Kirlian photography

Kirlian found that when he photographed living materials in a high frequency oscillating EM field, he saw in the films colored lights apparently surrounding, and emanating, from the object rays from finger tips, auras around leaves. Kirlian auras are only visible in the film. They are not apparent when one looks directly at the object in the field. So we are not dealing with visible light. We are dealing with an invisible energy still possibly an EM radiation, e.g. UV. Most scientists feel that Kirlian photography is artifactual, but the artifact is not adequately explained. The Professor thought it was probably a moisture artifact. That Kirlian photography records patterns of moisture that surround objects. Well, it would be interesting to know why there are rays of moisture coming off peoples fingers tips. But its more likely that we are looking at EM fields. After all, we can expect those be there.

When you put an EM field-generating/interfacing crystal [such as bone, collagen, or cellulose, the stuff that animals and plants are made of in a high frequency oscillating EM field you might expect to see a lucent reaction, but not necessarily in our narrow spectrum of visible light. But note, there is a difference between dead and living materials in the Kirlian field: wood, paper, non-living substances dont generate the same fields, so well have to distinguish living crystals , there is a difference between dead and living processes. In the living crystal processes are happening to their EM field and when we put a living system in a high frequency oscillating EM field, I dont think that lucent phenomenon should surprise us. The world no doubt behaves, as it should. There is neither miracle nor artifact here.

Kirlian photography and homoeopathy

Igor Jerman, M.D., Sc.D., Full Professor of Theoretical Biology, Slovenia shares his experience with homoeopathic dilutions of potassium iodide in water:

Although more than 200 years have elapsed since the beginning of homoeopathy, the

so-called (long-term) memory of water is still a highly disputable and controversial theme in scientific circles. On the basis of the known and accepted physical laws and properties of water, a vast majority of scientific community does not allow even a remote possibility that water might remember a substance once diluted in it. The reason for this is that the Brownian motion of water molecules and clusters would annihilate any memory structures in terms of Pico seconds. However, in spite of this presumably physical impossibility many healing practitioners as well as many scientists claim on empirical grounds that water can prove its memorizing capacities. In physical researches the most striking results indicating water memory were obtained from NMR, UV and X-rays spectroscopy of ultra-highly diluted water (ultra high dilution means a dilution of a substance in which there is high probability that not even one molecule is left; it is practically Pure water), less significant results were gained from Roman spectroscopy. Many challenging results were obtained in physiological researches on various organisms such as wheat, tadpoles, chicken embryos, mice, humans, cell cultures etc. there were also some extensive double-blind medical examinations of homoeopathic treatment that showed statistically significant differences between placebo and homoeopathic water effects.

A series of experiments was performed, in which potassium iodide (KI) solutions of different concentrations (prepared in twice distilled water; water was prepared in the laboratory for Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Technology, University of Ljubljana) were compared with pure twice-distilled water (control, named K0). KI solution was used because it gave most significant results in our research of the influence of ionic composition of water on the corona discharge around water drops. Kirlian

PH of twice distilled water was around 6 (presumably because of CO2) and any solid precipitates from glass were present only in traces. However, KI solutions were prepared with the same water as the control, so any trace impurities were present in both compared

waters.

Our results therefore reveal two different effects: that of dilution and that of succession (the vigorous shaking of the solution during the potentisation process); they are both combined in homoeopathic solutions. The effect of diluted substances, generally directed in opposite to that of normally effective solutions (for instance poisons), is already known as the hormesis effect (according to Neafsey, hormesis is a term which has been applied to a variety of stimulatory responses to low doses of otherwise toxic substances which improve health and enhance longevity). Our results consistently prove that strongly diluted substances have an effect opposite to that of the mother solution and usually to that of the weak solution (10-3M) as well. This indicates a possibility that the hormesis effect is not based only on some general physiological properties of organisms but on the as yet unknown physical properties of the solutions themselves. But there is also a certain difference between the hormesis effect and our investigations, since the former usually disappears at higher dilutions (around 10-5M), while Kirlian electro photography still reveals some significant effects even at dilutions as high as 10-24M.

In conclusion, our results demonstrate repeatable and statistically significant effects of highly diluted standard and homoeopathic dilutions of KI on corona discharge Kirlian electrography. This, together with countless results obtained by other research groups, related to biological effects of homoeopathic dilutions, indicates that there is some physical basis enabling organisms to utilize information imprinted into water.

What statistics have to say about homoeopathic results?

Duplicated remedies show no change in freezing patterns or in Kirlian photography. Duplicated remedies are probably a placebo response at best. To test this supposition, a double blind experiment was conducted.

Procedure:

35 patients were chosen from a naturopathy doctors practice. All patients were using homoeopathy on a regular basis and knew what results to expect. Some patients used a Candida nosode to control bloating or other body symptoms; others used Belladonna or Lachesis for symptoms. All were familiar with their remedys effect. Each patient was given either a regular homoeopathic or a duplicated remedy. Each patient was also given either a placebo sugar pill, or a pill with 5mg. Narcan (Naloxone). Naloxone is used to block endorphin response and has been found to block the placebo effect in placebo responsive patients. Patient profiles were chosen to exclude those symptoms of pain as Naloxone can increase pain perception. The test was double blind with neither patient or practioner knowing which formula was given. Patients were given questionnaires to evaluate the efficacy of the remedy. Results of the effectiveness are shown in the accompanying diagram.

Results:

Tests indicated that the duplicated remedy performed significantly lower than the real remedy. The placebo blocking Narcan pill significantly lowered efficacy. Perhaps the information transfer of mode number four (multi-dimensional transfer) could account for the transfer of duplicators; the Narcan with its endorphin blocking action might also block other dimensional information transfer. Even though the study shows a markedly decreased efficacy with the duplicated remedy, radionic remedies have no pharmacology, uantic state or polymorphic state; thus, they are not homoeopathics yet homoeopathy is continually

blamed for radionic remedies that fail.

Here again, quality is not of paramount importance to all homoeopathic practitioners. Some prefer the greater monetary reward duplicators or imprinters provide. This lack of focus on quality and effectiveness compromises the homoeopathic industry. Only through quality and dedication to developing and delivering the finest homoeopathics can we truly succeed.