- By Dr Jyotsna Singh
Mumbai/Rajasthan: 06 February 2022 :: An experiment tested the hypothesis that water exposed to distant intentions affect the aesthetic rating of ice crystals formed from that water. Water samples located near the target water, but unknown to the people providing intentions, acted as ‘‘proximal’’ controls. Other samples located outside the shielded room acted as distant controls. 24 hrs. freezer in between 2 hrs. Gap for anger experiment.
Ice drops formed from samples of water in the different treatment conditions were photographed by a technician, each image was assessed for aesthetic, and the resulting data were analyzed, Results suggested that crystal images in the intentionally treated condition were rated as aesthetically more beautiful than proximal control crystals (p ¼ 0.03, one-tailed). This outcome replicates the results of an earlier pilot test.
The Keywords of the research was Intention, water, consciousness. The primary check out was “Can one person’s intention affect another person’s health from a distance”?
A growing number of clinical studies have investigated this question. Some of them provide positive evidence, others do not to help study this question under more stringent laboratory controls, investigators have also explored whether one person’s intention can affect another person’s nervous system from a distance. From those studies the evidence is clearer. From a meta – analytic perspective the original question can be answered with a tentative yes. Tentative, because while the evidence is statistically significant and repeatable,
the observed effects are small in magnitude, nontrivial to replicate, and theoretical explanations remain speculative. Because of the complexities associated with studying human health and
physiological responses, still other investigators have aimed towards further simplification by asking whether intention affects properties of water. This remains relevant to the question about health because the human body consist nontrivial to replicate, and theoretical explanations remain speculative.
Some recent clinical studies have investigated whether a person’s intentions can affect another person’s health at a distance. While some of the studies do provide evidence 1, others do not 2.
To assist with further research under more stringent laboratory conditions, we have developed the following testing protocol.
According to one perspective, the original question can be answered tentatively with yes . The evidence is statistically significant and repeatable. However, the observed effects are small in magnitude, not easily replicated, and theological explanations remain speculative.
Method was used by Dr Jyotsna Singh as she prepared water samples for this experiment by purchasing two glass containers filled with the same type of water that was used in the pilot study. One bottle as the treated sample, two as the immediate control, and two as the distant control, with
one as the happiness treatment and one as the anger treatment. In the treatment periods, the bottles remained in their original positions and were not disturbed. The third and fourth authors Dr Jyotsna Singh knew ahead of time that there would be treated and distant control bottles. After the distant intention treatments had finished, the participants were informed about the proximal controls. The primary interest of this study was the averaged esthetic differences of frozen water crystals. After the distant intention treatments had finished, the participants were informed about the proximal controls. The primary interest of this study was the averaged (blindly rated) aesthetic differences of frozen water crystals. study, but they were not informed about the existence of the proximal controls until after all distant intention treatments had ended. The comparison of principal interest in this study was the average aesthetic differences of frozen water crystals obtained using the treated vs. proximal control samples. This is because those two conditions were located close to each other in the same environment, and because the proximal control was not influenced by dr Jyotsna Singh prior knowledge of its existence. That is, to take seriously the hypothesis that intention plays a role in this experiment, we felt it was necessary to constrain who knew about the potential targets of intentional influence. By analogy with a quantum optics system, in which the knowledge one has of the path that photons take through a double-slit apparatus influences the behavior of those photons, we speculated that knowledge of the experimental conditions in this test might influence what was ultimately measured. Thus, to provide some control over the distant intentions in this study we required a comparison condition that was unknown to dr Jyotsna Singh or to the groups of ‘‘distant intenders.’’ This was provided by the proximate control. The distant control was retained in this study primarily because we used a similar control in the previous study would have expected it.
Photo of the treatment bottles inside the shielded chamber with the words of an intentional ‘‘prayer for water’’ (Happiness) overlaid on the photo. After explaining the photo and purpose of the experiment Jyotsna led the group in speaking aloud the words of the prayer for about five minutes conditions) wrapped the bottles in separate sheets of aluminum foil and placed.