Monatomic, Diatomic or
In his Dallas
lecture David Hudson said:
those of you who are interested, did you know that
has learned that you can scrape tissue out of the checks of the
and put the equivalent of a lie detector instrument on the tissue and
when the astronaut is out there, you know, millions of light years
that when he's subjected to stress, that the cells instantaneously
stress here on Earth even though they're not in his body."
Does this mean
that NASA astronauts have been millions of light years
on their way to the moon or does it mean that David Hudson can be wrong
The scientific method requires that we confirm David Hudson's
Just because David Hudson says that the ORMUS form of the transition
is monatomic does not necessarily mean that they are monatomic.
David Hudson has not provided any evidence to prove his hypothesis that
ORMUS form of the transition elements is monatomic in every case. The
empirical evidence that David Hudson references is his observation that
elements must be monatomic because if they were larger than a single
they would show up in x-ray diffraction spectroscopy because the 15
wavelength of the x-ray would have to hit the sample twice in a diatom
There is another condition, which might apply here though. A diatom
a conjoined or condensed nucleus and cooper-paired electrons might
be smaller than a conventional gold monatom. I will explain what I mean
later in this article.
I have not seen any evidence that the m-state
are monatomic. Since they exist in nature at a reduced weight they must
be in some hitherto unknown state. Since they cannot be assayed using
electron based spectroscopy methods they must not have the unpaired
electrons, which should give a reading. Hudson makes a statement to
this effect in his patent:
"Attempting to quantify
the number of electrons remaining in an ORME is extremely difficult due
to the electrons lost to oxidation, thermal treatment, and the
inability, except from theory, to quantify electron pairs using
electron quanta. It is established, however, that the ORME does
not have valence electrons available for standard spectroscopic
analysis such as atomic absorption, emission spectroscopy or
inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy. Moreover, x-ray
fluorescence or x-ray diffraction spectrometry will not respond the
same as they do with T-metals in standard analysis."
In order to exhibit the properties, which are associated with bosons,
i.e. superconductivity, tunneling, superfluidity and spin coherence,
they must fit the criteria for bosons. Bosons all have an even number
of sub-particles while fermions have an odd number of sub-particles.
The smallest unit of gold atoms, which could be a boson, is a diatom.
Superfluidity, superconductivity and Josephson tunneling are bosonic
These phenomena do not exist in fermions. The distinction between
bosons and fermions seems to be pretty well accepted
by modern physicists. If only bosons can exhibit superfluidity and
then it seems reasonable that the magical white powder of gold which
says is a single unit superconductor would have to be a boson. This
that it must have an even number of protons, neutrons and electrons.
Since the elements are defined by the number of protons they have
numbers of neutrons defines isotopes of a given element and differing
of electrons defines ions) then gold, with an uneven number of protons,
be both monatomic and bosonic. If it had one more proton it would be
if it had one less it would be platinum.
Using this logic, the ORMUS elements which could be monatomic would be
ruthenium, palladium, osmium, platinum and mercury because these
have an even number of protons. The ORMUS elements which could not have
true monatomic form would be cobalt, copper, rhodium, silver, iridium
Hudson claims, and others have confirmed, that the ORMUS form of all of
elements exists in nature. He also claims that, in certain
they "look like" other elements. He said that the m-state gold, in
stages of its manufacture, looked like iron, silica and aluminum. Since
naturally occurring ORMUS elements have evaded detection by modern
ever since spectroscopy was invented, it seems reasonable to assume
they are masquerading as other elements.
They must also match the physical properties of the elements they are
as. This means that ORMUS rhodium, for example, would measure as having
specific gravity similar to some lighter elements, if we accept
5/9 rule. But remember, the weight loss, which Hudson described in his
happened in the first heating and cooling cycle after the material was
and washed with hydrogen gas. Does this process change the monatomic
auride into monatomic mercury with the addition of an atom of hydrogen
perhaps, two or more gold nuclei are conjoined in this process to form
As I mentioned before, if these elements are single unit
superconductors (that is if they are superconductors
as a monatom or diatom) then this superconductive state requires that
be bosons rather than fermions. Here is a description of some
of these bosonic properties from an American Institute of Physics web
superfluid is a liquid that flows without viscosity or
friction. For a liquid to become superfluid, the atoms or molecules
up the liquid must be cooled or "condensed" to the point at which they
occupy the same quantum state. A liquid of helium-3, an atom whose
is made up of an odd number of particles, is a type of particle known
a fermion. Groups of fermions are not allowed to occupy the same
This quote with
pictures can be found at http://www.aip.org/png/html/helium3.htm
By cooling the liquid to a low enough temperature, helium-3 atoms can
up (left panel). The number of particles in each nucleus adds up to an
number, making it a type of particle known as a boson. Groups of bosons
fall into the same quantum state, and therefore superfluidity can be
Helium-4 (middle panel), a boson, does not need to pair up to form a
groups of helium-4 atoms condense into the superfluid state at about 2
above absolute zero. Superfluidity, especially the kind that exists in
is analogous to conventional low-temperature superconductivity, in
electrons flow through certain metals and alloys without resistance. In
superconductor (right panel), electrons, which are fermions, pair up in
metal crystal to form "Cooper pairs," bosons which can then condense
a superconducting state."
Since both superconductivity and superfluidity
have been observed as
of ORMUS gold and since metallic gold is known to have an uneven number
protons and electrons the ORMUS gold must be a boson despite the fact
metallic gold monatom would be a fermion.
How might this happen? I can think of a couple of ways. One way is
in the quote above where two helium nuclei pair up to make a helium
with condensed nuclei. This might happen with element 79 (gold) as
The condensed nuclei of such a gold diatom would have an even number of
(158) and neutrons (236). This would make the diatomic gold a boson,
is capable of the bosonic behaviors of Bose-Einstein condensates,
The other possibility might be that the nucleus of a gold monatom would
with a hydrogen atom (for example) giving a condensed nucleus with 80
and 118 neutrons. Of course this would no longer be gold but would have
monatomic mercury 198 (which would be a boson because it has an even
In his Dallas lecture Hudson describes how m-state mercury can drop to
gold by heating it to red heat in the air. I am wondering if this door
the other way too and the so-called monatomic gold is really monatomic
This would be one possible path for a fermion to become a boson but
is another. Since we are already talking about possible mechanisms of
with the a priori assumption that nuclear transmutation is taking place
Hudson's relatively low temperature chemical process, it does not seem
much of a stretch to consider that two gold atoms are undergoing
fusion and that we really have a monatomic form of element 158.
Of course the periodic chart currently does not go up much beyond
110 but there has been some scientific speculation that there might be
plateau of stable elements as atomic numbers get higher than a certain
Ordinary type I and II superconductivity requires a solid matrix in
the electrons cooper-pair up and become bosons. With single unit
this solid matrix would, theoretically, not need to exist. It would,
be possible to have liquid or gaseous superconductors.
In the Paranormal
Gary suggested that the ORMUS elements are type III superconductors
they exhibit the Meissner effect without being in a rigid matrix. He
that the thermal jitter, which prevents superconductivity at high
in a metal matrix, is overcome by cooling the metal to cryogenic
This thermal jitter in the matrix would not be a problem in a single
(monatom or diatom) superconductor.
Magnetic levitation ORMUS traps depend on the superconductive
behavior of the ORMUS elements in water. Water is diamagnetic and it
in magnetic fields. In this model diamagnetism and the Meissner effect
turn out to be one and the same thing.
A colleague has observed that ORMUS made from metal using ozone and pH
is very sensitive to magnetic fields. He has many stories how these
exhibit antimagnetic behavior when exposed to moving magnetic fields.
has reported that the more energetic of these substances would
invoke an out of body experience from a single whiff of them after they
been stimulated with a moving magnet. He frequently reported difficulty
containing these really energetic ORMUS materials.
My most profound ORMUS experiences resulted from ingesting ORMUS
made from metal that had "escaped" from proximity to a moving magnetic
Other researchers have also noticed difficulty in keeping higher energy
products confined to containers.
In summation, these behaviors suggest that we have single unit
Single unit superconductors would have to be bosons. Bosons would have
have an even number of protons, neutrons and electrons. Condensed
i.e. a gold diatom, would provide a mechanism that would tie together
of the strange properties we have observed in the ORMUS materials.
superfluidity, tunneling, biological
quantum coherence, diamagnetism
the incredible shrinking diatom (x-ray
fluorescence invisibility) might all be explained with this theory.
There is another related fact that Hudson does not adequately
address in any source I can find. This is the fact of the weight change
of these elements when they go from metal to m-state. Hudson has
observed this as have Jim, the Essene and others. What are the physics
of this phenomenon?
In August of 1996 Matti Pitkanen wrote me of a phenomena described in a
Scientific American article which might help to understand this. Matti
monoatomic homepage I found
reference to Scientific American article about spinning nuclei with
following property. When bombarded with protons (if I remember
correctly) new heavier nuclei were obtained from given heavy nucleus.
What was peculiar was that the moments of inertia (proportional to
mass) were not changed at all when nucleons where added to the original
nucleus! Neither did the band structure of rotational spectrum
change.! As if the protons would have gone- You can guess the
continuation- to a different spacetime sheet and therefore would not
participate the rotation nor contribute to the moment of inertia!"
One could hypothesize that the loss of weight when these metals go to
their m-state is analogous to the change of state the electron goes
through when it is Cooper paired. Since most of the mass of an atom is
in the nucleons it seems very unlikely that the Cooper pairing of
electrons would be responsible for this loss of weight. If, on the
other hand, the nucleons of two identical atoms were also Cooper paired
this would allow them to become a Bose-Einstein condensate with the
properties of a single atom. This diatom might assume the weight of a
Gary suggested that the Scientific American article Matti is referring
to provides support for his theory that various levels of electron
Cooper pairing exist. Gary wrote:
will also mention something about
the DH reference in Scientific American [Oct 1991]:
"A spinning superdeformed nucleus slows down in discrete steps, each
time emitting gamma rays, or highly energetic photons. The
emissions produce a characteristic band of energy spikes all spaced
equally apart. The surprise: the spectra of some different
superdeformed nuclei were almost identical."
I suggest to you that these discrete stepped emissions are the result
of rupturing the valence circuits, one pair at a time, releasing their
circuit energy (as an emission). Since the emission energy is a
function of the energy stored in the valence circuit (and so not
constant), when they are observed, as reported, to be the nearly the
same for different elements, then this is only because the atoms were
all charged in their circuits to nearly the same energy level; this is
most probably a consequence of conditions imposed by the
instrumentation environment that the atoms were placed in, and were
I suspect that this whole issue of electron and nucleon pairing is
crucial to understanding the nature of the ORMUS elements. While it is
clear that these elements can chemically bond in the metallic and near
metallic state it is not at all clear that they can chemically bond in
the m-state as they occur in nature. We need to design some
experimental method to clear this up, as it is central to our
understanding of these materials.
I see one of our next problems to be figuring out how to determine
the ORMUS elements are monatoms, diatoms or something else, using
It would be nice if we could make this kind of determination using
chemistry but it is beginning to become apparent that no one really
the chemistry of the Hudson process on some very fundamental levels.
is one issue that neither Hudson nor anyone else has addressed, as far
A monatom (or diatom) is too small to be visible yet we clearly have a
(or gray or red-brown) powder that is visible. The particles of this
are clearly visible but, in the case of the white powder of gold and
are not easily soluble using strong acids. This would suggest that
chemical bonds are active in the visible white powder particles.
If chemical bonds are holding these particles of pure gold together
they cannot be monatomic gold. They cannot be diatomic gold either. How
gold atoms must be bound together before you get a visible particle?
In one of his un-transcribed lectures, David Hudson quotes from one of
scientific papers he uses for reference. (I wish I had the exact quote
the lecture reference but I don't and it might take days to find it.)
quote was probably from one of the Physical Review papers on monatomic
elements. As I recall, the quote suggested that monatomic gold could
exist as a gas.
If this is true, what is it that we see when we see a small white
of ORMUS gold? What is the bond that holds these particles together? Is
a chemical bond, a nuclear bond or something we have never heard of? We
need a theory, which will clarify how these seemingly contradictory
can all be true. The hypothesis, which I would suggest might reconcile
contradictions, is that the bosonic unit (that is the monatom or
is not what we are seeing at all. Rather, what we are seeing is the
or box that the bosonic unit is held in.
I suspect that virtually all chemical manipulation of the unassayable
elements is actually just manipulation of the particular molecular cage
If these elements are superconductors which exhibit diamagnetic
in water then they would have to be "single unit"
than matrix superconductors like we are used to. A "single unit"
would have to be a boson with fully paired electrons AND fully paired
The "preference" that these elements seem to have for hanging out
molecular cages could be that these cages provide some shielding from
and other forces. As single unit superconductors they would tend to
from magnetic fields into any structure which gave them some shielding
those fields. My colleague noticed this when he found that a rubber
stack of microscope slides would tend to collect ORMUS in the tight
between the slides.
He took advantage of this effect when he would put a sealed bottle of
oxide desiccant beads in the shielded container with his ORMUS
He claims that these beads provide a tight comfy place for the ORMUS to
out and that the ORMUS "gets into" the sealed container and changes the
of the indicator beads while the factory seal on the bottle is still
(I have seen this happen.) The sealed bottle of desiccant beads
gains weight as the beads became saturated with ORMUS.
I would like to suggest that the ORMUS affinity for tight spaces also
as an affinity for the very tight spaces inside molecules. While in
tight inner molecular space I would expect the Meissner "field" to
some control over the behavior and configuration of the molecule it is
Dr. Martin Chaplin who is the Professor of Applied Science at South
University in London has a well-described theory that water is
composed of icosahedral water clusters. You can read more about this
These water molecules would, in essence, be like molecular geodesic
which would provide a nice comfy inner space for the ORMUS unit to
out. These water molecules with their ORMUS resident would also be
for other chemical bonds. When bonded with hydroxide radicals they
become visible as a precipitate.
As I suggested before, the ORMUS resident in the geodesic water
might exercise some control over the structure and behavior of the
molecule through subtle energetic forces like the Meissner effect.
Is there any evidence that such changes in the structure and behavior
of water take place in nature?
Of course there is. We have all seen pictures of Dr. Emoto's water
which have been shaped by music, prayer, pollution or intent.
water" is the buzzword of the new age water industry. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
that the structuring of water is the basis of homeopathy. Here is a
from one of her articles on this subject:
the mid-1990s, quantum physicists Del Giudice and
and other colleagues in University of Milan, in Italy, argued that
coherent domains measuring 100nm in diameter could arise in pure water.
show how the collective vibrations of the water molecules in the
domain eventually become phase-locked to the fluctuations of the global
field. In this way, long-lasting, stable oscillations could be
in the water. One way in which 'memory' might be stored in water is
the excitation of long-lasting coherent oscillations specific to the
in the homeopathic remedy dissolved in water. Interaction of water
with other molecules changes the collective structure of water, which
in turn determine the specific coherent oscillations that will develop.
these become stabilised and maintained by phase coupling between the
field and the excited molecules, then, even when the dissolved
are diluted away, the water may still carry the coherent oscillations
can 'seed' other volumes of water on dilution. The discovery that
substances form increasingly large clusters is compatible with the
of a coherent field in water that can transmit attractive resonance
the molecules when the oscillations are in phase, leading to clumping
dilute solutions. As the cluster of molecules increases in size, its
signature is correspondingly amplified, reinforcing the coherent
carried by the water." [http://www.i-sis.org.uk/water3.php]
Gel States and Ordered Water: Possible Roles in
Biological Quantum Coherence" - (http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/hameroff/water2.html)
Stuart Hameroff suggests that quantum coherence within the microtubule
is related to the structuring of water:
"Here we consider three proposals in which ordered water may play a
in biological quantum coherence essential for living systems and
1) quantum optical coherence in microtubule inner cores
and "self-induced transparency"); 2) cellular "vision"; 3) isolation of
from environmental decoherence."
The coherent changes that Hameroff and Ho are talking about must be
by something. I am postulating that the ORMUS unit inside some water
is the director of these coherent changes. I imagine that the ORMUS is
the driver of a radio-dispatched taxi. Using this example, the coherent
which we think happens between ORMUS elements, could give all of the
drivers in a city instruction to change lanes at the same time.
When the structure of water changes, work is being done. The taxi
have to tug on their steering wheels in order to change lanes. Where
the energy for this work come from? How does the intent of someone
over some water get translated into a change of the structure of that
How does a thought make coherent changes in all of the water in the
These are all mechanisms that I think ORMUS theory will eventually help
Several researchers, who have been doing ORMUS chemistry for a long
have noticed that there are similarities between the chemical
of the metallic forms and the chemical interactions of the ORMUS forms
these elements. They have also noticed differences. While the same
reactions may occur with the ORMUS form they are sometimes slower or
robust than the corresponding chemical reaction with the metallic form.
many repetitions are required to get the ORMUS form to do what we want
to do. This is quite noticeable in David Hudson's patent.
In my hypothesis, the difference would be accounted for because with
metals there is a direct chemical interaction with the transition
With the ORMUS form, on the other hand, the molecular cage that the
unit is in mediates the chemical interaction. All of these chemical
are taking place in some sort of water-based solution. Since water is
the mediator of these chemical processes it is not that big a stretch
postulate that the difference is that the ORMUS form is in a water cage
the metallic form is not. The "hydroxide" ORMUS precipitate would, in
model, be a way of aggregating ORMUS/water cages so that they could be
isolated and concentrated.
This model might also provide a greater understanding of other
properties of water. As I mentioned earlier in this article, water is
This means that it is slightly repelled by magnetic fields. My theory
a number of questions, which might be answered empirically.
· Is this diamagnetism a form of
superconductive magnetic levitation of the ORMUS/water cage molecule?
· Might changes in the Meissner "field" bring
about corresponding changes in the structure of water?
· Does quantum coherence between the ORMUS
units modulate the Meissner effect?
I think that the Bosonic ORMUS and water-cage models might provide a
framework for understanding the chemistry of these elements.
While we need to look at the ORMUS elements and their properties
the eyes of chemists but also we need to look at them through the eyes
physicists and mystics as well. Perhaps we will discover that all of
matter we see around us is just standing wave interference patterns in
sea of energy and the energy is the breath of God.
Let's not limit our ability to see beyond the realm of appearances by
the definitions of one agricultural chemist to these phenomena. Since
word "ORMUS" has no preexisting scientific meaning we can apply it to
whole class of unassayable materials without fostering rigid thinking.
move on now to describing and naming the finer distinctions of these