcohol.”

“Bacteria quickly learn to metabolise everything which is presented to them and which doesn’t kill them straight away. What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger!

“The first experiment I did as a biologist was to see that when you keep increasing dioxin concentrations and at the same time suddenly withdraw the nutrient solution, the bacteria start digesting the dioxin. The nutrient solution is depleted and they live solely on this toxin. The same thing happens when antibiotics are used instead of dioxins; the bacteria start to metabolise them.

“If the nutrient solution is then suddenly given back to them and the poison is simultaneously taken away – they die. They first have to re-learn to metabolise the solution and that is what the RNA is for.

“RNA comes in all variations and that is why a PCR test can test anyone positive for anything. All you have to say is that this is the gene sequence for this or that, and after looking for long enough you will find it. Or you let the PCR run for a long time and it will produce sequences that weren’t there before.

“RNA is self generating. RNA is its own catalyst.

“In that sense it is another presentation of Life and of how Life, invisible to us, emerges from this substance water (Pi water)”

Stefan on DNA: “Here we have a model of DNA. Current science believes that DNA defines the body’s metabolism, that it is the dominator. But it is not that in any way. It is a resonator and stabiliser! It changes permanently (continually?) and serves mainly to release energy in the body.”

“The DNA is coiled up in this diagram, as you can see, but geneticists have known for a long time, that DNA is a long strand in the nucleus most of the time, and it only coils up in this X-shaped way when the cell is dividing. So it is ‘unwound’ most of the time. And not only that, it also constantly builds up and unwinds again. It is not a fixed strand that never changes, it constantly builds up and reassembles itself.”

“The reason why the DNA in the cell nucleus does not get knotted up, is because it constantly builds up and breaks down again, it oscillates. Geneticists, who believe in fixed genes, cannot explain this. It’s a constant transforming, a coming into being, a disappearing again. This is our current knowledge about DNA.“

“But if you are stuck in cellular theory you cannot imagine what you see here. You are forced to think in a too complicated way, you are forced to think in incorrect models. Incorrect models that have been imposed on us throughout our history.“

“This history of ours has culminated in corona. I must say ‘Thank God’ because, through it, we have the chance to get rid of this global dogma, to bring it to a controlled implosion.”

On the atomic theory of reality: “With all this, I have a completely different understanding of my body, of the interrelationships and also connectedness with the cosmos. The atomic theory had prevented this understanding.” – Lanka

“In pre-Socratic times we had the Ancient Greek principle of ‘as above, so below’, and the atomic way of thinking destroyed this way of thinking.

“Democritus said that if we keep cutting through the hemp rope, then suddenly it is no longer hemp, suddenly it is no longer known matter; only atoms remain; we don’t know anything about these atoms but they simply must be there. He then presented this atom theory as an explanation of Life: atoms come into contact with each other, molecules are formed and so on.

“This is 2500 year old rubbish, and it stinks to high heaven; it’s simply incorrect. This has lead us to this dead end and maybe, thank God, we are in this dead end, because we must end this global dogma.

“The weakest point in the whole theory is the virus dogma.”

Key points

Our concept of the atom has held back progress
RNA and DNA are energy accumulators
RNA and DNA have some sort of ‘memory’
Both are created ‘out of nothing’
Creation is not sequential but parallel
There is no ‘replication’ as such
The structure of DNA is determined by the cell
PCR tests are just nonsense

Comments

The concept of a molecule that we are familiar with resembles the illustration on the right where hard metallic looking atoms are held together by indestructible looking bonds which are themselves made of metal, glass or sometimes Bakelite.

Physicists don’t think of them like this (I hope!) but this is how most other people will picture then and whilst this is fine for many purposes it is quite crippling for the imagination and will strongly discourage any hypothesis that is hard to reconcile with this visual image.

Stefan blames the Ancient Greeks but whilst they had some theory of atomism or materialist reductionism, I can’t imagine that they had in mind the image presented above.

Indeed Konstantin Meyl insists that the texts have been mis-translated and that what was proposed was more like his theory of vortex physics which supposes that what we call ‘atoms’ are really agglomerations of field vortices:

“Remarkable about the passage by Plato is not only the fact, that the potential vortex already was known for 2500 years and was taken into consideration for an interpretation, but also the realization that during the described transition the smells form. Smell thus would be a vortex property!” – Konstantin Meyl: Scalar waves p.189

Stefan Lanka wants to describe biological ‘substances’ such as pi-water as the current atomic model is in contradiction with his observations, but the vortex model of Meyl is much more sympathetic to his needs.

As above, so below.

Atoms are composed of fundamental (spherical/toroidal) field vortices and molecules are collections of such. Within this model, the transmutations of Kervran do not seem so unlikely and Meyl describes how solar neutrinos may be captured by the water vortices and materialised as electrons in biological systems.

The vortex structure is seen at all scales of physical reality and so the Greek’s principle of ‘as above, so below‘ is now preserved. This follows from the vortex model of Meyl ,which has field movement as fundamental, and the hairy ball theorem which makes a torus structure a necessity; the torus being the only shape able to sustain smooth energy flow without a discontinuity.

Atoms, electrons, blood flow, brain function, weather systems and galaxies are now all composed of the same ‘stuff’ (field vortices) and all conform to a toroidal topology.

If Stefan were to discover the theories of Meyl he would be able to ‘wash and not get wet’.

(DNA) is a resonator and stabiliser! – Lanka
Suspension bridges are prone to dangerous resonant vibrations from wind vortices and earthquakes are are therefore fitted with either counterweights to damp oscillations or connectors (right) at odd intervals to prevent the formation of standing waves..

A cell is in a constant state of energetic vibration and it is therefore perfectly conceivable that some sort of damping system is necessary to absorb surplus energy, whether it be from acoustic waves or electromagnetic pulses (photons).

Various scientists have observed that DNA is the perfect structure to form a fractal antenna meaning it will receive a large variety of frequencies and not just a narrow resonant band. Some have the DNA emitting some sort of instructions to the rest of the cell but the most prosaic explanation is that it is there to stabilise cellular vibration.

Energy is conserved and in biological systems this must happen at all physical scales from the whole organism to the sub-cellular level. There should exist, by analogy with electrical systems, buffers, accumulators and transducers all over the place to ensure smooth flow but these considerations are not talked about too much.

Energy comes into a cell according to supply but is used up according to demand and these do not necessarily match up so there is a need to temporarily store energy as it becomes available and to release it again as it is required.

“It changes continually and serves mainly to release energy in the body.”” – Lanka.

Reality at the atomic level according to Konstantin Meyl is best described as a field structure consisting of potential vortices and eddy currents which are in continual movement and interaction with each other. Some vortices stabilise into what we call ‘atoms’ and others into energetic ‘quanta’ such as photons.

Movement and transmutation are continual, with larger whirlpools sometimes absorbing the smaller before splitting again into different configurations. A molecule of water can be split and the oxygen transmuted to nitrogen and even carbon, so we have the main constituents of nucleic acids created on the spot from H2O and spare energy.

This seems precisely what Lanka is describing above: “(DNA) constantly builds up and breaks down again, it oscillates. Geneticists, who believe in fixed genes, cannot explain this. It’s a constant transforming, a coming into being, a disappearing again. This is our current knowledge about DNA.“

Hs observations are clearly consistent with the atomic model of Konstantin Meyl.

The adaptability of cells and bacteria has been confirmed by many researchers with The ‘Hill effect’ demonstrating increased resistance to toxins of not just the poisoned cells, but also their non-poisoned relatives!

Mae-Wan Ho in The fluid genome describes bacteria with a defective lac-z gene adapting to the introduction of lactose. The cells could not process it at first but soon adapted and ‘corrected’ their defective gene, thereby ‘remembering’ the new metabolic process and passing it on to the next generation.

Causation is top-down in biological systems, with the cellular cytoplasm forming a de-facto cognitive system which is obviously capable of interpreting input and registering the response as a very precise and directed alteration of DNA sequences.

This is what has been missed and seems inconceivable to most people: that it is the cellular activity which is responsible for creating the precise structuring of the DNA and not the other way around!

If the DNA is coming and going as Lanka claims, then it cannot itself be the storage medium for cellular memories or metabolic programs. There must be something else.

John Stuart Reid in his video shows that cymatic patterns induced in water droplets were produced more readily if the droplet had experienced them before and the rates increased with repeated exposure, So a memory of the procedure has somehow been created and recalled at a later time in response to a similar stimulus

Where is this memory stored? There is no DNA here that we know of and the molecular structure if water is not fixed so it seems unlikely that any data can be stored in the physical substance of the water> We are again left with the idea that something else is necessary.

A bio-field based on the magnetic vortices as described by Konstantin Meyl is an obvious solution to all these conundrums. Physical patterns or electrical disturbances in the water or in the movement of DNA strands are registered in this informational field and become available fr use at a later time.

If DNA vanishes then it can be re-materialised again from the information residue in the bio-field and if the cell needs to reproduce, a copy of the DNA is manufactured directly from this field by materialisation and transmutation. No replication needs to take place, there is no need to ‘read’ information from the existing DNA strand as the information is already there, held in a separate domain.

Information can be passed down generations in this way and this is what constitutes inheritance; there is no need to pass on the actual physical DNA as this will be reconstituted from the bio-field information – see Telegony

Conscious materialisation. Lanka has said in another video that “Life is the materialisation of consciousness” (Stefan Lanka: vitalism), indicating that the arrangement of DNA base pairs may not be the sole chance of the laws of physics but that there may be some specific organisational principle at work behind the scenes.

Here again the scalar waves of Meyl should be considered. He has said that the brain is a scalar wave computer (What is the brain?) and so we now have an actual mechanism for consciousness that is supported by contemporary physics and is potentially capable of organising not only thoughts but the materialisation and construction of DNA and RNA.

This bio-field is electromagnetic in nature and will therefore be sensitive to disturbances of this nature whether generated inside the cell or introduced from the outside.

What do isolation experiments show? Virologists are very excited about these and imagine that they are somehow finding small quantities of RNA in tissue cultures but from the above comments we see that they are not isolating RNA but instead are actually creating it from scratch!

There is no replication according to Lanka, only materialisation. The RNA strands are being created from the tissue culture and their structure will reflect the conditions in that culture which arise from a combination of the host bio-field, the chemicals introduced into the culture and very likely the ambient electromagnetic field conditions.

Virologists say that certain viruses are very difficult to cultivate and that very specific conditions and procedures are required. Well this doesn’t sound consistent with a naturally transmissible pathogen, instead a strong association between procedure and gene sequence suggests that it is the procedure itself that is responsible for the measured genome sequence.

Virologists also say that they can track a new variant of virus throughout the season by measurement of the genome but all this proves is that the sequencing techniques are somehow sensitive to the seasons and latitude. Either the host organism, the tissue culture itself or the PCR procedure is sensitive to the Earth’s geomagnetic field and it is variations in this that lead to stereotypical changes in the genome.

Kou et al found that different types of influenza (type A, type B, H1N1) tended to predominate in particular locations at particular times of year and that they were often related to dramatic changes in the weather. This does rather suggest that it is the latitude and season themselves that are being reflected directly in the genome sequence.

This is not an unreasonable hypothesis. The body is regulated by a scalar wave network and the cellular bio-field works on the same principle and so we would expect electromagnetic disturbances to affect this process somehow, with the adaptive, interpretive and teleological nature of the cellular system ensuring stable and reproducible results.

The loose correlation between sequenced genome and disease manifestation is also explained. The change in climatic conditions at a specific time and at a specific latitude has the twin effects of making people sick and also of changing the sequencing results. The two effect are linked but not causal with respect to each other, thereby leading to confusion over false positive tests and ‘asymptomatic’ disease.

The idea of a ‘virus’ being ‘replication competent‘ in this scenario makes no sense whatsoever. There is no ‘reading’ of the RNA strand and no molecular machinery to make new RNA to order. The cell itself is in charge of what happens within the cell. DNA and RNA are energy accumulators and transporters and not instruction manuals. DNA is downstream of cellular organisation, not its origins or blueprint.

Cell division. ” DNA is a long strand in the nucleus most of the time, and it only coils up in this X-shaped way when the cell is dividing.” – Stefan Lanka
This makes a lot of sense; the DNA acts as an energy buffer, absorbing and releasing energy as required until it is time for the cell to divide.

Once the molecules have coiled up into a helix, the laws of physics cause the strands to form an antenna and sufficient energy is accumulated to power cell division. See Meyl on DNA

Comparison with mainstream explanation.

The mainstream explanation as to how DNA is replicated involves complicated molecular machinery and a sequential construction method whereby base pairs are ‘read’ one at a time and then somehow a new pair is obtained, moved into place and fixed onto the end of the new strand.

Miraculous indeed! This is made to seem reasonable by nicely constructed cartoons and videos but in reality it creates more questions than it solves.

How do these machines work in a dense viscose water gel?
How are the new base pairs moved into place so precisely?
Where and what is the power supply for all this machinery?
How exactly do you ‘read’ a base pair and how is this information represented?
If DNA is constructed by a molecular machine , then what constructs the machine?
Where is the blueprint for the molecular machine and how is it inherited?

In addition to these questions we have the fact that DNA is claimed to consist of 3 billion base pairs that are replicated in about 1 hour. This means that the base pairs are being aligned and attached at a rate of more than 800,000 per second!

This is just not credible without further evidence. DNA is therefore not created sequentially and not transported around the cell or assembled by a machine but created in parallel and constructed on the spot according to either fixed physical laws or information from a distributed bio-field.

The description from Stefan Lanka is one of a gradual emergence from a structured vortex flow that is in tune with the energy needs of the cell. The mechanism is consistent with the known laws of physics from Konstantin Meyl and the observations of biological transmutation from Louis Kervran.

Cellular water is arranged in vortices which continually absorb neutrino energy from the sun and distribute it to the rest of the cell. DNA and RNA act as a buffer to smooth energy flow with temporary excess being used to transmute water to higher energy molecules such as carbon and nitrogen.

These molecules eventually join together in a spiral structure which accelerates the accumulation of energy and in due course will enable cellular reproduction.

The physical changes see in cells can be seen, not so much as the result of mechanical action or ‘design’ but as a reflection of energy management, which works at least in part by the continual transmutation from low to high energy molecular states and back again.

Related pages:

References:

Stefan Lanka: What biology IS – body and soul biology and the substance life is made of
https://odysee.com/@counterpropaganda2020:a/Stefan-Lanka–What-biology-IS—Body-and-soul-biology-and-the-substance-life-is-made-out-of:9

Konstantin Meyl: Scalar waves https://www.meyl.eu/

Differences in Influenza Seasonality by Latitude, Northern India – Koul et al
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4193176/

Stefan Lanka: What is Life?

This page is a copy and paste of two auto-translated pages from Stefan Lanka’s Newsletter Archive. The articles are : “What is Life?” and “In the beginning was sugar” and the source page is here .

What is Life? – 6 September 2013

The correct answer is: life is maintaining and increasing the flow of energy and matter. Surface formation from the liquid water creates energy and all things and structures emerge from it. “Water is life “ is a true statement.

All substances and biomolecules of all kinds are formed in the water, as Oparin and Miller & Urey were the first to show. Sugar molecules as energy stores and nucleic acids that generate energy are the first visible structures that arise.

Jellyfish arise in this way, Bear animals and even our heart was first a pulsating tube from a stabilized water membrane. This only gets the final form through immigrant muscle cells when blood cells flow through it (knowledgecreatesplus No. 2/2013).

What is called giant viruses today, of which I was in 1986 the first isolated from the sea are structures that arise in the water without a template. Bacteria arise from them when they grow up. There are so many „ viruses “ in the sea that they are strung together form a thread of 200 million light years.

When bacteria merge, cells are created. And they do this all the time because the cohesion of the water membrane, the coexistence, the symbiosis is the basis of life. All bacteria, cells and bears that have a circular nucleic acid are theoretically immortal, since this, when wetted with water, immediately generates energy again.

Dramatic consequences of a plagiarism

On the other hand, almost all doctors and interested people believe that life is only a system property of cells and multicellers. Everything else is called dead matter. Cells would operate a metabolism, ensure their inheritance through the formation and maintenance of a genetic material, and differentiate themselves from the outside world through a shell membrane.

This enveloping membrane also consists of the surface tension membrane of the water, which is stabilized by minerals, sugar, fats and proteins. Like everything, it is constantly in motion and can only be maintained through a constant flow of energy. It is impossible to define where it starts and where it ends.

Cells are therefore a system property of water and an expression of a higher development of life. They are connected to everything and everyone via the water, because the water runs through e.g. in the form of air humidity the whole cosmos. There is no absolute vacuum.

To deny the apparently inanimate the potential to live is the result of an outrageous plagiarism from 1858. Rudolf Virchow gave important results from two researchers (Friedrich Günsburg and Robert Remak) on cells that developed and published these findings many years earlier than his own findings.

He therefore had to constantly suppress their knowledge and skills and was therefore able to discover the cotyledons by the doctor Remak and do not perceive their importance for explaining development, health and illness. Dr. Hamer. Günsburg and Remak died very early in the Gram.

The birth of today’s conventional medicine

At the same time, Virchow gave up his knowledge that life arises from the water and claimed that only cells live and that diseases arise from defects in cells. The fixation on cells was made by the publication of his „ Cellular Pathology “ in February 1858 to the new dogma and replaced the existing dogma of medicine, the ancient teaching of juices.

After the Virchow plagiarism of 1858, diseases were and still are explained by the fact that cells become defective and still have the strength to multiply more than healthy cells. In the end, the theological worldview, according to which evil is stronger than good, was transferred to a new, very successful sham science model.

Through his plagiarism, taking over the results of others without appreciating them, he neutered himself and medicine. He left science, holism, symbiosis with other researchers and was cut off from further knowledge. From then on he was restless, always with the fear of being caught and this restlessness gave him an inglorious death.

The plagiarism of Virchows also did not develop Friedrich Günsberg’s enormous potential. The Bavarian State Library published some of his most important works. In his essay on cholera he warns of the dramatic undesirable developments in medicine.

I wrote this article to make it understandable why western university medicine, through its tunnel view of cells, cannot grasp the basics of life and cannot recognize relationships. From this perspective, the big questions about life, health and illness cannot be answered. The rehabilitation of Günsberg and Remaks and the awareness of the Virchow plagiarism should lead to a new beginning of medicine.

On the 5th and 6th. October there is a seminar specifically on this topic Hann. Coins. They will find out how biology is reflected in our behaviour and relationships on the 14th and 15th. September in the Switzerland and from 11th to 14th. October in Austria. From the 21st to the 26th. October has first-hand knowledge and therapy at the congress Knowledge of being healthy in Langenargen.

I look forward to meeting you and a symbiosis that will create plus: for you and for everyone.

your

Dr. rer. nat. Stefan Lanka

In the beginning was the sugar. – 7-August-2013

It is clear to everyone that having energy and maintaining the flow of energy is crucial. Keeping the flow of energy running and increasing is life. It is therefore not surprising that the first complex molecules that arise automatically in the water consist of sugars. The Russians have known this since Oparin, NASA recently when it found that water and sugar are involved even in star formation.

The RNA and DNA, which maintain the energy supply in each cell, result from sugars. The matrix as well, which surrounds every cell and in which all cells live. Every organ, every structure first forms from a shell made of density water, which is increasingly stabilized by long-chain sugar molecules. This is how the jellyfish is created.

After organs and structures work, cells form, migrate into them, stabilize and support the functions. It is only through this process that the organs look as we know them. This creates all structures, veins, bones, organs, the brain and the heart (No. 2/2013 from knowledgecreatesplus). Lack of certain types of sugar in stages of this development, e.g. because breastfeeding is not carried out, malformations can occur.

During my time as a marine and microbiologist, I gained experience with algae and the long-chain sugars formed in them. I needed high-purity purifications of it to isolate and characterize the first harmless “virus “ from the sea and the extremely long, circular DNA. Today such harmless „ giant viruses “ are discovered in the current band. They are obviously the forerunners of bacteria and thus of cellular life.

These sugars have long been used in the form of dry substances and hydrogels in nutrition, cosmetics and medicine. We are currently developing a special sugar polymer with the aim of providing the brain and thus the energy supply to the body „ young “, i.e. to get fully functional. If our considerations are correct, these sugars also help our outer and inner skins „ young “ to remain and the most important thing is to maintain our internal and external communication skills.

When blood vessels formed without a template during experiments with these sugars Researchers from Freiburg more than amazed: „ It is astonishing that the organization of the endothelial cells in our gels can take place without surrounding supporting cells. “

Sheldrake’s TED talk

Rupert Sheldrake’s TED talk , “The Science Delusion”, listed ten points of contention concerning ‘accepted’ tenets of modern science. The presentation caused quite a stir and was “taken out of circulation by TED, relegated to a corner of their website and stamped with a warning label.” – Sheldrake

The general theme of the talk is that contemporary physics, as usually described, is mechanical, materialistic, insufficient to describe biology, inheritance or consciousness and is in any case incomplete of itself. Modern science is therefore deluding itself if it thinks it has the answers to everything or even that it could supply the answers to everything, as it is hampered by its own self-imposed constraints.

This is only partly true. There is a strong streak of ‘materialistic’ thinking in all sciences certainly but field physics and in particular the Theory of Objectivity of Konstantin Meyl do not deal with ‘matter’ or even ‘forces’ as fundamentals of nature and therefore paint a very different picture from the one to which we are accustomed.

The desire to reject ‘materialism’ is fuelled in part by an incomplete description of what actually constitutes ‘materialism’.

The ten points:

Nature is mechanical or machine-like
Matter is unconscious
The laws and constants of Nature are fixed
The quantity of matter and energy is constant and was fixed by the big bang
Nature is purposeless and evolution is without direction
Inheritance is via the continuity of the structure of some physical substance (genes)
Memories are retained in the brain as material traces
‘Mind’ is inside the head and consciousness is just brain activity
Apparent paranormal abilities such as telepathy are the illusions of Bad Science
Mechanistic medicine is the only one that matters

3. The laws and constants of Nature are fixed
Yes! Of course they are! If not then how does the universe run? How does it maintain pattern, order and stability? If the laws that maintain order are changing all the time then there must be some meta-laws that determine how these changes occur.

The alternative is that things just happen and anyone who thinks that can just give up on pretending to be a scientist.

The problem we have is not whether or not the laws are fixed but whether or not the laws and constants that scientists use to describe reality are in fact the fundamental laws and constants of reality. Countless observational oddities and internal inconsistencies suggest that they are, at best, incomplete.

The laws of physics as described by Konstantin Meyl are described by a single field equation and from this can be derived the laws of gravity, the Schrödinger equation and the laws of general relativity. So Meyl’s equation can reasonably be described as ‘fundamental’ but the other laws cannot. They are just mathematical representations of isolated laboratory observations.

The speed of light. In his talk Rupert mentions that the speed of light slowed down by about 20 km/s between 1928 and 1945 before resuming its approved value. The response of the standards authorities was to simply re-define the length of the metre in terms of the speed of light so as to correct for the difference
So the speed of light is now a constant by decree (but not by observation) and length is no longer fundamental. But what about ‘time’? Is that not fundamental?

We have no direct way of measuring time and the best we can do is to count the number of oscillations of an atomic clock and declare the result to be representative of elapsed time. A big problem with this is the following chart which shows that two atomic clocks in the same room but oriented differently will keep very good time with each other – except during an eclipse!

So we are stuck with a science that somehow regards length as a variable quantity and has no reliable way of measuring elapsed time and we can therefore ask: “What then is meant by speed?” or “How on can we measure distance travelled per second when we have no stable definition of either a metre or a second?”

We have too many variables and no clear idea as to which are to be regarded as ‘fundamental’.

The solution.

Konstantin Meyl cuts through the confusion with a single field equation (below). This equation only is ‘fundamental’ and nothing else.

This is the entire equation and there are no three types of mass, no separate force of inertia, electrostatic attraction, gravity etc. and as a consequence, no need for multiple ‘constants’ to mediate between such entities.

Both time and distance and the speed of light are dependent upon field strength, with high field strength leading to a shrinking of distance and a slowing of time. Light speed can vary in absolute terms but measurements of it will remain constant to the observer because as lengths shrink, so will time slow down, giving the impression to the observer of a fixed light-speed.

The observer is now part of the experiment and will shrink or speed up along with the experimental equipment and the observed phenomena.

It is the variations of the rate of atomic clocks owing to changes in the solar neutrino stream that is likely leading to variations of the measured speed of light.

4. The quantity of matter and energy is constant and was fixed by the big bang. Classical physics is clearly struggling on this one. There can be no explanation of such an initial event in terms of known physics simply because the bang itself, having created the laws of physics must therefore precede them and hence cannot be derived from them.

According to Meyl, ‘matter’ is a stable balance of positive and negative field elements which together cancel each other out. Matter can be materialised from non-matter and can be destroyed again to leave nothing behind. The total amount of ‘energy’ in a particle is always zero and so the total amount of ‘energy’ in the universe is in fact constant and equal to zero.

Einstein’s famous E=mc² is incorrect and Tesla agreed with this, having claimed to have destroyed billions of atoms with no ill effects.

Note that Meyl’s assertions concerning mass and energy derive straight from his single field equation which therefore remains the single fundamental assertion with all other physical entities being emergent properties of those equations.

Contrast this with mainstream physics where the well studied entities matter and energy are held to be fundamentals and obeying the laws of nature but at the same time all coming from the big bang and so cannot really be fundamental. They even derive from something that is not itself part of the laws of nature, is not describable by them and is fundamentally unmeasurable, untestable and un-falsifiable.

The whole framework is topsy-turvy and badly structured. We need a single testable hypothesis but what we have a patchwork quilt thrown together from ideas which are good enough of themselves but bear not much relation to each other.

6. Inheritance is via the continuity of the structure of some physical substance (genes) This is just not true. The phenomenon of Telegony is proof of this, the page on The DNA delusion confirms that inheritance has nothing to do with DNA and the page Evolution and Inheritance puts a good case that inheritance is via some sort of informational field.

It is this field that is responsible for morphogenesis and inherited or ‘innate’ behaviour – does anybody really believe that the nest building abilities of a bird for example could be encoded in a few gigabytes of DNA?

Mainstream biology now only ascribes the function of protein construction to DNA and even then there are only 20,000 genes to encode for 100,000 proteins.

What is inherited is, in most general terms, a dynamic pattern of biological activity, or a set of rules for a molecular or neural network. Stable, dynamic patterns are best represented in terms of ‘attractors’ or closed loop control systems and the suggested physical mechanism for these is the magnetic scalar waves as described by Konstantin Meyl. They are stable, dynamic, can co-exist with matter and are not measurable by modern instruments which s why they gave been missed by scientists so far.

These scalar waves are by far the best candidate for Sheldrake’s morphic field.

A bio-field to create the shape of a snowflake? The image, taken from a Michael Clarage lecture shows distinctive looking patterns in the formation of snowflakes. At the same time it is asserted that all snowflakes are different so how do they achieve self-consistency and variety at the same time?

Physics doesn’t provide a good explanation as to how groups of billions of molecules can apparently ‘know’ what each other are doing so some new physics is needed.

The snowflakes are arranged according to some template which is going to be electro-magnetic and cymatic in nature. It looks like some force-field is creating a pattern in the way the molecules are bonding together. However Martin Chaplin claims that even this is not true, with there being no fixed pattern of bonds and instead a constantly shifting landscape of molecular connections which somehow seem to maintain a precise overall shape.

“In the case of ice the hydrogen bonds also only last for the briefest instant but a piece of ice sculpture can ‘remember’ its carving over extended periods.”

“.. the behaviour of a large population of water molecules may be retained even if that of individual molecules is constantly changing.” – Martin Chaplin: The Memory of Water

So what is it that is constant? What is it that determines the overall shape?

7. Memories are retained in the brain as material traces Ideas that the brain works by arrangements of neurons or movement of chemical currents have been ditched I think for ideas that it works by electric fields or currents but this still isn’t correct. The brain most likely works as a scalar wave processor (What is the brain?)

Scalar waves are stable of themselves and have all the characteristics required of a medium for the hosting of cognitive computation:

Parallel processing
Associative memory
Speed of light response
Energy renewed by solar neutrinos (?)
De-coupled from the physical brain

The last is particularly important. The physical brain has its own supply of energy and nutrients. Brain cells will de and be renewed. To have conscious thought somehow coupled to the physical maintenance of the brain or to even use the same processes as are used by that maintenance would surely result in chaos and confusion?

We require that cognition is kept separate from maintenance somehow. We do not want every physical change in the brain leading to, or being perceptible as, a ‘thought’ and nor can we have ‘thoughts’ requiring physical changes in the brain – this is just too slow.

The first computers used mechanical levers to implement logic circuits but they were very slow, the maintenance cost was proportional to the amount of thinking and the complexity of thought was limited by the complexity of the physical structure of the machine.

Modern computers are a big improvement, are much faster and the complexity has been factored out into the software which runs as electric currents. ‘Portable’ software means that the computations are now independent of the hardware that they are running on.

Computers do not maintain themselves however so that electric currents are available for computation whereas in the human brain, electric currents have physical consequences not necessarily related to the intent of conscious thought. Using scalar waves is therefore a much better solution for thought processes that are to be largely independent of the physical state of neurons.

One free miracle: “As Terence McKenna observed, ‘Modern science is based on the principle: ‘Give us one free miracle and we’ll explain the rest.’ The one free miracle is the appearance of all the mass and energy in the universe and all the laws that govern it in a single instant from nothing.” – Sheldrake

So modern science is really asking for a whole set of interrelated miracles which seem finely tuned to permit the existence of life:

“The universe looks more and more like a great thought rather than a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter… we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.” – James Hopwood Jeans (Physicist, mathematician, idealist)

“The characterization of the universe as finely tuned intends to explain why the known constants of nature, such as the electron charge, the gravitational constant, etc., have the values that we measure rather than some other (arbitrary) values. According to the “fine-tuned universe” hypothesis, if these constants’ values were too different from what they are, “life as we know it” could not exist. – Wikipedia

“The fine-tuned universe is the proposition that the conditions that allow life in the universe can occur only when certain universal dimensionless physical constants lie within a very narrow range of values, so that if any of several fundamental constants were only slightly different, the universe would be unlikely to be conducive to the establishment and development of matter, astronomical structures, elemental diversity, or life as it is understood. Various possible explanations of ostensible fine-tuning are discussed among philosophers, scientists, theologians, and proponents and detractors of creationism.” – Fine tuned universe

So a little confusion maybe with the scientists unable to explain in terms of science how the fundamental constants arise and the creationists seizing the opportunity to preach intelligent design. However, both are basing their views on what is apparent and not what is real; both are assuming that the description they have of reality is the best available.

Konstantin Meyl provides the most consistent description of physical reality so far with his Theory of Objectivity. This is based upon a single field equation (see above) and all the ‘fundamental’ constants are derived from this so there is nothing fundamental about them at all.

Meyl has calculated, just from his single equation and with no additional input, the masses of the elementary particles and the radii of the elements [more]

So we really are in a situation now where we only need a single ‘miracle’, which is the prior existence of some medium, the behaviour of which is consistent with the field equation.

“Sooner or later even the last natural scientist will realize, that nature does not provide ‘constants’ at all. If ‘constants of nature’ did exist, as listed in textbooks and encyclopaedias, then they aren’t consistent with causality, since we don’t know the cause, why the factor should have exactly this size and no other. Behind every so-called constant of nature unnoticed is hiding a physical closed loop conclusion. (solution)” – Scalar waves p. 599

So ‘causality’ here remains within the realm of the physical world or more accurately, within the (theoretical) confines of the Theory of Objectivity.

9. Apparent paranormal abilities such as telepathy are the illusions of Bad Science The root cause of this attitude I think is not that there is lots of bad science around (there certainly is) but that paranormal phenomena have, by definition, no plausible mechanism within the accepted scientific frameworks.

This leads to a view that “If there is no mechanism then it isn’t science and so it isn’t really happening.” This isn’t quite true of physicists though. Reading books and papers on biology and consciousness written by physicists it seems that almost all of them believe in some sort of telepathy and even life after death.

The reason is that they are used to working with ‘insubstantial’ entities such as force fields, ‘information’, quantum entanglement and action at a distance. The brain is assumed to work by electric fields and these are the ideal candidate for transmission of thoughts.

Konstantin Meyl describes instead magnetic scalar waves and wave resonance as being the medium of choice for thought transference. These turn out to have precisely the properties required to describe many experiments on ESP.

Are hypothesised to be the medium for cognition
Can form persistent connections between two individuals
Can penetrate walls
Resonant connections do not diminish with distance
Connections may be stronger between related individuals (The ‘Hill effect’)

The existence of a putative mechanism now means that there is something to investigate, something to try and measure or in other words some chance of doing some proper science.

Dean Radin (pictured) is arguably at the forefront of ESP research and is mentioned by Sheldrake. He and others have tried to make a science out of PSI research by introducing rigorous controls and by attempting to remove bias by the introduction of random number generators.

The problem with random number generators however is that there is no guarantee that they are in fact ‘random’. Many are based upon some assumed random process from nature such as radio-active decay but The Shnoll Effect shows that these figures depend upon planetary alignments such as eclipses and the page Neutrinos, eclipses and plagues gives the mechanism as variations in the solar neutrino stream.

One experiment from Radin showed an apparent ability of subjects to introduce a bias into the double slit experiment by thought alone. The choice of slit for a particle to go through had a slight bias that was different from a control experiment.

Dean commissioned some statisticians to repeat the experiment and to comment on the results, [here]. Wallacczek, and Stillfried were unable to produce the results . In addition to this they tried the experiment again but this time with no test subjects at all. They found that they still got a positive result, a difference in bias between the two setups, even with no ESP attempted!

The authors offer various explanations for why this might be, including: “For example, the detection method may manifest a sensitivity to (as-yet) unknown physical factors which are beyond the ability of the particular method to reveal, track, and identify“

So variations in the neutrino stream could conceivably be influential in the irreproducibility and could even be the cause of the effects manifest in the first place.

Despite their best efforts then, ESP researchers may be discovering, not paranormal abilities, but subtle physical influences unknown to most scientists.

2. Matter is unconscious Whether or not this is true depends upon precisely what is meant by ‘unconscious’ but the page The origins of life presents an argument that there is effectively a world parallel to the physical that might be called etheric and consists of an informational field which organises and animates all physical matter.

Assumptions that there is ‘something else’ need to re-examined now, as it is entirely possible that with the recent discoveries by Meyl, we have everything we need in order to explain all of the observations and measurements that we can make of the world.

No sensible discussion on consciousness can take place until we have a reasonable definition or characterisation of: consciousnes

5. Nature is purposeless and evolution is without direction The standard view of evolution is one of small random variations of DNA leading to small random variations of phenotype which are then selected for, with propitious variant surviving to reproduce.

Now quite apart from the fact that DNA has very little to do with inheritance (The DNA delusion), the way that neo-Darwinism is phrased somewhat skips the fact that all development must be according to the laws of physics and must involve rather stable patterns of molecular arrangement or we are finished before we have even started.

The interpolation of DNA and some imaginary transcriptional mechanism has conceptually de-coupled the evolutionary process from any physical law or principle and reduced it to theoretical randomness whilst at the same time giving the impression that almost any end product is possible. In reality though, the construction of a human being must obey some quite restrictive conditions and must be stable to perturbations at all stages of development and evolution.

The ‘direction’ of evolution therefore is towards ever more efficient ways of transducing solar energy into functional shapes and units: Evolution and entropy.
Organisms use the laws of thermodynamics to their evolutionary advantage instead of fighting against them, as explained by Baverstock and Rönkkö:

“In summary, we propose that the life process is based not on genetic variation, but on the second law of thermodynamics .. and the principle of least action, as proposed for thermodynamically open systems by De Maupertuis (Ville et al. 2008), which at the most fundamental level say the same thing. Together they constitute a supreme law of physics..” – Baverstock and Rönkkö

“All results of the evolution in the biosphere that have arisen between the ‘capacitor plates’ of the earth itself and its ionosphere can be regarded as structured capacitor losses, which also apply to humans” – Konstantin Meyl

9. ‘Mind’ is inside the head Yes. Various people have postulated various levels of exotica including a whole extra dimension to house all our memories, but a magnetic scalar-wave network seems sufficient to describe consciousness.

The impression that our thoughts and visions are ‘out there’ is a clever and necessary illusion created by the structure of our cognitive system. (see video above).

The brain maintains spatial awareness by constructing a (literal) internal space with the ‘self’ at the centre. The outside world is big but the brain is small so the internal space is wrapped around in a nested torus system so as to fit it all in.

“The Regularities of Nature are essentially habitual” – Rupert Sheldrake
The field equations of the Theory of Objectivity are fixed but will organise into stable and adaptive control systems at a very early stage and hence manifest as higher ‘laws’ which may well have become ‘habitual’ over a million years of evolution.

Habituation, then , is not at the roots of the laws of physics but an emergent feature of them.

R.S. gives an example of the growth of certain crystal structures which once seemed impossible but now are routine. It seems to be assumed that crystals are formed by the random banging together of molecules which fall into some natural alignment because of their regular shape but if we hypothesise for one moment that there exists a hidden field that induces organisational forces on the molecules then the situation becomes clearer.

Existing crystals lead to an attendant magnetic field which is the entity that acts as the nucleating structure, not the molecules themselves, promoting further growth. Changes in geophysical factors such as the Earth’s magnetic field or variations in neutrino stream operate on this field directly and thence on the the physical molecules indirectly, to produce the changes in the patterns observed.

The experiments of Giorgio Piccardi clearly show time variations of measurable parameters in both biological and chemical processes.

Things which seem both variable and fundamental at the same time are certainly not fundamental but ’emergent’. This is the main reason behind the Science Delusion itself:, that downstream effects have been mistaken for root causes and and variables taken for constants:

“The Science Delusion is the belief that science already understands the fundamental nature of reality in principle, leaving only the details to be filled in” – Rupert Sheldrake

Related pages:

References:

Rupert Sheldrake’s ‘Banned’ Talk – The Science Delusion at TEDx Whitechapel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO4p3xeTtUA

Scalar waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://avalonlibrary.net/Nikola_Tesla/Books/Meyl%20-%20Scalar%20Waves%20(First%20Tesla%20Physics%20Textbook).pdf

Atomic clocks
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/how-do-atomic-clocks-work.html

TED “Bans” the Science Delusion
https://www.sheldrake.org/reactions/tedx-whitechapel-the-banned-talk

Interview with Konstantin Meyl – YouTube
https://youtu.be/tKTkpC-DHZ8

Big Bang is a Big Bluff says Meyl – YouTube
https://youtu.be/xwIJ-URG_P8

The website of Konstantin Meyl – http://meyl.eu

False-Positive Effect in the Radin Double-Slit Experiment on Observer Consciousness as Determined With the Advanced Meta-Experimental Protocol
Authors: Jan Walleczek, and Nikolaus von Stillfried
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6714546/pdf/fpsyg-10-01891.pdf

The evolutionary origin of form and function – Keith Baverstock, Mauno Rönkkö
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24882811/

The Memory of Water: an overview – Martin Chaplin
https://www.academia.edu/47898216/The_Memory_of_Water_an_overview

Newton’s gravity

The Law of Gravitation from Isaac Newton is described as consisting of a force-field that emanates from an object by virtue of its mass and affects other objects at a distance by virtue of their mass. Newton himself was not at all happy with the idea of action at a distance. Konstantin Meyl fixes the problem.

According to Wikipedia, the modern formulation of Newtons Law of Gravitational attraction is as follows:

“Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force acting along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them” – Wikipedia

So each object in the universe is having an effect on other objects, possibly a great distance away. There is no mechanical connection but the idea of something called a ‘force’ has been introduced to make the whole thing seem more plausible.

Newton formalised this and produced a workable theory which was vindicated by experiment, but he wasn’t happy with the implications:

“That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one another, is to me so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it.” – Newton 1692 – Wikipedia

Good man!

The formulation of this ‘influence’ as stated above gives the idea that there is some sort of connection between two distant objects and each is having a causal influence on the other across a space of possibly millions of miles. This impression is so strong that it is given a name, ‘gravity’, and physicists adopt it as a real entity.

Years later, Newton was to write: “I have not yet been able to discover the cause of these properties of gravity from phenomena and I feign no hypotheses…. It is enough that gravity does really exist and acts according to the laws I have explained, and that it abundantly serves to account for all the motions of celestial bodies.” – Newton 1917 Wikipedia

Newton now accepts that gravity itself as an existing phenomenon and is instrumental in the movement of all celestial bodies. The problem of action at a distance has been circumvented by framing gravity itself and not the distant object, as the causal factor, the prime mover.

Progress has been made; the thing causing an object to move around is now not a mass many miles away, but the strength and direction of a local ‘field quantity’. The immediate cause is not distant but but proximal. This marks the start of a move away from material or mechanical action and towards a field physics where abstract field interactions are paramount.

The modern formulation places the particles of distant mass as doing the attracting, as being the first link in a causal chain acting through gravity as a mediator. Newton, however, could find nothing that could be the cause of gravity and so merely had to accept its existence.

In the paragraph quoted above, Newton doesn’t even describe it as a ‘force’ but only says that it accounts for the motions of the objects.

So what is it that causes the gravitational field?
In the field physics of Konstantin Meyl, the field is ever present and evolves according to the field equations of the Theory of Objectivity. There is no ‘mass’ needed to account for the source of the field, no mass for the field to act upon and the motion is not described as being caused by a ‘force’

There are no ‘objects’ in the theory of Meyl and no ‘matter’ exists as distinct from the field. Instead, what we call ‘atoms’ consists of stable states of field vortices which combine together to form molecules and again to form objects, humans and planets.

There is no separation between field and matter and so no need to describe mechanisms by which one may affect the other. Matter and Field are continuous with each other, made of the same ‘stuff’ and subject to the same laws.

The idea of causation as usually conceived, depends upon some sort of separation, some distinction between discrete objects so that an effect or influence may pass from one to the other, possibly via some intermediary such as gravity. This results in a proliferation of concepts, influences and ‘stuffs’ such as gravity, mass (three types no less!), charge, magnetic force, inertia, energy, the permittivity of space etc.

With Meyl’s theory, the field develops according to the field equation at every point in the universe and the emergent patterns are what we perceive as reality. In practice this means that various patterns are formed (eg planets) which result in a concentrated field strength that diminishes with distance and it is this that appears to act as as some sort of ‘force’ field by virtue of the effect that it has on other field variations (other planets, falling apples, human beings).

There is no real matter, mass or forces, merely the illusion of such. The moving together of two ‘objects’ is not by gravity or any action at a distance but by the interaction of the field with itself.

‘Causes’ as such do not travel all over the place but field changes propagate at the speed of light giving the impression of separation and causality whereas in actuality, everything develops as an undivided whole but according to local field conditions only.

Related pages:

References:

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://avalonlibrary.net/Nikola_Tesla/Books/Meyl%20-%20Scalar%20Waves%20(First%20Tesla%20Physics%20Textbook).pdf

The website of Konstantin Meyl: http://meyl.eu

Newton’s law of universal gravitation – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation

Neutrinos, eclipses and plagues

Radioactive decay. Large molecules will ‘decay’ by the emissions of particles and photons at seemingly random time intervals. If we are to believe in an ordered universe at all then we should not be satisfied with explanations involving the random fluctuations of quantum vacuum energy but instead look for a cause in the physical universe.

The solution proposed by Konstantin Meyl in his book Scalar Waves is that neutrinos from the sun will occasionally pass close to an atomic nucleus and the field disturbance thereby created will supply sufficient energy to destabilise the structure and result in the emission of a wave-particle.

This is causal now instead of random and can therefore be tested. If the decay rate depends upon neutrino density then any change in that density will result in an increase or decrease in decay rate.

Thousands of measurements made by Simon Shnoll confirm this hypothesis. Radioactive decay (right) varies according to the time of year and the phases of the moon. The Shnoll Effect

Atomic clocks are based upon such decay and we would therefore expect to see altered timekeeping during significant cosmic events such as eclipses. This turns out to be true with even clocks in the same laboratory losing synchronicity if they are aligned differently with respect to the sun.

Atomic clocks during eclipses The times on two caesium atomic clocks were compared and were seen to be generally in agreement except during an eclipse.

The two clocks were in the same laboratory but were oriented in different directions. This is unexplained by mainstream physics but is not at all surprising if we accept the physics of Konstantin Meyl.

Meyl puts the effect down to an additional energy input from solar neutrinos which become more focused when the sun, earth and moon are in alignment.

Further data from around the world support this correlation and the effect is so strong as to affect various Foucault pendulums around the world.
“The effect of an eclipse of the sun, to which for instance a Foucault pendulum reacts, can equally be traced back to the interaction of the neutrinos as the free energy.” – Scalar Waves p441.

The experiments of both Giorgio Piccardi (right) and Vlial Kaznacheev both showed that biological processes were affected by the season, phases of the moon and particularly by eclipses. The explanation given by Meyl is that biological systems will absorb energy from solar neutrinos and utilise it to their advantage.

The gravitational field of the moon act as a lens, focusing the neutrino stream on some parts of the Earth’s surface, creating ‘hot-spots’ of biological activity (not always beneficial).

From Meyl’s book:

The shadow of an eclipse follows a very precise path across the globe, making it ideal for investigating correlations between the neutrino stream and global events.

Meyl has linked variations in the neutrino stream and alteration in field vortices to both earthquakes and plagues as well as mere sleep disturbances:

“Whoever places himself in the centre line of the complete shadow on August 11, at first will detect a decrease of the neutrino radiation to 50 to 60 percent, then a steep increase to 2800 percent and from the summit again the whole backwards, while standing on the earth he turns by under the moving moon shadow. The ring with half the radiation, which reaches us first, doesn’t pose a problem since, as said, we only have half the radiation in every night. Some animals and plants as a result erroneously will set out for sleep.” – Scalar waves p. 417

“In the case of an eclipse of the sun effects on the biology, like problems with the heart among affected, at least can’t be excluded. If the scalar wave density increases above the density which is normal, then this has a positive effect on the economy of energy, as long as the body is capable to regulate the amount taken up. If the regulatory process however should fail . then the risk of a self-inflammation exists. “

“Also straw bales and other organic and inflammable materials could thus go up in flames.”

“But before that happens, first the information technical influence of the scalar waves will show. Here we have to expect a psychotronic influencing, which is showing in a limited ability of perception. History teaches us as an example that a by Thales of Milet predicted total eclipse of the sun at 28.5.585 B.C. compulsorily has ended a battle in Asia Minor between the Medes and the Lydians, because the soldiers apparently most literally had gone out of their mind” – Scalar waves p. 419

Death and war play dice about the fate of mankind during the
eclipse of the sun of 1562

There are in fact several papers on the effects of eclipses on health but results are patchy and research is struggling as they have no putative mechanism to investigate and so effects are assumed to be largely psychosomatic. Patients with schizophrenia appear to be particularly sensitive, showing both behavioural and physiological changes during the eclipse:

“Of the hormones studied, it is prolactin which showed an increase in titre associated with behavioural abnormalities in concerned patients during and immediately after the total solar eclipse.

“We find that over the six post eclipse days the previously increased titre of prolactin shows a tendency to come down gradually to the normal and behavioural abnormalities and symptoms like sleep disturbance, restlessness and anxiety were seen in patients” – Boral et al

Related pages:

References:

Meyl’s website
https://www.meyl.e u/

Scalar waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242200443_Scalar_Waves_Theory_and_Experiments_1

Effects of total solar eclipse on mental patients; a clinico-biochemical correlation – Boral, Mishra, Pal, Ghosh
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3013169/

Lunar phase and psychiatric illness in Goa – Parmeshwaran, Patel, Fernandes
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2962285/

The origins of life

This page is presents an argument to the effect that there is no sharp dividing line between animate and inanimate matter and hence no single point at which life begins. The life principle is not one of complexity or of digital coding but rather a learning system based upon feedback between the physical body and an organisational/informational field structure.

Key assertions:

The life principle is present in the fundamental laws of physics
Feedback systems exist at the molecular level
Exactly the same pattern exists in whole organisms at the macro level
Reproduction and selection precede the formation of the cell
Organisation and feedback must precede the development of the cell
The organisational field is comprised of magnetic scalar waves
The evolutionary process is driven by energetic input from solar neutrinos

So ‘life’ forms a continuum from the most fundamental particles all the way up the scales of size, functionality and complexity, to a complete organism and even further to entire ecosystems.

The simplest diagram to illustrate this is shown below. Energy from the sun fuels a closed loop control system composed two components: the physical and the organisational. Additional ‘information’ from the environment includes a selective process and is instrumental in adaptation to that environment.

It is this feedback type structure that should be regarded as the fundamental building block of life, not a molecule, not an atom and not a stand-alone electric field.

The physical element is comprised of the atoms and molecules that we are familiar with. These have limited organisational properties. Maybe, just maybe, they can form regular crystalline structures without instruction, but they will still need some energetic input.

Atoms tend to cluster together to form the discrete structures of molecules which have only a local effect on neighbouring molecules and even this is poorly understood.

The rigid physical structure of atoms is necessitated by strong electrostatic forces and this makes them somewhat inflexible and highly unsuitable as carriers of information.

Books and papers on biology talk a lot about self-organisation in an attempt to explain the construction of complex molecules apparently from scratch. There is nothing in the standard description of an atom however that suggests it is capable of such activity and no explanation at all of why the basic elements of life should organise into a protein and sometimes into RNA.

The organisational element is comprised of the scalar waves as described by Konstantin Meyl.

Scalar waves are stable harmonic states of magnetic potential vortices. They are flexible but robust to perturbations, making them ideal carriers of information. A dividing in two of such a field structure results in a duplication of all the information carried therein, meaning we have the phenomenon of reproduction even at the sub-atomic level of reality.

In biological systems, these magnetic fields are responsible for organisation at all scales of reality from gene expression at the molecular level up to the functioning of the human brain as a scalar wave computer at the macro level.

In the case of the brain, a single scalar wave complex is causal in coordinating the physical behaviour of several billion neurons. What is the brain?

Physical-etheric duality. The equations of Konstantin Meyl’s Theory of Objectivity predict the existence of various stable states of spinning field vortices. We can group these into two main categories, electric and magnetic, as depicted below:

Electrical eddy currents. On the left is depicted a spinning electrical eddy current, ‘I’, which results in a static magnetic dipole field ‘H’ with north and south poles. This is the fundamental unit of what we call ‘matter‘, it is an electron. All physical matter in the universe is composed of agglomerations of structures such as this.

Magnetic potential vortices. The diagram on the right is similar but now the structure presents as spinning magnetic field ‘U’, with an associated static electric dipole ‘E’ as a result. These entities are described by Meyl as having very different properties to the eddy currents, They can move through matter completely unaffected or they can interact with it, having an effect on it whilst at the same time being affected by it, depending upon precise field conditions.

The magnetic and electrical aspects of reality are therefore coupled tightly together, with electrical movement creating magnetism and magnetic movement creating an electrical field . In reality, both magnetism and electricity are dual aspects of the same universal field which is self-creating, self-stabilising and self-organising.

Everything in the universe is made of these structures, with the eddy currents constituting the physical matter that we see and measure and the magnetic vortices providing an invisible organisational field. The two aspects of the field affect each other in a self-referential feedback loop which constitutes an adaptive cybernetic learning system:

“The connected regulatory circuit structure provides the matching answer: cybernetic systems, which usually and as is well-known strive to a state of balance, get their target value from their dual “partner”. It is crucial that correspondingly dual systems are self sufficient and can form and develop independently out of themselves without target values of a third side. This basic principle of cybernetics undoubtedly is brilliant.” – Scalar Waves p 181 (Konstantin Meyl)

In living systems, the organisational principle has adapted enough to form an effective etheric body which sustains the physical body throughout its life. Biologists have described ‘self-organisation’, ‘vitalism’, a ‘dynamic kinetic stability’ etc. to explain the effects they see, but we now have a credible physical mechanism.

Consider this video of a neutrophil chasing a bacterium. It has no nervous system and no brain, eyes, or musculature and yet it reacts instantly and meaningfully to each change of direction the bacterium makes. Scalar waves are used here as a communication medium and as cognitive system. The whole colony here has a single unified etheric body.

Information is passed through the water matrix to the neutrophil whereupon it is immediately interpreted via a scalar-wave attractor system. The output from the attractor is transferred to the physical body of the cell and energetic input from neutrino transduction allows for amplification and the manifestation of the observed physical movement.

The phantom leaf effect showed that a portion of leaf could be photographed even after it has been physically removed from both the leaf and the camera set up. This is explained by the persistence of a bio-field that is separate from the physical molecules of the leaf.

The bio-field has ‘leaked’ from the leaf into the perspex material of the preparation slide which is an electrical insulator and therefore ideal for the conduction of magnetic scalar waves.

So a bio-field exists within bacteria and plant life and is in constant communication with the etheric body of the environment as a whole. The presence of a ‘residue’ in the perspex implies an energy loss from the leaf which means there must be a constant renewal of that energy and we assume that is via absorption of solar neutrinos.

Information in the form of scalar waves has multiplied and has persisted in a separate physical medium. Not much has happened because that medium is not responsive to that structure but it could conceivably act as a transporter for such information.

Water vortices. This short video shows the behaviour of water vortices which are similar in structure to magnetic field vortices. The water rings show many of the qualities we require for an etheric body and help to visualise components of the bio-field.

They fulfil may of the requirements of ‘life’ itself and indeed most definitions of life fail to exclude water itself as a living being!

The vortices are self-sustaining and self-repairing
They move independently of their surroundings but will adapt to it
They are shown merging together
They are shown dividing (reproducing)
Energy input from neutrinos is possible according to Meyl
Ripples on the ring constitute information storage and can be passed on to children (see Telegony)

Cymatics. In this video John Stuart Reid demonstrates that it initially takes about 6 seconds for a water droplet to stabilise to a particular cymatic pattern in response to a to a specific acoustic frequency, but that this time is lessened after each exposure. The relationship between stimulus and response has somehow been encoded into the water.

Explanations for this seem to elude physicists so the we therefore need some new physics. The water has a bio-field, an etheric body that stores the information and recalls it at a later time, translating it to physical organisation of the water molecules. We therefore have feedback between the physical state of the water and a persistent memory-field, a dynamical learning system even before a single cell has evolved.

The cymatic patterns thus made look remarkably similar to early forms of life.

Jacques Benveniste 1935-1994 performed some experiments (here) which were later repeated by Luc Montagnier and others, whereby water was subjected to electromagnetic radiation and the resulting ‘memory’ was used to organise nucleotides into a DNA sequence.

The precise meaning of this result is not understood, but Konstantin Meyl has an explanation whereby the frequency generator will not only output the desired frequency but will also generate scalar waves as an artefact. These waves will have the form of a vortex and will assume a consistent chirality according to the laws of physics.

If similar waves are produced by discharge from our ionosphere then we have a possible explanation for the spontaneous assembly of helical molecules within either the oceans or atmosphere.

Stefan Lanka is claiming in an interview that DNA is materialised ‘out of the nothing, without a template‘ and in a separate essay ‘What is life?‘ that first come the nucleic acids which accumulate energy, followed by the sugars which are used to store that energy. The organisation and materialisation of these molecules is surely via scalar waves and neutrinos?

“All bacteria, cells and tardigrades that have a circular nucleic acid are theoretically immortal, since this, when wetted with water, immediately generates energy again.” – Lanka

Because the circular molecular structure hosts a toroidal water-wave that acts as an antenna for solar neutrinos; this is where the energy comes from.

Corentin Louis Kervran 1901-1983 found many examples of the transmutation of one base element to another. This starts arguably in granite rocks and primordial clays and continues with bacteria in the soil creating their own calcium. A balance is achieved and plants start to thrive on the newly created mineral diet and again transmute more elements.

An entire ecosystem mediates between the indigenous minerals in the underlying bedrock and the requirements of a mammalian population which in turn can apparently manufacture most of their own minerals from a few basics.

How are the base elements in a human being balanced and how are they transmuted? Potassium seems to be created from sodium as and when necessary from the concentrated energy arising out of mere body heat. Some additional process over and above normal metabolism is surely at work here?

The primordial soup is now not a mixture of complex molecules brought to life by a lightning bolt, but a collection of basic minerals coupled to an informational bio-field to form a closed loop adaptive learning system. It is fuelled by sunlight, neutrinos and field vortices caused by discharge from the ionosphere.

The structure of the scalar waves is at least as important as the arrangement of the physical molecules and it is this bio-field that forms the organisational framework for life at all stages and is the true source of continuity, stability and innovation in all evolutionary processes.

Energy falls on a mixture of minerals and water and transmutation begins
The elements thereby formed are those propitious for life processes
Molecular complexes begin to form from scalar wave instructions
Competition for minerals begins results in molecular selection
It is the organisational infrastructure that is selected for – the scalar waves
Stable, successful structures persist, unstable structures do not
If a physical piece of soup breaks from the mass then it carries a copy of the bio-field with it and we have pre-cellular reproduction – evolution speeds up
The bio-field is continuous throughout the whole of evolution
The bio-field learns to reproduce by itself and even initiate movement
Evolution and innovation happen according to the laws of the etheric body – not by random variations of the physical body
The etheric body operates according to attractor patterns and closed loop feedback systems. It will provoke activity in terms of physical structures that are least-energy or maximal-likelihood solutions, giving the impression of purposeful (teleological) or ‘directed’ behaviour.

“Information is the structure of a scalar vortex” – Konstantin Meyl

“All results of the evolution in the biosphere that have arisen between the ‘capacitor plates’ of the earth itself and its ionosphere can be regarded as structured capacitor losses, which also apply to humans” – Konstantin Meyl

Related pages:

References:

Potential vortices: Volume 3 – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/indexf44b.html

Towards an evolutionary theory of the origin of life based on kinetics and thermodynamics – Pascal, Pross, Sutherland
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3843823/

The evolutionary origin of form and function – Baverstock, Rönkkö
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4048086/

Biological Transmutations – C L Kervran
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Biological-Transmutations-C-L-Kervran/dp/0846401959

What is life? – Stefan Lanka
https://wissenschafftplus.de/cms/de/newsletter-archiv

On the crucial stages in the origin of animate matter — S Lifson
“Life and its origin are shown to be one continuous physicochemical process of replication, random variation, and natural selection. Since life exists here and now, animate properties must have been initiated in the past somewhere. According to the theory, life originated from an as yet unknown elementary autocatalyst which occurred spontaneously, then replicated autocatalytically. “
“The changing environment exerted a selective pressure on autocatalysts to replace dwindling reactants by accumulating sequels. Sequels that were incorporated into the autocatalytic process became internal components of complex autocatalytic systems. Primitive forms of metabolism and organization were thus initiated. They evolved further by the same mechanism to ever higher levels of complexity, such as homochirality (handedness) and membranal enclosure. Subsequent evolution by the same mechanism generated cellular metabolism, cell division, information carriers, and a genetic code. Theories of self-organization without natural selection are refuted.“
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9010131/

Does gravity exist?

Konstantin Meyl has described physics in terms of a Unified Field which can be thought of as a blend of Electromagnetic Field Theory. Quantum mechanics and Relativity. Indeed, it contains these theories as special cases and is so consistent with them to a large degree.

Meyl has not given a name to his field so I will just refer to it as ‘the field’.

In this first slide from his talk, two objects are in the influence of each other’s field and the field in between them is rather strong, being the sum of the two fields combined.

The field shares a property with Einstein’s Relativity in that it alters spatial measurements in a form of length contraction and will shrink distances according to the strength of the field.

The diagram depicts electric charge as opposed to gravity but the principle is identical. This is really the same diagram as above but the fields from the objects have been added together instead of superimposed so a composite field is shown.

The field lines indicate the direction of attraction and their density represents the field strength. There is obviously a higher field strength in between the objects.

Accordingly then, the distance between the objects is lessened and so the objects move closer together. Attempting to part the objects will meet with some resistance and this will be perceived as a (gravitational or electric) force.

There is no ‘space’ here, only the field which itself determines the property of size.

There is no ‘force’ here as such just a shrinking of dimension leading to ‘movement’.

Nor is there any mass or charge. All that happens is described as interactions of the field. Block out the objects with a fingertip and try to imagine that happens is that a whole bunch of field lines move and merge with each other according to Meyl’s field equation.

Charge and mass are merely hypothetical causes of fields and forces in classical physics, computational conveniences if you like. They are simply not needed for any description of field behaviour.as it is only the local field properties that matter, not the existence of a charge or mass maybe a million miles distant.

In the physics of Meyl, mass, charge and force are hypothetical (and illusory) results.

In this next slide, the field strength from the sun acting upon the Earth is seen to diminish according to the square of the distance from the sun so that the sunny side of the Earth is subjected to a slightly stronger field and accordingly, the lengths here are slightly shorter than on the dark side.

This means that the far side of the Earth is moving along a ‘longer’ path than the sunny side, resulting in a curved (circular or elliptic) path. (See YouTube: Big Bang is a Big Bluff says Meyl).

The orbit of the Earth here then is seen to arise from a purely geometric deformation of the field and there is no need for a gravitational ‘force’ or the idea of ‘inertia’ as is found in Newtonian theory.

Roger Joseph Boscovich (1711-1787) is credited by Meyl as having had these ideas many years ago. The idea that gravitational force diminishes as the square of the distance from the source was known and understood. Boscovich turned it around arguing that it is not the distance determining the field strength but the field strength determining the distance.

A consequence of this is that the hemisphere of the Earth in darkness will expand as it moves slightly further away from the sun and then contract back again as it turns to the light. The weaker field strength on the far side has allowed each and every atom to relax a bit and increase separation, resulting in an imperceptible increase in Earth size.

Attempts at measurement will fail as all measuring instruments are now expanded proportionately.

Evidence for length expansion comes from the Tamarack mines experiment where two vertical shafts were dug and the distance between them measured, The shafts did not appear to converge as one would expect, but instead diverged, with the distance between them seeming to actually increase. This is in contradiction to the laws of geometry but consistent with a diminishing field strength according to depth.

The Hafele – Keating experiment showed that clocks orbiting the Earth moved at different speeds to each other and again different to one stationed at the Earth’s surface. This is in contradiction to the Theory of Relativity but again consistent with Meyl’s Theory of Objectivity where the difference in centrifugal force experienced by the clocks counteracted the force of ‘gravity’ to some degree and affected the workings of the clocks.

What then is ‘matter’? The behaviour of the field only depends upon local properties of the field and no charge or mass is needed to sustain the field as it is self-perpetuating. Both mass and charge are said to be properties of matter but neither are needed in the field theory so where does that leave matter itself?

The behaviour of matter is defined by its properties of mass and charge and when these are taken away we have nothing left, nothing to see or measure, nothing to define it by! If this is the case then how can we even say it exists?

Matter is an illusion created by the field behaviour. If field lines converge to a point or if the field rolls up into a stable, spherical vortex, then it appears as a solid mass as we would expect and since we only ever measure charge or gravity at a distance we remain under the impression that there is something there.

Related pages:

References:

Meyl’s website
https://www.meyl.e u/

Scalar waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242200443_Scalar_Waves_Theory_and_Experiments_1

Microcosm to Macrocosm Calculated with One Equation – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/Meyl-Micro-_to_Macrocosm-cert.pdf

Ozone containing water engine – Prof. Dr. Konstantin Meyl
https://www.k-meyl.de/go/50_Aufsaetze/water_engine_4.pdf

Transmission of Power Without Wires (Scalar Waves)
https://youtu.be/LD8OkbumcY0

Konstantin Meyl and Scalar Wave Technology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZauFetD__k

Consequences of the Extended Field Theory – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/2P9_0930-1-piers-extended_field_theory.pdf

Slides from presentation
https://slideplayer.com/slide/5827727/

Magnetic Wave Transmission of Drug Effects about the Waves, Generated in the Measurement Set-Up and Used i.e. for Anticancer-Treatments – Konstantin Christian Meyl – (An interesting description of scalar waves but nothing about cancer)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335271748_Magnetic_Wave_Transmission_of_Drug_Effects_about_the_Waves_Generated_in_the_Measurement_Set-Up_and_Used_ie_for_Anticancer-Treatments

What is the brain?

The brain is a scalar wave computer. It is formed from a scalar wave template and when developed will host a toroidal standing wave complex which acts as the computational centre for holistic cognition. Communication with other parts of the body is by means of longitudinal scalar waves via the myelin sheath surrounding the nerves.

In the case of the Brain of a White Collar Worker a man only had 90% of a full sized brain, He had some leg weakness on one side and a low IQ of around 75 but still managed to maintain a job as a civil servant and to raise a family. This case is cited by some as proof that the brain is not the centre of intelligence and has some other purpose.

We are told by neuro-scientists that the functions of the brain are arranged geographically, with some areas responsible for emotional regulation and others processing visual information etc. Either the brain above has compensated in a spectacular fashion or what we are being told is simply not true.

John Lorber 1915-1996 produced images of hundreds of brains and found many cases of hydrocephalus that had resulted in reduced brain size but with often no great cognitive impairment. In one case, a young man had an IQ of 126, gained a first class honours degree degree in mathematics and had normal social function but hardly any brain.

“When we did a brain scan, we saw that instead f the normal 4.5 cm thickness of brain tissue between the ventricles and the cortical surface, there was just a thin layer of mantle measuring a millimetre or so. His cranium is filled mainly with cerebrospinal fluid.” – John Lorber

The man had been referred to a physician as a boy because his head was slightly larger than normal.

What does all this mean?

The conundrum here is that the human head is quite large and uses up a lot of resources, which by itself is an evolutionary disadvantage. There must be some other pressing need then for a large cranium although brain volume seems irrelevant.

The logical conclusion is that the important factors in the workings of the brain are not the volume or number of neurons but instead the overall shape, size and proportions of the organ itself.

To see how this could be so we will need to understand a bit about embryonic development, fluid pressure, scalar waves, electromagnetic forces, fractal holo-fields and the golden ratio.

If, after this, things still seem a bit incredible then we can recall the words of Sherlock Holmes: ”When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

In embryonic development we find that blood flow precedes the development of the blood vessels and apparently acts as a guide for their development somehow. Electric fields are suspected and this idea is reinforced by the observation that spiralling blood flow in the aorta is instrumental in the formation of the heart as a spiral vortex machine,

Once the heart is formed, regulation of pressure serves to refine the shape and determine the dimensions of the arteries and indeed the thickness of their walls.

Consideration of development is important. Evolutionary processes are commonly evaluated according to their function but what is hardly ever discussed is that every physical feature in biology has to have a physical cause; there has to be some developmental plan that can result in that organ or ability,

The developmental function of the early brain then is to increase in size thereby exerting a gentle outward pressure (static electric forces) on the still malleable skull and causing it to expand at a controlled rate. There is no need for DNA to be involved here, the forces are physical and the ‘plan’ is simple.

The brain grows in a particular way which determines the rate of expansion of the skull. Grey matter is added in a way that results in a ‘blooming’ much like a cauliflower or cloud might develop. This allows for a refinement of shape which a simple balloon-like inflation would not.

A skull that is expanded via a filling of water will experience equal pressure in every direction and tend to be larger, wider and more spherical than the norm.

The Golden Ratio

The normal skull is not spherical though, it has a very specific shape of very specific proportions and those proportions involve the Golden Ratio.

So to provide fine-grained control the shape of the developing brain then we need a morphogenic field that somehow ‘knows’ about the Golden Ratio.

As luck would have it, the scalar waves of Konstantin Meyl are the ideal candidate for such a function. It isn’t so much that they are capable of such a ratio but that they naturally form three dimensional structures whose most stable state has dimensions in the Golden Ratio.

So these dimensions then are actually ‘hard-coded’ into the laws of physics and it should not be surprising then to find them cropping up all over the place. As an example, the dimensions of the red blood cell are also in this ratio: Blood flow and scalar waves

So a series of linked toroidal scalar waves are suspected of being instrumental in the development of the brain and skull. But what happens once development is complete?

This magneto- electric field now has another function which is to act as the substrate for cognition. The whole brain is the host for a distributed ‘holographic’ field which is responsible for information management for the rest of the body as well as intellectual and emotional computation.

The field is non-dissipative and maintains stability as a toroidal attractor state with the ideal dimensions to suit its physical nature.

Mae-Wan Ho has described the field in the brain as a sequence of nested torii with each layer vibrating to a different frequency and the ratio of the frequencies between adjacent layers as being equal to Φ, the golden ratio again. This ensures that there is minimal resonance between layers of the field and hence least interference but maximal independence between layers of the field. Good design.

Signals are sent to and from the brain via the nerves but again using scalar waves as the transmission medium: Scalar waves and nerves

Physicists almost unanimously require that the field be holographic in nature, meaning not that it is an illusion but that each part of the field contains all of the information rom the entirety of the field. This means that the field is also fractal (self-similar) in nature with any small part being a miniaturised version of the field as a whole.

The structure of the torus is ideal for representation of such field, being supportive of stable, resonating scalar waves and being describable by the same laws of nature at all physical scales of reality. There is clearly a need in biology for information to move freely from the macro to the sub-atomic and back so the idea of a holo-field is pretty much a necessity given only this requirement and nothing else.

In the new field physics of Konstantin Meyl, there is no Plank Length, no minimum size to any piece of the universe and so any piece of bio-field can theoretically hold an arbitrary large amount of information.

In one experiment, tissue from a human brain was implanted in a mouse and an immediate increase in learning ability was demonstrated, leading the experimenters to conclude that it isn’t so much the size of brain that is important as the quality of the tissue.

Another interpretation is that along with the material substance of the brain, the scientists had transplanted a piece of the holo-field containing all of the information from the human brain including memories, emotional processing and sense of self. This structure had merged with the field of the mouse to produce what is essentially a single hybrid consciousness.

Advisable not to try this at home, maybe.

‘Life after death‘ experiences are recorded where a patient will describe complex and coherent experiences that happened whilst zero cortical activity was recorded. This is because the scientists were recording classical electric fields only which are radiative and hence measurable. Scalar waves are non-dissipative and difficult to measure.

“Brain death is a lie, it has always been a lie and it continues to be a lie” – Paul Byrne M.D.
Many people have made complete recoveries after a diagnosis of brain death. Many people have had their organs removed whilst arguably still alive.
Clearly the wrong thing is being measured.
[video]

Summary

The brain is a scalar wave computer whose proportions derive from its development and are also instrumental in its eventual function. The overall dimensions are crucial to its performance by electromagnetic vibration and not chemical exchanges in the neurons.

A millimetre of grey matter appears to be all that is necessary to create a toroidal signals transducer of Golden Ratio dimensions but brain geometry that is irregular can disrupt the standing wave within the skull and result in impaired cognition.

Damage to specific areas of the brain will disrupt the field in specific ways which makes it appear that function is somehow attached to physical material when it is really a ‘holistic’ or holographic field with information distributed across the whole field and very likely throughout the entire body.

Related pages:

References:

Brain of a white collar worker – Feuillet, Dufour, Pelletier
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)61127-1/fulltext

Is Your Brain Really Necessary? – Roger Lewin on John Lorber
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.7434023

Hersens, brains, prof. John Lorber – YouTube documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syq7xpI4CYU

John Lorber – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lorber

DNA Structure and the Golden Ratio Revisited – Stuart Henry Larsen
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/13/10/1949

Mammalian Skull Dimensions and the Golden Ratio (Φ) – Tamargo, Pindrick
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7329205/

The influence of the Golden Ratio on the Erythrocyte – M Purcell, R Ramsey
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331103066_The_Influence_of_the_Golden_Ratio_on_the_Erythrocyte

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/index92d2.html

“Meaning of Life & the Universe: Transforming” – Mae-Wan Ho
ISBN-10. 981310886X ; ISBN-13. 978-9813108868

Consciousness in the Universe is Scale Invariant and Implies an Event Horizon of the Human Brain – Geesink, Meijer
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320267484_Consciousness_in_the_Universe_is_Scale_Invariant_and_Implies_an_Event_Horizon_of_the_Human_Brain

“Brain Death” is False – Paul A. Byrne, M.D. and Rev. George M. Rinkowski
https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2203&context=lnq

Influenza and field vortices

This page looks at the epidemiology of influenza and asks if it is not somehow related to the newly discovered phenomenon of magnetic potential vortices. The idea is that at certain times of the year there is an increased likelihood of structured electromagnetic discharge from the ionosphere that is somehow causing outbreaks.

The epidemiology of flu demonstrates several outstanding and well documented features that need some explaining:

Seasonality with sharp peaks at winter solstice
Latitudinal correlation of outbreaks
Hemispherical correlation – an epidemic in the Northern hemisphere is followed by an epidemic in the Southern hemisphere
Tropical outbreaks – in both summer and winter
Local outbreaks independent of population density

Seasonality The chart shows deaths from influenza and pneumonia. The seasonal accuracy is striking, with peak deaths occurring close to winter solstice and the ‘base rate’ in summer remaining at a constant level.

This sort of phenomenon cannot be caused by light or temperature levels as these vary from year to year and vary greatly according to latitude.

What is happening is that the health of the population has become entrained somehow to the seasonal rhythm and is for some reason more susceptible to disease at mid winter. A not unreasonable hypothesis is that this resonant entrainment is in response to some feature of the Earth’s magnetic field as this will be independent of both temperature and light levels.

Correlations with day length or humidity are from this point of view, illusory.

Latitudinal synchrony. This chart from the Fred Hoyle paper Viruses from Space (originally from Hope-Simpson) shows influenza rates in Prague and in Cirencester, UK. They both lie on the same latitude and both show remarkably similar patterns. Other studies support this pattern.

Note that in the winter of 1973-73, the peak rates are delayed past solstice in both places by the same amount. This suggests that it is maybe not the population that is directly attuned to the seasons but rather that some other cause is responsible for the flu and it is this phenomenon that is itself strongly seasonal but is capable of variation

The attack rates of influenza in Prague and Cirencester(Hope-Simpson)

A departure from solstice is seen and it is consistent along a line of latitude.

Magnetic field vortices. Shown is a mini tornado, a vortex of spinning air that can form seemingly out of nowhere and vanish when sufficient energy has been dissipated. The physics of Konstantin Meyl allows for such vortices, not only in the physical substance of the air but also in the magnetic field of the Earth itself.

The surface of the Earth and the ionosphere form two capacitor plates with a potential difference of about 200 000 volts and classical physics allows for a discharge between the two as either a steady slow current spread out over the whole planet or a sudden violent discharge in the form of lightning during a storm.

The newly formulated equations from Konstantin Meyl however allow for instabilities in the field to form vortex currents and to discharge much in the same way as the mini-tornado.

Corona discharge. Such vortices can be seen in an extreme version as corona discharge coming from protuberances on power lines but there isn’t any reason why somewhat subtler energies should not discharge in an invisible and apparently harmless manner from ionosphere to ground.

Tropical outbreaks are discernible in the data from the Hope-Simpson paper. It appears that influenza is sensitive to what must be a very small stimulus so either the population is resonating to the seasons or some other intermediary is doing the job.

Outbreaks in the tropics are in both summer and winter solstices. Smaller outbreaks also occur outside of the tropics at other times of year.

These seem like harmonics. The ionosphere is resonating somehow like a large electromagnetic bell with a fundamental frequency of one year and harmonics at six month and three month intervals.

Hemispherical correlation. Another chart, again from Hope-Simpson, shows the coincidence of an ‘epidemic’ in the Northern Hemisphere followed by a similar feature six months later in the Southern.

Viral transmission – not credible
Solar effect in the north waits for six months and re-emerges in the south – not particularly credible

Again this looks like an annual effect of some atmospheric resonance. A standing wave of some sort is present and effects apparent on one side of the planet are seen on the other side at a 180° phase difference without necessarily passing through intermediate points.

Videos of resonating membranes and balloons help visualise what might be happening with the ionosphere. The (1,1) mode right shows a standing wave developing with large amplitude at each ‘pole’ and smaller amplitude within the tropics (centre).

This is the basic mode for resonating waves and superpositions of higher degree harmonics on top of this can explain the finer grained seasonal effects. Note that the Earth’s physical and magnetic bodies do not form a simple symmetric system like a balloon. The physical and magnetic poles are not in the same place, the Earth is at an angle and is spinning with respect to its own orbit around the sun.

The ionosphere is not necessarily vibrating with a physical amplitude but rather a variation of magnetic characteristics.

Local outbreaks of flu were studied by Fred Hoyle and summarised here: The HART group model. It is easy to think that if flu tends to occur in localised groups that it must be infectious but the data studied by Hoyle not only did not support this view but actually ruled it out.

The outbreaks were localised but were scattered in a fashion that was random with respect to location and random with respect to the population density. Hoyle believed in some sort of viral cause and so reached the only conclusion he could which was that the virions had come from outer space and were only available during winter because of the location of the Earth within the solar system.

Time to consider localised magnetic vortices instead.

The hypothesis of this page then is that:

Magnetic potential vortices are responsible for influenza outbreaks.
Such vortices can be as thin as a pencil beam or as wide as a cruise ship
They will cause about 10% of the affected population to succumb to flu
They are more prevalent in winter
They are produced by some magnetic instability that respects latitude
They are not easily measurable by scientific instruments
They can pass straight through the roof of a building

Anecdotes of entire families or hospital wards getting flu at the same time now make sense; they were all in the same room at the same time or went out on a walk together and had their regulatory systems disturbed by the same magnetic field discharge.

Do such vortices exist?

Images of magnetic vortices have now been created from data produced by radio telescopes.

In this video Cleo Loi explains the process and shows what appear to be the upper half of magnetic ring vortices in the atmosphere which organise ionised gas particles (plasma) into the shapes seen.

Now if these magnetic field patterns show some seasonal variation and latitudinal affinity then they are surely a good candidate for the initial cause of the processes described above.

Man made radiation. There is much evidence to show that proximity to cell-phone towers increases the risk of chronic diseases such as cancer but can also trigger episodes of influenza; so much so that Soviet scientists labelled the disease ‘radio wave sickness’. [link]

Konstantin Meyl is claiming that it is not the radio waves themselves that are having biological effects but rather the scalar waves )potential vortices) that are emitted as an artefact and are measured as ‘noise’ by scientific instruments.

Much circumstantial evidence points to magnetic vortices as responsible for biological organisation and Meyl has stated simply that ‘the brain is a scalar wave computer’.

This then accounts for the sickness resulting from cell-phone towers and also for the confusion created when performing studies. They are measuring the wrong thing, and getting inconsistent results; they are measuring the transverse radio waves instead of the longitudinal.

Pneumonia Why is influenza associated with pneumonia and why does the one seem to transform into the other? Why does pneumonia seem to happen mostly in hospitals and why is it not infectious? Why do diseases seem to get worse as more patients are added to a crowded ward?

Pneumonia is characterised by a deterioration and eventual necrosis of lung tissue followed by a bacterial proliferation which serves the purpose of removing the dead tissue.

The lungs gave a lot of work to do which makes them somewhat sensitive to energy or oxygen deficit. They must maintain two separate blood circulations, one to collect oxygen from the inhaled air and another to supply oxygen to the lung tissue itself.

The blood moves around the capillaries powered by scalar waves (Blood flow and scalar waves) and this movement serves as the one of the main powerhouses for the circulation to the whole body.

Heart rate and hence blood flow are reduced immediately upon posture departing from the vertical (The Heart and Circulation) and so lying in a hospital bed is already reducing oxygen to all parts of the body. Not a good healing state.

Meyl has stated that atmospheric moisture contains stored energy in the form of scalar waves and that this energy can be released into the lungs upon inhalation. Scalar waves can continue to absorb energy from solar neutrinos and can release it in various forms:

Movement aiding the flow of blood
Materialisation of electrons
Transmutation of other elements (?)
The release of oxygen into the blood by the splitting of H2O

So a vulnerable person succumbs to flu one winter, feels dreadful and is admitted to hospital as a precaution. The windows are closed and they are breathing air that has been depleted by other patients and possibly re-cycled via an air conditioning system, They are lying horizontal which reduces circulation automatically and therefore deprives the body of oxygen and the blood of its locomotive force. In addition to this they are very likely surrounded by various electronic devices emitting an unholy mixture of microwaves and magnetic vortices.

The lungs have been deprived of oxygen and energy, the tissue is stressed to breaking point and pneumonia ensues.

Florence Nightingale said that as patients were added to a ward, it wasn’t that new diseases emerged but that existing diseases got worse. We can now give a reason for this and also to give some explanation for legionnaire’s disease; the recycling of air by whatever means is leading to a dangerous lack of scalar vortex energy.

Summary

The hypothesis outlined above is somewhat speculative but there is good evidence for each of the separate parts.

An explanation for the epidemiology of influenza is a necessity for any hypothetical mechanism and this rules out a virus as a cause. The idea of magnetic discharge from the ionosphere however is consistent with population data and there are documented mechanisms for causing disease: EMF and Biology

Questions as to how the effects of 5G ,for example, can mimic an assumed seasonal viral disorder are now answered by saying that the symptoms are the same because the cause is the same and hence the disease is also the same in each case. It is a bio-regulatory disturbance caused by magnetic potential vortices of some form or another.

Related pages:

References:

Estimating Influenza-Associated Deaths in the United States – Thompson et al
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26864108_Estimating_Influenza-Associated_Deaths_in_the_United_States

Viruses from space and related matters – Hoyle, Wickramasinghe and Watkins
https://www.hoyle.org.uk/resources/virusesfromspaceCompressed.pdf

The role of season in the epidemiology of influenza – R E Hope-Simpson
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2134066/pdf/jhyg00034-0042.pdf

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/index92d2.html

The Heart and Circulation: an Integrative Model – Branko Furst
The introduction to the book
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm:978-1-4471-5277-4/1.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288981713_The_Heart_and_Circulation_-_An_Integrative_Model

Circular Membrane (drum head) Vibration – Dan Russell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4ELxKKT5Rw

Normal Modes Of Circular Membrane Vibration ( Drum ) – Spiros Kabasakalis
https://youtu.be/DZ8VGAx4178

Balloons look really weird when they resonate – Steve Mould
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDHcQ0PUyMo

The Hamer focus

The Hamer focus (right) is a circular structure consisting of several concentric rings that appears in computer tomography brain scans. The circles are named after Ryke Geerd Hamer, the founder of German New Medicine, and are claimed by advocates to represent physical brain damage resulting from psychological trauma. They do however look a lot like laboratory artefacts.

The image above has been used on the cover of several books on GNM (below) and a similar image appears on a page of a GNM website (image on right)

Advocates of GNM insist that the size, position and nature of these circles is indicative of past psychological trauma:

“The location of the Hamer Focus is determined by the nature of the conflict. The size of the Hamer Focus is determined by the intensity of the conflict.

On this CT scan, the Hamer Focus (HH) shows in the area of the brain that controls the left arm. It tells the story of a left-handed woman who had suffered a motor conflict when she unexpectedly lost a beloved friend (she was not able to hold him with her left ’partner arm’). The sharp ring configuration indicates that she is in the conflict-active phase.” – Learning GMN

Th image looks unnaturally precise for a biological system and there are many similar images that are just simple artefacts of a ‘badly calibrated system’ . Moreover, not all of these are images of the brain (click to enlarge) – Images from Radiopaedia

The GNM website is aware of this problem and as a defence presents the following images as artefacts and points out that they look different from the Hamer rings.

This may be so but there are many images above that bear close resemblance to the Hamer rings and this needs to be addressed in order to avoid a charge of gaslighting.

The Famous Siemens Certificate

The GNM site claims that: “Siemens, a manufacturer of computer tomography equipment, certified that these target rings cannot be artifacts, because even when the tomography is repeated and taken from different angles, the same configuration always appears in the same location.”

This doesn’t appear to be true though: https://www.psiram.com/en/index.php/Hamer-Focus#The_famous_Siemens_certificate_December_22.2C_1989

“The concentric circles in the Hamer focus, shown on the front page of his book, looks like an artefact and very little as a biological phenomena, which in humans are almost never seen as concentric circles ” – Sören Ventegodt

Hypothesis

The rings are in fact artefacts produced by the interaction between the x-ray system and the electromagnetic field and charged tissue of the brain itself.

The origin of the pattern in the machine accounts for the precision of the concentric circles and the interaction with the brain matter accounts for the slight variations upon this precision.

If the x-rays manage to induce some temporary polarisation of the brain’s tissue then the subject can be moved slightly for a second scan and the pattern may appear in the same place again.

Related pages:

References:

Hamer-Focus – PsiRan.com
https://www.psiram.com/en/index.php/Hamer-Focus

Ring artifact – Radiopaedia
https://radiopaedia.org/articles/ring-artifact-2

Wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryke_Geerd_Hamer

Expanding Earth

The Earth is growing as has been noted since the time of the ancient Greeks and as it grows, the continents move apart and cracks appear in the ocean beds from which flow lava to form the newest rocks on the planet. The expansion is fuelled by a continuous stream of neutrinos from the sun which materialise to create 80 000 000 000 000 000 kg of matter per year.

Professor Sam Carey finds that the continents do not quite fit on his globe but would clearly look better on a smaller sphere with the tip of south America curling around the cape of Africa:

The theory of plate tectonics claims that the Himalayas were formed by India moving 1000km north to collide with Asia but two facts prove this wrong:

The expansion of the Indian Ocean occurred 150 million years before the uplifting of the Himalayas
Fossil records are continuous from India to China, this showing that there has never been a large area of ocean between India and Asia

The earth expansion has been known since the time of the Greeks and in the Modern Era there are many papers and books written by reputable scientists.

Sam Carey explains:

According to the theory of continental drift, the Pacific should be much smaller than it is today
All the ocean beds are very young compared to the age of the land masses – where did the old ocean beds go?
All continents have moved north by 5000km which should squeeze the Arctic correspondingly but evidence shows that the arctic has been expanding
There appears to be no ocean sedimentation before the paleozoic era (because there was no ocean floor before this time?)
Other planets in the solar system demonstrate polygonal fracturing and rift valleys consistent with volume expansion
Corals have both daily and annual growth rings which suggest that there were once many more days in the year that there are now which is consistent with an expected slowing down of the Earth’s rotation owing to increased mass

This diagram below from the Meyl paper shows Hilgenberg’s idea as to what happens to the Earth’s crust as the Earth expands.

As the Earth gets bigger, the radius of the crust is too small for the new diameter and starts to crack to accommodate the reduced curvature. It eventually collapses leaving typical patterns of mountain ranges and rift valleys.

Inflation or mass increase?

So is the Earth inflating as a balloon whilst maintaining the same mass or is it somehow accruing more material, more mass?

The increase in day length means that the Earth’s rotation is slowing down and the precise degree of slowing provides the answer to the problem.

NASA measurements suggest an expansion of circumference of 18-19 cm per year and the day is increasing by 0.7 seconds per year. Calculations from the Meyl paper show that this is consistent with an Earth that maintains its density (i.e. no balloon inflation) but is somehow increasing its overall mass.

The mass increase according to Meyl is caused by absorption of neutrinos coming from the sun. These energetic particles have no mass but are materialised in the interior of the Earth to create 80 000 000 000 000 000 kg of matter per year. This extra matter takes various forms but key amongst these are primordial water and crude oil.

“To summarize: In the inner core, connected to the beta decay, especially the absorption of energy from the cosmic neutrino field and the materialization of elementary particles. In the outer core the most diverse gases arise, which are subject to the influence of extreme pressure and so to a constant change.” – Meyl

“Random products and chemical reactions give rise to liquid matter that is pressed as a result of centrifugal forces in the Earth’s mantle and there it is stirred slowly as a chewy hot mass. Liquid emergence products are for example Juvenile water that feeds the ocean from the interior of the earth (1 cubic km per annum), or mineral oil, that can fill up the empty pumped oil fields over the time or even completely unexpectedly occur in granites. When such phenomena are observed and reported they surprise only professionals who work with unsuitable model concepts.” – Meyl

Consequences:

The problem of where the Earth’s primordial water comes from has been solved
Oil s not a fossil fuel and reserves will be constantly replenished
If all the continents fit on an Earth a third the size of today’s then the gravity at the Earth’s surface was correspondingly reduced
Much reduced gravity allowed for the growth of giant plants and animals
Dinosaurs with long necks would not have so much trouble pumping blood to their heads
Maybe winged dinosaurs could actually fly?
Density of ancient granite is reduced, possibly to the texture of a gritty clay, thereby enabling easier stonemasonry and construction of pyramids
The expansion is actually speeding up so earthquakes will continue

Related pages:

Videos

Planet Earth: A Question Of Expansion (1982) – Prof S Carey
https://youtu.be/Othb0xsvZb4?si=MqRFn4xuf5M-7XPk

Towards a New Study of Planetary Science: Expansion Tectonics 101
James Maxlow RTF Lecture
https://youtu.be/9AkhUzbJQeQ?si=8c0xji49owsTQvQ2

Neal Adams – Science: 01 – Conspiracy: Earth is Growing!
https://youtu.be/oJfBSc6e7QQ?list=PLOdOXoiGTICLdHklMhj9Al8G-1ZLXGEP2

7 Major Problems with Plate Tectonics that point to an Expanding Earth
https://youtu.be/8qoTs7w22r4

The Origin of the Expanding Earth
https://youtu.be/9HyZ1Ns_yKA

References:

Earth expansion by neutrino power – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/earth-expansion-by-neutrinopower-jgg-1000219.pdf

The expanding Earth: a sound idea for the new millennium – Giancarlo Scalera
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283604670_The_expanding_earth_a_sound_idea_for_the_new_millennium

The expanding Earth theory – Meg Neal
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a22594681/weve-been-wrong-before-expanding-earth-theory/

ΔT (timekeeping) – Wikipedia
“The value of ΔT for the start of 1902 was approximately zero; for 2002 it was about 64 seconds. So Earth’s rotations over that century took about 64 seconds longer than would be required for days of atomic time.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%94T_(timekeeping)

Leap second – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second

Hilgenberg O (1933) Vom wachsenden Erdball.

Evidence for primordial water in Earth’s deep mantle – Hallis et al
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aac4834

The Heart and Circulation

The book The Heart and Circulation by Branko Furst is nearly 400 pages long and summarises over 100 years of research into the nature and cause of blood flow around the human body. Despite all this work it is still not known how this happens. These are my immediate thoughts upon reading the book.

Over 100 years of scientific research on the mechanics of the circulation of the blood has failed to come up with a good description of how it happens. Overwhelmingly we find that experimental results show that the heart does not act as a pressure pump for the blood and indeed contributes little to nothing in the way of either pressure or flow rate.

Even more surprisingly, it seems that ‘pressure’ as such has little to do with movement of the blood at all and that the blood moves around by some other means.

Proof of this is found on almost every page of the book:

The blood, after leaving the heart, will accelerate against the pressure gradient, moving with increasing speed from low to high pressure.
The heart of a dog was stopped but the blood continued to flow for an hour after
A heart in a chick embryo was re-plumbed to pump the ‘wrong way’ (from artery to vein) but even though the heart continued to beat, the blood also continued to circulate without changing direction

If the blood is moving independently of the pressure gradient then we need to find at least:

A source of energy external to the blood
A mechanism for transduction of such energy to movement
An efficient flow geometry that dissipates very little waste energy

The solution is to be found in water vortices which are mentioned a few times in the book and are even illustrated:

The Morozov paper claims that vortices will self-assemble and commence flow unaided when ATP and other bio-molecules are added (diagram below)
Videos of Water Rings on YouTube demonstrate self-propelling structures on a macro scale
Konstantin Meyl (‘Scalar Waves’ – Meyl) claims that water vortices can utilise a continuous supply of energy from solar neutrinos
Viktor Schauberger has shown that spiral and vortical water configurations can flow with zero energy loss and even some gain (presumably from the neutrino stream)
Not only water vortices but also electromagnetic field vortices may play a part
Meyl is claiming that the hexagonal ring on ATP molecules will form a field vortex which itself acts as a neutrino net and transducer
Such vortices are most stable having geometric proportions according to the golden ratio – the same proprtions as red blood cells
Neutrino energy is sufficient to dismantle a water molecule into separate hydrogen and oxygen atoms
Neutrino energy is sufficient to effect transmutation of base elements within the blood vortices

‘Schauberger’ flow [page]

The complex flow illustrated by Viktor Schauberger consists of central twin spiral streams surrounded by ring vortices.

The twin spirals are observed in chick embryos and are known to cosmologists and meteorologists as ‘Birkeland’ or ‘force-free’ currents. They arise from the flow of partially ionised gases or fluids and are practically friction free. The faster the current flows, the tighter the spiral becomes, with Schauberger noting that the flow actually came away from the pipe sides at certain harmonics.

The ring vortices act as ‘bearings’ for the main central flow and are themselves almost friction free. Water has a variable viscocity according to the geometry of the flow, with a natural tendency to form spiral flows as a ‘least resistance’ solution (just stare at a river for a while). Ring vortices can move at their own speed which is independent of the speed of the surrounding stream.

The flow shown is in a hard (wooden) pipe but if it were to occur in a thin flexible vessel then it would not be surprising to observe what appear to be slow moving peristaltic waves hosting a spiral stream that moves faster than the waves that appear to be pushing it.

What is happening is that it is not the vessel contractions that are pushing the fluid but the other way around. The ring vortices are dilating the vessel walls, creating the illusion of peristalsis. whilst the Birkeland Flow moves under its own power independently of everything else.

Self-organising vortices

The diagram from the paper by Morozov shows multiple vortices forming when biological material is added to water. The vortices form by themselves, orient themselves and begin to flow by themselves.

Water flow consist of many interacting water vortices. A vortex is electromagnetic by nature with spiralling electric currents necessarily forming a magnetic dipole at right angles to the current direction.

Both clockwise and anti-clockwise currents exist and will self-organise according to their magnetic structure with north-south magnets aligning with south-north, meaning that clockwise and anti-clockwise vortices will form pairs and commence linear motion guided by each other.

For this flow to evolve we would expect the containing vessel to be of a comparative size to the vortices. Too many vortices together will not likely organise into unidirectional flow but on the other hand, the container must be large enough to accommodate whole vortices.

This suggests that the shape and dimensions of the blood vessels themselves are instrumental in determining the mechanics (and hence speed) of the blood flow. One type of flow is produced by the heart, flows down the aorta and evolves into another more suitable flow geometry as the blood progresses along the circulatory conduits.

Development and pressure

It seems that the blood flow controls the development of the heart and arterial system via a ‘least-energy’ principle. The blood flows around the embryo initially without physical vessels and will find optimal paths around the tissue much like a river flows to the sea.

Thereafter, the blood vessels will emerge around these flows and the developing aorta will spiral in response to the spiralling fields caused by the blood flow. Pressure is carefully controlled in embryonic circulation and will be maintained as such as a response to quite severe interventions.

We can consider that the heart and blood vessels are developing largely guided by the pressure of their own blood flow and that the end result will be a system that performs best with more or less equal pressure distributed throughout the network.

Maintenance of pressure

Attempts to manipulate pressure in a mature circulatory system have surprising results because incorrect assumptions have been made as to the function of the pressure control within the system.

Every indication is that pressure has little to do with blood propulsion. This actually makes a lot of sense. If the blood were propelled solely by pressure from the heart then there would be a huge pressure gradient from heart to capillaries and excessive strain exerted on all parts of the circulatory system.

A good design principle would be to ensure that the peak pressure and hence maximum stress on artery walls are kept to a minimum. The way to do this is to spread the load as much as possible by maintaining as equal a pressure as possible everywhere along the system, or by matching wall thickness to the pressure required at that point in the flow.

Responses to attempts at manipulating pressure are therefore not functional in respect to restoring flow (pressure and flow are not causally related) but to maintaining tissue integrity by minimising elastic stress on the blood vessels.

The function of the heart

The pumping of the heart is not increasing blood pressure or blood flow and even appears to slow down the flow rate with removal of the valves actually speeding up the blood flow.

A high rate of disorganised bood coming from the heart is not a good thing and when it hits the capillary bed there will be high pressure and trouble. We don’t want blood driven by high pressure or high momentum – we want control.

The heart takes in low density blood with deteriorating vortices and forms high density orgaised flow. It is transforming kinetic energy and momentum into organised, compact ring vortices whose energy can be released in a controlled manner as the blood proceeds along the aorta.

The rings accelerate against the pressure in a controlled manner and the windkessel device further softens the pulse from the heartbeat.

Capillary flow

The vortices produced by the heart encounter bifurcations in the arterioles and simply split and reform as two separate rings each half the size and this continues down to the size of a red blood cell and below.

This is the central miracle of blood flow, that the scalability of vortices permit a near identical geometry and mechanism throughout the entire circulatory system. Try even imagining achieving this with laminar flow with friction all over the place and turbulence at each branching of the arteries.

Vortices in the capillaries are within the plasma and can absorb energy from neutrinos that emanate from the sun. Water vortices and electromagnetic vortices around ATP hexagons can absorb energy and transmute it to various forms. Heat, electromagnetism, and now kinetic energy at this scale are all essentially vortex phenomena and it isn’t surprising that energy can easily flow between all ‘formats’ and all scales.

The body requires more energy so it dilates the capillaries and fills them with fluid. The number of vortices increases here in proportion to blood volume and so the capacity for neutrino absorption also increases proportionally.

The capillary bed therefore acts as a finely controllable antenna for neutrinos and it is this phenomenon that the main source of the energy required for blood propulsion. Energy production is proportional to the number of vortex centres and to the length of time they are in existence.

The capillary beds are the correct place to drive the blood from as accumulated energy leads to accumulated speed and this will occur as the blood moves to the veins i.e. as it moves from narrow tubes to wide. If it happened the other way around we would get a pressure build up as the blood tried to accelerate from artery to capillary.

Venous flow

The Morozov paper shows that small vortices wil self-orient and self-assemble into larger vortices whereupon they will move under their own energy in a globally uni-directional flow. This is precisely what is needed when moving from capillary to vein.

So millimetre-scale vortices move up the veins to the heart. As energy is expended the vortices start to lose their form and the overall density of the blood decreases, leading to expansion of the stream which further aids movement of the blood. Valves prevent return flow and give the expansion something to push against but they also help organise the vortex rings at the macro-scale. Photographs (in the heart at least) show the rings forming as they pass through the valves.

Back to the heart

The function of the heart then is not to provide pressure nor to slow the blood flow but to assist in restructuring the flow into an organised stream of vortices which will move around the system in an energy-efficient manner whilst imposing minimal stress on the living tissues.

Red blood cell creation

Red blood cell dimensions are in the Golden Ratio beloved of artists and architects. This happens to be the ideal ratio for the formation of electrical scalar waves (eddy currents) and indeed it appears that there are such electric circuits maintained in red blood cells and charged by alternating currents from the de-polarisation of heart muscle.

Possibly this is how they maintain a zeta-potential and very likely has something to do with maintaining the structure of the blood flow. The question arises then: “How does the body create blood cells in this ratio? Where is the template?”

The answer is already stated that electromagnetic ring vortices form naturally in this geometry according to the laws of physics (Meyl) and as with the construction of blood vessels from the electric forces given off by the blood, so are the blood cells modelled around these ideally proportioned electrical tornadoes.

The electromagnetic fields form a de facto ‘etheric’ body which acts as a guide or template for the construction of first the blood, next the vessels and eventually the heart itself.

Atomic structure, friction and heat

Atomic structure is misrepresented in classical physics and is better described by the vortex physics of Konstantin Meyl.

All fundamental particles are formulated as field vortices which makes vortex flow natural in a fluid such as water. Friction occurs by field drag which means that if the fluid is moving in harmony with the vortex rotations then there is no friction to speak of.

Heat transfer is via vortex loss and gain with angular momentum being transferred from one field vortex to another. Descriptions of the blood moving according to its own ‘internal heat’ are therefore quite correct in this respect.

Blood pressure

Pressure is measured two ways at least:

Lateral pressure. This represents radial energy loss and is therefore either inversely related or not related to longitudinal flow
Invasive techniques. These disrupt flow and therefore cannot be said to be representative of anything real

High blood pressure is probably bad but the measures taken to correct it seem misguided given the nature of the blood flow and the tendency for self-regulation.

The diameter of the blood vessels to some extent determines the geometry of the flow and so alterations via vasodilators may well have an effect but it may not be the one that is intended.

The blood flow as a whole forms an attractor pattern meaning that it is globally self-stabilising but theoretically not predictable given any finite set of observations. Local measurements are therefore largely meaningless with regard to analysing the system as a whole.

Related pages:

References:

The Heart and Circulation: An Integrative Model
Author: Branko Furst
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 144715276X
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1447152767

The Heart and Circulation: an Integrative Model – Branko Furst
The introduction to the book
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm:978-1-4471-5277-4/1.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288981713_The_Heart_and_Circulation_-_An_Integrative_Model

From chaos to order in active fluids – Alexander Morozov
https://people.brandeis.edu/~kuntawu/Publications/Science_355_eaal1979_2017/Science_355_1262_2017.pdf

Living energies – Calum Coats
https://www.foodforthoughtstore.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Living-Energies-Callum-Coats-Part-1.pdf

Living energies – Calum Coats
http://www.foodforthoughtstore.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Living-Energies-Callum-Coats-Part-2.pdf

Flow patterns around heart valves – Charles Peskin – PhD thesis 1972
https://www.math.nyu.edu/~peskin/papers/csp_thesis.pdf

Neutrino Power – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/indexa90a.html

The influence of the Golden Ratio on the Erythrocyte – M Purcell, R Ramsey
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331103066_The_Influence_of_the_Golden_Ratio_on_the_Erythrocyte

Physics of Life – Life at Low Reynolds Number – Scott Turner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZk2bMaqs1E

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/index92d2.html

Blood and Qi – Traditional Chinese Medicine World Foundation
https://www.tcmworld.org/blood-and-qi/

Physiology, Pulmonary Circulation – Boyette, Burns
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK518997/

Potential vortex, newly discovered properties of the electric field – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/indexb830.html

Stefan Lanka: vitalism

Dr Stefan Lanka believes that living systems are organised and even materialised by a separate consciousness which manifests itself as a physical being by first creating the necessary material substance and then organising it into the well studied molecules of RNA and thence DNA.

This page asks if this is consistent with current theories of physics and in particular the Scalar Wave physics of Prof Konstantin Meyl.

DEBUNKED: CRISPR & GENETICS (DR. LANKA, DEAN & KATE)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MfKQyKJ3AxCK/

From the start of this video we have, from Stefan:

“Either we explain life in a pure materialistic manner and we are in a dead end, or we open ourselves (to the idea) that there is a spirit, a consciousness acting on life or even materialising the life.”

After looking at the ideas of Hamer, we realise that “we are all parts that consciousness is materialising itself and this is a completely new kind of thinking. And therefore life becomes visible as processes at various stages and the first thing that becomes visible to us is nucleic acid, RNA in all its variations.”

“So it is completely different (from the mainstream view), it’s not the genetic inheritance of DNA with RNA as the messenger .. No! The RNA is constantly produced out of the nothing!“

“Even without a pre-existing text a pre-existing sequence; everything comes into existence and goes“

TEAM REDPILLED ZA EVENT – 26 JUNE 2021 – COURTENAY-ADAM-LAWRENCE & DR STEFAN LANKA
https://www.bitchute.com/video/m6cyT5eQNsGs/

And from 8:40 in this video:

“We are forced into this thinking because when we are not allowed that there is a consciousness watching on life, or even life is a materialisation of consciousness .. if we are not allowed to think that there is a field or there is a spirit there .. then we are lost in a dead end .. and this is it.”

So Stefan has said on multiple occasions that material substances will appear from nowhere in living cells and some sort of ‘field’ will organise them into functional bio-molecules. He identifies the source of such materialisation as ‘consciousness’, without trying to describe its nature, and claims that it is essential for organic life.

This will sound like vitalism to most scientists and will be rejected because of this.

The problem with this view is that many clever people over the past century have been trying to explain the emergence of Life using the established theories of physics and biology and have failed spectacularly; they can’t even describe how blood flows around the body!

To keep on trying using existing concepts is by now just stubbornness and a refusal to learn from, or even admit to, past mistakes. Each scientist imagines that their basic knowledge of the universe is somehow ‘complete’ and all that is necessary is to rearrange existing tenets into a readable paragraph, perhaps inventing some new vocabulary along the way and then presenting the result as a working theory.

Overwhelmingly, we find that the laws of physics are ignored whilst observation is presented as explanation and coincidence as causality.

Some new science is therefore needed that will fill the missing holes and yet still agree with existing experimental results.

Konstantin Meyl is a professor of physics and has proposed a new formulation of physics that proposes the existence of magnetic ‘potential vortices’ or ‘scalar waves’ that are claimed to have many of the properties required to solve the problems of consciousness, creation, transmutation and biological organisation.

The brain is a scalar wave computer
An emergent attractor state forms the basis of consciousness
A similar construct forms a distributed bio-field responsible for morphology and inheritance
Solar neutrinos are converted to material substance within such a bio-field
Materialisation (of electrons) and transmutation (of elements) also happens within physical water vortices
These scalar waves form an informational bio-field which organises the materialised matter into RNA molecules as and when required

This is in broad agreement with Lanka but gives a theoretical framework to test against which should hopefully be more acceptable to the mainstream scientific community.

The energy to create new material comes from the sun in the form of neutrinos and is transmuted into matter by the water vortices whereupon electro-magnetic fields organise base elements into complex molecules.

This will still be difficult for many people to stomach, with those from the field of biology rarely even mentioning electromagnetism, seemingly thinking it surplus to requirements, whilst those with a background in physics imagining that the science was completed with the formulation of quantum theory.

Anyone using the term ‘vitalism’ in a derogatory manner is really saying “I know all the important things there are to know and to assert otherwise is a form of mental disorder“. Henke

The mainstream explanation for all this is actually not so different to the methods described above except that they are missing the physics of Meyl and loathe to accept any causality outside of the purely physical and so will attempt a conjuring trick of hand-waving and distraction to avoid admitting ignorance.

From the Wikipedia description of DNA replication: “In late mitosis and early G1 phase, a large complex of initiator proteins assembles into the pre-replication complex at particular points in the DNA, known as ‘origins‘”.

Interesting. So molecules ‘assemble; as opposed to molecules ‘are assembled’. The former suggests that the molecules do it by themselves whereas the latter points to some other mechanism. Molecules ‘assemble’ suggests self-assembly which seems to be an accepted paradigm in biology . It is used all over the place to describe organised processes that have no discernible cause.

The effective meaning of this is that; “The explanation stops here”!

This is inadequate to put it mildly:

How are these molecules assembled? What is the mechanism?
What are the forces that moved them into place?
Where is the bauplan for such an arrangement?
From where does the energy originate used to initiate movement?
How, where, when and why were the base materials manufactured?
How is energy organised to effect the binding of the molecules?
What happens to any excess heat generated by the reactions?

Further reading is not enlightening, with words like ‘binding’, ‘activation’, ‘recruitment’, ‘displacement’, ‘inhibition’ etc. providing an easily understandable description but with little recourse to the laws of physics.

Molecules are said to ‘assemble’ because it is inconceivable that they could have spontaneously materialised, inconceivable that matter could appear out of nowhere. There are however many experiments showing the transmutation of elements within biological systems and some of these show a measurable increase in mass with apparently only sunlight as a source. – See Transmutation

“A reaction intermediate called the pre‐initiation complex (pre‐IC) has been proposed to assemble transiently during firing, but the existence of the pre‐IC has not yet been confirmed.” - NIH

What does this all mean?
Stefan Lanka is not claiming that the molecules ‘assemble’, rather they are “produced out of the nothing“! If true then this is surely a cue for a massive paradigm shift in biology.

“Out of the nothing“ isn’t going to happen by magic: there is a persistent field of biological information and energy available somewhere.

DNA comes from RNA according to Lanka and RNA is transient, being created only when necessary and destroyed afterwards. DNA therefore cannot be the inheritable substance of genetics. If DNA ultimately comes from a field of biological information, then it is the information within this field that is accessible to successive generations and must be the prime candidate for inherited characteristics.

Meyl gives us a mechanism for transmutation via water vortices but also a host medium for the bio-field in the form of magnetic scalar waves. The structure of these waves constitutes ‘biological information’ and the energy contained within them somehow enables interaction with physical matter as and when required.

The true roots of biology therefore lie within the bio-field which is a cybernetic learning system that has co-evolved throughout the ages along with our physical selves to produce the process we call life.

The field contains the information necessary to organise the physical molecules into a living being via ‘minimal energy’ and ‘maximal likelihood’ solutions. Thus stochasticity and the laws of probability, rather than being inconveniences in biological organisation, are actually fundamental principles.

Related pages:

References:

DEBUNKED: CRISPR & GENETICS (DR. LANKA, DEAN & KATE)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MfKQyKJ3AxCK/

TEAM REDPILLED ZA EVENT – 26 JUNE 2021 – COURTENAY-ADAM-LAWRENCE & DR STEFAN LANKA
https://www.bitchute.com/video/m6cyT5eQNsGs/

The website of Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/

A Note on the Psychology of Vitalism – Frederick G. Henke
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1413678?seq=1

Pre‐initiation complex assembly functions as a molecular switch – Miyazawa-Onami et al
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5623835/

Letter to James Tour

James Tour is doing a good job of highlighting some of the inadequacies of mainstream science in explaining the origins of life, cellular construction and maintenance, evolution, inheritance and the function of DNA. Several important principles of physics are rarely mentioned in these discussions so I started the ball rolling by making a list and sending him an email.

Hi James,

Thank you for starting a debate on the Origins of Life, this will hopefully highlight other areas of uncertainty in biology, all of which are suffering from similar inadequacies.

I have no training in biology or chemistry but have been reading about biology now for three years under the assumption that the basic laws of physics must hold under all circumstances and that there can be no exceptions. This holds even for biological systems at their origins, evolution, development or daily maintenance.

I will first state an overview of what I think is necessary and then briefly outline some major ideas from physics and mathematics that I consider relevant. There is enough verifiable research to support all my claims but a complete description of the Origins of Life may be beyond our grasp for reasons which will be explained.

Biology, as you have stated, is not just a bunch of chemical reactions but a precisely orchestrated dynamic organisation of energy and information which is stable, adaptive, self-organising and self-perpetuating.

Such a system is surely not possible without:

Some repository of information additional to the physical ordering of existing molecules.
A distributed energy system over and above what is normally described.
A holistic ‘bauplan’ or blueprint of global organisation
Some mechanism to implement such a plan as a physical structure
Survival of the blueprint in the event of damage to the material
Some qualities of the physical universe that are ‘propitious’ to the creation of life

The following constructs from contemporary physics therefore sound encouraging:

The existence of magnetic field vortices (scalar waves) as holders of information
The idea of Attractor States as stabilising and organisational units
Closed loop control systems with feedback as molecular learning systems
The concept of ‘least energy solutions’ as global organisational principles
Solar neutrinos as additional energy for electron materialisation within ATP and as a sustaining power supply for the information storage
The existence of mono-chiral field discharge from ionosphere to ground
Field vortices as long term (multi-generational) storage and transmission of biological information
The field vortices form an electro-magnetic bio-field which exists along with the physical molecules and is instrumental in their organisation
Cymatic resonance as a means of parallel i.e. non-sequential construction of complex molecules
Information is stored as some sort of structure on a scalar wave – no digital information in biological systems
The possibility of transmutation of elements within field vortices and powered by solar neutrinos.

In the following diagram, life starts at the sun with crude ‘energy’ which is modulated by the ionosphere into several elements including mono-chiral field vortices. These will power a local bio-field which in turn is responsible for informing the organisation of actual physical matter. Direct absorption of neutrinos into water vortices aids the physical process and enables the transmutation of elements.

So the overall physical structure for living entities is maintained by an electro-magnetic bio-field that is powered by a solar neutrino stream. The field acts as an informational source for the physical arrangement of molecules which is implemented via ‘cymatic’ vibrations and the actual creation of elements when necessary.

The fundamental unit of Life, then, is not a bio-molecule but rather the means to create the said bio-molecule. The information to do this is held within a field vortex system with closed loop feedback. This forms a robust, stable system with some sort of molecular Darwinism being responsible for the trimming of maladaptive developments: Stable systems persist, non-stable systems perish.

The bio-field arranges the molecules but retains its own identity so that mishaps in physical construction do not necessarily affect the original (developing) blueprint. The blueprint has the character of a stable attractor and develops according to the rules of the attractor whereas the physical matter obeys the laws of physics and falls into place according to a ‘least-energy’ or ‘maximal likelihood’ principle.

There is no true randomness here and no need to ‘do over’ half finished molecules. The attractor development is, in principle, irreversible and only pseudo-random, whereas the physical arrangement of molecules is via a statistically most likely solution where the environment and bio-field introduce a bias towards the ‘desired’ result.

Things which seem complex from one point of view (sequential construction of molecules) are really simple from another point of view (attractor emergence) with this view of biology actually using the laws of thermodynamics to its advantage.

The ordering of base pairs of any molecule can in any case never be described as ‘information’. It is at best ‘data’ until some meaning is ascribed to it.

The Resonant Recognition Model of Irena Cosic claims that all amino acids that go to make a functional protein have the same resonant frequency, so in a vibratory environment this means that all such molecules will experience forces of mutual attraction. The construction of a protein under such circumstances is now sounding considerably more likely than in some ‘dice rolling’ scenario.

Chirality. Life evolved, and is still evolving between the opposing capacitor plates of the ionosphere and the Earth’s surface and there is evidence that suggests that the potential difference was many times greater in the past. Field discharge from one plate to the other can occur in the form of spiral movement of ‘charge’ and this movement will always be right handed by analogy with Maxwell’s equations

If molecules are in fact assembled piecewise then it will need some force for this to happen and that force will be electromagnetic in nature (what else is there?). All this is happening within a dynamic mono-chiral electromagnetic torsion field.

Chiral induced spin selectivity. The vortex physics of Meyl make this seem entirely natural. All particles are really composites of field vortices and all have a magnetic moment deriving from an electric spin. There is no distinction between field and particle or matter and energy. They are all geometric arrangements of the same thing: charge movement. Laboratory experiments should take place within an appropriate electromagnetic vortex field for the effect to be studied correctly.

Current physics and hence also chemistry, are ‘incomplete’ in this sense; they are missing key ideas. This sounds like a big claim but the many anomalies and unexplained phenomena really do lend support to this. Clever people have been trying for a hundred years to explain these things and made unsatisfactory progress so some out-of-the-box thinking is clearly required.

Thermodynamics and Entropy. Many scientists will claim that biological systems are ‘far from thermodynamic equilibrium‘ and while true, the word ‘equilibrium’ is a little misleading I think. There is no stasis here, despite the term ‘homeostasis’. These systems are highly ‘dissipative’ and are running downhill thermodynamically with increasing entropy just like the rest of the universe.

Constant energy input comes from the sun in the form of neutrinos and this energy is used in an increasingly efficient manner to create complex molecules as guided by the bio-field. We are in a constant state of carefully managed decline.

Why do cells not overheat? One way is via transmutation of, for example, sodium into potassium (Kervran) . Energy is instantly sequestered as molecular bonds and expelled in due course as sweat.

Evolution, from this point of view, consists of a cybernetic learning system discovering increasingly more likely ways to dissipate the input energy, much as the shape of a river evolves throughout its lifetime to more easily transport the water from a high energy state to a low energy state.

The attractor evolves according to the rules of the attractor and in accordance with its own response to environmental input. Physical molecules obey the laws of physics guided by the attractor and the whole thing is subjected to some form of natural selection. ‘Life’ emerges as a result.

This is a very different picture from that of a sequential placing of molecules as with a builder constructing a house. The builder builds to a design and it is the design that evolves, according to the availability of new materials and the success of previous designs. The design for a house is separate from the house itself and so it is with living systems. The design is held in scalar waves which as yet cannot be accurately measured and so have remained invisible to science.

Attractors form an impenetrable barrier from an analytical point of view, with the future behaviour of such a system dependent upon the entire history of the system, including a billion years of adaptation in response to environmental input. This means that it will likely be impossible to recreate ‘life’ as we know it in a laboratory.

Life is not defined by any sort of arbitrary complexity metric with an equally arbitrary threshold but by a specific symbiosis between physical matter and energetic information. One attempt to define the Origins of Life is to say that it is the first time a piece of Primordial Soup is able to move around of its own accord whilst taking with it its own piece of bio-field, its own maintenance system. Until this happens, it doesn’t matter how complicated the molecular arrangement might be – it is still just complicated soup!

The transfer of spermatozoa is the passing on of a piece of bio-field to the next generation. (Telegony)

“All results of the evolution in the biosphere that have arisen between the ‘capacitor plates’ of the earth itself and its ionosphere and can be regarded as structured capacitor losses, which also apply to humans” – Prof. Konstantin Meyl

“The Laws of Physics must be obeyed” – Prof. Konstantin Meyl

References:

Scalar Waves and Vortex Physics– Prof. Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/indexbe14.html?dir=47_Papers&page=1&sublevel=0

The gene: an appraisal – Keith Baverstock
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33979646/

Episode 0/13: Reasons // A Course on Abiogenesis by Dr. James Tour
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71dqAFUb-v0

The new particle physics (Why we should trust Meyl) – Atomic structure: Meyl

Assembly via cymatics – Resonant recognition model and The cell as a cymatic resonator and The Origins of Life

Evolution as Entropy – Evolution and entropy

Evolution as an attractor progression– Evolution and Inheritance

Introduction to attractors – Strange attractors

Chemistry actually depends upon the phases of the moon – Giorgio Piccardi

Physics depends upon the phases of the moon– The Shnoll Effect

Scalar waves are the foundation of biological communication – Distant cellular interaction and The ‘Hill effect’

Structure emerges from randomness – Random events

Inheritance is not via DNA – Telegony

Biological transmutation – Transmutation

Atomic structure: Meyl

The Theory of Objectivity of Konstantin Meyl builds up a picture of reality starting with field equations from which the familiar constructs of space, time, matter gravity and charge are expressed as emergent properties. The field has a vortex-like structure and the smallest attractor state is the electron.

The elementary particles: Meyl asserts that there really is only one fundamental particle, the electron, and all other particles are just agglomerations of various forms of electron. A positron is just an electron turned inside out and other particles are collections of electrons and positrons stacked side by side and nested inside each other.

A particle or electron shell inside another will shrink down owing to increased field strength and the laws of physics remain in place but at a reduced scale, meaning more particles can be nested inside.

Once a plausible geometric arrangement has been decided upon, Meyl can calculate the mass of the resulting particle with pencil and paper and check it against existing measurements.

Electron shells. The basic unit of matter is an electron which can be thought of as like a small soap bubble with a single unit of electric charge on the outside balanced by a unit of positive charge on the inside. The diagram shows the proposed structure for a muon; it consists of three nested electron shells.

A muon consists of three nested electron shells with alternating charge so they repel each other. The outer shell retains its natural radius but the inner ones are progressively compressed owing to the increasing field strength (think of soap bubbles shrinking owing to pressure).

So the image of small electrons whizzing around a large nucleus is incorrect as what we have is three complete charge shells at each radius.

The Proton. Here we see the structure of the proton comprising an outer electron shell with two nested electrons as with the the muon, but here the arrangement is slightly different. The total sum of apparent charges is positive.

The nested electrons are inside out and so both present as positrons. Their positive charges will repel each other, thereby keeping them apart. They are also kept separate from the outer shell as it has positive charge on the inside.

This thing will sit nicely inside several nested electron shells and will shrink accordingly dependent upon how many shells there are.

So everything is of a flexible size, electrons, protons, atomic nucleus, all of them. This has been missed by classical physics which describes immutable ‘fundamental’ particles when what we really have is flexible charge fields forming stable attractor patterns.

The only really fundamental ‘particle’ is the electron which is really a stable vortex of electrical charge forming a magnetic dipole.

The Neutrino. The diagram below depicts a neutrino changing into an electron. All basic particles are vortex structures.

The neutrino is shown with negative charge on the outside and positive on the inside. It alternates rapidly between the two as the charge travels around the torus.

The alternation gives the neutrino an average charge over time of zero, meaning it will measure on a device as having no charge. Similarly it will register as having no mass as it effectively alternates between an electron and a positron.

If it were to encounter a specific field structure it can flip to another stable state whereby it stops alternating and remains with the negative charge fixed on the outside.

It has apparently acquired both charge and mass; it has materialised as an electron.

Electron pairs

The electrons are stable field vortices which are negatively charged on the outside. The spinning electric field necessarily produces a static magnetic field arranged in a dipole as with a bar magnet.

The magnetic field dominates and draws the electrons together but the negative electric field repels the vortices, keeping them separated and achieving a stable balance with the magnetic field.

The electrons, usually spherical, are squashed together a bit resulting in a composite particle which is almost spherical, has no magnetic moment but two times the apparent unit charge of electric field.

It is collections of particles such as this that make up atoms and molecules. All the forces shaping this entity are electromagnetic; there is no need for Strong and Weak nuclear forces. One consequence is that should a particle with a stronger magnetic field than this one interact with it then there is a chance that the magnetic bond will be broken and the electrons will fly apart.

There is therefore no need for expensive particle colliders to take apart matter as there are now no strong nuclear forces holding things together. Biological transmutation is possible and the creation of DNA from Pi water sounds credible: Stefan Lanka on DNA

Calculation of the masses of the Elementary Particles: Dark bars in the chart below are the mass of the elementary particles as calculated by Konstantin and the grey bars are the mass as measured by experiment.

The chart is ‘proof’ as proof can be that Meyl is correct. Molecules are as described by scalar waves and not as described by the Standard Model, they are not hard billiard ball objects but continuously flowing and deformable field vortices.

For the first time in history then, we have a way of calculating the fundamentals of matter from basics, without the need for extra assumptions or experiment. The billions of pounds spent on the hadron collider is now just a waste of money and has been since about 1990 when Meyl first published his results.

The elements of the periodic table. In this chart, Meyl has applied his theory to whole atoms of the elements in the periodic table and attempted to calculate the radius of each atom on theoretical grounds alone.

The large jumps appear whenever a new electron shell is required and the calculations agree remarkably well with existing measurements.

Accuracy diminishes after each jump and Meyl puts this down to the necessity of theoretical simplification as the calculations become more and more complex. Precision is restored at the introduction of a new electron shell.

This pattern matching is clearly more than just a statistical coincidence.

There is now a single unity to the whole of physical reality which consists of the field equations of Konstantin Meyl. The equations are solved by stable attractor states which represent all matter, energy and forces in the known universe.

References:

The website of Konstantin Meyl: http://meyl.eu

The Nature of Science

Science is structured as a relationship between formal theoretical frameworks on the one hand and actual ‘reality’ on the other. A refinement of this idea will involve a separate ‘measurement domain’ for the Theory of Objectivity whilst classical science is careful to draw distinctions between matter, energy and information.

Here is Robert Rosen’s diagram of the relationship between the two separate worlds of Natural (biological) systems and Formal (theoretical) systems. The two are not the same but operate in parallel and an assumption is made that the structure of one reflects the nature of the other.

So we have:

The Real World
A formal system, a ‘model’ of reality
A proposed relationship between the two (here referred to as encoding and decoding)

Proofs in the Formal System (here referred to as Implication) are assumed to correspond with events (causation) in the Natural System

Calculations are made within the theoretical system and these are translated to predictions in the real world. Experiments are performed and the results are then translated back to the the formal system to see if they agree with theory.

If results disagree with theory then either the theory or the proposed relationships are inappropriate. I don’t say the theory itself is ‘wrong’ because it is within a mathematical framework and will hopefully be mathematically (theoretically) correct. The problem will be that it simply does not correspond to reality.

The New Biology movement. Many members of the New Biology movement have trouble with this and want to discard the whole left hand side of this diagram. They don’t understand scientific modelling and so they don’t understand science and therefore try to re-define it as they see fit.

They complain that there is no ‘proof’ within formal systems but this is just not true. The idea of ‘proof’ has a very specific definition within mathematics and this is the only place where the idea of ‘proof’ does make any sense. There is no ‘proof’ within actual reality, only (subjective) observations. Moreover, you can never really ‘prove’ that you have the correct model as there may always be an alternative yet to be discovered.

The introduction of a ‘measurement domain’

This diagram shows a clear separation of theory and reality and introduces a conceptually separate ‘measurement domain’

Observations are made of real events and are translated to quantitative measurements which are then plugged into some interpretive system (theoretical model) where calculations are made, the results of which are translated back to the measurement domain to make predictions concerning future ‘real’ events.

Note that space, time, gravity etc. are purely theoretical constructs and never directly observed and yet many will still think of these as ‘fundamentals’ of reality.

Scientists working with these constructs have come to think of them as real and somehow immutable and that has hampered progress for a hundred years. According to the Theory of Objectivity of Konstantin Meyl, all of time, space and gravity are ’emergent’ properties of the theory and do not ‘exist’ as independent variables.

Think about what we actually observe, we cannot ever observe time directly, nor speed, force or temperature. all we can ever do is look at the position of something whether it be clock hands, a dial on a speedometer or the trajectory of a falling apple.

None of these give us a good idea of how to predict future events nor do they confer any ‘understanding’ of nature until they are interpreted within the model as ‘everyday’ concepts such as time, weight, speed etc.

The reality of our perceptions is tied more closely to the theoretical domain than it is to actual reality. Consciousness provides us with a working model that is good enough for survival and reproduction but insufficient for the endeavours of contemporary science. The ‘inner’ task of the scientist is to use the developed theoretical model to create a new intuitive structure with which to investigate the world.

Top down causality – bottom up emergence.

A diagram adapted from the Baverstock paper gives an overview of the patterns of causality in biological systems.

From the bottom: An electromagnetic bio-field guides molecular organisation in the form of ‘gene expression’ and protein construction. Information from here is organised via attractor patterns into a cellular phenotype and thence to an entire organism.

Feedback from the emergent behaviour is funnelled back down through the attractor to instigate meaningful changes at the sub-molecular level. Information ‘persists’ in the bio-field and can be passed on to the next generation.

Most important to note is that top-down influence is predictable and so can reasonably be described as ‘causal’ whereas bottom-up influence is via emergent properties whose behaviours are not derivable from their component parts and therefore cannot be classed as such.

Summary:

All the ‘work’ in science takes place within a strictly theoretical framework
The idea of ‘existence’ is not addressed as it is not necessary for scientific enquiry
Causality in biology is via attractor patterns, emergent properties
The ‘fundamentals’ of physics such as space and time are purely theoretical constructs – they do not ‘exist’ as usually understood
The most reliable representation we have of Reality is a set a ‘measurements’ but this confers no meaning or understanding which is why the theoretical constructs are necessary.

Related pages:

Scalar waves and nerves

Nervous impulses seem to carry a great deal of information very efficiently with very little power supply and often from point to point as opposed to forming a complete circuit. This is inconsistent with electricity as being the transport medium but is instead characteristic of magnetic scalar waves as described by Konstantin Meyl,

Scalar waves can transmit information in parallel instead of in series, will conduct easier in an insulator than a conductive medium, need no complete circuitry and form self-stabilising vortices needing no error correction.

They are used in nervous conduction, vision and the sense of smell.

Shown right is an image of ‘standing waves’ similar to those on a plucked guitar. The waves shown are transverse but the same principle applies to longitudinal (scalar) waves. The wave system forms natural ‘nodes’ of zero amplitude whose position and spacing remain fixed and are a function of the frequency of the wave.

Konstantin Meyl is claiming that the neurons are conduits for magnetic scalar waves which are propagated through the myelin sheath as opposed to the interior of the axon. The spacing of the nodes on the axon thereby acting as a signals filter to ensure that only waves of a specific wavelength can be transmitted.

Noise is thus reduced and since the filter works both ways, a ‘mental workspace’ is created which insulates the brain from all but a selected subset of information.

Information is transmitted but no energy really flows as the wave never moves but slight modulations of the waveform are what carries the necessary information. This arrangement transmits signals from A to B with no need for a complete circuit or ‘earth’.

The idea of nervous impulses as electric currents is just horrible. Electricity needs a complete circuit, voltage to push it, creates heat, loses energy and needs a coding scheme for modulation. The idea of chemical reactions is no better as being much too slow to account for the observed effects and too crude to carry sufficient information.

In the case of scalar waves, the modulations ‘are’ the required information. These type of structures form a universal language for all living systems.

If the nerve is damaged it is easy to imagine that the remaining signal is instrumental in effecting repair for the system. The resonance determines the shape and the shape strengthens the resonance.

Many papers find that there is a relationship between the speed of propagation of nerve impulses and the thickness of the insulating sheath surrounding a nerve; the thicker the myelin sheath, the faster the signal propagation:

Local modulation of neurofilament phosphorylation, axonal caliber, and slow axonal transport by myelinating Schwann cells – de Waegh, Brady
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1371237/

Thinner myelin sheaths around nerve fibres result in slower propagation of electrical signals whilst thicker sheaths result in faster propagation.

This is because electrical currents are really movement of magnetic ring vortices where the large proportion of energy is carried in the vortex movement in the insulating sheath with the ‘electrical’ current in the conductive interior showing an interesting side effect necessitated by the laws of field physics.

The distance between the nodes is related to the diameter of the nerve and the thickness of the sheath. This is because the whole nerve is a physical manifestation of an electrical phenomenon having certain field properties, resonant frequencies etc.

The template for the nerve is precisely the scalar wave structure that it will eventually host. The field precedes the physical nerve which is optimised to carry a current with similar properties.

The activities of the various bio-molecules involved are a reflection of the electromagnetic environment rather than being the primal cause of it.

Vision. Konstantin Meyl has identified the nerves as being transmitters of Scalar Waves via the myelin sheath so now Herzian waves (photons) must be rolled up into vortex shaped Tesla waves at some point for transmission to the brain.

“A good example is the human eye, the rods and cones of which merely can pick up potential vortices and pass them on to the nerves as so-called reaction potentials. Incident waves can only be detected, if they first have rolled up to vortices in the corpus vitreum of the eye.” – Meyl (Scalar Waves p. 475)

Note that nerve cells work via action ‘potentials’. A ‘potential’ is a ‘voltage ‘in electronics language and scalar waves contain their own ‘potential’. They are ‘mobile voltages’, a means of building up a potential difference and then transmitting it via a nerve and merging it into the field structure of general cognition.

Sense of Smell. “Molecules of odorants passing through the nasal passages dissolve in the mucus .. and are detected by olfactory receptors on the olfactory sensory neurons. ” – Wikipedia
So some sort of information is being passed from molecule to neuron. What form does this information take? How is it stored, ‘detected’ and transmitted?

Konstantin Meyl: “Does the bloodhound for instance interpret the vortical oscillations of chemical substances like lattice oscillations or the movements of the electrons in the atomic hull?” – Scalar Waves p. 189

Meyl is asking if the information representing smell is somehow stored in the physical structures of the molecule and is this the data that is somehow transformed to a neural impulse. Is there some kind of encylopaedia used to look up a set of molecular features (how would that even happen?) and translate them into electrical signals and are these signals again converted into some unique cognitive symbol before reaching the brain?

This all sounds very unlikely. The simplest explanation is that electromagnetic scalar waves are emitted by the odorant and are picked up directly by the olfactory neurons which already are instruments for the transmission of such waves. The scalar waves are transmitted unmodified to the brain where they can be amalgamated into the global cognitive system.

So a smell ‘is’ the information on a scalar wave.

No encyclopaedia is necessary and no conversion of signal from one format to another is needed. The scent itself proceeds unmodulated from flower directly to consciousness via the neurons.

We can’t have this system with electrical impulses as we would need a coding system from smell to signal and then back again when we reach the brain. The signal itself would need to be modulated somehow to carry the information which would need to be transmitted one ‘bit’ at a time. Electricity need a voltage supply and a complete circuit to work properly.

The structure of a scalar wave is suitable for use as an information carrier between and within all parts of biological systems.

Plato had the basic idea 2500 years ago: “As water (the potential vortex) turns into air (waves) or air (the wave) into water (potential vortices), the smells are formed during this transition, and smells are smoke or fog. But fog is the transition of air (waves) into water (vortices), the transition of water (vortex) into air (waves) however smoke“

Meyl: “Plato here provides an indisputable and conclusive interpretation of the fundamental field equation. In this equation the potential vortex acts as damping term in the wave equation, what in the case of waves rolling up to vortices will show to the observer in the way that the electromagnetic waves and therefore also the light will be damped. We say, the visibility gets worse and speak of fog. If the damping phenomenon disappears again, as the potential vortices break up, then Plato speaks of smoke.” Scalar waves p. 187

Sense of taste

The sense of taste is likewise provided for by a direct absorption of information-carrying field vortices. Small hairs at the surface of the tongue act as antennae for the electrical emissions and being contiguous with the nerves will convey the signals directly to the brain. Both smell and taste then are essentially the same sense and can easily be confused with each other.

“If the tongue while tasking responds to dissolved substances, then it not by all means needs to be a chemical excitation. Instead fine hairs, the taste hairs resp. sense pins, serve as receiver like in the case of the nose. The similar structure of the receptors and the circumstance that for most invertebrates sense of taste and sense of smell can’t be distinguished of each other at all and consist of the same primary sense cells, suggest that the tongue doesn’t analyse the chemistry as such, but only the molecular oscillation patterns, that also the taste is nothing else but vortex information!” – Konstantin Meyl (Scalar waves..)

Related pages:

References:

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/index92d2.html

Sense of Smell – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense_of_smell

Blood flow and scalar waves

Various researchers have given up on determining how blood flows around the circulatory system and have decided that whatever energetic motivation there is from the heart is insufficient to describe the total flow and that there must be some other forces at work.

“The widely accepted pressure-propulsion circulation model fails to explain an increasing number of observed circulatory phenomena”

“Experimental and phenomenological evidence suggest the opposite, namely that the blood possesses autonomous movement sustained by the metabolic demands of the tissues at the level of microcirculation.“ – Branko Furst

So the blood appears to move by itself. This contradicts the laws of physics, so we must look to some other source of energy to explain the blood flow and some physical mechanism by which this energy is harnessed and converted to kinetic energy.

Assertions:

Blood flow is organised into scalar waves
Scalar waves exist within red blood cells
Scalar waves form within the blood plasma
Scalar magnetic waves may exist as an etheric blood flow
These waves are energised by solar neutrinos
These structures are instrumental in circulation of the blood

Start with a drawing from Viktor Schauberger of water flow in a pipe.

The flow of water is largely spiral and almost friction free. The main body of the water has separated from the walls of the pipe (observed by Schauberger) thereby reducing friction even more and toroidal ring structures (scalar waves) exist at intervals to act as bearings to further help reduce friction and propel the main flow.

Such flow was measured by Schauberger (here) to demonstrate a sinusoidal response to increasing pressure and to actually develop negative resistance at certain flow rates. This result was reproduced by independent researchers and implies that some extra input of energy is coming from somewhere.

An image from Charlie Peskin’s PhD thesis shows fluid flow (top to bottom) through a valve structure such as may be found in the heart or veins. Vortices can be seen forming around the valve outlet and they will, when fully formed, close the valve behind them.

Another image from the paper by Merab Beraia showing spiral structures everywhere in the arterial system with even supposedly ‘turbulent’ blood flow being comprised of highly organised helical flow. The suggestion is that the blood is not behaving as a simple Newtonian fluid at all but that its movement is largely determined by electromagnetic forces, with spiral formations being typical of the interaction between charged particles and magnetic fields.

So the blood is forming toroidal structures known as ‘scalar waves’ which are electrically structured and largely self-sustaining and highly energy-efficient. The performance of such structures allows for the blood to actually accelerate as it comes out of the heart and to propel itself along the arteries.

Short video shows similar structures in sea water.

Here we see luminescence in sea water that is attributed to plankton. Maybe, but waterfalls have demonstrated the same phenomenon and Viktor Schauberger claims to have reproduced the phenomenon in a laboratory.

Konstantin Meyl gives the following hypothesis: Small vortices created in the water act as receivers for solar neutrinos and then release the energy as photons. Neutrinos are already in the form of a charge-vortex (right), making their absorption into similar structures highly plausible.

This would be a good explanation then for Schauberger’s observation of ‘negative resistance’; the water flow is already friction free and is absorbing additional energy through neutrino transduction.

Time to consider the possibility that vortical eddy currents in arterial blood will also absorb neutrino energy thereby magnifying their own action and helping propel the blood cells through the capillaries.

The Influence of the Golden Ratio on the Erythrocyte

This paper from Purcell and Ramsey claims that red blood cells are constructed according to the Golden Ratio.

If in addition we have an electric current flowing around the blood cell, we have precisely the conditions for the generation of stable scalar waves.
The blood is energised by an electric field in the heart and toroidal currents are maintained by input from neutrinos.

The capillary problem. Fluid flow at small scales is profoundly different from that of macro scale flow. Here, viscous forces completely dominate the flow dynamics, making even distilled water seem, not so much like honey, but thick warm tar.

Scott Turner explains:

Intuitive ideas of fluid flow arise from observations at the macro level and do not translate well to the micro-cosmos. Any explanation of capillary flow emerging from such intuitions must be considered invalid.

So how are blood cells squeezing through capillaries that are smaller than themselves? The idea that pressure generated a billion cells away can do this without exploding the intermediate arteries is a very big stretch of the imagination.

If our new toy is toroidal waves fuelled by neutrinos then it is time to consider this surely?

Scalar waves were described above as created from physical matter (water) but with some electrical properties which help organise the matter into spiral flows and toroidal rings. Meyl, however, in his book Scalar Waves, describes them as stable dynamic states within the electromagnetic field itself with no need for any supporting material substance.

These waves can exist by themselves and carry energy and information around biological systems. One German scientist documents how they can apparently organise physical conduits within the cells in order to facilitate communication and then dismantle them when no longer necessary.

If blood is observed by competent scientists to ‘propel itself’ around the capillaries then maybe such field waves are implicated here, after all: what else is there?

Capillary flow (Pollack) The video clip from Gerald Pollack of water flowing autonomously through a tube (left to right) can be found here. “Unending flow through the tube; it can go on for a full day” – Pollack

We see water with no discernible source of power flowing steadily into a tube. The phenomenon only works with hydrophilic tubes and is enhanced by application of infra-red or ultra-violet light.

The whole phenomenon is self-organising, with the ability to absorb external energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation and to use it as ‘fuel’

From chaos to order in active fluids – Morozov. Wu et al

In this paper, some biological substances including ATP were mixed with water and the resulting solution placed in small tubes and cylinders.

The fluid spontaneously organised itself into vortices, the vortices oriented themselves with respect to each other and then the whole thing started to move in a single unidirectional flow.

The diameter of the tubes determined the speed of flow and small notches made in the cylinder walls could be used to control the direction of the flow.

The flow then is not driven by a pressure gradient and the author asks if the idea of ‘pressure’ even makes sense in such liquids.

We know that the heart creates vortices of blood at the scale of centimetres but this paper now suggests that at lower scales, i.e. in the capillaries, there is scarcely a need to mechanically shape the blood flow as it seems quite capable of organising its own affairs.

In dogs whose heart has been stopped, the blood continues to flow for up to a hour. This blood is clearly not being driven by the heart but by some residual energy left in the bloodstream that continues to organise and implement flow independently of whatever catastrophe may have occurred elsewhere.

The venous problem. If the blood is pumped around by pressure alone then the rather slow flow emerging from the capillaries will speed up into the veins and eventually emerge as a flow into the heart that seems as fast and vigorous as the flow exiting the heart after being pumped.

Venous flow is claimed to be by muscular contraction, with the valves preventing return flow, but if the flow into the heart is a fast as claimed then there is surely no return flow to mitigate against? And what happens when we are asleep or bedridden?

The valves may well prevent return flow but they also serve the purpose of restoring vortices to the blood which in turn can now transmute ambient vortex energy to kinetic propulsion of the blood.

In addition, the construction of scalar waves will give the blood flow a specific direction. It is no good postulating some sort of energetic input to the bloodstream without both a description of a mechanism of how flow is generated and a way of determining the direction of that flow. The idea that scalar waves are produced by venous valves fits these requirements precisely.

Branko Furst: “Experimental and phenomenological evidence suggest .. that the blood possesses autonomous movement sustained by the metabolic demands of the tissues at the level of microcirculation”. So the blood flow is regulated and physically caused by the actual demand for the blood flow and this happens at the capillary level!

What are we to make of this? The body is making its own requests for blood flow at the cellular level, with each portion of capillary making a small contribution to the overall blood flow. We can suppose that requests for extra blood are made by the transfer of scalar waves somehow from organ to capillary and that these waves will then absorb neutrinos and maybe actually help drive the blood through the capillary to the required degree.

So running upstairs leads to surplus heat ‘waste’ (vortex energy) in the muscles which spirals inwards towards the capillaries, becoming more concentrated as it does so. This energy passes through the capillary walls and has an effect similar to the application of infrared light. The overall blood flow increases with this extra energy and the heart beats faster as an end result of the increased blood flow, not as an initial cause of it.

The blood enters the heart as fast as it exits (this must be the case anyhow) – so is the heart causing the blood to flow or is the flow causing the heart to pump? The speed of the blood entering the heart cannot be caused by blood that was pumped out of the heart and around the body as the two flows are decoupled from each other causally by both the capillary and venous blood flow, neither of which are dependent upon arterial blood pressure.

Is the heart sucking up the venous blood (opinions seem to differ on this) or is the blood simply moving by itself with the beating heart simply interpolated in the middle and acting as some sort of regulator?

“Pulmonary circulation is the system of transportation that shunts de-oxygenated blood from the heart to the lungs to be re-saturated with oxygen before being dispersed into the systemic circulation.” – NIH
So blood flow out of the lungs is via dispersal. This really is avoiding the question.

Konstantin Meyl (here) points out that there is considerable energy stored in water vortices in humid air and that these contribute a significant portion of the energy input to the human body. There is less energy in the air we breathe out than the air we breathe in.

So it is possible then, that scalar waves from the air we breathe directly enter the pulmonary blood flow and make a contribution to the circulation. This makes a lot of sense with an increase in breathing leading increased energy input which then directly causes an increase in circulation. The requirement is determining the physiology as described by Furst. See also: Do we breathe oxygen?

How else is blood assumed to flow away from the delicate lung capillaries? Is there really enough pressure maintained here to continue pumping the blood all the way around the body? Is this local pressure somehow micro-managed by the beating of the heart according to demand? That really would be a miracle!

Are conditions such as legionnaire’s disease and pneumonia largely the result of bad pulmonary circulation as a result of lack of fresh (energised) air? See: What causes pneumonia?

The Yin and Yang symbol is not far off a stylised depiction of a scalar wave and descriptions of Qi energy tie it closely to the blood: “Blood nurtures and supports Qi, or the body’s life force; in turn, Qi supplies the power, intelligence, and messages to propel Blood into all the physical structures where it’s required “

“Blood is the mother of Qi; Qi is the commander of Blood”

“Blood is the material substance that courses through our veins. But without the messages and wisdom of Qi and the power of its flow, we could not live. Without a sufficient quantity and quality of Blood, at the physical level, you cannot create Qi. All the body, mind, and spirit actions you perform in your daily life depend on the value and quality of Blood and Qi. The quality of your Qi helps Blood flow properly throughout your body.” – TCM

A very clear dependent duality here that mirrors the scalar wave theory of Konstantin Meyl

Related pages:

References:

The Heart and Circulation: An Integrative Model
Author: Branko Furst
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 144715276X
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1447152767

The Heart and Circulation: an Integrative Model – Branko Furst
The introduction to the book
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm:978-1-4471-5277-4/1.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288981713_The_Heart_and_Circulation_-_An_Integrative_Model

Living energies – Calum Coats
https://www.foodforthoughtstore.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Living-Energies-Callum-Coats-Part-1.pdf

Living energies – Calum Coats

http://www.foodforthoughtstore.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Living-Energies-Callum-Coats-Part-2.pdf

Flow patterns around heart valves – Charles Peskin – PhD thesis 1972
https://www.math.nyu.edu/~peskin/papers/csp_thesis.pdf

Neutrino Power – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/indexa90a.html

The influence of the Golden Ratio on the Erythrocyte – M Purcell, R Ramsey
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331103066_The_Influence_of_the_Golden_Ratio_on_the_Erythrocyte

Physics of Life – Life at Low Reynolds Number – Scott Turner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZk2bMaqs1E

Scalar Waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/index92d2.html

Blood and Qi – Traditional Chinese Medicine World Foundation
https://www.tcmworld.org/blood-and-qi/

Physiology, Pulmonary Circulation – Boyette, Burns
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK518997/

Potential vortex, newly discovered properties of the electric field – Konstantin Meyl
https://www.meyl.eu/go/indexb830.html

Seasonal disease

Many diseases show striking seasonal patterns:

Influenza – winter
Gastroenteritis – spring equinox
Measles – spring
Heart attacks – spring equinox
Cancer diagnosis – winter

Influenza

Influenza admissions according to the CDC demonstrate a precise peak about 10 days before winter solstice. Why?
Admissions precede the shortest day and cannot therefore be caused by any occurrence on that day.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4909a1.htm

Deaths from influenza show a heavily seasonal pattern.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4909a1.htm

The exact season however, varies with latitude and seems to be triggered by sudden changes in the weather (humidity, pressure, rainfall..)

Differences in Influenza Seasonality by Latitude, Northern India – Koul et al
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/20/10/pdfs/14-0431-combined.pdf

Spatial Variation in Humidity and the Onset of Seasonal Influenza Across the Contiguous United States — Serman et al
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2021GH000469

Norovirus

Norovirus is supposedly a transmissible disease but nevertheless seems to know what time of year it is. Peaks at winter solstice, zero at midsummer.

Estimated hospitalizations attributed to norovirus and rotavirus infection in Canada, 2006–2010 – Morton et al
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277085418_Estimated_hospitalizations_attributed_to_norovirus_and_rotavirus_infection_in_Canada_2006-2010

Gastroenteritis

– a ‘stomach bug’ peaks around spring equinox!

Very interesting Children peak at a different time to adults and display an intriguing biennial pattern.

Heart attacks

Heart attacks again are seasonal. Here we see the pattern for heart attacks within hospitals so we can’t really blame physical exertion or excessive cold.

Outside of hospitals, the phenomenon was found to be more common in temperate climates.

Seasonal Variation in the Incidence of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest – Ashraf et al
https://www.jacc.org/doi/full/10.1016/j.jacep.2023.04.012

This chart of Australian data shows heart attacks peaking close to the spring equinox. The seasonal pattern was found for both acute and chronic heart disease.

Provisional Mortality Statistics – Australian Bureau of Statistics
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics/jan-dec-2022

Seasonal variations in cardiovascular disease – Stewart et al
(Most predominant in temperate climates)
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrcardio.2017.76

Winter Cardiovascular Diseases Phenomenon – Auda Fares
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3662093/

Strokes

– midwinter:

An analysis of recent stroke cases in South Africa: Trend, seasonality and predictors – Ranganai, Matizirofa
https://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0256-95742020000200007

Kawasaki disease and Adenovirus

.. again winter seasonality.

Calculating the fraction of Kawasaki disease potentially attributable to seasonal pathogens: a time series analysis – Valtuille et al
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370%2823%2900255-9/fulltext

Pertussis (whooping cough)

.. is again winter-seasonal

Monitoring Pertussis Infections Using Internet Search Queries – Zhang et al
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-11195-z

Measles

.. is heavily seasonal in late winter / early spring

In this paper they try to model the seasonal pattern of measles by a modified infection model. But if the main feature is seasonality all you need to predict the number of cases is to look at the calendar!

Modelling seasonal measles transmission in China – Bai, Liu
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1007570415000088

Measles again, this time from the WHO – peaking in spring
https://vaxopedia.org/2019/07/08/when-is-measles-season/

Chickenpox

Delineating the Seasonality of Varicella and Its Association With Climate in the Tropical Country of Colombia

“Similar to many other infectious diseases, the incidence of varicella is highly seasonal, with a latitudinal gradient in the peak timing observed on a global scale. In temperate regions, this seasonality is typically characterized by a single peak at the end of winter (eg, in the United States and Germany) , although 2 peaks have also been described (eg, in Japan and China). The seasonal patterns in subtropical regions generally mirror those in temperate regions“

An AI search gives the following chart:

Digital epidemiology reveals global childhood disease seasonality – PNAS
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1523941113

Fine grained analysis shows characteristic patterns that depend upon both time of year and latitude. This is similar to influenza, which therefore suggests some sort of geo-magnetic disturbance that is influenced by both season and latitude. See: Influenza and field vortices

“We detected significant seasonality of the Google Trends data in 27 of the 34 countries for which weekly data were available. Each geographic region in our study displayed distinct seasonal patterns of information-seeking behaviour. A strong latitudinal pattern was clearly discernible, with peaks early in the year in the Northern Hemisphere and later in the Southern Hemisphere, corresponding to springtime outbreaks worldwide. These spring peaks agree with the seasonal timing found in historical datasets and previous studies of chicken pox . European countries were mostly unimodal, with a peak in March–May, but some had an additional smaller peak in late December. Several countries in the Southern Hemisphere, including Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and those countries located in South America, had a single discernible peak at various times of the year. China and Japan had bimodal peaks, which occurred in March–May and December–January, balanced by deep summer troughs occurring in July–August. Other Asian countries had a single peak that occurred in February–March, punctuated by a relatively shallow trough.” – Bakker et al

Cancer

First description of seasonality of birth and diagnosis amongst teenagers and young adults with cancer aged 15–24 years in England, 1996–2005 – van Laar et al

https://bmccancer.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2407-13-365

The diagnosis of cancer in teenagers and young adults (TYA) shows a seasonal pattern, leading to the authors speculating an ‘infectious’ cause:

“Our novel findings support an infectious aetiological hypothesis for certain subgroups of TYA cancer in England. Further work will examine correlation with specific infections occurring around the time of birth and diagnosis within certain diagnostic groups.“

Seasonal Variations in the Diagnosis of Testicular Germ Cell Tumours: A National Cancer Registry Study in Austria – Tulchiner et al
https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/21/5377

Herpes

Elevation of ambient temperature is associated with an increased risk of herpes zoster: a time-series analysis – Choi, Lim, Lee, Hong
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-48673-5

Varicella Vaccination Alters the Chronological Trends of Herpes Zoster and Varicella – Wu, Wu, Choi, Sung
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258350867_Varicella_Vaccination_Alters_the_Chronological_Trends_of_Herpes_Zoster_and_Varicella

Chart showing herpes zoster and varicella. When one increases, the other decreases. The sum of the two is approximately constant most of the time. Possible diagnostic artefact?

Related pages:

Random events

There is no formal definition of ‘randomness’ within the field of mathematics and therefore none within theoretical physics. As far as practical physics is concerned then, there can be no quantitative study of randomness or even recognition of ‘random’ events. Any philosophical musings on ‘randomness’ have no foundation in anything meaningful.

No individual event then can be said to be ‘random’. However, there do exist processes that generate multiple events whose collective outcome can be usefully studied and characterised by the techniques of statistics and probability theory.

Wikipedia: “The fields of mathematics, probability, and statistics use formal definitions of randomness. In statistics, a random variable is an assignment of a numerical value to each possible outcome of an event space”

Wikipedia: “A random variable is a mathematical formalization of a quantity or object which depends on random events. The term ‘random variable’ can be misleading as its mathematical definition is not actually random nor a variable,“

Wikipedia: “A random sequence is a vague notion… in which each term is unpredictable to the uninitiated and whose digits pass a certain number of tests traditional with statisticians” – D H Lehmer

So randomness is defined in terms of ‘random variables’ which are not really random but nevertheless depend upon ‘random events’. We have a somewhat circular definition with experts not even liking the whole idea anyhow.

What is happening is that intuitive notions of randomness and unpredictability of individual events are impossible to formalise and therefore have no relevance to mathematics or physics. What is important however is the predictable patterns that emerge from the repeated outcomes of such events.

The language gives the impression that one thing is true whereas it is the precise opposite. So called ‘random’ events are characterised by the predictable emergent properties of collective outcomes and not by the unpredictability of individual events.

Coin tossing example. A coin was tossed 32 times and the number of heads was noted. The experiment was repeated 50000 times and the results plotted on the chart below. Unsurprisingly, 16 was the most likely number, with other outcomes being progressively less common as shown.

The resulting curve is a probability distribution, in fact a Gaussian distribution. The shape of the curve becomes more precise the more coin tosses there are and it is this shape that can be used to make predictions and to do some practical science.

Coin tosses are unpredictable as individual events but highly predictable as collective events. We have a sort of reversal of entropy whereby the more ‘noise’ (randomness) is put into the system, the more ordered the output becomes.

The coin tossing procedure therefor is characterised by the outcome curve and not by the unpredictability of individual events and not by the physical mechanism of the coin toss.

Unpredictability. Attempts to define randomness as something to do with being ‘unpredictable’ fail because:

Once an ‘unpredictable’ sequence of events has been observed it is no longer unpredictable but is nevertheless the same sequence of events
The whole concept of ‘unpredictability’ is therefore not well-defined
Probability distributions are characterised by their long term outcomes and the predictability or otherwise of a single event has nothing to do with this anyhow

Random number generators. Attempts to define randomness by the complexity or opaqueness of the generation method fail because:

Probability distributions are characterised by their long term outcomes and the method by which these outcomes are generated has nothing to do with this

The digits of π are distributed evenly throughout the range 0 to 9 and may said to be occur ‘randomly’, but they are certainly not unpredictable and are, furthermore, generated by a mechanism that is completely deterministic, well-defined and reproducible.

The Galton board. In the video, it may be said that each ball follows a ‘random’ path which is superficially unpredictable but actually predictable if you have enough information. However, the outcome is always predictably the same – another Gaussian curve. Emergent properties arise from multiple events.

Meyl on DNA

DNA formation – In his book Scalar waves, Konstantin Meyl presents a hypothesis concerning the formation of the double helix of DNA. Rather than a double helix forming simply out of the intrinsic properties of molecules, an electromagnetic force field of spiralling currents is instrumental in shaping the familiar helical shape.

DNA spends most of its time as a part of a mass of amorphous chromatin fibres and only takes shape when it is time for the cell to replicate, whereupon it assumes the familiar helical shape and further winds around into a chromosome. The chromosomes replicate and the whole cell is seen to divide.

Meyl asks how these transformations take place – is it purely chemistry or are there spiral forces actively shaping the molecular structure?

Meyl is a physicist and so assumes that to get things done properly you need some sort of force, and since attraction, repulsion and spirals are involved then those forces are going to be electromagnetic in nature (what else is there anyhow?). The hypothesis is that electromagnetic scalar waves (also known as near-field or Tesla waves) are created within the cell and form spiral eddy currents which help shape the initial helical arrangement of molecules.

Once the helix has been formed, the DNA acts as a resonant chamber for photons, creating an electromagnetic standing wave. When enough energy has been accumulated it is used to wrap up the DNA into a chromosome.

This all sounds quite reasonable. The forces of physics are used to organise specific molecules into a functional geometry. Now if DNA is a source of genetic information we can ask how this information might be disseminated to the gene-expression network.?

The possibility described is that the precise order of the base pairs on the DNA will alter the ambient electromagnetic field in a subtle way that is meaningful for the expression process (this has been suggested by others).

The frequencies of electromagnetic energy used are close to that of a blue-tooth device.

How else is a cell going to divide? It is held together with rather strong electrostatic forces which cannot be relaxed or else the cell will fall apart so what is needed is the generation of a strongly repulsive force which pushes the cell apart against the existing forces. For this we need a lot of energy which needs to be held somewhere without causing damage to the cell. DNA is then a specialised accumulator which is brought into being on demand, charged up and used to power mitosis.

Two daughter cells have to maintain two outer membranes each supporting a huge voltage gradient. It therefore follows that an overall input of energy is needed. This energy isn’t just lying around in the cell so there is a need for an accumulator (capacitor) to build sufficient resources to perform the task.

What is DNA for? DNA is too unstable a molecule to act as a source of genetic information so what is it for? Well if mitosis is what it ‘does‘ then maybe mitosis is what it is ‘for‘?
Another idea is that DNA is a radio receiver or transmitter of information. This needs to account for the fact that it spends only a small percentage of its time as a helical antenna.

Related pages:

Transmission of Power Without Wires (Scalar Waves)
https://youtu.be/LD8OkbumcY0

Hafele – Keating experiment

In 1971 Joseph Hafele and Richard Keating arranged for two atomic clocks to be flown around the Earth in different directions. The Theory of Objectivity described by Konstantin Meyl gives better fit to the published data than does the Theory of Relativity from Einstein.

Caesium clocks were sent in planes around the Earth, one travelling westwards and one travelling East. When the clocks were re-united, the times were compared with those of each other and with that of a third clock that had remained stationary.

The two travelling clocks have moved against gravity and have undergone some acceleration and deceleration They have moved from one inertial frame of reference to another and have spent considerable time flying in a slightly diminished gravitational field according to altitude.

According to the theories of both Special and General Relativity then we would expect both clocks to have gained time relative to the stationary clock and we would expect that each travelling clock to read the same time as there is no meaningful difference between their paths according to Einstein.

The actual published results however, show that although the Westward travelling clock did gain time, the Eastward travelling clock actually lost time.

This result was claimed to be consistent with the theories of relativity and even put forth as ‘confirming’ them.

Konstantin Meyl begs to differ and gives an alternative explanation.

Full details can be found in Meyl’s book “Scalar Waves” but this screenshot gives part of his calculations as to the predicted difference between clock times:

Now comparing the measured difference in times with table 1. we find that:

273 – 59 = 214 (Measured difference quoted by Meyl)
but
273 – (-59) = 273 + 59 = 232 (Difference calculated from Table 1)

So Meyl has missed out the negative sign and miscalculated. The true difference in clock times is 232 nano-seconds; even bigger than calculated.

To summarize then:

232 ns Measured difference
207 ns Predicted by Meyl
0 Predicted by Einstein.

How was this missed? The answer is that they simply were not looking for it. The experiment was not performed to measure the difference between the clocks but to measure the difference between the travelling clocks and the stationary clock.

Relativity predicts a difference in clock times according to acceleration, and altered gravitational fields so these were the results that interested them.

So what is the explanation? Complicated, but according to the Theory of Objectivity, measurements are made relative to some field and quantities previously thought of as absolute (time, length, speed of light..) are now a function of field strength.

The clocks were flying around the Earth in different directions and so the Eastward flying clock was travelling with the spin of the Earth and was hence flying faster. It was therefore subjected to a greater centrifugal force acting against gravity and this affected the workings of the atoms.

So whereas the theory of relativity gives time dilation as an explanation for clocks going wrong, we have here an alternative mechanism whereby it is length contraction that alters the workings of an atomic clock.

Meyl: “The reason for the measured difference in going is seen in the field and here specially in the different gravitational field. The centrifugal force directed opposite to the gravitational force at least is not the same, because for a westward flight along the equator the speed of the plane should be subtracted from the velocity of rotation of the earth, whereas in eastward direction it should be added.

“For the steering quanta supplied by the caesium resonator now the energy balance is put up and the change of the reference frequency is calculated. With the change in frequency is connected directly a change of the at the two clocks readable times. For a journey around half the earth, where one clock is flown westwards and the other one eastwards, the difference in going should, according to the calculation, amount to 207ns. Interesting of the result undoubtedly is, that the velocity of the planes doesn”t play a role. It is cancelled out.” – Scalar Waves p. 271

Related pages:

References:

Hafele-Keating experiment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment

Scalar Waves – 13.2 The clock paradox – Konstantin Meyl
https://avalonlibrary.net/Nikola_Tesla/Books/Meyl%20-%20Scalar%20Waves%20(First%20Tesla%20Physics%20Textbook).pdf

Tamarack mines experiment

In 1901 in Calumet, Michigan, two vertical mine shafts were dug 1.5 km apart and 1.3 km deep. tunnel linking the bottom of the two shafts was constructed and its length was measured. Now since the Earth is spherical we would expect the linking shaft to be 26.5 cm shorter than the 1.3 km.

It was a bit of a surprise then to discover that this shaft actually measures 20.9 cm longer than the 1.3 km measured at the surface.

Konstantin Meyl’s assertion is that the measurement wire has actually shrunk owing to the increased strength of the tangential component of the local (magnetic) field thereby making the measured distance seem larger by comparison. (Scalar waves page 273).

Theoretical calculations suggest a shrinkage of 40.0 cm. Calculations from experimental data give a shrinkage of 40.7 cm . Not exact but still much better than the original expectations.

The measured distance cannot be extrapolated to the centre of the Earth but instead when plotted, converges to to some point way outside of the Earth’s surface.

This is a good confirmation of Meyl’s field theory. We have measurements here made with piano wire and very basic geometry is used to make the calculations. The speed of light is not involved and no fancy interferometers are needed to measure ultra small distances. Classical physics is way off. Meyl is correct.

W are accustomed to using measuring devices for time and length that are assumed to be immutable in nature, giving the same results wherever we are in the universe and in what direction we are oriented. It is not so.

“The newest definition of the metre acts as a blow for liberty and thus marks the abyss, at which we are standing” – Meyl

Related pages:

References:

Scalar waves – Konstantin Meyl
https://avalonlibrary.net/Nikola_Tesla/Books/Meyl%20-%20Scalar%20Waves%20(First%20Tesla%20Physics%20Textbook).pdf

The HART group model

The HART group response to the ‘no-virus’ argument proposes a model of disease that is, in its simplest form, one of ‘bottom-up’ causality from RNA molecule up to systemic level. This page proposes an alternative ‘top-down’ model.

We will examine the idea of top-down causality and see how it compares with the HART group model in its ability to explain the evidence. This model will provide a credible alternative to the RNA replication model and explain the epidemiology of influenza to a more satisfactory degree.

It is not ‘complete’ by any means and some of the mechanisms are missing but the HART group have indicated that they are open to nuanced debate and are prepared to allow some ‘tolerance’ in the model. Many in the ‘no-virus’ group by contrast have declared an open hostility to any degree of uncertainty, to any form of ‘modelling’ and any evidence that cannot be directly observed.

Modelling, in brief: The idea is to construct a framework of central assertions within which measurements and other evidence can be interpreted as having some meaningful relationship towards other pieces of evidence and towards the model as a whole. The model is asserted at the outset and evidence is tested against it, with any contradictions requiring a review of the whole theory.

Making minor adjustments for each small anomaly leads to an integrity ‘creep’ whereby the structure of the model slowly degrades to a point whereby the initial foundations can become quite meaningless and actually unrelated to the evidence.

The Terrain Model proposed by the ‘Terrain theorists’ has always been one of top-down causality of disease states, with environmental factors such as toxicity leading somehow to actual disease. Lanka, Cowan and Kaufman have said from the beginning that the particles characterised as viruses are really exosomes and are produced as a result of disease rather than being a cause of it.

Similarly, activities of what is described as the ‘immune system’ are really productions of specific proteins to help resolve some sort of deterioration at the cellular level. They are produced by the body, not by the assumed virus.

How do environmental factors actually cause disease? This seems to be not talked about so much with Terrain theorists simply claiming that toxicity leads to a ‘detox’, the symptoms of which are misinterpreted as disease. No actual evidence of the expulsion of toxins has been put forward.

Claims such as “The body needs to expel toxins and so initiates a detox process” suggest an intelligent system that ‘knows what it needs to do’ and ‘initiates’ the appropriate protocol. This is an odd insertion of teleological language into a scientific framework, but not necessarily incorrect.

An extended version of the above model puts in a couple of ‘interpretive matrices’ to indicate what must be necessary to make sense of real world data and translate it to physical processes within the body.

Each matrix is effectively a ‘cognitive system’ in its own right, taking information from one ‘realm’ of reality and converting it to a form suitable for use in another.

Environmental influences impact the body from top down and information is funnelled from the outside macro world into meaningful structure in the micro world in the form of very precise and functional molecular organisation.

This then is the foundational structure of the proposed model:

Top-down causality
Coupling of organism and environment
Information interpreted, translated and scaled downwards
Disease as an altered state of regulation
Altered molecular expression as a consequence of disease – not the cause

It is time to look at some of the questions raised by the HART team.

From the HART group: “First of all, given that all life is based on a system of encoded replication, it would be extraordinary for there not to be viruses that can hijack that system. They have been studied in plants and animals as well as humans.”

This is their foundational principle which forms a lens through which all other concerns are viewed.

Terrain response: The body forms an integrated whole that is organised, stable and robust to all manner of insults. Causality is top down and it would therefore be very surprising indeed if an organised disease state could be forcibly induced by a few complex bio-molecules. The foundation of life is ‘organisation’.

HART group: “An environmental exposure predicted an illness. Although a significant proportion of infections were not traceable to an outbreak, the majority were. Groups of people became ill with similar symptoms after having shared the same environment.”

The HART group claims that this supports their hypothesis of viral transmission but this is a flawed argument as explained here: The HART group. The top down model has environmental influence built in as a fundamental and so the fact that “Groups of people became ill with similar symptoms after having shared the same environment“, far from needing an explanation, now becomes actual evidence in favour of the Terrain Model.

From HART: “A unique RNA sequence was detected in these people.” Also unique protein coded for by RNA and matching antibodies.”

Within our top-down model this can be rephrased as ‘individuals in the same physiological state will produce similar if not identical bio-molecules’. This should come as no surprise as individuals regularly reproduce precisely the same molecules on a daily basis, most of them without the need for an RNA template.

The contentious part of the top-down idea then will be that it is the precise form of the molecules that is a function of the overall physiological state as opposed to the other way around. How can this be?

Information flow in biological systems can be thought of as consisting of bottom-up emergence combined with top down causality.

Molecular activity is coordinated to form translational structures (attractors) via the phenomenon of emergence. These attractors act as interpretive (cognitive) systems to effect meaningful action as a response to environmental input.

Information from the macro scale is received and interpreted according to the current attractor state before being merged into the active regulatory system, with the natural consequence that a specific stimulus may not necessarily result in the same disease state in all individuals. Variation within a norm is thus built into the system.

Contrast this with the viral model where the particle itself is claimed to produce precisely the same symptoms in everybody. This doesn’t happen and some extra addition to the model is required to explain it away.

Classical determinism formulates causality as proceeding from one event to another in a way that is precisely predictable from a theoretical point of view but which in practice will diverge considerably as time goes on owing to noise in the system leading to an accumulation of errors.

Attractor activity however behaves in the opposite manner, with long term stability that is robust to the input of noise. Errors do not accumulate and the result is a convergent causality that can produce a precise result even from differing starting points and despite considerable ‘noise’.

From this point of view then, it is not surprising that individuals could react to the same environmental stimulus with different symptoms and yet still produce precisely the same RNA sequence. This is a now a feature not a bug.

There are precursors to this idea even in mainstream biology today, where the study of epigenetics proposes that organised network activity is held to produce very precise molecular structures and moreover that such activity can be passed on to the next generation in the form of self-sustaining feedback loops (Wikipedia).

From HART: “Lab grown virus. Material thought to contain virus has been collected from patients and replicated in cell culture.”

There was no evidence supplied that such material was capable of causing a disease state. The Terrain model claims that these particles are a reflection of the experimental conditions and so identical lab conditions will result in near identical genome sequences.

Material is produced according to attractor activity which has the properties of convergence to the attractor but variation within the attractor leading to both stability and variation of genome and thereby giving the illusion of viral evolution described by the group themselves. (See Evolution and Inheritance).

Attractors exhibit long term stability with the occasional sudden phase change, possibly in response to a stimulus but not always. This is similar to the way viruses are said to mutate and produce variants which remain stable for a while before mutating suddenly again. This behaviour does not seem so consistent with the actual viral model which claims continuous mutation despite reproducible results. (Strange attractors)

The fact that seasonal influences can affect biological systems in has been demonstrated by Giorgio Piccardi, Vlial Kaznacheev and Simon Shnoll. Cell cultures, rabbits blood, enzyme reactions, precipitation rates and even atomic clock timings were found to have seasonal variations that were measurable and to some degree, predictable

From HART: “Finally, There was an illness which some people regard as both viral in nature, and also characteristic. This is of course subjective and opinions differ on this. Some claim it is unclear how different this actually was from the range of respiratory viral illnesses experienced before.”

Well, “viral in nature” is clearly circular reasoning. More interesting though is how one measures a difference between diseases. Geneticists might be tempted simply to count the differences in sequences, others might look at bio-metrics such as temperature or simple verbal descriptions of symptoms.

If attractors are involved however, we need to think somewhat differently. In this case we would expect difference between individuals but similarity of clusters within a population. Attractor phase shifts can be sudden and unpredictable, with cause and effect seemingly de-coupled. Dose-response relationships may be complex or even non-existent, with apparently large stimuli having no more effect than smaller ones.

It is entirely conceivable that individuals could have very different symptoms, yet generate identical RNA sequences and antibodies.

We see all these effects.

Attractors are characterised by their sub-states so some direct identification of these is necessary to obtain a classification of disease that corresponds to some sort of internal reality. Some progress has been made in this area with the identification of the Core Diseasome.

Summary:

Seasonal variation clearly implies a seasonal cause
The epidemiology favours environment over transmission as a cause
Interesting genome sequences are a result of disease
Attractors enable a direct causal pathway from environment to cell
The claimed evolution of viruses shows attractor-like qualities
The sudden onset and stability of disease state is typical of attractors
Causality is top-down in biological systems
The model described above is a better fit to the evidence than the viral model

Related pages:

The HART group

The HART group gives some interesting arguments as to why they are rejecting the idea that viruses do not exist. One is a flawed statistical argument and others are observations of genome sequences. None of this explains the epidemiology. This page shows why they are wrong and suggests an alternative model for influenza outbreaks.

The statistical argument is listed at number 1 and is tackled first.
The screenshot below is from their website

Note that it is number 1 on their list.
Not everybody got sick as part of an outbreak and that number of people is considered “significant“
People who shared the same environment got sick at the same time – consider then an environmental cause or trigger
The majority of sufferers were part of an “outbreak” i.e. an event where many people got sick.

If an outbreak is defined as a large number of people getting sick at the same time then it isn’t surprising, given the population distribution in a city, that the majority of sick people got sick as part of an outbreak.

Shown here is a city grid of equal sized squares where some squares are densely populated and others not so. This sort of situation is ideal for studying epidemiology if only decent data were available. We can look at how many people in each cell got ill and try to correlate it with population density.

First imagine that some non-infectious pathogen is introduced into some of the cells on a completely random basis. Think of toxic gas being released, 5G death rays maybe or some sort of bio-energy beamed down from space.

We would see then that the chance of a cell showing disease in any of its residents is unrelated to the population of the cell so that a sparsely populated cell is as likely to show disease as one containing many occupants.

In this case then, disease would be correlated to location and since the release of a toxin into a densely populated cell would result in many people being sick we would see in the overall population that the majority of sick people would necessarily come from cells where there were many other sick people.

This is really just saying that the majority of people in a city come from population-dense areas.

This much is obvious. It is also precisely what is described in point 1 of the HART group’s statement above. They even attribute the illness to “having shared the same environment” as opposed to “having been with other sick people“.

Now let us fantasise about infection. If this were possible then we would expect that infection would spread more effectively in densely populated areas. We would also expect an increased likelihood of seeing disease in these areas as there are many more people to introduce the pathogen into the grid square from elsewhere.

Statistical analysis should then show a correlation between cell population and the occurrence of disease in that cell. Recall that in the first case, cells get affected at random and there was no correlation with population density; a 5G death tower does not know how many people there are living nearby.

There is the possibility then that an infection model can be proved or disproved merely by looking at some statistics.

If only somebody had thought to collect some data..

Fred Hoyle (1915-2001) was an astronomer and statistician who looked at the epidemiology of flu by studying incidence of the disease in English public (boarding) schools. Some pupils will board at the school and be in contact with each other 24-7 whilst others will go home at weekends or evenings. [paper]

All these schools have children of the same age groups, eat similar food, are subjected to the same harsh exercise regimen and engage in stereotypical social contact. Schools themselves are organised into ‘houses’ and dormitories, giving a controlled structure to the possible transmission routes.

These are ideal conditions to study incidence of influenza. Hoyle looked at epidemiological patterns as described above and found that, for example, a dormitory full of boys was as likely to demonstrate influenza as a solitary boy sleeping at home with his parents.

Hoyle believed in viruses but still concluded:

Person to person transmission is ruled out as a significant cause of the disease.
The overwhelming cause of the disease comes from ‘elsewhere’.
Low level outbreaks occur completely at random and unconnected to each other.
Larger outbreaks occur in geographical clusters which vary in size from a whole school and its environs to a single dormitory or part thereof.
A virus is ruled out as the actual cause.
Viruses are manufactured within the body in response to an external trigger.
The external trigger is some kind of ‘virion’ that comes from outer space.
[The results do not indicate food poisoning or collective detox.]

The chart below shows that population influenza is best modelled by a simple gaussian distribution with a mean around winter solstice and a 90% interval of only a few weeks.

Observations must be explained and the ‘viral model’ does not explain the epidemiology.

The members of the HART group know this and know that transmission studies have failed, but are still sticking to their model because: “The virus model explains all of the above in a way that no other proposed model can (yet).“

Other individuals have complained of a lack of a better alternative and that viruses are ‘still the best explanation‘ for what they are seeing.

Again, from the HART group: “Scientists form a model that best explains the majority of the evidence. ” So we need to explain the epidemiology.

A statistical model:

Seasonal incidence: Outside of the tropics, populations will succumb to influenza in the two weeks either side of winter solstice
Latitudinal patterns: Finer grained structure is seen along lines of similar latitude (Hoyle and others)
Local outbreaks are delineated by location and are distributed at random

No mechanism is suggested here but we have achieved:

Prediction of timing: over 95% of cases will be in midwinter although how many seems to vary a bit.
Characterisation of outbreaks as being somehow related to location (we can’t even say environment).
Better interpretation of epidemiology: The assumption that clustering implies contagion is incorrect and has been dangerously misleading.
Scope for further research: What is there that is special about certain latitudes and locations?
A model that actually fits the observed data: Other models based upon the flawed assumption of transmission have failed spectacularly.

This seems like a good basis for a model as being grounded in observed reality. We can refine it later and look for biological mechanisms to explain these patterns but the foundation should be as described above.

The HART group, by contrast seem to want to plunge straight in with assumed bio-molecular causes and to worry about the facts of disease later on. This is the wrong way round to do science: the ‘majority of the evidence‘ needs explaining.

The group is asking the virus sceptics to explain various molecular and genomic phenomena. These all sound very interesting but they do not of themselves constitute disease and have not been shown to cause any disease.

Towards a mechanism

The model described above is purely statistical in nature and may well make useful predictions but it gives us no ‘understanding’ and describes no biological mechanism whereby disease might be caused by seasonal change.

Seasonal incidence: This is so precise that the only possible way that this can be achieved by resonant entrainment to some seasonal influence, either daylight hours or maybe the Earth’s magnetic field.
Latitudinal coincidence: This again suggests the Earth’s magnetic field is involved.
Local outbreaks: Tricky. Hoyle suggests virions from outer space, I will suggest cosmic ray showers or eddies (vortices) in the Earth’s magnetic field, but I am certainly open to alternatives.

What else is it that we need to explain?

The HART group is asking to explain things like a unique RNA sequence found in people who appeared to have similar symptoms, Now nobody goes to their doctor complaining about a unique RNA sequence. We don’t need to explain this, we need to explain the symptoms.

The symptoms, even by mainstream accounts, are caused by an altered bio-regulatory state. This state (erroneously referred to as the ‘immune response’) consists of an an orchestrated sequence of events leading to symptoms that include sweating, muscle aches, elevated temperature and lasts usually five days before returning to normal.

I don’t say ‘returning to homeostasis’ because this state is managed by the body itself and is perfectly stable although not sustainable.

It is this state that causes distress and constitutes what we call ‘disease’.

For this process to fit within our model then, we are looking for some way that it is produced as a direct result of the seasonal rhythms and without the intermediary of a viral particle.

This is the research to be done. It sits firmly within the purview of bio-regulatory medicine and not so much virology or genetics.

Top-down causality is common in biology and is implemented via means of attractor systems which interpret external stimuli to effect change at the cellular and even molecular level. Attractors can be highly sensitive to rhythmic input. It is quite conceivable that people in similar physiological states can produce RNA with similar sequences.

Now since most disease is just assumed to be viral in nature it follows that most disease research is performed by virologists who are really geneticists and think almost exclusively in terms of bottom-up causality, that is to say, that a small piece of RNA has the ability to destabilise a system that demonstrates organisation and robustness to perturbation at all levels.

The idea of an attractor is not something that would readily spring to mind to one trained in biology but it is essential for the understanding of living systems. Attractors are the key to top-down causality, providing an interpretive interface between the organism and its environment.

Influenza is just a sudden phase change in an attractor state triggered by some external input. Genetic events are the end point of attractor activity, not the primal cause.

Why do symptoms differ between individuals?

This is behaviour typical of chaotic attractors. Paths will converge to the attractor but diverge on the attractor so no two people will demonstrate identical disease progression. Attractor phase states are general patterns which are not precisely definable or predictable. Attempts to refine diagnosis by increasing accuracy or number of measurements will just cause confusion as there is no meaning in these details.

Since each individual is on their own specific attractor path and in their own ‘state’ at midwinter, it is now expected that not everybody will get ill at solstice. This is natural behaviour for attractors. We would expect that there is a component of disease risk that is actually independent of other health factors; an element of ‘randomness’.

Attractor states are highly stable, making routine treatment somewhere between difficult and impossible. Phase changes can be sudden and apparently non-causal, resulting in what are usually described as ‘miracle’ cures. So miracles do happen and we now have a scientific explanation for them.

Attractors present a problem from the point of view of determinism . Their behaviour is stable and predictable insofar as they will reliably produce meaningful biological patterns that result in a robustly functioning organism. However, this behaviour is not predictable from examination of their parts and not predictable from any finite history of that behaviour. This is a hammer blow for traditional reductionist science; there will always be something incalculable and unknowable where biological systems are concerned.

Summary:

The data comes first, the explanation comes later
The mechanism of genetics is interesting but does not cause flu
Influenza is a disturbance of organisation – not cellular damage
Top down causation is provided for by attractor patterns
The presence of attractors implies a ‘cloud of unknowing’
Observations (seasonality) require explanations

Related pages:

References:

Why HART uses the virus model – Arguments against “the virus doesn’t exist”
https://www.hartgroup.org/virus-model/

Viruses from space – Fred Hoyle
https://www.hoyle.org.uk/resources/virusesfromspaceCompressed.pdf

Surveillance of influenza and other seasonal respiratory viruses – UKHSA
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-flu-reports/surveillance-of-influenza-and-other-seasonal-respiratory-viruses-in-winter-2021-to-2022

The gene: An appraisal – Keith Baverstock
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33979646/

Epigenetic Regulation of the Mammalian Cell – Keith Baverstock, Mauno Rönkkö
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0002290&type=printable

A theory of biological relativity: no privileged level of causation – Denis Noble
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3262309/

“Meaning of Life & the Universe: Transforming” – Mae-Wan Ho
ISBN-10. 981310886X ; ISBN-13. 978-9813108868