Time Travel Research Center © 2005 Cetin BAL - GSM:+90  05366063183 - Turkey/Denizli 

Amplitude Modulation and Phase Conjugation

(On KeelyNet as AM.ASC, 2/24/96 by Rick Andersen)

This file presents some background on AM/sideband radio communications methods and then proceeds to show some interesting extensions and correlations to Phase Conjugation, which has been the topic of increasing interest to the scientific community and especially to many of us KeelyNetters who have been following Tom Bearden's theories regarding Phase Conjugate/Time Reversed Waves.

The purpose of the comparison is to stimulate creative thinking on the subject:

Can we apply the esoterics of PC generation to more mundane electronic circuitry that we already understand and use?

Is the technology already under our noses if we can only look at it from a new viewpoint?

Here are some ideas to chew on.


Let's take a short visit to Communications 101 class at our local "electronics vocational school" and do a little review of AM radio modulation theory.

We find out early on that we can't directly "broadcast" information very far at audio frequencies, but that higher frequencies (Radio Frequencies) will radiate-- so we start with a "carrier" wave having a frequency of 1 MHz.

It travels out from our transmitter antenna very well at that frequency but isn't carrying any information until we mix it in a special way with some information. So we choose a 1 KHz audio tone as our "information". (In broadcast radio, the "information" would be voice, music, etc.) Our goal is to transmit the 1 KHz tone from a transmitter to a receiver some miles away.

Early in the 20th century it was discovered that you can mix the audio wave with the carrier wave in a MODULATOR circuit which mixes the two frequencies nonlinearly. The result is a 1 MHz carrier whose peak-to-peak AMPLITUDE varies at the slower, 1KHz audio RATE. That's the TIME DOMAIN description of Amplitude Modulation of an RF carrier wave, and it's what you'd see on an oscilloscope screen when examining the output of an AM transmitter.

On the 'scope it looks like a solid green "envelope" whose "height" is varying (equally varying, up and down from the "zero" line horizontally bisecting the screen, in a "double-sine-wave envelope" shape). It looks "solid" because, in order to see a few cycles' worth of the 1 KHz amplitude envelope variation, we had to turn the scope's horizontal sweep down to, say, .5 mS/box, and there are many more cycles of the 1 MHz RF carrier "squashed" into the same area on screen that it takes to show only a few cycles of the 1 KHz audio modulation.

Nowadays it's becoming more fashionable to talk about the above from the FREQUENCY DOMAIN standpoint. That's what a SPECTRUM ANALYZER shows you, as opposed to an oscilloscope. In the frequency domain, we see that the amplitude-modulated carrier is actually composed of FOUR waves:

#1) the original 1 MHz carrier
#2) the original 1 KHz audio
#3) the SUM of the above two frequencies which is 1.001 MHz, and
#4) their DIFFERENCE, which is .999 MHz.

What we call "AM" is a MULTIPLICATION of instantaneous AMPLITUDES in the TIME DOMAIN (the modulator multiplies the 2 waves together); but it's also ADDITION and SUBTRACTION of FREQUENCIES in the FREQUENCY DOMAIN. Thus, amplitude modulation is a kind of FREQUENCY-SHIFTING (similar to but not to be confused with FM, which is Frequency Modulation).

The original carrier "splits" into two new frequencies in addition to itself: The upper one (upper sideband) shifts UP the spectrum by an amount equal to the modulating frequency (1 KHz), and the lower sideband shifts DOWN by the same amount.

[If you've read my files PHASCONJ.ASC or ANDERSEN.ASC you may remember that a similar "frequency splitting" occurs in the phenomenon of "Stimulated Brillouin Scattering", which is one method used to produce Phase Conjugate waves -- one of those "thought-seeds" that led to the writing of this file.]

In practice, the 1 KHz audio frequency (#2, in the list above) is filtered out (discarded) and the remaining three (#1, #3, and #4) are transmitted as a group out the antenna.

THREE frequencies are broadcast simultaneously from a single transmitter? Yes, but in the time domain their instantaneous phases add up (interfere) in such a way as to produce the appearance of a SINGLE amplitude modulated 1 MHZ carrier on the oscilloscope.

Viewed again via a spectrum analyzer (frequency domain), we see 3 distinct "blips" or lines on the screen: the 1 MHz carrier, the .999 MHz line to the left of the carrier, and the 1.001 MHz line to the right of the carrier. We call the .999 MHz frequency the LOWER SIDEBAND (LSB), and the 1.001 MHz frequency the UPPER SIDEBAND (USB).

All of the above is standard radio theory-- it works, and has been in practice since the 1920's in commercial AM radio. In the 1950's the Amateur Radio "Ham" operators began switching over to SINGLE SIDEBAND transmission, or SSB, following the military's lead. SSB turns out to be more efficient than AM. AM is actually wasteful of both transmitter power and frequency spectrum space, because:

1) Since the lower and upper sidebands are "mirror-images" of one another, they're both carrying the same information-- a redundant waste of transmitter power

2) The carrier itself, when viewed in the frequency domain, carries NO information; that may sound surprising, but the intelligence or information is all contained in the sidebands! But the carrier does "hog" power, while not doing anything to earn its living.

(Note that we THOUGHT it DID, but that's how it SEEMED when we viewed it in the time domain on the oscilloscope. So your instruments can mislead you into seeing what you think you OUGHT to see-- Free Energy researchers, take note!!)

Well, if the carrier is a waste of power and spectrum space, and the sidebands are redundant mirror-images of the information, why not just throw the carrier and a sideband out-- and devote all our power to the transmission of just ONE of the sidebands? That's "Single-Sideband" (SSB).

The only (minor) drawback is that you have to re-insert a "substitute" carrier at the RECEIVER-- easily done-- to DEMODULATE the SSB signal and recover the original 1 KHz audio information.

Voila - we've successfully transmitted an audio tone out over many miles by FREQUENCY-SHIFTING it up the spectrum so that it was translated into a 1.001 MHz RF wave (using the upper sideband in this example). Then we re-mixed it with a 1 MHz "fake" carrier at the receiving end, and the DIFFERENCE frequency from that demodulation process popped out as our original 1 KHz audio tone.

In my ongoing ruminations about Phase Conjugation Theory, sparked of course by Tom Bearden's books and papers on its application to Scalar Electromagnetics, I came across some interesting diagrams in such places as the A.R.R.L's Handbook for Radio Amateurs, books on Fourier Transform (Spectral Analysis) Theory, Digital Sampling Theory, Spread Spectrum Communications Theory, etc.

Getting to the point, these references, in explaining modulation as I have previously done above, contain diagrams showing how the spectrum or sidebands are produced/shifted via a given modulation method. What caught my eye was that several of these sources place "0 Hz" - zero frequency, DC - in the MIDDLE of their spectral diagrams, not at the left end, as one might expect, since you "can't go any lower than zero cycles per second!"

Or can you?

If you could, what would that mean? It would mean you'd have a NEGATIVE frequency. Since frequency is the reciprocal of time (t=1/f, f=1/t), we're talking about negative time -- TIME REVERSAL -- when we go below 0 Hz.

While most "vocational school", technician-level textbooks would place 0 Hz at the left-most end of their spectrum diagrams, with higher frequencies as you move to the right, several of the "engineer-level" texts mentioned above put 0 Hz in the CENTER and express negative frequencies on a "dashed" (not solid) line extending to the left-- as if these are "imaginary" frequencies-- because everybody knows you can't have less than zero! (Except in your checking account, between paydays; my bank charges me "negative deposits" in the amount of $20 per pop.)

Well, after years of psychotherapy, we've all been adjusting our "reality goggles" to another, related culture-shock since we took algebra and trigonometry in high school: Remember when they sprang the "square root of -1" on you? Can't be done!

Or can it?

Yeah, it can, if you're willing to give it a new name like "i" ("j" in electronics) and reckon it as existing on an "axis rotated 90 degrees away from the REAL numbers" that we've come to know and love so well.

We call numbers like the square root of -1 "Imaginary Numbers" and manage to use this mathematical curiosity to pass our trig tests as well as our AC circuit analysis tests in Electronics 101. Turns out that we can stick real numbers on the X axis of a graph, imaginary numbers on the Y axis, and plot all kinds of otherwise indescribable stuff, like Minkowski did when he interpreted Einstein's Relativity for the rest of us commonfolk.

Well, my point is that, like imaginary numbers in AC analysis, we do use or infer negative frequencies in spectrum analysis and modulation, but we treat them as a sort of bothersome mathematical "artifact", a nuisance that doesn't deserve solid lines on our less-than-zero frequency axis, but only dashed ones-- assigning them a sort of "unreal", "imaginary" status. But we like to flirt with them anyway, don't we?

Just like the "time-reversed", negative, "advanced-wave", mirror-image solution to Maxwell's electromagnetic wave equation, for example.

Noted as far back as the (last) turn of the century by Carl Barus, Stoney, and later treated by Wheeler/Feynman in their 'Advanced vs. Retarded Wave' "Absorber" theory (see my previous file ANDERSEN.ASC), the math works both ways-- forward and backward-- and, suffice it to say, the common man is told to be content with the "forward" solution, unless, like me, you're used to having a chronically-overdrawn bank account.

The 'party line' is: we live in forward time; we can't prove there's such a thing as "backward time-flow", so the "backward" solution is just a figment of the math-- a symmetry-- and why don't you weird-science nuts just leave it at that.

The hottest new thing since audio cassette tapes is the CD player. In Ham radio, the hottest new toy is the DSP filter, which magically nulls out interference that was impossible to get rid of up to now. Both of these devices use IC chips based on the newly-emerged field of Digital Signal Processing, which springs from a cross-breeding of Fourier Analysis theory, digital information-sampling theory, analog filter theory, and radio modulation (heterodyne) theory.

They've got IC chips now that are selling like hotcakes (and getting cheaper, too) that enable you to build electronic echo/reverb boxes, digital audio filters, speech synthesizers, Fourier spectrum analyzers, frequency/pitch/spectrum shifters (so you can sound like God doing the weather report if you're a DJ looking for ratings) -- the list goes on and on. The technical literature behind these toys, with all the math and nitty-gritty, provides the basis for our "time reversal" discussion.

According to what's known as the "Nyquist Theorem" in information sampling theory, if you're a digital audio engineer and you want to produce a CD with crisp frequency response right up to 20 KHz (the upper extreme of the range of human hearing), you must digitally "sample" or convert your audio source (music, etc.) to digital "slices" at no less than TWICE the highest frequency of interest-- i.e., 40 KHz sampling rate to faithfully reproduce 20 KHz audio tones.

The reason, in simplest terms, is because you want to get a "snapshot" of BOTH the + and - excursion of the 20 KHz sine wave -- which requires 2 snapshots or "samples" per cycle -- which equates to twice as many samples as "Hz" in the wave, or 40 KHz for a 20 KHz tone.

Well, what if you DON'T sample at the Nyquist frequency? What if you sample at, say, 37 KHz instead of 40? What will happen?

What happens is that the 20 KHz audio tone is not always "snapped" at the same points per cycle as time goes by-- and an imperfect "mix" occurs between sampling frequency and sampled frequency. The net result somewhat resembles mixing two frequencies in an AM modulator, as we described at the beginning of this file: we get HETERODYNING, or nonlinear mixing effects, which creates spurious sidebands and shifts the frequencies down the spectrum, usually in some undesirable, dissonant-sounding way, musically-speaking. The audio buff hears strange "wrong-pitch" tones and distortion in the music. These spurious pitches are called "alias frequencies".

The sampling frequency acts as a sort of "ceiling" that "reflects" any frequency higher than "Fsampling/2" DOWN the spectrum, manifesting as alias frequencies.

Now, down at the other (low) end of the frequency spectrum, in a similar way, any tones which by "AM differencing" end up BELOW ZERO HERTZ get "folded" or reflected back UP the spectrum from 0 Hz, which is like a "floor" or barrier that reflects frequencies UPWARDS.

And why would 0 Hz "reflect frequencies"?

The time-forward engineer will tell you that it's because "Thou shalt not have Negative Frequencies, lest there be Time-Reversal." (Oh, all right-- those were my words.) And he feels secure in his time-forward world, because he sees that "up-folding" as proof that even if you wanted to produce negative frequencies, you couldn't-- nature prevents them by reflecting them back up into the positive spectrum as alias frequencies that are a nuisance to digital audiophiles.

(If you want to try this out for yourself, Radio Shack sells an electronic Reverb/Echo box for about $40 that uses a "bucket-brigade" IC to sample and delay an audio signal; set the Delay slide-pot to maximum (longest echo) and you'll clearly hear weird, chime-like alias tones in the higher frequencies of your music.)

Now for the correlation. I'm asserting here that the spectrum-folding phenomenon in digital sampling theory, which keeps "negative" frequencies safely bounced back up into the positive-frequency region, is the ANALOG OF A PHASE CONJUGATE MIRROR currently used at optical frequencies by mainstream science!

In optical labs, they're using barium titanate crystals, methane gas under pressure, etc., to serve as a nonlinear medium which produces a phase conjugated, time-reversed reflection when properly "pumped" with enough energy to get their index of refraction to vary in step with the incoming energy (something like the way a silicon DIODE or TRANSISTOR can be described as a NONLINEAR RESISTOR whose resistance varies according to the "pressure" of the voltage across it (= the current through it)... its "breakdown" threshold is around .6 volts).

I'm saying that, in digital sampling, ZERO HERTZ is the BARRIER corresponding to the phase conjugate MIRROR; it produces the REFLECTIONS (aliases) that appear SPATIALLY REVERSED (spectrally-reversed) to us time-forward observers. But it's BECAUSE they're reflected back up into the "positive" that we know they're actually NEGATIVE FREQUENCIES.

In the same way that we would see a "time-reversed" action as a "movie running backwards" in our positive time flow, so we see that the direction of PHASE ROTATION of the reflected alias wave has been reversed so that it now COINCIDES with the forward-time/positive spectrum waves.

For you Hams out there: Ever build a Direct Conversion receiver? You pull in your RF signals at the front end, mix them with a Variable Frequency Oscillator (VFO) tuned to almost the same frequency, and thereby convert the modulation directly down to baseband (audio) without going through an I.F. conversion first. It's simple and works adequately-- except for the fact that it does not provide "single-signal" reception like a superheterodyne radio does-- because in a Direct Conversion receiver, you "zero-beat" the VFO against the carrier (or suppressed carrier in SSB), bringing your difference-frequency "carrier" down to 0 HZ! This pushes the LOWER SIDEBAND (which was lower in frequency than the carrier to begin with) BELOW ZERO HERTZ by an equal amount as the upper sideband is ABOVE the carrier (0 Hz).

The lower sideband gets "folded" (reflected) back up by an equal amount of Hz ABOVE zero Hz so that now it OVERLAPS the upper sideband information.

If the original signal coming in was an AM signal, the above scenario works fine, since there's mirror-redundancy between the sidebands anyhow -- they're both carrying the same information, but in opposite phase to one another. Well then, why don't they cancel each other out when the lower gets reflected up on top of the upper? Because when negative frequencies are reflected into the positive-time spectrum, the direction of phase rotation is reversed.

Now BOTH the upper and lower sidebands are at an identical frequency, and on top of that, their phases are rotating TOGETHER, not against one another. So they add constructively at all times-- JUST LIKE A SPATIALLY-IN-PHASE "WAVE/ANTIWAVE" pair as described by Wheeler and Feynman, and (I think, but am not sure) by Tom Bearden.

If, on the other hand, the original signal desired was an SSB transmission, the Direct Conversion receiver creates the problem of "double-signal" reception:

Since SSB gives Hams twice as much spectrum space in the band, therefore there are now twice as many "channels" to use. Accordingly, where there used to be room for 1 AM transmission with its 2 sidebands, now there's room for 2 SEPARATE SINGLE-SIDEBAND transmitters. So each guy chats away in his own conversation-- separately-- while the unfortunate listener using the D.C. receiver hears BOTH-- but the "interfering" signal is unintelligible, scrambled, "Donald Duck"-sounding gibberish, because it is SPECTRUM-INVERTED.

The user of a better receiver, such as a superhet, never hears the lower sideband since it's filtered out up at the Intermediate Frequency (I.F.) such as the 455 KHz I.F. most often used in AM radio.

Let's digress here for a few minutes; my behind is getting sore from sitting at this computer and writing-- Let's go bike riding!

We hop on our bicycles and tool on down the road to the park, where we come upon three other cyclists up ahead. We ride up behind them and then maintain a constant speed behind them, so that we keep a stable observation point from which we can see all three.

As we observe them, we note that the guy on the left must be in 3rd gear, since he's pedalling slowly. The guy in the middle seems to be pedalling "normally" so we assume he's in 2nd gear. The guy on the right-- he's pedalling rather fast and furiously-- so he must be in 1st gear, for whatever reason. But they're all keeping abreast of one another.

Well, little did we realize that it was getting so late; the sun has set and it's getting dark, but these Olympic champs want to keep on riding! So we hang in there with them a little bit longer, noticing that the road is becoming darker and the streetlights are few and far between.

As luck would have it, there's a guy up ahead using an ignition timing light to tune up his car, which is parked by the curb. Promising in an apologetic tone that I'll be right back with his light, I swoop by and grab it from his car hood-- and lo and behold, it's a portable model that can be triggered, like a strobe light, by an internal pulse generator as well as by the engine ignition. So I switch it to "internal trigger" and, speeding up, I ride up behind and to the left of the three cyclists, so that I can get a sort of diagonal side-view of their bicycle wheels. I now switch on the timing light and adjust the strobe flash rate until it is just a bit SLOWER than the pedalling speed of the first guy (on the left, closest to me) who's in 3rd gear. You move up alongside me and we both watch the 3 cyclists by the light of a silvery strobe.

What do we observe?

Since the stobe light is the only light source on the now-dark street, we see only momentary flashes of the action: we see the same relative pedalling- direction at each bicycle that we noticed when it was still daylight; only now it looks like an old movie, flickering, because we're just "sampling" the action as they pedal.

Next, I carefully SYNCHRONIZE the strobe with the first rider's pedalling so that it flashes ONLY when his left foot reaches "12-o'clock" on each pedalling cycle. We notice that rider 1's pedalling has now appeared to come to a STOP-- we've "frozen" the action because we take only one "snapshot" of it per cycle. We also notice that the guy in 2nd gear appears to be pedalling quite a bit more slowly; the 3rd guy is also slower but still faster than the 2nd guy.

Now you suggest to me that I should increase the strobe light's flash rate some more, PAST the left-most rider's pedalling speed, which I do. What do we observe now? We see the old "wagon-wheel" effect from the movies-- the first rider now appears to be pedalling BACKWARD from our perspective, because our rate of perception (strobe light illumination) is just slightly greater than his pedalling rate.

Getting excited, you now have me adjust the strobe to be in sync with the 2nd guy, the guy who was originally seen to be pedalling in 2nd gear. We see HIS feet "frozen" and not pedalling, while the first guy is now pedalling backward even faster, while the last guy (1st gear), to the right, is still pedalling forward, but much more slowly.

Finally, we sweep our strobe rate up to the rate of the 3rd guy; he freezes his pedalling, and we see the first two pedalling backwards, faster yet.

As an encore, we increase the strobe flash a little more, and all three appear to be pedalling backwards.

We marvel at how "relative" perceptions can be and apologize to the man from whom we stole the timing light. (The three cyclists are last seen making a right turn at Albuquerque.)

The illustration above shouldn't be hard to visualize, especially if you've ever watched a wagon wheel turning backward in the movies or if you remember not so long ago when your hi-tech record (phonograph) turntable had black and white stripes along its perimeter which appeared to "stand still" in the light of a mini-strobe when you had the record speed adjusted just right.

The bicycle-wheel illustration above refers to a carrier wave and its sidebands. From a reference point of zero Hertz, they're all rotating their phases in one direction; the upper sideband turns the fastest, the lower the slowest, and the carrier halfway between.

If we now SHIFT OUR REFERENCE POINT, or frequency, up to that of the carrier, which we modelled as our "middle" guy in 2nd gear, we see the sidebands' phasors rotating equally in speed (frequency with respect to the carrier and us) but in OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS, while the carrier itself appears to be "stopped", or at 0 Hz.

Alternately, we can shift the three of them, as a group, DOWN the spectrum until the carrier is at 0 Hz-- and then the lower sideband will be at a NEGATIVE frequency, still rotating "counter" to the upper sideband, because THE TWO SIDEBANDS ARE CONJUGATES OF EACH OTHER, once you agree to call the carrier the "zero" reference! But since the lower sideband is reflected back up off the zero Hz "floor" (the "phase conjugate mirror"), the lower sideband now ends up superposing 'on top of' the upper, and is now rotating together with it in the SAME direction! ("Spatially in phase, out of phase in the Time dimension"...)

We now have an illustration or a correlation between the Wheeler/Feynman (and probably Bearden) "Wave/AntiWave Pair" and the commonly-used techniques of modulation and spectrum shifting as is now quite easily done in radio and audio systems.

A couple of years back, Preston Nichols published some books about the so- called Montauk Project, an alleged coverup-type series of experiments said to have taken place in the 1970s and '80s using the old SAGE radar at the defunct Montauk Point, Long Island radar base. In his first Montauk book, Nichols (and Al Bielek, indirectly) makes reference to a device called a "Zero-Time Reference Generator", described as an electro-mechanical device in a large box, allegedly developed by Nikola Tesla. The device was supposed to have been the inertial "time reference" for the pulsing of the large degaussing coils aboard the U.S.S. Eldridge (in the infamous "Philadelphia Experiment").

While the "PX" has long been an interest of mine, I found most of Nichols' allegations fairly unbelievable-- but notice how the concept of a pulsing electro-magnetic-inertial "reference" ties in with my "strobe light" story.

It seems that our "time" is bordered by 0 Hz at one end of the spectrum; everything below that gets reflected back "up" as a length/time/spectrum reversed copy.

At the upper end of a somewhat different but related scale (speed, which is equal to Space [distance] / Time), we have another "barrier", the speed of light, "c".

Any wave that might "try" to "run up against" that barrier would seem to get DOPPLER SHIFTED; it's WAVELENGTH is compressed, but its (group) velocity stays at c.

If an optical phase conjugate mirror is a variable refraction or "phase" grating (as it's called in the literature), and if the PCM produces "phonons" or SOUND waves at light frequencies, then those waves are LONGITUDINAL variations in the energy density at the mirror, just as Bearden has been telling us. Thus it would seem that an incoming EM wave would encounter a VARYING-DENSITY BARRIER which would produce alternate up and down DOPPLER SHIFTS (almost like FM, but in BOTH frequency directions like AM sidebands). And there we have it: The spectrum splitting (line-broadening) as described by researchers of Stimulated Brillouin Scattering phenomena.

Maybe "Zero Hertz" is not absolute, like Einstein said Newton's Absolute Time is not absolute. Maybe time flow, or at least the perception of it, depends on whether you're "in sync" with the "reference" defining the local reality.

Maybe we can build an electro-magnetic-gravitational "strobe light" that detaches us from the "local" time and allows some "sync shift". If I were to shift my reference to, say, -2 KHz, then I'd see -1 KHz as "forward-time" while you'd swear it was "time-reversed" and that I was, too...

(Bearden's 1970s "Quiton Perceptron" paper; Nichols' and Bielek's "Zero-Time Reference Generator"???)

I hope you've gotten some brain buzz from some of these ideas. They've been coalescing in my mind for a while now, having been helped along by many of the interesting comments made by Bearden and several of the KeelyNetters.

I think the "circular polarization" topic recently brought up by Terry Bastian has some real relevance here; my thoughts are that we're hampered by our continual visualizing of EM waves as 2-D plane waves; 2-D waves are probably only "flat", inadequate projections of a richer 3- or more dimensional EM wave. Direction of phasor rotation most likely plays a major role, when understood in conjunction with propagation direction.

Another possible avenue for exploration might be to do a detailed study of reflections on transmission lines, in the context of this file. The standing waves caused by either open or shorted RF transmission lines produce "conjugate" reflections of voltage or current, causing the formation of what we call "normal" standing waves. (That's what the Hams and CBers call "SWR" and want to minimize in their setups; KeelyNetters might want to MAXIMIZE it!)

Are these "conjugates" the same as the phase conjugates (time-reversed) that Bearden writes about? Or are they what he calls "pseudo-conjugates"?

I'll have to leave that topic for another file.

Happy Zero-beating!

Experiments & Results

The first experiment I tried when I had conceived and built this apparatus was to test its effect out on two of my fading Aloe Vera plants. Both were victims of being in the same room, same potting soil, etc., too long, and they were losing their bright green color to a sort of olive-brownish hue. Some smaller specimens sharing the same pots eventually got a kind of "jelly"-like, translucent look about them, and soon died. Moving the survivors to a sunny window temporarily only seemed to make matters worse, as they too began to turn "olive" and get translucent-looking.

One at a time, I tested them inside a small Lorentz "regenerator" consisting of a Tupperware container wrapped with coils and covered with aluminum foil (grounded shield). For the "sense" plate I substituted a copper wire which I stuck into the moistened potting soil, so that the plant and soil were connected electrically to the amplifier input, but contained within (and physically isolated from) the grounded enclosure.

With headphones temporarily connected across the amplifier output, I carefully adjusted the amp gain until I heard a soft hissing noise, but backed the gain just off from the point of oscillation (a loud howling in the headphones). I powered the amp with a 12v hobbyist gel-cell with a 13.8v regulated power supply in parallel with the battery. Removing the headphones, I then left the whole setup alone for a week.

At the end of that time, I opened the grounded foil covering (which had kept the plant in darkness for 7 days) and was delighted to see that the plant had regained most of its former bright green color and lost the translucent olive color that it had had before the "treatment". The same result occurred with the second plant, which was in a different pot. At this writing two weeks later, both plants still look bright and "new" and have begun to grow again, where they had "stalled" before the treatment.

Since you're taking my word on this, all I can do now is encourage you to build this circuit and try a similar experiment for yourself. That's what matters-- your results. Maybe sick or aging animals-- or humans-- could benefit from taking a regenerative "bath" in their own, reinforced electromagnetic "aura" fields. Remember, research since the 1960's has shown that only a weak field is needed to profoundly affect processes within living organisms, under proper conditions. You might need a "Philadelphia Experiment"-sized field to warp spacetime and compete with Scotty's transporter, but to stay healthy apparently takes only microwatts of power, as long as the information field contains the proper patterns conducive to the reinforcement of the patterns of energy making up the body.

Hiçbir yazı/ resim  izinsiz olarak kullanılamaz!!  Telif hakları uyarınca bu bir suçtur..! Tüm hakları Çetin BAL' a aittir. Kaynak gösterilmek şartıyla  siteden alıntı yapılabilir.

The Time Machine Project © 2005 Cetin BAL - GSM:+90  05366063183 -Turkiye/Denizli 

 Ana Sayfa /İndex /Roket bilimi /  E-Mail /CetinBAL /Quantum Teleportation-2   

 Time Travel Technology /Ziyaretçi Defteri / DuyuruUFO Technology 

 Kuantum Teleportation / Kuantum Fiziği /Astronomy