Recent Paranormal Observations of the Atomic Structure of Orbitally
Rearranged Monoatomic Elemental forms of the Transition Metals
Historical background, instrumentation
- Between August 1895 and October 1933, Charles W Leadbeater
and Annie Besant of the Theosophical Society conducted clairvoyant
studies of the atomic structure of the elements of the periodic
table and some compounds. Both of these individuals had previously
awakened kundalini; Leadbeater has described his having done so by
pranayama, which is the same method I used. After kundalini has
been awakened, and after the ajna chakra (brow chakra) is fully
functioning, it is possible to extend one's consciousness,
specifically the faculty of vision, through great ranges in
magnification, either up or down in objective size. In yogic
writings, this is part of what is allegorically referred to as the
ability to make oneself very small or very large at will. These, in
Sanskrit Anima and Mahima, are the first and second of the eight
major siddhis, The actual nature and extent of many of the
siddhis, or paranormal powers, are often (intentionally) described
allegorically, and so are widely misunderstood.
Anima and Mahima actually each refer to several different things.
One of these, or what actually happens in the case of these
observations, is that a projection from the ajna chakra is formed by
the yogi; the functional aperture and gain of this protuberant
projection or filament can be controlled by the yogi, according to
the scale of the object under observation. This extended faculty is
symbolically depicted in ancient Egyptian iconography by the small
serpent on the pharaoh's forehead, dismissed by most Egyptologists
as being just a part of the headdress. By its means, one is capable
of seeing objects far smaller and far more distant than is possible
by means of any man-made instruments yet devised. Leadbeater, for
example, describes an entire spectrum of particle sizes below the
The results of Leadbeater's and Besant's investigations were
published serially as articles in the journal The
Theosophist. The material was later arranged and published
in three editions (1908, 1919, 1951) as a book titled Occult
- A British physicist named Stephen Phillips became aware
of this material, and in 1980 published a book titled "Extra-Sensory
Perception of Quarks", describing the two Theosophist's work and
interpreting it in the light of modern atomic theory. Though the
atomic structures observed by the yogic faculty, as described by
Leadbeater and Besant, did not make much sense to their
contemporaries, present day theories of atomic structure and
particle physics make their descriptions much more recognizable,
validated, and startlingly accurate, as Dr. Phillips was amazed to
Phillip's book was published before the high spin state was
recognized. He does notice how the observations match the Higgs
superconducting vacuum model, recognizes non-Abelian monopoles with
Nielsen-Olesen vortices as carrying quantized flux, and identifies
the mechanisms at work underlaying quark stability, among many other
things. All in all, he did a fine job of it. [Extra-Sensory
Perception of Quarks, by Stephen M. Phillips, PhD, 1980,
Theosophical Publishing House, Wheaton IL, ISBN 0-8356-0227-3,
- David Hudson's ORME patent
literature specifically names eleven elements (cobalt, copper,
nickel, silver, gold, palladium, platinum, ruthenium, rhodium,
iridium, and osmium) as exhibiting the orbitally rearranged state,
with the attendant room temperature superconductivity. Later, he
announced in his lectures, that he finds that mercury also exhibits
the same behavior. As far as I am aware, he has not yet publicly
suggested that any other elements (excepting only mercury) are
capable of stable ORME states and high temperature
superconductivity, beyond those listed in his patent literature.
- (a paragraph on the work of the mathematician Chris Ilert
might well go here. His 1991-1995 articles and two books on
Calculating Nuclear Binding Energies and Nuclear Shell Properties
from a Model using the Platonic Solids, is based on the work of
Leadbeater and Besant, and is not well known. The title Ilert
choose for the books didn't help: Alchemy Today vol 1
Recent clairvoyant work
Based on these
published materials, and on certain studies I have done, I may now
relate some further information regarding monatomic forms of the
physical elements, their shapes as monatomics, some additional light
on superdeformation, superdeformation's relation to the high spin
state, and what these several factors have to do with the
manifestation and development of superconductivity.
As monatomics (single, isolated atoms), the elements are yogically
observed to display shapes, which turn out to resemble certain of
the platonic solids and other unanticipated shapes, more than the
Bohr atom most people think of. However, valence structures,
subatomic structures, and numerous other complex phenomena can be
identified, given patient study, so that the physical basis for our
theories are nearly all seen to be revealed, even if they are not
implemented quite as we had supposed. The valences take the form of
rod-, bar-, and funnel-like shapes, with the large end of the funnel
cone pointed outwards. The valence shapes, nuclei shapes, and other
observed macro features are of course not solid forms, but are swept
volume envelopes, made by the rapidly moving particles which compose
the atoms. I will be referring to the "valence structures" etc.;
these are equivalent to "orbitals" as used in the ORME acronym.
Dr. Phillips has observed that incongruencies exist between the
valences observed yogically, and those predicted by theory; that the
number and nature of the valence structures actually observed (in
the monatomic state) are not as would be expected, according to
present scientific theories of atomic structure. He has made an
effort to reconcile the two, theory and observation.
Valency, as observed, can be seen in some cases to be comprised of
sets of half valences, so that there are two valence structures for
each of the valences allotted in our present theory, and other
variations in other cases. Dr. Phillips puzzles over this at length
in his book. He never quite makes the connection (though he comes
to within a hair of it), or it fails to occur to him, as to how
these sets of "half" valences (for instance) relate to, and are
responsible for, the forming of Cooper pairs.
Phillips concludes that the majority of the atoms observed by the
investigators, and presumed to be monatomic, are actually diatomic,
and points out that this assumption clears up most of the apparent
difficulties. In this article I will refer to the observed forms as
monatomic, for continuity with the original investigators. (1)
Dr. Phillips' book, sadly, has not received much attention.
Scientists do not enjoy giving up their theories, but few would
argue that the theories as they stand today shall forever remain
unchanged. I recommend that those interested read his book, for a
hint at what the theories will be ... changing to.
The physical structural arrangement of elemental atoms, and
particularly the arrangement of valence structures in the atom, are
observed to develop as several periodic patterns. Leadbeater and
Besant soon found that the structural patterns do not fit well into
the Mendeleyev table (which has been found so useful for predicting
chemical properties), but the observed structural periodicity is
nicely predicted by the periodic system proposed by Sir William
Crookes, which was later refined by Jinarajadasa into a quadruple
lemniscate. Crookes-type tables, which can be represented by a
multi-level 3-dimensional figure 8 pattern, fit the data far better
from a structural characteristics standpoint, **for the purely
singular and monatomic forms of the elements**. This is an
important point to remember, as the elements have dramatically
different shapes when they are observed in chemical combinations.
The elements in Table 1 (below) are yogically or paranormally
observed to have shapes which appear as moderately high aspect
symmetrical dipoles, when examined as single atoms; ie, apart from
chemical-, cluster-, lattice-, or crystalline- influences. They all
show symmetry of rotation about their major axis, as well as mirror
symmetry about a plane bisecting their major axis. They were aptly
termed "dumbbell shaped" by Leadbeater and Besant. The valence
funnels are dipolarly disposed on either end of the atom, giving
them a distinctive dumbbell shape.
Dumb-Bell Shaped Atom
In the case of the dumbbell shaped atoms, which might be considered
as one of the most puzzling shapes to someone seeing it for the
first time, it is arranged as follows. The main or central body
envelope is a swept volume which is approximately represented by
imagining an elliptical solid, or ellipsoid of revolution, formed by
spinning an ellipse on its major axis. The aspect ratio of the
major/minor axes (speaking only of the central structure) is greater
for smaller atoms in this family, like sodium, where it is
approximately 4:1, and becoming relatively "fatter" in the heavier
atoms. Monatomic gold has a central body of about 2:1 aspect.
Each element in the dumbbell shaped group has a total of 24 valence
funnels; there are 12 at each end of the atom, representing 6 sets
of half valences. The 12 funnels are arranged a bit like blades of
a ceiling fan, which rotate on the major elliptical axis of the
central body, hence the dumbbell look. The ends of the valence
funnels are slightly staggered, alternating up and down slightly as
you go around the atom.
Within the central ellipsoid form and the valence structures are
found smaller forms (and similarly so for the other element family
shapes), which Phillips has managed to relate to protons, neutrons,
quarks, and their components. Of course quarks, let alone baryons,
leptons, omegons, etc. were unheard of when this information was
first published. The smallest particles which make up the physical
atom are referred to by Leadbeater and Besant as "ultimate physical
atoms", since they seem to be the constituent particle from which
all the subatomic particles are built up. They have called these
"Anu", after the Sanskrit name for the ultimate particles of matter
(it is the same root term used in Anima, "the size of an atom").
There are two types of these, termed + and -. The Anu "particles"
are composed of whirls of energy which spin in opposite senses
between the + and - varieties. These whirls of energy, when
magnified under increasing power by yogic vision, are themselves
composed of smaller spirals, and those of smaller spirals, and so
on, down through 7 layers of nesting.
The Anu are many orders of magnitude smaller than the subatomic
particles, and the subatomic particles are in turn many orders of
magnitude smaller than the elemental physical atoms of the periodic
chart. The Anu, and more complex particles, all move at enormous
velocities, sweeping out the shapes that I am referring to, and the
atom is an extremely active thing to see. It is ceaselessly
throbbing, pulsating, spinning, gyrating and precessing with amazing
rapidity and vigor when so viewed. Not at all like the billiard
ball protons and neutrons with the spherical electron shells many
would expect to see. But our dashed expectations are our own fault,
rather than Nature's. Still, we are better prepared now than at any
time before to understand the remaining secrets of atomic structure;
we must only recognize that things are far more complex than we have
ever previously supposed.(2)
Table 1 elements are all structurally similar, despite the fact that
under our present periodic arrangement samarium (for example)
inserts columnarly in VIII between ruthenium and osmium, and sodium
falls in group IA with the alkalis. Most of the nonmetallic halides
are found, by this faculty, to similarly be dumbbell shaped in their
monatomic states. Of the elements in this family, David has already
observed ORME state superconductivity which develops in gold,
silver, and copper.
Table 1: "Dumbbell" group monatomics, predicted to exhibit the
ORME superconducting state.
+ Already specifically named in David Hudson's patent literature.
- Copper +
- Silver +
- Gold +
The inclusion of an alkali metal like sodium, most of the halides,
and so on, flies in the face of existing interpretations as to the
underlying causes of the ORME phenomena (which is presently
postulated to be a consequence of partly filled orbitals). Many of
the elements I suggest in this article to possess superconducting
ORME states are, of course, nowhere near the center of the
Mendeleyev periodic table, where elements with partly filled
orbitals are placed.
It would be good to recall at this point that the periodic table was
originally developed only as a means of helping us understand the
laws governing the elements' chemical properties, and we should not
fall into the trap of extrapolating its fine success in this regard
to imply that it also applies to, or continues to hold true for,
monatomic shapes. To assume that chemical properties are a
reflection of an element's monatomic form is not supported by yogic
observations. There is little hope in discovering an element's
atomic propensity for having an ORME state by peering at the
Mendeleyev periodic table. This phenomena has little to do with
orbital filling as shown there. However, the phenomena and the
reasons behind it become clear and plain when viewed yogically.
The actual reasons that certain elements exhibit stable ORME states,
form Cooper pairs, and display Type 2 superconductivity (as David
has correctly described them as doing), lies in their structural
characteristics, and these particular structural characteristics
only occur in the monatomic forms of elements, and then only among
certain monatomic-form structural families. The valence forming
structures (ie, 'orbitals') of the elements named in David's patent
literature (as well as mercury, and others), are seen to "rearrange"
precisely as David has indicated, and this rearrangement is indeed
what leads to their extraordinary properties. Other elements,
discussed in this article, not yet acknowledged as ORMEs by David,
shall eventually be found to exhibit this same behavior, under
The elements which can potentially exhibit room temperature (and
higher) superconductivity do not necessarily immediately or
spontaneously rearrange themselves into a superconducting ORME state
upon disaggregation. They first require an impetus to set them
rapidly spinning. High spin is a necessary condition for this
rearrangement to occur; it is the first step in how the ORME state
is reached. (It should be apparent that to have a rapidly spinning
single atom means that it is monatomic.) However, the relatively
low energy of thermal collision forces is sufficient to get them
spinning fast enough. Simple glancing thermal collisions knock the
monatomic atom into a rapid spin, and that is how the high spin
state leading to ORME transition is most commonly achieved. That is
the reason David had to heat the monatomic material in order to
transform it into a superconducting ORME state. It is indeed a
strange consequence that thermal energy transfer, in the form of a
spin-imparting collision, may act to lower the atomic energy
temperature, but it is an observationally evident effect.
The spin of the atom centrifugally causes the valence structures to
deflect from the normal positions they have as single (monatomic)
atoms. Rearrangement of the valence structures into the ORME
configuration then occurs, which, once formed, is extremely stable
for some elements. [For some other elements capable of forming
ORMEs, much greater excitation levels are required, and stability is
Here is how the transition into an ORME works from an observational
standpoint. Assume an atom of one of the appropriate families has
just become disaggregated (let us say, by some means that does not
impart substantial kinetic energy to it) from a lattice, or crystal,
or chemical combination, so that it is free to assume its normal
monatomic (family) shape, and is just floating around without much
velocity or spin. In its initial condition, upon disaggregating,
its valence structures will be arranged in their "normal"
symmetrically disposed manner as a monatomic chemical atom. In this
shape and condition, it is stable, though it is, of course, able to
chemically combine in normal ways, since its valences are as yet
How long the atom has to wait for a suitable collision depends on
the temperature and population density of its environment. This may
be very brief, as some atoms can make this transition at only
moderate temperatures. Even if its environment is relatively cool,
an energetic collision may still occur, it is just less likely.
Eventually (assume), a collision occurs causing it to tumble or spin
about its center of mass.
There is a statistical probability that the collision will impart
rotation to the atom, in (or reasonably near to) one of the possible
spin planes which will deform the valences into one of the possible
ORME configurations for the particular atom.
When an atom is set properly spinning and on its way to forming an
ORME configuration, the outreaching valence structures are flung
centrifugally from their normal orientations, and this always
happens in the manner that most increases the atom's moment of
inertia in the closest ORME spin plane. For example, in the case of
the dumbbell shaped atoms of Table 1, this would be a tumbling of
the major axis itself (ie, the major axis is rotating around a line
passing through the atom's center of mass and orthogonally bisecting
the major axis), and all the valence structures at either end of the
dumbbell swing outwards, away from the center of mass of the atom,
to align or cluster towards parallelism with the atom's tumbling
The atom thus deforms as centrifugal forces overcome the forces
which hold the valence structures in their "normal" positions. It
just happens fortuitously that the Coulomb forces which want to keep
the valence structures separated, and the centrifugal forces the
valences actually experience under high spin conditions are similar
in magnitude. The atoms and their substructures are extremely
stretchy and springy; this should not come as a big surprise, since
after all, they are basically bundles of forces and masses. As
rearrangement of the valence structures takes place, it acts to
reduce the spin of the atom, similar to how spinning ice skaters can
slow down by extending their arms outwards.
However, if enough angular velocity has been achieved, the valence
structures ("orbitals") rearrange into two groups, like two bouquets
of funnel-like flowers, with one group swung centrifugally outwards
on each end of the tumbling, now highly elongated atom. In this
superdeformed condition, their outermost ends (where the chemical
bonds form) approach each other. When (and if) the coupling ends of
the valence structures come into close enough proximity, they link
together in pairs in a specific manner. In other words, in this
superdeformed condition, the atom becomes able to bond to itself,
much the same way it would bond to another atom, only more tightly.
When this happens, it looks a bit like the atom is "hugging" itself
with its multiple valence "arms", all joined together in pairs. It
is like when you stick your hands into the opposite sleeve of your
coat on a cold day.
To yogic vision, this is what actually happens physically and
structurally, corresponding to what is termed in modern scientific
theory as the formation of Cooper pairs. It is the forming of a
micro-cosmic orbit, so to speak, at an extremely tiny atomic scale.
In a sense, it seems ORMEs are metaphysical, even from a structural
standpoint; they are like the atomic equivalent of the ancient
adage: "Turn inwards, and know thyself."
When the valences are all paired together, the atom will look
nothing like it used to, from a chemical properties or analytical
standpoint. No free bonds are left to form compounds. Externally
it appears inert, all closed up, not a valence to be seen. Its
spectral emissions will be entirely different. David's statements
here are right on the mark. This closed-up-armadillo-like structure
is why they are insoluble in the strongest acids, capable of
withstanding great temperatures, and so forth. The internally
closed circulating flow, through the self-joined valences, is the
source of their individual Meissner fields.
It is important to note that it is also possible to have partial
ORMEs, in which some of the valences are "normal", and free to form
chemical bonds, while the others, on the same atom, are coupled as
Cooper pairs. These "partial" ORMEs may result from either a
marginal collision, resulting in an incomplete ORME formation; from
an odd collision event that knocks two valence structures together
just right to cause them to join; from a fully paired ORME that
experiences a partial uncoupling of its paired valences; and from
other less probable events. Varying degrees of "partiality" are
possible, in steps of one valence structure pair at a time, from all
to none.(3) This is a bit like
the Cheshire cat, who gradually disappears, a little at a time, till
all you have left is the smile.
Partial ORMEs are less stable; when the still exposed valence
portion of a partial ORME enters into a bond with another element,
etc., this can introduce other internal changes in the partial ORME
which disrupt the remaining Cooper pairs, causing them to decouple.
Partial ORMEs having chemical bonds to other atoms may eventually
relax their Cooper pairing and drop back into a normal metallic or
chemical atom state.
There is no question but that many of the naturally occurring and
manufactured ORMEs David has been working with are, in fact, partial
ORMEs. The natural ORME materials found in the tailings and volcanic
deposits Dave is using contain or comprise a mixture of both
completely and partially formed ORMEs. The partially formed ORMEs
components exist in varying levels of completeness in their Cooper
pairing. Of this raw material mix, the natural, partially formed
ORME atoms which still remained semi-uncoupled were able to bind
with his cyanide solution. That is why they were able to be caught
by the chemical leaching process of his tailings recovery operation,
leading Dave to his path of discovery. This was only possible, and
only happened this way because partially formed ORMEs still retain
some of their metallic attributes. The fully formed ORMEs do not
act like metals at all, and do not in the least interact chemically
with the leaching process cyanide. If all the ORMEs in the tailings
had been 100% Cooper paired, they would all still be sitting in
those tailings piles, and Dave would still be growing cotton; the
cyanide would have never caught them.
It was only the incompletely or partially formed ORMEs, still weakly
metallic, which were picked up by the recovery solution.
Fortunately however, the partially formed ORMEs still form linkages
with fully formed ORMEs through their Meissner fields, even though
the fields of partial ORMEs are weaker. And so both varieties were
carried along together by the recovery process. The partial ORMEs
reacted with the cyanide (using what free metal bonds they had left)
and were washed out with it. These captured partial ORMEs in turn
dragged the fully formed ORMEs along for the ride, pulling them by
their Meissner fields like a big dog on a leash, towing its owner.
The 100% ORMEs are easy for these partial ORMEs to pull around,
since the full ORMEs offer no resistance at all. No other chemical
attachment forces can act on them (chemically speaking they are as
slippery as a greased pig), and so they obligingly follow their more
chemically attached partial ORME partners, being pulled along as if
they were riding on ball bearings.
Later, when the solution mix of partial and complete ORMEs is
subjected to further chemical separation methods, the Meissner leash
connection between them eventually gets severed. This is usually
through the full ORME's stronger attraction to the Meissner fields
of other full ORMEs, thus breaking up the partnership. The partials
are eventually removed through their still semi-functional metallic
reactivity, as an "impurity" along with the precious metals. This
leaves behind the fully formed ORMEs, clogging up Dave's process
solution, and causing David and his associates so much bafflement
when they were found to resist all known forms of analysis.
Fully formed ORMEs will not react with hydrogen cyanide any more
than they do with aqua regia or anything else. Their main
interaction with the external world is through their Meissner fields.
In Nature, only other ORMEs, partial or complete, speak their
language. They all ride along together in a world of their own on
the waves of magnetic and electric fields that pass through the
David's patent literature says the following:
"Further, the applications to which the ORMEs are directed will
establish their relationship to a specific T-metal by virtue of the
manner in which the ORME performs in that application as compared to
the performance of commercially available derivatives of the
T-metal. An example is the performance of commercial rhodium as a
hydrogen-oxidation catalyst compared with the performance of the
rhodium ORME as used in a hydrogen-oxidation catalyst."
Partial ORMEs will still work, to some extent, depending on the
degree of partiality, in fuel cell catalysis, for the same reason
they react with cyanide; a consequence of the weakened metallic
properties they retain. Dave has indicated in his lectures that
some elements in his patent are susceptible to nitric oxide
destabilization as ORMEs (specifically excluding gold, which of
course does not react with nitric oxide, even in its metallic form).
This then, strongly suggests that these are not 100% coupled ORMEs,
in which he has observed this effect. 100% coupled ORMEs,
regardless of element, will not react with nitric oxide. They will
not do anything in a fuel cell. Nor will they form bonds with
cyanide, acids, etc. By definition, a 100% ORME is one which has
nothing - no bonds - remaining but Cooper pairs, so it *cannot* react
chemically; it has become incapable of doing so. Only partial ORMEs
may react with nitric oxide, or other chemicals. To repeat myself,
in 100% ORMEs, all the valence structures are coupled and closed.
Dumbbell group atoms of Table 1, with their 24 valence structures
capable of forming up to 12 pairs, thus have from 0 to 12 levels or
stages of partiality (ie, orbital rearrangement), with zero being a
normal chemical atom.(4) Bars
group atoms, listed in Table 2 (and discussed later in the article),
with 14 valence bars, may form from 0 to 7 distinct levels of
Presently, I do not believe Dave or his associates are aware of the
distinction which exists between full and partial ORMEs.(5) It is obvious that
determinations as to whether 100% Cooper paired ORMEs are best
suited to, and should be supplied for, medical and philosophical
uses are not possible as long as there is no such awareness.
Depending on the element, only a partial complement of Cooper
pairing may be needed to prevent heavy metal toxicity in the body.
For example, partial pairing, from a toxicity standpoint, is not
even an issue for a nontoxic element, such as gold. But fully
paired ORMEs are more effective and efficient in the intended
applications, due to their stronger Meissner fields, which is the
number one active ingredient.
But I shall also suggest that a complement of partial ORMEs helps
the body to utilize ORMEs better. Perhaps, I shall suggest, the
body may wish to have a certain amount of certain partial ORMEs to
act as tethers, to keep the 100% ORMEs on a leash, at the place
where they are needed. Perhaps the partial ORMEs are a natural
"handle", provided by Nature to help hold onto their more slippery
cousins. The fact that partial ORMEs that have first been reacted
with HCl are reported to be most effective, eg when administered by
injection, strongly suggests this is so to some degree. [These were
partials or the HCl could not have reacted with them.] Or perhaps
partial ORMEs are a hidden danger, waiting for those who ignore them
to learn a tragic lesson from. Perhaps all these things. The
subject of partially formed ORMEs needs to be closely examined, in
the context of its implication for each of these elements.
The subject of partial ORMEs is the main reason I have decided to
submit the information in this article. There is a present lack of
understanding here, and hopefully these explanations will be plain
and obvious enough to help remedy this. I would rather that someone
else had pointed out, but this hasn't happened.
Reasonably high yields of fully coupled ORMEs are obtainable by
simply processing monatomics in a finely divided form for a
sufficient length of time at optimum temperature and pressure in an
inert gas atmosphere. The inert gas atoms provide an effective
spin-inducing collision mechanism. The lack of external valencing
of the inert gases results in more effective spin-inducing
collisions than for any other medium. Batch yield, or a
determination of partial ORME content can be gauged by screening a
sample with aqua regia, fluorine, hydrocyanic acid, or other
powerful reactants, depending on the ORME elements involved. If it
doesn't react with those, it is certifiably highly Cooper paired,
and obviously safe for the body. There are no doubt other partially
paired gaussian distributions for each of the various elements,
which may be certified as safe under less stringent criteria, but
these determinations need to be made in an informed, intelligent, and
demonstrative way. There will always be some partials produced by
any practical process. David's methodology, as gleaned from his
lectures, presently seems to include no provision or means to
analyze, monitor, regulate, or optimize the product ratios of these
partial forms, let alone assay or separate partials out according to
the discrete levels or stages of their Cooper pairing.
The stability (or actually, lack of stability) of the ORME states of
some of the other elements I speculate about in this article may
render them unsuitable for consumption. However, any ORME elements
which are observed in any quantity in Nature are arguably stable
enough, or they would have long since disappeared as such forms. I
suggest that less stable ORMEs shall nevertheless be found to be of
great interest in other exciting ways.
Loading the ORME atoms with more energy than they can handle will
also break up the Cooper pairs. One way this can happen is as when
Dave exposed the material to direct sunlight. When overloaded, the
links between the ends of the valence funnels or bars burst apart
like the joint of a water pipe when forced to carry too much
pressure. This is the structural observation of what happens in a
superconductor collapse, such as occurs with experimental and
commercial superconducting-ring energy storage devices, when too
much energy is pumped into the Meissner field. Most of these
devices develop Type 2 superconductivity using cryogenic
temperatures, but the formation of Cooper pairs in the metal
lattices of low temperature superconductors follow valence behavior
principles related to those occurring in ORMEs.(6) The self-bonding of
ORMEs has the decided advantage of not having to contend with local
lattice thermal jitter, and thus functions at high external
It appears that overloading is what is occurring in the
electro-winning method Dave uses in his patent literature to
reconstitute the group VIII ORMEs into metals. On this the patent
"ORMEs are transformed into their original T-metal by means of a
chemical bonding with an electron-donating element, such as carbon,
which is capable of d orbital electron overlap and "spin flip".
When the G-ORME is chemically bonded to carbon in an aqueous
solution of ethyl alcohol under a specific potential, carbon
monoxide is formed and the ORME forms Au+(Au+, a black precipitate,
which under continued application of potential and dehydration
reduces to Au+1 (Au-1, a metallic bonded diatom of gold. **This
invention establishes that a high potential applied to the solution
forces an electron into the d orbital, thus eliminating the electron
pair.** The first potential, which for G-ORME is approximately -2.2
V and for other ORMEs is between -1.8 and -2.2 V, re-establishes the
d orbital overlap. The final potential of -2.5 V overcomes the
water potential to deposit gold onto the cathode." ( **'s added.)
And again, later:
"An ORME can be reaggregated to the T-metal form using conventional
wet chemistry techniques, by subjecting the ORME to a two-stage
electrical potential to "oxidize" the element to the metallic form."
It seems that what is happening here, in the description of
converting gold ORMEs (or G-ORMEs, as they are termed) to metal, is
that the partial ORMEs are reacting mildly with the cyanide solution
(the carbon referred to), dragging fully formed ORMEs along in the
process, just as I have described earlier as happening for Dave's
heap leaching process. The chemistry that is referred to as going
on is all associated with the weakly metallic aspects of the partial
ORMEs only. The 100% ORMEs don't participate in it. The part I
have highlighted (between **'s), is where the energy loading that
breaks the Cooper pairing occurs, coming from the electric potential
in the cell, and Dave is specifically recognizing that and pointing
it out in a subtle way. The mistake is in failing to understand
that partially formed ORMEs are involved, and what their role is in
the process. This is not intended as criticism; the best present
theories of atomic structure which he is applying to the phenomena
are simply not yet able to provide many clues as to the true
explanation of what is going on.
In Dave's lectures and in the 5/26/1996 interview with binga, he
indicates he uses a chemical analysis on test materials, to
determine their ORMEs content, which appears to take several days of
running to complete. This is a proprietary method he has not given
any details on, but has released on disclosure to certain parties
such as MIU. Without knowing the details on this, it is likely for
the reasons I have discussed, that Dave's analysis method (being
chemical) acts on partial ORMEs, though the process may well also
accumulate full ORMEs, by Meissner linkages, similar to the way his
tailings recovery process did. I tend to suspect that this is the
case, even though it seems to not yet be apparent to Dave that a
distinction exists in ORMEs, between full and partial varieties.
In determining whether a particular element in the periodic table
may exhibit structural bistability, having both a stable chemical
atom state and an ORME state, there are several factors to consider.
Everything about these ORME's behavior is structural in nature. In
order to form a true, complete ORME state, all the valences must be
paired up as Cooper pairs. Ideally (though not in practice) only
elements having a number of valence structures divisible by 4 can
exhibit ORME behavior: the valence structures divide into 2
opposite groups under high spin. There must also be an even number
of valence structures in each spin-divided group in order to form
Cooper pairs, so all the valences "disappear". Hence the factor of
4. Element families which have a number of valence structures that
is a multiple of 4 meet this ideal, and form symmetrical ORMEs.
There are three atomic structural families among the physical
elements that satisfy this "ideal" criteria. These are called the
dumbbell, octahedron, and tetrahedron families by Leadbeater and
Besant (viewed as monatomics), and have 24, 8, and 4 valence
structures, respectively. Gold, silver, and copper from David's
patents are from the dumbbell family. Mercury is from the
All the other elements in David's patent are from another family
shape, which doesn't meet the criteria of having a valence structure
count divisible by 4, but manages to get around this (and very
successfully) by utilizing an unbalanced spin in forming ORMEs. This
is the "bars" family, each element having 14 valence structures.
These are called bars, as the valence structures resemble bar
shapes, radially projecting from the center of the atom. The
valence bars are (monatomically) disposed towards the 6 face centers
and 8 corners of an imaginary cube (the cube shape is not visible in
the atom, but that is how the bars arrange themselves). When bars
elements form monatomics, they form (when spinning) an unbalanced
dipole, with 6 bars (3 Cooper pairing sets) grouped on one end, and
8 bars (4 Cooper pairing sets) on the other end.
Bar Group Atoms
Besides the dumbbell and bars families, there are also atomic
families with shapes resembling octahedrons, cubes, tetrahedrons,
spikes (shaped similar to carpet tacks), and 6 pointed stars. There
is a separate group for hydrogen. I will not discuss these groups
except for briefly mentioning a few elements from some of them, that
appear to have potential for ORMEs formation.
Table 2: "Bars" group monatomics, predicted to exhibit
superconducting ORME states. This group has the highest
thermal-collision statistical probability to form an ORME state,
based on number of possible spin planes, resulting in their having
lower average temperature transition points.
- Cobalt *
- Nickel *
- Ruthenium *
- Rhodium *
- Palladium *
- Osmium *
- Iridium *
- Platinum *
* Already specifically named in David Hudson's patent literature.
The "bars" family, followed by the "dumbbell" family have more
possible spin planes than the "octahedral" and "tetrahedral"
families, which can all (potentially, -even the cubics) form
complete sets of Cooper pairs. This gives bars and dumbbell group
elements a statistical advantage, by reducing the number of thermal
collisions necessary for a successful valence rearrangement
transition. This seems to explain why such a high percentage of
these elements (bars group in particular) occur in Nature as ORMEs,
and hence why the majority of the ORMEs David has discovered to date
are in this category. The bars group have long extended valences
which bend together to couple relatively easily, and the large
number of them means the required angular deflection (the angle
between the valence bars) is comparatively small compared to the
octahedrons, cubics, and tetrahedrons. All these factors tend to
make the bars family ORME states highly stable and easily formed.
On the other hand, the unbalanced high spin state of bars group
elements make them distinctly more susceptible to the formation of
partial ORMEs. This conclusion also appears substantiated in the
higher relative ratio of partial to complete bars family ORMEs, as
found in Nature. Since these elements are the largest constituent
for ORMEs in Dave's volcanic mineral deposits, it is unavoidable
that the production process will generate large amounts of partial
ORMEs, with or without awareness of the fact.
The dumbbell family has an infinite number of spin planes, but they
are not uniformly distributed, being all planes which make up the
set that include the line of the major axis. In other words, if you
imagine a spin plane which includes the line of the major axis, then
rotate the spin plane using the major axis line as a pivot, every
angular position the plane can have, as it rotates in this manner,
represents a possible spin plane; there are an infinite number of
such spin planes in 2PI radians. The bars family, on the other
hand, while actually having no "ideal" spin plane possibilities (its
valence structures are not multiples of 4) is nevertheless
statistically more likely to benefit from a particular collision.
Its '6+8 arrangement' unbalanced spin plane combinations are evenly
distributed, and valence positional variance, plus the tolerance
window for collision angles, eliminates nearly all non-ORME-forming
collision "blind spots". As a result the bars family enjoys a much
greater total number of potentially transitionable thermal collision
Among the octahedrals, titanium, and zirconium appear to have
potential for ORME formation, based on their structural proportions.
Titanium and zirconium are oddities within this family, each having
4 long narrow valence arms which bifurcate at the very ends. They
have a strong affinity for carbon, as their valence terminations are
identical in structure to that of carbon's valences. Most of the
other octahedral elements (and more so with cubics and tetrahedrals)
have short broad valence funnels, which would have a hard time of
it, trying to reach around to each other to form a Cooper pair
coupling. Of the other octahedrals, lead looks like it would be the
next most likely possibility; its valence structures are a little
Once the valence structures of an atom have been self-coupled into
Cooper pairs, the atom may (or may not!) remain this way. Upon
fully coupling, the valences have a strong mutual affinity to
staying paired; after all, it is coupling to itself, and so the
compatibility factor is pretty high. Many elements highly prefer
being in the ORME state.
Some of Nature's elements form extremely stable and tightly clenched
ORMEs. Other elements simply cannot, or else barely can, bridge the
distance to make the connection, even when spinning enormously fast.
These latter cases are much less stable as ORMEs, though they may
still form under appropriate conditions. Elements having stubby
valence structures must be spinning much faster to deform the
valence positions, than elements with longer more gangly valences.
Greater "at rest" separations between valences means that more
deformation must take place before Cooper pairing can occur.
Elements with platonically shaped monatomics having fewer faces are
more disadvantaged in this way. Elements which are less
structurally disposed to forming an ORME state will require
proportionately higher collision temperatures, to get to the coupled
superconducting condition, once they have been disaggregated into
Consequently, even though the elements of certain structural
families may potentially form ORMEs, some of them, such as many of
the octahedrons, cubics, and especially the tetrahedrons, can only
do so under extraordinary conditions. Even then, once formed they
may not have sufficient stability to remain rearranged when their
spin drops below a certain rate. The restoring forces trying to
pull the valences apart will become stronger than the self-coupling
forces, if the atom's spin rate drops too low.
Of the cubics, some of the heavier elements, most notably tantalum
and lutetium, have relatively long valence funnels and may be able
to successfully form Cooper pairs under suitable conditions. Like
the bars family, these cubics would have to enter an unbalanced spin
in order to form ORMEs. That is, the cubic elements must spin so
that there are two valence funnels (1 Cooper pairing set) on one
end, with the other four valence funnels (2 Cooper pairing sets) on
the opposite end of the spinning atom, in order for complete pairing
to be possible.
Mercury is a special case, coming as it does from the tetrahedral
structural family, with only 4 possible spin planes (2+, 2-) which
might form an ORME superconducting state. How is it that mercury
has managed to have this capability and be discovered already? One
might think that the tetrahedrals would be among the least likely
families from which would appear a stable ORME. To yogic vision,
mercury (like Ti and Zr) is seen to be a bit of an oddity, compared
to other elements in its family. It has some major subatomic
structures in common with gold, and while showing the expected
structural family features, it is oddly proportioned quite
differently than it might be expected to be as a tetrahedral family
element. These nonconformaties enable it to deform more than other
tetrahedrals with the same amount of spin, allowing it to rearrange
and achieve a superconducting state more easily. When it
superdeforms, it winds up looking more like a gold atom that has two
big valence structures on each end, rather than like the other
Vaporizing mercury in an inert gas atmosphere of sufficient
temperature and pressure will form Hg-ORMEs. This is an effective
means of forming ORMEs for any element. Seeding this process with
some already formed ORMEs will help catalyze the transition.
Occasionally this even occurs in a minor way in mercury vapor
turbines, but has not been recognized. With only four valence
structures, there are only three free state possibilities in the
case of mercury: metallic (chemical) atoms, 50% partial ORMEs (1
set of valence structures paired), and complete ORMEs (all 4 valence
structures paired, into 2 sets).
In David's patent literature, he uses this process in the case of gold:
G-ORME was prepared from metallic gold as follows: ... (19) The
monoatomic gold is placed in a porcelain ignition boat and annealed
at 300 C under an inert gas to remove hydrogen and to form a very
chemically and thermally stable white gold monomer ....
This step appears to say that the 300 C temperature and inert gas
are mainly there in order to facilitate removing the hydrogen. The
description might leave one with the impression that if the hydrogen
could only be removed in some other lower temperature manner,
perhaps the process would still succeed, and that the ORMEs form
spontaneously. Well, they do, in a manner of speaking, but it is
because of the high temperature, and the presence of the inert gas
that the "spontaneity" happens. As soon as they become monatomic,
their exposure to these conditions gives them an excellent
opportunity to experience thermal collisions, knocking them
immediately into the high spin state that leads to their forming
into Cooper paired ORMEs. The environmental conditions are the most
important parts of the equation. Though he has mentioned using
welding grade argon, David says nothing in his patent about the
pressure he is doing the annealing at, and has not mentioned in his
lectures whether he has experimented with gas pressure as a
variable. The gas pressure is not a critical factor to success, but
it does impact the process rates.
For each particular element, there shall be found to exist a range,
or window, of conditions of pressure and temperature, depending on
which inert gas is used as the atmosphere, which will result in
ORMEs (and partial ORMEs) formation. Besides the associative ORMEs
formation process, there is also a dissociative process operating
simultaneously. As in all other thermally driven reactions of this
nature, the rates of both processes increase with temperature.
Optimum ORMEs formation will occur under specific conditions, and
may be arrived at computationally, but these may also be determined
empirically (simple trial and error) for specific cases. Once the
process has remained at some fixed conditions long enough for the
rates to stabilize and reach equilibrium, no significant further
change in product quantity will occur. In ALL cases, the process
result will be a combination of complete and partial ORMEs, to some
degree. The object is to set up the process to maximize or peak the
full/partial ORMEs ratio for each element.
Remember the 300 second spectroscopic burn David refers to in his
lectures? I suggest the following be considered as an explanation
of what was happening there, in illustration of how these two
process rates I've just discussed operate. As a premise, I believe
the samples Dave was using in these spectroscopic experiments were
most likely 100% paired ORMEs to start with. The sample material (I
am supposing) had inadvertently been selectively concentrated that
way (as 100% ORMEs), by his tailings recovery process, as explained
earlier. I think he may have had quite a bunch of this material
around, that nearly all the partials had been removed or excluded
from, as a side effect of his refinement operation, and that this
was where the materials he was using at the time came from. But any
other 100% source he may have had would produce the same results.
The spectroscopic arc is inert gas shielded, and very hot. Just
like what I've described as an efficient ORMEs formation process,
and just like what is in Dave's patent for making ORMEs.
What do you suppose would happen to 100% ORMEs, under those
conditions? They obviously cannot follow the association process
function, since they already are all 100% paired. The only thing
they can do is begin to dissociate, once the temperature drives the
function high enough. Dissociation will continue until the partial
population count (within a particular minute volume in the arc)
becomes high enough that the two rates, associative and
dissociative, come to equilibrium. Dissociation will be the
strongly dominant process. ORMEs vaporized off the sample will be
turning into partial ORMEs, as a dissociative process, as collisions
with inert gas atom break their Cooper pairings.
Dissociation for the first element (palladium) seems to commence at
70 seconds into the burn. At that time, the ORMEs start vaporizing.
As soon as the ORMEs leave the sample's surface, partials begin to
form, and spectral lines begin to show up. Only when ORMEs
vaporization and dissociation starts, do platinum group spectral
lines appear, those metal lines being emitted by the unpaired
portions of the newly-dissociated partial ORMEs. The dissociation,
is occurring in an ordinary manner, by means of thermal collisions
between the ORMEs and the hot inert gas atoms occasionally breaking
some Cooper pairings in the ORMEs.
When Dave stopped the burn at 68 seconds, thinking (in those early
days) that he should then have only metals left, he had only
succeeded in further purging his 100% paired sample of extraneous
impurities of lower boiling point. No transmutations were
occurring, or are needed to explain the results. Only ordinary
associative/dissociative reactions, acting on some very unordinary
Later, when the sample was analyzed, no evidence of metals could be
found in it. Why? Because the sample was still 100% ORMEs, as it
had started out. The dissociation was occurring among the ORME
atoms in the arc, just where you would expect it to be occurring,
not in the relatively cooler sample body. These vaporized and
Cooper-dissociated partials, after emitting their spectral lines,
get carried off in the draft of the inert gas. So no metals (or
partially metallic ORMEs) would be expected to remain in the sample.
Had the arc vapors been trapped and condensed, a small quantity of
weakly metallic ORMEs would have been found there. What if the
original sample had not been 100% ORMEs, as in my premise? That
seems improbable to me, as the unpaired metallic portions of the
partial ORME atoms would then have shown up in the quantitative
chemical analysis of the sample, both before and after the burn.
In his lectures, Dave often speaks of how the atoms are
undetectable, don't match any known spectral lines, defy analysis,
and can't be dissolved in aqua regia. Then in almost the same
breath, he tells of seeing platinum group spectral lines though no
metals can be found, that the material works in fuel cells, can be
analyzed in things like Acemannan, carrot juice, and cow brains
using chemical means, and recovered in his cyanide to the point of
clogging things up. Now it's chemically reactive ... now it isn't.
These are incongruous statements, and I sense he is uncomfortable
with them. I believe many others sense a problem here, too, though
they haven't been able to put their finger on it. I have tried to
explain here, that the seemingly dual personalities of this stuff
are not at all as contradictory as they seem on the surface. There
is an explanation. It just requires a deeper understanding of what
the materials are doing, way down there in the tiny world of Anima.
When you look very, very closely, and see that Cheshire cat smiling
at you, it all makes sense. I hope some of Dave's friends will take
this to him. This is what he needs to know.
At some future time, it may be possible to comment further on these
interesting topics.(7) I invite
forum subscribers to pursue this area of study as a potentially fruitful
direction for new discovery. Science has indeed come a long way. But do
not rest just yet.
About the author
Gary Pnym describes himself as a kundalini awakened American
engineer. Gary is a single white male in his mid 40s who works as
an engineer with a large US company. Gary has "a background in
physics, electronics, and knows a few things about chemistry and the
"I am fortunate to have copies of the 1919 and 1951 editions of
Occult Chemistry. Over twenty years ago, in the 1970's, I
corresponded at length with the Theosophical Society's Olcott
Library (Wheaton, Illinois), and they graciously provided me with a
good deal of further information. Since that time, and during my
own studies, I have awaited in hopes that the Theosophical Society
would reprint all the original material. This has not yet occurred,
though I continue to hope for it. Editions of Occult Chemistry are
now very rare and difficult to find."
As Leadbeater and Besant's work has already been published,
presenting a great deal on this subject (even if it is not widely
known), and it has been available for some time now, and monatomics
are also now becoming more widely recognized, and a certain
requisite amount of discussion has taken place regarding it, (thanks
to Dr. Phillips), it is at last permissible to comment on the
information that has been released occultly, with greater openness,
and from the perspective of monatomic research.
- (1) SO CALLED MONATOMIC ATOMS ARE DIATOMIC
To state this plainly, the "monatomic" ORMEs in Hudson's patents
are, in fact, diatomic. It is also clear to me that most of these
elements do not exist stably in an isolated, monatomic state, but
quickly disintegrate when forced by the Will to assume that
condition, although they are perfectly stable as such when in
(I chose to refer to the elements in my original article as
monatomic, prefaced by an explanation of why I was doing so (quoted
above), so that anyone sufficiently interested in studying the
article material carefully would note this and take it into account
in understanding the rest of what I wrote in the article. I knew
full well that this brief note would be lost on most who would read
it, but I also knew that those few who would read it very carefully,
which should include any scientists, would pick it up.
This was done in the hope of making the content of my discussion at
least appear to stand on familiar ground, and so be more acceptable to
David Hudson, et al, through a commonality of sorts in terminology.
My taking this approach also considerably reduced the amount of
explanation I would have had to include, to make the subject
intelligible to everyone, who have been (in the absence of anything
else being available) only familiar with ORMEs theory as propounded
by David Hudson. Even so it was a rather lengthy article.)
For diatoms, the number of valences will obviously always be even,
ie divisible by 2, and so Cooper pairing is freed from the objection
that atoms with uneven numbers of electrons could not be completely
Cooper paired. The valence funnels "rotate" (as a consequence of
the motion of the particles forming them) in alternating senses, as
viewed in a sequence going around the atom (e.g. a gold dumbbell -
See below). It should be clear that two adjacent funnels, one
rotating clockwise, and one counter-clockwise, will coincide in
rotation if the funnels are distorted into a loop so that the mouths
join. They then form a continuous rotating tubular vortex. This is
the physical action corresponding to two electron spins joining and
canceling to form a Cooper pair. A similar effect occurs in metal
lattices at cryogenic temperatures, except that funnels join between
neighboring atoms, rather than on the same atom for an ORME.
Describing ORMEs as monatomic is still justifiable in a sense
(albeit technically inaccurate) since the ORMEs state is still the
smallest atomic level division that most of those elements remain
stable and intact at when isolated.
I will also suggest that, (if you will expand on what I have written
in my original article) it should then be obvious that, in addition
to the electromagnetic flux carried by the closed loop funnels of
ORMEs, other energies may (and do) also flow through these circuit
paths, and may (and do) do so in parallel with electromagnetic
energy. Since this flux, in moving around this atomic-level closed
circuit, passes through the very heart of the atom, it should not be
at all surprising, and should indeed readily suggest itself to
anyone reading my article and thinking about it that the nuclear
strong and weak forces may also participate in this flow (they do).
This ORMEs circuit is one of the few cases in Nature in which these
internal forces may thus develop macroatomic fields, extending
beyond the outer envelope or perimeter of the atoms, and each of
these forces (and others still more esoteric) generates a field,
which, like the electromagnetic Meissner field, has unique
properties, according to the laws governing each of the underlying
forces generating those distinct yet co-spatial fields. Like the
electromagnetic Meissner field (which Hudson and others have erred
in rushing to suppose to be the same as the aura) each of these may
vary in the amount of energy they contain, as a function (by
specific type) of their flow in the circuit.
Speaking now, in stricter use of the concepts 'monatom' and
'diatom', I offer some further comments which may be of interest.
This is in regards to Brown's gas.
Diatomic hydrogen is observed to be an ovoid, containing two
triangular "monatoms", each composed of 3 quarks (having 3 anu
each). The triangular H atoms are not identical in the types of
their constituent quarks; each hydrogen in the diatom has the same
mass, but differs from the other as a consequence of their quark
components. When dissociated into monatoms, the two separated
hydrogen atoms are stable (ie do not spontaneously dissociate
further) but I would suggest that they would prefer to be paired.
As monatoms, they loosely associate with free particles, forming
something like the atomic equivalent of the double-layer of
continuous-phase charge which forms around colloidal particles to
neutralize their remaining charge; it is a less defined layering for
a gaseous continuos phase than for a liquid as far as colloids are
concerned, and this (gas case) is a close analog of what happens in
the atomic state, where the atomic-level vacuum is the continuous
phase, and the myriad of loose and undifferentiated subatomic
particles are the matter that the layers are (dynamically) formed
from around the monatoms, as a loose aggregate.
Diatomic oxygen is also an ovoid, containing two spiral shapes,
looking very much like helices of 5 turns each, with each being
"wound" in the opposite direction. Like the hydrogen, each monatom
of the O2 diatom is dissimilar, being more positive or
negative, respectively, from its mate. Oxygen is also stable as a
monatom, but also prefers to be paired. It too can use loose matter
to neutralize its monatomic charge, but is entirely much less happy
about the situation.
Three such oxygen monatoms may unite to form ozone. These will
either be +-+, or -+-. The helices arrange with their axes
parallel, and triangularly spaced as an isosceles, when viewed end
on. Leadbeater noted that the positive variety of ozone (+-+) tends
to rise, though no tendency to move either up or down is noted for
the negative variety. This is further confirmed in that for
observations performed at high altitudes, nearly all the ozone found
in the atmosphere is of the positive type. In any practical ozone
generation system, equal amounts of each type will be formed. While
I have not tried it, it appears that it should be possible to
separate these according to species, once formed, by placing ozone
gas in a potential gradient (- on the upper electrode surface) that
draws the two types apart. Ozone that is thus separated by species
is substantially more stable and far less explosive in nature than
ordinary heterogeneous ozone.
Oxygen is a very energetic and active element, and is capable of
mediating several types of energies, some of which are not as yet
recognized by Science.
- (2) OTHER FORCES ARE AT WORK
There are several forces, flowing between and linking individual anu
into associations of the different subatomic particles, and these
forces are seen to originate from, and return to, higher dimensions.
They well-up and later disappear, in a source/sink fashion,
associated with anu forming the ends of their flow paths in our 3
dimensions. Several types of distinct forces transit along the
different coils or whorls of the anu themselves. Still other types
of forces act through larger particles and atoms, and linking
monatoms (for instance) together into diatomic arrangements.
Describing all the forces which can be observed at work is a real
challenge. It will take a great deal of work to separate and
quantify these forces, to reduce them to physics.
As far as I can tell, none of the high energy experiments we can
perform actually "create" (or destroy) matter. But this statement
must be qualified. Under appropriate conditions, particles already
existing in the atomic-level background-vacuum, but still too small
(or for other reasons) to be detectable by us, may be caused to
thereby associate, and this association forms a larger particle,
which *is* detectable. This may make it appear that an energetic
photon (for example) was transformed into matter, whereas the photon
actually did no more than provide the energy of association for a
number of (unseen) particles that were already present.
Likewise, the mass-to-energy losses that are observed, to balance
the equations in nuclear disintegrations, etc., are also related to
the binding energy of particle associations. The flux between anu
is a stream of tiny "particles" (though these are not hard
"particles" any more than the anu are). These tiny particles each
have a minute mass. The mass of this binding energy stream is a
function of the length of the stream; larger particles typically
have longer binding streams, since they are composed of more anu.
It is the mass represented by the inter-anu energy streams, which
represents the mass change in (at least many of) our nuclear
equations, apparent as energy. The anu do not change mass, and both
types are the same. The larger particles of matter we observe thus
have masses which are integer multiples of the anu mass, plus
however much mass is represented in their linking, or binding energy
stream. There are a number of different ways (lengths of stream
paths) that any particular number of anu may be linked.
This general statement on atomic and subatomic particle mass quanta
does not, of course, apply to particles smaller than one anu, such
as electrons, photons, etc.
If one takes an anu, and uses the Will to take it apart and
completely dissociate it, this can be done, but as soon as the Will
is released, the anu reforms again. It is like taking a piece of
slinky spring, and unwinding it by stretching it out and pressing it
flat on the floor with your hands. But as soon as you let go, it
pops back. The individual anu are each (one discovers) direct
force-aspect manifestations of a higher Will, which generates and
sustains all the matter in the Universe. It is ... in very fact,
the "Force", which is with us. This Force originates from a
dimension far higher than we (certainly, I) can reach while still
clinging to corporeal form. When we try to conceive of the
stupendous number of anu, throughout all matter of the visible
galaxies, which are being held in existence in such manner, the
extent and scope of that Will is truly mind numbing.
If you are interested in gaining insight into the forces at work in
ORMEs systems, you might wish to read a book, first published in
1758, by a Slavic Jesuit monk named Roger Joseph Boscovich. Its
title is "A Theory of Natural Philosophy - Reducing to a
Single Law All the Forces Which Exist in Nature" [Theoria
Philosophiae Naturalis - Redacta ad Unicam Legem Virium in Natura
Existentium]. I believe it is still available from MIT Press, where
I got a copy about twenty years ago.
- (3) MONATOMS SLOW IN DISCRETE STEPS
According to a reference in Scientific American [October 1991, Spin
Cycle - The Spectra of Super Deformed Nuclei, by Philip Yam] from
David Hudson's Dallas presentation:
"A spinning superdeformed nucleus slows down in discrete steps, each
time emitting gamma rays, or highly energetic photons. The
emissions produce a characteristic band of energy spikes all spaced
equally apart. The surprise: the spectra of some different
superdeformed nuclei were almost identical."
I suggest that these discrete stepped emissions are the result of
rupturing the valence circuits, one pair at a time, releasing their
circuit energy (as an emission). Since the emission energy is a
function of the energy stored in the valence circuit (and so not
constant), when they are observed, as reported, to be nearly the
same for different elements, then this is only because the atoms
were all charged in their circuits to nearly the same energy level;
this is most probably a consequence of conditions imposed by the
instrumentation environment that the atoms were placed in, and were
Some of the elements, though capable of forming ORMEs states, are
unstable as such unless kept spinning quite rapidly, and would drop
out of the ORMEs condition as their spin decreased. The changing
effect on atomic moment of inertia is a result of the valence
funnels deforming by swinging out into the super elongated shapes,
and the same is true in reverse as they release while spinning down.
This tends to keep angular velocity (spin rate) from changing as it
would normally be expected to, as angular momentum is added or
subtracted. If an observer using conventional methods is unaware
that this is happening, it can lead to incorrect conclusions about
their moments of inertia.
- (4) ELECTRON ORBITAL MODELS DON'T APPLY HERE
Although all elements with the dumbbell structure have 12 pairing levels
because each dumbbell has 24 funnels, and these combine by two's to form
12 pairs, this has little to do with the number of electrons (and positrons)
inside the atom.
Do not try to overlay the orbital theory of the atom, onto yogically
observed *real* atoms. You must recognize that while the orbital
**model** explains a great deal, it is, in the final analysis, only
an analogy of reality, and like all analogies, breaks down
eventually. Comparing its artificial constructs to real atoms can
In reality, yogically observed atoms do not have electron
orbitals. They are not constructed as we were taught in school.
They do not have a single central nucleus. They have instead
multiple "nuclear" concentrations within the atom, and these move
about rapidly. That is the basis for the nuclear orbitals which
Science has recently begun to appreciate. Atoms are built
differently than current theories predict; the forces which hold
them together and maintain their shapes are as yet little understood
by modern science. However, Science *has* observed, cataloged,
measured, and named many of their component particles.
If you will study the drawings of the atoms in Leadbeater and
Besant's work you will see that the funnels and bars are formed by
the motions of the groups of anu inside them.
The atom is observed to be built from anu, and the quantized
energy-particle flux between anu. Even the anu are essentially made
of these energy-particles. (Leadbeater has described how this is
only an approximately correct statement, see OC 3rd ed, p.19-20).
Each anu is composed of the *equivalent* of 49 smaller particles, on
the first level.
The lines of force between the anu, are also streams of tiny
particles. These particles are the equivalents of electrons and
positrons of conventional physics. The positrons are basically the
reality behind the "holes" of conventional solid state physics.
Their presence and number within the atom comprises the total mass
of the atom, both as (by equivalency) sub-components of the anu and
as energy streams.
I hope it is clear that each funnel or bar does not represent a
single electron, but only a valence. The valency arises as a result
of the algebraic sum of + & - charges in them, and is much less
than the total charge present. Hence sodium does not have 11
electrons and lawrencium 103 (they do in modern theory, but not in
real atoms). They each have many thousands of electrons and
Those who wish to go into this further (the electron as the basis of
3 dimensional atoms) might hunt down a book titled "The
Electron Theory of Matter" by Owen Richardson, published in
1914 by Cambridge University; 612 pages. Owen shows quite elegantly
how all atomic phenomena can be derived, based on only electrons.
Very good book. Pity no one reads it anymore.
- (5) PARTIAL ORMES
back In my opinion, the ORMEs David Hudson and
others are working with under the blanket term "ORMEs", are
predominantly partials of various levels, and in most cases high
order partials, > 65% paired, with some 100% species also
present. This somewhat arbitrary division includes 4 partial levels
of from 8-11 Cooper pairs for dumbbells, and two levels of from 5-6
pairs for bars-family elements.
Partials rapidly become difficult to distinguish, using ordinary
methods, from one level of pairing to the next, and from completely
paired ORMEs, as the pairing complement increases. That is, they
behave like 100% ORMEs under most circumstances. So the behavior of
100% ORMEs is "typical" of the ORME mixes David Hudson is working
with, composed of mostly high order partial and 100% ORMEs. I said
the color (whether they are white or not), does not particularly
matter, because high order partials are also white (& fluffy,
recalcitrant, etc.), and are in most ways like 100% ORMEs. However,
I remain concerned about the potential for long term biological
effects of certain partials, other than gold.
For your convenience, the following table may help to explain what
is happening. I have arranged bars element pairing to approximately
match up or correspond to pairing levels of the dumbbell family.
This table simply depicts the paired to unpaired funnel ratio, as a
Dumbbells (24 funnels)
Bars (14 bars)
This table should not be interpreted as describing the degree of
manifestation of ORME properties, which are usually not in
proportion to pairing complement, but are rather nonlinear for many
properties. The table only shows ORMEs structural stages.
With fewer pairing combinations, bars group elements are "lumpier"
in their partial steps, while dumbbells have a fairly fine gradation
of partial ORME stages or steps. There are also differences in
behavior, for the same number of pairs, depending on where the pairs
are, relatively speaking, on a particular partial ORME atomic
100% ORMEs are definitely scarcer in Nature, and in man-made
processes designed to create them, than are their less-perfect
partial relatives. Perfection is certainly not unheard of in
Nature, but it is comparatively rare. It is the pinnacle of
achievement, not the rule or the norm. How could it be otherwise?
100% ORMEs do not constitute anything like a majority fraction in
Nature's stores of these elements, though they certainly are an
important fraction, whose magnitude varies from element to element,
and which Science will soon quantify, once it learns how to detect
With understanding of how statistical processes function, and
recognizing how parallel thermal rate functions (referring here to
internal geologic processes) of association and dissociation work,
as I describe elsewhere in this article, it seems hard for me to see
how someone could draw any other conclusion.
Though I believe David Hudson and company are certainly screening
out (e.g. by acid dissolutions, etc) most of the lower order, more
metallic-like partial species, and this increases the relative
concentration of 100% ORMEs (and high order partials) in their
preparations. But again, remember that acid solubilities of
partials cannot be categorically defined, based on pairing alone,
since it depends strongly on the energy flowing in the paired
valence circuits. More energy flux brings out their ORME-ishness,
and increasingly screens (masks) their remaining chemical and metallic
If the association and dissociation processes were symmetrical
throughout the ORMEs pairing range, this would result in a gaussian
distribution, or a bell curve, centered around 50% pairing, as the
highest incidence of occurrence. But there are non-linearities that
David Hudson's comments notwithstanding, it is noteworthy that
partials participate in metal clusters. They fit a bit awkwardly
into the lattice, but they still behave (partly) as metals,
depending on their pairing levels. That is why Hudson found that
commercially prepared metal standards have a second spectroscopic
reading, which shows up late in the long burn, just like his native
David Hudson has stated that ORMEs don't form metal-metal bonds, yet
offers no explanation, other than pointing out the obvious
implication, that it is due to the presence of ORMEs. Many low order
partials exist in and among metals, rather than as monatomics. They
might be termed partial-ORME-to-metal alloys. They can markedly
alter the properties of the metal, when present in significant
amounts. When partial ORMEs are understood, their occurrence and
effects in metals should come as no surprise.
An individual, free mon-atom may drop to a 0% ORME state (by any of
a number of mechanisms), so that it technically becomes an ordinary
metal/chemical atom. But unless it joins an aggregate of metal
atoms, it remains susceptible to collisions and other events, which
now in all probability would knock it back into some level of ORME
state. Joining a metal cluster is an unlikely event, since it has
been existing as a free and independent mon-atom, and is not likely
to be close to a metallic cluster. So being a mon-atom is,
statistically, a hard habit to kick.
It is more likely that a metal atom will get knocked off its
cluster, and become a mon-atom (ORME or otherwise), than the chance
that a metallic mon-atom will get attached *to* the cluster. That
is because mon-atoms are free, and subject to dispersive forces, so
concentrations of them tend not to develop. So there is a distinct
statistical bias, moving metallics into the ORME state. The rates
of these opposite processes (in Nature) only equalize when there are
substantially more ORMEs than metal in the region around a state
system interface at which such processes are active.
Within an ORME population, where all the members are monatomic
(including 0% paired metal atoms), there are also important
non-linearities. For internal geophysical processes, the process
rates that drive population distributions are **typically** such
that the rate of Cooper pair formation and the rate of Cooper pair
loss, do not balance until a population average above 50% pairing is
reached. There is at least one identifiable factor at work
accounting for this. It is that pairings, once formed, are not only
stable (referring only to dumbbell and bars elements), but tend to
increase in stability as a result of energy subsequently building up
and increasing, flowing through the closed valence circuits. So it
typically takes less collision energy to form a pair, than to break
it apart, once it has existed for a while. In breaking apart, the
acquired energy of stability is sometimes all released, or may be
absorbed to varying degrees by other circuits that may be present.
A second factor is that, once an atom has been knocked into a high
spin state and some pairs have been formed, these tend to be
(obviously enough) on opposite ends, so the bar or dumbbell is more
elongated in aspect than it was before. This increases the
likelihood that a subsequent collision will knock it into a spin on
the same spin plane again. This is particularly true for dumbbells,
which tend to have their population peak at a higher number of pairs
than do bars elements.
In Nature, populations of most geothermally formed ORMEs elements
peak at 8-10 pairs for members of the dumbbell group, and 4-5 pairs
for elements in the bars family. Common ORME configurations for
many bars elements, is for the ORME to have two pairs on each end,
ie roughly opposite each other as head and tail, and 6 free valence
bars sticking out in between, around the "waist"; or else three
pairs on one end, two on the other, and 4 free valence bars in
These pairing level distributions are sufficient to give those
elements "ghost gold" properties, making them somewhat detectable,
though not recoverable as metals by ordinary methods, since they
won't coalesce into the metal lattices, characteristic of their
respective elements. That is about the level (coming straight from
natural materials) that Hudson experienced, when his dore' button
would shatter like glass when hit with a hammer. As solids, their
abnormal valence structures don't produce a regular symmetrical
lattice, and that is why they seem like ceramics. Low order
partials are essentially glassy or amorphous in their
So 100% ORMEs (within natural monatomic populations) are not as rare
as metal mon-atoms, but still by no means dominant.
As I have mentioned, there are ways of precisely separating each
pairing species from one another, and also similarly paired species
of related elements. David Hudson and company are presently unable
to do this. Actually, hardly anyone working with ORMEs at this
point even understands or admits partial pairing exists as a feature
of atomic structure, and so experimenters don't even know there is
anything **to** separate.
The potential hazards of partial ORMEs should not be
under-estimated. Low order partials are inherently dangerous when
taken indiscriminately, by those oblivious to the very real effects
of their remaining metallic factors. Gold, even when metallic, is
non-toxic, so less caution is necessary. However, when someone is
suffering from a life-threatening condition, then it is sometimes
necessary to take extraordinary measures, and to weigh relative
- (6) SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND ORMES
While I have previously referred to ORMEs as exhibiting type II
super-conductivity, this is only superficially correct, and ORMEs
(in my opinion) deserve to be given a separate, distinct
classification, such as type III.
In conventional type II Superconductors (SCs), for temperatures
within their superconducting regime, as the external field is
increased, the Meissner-generating currents flowing through the SC
(necessary to expel the external flux) reach a level at which
superconductivity in the sample can no longer be sustained, and
superconductivity is destroyed. I have described this event as a
wholesale rupturing of bonds between valence funnels of adjacent
atoms in the lattice. Removing the external field (and hence the
current) results in reforming the Cooper pair bonds, and restoration
of superconductivity (assuming the sample temperature hasn't
However, in the case of ORMEs, superconductivity (transmittance
across the sample body) occurs through Meissner field linkages
between individual ORMEs atoms - an entirely different mechanism.
This is true whether the ORMEs are a continuous body, like an ORMEs
glass (small ORMEs-glass particles are merely small examples of
continuous bodies), or an aqueous dispersion. (Of course, observing
superconductivity in aqueous phase dispersions is not even a
possibility for other SC materials, because they are cryogenic.)
At Hc2 (Hc2 is the energy field level at which superconductivity
ceases) for ORMEs, the external Hc2 field only succeeds in
establishing itself *between* the ORMEs atoms, suppressing, or
causing their individual atomic-level Meissner fields to withdraw or
be pushed back sufficiently so that the Meissner-mediated energy
transfer between atoms is blocked, interrupting macro-current flow
in the sample. To restate this, the macro Meissner-generating
currents, which act to expel an external flux from an ORMEs body,
flow *between* ORMEs, not *within* individual ORMEs. The function or
role of the ORME atom is to establish the macro-current *path* (via
a continuous chain of Meissner fields), not to produce the expelling
current itself. It is, in fact, a DOUBLE-NESTED system of
superconductors: the macro body superconducts via Meissner field
linkages, and within that the individual ORMEs each superconduct on
an atomic level through their individual closed Cooper pair
An individual ORME atom in such a population is not much affected by
the presence of an Hc2 field, even despite its stopping of
macro-current flow in the sample body. The ORME atoms' own Meissner
fields are only moderately changed at best; they only must scrunch
up a bit, so as to make room for the external Hc2 field, which is
now passing between them. The currents in the ORMEs atomic circuits
thus do not change very appreciably, since most of the external flux
passes around (between) them.
This leads one to the conclusion that Hc2 for ORMEs is not a
constant (though unlike type IIs, it does not depend on
temperature). Instead, for each element, it depends (primarily)
upon the energy contained in the Meissner fields of the individual
ORMEs (I am also assuming the ORMEs as being arranged at their
preferred atomic spacings). The strength of these individual atomic
fields ultimately determines how much external field will be
required to force them apart, and supplant them from their
inter-atomic connections. If the Meissner fields are pumped up (or
conversely, drained down) and the Hc2 measurement experiment is
tried again, a different value for Hc2 will be found.
Hc2 for ORMEs is still defined as the external field which destroys
super-conductivity in the macro-body of the sample. On the surface
it seems the same as the definition for type II SCs, despite
entirely different mechanisms at work, and despite ORMEs'
temperature independence. Furthermore, like type II SCs, removing
the external field restores superconductivity in ORMEs bodies. (The
ORMEs themselves never lost their atomic-level ORMEs circuits; if
they had, removing the external field would not result in a
resumption of superconductivity, which it does). Because of these
similarities, it can be seen how ORMEs could easily be mistaken as a
type II material, and how casual reference to it as such is even
reasonably accurate for some purposes ...
So these are laws at work behind the observed phenomena by which
ORMEs particles may sometimes:
- flee the approach of a magnet or a hand
- first act inertly when in an intense magnetic field
- then resume their flightiness when it is withdrawn; and so on.
Hopefully, the superficiality of the similarities between type II
and ORMEs behavior are now clear. The following few statements
summarize these conclusions about ORMEs.
- 1 ORMEs superconductivity is essentially temperature
- 2 Macro currents are transmitted by inter-atomic Meissner
field linkages through an ORMEs body.
- 3 Hc2 is the level at which macro-currents in the ORMEs
- 4 The Hc2 level for an ORMEs body is a function of Meissner
field strengths of the individual ORMEs.
- 5 The atomic-level Meissner fields of individual ORMEs are
distinct and largely independent of the macro Meissner field of the
ORMEs body, and only moderately increase at Hc2.
- 6 Cooper pairs of the ORMEs themselves are typically
unaffected by Hc2 field levels, unless the ORMEs Cooper pair
circuits are already carrying flux at or near their critical
ORMEs are somewhat hydrophilic, and tend also to be hygroscopic.
How much so is in a proportion to how strongly their fields are
charged. In "solution", the Meissner field of each ORME is capable
of controlling a significant number of water molecules; how many,
again depends on the ORME's charge. In such a solution of ORMEs,
the separation between ORMEs, specifically, the distance at which
energy normalization can occur between them is extended by the
presence of the water molecules, for a given strength of Meissner
field. It is similar to how inserting a dielectric material
increases the capacitance between two plates. The plates may be
much more widely separated when the intervening space is filled with
a material of high dielectric constant, than without it, for the same
capacitance. Likewise, the ORMEs can be further apart in water, and
still communicate energy between one another.
The effect of the Meissner fields in such a situation is to
artificially increase the apparent viscosity of the water. It
produces a "stiffness" or pseudo-viscosity which is a function of
the concentration of ORMEs, and of the field strength. The field
strengths naturally normalize between ORMEs under such conditions,
so all individuals within the population come to an equivalence in
energy level (assuming mixed species), or to an identical energy
level between identical species. This is the explanation behind the
slimy, gelatinous consistency of aqueous ORMEs dispersions.
The "viscosity" of the suspension may be altered drastically and
dramatically, as the Meissner fields are perturbed. For example,
placing a sample drop in a magnetic field, well in excess of Hc2,
will suppress the extent or range of the individual Meissner fields
and (unless other field types, as I alluded to elsewhere, are
operative) the viscosity may be observed to diminish, particularly
if any macro-currents were present.
The possibility of achieving high-temperature superconductivity with
Tc > 300K was predicted over 30 years ago by W.A. Little [Phys
Rev A 1964, vol. 134, p 1416]. You may also be interested in
reading D.M. Eagle's paper in Physica C [1994, vol. 225 p 222-234]
on observed room temperature superconductivity, and other
discussions of same delivered at Brookhaven National Laboratory in
April 1994. This is related to the earlier work by LN Grigorov, et
- THOUGHT EXPERIMENT ON SUPERCONDUCTIVITY
Lets suppose that a small pile of lumpy and granulated ORMEs powder
and particles are the sample of an experiment. Let us also presume
that these ORMEs are only weakly or minimally charged, so that Hc2
for them is considerably below the field strength of a test magnet,
at a distance of a few centimeters. What will happen then ... when
the magnet is brought near?
In their initial states, the weakly charged ORME atoms are fixed in
position and orientation, within the solid particle they are a part
of. For individual ORME atoms, sufficiently dispersed in a matrix
of other ORMEs or non-ferrous material, with the ORMEs being
sufficiently low in atomic-level Meissner field strength so as to
not be in Meissner linkage with one another, they may be seen to be
capable of something superficially approximating ferromagnetic
behavior. Due to the atomic-level circuits each ORME atom
possesses, some flux will always be present (whenever there are
closed valence circuits), and this will result in a small, net
magnetic moment; this is what I am referring to when I assume they
are only weakly charged. Another way of saying it is that this
means a tiny magnetic field is associated with each ORMEs atom,
because of their individual circuit flows.
The nature of the magnetic field of a single ORME atom (although I
am using "atom", I am doing so loosely, so keep in mind that these
are diatoms) depends on which element it is (specifically, what its
elemental atomic shape or form is), how many closed valence circuits
it has, and (for partial ORMEs) where these circuits are located on
it, among the possible pairing locations. The resulting field
shapes are not simple dipoles, but are complex multi-polarizations,
depending on the permutations of these several factors.
Nevertheless, in many cases, there will be some net dipolar or
quasi-dipole component, which will be particularly apparent and
dominant in near-field aspect. The net effect of these tiny ORMEs
dipoles generally will produce a gross dipole of some degree in a
particular sample particle, though it is also possible that the
sample particle will also display a more complex field.
The degree to which the net dipoles of the individual ORMEs in a
given particle are aligned to form a gross dipole obviously depends
on the history of the particle, such as what aligning conditions
were present at the time the ORMEs became solidified and fixed into
their matrix, and what other relevant influences were present at the
time. They usually tend to align, individually relative to their
neighbor's influences, and as a group relative to external
When an ORMEs body is placed within an external magnetic field, only
three things may happen, as regards the flux of this field. It may
pass around the body, it may pass through the body, or it may
terminate on a pole or poles associated with the body; each magnetic
flux line originates from, and eventually terminates on, a pole, and
these are the only possibilities (which I shall discuss) that will
satisfy this, as far as the ORMEs body is concerned.
As the test magnet approaches, under a watchful eye, two main things
The first thing is, some of the magnet's flux engages, and
terminates on, the pseudo-dipoles of the ORMEs atoms (those that are
aligned attractively with the external field), whose fields then
become continuations or a nexus for it. While the individual ORMEs
do not move about or flip, fixed as they are within the solid, the
particle as a whole may move to orient itself, under action of the
magnetic forces, so that it is aligned most attractively with this
external field, according to its gross dipole or the net disposition
of the ORMEs within it, and that will be its natural inclination, in
seeking a condition of lowest potential energy. This results
*initially* in an apparent ferromagnetic attraction of the gross
ORMEs particle to the magnet. They start to line up in whiskers as
if they were iron filings, mapping the local field of the test
The second thing that happens is, some of the magnet's flux
penetrates *between* the individual ORMEs atoms (I don't mean
between the particles of powder, but actually between the atoms in
each particle), separating the atoms and cutting off any
inter-atomic Meissner linkages which might have been present.
(Remember, I have assumed that the ORMEs were weakly charged, so Hc2
is below the magnet's strength, allowing this penetration to occur.)
In penetrating the particle, the field attempts to pass through
where the ORMEs atoms themselves are also, and in doing so it tries
to scrunch their tiny atomic fields up, close to the atoms. This
latter mentioned action, by induction, causes a current in the
superconducting ORMEs valence circuits, opposing the magnet's
encroaching field, and forcing it back, away from the atom. The
superconducting valence circuits act as a perfect inductive mirror.
If it were only one atom that we were talking about here, that is
where things would stop, but that is not the case. There is a
community of atoms, and the atom has other atom neighbors, on every
side of it, and above and below, in a 3-dimensional arrangement.
Consequently, while the first atom is excluding the field from near
itself, it has several neighbors which are each doing the same
thing. As these neighbor atoms exclude the field, they are at the
same time pushing the unwanted flux toward the first atom again,
just as the first atom is pushing it towards them. It is a case of
everybody saying "Not in my neighborhood!", all at the same time.
This is the source, nature, and mechanism of the field
amplification, within the ORMEs population, that would be needed in
order for the ORMEs to behave as has been observed, in levitating in
the earth's half gauss field, note also that type II SCs do this.
The squeezing of the external field between the ORME atoms greatly
increases the local strength (flux density) of the external field,
as seen from the viewpoint of each individual ORME atom. The actual
degree of flux compression (field strength amplification) that takes
place in this inter-atomic flux pinch depends in part on the
separation between the ORME atoms, but is very, very great, and may
certainly exceed the factor of 106 that is required
[presumably to overcome the gravitational field]. The evidence that
it does is plainly obvious to anyone, in that ORMEs *do* levitate.
As the field compression progresses, each ORME atom continues, in
this runaway induction, to increase the strength of the
Meissner-generating currents which flow in its superconducting
closed valence circuits until a state of equilibrium is reached, as
the flux compression function runs into an asymptotic wall. From
the standpoint of each ORME atom, it looks as though a wall of flux
surrounding it is increasing almost without limit (a near
approximation to the hypothetical ... Irresistible Force), when all
they are really doing is pushing against each other with the
external flux trapped in between, like a veneer. The magnet's flux
that succeeded in penetrating the particle is now trapped in the
inter-atomic spaces it intruded into. The particle is (for the
moment) something like a bead strung on the lines of external flux.
Just about the same time as this is going on, something else
happens. As the external magnet's flux becomes more and more
confined, and the Meissner fields of the individual ORMEs atoms
become increasingly powerful, they are also forming increasingly
efficient field linkages between themselves. The atoms begin to
become capable of (more and more efficiently) transferring energy
between one another, which is another way of saying that the Hc2 value
for the system is increasing.
As this inter-atomic coupling begins to develop, macro "currents"
begin to flow (only in small localized regions of the particle at
first). These localized effects begin expelling the external flux
from their area. As the atoms come into communication with each
other, and external flux continues to be expelled, this sort of
cascades and the whole population transitions into a superconducting
state as a contiguous, extended particle body.
In other words, the first thing they do when linkages form is to
promptly develop Meissner-field-generating currents in the
macro-particle, to exclude the external magnet's flux that has, just
before, become trapped between the ORME atoms. As the flux is
expelled, the growing diamagnetic field opposes that of the test
magnet's field, and the particle's attraction changes to being
repelled from it.
The rate of development of diamagnetism (or repulsive force) starts
slow, as inter-atomic linkages begin to form for the most closely
spaced atoms, increases as more linkages form and larger currents
are possible, and then finally levels off, as nearly all interatomic
linkages which are possible within a given particle have formed,
even for the more widely spaced ORMEs atomic neighbors. At that
point the diamagnetic field stops growing further.
It takes a certain amount of time for the ORME atoms, working
cooperatively, to move the embedded external field's lines from
being inside to being out of the particle. Its like when you see
somebody being passed across the room, above the heads of the
audience at a rock concert, by everyone's arms gradually handing
them from person to person. But eventually the lines get expelled
from the particle. This migration time (which depends on several
factors) causes a delay before significant repulsion begins to
In finally flying away from the magnet, the particle then obeys
kinematic laws (a=f/m) as the acceleration (integrating into
velocity) is determined by the instantaneous repulsive force, as a
function of instantaneous field strengths (etc.).
So the particles first appear to ferromagnetically attract, but
before long change their minds and fly away in diamagnetic
repulsion. Please allow me to point out, that all these behavioral
phenomena are consequences (as put forth in the inductive reasoning
of the foregoing explanation) only of the fact that ORMEs have
closed valence circuits. Showing in a compelling way that the same
observed behaviors are required by theoretical atomic concepts or
models, which do not admit to or include closed Cooper pair valence
circuits, may be very difficult indeed, and certainly not as
compelling, I would say.
- (7) OTHER MEISSNER RELATED PROPERTIES
Zero point coupling is also related to ORMEs' ability to interact
with water, producing the pseudo-viscosity discussed
previously. The electromagnetic zero point in these phenomena is an
important mechanism by which energy moves to and from the vacuum
energy field, and out of or into our own space-time.
There exist many zero point doublets, within reach of our experience
(ie, associated with matter and energy phenomena we are capable of
manipulating). They are points where physical and transcendental
resonances occur simultaneously, ie, highly non-linear natural
interactions between matter, energy, and space-time. Each of these
zero points represents a point of communication, through which
energy may enter (or exit) our 3 dimensional world from higher
dimensions, the ultimate source of the vacuum energy.
The important thing to understand, is, that it is not necessary for
a particular wave's frequency to "match" the mid-frequency of a
particular zero point doublet, to experience this sort of
transition. It is only necessary that coupling exist between energy
(or matter, or both) in our dimensions (for example) and a zero
point resonator. The presence of the appropriate coupling
circumstances with a zero point notch or doublet results in the
entrainment or discharge of energy, by means of coupling transfer.
It is the coupling to the doublet resonator (e.g. a water molecule,
ORME, etc.) which is important. The frequency "shift" of the
coupled energy occurs as a natural consequence of this, due to
topological properties associated with the zero points themselves.
The zero points are not merely the specific frequencies they happen
to fall on, within the electromagnetic spectrum, but are the result
of the trans-dimensional resonator, which just happens to have
whatever frequency it has; tuning the 'right' frequency without or
apart from a zero point resonator does not constitute a zero point.
Meissner effects may also affect taste. Strongly charged ORMEs
might be masked in their metallic properties by the Meissner fields.
The manna of the Israelites was described as tasting like "honey"
(Exodus 16:31), or "fresh oil" (Num 11:8). In making it into cakes,
the Hebrews, of course, had to add water to it. Both honey and oil
are viscous substances, and these terms may also give us an
indication of the amount of charge present for those allusions in
the account, with perceived taste varying according to charge.
ORMEs, having individual atomic-level Meissner fields, differ in
behavior from that of type II superconductors, when an ORMEs
suspension is exposed to an external magnetic field. The external
magnetic field direction (earth's field), which penetrates a water
suspension of ORMEs is nearly horizontal. The reaction of the ORMEs
population is to exclude the magnetic field. But because the ORMEs
population in suspension is both mobile and discontinuous, some
interesting things occur. The ORMEs nullify and confine the
penetrating field by forming current vortices around each of the
quantal lines of flux. This forms a vortex field, that is, a field
made up of a great number of tiny vortices, dispersed uniformly
through the solution when viewed in a direction parallel to the
earth's field lines.
Despite being discrete entities, these vortices mathematically sum
into a single peripheral vortex encircling the flux. Because of the
mobility of the ORMEs in suspension, the ORMEs themselves gradually
flow towards an arrangement of lower energy, which shall eventually
exclude all the field lines from the container. As they do this,
these small vortices gradually coalesce into larger and larger
vortices, containing and enveloping the penetrating flux in larger
and larger clumps, till it is all lassoed into only one large
bundle. This might look like a solar prominence. A large ring
current flowing through the arch (and continued in a circuit through
the material in the container), sufficient to exclude the flux from
it. If you broke the arch (physically), the ring current would be
interrupted and cease, and the arch would fall and collapse (no
current left to sustain it, once broken), and the flux trapped under
it would escape out through the point of the breach as the two limbs
of the arch fell.
Strength In Wisdom
For the Record Interview
Interview with person who took monoatomic Rh and Ir
The following transcript is from a recorded conversation between
myself and one of the key players in the area of monatomic elements.
The interview took place on July 27, 1996. Prior to our recorded
conversation, it was agreed that the interviewee was to remain as
anonymous as possible therefore I cannot provide any specific
information (e.g. name, contact information, position, location
etc.). For the record, I personally attest that this person is
indeed both qualified and capable of speaking on the following
subjects. This material is not copyrighted and may be reproduced
and distributed freely, but only in its entirety.
Strength In Wisdom
- I understand that you have ingested monatomics
in the past, what product did you take?
- A combination of Iridium and Rhodium.
- About two years ago.
- How much?
- I started with 250 mg a day and by the time I
ended a 42 day fast was up to about 2500 mg. I probably took 2500
mg for a total of five or six days though, and I only did 250 mg
three or four days.
- Then went up to 1000 mg?
- I'm impatient, I moved up very, very quickly. I
started taking the material eight days into the fast. I did a lot
of cleansing both before and during (slightly into the fast).
During the fast, we monitored every single detail we could
including: blood sugar, blood pressure, weight, temperature ...
things we could have a handle on.
- So, you were fasting for seven days. On the
eighth day, you started taking 250 mg. Are you still taking it?
- I still take material but I don't take it in
that volume. Now you have to understand, these materials are
present in carrots. They're present in all kinds of food.
- Yeah, grape juice, bilberry, slippery elm bark
... are you currently taking any isolated material?
- Occasionally. But not at 2500 mg doses.
- Why did you take it in the first place?
- There were a lot of things we wanted to find
out about and there was no other way to do it. I'll tell you right
now: we didn't know if I would die or not.
- But you were willing.
- I have no fear about anything like that. I
really do not have any fear.
- What effect(s) can you attribute to your
ingestion of this material?
- It wasn't very long after I started that the
sound started occurring. The sound outside of sound. That
really is key to what can happen. Most people will hear that and
think their ears are ringing. If you're careful, you'll realize
that it's not in your ears. As you proceed with this, you'll
realize that it actually moves outside your head and just above the
crown of your head. It's more than a sound, it becomes an emanation
... .it really does. And that's when you have something that you
can work with. By far, the majority of people who've ever had to
deal with this didn't have a clue. If they'd studied some Taoist
alchemy ... if they had studied anything and applied it to
themselves rather than keeping everything outside themselves ...
they'd have known that the dialogue they build with that phenomena
gives them the keys to the next steps. There really is a trade-off
that starts to occur. That's what made my experience so uniquely
different from everyone else's.
- So you were prepared for it.
- I knew what to do. But there are very, very
few people who do. This takes place internally. It's an active
process. You're not going to sit there and have this zip through
you and all of the sudden these wonderful things are there. It
can't be that way. That's not the way the circuit is set up in your
system. Your chakras and realizations are not built that way.
Nothing is built that way. And to expect something outside of that
is absolute foolishness.
- Is that all you experienced?
- No, but that's a two day conversation in
itself. If you want to get to the rest of your questions ... it got
to the point where I was standing in an electric flame. I could
tell you a million things that occurred that were all way different
from anything normal, but they occurred progressively as a result of
me dealing with them.
- Were you psychic prior to ingesting it?
- Yeah, probably. But what happened afterwards
is truly unique. It changed everything in a way that hasn't made my
life very nice. If you were to talk with some people, they would
say it's made me impossible to be around ... there's no way in the
world to lie. It's not fun. Most people are not going to like it.
It's not light-hearted. It's not easy. Unless you have someone
that you can deal with that has a point of reference for it, you're
going to be very alone. These materials and how they've been dealt
with historically have a rich, beautiful tradition built around
them. Only now do I understand why.
- Any adverse effects?
- Well, my life is not Father Knows Best.
- Are there any lasting manifestations?
- Absolutely yes.
- Care to elaborate?
- Well, psychic, physical, emotional.
- Did you get more psychic?
- Yes, oh god yes. Little things, all the time.
It got to the point where you just didn't want to deal with it
anymore. Like answering someone way before they ask you ... it
scares people. When this happens thirty times or more, they realize
that it's not just a coincidence.
- Do you think that your experience is typical of
what others might experience?
- No, I don't think my experience is typical of
what anyone else experienced who did any meaningful amount of it.
I'll tell you right now, I'm the only one who did what I did. All
of these sages that came out of the woodwork: after about 15 or 20
days, couldn't even make their fast. They started cutting corners
and then said: 'Well it didn't happen to me'.
- Had you had previous kundalini experiences?
- Yes, I had on several occasions in my life.
- Were you on the verge of having these
experiences on your own volition?
- Well, its like this: I knew what to expect.
When it started to occur, it didn't frighten me. It's like waking
up in an Astral dream, the first few times you frighten yourself
into waking. After that you finally say 'Wait a minute, don't do a
thing, I think we have finally hit the trigger', and then you float
out. That's something I had worked at for years, and years, and
years. I got so far into it, I finally quit doing it. It got to
where I could do it any time I wanted to within five minutes or so.
- Out of body experiences?
- Yeah, I could put myself right there.
- Well you've been on a spiritual path since
what? Age eight?
- My whole life has been tied to it. Being
down-to-earth, incredibly well-grounded, reasonable, logical and not
giving up common sense is very important in this work. We're going
to have to call it a prerequisite.
- What do you think the mechanism is at play
here? Is this a chemical reaction?
- Well everything in your body, we could sooner
or later get around to saying, is chemical but the junctions in your
nervous system are all made up of these materials. You've probably
seen the paper Superconductive Tunneling and Biological
Systems. When you start overloading everything with this
material, your real potential begins to be accessed. Now that's one
thing that happens. The real trick to it deals with the monatomic
gold in a perfectly charged way. We could go on forever on this ...
- We have a lot of ground to cover too. Has
anyone taken monatomic gold?
- Who? You?
- How long did you take it?
- Very little. Not for very long.
- Why did you stop?
- There's very little of it to go around.
- You would have taken more?
- Of course I would have. I'll tell you right
now. Monatomic gold can only be typified as The, not
a, The Precursor.
- So you'd take as much as you could get?
- It's not a matter of how much, it's a matter of
having it prepared properly. It takes very little when it's
- What do you think a full course of the gold for
- A full course would be one application.
- Like 500 mg?
- No, I doubt it's anywhere close to that. 500
mg, when you throw it out on a table, isn't very much. But we're
not talking volume here. Volume has nothing to do with it. It's
also what you bring to the table that will have a great deal to do
with the banquet you enjoy.
- What role do you play now in all of this?
- Well, my role is my own. It's not really
connected to anything. But, it is important to me, personally, to
put together enough coherent information to allow people a little
easier access to this body of knowledge than they have had
historically with alchemical information. I used to be so angry
about how the alchemical texts were written because so much of it is
misleading. Some of it is bad. Some of it's misinformation.
- On purpose.
- There was a real good reason for that, but now
it's time for that reason to be over. There's a lot of danger that
goes with this and the danger is not something that takes place with
occult practices. What I'm talking about is, for example: say you
were able to convert lead into gold. The monetary systems around
the world are built around this system and all the powers that be
are pretty happy about the arrangement. If you have a wild card
show up, it becomes dangerous for a lot of reasons.
- We are all aware of the philosophical claims
made for these materials: do you think the claims can be borne out?
- Will humans truly effect biolocation?
- You just think about where you want to go and
- And you just take along your physical body?
- Absolutely. Absolutely.
- It's not a purified physical body? Sort of a
less dense version of what we have?
- Listen, it is physical. It is so physical you
can eat, have sex, bleed.
- Is this the voice of experience?
- No. But I'm telling you it's absolutely
physical. It's not allegorical. It's not symbolic. Those are
nothing more than Tinkerbell and Disney.
- Could we beam our selves to an inhospitable
environment and die?
- No you can't.
- It's physical.
- It's physical here where it's supposed to be
- So you become what ever is appropriate for the
place you beam to?
- Yeah, of course. You'd hate to show up at the
ball in your painting clothes. But from the point of logic you are
using right now, you can only apply that logic to how that might be.
When it occurs, you've already moved yourself to that place. The
change takes place at the same time.
- But you still have memories of this third
dimensional reality and your previous life. You are still 'you'?
- It's not just a memory. Which do you think
would be the most amazing miracle: if I brought someone back to
life, or changed water to wine? The truth is: they're both the
same. If you can do one, the other's just as possible.
- It's just moving atoms around.
- It's even simpler than that. You're turning,
literally turning, ninety degrees. There's another reality right
around the corner. And when I say right, I mean ninety degrees.
It's physically right around the corner.
- Isn't it just a change of perspective or
- No, there's a whole new deal there that is
beautiful and so totally other that it's nearly impossible to
imagine from here. But you can go both ways. Once you are capable
of one, you can do the other. Like I said, water into wine is no
different that turning lead into gold.
- Or turning the sky green.
- That's right, once you learn to cheat this way
you can cheat any way you want.
- How about the technological claims? Like the
fuel cell application?
- Oh yeah, that's totally wrapped up. That's
fact, fact, fact.
- How about the medical claims?
- Absolutely. All the technological and
biological possibilities are incredibly real possibilities.
- Do you see any other uses that haven't been
- Thousands of them. Anything that concerns
itself with catalytics ...
- Are we finally going to get off the grid? Will
we be free?
- Well we may be, and there will be many, many,
many hundreds and thousands that will. But if you're talking about
the five billion or six billion: most of those are going to perish.
But that's OK, it took this many to get us where we are now.
- So we're talking the 144,000?
- Well, don't hold me to a figure like that.
There's just a logistical problem that goes along with this. You
can't just hand it out in a crowd, there's a lot more that goes into
this. But let me tell you, the capabilities of discernment that go
along with what I'm talking about are great.
- So when you're talking about this stuff
do you mean Rhodium, Iridium, Gold? Do you mean all of it?
- You only mean gold.
- Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.
- So what about the rest of the stuff? Is it
only gold that will do the philosophical ...
- No, the other will do a lot of things but I'm
talking about something beyond most people's ability to even
- You said before that you thought many people
might die from the ingestion of these materials.
- The emotional shock of it would be enough to
kill most people. Look, even if you took someone 3/4 brain-dead and
started pumping it down them, in a certain amount of time you would
probably start to effect them on an emotional level.
- Do they need to believe it's going to
- No, this doesn't require any belief. These are
physical materials, they're not allegorical.
- What can you do to prepare yourself in order
not to die or suffer any adverse effects?
- You cannot sit in a cloistered room and prepare
yourself for any type of disturbance. Your ability to deal with
being disturbed, having your boat rocked, putting up with the storm,
being tough, being gentle, being loving, being harsh, being all of
those things ...
- Being real?
- Yes, those are the things that prepare you for
this. Thinking everything is love, beautiful and New Age horse
shit, isn't going to do it. You're going to get slam-dunked.
- What types of adverse effects do you
- It could be as simple as someone with cancer,
who doesn't believe that something so weird could possibly have an
effect on them, taking it at the request of a loved one and finding
themselves miraculously cured. Now that could be a huge emotional
shock to someone. If you really think about it for a minute,
people's belief systems act as t h e best prisons
in the world.
- I was speaking more in terms of physiology.
- No, no I don't think so. Your whole body
depends on this just to be able to act like you're alive.
- Do you think everyone should ingest monatomics?
Who should or should not and why?
- Everyone does ingest monatomics. They're
present in common everyday foods. I don't think life would go on at
all without them.
- In concentrated forms.
- In concentrated forms, I don't think it's for
everyone. I don't think many people, in terms of percentages of the
population are going to be compelled to deal with this in the way
someone who has spent years working on a spiritual path would be.
- So, only people who are working on a path ...
- Well, people who have been drawn to it from
some very deep part of their soul.
- With the many other materials purported to be
monatomic on the market today and the prospect of even more in the
future, how will we be able to tell what is real and what is not?
- 99.9% of all materials out there are total
bullshit. Most people are being sold a bunch of hype. There are
some materials out there with monatomics in them, but generally you
can get just as much from a couple of carrots. You know it makes me
feel very bad that this is being capitalized on by such unscrupulous
- So how can we tell what is real?
- There are people selling materials that have
mercury and lead in them. They know it, and they're not including
it in the analysis they are putting forth. Through the analyses
we've done, I can assure you that any White Gold products
(and there are many out there), contain no monatomic gold. Some are
even contaminated with lead, a fact they choose not to include in
their public analysis. Now, is that spiritual?
- Yeah, this brings out the best and the worst in
people. So there's no way for people to tell if the material is
safe, or real, or what?
- The only way to tell if a material is monatomic
is through testing. If they are willing to pay for it. It can be
done, but it's going to cost $3500 to $4000 to do a certified
analysis. There's only one lab that I know of that can do it.
- Can't you put it in aqua regia and if it
doesn't dissolve ... ?
- Yes, that would be a quick and dirty test. But
all you would know is that it's monatomic. You wouldn't know what
it was: Osmium, Ruthenium ... etc. But you could also have
something left there that's not monatomic, especially if the source
wasn't from a pure metal standard.
- For what purpose, in your opinion, should the
monatomic gold be used?
- Most people who are going to take it on purpose
are doing so for the sake of expanded consciousness. The gold has
unique physical properties. There are technological applications
but those have never been applied. This is the edge of the razor
here, can you feel it?
- So what would you do with a pile of monatomic
- Well, quite often those elements are very
desirable in electronics.
- And Palladium?
- Well, those could be applied to a lot of
- Any type of surface-wear applications.
Plating. Where very durable corrosive resistance necessities are
present. Any catalytic application. The same is true for Rhodium.
Of course the biological applications for those two are the best
known at this point.
- You said previously: 'You don't have to be a
chemist to make this stuff', what did you mean by that?
- Any housewife in Dallas could make this
material right now in her own kitchen, if she did her homework.
- But it still involves chemicals ... correct?
- Yes, it does. Lots of study, lots of time,
lots of diligent observation.
- Lots of holding your mouth right, saying the
right things over it, putting your hands on it?
- No, this is a physical thing. The observation
is important. There's a lot of things that can happen. You have to
build an affinity for it.
- Does it take twenty years?
- No, you could do it in a few years probably.
But it's one of those things that if you screw-up part of the way
through it, you have to go back and start over. You can't imagine
how disheartening that is. It really is an exercise in patience,
perseverance and observation. My position on this is if someone is
jazzed about it, they should bring it into their life. What they
bring is a rich tradition that is full of guidance that will come to
them when their heart is in the right place.
- Some people have children, bills to pay, and
Oprah to watch. They don't have time to do it.
- And that's a choice for them. This isn't
something on the level where people just casually say they have an
extra $100,000 or $500,000 ... there's no amount of money that can
be put on what we're talking about.
- There are a lot of people who think you could.
- Those are the same people who should study the
Mayan cargo system which still exists today. That is: you don't
send money to put on the parade when it's your turn to carry the
flag. You carry the flag because that's the only thing that counts
for carrying the flag. When people think for a second that they can
spend $500 and get a seat next to the Buddha they're wrong.
- What do you think the ramifications of the
distribution, and subsequent ingestion, of monatomics will be on:
human evolution, society, technology, finance, consciousness, the
planet, the known/unknown universe?
- Everything we know will be changed ... on all
- Could you be more explicit? What do you think
will happen to society?
- When people start taking it and the materials
start being applied, not just in terms of oral ingestion, the world
will never be the same again.
- What is your vision of that?
- Everything from biology to power production,
political structures (decentralization of government), everything
has the potential to be radically changed. So many of the things I
just mentioned are based on structures and paradigms which are
centered around control of resources ...
- And perceptions.
- And perceptions, and all of those can very
easily be displaced by the applications of these materials.
- What do you think will be the effects on the
known and unknown universe?
- They're going to trade places. The expansion
will be so great that 'expansion' is what is.
- The process is what it's all about.
- Yeah, it's not a matter of getting to a point
where we've made this achievement ... we've become aware because of
the speed of this achievement that it's an expansive, never-ending
- Some of us, who are 'present,' are aware of
- Some are. It's balance through movement. Like
movement you have in the European Tarot deck's two of discs. It's
like the movement of a bicycle, the movement forward is what allows
for the balance. The stability is there through the movement.
Where most people cling to an idea of stability with no movement.
- Many people I come into contact with, think of
it as a destination.
- There is a lot of belief that this is 'the
- Do you see only a few people taking it at
- Only a few.
- Do you foresee a time when it will be available
in vending machines?
- No, I don't. If you study how our planet was
peopled, creating the beings we are now, you'll find that political
structures have always made this an elitist phenomenon.
- What kind of time frame are we looking at?
- This is total conjecture on my part, but ... a
lot of this will remain in research for the next five years or so.
After that, there may be efforts for it to trickle out in some way.
There are other people, I personally know, who are so far down the
road in applications and technologies (not necessarily in terms of
production capabilities) ... but you throw money at that one and the
problem goes away very quickly. There are many people working on
this same project, as there have been in the past. There are
several ways of making this material.
- You've said that there are different forms of
monatomic gold? Do you mean different spin states?
- It's not a matter of a higher spin state. It's
a matter of once it is in the high-spin state, it being properly
charged. That involves very subtle operations. Very subtle. We're
talking beauty again, that's how subtle.
- Beauty in the true sense of the word.
- There is a difference in these
materials. They are all individual, unique materials. They have
their own qualities. That's why they have different names. To lump
them all together under one heading as monatomic gold is just not
accurate. These are different materials.
- You are making a distinction between isolated
monatomics and more highly charged monatomics?
- Yes, yes I am. This aspect has not been
addressed as far as I know.
- So what is the correct term to use in referring
to these higher-charged materials?
- I call it the Philosopher's Stone. You
could call it the Manna. There's a lot of things you could
- But there's as much difference as night and day
... ingesting this over the other.
- That's an understatement.
- Are you aware of other materials which carry
the same attributes and implications?
- No, this is it ... the real thing ... the only
- This meaning higher-charged monatomics?
- You have to understand: the isolated materials
are The Precursors. They were very difficult precursors to
ever come up with. Very difficult. But it's the battery that you
have to charge. It has to be charged to be able to turn over the
governors that are present in our genetic code. Those were
- What practical advice do you have for those of
us who know about these materials, and the potential they hold, but
are living outside of ground-zero?
- Do your own homework. Don't let anyone impose
their truth on you. Let them present the various
facts and make your own decision. Keep searching for answers ...
your own answers. That seems a little patronizing in general, but
realize that it takes work ... physical work. This is not something
you read into existence. You read enough to know that you have to
do something physical. If all you do is read the book In Pursuit
of Gold there's enough information there (if you apply yourself)
to go very, very far. For someone who's doing nothing, that is a
huge step forward.
- Do you have any specific advice for members of
the Science of the Spirit Foundation (SOSF)?
- This material is real, but if someone expects
to eat it and suddenly fly through the chimney: they're in for a
real surprise. But the material, in terms of medical performance,
is real. It will perform as expected and then some.
- And the technological part? Some people are
expecting to make some money on their investment.
- They very well may. But there are so many
other uses for this material ...
- If you had it all to do over again, what would
you do differently?
- Absolutely nothing.
- No regrets on any of it?
- None at all.
To Top of Document
HTML validation by:
spell-checked, minor editing, reset in HTML 4.0 in July 2000
Strength In Wisdom added August 17 2000