Very nice obfuscation, with I’m sure the intended result of leaving the field foggier than before.
You said you had built a Hieronymus machine and then purported to answer what it was supposed to do.
Then you say you are merely reporting what others claim.
What are we supposed to take from this? That you built a H and then never tried to use it? That you used it and it did nothing at all? That it worked but did something other than what everybody else claims it does?
Either you answered the question or you did not. Either the machine does certain things or it does nothing at all. Please pick one from column A and one from column B. If you have used the machine to do anything, anything at all, state what that is.
Yeah, I bet it is. And then you have the gall to defame skeptics.
JoeMax93, this is as close as something can be to “magic only works if you believe in it”, and still have some putative connection to ordinary concepts of physics and objective reality. I think we would accept even as subjective a claim as this if somewhere, there was someone who could make a Hieronymous Machine perform consistantly. How would you propose distinguishing the operation of this device from self-deception?
Part of the confusion about the Hieronymus machines is that he actually made about 12 different types, and they do different things. Let me explain some of it.
Hieronymus Atomic Analyzer = Industrial Analyzer = Prism Analyzer. This is the type he got a patent for ca 1949. It determines the presence and type(s) of elements in an unknown sample, and general quantities of them. It has a pickup coil, tuner apparatus (a rotating prism, 2 capacitors, and variable resistor), an ideosyncratic amplifier, and an output coil with a slick black acrylic surface called a stick pad. Operation: Place the sample in the pickup coil. The coil picks up an unknown energy off the smaple based on the element(s) in it. The electrical currents (RF) and the unknown (magnetic???) currents flow together into the pickup coil together. It they pass into the prism area, and the unknown energy becomes an “optical” wave, and gets refracted by the prism. The pickup is tuned to different angles to isolate the elements specific “frequency”, in the UV region. It turns back into a current. The capacitors are not used by Hieronymus later in his research. Amplified in a special amplifier, the electrical and unknown currents together. Output to the coil where the unknown enery emanates off the output coil, through the black acrylic pad, to the rubbing fingers of the operator. If the prism is tunes correctly, there is a stickiness on the rubbing plate. That’s the spooky part of the machine. The part that interested me the most is that the heavier the nucleus, there is a nearly linear relationship to the “frequency” of the unknown radiation coming off. More energy comes off radioactive isotopes, by about 1000 times. These may be the proposed “magnetic photon rays” but I have no idea. The machine fails to work if strong sunlight falls on the wires and prism (its in a light tight box), and fails if you bring up a strong magnet to it.
Hieronymus Medical Analyzer = Eloptic Analyzer. Same as above, except the prism unit is taken out. Now it takes energy picked up from biological samples (or witnesses, that needs explaination), and the capacitors are used to tune for a medical anomality in a location in the body. The stick reaction is a yes, they have the anomaly. Then you treat at those “frequencies” to rid the problem. So its a diagnosis and treatment machine, but it can do it at a distance, without the person being there. These types of machines are called Radionics, not accepted by modern medicaine, so seek medical attention with conventional medicine. I only take on medically impossible cases. About 30 so far. All for free, no donations excepted. In 10% or so of the cases have I personally had success. See next paragraphs.
Case1: Lady incapacitated with advanced multiple schlerosis. Bed, and home ridden. After about a month of treatment (a long time) went back to work full time and joined a gym. Symptoms greatly reduced.
Case2: Lady with breast cancer that had metastasized throughout her body. Treatment 2 months (a very long time) all cancer gone
Case 3: man in a coma about 6 months, brain function missing so had to be on a breathing machine, force feeding, etc. Terminal coma, were going to pull the plug on him. Treated 1 day, he opened eyes and began to talk. Treated muscles and systems second day, and walked out of the hospital on his own power. Unfortunately, he did not live but a month after that, but long enough to get his affairs in order, spend time with his wife, etc.
A lot of cases I treat are simpler, and don’t have objective miraculous results, so I am not including them. Have no idea why it works for 1 person and not another. But if even 1 person has a better life, I am glad to help.
If interested, I can tell more about the other instruments. But be courteous, or I will not come back. And I will never be mean in return. Its just a hobby. Made about 80 machines so far, all around the world.
Bill. Can you propose any kind of empirical test that could be performed on these devices, to conclusively determine what, if anything, they are doing?
I mean: a method of testing that determines whether these machines do anything, and if so, what they do, a method that declares ahead of time the meaning of ‘success’ for the test (and by complement, also ‘failure’) - a test that any person can then apply to the machines that will yield consistent results dependent only on the function of the machine - independent of the tester’s desires, expectations, wishful thinking etc.
Oh wow! I just realized that this thread has two more pages now.
Ok, so I stand by my last post but have a lot of questions now that we actually have Bill Jensen here to comment! Thank you for your time, btw!
Then use the same operator in all of the tests. It’s called a constant. Granted, for all reproductions of the test, the same operator (or another useful one) would be required, but if the human nervous system is really part of the device then that is to be expected.
For some reason this reminds me quite a bit of a device tested on the “Anti-Gravity” episode of the Mythbusters: http://www.56.com/u31/v_Mjk3OTI0MjA.html (Sorry -I could only find the whole episode)
They tested a device purported to produce anti-gravitational effects. In the end it was actually creating a magnetic field, but not defying gravity.
Question about the performance of these devices: In the example of the tree and the leaf, are you implying that given a leaf, the operator could figure out the illness of the tree? Is the operator able to treat the tree remotely as well (by treating the leaf?).
I understand the idea of taking a tissue sample and deducing a problem with the larger whole, but if I have a big mole the doctor isn’t taking a sample of my toe-nail. Surely, if these devices work, it would have to be a little bit more specific than that, yes?
A nice cordial discussion, thus glad to be of assistance.
OK, empirical tests would be like a scientific experiments, try to keep all the variables the same, and only change 1 at a time if possible. Make a statement of what a success and a failure of the test would be, be independent of the researcher’s innate talents or belief system. Come to a conclusion that the machine is the only variable creating any successes.
Indeed this might take a lot of time, and someone with patience, scientifically trained, enough money to support the research, etc. Plus a machine, I sell everyone right away as I make them, a big demand. I only keep one. Limited funds to the max.
The biggest problem is most of the Hieronymus 10 machine types require some sort of “dowsing” skill to detect, diagnose, etc. But, luckily, not all of the machines need to have a skilled operator. Let me discuss two such Hieronymus machines.
The first is the Hieronymus Homeopathic Preparator (I only made one, I don’t have it now). If the testing of effacacy of homeopathic reagents, and getting a scientific provable effect is a big doubt in your head, go to the next one. Otherwise if you have at least one homeopathic control substance that is scientifically proven in your mind, we use it as a control. This machine replicates the homeopathic reagent’s “energy” into nothing but a pure distilled water sample. Normally these reagents are water with some powerful, even poison chemical in them. One drop in 99 of water. Then the test tube is “pounded” on a surface like a book 100 times. Apparently, not only does the chemical disperse in the water, but something else (an energy off the chemical?) goes into the water. Now you take 1 drop of this and put it into another test tube with 99 drops of pure water and pound again. You repeat this scores of times and mathematically there is No chemical left except pure water and this unknown energy. It is this water that is ingested and gives a form of medical cure. Someone else performed experiments and trials, enough that many people believe in homeopathic medicines. But for skeptics this is not enough. Many many trials would be needed to get at the statistics. People and their environment are very complex, so it is impossible to really have controlled experiments. But a cure is a success.
More on homeopathics: these pounded reagents lose their curative function with exposure to sunlight (so the brown bottles) and strong magnetic fields. I guess someone had to have done the experiments, but I don’t know who they were. I just research Hieronymus. New topic: with the Hieronymus Homeopathic Preparator, you make reagents by placing them in a coil of wire, something is amplified by the ideosyncratic amplifier, and output to the output coil with a recipent bottle of pure water. One such pass amplifies it about 100 times as fast as a 1 pass pounding method. Also, these reagents are also destroyed by strong sunlight and strong magnetic fields. Something similar is happening here, and some experiments could be performed. But if you believe that homeopathics are useless, it might unmotivate you.
The second type of user-independent Hieronymus machine is the Anapathic Auto Scan-Treat machine. I just finished a 1.5 year process of replicating it, and have made 3 of them. You can check my website for more explanation on it. http://www.wdjensen123.com/hieronymus/AnapathicWeb.htm
Basically anyone can operate it, no belief is required. Its a healing machine, radionic family, with a tuning prism inside like the Atomic Analyzer (no other radionic machines use this Hieronymus prism method, its been lost for 20+ years). No need to know what is wrong with the patient. 30 minutes to scan the patient’s energies, organ energetic function, etc into water, then they ingest it! This would be a good candidate for someone to test.
Now I am not going to loan one to just anybody, they would have to be very serious. And a lot of data would need to be collected, as there are many different people, their environments, and diseases. I concluded that I would only treat hopeless cases, so if something good happened, it would likely be the machine I hoped. But who knows, maybe its just prayer? Wishful thinking? You would need a lot of different operators to verify that it wasn’t the operator, and blind experiments.
Leaf / tree question: The Medical Analyzer and Anapathic machine claim to be able to use an actual part of the organism like a leaf, DNA, etc, to heal the whole organism, even remotely. You better start at the simple experiments before you tackle the really spooky effects of the machines. Hopefully I hace mentioned 2 simple experiments.
Oh, I remember another experiment you can do at home: grow green healthy plants in complete darkness, only exposed to a specific arrangements of metal plates and wires. That’s another discussion, and maybe I have to post the document somewhere since it needs a diagram and long explanation. But anyone can do it. Can I post about 5 1.5MB pictures here so you can read about it? How do I do it? Maybe just on my website if requested.
If someone will volunteer to take some (5?) Jpg pictures and create a pdf, I’ll post the experiment you can do. If you can do optical character recognition, even better.
Hi Lumpy, I think I’ll discuss it with you - you seem to be skeptical but less personally agitated about it, and I appreciate that.
I think the harder task is distinguishing the results from being attributed to “only” a placebo effect. Especially since, as reported recently in Wired magazine, the placebo effect seems to be getting more effective.
Wired is not exactly a hotbed of New Age fluffiness. According to the article, if some drugs like Prozac or Relefen were subjected to trials today to prove they were more effective than placebos, they would possibly fail.
So the task is daunting. Not only would someone have to set up a well-designed experimental protocol, but also figure out a way to “placebo-ize” a supposedly non-working Machine to use as a control.
There would have to be results that beat out the new statistical standards of placebo effectiveness. So who knows? Maybe a Hieronymus Machine is just a device that facilitates what doctors label “placebo effect”. I think it’s amusingly ironic that over the last 20 years pharmaceutical drugs have gotten weaker and placebos stronger.
Like Bill Jensen, I’m a hobbyist, not a research scientist. I built the machine as much as an art project (the outer case is designed as Steampunk art) as a device to do serious research with. If some foundation wants to give me a grant to run a year-long research project on it, I’ll be happy to take a leave from my job and devote all my time to it. But I don’t see that happening.
But to politely answer the question previously raised, I’ve only had the machine complete for a couple of months now. There’s a bit of a learning curve to get the knack of operating it, and I don’t call myself an expert yet by any means, so trying to prove its capabilities by me isn’t a fair trail. I’m reminded of the scene in the “Iron Man” movie where the evil boss yells at a scientist, “Tony Stark built this out of a pile of junk, in a cave!” and he replies, “but sir - I’m not Tony Stark.”
I’m happy to describe some of the less-than-rigorous experiments I’ve tried, but it’s just an anecdotal account by a person you don’t know writing on an internet forum, who could well be lying. I can prove nothing by any means available on a discussion board, certainly not to the satisfaction of a hostile skeptic.
Also, I have no ethical authority to conduct human experiments, and doing so would put me at risk of violating medical laws. In the USA (no matter what you might think of the practices) it’s legal to twist spines, insert needles, feed herbs, administer vastly diluted concoctions, lay on hands or just fervently pray over someone for the openly advertised purpose of effecting physical healing (and get paid!) but if there is a box with dials on it involved, suddenly it’s a criminal act.
Most of the genuine Hieronymus-design machines sold today are marketed for agricultural use only, because of legal risks.
I’ll relate one anecdotal account of something I did with the Machine that has the appearance of a positive result. (We’ll see how it goes over.)
A friend of mine has a 17 year-old cat that was seriously ailing and about to be put down. The vet diagnosed the cat’s kidneys were failing and said euthanasia would likely be necessary soon, but my friend took it home to think about what to do. I told her about the Machine and she supplied me some fur samples from the cat - at that point she felt there was nothing to lose. I followed the recommended procedure to treat kidney malfunction from the manuals written by Hieronymus. Four days later she brought the cat back to the vet, and it was seemingly more energetic than before. The vet examined the cat and said that its kidneys were functioning better than five days ago, and it was not in imminent danger anymore. That was on (looking at notes) April 28th, and the cat is still alive and even more energetic, as of last week when I saw my friend.
Now, did my operation with the Machine aid the cat’s kidneys to regain function? Hell, I don’t know. That’s not a proof. Correlation is not necessarily causality. Frankly, I fully expected it not to work, if for no other reason than due to my relative inexperience. It could easily be a weird coincidence. Sometimes failing cat kidneys go into remission, I suppose.
But animal experiments are also ethically dubious (at least for me.) I have no large sample base of cats with failing kidneys to run double-blind protocol tests with, to try to replicate the effect. What do you propose I do? March in to a vet clinic with my Hieronymus Machine and ask if they’d like to let me conduct experiments on their sick cats? Explain that the Machine is supposed to perform long-distance healing, and would they mind giving me clippings of fur along with each cat’s medical chart so I can run proper experiments with it? You can imagine what their response would be. Probably similar to Monsieur Snapcase’s.
So what I plan to do sometime next month is to try experiments with plants. I’ve got a small garden to work with, so I figured I’d use sunflower plants which are fairly easy to grow and they grow tall, making them easy to measure. I’ll perform the procedure to “potentize” one batch of seeds as described in the manual, and leave another batch untreated. Then I’ll plant them and monitor what happens. I might also use the Machine to control pests and transmit “general vitality” on the first group and not the other. But that’s about as complicated of an experiment as I’m capable of doing myself. I’m not a botanist, so who’s going to believe me even if I do get positive results? And again I’m up against the same problem - do I march in to a university ag department with my Hieronymus Machine and ask if they’d like to let me conduct experiments on their plants? Explain that the Machine is supposed to perform long-distance healing and growth, and would they mind giving me clippings of leaves so I can run proper experiments with it?
Your question about avoiding self-deception is quite valid. How do I know that the effect I seem to be feeling coming from the touch pad isn’t “just my imagination”? I don’t know. How can I know? There’s no way for a test device to monitor what’s happening. I could just as well delude myself into thinking it doesn’t work as thinking it does. I don’t see any way to cut that philosophical knot except to simply assume that it works or it doesn’t, one way or the other, and act accordingly. I choose to act as if it’s working.
One thing that might help “filter” out self-deception is being surprised by the results. If I only get exactly what I expect to get, I could just be “talking myself into it.” I really didn’t expect using the machine to help my friend’s cat to work, but the cat got better. I didn’t know exactly what a stick-pad response was supposed to feel like, but I got one that matches the written descriptions, even though it wasn’t like what I was imagining it to feel like.
So I’m open to advice on how to go about proving the Machine works that’s within my power to do. With what I’ve explained about the nature of the process, does anyone have any practical suggestions? Does the experiment with plants I described above seem rigorous enough?
Hi there, I got the growing plants in the dark article converted to Adobe pdf. Its about using this unknown energy, channeling it in wires, and turn it back into a wave to illuminate and grow green plants. Its the same experiment Hieronymus talks about in his 1949 patent, and a really good place to start the research. Remember to insulate the metal plates and stuff off the ground and structures, ceramic insulators are best. My CD for sale on Ebay on Hieronymus has more info about it too:
I was reading the beginning of the post, and it mentioned Campbell making a “symbolic” “hieronymus” machine. In the boxes of notes I recovered, there was a lot about Hieronymus and Campbells letters. Basically Hieronymus felt that Campbell was a good operator that got lucky in that his defective “machine” worked at all. Campbell did not build a real Hieronymus machine at all, and Hieronymus told Campbell that the symbolic version on paper might work for diagnosis with a very skilled person (psychically), but it would be totally useless for treatment, as that requires power and amplification. Hieronymus admitted that the diagnosis part did not need power to his machines for people with lower but effective stick-pad skills, and that psychically in-tune people could diagnoses without even any machine at all, they just needed a machine for amplified powered treatment, except in rare cases of special healing abilities. So the Campbell symbolic Hieronymus machine was considered by Hieronymus to be a nearly useless and misleading pursuit for most people trying to diagnose and treat. He did not sanction it. Their discussions were at times quite heated.
Here is a letter I wrote to a published Physicist who proposed some interesting things. I did get a reply:
Dear Dr. Rainer W. Kuehne,
Summary: I make unusual patented machines that may be amplifying, manipulating, and detecting magnetic photons, if they exist. The energy has optical properties, but behaves differently than normal optic rays.
I am an experimental researcher working with some sort of electrical / optical waves that have observable, but different electrical and optical properties than regular photon waves. I came upon your paper on magnetic monopoles, which theorizes a different type of light called magnetic photons. Perhaps I have been working with these magnetic photons, and did not realize it.
My research is based on the US patent (2,482,773) of Dr. Thomas Galen Hieronymus. He patented a machine that measures some sort of electro-optic waves coming out of different element samples placed in the machine. These waves exhibited different Electrical and optical properties than normal, and coined them “Eloptic Energy”
He found that each element emitted a specific Eloptic Energy “frequency” that directly was proportional to the atomic weight of the atom under observation. If the Eloptic energy was made to conduct in copper wires and directed to refract through a prism, the Eloptic energy would refract at a proportional angle to the atomic weight. It was done in total darkness. He tuned the angle with a moving metallic pickup, used idiosyncratic electrical amplifiers, and a “sensitive” person as the detector means. If the energy was conducted and to be detected for the set angle, it circulated in an output copper coil beneath a black acrylic plastic plate which became “sticky” to the touch. If the prism angle was de-tuned, it would feel smooth. It seems illogical, but he was able to demonstrate that it worked with a sensitive person with skills similar to dowsing.
If these radiations are actually what you call magnetic photons, I have a whole list of materials that insulate and conduct them (they have high penetrating power, but are hard to detect), information on what isotopes seem to emit them more powerfully, idiosyncratic information on constructing machines that can amplify (or at least direct) the magnetic photons along wires and optical paths. The energy can be stored in some solids and liquids. It is emitted further in distance from radioactive isotopes. It can be amplified. It can be refracted by glass prisms and even black acrylic prisms. It can be reflected from mirrors. It propagates in straight lines in air. Can be conducted through a list of materials, and insulated by another list. It follows electric currents in wires. It is extremely fast in space. It has great penetrating power through most matter and gases. These experiments were carried out in working instruments, and altering one parameter at a time.
Dr. Hieronymus was very secretive about his livelihood, and even purposefully hid information from his US patent. After he died in the late 1980’s, his widow abandoned his research papers and machines in a Georgia warehouse. I was able to recover the information / machines, study and summarize the information, and determine the secrets behind the machine’s operation and construction. I have publicly put up plans on the web for one of the 10 machines he built that utilize the energy. Apparently they can be used for healing organic systems somehow, and I have had some miraculous results, as well as others (Some of these machines fall under Radionics).
It seems that the energy will hop off a conductor and follow the path of strong sunlight or even magnetic field lines. It was observed that some part of sunlight’s energy components could be directed along wires to grow green healthy plants in complete darkness, with a plate attached to the wire above them in the light tight box.
If any of this is interesting, I would be happy to discuss it with you, or perform experiments to determine the physical properties and behaviors of the possible magnetic photons, or whatever they are. Hieronymus spent his whole life trying to find an objective electrical way of detecting the radiation without the sticky human interface, but was unable to do so. I am considering galvanic / electrical responses from leaves exposed to the output end of the amplifier to see if I can get electrical readings that way. Remember that the leaves responded to the Eloptic energy from the sun, conducted into the dark by wires (no amplifier was needed in these experiments), so may respond with electrical signals.
Actually, I re-dressed the wiring since that photo was taken when I added the ultra-violet indicator light under the sample well. I hope to put up new photos soon.
This is a very interesting topic, but not all that relevant to the discussion until a valid scientific experiment is first done. If the results are similar to the placebo effect, however, then I think that it’s certainly worth discussing.
Point noted.
You’re certainly correct that your home experiments aren’t quite the same as a peer-reviewed, double-blind study published in a major journal. However, I think it’s a grand idea!
You shouldn’t test both of those variables (the “potentization” variable and the pest control variable) on the same plant. Rather, set up three groups:
Control (meaning nothing special is done)
Potentized only
Pest control only
Otherwise, if you get a positive result for the tested group, you’d be forced to preform a second experiment to determine which technique resulted in the healthier plant.
Also, be certain that all other variables are controlled: same soil type and amount, same exposure to sunlight, and same amount and type of water/food. And if you want to convince other people of the results, I suggest making a detailed outline of the experiment.
This shouldn’t be too hard to do.
Another fantastic experiment to do (and even easier than your plant test) is to test for user bias. The assertion is out there that whoever operates the machine convinces themselves unconsciously that it works, much like Ouija boards .
So, what you do is simple:
Get a friend/collaborator and test on yourself (or someone else familiar with the proper use of your Hieronymous machine.)
Set up a physical barrier between yourself and the sample you’re testing (this shouldn’t be too hard -maybe get some cardboard and a pair of scissors.
Leave the room and have your friend load the sample, without telling you anything about it. 50% of the time he/she will leave no sample, but won’t give you indication one way or another. In fact, it’s best if you don’t have any contact with this person whatsoever to prevent any accidental information leak. They also need to mix it up, so that it isn’t as simple as odd = sample and even = control (in other words, don’t simply alternate).
Repeat this test…oh…say…50 times? That should certainly be enough to account for simple human error. If you’re up for it, do the test 100 or 200 times.
In the end, if you are in fact sensing eloptic energy (or whatever it is, for that matter), then you should have a very high rate of accuracy.
Let’s say that this turns out to be the case. You have not proven that the machines work, but you have proven that the sensations you get have a real causal relationship with the presence of a sample.
Furthermore, you could prove that only certain individuals can successfully use these devices by repeating the experiment on more people (and specifically on those claiming to be able to use them).