In Reciprocity, Volume 12, No. 3, Summer, 1983, p. 12, Dewey B. Larson writes:

Some of the readers of my latest book, The Neglected Facts of Science, are apparently interpreting the conclusions of this work as indicating that the Reciprocal System of theory leads to a strict mechanistic view of the universe, in which there is no room for religious or other non-material elements. This is not correct. On the contrary, the clarification of the nature of space and time in this theoretical development removes the obstacles that have hitherto prevented science from conceding the existence of anything outside the boundaries of the physical realm.

In conventional science, space and time constitute a framework, or setting, within which the entire universe is contained. On the basis of this viewpoint, everything that exists, in a real sense, exists in space and in time. Scientists believe that the whole of this real universe is now within their field of observation, and they see no indication of anything non-physical. It follows that anyone who accepts the findings of conventional science at their face value cannot accept the claims of religion, or any other non-material system of thought. This is the origin of the long-standing antagonism between science and religion, a conflict which most scientists find it necessary to evade by keeping their religious beliefs separate from their scientific beliefs.

In the Reciprocal System, on the other hand, space and time are contents of the universe, rather than a container in which the universe exists. On this basis, the "universe" of space and time, the physical universe, to which conventional science is restricted, is only one portion of existence as a whole, the real "universe" (a word which means the total of all that exists). This leaves the door wide open for the existence of entities and phenomena outside (that is, independent of) the physical universe, as contended by the various religions and many systems of philosophy.

Inasmuch as the Reciprocal System is a theory of the physical universe only, it arrives at no conclusions as to the validity of the contentions of the various non-scientific schools of thought, but it removes all justification for the assertions that are frequently made to the effect that those contentions are scientifically impossible. Those scientists with strong religious convictions who are now looking askance at the Reciprocal System under the mistaken impression that it envisions a purely materialistic universe should, in fact, welcome it, because it removes the basic conflict between science and their religious beliefs.

Those who are familiar with the study of UFOs are well aware of the fact that “close encounters” with this phenomena often result in the erratic behavior of electrical devices. It is well known that cars stall out and cannot be started—though the engine will often crank—and things like radios, television and kitchen appliances will suddenly turn on and cannot be turned off.

Legacy science has no explanation; and Larson’s RS doesn’t fair too well here, either, but comes a bit closer.

Examine first Larson’s view of electricity, which comes in two varieties:

1. The uncharged electron: being a space displacement, becomes trapped in wire (temporal displacement) and gives us the phenomenon of electric current.
2. The charged electron: still a spatial displacement, but being neutralized half the time by the charge (as a vibration), thus able to jump gaps across the vacuum of space (when charge is effective), and remain trapped in matter (when charge is ineffective). This gives us the phenomenon of static electricity.

In a conductor, the behavior of “current” and “static” electricity is a bit different; electric current, without a charge, will distribute itself evenly over the cross-section of the wire, making the current proportional to the cross-sectional area, which is a known and measured quantity. Static electricity exhibits the “skin effect”, where the “same charge” on the electrons pushes them apart, so they move to the surface of the conductor. In a basic conductor, we will find both forms of electricity, static on the surface, and current in the middle.

In the Law of One material, Ra indicates that the majority of UFOs are actually manifestations from the “4^th density”, our own density being defined as “3^rd”. (4^th density is commonly referred to as “astral” and the 3^rd is “physical”). Therefore, when a UFO enters our realm, it has about it a “field” of 4^th density “energy” (I quote the terms, because they are not technically correct, but relate the concept). Therefore, it is logical to assume that the weird electric effects are a result of this 4^th density “energy field”, which we will now evaluate.

One of the characteristics that the RS2 evaluation brought out concerning electrons is that they can “pair up” or form “triplets”, the triplet being known as the compound motion of the charged electron neutrino, which is also a “rotating unit of space” as Larson describes it (“This charged neutrino is thus, in effect, a rotating unit of space, similar in respect to the uncharged electron, and, as matters now stand, indistinguishable from it.”, Basic Properties of Matter, p. 262). The big difference between the electron and electron neutrino is that the neutrino is a magnetically-rotating (2-dimensional) unit of space, whereas the electron is an electrically-rotating (1-dimensional) unit. But, being a unit of space, it, too, can become trapped in a conductor—and can flow thru matter just like an electron. Larson refers to this as a “magnetic temperature”.

It has been theorized that UFOs use some form of magnetic propulsion. An analysis of the data indicates that the type of “magnetism” it uses is not the common rotational vibration, but the non-local field generated by charged, electron neutrinos moving thru conductors—a “4^th density” magnetic field. This field will, of course, induce a similar movement of electron neutrinos in the matter in the vicinity, and hence cause the electrical problems exhibited. But why do some things shut down, and others turn on?

As indicated above, Larson identified two forms of electricity, charged/static and uncharged/current. The presence of this 4^th density field will try to form charged electron neutrinos by transferring the charges from the static, charged electrons and placing them on existing uncharged neutrinos in the area (since static charges are not confined to conductors, and are free to move). Thus, any device that relies on a “static effect”, such as the spark plugs in a car or a neon sign, will fail! But, devices that rely solely on electric current will continue to work, which is why one can still crank the starter motor on a car during one of these events, but it will not start because it cannot generate a spark.

But what of the charged, electron neutrinos being generated… increasing Larson’s “magnetic temperature”? Since the charged electron neutrino behaves like electric current, everything in the vicinity that requires electric current will suddenly have electric power available, even if it is not plugged in! This effect was noted by Nikola Tesla during his experiments, as well as during UFO close encounters. Radios and TVs turn on, blenders in the kitchen start spinning… usually out of control, digital appliances tend to burn out.

And what other effects does the flow of charged, electron neutrinos have? The charge on a neutrino is inward, not outward, as other magnetic charges. Thus, the location of electron neutrinos in a conductor will be the inverse of it’s static equivalent—they will accumulate at the core of the conductor, not on its surface, forming a thin, intense stream running down the middle of a conductor, which gives us a 3^rd form of electricity, and a 3^rd type of behavior—cold electricity—a type of electric current with no thermal/heat properties, because it’s “thermal” condition is magnetic.

One of the dangers this analysis brings out, however, is summed up by a statement Ra made in Session 63:

“If a third-density entity were, shall we say, electrically aware of fourth-density in full, the third-density electrical fields would fail due to incompatibility.”

“To answer your query about death, these entities will die according to third-density necessities.”

Every advancement has its dangers; fortunately, there are some warning labels.

Distribution of Electron Types in a Conductor

This diagram shows where regions of static (charged) electrons, current (uncharged electrons) and cold electricity (electron neutrinos) exist within a cross-section of a conductor.

I also noted that cold electricity tends to aggregate at the center of gravity of the cross section, and since electron neutrinos are also responsible for isotopic mass, one would expect to find the higher isotopes of an element near its center of mass. From the little I was able to find on the topic on the Internet, this does indeed seem to be the case—right down to the Earth, itself, where the heaviest isotopes occur closest to the center of the planet.

This might change the view of “magnetic temperature” slightly; Larson had attributed it to a field effect (magnetic ionization level), but it may actually be the rotational vibration of the electron neutrinos, concentrating at the center of mass, that causes the increase in magnetic ionization along with the related effects (increased radioactivity, stellar combustion, co-magnetism, thredules, etc).

It is an interesting cascade situation; the presence of neutrinos causes the magnetic ionization level to increase, causing more elements to become radioactive, releasing more neutrinos, increasing the magnetic temperature further, causing more radiation. Sounds like the basis of nuclear fission—another interesting side-effect of “cold electricity”.

See: http://www.subtleenergies.com/ORMUS/

ORME, or monoatomic elements, are metals that exist as a powder rather than a metallic crystal. David Hudson, back in the 1970s, worked with these monoatomic elements discovering some unusual properties, such as their ability to superconduct, aid in healing the body and induce psychic experiences. The monoatomic state of an element, the m-state, is investigated here in light of the RS2 understandings of polar geometry and birotating electron pairs (aka "Cooper Pairing").

Background Information

It is recommended that one read KVK Nehru's article, "Superconductivity: A Time Region Phenomenon?" prior to reading this article, to gain insight into birotating electrons and the mechanism behind superconductivity.

Also recommended is Bruce Peret's article, "Positrons and Electrons" in the RS2 theory website, to understand the dimensional relations involved in creating charged electrons, electron pairs and electron triplets.

Monoatomic Elements

Monoatomic elements are elements that exist as single atoms only, as compared to diatomic elements which exist in pairs. When evaluated in terms of the magnetic and electric rotations of the Reciprocal System, they all fall within a specific range of electric rotations:

RS Layout	Electric Speed
Magnetic Speed	8			9			10 / (8)			11 / (7)			12 / (6)
3-2 (5)	Iron	BC	Bar	Cobalt	Hex	Bar	Nickel	FC	Bar	Copper	FC	DB	Zinc	Hex	Tb
3-3 (6)	Ruthenium	Hex	Bar	Rhodium	FC	Bar	Palladium	FC	Bar	Silver	FC	DB	Cadmium	Hex	Tb
4-3 (7)	Osmium	Hex	Bar	Iridium	FC	Bar	Platinum	FC	Bar	Gold	FC	DB	Mercury	Rho	Tb
4-4 (8)	Hassium			Meitnerium			Darmstadtium			Roentgenium			UnUnbium

• Items listed in green were not on Hudson's list and were added to fill out the table, based on projection.
• First notation after the element name is the metallic crystal structure:
  BC = body centered, Hex = hexagonal, FC = face centered, Rho = rhombic.
• Second notation after the name is the Theosophical "Anu" structure:
  DB = Dumb Bell group, Tb = Tetrahedron group B, Bar = Bar group.
• Whereas the elements in the 4-4 magnetic range do not naturally occur in nature, and were not observed, the crystal structure and Anu structure are unknown.
• Elements below the 3-2 magnetic range have insufficient displacement to have an electric speed greater than 7, which is required for the m-state.

ORME Characteristics

The bulk of the metallic structures are face-centered cubic, followed by hexagonal. Only mercury is rhombic. It is interesting to note that the ONLY "Bar group" element that isn't considered an ORME is iron, which is not on Hudson's list. ALL the remaining Bar group elements are ORME.

There is definitely something about this range of elements that works with biologic structures. The Theosophical Bar group elements are a set of 7 rods piercing a cube, which is virtually the SAME geometric configuration that I cam up with when I plotted the intersection between polar and rectangular geometric of the Cosmic to Material sector linkage, respectively:

Theosophical "Bar Group"	RS2 Diagram of Polar/Rectangular Intersection

Nehru has identified the energy in the Cosmic sector, existing as a conjugate rather than an inverse to the Material sector as prana, the life force. This does appear to indicate that some of the unusual shapes that were seen by the clairvoyant viewing of atomic structure by Theosophists has some validity, as it is the resulting geometry of Material-Cosmic linkage.

Nehru identifies "Cooper pairs" as bi-rotating electrons, which might be exactly how the monoatomic elements work--put simply, the outer "valence" electrons transform from individual units into bi-rotating pairs. Due to the dimensional reduction that occurs when electrons pair (described in Nehru's article), the element will lose its electric valence and act a noble gas element. I notice that ALL the noble gas elements have face centered cubic crystalline structures, the same crystal structure as the bulk of the ORME, so there is some superficial evidence to support this conclusion.

Monoatomic elements are noted for their inability to form a crystal lattice or to bond with anything, existing in a fine powder form only. In the link referenced above, even hydrochloric acid and aqua regia have no effect. The behavior as a noble element would explain this inability to form bonds with other atoms.

The presence of bi-rotating electrons in the outer bands will give the element room-temperature "superconductivity", as described by Nehru's article on superconductivity, being a property of the bi-rotating electrons within the material, rather than a characteristic of the material, itself. This is also exhibited in monoatomic elements when exposed to a magnetic field.

Indirect References to ORME

The monoatomic powder has turned up in other references. During Tesla's radiant energy experiments, his copper wiring would often turn to powder, ruining his experiment. This would indicate that certain frequencies cause pair production in metallic elements making them drop out of the metallic bond state and into a monoatomic form, literally turning the metal into dust.

Notable experimenter John Keely demonstrated resonant devices that were able to reduce solid rock and metals to dust, as an alternative to drilling in mines. Again, this is exhibiting similar properties to Tesla's accidental work by using specific sets of frequencies to dissolve the atomic bonds in metals and crystals.

In a second application, Keely was able to fuse metals together in such a way that no weld could be found--almost as though the metals were blended together as a single piece, without any heat. The transition state between crystalline and ORME could explain this, where the atomic structure was beginning to lose it bond, forming a gel rather than solid powder, thus allowing two pieces of metal to be brought together and fused without heat. Upon removal of the effect causing the transition, the material would return to the crystalline state.

Canadian John Hutchinson reproduced this effect repeatedly during his demonstrations of the "Hutchinson Effect", where objects and metals would exhibit superconducting "anti-gravity" effects, along with objects fusing together without any heat, or one object being pushed through another without any distortion of material. Unfortunately, Hutchinson's work was not easily duplicated.

The RS2 Model of the M-State

The RS2 atomic model is closer to the conventional physics model than Larson's atom. It includes both valence and conduction bands, which are nothing more than speed zones created by the magnetic rotations of the atom. Electrons, being cosmic in RS2, are captured in the speed zone that matches their energy, resulting in zero net motion--captured. They are not an inherent part of the atomic rotation, but due to the extreme number of free electrons in the environment, all atoms will capture their quota in a small amount of time. It should be noted that the number of electrons that can be captured is directly proportional to the net magnetic speed. Therefore, it appears that each atom has the same number of "protons" and "electrons", as conventional science would understand it.

The RS2 explanation proposed to explain monoatomic behavior is that the outer, "valence" electrons are converted into birotating electron pairs (the "Cooper Pairing"). Electrons are cosmic and are therefore adjacent in time, not in space, so when viewed by our technology, the electron pairs will be distributed across the environment, not stuck together.

When electrons form a birotating pair, two things happen: first, the rotational torque associated with a "rotating unit of space" is cancelled out, and the electron becomes a boson, with all the characteristics of a photon. Secondly, as Nehru described in his article, it undergoes "dimensional reduction"; the area that comprises resistance to the movement of the electron is reduced to a 1-dimensional structure, with no resistance and would appear as a HF photon in the category of hard ultraviolet or X-rays.

Electrons, in RS2, only occupy a single, rotational dimension. Birotating electrons, like photons, occupy two dimensions and are still carried by the progression of the natural reference system and thus would move easily from atom to atom. When an electron (1-dimensional) captures a photon (2-dimensional), the resulting structure is 3-dimensional, without any free dimensions to be carried by the progression--the "charged" or "static" electron. However, the birotating electron appears as a photon/boson, a 2-dimensional system, which can be captured as a "charge" by another electron.

Microclusters

When the environmental conditions are set up to form birotating, "Cooper" pairs, the probability is that the electron that captures the "charge" will be part of another birotating system, resulting in a type of covalent bond between them--one electron being shared to make each of the birotating systems appear as a stable, captured triplet, remaining fixed in the valence band.

However, due to the non-locality of the electron pairing, it is unlikely that the other member of a pair will exist within the same atom. Thus, a type of covalent bond will form between atoms. It has been noted in Cooper pairing that the spatial separation is limited; so the neutral, noble-gas like behavior of monoatomic elements will bond together, but as a loose aggregate. The most stable structure of a loose aggregate is a sphere, observed as the microcluster.

Microclusters would have no limit on size, since the bond between atoms is random. However, external influences, such as electric, thermal and magnetic ionization levels, will tend to break up larger clusters since the electron pairs are not as stable as magnetic and electric bonds that one normally finds.

Identification

Identification of monoatomic elements would be difficult, since most test equipment determines the element number based on the number of electrons present (assuming the same number of protons present). Bi-rotating electron pairs appear as PHOTONS, not electrons, and hence would be invisible to that type of testing equipment, resulting in the appearance the the element is of a substantially lower atomic number.

Tests that involve chemical bonding would also be useless, because of the inability of ORME to form chemical bonds.

Spectrophotometers would have a similar difficulty, because the electron triplets forming the aggregate bonds would not be able to absorb and release photons to change energy levels, thus making those spectral lines invisible.

The only way an ORME could be properly identified would be through the rotations of the atom, itself. The magnetic rotations will express themselves through magnetic valence states, but without an ability to directly measure the electric rotation, it is unlikely that the ORME can be identified as their proper elements, unless the element is known prior to conversion.

Reintegration

Hudson, when creating the m-state, said it was like converting an apple to applesauce... once the conversion had been accomplished, it could not be reverted. This may not necessarily be true.

Unlike converting applesauce to an apple, elements do not need to retain their original pattern. Based on Keely's research, sympathetic resonance can be used to create the birotating electrons, so therefore discordant resonance should be able to destroy the pairing, returning the material to a crystalline powder, with all of its original properties.

The “zero point” is the energy flux that occurs within the vacuum of space. Legacy science refers to it as “zero” because it should be motionless; nothing should be there—but there is. It is often described as a “sea of electrons”, which pop into existence then back out again, making the capture of electrons a bit tricky since you never know when they will appear, disappear, or even where the event will happen.

Within the projective geometry model of RS2, the region of the observer appears Euclidean, but the regions beyond any unit boundary appear as the geometric inverse, polar-Euclidean, or commonly called “counterspace”. The space/counterspace interaction creates a set of “duals” between the geometric objects within the region. In space, we see a point, but in counterspace, we observe a plane. A planar construct in space is then viewed as a point in counterspace, BUT a line is a line in both regions. This linear intersection, therefore, is the geometry underlying the “zero point” domain.

It makes sense if you consider that the zero point flux is referred to as a “sea of energy”. We know from Larson that “energy” is inverse speed, namely t/s. Speed in space is translational; speed in counterspace (time) is rotational. The linear intersection of translation and rotation is the projection of rotation upon a line, or the projection of a line upon a rotation—namely, linear vibration.

This sea of energy is, therefore, a sea of vibration… not a “zero point” but a “unit line”.

In RS2, the first manifestation of motion is the m-positron or c-positron (electron). They are both simply ’rotating units’ in counterspace (or countertime), without sufficient magnitude of motion to make any effect outside of their unit time (or unit space) boundaries. Also consider that counterspace is the full geometric inverse of space—with a plane at zero and a point at infinity (the center). This means that the first displacement of speed is physically located ON the unit boundary, extending inward. Any displacement, even those that do not have sufficient magnitude to have an outside effect, can still be seen at the unit boundary.

Given that we are not actually looking at “zero space” but at “unit space”, in a vibrational aspect, one would expect to see a totally stationary system, with the material and cosmic sectors perfectly divided at this sub-atomic level. So how does one account for “flux”?

From observation by experimenters, the zero point is a fluxuating sea of electrons and positrons, winking in and out of existence. But DO they? In RS2, NO. Only the projection upon the measuring instruments is winking in and out; the physical motion, itself, remains constant. The difficulty occurs because of the intersection between space and counterspace—the resultant linear vibration has no orientation. Therefore, at times we view it head-on, and see an electron or positron. Other times, when viewed from the side, it appears as a wave. Other times, when viewed end-on, it disappears entirely. But it is not the motion that disappears! It is the projection of that motion into our coordinate space that disappears.

Based on a new understanding of this “unit line” sea of energy, and the fact that it is the projection that is causing the problems with utilizing it for a source of power—not the motion itself—a new approach can be taken to examine the zero point energy devices, determine exactly how they work, and what can be done to eliminate their problems and increase their efficiency.