Gary's best stuff

Date: Sun, 05 May 1996 18:31:21 -0600

Subject: Dave Hudson Newsletter

Hi Barry,

Thanks for your message to White Gold Forum on Dave's past appearances. I have joined the Science of the Spirit Foundation, but have not received a newsletter or any other form of acknowledgment from them so far (other than my canceled check). :-(

Can you tell me if there are monthly newsletters? Also, do you have a schedule of Dave's future appearances?

Thanks

Gary

Subj: Introduction

From: Gary

Recently, Patrick Bailey wrote the following:

(snip)

>What we really need soon is the series of exercises and lesson plans that
>those people chosen will need to follow - when the WPG does become
>available. So far, no school for that exists to my knowledge.
>
>Let me know if you have any further information in these areas.

This is my first post to the WG forum. I am a SWM in mid 40s, and work as an engineer with a very big US company. I have a membership in Dave's Science of the Spirit Foundation.

I would like to thank Binga for the conscientious job he is doing in moderating and supporting this forum.

I have some personal experience that relates to Patrick's comment.

I intentionally awakened kundalini several years ago (starting in 1989) by a prolonged and very concentrated pranayama (controlled breathing) practice, and underwent many intense physical, emotional, and spiritual experiences, as the awakening unfolded and progressed.

My kundalini experience (still progressing) is not going to be exactly duplicated by anyone else. But despite individual differences, there are many similarities for most awakenings. If anyone has any specific questions, I can give you an idea of what to expect, based on my own experience, if/when you decide to go through it. Regardless of whether you awaken kundalini by pranayama, as I did, or do it by taking the material, you should be aware -foremost- that it (ultimately) leads to the irreparable loss and permanent destruction of the Ego, and very few people understand just what all ego-death implies, until you first confront it in an awakening experience.

Gary

Subj: Kundalini Experience

From: Gary

J.McInnis wrote:

>

(snip)

>Does the loss of ego prevent your being effective as an engineer?
>It seems likely that you could not function as a manager without
>some ego.

--------------------------------------------

Dear J. McInnis,

At the present time, I have not gone through ego death, but have come close enough to that point to know what it is, and that it is an unavoidable part of the process. My ego has been crippled, but is still basically functional. I found the partial loss, and prospect of total loss, of my ego to be very discomfiting. The "ego" (in the sense I am using it) controls (I have discovered) my will, memory, passions, desires, goals, aspirations, hopes, motivation, functions that have to do with planning, future projections, - anything that is in some way a "want" and/or is not related to the Here-Now-Present.

The semi-disconnection of memory is the worst thing about it, for me as an engineer. It is a growing forgetfulness or absent mindedness, a recall problem, rather than forgetting. The info is still in there. It is not very severe so far, but I can see long term memory would be affected worse with more progress. I have not identified just what is going on with memory, to have figured out just how to handle it, and that is the main problem. My mind doesn't work in past and future modes like it used to. It is becoming more present-tense oriented, and that affects memory access (as well as perceptions of the future). It is kind of hard to explain.

I have compensated somewhat by using tons of post-it notes and making lists of things to remember. I usually try to write things down immediately and not rely on casual recall. It has not affected my organizational ability, and only affected my analytical skills to the extent that memory of details are concerned. It is not as bad as it probably sounds. Just inconvenient.

Gary

Subj: Kundalini Experience

From: Gary

Mod. Note: The following post contains information which, at first glance, may appear to be *opinion* in nature. Further reading will reveal that Gary is speaking from direct experience. As such, his submission, in addition to being first-person anecdotal, is in fact *expert* in nature and falls within the admissibility guidelines of the WhiteGold FAQ.

I. Simek wrote:

(snip)
>It seems that WPG has the potential to "awaken kundalini" or fast track the
>process normally attained by years of disciplined meditation/exercise.
>Perhaps the focal point is, as Gary puts it, "permanent destruction of the
>Ego". Gary could you expand on the "ego-death" aspect of your note. Is it
>possible to attain this in a rapid manner? Is it safe to do it that fast?
>What are the ramifications? What are the dangers?

----------------------------------------------------

Dear Iron,

Please refer to my responses to J. McInnis and Byrun Fox for explanation of the ego death, as far as I can relate from experience.

In some of Dave's presentations, he describes the progress of the unnamed fellow who has been taking the WPG material in large amounts. In one of these, Dave relates that the man became so sensitive that he retreated to a remote spot in New Mexico to be alone.

During awakening, ones' collection of personal karma has to be burned away, at one point or another. Doing that involves suffering by the individual. The karma is stored in the body tissues somehow, and when kundalini goes through and purges out all the nadis, this karma is released either as a side effect, or direct action (I can't tell which) and it causes the suffering when released. Some people may have "Happy" karma in there that causes them Joy, or the opposite of suffering. As far as I could tell, 99% of mine was soot-black. On a small number of occasions (far too few) I had experiences of spontaneous joy. But mostly it ranges from very stressful, wired, and unpleasant, to dark and despondent. Along with everything else I got a replay of every disease symptom and injury pain I've ever had or was scheduled to have.

In general, the faster the awakening proceeds, the more intense the suffering, since the same amount of karma has to be dealt with over a shorter time. And the stress on the organism would be proportionately greater. Should the suffering become too intense, the person could easily become suicidal. If a person took too large a dose, perhaps you can see that the effect would begin to approximate an internal explosion of energy and karma, and could exceed what the human body and spirit can withstand and still remain connected together.

But I don't want to over state the situation either: it was bad, but it wasn't *that* bad. It wasn't undoable; I would say even a frail person could do it with care and prudence. I cannot imagine a better method than WPG to accomplish this, to bring the opportunity for awakening to the people at large.

There are also some built-in safety checks at work: (1) Kundalini is a *supremely intelligent force*; she knows *exactly* what she is doing. You will be amazed at how hard it works for you and for your benefit when you see it in action fighting disease, or healing an injury. The ultimate physician to have on your side during an awakening. (2) Having control of the dosage (or pranayama intensity in my case) allows you to back off when things get too tough. You can go at your own rate. (3) The higher self watches the whole thing like a hawk. Success is not guaranteed, but you should not be discouraged just because it is not roses all the way either. Just know what you're getting into before you start. Its a one-way ride.

The Dark Night of the Soul that Dave's friend is, or was, going through is how it is while this is going on. Ego death is the culmination of it. Lets all hope that he came through it, and is ok now. My hat is off to him. I would have *loved* to have been alone in the desert.

Gary

Subj: Isis Efficacy

From: Gary

Bruce Bartlett wrote:

(snip)

>In the interim, I'm looking into substitutes such as Isis White
>Powder Gold, Etherium Gold, Vitali-Tea and Chamae Life Vine Tea.
>I understand that these products are not equivalent to Hudson's.
>For example, Hudson said in his Vancouver video that he measured
>Isis WPG and found no rhodium or iridium. If you have used any
>of these products, please tell us about your experiences.

---------------------------------------------------

I was not aware of Dave's analysis that Bruce mentions, that Isis WPG does not contain rhodium or iridium, but this agrees with my own experience.

The following summarizes my experiments with Isis WPG. I ordered 2 oz of Isis White Powder Gold, from Online Health, and experimented taking it as follows:

(1) Once per day for 4 days, I drank 3/4 pint of water with a bit over one gram of Isis material stirred up and suspended in the water, so I was taking the soluble as well as insoluble Isis material along with the water.

(2) Next I put 1/4 oz of Isis powder in 2 qt. of water, stirring, letting the non-soluble material settle, and then using this for my regular drinking water. The Isis material completely covered the bottom as sediment. The finest part stayed in suspension giving the water a dingy look. I drank two pitchers of this (4 qt. total) over 1 week.

I judged the results by observing kundalini flow for change. This was easy to do by noticing any change in tinitus level (the internal ringing that has persisted since awakening kundalini), and also by noting the perceived pressure in the head from kundalini flow.

There was from little, to no detectable change in kundalini activity on any level, during or following taking the Isis powder.

For comparison, ordinarily tinitus increases noticeably after eating, even for small amounts of food, such as a slice of bread. The ringing intensity and pressure sensations track the digestive progress, and are highest when absorption is peaking; it is difficult *not* to notice changes in it, or to ignore it. Larger amounts of food typically increase ringing/flow only up to a certain point, apparently limited by the maximum normal rate of absorption. There are a number of variabilities.

Small brief changes occur from taking commercial vitamin supplements, but I haven't discovered whether this is partly due to the vitamins & minerals, or just caused by the small amount of starch filler, sugar coating, etc. I suspect the latter.

Based on these experiments, I have concluded that ingesting Isis material has no significant affect on kundalini activity, and larger doses are unlikely to improve things, due to its apparent inertness in this regard.

So far I haven't bought or tried any of the other products said to contain monatomics. I haven't had much success identifying effects that could be attributable to monatomics in ordinary foodstuffs using this approach, since the effect of any monatomics in them is difficult to separate or distinguish from the ordinary food energy absorption.

Gary

Subj: Tinnitus, an awakening side effect.

From: gary

Barry Carter wrote:

>You describe the kundalini sound as originating inside your head.
>The gentleman Hudson talks about describes the sound as
>originating at a point above his head:
>
>He said, "Dave, the sound seems to originate about 8 inches above
>my head, it comes down into my brain, it's like a hat band around
>my head, and it just roars here in my head. I can feel the
>vibration all through my body".
>
>Do you have any thoughts about why there is a difference?

-----------------------------------------------------------

Dear Barry,

I remember the description you are quoting, and noticed this point of dissimilarity too. I'm glad you pointed it out.

I can't offer a conclusive answer or explanation for you. The best answer will come when those individuals present analyses of their own experiences.

However, for the present, I will suggest some ideas that come to mind, as possibilities. Discussion on these lines is useful; it is difficult to explain one aspect of kundalini without touching on others, and this helps to promote a wider understanding of the subject. I *do* know precisely what he means by "like a hat band" around his head; this is a tight, gripping sensation, due to energy congestion around the edge of the sahasrara, or crown chakra, and is very common. It is often strongest along the very top of the jaw muscles, above the ears. The vibrations mentioned are also common to nearly all kundalini awakenings.

The experiences involved in Awakening are highly varied. It is hard to overstate this. As you are exposed to more and more accounts of awakening experiences, you will find that there are often as many or more differences as there are similarities. The point of origin for the Nada is a fine example.

Please allow me to digress from your question for a moment, to point out some of the fundamental differences in experiences which lie beneath these variations. When a broader understanding is gained, there is less tendency to get tangled up in the bewildering array of symptoms and effects, and making sense of things becomes easier.

In my observations, I have noticed that a significant number of awakenings may be roughly classed into two groups. The distinguishing factor between the two groups is in the method used to effect the awakening, which seems to have a modest statistical influence on the progress and development of events and experiences throughout the awakening process. I have not actually been compiling statistics on these, but there does seem to be a slight recognizable trend emerging. On the other hand however, I am not aware of any Masters who have made this specific generalization, and that may indicate that doing so is not particularly useful. But I shall use it here for illustration.

In one group, spontaneous awakenings and shaktipat awakenings seem to share or outline a trend toward similarity in the character, tone, and sequence of awakening experiences. [Shaktipat, refers to an impulse of energy, transferred to an individual by someone with kundalini already actively functioning; if the recipient is sufficiently close to the point of a natural or spontaneous awakening, shaktipat can then serve to instigate a self-sustaining awakening. Otherwise the effects of shaktipat fade away, as imparted energy dissipates.]

The other group includes awakenings effected through means such as directed meditation, pranayama, and other yogic practices. Awakening kundalini by these methods is comparatively rare, in relation to other types of awakening, particularly in the West.

Classifying awakenings like this can only be done in very general terms; there are lots of exceptions where this scheme does not hold. The experiences Dave has related of a few individuals taking monatomics appear to fall in with the first group; my awakening method, pranayama, is in the latter group.

In general, satisfying demands of the karmic burden seems to be delayed to later stages of the awakening, for the first group. In some cases I am aware of, very little karma had to be dealt with until after the first stage of enlightenment had been achieved, by which I mean establishing a conscious link with the higher self. Because the individual then acquires an entirely different point of view, a detached-observer perspective, as well as conscious access to the higher self, the individual is better able to weather the negative aspects of karma dissipation.

Awakenings in the second group may be generally noted to more typically involve settling up the balance sheets of karma in the early stages of the experience. There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches. The first group is without doubt the most suited for any large scale movement towards awakening, such as is now taking place with monatomics. If there is any legitimacy to the classification system I have described, the spiritual impetus behind the monatomic movement is perhaps its strongest and best argument in evidence.

Returning to the issue of the supra-cranial vs. intra-cranial origins of Nada, it appears that the individual Dave is describing may be in the first "group", based on his experience descriptions. The nature of the Nada he is experiencing, may be a characteristic of this "class" of awakenings.

One form of the Nada which is frequently described by individuals undergoing an awakening is a humming sound, which can be approximated by imagining the sound heard by listening to a beehive; the sound made by a large number of bees using their wings to circulate air through the hive. It is sometimes also compared to the hum of big power transformer, but this is not as close. It is a pleasant, warm, comfortable-feeling sound. This Nada is more often associated with the first "group" of awakenings. We might speculate that this is representative of what Dave's friend hears.

I experienced such humming, only as an occasional sound during awakening. Others sounds included beautiful mystical sounds like tinkling glass wind chimes; short, immensely loud discordant blasts, like the powerful, loud BUZZZ you get when a microphone jack is only part-way plugged into a PA system; and on a few occasions, something resembling the sound of monks chanting, and lonely sounds of wind wailing over a desolate landscape. One of the most common ones was clicking, which sounded exactly like the sound of crickets clicking. There were others that are more difficult to characterize. All these sounds tended to be brief, particularly the more pleasant ones. It is not in keeping with the intent of paying off ones karmic debt in a direct fashion to expect to have much pleasantness bestowed upon one.

On those occasions when I experienced humming, a lot of other things were going on, and I did not make any careful observations on how the sound was being produced, where it was coming from, and so on. During those, and similar auditory experience events, I was focused on other things, and not paying particular attention on determining the apparent location of the sounds. I do not have a very clear recollection today, except that some of the sounds were "outside" of my head, or externalized, though still in immediate vicinity. Since I am still in an elementary stage of progress, perhaps I will be able to refine my observations further at a later time.

Gary

Subj: Tinnitus, an awakening side effect.

From: gary

Ed Pearson wrote:

>The following is from page 702, "Alternative Medicine: The Definitive Guide"
>compiled by The Burton Goldberg Group published by Future Medicine Publishing
>Inc., Puyallup, Washington, 1994:
>
>"Tinnitus is characterized by a continuous ringing or hissing in the ear,
>sometimes accompanied by pain. Causes can include excess ear wax, a blocked
>or impaired Eustachian tube, and dysfunction of the auditory nerve. Dr.
>Kotsanis notes that the onset of tinnitus may also be linked to excessive
>drug use, aspirin, sustained exposure to loud noise, electrical stimulation,
>smoking, trauma, Meniere's disease, and temporomandibular joint syndrome
>(TMJ). Tinnitus in the elderly is often due to decreased circulation in and
>around the ear.

----------------------------------------------------------

Dear Ed,

Thank you; I appreciate the medical reference material on tinnitus. However, the tinnitus I am experiencing is not physiological in origin, in the ordinary sense, and hence not treatable.

Ringing in the ears (tinnitus) was one of the earliest and most persistent side effects of my awakening of kundalini. It began within a few days after commencing intense pranayama, and has continued uninterrupted to the present time.

At one point I used a precision synthetic frequency generator to produce a comparison tone, to measure the frequency it was ringing at. As I recall it was about 12.5 kHz, which was well below my ear's frequency cutoff for external sounds. It was easy to match with the precision oscillator to within a few Hertz. I don't know if the frequency is the same for all people that hear it following an awakening. It sounds quite like the frequency-matched oscillator tone, so I presume it is a pure sine wave, with little or no harmonic content.

For comparison purposes, at the very beginning it was easily louder than the sound of my electric shaver when shaving next to my ears, quite a high dB level. However, since it is an internal sound, it does not affect my external hearing. It is (obvious to me) caused by, or a result of, kundalini's flow into the head, and seems to me to originate as an excited-cavity oscillation as it enters the brahmarandra, similar to an acoustic whistle or klystron cavity. Its intensity (along with pressure sensations in the head) varies, depending on kundalini flow activity at any particular moment.

In my case, kundalini typically prefers to flow up the sushumna, or spinal cord, until it reaches a level slightly below the point where the heart chakra stem connects. It then branches to the left, passing into the saraswati nadi, whence it continues up into the head, passing closely behind my left ear. The saraswati normally carries thought currents, and because I am constantly involved in mental work, this particular path was already quite developed at the time of the awakening, and has been preferentially adopted by kundalini.

After a months of living with this ringing, I found myself longing for silence again. The sound (Nada) is always there, and the only respite within my experience to date is when the physical and nonphysical bodies separate, such as in sleep. This never ending ringing went from being something I enjoyed at first, to become an irritation and source of mental stress. But as the years have gone by, it seldom bothers me much anymore; you just get used to it and become resigned to the fact that it will always be there. It then becomes more peripheral to your everyday awareness, so you usually don't notice it.

Kundalini awakenings, in their early stages, often involve a wide variety of unusual sounds, and this was so in my case. However, as the awakening progressed these have cease for the most part, excepting only for the endless song of the Nada...

Gary

Postulated Monatomic Mechanism for Kundalini Awakening

Subj: Updated Conclusion on ISIS WPG.

From: Gary

I recently received issues 1 through 7 of the Science of the Spirit newsletters.

Issue #3, Dec 20, 1995 contains information which pertains to my former negative appraisal of Isis WPG, following tests, in which I observed kundalini activity to determine if taking the Isis WPG had any effect. (There was no discernible effect).

In SoSF NL#3, Dave reports that 12 people were given 500 mg of Rh/Ir per day. Five of the 12 did not experience any of the expected effects, even though they were all anxious for the material to work.

Of these five persons, Dave states:

"Four of the five people were strict
vegetarians. They already were hearing
the high frequency sound in their head
prior to taking the powder. These four
people were already seeing the angels
in their meditations. Rather than
working better on these people, there
seemed to be no effect at this rate."

"I have concluded therefore, that these
people had already achieved the first
level naturally and therefore need
higher levels of material - say 2500
mg. per day. When I came to this
realization - that we needed more
material at a cheaper price - I quit
giving the material for philosophical
testing myself and sought doctors who
could monitor the patients' progress
if we are going to spend 2500 mg. to
5000 mg. per day."

This information requires me to revise my previous conclusion about Isis WPG. It clearly shows that individuals in whom kundalini is already active are unlikely to experience an effect at quantities of half a gram per day or less, of monatomics.

My conclusion is now that Isis WPG does not have any effect on *already* *awakened* kundalini activity, in the amounts I tested it for (1 gram/day total Isis WPG).

Based on Dave's statement, even if Isis WPG happens to be 50% (or more) monatomics by weight, it may still have been unlikely to have caused an effect, in my case.

Bruce Bartlett has referred to Dave having stated elsewhere that he tested Isis WPG and found it contained no monatomics. However, ISIS WPG is a natural unrefined earth material, and it is possible that there is some variation from batch to batch, or that there may be other materials in it, which also do not cause a perceptible effect on awakened kundalini, and that so accounts of positive results reported by other users should not be discounted.

Gary

From binga's list of questions for David Hudson.

The following is more of a suggestion which deals with something that is a genuine obstacle to the commercial success of the rhodium plant, and could thus affect all of those interested in seeing Dave's work succeed, should the problem go unsolved. The concept occurred to forum subscriber Gary the instant he heard you at the July 1995 Portland presentation.

You mentioned in your July 1995 Portland presentation that there is a nine month delay involved in reducing the monatomic state to metal:

"I haven't specifically told you this, but the way you make
it into metal is it must sit for 9 months."

The explanation for the 9 month delay (same Portland presentation):

"After you separate high purity elemental rhodium, you have
to go through some chemistries that require 9 months for
dipole-dipole resonance to be transferred into the nucleus,
so that the internal temperature can get up to the
crystallization energy, so that you can pyrolyze the organic
and get it down to the metallic state."

This 9 month wait is during the period after bonds have been formed between the monatomics and either carbon (or nitrogen, depending on the element), and is apparently a function of the energy transfer time constant for the process, in which the nuclear temperature of the monatomic is gradually raised, mediated by the carbon bonds, in order for it to drop out of the high spin state, and so form conventional carbides or nitrides.

Here are a couple of forwarded posts from Gary.

Dennis C. Lee wrote

>I am not an advanced practitioner of Master Mantak Chia's Healing Tao
>System. However, reading about these negative experiences about the
>Kundalini experience has compelled me to respond. Master Chia is completely
>against the Kundalini awakening. He even has a term for those who have
>negative experiences. He calls them Kundalini casualties.
>
>In Master Chia's system, the energy coming up the back meridian takes a
>U-turn at the crown, goes down the front meridian, and takes another U-turn
>at the perineum thus closing the loop. I don't believe that there are any
>negative effects associated with this system. For more info, the Healing Tao
>phone number is 717-348-4310.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Dennis,

Please allow me to respond to your comments. I have high regard for Master Mantak Chia. I bought and read his book "Taoist Secrets of Love - Cultivating Male Sexual Energy" in about 1985, shortly after it was published by Aurora Press. I studied it very carefully, and have verified some of its teachings by personal experience, including perfect semen retention, seminal sublimation and transmutation, internal orgasms, and extended breath retention leading to golden nectar release and conservation by means of the khechari mudra (tongue extended back into throat below the palate). The khekari mudra also leads to a closed circuit similar to the microcosmic orbit taught by Master Chia. These things, and others, were all experienced after awakening kundalini, and in some cases occurred spontaneously, with no effort on my part.

Master Chia's Healing Tao System is not focused on attaining an awakening. His methods are primarily intended for mastering and controlling sexual energy (which is also kundalini energy) for practical uses such as healing, and in other instances for greatly enhancing personal sexual satisfaction and experience; achieving an awakening leading to enlightenment as the final goal is not emphasized.

On page 118 of the above cited book, Master Chia provides the only reference and instruction he gives therein as to the means of opening and making clear the meridian channels (nadis) through which chi (kundalini) must flow, in order to perform the practices outlined in the remainder of the book:

"Progress to the higher levels of transforming sexual energy without first learning the microcosmic [orbit] is very difficult. Many people may already be "open" in these channels and simply need to be told where the energy flows in order to do it. Others get it by simply being very relaxed and living close to nature."

It should be clear from this quote that only a modest degree of opening of the channels is required to succeed in the practices Master Chia is teaching. This can be concluded a priori because of the small amount of attention it receives (only two sentences to casually mention it in the entire book), as well as the simplicity of the only means that is suggested as a way to accomplish it, and that many people are said to already have sufficiently open channels.

Dennis, it is not that I was unfortunate to not be one of those "many" Master Chia refers to, or that I also failed to achieve having open passages for chi to flow through by not living in a relaxed way and close to nature (though that would have been immensely preferable if I could have done it that way). Based on my experiences, what Master Chia has said in this quote is completely correct, because Master Chia is referring to the teachings of his own System, rather than to the conditions necessary to sustain a process capable of achieving an *awakening* by using chi (kundalini).

The amount of chi that is needed to flow through the channels for healing of oneself, healing of others, sexual enjoyment, athletic prowess, and similar ends, is not as great as that needed for an awakening leading to enlightenment. This is true for the lower echelons of Tantra, as well as for the Tao. The moderate flow of chi in Master Chia's Healing Tao System is intentionally meant to be kept smaller, so as not to excessively purge the practitioner's channels; too much chi flowing *would* result in karma release, and consequent suffering - the negative experiences I have described, that concern you. By keeping the chi flow relatively small, these difficulties are avoided, though it also places upper limits on the progress that is possible within the system. The same gentler-flow conditions are used in their Tantric equivalents. These practices are truly excellent as a means of individual development in preparation for an awakening at a future time.

Mantak Chia is very wise Master, and he did not develop the System he now teaches in order to limit the progress of his students. Master Chia has decided that the student must first be taught to win the small battle, before trying to win the big battle. When you have progressed sufficiently, Master Chia will guide you unfailingly towards enlightenment. But you should not conclude that because your present system does not cause you to experience any suffering, that it shall always remain so. The path becomes much steeper later in the journey.

Gary

Here's part 2.

Dennis C. Lee wrote:

> Is it impossible or inadvisable to do the Microcosmic Orbit with the
>energy channels at "wide open throttle" so to speak? (I believe that this
>will be the net result of meditating with pure WPG.) I seem to get the
>impression that this is the main difference between the Kundalini Awakening
>and the Microcosmic Orbit: the magnitude of the life force energy flow.

----------------------------------------------------

Dear Dennis,

A microcosmic orbit can be created with kundalini over a wide range of flows, but is perhaps most useful for conserving energy, when kundalini has not yet become very aroused or active, and is not yet flowing very much. (There may well be other important uses outside my present limited experience.)

When the nadis are fully purged clear, and are all open, and kundalini is also flowing actively, the potential remains to create a powerful, closed microcosmic orbit. However, if kundalini is flowing very strongly, doing so quickly results in a very large build up of energy in ones body, which may be undesirable, depending on the state of advancement of the individual.

My opinion is that such a condition (very strong closed internal flow) may be capable of being handled and tolerated by an individual who is sufficiently adept in managing kundalini energy, but could cause troubles for those, who like me, are still working towards that goal, and for whom provoking a powerful closed-loop flow is likely to be more problematic in result than beneficial.

It is like redirecting a large river into a circular loop. The system rather quickly becomes filled to overflowing, and the energy and pressure continue to build (rapidly) until something happens to open an outlet. If the person is not sufficiently advanced, such a large flow could be too disruptive to the system to sustain, and something would have to let go before long, perhaps prejudicially.

For large flows, I believe kundalini may be directed into an eddy-like loop, that is similar to the microcosmic orbit, so it still circulates, but also has an avenue for the excess flow to escape. However, I haven't done any experiments on this.

As kundalini flow becomes greater and greater, one finds that there is so much energy, that conserving it in a loop is no longer an important issue, and you become focused on becoming as transparent a conduit to the flow as possible. You (and kundalini) naturally keep trying to eliminate resistance to the flow in your system, as this is "uncomfortable". But as soon as a particular restriction is cleared, the flow increases proportionately, and so highlighting other places, which have now become the places of greatest remaining obstructions. The process of reducing restriction and increasing flow thus goes on and on, seemingly indefinitely. As the flow increases, more and more energy emanates from you, into your surroundings, yet you remain charged to the max, like a section of a big pipe, through which a column of water is constantly roaring under high pressure.

As I stated in my original introduction to the WG forum, there is a lot of variability between individuals. Some may be fortunate to be able to forego the unpleasant aspects of karma elimination to a point later in the process, when the individual is more capable of tolerating it. The experiences of the person Dave has described seem to mirror my own, in general terms and sequence, at least up to as far as I have gone. I do not know whether this will be found to be typical for the majority of those who take WPG.

I am still in a very early stage of progress, and am not competent to reliably describe things beyond my personal experiences. Please remember that the above thoughts are my views, based on observations from my present situation, and should not be assigned any more weight than that.

Gary

------

PS

I don't wish to further impose on binga, to continue to forward personal messages; I hope you also feel this way. I will, however, respond to questions posted to the WG forum. I hope you will consult Master Chia for advice on other matters. I suggest you first try your best to reason out the answers to your questions, or study the appropriate books, do experiments, etc., and then ask Master Chia for the answers to those you cannot discover after making your best effort. He will tell you anything that you need to know, in one way or another. Just keep your mind open. Answers come in many forms.

Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 13:57:54 -0600

Subject: Re: J's Story

Dear Barry,

Binga forwarded your message with J's story. It is a very interesting, and sometimes troubling account, but not lacking in comic relief.

J's condition re: kundalini

Without knowing what you wish to know about this, I will offer general comments, addressing J's condition, which I believe is worse than it appears on the surface. Here are my views and recommendations regarding your friend J's experiences.

Aside from any diverse physiological repercussions that your friend may be experiencing, he also has a good case of kundalini shaktipat underway, courtesy of his initial accident with the ozone activated material.

His chronic drowsiness is diagnosed as a kundalini manifestation known as Yoga Nadra or Kundalini Nadra, also commonly known as Meditator's Drowsiness. Its symptoms are just what J is having: recurring bouts of deep drowsiness and lethargy, often causing him to nod off to sleep. Its cause is the increased kundalini flow into the brain he is experiencing (as a continued effect of the kundalini activation from the influx of ORMEs into his system), overloading it with energy flow, to a degree which it is as yet unaccustomed. The physiological response is the very heavy-headed sleepiness. Virtually everyone who awakens kundalini experiences the nadra, and it is usually strongest near the beginning of the process. It will eventually diminish. The nadra is as a baby's sleep; it is a natural thing, when the body is complying to forces of inner growth and evolutionary change.

As a kundalini awakening effect, it is neither serious nor threatening - unless there are some physio-chemical processes at work in parallel with it. Because of the complications from lead and arsenic poisoning, J's situation is substantially more complicated than usual. But there are mitigating factors at work, which I will mention in a moment. Based on the descriptions, J does not appear to be in imminent danger, though he remains at high risk.

Because the drowsiness is not a consequence of exhaustion or energy depletion, it is less likely to affect him if he *has* to remain alert, such as when driving. Kundalini is usually smart enough to know when it has bad timing, and will take its cue from the act of Will to override it. I would expect that along with the heavy-headedness he will before long begin to experience an increasing degree of pressure sensations inside his head. The spaciness is likewise a common kundalini symptom that nearly everyone has for a while, and off and on thereafter; it also eventually diminishes as the brain gets tuned up.

J may find that the drowsiness will later shift to coincide with the period of "after eating drowsiness" many people normally experience following a meal, and it will only be a little worse than normal at that point.

Your friend should continue to get checkups regularly, but mainly to see how things are going; be very cautious about taking any medications or prescriptions. The big caution here is that kundalini often produces symptoms that exactly mimic various maladies. If these symptoms are treated with conventional medications, this can lead to a spiraling loop of complications. Kundalini usually does a better job than the medications anyway.

If your friend has any heavy metals remaining in his system (which he doubtlessly does to an extreme), kundalini will attempt to corral these and "store" them in an inscrutable way. It is most likely that it will use the metallic gold available to temporarily "coat" the toxic metals, shielding the body from exposure to them. It will attempt to hold these in a latent stored form, and it can do this if the amount is not too great. J does not have any margin at this point for further contamination to his system. He must be very careful, and do whatever he can of a purifying and purgative nature, to assist kundalini with the clean up process. Kundalini will typically release these toxins, a little at a time, in small amounts that the body can tolerate (under kundalini's jurisdiction) and so they are eliminated in small recurring episodes. It may take quite a while for this to be completed. Don't let J mess up on this one. One day his body will read like he is loaded with heavy metals, and the next day nothing. A few good days and feeling fine doesn't mean anything as to his prognosis. He is on a roller coaster ride, internally, and must keep his seat belt fastened, figuratively speaking, or he'll be history.

Kundalini is J's best friend right now. Don't tempt Fate.

The fine gold wires that appeared in J's flesh as a result of his original accident, as well as those he continues to exude and cough up are related to the post I placed on the forum earlier, describing how kundalini allocates the ORMEs as quantum-coupled strings along the nadis of the subtle body. You may wish to re-read it.

The unusual method that your friend used to recover gold from the pond obviously led to the recovery of ORMEs, having their Meissner fields extremely highly charged with energy, near their absolute maximum critical levels, as a side effect of the action of his recovery device. Energy was absorbed by the ORMEs, apparently by direct transfer from the ozone molecules. (It could also have been a consequence of the device itself; I can't say for certain, without knowing more about how the device is designed to work and its layout).

Gold fibers from the back of J's hands

Once these ORMEs got into his system, they were, as a consequence of their sheer quantity, and extremely high energy Meissner levels, self-attracted to the nearest nadis (prana channels) in his body. They migrated to, deposited themselves, and aligned themselves along, the closest nadi paths, which happened to be in the area of first contact, in the region around his hands, and worked their way into him from there, following paths of least resistance.

Within just a few seconds, they began decoupling their Cooper pairs, and reverting to metal (metallic gold, etc.). Because they had arranged themselves along the nerve-like nadi paths, when they decoupled, they appeared as the tiny wire filaments of gold that J found to be imbedded in him and sticking out of him (extraneously following the emanation lines of the inner aura of the subtle body, which extends beyond the surface of the physical body).

The main cause or explanation for the decoupling was a cascade collapse of the Meissner field complex. When the ORMEs are all charged up and Meissner-linked together, they are as one, and their individual energies all come to the same level, like water in a tank. They are connected, and so all reside at the same energy potential. When there is a break someplace, everything in the whole system goes down together, all at once; it is like a short circuit that pulls down the entire grid.

The collapse in J's case appears to have happened in a cascade fashion, over a several seconds, rather than instantly. Nearly as soon as the ORMEs linked into the nadis, they began off loading their super charged Meissner fields into the pranic system of J's subtle body, deflating them way down. This process was sustained, to some degree, as long as more ORMEs were coming "online", but ceased as soon as J pulled his hands away.

Following the rapid Meissner field deflation, the Meissner shielding that artificially masked their metallic properties was gone, and they were rendered as metallic or low order partial-ORMEs. I suspect that many of them, experiencing such a rapid loss of energy, probably rendered them unstable so that their Cooper pairs decoupled spontaneously.

J's nausea

J's bout of nausea could have been from several things. Intense nausea is a regular symptom that is experienced the first few times kundalini enters the navel chakra (manipura chakra). That would have been the first stop above par for J, who might have been likely to have been centered in the swadhisthana. It may have been related to this. Actually, it seems more likely that it simply was the body's reaction to being suddenly flooded with metal contaminants.

Warning for J

Under the charged up Meissner shielding, even low grade partial ORMEs could flow into J's body as easily as electricity flows along a wire. A very large amount may have entered him, and will no doubt be present in his system for a long time. The lead and arsenic entered J via metal-metal bonds with partial ORMEs. The extraordinarily high energy levels imparted to the Meissner fields of even the partial ORMEs was apparently sufficient to extend over and mask the Pb and As.

J should NOT play around with O3 charged ORMEs any more. They are far too difficult too contain. Should further metal get into his system it could cost him his life. The only reason J is still with us is that the majority of them seem to have been nice, friendly, non-toxic gold.

There is a place at the very back of the palate where a major nadi node is located. This spot is used in the khecari mudra by yogis, to complete a microcosmic circuit in the body. I used that several times during kundalini awakening. It is likely that this powerful juncture location is part of why J is experiencing gold particles in phlegm he coughs up. It would be a natural exit point for kundalini to off load or dump metal, for handy expulsion from the body via the throat and mouth.

Kundalini is no doubt using every available exit mode to eliminate metals: pores, mouth, excretory, and urinary systems are all working overtime. Kundalini will use paths of greatest prana capacity in moving the metal out. The finger tips are an obvious choice, as the aura is very concentrated there. If J drinks, this would be a bad idea, as the liver and kidneys don't need the extra work right now. Drink lots of water. Eat foods of a pure nature. Have sex as little as possible - that energy comes directly from kundalini's reserves, and it is now his only hope, the only reason J is here today. J should be good to She who is keeping him alive.

J has had a wild ride, and has certainly learned first hand that the story of King Midas has an ancient basis in fact. He is also using up his lucky karma coupons at an alarming rate, and I would advise him to, from here on, *proceed with great caution*. Please present my advice very seriously regarding continuing care and purification of his system, and avoiding further problems.

In regards,

Gary

Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 13:57:58 -0600

Subject: NLs, actinides, radiation cleanup

Dear Barry,

Are actinides and lanthanides monoatomic?

Thanks for advising me regarding DHs Los Angeles remarks. Dave has also mentioned the actinides and lanthanides in the Dallas lecture (see below). In the Dallas quote, he simply describes research showing these elements as being unstable, and spontaneously disintegrating, but goes no further. He does not say or imply anything about them having ORME states.

You relate to me that in the Los Angeles lecture, Dave says the actinides are monatomic.

We have thus: "came apart all on it's own", and "monatomic".

Neither of these terms or descriptions is equivalent to, or the same as saying that those elements have "ORMEs" states. The "orbitally rearranged" ORME state is the only state that will be superconducting, and will have the properties most of us are interested in.

Dave's reference to the actinides and lanthanides as showing spontaneous instability doesn't relate very much to Dave's work, other than to illustrate that scientists are still learning surprising things about the elements.

If these elements have been found to display ORMEs states, and Dave is aware of this, one might suppose that he would plainly point this out, but he does not (at least in Dallas). I am doubtful he does in LA either. I suggest that that some of Dave's listeners are incorrectly interpreting his remarks and jumping to this conclusion.

When Dave says the actinides are "monatomic", that is not particularly significant on its own. Single, monatomic atoms of *all* the elements can be prepared in the laboratory. However, this, of itself, does not in any way mean that they will all form ORMEs and be room temperature superconductors. Even the fact that an element may superdeform in high spin does not necessarily guarantee it will form an ORME, though it is highly likely that it will.

It depends on whether he said anything about "ORMEs states", having a "high spin state", or "superconducting", in connection with describing them as monatomic. I believe Dave's reference to "monatomic" will be found, on closer examination, to indicate that the instability which scientists have observed in the lanthanides and actinides, only occurs when these elements are in a "monatomic" state, apart from lattice association or chemical bonds, and to claim no more than this.

Theoretically, I believe that many of the actinides might potentially form ORMEs. But I certainly don't believe this has been done, nor that they would all be stable in an ORME state, or that conditions for transitioning all of them have been realized in any laboratory presently in existence.

Barry, if you have the context surrounding Dave's Los Angeles mention of monatomic actinides, and you would like to send it to me, I would be happy to review it to see just what he is saying there. Dave may be implying something about them I am unaware of, if he is not just talking about them again, as relates to scientific research, like he did in Dallas.

--------------------

Nuclear waste cleanup

Regarding cleanup of nuclear waste, there is a lot of good news in sight. I have been observing developments in CF research, since Pons and Fleischmann. Several researchers have reported wholesale transmutations occurring in these reactions. There have been numerous cases of radioactive substances displaying substantially reduced emissions, and even being rendered virtually non-radioactive. Besides the CF work, there are several other areas, such as sonoluminecense, Brown's gas, hydro-cavitation devices, and others, that are all showing transmutation effects. It seems that we are suddenly being bombarded by transmutations every time someone tries a new experiment these days.

I suggest that the ancient philosopher's stone is an ORMEs-based material. When ORMEs visit the scientific world in the near future, they will shortly thereafter be found to be the grand-daddy of all transmuters. Metals, concrete, liquids, and gases -all the radioactive materials of atomic sites- (I suggest) shall all be healable of their atomic instability by this means. It is going to be an amazingly different world from that time on.

In the same way the energized ORMEs of your friend J were able to penetrate their container walls, the ORMEs of the philosopher's stone likewise possess the ability to penetrate all forms of matter.

So I believe the ORMEs phenomena shall indeed provide means of effecting such stabilizing transmutations. In this regard, it does not particularly matter whether the actinides contain ORME-forming members, or not. There is far less reason to lose sleep worrying about a nuclear cleanup problem than there used to be. The almost-magical technology break-throughs that will make cleanup possible are finally beginning to come into view. It will even make your trees grow better.

Gary

=======================================================================

--------(start quote from Dallas lecture)

"Now basically the Actinide group are the heavy elements. And what happened about 1985-86, is these physicists, these nuclear physicists were watching these elements that were Actinide group elements, and all of a sudden this atom blew apart, it literally came apart all on it's own. And there was no gamma emissions, there was no alpha emissions, there was no beta emissions. There was heat emissions, tremendous heat, but it literally.., one element became two elements, just bang, it happened.

And it really took the physicists back, because this was not an element that they expected to come apart. This was a stable element. And as they begin to investigate it, they found out that all of the Actinide group basically would do this. But this, you know, these are kind of heavy nuclei, they're big fat, they're lots of protons and lots of neutrons, and they said, "Well maybe it's just because they're big cumbersome nuclei. They're not that stable anyway".

But within a couple of years, these same researchers begin to find that the rare earths would do this, the lanthanide group. Okay, now for those of you who aren't chemists, the lanthanide group, number 57 is lanthanum, and all of these elements right here are called the lanthanide group or the rare earth group. Now the place down here by themselves on the Periodic Table, because they, ah, supposedly you're not going to run into them that often in your normal chemistry you're performing, and so they stick them also down here, like the Actinides, at the bottom of the periodic Table. But they found that Samarium through Dysprosium, Samarium through Dysprosium would do the very same thing. They literally, as a single atom, could come apart all on they're own, and they're not radioactive isotopes."

-------(end quote from Dallas lecture)

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 21:46:52 -0600

Subject: To Barry, 7/16/96

Dear Barry,

I'm pleased to hear that your friend is well, and that your group is making progress in understanding and manipulating those materials. Your friend J is without doubt a very gifted inventor.

Another warning for J

Unfortunately, I don't share your opinion that J, or others working around your materials, have not had additional exposures to the High Energy ORME-born toxins since his initial accident. In their "gaseous" state, H.E. ORMEs are every bit as attracted to an individual (via the person's pranic system and aura) as they are when mixed with water, when as a liquid they creep across a surface towards the closest person.

The main difference is that in the gas-like state they have much greater mobility. J and others in the vicinity of the material are absorbing significant quantities of it, just like the hydrophilic desiccant does only more so, even though you don't feel it happening. It penetrates into you with no difficulty. If heavy metal contaminants are in the high energy mixture, metal-metal bonded to partial ORMEs, they will likewise be absorbed, to your detriment. The material needs to be thoroughly chemically purified of all non-ORME-forming heavy metals, while it is in either a metallic or low energy ORME state, in order to prevent this mode of contamination from happening when it is brought to an activated condition, such as by using ozone.

"He is also getting a handle on how to manipulate it without
breathing too much of the gold gas."

Yet you write of the past seven years:

"There were no subsequent exposures during that time..."

Barry, as long as it is only gold gas you guys are breathing, I'm not at all concerned. It is the potential for lead and arsenic (etc.) tag-alongs that causes me worry, and which I hope you remain cognizant of.

Gary's background

I am certainly interested in hearing from you all about what you are doing. I will respect your confidences, and will not divulge anything you choose to share with me to anyone. I have a background in physics, electronics, and know a few things about chemistry and the elements.

Hudson's karmic importance vs. Hudson monopoly

I sympathize with your feelings about David Hudson having a monopoly over these materials. I think that is how it will turn out to be at first. But, there is no way it will remain that way for long. As you are finding out, the materials are plentiful in nature, and recoverable by simple methods, not much more complicated than the old-timers used in sluicing for gold.

David Hudson's work is important karmically, because validation of it is taking place at a scientific level. His facility, the medical studies he is supporting, the technological applications he will foster, and his patent history, are just what is needed to give ORMEs a sort of respectability, semi-legitimizing and helping spread the ORMEs movement, which will subsequently take place. That is something neither you and your friends, nor anyone else, are presently able to accomplish. He will have the necessary quality control to produce a suitable product that will open the door to enlightenment for many, many people.

In a very short time, not far into next year, his Foundation's members and others will begin taking ORMEs, and awakening kundalini. It is the beginning of something that has never before happened on this planet.

But a monopoly on these materials is not possible, any more than for air, and David Hudson already knows that in his heart-of-hearts.

If the materials are to become available in the most desirable sort of broad way, everyone should remain patient, and generally supportive of David Hudson's efforts, until these first goals are achieved. It would be counter productive for everyone to do otherwise at the beginning. However, once that point is reached, your own work, when you choose to disclose what you are doing, will be in high demand.

Regarding your offer to send me samples of your materials, I decline to accept. I cannot help anyone in that way. My advice is always free to you, but that is as far as I can come.

Barry, there is a great karmic burden, or cost, associated with knowledge obtained by paranormal means. A vast amount of knowledge is available, by looking beyond what the five senses reveal, but that is not how the World, all the things taking place in it, is meant to be run, just yet, though that will be changing, changing, changing.

One doesn't need to be omniscient (I am certainly not) to figure that out.

The Universe, it seems, has an economy, of sorts, and knowledge is a commodity. "Karma" is one of the mediums of exchange. Knowledge has its price, and karma is the currency. A great amount had to be accumulated (by many others than me), over a long period of time, and spent as one great lump sum, in presenting the information in that article, even for the small number of people that have seen it as of yet.

Please be careful, and don't act too impetuously.

Gary

Date: Sat, 07 Sep 1996 23:37:45 -0600

Subject: Monatomic vs. diatomic clarifications

Dear Barry,

Regarding your question recently posted to the unmoderated WG forum, please allow me to point out that both you and Pitkanen are apparently overlooking an important statement I made in my article on paranormal observations of the elements. This statement is:

"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, as
much as for any other reasons."

That is to say, I *agree* with Dr. Phillips, that these are diatoms. To state this plainly, the "monatomic" ORMEs in DH'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 chemical combinations.

I chose to refer to the elements in my 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, such as J. McInnis clearly did.

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. But my efforts do not appear to have succeeded, as I perceive Hudson & associates have rejected the bulk of it. Hudson's mind is not open to new ideas at this point, and he will stay like that for some time. Some of his associates can even be described as quite hostile towards my article, like the ORMEs-consumer interviewed on the moderated forum. Kundalini amplifies arrogance, just like everything else, and I find I still have problems with it myself, despite 7 years of steady work on it. One day, they will see it truly though.

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 DH. Even so it was a large, 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 in your post, as expressed by Dr. Pitkanen. 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). 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.

If you and Dr. Pitkanen will rethink things, in light of this explanation, perhaps you will find that the descriptions I have provided are not as foreign and incompatible as you had supposed. I do not fault Dr. Pitkanen or anyone else for harboring doubt or skepticism on the subject at this point. But in due time it will become clearly apparent that yogic observations cannot be dismissed as "symbolic", and I am quite content to wait.

However, I will also suggest to you 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 EM 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 (though it apparently hasn't, yet) 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 EM Meissner field, has unique properties, according to the laws governing each of the underlying forces generating those distinct yet co-spatial fields. Like the EM 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.

I am extremely pleased that you have considered this as a possibility, at least to some extent, as expressed in past posts to the Net in the alchemical forum, and I genuinely commend you for your independent thinking in this regard; your previous comments are the only reason for (and making karmically possible) my mention of this information to you.

Speaking now, in stricter use of the concepts 'monatom' and 'diatom', I may also offer you some further comments which may be of interest to you. This is in regards to your question on Brown's gas, and also relates to your work using ozone, as an ORMEs charge pump.

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 and ozone spiral structure

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 type of energies, some of which are not as yet recognized by Science. I believe these are behind some of the phenomena you have observed, causing certain results you described to me, which were observed from your friend's experiments with ozone-activated ORMEs. Positive ozone is of most interest for use in activating ORMEs.

I hope you will take a moment to relate details of your, and your friend J's, activities to me from time to time when possible. I wish for your success in what you are doing. Please always continue to exercise caution and reason in your experimentation.

Gary

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 23:18:49 -0600

Subject: Various ORMEs comments & reply

Dear Barry,

Esoteric Forces

Karma

My reference to "esoteric" forces, is to forces not among the 4 fundamental forces so far acknowledged. Practical (ie useful) information about undiscovered forces is probably the most karmically burdened subject there is, as far as scientific topics are concerned. This seems to be so because it is something which is so intrinsically prone to abuse, or to being used in a self-serving capacity. There are a lot of people who actually go into something akin to Lust, at the prospect of getting their hands on such knowledge. But there is good news on the way, as the many inroads being made to CF, free- energy, etc. will eventually breach this karmic price barrier, and the knowledge will come through, a bit at a time, over many distributed points from the work of widely separated individuals. This is a sort of karmic cost-sharing plan underway that will make it economically possible for mankind to gain this knowledge, all together as a whole. It will ultimately thwart the powerful's efforts to seize control of them, as might otherwise happen.

Forces linking anu

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.

Suggested book

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.

Creating or converting matter

In regards to J's other questions, I can only speculate about high energy particle accelerator experiments. I am not qualified to make more than a very limited personal appraisal on matter/energy transfers, so my views are nothing more than opinion; for example, I have no experience at all regarding matter/anti-matter annihilations.

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 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) 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.

Damaging the fabric of the universe

As far as atomic experiments damaging a "fabric of the universe", I do not know that there is such a thing. "Fabric" implies a medium or continuum which, when damaged or penetrated, does not self-heal, or close again. I am not aware of any experiments we might perform which could have this result.

I am certain that there are permanent "scars" which form at places like nuclear test sites, but these are associated with place-memories, (as in psychometry), and imprint on Time, rather than upon spatial dimensions or continua. I am not advanced enough to be able to authoritatively answer such questions, but I do not get any excessive anxieties when I explore it, so I am not inclined to be as concerned as those whom you refer to seem to be.

Personal veil

There is a non-physical "veil" each individual usually has, stretched across the sahasrara, which normally blocks our perceptions of higher things. Like excision of the Ego, this web-like non-physical membrane does not seem to close again once ruptured. But I don't know of an analog of this in Nature which could apply to our planet, etc.

ORMEs and water: viscosity

As far as your observations of the oily substance are concerned, I'm sure you are aware, 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 hi-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. This false viscosity is the oily, glycerin-like consistency you reported.

The "viscosity" of the suspension may be altered drastically and dramatically, as a function or cause of anything which affects the Meissner fields. 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 before, are operative) the viscosity may be observed to diminish, particularly if any macro-currents were present.

I'm sure that you also, by now, have a clear understanding of the tunneling actions ORMEs are capable of when sufficiently charged. I suggest the following as an explanation of your pipetting descriptions. We might assume that the liquid you observed within the bag, and between the petri dishes had formed from ORMEs, sufficiently charged so as to tunnel out of their containers, and that's how they came to be in those places.

Hence the high "viscosity" upon drawing them into a pipette. The aqueous ORMEs suspension which you found accumulated on the inside of the Nalgene lid may be conjectured as being insufficiently charged, and incapable of tunneling, and so became trapped there. Upon bringing the low charge ORMEs suspension (from the lid) into contact and communication with the highly charged (viscous) ORMEs in the pipette, the first thing that would have happened would have been a instantaneous transfer and normalization of energy between the two populations, with energy flowing from the material in the pipette, to the newly introduced low charge material from the lid. This normalization, or evening out of energy distribution, would result in a new net energy level, below that formerly present in the solution in the pipette. The drop in Meissner field resulted in the observed decrease in apparent viscosity, that you saw.

Experiment

I suggest you try some experiments, to check the viscosity of ORMEs suspensions, both before and after charging them, and also checking for viscosity changes in samples when placed in a strong magnetic field (this may need to be quite strong to have an effect, depending on how charged the ORMEs are).

Taste of material

The difference in taste I also conjecture to be a consequence of the Meissner fields. The low-charge material lacks a field to shield its free metal bonds, so you may perceive the metallic taste of partial ORMEs, assuming it contained no HCl, which would certainly account for an "acidic" taste. It might also have been a galvanic taste (due to the charge action), similar to the acidic taste of a 9V battery when touched to the tongue. The more strongly charged ORMEs would be masked in their metallic properties by the Meissner fields. You may recall that the manna of the Israelites was also 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.

Vortex effects

I might also mention the effect you describe in the earlier account you sent me, of the ORMEs material, as a suspension in the bucket, rising up similar to a solar prominence. 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 was penetrating the bucket is of course enough 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 bucket. 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. That is the basis of formation of the solar prominence you observed. A large ring current was flowing through that arch (and continued in a circuit through the material in the pail), sufficient to exclude the flux from it. If you broke the arch (physically), the ring current would have been 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.

Type III superconductivity

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 his Exotic Atoms WWW page [e.g. part 5.4, b], Dr. Pitkanen seems to be perpetuating my casual usage in this way, which I am already beginning to regret.

As you may know, in conventional type II 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 changed).

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 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 circuits.

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 hand; first act inertly when in an intense magnetic field and 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, and further confusion of the two can be avoided. The following few statements summarize these conclusions about ORMEs.

1. ORMEs superconductivity is essentially temperature independent.
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 body cease.
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 capacity.

Gary

Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 19:51:58 -0600

Subject: Further comments on ORMEs SCs &c

Dear Barry,

Thanks for forwarding me your communications with Dr. Matti Pitkanen. He is certainly a man, brim-full of ideas, isn't he? Dr. Pitkanen's TGD expansions go far beyond earlier concepts of geometrodynamics, from JA Wheeler's model (1962) and others since, and are very innovative. I'm sure he will eventually succeed in gaining an interested audience among his colleagues, as ZPE and other effects his model can explain begin to become more widely recognized, and the merits of his ideas are more apparent. It is a sad fact, but among scientists, the method of presentation of a theory often seems to be more important to its acceptance than the content.

To Pitkanen regarding superconductivity

In this email, I am going to comment on a few things relating to ORMEs superconductivity &c from your communications with him. I have been delaying answering, since you said you intended to reply to me further, but as I haven't heard from you, I assume you have been too busy.

On the other side of Dr. Pitkanen's relating [Aug 14] how theoreticians had ridiculously 'proved' that high temperature superconductors were impossible, you may be interested in my mentioning that the possibility of achieving high-temperature superconductivity with Tc>300K was predicted over 30 years ago by WA Little [Phys Rev A 1964, vol. 134, p 1416]. Dr. Pitkanen may also be interested in reading DM Eagles 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 al, that I cited to you some time ago, in a reply I wrote taking exceptions to one of Joe Champion's posts.

"Thought problem" (superconductivity) explanation

Regarding your "thought problem" of July 30th, posed to Dr. Pitkanen, as to predicting the behavior of ORMEs particles (as a powder) near which a magnet was to be brought (and which experiment you performed), please allow me to give you some background information and explanation related to this, to see if this is of help to you.

Lets suppose that a small pile of lumpy and granulated ORMEs powder and particles, just as you described, are the sample of the 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 the NeFeBo test magnet, at a distance of a few centimeters. What will happen then...when the magnet is brought near ? (ie, why did they behave as you observed them to, when you actually did this?).

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 influences.

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 happen.

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 magnet.

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 Dr. Pitkanen correctly notes would be needed in order for the ORMEs to behave as has been observed, in levitating in the earth's half gauss field, and he also notes that type II SCs do this.

"The levitation of ORMEs in magnetic field as weak as
Earth's magnetic field could make sense if there is a large
amplification of the Earth's magnetic field inside [the] ORME.
Amplification factors of order 10^6 are required."
...

"Super conductors of type II in fact do this kind of
amplification: the external magnetic field is channeled into
flux tubes inside which the magnetic field strength is much
higher than in the external magnetic field: average magnetic
flux does not change and the model is generalization of this
mechanism." [Matti Pitkanen to Barry Carter, August 21
1996]

In my email to you of Sept 9, prior to your forwarding me those communications, I explained how the arch of ORMEs solution in your bucket was an example of precisely this effect, and also explained some of the key points in which ORMEs differ from conventional type II SC materials.

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 10^6 that Dr. Pitkanen estimates is required. 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 with 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 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) is the source of the delay you noticed before significant repulsion began to become apparent.

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 to you here, 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.

Barry, I hope this makes it reasonably clear for you, that the simple gross behaviors you are observing are actually the result of many complex interactions which are going on; they are only manifestations of the interplay of all these things.

Pitkanen and Gary disagree with Hudson about deformation shielding

Dr. Pitkanen also states [Aug 6] that:

"...Hudson believes that nuclear deformation produces the
positive shielding of the valence electrons'. This does not
make sense to me: the size of the atomic nucleus is 10^-14
meters whereas the electrons are at a distance of order
10^10 meters from nucleus!"

I agree with Dr. Pitkanen, that this is an untenable argument DH makes. However, the chemical inertness, lack of valencing, and lack of conventional emission spectra are yet other instances of the difficulties faced, and which must be explained, if the closed, self-paired valence structures, which ORMEs can be yogically seen to possess, are dismissed.

Trapping ORMEs

J's charging the atomic-level ORMEs fields, such as by induction from moving them in a magnetic field (or moving the magnetic field, relative to them), as J is doing in his experiments and trapping devices, will increase the atomic-level flux, increasing the strength of their pseudo-ferromagnetic properties (ie making them more magnetic). This will be true, up to the point where their individual Meissner fields begin to touch, which if/when this occurs (again, depending on their inter-atomic spacing within the sample particle) they will at some point (as an energy-communicative grouping) begin to develop a macro diamagnetic Meissner field. Since natural ORMEs (particularly in solution) may not be very close (on average) to one another as individuals, this approach is an effective one.

The same thing ("magnetizing" the ORMEs) can be done faster with a fluctuating field, as in transformer action, but doing it by mechanical induction is intrinsically safer and somewhat self-limiting, and is far less likely to blow apart the ORMEs Cooper pairs from over-charging.

J is ingenious to utilize this effect for the practical purposes of collecting ORMEs materials from Nature. Because of the typically large inter-atomic spacings of ORMEs in natural dispersions, pseudo-FM effects are very important in this regard. The mechanical translation velocity between the ORMEs and the field lines in his method largely avoids flux embedding effects and consequences.

There are large quantities of ORMEs in sea water, and other similar salt water bodies, as a result of eons of natural accumulation. The unique field properties of ORMEs may also be harnessed, to discriminately separate or "sieve" them out for extraction. The uniformity and pumpability of the brine carrier medium makes this a considerably simpler and more direct approach for recovery than the processes necessary to extract ORMEs from volcanic rock. If J has not yet considered this, perhaps he should. It is potentially far more benign (it seems to me) from an environmental cost standpoint, to pump water out of the sea, extract the ORMEs, and then return it, rather than obtaining ORMEs from tertiary volcanic deposits by excavations. The relative percentage of gold, mostly as partial ORMEs chlorides, is also significant.

Scientific American: nucleus slows in steps - explained

I will also mention something about the DH reference in Scientific American [Oct 1991]:

"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 to you 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 the 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 observed under.

You may recall from my article on Paranormal Observations, that 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. I also discussed the changing effect on atomic moment of inertia, as 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.
 
 I will look forward to hearing from you again.

Gary

Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 13:42:20 -0600

Subject: Pitkanen, viscosity testing, and various practical ORMEs topics

Dear Barry,

Thank you for forwarding me Dr. Pitkanen's relating of his most recent ideas and developments. He has arrived at a very interesting place in his cellular and neural models.

Pitkanen's TGD throats and Cooper pair equivalence

>...Amusing thing is that both "throats" ("wormholes") and Cooper pairs
>appear as BE condensates and lead to essentially identical models for
>nerve pulse generation and I do not know, which alternative is correct!

The fact that Dr. Pitkanen's TGD throats (or valence funnels, to use my past terminology) and Cooper pairs share this 'unexpected' predictive equivalence, I hope will suggest to him that their apparent equivalency in this way is more than coincidental for these two models, and that this will lead him to explore it further, and consider possible means of unifying them, or establishing other commonalties that could tie them together. For topological classifications of throats and vortices in non-Abelian gauge theories, as shown by Tze and Ezawa, the necessary condition for the existence of vortices in the superconducting vacuum (Higgs field) is that the global invariance group acting on the vectors of physically real representations should be multiply connected. But it is the dyadic case that is of special and particular interest, as applied to ORMEs.

Perhaps it might be useful if Dr. Pitkanen will see if there are any appealing modalities for throat pairs in which spin interactions could lead to phenomena analogous to that which is classically ascribed to electron interaction in Cooper pairing. For example, Dr. Pitkanen might wish to consider if the laws of symmetry permit for him some characteristics of throats to exist as mirrors of each other, and this, I suggest, shall be found to lead to and imply important and unexplored interactive possibilities between opposite types.

Correction of DH's BCS date

DH was quoted as stating:

>They gave the Nobel Prize to Bardine, Cooper and Schriver in 1986 for coming
>up with this theory of one electron perfectly paired with a mirror image
>electron. ...

Actually, John Bardeen, Leon Cooper, and John Schrieffer won that Nobel Prize in 1972. 1986 happens to be the year that Gerd Bennig and Heinrich Rohrer shared the Prize for their invention of the scanning tunneling microscope, along with Ernst Ruska for his work in electron optics (I mentioned the STM to you in exceptions to Champion). But I can't blame DH very much for this; I make enough mistakes of this sort myself.

Viscosity experiment

You previously wrote:

>None of us are set up to do any tests of viscosity. Please realize that
>most of J's work is taking place with equipment that he has built, with
>virtually no money for supplies and in a friend's equipment shop. All of
>J's formal training is in electronics. He has taught himself what
>chemistry and physics he knows. If you wished to test some of these samples
>I could probably accommodate you.

A fairly simple method for qualitatively judging viscosity changes, for your purposes, may be performed in your home by placing a drop of the test liquid on the surface of an inclined plate, and observing the rate the drop runs down the plate.

Use a clean piece of smooth, flat glass, perhaps temporarily borrowed out of a framed picture. Tape a thin plastic (non-metal) ruler on the back, or else a strip of ruled paper, so the graduation lines can be read through the glass. Set the glass up so that the plane is tipped at an angle of about 60 degrees from horizontal.

Use an eye dropper or pipette to place a drop of ORMEs liquid near the upper end of the glass plate surface. Time how long it takes the drop to travel 3 or 4 inches down the incline. The plate must be cleaned and dried for each test run. You might average the time of 3 runs or so for each test. Try this before and after charging the ORMEs. Two drops can be started side-by-side at the same time, with one drop from a source before charging, and the other (from the same source) after being ozone-charged. Such side-by-side comparisons make variations fairly easy to notice and judge. You may wish to experiment further, subjecting the ORMEs drops to magnetic fields of different strengths.

ORMEs separation

>...J has worked on an experimental magnetic separation device which,

>he claims, should separate and "charge" the various monoatomic elements.

I assume J is referring to bulk "separation" of heterogeneous ORMEs, in extracting them from other materials or liquids. Precision separations, and classification of ORMEs types *from one another*, according to elemental species and degree of partiality, may also be accomplished by means of direct manipulations, based on their field properties.

Answer to ORMEs energy storage question

>I am still absorbing much of the new information you have conveyed about
>superconductivity. I have been wondering if ORMEs superconductors could be
>used to store energy. If this is possible how might Hc2 limit their energy
>storage capacity.
>...
>Half of all electrical generation is wasted in transmission. High capacity
>electrical storage would help mitigate this.

In a previous post elsewhere, you also wrote in this regard:

>PS to EKarels:
>
>Room temperature superconductors can store tremendous amounts of
>energy in a very small space. Don't worry about lithium batteries or
>other energy storage schemes.

For a storage device, Hc2 limits the maximum energy density. As I described, Hc2 in ORMEs is a variable function of atomic spacing and atomic-level fields. In any case, Hc2 only affects the size of the device for a given capacity. The energy storable by ORMEs systems per unit volume is potentially greater than for type II SCs. Many seem to limit their thinking of S-ORMEs to just viewing them as materials for making no-loss wires, etc.

Exceeding those, room temperature ORMEs superconductors -which will before long become almost as cheap as silicon- will revolutionize technology beyond the wildest dreams of futurists. This will bring more good, but also bad and ugly, into our world. While energy storage is an obvious application, other unanticipated uses will quickly emerge. Stretch your imagination...!

Suggests we try fusing ORMEs to a glassy state; suggests how to do this.

You have not yet made mention of any efforts by you or J to fuse ORMEs into their glassy state. This is an area that, I think, deserves your consideration. Making a home-made vacuum furnace capable of doing this is something that is probably within your & J's means to put together. A rotary refrigerator compressor may be salvaged and modified to use as a suitable, inexpensive vacuum pump. Besides that, you would need a tank of welding-grade argon with a regulator, an automotive vacuum gauge, a 4-6 foot length of 4-6 inch diameter stainless steel pipe with flanged ends, an acetylene torch, a pound of lead, a high temperature thermocouple junction and meter, miscellaneous tubing, rod, fittings &c, and a few days of cutting, drilling, grinding, and welding.

If you are interested in trying this, I'll describe it further.
 

Suggested experiment

>Are partial ORMEs more detectable using electronic detection devices than 100% ORMEs?

Why don't you try passing a metal detector over your bucket of ORMEs suspension, and see? ;-)

Gary

Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 23:29:35 -0600

Subject: "Final" comments on Pitkanen's TGD

Dear Barry,

Gary disagrees with Pitkanen's conclusions re: exclusion of equivalence between Cooper pairs and throats

Thanks for forwarding Dr. Pitkanen's recent report.

>I have done further work with EEG-nerve pulse model and it seems
>that situation is now clearer. These two things are certainly two
>different things. It is really these tiny throats (wormholes)
>whose BE condensate behaves just like Cooper pairs mathematically
>that could explain neatly the nerve pulse and EEG.

Dr. Pitkanen has found a difference which he believes excludes the equivalence I have said exists (and invited him to explore), between Cooper pairs and throats (as paired funnels).

>The difference emerges at quantitative level. The earlier
>model of EEG based on Cooper pairs had ad hoc assumption about value
>of certain parameter: the value was unnaturally small. If the parameter
>has 'natural' value, the 'EEG' associated with Cooper pairs
>corresponds to light frequencies of order 10^13 Hz rather than
>frequencies of EEG of order Hz.

This large frequency difference is certainly a real one from a mathematical perspective, but he does not seem to see where it is coming from and so concludes that throats and Cooper pairs are unlikely to share any further equivalence within his model, and does not see why or how they could be the same.

I suggest he look into it further, beyond the face-value of what his equations say, and think what phenomena the frequency difference could represent, and what this would mean, if the Cooper pairs and throats *are* the same. Ask: "What might lie behind the production of this result, to make the same phenomenon appear as two different ones, with this frequency disparity?" Sometimes Nature is found to have some very good tricks up her sleeve, and this is one of them.

Zero point discussion

Barry, perhaps Dr. Pitkanen's estimate of 10^13 Hz (30 microns) for the light frequency of Cooper pairs rings a bell with you, from DH's lectures. Do you recall DH's discussion of the electromagnetic zero point? That is what I am referring to.

In other words, I suggest that (though quite real mathematically and physically) this is actually an artifact, generated by a zero point interaction; phenomena of this sort are only beginning to gain marginal acceptance.

The notch which Max Planck found between black body and solar radiations occurs at about 4 microns. You may also recall that the doublets in DH's near infra-red spectroscopy data for rhodium and iridium ORMEs show unique, distinct zero point doublets, and are even closer to Dr. Pitkanen's figure. These latter two fall within the resonance band for ordinary water molecules, which has significant resonances at wavelengths between about 5-7 microns. As you can see, these are less than an order of magnitude from Dr. Pitkanen's estimate.

Pseudo viscosity of water

Zero point coupling is also related to ORMEs' ability to interact with water, producing the pseudo-viscosity that has been discussed. The EM 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 ZPs 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 ZP 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 EM 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 ZP resonator does not constitute a zero point.

Gary

Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 23:34:57 -0600

Subject: J's situation & business advice

Dear Barry,

I'm sad to hear that Dr. Pitkanen is presently ostracized as he is, but am glad he is at least working with a university. Einstein had a really tough time of it too, early in his career. I'm sure things will improve for him.

Regarding your most recent message, concerning J's situation with Ron.

ORMEs: Biggest thing to come down the pike

As I have inferred before, the whole matter of ORMEs is the biggest thing to come down the pike on planet Earth for a long, long, time. The forces behind this are very "substantial". This is due to its enormous importance to the human race, at this critical point in our history, when so many titanic factors are converging at once, to determine our destiny as a species.

Karmic pressures on J

Here in everyday-land, J currently has control of the patent rights, for the ORMEs ozone activator of choice. Presently, no one but J and J's company may legally manufacture them. This may suggest the nature of the karmic pressure J is under. It is like one of those gigantic presses, used to make diamonds, where huge tetrahedral jaws mesh at one tiny little point, to apply an irresistible pressure. This, except the forces are karmic, and J is the focus. J *is* under a lot of increasing pressure, from his standpoint. But it is barely a hint of what is standing by, and there is much, much, more, where that came from. Perhaps this suggests to you what the karmic objective of J's present circumstances is, and what the result is likely to be. How long J's suffering continues, and what level it attains, depend in part on which direction J goes in the decisions he faces.

But great forces of mercy and compassion are also at work, and I remain optimistic everything will yet be well with J. These things are all favorable to you coming to an agreement with J in the immediate future, granting you license to manufacture FEs.

As you know, this issue of manufacturing rights must be resolved before you can proceed. Without written proof of your rights, you are, of course, on very shaky ground, legally speaking.

Work out agreement with J

In my opinion, you should come to an amicable agreement with J, before you advance your plans any further. I suggest that you first consider reorienting your plans again, towards the ORMEs-related market; you may find that things shall then begin to go much smoother for you, if you do. The anxieties you've felt and the legal difficulties you have been facing are telling you something; perhaps in this case, it is in regards to your intentions to sidetrack ORMEs work and enter conventional markets.

I suggest that the next time you are in Portland, you meet with J and have a heart-to-heart talk. Have a long lunch with him in a booth at a cheery, well-lit place you both like that has good vibes. Talk about him, what he has been doing, his financial situation, and his plans. Tell him you're worried about him, for taking drugs, but be genuinely understanding and non-judgmental. Tell him you may have a way of helping him gain some stability. Ask him if he knows what happened to your Allotech investment, and discuss what you think happened to it. Explain that ORMEs will soon be available from David Hudson, and that if he'll give you permission to sell those people FEs for ORMEs activation, this could be a source of income for him, to fund his own research. Explain that those people *need* his technology. I believe you will find him sympathetic to what you say.

Suggest a royalty percentage, based on gross sales. If he seems hesitant, ease back, and let him think it over, pointing out that nothing is happening now, and that would at least be something. Let him know that you are being honest with him and aren't trying to cheat him. Recall the times you've backed him, and stayed with him, and stopped others from wresting control from him. You have my permission to tell J what I have told you, that your offer will prove good for him, and that I advise him to accept. See if you can write out the simple terms for a permanent FE license agreement on a napkin or the back of a place mat, and arrange to have his attorney type it up, and send you the bill. Remember to shake hands, and leave as better friends than before.

If J rejects your offer, then repeat it to him again later, should things turn worse for him (which they doubtlessly will, if he rejects it). Hearing it once now will only make it sound that much better to him the second time.

Would this not be an improvement to lurking around, conspiring in secret, waiting for J to crash and burn? I understand what is behind your wife's aversion to J's drug problem, and she is right in her advice. But in this case, Susan's concerns will not materialize, and she need not place any reservations on you; you are capable enough to guard yourselves that way. The potential exists for you to help J out, if you can come to an agreement. And talking to J, the Mad-Man, will not be as tough as you think it will. Don't take things so seriously. There will be a time when all this seems quite hilarious to you, looking back on it.

Answers to questions about FE element

>... The one problem was with the ozone generating gas track
>element. We were going toward a ceramic element but
>only a couple of prototypes were made for the small unit. The large unit
>used a helically cut series of 1/8 inch radius groves cut into a four inch
>diameter by fourteen inch long Plexiglas tube. These seem to last pretty
>well in intermittent use but we don't trust that they will hold up under
>continuous use. I have not seen any drawings of these elements. One
>problem with J is that we could never get a finished design out of him.
>He was always tinkering with something or other.

Yes, Plexiglas will eventually succumb to ozone. I am sure you have considered other solutions to this, besides ceramic. There are machinable ceramics available now, but their intrinsic brittleness makes them prone to cracking and chipping. Perhaps you are familiar with the chemical vapor deposition processes that have recently come into use. CVD and related technologies can now deposit a film of quartz onto plastics. This would allow you to continue to use tough, easily machinable, inexpensive plastic tube, protected by the ozone-inert quartz film. CVD is commonly used to make quartz coated scratch-proof plastic headlight covers, and to coat other optical-application plastics. The groove size in your design would probably not pose a serious problem. Deposition on a tube of those dimensions should be quite practical.

I gave some thought to other types of coatings, on the plastic tubing surface, but silicone, ceramic paints, Teflon coatings, etc. all have drawbacks or failings that disqualify them. A Teflon coating might be all right if you could manage to satisfactorily cure it in a manner so as to not damage the tubing, and the porosity is low enough.

You might consider Kynar as a replacement material. As I recall, I believe it has an extremely high tolerance for ozone exposure. Another option would be some of the machinable polyimides that have recently become available. However, these are very expensive, even in production quantities, but could prove to be useful as an insulating material elsewhere in your designs.

More on my superconducting experiment

From the descriptions of your magnet experiment, which I analyzed at some length for you, there should not be any doubt that this is so, presuming the ORMEs powder you were testing was produced from gold, rather than recovered by J's ORMEs traps. I am unaware of any other material besides ORMEs, which could act as they did in your experiment. If you will describe details of the procedure you use to go back and forth from the metallic state, perhaps I may be able to offer a more solid comment on what mechanisms are acting.

Using FE to recover metallic gold for funding

I formerly avoided mentioning the use of Fluid Energizers you have to recover gold, to self-fund your project. Doing so is a possibility, but it in-part short circuits the work necessary to pay off the karma of success. This could be reclaimed if you were willing to donate about 20-25% of the recovery returns to humanitarian charities. You may be aware that the area you live in, from Baker City to Halfway, lies almost directly atop the bed of an ancient, tertiary river channel, which was extremely rich in gold. There are rich alluvial deposits along its course there, which may be exposed locally at anticlines, etc., crossing it. FEs would not even be needed for recovery, if you find such a spot.

Legitimate vs. ORMEs applications for ozone

>These ozone generators have many other uses which are independent of ORMEs.
>I believe that they are more efficient than other products. I am hoping
>that we can market them for "established" uses before the word gets out that
>we can generate high energy ORMEs with them.

(snip)

>I prefer to build a "legitimate" ozone generator business before getting
>into promoting the sale of our generator for any non conventional uses. On
>the other hand, someone else could promote these uses.

Barry, from my perspective, Mankind needs the benefit of your technology for enlightenment, considerably more than it needs another (albeit, superior) brand-name solution for traditional ozone-use applications. But it is true that it would be much more difficult for you to move into traditional uses after an initial focus on ORMEs activation; targeting conventional ozone use markets first allows you to establish a place for yourself in both areas.

This scenario will unfold differently, and you will need to paint it yourself. If you do not wish to follow my advice on approaching the ORMEs market first, then use the principles you wrote of, using your imagination to create the events you want to happen, and continue to replay it over and over again, reinforcing it. An important key that most people fail at is to willfully and intentionally *release* the image from your mind, each time, so the thought form energy can leave to start aligning things to fit your plans. If you fail to do that, the construct just remains hovering around you, like an unfinished idea, and never gets a chance to make things happen for you. Consciously put energy into your plan picture, and consciously send it out. But you will be cutting your own road on this; no forces are moving in that direction.

There will be a period at the beginning, during which you will still be able to enter into the ORMEs-related market, advantageously for both you and your customers. Keep a tight watch at the beginning, and if things don't look like they are developing well for you in traditional areas, you can still move over to the ORMEs market, if you don't delay too long. There is a lot of invisible impetus moving that way (in these most radical of times), that you (and almost you alone) could benefit from.

You could still achieve the best of both scenarios, if you were willing to set up sister companies, each directed to their own respective markets. At one time, I worked in the laser industry for a twin-company that did just that. They even shared the same building, barely partitioned from each other, with virtually all of management and procurement holding parallel positions in each. One side built specialty exotic medical lasers, and the other side turned out only mass-produced copier lasers, that essentially underwrote both companies. They were only separate by the barest of legal distinctions.

Gary

Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 21:38:40 -0600

Subject: Please forward to Croata

Dear Croata,

You wrote, in part:

The role of mercury in alchemy

>Specially prepared mercury is supposed to be the trigger
>for almost instant enlightenment...
>...
>and what I wanted to ask him is: how would he explain
>the role of mercury and not some other metal?

It is important to understand that enlightenment, instant or otherwise, is not the same as perfection. And we must be wise enough not to rush to jump into such a fire, until we have first assured ourselves that we are fireproof.

Why is mercury used in Hermetic Science, and not some other? Just saying, "because that is the way it was intended to be" is the real answer, I think, but that isn't very helpful.

The alchemical experiment is very, very, old. It was designed by those who gave it to Man, to be doable using a minimum of technology. In deciding on a suitable experiment to give us, it was clear that it had to be something that could be done at not too hot a temperature, otherwise it would require too much fuel to be practical, and be much harder to control.

At the temperatures the Great Work could be performed at, only a few of the metals then available to men melted at low enough temperatures to be possible candidates for something that men could do, within the limitations these conditions imposed. The materials in the experiment have to be liquid, initially, at the working temperature, in order for them to combine and process properly, as the experiment progresses.

About the only practical fuel they had that could be used was oil, though some number still managed it using wood, coal, pitch, etc.

You had to have glass, you had to be able to develop a steady heat at about cooking temperatures for months without stopping, and you had to be able to purify and refine the materials that go into the experiment well enough for it to work. And you had to be able to control the temperature just by how it looked, as things progressed, since no one had anything like a thermometer back then.

Of the possible metals, mercury was the obvious and best choice. It was liquid at room temperature, it was easy to obtain from cinnabar and easy to refine by distillation (using glass or pottery implements). The only other possibilities were lead and tin, and experiments producing the desired results based on lead or tin were all too complicated, or had some other reason that made it too hard for early men to correctly do. So mercury was chosen. It beat out lead and tin. It just happened that the two other ingredients, that needed to be used for an experiment based on mercury, were also obtainable.

The ancient Philosopher's Stone is not the same as the ORMEs David Hudson discovered. But it is very closely related. Both may enlighten the possessor. Both may destroy the possessor.

Aushadi: Raising Kundalini with herbs

You also wrote:

>Also, how could he explain aushaddhi, the ancient method
>of rising of kundalini with the help of herbs?

I have not followed aushadhi, and so am not very qualified to answer your question, as I have very limited information. I know Swami Satyananda Saraswati and others have said a few things about it, but I do not have any direct experience on that path nor have I ever spoken with anyone who has followed it, at least with anything resembling success.

Nearly all foods act to some degree on kundalini, either heating it or cooling it, and we normally experience these effects, only without recognizing that kundalini is, in part, behind them.

Certain foods also act preferentially, to stimulate some chakras more than others, and the same with nadis. I believe it is possible to prepare an herbal mixture of several kinds, which act simultaneously to stimulate both ida and pingala, both cool and hot acting at the same time, and if done in balance, this may arouse kundalini to greater activity.

Specific herbs contain substances that duplicate these food actions, but more intensely, and more directed in focus than foods, just as some medicines are very focused in where and how they act in us, while others are more general in effect.

I know that some plants have a definite cleansing effect on the nadis, such as eucalyptus, and others, but I have not made more than casual observations. I am sure you understand that anything which tends to clean the nadis is also promoting kundalini activity, even if indirectly.

Some mind-affecting herbs contain materials that drive intense thought currents up the saraswati nadi, which carries thought currents to and from the brain and the seat of kundalini. The saraswati is to the left, and forward of ida. Others plant substances contain highly volatile compounds that penetrate through the sahasrara on an etheric level (forcibly) leading to temporary experiences. But these may have a cumulative effect (though certainly not always a desirable one). This is also the same category that glue and solvent sniffing, and some of the so-called mind expanding drugs fall in.

Finally, there are herbs in all lands which act to naturally absorb and concentrate ORMEs materials, such as the two found in the teas that David Hudson mentions. Similar types of plants are a very important part of aushadhi, as it has been passed down.

In deferring to authority, perhaps we should reflect on this observation by Sri Swami Satyananda Saraswati, taken from his book, "Kundalini Tantra" (Munger, Bihar, India, 1984):

"Everyone is craving kundalini awakening, but few people
have the discipline and mental, emotional, physical and
nervous preparation required to avoid damage to the brain
and tissues. So, although no one is teaching the aushadhi
method of awakening today, its knowledge has been
transmitted from generation to generation through the
guru/disciple tradition. Perhaps someday, when the nature
of man changes and we find better intellect, physical and
mental response, the science may again be revealed."

Perhaps, indeed.

Gary

Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:40:31 -0600

Subject: Information request

Dear Barry,

Request for information on FE element

There are a few bits of information you may be able to provide, that would be useful in investigating materials solutions for the gas track dielectric tube. Having the wall thickness', groove dimensions, and groove spacings for the models you plan to manufacture would help. The former will help categorize whether standard tubing sizes for materials under consideration could be used, and the latter impact application uniformity issues for coating solutions.

I presume the accelerated life test failures you observed in Plexiglas would have been insulation breakdown, such as from the bottom of the groove, through to the inner electrode. If this was otherwise, please describe the details of what you found. I am also interested in what the surface condition of the lands between adjacent grooves was following prolonged exposure, and if you polished the surface of the grooves after machining them.

As my time allows, I am directing some attention to the varied phenomena described in your conversations with J. As things presently stand, there are karmic limits as to what I may convey. This is particularly so until I am able to experiment with one of the Fluid Energizer units. I do not wish to describe the transition mechanisms until that changes.

Perhaps you will relate your plans and progress in that regard, and what the prospects are of securing one, as you view the situation. Also, what is the status and disposition of the various prototypes that were made? How many of these remain functional, and how many are still in use?

Lastly, please notify me at such time as you mail the audio tapes. I hope the grant requests that you have been working so hard at reach receptive hands, and meet with success.

Gary

Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 17:46:16 -0600

Subject: #2, Please forward to Croata

Dear Croata,

My only reason for not naming the herbs in the teas, is that you had already asked that question to Barry, and so I felt it would have been improper for me to do so; that information is repeated in several of David Hudson's lectures.

Monatomic herbs in Essiac tea

The two monatomically active herbs, of the four components in Essiac tea, that David Hudson refers to, are named slippery elm bark and sheep sorrel; both contain Rh & Ir. The other 2 herbs contained in this tea are burdock root (as you rightly guessed) and turkey rhubarb, but these he describes as being general body cleansers and he did not find any ORMEs in them when analyzed. Slippery elm bark and sheep sorrel are most effective when finely powdered, and nothing is strained out of the tea.

According to DH's analysis, two ounces of Essiac tea (all 4 herbs blended together) contains 6 mg of iridium ORMEs, and 6 mg of rhodium ORMEs, yielding 12 mg ORMEs total.

I would suggest using more of these than would be used for a thin, tea-consistency beverage, so that it is rather thickened. Slippery elm bark, for example, is quite pleasant tasting, somewhat reminiscent of a mild, cooked-oatmeal flavor. In hot water, you will find it forms a mixture similar to half-congealed Jell-O, as the amount added is increased. Make it fairly hot, and allow it to sit and cool down till at a comfortable temperature to take, or else steep it for a few minutes. The materials are released a bit better that way.

Herbs that purify the nadis through breathing

Regarding the use of herbs for purifying the nadis, the following is the best advice I can give you in this area.

Herbs in this class include eucalyptus, most of the mint family (Labiatae; also their natural extracts, e.g. peppermint menthol), camphor, and needles of pine, fir, cedar, and similar conifers, all of which contain essences that act to beneficially clean the nadis. These may be used in several ways, most being designed to make the essence available aromatically, ie by aspiration, in conjunction with prana drawn in from the atmosphere. The essence in these plants is comprised partly of volatile physical substances, and partly etheric matter, with both playing a role.

Transfer of these active materials into the prana conduit system of the body takes place much more efficiently by means of using the pulmonary interface of the lungs, rather than via the digestive system. This is the most direct way to reach the pranic system, whether purely for pranayama, or for aushadhi cleansing techniques. This is not to say methods of consuming substances, etc., don't work, only that they take the long way around to reach the destination.

A very good method is to put the aromatics (oils, extracts; crushed leaves, needles, bark etc. of the plants), along with a little honey, into a water pot, which is then gently heated, and the vapors are breathed through the nostrils (only), during meditation. The intent is to draw in both prana and the cleansing essences, along with oxygen in the air, which then all act symbiotically to open and clear the nadis. The effectiveness is increased, beyond simple breathing, by practicing a pranayama such as the deep cleansing breath, at the same time.

So as you can see, our forester friend, Barry, whether he realizes it consciously or not, has chosen a vocation which regularly exposes him to these purifying influences, every time he makes a field trip to his evergreen "office". It is no wonder that the more spiritually aware part of the Earth's population mourn the losses we see taking place in our forests.

The enjoyment felt from particular aromatics when practicing this, and one's personal preferences for which materials are used should be followed, and practice should not be pushed beyond reasonable limits of comfort and tolerance, or before long the effort may well become counter-productive. If done in this way, and in the absence of allergic reaction to the materials, this is a relatively safe approach for a healthy person.

As far as details on herbal preparations to awaken ida and pingala, etc., since you are already familiar with Swami Satyananda Saraswati's teachings, you should then know that he specifically warns of the dangers involved in this:

"There are herbs which can transform the nature of the body
and its elements, and bring about either partial or full
awakening, but they should never be used without a guru or
qualified guide. This is because certain herbs selectively
awaken ida or pingala and others can suppress both these
nadis and quickly lead one to the insane asylum. For this
reason, aushadhi [using these approaches] is a very risky
and unreliable method."

(Op cit. Comments in brackets are mine.)

Warning against improper use of herbs

Similarly, I do not consider it appropriate to say anything instructive about this. Some things are to be kept back, and there is good reason for this. Some Tantric preparations are very, very toxic, with mixtures including such ingredients as night shade (Atropa belladonna), thornapple (Datura stramonium), henbane (Hyoscymus niger), etc., or their regional equivalents. These are absolutely deadly if taken internally; such class of mixtures may only be applied topically, rather than by ingestion which would almost certainly prove fatal. There are other types of preparations in this class you inquire of which are consumed, but these too are equally very dangerous, and are not to be presently discussed either.

No one in their right mind would experiment with such substances, unless sanctioned by a master or guru. Experimenting in that manner is on a par with attempting brain surgery without training. A slight error in preparation or use could entirely ruin one's health, sanity, or lead to death. In a single misguided effort, a foolhardy experimenter can dash all hope for spiritual progress in the present lifetime. No one who knows this information is going to dispense it, except as the Masters have already provided, in a guru/disciple scenario. For anyone to do otherwise would be highly irresponsible.

Likewise, if you wish to demonstrate to those higher than us, who can see you as plain as day, that you are responsible, trustworthy, and able to discreetly retain such occult information, then my advice is that you carefully refrain from discussing hazardous practices, or giving encouragement to anyone in the direction of such experiments.

Croata, there is nothing wrong with curiosity, and knowledge is not intrinsically good or bad. But if your aim is to make progress, you should perhaps consider more productive and readily available alternatives, which you already know. These will not only lead you to success, but will, I suspect, also bring you to the knowledge you seek at a faster pace as well.

So I sincerely recommend you consult a master or guru (which I am neither), if you feel you must find answers to your further questions on aushadhi, as I have nothing more to say about it.

Gary

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:17:43 -0700

Subject: Regarding Alax

Dear Barry,

Suggestions for Alax

Thank you for taking the time to write. Inviting Alax into your home as you have done is very commendable, and I hope this has the desired result of reducing stress on her, and allowing her to relax better and concentrate on recovery. I hope you will remember to take the time to share with her at length the principles you learned from Emmett Fox.

Alax is right to follow her instincts regarding sunlight exposure. There are vitalizing factors in sunshine, but if harsher components bother her, than this is an obvious indication that the overall or net effect is negative for her, and she has chosen to do the right thing.

Besides Vitali-tea, which may be obtained directly from D, (602-374-5744), in the absence of Au ORMEs from J, I would urge you to investigate the financial options available towards procuring commercial veterinary Acemannan for Alax, which would be her best alternative, due to its very high (90%) rhodium ORMEs content.

As you know, David Hudson reports that about 100 mg/day appears to be the nominal level for cancer treatments. Alax's case, with 2 tumors plus leukemia may require elevating the dosage to 300-500 mg/day, to be determined by her response, just as you suggested at an earlier date to J. Unless you have already found a closer source, I will arrange to supply Alax with all the DH-produced ORMEs needed to support her dosage requirements, as soon as these become available, possibly as early as 3-4 months from now. If the money can be raised or borrowed to pay for Acemannan in the meantime, that is her best course.

By this time next year, she should be fully recovered, quite active, and normal again, and her present condition be only a memory, to remind her how valuable life is, to enjoy from moment to moment.

DH has commented on ORMEs-mediated cancer remission as follows:

"First of all, if you use the rhodium and iridium, one of the
things you can see is that in the first 3 to 4 weeks the tumor
actually appears to grow faster. So if you have taken a biopsy,
and found that you have a tumor, if you take the rhodium and
iridium, in the first 3 to 4 weeks the magnetic resonance imaging
will show it's growing faster, which really scares people. They
say 'God, that's not what I want'.

What you have to understand is, that the dense cancer tissue,
when the tissue is converted to healthy tissue, it enlarges in size.
And so if the physical tumor is this large (gesture), when it's
cured will be this large (gesture). It actually gets larger because
it's going to healthy tissue. It's called necrosis in the medical
community. Its the opening up of the tumor, okay, and the going to
normal. After 60 days you do a biopsy on the tumor and its no
longer cancer. Its a benign tumor. The doctors who surgically
remove the tumor say 'Gosh, it looks like cancer, looks like it
ought to be cancer, it was cancer 60 days ago; its just not cancer
now...I don't know what to explain.' Well, that's okay. It takes
about a year and a half for all this mass of tumor to dissolve away.
So... if you have a cancer in the brain, if you have a brain tumor,
my advice is to stay away from this. And the reason for it is there
seems to be a growth. And that's a problem when you have a brain
tumor because your brain is encapsulated in a skull, which has a
limited amount of room. And so I advise people, you can have
surgically implanted a radioactive iridium pellet -which you don't
have to have radioactive, you can put the [non-radioactive] iridium
and it goes away too, but they make it radioactive so that standard
science can accept that this is why its going away; I thought 'That's
stupid' when I read that. Anyway then, implant this pellet in the
tumor, and the tumor shrinks down to the point that they can
surgically remove it, without hurting the brain. Then they actually
take the tumor out and they take the pellet out also. *Then* you can
take the material. Okay? But my advice to you is to be careful in
dealing with brain tumors, because you do have a space limitation
here."

Of course, the locations of Alax's two tumors make DH's suggested Ir pellet implant very difficult to do, surgically, and so the best recourse in her particular case is to continue taking ORMEs orally, or preferably by injection if Acemannan can be arranged. However, the additional insights to tumor behavior when treated by ORMEs that this DH quote provides may be helpful, in evaluating the day-to-day specifics of progress in Alax's case. Please keep me up to date on developments in her treatment and progress.

Gary

Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:17:46 -0700

Subject: #3, Please forward to Croata

Dear Croata,

Regarding further aushadhi questions, I will only clarify my last statements, and strengthen my earlier intended points. However, you also asked some other things pertaining to ORMEs, and these I may discuss.

Discussion of D's test method for ORME content in herbs

I know of no published data on the Rh or Ir content of any of the aromatic materials I mentioned, which when used as specified generally aid opening all the nadis. Plant materials that act on specific nadis do so through means other than ORMEs, as far as I am aware. Mr. D might be willing to test these or other materials for you, to determine their ORMEs content, at a charge sufficient to cover his expenses, but you will need to call him and discuss that with him. I discuss his presumed methods in more detail, below.

Rh and Ir, respectively, do not stimulate one nadi more than others, as far as I know, so I don't believe their ratios are relevant to stimulating ida or pingala, individually. However iridium is considerably better for opening (any) nadis than is rhodium; the former acts directly on the nadis, while the latter associates more with the physical nervous system, etc., in normal individuals. Perhaps more can be said about the effects of particular ORMEs after DH makes the materials generally available and some observations can be made.

DH has not done precise quantitative measurements of ORMEs in many common substances; he states that the most accurate quantitative process he has developed costs $9000 per substance to test, requiring large amounts of expensive reagents and a great deal of time, so they use it only when necessary. Nearly all the data he has released on ORMEs content of common materials (which is the list containing fruit and vegetable juices you refer to), was obtained from experiments performed by his friend and associate D, using a semi-quantitative or indicator method, which is perhaps 90% accurate under good circumstances (ie, no materials present in the sample which interfere with the process).

Those natural materials analysis experiments were run, according to DH, mainly to satisfy Duke's own curiosity, on the extent of natural ORMEs occurrence in foods and other things. (Besides being a talented chemist, Mr. D is diabetic, and has a great personal interest in learning about the properties of various foods). I believe the accuracies of the ORMEs amounts in the materials list that is in circulation must thus be viewed as having an unspecified error band, which would then be at least +/- 10%, and to this must be added the fact that not all sources of carrots (etc.) will have anything close to a consistent ORMEs content, depending as they do on the soil conditions they were grown in. DH says this shorter process takes about a day and a half to complete, and this is doubtlessly the one that they use for things like the ORMEs material sample you sent in, on Barry's behalf, for analysis.

I gather that their method is based on converting, separating, and isolating partial ORMEs in salt solutions, e.g. as chlorides, using chemical operations conducted much as though the ORMEs were actual metals present, except for allowance for the lower reaction rates, and taking some measures to speed them up, and then using colorimetric and spectrophotometric analysis of the salt solutions to make a semi- quantitative determination or estimate. Partial ORMEs salts largely behave normally in this way (exhibiting characteristic solution colors). Such an analysis method seems to fit very well with everything I am aware of DH having said about their techniques, but it is still conjectural.

Response to invitation to ashram

Thank you for the invitation to participate in the trials at Rishikesh, Varanasi, and at some other Himalayan monasteries. Varanasi is not too far from Swami Satyananda Saraswati's School of Yoga in Bihar, perhaps 250 km or so, and is also very close to Benares, where much can be learned. Please keep me informed as to the time and place of your trials, when you have the details. Which of the several ashrams in Rishikesh are you referring to?

I might also suggest you contact Yogi Gupta's ashram in New York. Yogi Gupta (as he prefers to be called), is President of the Kailashananda Mission in Rishikesh, and he travels back and forth between New York and Rishikesh regularly. He is, I would say, one of the most knowledgeable Masters alive today as regards to aushadhi. His New York Center is 718-592-3217, 70 West 46th Street, New York 36, NY. In your case, you may also call 212-247-1681; at this number you will probably get his house keeper, and she may be willing to ask him one or two questions for you, if you have them ready in advance, and he is there.

Croata, it would be very helpful if you would be willing to investigate the possibility of obtaining one or two ounces of Sri Sathya Sai Baba's vibhuti packets, and if you can get any, send them to Barry. Barry has someone staying with him who has a very serious medical condition, and those, as I'm sure you are aware, would very much help in improving her condition.

Perhaps you know someone in the area of Puttaparthi or Brindavan who could assist in obtaining them. It does not matter whether they are vibhuti from his hands, or the tourist packets of vibhuti sold at his compounds. We will appreciate any help you can provide in this way.

Gary

Date: Mon, 04 Nov 1996 00:59:39 -0700

Subject: Alax; tapes; & recent karmic matters

After viewing the video tape of your experiment, it is clear that additional factors are involved in the material's magnetic response than those I described earlier, which was directed to pure ORMEs. Your sample is not isolated ORMEs, but gold chloride (probably chloroauric acid trihydrate) as either a commercial product or made by J's pressure cooker method, and this in turn has been ozonated to produce ORMEs activity.

ORMEs and O₆

You have previously said:

>There is a large gap in our knowledge of the mechanism by
>which ozone moves the precious metals to their monoatomic
>state.

J's ozone technology generates a substantial amount of O6. I don't believe this particular allotrope is recognized yet, or it just barely has been, and satisfying the karmic cost of that has been the cause of the delay in discussing it for you.

This is a conjugate molecule, which might be termed di-ozone, and consists of six oxygen helices, arranged at the corners a hexagonal cell, alternating +-+-+-. It is reminiscent of the phalanx of rocket engines at the base of a Delta launch vehicle.

In oxides of the smaller members of the dumbbell atomic family, e.g. sodium, the oxygen spiral actually situates so it winds round or encircles the main central body of the dumbbell. From copper upwards in the dumbbells, and also the bars group, it cannot do this (oxygen is too small in diameter for them to fit), and so contents itself with a side-by-side arrangement, like a catamaran's outrigger. In the case of dumbbells, the oxygen and dumbbell axes always align in parallel. For a heavy dumbbell atom like gold, it is like a tiny man, dancing with a huge fat lady - there just isn't any good way to hold on, and this is (in simple terms), how gold resists oxidation so well.

I previously stated

>Simple glancing thermal collisions knock the monatomic atom
>into a rapid spin, and that is how the high spin [super
>deformed] state leading to ORME transition is most commonly
>achieved.

Now, I may finally say some things about the particular ORMEs generating mechanism you are concerned with.

ORMEs formation by ozonation is a mechanism that also occurs in Nature. A small but significant amount of O₆ is produced by each lightning strike, and also by highly energetic photons in the upper troposphere, stratosphere and ionosphere. However, because of their very high reactivity, the mean life of O₆ molecules is usually quite short, and so this mechanism generates far fewer ORMEs in Nature than geothermal processes, yet it is still an important process.

When an O₆ complex approaches a gold dumbbell, something quite interesting happens. Oxygen is a highly vigorous atom taken singly, but the dipolar forces from six synchronized oxygens, working as a team, is something exceptionally powerful, and in a class by itself. The powerful forces of this molecule are what effects the transition of gold, etc., into a superdeformed condition, and thence into the ORME state.

In most cases, even when a single oxygen is paired with a dumbbell, the axial dipole of the oxygen has a marked effect on the configuration of the dumbbell. For example, a copper hydroxide molecule [Cu(OH)2] is flanked by 2 OH groups, each of which consists of an oxygen spiral with a hydrogen triangle (composed of 3 quarks) floating over each end; these two OH's stand on opposite sides of the copper main body. The effect of the forces from the ends of the oxygens in this configuration is to repel and displace the funnels on each end of the copper, into a shape like an oriental fan or peacock tail, standing straight out like a Mohican haircut, on each end of the copper. This funnel displacement takes place, even after the forces at the ends of the oxygens have been mediated and toned down by the hydrogen groups.

The published illustration of Cu(OH)₂ in Occult Chemistry doesn't do it justice. Leadbeater and Besant early on gave up trying to show things in 3-D, and settled for simple 2-D diagrams of the elements. The oxygens are not really in the plane of the fan as depicted, even though described that way in the text, written by Jinarajadasa, who was describing the illustration rather than the atomic structure. The plane connecting the two oxygen cylinder axes is actually perpendicular to the copper's funnel-fan plane.

When gold meets an O₆ complex, something of like nature occurs to its funnels. As they approach, the O₆ and gold polarly align, and the gold dumbbell slips into the center of the hexagonal O₆ cell, which enlarges somewhat to accommodate the gold. Like flowers held in the blast of a jet engine exhaust, the funnels at each end of the gold then stand straight out, along the main axis of this complex, under the powerful combined action of the forces emanating from the ends of the synchronized oxygens.

The 6 oxygens each contain counter-rotating spirals. These all come into phase lock when an O₆ molecule forms, so that all 12 spirals are rotating in a synchronous fashion in the molecule, speaking in regards to the rotational phase relationships of the main charge carriers, which are uniformly located, one per turn, on the helix of each spiral. This intra- molecular phase resonance is responsible for the great power of the O₆ group, which thus exceeds the sum of its parts in its oxidizing potential. As can be seen, physical structure has a lot to do with atomic interaction and bonding potentialities.

With the funnels of an O6-embraced gold dumbbell standing straight out, it at this point has precisely the same super- deformed physical configuration as a dumbbell in high spin. This then, constitutes the basis of the mechanism responsible for the formation of Cooper pairing, and genesis of the ORMEs state, that occurs from exposing specific elements to high energy ozone. A very similar process occurs when bars family elements are exposed to O6. For compounds such as gold chloride, there are additional complexities, but in general terms, basically the same type of phenomena occurs.

The highly dipolar nature of this complex is what lies behind, and is responsible for, the magnetic properties of ozonated ORMEs (or ORMEs di-ozonides) and their salts. There are a number of variations to the structure I've just described. For example, the O₆ group acquires hydrogen ions to form hydroxyl groups (similar to those of copper hydroxide, described earlier) when in water.

The propensity for the an ozone-gold complex to deposit gold on carbon, and its attraction to hydrocarbons such as grease and gasoline, is nothing more than an expression of the disposition of these materials to oxidize, and the affinity of the O₆ in such an ORMEs complex for them. The appetite of the O₆ is hardly satiated by the gold dumbbell, and it is eager to find something else more reactive to bond to.

Even the tetroxides of platinum group elements like Ru and Os are relatively volatile, and the di-ozonides are even more volatile. When di-ozone is combined with salt complexes of these metals, the resultant compound is more stable, but is still anxious to be elsewhere, as soon as it gets a chance. For instance, in aqueous solution, volatility increases due to dissociation.

Following laws of partial pressure and osmotic diffusion, volatized ORMEs (fully capable of tunneling), will ignore barriers to other molecules, and go to where the closest, most attractive reactants are, following the path (as they see it) of least resistance: straight through into the gas tank, the crankcase, and the grease spots on the floor. The more combustive energy a substance has, the more the di-ozone portion will be attracted to it.

When the oxygens have reached their destination, they may or may not abandon the ORME they are attached to. There is a wide range of events that could happen at this point. But as you have seen, in some cases metal will be deposited, and some ORMEs will also remain, gelling the material. The absorption of "gold gas", or di-ozone-ORMEs complex into silica gel, which has a natural affinity for ozone, is based on the same principle; its affinity for di-ozone is greater still, in proportion to the increased O₆ reactivity.

When kept in solution in a beaker as di-ozone ORMEs complexes, when they leave the liquid phase at the fluid interface, they do not go straight up into the atmosphere above the liquid, but depart from the liquid along a vector which is dependent on their departure velocity vector, and this vector is random through a 180 degree umbrella. Because of the pseudo two dimensional interface between the container and the liquid, this will naturally tend to be an area where significant migration activity occurs. Because of this, the number of ORMEs exiting along or immediately near the edges of the glass container will be greater than for any other part of the liquid surface. It is also obvious that particles exiting in this region will tend to strike the inner wall of the container, just at or above the liquid level, since a large number of their possible departure vectors will point them at that region, for that exit zone, around the edge where the liquid/container interface or meniscus is.

Some percentage of the ORMEs hitting this region of the inner container wall will tunnel, rather than rebound. Should the tunneling ORMEs deozonate, as a result of local conditions in the amorphous structure of the glass, than the resulting gold atom will become stuck there, and its "appearance" will result in a localized stress riser, as a dislocation in the glass structure. After enough of these stress dislocations have accumulated in the same region, the glass will crack. In this case it cracks in a nice clean ring.

Tunneling was occurring in other parts of J's glass beaker walls also, but this was taking place at random locations, so the points of added stress were spread out and more-or-less evenly distributed. Hence no cracking anywhere else. Glass containers should not be used to store ORMEs solutions for prolonged periods.

The solid/liquid transition J observed, depending on the presence of ambient light is very interesting. This is a phase change, or mesophase, between a 3D crystal lattice and 2D liquid crystal. While liquid crystals are thermotropic, this is in fact a phototropic mesophase change, mediated by the change in lattice binding energy from just ambient photons at frequencies matching the absorption spectra of the material. I have been considering and investigating possible karmic pathways which could enable discussions to be presented on ORMEs subjects of immediate interest. These include the further discussion of subjects related to the formation of ORMEs produced by J's patented ozone technology; on the numerous important observations of ORMEs phenomena you have related; on means of separating partial ORMEs from one another according to Cooper pairing levels; on other phenomena reported by DH which have as yet only been described in terms fitting his understanding, which is largely grounded in conventional (though certainly up to date) scientific views of atomic theory; and a number of other areas.

There is 6 inches of string to bridge two points 10 inches apart. Either the string must be made longer, the points brought closer, or some of both. The string is the karmic cost of the knowledge, and the span is the knowledge gap to be bridged. The prospects look good that this can be done.

I encourage you to continue to actively pursue a course that will remove those obstacles. Continue the active exchange and brokerage of information. Continue looking for a way to obtain FEs to support this purpose. I suggest you approach J, at such time as seems to you to be propitious, with a request for a signed authorization from him, granting you, and also me, his permission to construct FEs for evaluation purposes. Besides forwarding the expansion of knowledge, that will also allow you to legally advance the designs of prototype models you plan to later produce.

Anything you can do to augment the flow of additional knowledge into the equation from sources such as yourself, J, or your other contacts and associates, will allow, and lead to, expanded scope of discussions, and interpretive explanations to promote your understanding. Keep up your efforts, Barry. The karma of this thing is beginning to melt like the wicked witch after Dorothy dowsed her.

Gary

Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 01:01:20 -0700

Subject: FE design, Carrington, gold, consciousness, alchemy, & anti-gravity

Dear Barry,

I've now gone as far as presently possible, in investigating ozone resistant materials and coatings for Fluid Energizer dielectrics. Further information would require carrying out some life tests under actual exposure conditions.

A continuously extruded or individually molded tube, made of Kynar, is the highest confidence solution (after Teflon), but is also the second most expensive (Teflon costs twice as much). Kynar has high dielectric strength, machines well (similar to brass), is thermally stable, and has excellent ozone resistance. Little or no testing would be necessary to optimize a Kynar dielectric design. For Kynar, it would be more practical and economical to machine flow grooves into the tube, rather than mold them in, until production volume exceeds at least 300 units/week (or maximum weekly capacity of one lathe, cutting the groovings). An extruded tube (14"L x 4"OD x 3.5"ID) would cost from $58 (from 100" uncut extruded lengths) to $118 for individually molded 14" pieces (these are 500 qty prices).

Some coating technologies could provide a satisfactory dielectric service life more economically than Kynar. Of these, parylene-c has the highest confidence. No real data is available on its performance under high concentration ozone exposure, and testing is thus recommended, but it is likely to prove suitable. Parylene has excellent dielectric properties, and is a very durable, zero-porosity coating. It has the best uniformity of any conformal coating in use, and meets most mil-spec requirements. This would probably work a bit better with a dielectric tube made polycarbonate, but should work for acrylic tube too. Either combination would be substantially cheaper than Kynar. You would need to find a coating vendor as close as possible to your manufacturing location, to keep shipping costs to/from the vendor from becoming excessive. There may well be some sources for this in Oregon.

Dozens of US companies do parylene coating, and you could even buy your own parylene vacuum deposition system and do the coating yourself, once production levels warrant it. The -c seems preferable to -n. The -n type has a slightly higher dielectric strength, but also has higher gas permeability, and is not as corrosion resistant. It may not protect as well for the same film thickness.

Parylene material is expensive. The cost of parylene coating is approximately a 2nd order function of film thickness. This is because doubling coating thickness doubles the material, as well as doubling the application time that a batch has to stay in the vacuum deposition chamber. Testing would be needed to determine the minimum consistently satisfactory film thickness. The cost of using parylene is about $5/tube, perhaps less, in quantities of 500/lot (amortizable by incremental delivery) for a .3-.5 mil coating. It might take 1.5-2 mils for proper resistance, or up to $20/ea. Start out with more than enough thickness, so you don't ruin your reputation from early units failing prematurely. You can cut it down later when you have more data.

There are some air-dry, room-temperature application silicone and Teflon (suspension) coatings that might do the job, but these would definitely need to be age-tested to verify they would remain bonded and offer adequate protection to the substrate. The resin matrix the Teflon particles are in is subject to attack. They would be expected to provide inferior protection compared to Kynar or parylene. Bond adhesion permanence is a major concern. But if they bond and protect satisfactorily, they would be the cheapest of any of the possibilities. You may even apply them yourselves, almost like spray paint. These could be applied to low-cost acrylic tube with no problems. It would take considerable effort to try out and thoroughly test these, to be able to decide if any of them will work, but they could result in a substantial reduction in the dielectric's net cost.

Silica (quartz) vapor deposition would certainly provide excellent ozone protection; it has high dielectric strength, and is very durable and permanent. But it is available from very few sources. The deposition temperature requires using a polycarbonate tube. Cost would be somewhere around halfway between Kynar and parylene; thickness would be a fraction of a mil.

The Bottom Line:

Vacuum applying a 0.5-2.0 mil coating of parylene-c to pre-machined and grooved polycarb/acrylic tubes seems to be the most economical, technically viable option, pending life testing for verification. The first 2-3 prototype tubes can be coated free, for life evaluation studies. If this or other coatings don't work well enough, then choose Kynar.

Using a thick wall aluminum outer electrode and an adhesive backed copper- or aluminum-foil inner electrode as you did, is the cheapest and also close to the best solution. It isn't necessary to platinum plate the ID of the aluminum tube. An untreated aluminum electrode will develop an oxide layer in an ozone atmosphere without it, and so would work almost as well without the expense of platinum electroplate. A slight interference fit

.001-.002 is easily achieved between the dielectric and outer electrode by preheating the aluminum tube and refrigerating the dielectric tube, just before assembly. Some graded dimensional matching may be needed to pair up the electrode and dielectric tubes; OD tolerances on plastic tubes are a bit sloppy.

I am collecting parts to prototype a 250KV AC power supply, to evaluate various ideas for an inexpensive implementation. The bread board circuit will over-drive an automotive ignition coil, as a parallel resonance-tuned tank circuit, which is perhaps the same approach J took. Most ignition coils (1:100 ratio) resonate at a fundamental between 3-5 kHz. With square wave switching, the voltage rise at resonance, and a drive amplitude around 55V P-P, it may achieve 200-250 KVs. The Q is low with a circuit like this, but is still high enough to keep primary current down. I'll excite the coil with an LMD18201 (rated 3A, 55V max), which is a low cost CMOS/DMOS H-bridge; a cheap 555 clock will run the 18201. I'm also going to evaluate some cheap off-the-shelf DC-DC converters and a few other areas. I'll let you know how the results come out, but I won't have time to work on this very often, these days.

I have spent some time reading Chemistry of Platinum Metals, by SI Ginzburg, et al. Hudson embellishes his references to the information in this book somewhat misleadingly, but he is generally accurate. This is the source for his use of carbon powder/strontium carbonate arc buffer, that he refers to in the LA talk.

I likewise have carefully gone through Platinum Metals Review (PMR) volumes 27-39, from 1983 through 1995. DH's British patent is abstracted there, under the regular section of New Patents, in the first classification (Metals and Alloys):

" METALS AND ALLOYS
Stable Monoatomic Forms of Precious Metals
Concord Res. Corp. British Appl. 2,219,995A
Stable non-metallic orbitally rearranged
monoatomic forms of Pt, Pd, Rh, Ir, Os, Ru, Au,
Ag, Co, Ni or Cu exist, having a 'd' orbital
hole sharing energy with an electron or electrons
and prepared by exhaustively solubilising and
evaporating a metallic salt. The materials have
high temperature superconductivity."

[Platinum Metals Rev. 1990, vol. 34, (3), p 167]

It is thus the very first listing among the abstracts in the New Patents section of that issue, and is rather hard to miss.

In the next year's volume (PMR 1991, 35, (1), p2-9) is an overview article by EF Maher, summarizing the state of high Tc (up to 100K) PG materials, research, and uses. In it, he seems to be bemoaning how platinum and some other PGEs have not been found to superconduct at all. Remarkably, he does not mention the (above) patent reference, published in PMR a year earlier, though he did manage to cite an obscure 1990 Japanese reference to a CuPt alloy reputed to SC at 200K. Six of his 79 citations are from 1990. It seems the abstract on DH's patent was just barely too recent, or was somehow passed over in the research done for Maher's 1991-published paper.

Carrington Patents

Recently, I examined the 15 patents (nearly all of which are rather lengthy), that have been assigned to Carrington Labs, mostly covering Acemannan and its precursors. One in particular details a colorimetric assay of Acemannan, by complexing this with commercial Congo-red, and noting the shift in color, showing a peak at 540 nanometers (ie, longer wave length than normal Congo red).

The patent says in this regard: "Surprisingly, it has also been found that the color development is negative for many non-aloe polysaccharides..." There is no question that this assay method is detecting the rhodium in Acemannan.

The Carrington patent descriptions of their extract is given as follows:

"Carrisyn is a fluffy, white, amorphous powder, which is
poorly soluble in water and dimethyl sulfoxide and insoluble
in most other organic solvents."

Sounds familiar. The term "most" other solvents, can be assumed to mean "none we've found so far", since none are ever listed anywhere; "poorly soluble" doubtlessly means "forms a suspension or dispersion". It also lists the results of spectrographic analysis on their extract.

"Emission spectrographic analysis was performed on CARRISYN
(R) extract sample. The analysis was performed by Huffman
Laboratories Inc. in Wheat Ridge Colo. A total of 68 elements
from silver (Ag) to zinc (Zn) was monitored. Only a few
elements were detected. These were calcium, sodium, silicon,
magnesium, copper, chromium, barium, iron, and aluminum."

As you no doubt notice, this list also has a rather familiar ring to it. The additional trace elements that Hudson didn't see are probably a result of the low purity of the raw Carrisyn, which is characterized as:

"Not less than 73% of Carrisyn (R) extract is Acemannan;
Carrisyn extract comprises generally about 73% to 90%
Acemannan."

The methods used to extract "Carrisyn", the active material which forms the basis of their various products, are largely applicable to any ORMEs-rich herbacious source.

The Carrington-assigned patents are:

5512488 Colorimetric assay for bioactive polysaccharide.
5468737 Wound healing accelerated by systemic administration...
5443830 Drink containing mucilaginous polysaccharides and its...
5441943 Uses of Aloe products.
5409703 Dried hydrogel from hydrophilic-hygroscopic polymer.
5308838 Uses of Aloe products.
5284833 Wound cleaner.
5118673 Uses of Aloe products.
5106616 Administration of Acemannan.
4966892 Processes for preparation of Aloe products produced...
4959214 Processes for preparation of Aloe products produced thereby and compositions thereof.
4957907 Processes for preparation of Aloe products.
4917890 Processes for preparation of Aloe products produced...
4851224 Processes for preparation of Aloe products.
4735935 Processes for preparation of Aloe products produced...

These run from 12 to 74 pages in length, with most around 40-50 pages, and contain a rich amount of technical information on the refining, manipulation, and medicinal properties of this curious "polysaccharide". In the event that you don't yet have these, I don't suppose you'd be interested in my getting copies of any of them for you, would you? ;-)

Patent 5,441,943, Uses of Aloe Products, (and many of the other patents) includes a lengthy list of viruses, maladies and cancers it is designated to treat. Several human, animal, and in-vitro case histories or studies are given in each of most of their patents, e.g. HIV patient recoveries, cancer remissions, human and animal diseases cured, etc.

Info on Diabetes

Notably absent are references to diabetes. For diabetes, I suggest D or others interested contact the Association for Research and Enlightenment, in Virginia Beach VA, and inquire regarding Cayce's readings related to diabetes.

In regards to D's reactions of emesis and other side effects from taking ORMEs. He could consult his physician and request a prescription of ondansetron, in combination with dexamethasone, to control and inhibit development of nausea, in conjunction with his ORMEs regimen. Because of his limiting conditions, he should not fast, but should take ORMEs (if orally) on an empty stomach before retiring. But he would be most wise to avoid the PGE ORMEs entirely for now, and just take gold.

Hazards of partial ORMEs

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. As in J's case, kundalini may shield against toxic factors, but this is definitely *not* the preferred method. Gold, even when metallic (let alone in its partial forms), 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 risks.

Hence my interest in your FE work. Hudson will not be able to supply gold ORMEs in any appreciable quantity for some time. J's technology, which you and your friends are involved in, is one of the shortest, most practical paths for those people motivated to seek to obtain gold ORMEs in useful quantities.

Gold ORMEs can make everybody happy. Consumers and Federal regulators alike. That is what everyone who hears about it instinctively wants anyway; they don't even really know why yet. You've heard for yourself the veiled tones of urgency, and sensed the emotion flowing deep beneath the voices of those who have asked Hudson "What about The Gold?", during the Q&A sessions of his lectures. Mankind needs your own, and your friends', services in this area.

Third World Applications

You last wrote:

>J has agreed to license us to make and sell the small FE
>for third world water purification applications. We need
>to talk about what resources you have available to move this
>forward. I will be submitting your business plan to J's
>board when they meet the Sunday after next.

Don't be discouraged about J sending you to the third world. I doubt that you will actually wind up selling Juan Valdez ozone generators. Just keep working towards desired goals. Every effort you make brings you that much closer to the point when the karmic barriers will fall away.

There is actually very little that I can offer you as resources to help bootstrap your business. J has the technology developed, and all the expertise needed to make your products work. You are a practical minded bunch with enough know how and common sense to run a business and make it go. In the suggestions for developing a business serving the ORMEs market I sent you, I included recommendations on raising capital, and virtually every other aspect of it. Is it not *your* business?

Perhaps I can offer you certain types of information you may not otherwise be able to obtain, but this is always offered freely, and only freely. I will be happy to help you out, free of any conditions, by working to locate sources for components and services, as my time permits, should you have difficulties finding something in particular. I may continue, for the time being, to comment on the underlying causes of ORMEs behavior, and certain aspects of the FEs, and perhaps bring to your attention some things you may be unaware of.

Consciousness of ORMEs

Also, you wrote:

>...We talked about many things including J's concern that
>his monoatomic trap could be used to trap souls as well. He
>feels that the monoatomic is alive and that the trap confuses
>it to get it to accumulate. This is similar to the way that
>Rachel described what happened to the monoatomic samples when
>I moved the magnet around under them. She said that she felt
>like they were irritated or preoccupied when the magnets were
>around. I am concerned as well that we might be disrupting
>an ecology that we don't even know.

Also, in the past, you have speculated on the consciousness of individual cells, in pondering the function of microtubules.

Atoms and molecules, cells, -all matter- minerals, plants, and of course what we normally recognize as sentient life, is imbued with chitta (mind-stuff), in varying degrees. There is nothing that is truly "dead" in this sense, in all of Creation. Do you recall my relating how higher Will is found maintaining the force that is flowing into and sustaining every anu in existence? Simply put, Life exists in all things. The Force is real; it was real, long, long, time ago, well before it recently became a mere Hollywood cliché. That is the source of this "mind", which, though it may be termed consciousness, it is not consciousness in the same way that Man is conscious. It is not a functional consciousness.

Atoms, Barry, do not think deep thoughts. When freed from an "uncomfortable" or awkward bonding arrangement, an atom might give a tiny sigh of relief, sort of like saying, "whew." But it lacks will of its own; it is far further on the evolutionary path of Life's progress that Will appears. Instead, atoms behave "instinctively" (to stretch the term). The "instinct" which they perfectly obey is what we call the natural laws of physics. There is no willful action in any of this, on their part. Yet the life force is within them, they have a form of consciousness.

Well, of course, the ORMEs are preoccupied, and a bit irritated, by a strong magnetic field. As I have elaborated, anything above Hc2 cuts off their interatomic conversations, it encroaches on their space. Is there any wonder then, that their attention is riveted to it when a magnet is brought near? So; does that make it unethical to bring a magnet near ORMEs? No, it certainly does not.

Deep within the earth, where the ORMEs were created and remained for ages, the magnetic field is far, far more intense than it is here on the surface. They were immersed in that field for eons, much stronger than for a tiny Radio Shack special. It is all just part of the job description that come with being an atom, like "fish must live in the water". It is about the same as the atmosphere is to us. It can be calm, or there can be wind. We notice the wind. We like it calm better. But wind is not unethical, imposing itself upon us. If it is too windy to talk, we will just have to wait until it is calm again to resume conversing.

Your & J's sensitivity to the consciousness of elements is very laudable, but J need not worry about trapping souls, or you of disturbing atomic ecology. In general, *any* dealing that less evolved life or matter has with Man, aids in its evolutionary progress, whether the interaction be positive or negative (as we might judge it). It *all* creates an impetus, propelling their development forward that much faster. The same is true when applied to us, when we experience contact from more advanced life --which is, for us too, often unawares. (This is to be understood, as the Big Picture is viewed, and not from the standpoint of isolated incidents.)

In order to grow, you must *experience*. You (or the ORMEs in a flowing stream) do not grow, have no realization of the potential to grow, unless there is some stimulus to react to. It is the delta, the difference between Shiva and Shakti, Yin and Yang, that makes the Universe work. When there is no gradient, no potential difference, it is all linear. Nothing interesting happens. Nothing grows. It is all Status Quo. A non-accelerating system; only random collisions.

To the little ORMEs, feeling a magnetic field changing in ways they've never seen in millions of years, certainly will be "confusing" ! It is something new. If you consider your actual reactions while riding on a roller coaster, they may include fear, uncertainty, a primal threat to your well being, and various forms of physical discomfort. Is this bad? No! It is FUN! Believe me... afterwards, those little ORMEs wouldn't trade a ride through one of J's traps for a chance to get blown 3 miles high, out a volcano!

Remember Barry, I keep telling you to lighten up. Things are not as serious as you think. The Universe really *DOES* enjoy itself.

In lieu of "irritated", I would suggest the word is "tickled". When someone is tickling you, giving you the old hand buzzer joke, or when you are experiencing an orgasm, would you say you are "preoccupied" by the sensation? You may reflexively want to jump, to leap away from the stimulus, if too intense. (Did a bell ring?) You may call it irritating, but it makes you laugh, doesn't it? An orgasm is kind of hard to do without something like a tickle in the right spot. Don't worry about the ORMEs. They'll get even, when its their turn to tickle you.

Anti-Gravity Reference

Regarding your reference to the anti-gravity device, let me add the following, if not too late to be of use for you. This device was originally reported in the British newspaper, The Sunday Telegraph, 9/1/96. The scientist is Dr. Eugene Podkletnov, who did the work in the early 1990s. The paper on it, which had been submitted to Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics (UK), though it was accepted for publication, has been withdrawn, and Tampere University in Finland (where the two physicists work) is now denying any knowledge of it, as is Podkletnov's associate, Petri Vuorinen. I suggest you check with Dr. Pitkanen, to see what he has to say about it. However, the experiment has been successfully replicated by others. The device in the experiment results in only a loss of 4.5 oz of weight (with the ring spinning) from a mass weighing 16 lb., though still a most remarkable achievement.

Sorry- I heard about it in October, but you hadn't mentioned to me you were interested in developments in that area. Also, glad to hear J is working with fusing ORMEs. Perhaps you will discuss details of this, and other areas, at some point.

Gary

Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:15:33 -0700

Subject: Mail, dielectrics, tests, O₆ factors, shipping

Dear Barry,

You asked:

>...How do the dielectric coefficients of Kynar and Teflon compare
>with those of acrylic? I know that one of J's major concerns
>with ceramic was that the dielectric coefficients pretty closely
>match those of acrylic.

The electrical properties of the materials in question are:

Kynar has close to the same dielectric constant as porcelain. Porcelain is generally representative of many electrical-application dielectric ceramics, excepting ferro-electrics like titanates and zirconates. Perhaps you have data for the particular ceramic J selected. Kynar also has a higher dielectric strength than any of these materials except Teflon. The higher dielectric strength would substantially reduce the incidence of arc-through failures.

A cylindrical dielectric, 14"L x 4"D x .25" wall, will be roughly 1000 pF between electrodes for Plexiglas, after allowance for the grooves. If this is increased to 2200 pF (by using Kynar), it will drop the resonance point somewhat, but shouldn't impact J's circuit significantly, beyond some minor value changes to adjust the oscillator frequency.

>...By the way, Js patent number is 0496666...
>I am going to try to get hold of a circuit board mask and a
>parts list for the FE. Would this help in your design efforts?

Thank you for sending me the patent abstracts; actually I looked up J's patent a month ago. I'm sure it is the case, but please do not consider sending me anything that J or his company owns or developed, unless he has expressly given you permission to do so. Both ethical and karmic considerations require that J's rights be honored at all times. It is premature to discuss sending me anything, at present.

You mentioned D concluded your materials were not ORMEs because:

>1) They were not white.
>2) Portions of the samples dissolved in aqua regia, ie.
> they were not pure.
>3) Some of the samples were not large enough to get accurate
> readings.

You also most recently wrote:

>...I tasted the sample and it had a sweet taste similar to the
>other clear samples. I ate as much of this sample as I could...

So...now I am beginning to see why you haven't accumulated a larger sample. It seems as though you are developing a karmic "sweet" tooth. Perhaps I should recommend a manna-free diet, until after confirmations are obtained. If you keep eating things up, you may have to spend 40 years in the wilderness. However, I concur with your observations and discussion of biblical manna, dew, &c.

Dissolution in acids may occur with partial ORMEs; a sample may be *nothing but* partial ORMEs and still completely dissolve in acid. Whether partials will dissolve in acids depends on the particular element involved, the degree of partiality, and the energy flowing through the paired valence circuits. You (and D too) presently lack means of quantitatively determining either of these last two parameters. You can use acid to eliminate partial content from your samples. But there are other considerations. Acids may also react with the oxygens in ORMEs-di-ozonides, with deleterious consequences, as explained in a moment.

In regard to D's criteria for rejection of your samples; you must be careful to properly distinguish the differences between sample types. There are several very distinct materials, which must be differentiated between if you wish to avoid repeating your recent problems.

Sample Approx. Color

1 ORMEs [white]
2 Partial ORMEs [from gray to white]
3 Partial ORME compounds (salts) [wide variations]
4 ORME di-ozonides [*white]
5 Partial ORME di-ozonides [*varies, typ. gray-white]
6 Partial ORME di-ozonide compounds [wide variations]

* Presumed colors

Copper is an exception, its partial colorations also reflecting the natural copper-red, in lesser degrees of partiality (2 & 5). The material J is collecting in his traps is 1, 2, and 3. The other materials, made by J from metals, or from ozonating trap material or chemical compounds are 4, 5, and 6.

As you can see from the above table, the fact that D and Killgo (let alone Hudson) remain unconvinced of the existence of partial ORMEs, as well as lacking familiarity with di-ozonides, is not particularly important from a color standpoint (criteria #1). But the presence of oxygen in the complex can alter the expected results, depending on the chemical processes (etc.) samples are subjected to. The reasons for this may perhaps help guide J toward fruitful directions of experimentation.

There are essentially two ways that an ORME-di-ozonide can lose its oxygens, to become a "normal" (ie de-ozonated) ORME. The O₆ can come off, just as it got on, by slipping off one end of the dumbbell or bars element. It is like a girl slipping a continuous circular bracelet off her wrist. But doing this exposes the funnels or bars on the exiture end of the ORME to powerful disrupting forces from the O₆ molecule as it departs, and often causes Cooper pairs to be broken during the separation process. This is its favored way of coming off in many chemical processes, in the absence of other factors.

The other means of losing the oxygens is for the O₆ complex to open up, like a hinged bracelet, so they come off without passing over the end of the ORME within. The O₆ breaks apart and comes off in pieces, in either O3 or O₂ molecules. This is much less likely to disrupt any Cooper pairing that is present; the captive ORME will then most likely still continue to be an ORME, after it is freed from the oxygens that were girdling it.

In many of the operations J has used to remove the oxygens, "pinning" the ORME, as you are terming it, the transformation into a metallic or partially metallic state (low order partial ORME) is actually the result of the oxygens blowing apart the Cooper pairing as they slide off, going after carbon for example, rather than chemical destabilization of the ORME's paired valencing. Once one end of a gold ORME's Cooper pairing is ruptured in this way, energy transients inside the atom often blow apart those funnel pairings on the other end as well, as the remaining valence circuits attempt to (often impossibly) assume a greater amount, or in some cases to maintain the entirety, of the atom's Meissner flux by themselves. It appears that stages of Duke's ORMEs analysis also causes this result. It will thus be necessary to first remove the oxygens yourselves, in a non-disruptive manner, before submitting your ORMEs to Duke. Having done this, treating the result with acid will eliminate low order partials, and you will have greatly increased your chances for accreditation.

J has noted that ozonated ORMEs seem to represent a metastable state, and this is why. Some processes remove the oxygen in a way that breaks the Cooper pairing, ending in a metal. Others remove the oxygen, in a manner so as to typically leave the ORME intact, which then, of course, shows itself very inert and recalcitrant to any further chemical manipulations, typical of ORMEs David Hudson has been working with.

There are some other factors which are important, and may be of help. You have learned that, because the di-ozone complex is highly dipolar, (as you have repeatedly observed first-hand with your various magnet experiments), it is susceptible to alignment and orientation by an external field. By aligning the O6/ORMEs complex with a polarizing field perpendicular to an electric field, the oxygens may be broken off and removed, laterally. I suggest approaching this by applying the electric field in an aqueous electrolytic cell, with a perpendicular magnetic field.

Perhaps you will inquire with J to see how he produced tiny popcorn- like sample grains; I am also interested in his comments on these. Regarding the zip file you sent, I do not presently have a data base program. I simply used a utility to strip out the high order control codes, and reconstructed the text in a word processor for the first data base file you sent. I'll do this for your second one when I have time, but it would be helpful if you can save it as an ascii file and resend it. Perhaps you can save it in a Quattro Pro format, which I can use.

Magnetic Containers for Shipping

You lately wrote:

>...by the magnetic field of the small super magnet that was attached
>to one of the smaller tin [-plated steel] can sample shields...

This suggests you and J are already doing something along the same lines as my recommendation for transport stability. Care must be used in placing magnet fields near the ORMEs; unless the field is properly configured, it may actually drive the ORMEs away from it as a dispersive force, rather than acting to confine them.

I suggest you transport the more active ORMEs as follows. Make a magnetic container, consisting of an iron pipe with flat-ground ends, sufficiently large in diameter and long enough to enclose the sample bottle. Magnetically attach a strong cylindrical permanent magnet, having the same OD as the iron pipe, to each end of the pipe, so they close the tube. The ends of the pipe and magnets should have flat mating surfaces, for minimum air gap.

The magnets are attached thus: [S-N][==pipe==][S-N]

If the sample is ozonated, include a small container or ampule of oil inside the pipe with it, to serve as a "getter" for ORMEs-di-ozonides minutiae that escape the sample bottle; I suggest using fresh olive oil or an oil-based capsule of vitamin E. The magnetic field, passing between the magnets and through the pipe wall will thus inhibit tunneling, by Hc2 suppression, and the portion of the field passing through the central region (where the sample vial is), will act to stabilize the ORMEs, and reduce their migration.

Once the sample is in the magnetic shipper, the magnets should be secured to the pipe by wrapping the joints with tape, or pushed into a confining plastic sleeve, to keep the magnets from shifting off-center if bumped. J can experiment with dimensions and field strengths, to find combinations that work satisfactorily with his samples.

It is not necessary for function to have a keeper bar around the outer poles of the magnets, as long as the magnets are sufficiently strong, and are retired if they become weak. But if it is going via a commercial carrier, you must include an effective keeper loop to close the flux path, to eliminate the stray external field of the assembly.

|[S-N][==pipe==][S-N]|
end bar-->| |<--end bar
|[====keeper bar====]|

A preferrable method is to use two magnetic shipper tubes to form their own keeper loop:

|[S-N][==pipe==][S-N]|
| |
|[N-S][==pipe==][N-S]|

Gary

Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 03:55:41 -0700

Subject: Comments on various of your recent emails

Dear Barry,

In an earlier email, you observed:

>J is reluctant to consider licensing the larger unit FE
>to me for any purpose. He is adamantly opposed to any
>license which involves selling FEs for ORMEs purposes. It
>seems to me like J feels that he has the ownership rights
>to experiment with ORMEs and does not want to give this up.

Of course J would be correct to feel that his patent ownership gives him exclusive right to use his technology as he wishes, including experiments with ORMEs. That is what patent law is intended to do, protect the inventor from infringement of his rights to his invention and its use, apart from any licenses he may issue. However, being legally right is not always the same as being ethically right.

J is experiencing the same desires for control that DH had to grapple with (and is still grappling with). The desire to maintain control is an ego thing. Hudson's ego finally let go, somewhat reluctantly, and he dropped his patents, after considerable financial pressure was brought to bare on him, under karmic action.

The futurity was for him to obtain patents, then subsequently drop them, just as has transpired. It was clear that he would not let go willingly, without some coaxing. "Coaxing", in Hudson's case, meant he had to suffer a decimating lawsuit, lose everything he owned, and declare bankruptcy.

DH is big-spirited enough to admit these causes, and consoles himself that he was also dropping the patents for altruistic reasons. But in fact, he would still be maintaining the patents today, had his finances permitted. Nevertheless, he has since genuinely perceived the truth he often repeats in his lectures: "No one can own this", "This is not for one person or group to control". That includes J too, to some extent, though J has not yet got as far in learning it, as Hudson has.

J's higher self is very patient, and will decide how to work things out in J's case. J's ego will have to fight his inner demons on his own. He must eventually come to a place, where he sees beyond his own needs, wants, and desires, to realize he can have what he seeks, along with everyone else, if he will... let go. J wants to know all about the technological side of ORMEs, and believes that releasing his grip for philosophical uses would jeopardize his position. But it is NOT releasing his grip that will cost him. Still, the ego holds on to its possessions with white knuckles. J has just about maxed-out his limit on inner demons.

Realizing it or not, J is, by his present actions, deciding how History will remember him. He may either aid, or impede, the spiritual advancement and enlightenment of Mankind. J's Life karma has helped bring him to where he is. But his own mettle is still being weighed, and tried for strength. Hudson could have avoided it all, all his losses, if only he hadn't been so stubbornly possessive. So can J, if he will let go. Or can be "coaxed" to.

Perhaps in the mean time, you may wish to challenge those ghosts of "daunting" specter that have been haunting you. I would suggest you enthusiastically pursue the opportunity to license and build small FEs. Try to avoid the problems that marketing territory boundaries would cause. Marketing boundaries are not practical, except from an advertising standpoint. You cannot refuse customers' orders, just because of where they live, or you may face some unpleasant visits from the Commerce Dept.

You will not need to violate J's injunction, not to go after the ORMEs market. Just go after the markets you agree on. The ORMEs market will come to you. J can keep control of his big units for his own research, you will be happy selling generators, your customers (ORMEs users and otherwise) will be happy, Hudson will be happy... why, everyone will be happy. :-)

Ozone generators properly designed around J's technology, whether large OR small, will produce O6. J cannot mandate how customers use products, after they buy them. A small FE will work just fine for ORMEs users. It can easily be utilized by individuals to charge small amounts of ORMEs for philosophical purposes.

Since you have not mentioned it, I shall point out to you, in case you are unaware, that J has allowed his fluid energizer patent to lapse, by not paying the (first due, of three) maintenance fees on it. It expired thusly, on 10/31/94, exactly 4 years after its date of issue.

J can still reactivate it, by paying a fee of $1600.00. His patent would then be active and valid through 10/30/98. If it still has not been renewed by 6 months prior to 10/30/98, when the second fee is due, it would then require $3200.00 to reactivate, for coverage through 10/30/2002, at which time the last of the 3 maintenance fees is due. Finally, it will permanently expire on 10/31/2005 (17 yr. from issuance).

The 3 maintenance payments each come due about 6 months ahead of their respective expiration dates, to allow the PTO time to process the extension.

Since J still has activation rights, I have preferred to discuss J's circumstances as if his patent was in force. However, karma being what it is, these facts need your attention. Under the existing lapsed status of the Fluid Energizer patent, you may (if you wish) legally proceed with your FE design and marketing, without any legal need to defer to J.

You may be able to coax J in the direction you wish to go, by tactfully reminding him of this, and perhaps leveraging the terms of your desired license agreement with an offer to pay the patent maintenance fee(s) for him.

You may wish to know, that J's FE patent could also be circumvented, such as by making non-obvious improvements and filing a new application. Many patents are easily negatable and this happens far more often than most people suppose. Anyone who knows how the device actually works could readily do so. This, of course would be wounding to J, and is very undesirable from any perspective. J deserves every chance to succeed which can be extended to him; his personal development as an individual is and always shall be precious, despite his sometimes prodigal ways.

But as you may have surmised, it is not altogether a coincidence, considering the importance of all this in the karmic scheme of things, that a kundalini-awakened American engineer is in close correspondence with you, who just happens to be familiar with ORMEs, from the perspective of their atomic-structure.

You wrote:

>D once told me that the deeper and darker the green
>color the more gold ORME present in gold chloride. I
>would expect that this deep forest green color is the
>result of partial ORME activity rather than a reaction
>to the full ORME...

Fully paired ORMEs do not react chemically, except as in the case of O₆ and some other unusual constructs. You may reasonably conclude that the ORMEs involved in D's chemistries are partials.

D may wish to do metrics to quantify, or keep track of, chlorine-in and chlorine-out (for example), to see how much is actually being bound to the ORMEs he is working with. This is an indirect means of monitoring the partialities present. Comparing the molar quantities of chlorine binding to the ORMEs, with the molar quantity of the gold present, will give him an idea of the number of partial valences engaging in binding reaction. He may release and measure the chlorine from ORMEs chloride, and deduce from that how many active partial ORME valences are present. That will only involve the partials engaging in binding, and would not tell anything about the amount of non-reacting higher order partials or 100% ORMEs which may also be present. But measuring released reactants is valuable, if the ORMEs were made from metal in the first place, so the molar amount of gold, etc., present is known a priori. Things may then be meaningfully deduced as to the relative number of non-reactive valences.

You separately wrote:

>I think it is fairly clear that the ORMEs materials as
>produced by D, CO and Hudson are complete ORMEs. The
>table in your last note,...and things that you say later
>in the same note, imply that you agree that Hudson et al
>currently have complete ORMEs.

Your conclusion here seems to contradict what you presumed in the preceding quote from you, and also incorrectly summarizes my views. I do not agree with this conclusion. They are surely producing and working with some complete ORMEs, but it would be inaccurate to infer that no partials are present, or even that they are usually a minority.

In reviewing my last email, to see where you might have gotten that idea, I presume the "things [I] say later" that you are referring to must be:

>>the fact D [etc.]...remain unconvinced of the existence
>>of partial ORMEs... is not particularly important from a
>>color standpoint (criteria #1).

and

>>[implied 100% ORME]...shows itself very inert and
>>recalcitrant to any further chemical manipulations,
>>typical of ORMEs David Hudson has been working with.

In my opinion, the ORMEs D, CO, DH, and J 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 (your criteria #1, 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 you see 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 percentage.

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 specimen.

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 them.

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 described in my original three part article, it seems hard for me to see how someone could draw any other conclusion.

No Barry: I am sorry that you misunderstood me to be implying that they are working with predominantly 100% ORMEs. I do not believe this is so, though I believe D and David Hudson 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 their remaining chemical and metallic properties.

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-linearalities that perturb this.

DH'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 ORMEs.

DH has stated that ORMEs don't form metal-metal bonds, yet offers no explanation for phenomena like this, 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 between.

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. Like ceramics, they are essentially glassy or amorphous in their micro-structure.

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. DH and D 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. It is certainly out of the question to discuss such things, while J is barring others from using his technology for ORMEs purposes.

Continuing, you wrote:

>If this is so, then the "charged battery" that D
>and CO are seeking does not differ from the uncharged
>ORME gold in terms of valence pairing but it must differ
>in some other respect....

Though the premise is not so, I agree with you, in your conclusion. Absolutely. The difference between most native ORMEs and charged ORMEs is the difference of how much, and what kinds, of energy flux are present in the valence circuits. I have previously discussed this for you, down to reasonably fine details, in several emails.

Charge is not the only difference between ORMEs and the true Philosopher's stone, which is made by a different process than that which D and CO are pursuing, after Artephius, with their gold. In medieval alchemical writings, "charging" is variously known as multiplication, magnification, exaltation, etc., of the stone, to amplify its power, and directly follows its completed preparation. It is a matter of a few weeks at most, and certainly not over a year as the process D and CO are doing.

>It seems that CO and D's observations of various
>phenomena that J has reported, probably indicate
>that J may have a way to skip part or all of the
>multi-year process that D and CO are engaged in...

Well, of course it does. Isn't this what we have been talking about for the last few months? Wrapping an O₆ around an ORME charges it just fine, in just about the twinkling of an eye. I might go so far as to say it is the Ne Plus Ultra method for ORMEs formation; at least it is the key first step in the process. It is getting the O₆ off again without trashing everything that I have been gradually and gently leading your attentions towards.

Charging an ORMEs system is different than charging ORME atoms individually, but there are some similarities and carry over, when individually charged atoms are combined into contiguity.

If D would like to work on this after he has completed his obligations to DH, that would be a very positive development. I will do what I can to lend him support, if he wishes it.

>However, the entire "charging" process has been done
>on their own time and D and CO "own" it.

I am glad to see you put "own" in quotes. Karmically, alchemical knowledge is clearly and unequivocally posted "Not For Sale", by the Original Owner. One may share in knowing such knowledge; this is not the same as owning it, which anyone would learn to their dissatisfaction should they ever attempt to lay an exclusive claim to it. David Hudson thought he "owned" some of it for a while. But note carefully that while this was technically the case, he accrued not one bit of material benefit from it. Indeed, that brief privilege cost him a good deal. He could never have maintained or used his patents for exclusionary purposes, under the heavy and ponderous weight of that enormous mass of karma.

Carrington Patents

As you can see after you have had time to review them, the Carrington Labs patents contain a great deal of information; even more can be deduced or inferred from the very substantial amounts of data they contain. Notice, for example, the doublet in their IR spectroscopy, matching Hudson's "electron-positron" doublet for Rh.

Why do plants accumulate ORMEs?

Hudson has noted that plants are the only natural concentrator of ORMEs that he has found which exhibit selective absorption. This is not particularly astonishing news, since animals, as a rule, don't eat dirt. Because ORMEs are predominantly in earth and water, and that is where plants' roots also are, this presents itself as a not-unexpected finding.

But one might ask, 'why would plants *want* to absorb ORMEs?' 'What *motive* would they have for doing so?' Are the forests enlightened? Is your plant psychic? ;-)

Plants take in ORMEs for a variety of reasons. ORMEs in the plant's sap, vascular system, and cells act to lower the freezing point of the sap, to reduce the evaporation rate (water molecules are less volatile when in the gel-like-state caused by the Meissner fields of the ORMEs), and improve the turgor, all of which are consequences of the Meissner gelling effect on water in the cells and tubules of the plant's vascular system. In the case of kelps and other seaweeds, for example, ORMEs' field actions aid in the reverse osmotic processes that keep internal sodium down to suitable levels. (D may wish to analyze some seaweed).

Aloe benefits mainly by the increased conservation of its water stores within the leaf gel. Succulents, as a general rule, are well represented among the species that tend to absorb ORMEs. ORMEs also help plants accomplish certain stages of photosynthesis, though they don't seem to be essential for it. Finally, plants do have a spirit of sorts, and ORMEs likewise aids them philosophically and curatively.

Etheric template for DNA repair

Regarding Hudson's negative results with in-vitro cancer cultures. Cell cultures do not behave the same as their in-vivo equivalents, for processes that involve kundalini. Cell cultures contain pranic energy, but they lack nadis, and kundalini. As kundalini generally oversees and directs the use of ORMEs, this means ORMEs actions in vitro will be substantially impaired, and much less effective, than in vivo.

Some have asked incredulously and sometimes vituperously how DNA could possibly be repaired and restored to its original sequence by *anything*, once damaged. I have listened to several such exchanges. Some apparently believe that, once the DNA is damaged, nothing remains to base a correction on, and hence have difficulty understanding how ORMEs (or anything else) could know *how* to "fix" sequencing damage, once it has occurred (assuming, of course, that both halves of the DNA have been altered).

Each of us has an etheric double, which is the coarsest of the subtle counterparts of our physical body. This and some subplanes of the astral are the level or home of an 'elemental', associated with the innate consciousness of the physical body. This is a separate consciousness, like those I touched on in explaining the nature of consciousness in matter, earlier.

Regardless of the physical damage cellular DNA may sustain, such as by ionizing radiation, phage-induced mutations, etc., the subtle template is always there, and though it may be depleted of vitality, it is not susceptible to these sorts of structural damage. It is around this prescient organizational form that our bodies grew, in genomic expression, once the individualization phase began in later fetal progress. Every molecule **related to organization and structure** has its subtle counterpart, within it. This is the same matrix which has been observed in the "phantom leaf effect", etc., in Kirlian photography.

Kundalini and ORMEs both function, in large part, in 4th dimensional astral levels. The original subtle "backup copy" of the DNA is readily available to them, at the precise place where it is needed, right at the damage site in the errant cell's DNA. The subtle part lies, superimposed 4th dimensionally, right where the physical part is, and there is no problem at all, in seeing where the two don't agree. There are a variety of mechanisms that repair DNA. In some cases, given sufficient ORMEs in the system, kundalini simply uses the ORMEs as a mechanism, like a read/write head so-to-speak, in repairing the damage. ORMEs are used to transfer a resonance from the subtle template, to guide the DNase, polymerase, endonuclease, and other various enzymes in removing and recoding the damaged base sequences. Each of the bases has a distinct vibrational signature, which the enzymes have no trouble at all in recognizing.

In a cell culture, the cell's own subtle template is present, but no kundalini is present as an organizing force, nor overall template, and virtually no organization is present among the cells, so the genotypical expression elements are largely running open loop. How likely is it that ORMEs may effect a cure under these conditions? Not very(!), though they still seem to have some slight beneficial effect. I suggest they shall have better luck with curing cancers when they experiment on lab mice and other living creatures.

Columbia River blow off points

You quoted J to say:`

>The [Columbia River] gorge trip has got two blow
>off points that are very specific.

The spots in question along the route between Portland and Baker City are not geologic, but rather are man-made, and occur where the highway crosses beneath high voltage power lines, as happens where transmission lines span the Columbia River and I-84, at the narrow point in the large southerly bend of the river, just west of the Dalles. Going under those lines, with the huge ground currents that exist there, would be enough to make any self-respecting ORME anxious to escape.

No to MHD, use radiation detector

Regarding J's experiments reducing ORMEs to metal, producing the slag-like material you mentioned. Please give him my strong advisement, that he always have an ionizing radiation detector present, on and working, whenever he does such operations, without exception. I would likewise strongly advise him against MHD experimentation involving plasma or gaseous ionization, for the time being. There are too many dangers, and there is little to be safely gained of philosophical value in that direction, until greater understanding is enjoyed. If J feels he must experiment with ORMEs in MHD experiments, I advise him to make sure his Will is in order, and to keep his experiments very small scale. He should focus mainly on areas related to philosophical uses.

Merry Christmas to you and Susan, to your friends, and to all those dear to you.

Gary

Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:53:46 -0700

Subject: Basis of FE's O₆ production, atomic theory, &c.

Dear Barry,

You lately asked:

>I would like to send this note to the White-Gold
>forum. Do you have a problem with the quote toward
>the end?

You may post it if you wish, however, my advice is that you do not publicly quote from email I have sent you until such time as I give you further discretion. I will certainly do so when other factors are propitious.

You previously stated:

>I assume that any restrictions that evolve will be
>in the best interest of getting ORMEs out there.

This is not necessarily a valid assumption. Taking the path of least resistance could be most unwise. Always think for yourself. Do not allow yourself to be submissively guided somewhere you do not wish to go, other than by someone whom you know you can fully trust. Live life with eyes wide open.

You have also inquired:

>... Why do you think that the FE produces O6?
>What is the mechanism? Is it the frequency or
>the voltage or the focused field?

The important and distinguishing factors in J's FE design for O₆ generation are the long gas travel path and its higher frequency of operation. The FE is unique in having both of these features together.

Like electrons in the old Farnsworth multipactor tubes, the oscillating E-field accelerates the O₃ molecules back and forth between the electrodes as the field changes, with +-+ O₃ molecules moving 180 degrees out of phase from the -+- O₃s. In approaching each other, going opposite directions, opportunities to pair and combine to form di-ozone are presented. The relatively high frequency of the high voltage field in J's devices means more such opportunities occur for a given length of time spent inside the ionizing field region, than for ozone generators operating at 60 Hz line frequency. Likewise, the longer travel path of the gas means that they stay in the field longer, for the same flow rate. It is a very good system.

The dielectric bridges between the electrodes, which are integral to J's method of forming the gas path groove, actually diminish the overall efficiency. Flux passing through the bridge areas constitute an impedance shunt, which consumes power, but which does nothing to generate ozone or O₆.

>...J claims that he can optimize for O₆ production
>but that it will reduce efficiency.

Normalizing the regions of high local field intensity would indeed reduce its effectiveness somewhat, in breaking down other types of molecules, just as J told you.

The dielectric efficiency and gas path design can be improved for O₆ in a number of ways. As shown below, thin wall Teflon tubing is packed between the dielectric and outer electrode. The tubing may be specially extruded as a square cross section, but, as will be seen, using ordinary round cross section tubing, which is forced into a square (with rounded corners) by packing compression, has some desirable advantages from an assembly tolerance standpoint.

Partial-section view of a suggested
improved gas path/dielectric design.

This arrangement does several beneficial things for you. It eliminates the need to machine grooves in the dielectric, lowering cost and scrap rate. You can use plain, standard plastic tubing for the dielectric, simply by cutting it to the correct length.

By not having to contend with tolerance control of grooves cut in the OD of the tube, the incidence of high voltage breakdown is greatly reduced. With a uniform "flat" surface, the field gradient will not concentrate into local, highly stressed regions, as occurs at the nadir of round-bottom grooves. To produce the same O₆ results with an axially uniform field gradient as developed by the non-uniform field of a round bottom groove, the total field gap need only be reduced by about 10%.

Because the oxygen, ozone, and di-ozone are entirely contained inside highly inert Teflon tubing, you may freely use cheap dielectric (plexiglas) and electrode materials without fear of degradation, since they are protected by the Teflon from the gases, and oxidizing exposure has been virtually eliminated. The service life of the FEs will be substantially increased.

(Some ozone will form in the small interstices between the tubes; this can be minimized by filling them with silicone grease, but that step will probably be unnecessary).

Teflon is the ideal material to contain the gases, and Teflon tubing presents a cost-effective means of enjoying all the advantages of Teflon, without the high cost and mechanical disadvantages that making the entire dielectric tube from it would entail. Thin wall Teflon tubing is relatively inexpensive, and is available from stock in a variety of diameters from numerous sources. Simply cut however many inches of tubing you need, and stuff it between the electrode and dielectric tubes, one loop at a time; the slippery Teflon will slide easily into place. Select tubing slightly greater in diameter than the separation between the electrode and the dielectric. Use a Teflon or stainless steel push-in fitting to make the end connections. Of course, you will need to design end components to hold everything together in proper relation, etc.

With Teflon tubing, the tolerance problem in fitting the dielectric tube into the outer electrode is eliminated. Teflon tubing, as it compresses into coils of rounded-square passages, will automatically center the dielectric tube and outer electrode. The usable tolerances in the diameters of the parts is thus much greater this way. The tubing compresses more, or less, depending on the amount of space between each dielectric-electrode set, removing the need for a precision fit that cut-grooves require.

Absolving the need for tight diameter tolerances here is important, since commercial plastic tube varies a great deal in actual OD. In contrast, a cut-groove approach could force you to fully machine both the dielectric OD and the outer electrode's ID, in order to achieve consistency in fit from unit to unit.

--------------------------------------------

The following sequence of diagrams illustrate how O₆ is produced in the FE.

The electrode polarity is actually alternating at high frequency; the sign polarity shown below is only a representation of its value at an instant when the left electrode is minus and the right electrode is plus. As the field reverses from instant to instant, the molecule orientations and their directions of movement all reverse with it, so everything oscillates with the E-field, and the (below) relative motions, as they are shown, repeat twice each cycle. The molecules are depicted in the actual orientations and approximate shapes they exist in, looking at the cylindrical oxygen helices from their ends.

-| |+
-| O2 |+
(a) -| (+)(-) |+ G
-| |+ A
-| +O -O |+ S
(b) -| <-- (+) (-) --> |+
-| |+ F
-| |+ L
-| |+ O
-| -O O2 |+ W
(c) -| (-)--> (+)(-) |+
-| |+ |
-| -O3 |+ |
-| (-) |+ |
(d) -| (+) --> |+ \ /
-| (-) |+ |
-| |+
-| |+
-| |+
-| O2 +O |+
(e) -| (+)(-) <--(+) |+
-| |+
-| +O3 |+
-| (+) |+
(f) -| <-- (-) |+
-| (+) |+
-| |+
-| |+
-| |+
-| -O3 +O3 |+
-| (-) (+) |+
(g) -| (+) --> <-- (-) |+
-| (-) (+) |+
-| |+
-| O6 |+
-| (-)(+) |+
(h) -| (+) (-) |+
-| (-)(+) |+
-| |+
-| |+
-| |+
-|------------(~)------------|+
High Voltage
AC Source

The explanation of the above diagrams is as follows:

(a)&(b) A diatomic oxygen splits apart under field
ionizing potential. Each ion is attracted
towards the oppositely charged electrode.
(c)&(d) A negative oxygen ion combines with a diatomic
oxygen (c), to form a (-) ozone molecule (d).
The resulting negative ozone molecule naturally
orients itself in the E-field as shown, and
moves towards the positive electrode.
(e)&(f) A positive oxygen ion combines with a diatomic
oxygen (e), to form a (+) ozone molecule (f).
The resulting positive ozone molecule naturally
orients itself in the E-field as shown, and
moves towards the negative electrode.
(g)&(h) Negative and positive ozone molecules (g), oriented
as shown, move towards the electrodes of
opposite polarity, respectively, under electric
field attraction and repulsion forces. In doing
so, they approach each other, and combine to form
(h) an O₆ molecule (di-ozone).

In his patent, J points out that the pressure falls as O₂ converts to O3, due to the reduced molar volume. The same thing occurs as O3 converts to O6. If all the diatomic oxygen was to combine into O6, the oxygen gas volume will thus be reduced by a factor of approximately three.

These conversions proceed efficiently in the FE, reducing the effective outlet flow rate. This keeps the gas between the electrodes still longer, augmenting the conversion efficiency still further, etc., etc.

It is a very good design, and ideally suited for making O6.

Guidelines on sizing a small FE for O₆ generation.

The critical factors for O₆ generation are (1) the amount of time it takes a particle to travel the gas track length, at the design flow rate; (2) how many field cycles occur during that time; (3) the strength of the field gradient; and (4) whether any substances are present in the feed stock gas (eg nitrogen) which may interfere with the formation processes.

For (1), there are two approaches to designing a small FE for O₆ production, based on scaling down a larger design.

a) Same length gas track If a small FE is designed so that the flow path length, average gas particle velocity, and gap field gradient (v/in) are all the same as for a larger FE, then the flow-proportional or percentage rate of O₆ production shall also be the same. A reduced O₆ capacity for the smaller FE in this case may be achieved by reducing the cross-sectional flow area in the gas track. For the same delta-p, this can be designed to result in same average particle velocity, but with an outlet flow rate reduction, in comparison to the larger FE.

b) Shorter gas track To design a smaller FE with a shorter gas track, while maintaining the same percentage of O6, you will typically reduce the gas velocity. The O₆ output rate is lower due to the lower flow, but the O₆ percentage is unchanged if the velocity is set so the time spent inside the field is the same. The velocity reduction is achieved by a combination of reducing the cross-sectional area, and/or the applied delta-p.

In both the above cases, all you need to do is establish conditions that result in a given particle remaining within the field for the same duration, and O₆ production, as a percentage, will stay constant, assuming the v/in and frequency are also the same.

Barry, I suggest that you and J join the International Ozone Association at some point. Once you and J have enough data to substantiate O6's existence, molecular ring form, and other properties, you will get a lot of valuable mileage by publishing it.

http://www.int-ozone-assoc.org

>...J loaned me one of the test bed hand held
>FEs to use as a demo for J.D. Running on air
>pumped through it with a hand held bulb, I
>ozonated a glass of water. The ozone was still
>detectable in the water the next day. I asked
>J about whether he thought that the FE ozone
>is more persistent than regular ozone. He said
>that he thinks that it is. Do you suppose that
>O₆ is more stable than O3 or just that it first
>has to break down from higher ozonides before
>breaking down as O3?

I have already commented on the stability of O₆ in an earlier email.

>I did not bring the samples in their magnetic
>bottle into the restaurant since it looks
>suspiciously like a pipe bomb.

I suggest you paint the pipe a friendly medium blue, and the magnets a warm yellow or orange. Be sure to mask where the magnets and pipe touch, to keep the paint's thickness from increasing the gap. Mark the pole faces with N/S, happy-face stickers, or whatever, so you can tell at a glance if the magnets are oriented correctly.

You wrote of your conversation with J:

>And then you put two of those together side by side
>reversed, so that you've got north south on one end
>and south north on the other.

If using two of these tubes side-by-side, you must be cautious to always use a keeper bar long enough so that the magnets of the adjacent tubes don't come in contact. If they do, this will effectively short-circuit the magnetic flux path, so much less flux passes through the tube walls, potentially defeating the device's intended function.

|[N-S]========[S-N]|
Right: | |
|[S-N]========[N-S]|
|[N-S]========[S-N]|
Wrong: |[S-N]========[N-S]|

^ ^ 

The field flux is effectively short
circuited at the arrow locations,
by direct contact between magnets.

Regarding the lapsed status of patent 4,966,666, you related:

>J denied this when he first heard it. As you
>can see from item 2 of his response to our
>proposal he has apparently changed his mind.

If you would like to check on the status of J's patent for yourself, you can call the Patent and Trademark Office toll free, at 800-786-9199. Ask for the office handling maintenance fees. Explain that you do not have access to a library containing patent information, and they will look up the status of J's patent for you.

Further on, you wrote:

>Do you have drawings or pictures of the various atomic
>valence structures? These would help me to visualize
>more of what you are saying.

These are illustrated extensively in Occult Chemistry and in Stephen Phillips' book. I doubt if I could improve much on what has been published. The published illustrations are a reasonable compromise in depicting the impossible (because of the problems of relative scale). I gave the reference for Phillips' book in the 3-part post to the WG Forum, and Croata provided a source for a 3rd edition Occult Chemistry reprint.

>In an earlier post you talked about how dumbbell group
>ORMEs have twelve pairing levels. This is not clear
>to me. It is difficult to picture a reason why sodium
>with 11 electrons and Lawrencium with 103 electrons
>would both have twelve pairing levels. Even assuming
>that the ORME state for these materials is diatomic,
>you would only have 11 pairs in sodium and you would
>have 103 pairs in Lawrencium. I have trouble
>visualizing the entire uneven electron diatomic ORME
>structure as well.

Of course, you doubtlessly understand that 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. But this has little to do with the number of electrons (and positrons) inside the atom.

It seems to me you are trying to overlay the orbital theory of the atom, onto yogically observed *real* atoms, and this is the source of the confusion. 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 be confusing.

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 the two cited references, 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, so I won't go into that; 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.

So, 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 positrons.

If you wish to go into this further (the electron as the basis of 3 dimensional atoms) you 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.

>J told me that Kynar has piezoelectric properties
>that make it unsuitable for use in the FE. He is
>still fixated on alumina. I have heard that pourable
>ceramics have been developed and might be suitable
>for our purposes.

Whether a dielectric is piezoelectric or not doesn't matter too much for the fluid energizer. In any case, Kynar is not a piezoelectric material. It would make an excellent FE dielectric. It is quite suitable in nearly every way, other than being somewhat expensive. Kynar is actually a high dalton thermoplastic polymer, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF). Thermoplastics like this do not exhibit the piezoelectric effect.

Perhaps J was thinking of 'triboelectric' (ie becomes positively charged by rubbing) rather than 'piezoelectric', but this too is not detrimental for application in a FE. Any charge developed by the gas flow is immediately removed by the gas and electrode. J's choice of alumina will work fine, electrically, etc., but is more problematic to work with than plastic.

You may wish to consider the approach I outlined earlier, using Teflon tubing, as an alternative.

Gary

Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:44:36 -0700

Subject: FE dielectric, frequency, tube shape, Ox allotropes

Dear Barry,

I'm glad your enthusiasm for the FE project is growing.

To begin, you wrote:

>I am wondering why the inner dielectric is necessary in your
>design. Couldn't we just have the inner electrode and the outer
>electrode with the Teflon tubing and air space forming the
>dielectric? It seems that the focused field would be more
>symmetrical with this kind of arrangement.

It is possible to eliminate the inner dielectric, and rely solely on the insulating value of the Teflon tubing, but, as I will explain, this would result in a system which would be prone to breakdown, and poorly optimized. The voltage gradient would have to be dramatically reduced.

One reason the inner dielectric is essential, is that when the applied potential reaches the point at which the gas ionizes, which occurs twice each cycle, the gas then becomes, effectively, a conductor. If you mentally replace the space occupied by the gas with a solid cross- section of copper, you will get the idea. Under that condition, the entire applied potential will appear across the two thin walls of the Teflon tube (assuming now that we have removed the inner dielectric, as in your question).

Teflon has excellent dielectric strength, but the few mils thickness of those two thin walls will be inadequate to withstand the ionization gradients which are needed to make the FE work efficiently. You would need to reduce the applied voltage by more than an order of magnitude, to keep the Teflon tube from failing and breaking down. Using as high a voltage as possible improves the net O₆ process rate. The inner dielectric keeps the device from becoming a short circuit, every time the gas ions inside the tubes cascade into the conductive regime.

Teflon has a dielectric strength of about 2100 v/mil (for FEP), which would have to be derated somewhat for tubing wall, since the density is a little lower, particularly when strained by coiling, as in the FE. If you have tubing with a 5 mil wall, as a nominal, you could not exceed about 15 kV peak between electrodes. For a reliable, long-lived system, you may need to nearly halve that value.

But a breakdown of the Teflon in the tube walls is the least of your worries. What do you suppose will happen when the thin film of gas between each of the Teflon tubes ionizes? The space between the tubes (especially when scrunched together) may seem insignificantly small, but that region contains thousands of microscopic grooves. The gas in them (for packed tubes) is effectively trapped, and non-circulating. Under voltage, it will ionize into more arc tracks than great granddaddy's whiskers, short circuiting the electrodes long before the gas ionization inside the Teflon tubes reaches peak levels. These intra-tube short circuit arcs, if they don't burn out the driver, will heavily load it, ruining the efficiency. You could fill that space with silicone grease or equivalent, but this would still be a marginal-confidence arrangement.

The dielectric also adds to the capacitance of the FE's gas cell. During discharge, energy stored in the dielectric flows into the gas, as if from a sort of storage tank, as it were. Without this effect, the duration the gas would maintain an ionized state (each half cycle) is reduced. As you can see from the diagrams I sent you earlier, showing the stages of formation, the final O₆ combination step does not involve ionization, only two ozones moving electro-kinetically. But the formation of O3, which is necessary to support that step, certainly does. So with a shorter ionization period, O₆ production efficiency will suffer a big penalty.

Regarding the frequency of operation, you wrote:

>With every modification to the generating element, J usually
>has to make adjustments to the driving circuit. We expect that
>this will be the case with the modification that you suggested.
>If Dan cannot figure out the necessary modifications we will
>have to get J to sign a non-disclosure agreement with Dan for
>this idea.

Also:

>There also appears to be a resonance frequency peak where ozone
>production efficiency is improved. It does not appear to be just
>that the higher frequency allows more collisions between oxygen
>atoms. Do you think that there may be a resonance frequency that
>would favor O6?

These questions are related, so I have put them together. In the fluid energizer, the inner and outer electrodes, together with the dielectric, etc., in between them, form a capacitor. This capacitor, in conjunction with the high voltage secondary winding (output winding) of J's coil or transformer, constitute a parallel resonant circuit, often called a "tank circuit". This resonant tank includes both lumped and distributed reactances. The net LCR values determine the resonant frequency of the circuit.

The characteristic of a parallel resonant circuit is that external impedance is maximum at resonance. Large currents flow within the tank, and the consequence of this is that voltages across the tank are maximum at resonance. The way external impedance peaks at resonance results in a happy state of affairs so the driving power required is minimum, ie, it is at maximum efficiency at that point. So a resonant tank driver like this is the best method of achieving high voltages, while minimizing power consumption. There are all sorts of drive circuit approaches and coil variations which can be used, but the resonant output stage is about the same in all of them.

When you change the size of the FE gas cell (electrode assembly), this alters the capacitance of the cell. The capacitance is a function of 1) the electrode surface areas, 2) the distance separating them, and 3) the dielectric constant of the material(s) in the intervening space (in this case, a dielectric, some tubing wall, and gas -either ionized or not. It is clear then, that if you change the size, shape, or make other configurational changes that affect any of those three things, the capacitance will also be changed. But because that capacitance is part of a resonant circuit, that means the resonant frequency will now be different. That is why J has to make adjustments.

Adjusting things to retune the driver to resonance again at the new frequency can be done in one of two ways. You can change or add capacitance or inductance to bring the tank circuit back to the oscillator frequency. Or (preferably) you can adjust the oscillator to match the tank's new resonant point. The latter is usually easier, and cheaper, as long as the change is within the oscillator and drive circuits' range. In the case of the FE, it is better to retune, so as much as possible of the tank capacitance is in the cell, though overall capacitance should be kept low. At 3-10 kHz or so, retuning the drive circuit should not present too much of a problem; a possible area that might prove to be problematic would be limitations in the output coil core's frequency range.

Making this adjustment is pretty straightforward. Simply tune for the minimum voltage drop across a resistor in series with the coil primary. Minimum voltage (minimum current through the resistor) will occur at resonance. RMS voltage read will dip as resonance is reached, and rise again at frequencies either higher or lower. J may even have provided a potentiometer or two in his circuit, as I have done with an experimental breadboard circuit, to tune the oscillator.

There is no special frequency that O₆ requires, to form in the FE. The frequencies the FE operates at are nowhere close to the natural frequencies of the very tiny atoms, which move far, far faster than the audio frequencies the FEs run at. The reason the device operates better, and puts out more O3 and O₆ at a certain frequency, is all tied to the superior performance of the tank circuit when it is tuned properly to the system's natural resonance. That is where the voltage envelope, which is the bottom line for the oxygen atoms, is optimum.

It is important to note that the large peak currents that develop during the ionization discharge do not come directly from the FE's power supply. These currents through the gas flow back and forth between the inductance of the drive coil where they appear as a magnetic field, and the capacitance of the FE gas cell, where they appear as an electric field (voltage). It is like a pendulum swinging, with energy moving rhythmically back and forth. The power supply only has to deliver enough energy to overcome losses.

Using Teflon tubing has an additional advantage here, in that it eliminates the dielectric bridges, which J had to use to form the separations between grooves in his design. Each rather thick bridge is thus replaced with a couple of rather thin Teflon tubing walls. This arrangement reduces the capacitance during the non-ionized regime, and increases it during ionization, since the thinner wall also provide more space for ionized gas between the electrodes. Without going into details, it means that the resonant frequency is increased, compared to J's grooved electrode approach. And as you understand, a higher frequency increases the O₆ production rate in the FE, other things being equal.

The narrow "bridges" of the Teflon tube also mean the stack height of the coiled gas path is shorter (for the same path length), since the tubes are closer together. This cuts down the electrode area needed, again reducing capacitance and raising the frequency.

I might add that there is a possibility to apply an external magnetic field to the FE, to develop NMR effects, which *would* then form a frequency critical system, but that is too far down the road.

Continuing with your questions:

>Did you have a specific reason for using copper foil as your
>inner electrode? We have had good luck with aluminum foil. I
>expect that our first effort will use a #12 copper or aluminum
>wire as the inner electrode and a section of aluminum arrow shaft
>as the outer electrode.

I suggested copper because it is easily solderable, but aluminum is fine. At the high voltages and low currents used in the FE, HV electrical connection resistance is not an important issue.

There are some other caveats associated with the small FE design approach you have outlined, which you should be aware of. Using a 12 awg aluminum wire for the inner electrode introduces a problem, in that thin wall Teflon tubing will kink and/or collapse, when wound around it, due to its small diameter. You should maintain a tubing-coil-diameter to tubing-diameter ratio no less than about 5-7, which can be adjusted, according to conformability trials for the tubing you use.

I suggest you use the aluminum arrow shaft as the inner electrode, wrap it with multiple layers of adhesive-backed Kapton film, as the dielectric barrier, and flow air or other coolant through this electrode for heat removal. Use a larger aluminum tube for the outer electrode. You may attach self-gripping longitudinal heat-sink fins, fabricated from sheet metal, which are slid over this outer tube. These can look pretty attractive if done well. The silicone grease I previously mentioned will also help augment heat transfer around the Teflon tubes, as well as increase the overall breakdown voltage (with or without a barrier dielectric).

On the gas path cross section, you wrote:

>You imply some advantage in the squared circle cross section. Is
>this just to minimize the spaces between the winding of the tubing,
>or is there some advantage to that cross section inside the ozone
>gas track?

Square tubing would (if exactly the right size) fit snugly into the space between the outer electrode and dielectric, without any packing force; the inner and outer surfaces in the installation, as well as the walls between neighboring tubes, are already flat. But if the gap is (because of tolerances) too big, then the tubing is loose. If the gap is too narrow, the square tubing will bulge on the sides, distorting and stressing the 90 degree tubing corners. The bulging will usually be outwards, but the sidewalls may also flex inwards, partially collapsing the gas passage. Not good. Either way, this results in undesirably large interstices between adjacent tubes.

But *round* tubing, effectively *turns into* square tubing when you pack it into that sort of confined space. The neighboring tubes scrunch together, flattening the tubing walls between them, just as the electrode and dielectric surfaces flatten it at the inner and outer points of contact. Properly sized round tubes will not flex inwards, in a collapse mode, unless packed extremely tightly. For a wide range of gap tolerances, you wind up with self-shaping and automatically self-sizing gas passages that efficiently use up a very high proportion of the available space. The immunity to tolerance variations, cheapness, and self-optimizing shape are all advantages.

You want a square (or rectangular) cross section because that produces the most uniform field for the gas, radially (between the coaxial electrodes), which is then free to oscillate as far as possible without contacting the tube walls, and also to minimize the dead space in between the tubes.

_____________
||||||||||||| /-----\ ---outer electrode
 ||||||||||||| /|||||||||\
||||||||||||| |||||||||||||
||||||||||||| |||||||||||||
||||||||||||| \|||||||||/
------------- ^ \-----/ ^ ---dielectric surface
 | | 

>Dan said that this was the idea that he figured out several
>months ago, but didn't want to share with me because he was
>afraid I would tell J and J would steal it.

Other ways also exist of doing this, such as an arrangement with the Teflon tubes configured longitudinally, like the barrels of a Gatling gun, connected together on the ends. But this particular arrangement does not lend itself to easy packing of the tubes so "scrunching" is difficult. I'm sure you can imagine other possibilities.

Unless you or Dan are planning on patenting it, J will learn about it anyway, as soon as he has one of your units incorporating it. I advise you and Dan to apply for patents, either on your own, or preferably in joint cooperation with J, in a cross-licensing agreement. Your claims should cover electrode designs with and without a separate barrier dielectric. There are no unusual karmic obstacles, in obtaining a patent on this, unless you should decide to sit on it, effectively suppressing the idea. That would be bad.

Dan's reticence to tell you of his idea caused a good deal of karmic blockage and delay, preventing discussion of this with you earlier. For karma to flow auspiciously, everyone involved must do their best to be as forthright and ingenuous as possible, and put aside elements of mistrust, suspicion, paranoia, selfishness, and the like.

On oxygen forms you wrote:

>The only thing that I can find that you previously wrote regarding
>the stability of O₆ is:
>>However, because of their very high reactivity, the mean life
>>of O₆ molecules is usually quite short, and so this mechanism
>>generates far fewer ORMEs in Nature than geothermal processes,
>>yet is still an important process.
>...Is O₆ a more likely or more stable structure than O₅ or O₇?
>and Why might FE ozone be more persistent than ozone produced by
>other methods?

Barry, you found part of what I was referring to, but I also discussed the phase lock between the atoms at some length, which might well have provided an indication to you that the molecule is intrinsically stable (I am distinguishing between stability, and reactivity, as two separate properties, the first relating to the tendency of a molecule to decompose, apart from reacting with other things).

You should also be aware that there is more than one form of O₆. The O₆ I have been discussing with you, with its unique ring shape, is the only one which has any usefulness relative to ORMEs. Others also exist. Though these others are more common, they are far less interesting than the O₆ ring. But the different forms all have the same mass and charge, though certainly not the same thermal stability or reactivity. So you must be discriminating in deciding which kind you have, by the way you measure them.

Because the O₆ ring shares the same mass and charge as the transient O₆ ozones, because of its relative rareness (except in the FE), because of its short average life, and because of its ability to "blend in" with its O₃ cousins (which always accompany it in large numbers), these factors have conspired to prevent scientists from noticing it, and hence from doing any work to identify it, up until very recently.

Left to itself, (ring) O₆ is very stable; ie, it doesn't show the same tendency to spontaneously decompose, as O₃ eventually does. But it makes up for it by reacting with all sorts of things, and doing so usually causes it to break up (most ORMEs-forming metals being notable exceptions, in which cases it remains intact).

O₅, O₇, etc., are variations of O₃ chains (see below), involving some O₂s tacked on, and are rather transient forms.

In water, O₆ will react vigorously with most types of impurity materials present in the water, but not much with the water itself. You may reflect, that J's initial gold recovery attempt, starting him on his present path of destiny, would have been an abject failure, if O₆ reacted with water to an appreciable degree.

Once the impurities have been oxidized, the remaining O₆ may persist for quite a while, depending on how much remains at that point, but will eventually diffuse out of the water into the atmosphere, where it soon finds something to oxidize. The rate of diffusion depends on the temperature of the water. Also remember, a little O₆ goes a long way -quite a bit farther than O₃- for a water taste-test.

In the same manner that Hudson obtained patents on ORMEs, you may do so for the O₆ ring. In fact, I strongly encourage you to do so, as soon as you have collected credible evidence to substantiate it. Do not delay too long to file. You can accrue and add further data during the pending phase. The reason operating here is the same as was the case for DH: if you do not act, others, far less benevolent, and moving in the same direction, will work to take control of it, to your exclusion, and dismay.

Obtaining an O₆ patent, too, will be worth a lot of mileage for you. Take care that you not allow yourselves to become overly demanding in regard to license arrangements. But if you are liberal and magnanimous, things will go well.

>Would a device to measure the gas volume going into the FE element
>and compare it to the gas volume going out, be an effective way to
>determine percentage of O6?

This is not a particularly promising approach. Full conversion of O₂ into O3 results in a bit less than a 1/3 volume reduction in the oxygen portion of the feed gas. Until the volume reduction passes that, the volume by itself is really not telling you anything decisive as to whether any O₆ is coming out. The matter is complicated since O3 may form weak chains, which also result in volume reduction:

_____ O2->(+)(-)(+)(-)(+)(-) (+)(-) (+) (-) (-)(+) (+)(-) (-)(+) \
(-)(+)(-)(+) (-)(+) <- (-) (+)(-) (+)(-) (-)(+) (+)(-) \<-O2
(+)(-)(+)(-) (+)(-) (+) (-)(+) (-)(+) (+)(-) (-)
Typical ozone chain formation O5 "Common" O6 O7
(chain length increases with typical variants typical
decreasing temperature) variant (non-ring) variant

Chain formation (even for short chains like common O6) is temperature dependent. As temperature decreases, the average chain length grows, slowly at first, accelerating as the temperature drops, eventually liquefying at about -112C. The formation and growth of these chains is *part* of the reason that O3 production is seen to increase by cooling. O3 is more stable in this form, buttressed by its adjacent neighbors. As chains, little of the O3 formed, decomposes again before reaching the outlet.

But before chains begin to form, the lessened thermal kinetics in the gas also prolongs the life of individual O3 molecules, and cooling down through this region is beneficial, until chain formation becomes significant. When common O₆ begins appearing in significant amounts, O₆ rings drop off.

O3 molecules which are incorporated into chains are obviously unavailable to form O6. Thus cooling the gas below the point of chaining will certainly increase O3 production, by reducing attrition, but shall do so to the great detriment of the O₆ (ring) formation rate. You ought not to cool the gas *too* much, or O₆ may be scarce indeed, in your FE's out-pipe.

You can, by trial, find the temperature at which O₆ production peaks, and where it drops off, in a knee, when chains begin forming, as the temperature is lowered. You will need to learn how to detect O6, in order to do this. Gaining detection capability will also put you well on your way to collecting the evidence you need for your O₆ patent.

Coincidentally. ;-)

Detection of a substance is much easier when you can work with it in abundance, and you are already well on your way, in that important area. One approach I might suggest is to use two oxygen sensors in the outlet gas stream. One is a conventional O₂ sensor (S1). The other sensor (S2) is identical, except for being shielded by a membrane having pores which are too small for the O₆ molecule to pass through, but which will pass the smaller O3 and O2. By reading the differential (S1-S2) between them, you will have a qualitative method of determining O6, which can be calibrated into a quantitative measurement, in conjunction with other methods of analysis. This approach may be elusive; there is a narrow pore-size window you will have to find. If you control the temperature properly, you can avoid the potential complications that would otherwise be introduced from the presence of common short chain ozones in the mix.

You may also find that the oxidation potential of the surfaces of certain metals will change when exposed to O₆ (in some cases, almost exclusively with O6), and this action may form the basis for a sensor. This could then, by careful selection of materials, work similar to O₂ present sensors, but would respond *only* to the unusually high reactivity of the O₆ ring. Why not try and interest D and CO in this? I'm sure J will be also able to devise other means of detecting and measuring O6. You should work closely with him.

Gary

Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:49:43 -0700

Subject: FE dimensions, breadboarding

Dear Barry,

You last wrote:

>Unfortunately there are no easy sources of Teflon tubing in the
>greater Baker City area.

I suggest you refer to the Thomas Register, for sources of supply for the various materials you need. This very large format, bright green set of volumes is similar to an encyclopedia-sized yellow pages, covering the entire US. It contains only commercial and business listings of products and services, and is available in most libraries' Reference holdings.

A new set is published every year; the 1997 set will be out in February. If you are fortunate, you may even be able to make arrangements with the Baker City public library to inherit their present set, if they plan to get a 97 edition. Most of the sources listed do not change much, from year to year. Sources for each heading are listed by states, which makes it easy to find the companies closest to you.

There should be no trouble finding sources of Teflon tubing of all sizes.

>I have found a source for 1/8" id, 1/4" od Teflon tubing. This seems
>to be an appropriate size for the hand held FE.

With 1/8 inch of Teflon, you may certainly be able to eliminate the dielectric barrier, provided you can keep it from arcing in between the tubes.

Following more specific dimensional case descriptions, you wrote:

>...Two inches of Teflon tube winding along a 1" aluminum tube gives
>us a gas track length of roughly 19". This may be an inadequate length to
>produce high levels of O6.

This length of the path can be fine, depending on what gas velocities you will use. A point I tried to get across in my last email, is that it is the *number of cycles* a particle experiences, which is the main criteria. The gas path could conceivably be very short, and still perform well, as long as the gas is traveling slowly enough so that it experiences enough process cycles during its transit through the electrode.

>I do not know how much expandability is built into the hand held FE. I am
>afraid that expanding either the area of the electrode (to increase the
>gas track length) or the gap between the electrodes (to insert a dielectric
>sleave) will put us over the capacity of the hand held unit. I know we will
>have to do some testing to find out.

Expanding electrode area to add length increases the capacitance, in direct proportion to the area increase. Widening the gap to add a dielectric sleeve decreases capacitance, in proportion to 1 / ln(b/a), where b is the ID of the outer electrode, and a is the OD of the inner electrode. Adding the dielectric raises it a bit, but the net effect is a reduction in capacitance. If you do both, you can come out all right. The formula for the capacitance of coaxial cylinders is: C (farads) = 2 x e x PI x length / ( ln (b/a) ). e = 8.9E-12 coul^2/nt-m^2. The dimensional units in the above equation are meters.

Perhaps it would be worth while for you, Dan, and J to collect all the data of this sort (dimensions for grooves, track length, electrode areas, voltage, power, flow, etc.) you can find on the FE different versions, and put it into a table, as you did with the ORMEs samples. You may be able to see some new things. An important part of knowing which way to go, is to know where you are starting from, and where you've already been.

If you find you are over capacity, you can reduce the production rate by either reducing the drive voltage, or by increasing the gas flow rate, or by retuning your license agreement. The last is the more desirable, but the first will do also. In the second, high flow also results in low output concentrations, so is only an option if you are using air as the feed gas. Of course, it would be very uneconomical to waste bottle oxygen that way.

>This would mean a 1 1/2 inch inner electrode. Is there any problem with
>accepting a certain amount of 0 shape elongation? I know you want maximum
>back and forth between electrodes for the oxygen to bang around in the
>tube. Will flattened tubing create that much of a problem?

It won't be that much of a problem. This is a refinement you can add later, under "New and Improved". Kinking is another matter, and if you find the tubing coil kinks, along the inner electrode surface, you must figure out how to fix it. It is not much of a problem for prototype experiments, until a leak develops, but it could spell premature failure if you still encounter kinking in production design units.

>If we use an extra dielectric it would be better off on the outer electrode
>where it could extend past the electrode on both ends to prevent arcing
>from the end of the electrode.

Though there is some difference in the resulting capacitance, depending on how you configure it, in a practical sense it does not matter too much which electrode the dielectric is physically associated with. It can also be split between the two, in terms of thickness.

Referring to my ascii tube crossectional diagrams:

>This looks like an elongated 0 shaped cross section. If the gas space was
>illustrated proportionally wouldn't it look more like this?

What I was trying to do there was to show square and round cross sections, to illustrate what I was describing about the free radial gas particle path. The circle came out very poorly. The parallel lines inside were intended to represent both the electric field lines, and the particle travel, which coincide, radially. The gas only has a full radial travel path in the very center of a round tube. Particles near the sides hit the walls, undesirably.

>The large FE uses a couple dozen tubes winding their way from one end of
>the large gas element to the other. They are joined by a manifold at each
>end. This would be more difficult to implement using Teflon tubes.

If you actually wished to try this, all you would need is a small number of straight couplings, at your present stage of prototype experimentation. Make the longitudinal "Gatling gun" Teflon tubes considerably longer than necessary, so they stick out some inches on each end of the electrode. Bend them into gentle curved bends, so the ends of the ones you want to connect together touch, like snakes kissing. Insert a small 1" long coupling tube half way into (or over) one, and then push the other one onto it also, making the coupling. That will do well enough for experimentation on driver operation, output levels checks, heating, checking various flow rates, etc.

The connections are made so the gas flows in the first tube, from end A to end B, then is routed through the next tube from B to A, then from A to B again, and so on. Having the gas path tubes broken into multiple segments, with external connections between them, offers an easy place to extract heat from the gas, at each of these junctions, with heat exchange, etc.

>I have in mind a test gas unit with a very long gas path interrupted by
>breaks in the outer electrode where we can tap the output to measure O₆
>levels. We need to determine optimum gas track length as well as
>optimizing other parameters.

This is a very reasonable approach. The FE has many nonlinear variables, and that will help give you the data you need to begin defining them. Until then, an empirical approach (trial and error) is necessary. Spend lots of thought on each experiment you try, to devise ways to learn as much from each effort as possible, to make the experiments productive.

You also asked:

>Have you tried out the Teflon coil gas cell on your breadboard unit? If
>so what size tubing are you using. Is your breadboard unit more the size
>of a large FE or more the size of a hand held FE?

Regrettably, I haven't had much time to spare, to work on this. I haven't built an electrode assembly yet, but the following is what I have in mind.

The dielectric will be an acrylic tube, 1 inch OD, 8 inches long, 1/8 inch wall. By using such a common size, 1 inch OD tube, it will be easy later to experiment with other materials and wall thickness. A copper foil inner electrode, 4 inches wide, is attached with adhesive to the inside of the dielectric tube, centered in it. A Hypalon-insulated copper conductor ignition lead is soldered to the foil, and exits from one end of the dielectric tube. I decided to attach it this way, to maximize the tank circuit Q, and provide a low impedance connection for the peak tank currents, which can (instantaneously) be quite large. It will help reduce losses. The electrode foil is installed first, and is visible and inspectable through the clear acrylic dielectric tube. The outboard edges of the foil and the solder-connection tab are dabbed with corona dope.

The outer electrode is an aluminum tube, 1.5 inch OD, 1.3575 ID, 8 inches long. This is commercially available as size 24 low pressure hydraulic return line tubing. (I may later revise this down to a size 22, depending on the final Teflon tube size I decide to use.) The radial gap between the inner dielectric and the outer electrode is thus 0.179 inches.

The gas path is formed from Teflon tubing, in this case nominally 0.18 OD, with the wall thickness to be decided later by availability, with a likely thickness being 15 mils. This then gives a mean coil diameter of 1.18 inches, which translates into a coil to tubing diameter ratio of 1.18/0.18=6.5, which is acceptable, and should show little kinking or collapse tendency, using a low tension wrap. A tube this size is well suited for the low flows appropriate for home ORMEs use. With a 15 mil wall, this would have an ID of 0.15. Assuming a 0.15 ID, that yields a flow area of 0.01767 in^2, which is fine. It is just right for bubbling O₆ through a glass or pitcher of water.

The Teflon tubing is coiled in a closed stack on the dielectric, directly over the inner electrode area. At 5.55 turns/inch, there will be 22.22 nominal turns over the electrode area, plus 2.78 added packing turns. The length of the ionizable gas path is thus PI x 1.18 x 25 = 92.68 inches. With this path length, together with the flow ranges achievable from an oxygen regulator, and by adjusting drive voltage, good control of the O₆ ring formation process rate is available.

In this setup, packing compression is (2.78 x 0.18)/22.22=0.0225 inches/turn, or 12.51%, which is about right for a tubing with a wall to diameter ratio of 0.015/0.18=.0833. (Maximum theoretical packing of thin wall circular tubing into a square cross section is 1-PI/4 or 21.46%.) This will result in a reasonably optimized cross section; packing can be adjusted by shimming or trimming the packing sleeves.

The Teflon tubing is held in place by a 2 inch long plastic packing sleeve on each end of the assembly. The sleeve is a slip fit between the dielectric and the outer electrode. The two sleeves each have a full length slot, 0.2 inch wide, cut in them, through which the tubing is brought out the ends of the assembly. The inner end of the slot is generously radiussed, so the tubing can make the 90 bend without kinking. The inner edge of the sleeves are matched to the pitch of the tubing coil.

The entire assembly is held together by plastic end caps. The HV lead passes through a strain relief grommet in one, and the caps are held together by a 1/4"-20 threaded plastic rod, passing down the center of the device and extending out the center of each end cap, where nuts hold the caps on, with packing force on the Teflon tubing being created by the tension in the rod. Notches in the caps for the Teflon tube allow the caps to be taken on or off without having to thread them over the tubing, which may otherwise involve having to remove them from fittings. The end caps will have a small step, so they register concentrically with the dielectric tube; this is done by gluing a plastic disk to their inside surfaces.

The rod is only a convenience to allow disassembly for inspection and changes. In a production environment, it would be better to simply glue every thing together with epoxy, while under compression. You could dispense with the rod, nuts, and holes in the end caps for the rod, and put the HV lead grommet in the center of one cap. This is a very easy to make and inexpensive electrode assembly, requiring a bare minimum of machining.

After the glue sets, the whole thing can be finished by painting a candy apple hot-lime/blue/pink/purple/or red. It will sort of resemble a glossy stick of dynamite on a fuse, when it is all done and wired up.

There is still some work to do with the circuitry. I have decided to change to a different type of low voltage regulator, to get better isolation between the low and high voltage power stages, and haven't had time to do this yet. The oscillator operates at 3.1 kHz, which is the natural (unloaded) frequency of the coil being used. There are pots which adjust the frequency and symmetry, but which are only used in the tuning procedure. The DC power supply is presently rated at 50W, as a result of using parts on hand, but this could be increased relatively easily. The LMD18201 H-bridge driver is rated at 150 watts, and is the ultimate power limiting factor of the present design. The goal is to optimize an operating point for the cell, in the 50-75 watt range. A pot controls the high voltage output, through a very wide KV range, and should facilitate finding an appropriate operating point.

There are still some chips, etc. still to be added later, to support a pair of miniature gas pressure transducers. This will act as a watch-dog circuit, monitoring failure modes for safety reasons, and is patterned after J's patent description. I currently intend to mount the sensors on the outer electrode, perhaps with a thermistor, and also with an interlock, so the sensors must be connected for it to turn on. The outer electrode is, of course, at ground potential.

The circuit is on a 4" x 10.5" perf board, excluding the 115 VAC input transformer and HV coil. I put this together for utility, without any special effort to keep things compact. When done, it can all go in a 5x6x12 box. A board less than half that size could do the job. I'll send you the circuit diagram, once everything is debugged, and the values are finalized.

The external controls (when boxed) will be an on/off switch, a red LED ON indicator, an "output level" adjustment knob (HV setting), a yellow LED "check inlet gas" indicator, a blue "flow blockage" LED indicator, and a piezo alarm that sounds when either problem condition occurs. Issues that need your careful consideration include packaging the electrode assembly and electronics together in the same enclosure, so the high voltage leads and terminal connections are totally out of reach of the customer, and, more importantly, the customer's children.

Gary

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 00:10:36 -0700

Subject: Breadboard and electrode details

Dear Barry,

As promised earlier, accompanying this one I'm sending you a GIF, attached to a separate email, of the schematic for the power supply I've breadboarded, which is described in more detail in what follows, below. I will send you one further email with some apodictic remarks in the near future.

The design is intended to provide a simple, low cost solution to a high voltage power for a small FE, while following good design practices, but keeping component and value counts down, using common low precision and inexpensive parts, and being easy to adjust, so as to accommodate a considerable amount of gas cell design variation. It isn't the "best" circuit, but rather an attempt at a good, yet low-cost compromise for possible use with a small, production FE.

The optional 12VDC supply has not been built, but is unlikely to require any modifications. The safety logic circuitry is essentially completed in design, but won't be built, tested and debugged until sometime after I finish the electrode, and so is shown only as a functional block. It uses a few op amps, comparators, gates, and analog switches, in conjunction with miniature Lucas or Motorola pressure transducers (silicon Wheatstone bridge types). I would now say that everything (except transformer and coil) would fit on a 4"x5.5" circuit board, or smaller, depending on the size of the 3 polarized caps, which are the largest board-mounted parts.

The coil used is a hot rod ignition coil, presently an MSD 8223. Without any loading (from a gas cell), the coil puts out enough voltage with this circuit that at 65% of the maximum drive voltage, it arcs *through* the spark coil's high voltage tower, onto the primary terminal posts. These arcs are violet, Tesla-style streamers typical of 3-4 kHz; this is more of the nature of a capacitively-coupled discharge than a breakdown. Later I will test the supply with an MSD 8201 coil.

It may well be possible to use a cheap, standard V8 or V₆ ignition coil; these will have the same turns ratio, but will have smaller gauge wire in the windings than the MSD, and consequently both more inductance and resistance. I may try a standard coil to check the resonant point, and see what its output level is. If found to be adequate, it would greatly help reduce net cost. The 8223 sells for about $29, and the 8201 is around $77.

The output will be loaded down somewhat when the cell is connected. Until the gas cell is ready to use, I am going to immerse the coil in transformer oil, by mounting it in a plastic peanut butter jar, in order to explore full voltage range available, while controlling arcing at the higher settings. This is done by putting a rubber gasket in the plastic lid, to seal the edge, and cutting a whole in the lid just big enough for the coil tower to press through. A piece of 1.5" thick closed cell foam is cut like a big washer to fit around the coil can, and hold it in place in the jar. The primary connections are brought out through the lid, using copper core spark plug cable.

The only component in the circuit that generates any heat is the LM317HVT regulator, which of course runs hottest when the drive voltage is adjusted to low levels so the regulator is dropping the most voltage. A small heatsink seems adequate to handle this. A pass transistor could always be added to increase current while cooling down the regulator, but I don't expect this to be necessary.

There are a few interesting features in this circuit that are worth describing. The LMD18201 requires isolation between power and signal grounds to operate properly. This is simply achieved by using the primary taps of the Stancor P-86505 in auto-transformer fashion, to run the Vcc supply. This provides the needed isolation, while avoiding the cost of a transformer with an extra winding.

The LM317HVT's 37V rating provides a nice solution to the keep the HV DC supply simple, while enabling adjustment through a broad range. Controlling the drive rail this way is a simple and direct means of adjusting the coil's high voltage AC output to the FE gas cell. With the reg saturated (ie at maximum drop) output is around 12V, so the drive is adjustable from 12V to 59V, or from 20% to 100% on the high voltage side.

Note that the maximum drive voltage for the 18201 is 57V. The adjustment is capable of exceeding this, so some care must be observed, though most pieces will handle this. Also, 12V is the highest Vcc value the input logic of the 18201 is rated to handle; this is not a problem, and fits in well with components that would typically be used in safety logic circuitry.

The safety logic in this design acts by cutting off Vcc to the oscillator, stopping oscillation and thus killing high voltage to the electrode. It is a nice low power control point in the system, minimizing the analog switch gate requirement (allowing use of a cheap chip) and maintaining stand-by, while providing fast, safe, and reliable electrode shut-off.

The 555 oscillator is configured to provide 50% symmetry capability in the drive signal. This makes symmetry and frequency adjustments somewhat interdependent, but is a small price to pay for simplicity, and these adjustments are only used during final acceptance testing of the electronics. The 555 is frequency-independent of Vcc, and with metal film resistors, resonant tuning will remain quite stable. Resonant tuning on an ignition coil is rather tolerant, anyway.

National Semiconductor has several variations of their H-bridge driver chip, but of these, the LMD18201 is the one best configured for driving a FE, and is quite inexpensive. Designed for high performance motor systems, it can handle the power needed to drive a small FE without breaking a sweat. It also has a built-in internal thermal protection circuit that shuts the chip down if it gets too hot, to keep it from being damaged, and this auto-resets after it cools down. This help will keep the electronics healthy, should the electrode or coil ever short out, or ground isolation is lost.

As mentioned, the LMD18201 is actually a motor driver chip, used here to drive the coil as a predominantly inductive load. As I have arranged it, the brake input is tied low, the PWM (commutation) input is pulled high, and the oscillator drives the direction line. An H-bridge configured like this has the very important advantage of effectively doubling the drive voltage seen by the coil, (compared to an automotive application), since the polarity is reversed each half cycle, toggled by the H-bridge. Power to the coil isn't simply turned on and off, but rather constantly flips polarity, back and forth, tracking the oscillator signal. Besides doubling the peak-to-peak drive voltage, the bridge drives the coil much like the points in an old-style distributor, only with maximum dwell. When one half of the H-bridge is conducting, current builds up in the coil's primary, following the L/R time constant curve. When the edge of the square wave is reached, and the 555's signal (direction line) changes state, this collapses the magnetic field, producing an inductive kick. But it doesn't simply collapse the field, because the other half of the bridge turns on at that instant, and so the field is actively driven in the opposite direction. This doubles the magnetic and voltage slew rates in the coil, and kicks the coil's output voltage to very impressive levels.

That is also the reason why the 555 is set up for 50% symmetry, to maximize the dwell time in each half of the cycle, so the inductive kicks are balanced. At 3-4 kHz, the coil needs all the dwell it can get to approach saturation. At 3.1 kHz, this is the same as an 8 cylinder engine running at 46,500 rpm. Despite this, the coil is performing nicely. Back in the 60's, Mallory had a very successful ignition system, marketed under the name "Rev-Pol", that worked on a similar principle.

C2 and C3 on the 18201's output are charge pumps for the high-side FETs, and are necessary for the LM18201 to work properly at the FE supply's operating frequency.

I have altered some of the electrode assembly details a bit, from what I described to you earlier, in order to utilize some commonly available pieces, and to make it a little easier to put together.

If you have trouble obtaining the aluminum hydraulic tubing I suggested for the outer electrode, ordinary copper plumbing pipe can be used as a substitute, for prototype purposes.

I will be using 1.5 inch diameter nylon furniture plugs as the end caps. These have a shoulder about 3/8" deep that presses into the outer electrode tube, and the packing sleeves will be shortened by the same amount so they fit between the edge of this shoulder and the Teflon tubing coil.

In lieu of using an ignition wire soldered to the inner foil electrode, I will be using a configuration involving a brass rod, as follows:

(Outer electrode, PVC spacers, & Teflon tube not shown)

On the left is a nylon furniture plug (end cap), with a 5/32 hole drilled in the center. A 10-32 nylon screw passes through this hole and fastens a stack made of 2 1" threaded nylon spacers to the inside of the end cap. The spacers are held together by a short length of nylon screw thread that was made by cutting the head off of another similar nylon screw, and the joint is permanently glued together with Weld-On 1701 nylon cement.

An 8.25 inch long piece of 10-32 all thread brass rod screws into the other end of the spacer stack, and extends to the right. It has three nuts in the center, attaching to a small solder ring lug that is connected to the foil inner electrode by a short piece of copper braid (a piece of #3 Solder-Wick). The braid/lug is the electrical connection between the foil inner electrode and the rod, and the outer tip of the rod connects to the HV coil. The rod is slipped through the lug during assembly, after which the right-most of the 3 nuts is threaded down the rod with a long hollow-stemmed nut driver, to secure the lug.

The right end cap also has a hole in its center, for the brass threaded rod to pass through. On each side of the right end cap are glued larger diameter 1" long nylon spacers, using Weld-On #1701 nylon cement. There are two spacers on the left, glued together, and one on the right, on the outside of the electrode assy. These spacers form an insulating barrier, to prevent arc over between the outer electrode, and the brass rod, which will otherwise tend to occur, particularly through the region where the end cap and slot are notched to allow the Teflon tube to exit.

This problem doesn't occur at the other end, as the foil electrode is recessed 2 inches inside the acrylic dielectric tube, and the brass rod doesn't extend into the notch area on that end.

A nut on the protuding tip of the brass rod holds the assembly together when installed in the electrode and dielectric tubes, and provides the force, in conjunction with end cap insertion friction, to apply packing pressure on the Teflon tubing coil, within. A spark plug terminal cap is screwed onto the rod's tip, and a short piece of ignition wire connects the brass rod with the coil's HV terminal, with the boot of the wire slipping over the outer nylon spacer, which is about the same diameter as a spark plug's insulator.

The electrical connection for the outer tube is by a short 6-32 pan head screw, passing out through a hole drilled in the outer tube in the region where the packing spacer and end cap tubing notches are. The screw head is on the inside of the electrode tube, and a nut on the outside holds it in place. Another nut serves to connect the lead wire lug to the screw. A star washer ensures a good electrical connection.

For 0.15 ID Teflon tubing, 1/8" (3#) barbed fittings work, but a 5/32 (#3.5) is better; this latter results in a very secure connection. After trying various fittings with these tubings, I have concluded that metal barbed (not bulged) fittings produce the best results; stainless steel would be the best material for ozone exposure. A bulged fitting may be used in a size #3.5, and this has the advantage that the connections may be taken apart, whereas with barbs, it is necessary to cut the tubing to separate the nearly permanent joint, due to the barb biting into the tubing material.

In order to wind the Teflon tubing onto the 1" diameter inner dielectric without kinking it, you must precede this by 3 stages of stress relieving, whereby the Teflon is wound in steps onto progressively smaller forms. Start with a 4.5" OD arbor, and allow the Teflon 24 hours to "set" into a coil. Follow this with a 2.25" OD tube, allowing another 24 hours, and then transfer to a 1.25" diameter tube for 24 hours. You can then move to 1 inch, either on a storage arbor, or directly to the dielectric. Hold the coils in place on the arbors with masking tape, etc. It is important to not allow the coils much time to expand, once they are taken off an arbor. Following this procedure will aid in obtaining a kink-free winding, and reduce waste from tubing damage.

Installing windings into the gap is simplified, by making a packing tool from a piece of the PVC pipe packing ring material. Get a piece about a foot long, and cut the working end so there remains a 270 degree circle of material. Ramp the edge of this end to match the coil pitch, just like the inner edge of the packing ring, and cut a big gentle radius on the corner of the leading edge to reduce the chance of this spot causing a kink in the tubing.

The 90 degree cutout should widen quickly, going towards the handle end of the PVC tool, to about 180 degrees, with the widening all cut away from the leading edge side. In use, the tool is rotated by one hand as the pre-coiled tubing is carefully fed into place with the other; the tool presses the coils into position, and assists in the feeding operation. Maximum care and patience must be used to avoid kinking, but it will be no trouble at all, once you've practiced a while.

Gary

--------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a complete parts list for the described electrode.

Teflon tubing, FEP/TFE, 0.18" OD x 0.15" ID, 10 ft
Acrylic tube, 1" OD, 0.75" ID, 8" long
(other materials and IDs may be tried as desired)
PVC pipe, white, 1" sched. 40, 1.75" length, qty 2
(fabricate notch shape for tubing & coil pitch ramp)
Aluminum tube, 1.5" OD, 8" long (or substitute copper pipe)
(chamfer edges, drill terminal screw hole)
Brass rod, all-thread, 10-32, 8.25" long
Copper foil, 2 mil, soft temper, 4" width, x2.5"
Adhesive for foil (spray can)
Screw, nylon, panhead, 10-32 x .5"
End cap, nylon furniture plug, 1.5" diam, qty 2
(notch edge for Teflon tubing)
Spacers, nylon, 10-32 threaded, 1" long, .3" diam, qty 2
(or use one 2" spacer)
Spacers, nylon, 1" long, .375" diam, 5/32 hole, qty 3
(or one 2", and one 1")
Nuts, 10-32, qty 3
Flat washer, for 10-32, qty 2
Lock washer, for 10-32, internal star
Solder lug, for 10-32
Solder-Wick, #3, 1.5" length
Solder
Screw, brass, panhead, 6-32 x .375"
Lock washer, for 6-32, external star
Terminal, 10-32 threaded spark plug tip
Nylon cement, Weld-On #1701 (resorcinol/ethanol formulation)
Corona dope, GC Electronics #47-2
Coil packing tool, fabricated from PVC pipe.

--------------------------------------------------------------

This is a suggested electrode assembly procedure.

1. Drill a 5/32" hole in the center of each nylon end cap.
2. Screw together two 1" long nylon spacers, using a piece of nylon 10-32 screw thread; apply 1701 cement and tighten the joint.
3. Screw the spacers (2) to one of the end caps, using a nylon screw; apply 1701 cement and tighten the joint.
4. Screw the 10-32 brass thread rod 0.5-0.6" into the free end of the spacers/end cap assy (3).
5. Install 2 nuts on the brass rod, 5.5 inches from the inside surface of the end cap; jam the nuts together.
6. Solder a ring lug to a 1" piece of #3 SolderWick, and solder the braid's other end to the copper foil, 0.5" from the edge (in the 4" wide dimension) of the foil.
7. Spray the other side of the foil (side opposite the lug connection) with adhesive, and install the foil electrode in the dielectric tube, centering it between the tube ends. Use a stiff rubber covered rod to roll the foil into place and work bubbles out from between the foil and tube. Wipe any excess adhesive from tube.
8. Apply GC corona dope to the two outer circular edges of the foil.
9. Cement two 1" long unthreaded nylon spacers together.
10. Cement the 2" spacer assembly (9) to the inside edge of the end cap, and cement a single 1" spacer on the other side, so the holes through them are lined up and continuous.
11. Starting at the end furthest from the lug location, insert the brass rod through the center of the dielectric tube, and through the lug (6) attached to the foil electrode.
12. Run a lock washer, followed by another nut, down the rod, to fasten the lug to the rod.
13. Slide the left packing spacer over the dielectric tube. (Notch, etc., already cut in packing ring spacer). Line up the notch in the spacer with the notch in the end cap.
14. Install a 6-32 screw, lockwasher and nut in a hole drilled 1" from one end of the outer electrode tube, with the head on the inside, so the threads stick out to form a terminal post.
15. Place the dielectric tube inline with the outer electrode tube, so that the end cap will be on the same end of the outer electrode as the terminal screw (14) when the two are slipped together.
16. Pass one end of the Teflon tubing through the outer electrode, and through the notches in the packing sleeve and end cap.
17. Slide the outer tube onto the dielectric tube assy; push/tap the end cap and outer electrode fully together, being careful not to kink the Teflon tubing.
18. Using a packing tool made of PVC pipe, carefully form and push the Teflon tubing into coils, pushing each coil into the space between the outer electrode and dielectric tube.
19. When the correct number of coils are in place, slide the right packing spacer into place, as far as it will go, guiding the Teflon tube though the notch. Line its notch exit up to match that of the opposite end cap.
20. Slide the right end cap, with the spacers glued to it, over the rod, so the end cap shoulder engages the outer electrode, and the Teflon tube passes through the notch.
21. Press the end cap fully into the outer electrode tube using a press, vice, or clamping fixture. Considerable force may be required (more with FEP, less with TFE), and it will help to blow hot air ~125 degrees F or higher through the tubing, to increase its compliance in forming a semi-square cross section.
22. Install a nut on the protruding thread rod, and a spark plug terminal tip.
23. Cut the Teflon tubing stubs to length, as required for fittings and routing.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a procedure to test and adjust the electronics:

Visually inspect for proper/complete assembly soldering, etc, and that all parts are installed correctly.
Use an ohm meter to check signal ground to power ground isolation.
Use an ohm meter to verify AC ground prong is connected to chassis.
With coil disconnected, Hi-Pot test at 1000 VDC/15 secs, between any metal chassis/housing and AC L1 & L2 plug contacts. (Hi-Pot set for 100 micro amp trip point)
Set the frequency adjust pot to its maximum resistance value. (lowest frequency)
Set the HV adjust pot to its minimum resistance value. (lowest voltage)
Set the symmetry pot to approximately mid-position.
Connect a DC volt meter to Vcc and signal ground.
Connect a second DC volt meter to HV and power ground.
Verify the coil primary leads are not attached.
Plug unit into the AC line and turn on power.
Verify HV reads approximately 12 volts.
Verify Vcc reads 7-9 VDC nominal (4.5 to 11.0 volt limits).
Verify "power on" LED lights.
Adjust HV pot upwards, and verify HV can reach 55 volts; set HV pot for 30-32 VDC.
Using scope or frequency meter hooked to the drive output (coil primary leads), tune the oscillator to ~3.1 kHz.
Using a scope, set the symmetry pot for a 50/50 square wave; adjust frequency and symmetry pots together as required.
Turn off power switch.
Connect leads to coil primary, with a 1K ohm 1 watt resistor in series with the lead to the coil's "+" terminal.
Connect FE electrode to coil.
Connect flowing air to FE electrode tubing.
Turn on power.
Adjust the frequency pot for optimum coil resonance. (minimum AC voltage drop across 1K ohm resistor).
Reset square wave symmetry to 50/50, as required, at resonance.
Turn off power; connect coil lead without resistor.
Turn on power.
Adjust HV pot for 55 VDC; verify proper gas cell operation.
Check AC line current consumption at full power.
Check safety circuitry and interlock operation.
(Actual procedure is TBD, per final design)
Using input and output pressure gauges, and an adjustable flow restrictor valve:
Verify "Check inlet" alarm/LED/HV kill activates at inlet pressures below TBD psi.
Verify "Check flow" alarm/LED/HV kill activates below TBD#1 psi, and above TBD#2 psi, differential pressures between inlet and outlet.
Turn off power.

Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 16:22:34 -0700

Subject: To be continued.

Dear Barry,

In my previous email, I neglected to mention that after being compressed into a packed state in the final stage of electrode assembly, the electrode should be left in a clamp and the tubing allowed to "set" into shape for a time, before the clamp is released and the assembly is completed.

As you progress towards obtaining a licensing agreement with J's company, I should also make you aware that Waltonen Applied Research, like the FE patent, has lapsed, and is not presently a valid company. This is a simple matter for J to rectify; he may renew his charter through 1999, by paying a small fee. But you are advised to see that this is taken care of before your license agreement is formalized, as the virtue of a license from a company not registered and officially recognized is effectively void from a legal standpoint.

From a conversation with J you transcribed, speculating on the fundamental cause underlying the high activity of the Fluid Energizer's output gas:

>Barry- Ok, well what's the difference between that ozone
>and other ozone?
>
>J- It is eager to react. It's unstable. It's been
>pumped up to the point. . . It's a balloon that's over
>inflated and it wants to pop.
>
>Barry- Ok, is it because you've got O4,O5 and O₆ or is
>it because . . .?
>
>J- No. That's a different issue. This is because
>it's just ozone. This is something we can measure today
>and demonstrate today vs the other which is difficult at
>best.
>

(snip of explanation by J of FE operation)

>
>Barry- Ok, I understand how you get it energized, but
>what's different about the molecule that's energized?
>
>J- Ah, don't know.

Despite J's view that this is due to some alteration of O3, the high activity is due primarily to the presence of O6, and to a much smaller degree to some other oxygen forms which, though less active than O6, are still a bit more active than O3. It is not because of a change in common O3's energy. Refer to an earlier email, for an explanation of the reasons why O₆ has eluded recognition.

Regarding J's discussion of the focusing field, which is distinguished from a uniform field by referring to the latter either as a CD (capacitive discharge), or a cross field:

>J- The process that we use. . . We focus the dielectric
>lenses, a groove with a lens, if you will, on the bottom
>of it. The gas goes around and it focuses the electric
>discharge onto the gas thereby getting a higher energy
>discharge into the gas so it gets pumped up. Other ones
>just allow it to flow through and meander as it will along
>a tube that's homogenous. It's straight. Instead we focus
>it on a gas track and make it follow. It's like having a
>continuing magnifying glass all the way around. It would
>be a similar type arrangement.

(snip)

>Barry - Does the crossfield do that?
>
>J- Nope. I wish it did. The crossfield is in a
>realm of it's own. It magnetically pumps, instead
>of electrostatically pumps the molecule.

Only an electric field is produced between the electrodes, regardless of the dielectric configuration. There is a small magnetic field component present due to the MHD action of the flowing ionized gas, but this is a secondary effect, and not highly relevant to the proper operation of the FE.

(snip)

>Barry- Could you discuss your Teflon tube ozone
>generator system, how well it worked and why you think
>it didn't work?
>
>J- A tube does not focus.
>
>Barry- It has to be a lens?
>
>J- A lens. It doesn't have a change in thickness.
>It's a tube. It's got a uniform thickness and a round
>shape which is not the same as a change in thickness
>which is what the Fluid Energizer is.

J is correct that the round bottomed groove in his design forms something like a dielectric lens, and that this concentrates or "focuses" the electric field, and that tube- type gas paths do not do this. This is all quite accurate. But he seems to have lost sight of exactly what the groove- distorted field is actually doing, to the extent that he cannot presently see there are other ways of achieving the same ultimate end, and that the alternate method is better, in many respects, than the groove approach.

Consider what is happening from the point of view of the oxygen atoms. The main thing they see, for this discussion, is the instantaneous electric field at their immediate location (they also respond to influences from their atomic neighbors). Each oxygen really only cares what the field is doing, in the tiny space right where it happens to be at the moment. What is going on elsewhere in the tube or gas track, is the concern of those other oxygens over there.

An electric field's strength varies with the inverse square of the charge (electrode) separations, and directly with the dielectric constant of the material in the intervening space. When the gas ionizes, as I explained previously, it becomes one of the electrodes, and the dielectric is then only what insulation stands between the gas and the other electrode. So the field strength is dependent on the separation between the gas, and the other electrodes. The separating material is, in J's design, only the dielectric that the groove is formed from, and of this, it is the thinnest part at the base of the groove which matters. In a tube design, it is the thickness of the dielectric barrier (which is uniform in this case) in conjunction with the Teflon of the tube walls.

If you develop the same field strength *everywhere*, that is, if you arrange the electrode spacing by the dielectric thickness and tube wall thickness to produce a *uniform* field between the electrodes that has that same strength or intensity, as the field in strongest part of the focused field of J's design, then from the atom's point of view, there is no difference.

No difference, except that now, *all* the atoms everywhere in the gas experience the same, strong field, instead of just a minority of them, as was the case in the focused field. The field exists *everywhere* in the gas at the desired strength, instead of just at one concentrated region. Since the entire gas volume is now able to be involved in the O₆ process, occurring at the same rate per unit volume that occurred before in just the relatively small focused portion of J's grooves, the overall production rate of O₆ is very much higher.

This does not involve making the gas passage bigger. It does not involve making the drive voltage higher. It only requires correctly spacing the electrodes, ie using a dielectric thickness that will yield the correct field strength. You must select a dielectric with an appropriate dielectric constant and dielectric strength, so it will sustain this field strength without breaking down, but that is not any more difficult with this approach than it is with grooves.

It is not at all difficult to accomplish, though it does require care in the design. Actually, the required field does not have to be as strong as the strongest field in the focused field region to produce as much (or more) O6. It only has to be strong enough to support the combinational process, at a per unit volume rate that will result in the (now) enlarged active gas region producing the same amount of O₆ as was obtained from the small focused region. This results in a reduction in the maximum electrical stress in the dielectric.

It isn't really a redistribution of the stress, since now nearly the entire dielectric surface is stressed, but the peak stress level is a bit lower than the peak value in the "focused" field. And the increased O₆ production rate means it is probably admissible to lower the stress (v/mil) in the dielectric still further and still exceed the focused field's production.

J seems to be hung up on the fact that the focused field produces a small region of intense activity. Well, of course it does. But, does it not make sense to you, that it would be better to design the field, so that the *entire* volume, or nearly so, is at this same intensity? Would you not expect the O₆ production rate to sharply increase by doing this?

J seems to want to ascribe a stature or quality to a focused field, which is unwarranted. There is nothing magical about focusing an electric field. There is nothing about the field at the focused region, or the reactions that happen there, that is in any way different than would be the case if the entire gas volume of the tube were under the same gradient conditions. Capable physicists or engineers can design a uniform field gradient that will do precisely what I have described. J can too, once he breaks out of the mental rut he has dug himself into.

A finite element analysis program like ALSYS may be used to analyze the electric field's shape in J's grooves, plot and measure its intensity at every point, and determine exactly what dielectric and tubing wall thicknesses will produce the same result, only uniformly. This will allow you to plainly see what the electric field strength is everywhere in the groove, just as may be done yogically, and if you do, you will find that the field strength is inferior on either side of the thin part. Such software is expensive, but you could hire an engineering consultant to do this for you. But it is an unnecessary exercise. You can get a working system by some simple trials, using Teflon tubing and dielectric thicknesses available in common sizes that are suitable for an economical design, that will perform very satisfactorily.

It is clear that this will result in a much larger active region in the gas cross section (circa 70-80%, depending on how thin tubing walls are and how flat-sided the passages are) versus a considerably narrower volumetric region in a focused field (no more than circa 35%).

What are the trade-offs in this? The main thing that happens, is that the increase in the size of the active gas region, with more gas now involved in combinational processes, raises the power consumption. But that does not mean the efficiency has suffered. The efficiency, or what you get in return for spending that power, is definitely higher; the efficiency is improved over the focused design. It consumes more power because you now have a much larger active gas region, in which the oxygens are engaging in combinational processes. The electric field is doing more work on more gas than it did before. Another way of looking at this is that it means you can make the tube size (gas volume) smaller, and still enjoy a large O₆ production.

The efficiency is improved, mainly because with the uniform field, there is no "waste region" on either side of the focused region where a sub-optimum field strength is consuming energy, ionizing gas, but too weak to drive the combination processes efficiently. Another reason is one I mentioned before, that the dielectric bridges between the grooves (which are lossy) can be narrower with thin wall tubing than they typically are with grooves.

Simply observing with your naked eye that the entire gas track of J's focused design is luminous when operating does not mean that the entire lit region is operating at the peak efficiency; this is not so. It means that it is at least partly ionized, to be sure, but that by itself is not a reliable or meaningful measurement of efficiency (speaking of the regions to the side of the focused part), and claiming otherwise is not justifiable.

In his reasoning, and in past observations, J has made the mistake of comparing FE operation of focused fields with that of uniform fields, *but with different peak field intensities*. He is comparing apples and oranges, and correctly declaring that there is a big difference. But this need not be the case; it is simply a failure to take into account all the relevant parameters, field strength being the most notable, which has caused him to come to an erroneous conclusion, and he will eventually realize this, if you will help him along.

He is presently very partial to the focused field concept, because of his personal involvement in developing it, having so much effort invested, and this is biasing his thinking. But ultimately, a uniform field, properly designed to produce a field strength similar to the peak value of a focused field, will prove to generate far more O6, perform more efficiently (watts/pound), be less prone to local breakdown, be cost effective to make, and to have other practical advantages.

This is not trivializing J's design. Concentrated fields have advantages. There are times when you want an inactive region. The inactive region in his design helps to reduce the oxidation damage to the dielectric material (except in the base of the groove), and plastics, like Plexiglas, can last somewhat longer. Sometimes a buffer surrounding the ionized region is useful or important. But this is not one of them.

I did not suggest using a rib or separator to you, as J related, because this approach still (ultimately) forces you to use a more expensive, ozone-resistant dielectric material. Teflon tubing saves you from that, and makes the design life much longer, and cheaper overall. Rib and separator designs have other localized problems I won't go into.

J is correct about the heating that may develop from losses in the dielectric. Dielectric losses are characterized by a term called the "dissipation factor", and this is a function of the field frequency. It is also a function of field gradient, but this latter effect is seldom discussed, since few uses come anywhere close to the sort of high voltage gradients that bring this aspect into significance.

But by choosing suitable dielectric materials, and by designing to keep the voltage gradients within ratings, these losses can be kept low. Because of the low power that the small FE will run at, dielectric losses are not the concern they would be for high power units. Teflon, Kynar, Kapton, polycarbonate, acrylic, ceramic, polypropylene, etc, all have dissipation factors sufficiently low to be suitable for your application. Acrylic and Teflon, as in the electrode configuration I suggest, will work fine for a practical FE product. The differences in dissipation factor among these materials is not sufficiently important to override cost decisions, in keeping materials expenditures low.

I suggest you heed J's advice, to not attempt to get too much performance out of a small device. It is better design practice to lower stresses whenever possible, unless you are just doing lab or prototype experiments. Reliability suffers dramatically when this is ignored, and poor product reliability is often fatal, commercially. FE's already produce O₆ far beyond the capabilities of competing technologies, and it is inadvisable to become tangled in pursuing efficiency, as a moral principle, until you have gained more design skills, which experience will surely bring.

As you move towards patenting O6, the following information may be of some assistance.

To obtain a patent you should be able to describe 1) how it is produced, 2) how it may be isolated, 3) what its properties are, and 4) how it is uniquely identified. Also of value are 5) its uses.

J already has a patent covering (1). Once you develop detectors, you can then demonstrate that it is produced in lesser quantities by other types of ozone generating equipment. By extrapolation, you may next also postulate that lightning, ionospheric reactions, etc, produce it as well.

You may obtain pure O₆ by passing the output of an FE (preferably a large unit) through a condenser cooled by liquid oxygen vapors. You may then separate O₆ rings from the other ozones and oxygens, by melting and boiling point differences. Though straightforward, these are hazardous experiments, to be performed with small quantities, and containment protection, as O3 is unstable in high concentrations and may spontaneously explode, even at low temperatures. Accomplishing O₆ separation/purification will satisfy (2).

Discovering, recording and measuring MP and BP values for O₆ are important for use in your patent. Measurements of the mass will establish it is O6. STM scans of frozen (solid) O₆ deposits on an inert substrate can likewise be used to verify this and establish its molecular structure is ring-like. This will all constitute, for (3), important, substantiating evidence from the perspective of your patent examiner.

Demonstration of di-ozone's reactivity with a (normally) non- oxide forming metal such as gold (into the ORME state, which you may refer to through DH's British patent) will help establish that it is not conventional O3, since this is a "new" or previously unknown reaction. This action may also be used to develop a sensor. The differential membrane-shielded sensor I suggested, is an another approach.

These sensors you may also patent, with the same karmic caveats that apply to all areas of this technology. Having one or more of these will satisfy (4).

The uses of the O₆ ring are great and manifold. It is a very powerful oxidizer. Its potential uses range all the way from creating and super-activating ORMEs, to recovering gold from sea water, to powering giant booster rockets. It will supplant and replace ozone in many existing applications, due to its superior oxidizer properties. Many new things will be discovered that were impossible before your patent shall become known. It will save and prolong countless lives, help clean up the planet, avert great suffering, and make the future a brighter vision.

So much from it... and such a tiny little thing it is, too, all bright, pure, and sparkling.

At some time in the future, should you find yourself in need of assistance, that the way forward seems blocked to you, then go and see JZ Knight. Ramtha knows all about you and the di-ozone work you're involved in. Tell him... Gary sent you. And tell him I'm still a better shot than he is.

You recently wrote:

>...J sees our greatest challenge
>with the monoatomic materials is to be able to separate
>and identify both the species of monoatomic element and
>the valence pairing level as well. He believes he has
>figured out a way to use his lab time at the Oregon
>Institute of Technology to modify an electronic testing
>method to be able to use it to identify species of
>monoatomic materials.

J's refusal, and your own reluctance, to actively pursue and support ORMEs applications and uses of the FE technology, has absolutely precluded my conveying any information to you on this line. Mankind has an urgent need in regard to ORMEs, and it is solely to this end that this (FE) technology has come into your hands, that knowledge of it has been given to you, which fact I suggest deserves considerably more appreciation and awe than you (particularly J) have afforded it thus far.

Though your choices have closed that door, at least as far as my service to you is concerned, still, at a later time it appears that it shall become possible to pass information on species separations, etc., to David Hudson, along with certain alchemical keys.

J seems to have little concept of the reasons I have been communicating with you, despite my having related some things in that regard on a number of occasions. I hope you will try and further explain this to him.

I decline J's invitation to communicate directly, and also decline his overture to give me further information, on condition of a confidential disclosure agreement, and I find this to be presumptuous, distrustful, and inappropriate.

You continue to be free to use any information I have given you, however you choose. You also now have my permission to distribute any information I have sent you, to whom ever you wish. Your only remaining restrictions are to not convey my email address, PO Box, information on where I reside, or last name.

I am displeased that you took it upon yourself to alter the comments and excerpt I sent for public posting, without first conferring with me. More and more, I am finding that a genuine understanding of karmic principles is a scarce commodity, and this is a lonely feeling indeed.

This is my last email to you. I am ending our correspondence. This is not with punitive intent, but because that now must be, as plain and simple cause and effect action. Of course, such things are all determined from well before hand, but that does not matter.

There are a lot of other things I would liked to have covered with you, but still, much has been conveyed, and I consider the effort a good success, and well worthwhile. It has been an enjoyable experience.

I have some final advice and an admonition for you that I want you to take very seriously.

There is a thin line, separating being protective of something, and hiding and suppressing the knowledge of it. On the one hand, there is discretion, where knowledge is imparted sagaciously, and on the other, there is secrecy, where it is kept hidden, buried, and covered up, revealed only to ones closest confidants.

I must warn you, Barry, that you have been dangerously meandering, crossing here, crossing there, along the line, the line which separates protection and propriety from suppression.

It is one thing to be protective of D's identity, or at least for you to presume that is what you are doing. It is quite another to suppress and deny such knowledge to others, to seekers of Truth...knowledge which has been rightly placed in the public domain, by those far better able to judge consequences than you, and is meant to be available and free to them. That is what you did by extracting the reference to D, and the source for the tapes from that message. You were wrong in doing this, and I hope and recommend you amend your actions.

Binga too, has struggled to find the key to discerning this line, and has been guilty of suppression, speciously thinking that is better to error on that side, than by too little discrimination. But that line shall remain elusive, until the day arrives when you can see for yourselves the ebb and flow of karma in our world.

David Hudson's lectures, the tapes made of them which are available in the public domain, are there for a reason. If you intentionally suppress access to them, grave consequences may follow. For a long time, David did just as you are doing; keeping the knowledge he held within his close circle of friends.

The Fluid Energizer patent is issued and open to public scrutiny. You must act quickly to file an O₆ patent application. As soon as possible after this is accomplished, you must begin releasing the information you have, in wider and wider circles.

You must loosen the hold you are maintaining on the singularly unique and invaluable knowledge you have, concerning ORMEs, their relation to O₆ and the Fluid Energizer, and the many, many other things you have come to understand.

D is perfectly capable of handling his affairs, without you standing guard. His higher self and the vast powers which are watching and directing the development of all this are more than capable of handling things. The unsolicited phone calls and attention you are preventing D from receiving will not ruin his life's purpose, but is interfering with the destinies of others. It is not your job to exclusively hold onto all this, like some chipmunk with his cheeks stuffed full of nuts.

Barry, it's time to spit it out.

It is time for you to make the transition from custodian of this knowledge, to its disseminator. You have a wonderful ability to articulately explain and relate things. You must now use that to pass all this on to others, who *need* the information, who will *grow* from it, just as you have grown.

Think over your reasons for not spreading what you know, beyond the bounds of your small group of friends. The mind is such a restless thing. It worries over this and rationalizes over that. Do not listen to those voices, but rather proceed with courage and conviction, knowing that many, many, whom you have never met or even know of, are depending on you, counting on you. Great and august invisibles are helping you, pulling for you, strengthening you.

I too, am with you.

There are now hundreds and hundreds of kindred spirits who are online, waiting for what you are charged to tell them about. They are your friends, and millions more will be joining them. Tell them the good news. Remember the parable of the Talents? Don't allow this to remain buried, confined to your small circle of friends, any longer. Good journey, Barry!