Water's capacity to remember

**Domen123** · March 08, 2017, 05:00 AM

The water and rice experiments

Japanese researcher Dr. Masaru Emoto discovered that crystals formed in frozen water reveal changes when specific, concentrated thoughts are directed toward them. With the use of high-speed photography, he found that water from clear springs and water that was exposed to constantly-repeated loving thoughts and words displays aesthetically beautiful, geometrically advanced, and colourful snowflake patterns. On the other hand, polluted water such as acid rain or water exposed to negative thoughts and words, formed distorted, asymmetrical patterns with dull colours. Russian Academy of Natural Sciences’ Doctor Konstantin Korotkov’s findings harmonize with Masaru’s. In his experiments, positive and loving emotions directed toward a flask of water increased its energy levels while negative and aggressive emotions notably reduced it. Although the results of such experiments can easily be skewed by various factors, including the water’s ‘memory’ as you’ll read below, what is most important here is not the scientific validity of the experiments but the idea behind them. (...)

Water’s capacity to remember

Scientific research attempts to clarify the cause of water’s unpredictability. It has been claimed that water has its own version of memory. Although very difficult for current scientific methods to fully prove, the experiments hypothesise that water receives and imprints any outside influence, picking up information and remembering everything that occurs in the space around it. Any substance that comes into contact with water leaves some type of trace in it. As it records information, water acquires new properties, but its overall composition remains unchanged. “The structure of water is much more important than the chemical composition,” explains Rustum Roy, who was a professor at Arizona State University. (...)

(...) If positive and negative thoughts affect the water then how, by what means is this effect being transferred to humans who are 70% water, what physical laws underpin this force and how can it be detected?

Source:

http://leopoldmethod.com.au/the-flow-of-football1/

**Iskar** · March 08, 2017, 05:38 AM

(...) If positive and negative thoughts affect the water then how, by what means is this effect being transferred to humans who are 70% water, what physical laws underpin this force and how can it be detected?

The answer is simple. They don't and there is nothing to be detected. There are no physical laws underpinning this force because this force does not exist.

Thoughts cannot be physically directed at something farther away than an electrode attached to your head for an EEG (and even that would be restricted to consciously controllable thought processes, so mostly just the frontal cortex - brain specialists correct me if I'm wrong). The currents involved are quite simply too small to produce any EM field strong enough to affect an outside object.

Do you know what you mean when you say "energy levels"? Increasing the energy level of water basically just means heating it up. No karma, cosmic "energies", leprechauns etc. involved.

Water isn't "unpredictable". It is probably among the best understood substances on the planet. Basically because it is interesting (fluid at relatively low temperatures) has an intrinsic dipole structure, relatively high adhesion vs cohesion and happens to occur almost everywhere. Yeah, not really everywhere. Sorry, Atacama.

It doesn't "remember" thoughts and events around it either. Crystal formation in freezing water is subject to pretty well understood statistical mechanics/thermodynamics and the final structure of crystals is subject to pretty well understood solid state physics.

I would highly recommend distancing oneself from such anti-scientific, neo-mythical nonsense. It is a tempting concept that "nice" thoughts cause beautiful, symmetric patterns in crystals and "bad" thoughts cause asymmetry and ugliness, but that is ultimately just a neo-platonic fallacy. The good, the true and the beautiful are not the same, I'm afraid.

PS: No reason to be sad, though. There is much more abstract beauty and curious facts in actual science than in this kind of pseudo-science. Just go get it.

**Kyriakos** · March 08, 2017, 05:59 AM

Water-displaced eureka? ^^

**Domen123** · March 08, 2017, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by Iskar

It is a tempting concept that "nice" thoughts cause beautiful, symmetric patterns in crystals and "bad" thoughts cause asymmetry and ugliness, but that is ultimately just a neo-platonic fallacy. The good, the true and the beautiful are not the same, I'm afraid.

Well, there are certain mathematical patterns:

**Domen123** · March 08, 2017, 11:02 AM

It doesn't "remember" thoughts and events around it either. Crystal formation in freezing water is subject to pretty well understood statistical mechanics/thermodynamics and the final structure of crystals is subject to pretty well understood solid state physics.

If there are certain repetitive patterns in the structure of crystals then it can be called memory (or written language, if you prefer).

**Iskar** · March 08, 2017, 11:07 AM

Indeed there are, but there are two points to consider:

1) The golden ratio (and the Fibonacci sequence related to it) is most likely a primarily helpful ("good") structure in nature/science that occurs as a more or less happenstance consequence of basic logics/mathematics. As it is beneficial to quickly/subconsciously recognise helpful patterns it is very likely that having an aesthetic preference for the golden ratio ("beautiful") is mostly a trait acquired by our species through evolution: Individuals with an aptness to quickly recognise it had a selection advantage and passed this on.

2) Just because there are examples where good, true and beautiful coincide that does not mean they do so everywhere. Yes, the golden ratio is naturally helpful (good), mathematically sound (true) and aesthetically pleasing (beautiful), but there are a lot of things in mathematics that are undoubtetly true and maybe even helpful but are profoundly ugly and tedious (e.g. numerical methods) or that are very elegant and true but utterly useless for real life (e.g. abstract geometry of arbitrary dimensions).

The unity of good, true and beautiful is a valid ideal to strife for in the things we do and create, but it is, sadly, not an accurate description of the world.

If there are certain repetitive patterns in the structure of crystals then it can be called memory (or written language, if you prefer).

No, I'm afraid. Crystal structure is subject to stochastic processes at the point of freezing and no connection to previous influences on the fluid, non-crystalline water can be inferred. Yes you can store information in crystals using sophisticated instruments to manipulate them or we could read information about the physical circumstances of the crystal's formation from its structure. If you want to call that memory that is a bit stretching the notion, but even if you do it does not constitute the claimed "memory of water" where random thoughts of bystanders later influence the crystalline structure.

**John Doe** · March 08, 2017, 12:57 PM

For millions of years, billions of animals mating, defecating and dying in water. It's not a bad thought, it's a fact.

Fancy a drink of "remembering" water?

**DaVinci** · March 08, 2017, 01:04 PM

... but even if you do it does not constitute the claimed "memory of water" where random thoughts of bystanders later influence the crystalline structure.

At least that runs under metaphysics/esoterics ... which some try to interprete or use as "science".

And yes to pretty much everything what Iskar said here. Patterns are natural occurances. It's all physics, which we discover, observe and try to understand, and fantastically, we are able to understand a lot, because we are part of the nature. I personally would be careful with a too resolute refusal of certain phenomenons, it is also a (mere confusing) science-principle, that the more we know, the less sure we can be about certain items (fe. the question-mark behind the discovered/solved question-mark).

The thread title jumped into my eyes.

**Iskar** · March 08, 2017, 01:23 PM

You're of course right, we cannot prove non-existence and there might always be some hidden mysteries of nature at work and one should always be open-minded about new findings or ideas. However, new developments/theories need to follow the scientific method and just (mis)using established scientific terms (structure, energy, force, etc.) in an imprecise way to create a veneer of accurateness is not in accordance with it at all. (I'm preaching to the choir in telling you this, I sure, just wanted to make that explicit.)

**DaVinci** · March 08, 2017, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by Iskar

... there might always be some hidden mysteries of nature at work ...

Just mentioning: Imo. those "hidden mysteries" are no mysteries at all, but belong to the said nature categories, which we discover etc., just have not understood yet.

That doesn't change the science-principle of simply put, the more i know the less i know. Whereas that background describes also or perhaps even primarily, the quasi-limitations of disciplinary studies ... versus, what i would prefer to bring forward, interdisciplinary studies. Examples in Germany: Leibniz-Gemeinschaft, Berlin; Institut für sozial-ökologische Forschung, Frankfurt.

Insofar, yes, i refuse as well all metaphysics which follow not acknowledged methodology, if they are handled as science, and anyway the more, if dealed with as supra-natural occurances. Else, let them, those guys have their fun. And who knows, the according branch might discover some day something valid/valueable. After all, science (application) started as alchemy.

**Kyriakos** · March 11, 2017, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by Iskar

Indeed there are, but there are two points to consider:

1) The golden ratio (and the Fibonacci sequence related to it) is most likely a primarily helpful ("good") structure in nature/science that occurs as a more or less happenstance consequence of basic logics/mathematics. As it is beneficial to quickly/subconsciously recognise helpful patterns it is very likely that having an aesthetic preference for the golden ratio ("beautiful") is mostly a trait acquired by our species through evolution: Individuals with an aptness to quickly recognise it had a selection advantage and passed this on.

A brief note here, since i have given this specific issue (geometric patterns in nature) some thought:

It isn't imo correct to regard those patterns as tied to nature itself, for they are identified by an observer, and in this case ourselves. It seems hugely more likely that the spiral patterns (or other ones, beginning with the simplest/"simplest" like approximations of lines etc) are only picked up that way due to the human mind working in some level* with geometrical patterns.
* In my view, from a philosophical point of view, it is probable that the human mind in some deeper (and mostly non-conscious) levels does not even rely on geometric or other patterns we examine in math. It seems to form those patterns as part of some cross-road or vortex of mental goings-on in the deeper mind.
That said, this isn't having to do with the external notice of such patterns, in nature. Those seem to be identified there because we can only identify them in this way, and not because nature itself is tied to math or patterns.

**Iskar** · March 11, 2017, 07:27 AM

From a purely philosophical point of view I fully agree with you.

From a scientific/evolutionary point of view one might say, though, that those patterns in our cogntive conduct have formed by evolution because mirroring natural patterns from the "outside world" in our thought processes made it easier to properly assess said "outside world" (which is a hazardous notion philosophically, but somewhat well-defined for scientific purposes).