27-09-2003
SOME RESULTS
Subject.
Scientific results from a 2 year investigation of the Joe cell. The
investigation focused on the Redox potential results, from minute by
minute readings of the water contained in a test cell, and under
varying conditions.
The 1,440 daily samples were logged, plotted and graphed. The resultant
daily graphs were studied over a two year period, and the behavioural
trends noted.
This paper is a precis of the results obtained. The full test results
would be enough material for a book on the topic, and in addition would
be extremely dry and boring reading for the vast majority of casual
experimenters. Apart from myself, I could not see anybody else getting
excited from the viewing of over 700 graphs. < g >
Aim.
To show the active cell experimenter a method of cell activation that
removes a vast quantity of myth, deliberate misinformation, rumour and
old wife’s tales. I present you with rock hard facts, what you do with
them ( if anything ) is up to you.
Note.
For readers that are conversant with the topic and are only interested
in the results, skip all the following sections and start reading from
the Results heading.
Preamble.
I have no shadow of a doubt that the Joe cell utilises a form of energy
that is ‘ invisible ’ to conventional scientific instruments ( as
utilised by the average scientist that is ).
In my opinion, the force that we are trying to measure is without mass,
is not visible, and is not magnetic or electric in the common use of
these terms. This causes obvious problems in trying to measure this
slippery little sucker.
For the interested reader, I will mention some instruments that I have
tried over the years. I am mentioning these in case you have a “what if
we try a ......? ” question.
Volt meters, Amp meters, ohm meter, electrostatic meters,
electrometers, Q meter, capacitance meter, inductance meter, Gieger
counter, Gamma meter, Uv meter, Lux meter, magnetic compasses, spectrum
analysers, ultrasonic meter, wide band spectrophotometer, UV
spectrophotometer, cloud chamber, Orgonometer, Gauss meter, phase
contrast microscope, vacuum chambers, vacuum pumps, Vacor tubes,
transducers, crystals, various colour lasers, ionisation tubes,
Uranium, rare earth magnets, electro-magnets, ELF meter, wideband radio
receivers, frequency counters, pH meters, Redox meters, dissolved
oxygen meter, temperature meters, ion meter, conductivity meter, TDS
meter, and more that I cannot recall at this moment.
I would not expect anybody to repeat my ten years plus of mainly
fruitless work. But you can save yourself a lot of work by not
repeating work that I have already done. That is the aim of my updates
and this aim also applies to the present paper.
I have been unable to find an instrument that can measure the cause (
the life force or Orgone ) directly. Thus I have resorted to measuring
the effects of the ‘ force ’ on more conventional test gear.
There is an ‘ instrument ’ that can indeed measure the cause directly,
it is called the ‘ organic meter ’ and a human being is a typical
example.
Unfortunately I am not one of the lucky few ( like Joe ) that can ‘
feel ’ or ‘ see ’ the force and thus can do in one day what takes me
many years.
Sadly, the majority of experimenters have my handicap, namely requiring
external means to help them to ‘ see ’, thus I have been trying to find
the most appropriate way of measuring what the ‘ life force ’ is up to
in the cell, and a method that can be easily replicated by the reader
if they choose to do so.
The most appropriate instrument would have to be relatively cheap, easy
to purchase, use standard scientific units of measurement, have a
reasonable service life, and most of all, easy to use by a relative
novice.
My choice for many reasons was a Redox ( or ORP ) meter.
Redox.
I have already described the Redox meter in previous writings, but for
the reader that may be a bit rusty on the facts, a quick revision will
do no harm.
ORP ( oxidation and reduction potential ) or Redox is a measure of a
water system capacity to either release or gain electrons in a chemical
situation.
Oxidation is the loss of electrons whilst reduction is the gain of electrons.
In passing, oxidation tends to result in the formation of a reddish-brown coloured deposit, rust. < g >
The Redox meter is a very similar instrument to a pH meter. Whilst the
pH ( powers of hydrogen ) meter is involved with the measurement of
change in the hydrogen ions, the Redox meter is more related to
measuring the electron change as a potentiometric measurement.
This electron activity is measured in millivolts ( one millivolt is a
1/1000th of a volt ). The scale of the meter usually covers a range
from + 2,000 millivolts ( 2 volts ) to - 2,000 millivolts.
A good pH meter will usually measure pH, temperature and up to 1.5
volts. A change of the probe is all that is necessary to start
measuring Redox instead of pH.
Do not be tempted in purchasing a very cheap meter, the automatic
temperature compensation and probe calibration features of the more
expensive meters are very worthwhile. As usual, you get what you pay
for. I would suggest that any meter under about $100 US is a waste of
time.
Do not buy a second hand probe as they have a limited service life. A decent new probe sells for around $100 US.
Additionally, a meter without a computer interface is next to useless for long term periodic measurement.
The Redox measurements DO NOT directly tie-in with the quantity of
Orgone in the cell. Nor do they indicate what the Orgone is. It is only
a handy side effect that can be used to give us some idea as to what is
occurring in the water.
For example, we cannot normally see the air or the wind. However by
watching a branch that is being bent by a breeze, we can measure an
effect ( velocity ) of the cause ( the air ).
I have found by experimentation that an ion meter is superior to the
Redox meter. However, the cost ( minimum $500 US ), the relative
difficulty in use and the interpretation of the results are some
reasons that prevent me recommending it as my first choice to the
casual experimenter.
However, if you are serious about the topic, the ion meter is very
useful. By measuring the ‘ dip ’ in the ion reading you will know (
just about instantly ) what the cell is doing.
The Method.
At a minimum you will require a Redox meter with computer interface
facilities, and obviously a computer. The reason being is that it would
be just about impossible for a person to take 1 minute readings over a
24 hour period.
Why every minute you may ask? Why can’t I go out a take a reading
during the advertisement breaks on my favourite TV program? And why 24
hours? Surely a reading or two when I have time will do the job.
Sorry, all things worthwhile require dedication and effort.
Thus, if you really want to understand the cell and so utilise the
secrets that nature has to offer, a sacrifice has to be made. In
reality it is not a sacrifice, it is choosing a path, a decision, a
devotion to where you want to go I this limited physical existence.
At the end of the day the old saying “ no pain, no gain ” is very
appropriate, you will reap in proportion to what you sow, the soil
being fertile that is. < g >
Back to the topic.
As some of the pulses that appear in the Redox measurements are of
reasonably short duration, measurements any longer than at one minute
intervals will miss them. Thus it is not sufficient for example to
measure on the hour. Additionally you would have to be very dedicated
to take readings even on the hour during the night period.
In my earlier days I did use a pen recorder, but I soon tired of
refilling the ink containers, unblocking the pens and getting covered
in some seriously indelible ink. The felt tip recorders were a bit
better but they tended to dry out as well as being expensive.
When computer become popular ( read cheap enough to buy ) I switched over and never looked back.
Be warned! The Joe cell loves to demolish computers. I am now using
lap-top computers as they last longer. Before I forget, another
advantage of the lap-top computer is the battery back-up feature, this
prevents loss of data if and when the mains power fails.
The deaths of the computers seems to be directly related to their
proximity to the test cell. There seems to be some sort of induction
via the leads to the computer, these I presume are a very high
electro-static type voltage. I have found that the lap-tops are now
lasting longer, as I have increased the distance from the cell to about
6 feet.
I also get the ‘ normal ’ type of computer software lockup, but this
are fairly rare at about one every three months on average. I lose a
day of data at most and I can live with this, as I simply repeat the
failed three day run.
For those interested, the failures are always on the mother board. The
hard drive, RAM, power supply and display are never damaged.
Another small point, if you use a lap-top, set the battery charge
setting to the ‘ always on ’ mode, otherwise you will cook your battery
pack.
The method I use is as follows;
* I use a glass test cell, this is always left in the same position,
ie. it has been in exactly the same position for two years.
* The stainless steel cylinder pack is made so that both the positive
and negative connecting straps come to the top of the cell, ie. the
negative does not go through a hole drilled in the bottom of the glass
container. This was done as a matter of expediency, so that I could
easily lift out the stainless steel cylinder pack as required. The pack
is supported from the bottom of the test cell on three ebonite rods
that also act as extended insulators. The pack sits one inch above the
glass floor of the cell. The water is one inch above the top of the
cylinders.
* Each run takes three full days. During that period, nothing is
disturbed and the only person that goes near the cell is me.
* At the start of the first run ( if required ) I give the cell exactly
30 seconds of charge. This is day one, the other two days do not get
any extra charge, the cell is left undisturbed.
The 30 second charge on the first day is of short duration and low
current to prevent any heating of the cell. At the end of the charge,
all leads are disconnected and I try to keep all ‘ antennas ’ away from
the cell.
* Electrolyte is not used, there are enough ‘ natural electrolytes ’ in
the waters used. The charge current is 150 milliamps and the voltage is
about 165 volts. As you are no doubt aware, the voltage is incidental,
it is the current that is important for electrolysis. You would also
realise that as I am not using an electrolyte, my voltage has to be
higher to be able to have a current of 150 millliamps. With electrolyte
165 volts would draw many amps of current.
* Different configurations were tested.
Tap water, rain water, stream water, spring water, distilled water,
supermarket water, as well as a few favourite brews were tested.
* Test were done with;
. Charged water with the cylinder pack left in.
. Uncharged water with the cylinder pack left in.
. Charged water with the cylinder pack removed after the charge process.
. Uncharged water with no cylinder pack.
In the above I was attempting to find out if any of the effects were a
result from the presence of the stainless cylinder pack, after it had
served it’s role as a charging device.
* At the end of each 24 hour period ( or as near as possible ), the
data was saved onto a floppy disk. This floppy was subsequently loaded
into my main computer and logged, graphed and printed.
Many, many hours then went into working out what mother nature was trying to tell me.
Results.
1. The charged water lost 80% of its anomalous behaviour or ‘ charge ’
by the end of the third day. Tests lasting over three days showed a
slow decay until the ‘ grass ’ or background floor was reached. This
took about two months.
2. The charge is a component of the water. The charge remains with the
water and the water can be removed form the test cell and used for
other applications. Again, the three day limit applies ( for me at
least) and this limit can be reduced to zero ( ie. no charge ) within
minutes, if the water is subjected to unfavourable conditions.
3. Once the water is charged, the cylinder pack serves no useful
purpose. From my tests it is clear that the sole purpose for having a
cylinder pack is to give the water the very special seeding that
triggers the required charge.
4. Nature’s water cannot be surpassed by any man made ‘ improvements’.
By this I mean that spring water will hold a superior ‘ frequency ’
than tap water.
5. No uncharged water has ever displayed negative Redox values.
Conversely charged cell water can show readings exceeding - 400
millivolts ( mV ).
6. There is a definite rhythm or periodicity to the frequency of the
water. In my case the peak positive is around 1830 hours, the low
negative is around 2200 hours.
7. The amplitude of the frequency variation is greatest for natural water and least for tap water.
8. The same ‘ good ’ water can be re-used indefinitely, as long as it
is filtered, and agitated. By agitation I mean any method that causes a
rapid inclusion of air bubbles in the water.
Discussion.
I will now comment on the above results. These are my views and
conclusions and should be treated with caution. Like anything that you
read you should filter, dissect and compare with all other information
on the topic. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
The comments tie in numerically with the above results.
1. Thus I concluded that the cell stayed serviceably ‘ charged ’ for
three days and that the ‘ leakage’ that resulted from the cell
construction, my locality, and dozens of other little variables slowly
‘ killed ’ the cell over a longer period of time.
I would like to yet again to comment on the “ is the cell connected to
the car battery whilst in the car or not ” debate. I still see that
some readers do no grasp the reasons for the charging process and I
also see that some people erroneously quote what I did say.
In a nut shell:
A. We initially charge the water to get it to act as a superior
accumulator of the life force. At a minimum this is stage 3.
B. This life force will dissipate over a period of time. The period of
time can be less than a minute or as long as many years.
C. You can replace this ‘ flat ’ ( and thus useless ) water with new
charged water, or you can recharge the ‘ flat ’ water.
Thus if we put A, B and C together, and if we talk in relation to running a car on the cell, we have;
A cell will run a car until the combined leakage causes its death. By
charging the cell as required whilst in the car, we can extend our time
of cell operation.
A couple of examples;
I charged the cell as required when I did my car conversions.
If you have access to videos of Joe running his car on the cell, you
will see that Joe did likewise. Joe had a switch on the dash of the
Escort that connected the cell to the car battery as required. If you
look at the video, you will see Joe operating the switch when he first
attempts to run the car and also when the car dies during the test
drive. Joe also mentions on another video that the cell required the
battery connection to run. On yet another video he mentions as to how
the car “ takes off ” when the switch is operated.
Surely these examples should be enough proof that the cell does indeed use the car battery, AS REQUIRED?
When the cell is not in use, the leakage problem can be partially
overcome by connecting a 1.5 volt D cell ( or similar ) across the
cell. I have mentioned this before and Joe explains it on his video.
In later car conversions Joe changed the method of operation, and the
power connection to the cell was not required, in actuality the cell
itself was not required. That however is another topic.
In private conversations to cell experimenters, when Joe states that he
did not have the cell connected to the car battery, he is talking about
the later conversions and not the earlier ones ( which is the present
topic ). This also goes for his statement that he “ does not use
electrolyte ”. Yes, later on he did not, earlier on he certainly did.
2. The charge is a characteristic of the water and not the charging
compartment or cell. So the preferred method is to charge the water in
a keg and then to transfer this charged water to the car cell. This
removes a few of the problems relating to the sediment build-up, as
well as preventing some of the erosion to the cylinders of the car cell.
A big advantage of the keg is the large quantity of charged water that
can be produced, as well as being easy to test and to observe during
the formation of the charged water.
I have always recommended that the standard radiator water is replaced
with charged water. For this the keg is the only way to go, due to the
fairly large requirement of charged water.
Once in the car water system, the water can be kept charged by making a
simple Joe cell that is inserted in the bottom radiator hose of the
motor. A small 4 to 6 inch long four cylinder pack is ample. The lower
hose is chosen as this is the relatively easiest access point to the
coldest water. No, the top hose location is far hotter and so not as
suitable, ( but very easy to get at ).
With your test Redox measurements you will know how long the cell stays
charged for you. With this information you will know the required
periodicity for the recharging intervals.
Please note, in point C. above I stated that you can recharge ‘ flat ’
water that is in the cell. This presumes that the cell is not ‘
polluted ’. The pollution may have been a short across the cell, a
voltage reversal, a deposit on the cylinders, faulty insulators, some
form of external magnetisation or similar. In these instances the only
recourse is to change the water, dismantle, ‘ flash ’ and clean the
cell. This procedure has been fully covered in my manual and updates.
3. Note. My glass cell water charge only lasts three days. A more
suitable geometric construct would allow the charge to last much
longer. In this instance, the inner cylinder pack may play a role in
prolonging the charge duration.
I have done some fairly inconclusive experiments along these lines. As
the optimum cell construction would require somebody that can ‘ see’,
it is pointless for me to try and do it, with a hit and miss approach.
For example, I know people that can look at a cylinder of stainless
steel and tell which end is ‘ positive ’ and which end is ‘ negative ’.
These so called polarities change as the cylinders are stacked and also
change in relation to the outer container as well as to the top an
bottom of the cell. The possible variables are staggering, and unless
you have these abilities to ‘ see ’ each time you made a cell it will
be different.
If you know a friendly sensitive or dowser or similar, you have a huge
advantage over the rest of us mere mortals. It is a great
disappointment to me when these gifted people ( like Joe ) refuse to
share with the rest of us. I have no idea as to why people do not
share, what is there to be achieved by gloating over their ‘ secrets ’
in privacy?
“ That which is almost impossible to accomplish by the unaided efforts
of a single individual, may often easily be accomplished by the
cooperation of many, and this law seems to prevail in all departments
of nature.
If a sufficient number of people were determined to retire from the
harlequin stage of the world and to turn away from the tomfooleries of
a fashionable existence, they might, if they could harmonize with each
other, form a power sufficiently strong to repel the attacks of the
monster which would devour them all if they were separated and unaided
by each other ”
Anon. 1887.
Yes dear reader, the same lament as mine, nothing has changed, so much for progress.
Back to the cell; I again implore you dear reader, if you get a cell to
stage 3, do not pull it apart until you have marked and noted all
possible variables. Many, many good cells were destroyed forever by
this simple oversight. Remember, “ If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it! ”.
< g >
4. I have tried many different waters over a long period to time. One
thing stands out, mother nature makes a better brew than us ‘ know it
all ’ humans. The more refined and ‘ better ’ we make our drinking
water, the more unnatural it becomes. It is no wonder that the life
force prefers the genuine article.
For people interested in finding out how to ‘ make ’ natural water I
can thoroughly recommend the 5 volume set of books that Callum Coats
translated, and that relate to the works of Viktor Schauberger.
Viktor was also working on his version of a Joe cell and he experienced
similar successes and failures as we are. He spent his life on the
quest, and he found the answers. No doubt about it, he was indeed the ‘
Water Wizard ’.
I will ask you a simple question regarding the ‘ right ’ water , “ If
you don’t know what to look for, how do you know when you have found it
? ”.
Water is not simply the resultant of combining hydrogen and oxygen, there is far more to it than that.
As an example, Viktor stated that we use the wrong type of impellers on
our water pumps. These impellers ‘ chop up and kill ’ the water. Now I
ask you, if the chemical result of the combination of two gasses forms
a liquid called water, why would this liquid care if the pump ‘ chopped
it up ’ or not? Surely the net chemical composition would stay the same
no matter what the shape of the pump impeller was?
Furthermore, if water is frozen it creates complex and exquisitely
beautiful crystals of ice ( snow flakes ). No two crystals are the
same, and yet each one is symmetrical and a very beautiful shape. Where
do these designs come from, and where did the capacity for these
geometric designs come from? Surely not from the two gasses.
Now, why would this oxide of hydrogen ( water ) be any ‘ different ’ if
it flowed in natural meandering river beds or if it flowed in man made
iron, plastic or concrete pipes? Can it still be truly called water
after we have ‘ improved ’ it with the addition of alum, chlorine,
fluoride, copper, potassium, magnesium and a variety of very nasty pipe
cleaning chemicals?
I don’t think so.
It should not be surprising that my measurements over the years show a
variation of the performance of the Joe cell with different ‘ waters ’.
Again, it should not surprise anybody that the cell works better with
the most natural forms of water.
If the experimenter cannot be bothered to drive a considerable
distance, walk up a mountain, fill containers with spring or living
water, lug it all down back to the car and use a day to do it, then he
should be prepared for the dismal failures that tap water will
guarantee. So be it.
In short, by the use of very simple common sense, an experimenter will
know what is the ‘ right ’ water. My two year test merely proves what
we have known all along, the better the water, the more the life force
will react with it and the easier it is to get to stage 3.
5. All water shows a Redox fluctuation over the 24 hour period. Even
distilled water will show a variation ( however it is very small ), for
the life force is everywhere and the quantity varies from minute to
minute irrespective of what we measure.
For example, a typical Redox reading for uncharged stream water varies from + 60 mV to + 180 mV.
For uncharged tap water ( in Melbourne Australia ) the variation is
from + 175 mV to + 200 mV. For non laboratory grade distilled water it
is from + 225 mV to over + 300 mV.
In the case of the uncharged stream water there are large daily
fluctuations, these same variations are much smaller in the case of tap
water, and in the case the variation is less than 10 mV in distilled
water.
To me the above is saying that the resonance of the water ( the
receptor ) is of a greater amplitude, or is more effectively tuned to
the ‘ sender ’ of the variations. If the sender or creator of the
variations was also instrumental in generating the life force, then it
stands to reason that stream water is a better medium than tap water.
I have no idea as to why some people seem to think that distilled water
is ‘ the ant’s pants ’ for Joe cell work. Sure, good distilled water
has a minium of residual chemistry in it, and this is supposed to be
‘ good ’. It is true that the ‘ wrong ’ residual chemistry as found in
tap water is ‘ bad ’, but the chemical found in spring and stream water
are fine.
The chemicals in the water results in the creation of very complex
harmonics which I would like to call ‘ memories ’. The memories as made
by nature in spring and river water are the ones that help the water
become what it is, namely ‘ living ’.
For people that are into electronics, this can be likened to the doping
of Germanium or Silicon in transistors to achieve our non linear
conversion of energies and the end result is that we ‘ amplify ‘. I
have explained this non linear requirement in a previous paper.
Personally, I have found no use whatsoever for distilled water in Joe
cell work. However if you build a Stan Meyer cell, then you must only
use deionised and distilled water in it, as it is used as a dielectric
in the capacitor ( the cell ).
The life force permeates all things. This ‘ frequency ’ ( for the lack
of a better term ) has cyclic fluctuations over a 24 hour period. As
shown, the amplitude of these fluctuations can be measured in water.
These fluctuations have a greater amplitude in natural waters than in
distilled water.
The purpose of the cell construction and the charging process is to
work with these fluctuations and to boost them with additive charging
energy ( at the right time ), until the cell frequency becomes self
sustaining. It makes perfect sense to me that we should start with a
substance that has the greatest initial amplitude of the desired
frequency. That is certainly not the case for distilled water.
A last point. All living things ( that utilise the life force ) have
electrolyte in their ‘ water’. I am sure that mother nature would have
chosen the right storage medium for its own energy source.
Backed up with my own tests, I find the above sufficient proof to
disagree with the people that are recommending distilled water for cell
work.
Moving on.
Once the water is given a charge things become more interesting.
As a result of the electrolysis, a greater rate of oxidation and
reduction occurs,. The activity that results from the 30 seconds charge
settles down after about 2.5 hours. This activity is normal and is to
be expected in all types of water and not just the ‘ living ’ types.
To play it safe, I have not taken much interest in the Redox reading for the first day ( 24 hour period ).
The first day does result in Redox readings sometimes going down as far
as - 800 mV. For people that want to drink this type of water, the Joe
cell is a very cheap form of what is sold as ‘ micro cluster water ’.
At - 800 mV it is equal to the output of ‘ water making ’ machines costing thousands of dollars.
This is not the place or time for this topic, however for the
interested reader, there is a huge quantity of material on this subject
on the net.
What is interesting is, that continuing into the second and third day,
the fluctuations represent a damped wave of a reasonably set frequency.
This wave slowly loses its negative Redox excursions and ends up ‘
straight-lining ’ at around + 20 mV.
A cell that does not ‘ catch ’ or go to stage 3, will lose very quickly, or not even start this damped wave pattern.
Each cell is unique, I can only give you the results of my tests. An
experimenter will be richly rewarded by carefully observing the
periodic behaviour of his own cell/s.
To sum up, ‘ living water ’ is more in tune, or is more affected by the
daily variations of the constantly changing forces acting on the water
( and all of creation as well ).
6. As mentioned above, there are definite peaks and dips in the daily
electron activity in the cell. I would dearly love to see the results
from experimenters in a different area to mine, as it would be
fascinating to see if the peaks and dips do coincide.
I personally doubt it very much however. I see Orgone ( the life force
) as being similar to clouds and the resultant energy interaction
having a definite ‘ high ’ and ‘ low ’ pattern to it.
I also see the sun and moon as being the primary donors or even
generators of the bulk of this energy. Furthermore I see this energy as
being a subtle influence, a clock and the ‘ food ’ that keeps all
things ‘ alive ’.
Lastly, I see a form of delay in the energy that lags the actual
observed sun activity. You would presume that when the sun was at its
closest and brightest that the cell would peak. That is not so, the
cell will peak maybe an hour or more after the Lux reading peak.
In short, there is a rhythm to the cell activity that is repeatable from day to day.
As I know of no other cell experimenter that has followed this line of
research, I cannot say if the peaks and dips coincide all over our
planet.
Note. What is important is for you to know when these peaks occur at
your location. For this is the best time to do the initial charge and
get your cell to go to stage 3. It also explains one reason why some
cell start sometime and not at other times.
These peaks and dips in the life force are very important information
for many uses, and not just for starting the cell. They have been
plotted by people in the ‘ know ’ since the start of recorded history.
Do not brush the subject off lightly.
7. I have already covered point 7, and the statement should now be self explanatory.
8. There is a belief in circulation that ‘ good ’ water can go ‘ bad ’.
said in another way, perfectly good water is throw out by experimenters
on a periodic basis , as if some magic ‘ use by date ’ has expired.
Yes, you should throw out water that has been contaminated in any way
whatsoever. By this I mean water that has acquired deposits as the
result of electrolysis, the break down of the insulators and such like.
Contaminated water is also water that has had its ‘ frequency ’ changed
by being in proximity to destructive frequencies. I have covered this
topic at length in previous writings ( Y factor ).
If we use a Grander unit as an example, we can see that a small
container of ‘ special ’ water is able to continuously alter the ‘
frequency ’ of millions of litres of ‘ bad ’ water that passes around
it.
Thus it is the molecular link-up of the water molecules that carries
the ‘ memory ’ if you like. This memory will give the water a certain
resonance, and a specific resonance is what is required to utilise the
life force.
So, a specific type of water will retain its memory or resonance, until
acted on by external forces that tend to dissipate this specific
resonant frequency. It is like striking a gong or tuning fork, which
will decay naturally if left undisturbed, but can be stopped dead by
touching with a finger.
In living water, we can reactivate the resonant frequency by utilising
a special construction of cylinders or cones to achieve the a frequency
that is in harmony with the life force ( charging ). Thus good water, (
like a good bell or tuning fork ) does not go bad, it merely has to be
reactivated, with the proper means!
In short. As I said before, “ if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it ”. If
your water is working well in your cell, let it do so
Summary.
The life force ( Orgone ) is very difficult to measure directly.
Redox readings are a method of seeing an effect that can be attributed to the life force.
Water is not just water.
There is good and bad water.
A short duration charge at the appropriate time is sufficient to activate the cell.
The charge remains in the water, to slowly decay over a matter of days.
The periodic changes in the quantity of the life force can be advantageously used to start the cell.
One line summary:
Redox measurements can be utilised to optimise the starting of a Joe cell.
**********************************************