1st Density - They sense each other

[bngenoh]

Session:

A: [...] Who is 1st density?

Q: (L) Rocks and minerals, right?
A: And?

Q: (L) Plants?
A: Yes. Now, what awareness do you suppose they have of you?

Q: (L) What awareness do rocks and plants have of US?! Oh, dear God! (V) That's an interesting way to put it. An excellent example. (T) When we ask why higher beings have awareness of us but we are not aware of them, we need to ask what awareness beings lower than us have of us. (J) Obviously no more than we have of 4th density. (T) But when you play music to a plant, it has some awareness because it makes it grow better. (L) But music is not a being. (T) It's an energy wave. (J) Wait a minute... what they are saying is: they have no more awareness of us than we, as 3rd density beings, have of 4th density beings. (T) Does this mean that they interact with us the way we interact with plants?
A: Who is "on" 2nd level.

Q: (L) Animals. (T) Insects, lower life forms.
A: Now, think carefully, what level of awareness, and more importantly, understanding, do they have of you?

Q: (L) Well, I guess they are aware of us in some way, but they don't understand us... (T) Some do at some point... (T) They understand us to a certain extent... (Frank) But their understanding is entirely different from our understanding of them. In other words, they see these big hulking beings, but they don't know what's going on. (L) Was Ouspensky's explanation of how animals perceive humans very close to the truth?
A: Close. Now, what about 1st level understanding and perception of 2nd level?

Q: (L) Okay, 1st density, minerals and plants... now rocks and minerals combine with plants through growing actions, water dissolution, erosion, and so on, they have a real limited existence. And what happens is that mostly animals come along and eat them. (Frank) Bees pollinate flowers. (L) Different kinds of animals live in trees. (T) Some animals live in the ground and in caves. (T) So, rocks and minerals and plants have a really limited understanding of the animals above them which interact with them in various ways.
A: Yes, and you have a limited understanding of the densities above you.

Q: (L) Well, that is still begging the question, my question was... (T) As an example, today we all experienced something we call thunder, but we were all aware that it was something more. Something happened in 4th density that we experienced in a certain way, and it was a limited understanding of that level.
A: Laura, unblock, do rocks and plants "see" you?

Q: (J) Probably not. (D) We don't really know. (T) We see the 3rd density manifestations of 1st density objects. We don't see the 1st density perception of itself. So, how do we see the 4th density manifestations, they see us on a 4th density level... not necessarily as we perceive ourselves.
A: Tom, you are making rapid progress. Laura better watch her Butt! {laughter}

Q: (V) So, I am curious... what do rocks look like to each other? (L) Let's ask. What do rocks see when they look at each other?
A: They sense each other.

Q: (L) What example of our sensory apparatus would be close to an example of what a rock senses when it is aware of another rock?
A: That is a cross conceptualization and will not work.

Q: (L) So there is no way we can interpret what a rock senses. Well, another 1st density example is plants. We know that plants can react positively to certain persons and negatively to others. They have experimented with hooking them up to polygraph machines and measured these responses. (J) They also react to music... (T) Third density reactions...
A: Yes.

Q: (L) If plants interact with each other, do they feel, say, fondness for one another?
A: Something akin to that.

Hit:

THEY can "smell" chemicals and respond to light, but can plants hear sounds? It seems chilli seeds can sense neighbouring plants even if those neighbours are sealed in a box, suggesting plants have a hitherto-unrecognised sense.

Plants are known to have many of the senses we do: they can sense changes in light level, "smell" chemicals in the air and "taste" them in the soil (New Scientist, 26 September 1998, p 24). They even have a sense of touch that detects buffeting from strong winds.

The most controversial claim is that plants can hear, an idea that dates back to the 19th century. Since then a few studies have suggested that plants respond to sound, prompting somewhat spurious suggestions that talking to plants can help them grow.

A team led by Monica Gagliano at the University of Western Australia in Crawley placed the seeds of chilli peppers (Capsicum annuum) into eight Petri dishes arranged in a circle around a potted sweet fennel plant (Foeniculum vulgare).

Sweet fennel releases chemicals into the air and soil that slow other plants' growth. In some set-ups the fennel was enclosed in a box, blocking its chemicals from reaching the seeds. Other experiments had the box, but no fennel plant inside. In each case, the entire set-up was sealed in a soundproof box to prevent outside signals from interfering.

As expected, chilli seeds exposed to the fennel germinated more slowly than when there was no fennel. The surprise came when the fennel was present but sealed away: those seeds sprouted fastest of all.

Gagliano repeated the experiment with 2400 chilli seeds in 15 boxes and consistently got the same result, suggesting the seeds were responding to a signal of some sort (PLoS One, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037382). She believes this signal makes the chilli seeds anticipate the arrival of chemicals that slow their growth. In preparation, they undergo a growth spurt. The box surrounding the fennel would have blocked chemical signals, and Gagliano suggests sound may be involved.

In a separate experiment, chilli seeds growing next to a sealed-off chilli plant also consistently grew differently to seeds growing on their own, suggesting some form of signalling between the two.

Though the research is at an early stage, the results are worth pursuing, says Richard Karban of the University of California-Davis. They do suggest that plants have an as-yet-unidentified means of communication, he says, though it is not clear what that might be.

The key question is whether the boxes around the fennel plants really block all known signals, says Susan Dudley of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. She concedes that plants make faint noises when water columns in their stems are disrupted, and that hearing functions in much the same way as the sense of touch - which plants have - but wants to see the results replicated before she is convinced that plants can hear. The study, she says, comes as a challenge to botanists to either refute or confirm.

 

[loreta]

Session:

A: [...] Who is 1st density?

Q: (L) Rocks and minerals, right?
A: And?

Q: (L) Plants?
A: Yes. Now, what awareness do you suppose they have of you?

Q: (L) What awareness do rocks and plants have of US?! Oh, dear God! (V) That's an interesting way to put it. An excellent example. (T) When we ask why higher beings have awareness of us but we are not aware of them, we need to ask what awareness beings lower than us have of us. (J) Obviously no more than we have of 4th density. (T) But when you play music to a plant, it has some awareness because it makes it grow better. (L) But music is not a being. (T) It's an energy wave. (J) Wait a minute... what they are saying is: they have no more awareness of us than we, as 3rd density beings, have of 4th density beings. (T) Does this mean that they interact with us the way we interact with plants?
A: Who is "on" 2nd level.

Q: (L) Animals. (T) Insects, lower life forms.
A: Now, think carefully, what level of awareness, and more importantly, understanding, do they have of you?

Q: (L) Well, I guess they are aware of us in some way, but they don't understand us... (T) Some do at some point... (T) They understand us to a certain extent... (Frank) But their understanding is entirely different from our understanding of them. In other words, they see these big hulking beings, but they don't know what's going on. (L) Was Ouspensky's explanation of how animals perceive humans very close to the truth?
A: Close. Now, what about 1st level understanding and perception of 2nd level?

Q: (L) Okay, 1st density, minerals and plants... now rocks and minerals combine with plants through growing actions, water dissolution, erosion, and so on, they have a real limited existence. And what happens is that mostly animals come along and eat them. (Frank) Bees pollinate flowers. (L) Different kinds of animals live in trees. (T) Some animals live in the ground and in caves. (T) So, rocks and minerals and plants have a really limited understanding of the animals above them which interact with them in various ways.
A: Yes, and you have a limited understanding of the densities above you.

Q: (L) Well, that is still begging the question, my question was... (T) As an example, today we all experienced something we call thunder, but we were all aware that it was something more. Something happened in 4th density that we experienced in a certain way, and it was a limited understanding of that level.
A: Laura, unblock, do rocks and plants "see" you?

Q: (J) Probably not. (D) We don't really know. (T) We see the 3rd density manifestations of 1st density objects. We don't see the 1st density perception of itself. So, how do we see the 4th density manifestations, they see us on a 4th density level... not necessarily as we perceive ourselves.
A: Tom, you are making rapid progress. Laura better watch her Butt! {laughter}

Q: (V) So, I am curious... what do rocks look like to each other? (L) Let's ask. What do rocks see when they look at each other?
A: They sense each other.

Q: (L) What example of our sensory apparatus would be close to an example of what a rock senses when it is aware of another rock?
A: That is a cross conceptualization and will not work.

Q: (L) So there is no way we can interpret what a rock senses. Well, another 1st density example is plants. We know that plants can react positively to certain persons and negatively to others. They have experimented with hooking them up to polygraph machines and measured these responses. (J) They also react to music... (T) Third density reactions...
A: Yes.

Q: (L) If plants interact with each other, do they feel, say, fondness for one another?
A: Something akin to that.

Hit:

THEY can "smell" chemicals and respond to light, but can plants hear sounds? It seems chilli seeds can sense neighbouring plants even if those neighbours are sealed in a box, suggesting plants have a hitherto-unrecognised sense.

Plants are known to have many of the senses we do: they can sense changes in light level, "smell" chemicals in the air and "taste" them in the soil (New Scientist, 26 September 1998, p 24). They even have a sense of touch that detects buffeting from strong winds.

The most controversial claim is that plants can hear, an idea that dates back to the 19th century. Since then a few studies have suggested that plants respond to sound, prompting somewhat spurious suggestions that talking to plants can help them grow.

A team led by Monica Gagliano at the University of Western Australia in Crawley placed the seeds of chilli peppers (Capsicum annuum) into eight Petri dishes arranged in a circle around a potted sweet fennel plant (Foeniculum vulgare).

Sweet fennel releases chemicals into the air and soil that slow other plants' growth. In some set-ups the fennel was enclosed in a box, blocking its chemicals from reaching the seeds. Other experiments had the box, but no fennel plant inside. In each case, the entire set-up was sealed in a soundproof box to prevent outside signals from interfering.

As expected, chilli seeds exposed to the fennel germinated more slowly than when there was no fennel. The surprise came when the fennel was present but sealed away: those seeds sprouted fastest of all.

Gagliano repeated the experiment with 2400 chilli seeds in 15 boxes and consistently got the same result, suggesting the seeds were responding to a signal of some sort (PLoS One, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037382). She believes this signal makes the chilli seeds anticipate the arrival of chemicals that slow their growth. In preparation, they undergo a growth spurt. The box surrounding the fennel would have blocked chemical signals, and Gagliano suggests sound may be involved.

In a separate experiment, chilli seeds growing next to a sealed-off chilli plant also consistently grew differently to seeds growing on their own, suggesting some form of signalling between the two.

Though the research is at an early stage, the results are worth pursuing, says Richard Karban of the University of California-Davis. They do suggest that plants have an as-yet-unidentified means of communication, he says, though it is not clear what that might be.

The key question is whether the boxes around the fennel plants really block all known signals, says Susan Dudley of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. She concedes that plants make faint noises when water columns in their stems are disrupted, and that hearing functions in much the same way as the sense of touch - which plants have - but wants to see the results replicated before she is convinced that plants can hear. The study, she says, comes as a challenge to botanists to either refute or confirm.

So interesting! That's why they say you can talk to your plants. And if you do it they will be ok.

By the way, I know a man who has a big garden and he told me that this years flowers don't grow like other years and it is because they sense something, that the weather is not normal, that it is cooler than naturally. And some flowers will hibernated if the weather is not appropriated. So plants and flowers have a sense, a sort of intelligence. We know nothing.

 

[MnSportsman]

If some were not aware of this...There is a type of gardening that s called "companion" planting. It is where you place your plants in ways that plants are near plants that are considered companions, & away from plants that are not considered companions. For a simple example, let's say peppers like tomatoes, but do not like onions. Tomatoes like onions & onion like tomatoes. So if you were to grow only these three plants in your garden, You would plant them in rows so that peppers were in the row next to tomatoes, & the onions were on the other side of the tomatoes row from the peppers . the tomatoes now creating a buffer between the peppers & onions. That is a simple example, but think it will explain well enuff.

Search engine use, using the terms "companion planting", will likely offer many sources for more info if someone would choose to do so.

Just a lil bit of info I thought would share that certanly seems related to the topic.
:)

 

[clearmiddle]

You can go below the plant level in searching for signs of awareness. I remember reading some interesting material in Stuart Kauffman's Reinventing the Sacred, which I read a few years ago. I will look through it and see if I can find a few relevant quotes.

 

[bngenoh]

You can go below the plant level in searching for signs of awareness. I remember reading some interesting material in Stuart Kauffman's Reinventing the Sacred, which I read a few years ago. I will look through it and see if I can find a few relevant quotes.

From what I have read of your post in the link provided, it sounds really fascinating, can't wait for the bits. :D

But we now have transdensity communication between 1st & 2nd, but it is more accurate to say that 2nd uses first as a medium for communication between other 2nd level entities:

Dutch biologists have discovered that insects can use plants as green phones for communication with other bugs.

A new study, published in the journal Ecology Letters, shows that through those same plants insects are also able to leave ‘voicemail’ messages in the soil. Herbivorous insects store their voicemails via their effects on soil fungi. The researchers from the Netherlands Institute of Ecology and Wageningen University have found this unique messaging service in the ragwort plant.

A few years ago, the scientists discovered that soil-dwelling and aboveground insects are able to communicate with each other using the plant as a telephone. Insects eating plant roots change the chemical composition of the leaves, causing the plant to release volatile signals into the air. This can convince aboveground insects to select another food plant in order to avoid competition and to escape from poisonous defense compounds in the plant. But the impact doesn’t stop there.

The new study shows that insects leave a specific legacy that remains in the soil after they have fed on a plant. And future plants growing on that same spot can pick up these signals from the soil and pass them on to other insects. Those messages are really specific: the new plant can tell whether the former one was suffering from leaf-eating caterpillars or from root-eating insects.

“The new plants are actually decoding a voicemail message from the past to the next generation of plant-feeding insects, and their enemies,” said first author Dr Olga Kostenko of the Netherlands Institute of Ecology. “The insects are re-living the past. This message from the past strongly influences the growth and possibly also the behavior of these bugs. Today’s insect community is influenced by the messages from past seasons.”

The team grew ragwort plants in a greenhouse and exposed them to leaf-eating caterpillars or root-feeding beetle larvae. Then they grew new plants in the same soil and exposed them to insects again.

“What we discovered is that the composition of fungi in the soil changed greatly and depended on whether the insect had been feeding on roots or leaves,” Dr Kostenko said. “These changes in fungal community, in turn, affected the growth and chemistry of the next batch of plants and therefore the insects on those plants.”

Growth and palatability of new plants in the same soil thus mirrored the condition of the previous plant. In this way, a new plant can pass down the soil legacy or message from the past to caterpillars and their enemies.

“How long are these voicemail messages kept in the soil? That’s what I also would like to know! We’re working on this, and on the question of how widespread this phenomenon is in nature,” Dr Kostenko concluded.

Hmmm, communication that transcends space & time working through different species. (or manifestations of consciousness ;) )

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Y'all might like Jeremy Narby's book Intelligence in Nature. He talks about a lot of interesting phenomena in nature (plants and animals) suggesting intelligence. Not as good as his Cosmic Serpent, but there's still some fascinating stuff, like 'smart slime' that solves mazes.

 

[StrangeCaptain]

Spontaneous ordering in nature is a pretty fascinating subject. It is nothing to do with plants, but this thread made me think of this book:

Sync: How Order Emerges From Chaos In the Universe, Nature, and Daily Life

It is a book for the general public, not particularly heavy reading, good for when you want to take a 15 minute break from having Gurdjieff kicking your butt ;-p

It is filled with fascinating little examples of ordering that happens without man's "intelligence" directly shaping it. I have felt for long time we need some counter-concept to entropy's seemingly implacable existence. I think even mainstream physicist's view gravity as holding the universe together at great scales against entropy's homogenizing effect, but the book gives examples of spontaneous ordering at micro-scales where gravity's effect is supposed to be negligible. As icing on the cake, the book presents the human side of scientific research with plenty of supplemental anecdotes like the sad story of Brian Josephson's being essentially exiled from the scientific community (and how freakin' smart the guy is) and the story of where the "six degrees of separation" meme comes from.

Anyway... The bottom line I got from the book that is relevant to our discussion here is that there seem to be phenomenon that arise in considering complex systems with many parameters and that these phenomenon pretty much disappear if you try to limit your study to just a couple of these parameters. They are thus very difficult to create experiments for and since we can not justify to grant-givers how these phenomenon will make money or burn people's skin off, it is hard to get support for this kind of pure science.

 

[clearmiddle]

Spontaneous ordering in nature is a pretty fascinating subject. It is nothing to do with plants, but this thread made me think of this book:

Sync: How Order Emerges From Chaos In the Universe, Nature, and Daily Life

It is a book for the general public, not particularly heavy reading, good for when you want to take a 15 minute break from having Gurdjieff kicking your butt ;-p

Perfect -- it's available as an audiobook and I was looking for what to read next. Gurdjieff is not popular as an audiobook author for some reason, so my reading tends to be a bit lighter. Thank you!

I am still digging through Reinventing the Sacred looking for similar material. I haven't found the part that I remember, but I was wanting to re-read the book anyway.

 

[Buddy]

My sense is that C's were directing attention to a level of existence (quantum) where reality's constituent parts are found as 'individuals' and 'ensembles' of individuals and aggregates of these ensembles. Each individual, ensemble, aggregate of ensembles and on and on, mutually observes and affects other individuals and groupings at their level and 'below'. From our macroscopic level, I guess one way these dynamics of mutual observings and affectings might be interpreted could be as attractions and repulsions working on individuals and collections.

Could this forum be an example of the above? To add more awareness of more views of more reality for more understanding of more contexts and such, more individuals need to be added to the group.

Just a few thoughts, FWIW, even though I know this thread is in the 'hits' section.

 

[bngenoh]

Anyway... The bottom line I got from the book that is relevant to our discussion here is that there seem to be phenomenon that arise in considering complex systems with many parameters and that these phenomenon pretty much disappear if you try to limit your study to just a couple of these parameters. They are thus very difficult to create experiments for and since we can not justify to grant-givers how these phenomenon will make money or burn people's skin off, it is hard to get support for this kind of pure science.

Couldn't agree more with what I put in bold Patience.

My sense is that C's were directing attention to a level of existence (quantum) where reality's constituent parts are found as 'individuals' and 'ensembles' of individuals and aggregates of these ensembles. Each individual, ensemble, aggregate of ensembles and on and on, mutually observes and affects other individuals and groupings at their level and 'below'. From our macroscopic level, I guess one way these dynamics of mutual observings and affectings might be interpreted could be as attractions and repulsions working on individuals and collections.

Could this forum be an example of the above? To add more awareness of more views of more reality for more understanding of more contexts and such, more individuals need to be added to the group.

Just a few thoughts, FWIW, even though I know this thread is in the 'hits' section.

Funny enough Buddy, I was thinking along the same lines yesterday and into today. Spontaneity then becomes an emergent phenomenon, no one knows exactly what's going to happen, it just happens, though probabilities can be calculated, the outcome is open. It was a very profound thought, it makes me feel like water.

To observe and just see what crazy stuff manifests in this conundrum humans call reality, laughing all the time, but always trying to understand.

 

[Buddy]

Funny enough Buddy, I was thinking along the same lines yesterday and into today. Spontaneity then becomes an emergent phenomenon, no one knows exactly what's going to happen, it just happens, though probabilities can be calculated, the outcome is open. It was a very profound thought, it makes me feel like water.

That's the connection to quantum reality, I reckon. The human mind (especially inductive abilities), artificial neural nets, Chaos theory, galaxy collections and happenings in reality itself can be practically described in terms of "self-organizing networks" or SONs. In these descriptions, there is always order. Chaos on any scale, for example, is just an order you weren't expecting.

Another example is the other side of the signal/noise ratio. There are times when high 'noise' and low 'signal' is valued. For example, for some artificial neural nets, introducing disorder, chaos, noise, allows fixed, static patterns to break up so that elements can recombine into 'more better' combinations so that a path of growth can continue. Stephen Thaler's patented 'Creativity Machine' is a practical example, I think.

At any rate, an idea here is that all the elements in a SON are self-other aware and are cooperatively choosing what happens next, so to speak.

 

[Paragon]

Funny enough Buddy, I was thinking along the same lines yesterday and into today. Spontaneity then becomes an emergent phenomenon, no one knows exactly what's going to happen, it just happens, though probabilities can be calculated, the outcome is open. It was a very profound thought, it makes me feel like water.

That's the connection to quantum reality, I reckon. The human mind (especially inductive abilities), artificial neural nets, Chaos theory, galaxy collections and happenings in reality itself can be practically described in terms of "self-organizing networks" or SONs. In these descriptions, there is always order. Chaos on any scale, for example, is just an order you weren't expecting.

Another example is the other side of the signal/noise ratio. There are times when high 'noise' and low 'signal' is valued. For example, for some artificial neural nets, introducing disorder, chaos, noise, allows fixed, static patterns to break up so that elements can recombine into 'more better' combinations so that a path of growth can continue. Stephen Thaler's patented 'Creativity Machine' is a practical example, I think.

At any rate, an idea here is that all the elements in a SON are self-other aware and are cooperatively choosing what happens next, so to speak.

Off topic somewhat, but would bolded be for example, similar to our reality in that there is high noise to signal ratio and it's up to the creative potential of STO to 'debug' our space/time locator? Conscious evolution? For those that wish to of course.

I only ask this because Im trying to connect a few dots in my mind :)

 

[Buddy]

Funny enough Buddy, I was thinking along the same lines yesterday and into today. Spontaneity then becomes an emergent phenomenon, no one knows exactly what's going to happen, it just happens, though probabilities can be calculated, the outcome is open. It was a very profound thought, it makes me feel like water.

That's the connection to quantum reality, I reckon. The human mind (especially inductive abilities), artificial neural nets, Chaos theory, galaxy collections and happenings in reality itself can be practically described in terms of "self-organizing networks" or SONs. In these descriptions, there is always order. Chaos on any scale, for example, is just an order you weren't expecting.

Another example is the other side of the signal/noise ratio. There are times when high 'noise' and low 'signal' is valued. For example, for some artificial neural nets, introducing disorder, chaos, noise, allows fixed, static patterns to break up so that elements can recombine into 'more better' combinations so that a path of growth can continue. Stephen Thaler's patented 'Creativity Machine' is a practical example, I think.

At any rate, an idea here is that all the elements in a SON are self-other aware and are cooperatively choosing what happens next, so to speak.

Off topic somewhat, but would bolded be for example, similar to our reality in that there is high noise to signal ratio and it's up to the creative potential of STO to 'debug' our space/time locator? Conscious evolution? For those that wish to of course.

I only ask this because Im trying to connect a few dots in my mind :)

Maybe a high noise to signal ratio in a specific context IS STO 'debugging' reality at that locator? After all, a bug, to me, is a "stuck" that's not keeping up with the rest of reality somehow.

In every case, though? I don't know, probably not. Conscious evolution? Yes indeed, by my estimation!

 

[anart]

Funny enough Buddy, I was thinking along the same lines yesterday and into today. Spontaneity then becomes an emergent phenomenon, no one knows exactly what's going to happen, it just happens, though probabilities can be calculated, the outcome is open. It was a very profound thought, it makes me feel like water.

That's the connection to quantum reality, I reckon. The human mind (especially inductive abilities), artificial neural nets, Chaos theory, galaxy collections and happenings in reality itself can be practically described in terms of "self-organizing networks" or SONs. In these descriptions, there is always order. Chaos on any scale, for example, is just an order you weren't expecting.

Another example is the other side of the signal/noise ratio. There are times when high 'noise' and low 'signal' is valued. For example, for some artificial neural nets, introducing disorder, chaos, noise, allows fixed, static patterns to break up so that elements can recombine into 'more better' combinations so that a path of growth can continue. Stephen Thaler's patented 'Creativity Machine' is a practical example, I think.

At any rate, an idea here is that all the elements in a SON are self-other aware and are cooperatively choosing what happens next, so to speak.

Off topic somewhat, but would bolded be for example, similar to our reality in that there is high noise to signal ratio and it's up to the creative potential of STO to 'debug' our space/time locator? Conscious evolution? For those that wish to of course.

I only ask this because Im trying to connect a few dots in my mind :)

Maybe a high noise to signal ratio in a specific context IS STO 'debugging' reality at that locator? After all, a bug, to me, is a "stuck" that's not keeping up with the rest of reality somehow.

In every case, though? I don't know, probably not. Conscious evolution? Yes indeed, by my estimation!

I think that's a rather enormous supposition on your part that doesn't really track to reality. A high noise to signal ratio is chaos - chaos is linked to entropy which is antithetical to STO.

I understand the 'order out of chaos' thinking in general, but I find the wiseacring that has occurred in this thread to be discouraging...

 

[Nachtweide]

This reminds me of the book: The primordial code.
Extract:
\" In the end of the 80s the Swiss researchers Dr. Guido of level and Heinz Schürch with the pharmaceutical giant Ciba (Novartis) managed a sensational discovery: In lab experiments they put out grain and fish eggs to an »electrostatic field« – to a simple high-tension field into which no stream(current) flows.

Result: Growth and yield could be increased(boosted) in this so-called "E field" massively – on top of that without fertilizer or pesticides! Besides, at the same time "old tenses" grew up absolutely unexpectedly, they have become extinct long ago: An annual million age the fern which no botanist could determine. Old maize(corn) with up to twelve pistons(butts) per handle(stem), how he once in South America sprouted \".