The next Water Intention Experiment: The Whole Elephant

[Lynne McTaggart]

I’ve just got off the phone with Rustum Roy, who has an exciting meeting planned with a Belgium company tomorrow. This company is worked with the Finnish materials physicist, Kiva Rainen, who has developed equipment with the unique ability to capture all parameters of water.

As you may remember, we are interested in examining whether intention changes the molecular structure of water. With our April 26 study with Penn State University, we tried to ascertain whether there were any changes in the structural organization of our water sample by looking for any changes in the scattering of light waves through our water sample.

Part of the picture

As you remember, our experiment isn’t conclusive – largely because we’re only looking at one parameter to see if it has changes.

This is a little like looking at an elephant from one side. If you look from the front, you will mainly see a trunk. Look from bottom, and you only see a giant mass hovering over you like a dark grey cloud.

Rainen’s new equipment consists of three separate devices that examine, respectively, the light scattering, the thermal expansion and any infrared changes in a sample of water. Once these measurements are taken, they are sent into a computer, and from this handful of data points, the computer can determine some 1000 parameters of the sample.

“This equipment represents a revolution in characterizing water,” says Roy.

The power of weak bonds

Professor Roy, who as combed the literature of the properties of pure water, has found that the way in which molecules cluster together can vary enormously. For instance, water can contain molecular clusters of up to several hundred H2O units apiece.

However, as he has written, these consist not only of hydrogen bonds but a wide range of very weak bonds (known as van der Waals bonds’ for all you science boffins).

“It is this range of very weak bonds that could account for the remarkable ease of changing the structure of water, which in turn could help explain the half dozen well-known anomalies in its properties,” writes Roy.

“In its subtler form, such weak bonds would also allow for the changes of structure caused by electric and magnetic fields and by radiation of all kinds, including possibly so-called ‘subtle energies’, which are the basis of an enormous range of claims about specially ‘structured’ water,” he says.

As Victor Frankel wrote in Man’s Search for Meaning, we can only understand something by looking at it from different perspectives. Rainen’s tool may offer us a way to ‘trangulate’ our perception of these subtle bonds in water so that we are able to see what exactly about it has changed through intention.

For the first time we’ll be able to see the whole elephant.

This is important, in terms of determining the power of intention, because it is ‘structure (not composition) that largely controls properties and structures can easily be changed. . . without any change of composition,” says Roy.

A perfect example of this is diamond and graphite. Both share identical composition, yet diamond is one of the hardest substances on earth and graphite one of the softest.

We will be repeating the Water Experiment as soon as Professor Roy approves of and gets hold of this equipment, so we’ll keep you posted about the date to write on your calendar.

[uranian]

a suggestion for a future experiment (only half tongue in cheek): get people to focus their intent on ridding the world of the federal reserve, and all other private (i.e. all) central banks, to end humanity of its slavery via debt.

[Kimm Viebrock]

In the paperback version, Masuro Emoto is featured rather prominently, if briefly, on pages 184-185 wehre there is also some discussion of Emoto's experiments being replicated by Dean Radin.

[Patricia Waters]

I wondered why the work of Emoto was not included in the book.

[Martha]

It is important that the subjects not send intention early. I know that I was unintentionally sending intentions to the water while powering up before the experiment began. I was also thinking about the experiment all week! So a change in protocol is important. We should not know the intention, until the experiment begins.

[Niranjan Fernando]

Please look at the works of Dr Masaru Emoto. He has done a lot of research on water Crystals.
Best Rgds
Niranjan

[clyde porter]

In the 1970s Cleve Baxter and another fellow wrote a book called "The Secret Life Of Your Cells" in which he explained the phenomena of the discovery by him that plants have feelings and respond to thought and intention. Baxter was/is a lie detector expert. The book is very sensible and compelling. Unfortunately in some 5000+/- attempts by others to duplicate the findings of his experimentation with plants the ability to duplicate was a faliure. No one else could get plants to respond to various stimuli which were transmitted by humans or other plants. The reason was simple. The scientific method is inappropriate for this type of experimentation because it demands the statement of an hypothesis, or the expected outcome of the experiment. This very act, hypothesis, informs the participating plants in the experiment, or in this case the water we are trying to restructure, what is expected, thus "warning"and arming the recipient of the intention. In the case of the plants in Baxter's experiment duplications, they appear to have witnessed the intention, or hypothesis, and dumbed down, or determined "ho hum, Im not playing" such that the duplications failed. That is the effect of pre intending. Baxter's success was based on spontaneity and very repeatable in demonstration of effect, but only spontaneously. That is my suspicion re the lack of expected response in the water experiment. We have to figure out how to tell everyone about the experiment except the water!

[Marvin]

Lynne:

When you repeat the water experiment, I suggest several controls on the sample; i.e. an otherwise identical sample held in an identical room, another sample in a shielded environment, etc.

Marvin