Bernd Kröplin
Regine C. Henschel

Water and its memory

New astonishing insights in water research

GutesBuch Verlag, Stuttgart

1st English Edition, 2017

© 2017 GutesBuch Verlag, Stuttgart

German Edition by AT Verlag, 2016 Switzerland

Translation: Ulrich Magin, Regine C. Henschel

Cover: “World in a drop”-Research, Prof. Dr. Bernd Kröplin, Regine C. Henschel

Picture editing: Vogt-Schild Druck, Derendingen

Layout: Rund ums Buch – Rudi Kern, Kirchheim-Teck

Print and bookbinding: Sowa Sp. z o.o. Piaseczno

Printed in Europe

ISBN 978-3-9819203-0-7

www.worldinadrop.com

Foreword It is time

Foreword

It is time …

Mind over matter – this postulate of quantum physics must be applied in our everyday life. And of all things it had to be an odourless, formless, even tasteless element which has shown us the direction of our research: water! And yet maybe it were just these characteristics of water which have made our research possible in the first place.

Water is the most common substance on earth. Without water, there would be no atmosphere, no life, no mankind – a human person is made up of 70 per cent of water! Water as the basic stuff of life has more than forty anomalies. It almost symbolically shows us in its drops what we currently experience in quantum physics and biology.

Actually, at the moment we all live through a most substantial transformation which may even herald a new era in the life of mankind. We are about to discover a new concept of mind and matter which understands man as a kind of co-creator, as an agent who spiritually designs his world. This transformation, in our opinion, is caused by the fact that physics, as quantum mechanics, is converging with consciousness research, which previously has been the domain of philosophy and psychology. And biology, with the most state of art findings of cell science, contributes to our understanding that life and the mechanisms of our cells can only exist when they are connected to a “higher consciousness.” Even the solid laws of genetics make place for epigenetics, which recognises the influence of environmental factors and sees the potential of a higher level consciousness in cell development and in the evolution of life (LIPTON 2014). The idea of solid matter has been replaced by the idea of an imaginary quantum field with attributes like intelligence, morphogenetic information and even vibrations of love. What the philosophers and mystics of old already knew, all the knowledge that had been feared forgotten or hidden, has now resurfaced in new form and in a wider understanding. We can almost touch it and use it in our millennium.

As Max Planck already remarked in 1944, “There is no matter as such! (…) Not the visible and transient matter is real or true, but the invisible and imperishable mind is real.”

Our conceptions of the world of man and the cosmos and their mutual relationship have long been revolutionised, but what does that mean for us, in our everyday life? Are we only self-organizing “clots of matter” dominated by indifferent and purposeless natural laws? Or are we beings that are possessed with consciousness, will, and spirituality, living in an interconnected world of information and uncountable possibilities? A world in which the different things know, reflect and understand more about each other as is generally assumed – a world in which water plays a central role?

With water, we can actively take part in our everyday life in this revolution of our conception of the world. We can understand it, we can experience it. With a few skills we can even perceive and discover these subtle worlds with our senses.

Our own voyage of discovery in the world of water was so exciting that we have set sail in this book to present our insights to all who are open to share the mysterious wonders of the world of water with us. We have deliberately decided to use an informal approach. This leaves room for intuition, feelings and creativity, and betrays neither science nor emotion.

In our water research, we have strictly adhered to the famous line by Albert Einstein, “The more we find out, the more we see a creator’s plan. God does not play dice with the universe.”

Let us surprise you!

Prof. Dr. Bernd Kröplin and Regine C. Henschel
www.worldinadrop.com

Water memory.

Effects, basics, experimental design

How it all started…

Water memory.

Effects, basics, experimental design

HOW IT ALL STARTED …

We were “air and space travellers” at Stuttgart University in Germany. Early in the 1990s, we thought we could see that Russian cosmonauts appeared to be far less exhausted when they returned from space than their American counterparts.

We heard that, on board, they received a treatment with electromagnetic waves, a process which was known in Germany as “bio resonance,” but whose efficiency was doubted. So we started our quest for a material which might be able to depict these weak electromagnetic waves and to lastingly and non-hazardously apply them to the human body. Can you imagine our surprise when we discovered that just such effects can be seen under a microscope in a dried drop of water! We almost immediately started our research project.

Now these are times where we believe that we understand and dominate the world in scientific terms by grasping its laws rationally – and continuously better. To this objective, we permanently make up wide-reaching theories which we then test, as we find truth not in a theory (which, after all, cannot be more than a vision), but in its experimental test. Only the experiment is real and describes a kind of “reality.” However, whether our experiment describes a real phenomenon can only be found out for sure when it can be replicated with the same result. This progress is often problematic as the results of the trials will often “scatter,” leading researchers to “invent” any number of side effects which have not yet been taken into account and which might explain such scattering etc. They do this to save their favourite idea. This, however, has already been refuted by a single result that does not conform to it.

And then there are many forces which evidently move our world and which cannot be measured in experiments. Either the effects cannot be replicated or they evade our conventional measuring methods and instruments. Among this we count emotions like love and hate, sympathy and many others whose power nobody would deny and whose psychosomatic effect on our efficiency and health are well known. To these forces we should also add the moon and her phases which without a doubt influence our sleep and plant growth in general, although she is generally regarded as a soulless piece of rock which orbits the earth. We could list many more similar examples.

In our experiments we decided to be as scientific as possibly, to tolerate certain deficits when it comes to the repeatability of our trials if only we manage to get into contact with phenomena which previously could not be measured and described.

We started our research in 1998. Initially we worked with Ruth Kübler, an artist from Stuttgart. Later we experimented in the premises of the Institut der Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik, the Institute of Aerospace Engineering, in Stuttgart, our professional home in which we develop and engineer aircraft. Our research into the properties of water was sponsored, in part, by the Ministry of the Environment of Baden-Württemberg.

After almost twenty years, we look back on a turbulent and moving time. As pioneers of a new kind of research and of new insights times this was not generally a bed of roses. In the meantime (and after many lectures and exhibitions) people more easily accept these phenomena and results. Today, many can envisage that water may “communicate” with the experimenter, while at first we were heavily criticized for saying so. Yet perseverance pays, and softest water will eventually wear away the hardest stone.

We have summarised our experience and our insights into chapters, “the seven secrets of water.” They add a whole new dimension to research on water. These seven secrets are:

1Water has different “faces”. The drop image as mirror – What do we see, what can we expect?

2Water – What we insert will be copied. Images of minerals, plants and time.

3Water and electromagnetic waves. Cell phone radiation, x-rays – we perceive even without senses.

4Water “hears” music and ultrasonics. Mechanical waves make an imprint too.

5Water communicates. The “water soup” – nobody is alone any more.

6Water and man. Sensitive reaction – mirror image, tell me who I am.

7Water – transference of the third kind?

Astronauts from a blue planet.

Résumé: Our first idea, namely to show the effects of electromagnetism on the human body using water, and our conclusion that we should follow where our hypothesis led, turned into twenty years of research into water. And our adventure is still continuing…

The memory of water – a vision

THE MEMORY OF WATER – A VISION

Let us start with a thought experiment. Just accept the following ideas and ask yourself some questions – as these are the questions we asked ourselves as theses.

What if …

–… water had a memory?
Water could distribute information in our bodies and body parts and contribute to body control and to improve our health.
Also, rivers and oceans would not be separate from us, but part of an enormous data storage medium.

–… water was able to communicate with itself?
Rivers, lakes, people and plants would exchange information. They would form a giant concerto of life and would know each other. A group of people or a garden would be a living community, and everyone would contribute, for better or for worse, to the whole.

–… water contained thought information that effects the structure formation of matter?
Water, regarded this way, would then be a dynamic, constantly changing blueprint for our world. Thoughts would be the building blocks – and a medium for our health and the health of the world as a whole.

Is it worth to investigate such concepts in any depth? We think so!

Now imagine that you mirror yourself, as an individual, in water. This isn’t hard to do when you think of a mirror image in water that is outside of yourself, such as the surface of a clear lake. You will find your mirror image life-like or somewhat distorted, depending on the movement of the surface. Now if the water that is contained within your body could, in its structure building, mirror your own and individual personality structure, you would have new possibilities to live your life, and you could actively influence life as such. Then, as in a flash, philosophical, social and spiritual approaches to life could be connected to an entire new and beneficial whole. Ancient methods of healing which had been regarded as “spooky”, be they of the western or eastern tradition, would turn out to have a basis in physics after all. It would be a great step towards a new understanding of man, mind and matter.

Lake water from a mining pond.

Lake water, detail.

A side note: What do other scientists think about the memory of water?

A SIDE NOTE: WHAT DO OTHER SCIENTISTS THINK ABOUT THE MEMORY OF WATER?

In the last years, as our research has become known internationally, we have received many letters from interested people who told us their own explanation for our results. We also closely follow the many new developments and partly acid discussions about “water memory.” The following are some of these explanations and positions of scientists and researchers.

Physics: All discoveries of our “world-in-a-drop-research” can be reduced to “microscope slide contamination.” This is an explanation scientifically trained critics like to use to explain the structures in the images of the drops. – We naturally do not agree, as it must be said that it is practically impossible to contaminate a microscope slide in such a way that they always form structures like these.

Geologie: A “remnant magnetism” (remaining magnetism) has been quoted as explanation for the structures formed in the drops. – At least in part, we agree. Such a force could contribute to orient particles in a magnetic field which is present but would hardly create the centred image structures we have observed time and time again. And these centred structures also form in drops within a Faraday cage which excludes magnetic emission (we will come back to this later in our book).

Jacques Benveniste was a French physician who became head of the research department of the Institut national des la santé et de la recherche médicale (INSERM) in 1984. He did research on water memory and expressed his opinion that highly diluted antigen may influence white blood cells thorough the memory effect of water. This thesis was presented in an article in the journal “Nature.” However, his research could not be repeated within his life time, and led to decades of scientific dispute. We know Benveniste and his results well, and several researches are still working for his scientific rehabilitation.

We can understand why Benveniste’s sensitive experiments could not be replicated with the same results, as the very subtle experimental design could not be repeated. Yet the design contributes to the repeatability. In our experiment we document the same water, the same place, and dripped by the same person on a microscope slide. This enables us to achieve a comparability of our results.

Another obstacle to repeatability is that water research has many almost uncontrollable aspects which will influence the results: Among others, they might include emotional stress of the experimenter. We will come back to this later.

Masaru Emoto was a Japanese researcher who found that thawing ice, when photographed with a microscope, formed beautiful crystals. He could observe that the crystal forms reacted to subtle influences like words, and that, in a way, he was able to “communicate” with the water. He printed his photos in a self-published book that met with an overwhelming response, as readers could react emotionally to it. Emoto said about his research that he had only published his own observations and that he did not claim that they were scientifically valid. He did not strive towards repeatability in his experiments but towards a deep consistency in emotion and heart which he reads in his pictures. For him, water is the stuff man is made of. In 1996, Masaru Emoto visited us in our institute. We talked and decided to cooperate, but it was not to come due to his death in 2014.

Luc Montagnier is the man who discovered the HI-virus and received a Nobel Prize for this. He now works on a theory on water memory. His theory, which in this sense resembles Benveniste’s, postulates that information of bacteria remain in water even when the tiny creatures have long perished. He sees the source of this in electromagnetic waves once emitted by the bacteria, which remain in the water and create a kind of “memory.” Luc Montagnier believes he has confirmed this behaviour of water in his own experiments. However, research into the phenomenon continues.

Bruce Lipton is an American biologist and cell scientist. He believes that life in cells is not regulated by the genome, but by a communication of the cell’s membrane with the outside world. Especially involved in this is cellular and intercellular water as well as the cell’s membrane. He thinks that there is a connection between humans and an intelligent information field outside of man in which transmissions from a distance are possible. He speaks of an individual complex from which the individual receives intelligent management information.

Our research and drop image method

RESEARCH AND DROP IMAGE METHOD

What we personally think about the memory of water was decoded by using the following research methods and filed according to the seven secrets of water. Our book includes many photographs of our research which show directly what the memory of the water records. For us, perception and research begins with visibility and the eyes, through phenomenological observation. We will reveal a world of mind and matter, and both are more intimately connected than we generally are aware in our everyday life.

Our experimental method

Our method is and was strictly experimental: we recognize and photograph phenomena. These precede all knowledge. We are, as the German physicist and educator Martin Wagenschein (1896–1988) remarked, something that becomes manifest, by which the world reveals itself without any outside force. This was our starting point, and that means that the experiments had to be designed in a sensitive way, and had to be analysed without fear, coercion and prejudice. We had physicists in our laboratory who refused to look through the microscope as they were afraid that the insights they might receive in this way could shatter their dearly held conception of the world. Science does need courage, because to discover something new often means to question old and dear “facts” – and even to let them go.

In addition to the very rigid experimental basis, our method differs from the usual procedure of science by the holistic outlook we try to achieve. Since Descartes, science attempts to find insights by compartmentalizing complex conditions into smaller, better understandable subsets. These are what is analysed, and not the complex whole. The behaviour that is measured is defined by simple parameters such as temperature, fluctuation, friction, and more. This is a very successful method when the subsets have easy to grasp interactions with the whole but has its limitations when the compartmentalizing and reassembling leads to irreversible changes of the subject of the research. Just imagine you want to analyse the life of a cat and cut it up into tiny parts. You can reassemble them but will find that all life has vanished from the animal. There are things that cannot be divided without a resulting loss of their characteristics. In quantum physics it is generally agreed that mind and matter are in multiple entanglement through communicating energy quants, therefore, we are well advised to find a method in our water research that is least disruptive for the whole.

Thirdly, we want to uncover a reality and not to be lured by a fantasy which only we think is real, which is little more than a “rumour.” To do this, it is necessary to replicate the experiments as only with repeatability under identical test conditions can we assume that the cause in our experiment has triggered and will always trigger the registered effect. Once we find the cause and effect correlation, we can talk about “reality” and a real phenomenon.

Résumé: We were looking for a method that holistically investigates a phenomenon and is replicable as to cause and effect and which additionally – as will be seen later – will give us information (among others) on whether electromagnetic or other fields leave a lasting impression in water.

Our early tests

In our search for the best method we soon excluded physical or chemical measurements, as they would only register individual parameters which, additionally, were still unknown to us. This meant we also did not even know the correct measuring method (which also meant we did not know which measuring instruments we would have to apply!).

Then one day we visited Ruth Kübler, a Stuttgart artist. She had taken photographs of a dried drop of water under a dark-field microscope. Her pictures were beautiful; she called them “the symbolic language of nature.”

This is why we thought about using imaging techniques as our experimental method. In contrast to the measuring of an individual parameter an image is made up of many points, each of which contains all colour information. In addition, the relation of the points to each other can show shapes and patterns and in this ways delivers a far greater amount of information as the measurement of a single parameter. This only shows an individual value on a certain point. Also, with imaging techniques we may perceive order in the distribution of image points that will lead to an easy recognition of symmetry or chaos.

When you look at the picture on the right here, you will, at first glance, only see a chaotic whirl of dots. Your brain will soon assemble them to form the image of a sniffing Dalmatian. But what is really real: the cloud of dots or the sniffing Dalmatian? The Dalmatian represents the interrelationship of the dots in connection with your experience in the past – and can only be recognised by an experimenter who knows at least dogs, if not Dalmatians.

To achieve an unbiased investigation of water structures which are normally not visible and measurable, we used the following procedure: From a sample of water that is to be tested we extract water with a syringe and apply a drop to the microscope slide. The drop is selected arbitrary as it only forms when it comes from the tip of the syringe. It is then left to evaporate and once it has dried what remains is photographed in enlargement. The molecular forces possibly existent in the liquid drop can form systematic structures almost without any friction and these will be preserved, at least in part, on the glass surface after drying and can be seen under the microscope. In the drop, the surface tension therefore forms a kind of “vessel” which enables these structures to be formed holistically.

What is remarkable is that the different drops of one sort of water do not finish as arbitrary and chaotic images on the glass slide, but in pictures which greatly resemble each other. We can almost call them comparable, and the degree of similarity becomes a measure of repeatability (cf. here).

Forms in a drop of water.

A Dalmatian or a cloud of dots? Picture points build up an image. (Photo R. C. James, from: Lindsay/Norman, 1977)

The drop image method

Our experimental method, as explained, consists in extracting, from a mass of water to be tested, a sample with a clean disposable syringe and then to give a very small drop on the clean and dust free glass surface of a microscope slide. Each microscope slide admits two rows of about 7 drops each. We used a fresh disposable syringe and a new microscope slide in each trial and all by the same manufacturer and for years. The drops have a diameter of c. 2 millimetres. With some practice, 14 drops find place on a single microscope slide.

Drops in comparison.

Disposable syringe

Microscope slide with drop still wet

Dark-field microscope with attachment.

The microscope slide is cleansed by a soft wipe with cleaning paper to remove fluff without leaving traces of the wipe. Cleaning paper soaked in alcohol must not be used.

The drops dry at room temperature and last between 5 and 15 minutes, depending on the moisture of the room. A special cleanroom or special instruments are not needed.

The dark-field microscope used was a conventional optical microscope with a dark-field attachment and a magnification up to 400. Most of the images which show a whole drop have been photographed with a 40-fold magnification. The dark-field device depicts transparent objects bright and the background dark. This renders transparent drops on a dark background especially visible.

The drops were also observed and photographed with a conventional dark-field microscope under room temperature.

The photo in the middle left depicts a microscope slide with a still wet drop.

The drops form a dome because of their surface tension.

During the process of drying this lessens and disappears, and the drop becomes “flat.”

Instruments for the water drop microscopy

Mikroscope

Olympus BX51TF bzw. B × 50 withadditional devias

Olympus Optical Co. (Europa) GmbH

Digital camera

Olympus BX51TF and B × 50 with fixtures

Olympus Optical Co. (Europa) GmbH

Disposable syringes

for example, 2 ml disposable syringes, 100 Sterican diameter 0,45 × 12 mm, 26 G × ¹/₂", manufacturer: B. Braun Melsungen AG

Microscope slide

Assistant, Elka microscope slide 76 × 26 mm, unchamfered

Starting an experiment

With a clean disposable syringe, we carefully extract a sample from the water to be tested and apply 14 drops of equal size on a clean microscope slide. These we let dry under a dark-field microscope and then take photographs of the drop images. These are the pictures that will be used as a reference in the test run.

In a second step, we subject the preselected test water to an influence, for example we electromagnetically irradiate it or treat it with ultrasound or we insert a plant into the water. The experimental method described above is used and a force exerted on the water. We therefore have images of the drops with and without influence. These are now compared – a classic before-and-after-situation. The changes in the arrangement depict the effect of the influence. We compare a before with an after situation of the same water. By doing this, we could also run trials with aging experiments.

The water used is always a watery solution. It is never pure or distilled but rather water with a good formation power for structures. Water differs in this respect due to origin and composition.

Immediately after application of the drop, one often sees a large amount of movement in the water. This is Brownian motion which can actually even create whirls in some of the drops. The process of drying often starts at the margin of the drop and moves towards its centre, as the margin is the place where evaporation can most easily begin. Sometime, the process of drying is quite slow, sometimes it happens in jerks. Generally, it leaves centred dehydration structures. As an exception, a drop might dry not centrally, but from one side to the other. Most often we saw this in essences. While drying, one can observe crystalline phases as well as sedimentary ones. However, the dehydration process is only the first stage in observation.

Rather more of interest is the final image on the microscope slide as it clearly depends on the sort of water and its components such as salts, minerals, calcium carbonate, etc., but also on the brand of object slide used and how it was cleaned. Even when we keep the materials used in our experiments (syringe, cannula, make of microscope slide, room, location, temperature, etc.) as constant as possible, the influence of the experimenter still remains. This rather fascinating aspect will be explained several times in this book, with examples, because it is an important one which has to be taken into consideration. The significance these outside forces have basically depends on the sort of water. We differentiate between strong and sensitive water. This will also be expanded upon in later chapters.

Dehydration rings of tap water from Poland (left) and dehydration rings from water with succulent inserted (right).

We deliberately selected a very simple experimental environment which comes close to the natural dehydration process – without cleanroom and complicated and vulnerable methods. In our work, we mainly focussed on the dehydrated remains, the image structures left by the water. The chemical content of the dried substances are of minor importance, as we concentrate on the patterns they leave due to the characteristics of a special water. Drops, for example, often dry in dehydration jerks which later leave almost circular rings (cf. the photos above).

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe

Lesen sie mehr in der vollständigen Ausgabe