SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY RSS FEED!
Facebook
Date posted: September 7, 2012

Miroslav Provod

My hypothesis was inspired by a finding of an Austrian citizen Johann Grandler. My attention was caught by his knowledge of revitalized water, especially about his activation unit, in which the properties of water are changed. During my research, which is described at http://www.miroslavprovod.com, I performed shaking of water in many experiments and I also noticed the change in the properties of water.

In order to compare Grandlers research outcomes together with my findings I replaced the water that is put into a home bread bakery with water that had been shaken for 1 minute in a plastic bottle. The bread made from this shaken water was of much greater quality, it was easier to detach it from the tray and the baking oven was completely clean after the breads removal. Also, coffee that had been shaken before drinking had much better taste.

By shaking (dynamisation) the separated static charge increases in fluids. This is due to the friction of the molecules of water with the sides of its container. This is nothing new, it’s a well known physical property.

This easy experiment that uses dynamisation could easily be realized in bakeries or at home, especially in situations where an expensive Grandler activation unit would have to be bought instead. In this case it’s not necessary. This is an interesting finding and it could be expected that in further verifying experiments, especially those with the changing static charge, more interesting aspects with other fluids could be discovered.

The Czech TV (Ceska Televize) received a so called ”bludny balvan” (mystifying stone) from the skeptics for broadcasting false information associated with revitalized water. I think that skeptics couldn’t find a better example to confront. In the near future, there will likely be mass repeated experiment with dynamisation and after it had been verified the skeptics would be criticized by many people.

Some of the stated findings could be used together with the research of homeopathy in connection with the four recently discovered properties of static charge that are published at http://www.miroslavprovod.com

The by Hahnemann used potential of 30CH goes over the Avogadro constant and therefore the scientific community believes that homeopathy doesn’t work because the probability that even a single molecule of the necessary fluid being present is very low. I don’t agree with this view, where disregarding one of many factors leads to the disregarding the functionally verified homeopathy. I am guessing that this is not about the remaining percentage of the necessary fluid but there are also other not yet known factors. By the repeated dynamisation of the fluid the static charge in it increases as described above and this could give us a hint in connection with the mixing of the fluid with further water

I will state a further example in which the basics of homeopathy could be hidden.

Millions of megalithic structures that are scattered around the globe like menhis, dolmens, cromlechs and many more  are described as astronomical observatories or structures used for calendar or agricultural purposes by the current science. This sounds like a paradox as many people in those times had different problems than to be interested in astronomy on such a large scale. I regard it as a big misinformation that this reasoning is being taught and people believe it.

Our empirical research has shown that megalithic structures were build for curative reasons due to spontaneous transfer of static charge from the rock onto the cellular membranes of the human body. I think that people didn’t know about this transfer in the past but it was sufficient for them that it worked.

In case of homeopathy the scientific community isn’t satisfied with the fact that it works. It needs some explanation like everybody who is interested in homeopathy. This explanation would however take time to be discovered. In my opinion we should first scientifically confirm the different understanding of our history where interesting findings could be hidden. We should more focus on the research of static charge where we need further explanation in connection with factors like ball lightning and other not yet explained facts.

We should under no circumstances disregard homeopathy only because the final fluid can’t contain even one molecule of the necessary fluid. The homeopathy works, it hasn’t just fallen from the sky, someone had to have discovered it. We should therefore assume that the one who discovered it had more necessary knowledge and could therefore orient better in the laws of nature.

Miroslav Provod
http://www.miroslavprovod.com

Comments

3 Responses so far.

  1. Shantaram Kane says:

    Hi,
    We have shown at IITBombay that market samples of metal based homeopathic medicines (6c, 30c and 200c) do retain nanoparticles of the parent metal. We have also estimated their amounts.

    We gave a webinar on our work. Please contact Dr. Iris Bell – ibell@u.arizona.edu or Kristy Lampe – klampe@windstream.net – to get the details of the webinar.

    Optionally, please see the paper
    2010 – Prashant Chikramane. A. K. Suresh, J.R. Bellare, S.G. Kane Extreme Homeopathic Dilutions Retain Starting Materials: A Nanoparticulate Perspective.
    Homeopathy, Volume 99, Issue 4, 2010: 231-242

    Our student has now done experiments to show why the particles are still present and we have sent the paper for publication.

    Please spread this information to the homeopathic community.
    Best,
    Shantaram kane

  2. Dr. ROSE DEEPTHY G says:

    It is encouraging to know that even non homoepathic people are trying to understand homoeopathy by chance or scientifically through Nano technology or static charge of water methodology etc etc……….Hope in future Mankind will accept the quantitation of Homoeopathy in a better way………All the Best

1. Comments will be moderated. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name, to   avoid rejection.
2. Comments that are abusive, personal, incendiary or irrelevant cannot be published.
3. Please write complete sentences. Do not type comments in all capital letters, or in all   lower case letters, or using abbreviated text. (example: u cannot substitute for you, d is not   'the', n is not 'and')


*

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.