Water: A Brief Survey

September 28 2011

Updated April 1 2014




Mysterious water

The unique qualities of water have long been acknowledged. A 1992 article in Discover Magazine notes that water is too complicated to be discussed in books on simple liquids. Unlike other liquids, if flows faster under high pressure than under low pressure, and its solid form is lighter than its liquid form. While other liquids are generally aloof, water's oxygen and hydrogen atoms like to form bonds with practically anything. [1] It is a compound formed from two gases, yet is a liquid at normal temperatures and pressures. [2] Water is the only substance that can exist is all three states: solid, liquid, gas; it has the highest surface tension of all liquids; is a powerful solvent, and can defy gravity in capillary action. [3]


Martin Chaplin, Professor and  lab chief at the Department of Applied Science at London South Bank University, notes that at the molecular level, water creates the structure of DNA; it creates the structure of proteins. Without water, there would be no DNA; there would be no protein; there would be no life. [4]


The unique properties of oxygen and reactive oxygen species (ROS) are necessary for life. These are not just chemical substances, but major participants of continuous flows of highly non-linear processes in which electron excited species emerge. These processes play an important role in energy and information flows in all living systems. In 1957, Szent-Gyorgyi stated that water should be considered not just a solvent for biomolecules,  but the cradle of life processes. He was the  first to demonstrate the importance of oxygen dissolved in water for the properties  related to electron excitation. He suggested biology missed the mark because it focused on particles, and ignored water and EM fields. [5]



The Structure of Water

From its chemical structure, water ought to be stiff and syrupy, more like a gel than a liquid. One explanation is that six molecules jostle  to occupy five molecule water clusters by sharing of a hydrogen bond. A shared bond becomes weakened and unstable, so that an intruding molecule can eventually push out another. Clusters are therefore continuously rearranging themselves in a microscopic game of musical chairs that keeps liquid water flowing.[6]


Yet the story cannot be that simple.


Clusters of various numbers of water molecules have been found experimentally or predicted theoretically in various forms of water; in ice, in crystal lattices and in bulk liquid water.


According to the July 2005 issue of Science Magazine, the structure of water; that is, how many bonds each H2O molecule makes with its neighbor in forming clusters, is among the top 100 unsolved problems in science. [7]


The experimental observation of water clusters requires sophisticated spectroscopic tools. Research is important because the realization that water manifests itself as clusters rather than an isotropic collection may help explain many anomalous water characteristics such as its highly unusual density temperature dependence, [8] or possibly the memory of water.


According to the journal Homeopathy, published by Elsevier, [9] scientists from the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, the USA, and the UK present remarkably convergent views using entirely different methods, indicating that large-scale structural effects can not only occur in liquid water, but can increase with time.



The Memory of Water

The concept of the memory of water goes back to 1988 when the late Professor Jacques Benveniste published, in the international scientific journal Nature, claims that extremely high ‘ultramolecular’ dilutions of an antibody had effects in the human basophil degranulation test, a laboratory model of immune response. In other words, the diluted water ‘remembered’ the antibody long after it was gone. His findings were subsequently denounced as ‘pseudoscience’ [10] and yet, despite the negative impact this had at the time, the idea has not gone away. [11]


A consortium of four independent research laboratories in France, Italy, Belgium and Holland has confirmed Benveniste’s results. [12]


Professor Chaplin defines memory of water as the extent to which past events may influence the future behavior or properties of aqueous solutions, and notes that a number of mechanisms allow this. This definition allows trivial cause and effect mechanisms, such as  adding a solute, which results in a slow movement of the aqueous solution towards equilibrium.


Other mechanisms are more interesting: restructuring after exposure to infrared radiation persists for a day. Changes to the structure of water are reported to last for weeks following exposure to a resonant IRC (inductance, resistance, capacitance) electrical circuits.


Water does store and transmit information concerning solutes, by means of its hydrogen bonded network. Although individual molecules of water cannot retain memory of past hydrogen bonding, clusters of water molecules can. Water cluster size and lifetime depends on their physical and chemical environment. Clusters can continue forever, although with constant changing of the constituent water molecules. [13]


According to Lynn McTaggart, Giuliano Preparata and Emilio Del Giudice have demonstrated mathematically that when closely packed together, atoms and molecules exhibit a collective behavior, forming what they call "coherent domains." They demonstrated that water molecules create "coherent domains".


Immunologist Yolene Thomas reports that Preparata and Del Giudice proposed that these long range coherent domains, caused by quantum electrodynamics, (QED) gives highly diluted solutes laser like properties. [14] i.e., one property of laser light is that it is coherent.


Chaplin notes that nanoparticles and nanobubbles may cause large scale order, making the formation of large scale coherent domains possible. [15]


McTaggart states that these single wavelengths of clusters of water molecules appear to become "informed" in the presence of other molecules; that is, they tend to polarize around any charged molecule, storing and carrying its frequency so that it may be read at a distance. This would mean water is like a tape recorder, imprinting and carrying information whether the original molecule is still there or not. Shaking of the containers appears to speed up this process. [16] Thomas says: “when the field matches the kinetic of the reaction, the later becomes functional as the optimal field strength as for a radio receiver.”

[requires more investigation]


In Japan, physicist Kunio Yasue of the Research Institute for Information and Science, Notre Dame Seishin University in Okayama, also found that water molecules have some role to play in organizing discordant energy into coherent photons; a process called superradiance.. According to McTaggart, this suggests that water acts as the essential conductor of a molecules signature frequency . If Benveniste is right, water both sends and amplifies the signals. [17]


Dr. Masura Emoto’a appearance in the movie What the Bleep, with his concept of “Messages in Water” popularized the concept that human thought has a direct observable effect on water, which is “remembered”. The observable effect for Emoto is the crystalline structure of ice crystals formed when water exposed to human emotion is frozen. Emoto found that ice crystals formed from water exposed to positive emotions were symmetric and aesthetically pleasing, while ice crystals formed from water exposed to negative emotions were unsymmetric and “ugly.” But are his claims supportable?  Kristopher Setchfield wrote a critique of Emoto’s experimental technique, and found it wanting. [18]

The Russian Konstantin Korotkov has developed Gaseous Discharge Visualization Bioelectrography. As noted in the ParadigmShiftNow paper Validation of the Human Energy Field, Korotkov and his GDV system have achieved a large following among medical and health science professionals. Korotkov has conducted many experiments on the effect of human emotions on water. People were asked to project positive and negative emotions on different flasks of water. The flasks were then analyzed. The lab concluded that love and positive emotions increased the energy levels of water, while fear, anxiety and hatred reduced the energy level. [19] There is a basis of credibility here. In his book, Measuring Energy Fields,  Korotkov notes that the results of his work on measurement of mental intentionality in water samples should be considered observations rather than strict experimental results, and that a protocol of double blind randomized results with strict controls is required. [20]

The research reported by Professor Bernd Kröplin at the Aerospace Institute in Stuttgart, Germany appears to support this memory effect. He stated that he has applied drops of water to slides and looked at them under a dark field microscope. He reportedly showed that while individual drops made by different students were different from each other, drops made by the same student repeatedly showed a similar image in the dried water drop.


Kröplin showed that an image of a flower and an image of salad remained in the water, after a flower or salad was immersed in the water. He apparently has taken the science of water memory a step further, but this kind of work is still regarded as pseudoscience by mainstream scientists.” [21]


.And yet another example: “Tests were conducted in a 2008 experiment in Russia in which ordinary water was exposed to the "NASA sound of the sun," and then cryogenically flash–frozen, photographed and examined under a dark field microscope. Author David Sereda and Saida Medvedeva, who produced the film, Waterthe Great Mystery, took a photograph of an ice crystal that had been exposed to the sound of a solar flare.” [22]


Alloise Gruber, of  Austria, supports the existence of these effects when he argues that we pollute water spiritually on a vast scale. Water absorbs all the negative emotion and stress of the places is has passed through.[23]


Sources appear to confirm the effect of physical actions on water structure. Water transported long distances in pipes with angular turns is said to retain the effect of this transport. Leonid Izvekov, researcher Chief of Lab Water Structure Research, Russia, says water that flows into our homes through pipes may have various forms, but are all deformed; the crystals show no symmetry or beauty. This is specially true of water supplies in big cities, which is processed and recirculated. 


Historical anecdotes suggest our mental state (ie intention) can improve the quality of even chemically impure drinking water. If consumed with good thoughts and a sense of gratitude, it can be energized and refreshing.[24] The possible truth of these anecdotes have been supported by lab tests.  Alexander Solodilov [25] showed that crude oil, which is a mixture of oil and water, can be separated by application of an EM field having a strength comparable to the strength of the EM field of the human heart. [26]


Recently it has been discovered that “natural water”, because of its structure, is oxidized, or burning continuously,  meaning that it gives off heat and light. Vladimir Voeikov [27] states that water “burns” at the temperature of the local environment. The light emitted (photons) can be recorded using supersensitive instruments. [28]


Digital Biology

Beneviniste and his scientists continued to probe the phenomenon of the remembered antibody. They discovered that if secussion (agitation) is eliminated, the memory effect disappears. They also found that although solute molecules reacted to heat with distinctive heat sensitivity, the memory effect is inactive between 70 and 80 degrees C.  The presence of silica in solution, dissolved from the glass containing the solution, is also important for the memory effect. The effect is also removed by exposure of diluted solutions to magnetic fields.  it has been suggested that electromagnetic fields in some way mediate information processing in cell communication. At this point, Beneveniste hypothesized the memory effect was electromagnetic in nature, and that molecules could communicate via EM waves.


He wanted to find which molecular vibration modes are efficient, and how these modes themselves coud be used to mimic some of the biological function of a molecule without its physical presence.  Beneviniste   experimented with a devise that was essentially a standard audio amplifier connected to another coil to create an “audio frequency oscillator”.


Thomas notes that she worked with  Beneviniste between 1992 and 1996 to show that they could transfer molecular signals indirectly to water or directly to cells with this amplifier, giving rise to “digital biology”.   [29]


In 2007, Dr. Mae-Wan Ho wrote: “[Veljko] Veljkovic and [Irena] Cosic essentially asked a fundamental question in biology: what is it that enabled the tens of thousands of different kinds of molecules in the organism to recognize their specific targets…” 

They proposed that molecular interactions are electrical in nature, and take place over macroscopic distances. Cosic later introduced the idea that molecules recognize their particular targets and vice versa by electromagnetic resonance.


“In other words, the molecules send out specific frequencies of electromagnetic waves which not only enable them to 'see' and 'hear' each other, as both photon (light) and phonon(sound) modes exist for electromagnetic waves, but also to influence each other at a distance…” [30]


Interestingly, although these ideas strongly resemble those of Jacques Benveniste, his name appears nowhere in Ho’s TheRealBioinformaticsRevolution paper.


Chaplin also notes that in digital biology, specific molecular signals in the audio range (hypothetically the ‘beat’ frequencies of water’s  infrared and far infrared vibrations) may be heard, recorded, transmitted and amplified to similarly affect other water molecules at a receiver. He points out that ignoring the evidence for such phenomena is scientifically unsound. He also notes that as with the basic memory of water concept, experimental confirmation of the phenomena may not confirm the proposed mechanism.


He points out that EM emissions have been detected during the freezing of supercooled water due to Ionization effects, and suggests that similar effects may occur during changes in the structuring of liquid water.


He notes that although memory of water is considered by many to be the apparent physical result of macro quantum entanglement, he believes such a viewpoint lacks any mechanism for experimental testing. 


Structured water in the human body.

The collagenous liquid crystal mesophases in connective tissue combined with the associated structured water constitutes a semi-conducting highly responsive network that extends through out the organism. This network is directly linked to the intracellular matrices of individual cells, forming an excitable electric continuum for rapid intercommunication throughout the organism. [31]


Skepticism of “Memory of Water”

Chaplin notes that many scientists who deny the memory of water do not produce data showing no memory, but rather produce arguments why it cannot have memory, such as the ease with which hydrogen bonds between water molecules may be broken. What such arguments fail to acknowledge is that large populations of water molecules may retain behavior even if individual molecules are constantly changing. For example, water waves may retain a shape and travel long distances even though individual molecules are constantly changing position. It is also argued that water clusters cannot retain their organization longer than a fraction of a second. Evidence for this is generally based on computer modeling, NMR and diffraction data. Computer modeling is inadequate for predicting long term effects for a number of reasons, including short simulation time and poor fidelity. NMR and diffraction are incapable of detecting mobile structures where components may change, which is true in virtually all water samples. Often the final argument against the memory of water is “I don’t believe it”, a very unscientific argument.[32]


Shpalman, in a rather sophisticated looking skeptical blog states “there is no memory of water” [33] without even attempting to explore what the term means. In support of this statement he provides a footnote to an article in the journal Homeopathy; Can water possibly have a memory? A sceptical view[34] This article is only a skeptical view, not based on any research, and only states the fact that this idea is not compatible with our knowledge of pure water.


Shpalman then dismisses another article in the same journal, The ‘Memory of Water’: an almost deciphered enigma. Dissipative structures in extremely dilute aqueous solutions. This article is based on experimental research, which affirms the fact there is a difference between water before and after homeopathic procedures. [35]


The situation is analogous to dismissing the idea of a heliocentric system because it was not compatible with our view of the universe prior to the Copernican  model.


Although shpalman provides largely correct information on a number of technical points, in my opinion he fails to refute anything.



[1] Wet Wild and Weird by Carl Zimmer from the Oct. 1992 issue of Discover Magazine: ..