The mechanism of potentization in homeopathy relates to typical electrical properties of water. One such property is conduction of electrical energy through water. The current ionic theory for electrical conduction in water (or aqueous solution) states that conduction of electrical energy takes place due to migration of ions to the electrode of opposite polarity. I.e. cations move towards the cathode and anions to the anode. We have shown previously in several papers, the limitations of the above theory in explaining electrical conductions in water. In our experiments we specifically used a DC (direct current) source, i.e. current from a battery or an adapter1. Thus conduction of Alternating current (AC) in water remained unexplained. Moreover, in some of our papers we have shown the effects of EMR (Electromagnetic Radiation) in water of a living body2 and its effect while preparing homeopathic imponderabalias3 ( X-ray , Luna etc ). Therefore, as EMR is able to induce AC (alternating current) in water2, we are now conducting experiments with AC (alternating current), to find a logical mechanism behind conduction of AC in water.
A step down transformer is used to step down 220 volts AC to 18 volts AC. One of the terminals of the transformer at the step down end is connected to a Graphite electrode (Gr A) placed in distilled water. The other terminal being connected to GrBat a distance of about 10 cm from Gr A, through a meter and an LED as shown in fig1 (A). The LED is found to glow and the current through the circuit is found to be about 22µA. The LED glows even when its polarity is reversed in the circuit. Leads of the LED are reversed and the current through the circuit is 23µAfig1 (B) .
Observations: The LED emits light when connected to a source of alternating current through distilled water irrespective of its connection of leads to the source.
Discussion: An LED is essentially a P-N junction that emits visible light only when forward –biased. It emits no light when reverse biased (Forward biased means that the positive lead and negative lead of an LED are connected to the positive & negative terminal of a battery respectively). It is therefore clear that AC emf is also able to forward –bias the LED for each half of a cycle for any particular connection of its leads to the AC source. Though no bubbles are seen at the electrodes Gr A & Gr B, emission of light by the LED confirms the passage of electrical energy through water. As the LED emits light only when forward –biased, it is clear that GrB acts as an electron rich zone whereas GrA acts as electron deficient zone for emission of light by the LED (Fig1A), while alternately, GrA acts as electron rich zone whereas GrB acts as electron deficient zone for emission of light by the LED (Fig1B).
Therefore as per existing theory of conduction of electrical energy through water, it is ions that conduct the electrical energy through water between two electrodes (GrA & GrB) i.e: H+ ions and OH– ions moving towards electron rich zones & electron deficient zones respectively, while conveying electric current.
Experiment 2: Five graphite electrodes are placed in a glass bowl containing about 30 ml of distilled water at a distance of about 5cm apart as shown in figure 2A. A step down transformer is used to step down 220 volts AC to 18 volts AC. The two terminals of the transformer generating 18 volts AC are now connected to GrA & GrB.
Observations: The AC emf shown by all possible pairs are measured and recorded in table 1
|Sl no.||Electrode pair||Emf in volts (AC)|
The emission of light by two LEDs (i.e. LED1 &LED2) are noted for different conditions as mentioned below
Condition 1: The negative leads of each of LED1 and LED2 are connected to GrC and Gr D respectively while positive leads of LED1 and LED2 are connected to each other through connecting wires. None of the LEDs are found to emit light. But on connecting junction “α” of the positive leads of the LEDs to GrZ through a connecting wire (α β) both the LEDs are found to emit light quite reasonably. Thus, GrC & GrD act as electron rich zones (ERZ) for LED1 & LED2 respectively while GrZ acts as electron deficient zone (EDZ) for both LED1 & LED2 (Fig2A).
Condition 2: The positive leads of each of LED1 and LED2 are connected to GrC and GrD respectively while negative leads of LED1 and LED2 are connected to each other through connecting wires. None of the LEDs are found to emit light. But on connecting junction “α” of the negative leads of the LEDs to GrZ through a connecting wire(α β) both the LEDs are found to emit light quite reasonably. Thus GrC & GrD act as electron deficient zones (EDZ) for LED1 & LED2 respectively while GrZ acts as electron rich zone (ERZ) for both LED1 & LED2 (Fig2B).
Condition 3: The negative lead of LED1 and positive lead of LED2 are connected to GrC and Gr D respectively while positive lead of LED1 and negative lead of LED2 are connected to each other through connecting wires. Both the LEDs are found to emit light quite reasonably. Further on connecting junction “α” of the positive lead of LED1 and negative lead of LED2 to GrZ through a connecting wire, no effective change could be noticed. Thus here GrC acts as electron rich zone (ERZ) for LED1 & LED2 respectively while GrD acts as electron deficient zone (EDZ) for both LED1 & LED2 (Fig2C).
Discussion: The relative electron density (i.e. electron rich or deficient) of graphite electrodes GrC , GrD & GrZ for all the three mentioned conditions is shown in tabular form
|Sl No||Condition||Electrode acting asElectron rich zone||Electrode acting asElectron deficient zone|
|1||Condition 1||GrC&GrD||Gr Z|
|2||Condition 2||Gr Z||GrC&GrD|
|3||Condition 3||Gr C||GrD|
It thus appears that, as per existing theory of conduction of electrical energy in water through ions, approach and consequent release of electrons by OH– ions at GrC & GrD in condition 1 makes it behave as an electron rich zone (ERZ) while subsequent acceptance of electrons by H+ ions at GrZ makes it behave as an electron deficient zone (EDZ). But in condition 2, the case is reversed, wherein approach and consequent release of electrons by OH– ions at GrZ makes it behave as an electron rich zone, while subsequent acceptance of electrons by H+ ions at GrC & GrD makes it behave as an electron deficient zone. Whereas in condition 3 it appears that approach and consequent release of electrons by OH– ions at GrC makes it behave as an electron rich zone, while acceptance of electrons by H+ ions at GrD makes it behave as an electron deficient zone.
The existing theory fails to explain how the approach of ions to any particular electrode can be optional, i.e. how electrodes accept ions based on the arrangement of the external load (i.e. here LED). In this experiment we see that all the three electrodes behave as electron rich zone for some conditions and electron deficient zone for other conditions. Thus none of the three electrodes can be designated as an electron rich (i.e. Cathode) or electron deficient zone (i.e. Anode) as their electrical character seems to depend on external applied conditions!
Case1: In this experiment six graphite electrodes are placed in a glass bowl containing about 30 ml of distilled water at six vertices of a hexagon with sides of about 3.5cms (as shown in figure 3A). Graphite electrode GrB is directly connected to one of the terminals of a step down transformer generating emf of about 18 volts AC, while GrA is connected to the other terminal through two parallel connected LED’s with reverse polarity (as shown in figure 3A). The remaining graphite electrodes are numbered from 1 to 4. For each combination of electrodes:
i) the emf is recorded in table below
ii) it is tested whether the emf generated for different combinations are able to light an LED or not.
Case 2: The AC source in the previous experiment is replaced by a DC source (9 volt battery) to see whether the LEDs emit light irrespective of bias or not.
Observations: Case 1: On allowing Current (AC) to pass through the circuit (fig 3A) it is found that both the LED1 and LED2 glow with reasonable brightness. The emf shown by various combinations are recorded in the table below.
|Electrode Combination(+) (—)||emf in volts (AC)||Condition of LED||Electrode Combination(+) (—)||emf in volts (AC||Condition of LED|
|Gr1—Gr2||1.8||emit faint light||Gr2—Gr1||1.1||emit faint light|
|Gr1—Gr3||4.4||reasonably bright||Gr3—Gr1||4.4||reasonably bright|
|Gr1—Gr4||5.6||reasonably bright||Gr4—Gr1||5.4||reasonably bright|
|Gr2—Gr3||2.6||reasonably bright||Gr3—Gr2||3.3||reasonably bright|
|Gr2—Gr4||3.8||reasonably bright||Gr4—Gr2||4.3||reasonably bright|
|Gr3—Gr4||1.2||emit faint light||Gr4—Gr3||1.0||emit faint light|
Case 2: On removal of the AC source and inclusion of a DC source (9 volt battery), it is found that only LED1 emits light, whereas there is no emission from LED2. Actually, due to the DC source, LED1 is forward bias whereas LED2 is reverse bias. While LED1 has an ERZ (electron rich zone) and EDZ (electron deficient zone), the reverse bias of LED2 does not allow any flow of electrons, hence there is no existence of an ERZ or EDZ.)
Discussions: From Case 2 of the above experiment it is found that LEDs emit light only when in forward bias and so only LED1, being forward bias, emits light. The electrical energy is believed to be conveyed between GrA & GrB by ions. Thus it seems that the migration and subsequent neutralization of positive ions or cations (H+) at the cathode (GrA) and negative ions or anions (OH-) at the anode (GrB) help in conveyance of electrical energy through distilled water.
However, in Case1 of the above experiment, it is found that both the LEDs emit a reasonable degree light. It therefore confirms that both the LED1 & LED2 are forward bias and a certain flow of electrical energy between GrA & GrB takes place in distilled water in both directions. This may be assumed to be due to the alternate approach and consequent neutralization of cations (H+ ion) and anions (OH– ions) at the graphite electrodes GrA & GrB while conveying electrical energy. However, generation of emf by different combinations (as shown in table 3) and their ability to light an LED certainly questions the concept of conveyance of electrical energy by ions in water. So the question arises, can ions move to neutral electrodes? The obvious answer being no, it continued to be a mystery how ions find their way to the neutral electrodes Gr1,Gr2,Gr3 & Gr4 for generation of emf ranging from 1.0 to 5.6 volts AC. Moreover, had this emf shown been due to migration of ions to the neutral electrodes, then the emf shown by the pairs would not vary in such a range, but rather would have been nearly the same.
From the table it is quite clear that not only Gr1 acts as positive electrode (i.e. acts as electron deficient zone) with reference to the other three electrodes but also Gr2, Gr3 & Gr4 act as positive electrodes with reference to the rest. It shows that, depending on the external applied load (i.e. here LEDs), the cation (H+ ion) and anion (OH– ions) migrate to each of the neutral electrodes and possibly anions release electrons at one electrode which then acts as a negative electrode & cations accept electrons from the other electrode which then behaves as a positive electrode. In other words it is the externally connected Load that will decide the nature of the electrodes (i.e. cathode or anode) by restricting a particular type of ions (cations or anions) from approaching the electrode.
Thus, not only conduction of direct current, as shown earlier 4, but also conduction of alternating current through water cannot be explained by the existing ionic theory of conduction of electrical energy in water. Therefore we are of the opinion that actually in water the ions do not conduct electrical energy, but electron flow occurs between different electrodes owing to the difference in relative availability of electrons at the electrodes. The presence of zones in water5 and the result of delocalization of electrons in water molecules6 affects variations in availability of electrons at the electrodes that account for showing different AC emf for different pairs of combinations in experiments 2 & 3, and hence electrical conduction in water.
Inference: Conduction of electrical energy (i.e. alternating current or direct current) in water is not due to ions, but to delocalization of electrons through orientations of water molecules.
. Orientations of water molecules-the force behind Homeopathy, Ruhul Amin, Biplab Chakraborty (Published in Homeopathy For Everyone Apr 2013 hpathy.com)
 Electromagnetic Radiation Induces an Electric Current in the Water of a Living Body by Delocalization of Electrons Through Orientation of Water Molecules Ruhul Amin and Biplab Chakraborty (Published in Homeopathy for Everyone June 2014) hpathy.com
 Electromagnetic Radiation as a source of Homeopathic Medicines – Imponderabilia, Ruhul Amin and Biplab Chakraborty (Published in Homeopathy for Everyone Mar 2012)hpathy.com
 Solutions Ionic or Non-ionic Conducts & Retain Electrical Energy Ruhul Amin & Biplab Chakraborty (Published in Homeopathy for Everyone July 2012)hpathy.com)
 The Science Behind Retention of Electrical Energy by Water, Ruhul Amin and BiplabChakraborty (Published in Homeopathy for Everyone Oct 2012)hpathy.com
 Delocalization of Electrons Through Orientations of Water Molecules Helps Electrical Conduction In Water ,Ruhul Amin and Biplab Chakraborty (Published in Homeopathy for Everyone Mar 2014) hpathy.com