Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001
16:34:33 -0600 Dear Richard, (1) The time-reversal was body-wide, including the immune system and its cells. The Priore method killed nothing at all (some of Pautrizel's experiments clearly showed this). Instead, it backed the pathogen back to where the immune system could still recognize it. It backed the immune cells back to that point as well, and back to their full vigor. The immune system then recognized the pathogens and destroyed the now-revealed and now-vulnerable pathogens. In the process it made and used very specific antibodies (its normal process). When the blood (containing those very specific antibodies, and also an "internal EM pattern" which we discuss toward the end here) was injected into new rats, it contained those very specific antibodies (and that very specific internal electrodynamics pattern). Consequently the new rat was able to immediately recognize, attack and destroy a later invasion by that pathogen. The effect, however, did wear away with sufficient time (some months) as the "excited state" of the internalized EM pattern dissipated. Pautrizel's experiments clearly showed the time-reversal effect on the cells. He took immature rats whose immune system had never fully developed. Infected the rats with massive pathogen infection. Then used the Priore treatment. In this case the Priore treatment restored the already infected cells back to normal, the pathogens back to their first entry state, and the immune system back to its former immature capability. Still immature, it simply could not resist the pathogens, which promptly reinfected the rat and killed it. Note that one major difference between the immature infected rat and the mature infected rat is the ability of the mature immune system to make those antibodies effectively, while the immature rat is deficient in that area. The immature rat could not yet make them strong or accurately enough. So whatever explanation you opt for, it must clearly show the difference between the mature and immature rat infections and results. Else it is not the proper model, being falsified by experiment. Time-reversal of the cells (which biologists call "dedifferentiation" anyway) does fit, so it is consistent. Understand, consistency alone is not proof, but it is the first requirement for proof. That is, the immature treated rats DID NOT show complete immunity to reinfection. (2) The key to your thesis in objection 2 is that the rats so treated were mature rats. This is not true for immature rats so treated; their blood did not transmit immunity when injected into other rats which then were infected. Indeed, their blood did not even retain immunity for the immature rats themselves.Again, cellular-reversal is consistent. Again, that is not total proof, but meets the first criterion for proof. Now let me explain the importance of time as energy, which has been neglected in medicine and chemistry. It will take a little, so some forbearance is requested.In one's physics model, the choice of fundamental units is totally arbitrary. One can build an absolutely valid physics model with only a single fundamental variable (it's done and used). Suppose one builds his model out of only one fundamentally unit, the joule. Then every other entity is totally a function of energy -- where most folks always assume is "spatial energy". Of course it turns out that mass is multiplied by c-squared, to convert it to spatial energy, and since the dawn of the nuclear age "mass as highly compressed (spatial) energy" poses no problems in understanding. However, time also is now totally a function of energy. It appears that time also gets multiplied by c-squared to convert it to spatial energy! Further, every photon (and hence all EM fields -- being comprised of photons) is comprised of a component of spatial energy and a component of time. From our new single-unit model, the photon is comprised of partly spatial (decompressed) EM energy and partly temporal (highly compressed) EM energy. Since in theory one form of energy can be changed into any other form of energy, we can take EM spatial energy as our preferred "joule" we use. So "time" has the same energy density as mass. In short, by applying time-energy and transducing a bit of it into spatial energy, one plays with energy on the order of nuclear energy, except now one can transduce the entire time-energy into spatial energy, easily (every charge does it) and cleanly (no nuclear residues).We can take the "normal" EM scalar potential and decompose it mathematically into a set of bidirectional EM waves, as shown by Whittaker in 1903. However, we must correct his interpretation of the phase conjugate twin wave; it is in the imaginary plane and therefore "prior to observation" (all observation is 3-spatial, a priori). So his harmonic set of bidirectional longitudinal EM waves becomes a harmonic set of pairs, where each pair consists of (1) a longitudinal (effect after interaction/observation) EM wave in 3-space, and (2) a longitudinal (cause prior to interaction/observation) EM wave in the complex plane (in the time domain, since t is the only variable in the fourth Minkowski axis, ict. We now define charge (this is the first time it has ever been rigorously defined in physics). Charge is the ongoing circulation of EM energy flow between the time and 3-space domains, as "seen" by the observer. Negative charge is the ongoing absorption of EM energy input from the time domain (from ict), transduction of the absorbed energy into 3-space EM energy, and re-emission of the EM energy in all directions in 3-space. Positive charge is the ongoing absorption of EM energy input from 3-space, transduction of the absorbed energy into the time domain, and re-emission of the EM energy in the time domain.Now we turn for support to two places: (1) particle physics and quantum mechanics, and (2) quantum field theory. First, in quantum electrodynamics it is long since proven that any "isolated" charge in 3-space is clustered around by attracted virtual charges of opposite sign; one must indeed allow for this to compute the "observed" charge as distinguished from the "bare" charge if that screening cloud of antiparticles was not there. Anyway, we take one of the clustering virtual charges and a differential piece of the observable "isolated" charge, and we have a composite dipole. Between the ends of that dipole, there exists a scalar potential. Hence a charge is a set of composite dipoles and may be so treated. Further, each of the composite dipoles has a potential between its ends which decomposes according to our reinterpretation of Whittaker 1903. So we have arrived at the fact that a single charge, considered as a set of composite dipoles, contains Whittaker-decomposable potentials. More on that shortly.We already know from particle physics that one of the broken symmetries (predicted by Lee and Yang, for which they received a Nobel Prize) is produced by opposite charges, such as on the ends of a dipole. Hence any dipole, by its broken symmetry, a priori receives (absorbs) virtual EM energy from the vacuum, but re-emits at least some of that EM energy in OBSERVABLE form. In short, we have just solved the long-vexing "source charge" problem, which I did in 2000. The observer, who only observes in 3-space, "sees" the charge as continuously pouring out EM energy in all directions in 3-space, without any input of energy in 3-space whatsoever. He sees a similar thing for the source dipole. He cannot "see" the exactly matching input of energy from the time domain -- i.e., the continual absorption of time-energy on the fourth axis by the spin of the particle, with the particle's subsequent spin in 3-space releasing the energy it already absorbed (for a negative charge). For a positive charge, it goes the other way. For the dipole (and the charge with its clustering virtual anticharges), there exists a circulation of EM energy from the time domain into 3-space and back into the time domain, etc. What is emitted from the source charge is this 4-space circulation, spreading outward in 3-space at the speed of light.So with "normal" electrodynamics, one ALWAYS involves time-energy and its transduction to spatial EM energy, and vice versa, whether one is aware of it or not. When Priore made his longitudinal EM waves in 3-space (in the plasma), unwittingly he also made associated time-polarized EM waves, with circulation between the two. By "pumping" the body with longitudinal wave irradiation, he thus "pumped" it quite strongly in the time domain. This type of pumping has been neglected in phase conjugate optics, but it's real. Pumping is just "squeezing" after all; the rule is that if we "squeeze" a mass in the 3-space domain, we form a phase conjugate replica wave in 3-space for our input 3-space EM wave. On the other hand, if we "squeeze" the mass in the time axis, WE TIME-REVERSE THE ENTIRE MASS AND ALL ITS PARTS AND DYNAMICS BACK TO A PREVIOUS STATE IN 3-SPACE.In short, if we squeeze with EM energy in 3-space, we time-reverse some wave energy (energy in EM wave form). If we squeeze with EM energy in the time-axis, we time reverse the mass-energy itself -- therefore the mass. And that is the secret of Priore's work. Most of his work was done before the ordinary phase conjugate optics was even known in the West (we were not smart enough; we only got on to it when Russian scientists briefed Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientists on it in 1972. Even then, we did not "get going" in that field till about 1979-80, by which time the Priore work was already closed and suppressed.In biology, time-reversal is euphemistically called "dedifferentiation". Dedifferentiation and redifferentiation were clearly proven by Becker, simply when cells were properly exposed to a scalar potential (which, as we now see, contained both time-polarized causal waves and longitudinal EM effect waves in 3-space). Where does quantum field theory stand on all this? It supports it. Read Chap 5 of Mandl and Shaw, Quantum Field Theory, Wiley, 1984. QFT recognized four polarizations of the photon, not just one. There are also time-polarized and longitudinally polarized photons. Hence there would correspond time-polarized and longitudinal EM waves. Mandl and Shaw argue very strongly that neither the time-polarized (scalar) photon nor the longitudinal photon is individually observable, but in "combination" the couple are observed as the instantaneous scalar potential. Transforming to wave terminology and reinterpreting Whittaker to separate cause and effect waves, this precisely agrees with Whittaker's decomposition.So particle physics affirms it. Quantum field theory confirms it. And the experiments that Priore and others with him did, also confirm it. The experiments of Becker confirm it. All in all, a most impressive set of experimental substantiation -- much more than many things in medical science have at present. One other thing: no observable exists continuously in time. In quantum mechanics, observation is a process which applies a d/dt operator to an on-going 4-space process, resulting in an instantaneous, frozen 3-space snapshot. That snapshot does not even exist the next moment. However, observation continuously recurs. So we "see" a continual series of such "frozen snapshots" -- like the frames of a movie passing rapidly by the screen, one at a time -- and we infer the motion and the continuity. We explained all that long ago, and the exact agent that produces the d/dt operation.So mass does not "continuously exist" as mass m at all. It cannot, else we must discard all of quantum mechanics. Instead, it exists as a series of m => mt => m = mt => m ..... Further, it exists in that fashion at every level. So the mass m continually recurs, since d/dt destroys the prevailing mt (existing prior to observation) to give the observed m. But mt is as different from mass m as impulse Ft is different from force F. Or as power is different from energy. The terrible thing is that the present U(1) electrodynamics primarily used in medicine (and in ALL previous "analyses" of the Priore experiments) is 137 years old, since Maxwell's seminal paper was published in 1865. Lots of physics has been discovered then, but the hoary old U(1) has not been changed. The Russians have not only changed it in the 1950s, but also have highly weaponized it. So have several other nations.E.g., in a 1904 paper Whittaker clearly showed that any EM field or wave can be decomposed into derivatives of two scalar potentials -- thereby initiating what today is loosely referred to as "superpotential theory" (it has had some further development). Now apply Whittaker 1904, and those two "base potentials" each further decomposes into the reinterpreted decomposition we discussed above. So ALL ORDINARY EM POTENTIALS, WAVES, AND FIELDS actually are comprised of a far more fundamental "internal" or "infolded" electrodynamics and imposed dynamics. By directly engineering the internal electrodynamics, one can essentially do what one wishes with matter. It turns out that the internal dynamics are also utilized by mind operations, and the Russian secret weapon scientists have been developing that area as weapons. This is not the time to discuss it; just to say that the area is highly developed in certain highly classified KGB labs, and it has been utilized and tested in the world at large.So Western medical science is far, far behind where it should be, if it overhauled its fundamental electrodynamics and therefore its chemistry. One can make "impossible" molecules, that cannot occur in the normal theory, but which can be made to occur, can be stabilized, and which yield a dramatic new chemistry. There is a company (I am under nondisclosure agreement here, so cannot discuss it very much) which is doing this today, right here in America -- but very, very quietly. Anyway, that's a sort of synopsis of my own view of the Priore mechanism. We later found a much better and easier way to more powerfully evoke that time-domain set of interactions, so we are slowly proceeding in that direction at present. Indeed, our first patent application has just been filed.Again, I wish you well in all your endeavors. We are going to need a far better medical therapy, desperately, as soon as we receive a major biological weapons strike on one or more of our major cities. Smallpox, e.g., if unleashed again, may kill some 2 billion people around the earth -- nearly one-third of humankind. Best wishes,Tom Bearden Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:11 PM Dear Tom:There are two immediate problems I have with your Conjugate or "time reversal" theory in regard to the Priore machine. (1) Irradiated and cured rats demonstrated an absolute immunity to future cancer impregnations (grafts).(2) The blood of irradiated and cured rats that had "sleeping sickness" when injected into newly infected rats proved effective in completely curing them. Time reversal can not explain either of these considerations.I am sorry you have a mycoplasma disease; they are extremely hard to get rid of as you know. It seems that everyone I know is sick in some form or another. I attribute some of this to all the "chemtrail" spraying. (We have been sprayed almost everyday for the past ten months.) Do you know what this crap is? No one in Washington seems willing to address the problem, which Washington itself is generating. I know you must tire easily, but if you can eventually muster the strength to send your Priore papers to me, this would be most useful. If we can build a machine and get it to work, we will give it away. It is in all our best interests for there to be a cure for cancer and other pathogenic diseases. Everyone benefits whether they know it or not.Please have a good Christmas and know that I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors. Sincerely,Richard |