rexresearch.

com


Biological Transmutations and Modern
Physics
by
Louis Kervran






Maloine S.A. Publisher, Paris (1982)
ISBN 2-224-00831-7
[Transcribed from an unpublished manuscript of the English translation -- a few
paragraphs are unreadable in my photocopy of the manuscript, and some sections are
missing.]

Table of Contents
Introduction
Part I ~ Experimental Proofs of the Existence of the Biological Transmutation
Phenomenon
Chapter 1 ~ General Overview
Chapter 2 ~ Experiments Proving Biological Transmutation
(1) Historical summary ~ (2) A few experiments made after 1974 ~ (3) Research by J. E.
Zundel ~ (4) Study of the variation of calcium in oat seedlings during germination in
twice-distilled water ~ (5) Comments on a study by Zundel on the increase in calcium in
oats during germination in twice distilled water ~ (6) Comments on some experiments ~
(7) Reservations on some analytical techniques
Chapter 3 ~ Additional Information on Physical Phytochemistry During Germination
(1) Summary of the germinating phases of grain cereals ~ (2) Average curve of the
increase in calcium of oats after germination
Chapter 4 ~ Photosynthesis
(1) Effects of artificial lighting in photosynthesis for the study of transmutation by
cereal plants ~ (2) Photosynthesis limited to traditional aspects ~ (3) Photosynthesis
cycle of Hatch and Slack
Chapter 5 ~ The Devils Advocate
Chapter 6 ~ Problems Related to Phosphorus, Complexity of Phytoanalysis
Chapter 7~ How to Correctly Duplicate a Typical Experiment in Biological
Transmutations
(1) Study of calcium variation in cultivated oats ~ (2) Biological conditions ~ (3)
Conclusions
Chapter 8 [ Missing ]~ Mass Spectrometer Analysis
(1) Conclusion
Part II ~ Explanation of the Phenomena By Modern Physics, Theoretical Study
Chapter 1 ~ Explanations From The Atomic Particle Theory
Chapter 2 ~ A Few Examples Of Theories Proposed By Physicists
(1) Process developed by a US Army scientific department ~ (2) L. Romanis
contribution ~ (3) Theory proposed by A. Dubrov ~ (4) A few interesting points of view
expressed by physicists ~ (5) O. Costa de Beauregards theory
Chapter 3 ~ Addenda To The Theoretical Study Of Low Energy Interactions Applied
To Particular Transmutations
(1) Effective section ~ (2) Isotopic variations ~ (3) Nature operates at a finer level than
man ~ (4) Changes in our understanding of some aspects of physics and weakness of this
understanding ~ (5) A few arguments against a unified theory for electromagnetic and
weak interactions ~ (6) Intermediary vector bosons
Appendix 1 [ Missing ] ~ Geology
Appendix II [ Missing ] ~ An Extrapolation: (1) Crying wolf ~ (2) One must rethink the
concept of energy in living matter ~ (3) Non-electromagnetic energies in living matter ~
(4) Parapsychology and hypothalamus ~ (5) Germination procedure for oat seeds with
no external addition of calcium
Appendix III [ MIssing ]~ Weinberg Theory Summary: A few definitions
Bibliography [Missing ]


Introduction






The present work consists of two distinctly separate parts.
Firstly, I cite some new experiments, completed since the appearance of my book which was
submitted for printing in 1974 and which was published in 1975: Biological Evidence of Low
Energy Transmutations (Maloine Publications, Paris, 1975). That book was concerned with a
comprehensive view of a phenomenon which calls for precise analysis. This led me to limit
research to a single aspect: to show that, however precisely one studies the germination and
cultivation of a plant, comparative analysis of the seed and of the whole plant coming from a
seed as nearly identical as possible, without the possibility of having an external contribution
from some mineral, show that there is, in a very significant way, a "creation of matter",
"appearance" of an element, thus an atomic "transmutation", which is confirmed by various
methods of analysis utilizing the most sensitive, most specific, and most modern techniques
of physics.
I limited myself to studying variations in the amount of calcium without studying what
element or elements could have given rise to this variation by this atomic modification. Such
a research project could be very complex indeed because there could be several origins as a
function of the species of vegetation (or animals, higher or lower, even microbial), confirmed
experimentally: the calcium could come from potassium, from magnesium, or from silicon,
by either separate or simultaneous reactions. So we have there a completely different point of
view. I wished to limit the subject so as to produce irrefutable evidence that there is indeed in
life forms a phenomenon which too many people have wished to deny for untenable reasons.
I will demonstrate it and limit the study to the variation of calcium in a single cultured
species, oats, in order to firmly show that such experiments can be reproduced, that the
conclusions result from hundreds of experiments and thousands of analyses and are amply
demonstrated. Accordingly, we are concerned here with an objective contribution [apport]
and not with a subjective deduction.
Next is shown an example of explanation placing itself in the framework of the most recent
atomic theory, that of "neutral currents" already sketched in the last chapter of my work of
1975 cited previously which included a "Terminal Note" of 1974 from the great French
physicist of international stature, Oliver Costa de Beauregard, theory confirmed by a
specialist in elementary particles, Bernard dEspagnat, director of the Laboratory of Particle
Physics of Paris. We are concerned here with a very young branch of nuclear physics which
is evolving very rapidly and I cannot even dream of following its most recent discoveries,
out-of-date before being printed. I will make a very condensed review of the situation in this
science toward the beginning of 1981, keeping in mind that the authors of basic principles of
this theory received the Nobel Prize for Physics at the end of 1979. That is to say that this
aspect of weak energy interactions is now adopted by International Science. This section
seemed indispensable to me because too many physicists, and along with them scientists from
various other disciplines, consider transmutations only a phenomenon which recapitulates
strong interactions. Blinded by the atomic bomb, they have not thought that there were also
low energy transmutations, from which they produce a stubborn and sterile opposition to my
work.
Here I give only the current status of a theory that is rapidly evolving. It will probably be
superceded in a few years, or more or less revised, but it is necessary to show that it is not
rejected by nuclear physics avant-garde, that if I have been correct too soon (for them),
nevertheless the transmutation of certain elements by a biological action is in no way
mystical; it is an explicable reality in conformance with a theory which is now very classical
and official and still ignored by too many scientists. Here they will find an incentive to study
more deeply this new entry into particle physics, unfortunately not possible to lay out in
detail because new facts are turning up all the time: in 1980 did not one come, does it not
seem, to produce evidence that neutrinos (basic particles of weak energy transmutations)
have weight when all calculations prior to 1980 were conducted under the hypothesis of a
null mass?
I will show, then, that:
(1) transmutations by living matter and with weak energy, do indeed exist; and
(2) that they fall within the framework of classic theory of weak energy interactions.

Part I
Experimental Demonstrations of the Existence of the Phenomenon of
Biological Transmutation

"It is absolutely impossible to prove a priori the impossibility of a fact" (Bergson).

Chapter 1
General Overview







Let us start out by considering a statement by Claude Bernard which will always be timely:
"The experimental method consists in revising theorems and not in preserving them. Theory
must adopt to nature but nature need not adapt to theory". Pasteur, on his death bed,
confirmed to Renon: "Bernard was correct when he said: 'When one encounters a fact which
conflicts with a dominant theory, one must accept the fact and abandon the theory, even
though the latter is supported by influential people and widely accepted'.
Experience has taught me just how close to truth was Claude Bernard. To talk about the
transmutation of matter in a biological environment seemed to be a risky bet for certain
theoreticians. In practice, however, it is certain that this phenomenon had appeared more or
less clearly to a number of observers at every intellectual level. Many professionals in various
disciplines have expressed this openly. It seems that the irrefutable facts were there known to
everyone, but refused acknowledgment by certain persons because of their timidity. Or
perhaps, having indeed seen the facts, they still did not dare say so".
Thus, between the two world wars of the 20th century, a Swiss agronomist, Pfeiffer, who
emigrated to the USA, called attention to the fact that a gardener perceived that his land
lacked calcium when his lawns were covered with daisies (or with buttercups). It is obvious
to everyone. The turf is composed primarily of rye-grass, a calcareous plant --- one which
consumes calcium --- which is therefore an indispensable component of the soil in order for it
to grow well. By contrast, daisies and buttercups, etc., are calcifugous plants: their
development is not satisfactory unless the soil is acid, almost completely without calcium.
Having had the curiosity to analyze the ashes of the daisies, however, Pfeiffer discovered that
these plants, which fled from calcarious soil , were rich in calcium. Could it be that a balance
is established, something like a symbiosis between rye-grass and daisy, precisely because the
daisy produced in the soil, by developing and dying, the calcium needed for a good growth of
rye-grass? He did not push his research any further, simply accepting the assumption that in
this soil, from which the calcareous component was sucked up by the rye-grass carried off
after having mowed the lawn, there was a creation of calcium by the daisies. That was
scarcely orthodox and he did not dare state that position openly --- to protect his career,
perhaps?
A discovery of the same order may be credited to horticulturists who were intensively
growing heather land flowers for resale. The calcifugous plants (azaleas, etc.) did very well in
a "good" heather land for several years. Then, little by little, the culture declined and it was
necessary to abandon plantations of this sort or to renovate the arable soil. In horticulture we
find eminent engineers and superior technicians who thought that the solution to their
disappointments could only be realized by chemical analysis of their land. Accordingly, they
discovered that this land, originally acid, had become basic, or occasionally neutral, clearly
richer in calcareous substance, even though taking into consideration that they were growing
calcifugous plants they had certainly avoided laying on any calcareous fertilizer whatsoever.
Where did this undesirable element come from?
Did they visualize an elevating of calcium from the subsoil by capillarity? But certain
cultivation, from all evidence, was not on a calcareous subsoil. To get to the bottom of this
they removed the stratum of arable soil right up to the subjacent layer of impermeable clay,
laid out some sheets of plastic on this layer to insure that there would be no reestablishment
of calcareous substance by any sort of unfortunate migration, vertical or horizontal, and then
covered the plastic over again with a layer of good heather land soil which had been carefully
analyzed.
After a few years there was a repetition of the preceding observations: without bringing in
any calcareous substance the soil was enriched in calcium. Having become acquainted with
my studies they asked me at a conference to explain to them the mechanism by which I
thought: in my opinion there had been production of calcium by the rootlets remaining with
each uprooting and accordingly absorbed by osmosis by the roots. What other explanation
can there be?
But it does not suffice to deduce and affirm. It must be demonstrated scientifically by
systematic and rigorous experiments. I did that. One will find in the present work irrefutable
demonstrations that certain calcifugous plants produce clear evidence of calcium in clearly
measurable quantities, absolutely without any possibility of error, excluding the possibility of
a change in solar radioactivity. Agronomists who know how to observe and whose judgment
is not obliterated by obsolete dogma clearly admitted this since it was a phenomenon well
known to their profession for some decades, although still formulated with too much timidity.
I should also cite results of analyses given by semi-official Tables of Nutrients, often referred
to under the name of Tables of L. Randoin, accounting services of the National Ministry of
Education. They do not make precise distinctions for different varieties; they only give
averages for genera and species and sometimes the analyses --- without precise methods ---
have been borrowed by different authors. Lets take the case of the soybean. It gives the
composition of the seed. We give here only the percentage of calcium, the element which will
mainly be studied in this book.
It gives: 280 mg per 100 gr of material. In soya sprouts, it indicates for Ca: 48 mg per 100 gr
These values are given without precise description of cultivation and methods of analysis (all
chemical at this time). Accordingly, they cannot be compared without some calculations. The
seed is given with a percentage of water of 7.5 gr per 100 gr of material, while in the shoots
there were 86 gr of water per 100 gr of material. From this fact, proceeding from equivalent
dryness (that of the seed being the starting point), the percentage of Ca, which is 48 mg (for
86 gr water) would be 554 mg in lieu of 280 in the seed, for 7.5 gr of water. The increase in
the sprouts then, is in the neighborhood of 96%, which is clearly in the order of magnitude of
the increase of Ca in germinated oats, as we will see further on.
So then, did the plants only accomplish a chemical exchange? Or did they accomplish
alchemy? This word generated fear and was rejected with horror by scientists subjugated by
concepts of physics much too recently established to be lightly set aside.
Too many physicists believed devoutly in laws which they considered to be general,
universal, and applicable under all circumstances. The evidence of facts which could not be
explained by their theories, which could not even come close to disturbing the pattern of their
professional commitments.
For them it was actually profane to think that a transmutation could be accomplished by a
living organism. This was evidence of feeble-mindedness... Indeed, people were obliged to
admit that transmutation phenomena could be produce din nature and in the second third of
the 20th century we even succeeded in reproducing radioactive transmutations (1935). At the
same time, non-radioactive transmutations had been artificially produced since 1919. Then it
was in 1945 that the atomic bomb had a formidable impact on the thinking of physicists,
blocking all critical thinking in far too many of them.
As a result of my previous studies, first published in 1936, I was officially appointed at the
national level, to follow closely the creation of nuclear physics essentially to promote security
measures to prevent biological effects of atomic radiations. For a period of 20 years, up to my
retirement, I retained these functions, periodically reconfirmed by council orders. Thus, I was
at the interface between physics and biology before the emergence of atomic energy. As a
matter of fact, I was present at the birth of nuclear physics and was able to follow all its
developments. Because of my official duties no laboratory classified secret was closed to me.
In 1936 the author published the first results of his experimental research showing that the
human body does not follow Ohms law, that its resistance varies as an inverse function of
voltage applied, which explains values which are not independent of voltage output from the
ohmmeters employed (for example, see Outlines of Industrial Medicine by Prof Simonin,
Maloine Publ., Paris)
These researches were interrupted by the second world war, and in 1940, the author was
arrested for Resistance, incarcerated at Fort Montluc in Lyon, and found guilty without
appeal. Having served his time, he participated in setting up the Southeast Resistance. In
1944 he was appointed Prefect by the general assembly of the Committees of Liberation of
Savoy, and then given the duties of Regional Prefect of Savoy-Dauphine. He received the
Medal of the Resistance. Shortly thereafter he re-entered his original cadre as director in
charge of scientific functions at Paris for a period of 20 years.
That is why I assessed the value of what was obtained with certainty in this discipline but
also the limits of our knowledge in accordance with the trend of the times. It seemed to me
that, primarily in biology, but also in physics, unverified data were being assumed by
inference [extrapolation], even though they were contradicted by certain observations which
oriented me along channels which were being ignored completely by most atomic physicists
who were unable to question their own understanding.
"You should discuss the matter with your peers", they once said to me. But who were my
peers? As a function of my duties I was also named "director of conferences" at the
University of Paris. That was, in fact, the official designation, as represented in the Deans
teaching directories. Accordingly, were my pers these tens of thousands of teachers on our
faculties? Could I put myself in the same structure as tens of thousands of professors of
higher education when I had a unique function in France, recognized by an official
appointment (and even several inter-ministry groups representing all the ministries
scientifically interested in atomic energy, by one title or another, also appointed me to
represent them in the inter-ministerial commissions which were obliged to take regulatory
actions in this domain requiring expertise in both biology and atomic physics (Atomic
Population Protection, Public Health, etc.)
Indeed I knew, having been a member of the examining committee at the doctorate level
(before the title was degraded by creating the "third level doctorate") how impossible it is to
avoid that in a huge corps of tens of thousands of members some diplomas slide by that are
really below any standard. If they are, in the overall, about one quarter of mediocre, about
one-half average, and one quarter good from which one can select out a true elite, several
working together --- I had no practical way of deciding who was a member of this elite group,
and, in any case, it was not up to me to make such a necessarily subjective and arbitrary
decision. I make no claim to be universal but I would recognize who in the national scene had
an "international value" and that my duties enabled me to consult, moreover, if need be, on
any detail, in order to achieve a synthesis, which is becoming more and more difficult to
realize because of intensified specialization which no longer leaves a place for any but the
"analysts", and rejects the "synthesists".
In 1950 I began to publish the first results of my research showing that living matter, both
animals and plants, accomplished transmutations of elements. These transmutations were
observed in man, animals, microorganisms and plants. They were transmutations which, from
all evidence, had nothing in common with high energy transmutations which are the only
ones which the majority of atomic physicists are inclined to accept and the only interactions
which scientists in general accept without any reservations. However, this did not block
official acknowledgment of the value of my work and in 1964 I received recognition with a
Legion of Honor ribbon.
I has experimentally produced irrefutable evidence of the existence of facts which could not
be explained solely in terms of "chemical" biology. I had evidence of phenomena of non-
radioactive atomic physics which could not be explained by classical atomic physics of this
time. But I had established that the only thing which could account for the observed results
was a nuclear physics which remained to be more precisely developed and which I was the
first to express in clearly stated formulae of nuclear reactions.
(1) "Life Is Nothing But Chemistry" ~
To a greater and greater extent, throughout the 19th century and then more fully in the 20th
century we have been taught that all biological phenomena depend upon chemical reactions. I
certainly do not deny the truth of this obvious situation. But that is only part of the truth. If
one desires to reduce everything to chemistry one is led into serious errors with respect to
human, animal and vegetal biology.
In advanced agricultural schools and faculties of science and medicine one still sees it
advanced with laughable self-confidence that, as an example, water is always water; there is
only one formula for water: H
2
O (which should be expressed less rigidly, for we can have
H3O4, etc, and the diversity of snow crystals shows that... but I do not wish to deal with
chemistry). Take some grapes which have been slowly dried out, then soak them in pure
water which bears a trace of mineral or organic matter. Everyone knows that grapes thus
reconstituted do not taste the same as and have other properties than fresh grapes. Likewise,
chemical analysis shows that composition with respect to carbohydrates, lipids and proteins
differs between fresh and dried grapes and that these differences are not simply a matter of
water evaporation. All nutritionists who are not blinded by dogma recognize this and take it
into account.
Otherwise stated, simplified chemistry fails to account for modifications of molecular
structure resulting from a physical phenomenon such as gradual evaporation. But that is
nothing more than an aspect which can be easily explained, for example, by classic
procedures of stereochemistry. In my publications and in conferences I have called attention
to the transformation that the organism forces on carbohydrates to generate lipids (one can
fatter a pig on nothing but potatoes which are rich in carbohydrates but poor in lipids). In a
diet nothing will suppress lipids for people who have a tendency to fatten on carbohydrates. It
appears that their organism provokes this transformation into lipids as a result of some
metabolic disturbance which may have a number of glandular or alimentary causes such as a
magnesium deficit, etc. One does not cure the effects by forgetting the cause. And this is true
throughout biology. We should remember campaigns against food substances rich in
cholesterol, a normal product of physiological catabolism, If they are not provided in the diet
the organism will, nevertheless, fabricate them. The unbalance is to be discovered in the
process of elimination, not in the process of absorption. It is not without interest to recall that
if certain individuals get fat on white bread it is because this bread is poor in magnesium due
to a sifting procedure which is much too gross, all the "rich" part of the grain having been
eliminated to be resold separately at very high prices. But few simple formulae have survived
in dietetics, alas.
And, likewise, how many simple formulae have survived with physiologists? For the majority
of them --- and the guilty are teachers, for the most part, particularly chemists --- a
carbohydrate is a tertiary composition where the hydrogen, oxygen and carbon are clearly
defied constituents. For example, for decades they have accepted without reservation that
pure saccharose was always saccharose, that there was one possible formula, confirmed by all
methods of chemical analysis. Accordingly, its biochemical properties are always the same.
But this is not true and if the chemical formula remains clearly the same, nevertheless its
biological properties differ in accordance with the origin of these saccharose substances.
Thus we can distinguish a saccharose from a beet, which does not have the same isotopic
composition as can sugar. Nature makes use of several methods to separate isotopes, to
modify the isotopic composition, and in critical proportions, making a lie out of the simplistic
conviction of too many physicists for whom the isotopic composition of an element is
obviously constant. In the bibliography at the end of this publication one may refer to the
works of Bricout referring to various authors. We see that it is now a common practice for the
Service des Fraudes and customs office to use mass spectrometry to reveal if a saccharose
comes from beets or sugar cane, because the import quotas differ as do the prices.
The confusion has persisted for a long time because, still too often, classic instruction only
takes into account the Calvin cycle in considering the function of chlorophyll. But this is the
cycle utilized by the beet and most dicots and too many publications still ignore the cycle of
Hatch and Slack, used in photosynthesis of sugar cane and the majority of monocots. They
have understood better that by adding tap water to dried fruit or to concentrated fruit juice
one cannot obtain the qualities of fresh fruit and fresh juice. The water in a fresh fruit is not
the water found in rain, in an irrigation ditch, or drawn from the soil; it is a different
compound at the subatomic, neutronic level. The number of neutrons differs as a function of
the origin of water but the number of protons and, accordingly the number of electrons
remains the same and it is therefore impossible for chemistry to differentiate them. I will
return to this later on because it has various implications which many chemists, atomic
physicists, agriculturalists and nutritionists have not taken into consideration. This situation
will be considered more carefully with respect to the functioning of chlorophyll, a mechanism
which is fundamental to this differentiation in isotopic behavior. However, I will not
undertake a detailed study of that because the isotopic separation provoked by the
metabolism of the plant is not a transmutation. In a way it is a kinematic operation between
heavy and lighter isotopes. Heavy hydrogen, or deuterium, is approximately twice as heavy
as ordinary hydrogen which has no neutron as opposed to one neutron in deuterium. The
speed of the reactions has a substantial effect and Ponticorvo, in a thesis written in 1958,
cited by Bricout (cf. reference section) calls attention to a reaction which leads to a 70%
diminution of deuterium which, from all evidence, is very significant and cannot go
unnoticed in a spectrometer.
This property of living matter is often not taken into consideration by physicists who
undertake analyses with an a priori assumption of isotopic constancy or, on the other hand, by
biologists who use radioactive tracers and generalize conclusions from data which are only
observed under very limited circumstances. A more precise study is definitely called for,
particularly in view of the fact that a radioactive isotope destroys cellules and thus opens a
pathway which modifies the behavior of a stable isotope. I dont mean to say that we should
abandon using radioactive tracers, but we would be well advised to be cautious in making
judgments based on their repeated use. Belief in constancy of isotopic composition is an idea
too easily adopted without a critical attitude and it sometimes leads to errors.
(2) Lavoisiers Law ~
The preceding comments show why it is wise to be cautious about general application of
Lavoisiers laws in biology. In no way do I reject these chemical laws, but let us leave them
in their place. The statement that "Nothing is lost, nothing is created" actually is just a play
on words creating a certain impression, Reality is more complex. Chemistry is indispensable
in order to understand molecular transformations, which were the only sort of transformation
which could be demonstrated in Lavoisiers time; but at the atomic level they become
inadequate even for those who take the position that in living matter there is nothing but
chemistry, since phenomena occur there which can only be studied in terms of physics;
electrical effects, pressure, heat, movements, etc. This is true even if one takes the position
that chemistry is simply a branch of physics and is explained in terms of displacement of
electrons. The present study will show that living matter employs energies which are not
electromagnetic, that nature also operates right into the heart of the atomic nucleus, which has
nothing to do with Lavoisiers laws. Lavoisier was completely ignorant of this aspect of
living matter, even though his contemporary, the great French scholar Vauquelin, suspected
it. However, he was a century in advance of physics and had no practical way to study the
phenomenon.
Even in our time there still exist pseudo-scientists (by profession) who take the position: I do
not doubt your analyses, but if you no longer find an element, that is because it has gone off
somewhere else where you have not searched for it. Because, for them, nothing is lost..
certainly, I could not analyze out an entire human body at one fell swoop. Studies made on
calves were subject to the same criticism: the analyses could not have been carried out on the
entire calf. And so I worked on lobsters, but in this case the reproof was that I had only used
8 animals. I carried out my studies on 48 mice and for various reasons the animals were
totally dissolved in acid. This is a complex operation because one risks the formation of
soaps, by saponification of fats; there are difficulties in dissolution of the keratin of the hair,
etc. I have described these various experiment sin previous publications. The complexity of
the procedures gave too much opportunity for criticism for there is nobody more deaf than he
who does not wish to hear. And so I decided to proceed only with relatively simple
operations, working only on plants and finally limiting myself to the study of variation of one
single element, calcium, in a single plant species, oats, under hydroponic culture, without
involvement of a complex culture medium, using only synthetic water (hydrogen and
oxygen) or double distilled water. Water demineralized on ion exchangers was not always
sufficiently pure. Or it might be necessary to distill permuted water.
In this process I found myself in cooperation with Zundel and his studies will be cited further
along.
Working with tens of thousands of seeds I could now talk only in statistical terms, in terms of
averages, where any individual difference between seeds more or less vigorously disappeared
before the law of large numbers. These analyses, applying to hundreds of cases, lead to proof
that one finds, in a calcifugous plant, a great deal more calcium in the plant than there is in
the seed from which it came. By incomprehensible quibbling certain chemists have extracted
from this only a proof that they were incapable of making a good analysis. For them the
discrepancies in calcium composition derived from the fact that in the seed there were
undetectable "hidden forms" which became identifiable after germination, after
mineralization by oxidation. Now the "organic" form in the seed could not be discovered by
titration. Whence, evidently, an augmentation of Ca in the plant. Now other chemists equally
incompetent, equally dogmatic, explained the contrary, taking the position that in germination
insoluble forms were produced, which could not be measured by titration, and that most
"seriously" of all. What a pity for their students.
Now variations have been discovered not only with respect to augmentations. For certain
elements in a plant species, in extra pure water, with acid pH, there can be reductions. I will
take the opportunity to deal precisely with these aspects of analytic methods.
Certain people suggested to me that I call this book my Testament", considering my present
age. But, in science, I take the position that there is no such thing as a "last will". I would be
presumptuous of me to think for one instant that anybodys scientific contribution can be
regarded as advice to be followed in the future. Science itself is in full charge. In no way can
we anticipate when the results of scientific progress will be replaced, when we will have
attained the asymptote of the curve of intellectual growth. Thats why, when in 1979 I
thought to write the present publication, I could have entitled it "Twenty Years Later", a title
which would scarcely relate to me! It would more appropriately be my "swan song".
More modestly, then, you will find in the following pages a tally of more than 20 years of
work done by different researchers who became interested in my first publications showing
that there were in the metabolism of living matter, both animal and vegetable, some aberrant
phenomena which could not be explained simply in chemical terms. Only through nuclear
physics could we come to understand such findings resulting from irrefutable investigations
and I used to advance the statement: there are, in that which lives, certain transmutations,
which, to abbreviate and to avoid confusion, I called "biological transmutations", avoiding
use of such expressions as fusion and fission, which called to mind atomic bombs, since we
were certainly concerned here with a phenomenon of nuclear physics totally different from
high energy interactions, which are the only ones which the majority of classical physicists
were studying.
I explained this in my first article, which appeared in 1960, and even more fully in my first
book, Biological Transmutations, which was issued by Maloine in Paris (1962). This
publication at the end of the same year, was translated and published in Japan, at the
instigation of G. Ohsawa, then some ten other publications followed in France and abroad
with so many reprintings that, in 1980, somewhat more than 100,000 copies had been issued.
The "biological transmutations" had, accordingly, made their mark despite certain
oppositions which are inevitable when one upsets accepted ideas, taught traditionally,
sacrosanct, and distributed via all channels: books, reviews, television, radio, where certain
people had established their position such that they could no longer recognize their error,
which is not scientific. But I received numerous positive supports from eminent scientists,
without loss of professional position, above and beyond dogmatism, who determined that my
studies were unimpeachable, and I was able to accomplish numerous publications,
conferences, etc., in France and abroad in order to subject my material to discussion. For we
had recognized and accepted data. It remained to explain the phenomenon; and any
explanation is more or less subjective and dependent upon knowledge which is more or less
accepted at the time.
In any case, after 20 years, Science has evolved. Thats why the present publication seemed
to me to be necessary. I do not intend to disavow my first publications, but rather to clarify,
to abstract certain prospective notions which have not been realized, which will not arrive,
perhaps, until later on. It is also intended to set aside certain over-extended representations
destined to concretize a phenomenon produced in our cell structure at an imperceptible level.
To explain is to attempt to force facts into the framework of theories which the majority of
scientists accept at a particular time. But these theories have evolved in 20 years. Accordingly
there are representations to be reconsidered and it is not excluded that we may definitely
throw out some comparisons which I made about 1960 and shortly thereafter. I will show as
an example that very recent studies recall certain representations which I proposed some time
ago.
Certainly, the facts and the experiments remain and retain their value for all time, except for
experimental error which was not detectable at the time. It is the explanation of these facts
which has evolved.
That led me not to follow through on certain reprintings. For, in 1974, a sharp turning point in
theoretical nuclear physics led me to rethink the entire theoretical portion of my studies and
that will be seen in greater detail in the second section. For this reason I ask the readers of the
present publication to disregard explanations of my books in review articles or sound
recordings, etc., prior to 1974. In a sense, they no longer have anything but historic interest.
But I do not totally discard certain analogies which can be useful and are not all absolutely
false. Certain recent advances in exploration of the atom show that some notions that I
expressed in the early 1960s seem to be confirmed but cannot be generalized in a simplistic
manner. This infinitely small world escapes out senses in a way which renders it unwise to
bend it into a set of images structured for our senses on a multi-molecular scale. Only my
book Preuves en Biologie de Transmutations a Faible Energie (first edition 1975) will be
reprinted. That publication contains a general perspective of the principal experiments which
enabled me to conclude that there are effective transmutations of elements by biological
mechanisms and what are the extensive applications that they have found in medicine, in
agriculture, and in dietetics. The present work scarcely touches on applications, constantly
changing, and attempts primarily to make available to scientists the irrefutable indications
showing that such transmutations do certainly exist and that we now have an explanation in
theoretical physics which permits their accommodation in classical studies. Therefore this is a
complement to the 1975 publication which will be kept up to date in future printings.
I wanted the present book to adapt to meet the most up-to-date theories of nuclear physics
and also to be an inventory of various researches specially undertaken and irrefutable in terms
of scientific method. I wish to set forth certain material involving details which must be
carefully considered because experience has shown me that well-known specialists were not
capable of obtaining transmutations placed within the framework of theories which were
unfamiliar to them. Due to some sort of professional defiance or to ignorance resulting from
over-specialization, but in any case, unfortunately, most difficult to get rid of, they cannot see
the decisive role of this or that biological situation. Routinely they are led into errors because
they wish to transpose the concepts they hold to a new science which demands that they set
up certain practices and theories which are completely out of line with those that they have
always employed.
Not everyone can set aside the concepts into which they have been formed (or deformed)
ever since their earliest schooling. I will sow a few examples, but it is obviously impossible
to address every aspect of this new problem which leads to calling in question an array of
notions which are regarded as classic. One must reflect shift ones wisdom, avoid automatic
reaction. For all of us, when we do not understand we must wait for the moment when we
will understand.
The problem studied here remains in conformity with known laws of physics. The reason that
we have studied transmutations for the most part among biological channels for the past 20
years is because this milieu gives a relatively easy means of producing them and then
reproducing them. And this is accomplished under very precise conditions which preclude
generalizing in a nave and infantile manner. The energy action which precipitates the
transmutation demands a combination of certain specific conditions; it does not appear in a
seed kept dry but does show up after a few days in a seed placed in a condition permitting
germination. There is then produced a synthesis of enzymes which modify the spatial
structure, the stereochemistry of certain proteins constituting ADN, ATP, etc. But this
structural modification is just a preliminary stage. It leads to exponential multiplication of the
capture cross-section (effective capture cross section) of molecules with cosmic neutrinos in
this ocean of particles in which we bathe.
We are not dealing here with some mysterious property which calls in some sort of vital
principle more or less well formulated from another point of view. I have, in fact, been able
to show that certain minerals, in combinations in metamorphic rocks, so-called because
experimentation and observation have shown that they can change their form: these minerals
can show transmutations in line with the same theories --- however, on a different scale,
because stereochemical modifications which occurred with the application of temperature and
pressure which "fluidifies" the mineral makes atom displacement easier and these rocks,
having come under the influence of cosmic neutrinos, modify their atomic composition both
qualitatively and quantitatively. In my 1975 book I dealt with research done under a pressure
of 50 kilobars and a temperature at the 850 C level. And so we also have applications in the
study of mineralogy and I will come back to that briefly, from another point of view, because
eminent geologists have been able to advance explanations of phenomena which were
completely incomprehensible in terms of classical theories.


Chapter 2
Experiments Establishing With Certainty Certain Biological Transmutations







(1) Condensed History ~
I refer the reader, for more details, to my basic book of 1975: Proof in Biology of Weak
Energy Transmutations (Maloine, Paris). None of my prior publications will be printed again
in full.
In the title of this book I did not retain the expression "biological transmutations" and
replaced it, as in other publications, after 1963, by the more general expression "weak energy
transmutations" because I was fully convinced, since my first publications, that this
phenomenon demonstrated by numerous experiments was more general than simply
biological and I referred to it in my second publication of 1963 by the term "Natural
Transmutations". In the present volume, in order that one not lose sight of this general aspect,
I have summarized in one chapter a few applications in geology, but it is a very limited
presentation of several studies appearing since 1975. However, it is not my intention to take
applications into account here, and it would be good to have a book expressly aimed at
studying the impact of weak energy physics specifically on mineralogy to get a view of
everything available in this domain. I will refer to several publications, one of which has
more than 90 tightly written large pages, and there are some publications which have
appeared abroad. It would certainly be desirable to distribute a synthesis of the essential
experimental studies along these lines because one must have very costly materials for this
sort of investigation while in biology any laboratory can do research without great cost.
However, here I wish to convince people that transmutations of elements can take place with
low energy in living matter under conditions which will be made precise for one must never
say that a phenomenon is general, that it occurs everywhere all the time. What I wish to show
is that my researches are a consequence of putting to work weak energy interactions, and not
a consequence of high energy interactions which have been the only sort of interactions that
most physicists have considered since 1974. I save the study of physics for the second part.
This is fundamental because too many scientists have their minds twisted by physicists
subjugated by the atomic bomb which led too many of them for some 30 years (a whole
generation unfortunately prolonged in distortion by those who continued teaching) to deny
the existence of and fail to see the possibility of weak energy transmutations. However, the
majority of truly great physicists did not lose sight of natural weak energy transmutations,
and I will come back to that, but these weak energy transmutations are a phenomenon which
is no less striking than atomic explosions and the contribution of these truly great physicists
was more modest than that of the majority.
When I discovered these biological transmutations and decided to publish my conclusions, I
was not thinking of integrating these findings with what was known (actually very little)
concerning weak energy interactions. More to the point, I did not know that very early
experiments, conducted over a century and a half, had demonstrated the creation of certain
elements and the disappearance of other elements (or, more precisely, the augmentation of
some and diminution of others). Biological observations in animals and plants were
numerous and varied, but for very "humane" reasons they had been kept under the blanket
and were relegated to trivial publications which people were reluctant to quote and therefore
they remained practically unnoticed.
But millions of people, via my publications, widely disseminated reviews, by radio and by
television (and because my official functions made silence impossible) learned about my
studies and among them were those who were aware of previous experiments and several
called these previous experiments to my attention. I should recall, for example, that the major
popular science review Science et Vie (Science and Life) devoted several articles to this from
1960 to 1963 in some 350,000 copies. Europe No. 1 (June 1961) distributed my 40-minute
interview with Jacques Mousseau and, previously, the Belgian television 819 devoted about a
quarter of an hour to these matters in December 1960.
If the above mentioned publications remained in the dark for the most part it was because
they were premature in the sense that they were incomprehensible and too many people deny
that which is not understood even though the facts are indisputable. However, I advanced an
explanation by a mechanism which had nothing in it which was mysterious for the 20th
century because it was in some ways parallel to fusions and fissions of the new atomic
physics born with the century.
Lacking an accepted scientific explanation these publications were often rejected out of hand
on the ground that they resulted from experimental error. Furthermore, it was impossible
because it would be a return to alchemy. That had been definitively thrown out by science of
the 19th century. One could no longer go backwards. It was absolutely necessary, however, to
proceed to the evidence of the turn of the 20th century.
The discovery of radioactivity demonstrated in a striking manner that transmutation of
elements was impossible to deny. One could study it better when, in 1919, the first forced
transmutation was achieved while in 1935, there was a successful artificial production of new
radioactive substances.
In 1963, the atomic physics professor of the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers made
available to me photocopies of several dozens of pages in which Freundler, a Sorbonne
professor, condensed, in a 1928 book, studies conducted for more than 10 years on the
production of iodine by algae. He is the first, to my knowledge, who saw that there was a
connection between the tin of the granite support and the iodine in these plants. He had
sensed the type of reaction that I indicated but he had not been able to convince anyone of
this. He had come too soon and his calculations had a weak point. The balance of charges and
masses was defective because the neutron was unknown at that time, not having been
discovered until 1932. But nobody else, even after 1932, dreamed of reconsidering the
problem which was nevertheless cross-checked, as it were, by converging studies. I touched
on the work of Freundler to a certain extent in my book of 1963 on natural transmutations,
which, after two editions, was not printed again.
Readers of books failed to see a good many lines which were rediscovered and took on new
dimensions when those readers saw my first publications. It was in just this way that a friend
of mine called my attention to a passage of Flaubert in Bouvard et Pecuchet, a publication
which challenged the science of the 1880 era in a series of critical dialogs. One chapter was
written by Flaubert under the inspiration of Regnault, a physicist well known to schoolboys
because of his Thermodynamic Tables, specific heat, etc., and by Giraudin, an agronomist of
world-wide reputation. Flaubert emphasized that the great French chemist Vauquelin (a
contemporary of Lavoisier but more open-minded than the latter) had demonstrated that a
chicken fed exclusively on oats laid in its eggs and in its droppings more than four times as
much "lime" as it had ingested with the oats which had been analyzed beforehand. He
provided a balance sheet for the "lime", which was what we would today call calcium
carbonate, and also that for "lime phosphate" because the balance sheet for phosphorus was
also modified. But the spectacular finding was the augmentation of calcium. There was,
according to Vauquelin, a creation of matter. His memoire had been published 19 January
1799. He tried to see what could have been reduced in order to give all this "lime". But in
those times people did not know about the atom and he did not conceive of certain possible
origins. I was able to obtain the original of this remarkable piece of work and discovered that
they knew very well how to make precise analyses of calcium at that time. But Vauquelin
knew how to isolate and discover certain "simple substances" and he was a very talented and
clever experimenter. Furthermore, in those days it was the main boss himself who made the
analyses and not a laboratory assistant. In my 1975 book I devoted 10 pages to presenting this
remarkable study which, in my opinion, constituted the oldest and one of the most serious
experiments before the atomic era on biological transmutations, an expression which had not
yet been formulated in the 19ht century and was much less available in the 18th century. I did
not mention this test in my first publication because I did not discover it until about 10 years
later.
That indicates that Lavoisier had produced an absolute law which was true within the
framework of chemistry but in chemistry only. Vauquelin showed that there was something
else in living matter and that the problem is more complex than in the chemistry of non-living
material. This shows the great historical importance of this 1799 publication.
I also refer to my 1975 book for the very important studies published from 1875 to 1883 in
Germany by Von Herzeele. He did numerous experiments on a great many species of seed
germinated in a dust-free situation with distilled water containing a mixture of two salts. One
of the salts always contained a constant anion and a cation which varied with each
experiment. In other experiments this was reversed: constant cation, variable anion. We see
that this investigator anticipated the phenomenon of transmutation and was studying the
correlation between the augmentation of one element and the diminution of another. But at
that time atomic structures were not known. He was then about 20 years before his time.
However, the results that he obtained are very important since, after Vaquelin, we have a
second stage, conducted scientifically, a valuable example of researches on variations of
certain elements as a function of metabolism in the germination and growth of various plants.
Certainly, Von Herzeele (and several others before him, not knowing the structure of atoms,
completed certain experiments which had no significance, but some of his experiments are
valid. In addition, being a chemist, that certain reactions are only possible as a function of the
pH of the culture medium and could not be conducted except in line with the needs of plants
which could be either calcifugous or calcium dependent. In the same way nitrogen needs are
not the same for legumes as they are for grasses, etc. The chemist did not see certain aspects
of plant biology. This was also the case 80 years later for P. Baranger, who was head of the
laboratory of organic chemistry at the Ecole Polytechnique de Paris and did not see certain
aspects of physical chemistry such as the importance of photosynthesis and its relation to the
incident light spectrum and the materials through which the light passed. He was a doctor of
sciences and had done a thesis in chemistry.
FIGURE 1 ~ Photocopy of Nobel Prize nomination
FIGURE 2 ~ Photocopy of Nobel Prize nomination, cont'd.


Chapter 3
Several Examples Of Experiments Subsequent To 1974







I will limit this chapter to just those experiments done on oats, referring to my book of 1975
for various experiments on humans, animals (such as mice, lobsters, etc), or with
microorganisms, I will briefly comment, in passing, on various results published here and
there concerning carbon, silicon, phosphorus, manganese, copper, etc., as they relate to
plants. I will not attempt to present in detail various complementary experiments on oats or
other plants to study variations of elements such as sodium, magnesium, silicon, copper, etc.
However, I would like to call attention to the fact that studies on the variation of copper in
cultures of oats (a plant which is, in the overall, rich in copper) have showed that, with
respect to the seed, the plant shows a reduction in the neighborhood of 19% (mean figure
from the analysis of five batches). But I judge that we did not have a sufficient number of
batches studied to generate a meaningful hypothesis concerning what it is that increases when
Cu diminishes (possibly zinc?). My researches on the Mn-Fe link are also not extensive
enough although the results tend to converge; however, we must look more closely at
reactions in this domain.
I will present in some detail an array of experiments bearing at one and the same time on
potassium and calcium in oats in order to show the principal precautions one must take when
one comes with nave eyes into a research area that others have seen from a very different
angle. Then I will give in another chapter a few results of research accomplished by J.E.
Zundel, research carried out subsequently to those cited in my book of 1975, which he
expanded considerably later on and which he carried out limiting himself almost exclusively
to variation of calcium in hydroponic culture of oats, in order to show the scope of detailed
parameters one must lose sight of in this sort of research. As he always kept me current with
his results, I will set forth the core of his research, more especially the memoir that he
circulated in the 1979 second semester as a photocopy --- then in an Italian university review
in 1980 --- under his signature and consisting of an excellent condensation of 13 years of
practically uninterrupted research. Thanks to this huge amount of work focused on a precise
area I believe that the study of oat culture has been pushed to a point that we may be certain
there is an augmentation of Ca in the order of 100% (varying from 50% to 150% as a
function of oat variety, season, etc.), the increase occurring in a plant which has germinated
several weeks being compared to a grain similar to the one from which it came without there
being any chance that this calcium came from the air, the water, the materials used in the
culture equipment, or as an artifact of analysis. Unfortunately, due to human vanity, I
understand that it is very difficult to obtain exact replication of an experiment. There are
many who consider themselves superior to the rest of the world (or more clever), and they
criticize what has been accomplished, desire to generate an experiment modifying the results
in line with their own procedures or materials in order to get their own name in the ring.
Thats human. But also quite frequently that comes from a misunderstanding of the main
problem resulting from distorted professional judgment.
But these inevitable human eccentricities did not curtail widespread dissemination of what
some call a "mutation" and what I call a transmutation, a label adopted universally for this
physical phenomenon of the mutation of nucleons in atomic nuclei. Thus it is that Prof.
Genevois, in the introduction to his Biochemical Mutations of Plants, was able to write a few
years ago, "It now seems, from collecting the facts on all cultivated plants of any importance,
that the condition of mutation is a general fact. Mutations are in the process of changing
domesticated vegetation. Perfecting analytic techniques... that consistency of the composition
of plant species was an illusion". One could not say it more clearly, but it is so pleasant to
cradle oneself with illusions, right up to ones death!
Now lets demonstrate scientifically that consistency of structure is truly an illusion to be
dispensed with!
(a) Research on Variations of Calcium and Potassium in Culture of Oats ~
I elected to continue investigating oats because that is the most calcifugous cereal I have
every encountered in my studies. It grows well in acid soils (granites, for example).
Accordingly, one can grow it in a laboratory with extra-pure water which is almost always
acid (therefore a proton donor according to the modern definition of the acid state --- and we
must not forget that which represent the pH of a pH meter). Accordingly one must avoid
neutralizing or "stoppering" it. I used extra-pure water resulting from combustion of
hydrogen and oxygen, these two gases being the product of electrolysis. They were, then
rigorously pure, which is not always the case when, for example, hydrogen comes from a
reaction of sulfuric acid on zinc. The zinc is often too impure except when it has been
produced by electrolysis. Commercial sulfuric acid is often produced by calcinations of a
very complex mixture of pyrites which requires that it be rejected for experimental use unless
it is a pure acid coming from refined sulfur. It was not always possible for me to have a
sufficient amount of such water; then I used bidistilled water because in water which has
been distilled only once a "head" [azeotrope] is formed at the outset of distillation, a
condition in which there are very diverse volatile products which condense before anything
else --- organic products which are often toxic. My colleague in the Paris Council of Hygiene,
P. Levine, of the Pasteur Institute, advised us that he was not able to conduct certain
experiments in microbiology or in human biology using the water of Paris with just one
distillation. He found it necessary to throw out the "alembic heads" and redistill the
remaining condensed portion.
Softened water, purified on ion exchange resins, also called permuted water, still contain too
many minerals for our research work. Permuted as well as possible, they must still be
distilled by a single passage. Analyses of every batch of water were made by atomic
absorption spectrophotometry on samples which varied from one to three liters per carboy
and were reduced to 50 ml by evaporation to ensure they did not contain a measurable
amount of Ca++ and K+ (since the experiments were concerned with these cations) which
could have influenced the results obtained by more than one percent. Such experiments were
also carried out on all those materials which might come in contact with the cultured plants
(purex, plexiglass, altuglass, polyethylene, etc.). It was also necessary to consider analyses at
different stages of the operation to be on the lookout to avoid having parasites get into the
circuit.
It seemed to me advisable to cite a few examples of such experiments, according to
publications that I distributed in photocopies, for the most part, extracting, however, all the
material which was simply repetitious.
(b) Research on K and Ca in Oats ~
I abandoned research on calcitropic plants, like ray-grass, due to a lack of time and personnel,
and in the end I limited myself to studies of oats, a calcifugous type of plant. In these efforts I
made use of the publications of Zundel and some others. Thus, I could take into consideration
a very large number of results showing a statistical convergence which could not be denied
by any conscientious person. And very shortly thereafter we find balance sheets on Mg and Si
which, under certain circumstances (in animals for instance), both may be able to transform
into calcium. Already in 1799 Vauquelin had demonstrated that if silicate diminishes and
lime increases when one tallies up the content with respect to a chicken as a function of
ingested oats, the diminution of Si does not correspond quantitatively to the augmentation of
Ca. Some studies --- perhaps too few --- have shown that in the germination of oats Mg and
Si did not play a significant role in the production of Ca. By contrast there were a good many
experiments confirming that there was a diminution of K commensurate with the increase of
Ca.
Zundel, likewise, only carried out a few studies on Mg and SI in his oat cultures because his
first investigations showed him that the variation of these two elements was too slight and
insignificant with respect to the increase of Ca. And he also set aside investigation of K for
two reasons:
He did not himself analyze K and did not wish to simply play the role of confirmatory of that
which had been done by others;
It seemed to him that the various analyses which he has had done by flame spectrometry, by
neutron activation, and by x-rays, for example, varied too much as a function of the methods,
the operators, the laboratories, and even the operators in one laboratory using the same
method. Repetition was not assured with respect to the numerical values of K that were given
to him and he had no way, himself, to determine the results which he could trust because he
placed his confidence in gravimetric chemical analysis, weighing milligrams of cations. In
this way he could measure to one-tenth of a milligram the creation of Ca, but with respect to
what? He does not pass judgment on that.
I will not give here results obtained by chemical methods, gravimetric or colorimetric. Rapid
analyses for crude verification have been made by various methods of complexometry (by
EDTA for example). They are often more delicate to accomplish than one might think
because the complexant must be chosen as a function of the affinity between Mg and Ca. I
indicated in my book of 1975, with respect to research on the lobster, why it was necessary to
reject certain methods because the affinity of Mg/Ca varied a great deal as a function of the
metabolism of the animal. After moult of the lobster, the method did not work in the majority
of experiments which made it very difficult to obtain results which could be properly
compared.
[ PARAGRAPH MISSING ]
I know --- and I have cited some results --- that convergent values for Ca have sometimes
have obtained by flame spectrometry. But I cannot have confidence in them a priori; they
must be cross-checked, because some equipment uses a flame of a temperature insufficient to
ionize enough Ca atoms and obtain valid and reproducible results. It is also preferable to have
the same operator in order to better control the regulation of the flame (the delivery and
pressure of the gas must be verified regularly).
(2) Simultaneous Investigation of Mg, K and Ca ~
To avoid a long drawn out description in the following paragraphs, I will present only mean
data for each whole experiment and will not give mean data for each experimental segment.
Obviously, in this experiment it serves no purpose to take account of variation in Mg since
that result has been obtained from ten other experiments conducted to obtain balance sheets
of Mg when placed in a culture of oats of different varieties. Thats one reason which led me
to terminate research on variations of Mg in 1976.
Comments on Analyses of K, Ca and Mg in Seeds and Plants of Oats in the Paper-Mill
Analytic Laboratory of the Grenoble University Complex ~
(a) Experimental Protocol ~
Oat seeds of the Flamingskrone variety (a blonde hybrid) with a 27,5 mg mean weight per
seed were germinated in special vats covered with an indented plate with two seeds per
indentation. The vats received double distilled water with a pH = 5.6.
A preliminary control was accomplished by destroying the water and material of a vat to
accomplish spectrophotometry of atomic absorption to verify that there was no measurable
amount of calcium therein. The culture was accomplished without added fertilization.
Germination took place in an enclosed space of about 70 x 40 x 30 cm of transparent plastic
material out of contact with seeds and water. The enclosure was swept with air sent by an
electric pump at a rate of about one liter/minute. This air passed through an air filter provided
with one meter of hydrophilic cotton folded and compressed. Then it was muddled through
four one-liter glass bottles, each filled with 750 ml of double distilled water, arranged in a
series. The first was supplied with 30 ml of HCl to precipitate any trace of calcium dust
which might have passed the filter. Then the air passed successively through two bottles with
additives of NaHCO3 in order to neutralize any trace of acid drawn by the air from the
preceding bottle. The fourth bottle contained only pure water.
Thus, neither by air, nor by water, nor by material in contact with the germinating seeds was
there any possibility of an introduction of Ca into the enclosure where there was an
overpressure of approximately 3 mm water which made it impossible for any entry of
ambient air contaminated by Ca.
At the end of several weeks the plants developed from these seeds were gathered, dried,
incinerated at 950 C, dissolved in hydrochloric acid and aliquot parts were analyzed by a
number of methods in order to cross check results.
At the same time there were analyzed some control segments of non-germinated seeds as
nearly identical as possible to those which were germinated. All seeds utilized were
calibrated and came from selected seedings furnished by the INRA and their germination rate
was better than 95%. Nevertheless, each seed was hand-picked, the same for the control
segments as for those which were germinated, in order to eliminate any abnormality of
dimension (either too large or too small) or presenting a visible defect of form or of color, to
have experimental segments as homogenous and as similar as possible.
The essential purpose of the experiment, within the framework of verifying my studies, was
to compare the quantity of Ca between seeds and plants in order to establish a balance sheet
showing that germination of the oat --- a calcifugous plant --- in water with an acid pH will
actually alter the quantity of Ca a few weeks of growth in a calcium free environment.
[MISSING TEXT]
...It was requested of the Paper-Mill Laboratory located in the University of Grenoble
complex (we note that the University of Grenoble supports the Superior School of Paper
Manufacturing which trains the production engineers in this profession) to measure not only
Ca and Mg by spectrophotometric atomic absorption but also to measure K by flame
spectrophotometry. This was to cross check the results of previous experiments made by
Kervran and by Zundel, independently, showing that the increase of Ca discovered in such
experiments on oats would only have come from a reduction of K which was quantitatively
almost the same.
The measure of Mg was requested of Grenoble because previous chemical analyses of Zundel
and physical analyses made by myself had always shown that in the growth of oats, a
calcifugous plant, the Mg was practically invariant. One more confirmation of this came to
light. I cite results from this Paper-Mill factory done for Zundel who sent them tome for my
information. The analyses were accomplished in 1970-1971 but I did not publish my
comments except by individual letters in September 1976, with a photocopy of the schedules
of the analyses. The following is a combined study.
(b) Tables of Results of Analyses ~
We will only consider experimental segments with identical numbers of seeds and plants, in
the two studies, one on Ca and Mg, done first, the other on K, done later, but on aliquot
sections coming from the same experiment.
TABLE 1ab
TABLE 1c
N.B. --- Question marks after a value indicate that it is possible (in my opinion) that there
was a slight measurement error with respect to this sample.
(c) Recapitulation ~
The possibility of slight errors from one sample to another is offset by the law of large
numbers, the analyses being carried out on hundreds of seeds and plants. The following table
recapitulates the above material rounded off to three decimal places. Values are stated in mg
TABLE 2
Remark: The variation of Mg in absolute value is very slight ()0.0069 rounded to 0.007). The
range of values per plant, for the four analyses, runs from +0.0059 to - 0.0072 whence,
around the mean there is a dispersion of 0.0065 (also rounded to 0.007). That is to say, as a
function of experimental error, the variation is equal to the dispersion. Fomr this fact we
conclude that there is no significant variation of Mg, which had already been confirmed by a
number of previously conducted experiments on oats.
(d) Comparison of Variations in K and Ca ~
In absolute value, K diminishes by 0.033 mg per unit while in absolute value, Ca increased
by 0.032 mg per unit (between one seed and one plant derived from a similar seed).
Thus there is a definite convergence between these two values, which allows us to conclude
that the augmentation of Ca comes from reduction in K, from which we have the following
statement:
K 39/19 + H 1/1 >> Ca 40/20 + ~ 0.01 u.m.a.
In different experiments this compensatory augmentation of Ca and reduction of K during
germination of oats in an acid culture has been observed to approximately 4%, reflecting
inevitable differences due to slight biological variations and experimental errors. Again, we
can present these values as follows:
in a seed: K + Ca = 0.140 mg
in a plant: K + Ca = 0.139 mg
Indicating that the total amount of K + Ca does not change. or even:
in the seed: K/Ca = 0.113 / 0.027 = 4.2 approximately;
in the plant: K/Ca = 0.080 / 0.059 = 1.4 in excess,
which again reflects the reduction of K with respect to Ca. As K + Ca does not change, the
increase of Ca can have no other origin than the diminution of K, which makes it useless to
look for some other origin of Ca. However, as we find certain metabolic systems (especially
animal systems) in which Ca could come from Mg --- by the reaction Mg12 + O8 >> Ca20 --
- due to complimentary adjustment, research on variation of Mg was made one more time, in
the experiment commented on herewith, and it was discovered to be non-existent. Likewise,
other previous experiments had shown that there was no significant variation of Si during the
germination of oats. Bear in mind that a calcitropic plant does not manufacture Ca, which
must be brought to it by the culture medium.
The values of K and Ca, in both seeds and plants, as set forth above, are accepted without
reservation because they confirm the mean measures supplied by other investigators using a
variety of different analytic techniques.
It is noted that in this experiment the relative increase of Ca is greater than 118%. The graph
in Figure 3 clearly shows the reciprocal variations of K and Ca.
(e) Review ~
For purposes of comparison let us consider a previous analysis by neutron activation made by
a Swiss government center for nuclear research on seeds of a closely related variety, Peniarth
(mean seed weight 32.2 mg). Analyses were made on five samples of six seeds and five
samples of six pants each.
FIGURE 3
Figure 3 ~ Inverse variations of K and of Ca in germination of an oat seed (Mg does not vary
significantly).
Mean figures per seed, from 3 analyses and a total of 840 seeds.
Mean figures per plant, from 4 analyses and a total of 403 plants.
Analyses of K by flame spectrometry
Analyses of Ca and Mg by atomic spectrophotometry absorption
Analyses made at the Laboratory of Paper Products Analysis (University of Grenoble).
DK = 0.113 - 0.80 = -0.033 mg
DCa = 0.059 - 0.027 = +0.032 mg
TABLE 3
Table 3: Batches of 6 Seeds and of 6 Plants (Values in mg)
So again we have an augmentation of Ca in a plant, compared with the Ca in a seed similar to
the plants seed of origin in the amount of 0.0560 - 0.0249 = 0.0311 which gives an increase
of 124%. We are not dealing here with the same plant variety as in the preceding experiment,
but we see that the order of magnitude of variation remains very close to the same. Actually,
the values obtained in Switzerland were corrected some time after issuance of the first
analyses because it was noted that, because of some germination failure the values reported
applied not to a total of 30 plants but rather to an average of 28.32 plants, thus leading to a
slight increase in the amount of Ca calculated for the plants. Another calculation was added,
by comparing the content of Ca, not just by the unit (seed or plat) but as a function of weights
and the values were given in ppm, which allows us to compensate the inequalities of weights
of the samples to obtain a more homogenous result. This led to confirmation of a 138%
increase of Ca.
We can briefly add other results showing the convergence of values obtained by different
laboratories, always with oats:
1. Nuprime variety, Kervran culture, 42 days; analysis by Dr Bieselaar, former lab director of
Fraud Service ---- Atomic Adsorption Spectrometry; average grain weight 24.65 mg (dozens
of experiments with this variety have given average weights from 22 to 25 mg, according to
the source of the lots).
2. Flaningskrone variety; average seed weight: 27.5 mg (has varied from 25 to 30 mg
according to the source. Ca/seed: 0.028 ~ Ca/plant: 0.056 ~ Ca change: +0.028 = 100%
3. Peniarth variety: using neutron activation, 52 day culture; Ca/seed: 0.057 ~ Ca/plant: 0.052
~ Ca change: +0.0263 = 103%
4. Same variety, dosed by atomic adsorption spectrometry, after 48 days of culture: Ca/seed:
0.0260 ~ Ca/plant: 0.064 ~ Ca change: +0.038 = 146%
5. Peniarth variety; using neutron activation, Ca/seed: 0.0249 ~ Ca/plant: 0.0572 ~ Ca
change: +0.0323 = 130%
FIGURE 4
All these examples definitely show similar results and an average increase in Ca greater than
100%, which is absolutely beyond all possible experimental error and confirms the "creation"
of Ca, pointing to a transmutation. We have seen that it begins with K. Dozens of
experiments, made up of hundreds of analyses, performed by different laboratories using
varied methods, have been conducted on tens of thousands of oat seeds and plants. The
phenomenon of transmutation is therefore well established beyond doubt. The increase of Ca
tends to become asymptotic after 5 days too 6 weeks of culture, which implies an exhaustion
of synthetic hormones during germination.
A transmutation by a lining organism does not follow the classical rules of high energy
interaction. Instead it can be classified in the category of low energy interactions. The loss of
mass is not explained by a release of heat and is not represented by any radioactivity ---
alpha, beta, or gamma. In my 1975 book, Costa de Beauregard, Research Director at CNRS,
showed after the confirmation of "neutral currents" in 1974 that the loss of mass is explained
by introducing the action of neutrinos. Therefore, the loss of mass does respect the classical
theory of physics. I have added to it the action of the neutral intermediate virtual boson vector
z, and the previously stated reaction could be written as:
C + K + H +Z
o
/ + enzyme >> Ca + v
1

with v prime not equal to v pertaining to energy level. The introduction of the H+ proton
would be explained by the tunnel effect by application of quantum mechanics.
In the above reaction v is different from v from an energy point of view. The entry of the H+
proton would be performed by the tunnel effect in accordance with quantum mechanics.
The text just quoted was released in French from September to October 1976. It was soon
after translated into English and released in the USA by Dr E. Stanton S. Maxey, surgeon and
owner of a surgical-medical center in Stuart, FL, who has done much for the release of my
research.
The above stated results seemed to me definite proof of an increase in Ca by an equal
reduction in weight of K. I saw, therefore, more or less, remarkable support to establish the
reaction proposed for approximately 15 years, given by the formula K + H >> Ca, resulting
from a great number of observations which all tended to converge on the same conclusion. I
attributed the slight variations of the numerical results to cultural protocol; to slight
differences in the strength of germination of the seeds; or to non-eligible, hard-to-measure
cosmic phenomena that have been confirmed experimentally by numerous scientists, such as
the influence of seasonal changes, etc. Subsequent experiments came to confirm such results.
FIGURE 5 ~ Formation of calcium from potassium by the combined action of an
enzyme and a neutrino.
The positive charges of the active site of the enzyme repel the H+ proton. The result of this
electrostatic field is represented by H. H does not appear as a label in this figure. [Ed. --- I
think he means the result of this electrostatic field is felt by H, as shown in the figure].
The enzyme would concentrate the neutrinos v, increasing the chances of impact with the
material.
A neutrino v, adding its effect to the enzymes positive charges, repels the H+ proton towards
the K nucleus with sufficient energy for the proton to penetrate the K by the tunnel effect.
The K atom recoils a little from the shock and becomes Ca (K
19
+ H
1
>>Ca
20
).
The incident neutrino v, which has accompanied H, does not penetrate very far into K. It has
given up some energy to H and is refracted in K, leaving with a different energy v prime not
equal to v by carrying off the excess energy resulting from the loss of mass between Ca and
K + H.
This re-emitted neutrino v prime will be lost in space without reacting with the material.
But I have never been able to understand why certain experiments performed elsewhere
seemed to indicate that there was not always a one-to-one correspondence in the increase of
Ca to the decrease in K, the loss of K being insufficient to account for the increase of Ca.
There was not sufficient reduction of Mg or Si to compensate for the increase of Ca. Nor did
I see any evidence that the analytical methods could be blamed. Was I to infer from this that
it is probable that we have not yet completely mastered the cultural protocols that allow us to
obtain reproducible results of the K content?
But it was no longer possible for me, for diverse reasons, such as age, health and financial
means, to start over again with a systematic study of the K life cycle, which would take years.
I therefore decided to continue only with the research that always pointed to an increase in
Ca, since Zundel himself was not analyzing K, but was instead specializing his research on
the increase of Ca in oats. There was a restricted but sufficient domain here to establish the
increase in calcium, and therefore the creation of matter in the germination of oats. That is to
say, there is a biological process of transmutation of matter, and that there are other
phenomena besides chemistry in living things where there is no evidence of high energy
transmutation. But I thought for the time being that we needed to be conservative about the
role of K in the formation of Ca. Researching the element, or elements originating from Ca is
quite another problem that young scientists will have to solve in the future.
FIGURE 6 [Not included here] ~ J.E. Zundels Research Station in Grasse, France (1976) --
- Environmental culture tanks. Pumps and purification flasks that control the air sent into the
tanks are in the back room.
First, I will present a study by Zundel that he had published in September 1979. He only
measured the calcium content, as you can see the results in his summarized table, which is
reproduced also. Then I will go on to some commentaries on diverse experiments, with the
logical conclusions that can be drawn from them. The following text has been reproduced in
French and Italian in Rivista di Biologia (Fall 1980), Univ. of Perouse, directed by Prof
Sermont.
(3) Research by J.E. Zundel ~
I introduced this researcher in my book of 1975. J.E. Zundel graduated from the Zurich
Polytechnicum as a chemical engineer. He then trained in the USA. He managed a paper mill,
keeping for himself the supervision of the chemical analysis laboratory. This allowed him to
maintain his proficiency in the field of chemical analysis for the rest of his life. He had a
completely open mind and he was a deft experimenter. My first works were a revelation to
him. He wrote to me as early as 1963. He understood immediately that my works pointed to a
whole new aspect of biology which was of great interest for pulp and paper research or on all
organic material obtained from vegetable fibers. Some alterations in paper could not be
explained by chemistry alone. Micro-organisms would implant themselves in the paper and
cause modifications which could not be understood. In 1963 Zundel began some preliminary
verifications of my ideas after broaching the subject with me in letters. His work was
intermittent, because his professional activities did not leave him the tie required for
continuous research. However, this preliminary survey convinced him that my works
contained a reality, so far ignored by all chemistry treatises and specialized periodicals. As
soon as he retired, he moved to a pollution-free location in the country, half way between
Gasse and Canes. At his own expense he installed a hydroponic experimental station housed
in a Vitrex greenhouse. Vitrex is made of fine wire mesh dipped into pure Cellophane, a
solution of pure transparent celluslose. Vitrex is more permeable to the solar spectrum than
glass. It is well known that glass filters some ultraviolet wavelengths. Vitrex is selective to
several infrared wavelengths which are conductive to the greenhouse effect. This Vitrex
greenhouse also protected the plants against unavoidable small dust particles. Some dust was
still brought in and out of the greenhouse on shoes and clothing despite these precautions.
Zundel even worried about dust carried by the wind from a quarry located 10 km away. This
was indeed improbable, but it had to be considered to counter any subjective objections
raised by the eternal systemic objectors. To present accurate digital data, he interspaced his
planters with control planters filled with pure water. In this way he could accurately measure
eventual dust fallout. In addition, he equipped a chemical analysis laboratory for the
measurement of Ca and some other elements such as Mg and Si. He personally did the
various analyses, as he distrusted lab technicians (I appreciate these highly qualified
technicians. They are very useful collaborators. Nevertheless, one should keep in mind the
old saying: "Better deal with God than with his saints", especially in a new field, which has
not been taught to them). This hobby kept Zundel busy during his retirement.
It is important to note that Zundel never measured K himself. This element is difficult to
measure by purely chemical methods. At Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, Prof; Baranger.
Director of the Organic Chemistry Laboratory, also abandoned the various chemical methods
prescribed in classic analytical treatises after he had performed questionable chemical
analyses of the element K. Subsequently, he used a physical method, fashionable at the time,
in order to avoid, as he told me, malicious comments by his "dear colleagues", always ready
to find faults in procedures set up by others. Only their method is reliable. I will not describe
the multiple causes of uncertainty in chemical methods. They are usually related to a
sequence of the solutions ending up with a compound which is insoluble in the next phase.
Too many chemists forget, in their quest for an element inside a seed, that this element is
related to different compounds in the plant grown from this seed. They reason solely as
chemists and they forget --- or ignore --- biological phases. For a long time now, analyses of
K have been performed essentially by flame spectrometry techniques (emission spectrometry)
which have been refined and automated. These techniques are easy to set up with a butane or
propane flame. However, preparatory steps remain delicate for flame spectrometry as for
other physical methods.
When Zundel wanted values for K, he usually would send ash samples to a well equipped
Industrie du Papier laboratory linked to the Ecole Superieure du Papier of the University of
Grenoble. In these cases, he only mentions the results without lending them his support. He
only claims as his own the data which he obtained himself and checked by a different
method. This is the case for calcium which he measures following a gravimetric method. The
samples are weighed on a high precision Sartorius scale sensitive to the 1/10 mg. This is
sufficient considering the quantities involved. Baranger weighed his sample on a Mettler
scale sensitive to 1/100 mg. Such precision is meaningless, because it is subject to
gravimetric variations such as the distance to the operator. Most recent models were
calibrated on very heavy bases to minimize the influence of distance to the operator. Still the
operator should not get too close to the scale and he should use proper remote controls.
Protections are necessary to shield the scale from the operators body heat and breath.
Zundel performed tens of thousands of experiments, including hundreds of analyses on tens
of thousands of seeds to establish a procedure guaranteeing reproducibility. He wished then
to check to results obtained using the method recommended by Prof Charlot of Institut de
France in his now classic Traite dAnalyse in order to eliminate any possibility of error. After
preparing a sample (an aliquot part) of ashes himself, he had it analyzed with an atomic
absorption spectrometer at Laboratorie des Industries de la Papeterie in Grenoble. It was a
Perkin-Elmer instrument. I used a Beckman. He had the concentrations in Ca and also in Mg,
obtained by Charlots method, tested with this instrument. We will not discuss these
concentrations here, as the variations in Mg proved to be small, if at all significant. The
results obtained by Zundel on oats regarding Mg confirmed mine. I stated this point in my
book of 1975. This is not the case for the amount of the variations of Ca in oats, a calcifuge
plant. In calcicole plants the metabolism of Mg is totally different. I will not elaborate on this
subject and I will limit my topic to a wealth of studies. In this field it is not permissible to
extrapolate results to other plant species without having a very large number of data taking
into account the numerous parameters which should be considered in the growing process.
Zundel used a third method, neutronic activation, in order to check his data. He entrusted
these analyses to the Institut Federal de Recherches sur les Reacteurs Atomiques located near
Zurich. As Zundel could cross-check the data by three totally different methods, he was able
to select the experiments which gave three sets of compatible figures. Any large discrepancy
in one of the figures would lead one to suspect an error in the analysis by the operator. In this
way he happened to detect a dilution error in an experiment with the atomic absorption
spectrometer. Ashes were dissolved in hydrochloric acid and then diluted in twice distilled
water prior to injection into the instrument. The analyzer was programmed to average data,
measured automatically on ten samples contained in small test tubes. In this analysis there
were obvious variations in the results as compared to those obtained in a large number of
previous analyses. The operator made the mistake by one order of magnitude. Sometimes the
error is due to an oversight. For example, something sticks in the bottom of the crucible after
firing. A calibration error is another possible cause, so is a zero displacement. These are some
of the reasons why one cannot rely on a single experiment.
I will mention again that I performed germination experiments on two layers of ash-free filter
paper in Petri dishes. I measured the total Ca content of plants and paper. In another
experiment, seedlings were cultivated in the cells of a seedling tray which had holes at their
bottoms. Operators had neglected to measure the Ca which migrated through the roots to the
underlying water. It was only an error of secondary importance. I ascertained that this Ca
contained in the water (null at the start) represented approximately 10% of the Ca increase in
the plant as compared to the Ca content of the seed from which it originated. This increase
was often greater than 100%. However, to be rigorously scientific, it was necessary to take
into account the Ca content of the water. I informed Zundel of the necessity to perform such
measurements, which were omitted in the first experiments.
In my book of 1975 I only mentioned Zundels studies prior to1972, at which time he
presented a paper to the Academie dAgriculture de France. Zundel did not publish from that
time until 1979. He pursued his study continuously during the whole period. I did not want to
publish the results he was sending me all along, in order that he would be the first to do so.
Also I only wanted to comment on data that he had published himself so as to have a public
database, which would not be the subject of objections. I will reproduce below a text printed
in 1980 in the Rivista de Biologica (quarterly issue, 3rd quarter 1980), published by the
University of Perugia. This is the original text followed by my short commentary which is my
sole responsibility.
FIGURE 7 ~ Hydroponic Culture of Grains
"The planter, presently made of polyethylene, includes a tray in which twice distilled water is
maintained at a fairly constant level. The pH is 6.5. The water level is topped off every 3 or 4
days to compensate for plant transpiration. This is done by means of a fixed tube linked to the
outside by a siphon. The external extremity is covered with a test tube as a hood for dust
protection. The test tube is only removed to introduce the pipette for water additions. A
multi-cell panel, also in polyethylene, is placed on top of the tray. The 75 cells receive two
seeds each. The roots reach for water into the tray below, wile the seeds are maintained
outside the water (aerobiea). A maximum of 150 seedlings can be grown in each planter. Two
chambers, as the one reproduced below, are fed in parallel from a same air supply.
"The planter is placed in a closed chamber made of thick, rigid Plexiglass 70 x 40 x 30 cm.
The box is closed with a removable Plexiglass panel after introduction of the planter. This
panel is fixed by steel clips to one side of the box. It is screwed to the box once everything is
in place. A gasket insures air-tightness between the panel and the box.
"Air is pumped into the chamber at an approximate rate of 1 liter/minute by a device which is
not represented on the figure. The air is pushed through an air filter by an electric positive-
pressure pump. From the filter it passes successively through four one-liter flasks partially
filled each with 750 ml of twice distilled water. 30 ml of HCl are added to the water of the
first flask to precipitate any dust (Ca, Mg, etc.) which might have escaped through the filter.
A check showed that the filter was effective. The air is scrubbed in the next two flasks filled
with solutions of NaHCO
3
in order to neutralize any acid carry-over. A final scrubbing is
made in the fourth flasks which contain only pure water. From there are filtered and scrubbed
air penetrates into the cultivation chamber. Air exits the chamber through a double siphon,
used also as a water gauge. A positive pressure of 3 mm W.G. was measured inside the
chamber. This way, no external air intake may happen accidentally, even with a defective
gasket. No Ca, for example, can be brought from the outside".
(4) Study of the Variation of Calcium in Oat Seedlings During Germination in Twice-
Distilled Water, by J.E. Zundel ~
Abstract: In the course of 60 experiments the Ca content of oat seedlings increases by 50-
250% during germination in twice distilled water.
Introduction:
(1) This research was carried out over the last 13 years, following the publication of works by
Monsieur C. L. Kervran. These works suggested a possibility of mutation in chemical
elements by biological means, in contradiction to the law if immutability of matter posited by
Lavoisier, being understood that the law remained fully valid from the chemical point of
view. Kervran was kind enough to follow my work with interest. His considerable knowledge
was for me a source of frequent and effective advice.
(2) It was by mistake that I selected oat for my study. Initially I was looking for silica in a
study which was not pursued. Even though the oat was a calcifuge plant, it showed a strange
increase in Ca which was to become the subject of this study.
(3) It was obvious that this study required the elimination of all Ca additions of external
origin during the experiments. This, I tried to accomplish over the years.
(4) During the presentation of a paper of a paper to the Academie dAgriculture de France, I
was strongly criticized for deleting experimental details. I will present them here as
accurately as possible.
Growing Procedure:
(1) At the beginning of my work, I was content to use common, fodder types of oats. Later
the Centre des Semences of INRA kindly supplied me with selected seeds: Nuprime,
Flamingskrone and Peniarth, species I finally adopted definitely for its high germinating
power. The Warburg and triphenyl-tetrazolium-bromide tests showed a germinating power of
close to100%.
(2) After trying several methods (beakers, Petri dishes, flat and hollow plates) I selected
Mutipot seedling trays, manufactured by Ossenberg.
Each device included a tray ( 30 x 50 x 3 cm) with a panel of the same dimensions with 73
cups 40 mm deep which were perforated on their bottoms. The assembly was made of PVC.
The analysis of the trays showed no Ca.
(3) The seeds were sized by sight with a 3% accuracy in weight.
(4) For pre-germination, I cover the bottom of a Multipot planter with two layers of ash-free
Whatman filter paper and I saturate the paper with twice distilled water. I spread over it 300
selected seeds and I place the assembly in a phytotron. Temperature is controlled at 28 C
during the 16 daylight hours and to 15 C during the 8 night hours.
During the day, the phytotron is lighted from the outside by a 400W Power Star Osram lamp.
After 5-10 day pre-germination, the seedlings are 30-70 mm high. The duration of the pre-
germinating phase, as well as the size of the seedlings, seem to show that besides controllable
factors, there are other effects which escape me. I then assemble the two parts of another
seedling tray and I fill it with twice distilled water to a level 4 mm above the bottom of the
cups. I pull the seedlings carefully not to hurt the radicles, and I transplant them two by two
in the tray. The complete tray holds 146 seedlings. I place the tray in the phytotron.
(5) The seedlings are harvested 28 days after the beginning of pre-germination. I selected this
time span because it corresponded to the average duration of the plants, hence probably to the
reserves in the seed. I pull the plants carefully out of the planter (roots may extend as much as
20 cm between the holes at the bottom of the cells and the underlying tray. I spread the plants
on Whatman filter paper and I dry the whole thing at 85 C for 72 hours in an electric
autoclave. I then grind the plants in a Moulinex coffee grinder and I weigh them.
The water used for the growing process (1,500 ml in average) is recovered and concentrated
to 50 ml for spectroscopic analysis.
Elimination of Extraneous Ca:
(1) The twice distilled water was supplied by Laboratoires Aguettant in Lyon. 3000 ml of this
water, reduced to 50 ml, do not show any Ca on the Perkin-Elmer spectrometer.
(2) The glassware is made of pure silica.
(3) The crucibles are made of platinum, with the exception of the ones used to incinerate
seeds and plants. For this work I used crucibles of pure silica.
(4) Reagents were supplied by Prolabo and were of analytical quality.
(5) From the beginning of my work, I was afraid of the Ca brought in by ambient air.
Therefore, I placed a tray with the same dimensions, filled with HCl, N/10, next to the culture
for the duration of the experiment. I recovered amounts of Ca corresponding to 2-3% of the
amounts measured during germination. As an additional precaution, I enclosed the seedling
trays in polyethylene cases and force ventilated with clean air.
Later I had airtight cases made of Altuglass which also had to be ventilated. Finally I
acquired a fully airtight phytotron (140 x 60 x 50 cm). Its case had a lid made of special
plexiglass, more permeable than glass to wavelengths below 400 mm. Lighting was provided
by a 400W Power Star Osram lamp located 45 cm above the plexiglass panel. This lamp
emits a fairly uniform spectrum extending into the ultraviolet. The light intensity at plant
level was approximately 5,000 lux. I some experiments I added a Mazda Ultraviolet 20W
lamp.
A small compressor provided air ventilation (2 liters/minute) for the phytotron. This air was
first filtered in compressed pharmaceutical cotton. Air purification was continued by
scrubbing into two flasks (2 liters) filled with HCl, N/10, one flask of concentrated NaHCO3
and one flask of twice distilled water. Following some objections, I replaced the cotton filter
with a Whatman Gamma 12 filter of 0.3 micron porosity. I did not find any significant
difference in Ca fallouts using these various protective methods.
(d) Analyses:
(1) Samples were weighed on a 0.1 mg Sartorius scale.
(2) Seed and plant incineration was made in closed silica crucibles on low Bunsen flame.
After distillation, I place the crucible in a slanted electric furnace heated to 800 C. Some
objections were raised about this temperature. However, my own experiments and other
experiments performed at Laboratoires Techniques du Centre Technique du Papier in
Grenoble, showed no appreciable differences for temperatures of 550 C, 600 C, 800 C, 1050
C.
(3) Silica was recovered from the solution following the Treadwell method. The precipitate
incinerated in a platinum crucible was weighed and diluted in 5 ml of concentrated HF. After
vaporization the SiO2 amount was obtained by weight difference.
(4) The determination of Ca (and its separation from Mg) was performed by Prof Charlots
method, as described in his Traite de Chimie Analytique Minerale.
(5) The determination of K was performed by flame spectrometry on a Perkin-Elmer
instrument at Laboratoires du Centre du Papier in Grenoble.
(6) All data were expressed in milligrams per unit of air-dried seeds or plants.
(7) Some result data was cross-checked by atomic absorption spectrometry at Laboratoires du
Centre Technique du Papier in Grenoble. Generally the values obtained with this method
were close to my results, although I noted discrepancies as great as 30%. Nevertheless,
percentages of increase in Ca between seeds and plants were similar to those I had obtained.
Additional checks were performed by neutronic activation at Centre de Recherches
Nucleaires in Zurich. Lesser discrepancies were noted, but percentages of increase in Ca were
equal to mine.
Results:
(1) All data the least bit suspect of Ca contamination from the air was deleted from the table.
Consequently, I only mentioned the data obtained from experiments in the phytotron and in
the Altuglas, polyethylene and Vitrex cases.
(2) As expected plant weights were greater than seed weights (photosynthesis) but in an
irregular fashion. There were two exceptions: item 345, phytotron, in total darkness, and item
353, Altuglass supplied with air without CO2 (consequently there was no photosynthesis in
either case).
(3) Ashes increased. However, item 329, phytotron, was an exception. Ashes decreased for
no obvious reasons. In seeds, P was included in organic compounds (phytins) which
disappeared during incineration. In plants we found P as a non-volatile Ca-phosphate. The
other source of weight increase of the ashes, was the formation of Ca. Probably from C?, i.e.,
2C + O>> Ca or 2 x 12 = 16 = 40). It should be noted that the increase in ashes is not
proportional to the increase in Ca.
(4) Mg remained identically the same. SiO
2
varied slightly in either direction.
(5) Ca showed a 52-292% increase. Here was one exception for item 342, phytotron,
additional lighting with an UV lamp and addition of CO
2
in the air supply, for which the
increase in Ca was 556%. This result was checked by spectrography and neutronic activation.
I could not duplicate this result under identical conditions (item 345). This test showed only
an 88% increase. There was an additional exception for item 264, no Co2 and no UV. There
was certainly a mistake, but I could not locate it. I mention these two experiments as I want to
be absolutely candid.
(6) Spectrographic analyses of the water from the culture at the end of the growth period
showed an average Ca content of 0.015 mg per plant. Normally I should have added this
amount to the Ca measured in the plants. I did not do it, because a water analysis was not
performed for each batch.
(7) K contents in the plants and in the seeds were different. The average variation was of
10%.
(f) Dead Control:
Tests on dead controls are fairly difficult as there are scores of methods to kill a seed. In
every case 24 hours at 100 C is deadly. 24 hours at 88 C seems to be marginal, as shown by
successive tests at temperatures progressively approaching 88 C. After germinating the
seeds for one month, there was no sign of life. Ca and SiO2 were the same as in the fresh
seeds.
I tried to kill the seeds with formaldehyde as an alternate method. Eight days immersion in
formaldehyde were required to prevent any germination. There again, Ca and SiO
2
were the
same as in the living seeds. I pursued the tests with gaseous formaldehyde. After a 7-day
treatment with the gas, I began cultivation. After 30 days there was still no germination. The
Warburg test was negative. However, the test with triphenyl-tetrazolium-bromide was not
100% negative. Therefore, a trace of life remained. Ca had increased by 24%, silica was
unchanged and ashes had increased by 24.4%.
Finally, I tried a fourth and more drastic procedure. I ground the seeds. I wetted the grounds
and left them in a calibrating glass for 28 days. The ashes had increased by 25%, SiO2 was
unchanged, and Ca had increased by 12%.
This test was repeated under identical conditions. It resulted in a 17% diminution for the
ashes, in no change for SiO
2
, and in a 23.5% increase for Ca.
To me, these tests do not look conclusive.
(g) Reproducibility:
I entertained great hopes for better reproducibility from air-tight lids and from the
purification of the air supply after obtaining ill-assorted results over the first years of my
study. This hope was only partially realized.
The most scattered results were obtained with the phytotron, though it provided constant
temperature and relative humidity, and purified air supply.
Item 326b: 111%
Item 329: 52%
Item 358: 64%
Item 360b: 204%
These results are indeed disappointing, but I cannot estimate the effect of the parameters
influencing the growing process besides those which I could control.
On the other hand I could correlate the results of the three other groups:
(a) Altuglass:
Item 326a: 257%
Item 351: 271%
Item 343: 260%
(b) Vitrex:
Item 254: 115%
Item 260: 106%
Item 274: 170%
Item 271: 97%
(c) Cultures with no photosynthesis:
Item 315: 54%
Item 345: 92%
Item 553: 84%
Therefore, the results were reproducible under some conditions.
These results appear to show the influence of light. The Altuglass, more permeable to light,
gives higher results than the Vitrex under solar exposure. Another corroboration can be seen
in tests 360a and 360b performed simultaneously:
(a) additional UV; increase in Ca: 286%
(b) no additional UV; increase in Ca: 204%
Conclusion:
(1) There is always an increase in Ca during the germination of oats in twice distilled water.
(2) It is likely that this increase comes from carbon after the pattern: 2C + O >> Ca.
It seems also likely that this process is produced in two phases: the first being supplied by the
reserves in the seed, the second by photosynthesis.
(3) Light seems to have an important influence, in particular wavelengths below 400 nm.
(4) Beyond controllable growing conditions one must probably accept other influences, yet
unknown to me.
(5) It is regrettable that my means (laboratory, time and age) prevented me from performing a
series of experiments instead of a single exploratory experiment. It would have been possible
to analyze the data mathematically. Certain discrepancies could have been explained, such as
the influence of the location of the planets during germination, a subject being researched by
several universities.
Grasse, September 1979
TABLE 4
(5) Comments on a Study by Zundel on the Increase of Calcium in Oats During
Germination in Twice Distilled Water ~
The point of paramount importance in this study, issued during the summer of 1979, is the
fact that each one of over 60 experiments shows an increase in calcium in oats, germinated in
an environment devoid of calcium. This increase varies between 52 and 292% according to
Zundel, and is always of an order of magnitude sufficient to rule out statistical errors.
This test is a summary. It is very short and can be quickly read by all. It reports data for only
19 experiments, including one on wheat, which I will discard. It is one of a kind and I do not
have enough precise information from research to establish valid comparisons, It would be
tiresome to review the separate results for all 60 experiments.
It is obvious that this text shows a long experience with chemical analysis on the part of the
author. Furthermore, his high scientific integrity makes him mention experiments giving
unequal results. This is really the value of this impartial study: it is not the result of an
arbitrary data selection. The text opens the way to a wide discussion because it presents the
research in all its complexity.
The author does not orient his research to obtain a reproducibility at all costs. He wants
essentially to vary the operating conditions. In spite of this, the increase in Ca is always large.
But what is the source of these variations in amplitude? One must look more closely at the
factors which differentiate the experiments.
It is seen that the increase in calcium is significantly smaller when carbon dioxide is
eliminated, inhibiting the photosynthesis metabolism. However, too few experiments without
or with an excess of CO
2
were performed to warrant definitive conclusions. The addition of
CO
2
is very difficult to control. Small amounts must be continuously injected. Nevertheless,
various other parameters allow one to see the importance of the photosynthesis metabolism.
Lets compare the dry weights for the seeds and for the plants. The photosynthesis cause the
synthesis of various carbohydrates (glicids, parotids, lipids) which together with the CO
2

derived from the air, produce cellulosis, starch, etc. This results in an increase of dry matter
in the plant. If no increase is observed (as is the case for items 346 and 353), it must be
inferred that the pant lived only on its reserves in carbohydrates, which were promptly
exhausted. Experiment No. 345 (darkness) had to be interrupted after 10 days and experiment
No. 353 (no CO
2
) after 16 days because the plants wilted. Due to the abridged growth, the
increase in Ca was less than 100% in both cases.
The photosynthesis metabolism is affected by the light spectrum which penetrates inside the
transparent chamber housing the culture. Glass is not the best material. It is known for
filtering some wavelengths in the ultraviolet. The production of Ca is increased if a special
UV light is placed inside the chamber (experiments 341 and 361a). On the other hand, results
for no. 347 remain unexplained. This confirms once more that a single experiment cannot be
relied on in all its details. Did anything escape our attention? Zundel acknowledges this point
when he writes: "besides controllable factors, there are other effects which escape me".
Anomalies of many different origins can happen. This is the case for wheat, for which the dry
content decreases in the plant though the amount of ashes increases. The same happens in
experiments No. 346 and 353. Sometimes the differences may be due to an oversight; some
material sticks to the bottom of the crucible, for example, and it is only detected during the
next experiment.
Some increases in Ca may appear abnormal (experiments No. 264 and 341) which does not
necessarily mean that there is an error in the analysis. Regarding No. 341, Zundel comments
on this aberrant increase, "as I want to be absolutely candid". He cold not determine the cause
of the aberration. The data obtained by Zundelin his own chemical analysis was confirmed by
compatible results obtained in following two different methods, atomic absorption
spectrometry and neutronic activation. His shows that it was not an error of analysis, which is
always possible when checks are not made by alternate means. Was the analyzed sample
abnormally rich in Ca? Why? It is not possible to answer this question. Was it due to an
accidental contamination during the handling of the sample? This is not proven. However, I
think that such data should only be accepted with reservation.
In these two experiments it looks obvious to me that all this calcium could not come only
from a transmutation of K (not measured in these two cases to my knowledge). On my side I
have data on several hundred analyses showing that in one oat seed there is not enough K to
account for such a weight increase of Ca. Could it come from Mg? It looks unlikely, judging
from past research. From silicium? I do not think so because of various experimental reasons.
Zundel thought of another cause (2 C nuclei rotating around an O nucleus?). I believe that no
experimental research was ever done along this speculative hypothesis. This shows, once
again, that one experiment or even two do not warrant conclusions, even when the
experimenter is highly qualified. These 616% and 556% increases in Ca remain an enigma.
There could be some cosmic influences yet undetected. Russian Prof Dubrov of the Research
Institute of the Globe, Moscow, mentioned in one of his books a large variation of Ca in
synchronism with a large geomagnetic field variation. The geomagnetic field itself varies
with solar proton showers. Such causes are diverse, complex, direct or indirect and above,
little studied.
Zundel was intrigued by the 556% increase in Ca, which corresponded to additional CO
2
and
UV light (Ref.341). Is this why he mentioned having duplicated the conditions (Ref. 347) ---
except perhaps the cosmic conditions? He only obtained 88% of increase in Ca. According to
him, "there is certainly a mistake" in one or both of the experiments. No conclusion can be
drawn; in any case, this example raises a wealth of questions. The importance of the filtering
of the light spectrum by various materials should be noted. Altuglas would appear to be more
efficient than Plexiglass.
Zundels study presents many enlightening aspects and this is why I take the opportunity to
comment on it. A commentary always embodies a personal point of view. It is subjective but
necessary, I think. Zundel made sure he presented a totally objective work. It was only right, I
think, that I showed the reader the lesson to be derived from it, to facilitate the thinking
process and to aid future experimenters attempting to duplicate the experiments. These
experiments showed a generalized increase in Ca, slightly larger than 100%, after a few
weeks cultivation in extra-pure water of approximate 5.7 0.1 pH (in my research). Zundel
does not state the pH of the water he used, but I know that it was approximately equal to this
value.
Note: Zundels table shows only the variations of Ca. All these data have been checked by
alternate methods and they all point to the same conclusion. Without quoting data in absolute
value, Zundel states that average K variations between plants and seeds can reach10%. In
fact, he had too few data, too widely scattered, to attribute a significant value to this figure
from the mathematical point of view. For K I have the data of many other experiments. The
uncertain mature of statistics should be kept in mind; after all, statistics measure only
"probabilities". Too often one tends to forget it. Statistical computations varied in time and
space. Today Gauss curves are little used. In France the fashionable method is Fishers. This
method introduces the very arbitrary "Students-t". For it, Prof Baranger had chosen a value
of 1; I chose a value of 5. This means that I discounted all variations smaller than 5%, as
Baranger accepted variations greater than 1%. In Russia the Kolmogorov-Smirnovs tests are
used: in other countries it may be the Kuiper-Stephens method, etc.
(1) About the Dead Control ~
An objection was that biological transmutation should not be observed in seeds which had
been killed in dead controls. In fact, significant, though small, variations were observed very
often in the mass of several elements when dead seeds were placed in water just like the
seeds to be germinated. Therefore, some transmutation could not be ascribed to biological
effects and some people were convinced there were errors in the test procedure.
Zundel also observed the same thing and he mentions the subject in his text. However, one
observation directed him to a possible explanation of the phenomenon: it was noted that dead
seeds laid in water for several weeks produced a cheesy small. Consequently, ferments,
yeasts, or micro-fungi had developed on the dead material. The transmutation observed,
leading to an increase in calcium, might be attributed to the action of this microflora. This
had to be verified.
For this reason, an antibiotic and fungicidal product, kanamycin, was added in a ratio of
approximately 10
-3
mg/liter. This concentration was recommended by Montuelle and Ochin
in 1967 to prevent the formation of mold on germinating seeds. The presence of mold
introduces an uncertainty. Should the result be ascribed to the action of seeds or to the action
of the mold? Tests were made on the European type of oats, Peniarth. In the USA, fungicidal
tests were performed on the local type Montezuma. The fungicide Ceresa was used. All Ca
increase in the dead controls disappeared.
(2) Cosmic Effects ~
Zundel mentions "unknown parameters" to explain quantitative variations. In a figure in my
book of 1975, I stated that I started the germination process at the new moon and that I
harvested 6 weeks later at the full moon. I did this in order to operate (hopefully) under
comparable cosmic conditions for each experiment though I could not establish this point in
any significant manner. At least for certain plants, the action of the moon is well known
among farmers and gardeners. However, it was not clear for oats. The biological
transmutation seemed to depend on other causes which I did not have the time to isolate. The
action of the moon on tides is well known, but its effect on oat seemed to be variable.
A book published by Robert Frederick around 1980, LInfluence de la Lune sur les Culture
states that oat is an exception, that it might be more sensitive to some cosmic rays. However,
it does not appear that the author tried to determine which ones. One must also consider solar
action, which shows its effects on high equinoxial tides. The effect of solar proton showers
was studied in particular by Prof G. Piccardi of the Institute of Physics and Chemistry of
Florence, Italy. In Russia this effect was studied by Prof Dubrov of the Globe Geophysical
Institute of Moscow, etc. The research should be pursued for specific vegetal species and it
should not be limited to solar effects. This research should be placed in the framework of
biorhythms which more and more, are shown to have an important effect on all earthly life.
This point is still ignored by some technocrats who play with time as they see fit while giving
fallacious arguments. However, this is not the place to prove this point.
FIGURE 8 ~ Variations of Ca after Dubrov
(6) Comments on Some Experiments ~
I will not go into the details of all the experiments performed; this would lead to tiresome
repetitions. I would like to draw some lessons from the statistical data collected on tens of
thousands of oats after hundreds of analyses of oats after hundreds of analyses on oat and oat
seedlings. The information mentioned below is important, because it constitutes a base of
preset references to verify if an analysis has been properly made. This is a point of the utmost
importance for all researchers in order to avoid hasty and erroneous conclusions, some of
which I noted in the research by students in national schools of agriculture or in public high
schools which train superior technicians for agriculture. I noted the same trend among
students as well as professors in schools of sciences in universities. I also saw so many
engineers, considering themselves as specialists or experienced professionals, commit serious
errors. These errors looked shocking to me as these people were in known territory, but
apparently it was unknown, because they were prejudiced by previous experience.
I believe it is important that each set of seeds in a good stat of health and of approximately
the same size. Each set should be prepared by the same operator. Unfortunately, in some
schools several students prepare sets of seeds for the research which to be the subject of a
dissertation or a thesis. Under these conditions, there are unacceptable differences between
tests. Sometimes I noted weight variations reaching 20% and more, which biased the results.
Each set should be weighted to 1/10 mg for control, as long as each set does not contain more
than a few hundred seeds. Weighing should be done to the milligram when a few thousand
seeds. The statistical average is then valid, barring bad luck. It is advisable to always avoid
seeds of a common grade and to use selected seeds. Even if they first underwent mechanical
selection. One must do this for several reasons:
(a) There are large differences between old species of black oats (some are still sown today,
such as the Noire de Prieure for example) and a modern hybrid light seed. The differences
can be as great as 100%. Often a species degenerates in less than 10 years. This was the case
in the past for the black winter oats that we used. These seeds each weighted 44 mg in
average. For the light Nuprime species hundreds of seeds showed an average individual
weight of about 21-25 mg (depending on the origin).
(b) Black oats are winter grains. They grow well only if they are sown in the fall and only if
they have spent the winter in the ground. The cold weather effect is absolutely necessary for a
good start in the spring. It is called wintering. This phase in the enzymatic modification of
molecular structures under the action of cold is seen as an absolute necessity, but the
wintering is not yet well understood. Consequently, one should not forget to expose the seeds
to artificial cold for several weeks when cultivating them in a laboratory. Too often,
physicists neglect this step. On the other hand, spring oats and most light oats do not require
wintering. Light oats can germinate at any time. Some precautions must be taken, such as
varying the daily light exposure. There may be other cosmic effects, still unknown and little
studied. Studies on this subject were made in Russia, Italy and Belgium. In France this
research was mainly done by Prof Faussurier, Director of the Physics Laboratory at Faculte
Catholique of Lyon. He used chromatographic techniques on metallic salt-impregnated paper
in order to correlate color changes in the paper with cosmic phenomena which had been
recorded by various observatories. There are still other effects, still unknown, which produce
barely significant variations.
(c) In light all season oats, I stopped the research on the Panche de Roye species for two
reasons: in this species the glume (also commonly called chaff) is well developed. It is
necessary to eliminate it to avoid complicating the research after germination. Some
agronomists maintain that the glume must be left because it participates in the germinating
process. In my research, its effect on mineral balances and germination power always looked
negligible.
In this variety there are two seeds in one envelope. Nine times out of ten, one is significantly
smaller than the other. It is then necessary to open the glume to extract the larger seed, which
complicates the operation. From the beginning this is why I concentrated my research on so-
called naked or glumeless species, such as Nuprime which is cultivated in France and other
countries mainly to make rolled oats. Later I used Flamingskone and Peniarth because I
observed that Nuprime degenerated and was giving only 70% germination. One should use
seeds sized and selected by a special section of INRA and with a minimum guaranteed ratio
of 95%.
As a general rule, it is preferable to express analytical data in per unit values --- one seed, one
plant. For comparative purposes one can indeed use equal weights and use the milligram or
the gram as the unit of measure. However, when a seed does not germinate, germinates
poorly or becomes moldy, the whole data for the seed is void. Therefore, the unit chosen
should be the seed, except in experiments involving thousands of seeds. If one seed in a set of
100 does not germinate, the uncertainty is of 1%. Germinating ratios for the best seeds can
only be guaranteed to 95%, leaving an excessive uncertainty of 5%. This is why I always
insisted that sets prepared for cultivation always include several hundred seeds. How
conceited on the part of researchers in Europe and America to be satisfied with sets of 20 or
30, sometimes less. In one experiment, for example, 6 seeds were left at the bottom of a test
tube where they poisoned each other with the gases from their metabolism, causing a
defective synthesis of growth hormones, etc. If a single seed out of 6 does not grow properly,
a 16% uncertainty ensues. This is unacceptable. Unfortunately, these concepts of vegetal
physiology are too often ignored by many physicists who only reason in the mathematical
abstract. Many chemists specialized in inorganic analysis do not know biochemistry.
Personally, I always used sets of at least 50 seeds and several sets in parallel. Zundel often
germinated batches of about 145 seeds each. He analyzed each set separately. he had two
trays in operation for a total of approximately 300 seeds.
To avoid an uncertainty of up to 5% due to deficient seeds, it seems advisable to sue
pregerminated seeds. To this effect, a number of seeds significantly higher than the number to
be cultivated, is germinated. The seeds are placed between two sheets of filter paper of the
so-called ashless quality. The seeds should not touch each other. The paper is soaked with
twice distilled water continually; it is sprayed twice a day. Seeds germinate. After 4 days, the
shoot (radicles, etc.) is a few millimeters long. Seedlings, which have germinated normally
and are of comparable lengths, are then selected. One is reasonably sure to deal with
seedlings of equal vigor. Each seedling is carefully transplanted in a seedling tray. An equal
number of seedlings, as similar as possible, are selected, dried and analyzed for their
respective contents in Ca, K, Mg, etc. An observation of the results shows that there s no
appreciable difference in the weights of these minerals between fresh seeds and
pregerminated seedlings. The synthesis of new minerals starts only after 5 or 6 days. It is
therefore necessary not to overextend the pregermination period. After 15 days, for example,
the difference in Ca is significant. This appears clearly in the curves we traced for calcium.
Other cations and anions have also changed at the end of this period.
Hundreds of experiments showed that the relative contents of the major minerals in the seeds
varies from one variety to the next. This is why some varieties are preferred when looking for
specific elements. In the same species, variations may exceed 20% according to the variety.
However, the composition spectrum is a characteristic of the species. In the same variety,
relative variations between elements can reach approximately 5%. This is due to differences
in the cultivated terrain, in soil composition, in the climate, in average seasonal temperature,
in insulation, moisture, etc. This constant value of no more than 15% allows one to detect
significant errors in the analyses. For example, with Nuprime seeds, I found the average seed
weights of 22 mg ( 10%) according to the origin of the batch. The average Ca content was
about 0.025 mg, or about 1/1000th of weight of the seed. With Peniarth seeds, the average Ca
content per seed was 0.029 mg for an average seed weight of 28 mg, 1 mg. These
measurements were made on thousands of seeds from the same crop. Some years I happened
to note that the average Ca content for the same variety was lower by a few points than the
1/1000th of the weight of the fresh seed in Ca. This is due to climactic conditions during the
year, or to the area of origin of the crops, or to intangible cosmic factors. This is of little
importance.
On the contrary, if data differ by 15%, we can state that there was an error in the analysis,
in calibration or in the preparation of the samples for the analysis, I have seen variations
greater than 10%, which did not seem to worry the researcher.
Often it is interesting to take into account the normal K content and to compute the K/Ca
ratio in the seed and in the seedling. For complementary information one may also look at
K/Mg and Mg/Ca. This can lead to the detection of an error. In oats K/Ca is found to be close
to 4.8 0.5 with minor variations according to the species. This shows that the calibration
probably is correct. However, comparisons with other analyses are indispensable, because
errors in acid dilution may have occurred prior to injection into the analyzer. The K/Ca ration
is not an absolute criterion of the validity of an analysis, but it often gives a good clue.
To illustrate this point: in an engineering school a student found an average Ca weight of
0.021 mg and an average K content of 0.078 mg per seed on 9 batches of Nuprime oats. This
gave K/Ca of 3.72, which was a little too low. Elsewhere, several analyses of Peniarth seeds
coming from the same stock gave average values respectively of 0.0273 mg for Ca and
0.1130 for K, or K/Ca = 4.1. This showed that the analyses of K and Ca were only marginally
acceptable and that they had to be cross-checked, as ratios were found to vary with the
species.
In Switzerland in 1974 a study made at a government laboratory by means of neutronic
activation gave the following respective results for each of the 5 analyses: K/Ca= 4.5, 4.7,
4.6, 5.2 and 5.0, or an average of 4.8. It is a good average. However, the batches included
only 6 seeds each and the accuracy of the analysis was only of 4%. The laboratory then made
a correction for the seeds which had been poorly germinated. Computations were made on
the base of 28.32 instead of 30. After correction the experiment showed an increase in Ca of
138%. In a French agricultural engineering school in 1973, the analysis of 9 batches of 30
seeds each (a slightly low number) of Nuprime oats showed average K and Ca of respectively
3.42 and 0.61 mg per seed, or a K/Ca ratio of 5.6. This was slightly too high a figure, perhaps
because of an excessive K (calibrating error?) but in my judgment certainly because of an
underestimation of Ca, due to an inappropriate measuring procedure for Ca. The
measurements were made with a flame spectrometer. For divalent elements there is a risk that
the number of atoms with no peripheral electrons is too small to yield reliable measurements.
In a West German university, a study made by a student on Peniarth oats gave a Ca content
of 29.5 micrograms, a figure which seems too high for seeds with an average unit weight of
21.36 mg. It is almost certain that an error was made on the K content, given as 118.36
micrograms. This leads to a K/Ca ratio of 4.0, which is too low, but shows that errors on K
and Ca can compensate each other. Therefore, it is necessary to do several cross-checks. I
will not mention any figures for a study made in a university in the USA, because the results
are certainly wrong. Though one might have reservations on x-ray fluorescence measuring
techniques with K and Ca, this time the error came from a mistake in the growing procedure.
Cultivation was made under artificial lighting with a lamp giving a completely inappropriate
spectrum. This resulted in deficient photosynthesis.
A set of studies on 10 batches of Peniarth oats coming from the same stock gave 3.9 for
K/Ca. Several months later 8 batches from the same stock led also to K/Ca = 3.9, showing
first that there had been no drift in the composition and second that the concentrations were a
little too low for this species. Usually the average figure gravitates around 4.8 10%. An
error could have happened either in the growing procedure or in the analysis. Once again we
see that errors compensate for each other, which makes cross-checks necessary.
An easy cross-check of the data in a study is provided by the seedlings dry weight. It must
be greater than the seeds dry weight because with good growth, there is production of
carbohydrates (starch, cellulose and other glucids, lipids and parotids) due to seedling
growth. This is due to the photosynthesis metabolism. The weight increase was observed and
measured as early as the 17th century. Nevertheless, I noted that some French and some
foreign researchers mentioned figures showing no increase in the weight of dry material.
Some even showed a decrease. This points to an error in the growing procedure. This did not
even catch the attention of these researchers. I will come back later to the importance of good
photosynthesis. I would like to say here that only dry weights can be validly considered.
Long discourse on the necessity of stabilizing the weights according to the humidity are
without merit, because moisture in the laboratory varies with the season, etc., and
comparisons between successive experiments are not valid. Dessication standards should be
set.
Even the weight of ashes is found to be higher for seedlings than it is for seeds in most cases;
this may be attributed to methods of analysis inappropriate for these types of studies. For
example, in chemical analyses of ashes, losses of phosphorus and sulfur, among others,
during firing are often forgotten. Some compounds become volatile at fairly low
temperatures, sometimes as low as 200 C, which is insufficient to obtain good ashes. One
forgets also that calcium sulfates and phosphates in some cases are insoluble in the acid used
and they may be formed during seedling growth. In these cases there is an excess of ashes,
but the amount of calcium is underestimated by the quantity which remains insoluble. This
shows that many chemists do not know their trade. If hydrochloric acid, often used, does not
give satisfaction, even if it has been heated, then other acids, such as sullfo-nitro-perhydric
acid or hydroperchloric acid should be used for the tests. However, we should not forget that
these acids are potentially explosive and they are difficult to handle. Usually hydrochloric
acid will do, but it is a good precaution to test the potential margin of error to see if it is
acceptable. Physical analytical techniques applied to dried, instead of incinerated, powders
can be used to circumvent these difficulties. However, with some techniques involving the
use of physics instruments, solution is still part of the procedure and the dissolving power
should be taken into consideration. No such problem occurs with spectrometers when the
powder is sparked.
Some of the figures mentioned in various studies are so obviously wrong! Such is the case in
a study made in a German university on 192 Flamingskrone oat seeds and 190 seedlings.
After 49 days of growth the following data was reported:
Average dry weight of each seed: 21.77 mg, and
Average dry weight of each seedling: 32.67 mg.
Data reproduced without comments.
There is certainly an error. Furthermore, the contents mentioned for Ca, mg and K are
questionable. All these figures are smaller than corresponding figures for the seeds, though
the total weight increased. The Mg/Ca ration is completely abnormal. Other cross-checks
show that the figure for Mg is much too low, and that the figure for Ca is too high. Evidently
this student did not master the analytical technique he was using. In an American university
we saw similar results, although the supervising professor did not make any comments. Every
result should be cross-checked.
In another university department the following values were quoted in micrograms, per
Peniarth seed:
K = 11.4; Mg = 33.7; Ca = 29.5, which gives:
K/Ca = 4.0; K/Mg = 3.5; Mg/Ca = 1.1.
K/Ca is almost normal. This might lead one to believe that K and Ca were fairly accurately
measured. However, if:
K/Ca = 4 and K/Mg = 3.5, it is impossible to have Mg/Ca = 1.1
A French researcher told me that he found the following relations:
K = 0.113; Mg = -.030; Ca = 0.027
K/Ca = 4.1 (about normal); K/Mg = 3.6, and Mg/Ca = 1.1.
These values are very close to those quoted previously and show an error of the same order of
magnitude in Mg.
In official tables for an unidentified species and following analyses by purely chemical
means, K/Ca is given as 7.03, which is too high. This shows that the value measured for Ca
was too low, because Mg/Ca is given as 2.5. If Ca is too low, then Mg is also too low, as the
K/Mg is given as equal to 3. At the minimum the chemical analysis of Ca and Mg should be
checked. It is likely that Ca and Mg were not properly separated (probably with oxalate?).
This would explain the errors in the three reports mentioned.
Experiments correctly performed show that K + Mg + Ca + Na is approximately constant for
a given species and no additional fertilizing elements are brought in. Whatever the species,
one can favor any cation by selection. Na varies a great deal in relative value (often 50-60%),
but we neglected it because it is very small in absolute value in vegetals. Therefore, it is
permissible to only measure and compare K + Mg +Ca. Many experiments showed that Mg
does not vary significantly in oats. For oats it is therefore sufficient to compare only the
values of K + Ca to detect gross errors in tests or analyses. I also neglect Si, which shows
small variations in relative value. However, these variations are often interesting to study, as
observed by Vauquelin in 1799. Please refer to my book of 1975.
By rounding off the numbers in the previous example, one obtains K + Ca = 0.14 mg in the
seeds as in the seedlings. This leads one to infer that the analyses are correct in both cases
(there is a small error for Mg). On the other hand, I noted an error in a study made in a
foreign university in which K + Ca was given as 0.154 mg for seeds and only 0.145 mg for
seedlings. In this test there was less Mg in the seedlings as well, and the researcher did not
notice that all the elements were in smaller quantities, although the dry weight had increased
by approximately 50%. With such comments one can appreciate the validity of experiments.
If Mg is also measured, we will note again that the three ratios, K/Ca, K/Mg and Mg/Ca help
to determine which cation was in error. I shall mention again that I gave the following figures
for the Flamingskrone variety:
Seed: 0.1130 K + 0.0273 Ca = 0.1403 Total
Seedling: 0.0799 K + 0.0590 Ca = 0.1389 Total
By rounding off to the third decimal:
In the seed the total is 0.140
In the seedling the total is 0.139,
which is a close match. We can refer to numerous and various cross-check performed on tens
of thousands of seeds of various species. However, in seedlings, the dispersion of the
measurement is often considerable due to differences in growing procedures: light spectrum
through various materials, etc. In any case K + Ca should remain nearly the same in the seed
and in the seedling. If not, one should try to determine the cause of the error, if possible.
(7) Reservations on Some Analytical Techniques ~
Several times I pointed out that a physical analysis technique, requiring the most modern and
sophisticated instrumentation, could not always be accepted without reservations. One must
always cross-check the results by completely different techniques. For example, I mentioned
the case of an error due to a wrong dilution during an analysis by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry. For comparative purposes, the gas pressure fed from a liquid acetylene
supply, the gas flow to the Bunsen burner, etc., should be recorded. So should the lanthanum
concentration in the buffer solution, which prevents interferences by some unwanted
elements. I also pointed to some sources of error in electronic transducers connected to a
computer. Each class of instruments has limits. I do not question how the figures were
obtained, however they are not always reliable.
(8) One Example With X-Ray Fluorescence ~
There are crazes, fashions and also habits peculiar to the laboratory or to the operator. In
Figure 9, I show an example of a curve obtained by x-ray fluorescence from dry ground oats
in the nuclear physics laboratory of an American university. It was taken from recording
made in 1976 of the simultaneous measurements of K and Ca. The continuous curve
corresponds to the actual measurement. It seems that, starting with an atomic mass of 41, the
K peak has a steeper slope. Studies have shown that this is due to the Ca curve which
contributes to the sharp rise in the K curve. The K peak is not a line. It spreads widely and
masks the curve for Ca. Computation factors fed into the computer are somewhat arbitrary,
because they may vary according to the material analyzed. For this reason the final result may
be right or wrong. A cross-check by a different technique is necessary, no matter how
carefully the calibration was performed (as the zero adjustment of a pH meter, in the case of a
relatively simple instrument). The values for the K peak and for the Ca peak (dotted line) are
good. A similar analysis was performed after the germination of the seeds. For the species
tested, it showed an increase in Ca of 125% corresponding to an equivalent decrease in K,
which confirmed the correlation between the two elements.
FIGURE 9 ~ Analysis of K and Ca by X-Ray Fluorescence
Additional Information On Physical Phytochemistry During Germination ~
Too many physics specialists are tempted to simplify vegetal biology processes and they
select germination procedures in which normal reactions cannot develop. This results in
distorted data. I do not intend to give a detailed study of this topic, but I want to describe a
few steps in the preliminary study. This study is essential if valid experiments are to be
achieved.
(1) Summary of the Germinating Phases of Grain Seeds ~
When the seed is exposed to a temperature of 15-20 C and to the proper moisture (close to
100%), the embryo produces which migrate toward an external layer of the seed, located
under the tegument and made of aleurone cells. There the hormones cause the formation of
various types of hydrolytic enzymes which circulate between the cells in the core of the seed
(endosperm). These cells constitute the reserves of the seed. The enzymes destroy the walls
of the cells and transform starch and proteins. Under the action of diastase, starch is
transformed into various sugars.
An enzyme cannot act if the cell structures constitute an impermeable barrier and prevent the
enzyme from reaching the substances it is supposed to transform. This is why some enzymes
must first transform the walls of the grains of starch. There is, therefore, a programmed
sequence of enzymatic actions. The product of a reaction with an enzyme constitutes the
substrate for the next reaction, which includes a spatial modification of the molecular
structure. Successive enzymes are prepared and they become available at the right time, so
that the effective section of interaction with cosmic neutrinos is continuously changing.
In the fresh seed, the external envelope, or tegument, provides a mechanical protection for the
endosperm, which constitutes the reserve of food. The embryo is located at one end, and is
also protected by the tegument, from which the roots and leaves will sprout. As early as the
second day, the embryo synthesizes a growth hormone, gibberellin. This can only be done in
the presence of water and under favorable temperature conditions. It acts as some sort of a
messenger for RNA which reaches the aleurone layer in a few days (1-2 days). There it
produces the synthesis of hydrolytic enzymes, which will transform the structure of the grains
of reserve proteins. These proteins include avenin (in oats) in addition to structural proteins,
the glutelins. The endosperm cell walls are mainly constituted of beta-glucane chains, which
are glucose polymers, close to cellulose, linked by very short peptid chains.
One of the effects of seedling growth is the decomposition of these various constituent
elements into small molecules. A few hours after the seed is moistened, the peptid links
between the beta-glucane elements are broken by an enzyme, carboxypeptidase. The
degrading process develops step by step. A whole series of enzymes act specifically on the
internal links as soon as they are in contact with the products decomposed by the previous
enzyme, and they produce various sugars. During that time, other still relatively unknown
enzymes decompose the pentosanes, breaking the walls of the starch grains. Once the cellular
walls are broken, other proteins interact with starch, which is converted into glucose. During
this time, the gibberellin migrates to the opposite end of the seed (the distal area) over a
period of 10 days, transforming almost all the aleurone cells at the back of the seed. By that
time almost all of the starch has been structurally transformed. The transformations are by
then macroscopically significant, to the point of making variations in the seed chemical
composition measurable. We published curves showing the abrupt changes which happens
after about 10 days of germination.
After two days, the tip of the embryo starts to emerge from the tegument. On the average, the
radicle length is 2-3 cm after 4 days. The embryo has eaten close to one-half of the starch by
this time. After 8 days, the radicle has 608 offshoots and almost all the starch has
disappeared. Enzyme activity is then fully accelerating and analyses show very significant
biological transmutations. It is at this time that the photosynthesis contributes its effects as
leaves are already well developed. This results in a sharp rise in the calcium content shown in
our curves around 8-10 days. Analyses made at short time intervals show that seed
compounds are not appreciably modified until the fourth day. For the purpose of comparing
Ca contents, after 28 days for example, it is legitimate to select the seeds which sprout well
after 4 days of pregermination. It is understood that no Ca should be brought from the outside
during that time.
FIGURE 10 ~ Grains of Cereal in Germination
(2) Average Curve of the Increase in Calcium of Oats After Germination ~
To my knowledge, about 60 experiments were performed over the last 10 years on the
germination of oats to study the increase in calcium in hydroponic cultures. This was done
over a period of several weeks without external addition of Ca.
These experiments required over 400 analyses by different physical or chemical techniques.
These analyses were made on tens of thousands of seeds or seedlings. The increase in Ca is
measured by comparison after analyses of a seedling and of a seed similar to the one from
which the seedling originated. This is to say that the phenomenon was studied for a long time
and that it is firmly established.
It seems of interest together the results from approximately 40 experiments especially well
performed on light hybrid species only. Their seeds are small and generally more
homogeneous than the big black seeds produced by old varieties. Nuprime, Flamingskrone
and Peniarth varieties were primarily used in these experiments. The seeds weighed
approximately 20-30 mg according to the species and the batch. They were calibrated to 1 mg
after selection in batches of 100-300 seeds. Some analyses involved batches of more than
1000 seeds. The units retained here for comparative purposes are the seed and the seedling
grown from a seed, because they represent the minimum biologic quantum of enzymatic
action. If a seed does not germinate, the whole weight of the seed remains inactive. However,
seed weights should always be noted to allow comparisons between batches of various
origins and varieties. In the light hybrid varieties considered, the Ca content represents
approximately 1/1000th of the weight of the seed. This figure is based on tens of thousands of
seeds. A fresh seed with an average weight of 25 mg will have roughly a calcium content of
0.025 mg.
Figure 11 summarizes the data obtained after about 40 experiments. This does not mean that
each point of the curve corresponds to an average of 40 analyses (by different techniques and
on several varieties). Most experiments involve only the analysis of Ca in non-germinated
seeds, and then on the seedlings grown from similar seeds and harvested after 4, 5 or 6
weeks. Experiments, in which seedlings were sampled after 2-3 weeks, are few; the majority
of the data is related to seedlings cultivated over 4-7 week periods. However, data collected
either during a short experiment or sampled after a few weeks from a batch left under culture,
are compatible and they allow one to draw the curve in the appendix.
This does not mean necessarily that every figure found for Ca in a new experiment or a given
duration will be located on this curve. It is an average for several varieties obtained by means
of various analytical techniques. The dispersion inherent to biological batches of different
vigor should always be taken into consideration. Nevertheless, the effects of all these
elements should not cause a variation greater than 15-20% from this curve even if they are
cumulative. Hence, this curve can be used as a guide in this type of research, to detect a
major error in the procedure or in the analysis. We established it for this purpose. It is a piece
of information and it gives an indication about the magnitude of the phenomena involved in
the production of Ca under the effect of growth hormones. One should note the asymptotic
trend of the curve after 2 months of growth (these spring oats are normally harvested 4-5
months after sowing). The growth metabolism is only active during half the life of the plant.
Growth hormones (gibberellin, auxins) synthesize the enzymes for the plant anabolism during
germination. The curve shows that the Ca formation is quantitatively linked to the activity of
growth hormones until exhaustion at the point of maturity (1)
[(1) The diminishing in growth of Ca production may come from Ca saturation in the plant
which, in turn, affects the enzyme. The saturation is reached after 8 weeks with a K/Ca ratio
approximately equal 1.5. In the seeds the K/Ca ratio is approximately 4.5. The transmutation
of K into Ca stops when the two elements are about equivalent in weight. That would be at
the time of maturity, when the growth hormones effects have ended.
FIGURE 11 ~ Augmentation of Ca in Oats
However, one should not infer that the production of enzymes alone can explain the energy
balance for the transmutation which leads to the production of Ca. The enzyme production
constitutes an essential element because a seed which does not germinate, does not produce
any biological transmutation. The question of energy does not have a place here. I only
wished to present an objective document on the data obtained as reference for future research.


Chapter 4
Photosynthesis







In one of my early books I mentioned a 17th century experiment made a Flemish physician,
Jean-Baptiste Helmont, in which he planted a 5 lb willow tree in a planter containing 200 lb
of soil. The planter was covered with a lid with two holes, one for the trunk and the other for
watering the tree. The purpose of the lid was to prevent any changes in the weight of the soil
by dust from the atmosphere. After 5 years the tree was uprooted and weighed. It weighed
164 lb. However, the weight of the soil had only decreased by 2 oz. Helmont did not find any
satisfactory explanation for this observation. Photosynthesis was then unknown.
For a long time the study of the phenomenon remained sketchy. From time to time crazy
results were quoted in quasi-official documents, without attempted justification. For example,
it was stated without comment that soils were improved by bamboo trees (1969). Oureschi,
Yadar and Prakash observed that the species Bambusa Tulda gave back to the soil more
calcium than it took. Other bamboo species, such as Nechouzeana Dulloa and Oxytenanthera
Nigrociliata, "give back more magnesium" --- from Nature and Resources No. 4, p. 15
(1975), UNESCO Publications.
But it was only during the 70s that the mechanism of photosynthesis was studied more
thoroughly. It was finally understood why monocotyledons exposed to atmospheric carbon
dioxide gave compounds which differed from compounds found in dicotyledons, C4
compounds in the first case versus C3 in the second. This explained differences in behavior
and yield among various families. Some plants growing on salty soils follow the C4 cycle due
to a specific effect of Na. This is also true of many weeds. They take more carbon from the
ambient air, and therefore need less fertilizer than plants with a C3 cycle. In addition, they
produce more dry matter and consume less water. We will study the role of photosynthesis
more closely, a subject still ignored too often by many agronomists, because it was not taught
to them.
(1) Effects of Artificial Lighting in the Photosynthesis, for the Study of Transmutations
by Cereal Plants ~
Many experiments were performed in various countries at various times to study the
transmutation of particular elements during plant germination.
Usually they were performed under natural light. With the development of this research, a
problem related to the use of artificial light arose. It was used in particular for the studies on
the germination of cereal grains, especially of oat and wheat.
These grains, as well as barley and rye, are said to have long day cycles. This means that they
grow in daylight and reach their maturity shortly after the longest days in the year. Ideally
they need 13-15 hours of daylight in French latitudes, 16 hours in more northern latitudes.
For this reason, the research on transmutations, which are produced at the peak of the
enzymatic activity (strong growth of the plant) is distorted when laboratory experiments are
run outside the spring season. Transmutations are indeed observed during germination in
sunlight, at different periods in the year, but they are not quantitatively equivalent.
It became clear then that artificial lighting would be beneficial, even in spring, in a room
insufficiently exposed to daylight. It would also be useful for studies made at other periods of
the year to extend the action of sunlight. It would enable the experimenter to have an artificial
day of controllable length, so as to always operate under optimal conditions for
photosynthesis in all locations and seasons.
(a) Photosynthesis ~
We are not trying to summarize here what photosynthesis is. We are restricting this word to
mean the action of solar rays on the chlorophyll metabolism. This does not encompass the
whole of photobiology. We will not discuss more specific subdivisions such as phototropism,
which manifests itself by an orientation of the pant toward light. As a point of interest for
what follows, we will note that blue rays are most active for phototropism. Oat plants lit
laterally with blue light bend toward light. As a point of interest for what follows, we will
note that blue rays are most active for phototropism. Oat plants lit laterally with blue light
bend toward the blue light source. There is an antagonistic effect with longer wavelengths. If
the other side of the oat seedling is lit with a green or yellow-green light, the seedling grows
vertically. We will not touch either on what is called photoperiodism, or the influence of
alternating periods of light and darkness. We shall recall that the inverse reactions of
photosynthesis are produced in darkness by the plant. Photosynthesis achieves the global
effect of taking carbon dioxide from ambient air, fixing carbon in various organic compounds
(carbohydrates) and ejecting the oxygen generated from the water generated from the water
supplied to the plant. In darkness, the plant takes oxygen from ambient air and ejects carbon
dioxide. This is respiration, which only becomes important in darkness, because there is no
photosynthesis. Furthermore, we will not discriminate between the optical spectrum of
photosynthesis and the sensitivity of chlorophyll to various wavelengths of the solar
spectrum. The curves for these two phenomena are very close, but they do not coincide,
because photosynthesis includes additional reactions beyond the metabolism of chlorophyll.
It is essential to remember tat our eye and plants have much different sensitivities to various
wavelengths of the solar spectrum. It is not sunlight, as we see it, which should be used as a
criterion in looking for the artificial light source closest to sunlight. We must find out to
which parts of the solar spectrum chlorophyll and the whole plant react best. A difficulty
stems from the fact that our measuring instruments, luxmeters for example, are calibrated
from the effects on our eye. Brilliance and lighting units are defined by optical effects. It is
the eye which is the final standard of measurement. In fact, there are two completely different
aspects. This appears obvious in Figure 12a where we have drawn the curves of maximum
sensitivity to wavelengths for the eye, and for photosynthesis.
FIGURE 12 ~ Lamp Spectra
Wavelength is expressed in nanometers (nm) or billionths of a meter. This is the unit most
commonly used today, because it conforms to the metric system. It is the thousandth part of a
micrometer (or a micron). The millimicron and the nanometer are equivalent, the second
being more common in spectrometry. Some people use the angstrom unit, which does not
belong to the metric system and which for this reason is being progressively abandoned. One
anstrom is equal to 10 nanometers. People using microns will divide by 1000 the figures
quoted here in nm.
Visible light extends in principle from 400 to 700 nm. These are average limits. In fact, some
people can see down in the violet as low as 380 nm; others see up in the red as high as 760
nm (sometimes up to 800 nm). By convention, the near infrared (IR) encompasses the 750 (0r
800) to 1200 nm band. The far IR covers approximately the band up to 3000 nm. Beyond this
wavelength the action of solar radiations is negligible and its effects on photosynthesis is not
considered. The longer the wavelength, the lower the frequency associated with the wave.
The photons with the most energy correspond to high frequencies, hence to sorter
wavelengths; they are the photons in the blue, violet and ultraviolet (UV). Rays with
wavelengths shorter than 380-400 nm are rated as UV.
The solar spectrum includes UV with a minimum wavelength of 390 nm (or 288). Shorter
wavelengths are stopped by the ozone layer surrounding the earth. Life on earth is only
possible because of the filtering out of the rays of shorter wavelengths. In fact, shorter UVs
are used for their bactericidal effects. They are life destroyers (the energy of their photons is
such that they decompose living molecules).
For photosynthesis one should not look for lamps with rays shorter than 290 nm. Even in
photosynthesis no action is observed from rays with wavelengths shorter than 380 nm. In fact
in nature, in the open country, there are rays between 290 nm and 380 nm. What is their
purpose for the plants? They may act on pigments and on protovitamins, in animals as swell
as in plants. There are few, quantitatively, and their energy seems to be weak. Their study is
indeed difficult. In order to do this, one must find solid substances to make prisms transparent
to these wavelengths and opaque to others. The molecules of monochromatic substances
should not be ionized by the energy of the photons in this band. Such materials are delicate.
Therefore, we do not know what nature does with the rays in the 290-380 nm wave band,
perhaps because their study presents too many difficulties. We are noting this, but we will not
come back to it, because the present document is only related to the aspects of photosynthesis
which we can understand with the help of todays instrumentation.
In fact, it seems that photosynthesis is altered by wavelengths shorter than 380 nm when they
are of high intensity. This is the case of the 365.4 nm mercury ray. It penetrates through
quartz, but it can be stopped by glasses of various compositions. For the purpose of
photosynthesis, glass filtering UVs below 375 nm should be used in mercury discharge
fluorescent lamps (or tubes) when fluorescence is produced by the internal coating. When the
arc is produced between two electrodes in mercury vapor, the discharge tube must be made of
quartz so it does not stop the UVs, which will trigger fluorescence in the special powders
coating the inside of the light fixtures external glass surface. The glass shields the plants
from UV rays (below 375 nm), but it does not stop fluxes in the 375-400 nm wave bands
which are essential for some phases of photosynthesis. The intense 253.7 nm ray is
completely stopped by the glass and it is used for the excitation of fluorescence.
On the other hand, IR rays have weak energies. Their energy is essentially thermal. It is
sufficient that the glass remains transparent to rays up to about 1000 nm. Glass is opaque to
wavelengths in the far IR, which explains its use for the greenhouse effect. The near IR
penetrates inside, and the ground reemits a heat of a longer wavelength which cannot get out.
The radiation of red and IR rays up to 780 nm controls the opening of the stomata of the leaf,
hence its respiration and its transpiration. Beyond this point, a counter effect is started. Leaf
moisture loss ad gas loss should not become excessive. Beyond 780 nm, photon energy is
low; this is why the curve of photosynthesis intensity remains close to the horizontal axis (see
curves in Figures 12a and 12c). The thermal agitation due to red and longer wavelengths
excites electrons in the atoms of the organic material of the leaf. However, the energy is too
low to permit the extraction of the electrons which have moved to less stable orbits. Electrons
do not move from atom to atom as they would under the stronger energetic effect of blue and
shorter wavelengths. This constitutes the chemical effect of blue, violet and UV rays on the
molecules prepared by the thermal effect of red rays. It can be seen from the curves in
Figures 12a and 12c that the peak of energy is higher on the side of short wavelengths than it
is on the side of long wavelengths. By contrast intermediary wavelengths in the green and
yellow have no significant influence on photosynthesis. On the contrary, under artificial light
in an apartment, for example. Our eye is most sensitive to yellow. Consequently, lamps
designed for industrial or domestic lighting should not be used in phyto-optics. We note this
point, which is sometimes forgotten.
(b) Characteristics of Some Lamps ~
We will not list the tens of lamp types used for artificial lighting in agriculture, horticulture,
etc. They are described in many published works. We used a wide selection of lamps,
incandescent, discharge, fluorescent and mixed, because not all plants are sensitive to the
same wavelengths. This fact is well known and it is used in the design of commercial
products. Most often it is known only empirically and the related information is marred by
many errors. We evidenced this during experiments on the transmutations observed on
particular elements during the germination and the growth of cereal plants.
At the beginning of the 60s some agronomists recommended lamps of the warm white type
or sometimes warm white deluxe. I believe this is a mistake. Figure 12b shows a diagram of
the characteristic emissivity for these lamps. The rectangles show the primary characteristic
rays of excitation of the fluorescence. The continuous curves characterize the spectrum
outside the lamp. It is obvious that these lamps are very deficient in the blue-violet and too
strong in the hot colors, the reds. We saw that red has an effect on the control of transcription,
hence on gas exchanges. Transpiration depends on the energy in the blue for about 40% and
on the energy in the red for 60%. However, plant growth and development and the chemical
reactions which cause the synthesis of the organic compounds constituting the plant, are only
active in the blue-violet and the UV. Growth hormones (auxins, etc.) are also synthesized
under their action. We are not surprised that phytobiologists, under their action. We were not
surprised that phytobiologists, after following erroneous procedures of 15 years ago, got
underdeveloped seedlings. Their plants grew only a few centimeters after several weeks as
seedlings of 25-30 cm height are obtained under optimum lighting in the same time span for
wheat as well as for oat. I have no base of comparison for other grains. Without blue rays,
wheat assimilates nitrogen and potassium with difficulty. Contrary to what happens under
normal cultivation, the plant cannot assimilate K correctly, therefore no transmutation of K
into Ca can take place. The circulation of water and mineral salts inside the plant is normally
made because of the long wavelengths. It is only a transfer, which does not involve any
physical or chemical transformations. These are only triggered by wavelengths in the blue
through UV band.
The color temperature of the warm white lamp is of 3,500 K (or color 29 on the Phillips
scale, as compared to 34 for the Warm White Deluxe. This figure of 34 corresponds to a
radiated power of 7.1 watts, as the lamp of color 29, which radiates in the red, has a peak of
8.1 W.
The radiant flux is greatest for the Daylight Lamp, but its flux in the red is too low. Its flux in
the blue is significantly higher. It is felt that it gives objects a bluish cast. This is why these
lamps were replaced with lamps which gave a warmer light (more red, less blue). These
lamps have a radiating energy in the blue which is significantly too low for photosynthesis.
They are lamps for home lighting. We will note that these lamps strongly radiate in the
intermediary spectrum, which is adapted to our sensitivity and appropriate for interior
lighting. However, it is a waste for photosynthesis.
(c) A Well Designed Lamp ~
One can change the shape of the fluorescence curve by changing the nature of the powder
coating the inside of the discharge lamps. This can also be done by changing the nature of the
rays triggering fluorescence in the compound coating the inside wall of the quartz discharge
tube.
Iridium radiates in the 411-450 nm band, hence in the blue. There is even a very weak ray of
380 nm in the UV. There are also two important rays around 680 and 690 nm. Two other
elements are also used to trigger fluorescence: thallium which radiates at 534 nm and sodium
at 588 nm. However, their intensity in the yellow must be corrected with too many blue and
red wavelengths to be practical. These lamps are now of little use. Magnesium arseniate,
fluorogermanate and manganese compounds were also used for the fluorescent coating.
Iodine gives an intense ray at 577 nm, at the limit of the yellow and green. Because of this, it
is used in large lamp fixtures for public lighting and automobile headlights. However, iodine
has other useful properties. It also gives a ray in the UV and it is added in some fluorescent
lamps as such, or as metallic iodides. Unfortunately, almost all the known spectra are not
appropriate for phyto-cultivation, at least in studies on elementary transmutations. These
transmutations cannot happen with spectra of the types represented in Figure 12b. I shall not
comment on the Osram Power Star lamp used by Zundel, as I had no experience with it.
In Figure 12c, I am showing the spectrum of a lamp specially designed by Societe des
Lampes Claude in France. For over 15 years lamps of the types in 12b proved inadequate.
Societe Claude markets lamps rated to 250 W and to 400 W. I was gratified that they lent me
units of the 250 W model giving 12,000 lumens. Lets not forget the relativity of the light
flux concept for the eye. A close correlation between lamp and photosynthesis spectra is the
only consideration which counts. In this oblong lamp, electrical discharges are produced in
Hg at low pressure between electrodes inside a quartz tube. The tube is closed and it can be
mounted in a horizontal position. It is surrounded by a surface made of special glass and
internally coated with a fluorescent salt. Various compounds were tested such as a ytrrium
vanadiate doped with europium; other more common compounds, such as phosphates,
aluminates, etc., could be used.
Rays radiated by the discharge tube, such as the 253.7 nm Hg ray, trigger the fluorescence in
the coating. Due to the filtering effect of the glass, the 404.7nm and other rays of longer
wavelengths are the only ones radiating outside the lamp. The spectrum distribution is shown
in Figure 12c. It is seen that two Hg rays are located toward the end of green and in the
yellow. They have little positive effect on photosynthesis and no negative effects in general.
Their effect is to give a light which is relatively white to the human eye, a useful point in
greenhouses. There, flower and leaf colors should look the same as under solar light, so that
the general state of health of the plants may be gauged in one glance.
The Phytoclaude 400 W model lamp, which was lent to us, gave the following radiated flux
in watts for various bands:
Wavelengths in nm: 400-450 ~ 450-600 ~ 600-700 ~ Total: 400-700
Flux in watts: 10.2 ~ 2.29 ~ 0.92 ~ Total: 13.93
One clearly sees the considerable advantage presented by this lamp: approximately 10/13 of
the energy transformed in light is in the 400-450 nm band, which is the active part of the
spectrum for photosynthesis. The Warm White Deluxe lamp radiates only 1.7/13.4 of its
energy in the 400-510 nm band. In fact, the 520 nm wavelength is already in the green, hence
has little effect on the photosynthesis. The total radiated energy is not a sufficient criterion;
the important point is the band distribution. Even if the band is extended to 510 nm, the
Warm White Deluxe lamp gives 6 times less energy than the Phytoclaude lamp gives in the
blue-violet with similar total radiated energies (13.4 W vs 13.7 for the Phytoclaude lamp).
(d) Cultivation in a Closed Chamber with Carbon Dioxide ~
Commercial cultivation of flowers and some vegetables under phyto-lighting is usually done
in large greenhouses. Laboratory studies are often made in small rooms and even in small
cabinets designed for this purpose. Sometimes they are made in the corner of a laboratory
under a plastic shelter which lets light in but stops dust. In all cases the plants are placed in an
atmosphere renewed naturally or by mechanical means.
For more precise studies, one can use closed chambers maintained at a slightly positive
pressure (3 mm W.G. for example) by a filtered air supply. Chambers normally include a
removable panel to allow the handling of the equipment and seedlings. Panels are fixed in
place by gaskets and screws. They are sometimes made of polymethylmetacrylate (plexiglass,
for example) transparent to the right bands of the solar spectrum. These chambers can be
exposed to solar light or to phyto-lamps. Even better results are achieved with Altuglas.
When extra precautions to prevent any external contamination are deemed necessary,
seedling trays are supplied with air by an electric centrifugal lamp delivering a positive
pressure. The air passes through a filter which retains practically all the dust, as we verified.
Sometimes even more stringent precautions may seem necessary. Lets take the case of the
study calcium variations during the germination of grains. One must operate with water and
air absolutely devoid of Ca variations during the germination of grains. One must operate
with water and air absolutely devoid of calcium to obtain an accurate Ca balance before and
after germination. Sometimes the Ca was measured by neutron activation techniques in the
seeds. Unfortunately, seeds exposed to non-lethal doses of neutron radiations were sometimes
irradiated for the experiments. This was a mistake. Seedlings are watered with twice distilled
water, free of measurable Ca. After several weeks the plants are analyzed by various
methods. To prevent any dust from entering the plant chamber the supply air is bubbled
through a flask partially filled with an acid solution (30 ml HCl to 750 ml of twice distilled
water in one-liter flask). The air is then pushed into the hydroponic cultivation chamber. Any
lime particulate in suspension is dissolved in the acid solution. With the positive pressure, no
external air leakage into the chamber can occur, even if a gasket is defective. Any leakage
would be detected with the water gauge at the air intake.
With these precautions, numerous studies on oats showed that there was a production of
calcium by the seedlings during their growth.
Additional precautions were taken for studies on oat and wheat in particular concerning the
purification of the air supply. Behind the flask with the acid solution were added two flasks
containing a NaHCO
3
solution and one flask containing twice distilled water for a final
scrubbing. The role of the basic solution was to neutralize any acid carry-over without
trapping the CO2 contained in the air supply. These represent the most elaborate precautions
which can be imagined. This was necessary in order to counter prejudiced objections, which
ascribe all increases in calcium to an external source. Even with such a wealth of precautions,
there is an increase in Ca which can exceed 100% of the total Ca contained in the seeds
germinated.
Tested were made on wheat in a controlled atmosphere with a CO
2
concentration of 0.08%
and a lighting 4,000 lux. With 10,000 lux it was possible to raise the concentration of CO
2
up
to 0.013%. Under intense sunlight it is possible to reach 70,000-80,000 lux, but the CO
2

concentration cannot be increased in the same proportion. There is a saturation phenomenon
in the plant for various reasons. Principally because other functions must follow: water and
mineral salt circulation, gas exchanges, etc. For wheat, the optimum concentration seems to
be 0.5-0.6% or approximately 15 times as much as in ambient air, and it produces an
assimilation about ten times higher than normal in the atmosphere. We shall remember that
the lux measurement is of little value as it refers to the human eye. Studies were made up to
20,000-30,000 lux and even more, but this is not economically feasible.
On the other hand, good results were obtained on wheat in a controlled atmosphere including
0.14% CO2, which is four times the natural concentration. These results were obtained in a
glass chamber in sunlight without additional phytolighting. More straw, heads and grain were
obtained and the heads were larger. This shows that the development of grains is limited by
the relative scarcity of CO
2
in the atmosphere. In a controlled atmosphere CO
2
concentrations
4 times greater than in ambient air can be used. We shall note that most published data related
to this subject are wrong because they are based on Calvins cycle. We shall comeback to this
point.
One barley species shows great resilience to intense irradiation by a light source of 460 nm.
In this band, 10,000 kiloergs/cm
2
are required to stop flower formation. By contrast, it takes
only a much smaller amount of energy (about 1,000 kiloergs/cm
2
) at 480 nm to stop the
formation of soybean flowers. Consequently, in the open, barley blooms during long days and
soybean plants bloom during shorter days, when the intensity of the sun has subsided. Usable
energies in the read are always low. Barley needs only 300 kiloergs/cm
2
at 700 nm. The
figure is the same for soybeans. Barley and soybeans show similar effects to green light.
Grains use 10 times as much energy in the blue as the legumes. This must be taken into
account when using artificial light. There is no general rule; each plant species should be
studied separately.
(e) A Few Additional Comments on Photosynthesis ~
I will deal here with a subject which, to my knowledge, has not been presented in any
published work. Our knowledge of the photosynthesis phenomena is incomplete and
agricultural engineers should hold reservations regarding some so-called authoritative
statements. We observe some results, but we cannot explain the complete sequence of
reactions which lead to them.
The most common mechanism for explaining photosynthesis is the Calvin cycle. This cycle
was adopted with much enthusiasm and too little discernment, because there was no
acceptable explanation previously. Calvin started from existing intermediary organic
compounds, which were already isolated. Everything Calvin surmised from there on seemed
to link up logically. However, he neglected energy balances. Many experiments with similar
results seemed to show that 8 photons were required for each CO
2
molecule in the air in order
that the plant could synthesize organic compounds. But what plant? Conclusions true for a
particular plant were incorrectly extrapolated to other plants. For these, the Calvin cycle
required a much higher number of photons. Consequently this cycle, adopted with enthusiasm
by a majority of the people, was the subject of justified objections. The cycle was modified
several times and Calvins name is now followed by the names of the main researchers who
added to it.
Despite all these additions, some organic molecules formed by photosynthesis in certain
plants could not be explained by the Calvin cycle. Following a very human and common
tendency, studies of photosynthesis had been conducted mainly on a single plant, spinach,
which supplies green material in large quantities and almost all the time. It was a fashionable
plant. The results were extrapolated to every plant. There was one photosynthesis
mechanism. It was concluded that chlorophyll (a and b in particular) was the same
everywhere, and consequently that chemical reactions had to be identical in every case.
Experience contradicted this simplification. It was observed that the Calvin cycle broadly
applied to almost all dicotyledons, but that it did not apply at all to plants as common as
graminaceae, such as corn, sorghum and sugar cane, all of which are monocotyledons. These
plants fix the CO
2
of the air at a much higher rate. They need less organic fcrtilizer and they
need less humus, because their carbonaceous components are derived out of the air in larger
proportion. This is also the case for weeds.
In the Calvin cycle, the CO
2
from the air attaches to ribulose 1-5 diphosphate molecules.
Each resulting molecule decomposes into two 3-phosphoglyceric acid molecules. On the
other hand, in the Hatch and Slack cycle, the CO
2
is fixed by carboxylation of the
phosphophenolpyruvate with formation of oxaloacetic acid. This acid reacts with C
2
or C
5

molecules to form pyruvic and phosphoglyceric acides.
This big difference between the two cycles can be presented in another way. In th Calvin
cycle, the compounds formed from the CO
2
in the air are primarily compounds with 3 atoms
of carbon, such as glycerol-3-hosphate. In the Hatch and Slack cycle, C
4
compounds are
synthesized, such as oxaloacetate.
In other words, dicotyledons fix 3 carbon atoms and monocotyledons 4 carbon atoms. This
explains the better yield for the latter. Synthesized enzymes are also different. There is more
in the Hatch and Slack cycle than in the Calvin cycle. Some dicotyledons growing on salty
lands follow the Hatch and Slack cycle. This would be due to a still unknown property of Na,
tentatively attributed by some people to a transmutation of Na. These plants can be used to
desalt a soil.
The Calvin cycle is the cycle in C
3
and the Hatch and Slack cycle is the cycle in C
4
.
Consequently, the latte produces more carbohydrates and more dry material. It requires only
half as much water and more dry material. It requires only half as much water. This is the
reason why these plants can grow well in fairly dry climates, as is the case with corn,
sorghum, etc.
There is another important difference. In the C
3
cycle, 40-50% of the atmospheric CO
2

initially fixed is returned to the atmosphere by photorespiration. This could explain why in a
closed chamber the atmosphere can still contain some CO
2
, although the incoming air has
previously bubble through a solution of caustic soda to fix any incoming CO
2
. The remaining
CO
2
decreases slowly and asymptotically. The plant wilts and dies slowly. On the other hand,
in the C4 cycle very little carbon is returned to the atmosphere. Almost all the carbon which
is fixed is retained. Carbohydrates are formed more quickly. Grain plants, such as cereal
plants, lack CO
2
much sooner than most other monocotyledons when they are grown in a
closed atmosphere, fed through a caustic acid solution. Their chlorophyll deficiency can be
soon observed. At least, this is my interpretation.
(f) Isotopes ~
One should also observe in passing another phenomenon. Monocotyledons and dicotyledons
are not only the seat of different chemical reactions, but they also have different physical
behaviors. They fix stable carbon, oxygen and hydrogen isotopes differently when they come
from CO
2
and from water. In the sugar beet (a dicotyledon), saccharose does not have the
same isotopic composition as the saccharose in sugar cane (a monocot). This question was
studied recently with the greatest care. Its implication is not only scientific, but also
economic. The selling price in sugar cane is much higher than the selling price in beet sugar.
Fraud is possible. For the chemists in charge of the analyses, saccharose is saccharose; its
formula is the same. It is impossible to determine its origin after it has been purified. But
Nature does not dabble only in chemistry, it also dabbles in physics. C
13
/C
12
, O
18
/O
16
, H
2
/H
1

ratio variations are high enough to be detected with mass spectrometry. Customs and the
Agency for the Repression of Fraud are now equipped to check sugar to determine its area of
origin. They use the same techniques with other compounds and other plants.
The treaties I know on photosynthesis are all silent on this point. Many other points are still
unknown. Understanding of detailed reactions in chlorophyll still escape us. We only know
some intermediary steps, and the molecular structures resulting from the combined action of
photomorphogenesis and photosynthesis. We still do not know what happens inside the
chlorophyll molecule at the atomic level. This molecule includes approximately 150 atoms
grouped around a nucleus or heart of porphyrin. This porphyrin is formed around a
magnesium atom linked to 4 nitrogen atoms. What happens at this level? Though magnesium
is at chlorophylls core, it is never included in the formulas proposed by agronomists.
Furthermore, it is assumed that chlorophyll preexists, but one does not known how Nature
reproduces it. As the pant develops, the number of leaves increases, leaves grow and
chlorophyll forms. Magnesium is a transition metal element, Does it act only as an electron
carrier as iron in hemoglobin, copper in the hemocyanin of the shellfish, vanadium in
ascidiae, etc.? There again we do not know the internal process generated by this central
atom; we do not even know the process generated by porphyrin, which is built around this
atom.
(g) Conclusions ~
Photosynthesis cannot be totally explained by chemical, hence molecular, phenomena, which
have not been completely explored. There are indeed phenomena at the atomic level, such as
variations in isotopic composition. However, we should consider the possibility of subatomic
phenomena. These may be direct or indirect mechanism. I am inclined to say indirect and
they work through the unquestionable and selective action of specific enzymes, growth
hormones and other hormones. These compounds may contribute to the transmutations which
were clearly shown in the course of the experiments. Nothing is simple. Results obtained with
one plant cannot be extrapolated and applied to all plants. Failure will result if this point is
not kept in mind. Each experiment should be performed according to a well defined
procedure. In this field innovation may lead to poor results. Even a simple question of
lighting, of inappropriate spectrum, may make the difference between positive and negative
results. This is essentially the point I am trying to make.
(2) Photosynthesis (Limited to Traditional Aspects) ~
In most treatises the study of photosynthesis is based on the research based on spinach. This
produces unwarranted generalizations.
In one kilogram of spinach leaves there are approximately 500 million chloroplasts. 60% of
the weight of the proteins contained in the leaves are located in these small organs which are
concentrated in the cytoplasm of the leaves.
These chloroplasts are 7-8 micrometer long and 2-3 micrometers thick. They are filled with a
lumpy liquid, the stroma, which is surrounded by a double envelope. One of these constitutes
a membrane network, the thylakoids. Thylakoids are vesicles filled with a liquid composed
80% of glycolipids and sulfolipids. Their envelopes contain very little phospholipids, but they
contain chlorophylls (150 micrograms of proteins and 30 micrograms of pigments such as
carotenoids). Nearly 50% of the proteins contained in the chloroplast are located in the
thylakoid envelopes. Cytochromes and plastocyanin were found in them; they are proteins
which can give or receive electrons according to their environoment. The nature of the
constituents inside the thylakoids seems to be totally unknown as of 1980.
The stroma is rich in soluble proteins (about 0.4 gr/ml of stroma). It contains about 50% of
the proteins in the chloroplast. The stroma contains the DNA and RNA which synthesize
some proteins in the chloroplast. The lumpy aspect of the stroma, revealed by the electron
microscope, is mainly attributed to ribosomes. The surface area for the external chloroplast
envelope amounts to about 500 cm
2
for one gram of leaf. The envelope contains only 1-2% of
the proteins in the chloroplast. To this day, none of these proteins have been isolated it seems.
Chloroplasts transform ADP in ATP under the effect of light and in the presence of electron
acceptors.
The knowledge of photosynthesis progressed after intact chloroplasts were obtained in 1965.
They simultaneously give some oxygen and fixed CO
2
in a 1/1 ratio in the presence of light.
However, chloroplast separation techniques were only applied to a very few vegetal species.
Experiments were primarily performed with spinach. Test preparation was perfected for this
plant. Its green material can be harvest all year round. Consequently, it was the subject of
70% of the research. This led many researchers to extrapolate their results to other species.
This is a mistake. It was observed in some green plants, such as corn and sugar cane, that
some intermediary steps were different from the steps in spinach reactions. This showed that
the photosynthesis for spinach, a dicotyledon, did not apply to these monocotyledons.
When thylakoids are exposed are exposed to light, electrons are transferred between water
and a final acceptor, of still unknown structure, designated as X protein. Walter Redox
potential for the final acceptor, E
o
= 0.1 V. Therefore, it is necessary to bring energy in, to
operate the transfer. The energy is brought by light photons. This energy transfer is coupled
with an ADP phosphorylation into ATP; this constitutes the energy storage mechanism. Light
energy is collected inside the thylakoid membrane by two antennas each belonging to a
different photosystem. These antennas comprise a system of proteins and pigments
(chlorphylls and carotenoids) which absorb light energy and transmit it, by resonance, to the
a-chlorophyll which is different in each photosystem. His chlorophyll is oxidized. One of its
electrons is transferred to an acceptor. The transfer creates a high potential gradient, 0.8 V for
one photosystem and 1 V for the other. For the first one, water is the electron donor, but to
this day the acceptor is unknown. It is designated as the protein.
A magnesium base proteins intervenes during this reaction. Water is oxidized, giving protons
and molecular oxygen (schematically: H
2
O + O = H
2
+ O
2
). The detailed mechanism of this
reaction is still the subject of current studies. It is now generally accepted that oxygen is
dissociated from water and not from CO
2
, as it was initially believed. In the other
photosystems, the electron acceptor (X) is a protein which includes iron and sulfur atoms. Fe
and S have a very low Redox potential. The two systems are connected by a chain of carriers
which is little understood.
Q molecule electrons are successively transferred to quinines, to various cytochromns and
then finally to plastocyanin, in which the electron donor is a blue protein containing copper.
Electrons are transferred from X proteins to ferroxoxin, which is a very small protein
(molecular weight of the order of 12,000) of a low Redox potential. E
o
= 0.32 C, containing
Fe and S). Ferrodoxin contains iron and sulfur. Ferroxin can transfer its electrons to various
molecules such as nicotinamide-adenine-dinucleotide-phosphate, NADP. It can also transfer
them to a nitrite based flavoprotein. This transfer produces NH ions and electrons can be
transferred to oxygen with production of superoxide radicals.
In this case the overall balance may be summarized by the following relation:
H
2
O + NADP >> NADPH
2
+ O
2

The NADP is reduced and the oxygen probably comes from the water. The primary effect of
this transfer of electrons is the production of the highly reducing NADPH
2
molecule; oxygen
is only a by-product, so to speak.
We shall note that magnesium, the central atom of the chloroplast molecule, does not appear
in these formulae. Its function has not yet been established. Many unknowns remain. Isnt
such research purely speculative? Many teams of researchers throughout the world are
attempting a direct transfer of electrons to a final acceptor by the channel of ferrodoxin
coupled to hydrogenase. Hydrogenase is an enzyme extracted from bacteria or from
molecular algae, through reactions producing molecular hydrogen. Hydrogen is a non-
polluting source of energy. In nature, the ferrodoxin-hydrogenase pairing is observed among
many bacteria produce a reaction similar to the above except that they dont free any oxygen.
The thalla which live in symbiosis in the blue algae, does produce oxygen.
The production of hydrogen results in a pH modification on both sides of the thylakoid
membrane. Plastoquinones, carriers of both protons and electrons, are reduced by Q
molecules on the external face of the thylakoids and they capture protons from the stroma.
However, the plastoquinones, oxidized by the cytochrome near the thylakoids internal
envelope, also discharge some protons in the stroma. The protons formed during the
oxidation of water contribute also to reinforce the pH gradient in the presence of light.
Balance is due to the phosphorylation of ADP into ATP based on the formula proposed by
the Englishman Mitchell:
ADP
3-
+ H+ = HPO
4
2
- >> ATP
4-
+ H
2
O
The detailed process of this schematic reaction is unknown.
ADP and NADPH
2
molecules bring the necessary energy and the electrons to the stroma to
fix the carbon dioxide from the air and to synthesize carbohydrates. 37 ATP molecules and
24 NADPH
2
molecules are required for the synthesis of one saccharose molecule from H
2
O
and CO
2
. In plant species of a type similar to spinach, the stroma inside the chloroplasts
produces C3 molecules primarily (phosphorylated C
5
-oses: glyceraldehydes-3-phosphate or
its isomer, dihydroxy-acetone-phosphate). This is a complex process realized in three steps.
A C
5
sugar is first decomposes in two 3-phosphateglyceride acid molecules. It is during this
step that the CO
2
from the air is integrated into organic molecules. One CO
2
molecule and
one H
2
O molecule are consumed. This reaction is catalyzed by an enzyme of large molecular
weight (500,000). It is a complex enzyme composed of 8 large units and 3 small subunits.
The second step is subdivided into two sub-steps and the third step corresponds to
regeneration. This series of steps is known as the Calvin cycle or now, as the BBC for
Benson, Bassham and Calvin.
Phosphorylated oses are produced in C
6
(fructose), in C
4
, C
7
, and finally in C
5
(ribulose). In
1973 Held showed that the pH of the stroma increased in the presence of light. The stroma
loses protons to the inside space of the thyladoids until a balance is reached. In darkness it is
the opposite. Enzyme activity is controlled by these pH variations.
Beet sugar and spinach leaves behave similarly. Both plants are dicots. Each square meter of
beet leaves feeds about 130 mg/min of glucids in the veins of the leaves from which the
glucids move to the roots for storage. The mechanism controlling the subsequent
transformations of the 3-phosphates glyceraldehydes, after they reach the cytoplasm, is not
known. Those which are not sent to the cytoplasm and those in the stroma, are transformed
into starch which is a high saccharose polymer.
Contrary to saccharose, starch is not phosphorylated. There is a biological limit to the yield of
the photosynthesis process. During the respiration phase, plants controlled by the BBC cycle
waste a large part of the carbon integrated during the photosynthesis phase. It is estimated
that these plants use only 1% of the 5.10
20
kilocalories received each year from the sun. This
consideration underlines the economic importance of the next cycle.
(3) Photosynthesis Cycle of Hatch and Slack ~
The photosynthesis cycle of Calvin is well known. It is the classic cycle in all published
works, because it was most widely studied. In fact, a study of the C
13
/C
12
isotopic ratio
(research of 1968 by Bender) showed that it could vary by 5-15% and even more according to
the photosynthesis cycle of the vegetal species. The study showed that this result was
independent of the composition of the living medium for the culture and that it did not vary
with time. The variations in the ratio could only be attributed to the physiology of the plant
under the control of its specific enzymes. The emphasis was placed on the ratio between the
two stable carbon isotopes in corn, as the chlorophyll metabolism seems to fix proportionally
less C
13
from the atmosphere.
Research on photosynthesis was first made with dicots because there was a convenient source
of supply of raw material. The research extended to monocots such as corn. Sugar cane was
included in order to stop fraud in sugar. Cane sugar contains more C
13
than beet sugar. As
previously mentioned, the Calvin cycle combines the CO
2
from the air with ribose-1.5-
diphosphate in beet sugar. The resulting molecule decomposes into two 3-phosphoglyceric
acid molecules. As early as 1966, Hatch and Slack discovered another cycle in monocots. In
that cycle, they showed that the CO
2
from the air was fixed by carboxylation of the
phosphenol-pyruvate and formed oxaloacetic acid. This acid combines with C2 or C5
molecules to form pyruvic and phosphoglyceric acids. In France, J. Bricout and others
observed that the C
13
/C
12
isotopic ratios were significantly different for beet and cane sugars.
The decrease in C
13
is of the order of 1.1%, compared to its concentration in the CO
2
control,
for cane sugar. The decrease is 2.5% for beet sugar.
We see the advantages of cultivating monocots rather than dicots. They derive more carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere and require less organic feed. Many weeds have the same
property and they grow even without fertilizer.
FIGURE 13 ~ [Missing]
FIGURE 14 ~ Values of Ca


Chapter 5
The Devils Advocate







When I published my first works I had problems with chemists for whom theory precedes
facts. For them, nothing is lost and nothing is created. This is true in chemistry. To many
biochemists, life is only chemistry, and chemistry is the supreme science which explains
everything, even the most abstract: will power, feelings, etc.
With a wealth of experiments I showed that chemical balances between elements in and
elements and elements out were not always null. I was astounded by the naivete and the lack
of realism of these biochemists. Their final argument was that a balance which was not null
could not only be attributed to incomplete analyses. They claimed that some elements were
surely hidden in a form which could not be detected by the analyses as performed. They did
not realize that they only confessed their incapacity to perform correct chemical analyses.
Chemists, even those who boast of being professors in our universities, could not be trusted.
Confronted with such common attributes, I just shrugged my shoulders. To avoid useless
polemics, I decided to stop referring to chemical analyses and to use modern techniques of
physical analysis such as flame spectroscopy for J, atomic absorption spectroscopy for Ca,
etc. At the beginning of my research, physical techniques to quantitatively measure specific
anions, such as S, P and N, had not been developed. The same is still true 20 years late. His is
why my studies, and those of researchers who wanted to duplicate them, were limited to the
study of balances for a few important cations by various physical techniques.
In France a university professor, who was a high-ranking Rationalist wrote in a publication
that I was wrong. He was director of the biological chemistry laboratory in his university.
Rationalism was a philosophy publicized by Robespierre, pope of the Goddess Reason. This
professor had decided to duplicate, as he said, one of my experiments. In fact his experiment
differed extensively from mine. A summary of his study was included on pages 88-91 of my
book, now out of print, Preuves Relatives a lExistence de Transmutations Biologiques,
published by Maloine in 1968. The essential argument was reproduced on pages 212-213 in
my book of 1975, Preuves en Biologie de Transmutations de Faible Energie, which is still
being reprinted. I will not say more on the obvious bad faith and the exaggerated cynicism of
some sectarian objectors. Far be it from me to place all Rationalists under one label. There
are exceptions among them as there are exceptions everywhere. I learned that several
distinguished scientists among them protested against the attitude of this learned master.
However, he was not the only one to think in this way. I mentioned the case of the hidden
iodine produced by some algae, which cannot be measured in a certain vegetal state, but can
be measured in another state. This showed indeed that some experiments were deficient. To
point at the errors was not sufficient. To disdainfully reject gratuitous affirmations was not
the solution to definitively eradicate affirmations was not the solution to credulous and
unscientific minds of too many biochemists. Figures were necessary. In the book mentioned
before, dating from 1968, on p. 158-167, I had indeed given some precise information.
However, it concerned phosphorus variations during the germination of lentils. Undoubtedly
this escaped various phytobiologists. I noted in a publication, Revue de Biologie, that a
professor of botany was still imbued with 19th century dogma in 1980. Criticizing the data
presented by Zundel on the increase in Ca during the germination of oats, she writes, "If the
ashes are dissolved in hot HCl, the acid cannot dissolve Ca which is in the form of sulfates
and phosphates. An underestimation of the total quantity of Ca in the caryopses could result,
whereas the Ca contained in the seedlings, and which can be oxidized, would be counted in
its totality. This could explain the increase in Ca which was noted". General statements are
made without regard for the precise experimental data, which are not even mentioned. In the
previous paragraph, she wrote: "In caryopses, Ca is partially found in phytins (inositol
hexaphosphate of Ca and Mg) in aleurone granules, and partially as insoluble phosphate and
sulfate. In seedlings, Ca is found mainly as pectate, which is transformed in oxide by
combustion".
But what are these pectates? "Combustions"? Arguments, but no figures! The "partially" is
meaningless. Which part? Which proportion? I will quote figures later. So much for the
questionable, and even partially wrong. Opinion expressed by this university professor.
Before presenting my figures, I believe I should say a few words presenting my figures, I
believe I should say a few words about phosphorus which is not part of this work.


Chapter 6
Problems Related To Phosphorus, Complexity Of Phytoanalyses







Phosphorus and calcium in living matter are closely related. They have been studied for a
long time. I dedicated a chapter of my 1975 book to Vauquelins studies on the balance of the
calcium ingested by a hen. Calcium is found as carbohydrates and sulfates in oats, in the egg
laid, and in droppings. Vauquelin mentioned chemical analysis procedures to measure the Ca
linked to P and to the carbonate. This is not a new problem.
In my book of 1968 I presented some detailed information on the studies related to form
changes of P during seed germination. It came from a doctoral thesis written in 1935 by a
pharmacist, Yves Colin, after a five-year study. I own a printed copy of this document in
which 84 pages are dedicated to "Technical Research on the Separation and the measurement
of Primary Phosphorus Elements in Seeds". Colin presented some data on wheat and on
sunflowers, but his research was primarily on lentils. P and Ca contents are the same in lentils
and in oats. However, there are marked differences in the nature of P compounds in different
vegetal species, so that the analytical procedure varies from species to species. I did not
include in my 1975 book the chapter which dealt with this matter in my book of 1978 which
is now out of print. One can refer to Y. Colins thesis in university libraries. It will show
precisely how wrong and biased were the statements expressed by the professor of botany
mentioned previously, statements unsupported by quantified data.
Good chemists know that P compounds are not soluble in any old solvent. Solvents must be
selected. Care must be brought to the sequence of the reactions. A reaction can stop the
sequence by fixing P in a compound which is then totally insoluble in the following reaction
and it will then resist all attempts to measure it.
In plants, P is found in phosphoric ester such as true phosphoro-lipids. Among the photo-
lipids are found lecithins, but mostly they are glycerol-phosphoric acid derivatives. One also
finds P in phosphoric acid esters of sugars, diphosphoric hexose monophosphoric ester,
momophosphoric polyoses, etc. During the last decade of the 19th century and the beginning
of the 20th century many studies dealt with P compounds and their quantitative variations in
germinating pants. Phospo-lipids and phospho-amino-lipids were studied first, then the
nucleic acids which incorporate large quantities of organic P were studied. After hydrolysis,
they release o-phosphoric acid. Nucleic acids differ according to the plant; some information
on this subject may be found in my book of 1962. These studies led researchers to look for
various ways to separate these compounds. For a given solvent, results may vary according to
acid concentration and temperature. My former colleague at the Conseil dHygience in Paris,
Gabriel Bertrand, was convinced that transmutations occurred in the metabolism of living
matter. He also showed me that P contents in ashes and in the dry material were different.
Differences were of the order of 10% if reactions, on material dried at 100 C, were
performed in a wet medium. At 200 C a loss of P was observed: this was mainly due to the
fusion of of alkaline phosphates. Fusion produced a slag surrounding the particles of organic
phosphorus which could not be decomposed by acids. Generally, these phospo-lipids and
phospho-nucleic compounds have no close relation with Ca; their study may be ignored in
research on Ca.
On the other hand, phosphoro-proteids, which are not water-soluble, but are alkali soluble,
are very important in fresh plants, though they are not widely found in animal tissues. Phytin
was discovered during the 19th century. It is a hexaphosphoric ester of inositol, or more
exactly it is a Ca and Mg salt of this ester. In 1903, Posternak established that organic P
accounted for 22% of the phytin, Ca for 12% and Mg for 1.5%. therefore there are large
quantities of Ca. Inositol is a polyaclohol widely distributed throughout plants. In grain plants
it accounts for approximately 50% of the total P and over 70% in sunflowers. In his thesis,
Colin describes the techniques which were perfected since the beginning of this century.
These techniques were primarily developed by Javillier around 1930; we both sat together on
the Conseil dHygience. He modified the analytical technique developed by Copeau in 1927.
Mineralization comes about through a mixture of sulfuric and nitric acids (to which Baranger
added some concentrated hydrogen peroxide). Phospho-amino-lipids are first extracted. Some
per-compounds are explosive and must be handled with care. One must follow carefully the
instructions given by the specialists in this type of research. For our study of Ca, the
important analyses concern acid-soluble P and then mineral P. To separate phytinic P from
total P, Colin had to develop a technique derived from Javilliers procedure. This was
because the P in the seeds of cereal plants differ markedly from the nucleic acid formed in
lentils. The presence of iron modifies the sequence of the reactions and requires the use of
hydrochloric acid.
In 100 grams of dry powder of lentil seeds or of oats, there are 300-400 mg of P in total. 50%
of this total is in phytin; a little over 10% is lipid P and a similar amount is nucleic P. The
ratio of the last two kinds varies little during germination. As they are not linked to the
production of ca, we will not show any data for them. Colin quotes results for batches of 400
lentils picked every third day after the lentils were prepared for germination. Here are the
weights in mg for each batch:
P (Phytin) ~ P (Mineral) ~ P (Total)
Before Germination: 50.63 ~ 18.30 ~ 92.00
After 3 days: 38.31 ~ 30.84 ~ 93.65
After 6 days: 12.64 ~ 54.61 ~ 90.00
After 9 days: 0 ~ 62.30 ~ 87
Other analyses were made after 12 days and after 33 days. We will not discuss the results
here. The main point is that the P in phytin decreased significantly after 3 days and that it
decreased by approximately after 6 days. It is around the 4th and 5th days that the rapid
transformation of phytin P into mineral P takes off. There is also a progressive decrease in
total P, which was confirmed by other studies on soybeans and on vetch and oats. I shall
come back to this point. It is remarkable that all the organic P in the phytin disappeared after
9 days, as it was transformed into mineral P.
In the seed, mineral phosphates of Ca and Mg amount to about one-half of the P contained in
phytin. The Mg is negligible. In the plant there is no more phytin after 9 days and mineral P
is a little over 3 times greater than in the seed. Therefore, if the mineral phosphate in the plant
is neglected by the experimenter because it is not soluble in HCl, the amount the amount of
Ca in the plant is underestimated. This is the opposite of what was stated by the professor of
botany mentioned in the previous chapter.


Chapter 7
How To Correctly Duplicate A Typical Experiment On Biological
Transmutations







When one wants to check a phenomenon, witnessed by another person, it is not right to give
an opinion on the validity of the phenomenon unless the procedure used to establish it is
strictly followed. If one parameter is different and if the authors conclusions are not
confirmed, it is right to first ask of the failure of the experiment is not due to the change in
the procedure and to the neglect of some essential points.
In other words, the verification of an experiment requires the exact duplication of the
experimental conditions set by the researcher who established the existence of the
phenomenon. It is legitimate to innovate only after this has been done.
Too often operators attempting to duplicate experiments modify the procedure described by
the inventor. They do so for several reasons.
In the goal they pursue they underestimate the importance of some points of an experiment,
which is new to them. This may be due to ignorance or to professional bias. Some extremely
complex fields of research require a good knowledge of nuclear physics and chemistry, and
an outstanding knowledge of biology. This is the case for biological transmutations which are
biophysical phenomena which can be detected by wet chemical analysis or physical chemical
analysis.
(1) Study of the Calcium Variation in Cultivated Oats ~
We will look at a study performed by a team, composed of a physicist and a phytobiologist,
in an American university.
They wanted to check if there was an effective increase in Ca and an effective decrease in K
during germination as compared to the initial amounts in the seeds. Germination took place in
ultra-pure water. No Ca could be derived from the water nor from the bottles used for the
experiment. This was checked prior to the beginning of the experiment.
Theoretically, according to classic rules, the Ca balance, as well as the K balance, should not
change, because "nothing is lost, nothing is created". This is true in chemistry. However, this
does not apply to some specific biological processes involving not only chemical reactions
but also prior to them, phenomena ruled by nuclear physics. Chemistry deals with phenomena
involving electrons, and in general only the outer shell electrons of the atom. Electromagnetic
energies, it would seem, cannot cause any transmutations. There are various reasons for this,
but they will not be discussed here. These transmutations can happen under the effect of
strong or weak interactions as it will be explained in Part II of this book.
After performing only one experiment, these American scientists concluded that my
observations were in error. For the K/Ca ratio, they found an average value of 4.5 for the
seeds and only 1.5 for the plants after germination and after too short a cultivation period, in
my judgment. From the outset, they should have attributed K/Ca variations either to a
decrease in K, or to an increase in Ca, or to simultaneous variations of K and Ca. Lets more
closely examine the reasons which led to their conclusions.
They analyzed three aliquot parts of a batch of seeds and of plants grown from "identical"
seeds. I will not cast any judgment on this technique, which, it seems, was used for the first
time in this case. It might be a mistake to try a new technique in this instance. Though I know
of so many scientists who are prisoners of their habits and sometimes of their equipment and
who are incapable of admitting that they are wrong. To them, their technique is the best; they
adopted it once and for all. This is a conceited attitude common to too many scientists. It is a
mistake. Various techniques should be used for cross-checking.
For example, I observed some unacceptable discrepancies in analytical data obtained by
complexometry techniques for Ca. The nature of the complexing agent must be adapted to the
Mg/Ca ratio in the solution analyzed. In spite of a double precipitation, the same is true for
analyses by means of oxalate salts. Specific techniques are legitimate in some cases and not
in others. In the same way, precipitations must be performed in the right sequence. Otherwise
a particular molecule may be made insoluble to the detriment of subsequent reactions.
Unfortunately knowing and remembering this point is not enough. This is the case in
experiments involving biological transmutations, when the outcome of a first transmutation is
unknown in advance. A technique may be valid for the control and not for the end product
due to the modifications caused by the transmutation in the ratios between some elements.
Two steps of an experiment may not always be cross-checked with the same technique if one
wants to reach the right conclusions.
Of course I do not object to chemical analyses, but the point emphasized above should always
be kept in mind. I always used the atomic absorption spectrometry technique for the analysis
of Ca (or Mg, Fe, etc.) to obviate the uncertainties presented by some chemical techniques
and to prevent (often ungenerous) objections by experimenters imbued by their own
technique. Uncertainties in chemical procedure can generally be cleared, once the experiment
is mastered and once its results have become reproducible. This requires that the parameters
of the experiment be maintained constant. Zundel used a chemical technique, developed by
Prof Charlot, for the analysis of Ca in oat seeds and plants. The material is heated to 950 C
to avoid the formation of carbonates, and to insure that all Ca in the final reaction is in the
form of CaO. The CaO is weighed to 1/10 mg for each batch. The amount of Ca is then
computed. With this technique, Zundel obtained fairly constant figures, though they were
always slightly higher than those given by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. This was
true for both seeds and plant so that the ratios between the Ca contents in the seed and in the
plant are independent of the analytical techniques. Variations in the absolute value of Ca may
be ascribed to various causes: calibration differences in the physical technique or the
presence of contaminants not precipitated previously in the chemical analysis. Despite these
factors, comparative results obtained by these two techniques often show little difference.
Balances are usually reproducible to a few percentage points with each technique. Too many
physicists, even chemists and biologists tend to ignore, underestimate or neglect differences
from one biological batch to the next. Among seed as among animals, there are vigorous
subjects and there are weaker subjects. At times differences in the nature of the subject can be
detected chemically or by analysis of the isotopes. The isotopic composition of an element
does not necessarily translate to an organic compound of the same element. The chemical
formula for its three main components, H, O and C, are not the same for cane sugar as for
beet sugar. In biology calculations should not be based on standard atomic masses, which are
average values as stated in our books. Although they are precisely defined, they are only
arbitrarily selected standard values. In reality there is no such thing as isotopic selectivity.
This is why, in my studies, I decided to accept only variations greater than 5% in average
values for the elements considered. It is understood that the number of analyses performed
must be sufficient to yield statistically valid averages.
Several cross-checks by neutron activation performed in authorized nuclear physics
laboratories showed that the technique was also valid for Ca. Magnitudes were approximately
the same as those found by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. With a minimum of 5
readings, measurement dispersion was smaller than 4%. Neutron activation, which is non-
destructive, should not be used to first test a seed and then the palnt grown from this seed. I
was able to establish that the plants germinating factors were altered by this technique. The
plant metabolism is modified and transmutation, which are produced by enzymes, are slowed
down. (please refer to my book of 1975, p. 233).
From the beginning of my research 20 years ago, I abandoned chemical techniques for K
analysis. Prof Baranger of Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, a chemical analysis specialist, finally
abandoned the chemical analysis of K after he had obtained questionable results for several
years. Zundel, a chemical engineering graduate from the Zurich Polytechnicum, who
supervised a chemical analysis laboratory, also abandoned the chemical analysis of K from
the start of his studies on transmutation during the germination of oats. We used emission
flame spectrometry despite the inherent difficulties in reducing measurement discrepancies
from one sample to the next.
The flame spectrometer is still an instrument which is difficult to set for good reproducibility.
It is now used by everybody, as there is no better instrument for the various purposes. Many
readings are required with this instrument to get statistically valid results. There are some
reservations on the various statistical methods prevailing in different countries as all these
methods are based on arbitrary postulates.
It is impossible to obtain statistically valid conclusions on biological samples from a small
number of analyses performed on aliquot parts, which are sometimes too light in weight to
start with. Usually we make 5 to 10 readings on a given sample. At times we made up to 50
tests. Baranger tested up to 300 and even 400 samples one by one. On the other hand, it
seems that only three analyses were performed in the USA. The results obtained were so
scattered that they were statistically invalid. Nevertheless, it was the basis for the negative
conclusions expressed by the scientists who performed the experiment even though the
average data showed a large variation of the K/Ca ratio.
(2) Biological Conditions ~
Ca and K variations during the germination of oats observed in the USA were different in
absolute value from those we had customarily observed during tens of congruent
experiments. These experiments included hundreds of analyses performed on thousands of
plants and tens of thousands of seeds. This consideration led us to carefully examine the
content of the report written by these scientists.
It showed us also that they underestimated or ignored some biological factors.
We recommended oats for the study of Ca, as this plant was extensively studied and it
showed clear results. The increase in Ca is considerable, often greater than 100%,
independently of the batch or the species, when the seed is germinated in twice-distilled
water with an acid pH (5.6-5.8). The oat plant grows on acid soils, hence it is clearly a
calcifuge. The seed contains little Ca, an element necessary for the first reactions for the
germination process. Ca is required until growth hormones are synthesized. After 8-10 days
the total Ca content of the seed and the seedling begins to increase very rapidly at the expense
of K, although no Ca can come from the outside. The seed is rich in K as its K/Ca ratio is
approximately 4.5 and varies little for different species. It constitutes the reserve for the
growth of the plant. This ratio decreases the reserve for the growth of the plant. This ratio
decreases to about 1.8 over 3-4 weeks and then declines asymptotically to 1.5, the minimum
value reached after 6 weeks. After this time the K reserves are too low to compensate for Ca
and the pant starts to wilt. We do not know if the pH was measured in the American study.
The pH is not mentioned in the text we received. It is not critical in this particular case,
because the water pH was certainly acid.
It seems to me that unsatisfactory cultivation conditions are the primary reason why no
statistically valid increase in Ca was found. A researcher should not try to innovate while
exploring entirely new grounds. He should follow the instructions of the people who have
long experience with the phenomenon and who have mastered this phenomenon only after
extensive research.
My attention was drawn to a short sentence mentioning that the germination was performed
under artificial fluorescent lighting with a lamp of the warm white type. As I have studied
fluorescent lighting over 20 years, I jumped. The warm white lamp gives a spectrum which
appears close to the solar spectrum to our eye. It enables agronomists to easily detect color
changes in the seedlings. However, such lamps should not be used for photosynthesis. Plants
and the human eye have very different sensitivities to light spectra.
In the beginning our studies were only made under sunlight, to approximate natural
conditions for the plant as closely as possible and to prevent the introduction of an additional
unknown. After a few years, various considerations forced us to use artificial lighting. We
needed to experiment at various times and in various seasons at poorly lit locations. Some
varieties of oats, often called winter oats, are sown in fall, others at the beginning of spring. It
took years of research and the help of discharge lamp specialists to select the right lamps.
Only these lamps could radiate the short wavelengths in the blue, violet and UV which are so
important for photosynthesis. Wavelengths in the red, which carry heat, are also well
represented in the spectrum of these lamps. On the other hand these lamps radiate very little
in the yellow, the band of maximum sensitivity for our eye.
This research led to the development of lamps with spectra well tailored to photosynthesis.
For visual observation, lamps of the warm white type or equivalent are needed. However,
they are only used intermittently and they cannot replace solar light in any way for
photosynthesis.
The phytolamps used were usually rated at 250 watts and sometimes at 400 watts. This was a
high but necessary power rating. These lamps radiate a great deal of heat and they must be
located outside the cultivation chambers. The chambers are not made of glass, but of
metacrylate. For supply considerations Altuglas rather than Plexiglass was used. Metacrylate,
as glass, absorbs some UV wavelengths. The bands filtered change according to the material.
Therefore, plants cultivate under glass or metacrylate are affected differently by light photons
than plants grown in the open under sunlight. For this reason we placed a small lamp inside
the chamber rated at a few watts, which radiated complementary wavelengths in the near UV.
With this lighting, we obtained plants as vigorous and as rich in Ca as plants grown under
direct, unfiltered sunlight.
The American researchers stated that their seedlings were more yellow (chlorosis) and more
flaccid than those normally grown in sunlight. They did not mention if they had considered
the possibility of deficiencies in photosynthesis. Another effect of this process is easily
checked. Under this mechanism, the plant produces some dry material from various
synthesized carbohydrate compounds (glucids, lipids, parotids, etc.). Lignin, composed of the
resulting celluloses (hemicellulose, etc.) contributes to plant system rigidity. The stems of the
plants grown by the Americans remained flaccid and bent. This was a sure sign of deficient
photosynthesis. In order to form carbohydrates, the plant takes its carbon from the carbon
dioxide in the air and its H and O from the water absorbed by its roots. A satisfactory
photosynthesis is therefore indispensable to plant metabolism and for the synthesis of
essential growth enzymes; it is absolutely necessary for the good health of the plant. An
enzyme linked to oxidizing phosphorylation, and created at the internal surface of the
mitochondria inside the envelope, is responsible for the formation of Ca from K with Mg as a
catalyst. The enzyme active in this reaction is derived from ATP chelated with Mg (Mg-
ATPase). This is a point I discussed in my books. Another point was presented by S.
Goldfein in a report written for and published by the scientific section of the US Amy in Fort
Belvoir, CA in 1978. Without the normal activity of this enzyme, there is a deficient plant
metabolism and a transmutation which is too weak to yield significant amounts of Ca. This
happened in the experiment performed in the USA. The seedlings were weak and stunted.
The stems were only a few centimeters long. During the same growing period, we obtained
firm and erect stems 20-20 cm long. We also obtained a much greater weight for the dry
material, and even for the ashes, than for the seeds. A poor photosynthetic action prevents the
formation of carbohydrates. Furthermore, the weights for the dry material or the ashes are
smaller than the seed weights because of the exhaustion of the seed reserves due to the
release of CO
2
in the atmosphere during respiration.
Another point deserves attention. In a controlled atmosphere, the incoming air should contain
some CO
2
as a source for the photosynthetic process. To prevent any external Ca
contamination, this air must be filtered. It should be bubbled through an HCl solution
contained in a flask, so that any trace of Ca, which escaped from the filter, would be retained.
To neutralize any trace of acid carried by air bubbles, it would then be bubbled through a
flask containing a basic solution. The base should not be NaOH which would absorb CO
2
.
NaHCO
3
was used because it lets CO
2
go through freely. We noted no clues in the report we
received from the USA which would lead us to believe that these precautions were ever
taken. After scrubbing in acid and basic solutions, the incoming air is scrubbed in a flask
containing pure, twice-distilled water before it lets CO
2
go through freely. We noted no clues
in the report we received from the USA which would lead us to believe that these precautions
were never taken. After scrubbing in acid and basic solutions, the incoming air is scrubbed in
a flask containing pure, twice distilled water before entering the closed chamber. The
chamber is maintained at a low positive pressure of about 3 mm W.G. to prevent any
unwanted air intake through the gasket.
We will mention another study related to the function of CO
2
. Photosynthesis develops very
poorly without this gas. It is only active for a very short time in the morning when the plant
absorbs the CO
2
it released during the night by respiration. During the night the plant draws
on its reserves of oxygen and carbon and in doing so, becomes weaker. The period of activity
corresponds to the time the light is turned on each day when artifical light is used. The
inverse experiment was also performed by increasing the CO
2
content of the air supply to the
chamber. Zundel showed that a large increase in the CO
2
concnetration (about 10 times the
normal concentration in atmospheric air) led to an unsatisfactory plant metabolism. There is
excess carbon. This requires an abnormal increase in both the absorption of carbon and in the
decomposition, which generates hydrogen and oxygen. As vein sections are too small, the
plant weakens and grows sickly. On the other hand an increase of 2-3 times the natural CO
2

concentration in the air is beneficial. Some algae, chlorella for example, are cultivated in
atmosphere rich in CO
2
.
At this range of CO
2
concentration we observed a new phenomenon. The increase in Ca was
very large (500-600%) and it could not be ascribed solely to the decrease in K. Analyses
showed that Si decreased very significantly, but insufficiently to account for the increase in
Ca.
This phenomenon does not occur in a natural atmosphere as was shown in the work with oat
plants. Various analyses, chemical as well as physical, supported this. In atmospheres
overloaded with CO
2
, there was a large decrease in SiO
2
stored in the seed. This was not
entirely surprising. We knew that in Nature there was a partial inverse compensation between
Ca and Si under specific conditions, which have not yet been completely studied. We studied
the reaction Si
14
+ C
6
>> Ca
20
in various books.
This explains why horsetail (equisitum) silica was used in phytotherapy in antiquity to
recalcify patients. It was necessary to harvest the horsetail at the end of spring, therefore at
the end of the period of full growth, so the silicon would be present as part of organic
compounds and not under the prevailing form of SiO
2
. Silicon is stored as mineral SiO
2
in the
rhyzome of the pant during fall and winter. Similarly, I made a detailed presentation (See
Preuves en Biologie...) of the research by the great French chemist Vauquelin on the balance
of Ca in laying hens. These hens were only fed oats. "Lime" was measured after precipitation
of the carbonates and phosphates contained in the oats and in the excretions from the hens
(eggs and droppings). A large increase in the "lime" balance was noted during these
experiments. Vauquelin thought that this "earth" or lime (we would call it today an alkaline
mineral compound) could only come from another "earth" contained in oats, silica. At the
time, knowledge of the atom was nonexistent. He could not imagine that the K
19
+ H
1
>>
Ca
20
reaction was possible. During his measurements, he observed that the increase in CaO
was greater than the clearly measurable decrease in SiO
2
. From this he concluded with a very
modern rational that Ca could not come totally from Si. The problem still has not been
resolved. We see how long ago (1799) the inverse relation between Si and Ca was noted. We
will not discuss here the hypothesis which would explain the presence of Ca as coming from
the excess CO
2
. Research on this subject is still too speculative.
(3) Conclusions ~
We showed some of the weaknesses in the studies made in the USA, or at least in the
documents which were forwarded to us. Even trained researchers with a background in a
different field can make mistakes. For example, Prof Baranger decided to limit his study to a
single vetch species, Vicia Sativa. He selected it for a reason of convenience because the
seeds were very nearly round and easy to gauge, without any regard for the vegetal biology
aspect. To achieve great accuracy in his measurements, he would weigh 10 seeds from a Petri
dish to 1/100 mg, which is difficult. Each batch of control seeds was weighed separately. So
was each batch of plants, growing on two layers of extra-pure and ash-free paper, moistened
with twice distilled water. For the integrity of the experiment, the data obtained on the
batches of seeds and on the batches of 3-4 week old plants were handed over to a
mathematician, specialized in statistics. Baranger always analyzed a minimum of 100 batches
of seed controls and of 300-400 batches of plants. The data obtained from these hundreds of
analyses showed that in average, there was a significant increase in Ca in the seedlings during
germination.
However, this increase in Ca, which was statistically established, looked too small to me. It
was neither impressive nor spectacular. The increase was usually in the 2-3% range, and
seldom did it reach 6-9%. I always express reservations on the 1% accuracy level in the
chemical analysis of biological materials. Batches of seeds age. Batches extracted from a
given stock over a period of one year are not endowed with the same vitality during their
respective experiments. Even a germination rate of 95% or more does not guarantee 1%
accuracy. Seeds, as with individuals of a same species, have different innate strengths; their
enzymes are not equally active. Averaging the data from hundreds of experiments obviously
alleviates the problem created by these differences. After selecting vetch seeds for handling
convenience, Baranger looked for optimal germination conditions. He noted that in twice
distilled water the increase in Ca was very small. It increased somewhat up to 6-9% when a
Ca salt was added to the water. After trying various salts, he selected calcium chloride
(CaCl
2
). The additional Ca was added to the Ca content of the seed. The sum was then
subtracted from the sum of the Ca contents of the plants and of the filter paper impregnated
with the excretions from the plants. Prof Baranger had to recognize that seeds, stored for a
long time, became moldy as soon as they were dampened. Should then the transformations be
ascribed to the molds or to enzymes in the seed?
We noted that Baranger never mentioned the pH of the culture medium in is reports. He
found that additional Ca strengthened the plant, but he apparently was not aware that this
effect was a calcicole property of vetch, which grows better in the presence of a little Ca, in
an alkaline soil. This is not a clearly calcifuge plant, like oats, which requires an acid
medium, a generator of protons, in order to produce the reaction. Vetch does not have the
enzymes required to form the additional Ca needed for plant growth. There ism hence, a very
small increase in Ca in the plant, usually less than 5% in average. On the other hand, on the
oat plant, the increase is sometimes greater than 100% when it is cultivated in an acid
medium. Such is not the case when the variations observed are 5% or less. For example,
Barangers research on P seems to show a decrease in P in the range of 1-1.5%. This is
questionable even if the precautions taken tend to validate these figures. I should add that
Barangers report does not give any indication that he was worried about the artificial light
spectrum for the glass case he used in his experiments. When I visited his laboratory, he had
no phytolamps with spectra adapted to photosynthesis. He used a Daylight-type lamp,
adapted to human vision. The few experiments performed in sunlight were made under a
glass cover which protected the medium from falling dust, but not from floating dust. His
seedling trays were located in a narrow courtyard, or rather a ventilation well, next to his
laboratory. There was no direct sunlight at all. All his seedlings were deficient in chlorophyll.
This might explain the small size of the variations obtained.
In spite of every precaution he can think of, a specialist in chemistry and biological chemistry
may overlook some aspects of an experiment, because he is too specialized. Yet Baranger
established, in the course of 10 years of research, that in Nature there were variations in some
elements which could not be explained by the theories included in official teachning
programs. Nature can do more than chemistry. Baranger did not want to hypothesize on the
causes of the variations. He did not want to go against established nuclear physical theories
and he chose to limit himself to his specialty and to remain exclusively in the domain of
experimentation. However, we see that it is necessary to leave traditional practices and to use
a large number of different techniques which are often difficult to unify.
It was even more difficult for two specialized researchers in the USA to reach valid
conclusions after making only one series of experiments on small batches (usually 30 seeds
each) and to avoid major pitfalls.
Final Remarks ~
I would like this last experiment to be duplicated again in this university or another. Then the
points made in the present document could be taken into consideration. As preparation, I
believe that it is indispensable to perform a series of experiments on oats only, as this plant
was the subject of many studies. These studies allow the experimenter to locate errors, as
there is by now a solid database for oats established over a long period of experimentation.
For health and age reasons, I cannot travel any more and I declined invitations to travel in the
USA, from the Los Angeles Park Service, for example. Following experiments based on my
work, the Park Service modified its application of fertilizers. The concepts of classical
agronomy have been borrowed directly from chemistry. They lead to excesses or deficiencies
injurious to the plant. What the plant needs is not what is found in the mature plant, at the end
of its metabolism. We saw that this was true of Ca. It is also true for other elements. These
needs vary according to the soil and the plant species (calcicole or calcifuge, for example).
The whole of agronomy must be reconsidered. The same is true for animal husbandry, and
human and animal dietetics. Many dietetic or medical publications deal with applications of
transmutation, a property of living matter. These transmutations are produced under
conditions controlled by nuclear physics and unrelated to the strong interactions which lead
to the atomic bomb. The Life process is gentle. Those of my works which were published
after1974 show how this phenomenon can be integrated in the physics of neutral currents or
weak interactions.
Note: Other experiments were duplicated in the USA in a school, in which a student
presented a paper several tens of pages long each year. The studies were related to several
kinds of plants (oats, wheat, soybeans, barley, gumbo-okra) and to various elements (P, Mg,
Ca, K, Na). I did not mention them before, because it seemed to me that the students
overlooked some important parameters. They did not contact me, nor did their professors. I
only received the data later. I did not have sufficient details to judge if the excessive
dispersions of the results should be ascribed to errors in the growing procedure, to mistakes in
the preparation of samples to be analyzed, or to any other causes.
The same is true for the studies directed by Komaki. I cannot accept the figures I received for
various elements in different kinds of pants: rice, soybeans, garlic and azuki, a species of
small beans. In fact, all these studies show that the respective compositions of a plant and of
its seed are always different. Also in France working groups of students preparing for the
BTS exam (Brevet de Technicien Superieur) in agronomy proceeded to do various studies.
However, the most important precautions mentioned above were not taken. I could not
comment on the variations observed in the data. The same was true for studies made in
Switzerland, Germany and other countries. This is why I thought it important to publish the
information presented in this document.
Figure 13 [Not included here] ~ Groupe de travail dune Ecole Technique Superiuer a
Nantes, en 1976, effechant des researches sur la variation du Ca dans une avoine de variete
Peniarth

Chapter 8
Mass Spectrometer Analysis








In the second half of 1979 I learned that the microanalysis laboratory of CNRS just acquired
a mass spectrometer of a new model linked to a computer. It could measure the elements
quantitatively, as previous instruments gave only rough quantitative indications: "traces", or
if the line was clear, the designation of the element was followed by one, two, or three stars.
Therefore, I had never been able to cross-check positive ion contents by any spectroscopic
method. The determination of the P content was important as it was accepted that the P/Ca
ratio was close to 606.5 for oats when P was determined by chemical techniques. Although I
have described above some aspects of the complex quest for various P compounds, I ignored
some other points. For example, the presence of manganese prevents the analysis of P. It is
eliminated before molybdate is added. The Mn content in oats is small and it is close to the
Fe content. A part of the P, remaining in the form of undetermined compounds, is ignored,
but it has little effect on the total results of the analysis.
For better accuracy, it was necessary to eliminate the error on the low side which was due to
seed and plant incineration. For this reason, I requested from CNRS a mass spectroanalysis of
various positive and negative ions, in order to cross-check the results obtained by the other
techniques. We sent to CNRS powder samples obtained after drying the material at 85 C for
72 hours and grinding it. This was below the limit of 100 C recommended by Gabriel
Bertrand, the temperature at which he operated. By working at lower temperatures, the
vaporization of some organic P compounds and the formation of alkaline slags, insoluble in
subsequent reactions, were prevented. The data presented below for P and Ca only are given
for cross-checking purposes. Lets keep in mind that only one cross-check experiment was
made, and that the values represent the average of two measurements. I received a written
confirmation of this data in early January 1980. The figures are expressed in milligrams of
the particular element per 100 gr of dry material.
S/P/V: P ~ Ca
Seed: 485 ~ 76
Plants: 310 ~ 115.5
Variation: =175 ~ +39.5
The P/Ca ratio is of 6.5, therefore normal. Consequently, I believe the calibration to be
correct. This analysis, which was performed in a French laboratory, does not represent an
absolute proof. The experiment should be repeated many times. As I was only looking for a
cross-check and, as the data was compatible with the data obtained by other techniques, we
may accept the data as reliable. They confirm once more that some variations occur in the
amounts of some elements during the germination of oats, although no additional amount of
these elements was brought from the outside during that period. It was not the purpose of the
CNRS experiment to prove that the increase in Ca was linked to the decrease in P.
Experiments of a completely different type would be needed for that. It is obvious that there
is no quantitative relationship between the absolute values for Ca and P. These discrepancies
cannot be attributed to errors in the experimental procedure as there are increases for some
elements and decreases for others. The figures tabulated above are not absolutely accurate,
because the dry weight of the seed, from which the seedling originates, is not exactly the
same as the dry weight of the control seed. The average weights for seed and seedling were
computed over hundreds of trial. These computations showed little quantitative variation and
no qualitative variation in the data shown above. This is the reason why I do not reproduce
here the details of these experiments. They were published in the scientific press in French,
English, and other languages.
As the quantitative bases are different, it is not legitimate to compare percentage variations,
as some people are tempted to do. After standardization, there is a 32% decrease in P and a
52% increase in Ca. It would be absurd to state that there is an appropriate compensation
around 44 8%.
After receiving a confirmation of the P concentrations in oats at the beginning of 1980, I
decided to further investigate the relative importance of the Ca which is insoluble in HCl.
This is Ca linked to the phosphates. I wanted to use these new figures to prove wrong those
who still insisted that the variations in chemical balances came from inappropriate chemical
analysis procedures. These statements were unwarranted: furthermore, they contradict the
conclusions drawn by their authors. Zundel performed three additional experiments on a total
number of 870 seeds and seedlings. He gave me the results in late November-early December
1980. I received enough data to be able to form an opinion. Peniarth oats used were supplied
by INRA. The seeds weighed an average of 34.21 mg each. Seeds and seedlings were then
incinerated at 950 C and chemical analyses were performed using Prof Charlots technique.
The weight of the material which was insoluble in HCl was 0.013 mg. The amount of Ca in
this material was then determined. The following results were obtained:
Ca content in insoluble material per seed: 0.0032
Average Ca content in insoluble material per seedling: 0.0319
The second figure is equal to almost 10 times the first one. This confirms that an important
molecular transformation happened, and it transferred a very large quantity of Ca into the
insoluble state. Neglecting the Ca linked to the insoluble material leads to a very sizable
underestimation of the Ca production during the germination of oats. This contradicts the
statements made by our professors of botany a few chapters back. Soluble Ca measured in the
seed averaged over the 3 experiments had a weigh of 0.033 mg. The average weight for each
plant was of 0.0511 mg or an increase in Ca amounting to 55%.
It is appropriate to state here the amount of Ca which passed from the roots into the water of
the cultivation medium. I also requested an analysis of the water. Per plant this amount was
of 0.0051 mg, or approximately 1/10 the amount of the content in the plant.
To summarize:
Ca: In Seed ~ In Plant
Ca insoluble: 0.0032 ~ 0.0319
Ca soluble: 0.0350 ~ 0.0511
Ca in water at end of experiment: --- ~ 0.0051
Total: 0.0382 ~ 0.0881
Or an increase of 152% in total Ca.
The comparisons can only be approximate because the measurement of Ca was only
performed by chemical analysis on the ashes. However, the direction the variations are taking
remains the same. The increase in soluble Ca from the seed to the seedling should also be
noted. It is 55%. The data given by CNRS shows a corresponding increase of 52% after mass
spectrometer analysis and standardization to 100 gr of dry material in both seeds and
seedlings. I was not briefed by CNRS about their procedure for preparing the material prior to
analysis by the spectrometer. I do not know if these measurements were performed directly
on a powder, on a spark or on a solution. In any case, the two figures are very close (52 vs
55%). In both cases there is a clear increase in Ca, which could not possibly result from an
underestimation of the total Ca in the seed. On the contrary, if some techniques lend
themselves to underestimation, they concern the seedlings and not the seeds.
Conclusion for this Chapter ~
]
I believe I have shown here that some chemists were conceited to the point of being
laughable when they systematically, out of misplaced pride, rejected the findings of some of
their colleagues. Why dont they themselves perform repeatable experiments with verifiable
quantified data? Unfortunately, many people tend to deny the validity of other peoples work.
They alone can detect the shortcomings of their peers; they carefully avoid doing anything, so
they do not run the risk of being wrong. It is so much easier. This is not science anymore; it is
malicious polemics.
I believe that the scientists mentioned here, all highly respectable in their profession, will
accept that their research quoted in this document, will be checked. They all agree that
analyses of various major elements show completely different results for the seed and the
plants under strictly controlled conditions. Water used for the cultivation is twice distilled;
the air is extra-pure. No contaminating mineral salts may be brought from the outside. They
observed the facts experimentally. They gave quantified data. But they did not interpret their
data, in the hopes of remaining totally objective.
It is our role to interpret them.
I did not mention empirical observations in industry, which were brought to my attention in
1960, because I wanted to dedicate the first chapters of this book to the increase in Ca in oats
during germination. The curing of potting clay by potters has been practiced since antiquity.
It is due to fermentation. So are the malting and the fermentation processes in breweries.
How many more examples couldnt we mention!

Part II
Explanation Of The Phenomena By Modern Physics ~ Theoretical Study







Chapter 1 ~ Explanations From The Atomic Particle Theory
Chapter 2 ~ A Few Examples Of Theories Proposed By Physicists
(1) Process developed by a US Army scientific department ~ (2) L. Romanis
contribution ~ (3) Theory proposed by A. Dubrov ~ (4) A few interesting points of view
expressed by physicists ~ (5) O. Costa de Beauregards theory
Chapter 3 ~ Addenda To The Theoretical Study Of Low Energy Interactions Applied
To Particular Transmutations
(1) Effective section ~ (2) Isotopic variations ~ (3) Nature operates at a finer level than
man ~ (4) Changes in our understanding of some aspects of physics and weakness of this
understanding ~ (5) A few arguments against a unified theory for electromagnetic and
weak interactions ~ (6) Intermediary vector bosons

"Felix qui potuit rerum conoscere causas ~ Fortunate is the man who succeeds in knowing the
(secret) causes of things" ~ Virgil (Georgics)
Chapter 1
Explanations From The Atomic Particle Theory







In order to explain a phenomenon, one must place it in a framework accepted by at least the
majority of scientists.
After I established the existence of biological transmutations, I suggested global formulae at
the atomic level. This was an entirely new idea at the time. It was then impossible for me to
place these formulas in the frame of the strong interactions of the atomic bomb type, which
was generally accepted. I was sure of the experimental results but these results could not be
explained by the prevailing atomic physics of the time. I did not challenge this well-proven
discipline in the least. As I had such strong evidence, I stated instead that we were dealing
with a completely different phenomenon outside the realm of strong interactions. I had no
accepted theory to propose, but I firmly stated that the strong force theory did not apply to the
cases at hand and that it was up to the physicists to find another theory.
Theories are built on facts and not the opposite, especially when it is obvious that specific
phenomena cannot be explained by these theories. Too many physicists keep in forgetting it. I
had the opportunity of mentioning some exceptions to this unfortunate behavior; among the
exceptions are the respected scientists: O. Costa de Beauregard, R. de Puymorin, L. Romani,
J. Barry and others in France. In Russia I referred to Dubrov, Nejman and Korolkov in my
previous works; several others wrote to me on this subject. In the USA, there were Dudley,
Myers, Maxey, Bird and others. In Japan, there were Sakurazawa, Odagiri, Maruyama and
others. Zundel and a few others, such as J. Boucher, performed experiments and did not
formulate any theories. This was also the case in the USA, Argentina, Canada, and India as
well as in other countries.
As there was no theory to explain these phenomena, I could only offer analogs to show that
various structures of the components of the atomic nucleus were possible. I did this over a
period of years. I showed that some schematic explanations, in fact simple vulgarizations
based on the average energy per nucleus concept, were only figments of the mind. I showed
that they could not be verified and that they were certainly wrong. There was room for other
analogs.
An analog necessarily gives a wrong view of a phenomenon. It leads to representing actions
at the atomic or subatomic levels as if they were working at the level of our senses or of the
cell. In fact, these actions cannot be detected at the molecular level, even less by our senses.
These considerations are only secondary, because the general public is primarily interested in
applications. Fortunately for our successors, we will leave them much to discover. As
important as application may be, it is not everything. There is also the satisfaction of
knowing, the interest found in abstract knowledge, which is a strong intellectual stimulus.
We had to wait 15 years, until 1974, before theoretical physics brought us the elements which
were formerly beyond our reach. The readers, who read the previous work I published in
1975, may have noted on page 281, that on July 23, 1874, I wrote to the physicist O. Costa de
Beauregard to confirm the existence of neutral currents. These currents were first discovered
in Weinberg and Salams theory. I believed that this theory could provide a base for the
explanation of transmutations at low energies. This supported the role of neutrinos in the
reactions I had proposed, a role I had suspected. By the second half of 1974 de Beauregard
had succeeded in refining the Weinberg-Salam theory and adapting it to my work. This
adaptation was included as an epilogue to my book, dated December 1974 which was already
at the printer. Dare say that shortly after that, in January 1975, a Nobel Prize official delegate
nominated me for the prize in Physiology and Medicine. The physiologists did not want to
take precedence over the physicists. Weinberg received his Nobel Prize in Physics only in
1979. This confirmed that this theory, the one I mentioned in 1974, was valid and
internationally accepted.
Those who have little interest in theoretical considerations may choose not to read Part II of
this book, but I believe that many will try to understand it. I will attempt to be understood by
the general scientific public; only the final chapter will be written for nuclear physicists. I
will keep in mind that for many of these, this is a completely new and unknown subject. Due
to their ever-increasing specialization, nuclear physicists tend to limit themselves to the
physics of the strong force and to focus only on some parts of this widely expanding science.
For them, this will be an introduction to the physics of weak interactions, a subject which is
still little known, especially in this form. This branch of physics is too new to be the subject
of many high quality publications. There is always a lag of several years between discoveries,
the synthesis of the new information they brought, and the acceptance of this new
information by the majority of the theoreticians. When I started planning for this book in late
1978, I thought I would complete it in 1979, and at that time no works on the physics of the
weak interactions were available. I decided then to include a chapter on this subject. It is
indeed somewhat abstract, but I believe it will be useful to the average scientist unfamiliar
with this branch of physics. The situation evolved after the award of the 1979 Nobel Prize in
Physics. The subject is now better and more commonly known; I decided to modify the plan
of this book. It is impossible to treat a subject in full evolution so the book remains up-to-date
for several years. Therefore, I thought that the scope should be modest and kept general so it
would not be contradicted by the discoveries in process. These discoveries fundamentally
change the picture presented below.
I will not mention strong interactions, which does not mean that I reject them. This would be
silly on my part. However, it should be recognized that too many physicists and too many of
their followers, scientists of various backgrounds, tend to grant too wide a scope to the data in
nuclear physics. One can always argue about an extrapolation and sometimes an
extrapolation may be plainly wrong.
I do not wish to argue about Einsteins laws. I accept them, although I do not always agree
with the people who use them any old way. The postulates, on which they were based, should
always be kept in mind. Indeed, Einstein never extrapolated these laws. E reminded his
dogmatic worshippers about their limits. In particular, he noted that his laws did not apply to
biology. He could not say why, but it was obvious that biological experiments were not ruled
by his laws. Einstein did not know about the neutrino when he formulated his laws. He only
knew that his knowledge was limited and that a lot of nonsense had been spoken and taught
about the restricted relativity law E = MC
2
. In this law C
2
is a constant and M is proportional
to E (and vice versa). It always remains a linear law, a first degree curve; in other words, a
straight line. This is why he had to search for his General Relativity Law, in order to explain
the curvature of light in the vicinity of large masses such as the sun or any large star.
Curvature means change of velocity, a factor of the second order. So many scientists forget
that M is not the stationary mass designated as Mo; it is in fact a relativistic mass.
One often forgets also that the mass-energy conversion is not a simplistic rule. We do not
know how to convert any old mass to energy. We first have to use some energy which
produces anti-matter which in turn gives energy after annihilation. We do not know how to
destroy a proton or a neutron. These particles remain unchanged in an atomic explosion or in
a fission reaction. Only a small part of the linking energy between nuclei is used. I do not
intend to discuss the heavy particles, the baryons, or their components, such as the quarks, or
even the gluons which supposedly link the quarks. There are vast problems in this area which
is in full evolution, but these problems do not concern the fields of weak energy. Indeed, we
will mention the hadrons in our study of weak interactions. The first statement on the
existence of weak interactions was made soon after the discovery of the neutron. Obviously, a
neutron was not simply a proton plus an electron. There was a particle, which could not be
detected at the time, but which was necessary to restore mass balance. It was named neutrino.
A very careful study of natural radioactivity showed that there was an electromagnetic
phenomenon, the emission of one electron, but that there was also the emission of one anti-
neutrino. Similarly, we will introduce the notion of proton movement in the course of our
study of weak interactions, in relation with other phenomena such as the tunnel effect or the
effective section.
We will study these phenomena a little later. Other particles must also be introduced. They
are necessary to the theory, but they have not been experimentally isolated yet. These are
some of the essential elements of the theory, for which the 1979 Nobel Prize was awarded.
They are the intermediary virtual vector bosons. We will spend a little more time on them.
As early as July1974 I had focused on Weinbergs theory, which was followed shortly by
Salams theory. I related this fact in a letter excerpt in the book given to the printer at the end
of 1974 and published in early 1975. I applied this theory to a biological phenomenon I had
discovered. But what is more important? The proof of the existence of a biological
phenomenon or the theory behind it? It is not up to me to judge. I cannot be the judge and
party at the same time. Furthermore, how should we judge when the problem straddles across
biology and physics, and when specialists of either discipline will be called upon to cast a
judgment. Each one tends to form an opinion on the basis of his own knowledge. It is only
human. There are no interdisciplinary Nobel Prizes. There is a Prize in Physics, another in
Physiology or Medicine. Specialization is a rule everywhere, especially in physics. The
biologist does not want to innovate and he follows the physicist. This is why the official
delegate who nominated me for the 1975 Nobel Prize I Physiology or Medicine was not
followed by his colleagues on the Nominating Committee. He was not a Frenchman. Nobody
is a prophet in his own backyard. Only in 1979 did the Physics Nominating Committee award
their prize for the Weinberg-Salam theory which I had adopted 5 years earlier. Lets not
dwell on the past. The essential was to prove that a fact scientifically established after many
indisputable experiments was in line with the classic theory. I am trying to show here that the
clear evidence obtained for this phenomenon and its multiple implications, represent a major
turning point for Science internationally. Theories other than Weinbergs were proposed
throughout the world to explain the phenomenon. I believe that the most widely accepted
theory was proposed by the physicist de Beauregard. It was refined during the second half of
1974 and its principle was then accepted by Bernard dEspagnet, a well-known atomic
particle specialist. The theory was summarized in my book of 1975. It was not refuted, but it
was only a schematic explanation. I completed this theory by introducing the intermediary
vector bosons in various publications as early as 1976. This is the reason why I will give
more attention to this theory and I will describe only briefly a few others, which incidentally
provide very interesting complements to this theory. I will describe this complementary
information in greater or lesser detail.


Chapter 2
A Few Examples of Theories Proposed by Physicists ~







(1) Process Proposed by a US Army Scientific Department ~
A department of the US Army Scientific and Technical Services headed by S. Goldfein
studied my research. The team gathered for this purpose worked on the report from
December 1977 to April 1978, and the report was published in May 1978. It was distributed
to numerous specialized service in the various branches of the Armed Forces (Army, Navy,
Air Force, General Services). It included 28 pages, not counting the cover, and 8 figures. In it
Goldfein proposed an explanation based on physical chemistry, delineating a possible process
which must still be developed and defined more precisely.
Numerous calculations made by the authors of the report, too few according to them, showed
homogeneous results. They showed that the reactions originating from my research
confirmed a gain in energy. There was a new source of energy, which had to be investigated
more closely. In our time no source of energy should be neglected just because it was
insufficiently studied. This was the reason this agency, highly respected worldwide, decided
to intervene.
Classic physics shows that K + H >> Ca + 0.008 a.m.u. This means that in the reaction v + H
+ K >> Ca + v, the energy taken by the outgoing neutrino v should be greater than the
energy brought in by the incoming neutrino v. In other words, in biology the production of
energy should not be limited to the sole exoenergetic chemical reactions. Exoenergetic
reactions of physical origin should also be considered, although the energies involved are
modest compared to the energy of fusion by the strong interaction. They are far from being
negligible, as they result in a positive balance of approximately 40% for the cases studied.
We noted from de Beauregard: v + p >> v + p with v =/ v (see the last chapter in our book
of 1975). The US Army Scientific Services state: v >> v and v ~ v + 40%. Could this be
attributed to a fusion process produced following a process other than the strong interactions
process?
The report describes an example based on the oxidative phosphorylation process in
mitochondria. Some animal cells include up to 7,000 mitochondria. From the energetic point
of view, the active molecule is ATP after chelation of one Mg atom (Mg-ATP) under the
action of an enzyme, Mg-ATPase. I discussed this process in more details in my book of
1975, in particular on page 85. I first presented the beginning of its study in my book of 1968,
now out of print.
The US Army study shows also an action by D-ribose molecules interacting with the Mg-
ATP to produce a rotation of the acyl-oxygen dipoles linked to P atoms. Schematic
representations and computations lead to a helix with H+ ions in an unsaturated ionic
structure. A link is established between the D-ribose and the form gamma oxygen. The Mg
++

chain electrons (axial chain of 10 Mg
++
in the study) produce an oscillating electric field
leading to a resonance. An H
+
ion, introduced between the components of an OH and
gamma-O pair, ends up on a circular helix trajectory of approximately 30 Angstroms
diameter under the dipoles impulsion. Following this hypothesis, the hydrogen H
+
positive
ions would finally acquire a very high rotational velocity. This would be a relativistic
velocity, so to speak, due a cyclotron effect, such that H
+
would cross the potential barrier of
an atomic nucleus and penetrate into it. If the proton receiver is an atom of K the reaction
would be: K
19
+ + H
1
>> Ca
20
.
The development of this hypothesis fills about 14 pages of the report. It is very interesting
because it provides an explanation for a physico-biological process partially established by
various studies. This hypothesis should be applied to other cases. I thought it was opportune
to mention it here because the US Army could not pursue the research for lack of funds, as it
commonly happens everywhere in the world. At least the agency wanted to show the solid
bases for the hypothesis.
In the first part of this chapter I did not intend to give my full and unconditional approval to
the study. The author of the report was fully conscious that complementary studies were
necessary and that the study completed constituted only a first step. He would have liked to
receive sufficient funds to be able to take one more step. At the time I am writing these lines,
this has still not occurred.
It is obvious, for example, that special procedures should be applied for the measurements
related to energy balances. These measurements are very complicated. Known calorimetric
methods cannot be applied, because neutrinos intervene, as we are here in the domain of
weak interactions. Neutrinos interact only very seldom with matter, A large part of the energy
is carried away under a virtual form, so to speak. It goes through space without affecting our
senses or our measurement instruments. How can we measure it?
How can we measure the energetic contributions from enzymes or from ATP? Here we are
dealing at the molecular level. There are uncertainties in the values measured indirectly by
methods based on theories which may be questioned in the future.
Many more points need to be investigated more thoroughly. Much uncertainty remains
regarding the quantitative study of energy balances and also regarding the qualification of the
operator. Many questions should also be raised on various theoretical points. It is pointless to
list them here. The main point is the experimental study leading to the confirmation or the
refutation of a theory. It is not the blind respect of theory.
I congratulate S. Goldfein for his report. Synthesis of physics and biology, such as the one he
presented, are rate. There is here a wide filed for research which is not even being explored in
most countries. Some aspects of the physics were left aside by the US Army scientists, weak
energy interactions in particular. Few traditional physicists knew about the work of Weinberg
and Salam before it was widely publicized after the Nobel Prize award at the end of 1979. S.
Goldfein and his associates stated some synthetic considerations of the highest interest and
their study is very encouraging. I have condensed too much the published report any my
summary may be inaccurate, because incomplete. The subject is so vast that it is difficult to
condense. Some American magazines presented summaries even more succinct than mine in
order to prod the reader to refer to the original report. The reputation of the agency which
issued the report is a guarantee that the study was done in earnest. My research reached
renowned agencies throughout the world. Its value was confirmed by my nomination for the
Nobel Prize by a scientist belonging to this internationally known agency. I started my
presentation with the US Army study, because to my knowledge, it was the most detailed
study published by an author and because the synthesis of physics and biology is most
interesting despite the reservations made by theoreticians on some of its pints. The future
alone will tell.
(2) L. Romanis Contribution ~
I must also discuss at some length a study made by the physicist L. Romani because it was
not published insofar as I know. L. Romani is a well-known fluid mechanics specialist. He is
known in particular for his remarkable contribution to the original, simple and efficient
solution of specific technical problems in the field of wind energy (automatically controlled
windmills) and of wind effect prevention (on suspended bridges, for example). He is the
director of the Eiffel Laboratory, in which air flow studies are made for the purpose of
improving aerodynamic shapes (aircrafts, automobiles, etc.). Eiffels laboratory facilities
include a wind tunnel, which is used to check computations on scaled models. This work
brought L. Romani to reexamine some aspects of acoustical waves and more generally of all
waves.
His keen understanding of energy problems related to air flow brought hi to study my work
because of its implications in the field of energy. As soon as 1963, he proposed for it a purely
physical examination which I presented in part in a book published in 1964. The validity of
his calculations was accepted by two respected scientists mentioned in his paper. However, it
seemed that the generalization of the phenomenon ran against some observations pointed to
me by a well-known specialist of wave mechanics. For this reason I did not publish the
remaining of Romanis study in my subsequent publications. I did not even include the text
published in 1964, as this study presented only a historical interest.
However, Romani did not forget the matter. To this day he was not able to propose a global
explanation of the process encompassing all the points established in my research.
Nevertheless he showed that one should not forget particular fundamental points resulting
from the study of wave phenomena if one does not want to become lost in farfetched theories.
This respected physicist published a basic work in two volumes on his theories, Theorie
Generale de lUnivers Physical... [blurred line in photocopy]... (A. Blanchard, Paris). He
frequently used dimensional equations. As far as my work is concerned, one should refer
mainly to partial studies, in particular to mimeographed copies of lectures he gave at the
Sorbonne and in various other places mainly from 1976 to 1978.
In November 1976, for example, he expounded various original points of view on energies at
Cercle de Physique A. Dufour in relation to Relativity and energy transmission via the ether,
which he still fully supports. He defended his position on this subject in multiple lectures. He
accepts four types of energy, as everybody does today in a non-definitive and non-limitative
way. He also stated the following:
(1) The body on which the gravitational field is exerted, or mass, has the dimension of an
inverse length L
-1
;
(2) The body on which is exerted the weak nuclear field, or hypermass, has the dimension of
a Gauss curvature L
-2
;
(3) The body on which the electric field is exerted, or charge, has the same dimension as the
ratio of a torsion by a curvature. It is a pseudo-scalar number;
(4) The body on which the strong nuclear field is exerted has te same dimension as a torsion,
L
-1
.
One can see here some of the fundamental differences in the nature of the fields for the four
types of energy. These lead us to express some reservations on some unified theories which
can only unify everything in confusion or in a generalization devoid of precise meaning.
I will come back to some of the differences in the main characteristics of the representative
waves for these forms of energy, as they were outlined by L. Romani. I will only mention in
passing various pertinent comments made by L. Romani, which are forgotten too often.
According to him, photons are not waves but they are pairs of whirls. This concept leads him
to original views which are far from being unanimously accepted by physicists. Waves do not
carry energy; they carry information. Romani is far from admitting the classic definition of
information as given by Brillouin and others. To consider information as the co-logarithm of
entropy would be a mistake, as information cannot consume any energy. Otherwise the
French language would not make sense anymore! But is it all that new? Blaise Pascal wrote:
"I never argue about a name, provided I am told about the meaning which is given to it".
Dialectic is still with us. A piece of information is a data, something abstract; it is something
potential. It is only when the information is used that there is energy consumption. The whole
entropy question should be reviewed, as it is generally agreed. In 1977-1978, J. Tonnelat
addressed this problem in a work in two volumes. He showed how poorly defined the
problem was. This problem is extensively reconsidered in J. Tonnelats books. The reader
will have a different view of the entropy (and negentropy) problem after reading them. "It is
not right to consider entropy as energy, although both are dimensionally equivalent" (p. 158).
One should also keep in mind some considerations which the author does not even mention.
In particular, and I insist on this point, the problem of energy in living matter should not be
looked at in the sole light of thermodynamics. Lets not forget the action of neutrinos coming
from the ambient medium (lets say cosmic; lets not be fooled by words) on the life
phenomenon. This is an essential point for our work, as we will see later.
Lets come back to a remark by L. Romani: a wave only propagates a movement. The
associated photon (electromagnetic energy) carries the information. In each point, at every
instant the kinetic energy of the undulatory movement is derived from the potential of the
Ether. There would be no energy transport by the waves of the local Ether. These waves are
used as signals; they transport the information. Information initiates a similar movement in
the receiver, which derives the necessary energy from the Ether and transforms this energy
into kinetic energy, the only form of energy we can perceive. This is why a wave appears to
carry energy. Romanis Ether concept is new; it is the "tense" Ether.
(a) Waves and Low Energy Transmutations ~
I will not summarize here L. Romanis views on waves. He dedicated to them Ondes
Inconnues (which was only mimeographed), a very dense work, too long to be summarized.
However I will refer to it in the later part of this book, because Romanis views on waves are
too important to be ignored or forgotten. It is essential to keep them in mind in order to
remember the fundamental differences between the various manifestations by other forms of
energy fields. For the time being, I will only quote a few statements made by Romani:
(1) Strong nuclear energy field waves are either centripetal or transversal and circularly
polarized;
(2) Weak nuclear field waves are longitudinal and circularly polarized.
I emphasize that only circularly polarized energy forms, as defined by Romani, seem to be
capable of producing element transmutations. This is a personal comment and it should not
be attributed to Romani. I am only borrowing his wave classification, not the effects of the
waves, which he did not mention. Wave effects were derived form my studies. I do not
pretend to establish a general and absolute rule, valid for all transmutations, but only for the
specific transmutations I was able to check.
Gravitational waves (if there was such a thing) would be longitudinal and not polarized.
Electromagnetic waves would be transversal with a rectilinear polarization.
It is often said to simplify that "all simple displacements are either rotations or translations.
Furthermore, a wave is either transversal or longitudinal". In short, it follows that:
(1) Gravitational waves are longitudinal and not polarized;
(2) Weak field waves are longitudinal and circularly polarized;
(3) Electromagnetic waves are transverse and linearly polarized (in a plane perpendicular to
the direction of propagation);
(4) Strong field waves are transverse and circularly polarized.
The first two longitudinal types can pass through shields, just like sound waves.
In fact, undulatory phenomena are seldom simple. In the course of their propagation, waves
may differ from the original forms in which they were emitted. Transverse waves may be
linearly polarized in the plane perpendicular to the direction of propagation. Hybrid waves
may occur such s waves polarized in a plane including the direction of propagation. Others
are transverse and circularly polarized in the plane perpendicular to the direction of
propagation. They could consist of the sum of two conjugated waves in quadrature.
The wave question is complex and I cannot suggest any work covering the whole subject.
The course by J. Bo and N. Hulin-Jong (Hermann), Ondes Electromagnetiques-Relativite,
brings up interesting points of view, but it tackles only one type of wave and does not provide
for any comparison, as it deals only with electromagnetic waves. These waves cannot cause
weak energy transmutations, which are associated to waves of a completely different nature.
I will come back later on specific ideas of Romani which I associated with some effects
which he did not mention. These effects are in line with the additional information that
Romani sent to me in May 1977 and that I discussed at the ARK-ALL inter-university
meeting of June 1977. My paper was printed in ARK-ALL Publication 1978, Vol. 4 (1): 49-
63. I will have the opportunity to come back later to some fundamental differences between
weak energy fields and other types of fields,
(2) Theory Proposed by Dubrov ~
In various letters, Alex. Dubrov, Dr in Science and Member of the Geophysics Institute of the
Sciences Academy of Moscow, shared with me his ideas on the theoretical mechanism of
biological transmutations. I will give here a brief summary of the information contained in
The Geomagnetic Field and Life, a book he published in the USA in 1978. This was a
corrected and much enlarged version of the book in Russian published in 1976. Dubrov sent
me a copy of his initial book in Russian.
The Geomagnetic Field and Life-Magnetobiology is a big book published by Plenum Press,
NY. It contains a bibliography of over 50 pages as well as 82 figures. In this work the author
gives many experimental results related to electromagnetic effects of the earth on live matter.
Some of the points studied were accepted by Prof G. Piccardi, formerly Director of Physics
Laboratory of the University of Florence. I met Prof Piccardi several times and he sent me his
book The Chemical Basis of Medical Climatology, published in the US in 1962 by C.C.
Thomas, Springfield. He spent much time studying the effect of solar fields on the rate of
precipitation of colloids, on human colloids, cells and blood in particular. He published
Biolelectric Rhythms in Human Blood in Holland, 1970.
Dubrov believes that geomagnetic effects are exerted at a very low level, even at a subatomic
level, in the framework of the weak energy interactions. Geomagnetic field changes could
reverse the spin of elementary particles, transforming a [ 1 sentence missing text ]. In some
cases they could cause dissymmetry by mirror effect (a 180 degree rotation). These molecular
modifications in turn could alter the oscillatory rhythms in several parameters of the living
organisms. The infractions to the symmetry law are important. They remain very much in the
actuality, as attested by the 1980 Nobel Prize in Physics. This prize was awarded to a
physicist who researched some specific infractions to the law of symmetry. His work was
done some time ago, but the award shows how much interest the infractions to the law of
symmetry still arouse.
In 1980 Dubrov published another book in Russian on mirror symmetries. He sent it to me,
but I do not know if it will be published in English. He advised me of the publication by
Planum, NY in 1981. This new book will be co-authored by an America named Pushkin. In
his book of 1978, Dubrov applies the geomagnetic field to biological transmutations,
following the formulas I proposed several years before. He mentioned these formulae in his
book of 1980. It seems that he did it from memory as he made some errors.
He quoted some studies which show that magnetic fields of 1,000-5,00 oersteds modify the
amounts of dry material and ashes in plants as compared to seeds from which they originated.
No minerals were brought from the outside during these studies. The same fields cause
changes in oligo-elements according to these studies, which could only be explained by a
transmutation of some elements.
The cumulative effect of changes in the earth magnetic field, due to earth rotation, of proton
showers and other factors, could produce structural inter-chromosome inversion by rotating
one chromosome segment. In so doing it would modify the coding for the synthesis of
enzymatic proteins. According to Dubrov, the genetic code would be based on a pentametric
symmetry and the RNA triads would be arranged in an icosahedron. If these triads would be
arranged in an icosahedron. If these triads were rotated by 180 degrees, alterations in residual
amino acids could result. A change in the position of a single asymmetric atom is sufficient to
modify the property of elementary particles which are becoming symmetric. In this fashion
racemic tryptophan could be transformed into laevo-tryptophan. Lets remember the
importance of asymmetric carbon in organic chemistry.
A magnetic spin reversal could be the initial cause of this transformation according to
Dubrov. Elementary particles are very sensitive to variations in the parameters which involve
weak energies. In this way there would be a correlation between macrocosm and microcosm.
Geomagnetic field effects should be studied more closely in the light of the progress made I
wave mechanics, communications, cosmology, and geophysics. They show tat there is no
theoretical impossibility in accepting that some biological transmutation do not belong to the
domain of strong interactions and that they can be explained by weak energy interactions.
Dubrovs study is most interesting because it emphasizes the mechanism ... [missing page in
text --- badly blurred photocopy]
According to Dubrov, there could be no significant interactions between neutrinos and living
matter without actions by the enzymes, whatever the direct cosmic effects. As member of an
agency affiliated to the University of Moscow, Dubrov focuses on a point worthy of
additional studies. For the time being he shows mainly the directions which may lead to the
explanation of the phenomena. He barely touched on their quantitative study.
(4) A Few Interesting Points of View Expressed by Physicists ~
Various theories were proposed to explain the phenomenon of transmutation by living matter.
The physicist Rene de Puymorin thought of a stationary wave mechanism similar to the
sound mechanism. Based on the computation of several specific data, he concluded that
electrostatic repulsion was wavelike and that it was not continuous or hyperbolic. He states
its wavelength and from there his computations enable him to determine other aspects of the
potential barrier. His study is primarily based on a specific concept of the electron structure. I
am afraid of distorting his point of view in summarizing it too succinctly. The reader should
refer directly to the work LOrigine de la Gravitation, published in 1975 by La Pensee
Universelle, Paris. In this book R. de Puymorin expresses different views on various
problems presented in a fairly simple and very personal way. It is food for thought. This
small book of 64 pages is easy to understand. Puymorin discusses biological transmutations
in 11 pages only. He sent me several other more extensive studies which had never been
published. I cannot refer the reader to them, and I have no room here to include the various
notes puymorin sent me.
(5) Costa de Beauregards Theory ~
As early as 1963 the physicist O. Costa de Beauregard saw the possibility of introducing the
action of neutrinos in the reactions which I published in 1960. I noted this possibility in my
book Transmutations a Faibles Energies, published by Maloine in 1964. C. de Beauregard
said he was convinced that the energy balance in my reactions could only be understood
though the effect of massless and chargeless particles.
He immediately ruled out neutrinos, of which he thought first, because the conservation
principles were not respected. Only 10 years later could he formulate a theory satisfying these
objections, at the time the neutral current theory was introduced. This theory constituted a
major progress in the physics of elementary particles.
This theory was summarized by the simple formula: p + v>> p + v , or:
i
N + p
1
>>
p
N + v .
I had observed that such reactions were experimentally verified only for odd A nuclei and
that they yielded modified even A nuclei with a
1
H
1
(or
1
p
1
) proton. At the time none of my
experiments showed that it was possible to jump from an even A to the A of rank
immediately superior. No experiment showed either that it was possible to go down scale
from N
+1
to N by a single step.
We had: p =/ p and v =/ v because the energy of the incident p proton was different from the
energy of the p proton included in the nucleus. A neutrino of v energy was absorbed and a
neutrino of v energy was re-emitted. The energy difference was emitted into the ambient
space without thermal effect or without any other effect on the material. This explained the
energy balance observed. Such a formula satisfied the most rigorous conservation of energy,
mass, impulse, angular momentum, spins, baryonic and leptonic numbers, etc. It could not be
refuted with any theory.
I will not give more details on de Beauregards theory. He presented it himself in the
epilogue of my book, Preuves en Biologie de Transmutations a Faible Energie (Maloine,
1975). In the last chapter I reported on our active correspondence during the time de
Beauregard was working on his theory. The principles of this theory came to his mind in the
spring of 1974 after the existence of neutral currents was confirmed. He asked me to insert it
at the end of my book, which was then at the galleys for publication in 1975.
A neutrino provided the necessary impulsion so that a proton can be included in an atomic
nucleus by tunnel effect in accordance with quantum mechanics. This was the basis of de
Beauregards theory. For example:
V + K
19
+ H
1
--> Ca
20
+ v
1
( with v =/ v )
The v neutrino is expelled in order to reestablish the energy balance between the two sides of
the formula. The incident neutrino v provides the initial energy or the impulse which permits
to introduce the H
+
into the nucleus of the potassium atom.
Costa de Beauregard noted that his theory was only a preliminary framework and that it had
to be completed. To this end a change in the transition natural possibilities under the effect of
an information structure inherent in the life phenomenon, had to be considered, according to
him.
The theory still holds after 7 years if progress in the physics of elementary particles. As soon
as 1976 I introduced various complementary concepts to enlarge and further document some
theoretical physical aspects of the basic principle which was published in early 1975. These
complements engage my sole responsibility. They cannot be attributed to de Beauregard I any
way.


Chapter 3
Complements To The Theoretical Study Of Weak Energy Interactions
Applied To Some Transmutations







As soon as 1975 I studied some complementary ideas which I thought necessary in order to
enlarge the theoretical physics basis laid down by de Beauregard.
Both of us lectured in London in 1975 in front of a large audience during the May Lectures
and the morning after in front of specialists at the Kings College.
These developments were the subject of various publications in French and English from
1976 through 1978, especially during the latter year. Different aspects of physics and
progresses realized in this science since 1975 led us to define more precisely the initial
concepts. I will briefly describe here the scope of our knowledge as of the beginning of 1981.
Fundamental concepts are too often unknown of the physicists bogged in obsolete ideas.
These concepts have been insufficiently publicized, unfortunately. This explains why these
physicists are taking positions incompatible with the new science of the weak energies
interactions. I can only discuss here a few fundamental points.
An objection, still raised in 1980, is that the effective section of interaction between neutrinos
and protons is too small to permit a weight change in the material. O. Costa de Beauregard
had precluded this objection in his ending note to my book of 1975. At the time he based his
concept of effective section only on classical theoretical considerations accepted by most
physicists.
Already in 1974 this notion was contested. It was based on the results of statistical
evaluations which were too general, oversimplified, sometimes purely imagined and not
confirmed by precise calculations. Incidentally, one did not know how to perform these
calculations at the time. The question was more complicated than it was assumed at the time,
and in a sense it was premature. The subject was discussed in lectures given during the 1974
summer session at Gif-sur-Yvette. In the June 1974 of Physics Today, it was noted that the
neutrino-hadron effective section did not have a fixed value and that it did not vary only with
the energy of the incident neutrino. It was proportional to the square of the atomic mass of the
nucleus. On other words, if the target was a K39 nucleus, then the square of this number
should be introduced in the calculations. A considerable scale change resulted. A neutrino,
which passes through a nucleus, comes close enough to all the nucleons in the atoms to react
with each one. It is not absurd to conceive that the electrons other than the K orbit, revolve
around the concentrated group of nuclei, when nuclei are very close to each other. This is the
case in molecules, in which nuclei keep only around themselves the two electrons revolving
on the K orbit. These electrons can even revolve in the interspace between nuclei. In this way
there are many different orbits. Some organic molecules may have molecular masses
reaching several tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands. The effect of an incident
neutrino is felt by the whole nuclei cluster.
Additional studies were going to support my ideas. In a 2-page paper published October 6,
1975, in Physics Letters entitled "Are Solar Neutrinos Detected by Living Things?", Ruderfer
quoted the results of experiments performed on the giant calmar. He computed the effects of
these neutrinos on mammal brains, as he had noticed that the sensitive part of a neuron
(axons and dendrites) can amount to 100-1,000 times the volume of a body cell. This brings
us to review the notion of capturing section, or more precisely, of effective interactive
section. A 5-page study in English by Ruderfer, "Neutrino Structure of the Ether", published
in Lettre al Nuovo Cimento (May 3, 1975), makes for an interesting read. So do other articles
on neutrinos published by the same author in this periodical as well as in other American
magazines. Some of these articles date back to 1968 and they deal with physiological and
psychic points of view.
(2) Isotopic Variations ~
I mentioned several times the wrong postulates accepted as classic by some physicists and
phytobiologists. These errors are taught in schools of science, in schools of agronomy of high
level, etc. Among these the invariance of the isotopic composition for a given element is most
commonly accepted.
I pointed out for example that photosynthesis is not a uniform phenomenon for all plants. His
was a recall for some and a first for others.
Isotopic variations explain the discrepancies in atomic mass between studied vegetal samples
given by analysis. In my first book, published in 1962, I quoted discrepancies in the atomic
mass of K measured with a mass spectrometer in potatoes. The mass varied according to the
variety. These variations were not mentioned because they were attributed to errors in the
laboratory procedure. Any other explanation could not be believed.
Too many physicists and in their lead, phytobiologists, chemical physicists, medical doctors,
agronomists and others, still ignored at this date these ideas seldom taught in school. For
them, the isotopic composition is stable and the atomic mass is given in chemical tables.
For how many physicists, even nuclear physicists, this axiom has become a taboo. Some told
me, "Your reactions will only be accepted when you show that initial isotopes correspond
quantitatively to final isotopes". To illustrate their point, according to them the increase in Ca
in a plant must represent the sum of an atom of K and an atom of H, such that K
39
+ H
1
>>
Ca
40
or K
41
+ H
1
>> Ca
42
. There is very little heavy hydrogen (deuterium) and it can be
neglected usually. However it is not always the case. It is obvious that all the stable isotopes
of Ca cannot be derived from the stable isotopes of K and H. I will state again that so far I
never observed that Nature had to start from radioactive isotopes and that it could not
produce radioactive elements. I do not pretend that it is not so and I insist on this point: I
never observed it personally. Studies were made on this subject with extremely sensitive
instruments, as at the French Centre dEtudes Nucleaires in Saclay. Hence it was proved that
the N
15
+ O
16
>> P
31
reaction by microbial action could only be obtained from N
15
and O
16
,
and that all other P isotopes would be unstable and radioactive.
All radioactive isotopes found in living matter come from the outside, as it is the case in
particular for C
14
and K
40
; furthermore they are found there in microscopic doses. A complete
study of these cases must still be made as they occur during germination. I lacked the time
and the financial resources required for such a study.
Studies made on K and Ca isotopes show that the isotopic composition of a plant is different
from the isotopic composition of a seed from which it originated. Photosynthesis should be
kept in mind. We saw that it may vary according to the photosynthesis cycle specific to the
vegetal family. This is why we can state that the people, who misinterpret the quantitative
inequalities between isotopes in biological transmutations, make unwarranted generalizations.
This should not be construed as a weak point in my observations, but only as the proof of
their ignorance.
One should also keeping mind what I stated in my earlier books and what I summarized in
my book of 1975. All the Ca does not come from an agglomeration, from a fusion of K and
H. there are other sources which vary according to the calcicole or calcifuge character of the
plant. Specific species may need an alkaline, acid or neutral soil. A legume is not cultivated
as rye grass or oats. Some plant families can transform manganese into iron. The reaction
may be reversed in other plants and in other soils. The reaction is as follows: Mn
55
+ H
1
>>
Fe
56
. In animals the following reactions occur frequently Mg
24
+ O
16
>> Ca
40
. The various
stable isotopes of Mg and O correspond to stable Ca isotopes. Other stable Ca isotopes may
lead to think that they come from stable silicon and carbon isotopes. I dedicated several
chapters to these transmutations in my earlier books. I noted that in 1799 Vauquelin
suspected such a correlation, although he did not mention it. Nuclear questions were
unknown at the time. His chemical analyses showed an increase in Ca and a decrease in Si
which were not quantitatively equivalent. He could not have thought of the K + H
transmutation. I did not have the time to investigate the various potential origins of the Ca.
Simplifications are out of the question and generalizations even more so. Naturally Vauquelin
could not introduce isotopes in his comparisons, as the isotope concept was totally unknown
at the time.
I also showed the isotopic correlation Fe
56
- He
4
>> Cr
52
which is valid for the four stable
isotopes of Fe and Cr. He
4
is the alpha particle. The correlation holds also to the few
thousandths for the ratios between stable isotopes. I discussed this point in particular in my
last two books. One should keep in mind this neutronic activation property. Its concept is
completely ignored, even rejected with contempt, by many specialists. For them there are no
differences in the compositions of live and dead matters. Life can only engage in chemistry,
in which discipline nothing is lost and nothing is created. However, there is an indisputable
variation during germination, as we showed in the first part of this book. We proved that the
creation of Ca in oat after germination in a medium which could not receive any calcium
from the outside. To compute the total Ca weight according to the isotopic ratio for a specific
nucleus may seem to be a figment of the mind. However, one should not forget that the
isotopic compositions given in the Atomic Mass Tables used in chemistry appeared to be so
different from each other that it was necessary to define internationally the origin of the
element selected as isotopic composition standard. Discrepancies are often greater than
1/1,000. In some cases they can be much greater, for the deuterium/light hydrogen ratio, for
example, because the deuterium atomic mass is nearly the double of atomic mass of light
hydrogen. In some reactions, decreases of up to 70% in H were noted compared to the initial
isotopic mixture. This is the phenomenon which allowed isotopic enrichments by separation
of light and heavy isotopes. This separation can be obtained kinematically by diffusion
through the appropriately calibrated hole of a porous membrane. There is no transmutation in
this case, but obviously one should have some reservation regarding some methods used to
track Ca or other elements, by neutronic activation for example. This does not mean that this
technique should be absolutely rejected from the outset, but that the results must be cross-
checked whenever the analysis is performed on living material. By neutronic activation the
stable Ca48 becomes radioactive Ca
49
which is easily identified with accuracy. It seems that
the ratios between these two Ca isotopes and the total Ca remains constant in the seeds as
well as in the plants. It is therefore possible to use them to measure the total Ca. However,
this does not explain the origin of Ca
42
in the total Ca in live materials. One should remember
that there is only 0.18.1,000 (less than 0.3/1,000) of Ca
48
in the standard. This extremely
small concentration can only be marginally detected by many analytical techniques. This may
be one reason why it is so difficult to trace the origin of this isotope. In oats its concentrations
increase from the seed to the plant. Whatever happens, it is accepted that the Ca
48
/total Ca
remains approximately constant. Total Ca variation is computed according to the variation in
activated Ca.
In this regard the director of a neutronic activation analysis laboratory wrote to me in
February 1976:
"We measure the Ca coming from the Ca
48
>> Ca
47
reaction. Therefore the activation analysis
yields basically the amount of Ca. The total Ca is obtained by accepting (assuming) the
natural distribution of isotopes".
For many physicists this acceptance is still an act of faith at the present day. There can be
exceptions, though this is not obvious, as I and many others before me could observe it.
However results obtained by the neutronic activation technique should never be accepted
blindly; they should always be cross-checked by chemical analysis (a gravimetric technique
in particular). Sometimes I have another cross-check made by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry (with a Beckman or Perkin-Elmer instrument).
Macroscopically the question of the origin of the Ca isotope is unimportant, because this
element represents only 2/1,000 of the total. However, I do not underestimate the theoretical
importance it may represent and it is the reason why I discussed it here, so physicists would
not forget, sometimes willfully, or would not ignore the biological causes of some physical
phenomena, among them the isotopic selectivity of live materials.
(2) Nature Operates at a Finer Level than Man ~
How much progress was achieved in chemistry in the last 100 years! It is now to the point
that chemistry invades everything, that all products on the market owe their existence to
chemistry and very few products are natural anymore. Unfortunately there are people who do
not understand that this ingestion of chemical products damages our bodies.
People who are for the use of chemical products pretend that natural and synthetic chemical
products of the same formula have the same effects on the human body. They state that their
effects on our body are necessarily the same, because they cannot be discriminated a=from
the chemical point of view, and for them al of Life phenomena are chemistry.
It is their mistake. Chemical analysis is not enough to characterize a product. As a matter of
fact, biochemists agree on this point now. They know that qualitatively and quantitatively
identical atoms can be located in space in different ways, and that for this reason, resulting
external electron envelopes may be different.

Translation ends here. The following sections are not available in English (or perhaps
my photocopy was incomplete):
...(4) Changes in our understanding of some aspects of physics and weakness of this
understanding ~ (5) A few arguments against a unified theory for electromagnetic and
weak interactions ~ (6) Intermediary vector bosons
Appendix 1 ~ Geology
Appendix II ~ An Extrapolation: (1) Crying wolf ~ (2) One must rethink the concept of
energy in living matter ~ (3) Non-electromagnetic energies in living matter ~ (4)
Parapsychology and hypothalamus ~ (5) Germination procedure for oat seeds with no
external addition of calcium
Appendix III ~ Weinberg Theory Summary: A few definitions
Bibliography




Your Support Maintains this Service -- and Your Survival ...

The Rex Research Civilization Kit

... It's Your Best Bet & Investment in Sustainable Humanity on Earth ...
Everything @ rexresearch.com, plus the Bonus Files CD !

ORDER PAGE

<<$13, Postpaid Anywhere >>

Rex Research, POB 19250, Jean, NV 89019 USA