The Source Field Investigations
Page 18
Few scientists would be willing to suggest that light could appear inside the pineal gland either—but Gariaev proved that the DNA molecule is pulling in photons from somewhere, by some unknown process. Due to the difficulty of studying a living human brain, no comparable experiments like this have been done within the pineal gland—at least none that are openly available to the public. The only technology we have that could hold light in a spiral like Gariaev found in the DNA molecule is a fiber-optic cable—but even then, fiber-optic cables don’t hungrily draw in all the light from their surroundings.
Dr. Peter Gariaev’s DNA Phantom Effect proved that the DNA molecule captures and stores light. A mysterious force holds the light in the same place for up to 30 days after the DNA molecule itself has been removed from the area.
We’re not used to thinking of light as something that can actually be stored—it normally just zips along through space at a very nice speed. If we could even capture it in one spot, we’d probably expect that it would just wear out—and lose its energy. Even in the case of photosynthesis, the only way a plant appears to be able to store light is by immediately converting its energy into green-colored chlorophyll. Now we’re seeing light itself being used like a food supply that DNA can store away . . . not unlike a squirrel hiding acorns in a hollowed-out tree for winter. This triggers a bunch of new questions. What exactly is storing the light? How is it being stored? And why is it being stored? In order to answer those questions, we have to delve deeper into what Gariaev actually discovered—because this is just the beginning.
The real magic happened when Dr. Gariaev ended the experiment. He grabbed the quartz container with the DNA in it and moved it out of the way. Nothing more was supposed to happen. Nonetheless, to his utter amazement, even though everything was gone—the container, the DNA, you name it—the light continued spiraling along in the same space, as if the DNA were still there.
Whatever was holding that light in place, it did not need the DNA molecule at all. It was something else. Something invisible. Something powerful enough to store and control visible light within the shape of the DNA molecule itself. The only rational, scientific explanation is that there has to be an energy field that is paired up with the DNA molecule—as if DNA has an energetic “duplicate.” This duplicate has the same shape as the physical molecule—but once we move the DNA, the duplicate still hangs around in the same spot the molecule was in before. It doesn’t need the DNA molecule to be there in order for it to keep on doing its job—storing visible light. Some force, perhaps akin to gravity, is holding the photons in place.
The implications of this are mind-boggling. Obviously, in the case of a human body we have far more than one DNA molecule to consider—we have untold trillions of them, in a very highly structured arrangement. We have bone DNA, organ DNA, blood DNA, muscle DNA, tendon DNA, skin DNA, nervous-system DNA and brain DNA. So, just by a simple extension of Gariaev’s experiment, it is very likely that our entire body must have an energetic duplicate. This fits in perfectly with what Driesch, Gurwitsch, Burr and Becker all theorized and observed—there is an information field that tells our cells what to do, and where to do it. Once we add Gariaev’s discovery in, we find out that perhaps the most important thing the DNA molecule does is store light—both in our physical body and in our energetic duplicate body as well. Obviously, conventional science is significantly in need of an overhaul. There is a great deal of information about biological life that we simply do not know, or recognize, in the mainstream sense.
The DNA Phantom Effect is arguably one of the most significant scientific discoveries in modern history. It shows us that the DNA molecule has some bizarre relationship with quantum mechanics that our scientists have not yet discovered in the mainstream world. We now have proof that DNA is interfacing with an unseen, yet-undiscovered energy field that is not electromagnetic, but which obviously can control electromagnetic energy—in this case by storing photons, even when there is no physical molecule there to hold them in place.
And that’s not all. When Gariaev blasted this Phantom with liquid nitrogen, which creates a sudden burst of great cold, the light spiral would disappear—but then it mysteriously returned after five to eight minutes.8 This persistence of the DNA Phantom—our energetic duplicate—even in the face of seemingly certain destruction, is very strange. Even if you destroy the coherence in the area where the DNA Phantom had been, in this case by the sudden blast of cold, it will repair and restore that coherence once more. The surrounding light will again be organized into the unique spiraling pattern of the DNA that used to be there. Conventional science has nothing to offer us that can explain why this happens—but it does.
How long do you think this phantom could have lasted? Amazingly, the DNA Phantom remained visible for up to thirty days after it first appeared.9 Gariaev could blast it with liquid nitrogen over and over again, during this entire time, but it just kept on coming back. As I’m sure you can see, this completely challenges everything in conventional biology—not to mention physics—but it works.
This information has been available for more than twenty-five years now, and the experiment was replicated in the United States by R. Pecora in 1990—but no one ever hears about it. Obviously, the DNA Phantom is not electromagnetic—there are all sorts of strange things about it that violate everything we know about electromagnetic energy. However, it does fit in very nicely with what we’ve been calling the Source Field. On a microbiological level, it appears that we have an energetic duplicate. Our DNA is somehow interfacing with an energy field that has remained largely unknown to Western scientists, and which leaves behind a phantom that can easily be measured. This means your duplicate is still doing its job capturing light for you, even when you’re no longer there. If you’re sitting in your chair right now, reading this book, and then get up and go somewhere else, your energetic duplicate is still spinning light into tiny little spirals, right where you were sitting—within each and every one of your untold trillions of DNA molecules—for at least thirty days after you leave your seat. Since the sizes involved are microscopic, you can’t see any of this with your naked eye—but Gariaev was able to measure it in the laboratory. It’s like a perfect hologram of your physical body—which is correct down to the tiniest cell.
Now think back to Dr. Ian Stevenson’s studies we discussed in chapter 4. For more than forty years, Dr. Stevenson collected evidence for reincarnation from some three thousand children, and found that memories, personality quirks, talents and other attributes carried over from one apparent lifetime to another—including the ability to remember people’s names and relationships—and there was a facial resemblance. 10 Dr. Jim Tucker went even further with this research, and used facial recognition software to confirm that these children had a forensic match with the people they remembered having been in their alleged past life.11 Furthermore, let’s not forget that lethal wounds from an allegedly prior lifetime often appeared as birthmarks in the “new” body. All of this can be explained if we assume that our energetic duplicate is not dying when our physical body ceases—it carries over from one alleged lifetime to another, and brings our memories along with it. Some of us are able to access these memories directly—particularly when we are children, before we are hypnotized into believing it is impossible by the compelling opinions of parents, teachers and other adults.
The Holographic Brain
If there is an energetic duplicate of your body in the Source Field, wouldn’t that mean your entire brain has a holographic duplicate as well? Maybe so. This raises an even more controversial question. If all the DNA in your brain has an energetic duplicate, then could this holographic brain somehow be responsible for at least a part of how you are thinking and functioning? Is a part of your Mind working in a hidden, unseen parallel reality right now, as you read this book? Do you have a perfectly identical holographic brain that somehow interacts with your physical brain, using the DNA within every physical neuron almost like an antenna? T
hese are intriguing questions. We’ve already given stunning new evidence to support the idea of an energetic mind in chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5—but now it’s time to look at some additional biological research.
In 1997, The New York Times reported that brain-damaged children actually improved their level of intelligence and physical coordination by having the entire hemisphere of their brain that was damaged—or should we call it the broken antenna—completely removed. If you lose half your brain, shouldn’t you lose half of your memories, and half of your ability to function? Apparently not. This finding “astonishes even seasoned scientists,” and according to Dr. Eileen P. G. Vining of Johns Hopkins University, who studied fifty-four different children who had the operation, “We are awed by the apparent retention of memory, and by the retention of the child’s personality and sense of humor.”12 This kind of extreme operation is obviously not an easy thing to persuade any loving parents to do, but it works. Johns Hopkins published a newer version of the same study in 2003, now involving 111 children who had the operation between 1975 and 2001, and showed that 86 percent of them became either completely seizure free, or at least no longer needed to take medication. Dr. Eric Kossoff explained what a seemingly miraculous effect this procedure produced.
It’s clear now that the quality of life of children with chronic, severe seizures greatly improves following [the operation]. . . . In almost all cases, the children no longer depend on multiple medications, and post-operatively, most of the children are walking and running and living normal lives.13
In 1980, Roger Lewin published “Is Your Brain Really Necessary?” in the prestigious journal Science, discussing the work of Dr. John Lorber—arguably the world’s top expert on a condition called hydrocephalus, or “water on the brain.”14 In these cases, cerebro-spinal fluid backs up into the skull and builds in pressure, with no way to drain out. In the most extreme cases, the skull can become almost entirely filled with fluid, leaving hardly any visible brain tissue at all. Many of these patients die or are severely disabled. Doctors now correct the problem with surgical shunts to drain the fluid, but in Lorber’s time this was not being done.
Lorber studied a total of 253 hydrocephalus sufferers at the University of Sheffield in London. Of this group, nine of them only had 5 percent of their regular brain tissue left—which would appear to be an utter and complete tragedy. Nonetheless, four of these nine people had IQs that were greater than 100—and an additional two had IQs greater than 126. Six out of nine were fine—other than the fact that they were almost completely missing a brain as we now think of it.
Here’s a direct quote from Lewin’s paper about this astonishing phenomenon.
“There’s a young student at this university,” says Lorber, “who has an IQ of 126, has gained a first-class honors degree in mathematics, and is socially completely normal. And yet the boy has virtually no brain.” The student’s physician at the university noticed that the youth had a slightly larger than normal head, and so referred him to Lorber, simply out of interest. “When we did a brain scan on him,” Lorber recalls, “we saw that instead of the normal 4.5-centimeter thickness of brain tissue between the ventricles and the cortical surface, there was just a thin layer of mantle measuring a millimeter or so. His cranium is filled mainly with cerebrospinal fluid.15
Again, in case you didn’t catch that, Lorber is saying the only brain tissue left was a one-millimeter-thick layer against the inside edge of the skull. According to Patrick Wall, a professor of anatomy at University College, London, this is nothing new.
Scores of similar accounts litter the medical literature, and they go back a long way . . . but the important thing about Lorber is that he’s done a long series of systematic scanning, rather than just dealing with anecdotes. He has gathered a remarkable set of data and he challenges, “How do we explain it?”16
After this controversial study emerged, there was naturally a tidal wave of criticism. Dr. Lorber acknowledged that it is difficult to interpret brain scans—and he published a much more thorough study in 1984. He found that in the case of the math student who had an IQ of 126, fully 44 percent of his entire brain volume had been lost—and the rest of his brain tissue was compressed down into a super-thin layer lining the inside of the skull.17 Nonetheless, he was happily enjoying a significantly above-average IQ, and had no trouble thinking and remembering information. This shows just how far our concept of “thinking with the Source Field” can really go.
Luckily, no one has to suffer with this condition anymore, thanks to the surgical solution of installing shunts to drain the fluid. The same is not true for the animal population. Throughout Central Europe, many laboratory hamsters end up with hydrocephalus as a hereditary condition. In 2006, Veterinary Pathology journal published a study showing that even the hamsters with the most severe forms of hydrocephalus—again where their brains are almost completely nonexistent—still appear to be just fine. They do not show any strange behaviors or difficulties—and can act, think, remember, move their bodies and breed in all the normal ways.18
It is fascinating to explore the connection between Gariaev’s DNA Phantom and the idea of a holographic brain that actually is doing some of the thinking for us. If Gariaev is right, and the DNA molecule really does capture and store light, then we should certainly assume that other scientists would have independently discovered the same thing.
DNA Stores, Transforms and Releases Coherent Light
One of my favorite parts of The Field by Lynne McTaggart is her discussion of the work of Fritz-Albert Popp, a theoretical biophysicist at the University of Marburg in Germany, who began making very similar discoveries starting in 1970.19 Although Popp did not discover the DNA Phantom, his work ties in with Gariaev’s findings very nicely—and also adds in additional breakthroughs. Popp started out by examining one of the most deadly carcinogens known to man, technically called benzo[a]-pyrene. When he zapped it with ultraviolet light, he found that it absorbed the light, but then sent it back out at a totally different frequency. A very similar chemical, benzo[e]pyrene, did not have this light-scrambling effect—and unlike its deadly cousin, it was totally harmless to living organisms.
Was this light-scrambling effect the missing key to understanding what causes cancer? After Popp studied thirty-seven other chemicals, some of which were carcinogens, he found that every single cancer-causing substance would rearrange ultraviolet light the same way. These deadly carcinogens consistently targeted the frequency of 380 nanometers. In fact, the only common link Popp could find between these various cancer-causing chemicals was that they all took in this 380-nanometer light and rearranged it to some other frequency. Obviously, this implies that 380-nanometer light is very important for our overall health and well-being—but if you never allow any sunlight to touch your skin without wearing sunscreen, you may not be getting very much of it, since sunscreen completely blocks ultraviolet light.
Popp then learned that many biological lab experiments have proven you can destroy 99 percent of a cell with ultraviolet light, but if you then give it a very weak pulse of the same wavelength, it almost completely recovers—in a single day. This is known as “photo repair,” and no one really understands why it works. To Popp’s amazement, the best photo-repair effects were already known to occur at 380 nanometers—even though none of these scientists knew anything about his discovery. 20
Therefore, it appears that as the Source Field flows into our own measurable reality, its electromagnetic signature is the strongest at the 380-nanometer wavelength. The Source Field also has fluidlike properties—a very important point we will go into more detail about later on. This means you can create a rhythmic pulsation, or what most people would call a vibration, within the field itself and get much stronger effects. Think about how Roman soldiers had to change the speeds they were marching as they went over a bridge, in different groups. Otherwise, if they all marched at the same speed, the entire bridge would start shaking—and could even completely come ap
art. All those little vibrations kept on resonating, and pretty soon they would build up to much larger effects. The same thing applies to the Source Field—except that here it’s a good thing.
So, in the photo-repair experiments, those weak pulses of 380-nanometer light apparently created a vibration in the Source Field that actually caused a much higher amount of healing, 380-nanometer energy to start flowing in. This, in turn, bathed the dead cells with a splash of rejuvenating, life-giving energy in a short period of time—and they enjoyed a remarkable healing effect.
Popp was hooked on the idea of finding out if the human body was indeed storing and giving off light. He challenged a student named Bernard Ruth to set up an experiment that could prove our bodies were giving off this light—in order for Ruth to finish out his Ph.D. dissertation. Ruth was a skeptic and thought the whole idea was ridiculous, so Popp challenged him to disprove the concept instead. Ruth then went to great lengths to design equipment that could count light—one photon at a time. His device is still considered one of the best light detectors out there. Ruth’s equipment was ready for the first test in 1976, and they decided to start out with cucumber seeds. To their amazement, the seedlings were giving off photons—and these light pulses were significantly stronger than Popp had expected.21 Ruth was skeptical, and felt it had to be due to the presence of chlorophyll—so they switched over to potatoes, which do not have chlorophyll or go through any photosynthesis. Nonetheless, the potatoes gave off even more light than the cucumber seeds. Furthermore, their light emissions were extremely coherent—meaning they were highly structured, just like a laser beam’s.