Mind Machines You Can Build

MIND
MACHINES
YOU CAN BUILD
by G. Harry Stine
TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN PUBLISHING

Largo, Florida 34643-5117 U.S.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced,
utilized or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical— including photocopying, recording on any
information storage and retrieval system—without written per-
mission from the publisher, except for brief quotations or
inclusion in a review.
Top Of The Mountain Publishing

11701 South Belcher Road, Suite 123
Largo, Florida 34643-5117 U.S.A.
SAN 287-590X
FAX (813) 536-3681
PHONE (813) 530-0110
Copyright 1992 by G. Harry Stine
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Stine, G. Harry (George Harry). 1928-
Mind Machines you can build/by G. Harry
Stine.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 1-56087-016-8: $11.95
1. Machinery. I.Title.
TJ153.S774 1992
133.028-dc20 91-27801 CIP
Manufactured in the United States

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
5
THE REALIST'S DILEMMA
9
DETECTOR RODS
21
PYRAMIDS
37
THE ENERGY WHEEL
61
PENDULUMS
83
THE HIERONYMOUS MACHINE
103
SYMBOLIC MACHINES
125
THE SYMBOLIC HIERONYMOUS MACHINE
143
THE WISHING MACHINE
165
POSTSCRIPT
181
BIBLIOGRAPHY
195
Devoted
to
Patsy and Clyde
INTRODUCTION
The intent of this book by my friend and colleague Harry

Stine is to challenge the technical community and amateurs
to build these machines, then try to figure out why they
work. All of them seem to violate the well-known laws of
physics or mechanics. Thus, the challenge is to resolve the
apparent contradiction.
In the history of science, the resolution of a dis-
crepancy is one of the most fruitful ways to make progress.
For example, it was Rutherford who saw an apparent
contradiction in the course of his study of alpha particle
emission by radioactive nuclei. He asked how it was
possible for an alpha particle of measured range and energy
to emerge from a nucleus without having the energy to
penetrate the higher energy potential barrier around the
nucleus - which could also be measured. Such penetration
by an alpha particle was energetically
5
impossible. It was the challenge of this apparent discrepancy
that led Gurney and Condon to the discovery and
development of quantum mechanical tunneling which has
been of major importance not only in physics but also to
modern solid-state electronics.
In science, one progresses from an observation to a
hypothesis about how or why the observed phenomenon
works, then to an experiment in which one proves not only
that the hypothesis is correct but that the hypothesis is
indeed a theory. The theory must then predict other
observable effects that can be tested and experimentally
confirmed. The fact that a certain device in this book works
does not mean that all our theories are wrong but only that
our understanding of how these theories should be applied is
faulty in this particular case. Essentially, we do not know
everything. Indeed, what we do know may not be so, but
may have some curious little twist that we have overlooked.
Apparent violations of the laws of physics are usually an
opportunity to make progress in our knowledge of the
universe.
In science, we also seek to understand how nature
works. And we often misunderstand or follow false leads.
Actually, the "laws of nature" are generalizations from
experience. For example, the violation of the law of gravity
is punished not by a jail sentence but more fittingly by
falling on one's face. Further, such generalizations are living
concepts needing modification in details as we go alone.
Einstein did not prove Newton to be
6
wrong but rather provided the next approximation in our
understanding of what actually happens when we make
measurements at speeds approaching that of light. Mass,
length, and time must be measured, taking the speed of light
into account. A basic physics experiment is that of
measurement, and it is important to carefully think through
the details of the actor procedure in a step by step fashion.
Science is a living and growing discipline, and much
remains to be done. This book will, one hopes, stimulate
people to build and test these odd devices, to think about
them, and perhaps to hit upon further approximations to our
understanding of the universe. Good science is done not
with apparatus but in people's heads by thinking.
- Prof. Serge A. Korff
(Prof. Korff was professor emeritus, department of

physics, New York University; Fellow, American Physical
Society; past president and life member, New York Academy
of Sciences; life member, American Society for the Advance-
ment of Science; past president and director, the Explorers
Club; and Chevalier of the Legion of Honor.)
7
Mind Machines You Can Build
8
CHAPTER ONE
THE REALIST'S DILEMMA
For more than thirty years, I've been working in high

technology areas - rocketry, space flight, aviation, advanced
industrial processes, electronic instruments, and space
industrialization, among others. I've managed an industrial
research laboratory, designed escape pods for pilots of
supersonic aircraft, and been involved in high-technology
marketing. None of these jobs existed in 1885. In fact, these
scientific and technical areas would have been considered
"magic" as recently as a hundred years ago, and I would
have been tagged a wizard or, even worse, a witch.
9
Many people still believe or would like to believe

that much of the modern technology with which they must
cope every day has indeed been created by wizards and
witches.
We've all encountered machinery that seems to be
magical or that doesn't or shouldn't work because our
common sense or expertise tells us so. But in my career as
an industrial research scientist and an engineer dealing with
far-out areas of advanced high-tech, I've run onto a series of
baffling, frustrating, and vexing machines and devices that
shouldn't work at all according to what we presently know
about the Universe.
But they do.
Sometimes they don't work for everyone. But they
do work for some people.
The apparent fact that some things work for some
people but not for others doesn't bother me. Although I
enjoy good brass band music, I can't get a single musical
note to come from a trumpet. Some people can, and some
people can't. But playing the trumpet isn't a magical feat. It
is mystical, however, as we'll see later. But people can teach
other people how to do it. Perhaps I can't get music out of a
trumpet because I've never been trained to play the trumpet.
But I can't get music to come out of a trumpet or a violin.
I'm a "grubby-handed engineer." I can build things
that work. I can usually discover why something doesn't
work when it quits, and I can usually manage to fix it or
10
The Realist's Dilemma
get it working well enough to get me to a place where a real
expert can make it work properly again. I'm at home in a
scientific meeting of the New York Academy of Sciences as
well as at the controls of an airplane. I'm a pragmatic and
skeptical person. I've run onto a lot of wild and wonderful
devices that don't work as claimed. But if a gadget works, I'll
use it.
So I'm not a mystic in the way I look at the world
around me. Murphy's Law notwithstanding, I believe that if
something works in a demonstrable and reasonably
repeatable manner, there must be a reason why because the
Universe isn't a place that behaves capriciously. Murphy's
Law exists and the Universe only seems to be capricious
occasionally because we still don't know everything there is
to know about it. The nineteenth century philosophy of
materialism says that we do indeed know everything there is
to know about the Universe, but that belief seems to be
incredibly presumptuous. As J.B.S. Haldane has observed,
the Universe is not only stranger than we know, it's stranger
than we can possibly imagine.
I've collected enough data and conducted enough
experiments with these amazing gadgets now that it's time to
put all the data together in a book so that other people with
inquiring minds and an open outlook on the Universe can
also try them for themselves.
11
But I didn't write this for mystics or for those who

dabble in the occult. This is a collection of how-to instruc-
tions for demonstrable gadgets that are somehow based upon
technology we don't understand yet.
We don't know why or how some of these devices
work, but apparently they work reliably for a large number
of people. Scientists haven't explained them yet. But you
don't have to accept the reality of these devices on blind
faith. By following the directions given herein, you can
build the strange device, test it, and determine for yourself
whether or not it's a hoax.
Some of these machines may be precursors to the
big scientific breakthroughs of the future. After all, the early
parlor experiments with electricity and magnetism in the late
eighteenth century are still used today in grade school and
high school science classes to provide a background for
understanding electronics, radio, television, and computers.
I can't tell you what particular scientific principles
these devices demonstrate because 1 don't know what the
science of the twenty-first century will be all about. I'm a
futurist but not a prophet. My crystal ball is very cloudy
indeed when I try to look beyond the year 2010.
But I can tell you something about the basic
principles behind scientific methodology that will be as
valid tomorrow as they are today:
12
The solid edifice called "Science" that looks so
imposing and monolithic when viewed from a distance really
isn't that way at all when you get close to it. As Dr. William
O. Davis pointed out in 1962, "Science is a cracked and
sagging edifice built upon the constantly shifting sands of
theory." It's in the process of being continually built, re-built,
modified, remodeled, and changed. Like New York City or
the United States of America, it's never finished.
However, some scientists have tried to convince
people this isn't so and that they alone know everything
there is to know about the Universe. Therefore, these
scientists occasionally need to be shaken out of their rut.
Scientific and technical controversy must be generated from
time to time to stir the pot and promote progress in human
knowledge. As the famous aerospace scientist, Dr. Theodore
von Karman, once observed, "How can we possibly make
progress without controversy?"
My formal academic education is that of a physicist.
After I'd graduated and obtained that important academic
degree that amounts to a scientific union card, I was given
my real education in the big outside world beyond the
groves of academe. My work became more and more
involved with applying scientific principles in order to solve
technical problems. Thus I was converted from a scientist
into an engineer who had to deal with things as they are, not
with the reasons why the Universe worked in that particular
manner. ("Never mind theoriz-
13
ing why; just get it built or working and in saleable

condition by next Wednesday!") By and large, however, the
principles of physics and other sciences that I'd learned in
college comfortably supported my engineering work.
But an unquestioning faith in what they'd told me
was true during my formal academic education and even
some of the pragmatic principles I'd learned afterwards was
shattered by my first encounter with an inexplicable machine
in 1956.
John W. Campbell, Jr., the late editor of ANALOG
magazine, published a science-fact article describing a
strange device known as a "Hieronymous machine" for
which a U.S. patent existed. He gave explicit instructions on
how to build one and invited the readers of the magazine to
try it for themselves before they labelled it an impossible
fraud.
The device - which is described in this book is an
electronic instrument whose purpose is to determine the
qualitative constituents of a metallic alloy. It uses a "tactile"
detector that is stroked and that "feels different" when the
device detects a given metallic component in an alloy.
However, Campbell reported that the Hieronymous
machine worked whether or not it was plugged into a wall
socket. He also claimed that it would work if you made one
simply using the diagram of the electronic circuit and
substituted thread for wire.
14
This open invitation to blow away an obvious sham,
fraud, and hoax was too much for me. I built one of the
"symbolic" Hieronymous machines to prove to the world
once and for all that it was a total impossibility.
It worked.
I still have it, and it still works.
But it works for some people and not for others.
I don't know why it works or how it works, but it
does. I don't know how to begin conducting truly scientific
research to answer these questions because I don't know
what questions to ask or even what measurements to make.
It's just not possible with the current state of the art in
science and technology to be Kelvinian about it, and I am a
firm believer in the advice given by Lord Kelvin (William
Thompson) in 1886:
"I often say that when you can measure something
and express it in numbers, you know something about it. But
when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in
numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory
kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have
scarcely, in your thoughts, progressed to the level of science,
regardless of what the matter may be."
Obviously, therefore, the Hieronymous machine and
other amazing mind devices that shouldn't work but do are
not scientific and are not yet amenable to scientific analysis.
Various hypotheses concerning how they might
15
work have been put forth, but these hypotheses have yet to
be rigorously tested and thereby transformed into theories.
In the meantime, the machines are fascinating. Most
of them are simple to build. Most of them will work for most
people. Once a group of "garage gadgeteers," the sort who
have created the basic foundations for most modern science,
begin playing around with them, someone stands a good
chance of eventually coming up with a testable hypothesis
that will at last provide a basis for the establishment of the
scientific field which embraces these machines.
Or perhaps not. The history of science and tech-
nology is not only rife with serendipitous discoveries that
changed the world but also ideas, concepts, and gadgets that
didn't work out rightin spite of everything. Be aware that
there are more failures than successes, more frauds and
hoaxes than straight arrows.
In any event, here are some impossible machines
that work for some people, that anyone with some manual
dexterity can build in a home workshop, that anyone can
build and test for himself.
I repeat: This is not an occult book. It's a book of
experiments with weird machines. I haven't included any
machine or device that I haven't built, worked, or tested
myself. I don't ask the reader to believe that these machines
work. I merely present a description of each machine, what
it's purported to do, how it worked for
16
me, exactly how to build it, and precisely how to operate it.
The remainder of the exercise is left up to the reader who's
free to experiment or to snort "Impossible!"
But be careful before you snort, "Impossible!"
We often have the tendency to snort, "Impossible!"
when confronted with a radically new idea, concept, or
device. But these machines are different. They can be built.
They can be tested. They are tweakers of the curiosity. They
shouldn't work, but often they do.
And if you don't believe this, why don't you see for
yourself?
The basis of scientific endeavor is the reproduc-ible
experiment. And the concept of reproducibility also
includes the possibility that the experiment will fail the same
way every time.
Right down at the basic level, this is a book about
magic, after all. But it's "magic" as defined by Robert A.
Heinlein: "One man's magic is another man's technol-
ogy-
And Arthur C. Clarke advises, "Any sufficiently
advanced technology will be indistinguishable from magic."
The book is a "how-to" instruction manual. Its
individual chapters are each devoted to a single strange
machine. Each chapter starts out with a brief description of
the device followed by a brief history, and step-by-step
instructions for building it. A set of instructions for using the
device is provided along with a suggested program of
17
experiments that can be conducted. The only thing I'm

telling you is: Here it is; build it and try it for yourself,
because it appears to work for some people, it can be built,
and the author has either tried it and can work it, or tried it
and can't work it. (I'm pretty good with most of the gadgets.)
I have gone out on a limb (as if some of my
colleagues won't believe that I've already done so) by daring
to suggest one or more hypotheses concerning why the
machine is doing what it's doing. But in many cases, there is
no tenable hypothesis, and I'm forced to simply say, "I
haven't the foggiest notion why it works."
I don't believe any of the gadgets are dangerous. No
reports have been received that any of them or the use of any
of them has caused physical or mental injury to anyone.
However, I must state the following caveat which the reader
must keep firmly in mind at all times: It's possible to be hurt
by anything and it's possible to misuse any device made with
any level of technology. People continue to be burned by
campfires, and the technology of fire is millennia old.
However, there have been no reported problems with
anything herein. Most of us have internal "programming"
that trips our internal "circuit breakers" to keep us from
going over the edge.
Don't dismiss any of the devices as an impossible
hoax just because it sounds impossible to you or because
you think it's fraudulent and can't work. Or because
somebody told you it was one or more of these. Here's
18
your chance to find out for yourself. You'll then be able to
say that the gadget works or doesn't work because you tried
it yourself. You didn't take someone else's word for it.
These gadgets may indeed work because of magic (a
technology we don't yet understand) but they aren't mystical
because I can tell you how to build one and how to operate it
without subjecting yourself to ten years' of guru training,
fasting, and all the rest of the curriculum of oriental
mysticism.
Some people won't be able to make some of these
devices work. Others may be able to make only a few of
them work. Some will be able to work all of them. This will
create enormous controversy.
(If you don't pucker your lips just right and blow
with just the right force into the mouthpiece, you'll never get
a single musical note to come out of that trumpet. But the
trumpet is there, and other people can make great music
come out of it. Are trumpeters magicians?)
I've been forced to draw the conclusion that these
mind machines are examples of future science. They're in
the same situation today that electricity and thermodynamics
were in the early part of the nineteenth century and as some
folk medicine was at the beginning of this century. The mere
fact that these devices exist and work for some people
means there must be some sort of scientific basis for them.
Therefore, we will be able to un-
19
derstand and explain them some day. They can't and

shouldn't be ignored. They're going to provide the foun-
dations for the science of the next century.
Besides, it's exciting, fascinating, frustrating, and
perplexing to build and work with them, if you can.
But don't be upset if one doesn't work; try it on
someone else. And if the other person can make it work
and you can't, why? What's really going on here?
The scientists of the twenty-first century may know,
and they may have found out from some flash of insight
that came as a result of someone experimenting with
these mind machines and others.
You may be the founder of a whole new field of
scientific investigation and technological endeavor!
Have fun.
20
CHAPTER TWO
DETECTOR RODS
Basic Description:
This device consists of either a single stick, rod with a

forked end that allows it to be held in both hands or two
separate sticks or rods, one of which is held in each hand.
21
The device had been primarily used for locating

hidden underground objects or materials such as pipes,
tunnels, and water. However, some experiments by the
author indicate that the device can be used to determine the
location of any object the user desires.
The device is grasped in both hands and held in front
of the operator. When the device passes over the
underground object being searched for, or when the operator
faces in the direction of the object being searched for, the
device appears to operate with no observable action on the
part of the operator. If it is a single, bifurcated or forked rod,
the single end not in the hands of the operator will abruptly
swing downwards. If dual rods are being used, the rods will
either swing apart if the operator is holding them together or,
if they are being held so that they point away from one
another, they will swing toward each other. The action is
quite strong, and many operators claim that they cannot stop
the rods once the swing has started.
Historical Background:
Many readers will immediately recognize this device

as the legendary "dowsing rod." Other names include "water
rods" or "witching rods." In the form of a branched or forked
stick or twig- some operators claim that only a live forked
willow branch recently cut will
22
Detector Rods
work properly - the device has been used in Europe and
America for unknown centuries. Its actual source is
shrouded in folklore, much of which is considered to be evil
or the "work of the devil" because of the inexplicable
operation of the device. In recent times, dowsing rods were
used by United States Marine Corps soldiers in South Viet
Nam for the purpose of locating underground Viet Cong
tunnels. However, no official reports of this exist and, as
might be expected, no official confirmation of this use has
ever been made.
Readers wishing to obtain more information should
contact the American Society of Dowsers, P.O. Box 24,
Danville,VT 05828.
Author's Experience:
The author built and experimented with his first pair

of dowsing rods in 1955 at the rocket research center at
White Sands Proving Ground and around his home in Las
Cruces, New Mexico. The basic metal dowsing rods
described later in this chapter were used. The author was
successful in locating the underground water and sewer
pipes leading into his home. At a later time, he found the
rods useful in locating misplaced objects, especially books.
23
In 1961 and 1962, he witnessed the use of dowsing

rods by the Water Department of the Town of Milford,
Connecticut for the precise location of underground water
and sewer lines prior to excavation.
On February 2, 1966, the footvalve of the ejector
pump failed at the bottom of the 150-foot-deep water well in
the back yard of the author's home at 127 Bickford Lane,
New Canaan, Connecticut. This required that the well be
uncovered and the piping pulled to replace the faulty foot
valve. The author had a plat drawing which indicated the
location of the well head. But initial excavation by well
company employees failed to uncover the well head at the
indicated location. The foreman took a pair of metal
dowsing rods from his truck and proceeded to locate the well
head within a few minutes.
In the upper valley of the Arkansas River between
Pueblo and Canon City, Colorado, dowsing rods and "water
witches" are extensively used for the purpose of locating the
proper sites for drilling wells that will produce good water at
depths considerably less than would otherwise be required
on the basis of the study of geological structures.
24
Detector Rods
Figure 2-1: Employee of the Milford, Connecticut,

water company using detector rods to locate city's
water mains. Employee did not wish to be identified
nor would he permit a second photo session.
25
Instructions for Fabrication,
Economy Model:
This model is an expensive one that may be

quickly fabricated as follows:
1. Obtain two (2) coat hangers or clothes hangers
made totally from wire. The size of the wire and the type
of wire are not critical. However, the wire should be stiff
enough so that it doesn't bend when held horizontally
by one end with the other end free.
2. Straighten each coat hanger wire.
3. Six (6) inches (15 centimeters) from one end,
make a right angled bend in each wire.
4. For safety's sake, make another right angle
bend in the other end of each wire approximately one (1)
inch (2.5 centimeters) from the end; this will prevent the
free end of each rod from sticking into something... such
as another person's eye!
Operate the Economy Model as described in the
Operating Instructions below.
Instructions for Fabrication,

Deluxe Model:
This model is intended for long life, high reliabil-

ity, and good sensitivity, features that are useful when the
device is used in the field or when experiments are being
conducted with many users. The cost is less than $5.00.
26
Detector Rods
Figure 2-2: Drawing of dowsing (detector) rod.
The Deluxe Model can be fabricated by anyone using

simple tools. The materials may be found in any hobby
store or welding supply store.
Bill of Materials:
A. 2 each hard steel wire ("music wire") 1/8"
diameter x 36" long.
B. 1 each seamless thin-wall tubing, aluminum
or copper (material not critical), 3/16" diameter x 12"
long.
Tools Required:
A. Hack Saw.
B. Slip-joint pliers or "Vise-Grips."
C. Bench vise (optional).
D. Small rat-tail file.
Fabrication:
1. With the hack saw, cut the 12-inch length of
tubing into roughly two equal 6-inch lengths.
27
2. Remove the burrs on the cut ends of the tubing

using the rat-tail file.
3. Using the slip-joint pliers, Vise-Grips, or bench
vise, make a right-angle bend in one end of each rod
approximately 7 inches from the end.
4. Slip a 6-inch length of tubing over the 7-inch bent
section of each rod.
5. Using the pliers or bench vise, make a short bend
in the free end of the rod sticking out of the piece of tubing.
When completed, the rod should rotate freely inside the
tubing.
6. Using the pliers or bench vise, make a right angle
bend 1 inch from the other end of each rod.
When finished, you will have two nearly identical
metal rods bent as shown in Figure 1. The tubing forms a
low-friction rotating handle on one end of each rod,
permitting the rod to rotate with ease inside the tubing.
The Deluxe Model will last for years if properly
cared for and the low-friction handles kept free to rotate.
The author's Deluxe Model was built in 1955 and is still in
use.
28
Detector Rods
Operating Instructions:
Both the Economy Model and the Deluxe Model

operate in the same manner.
Figure 2-3: Holding and using detector rods. To
Operate:
Step 1: Decide what you wish to locate. Beginners
usually choose some easy underground object such as the
water or sewer pipe leading to their house. In most cases, the
place where the water line enters the house is known, but the
location of the sewer line isn't. And, in
29
most cases, the general alignment of either underground

pipe isn't known. For other suggested items to locate, see the
"Experiments" section below.
Step 2: Grasp the low-friction tubing of each rod in
each hand.
Step 3: Hold the pivot axis of each rod vertical so
that each rod is in a general horizontal position (see photo).
Step 4: Place both of your hands in front of you,
holding the rods horizontally before you (see photo). Some
people find that their wrists must be touching. Others find
that there is no specific way in which they must hold the
rods.
Step 5: By tilting your hands, arrange the rods so
that they are (a) parallel to one another and pointing ahead
of you, or (b) at 180-degrees to one another (pointing away
from one another) to both sides of you (see photo).
Step 6: Begin searching for the object you wish to
locate by either turning or by walking slowly.
Step 7: When you pass over the object you're
searching for, or when you're pointed toward it, the rods will
swing, indicating that you have located the object.
30
Detector Rods
Operating Hints:
It doesn't make any difference whether the rods are

together in front of you or pointing directly away from one
another; when they swing, they swing. When you've located
what you're looking for, the action of the rods is
unmistakable; when they swing, they swing. Operators
continually report(and it's confirmed by the author) that
there seems to be some sort of definite, positive physical
force that makes the rods move. Furthermore, they seem to
move in unison.
Experiments:
If you misplace something, try using the rods to help

you locate it. Put the rods in hand and simply begin to turn
around; when you're pointed in the direction you should go
to move toward the object, the rods will swing. You should
be able to pin-point its location using the principles of
triangulation by taking "sightings" from different locations;
where the lines of position cross is where you're most likely
to find what you're looking for.
Do not be disturbed if you happen to obtain erratic
data from such location experiments. They may only mean
that the object is irretrievably lost in such a manner that you
have no possibility of recovering it. The author discovered
this phenomenon when searching for a misplaced book; the
meaningless results finally re-
31
minded him that he'd lent the book to a friend while living in
Denver and he was at the time living in Connecticut.
Modern instrumentation should be able to measure
the actual torque on each rod as it swings. To the best of the
author's knowledge, no such measurements have yet been
made.
Modern instrumentation should also be able to
detect any tilting of the operator's wrists or other movements
that may produce rotation of the rods. To the best of the
author's knowledge, no such measurements have been made.
However, data from such experimental measurements still
may not answer the basic question, "How does the operator
know when to tilt his wrists to accomplish this?"
Some investigators will want to design experiments
that will offer incontrovertible proof that this device actually
works. Data from such "wild" sources as users or historical
data on water witches and dowsers would not normally be
acceptable in such controversial and apparently unscientific
(scientifically inexplicable) situations such as this.
The biggest problem faced by any investigator when
designing experiments in an unknown area such as this is:
What should be measured? What measurements will be
meaningful? And, basically, what is the nature and level of
importance of significant data? What is significant data?
32
Detector Rods
Experiments need to be conducted with a large

experimental universe of operators, the larger the better, to
determine the percentage of the population capable of
working the rods. Double-blind techniques should be used to
validate the data. Some experiments, however, will serve
only to provide statistical data on the percentage of the
population capable of successfully using the rods. They
won't determine why the rods work or what sort of person
can make them work unless the experiment is structured to
determine the specific personality traits of the user.
Other experiments need to be conducted to verify
whether or not the rods can be used to actually find an object
whose location is truly unknown to the operator, or whether
the operation of the rods depends upon some manner of
subliminal recall on the operator's part, the rods acting
merely as a symbolic crutch.
The influence of mood-altering substances (such as
alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine) on an operator's ability may
well uncover some interesting new data. However,
experiments with other mood-altering drugs such as
meprobamate should be conducted only by qualified,
licensed medical practitioners or under their direct su-
pervision.
No experiment yet designed offers any hope of
determining the actual operational cause behind the
apparently successful use of dowsing rods. At best, most
experiments will lead only to experimental confirmation
33
of the phenomenon or to statistical data concerning the
talented population. However, to the best of the author's
knowledge, none of these basic experiments have been done
and reported in the open literature. Perhaps once this has
taken place, interested parties may be able to proceed further
in the design of experiments to determine operational
causes.
What If It Doesn't Work?
If you cannot get the rods to work for you, you are
most probably one of those people who do not have the
unidentified "talent" for them. Not everyone can play the
violin. Data to date indicates that whether or not you believe
the rods will work has little or nothing to do with your
ability to make them work. The author was a confirmed
disbeliever when he first tried using the rods. However, if
you can't make them work, don't throw them away. Try the
rods on your friends, and you might be surprised at who can
operate them and who can't. At this time, the ability or
inability to operate dowsing rods does not appear to correlate
with any known personality trait, religious belief, level of
education, or ethnic background.
34
Detector Rods
Hypotheses:
The existence of the dowsing rod phenomenon has

naturally led people to formulate a number of hypotheses
concerning how the rods work. Among the most interesting
and the most acceptable of these hypotheses (another word
for unconfirmed, unsubstantiated, wild guesses) are:
The operators may somehow know, perhaps on a
subconscious level, the location of the object they're
searching for.
The rods might serve only as a "crutch" to stimulate
the recall of memories concerning the location of the object.
The operators may actually sense the presence of
what they're looking for and use the rods only as an
"amplifier" or a physical "detector" of the presence of the
object, the rods actually being swung by subconscious
movements of the operator's wrists.
There are other less-tenable hypotheses involving
"psychic forces" or extrasensory perception. At this time, it's
impossible to confirm such hypotheses to the level of
credibility demanded by scientific peer groups. Such
hypotheses must be viewed as "beliefs" or the results of
wishful thinking rather than the products of data from
carefully-conducted experiments. Perhaps some reader may
be able to design, carry out, and validate a repeatable
experiment that will lead toward the develop-
35
merit of a valid hypothesis. Although the human mind is an
incredible device itself, and although we are learning more
and more about it every day, the actual existence of "psychic
fields" or "mental forces" isn't confirmed. But, in analogy,
the nature of the electromagnetic field wasn't known, much
less suspected, by the early scientists of 1800, either.
Conclusions:
The author has seen dowsing rods used successfully

on many occasions. The use of dowsing rods seems to be a
repeatable phenomenon. The author also happens to be one
of those who can make them work for him, whereas his wife
cannot. Reported observations of the phenomenon from
reliable observers abound. The device is simple,
inexpensive, can be readily made by most people, and can be
used to conduct numerous experiments, most of which
haven't been done yet, to investigate the reasons for its
operation. The nature of these experiments is such that the
basic ones can be carried out by nearly anyone willing to
follow the basic guidelines for the design and conduct of
scientific experiments.
36
CHAPTER THREE
PYRAMIDS
Basic Description:
Tetrahedral pyramids made from electrically non-con-

ducting materials have been used to maintain sharp
cutting edges on steel instalments, dehydrate or mum-
mify organic materials, and improve the growth rates of
plants. The precise mechanism(s) by which a hollow
pyramidal shape accomplishes these things is unknown.
37
It appears to be a passive concentrator of energy, but the
mechanism and type of energy has not yet been thoroughly
defined. However, a large number of confirming
experiments have been carried out to verify the performance
claims of investigators, advocates, and individuals applying
for domestic and foreign patents. These experiments tend to
confirm the existence of some manner of energy
concentration and the reality of the claims.
Many advocates and proponents of "pyramid power"

tend to base their hypotheses on elements from Egyptian
history and mythology. Some of these people believe that the
ancient Egyptians possessed arcane knowledge that led this
early riverine culture to build the fabled pyramids of Giza on
the basis of either scientific principles unknown to us today
or empirical data acquired by means often classified as
"bizarre" by the detractors of the Egyptian hypotheses.
Regardless of whether or not any of the hypotheses
derived from ancient Egyptian history may be true, the
demonstrable fact remains that tetrahedral pyramid shapes
appear to do something to objects placed inside them and
offer a subject amenable to experimentation by modern
techniques carried out by both professional and amateur
scientists.
38
Pyramids
The modern historical background of pyramid research
began in the 1930s. Antoine Bovis, the owner of a hardware
store ("Quincaillerie Bovis et Passeron") in Nice, France,
took a trip to Egypt in the 1930s and visited the "great
pyramid" of Cheops at Giza. While inside the King's
Chamber of the great pyramid, Bovis noticed a garbage can
filled to the top with dead small animals which the guide told
him wander in the structure from time to time, become lost,
and die. It seemed unusual to Bovis that these dead animals
appeared to be completely desiccated (mummified) with no
trace of decay or putrefaction. Upon his return to Nice, he
built a plywood pyramid in which he placed a dead cat. The
carcass of the cat did not decay but became desiccated.
Unfortunately, Bovis did not believe in the scientific method
nor in conducting proper scientific experiments with full
documentation. He made no attempt to present papers before
scientific societies where his work would have been
subjected to peer review, comment, and criticism and so
others could duplicate the experiments for verification of
results. Bovis preferred to believe in intuition and faith.
Although the synthesis of seemingly unrelated data by
intuition is the basis for all great advances in science,
pioneers such as Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Charles
Darwin, Edwin Hubble, Marie Curie, and Sir Alexander
Fleming followed their intuitive discoveries by publication,
permitting and encouraging others to verify and expand their
results and hypoth-
39
eses, while at the same time opening their work to comment

and criticism. The failure or refusal of Bovis to do this
probably resulted in a fifty-year set-back to the serious
scientific examination of his data.
Following World War II, a Czechoslovak radio
engineer, Karel Drbal, read some of Bovis' material. Drbal
worked in the Radio Institute of Research in Prague. Radar
and microwaves were part of the technology that had
mushroomed during the war. Many microwave antennas and
other devices are horn-shaped or pyramidal in nature. Drbal
began to experiment with small pyramid models for
desiccation and dehydration because he either suspected
some phenomenon connected with microwaves or wanted to
prove Bovis wrong ~ we 11 never really know for certain.
As has happened, to so many others who have
researched the pyramid phenomenon with the goal of
proving that it was a hoax, Drbal discovered that tetrahe-dral
pyramid shapes did desiccate both organic material and fine
crystalline structures. Metals and metallic alloys are
basically crystalline in nature and structure. The steel alloys
used in fine cutting tools are composed of very small
crystalline structures throughout. Drbal discovered that he
could shave with the same razor blade 100 to 200 times if he
placed it inside a cardboard pyramid each day after use.
More as a joke than anything else, Drbal applied for a Czech
patent on a "Pharaoh's Shaving Device" on November 4,
1949. Normally, Czech
40
Pyramids
patents are granted after an examination period of two to

three years, but it took Drbal ten years to get his patent. It
was granted on August 15, 1959 only after he'd proved to
the Chief Examiner, Engineer Vrecion, that a pyramid did
indeed maintain the edge on a razor blade. In the course of
this decade-long examination period, Drbal performed some
experiments and made some measurements that will be
discussed later.
Cardboard pyramids came into use in the Czech
army as a way for soldiers to keep their razors sharp.
Soldiers in the Soviet army picked up this concept in later
years. The Soviet soldiers would get only one razor blade
per month, so it's important to them to keep their razors
sharp. However, no company has placed pyramids on the
market anywhere, including eastern Europe. Drbal believes
his invention has been suppressed by razor blade
manufacturers who do not want to see their products used
ten times as long. This reaction, however, is typical of some
inventors of strange machines who often believe there are
paranoid plots to keep their inventions secret. The lack of
pyramid products more likely arises from the fact that they
are so easy and simple to quickly build using available
materials.
A number of European researchers began to
experiment with Drbal's pyramids. Drbal came into
correspondence with pyramid researchers in Sweden, West
Germany, France, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union. In
the United States, little was known of the
41
pyramid phenomenon even though Nobel laureate (physics,

1968) Dr. Luis W. Alvarez attempted to locate hidden
chambers inside the Chefren's Pyramid (near the Cheops'
Pyramid), using cosmic ray absorption measurements, was
unable to correlate his data, and stated that "something
outside of known science is happen-ing.
In the United States, pyramid research was taken up
by Dr. G. Patrick Flanagan who had been interested in
electromagnetic energy fields connected with living
organisms. When he was fourteen years old, Flanagan began
experimenting with a phenomenon discovered and reported
by Count Alessandro Volta (1745-1827) in 1800 and tagged
"electrophonic hearing." By 1962, Flanagan had perfected
his "neurophone," a device which electronically stimulates
the skin to produce hearing. Dr. Flanagan is a very private
individual not totally unlike many inventors. The author has
known him personally since 1962. Flanagan prefers to carry
out research on his own, seeking knowledge for the sake of
knowledge with second priority being given to reporting his
results in scientific journals.
In 1980, Flanagan presented his results in a book,
Pyramid Power, which he published himself. His second
book, Pyramid Power II, was published in 1981 and reports
on pyramid experiments performed by eight qualified and
respected scientists who were funded by grants from the
Mankind Research Foundation, 1110
42
Pyramids
Fidler Lane, Suite 1215, Silver Spring, MD 20910, from
February to April 1975. These tests were properly designed
and conducted according to the strictest scientific and
statistical protocols. They revealed increased growth rates of
pea and bean plants, improved preservation of raw
hamburger meat, and decreased growth rates of throat and
yeast bacteria placed inside a structure shaped as a
tetrahedral pyramid. Less definitive results with a lower level
of confidence indicated that the weight of crystals formed
from the cooling of supersaturated solutions might have been
increased, that dead organic materials might have been
preserved longer, and that the death or decay rates of live
plants might have been decreased. Tests on human
volunteers who slept for several nights inside pyramidal tents
provided a subjective consensus that there had been a change
in the quality of sleep, vividness of dream recall, overall
emotional state, and openness to new experiences. However,
the changes were not in the same direction for all group
members.
The author has built miniature pyramids with 6-inch

and 12-inch bases as described below, fabricating them from
both shirt cardboard and Crescent No. 201 hot press medium
weight illustration board. Each had access holes with a
diameter of 2 inches and 4 inches respectively on all four
surfaces. The author determined
43
to repeat the Drbal experiment with razor blades since this

test is easily conducted and the results unambiguous to
anyone who has ever shaved with a dull razor. When a
razor's edge is dull, there is no doubt whatsoever of this
because of the extreme discomfort associated with shaving
one's whiskers with a dull razor blade.
Six Gillette one-shot razors were selected at random
from the display at a convenience store. One of these was
selected at random and visually tagged to identify it. Each
morning, the author shaved with the two razors using
Gillette "Foamy" shaving cream. One razor was used to
shave the left side of the face, and the other was used to
shave the right. On a day-to-day basis, razors were used to
shave alternate sides of the author's face. At the end of each
shaving session, both razors were simultaneously cleaned in
hot, running water. The tagged razor was placed inside a 6-
inch cardboard pyramid as instructed by Drbal - i.e., with the
pyramid aligned to magnetic north and the razor placed in
the center of the base of the pyramid with the edge of the
blade aligned to magnetic north. The untagged razor was
placed in a drawer of the bathroom washstand.
The author shaved twenty-four times with the razor
kept inside the pyramid. It was impossible to shave with a
control razor more than three times. Four control razors
were used up while the experimental razor inside the
pyramid was in daily use.
44
Pyramids
Figure 3-1: Experimental cardboard pyramids used

in the author's re-run of the Drbal razor blade test.
Figure 3-2: Template for constructing pyramid

sides. See Table 3-1 for dimensions.
45
A repeat experiment was conducted with six more

disposable razors but with the base of the pyramid not
aligned with magnetic north. The same number of shaves
(twenty-four) were possible with the experimental razor kept
inside the pyramid, while the control razors could be used
only three times before becoming painfully dull.
The gross results from these simple experiments
caused the author to conclude that "pyramid power" was not
a hoax.
Further tests were conducted by the author and by
other individuals using the pyramid matrix made by
Flanagan and shown in the accompanying photograph. The
basic fact that a pyramid shape does indeed maintain the
edge on a razor was confirmed.
Instructions for Fabrication:
The fabrication of a miniature model of the Cheops'

pyramid is not difficult.
46
Pyramids
TABLE 3-1: DIMENSIONS OF

EXPERIMENTAL PYRAMIDS
NOTE: Refer to Figure 3-2 for dimensional
symbol references, All dimensions in inches.
Base Height Side Hole Dia Center of Hole

X&B Y H A D C
6 3.82 5.71 2.00 1.60 3.00
12 7.64 11.41 4.00 3.20 6.00
18 11.46 17.12 6.00 4.80 9.00
24 15.28 22.82 8.00 6.40 12.00
Figure 3-3: Basic three-view and isometric drawing of

the experimental pyramid shape.
47
To make it easier to gain access to the interior of the

pyramid, cut circular holes in all triangular faces. The
diameter of the access holes can be as much as one-third the
base dimension of the pyramid - i.e., two inches diameter for
a six-inch pyramid, four inches diameter for a twelve-inch
pyramid.
There is nothing critical concerning the material
used to fabricate a pyramid. However, for test purposes, they
can be easily made from shirt cardboard, corrugated
cardboard, or stiff manila. The only requirement is that the
complete pyramid be sturdy enough to be picked up, moved,
and otherwise handled. For advanced experimental purposes,
pyramids can be made from sheet plastic (plexiglass,
fiberglass, sheet styrene, etc.). Readers may wish to
experiment with pyramids made from sheet metal and
welded or soldered together along the edges.
Using a rule and a pencil, lay out the dimensions of
the pyramid on the material and then cut the square base and
four triangular sides from the material. Accuracy of
dimensions and straightness of cuts are not critical, but try to
measure and cut accurately in order to make parts fit better
parts fit betterand assembly easier .
Cardboard and paper pyramids of sizes up to
twenty-four inches can be assembled using cellophane tape
to hold the parts together at their edges.
48
Pyramids
Figure 3-4: This plastic pyramid matrix produced by

Flanagan was also used to conduct the Drbal razor
blade tests with the razor placed as shown.
Lay the square base on the table and place the

triangular sides flat on the table with each of their bases
flush with the sides of the square base piece. Fasten each
triangular side to one edge of the base piece using cello-
phane tape.
Fold each of the triangular side pieces upward so
they meet at the apex of the pyramid. It may be easier to do
this starting with two adjacent sides, then bringing each of
the two other sides up one at a time.
Fasten the edges of the triangular side pieces to-
gether using strips of cellophane tape.
49
If you have been careful while measuring and

cutting, the pyramid should be neatly even and come to a
uniform apex.
The test pyramid is now completed.
Early experimenters such as Drbal maintained that a

pyramid had to be aligned with the local magnetic north.
Flanagan discovered that this orientation was not necessary.
Other researchers believed that the object to be processed
should be placed at the scale location of the King's Chamber
of the Cheops' pyramid - i.e., about one-third the height of
the pyramid up from the base directly beneath the apex.
However, Flanagan again showed that an object could be
located anywhere within the pyramid and be subjected to the
same unknown energies.
The easiest and most dramatic experiment that can
be conducted with a pyramidal shape is the classic razor
blade experiment. This requires a 12-inch or an 18-inch
pyramid.
Obtain at least six good quality razor blades or
disposable razors.
Select one at random and mark it for identification.
50
Pyramids
The experiment may be conducted by either men or

women. Men will want to shave their faces. Women can
conduct the experiment by shaving their legs. For the sake
of clarity and brevity herein, the experiment will be
described as it is conducted by shaving the face; the same
procedure can be used to shave legs.
Each morning, shave one side of the face with the
razor kept inside the pyramid. Shave the other side of the
face with one of the "control" razors.
Alternate the side of the face shaved each day with
each razor.
Use a good quality shaving cream, and use the same
shaving cream product each day. Don't shift from product to
product during the test.
After shaving each clay, wash out both razors with
hot running water.
Place the marked razor inside the pyramid. Place the
unmarked control razor in the normal place you would store
a razor.
Keep a written record of your shaves and of your
subjective reactions to the sharpness of each blade.
If the control razor becomes dull and therefore
painful to use for shaving, substitute a fresh new control
razor. Be sure to note this in your record.
51
Experiments:
The razor blade experiment is perhaps the

classic one. But there are several others that can be
conducted to verify the results of the tests conducted by
the eight scientific researchers for the Mankind
Research Foundation.
1. Growth of bean sprouts:

Obtain a package of bean seeds. Place the seeds on
a wet sponge and permit them to germinate. Once they
have developed their rudimentary roots and stems, di-
vide the group randomly in half. Place each experimental
group on its own sponge soaked in 50 milliliters (about
2 liquid ounces) of water. Cover both groups with a wet
paper towel. Place one group inside a pyramid and the
other in another location in the same room. After five
days, measure the length of the bean sprout roots. Ref-
erence points for measurement are defined as the dis-
tance from the point where the root leaves the bean to
the tip of the root.
2. Decay of hamburger meat:

Obtain a quarter-pound of hamburger meat. Divide
the sample into two equal portions of about an eighth of
a pound (100 grams) each. Place both samples in shallow
52
Pyramids
saucers. Place one sample inside a pyramid shape. Place the
other in another location in the same room. After five days,
compare the appearance and odor of the samples.
3. Yeast bacteria:
Mix approximately 1/4-ounce of Brewer's Yeast with
one-half cup of water heated to a temperature of 100 degrees
Fahrenheit. Allow the culture to grow for six hours. Divide
the culture into two equally-sized portions and place each in
a clean saucer. Place one sample inside a pyramid and the
other in another location in the same room. Each 24 hours,
observe the two samples and note differences in growth,
appearance, or other physical factors.
4. Bacteria growth:
Crack two fresh eggs into separate clean saucers. Place one
drop of saliva in each saucer in contact with the egg
material. Place one saucer in a pyramid and the other in
another location in the same room. Observe the appearances
and physical attributes of each sample daily. The author
does not recommend conducting experiments using dead
animals because of potential health problems to say nothing
of the reaction of neighbors or colleagues.
53
If negative results are forthcoming from any or all of

the experiments suggested above, the first step is to try them
again. Something (we don't know what) might have gone
wrong in the preparations for the first tests. If negative
results are obtained on the second try, give the pyramids to
an acquaintance and have them perform the experiments. If
the materials in suggested experiments #2, #3, and #4 show
no significant differences, try running the experiments in a
room heated to 90 degrees Fahrenheit. Try enclosing both
samples by placing another saucer inverted over the sample
saucers.
Hypotheses:
When it comes to speculating why pyramids work as

they appear to do, there are about as many hypotheses as
there are investigators. Some hypotheses are, frankly, quite
speculative.
In many cases, investigators utilize scientific ter-
minology such as the word "energy" to describe something
that may not be energy at all as physicists and engineers
know it. This happens to be the case when it comes to
discussing many of these strange machines and, in fact,
unknown or "psychic" phenomena in general. One should
always keep in mind that terminology is often borrowed and
then used with perhaps a different
54
Pyramids
meaning in mind because people have an overwhelming

tendency to name the unknown, thereby giving them the
belief that they partially understand it. It is not that
investigators of strange phenomena are too lazy or ignorant
to develop their own terminology because they often do,
coining words to describe phenomena yet with little or no
attempt made to carefully define or quantify these new
terms.
The terms "energy," "power," "radiation," and other
words pertaining to unseen and non-physical manifestations
of the universe are most usually "borrowed" to describe the
unseen, non-physical, and unknown phenomena associated
with strange machines and other discrepancies in the
Universe as we perceive it.
As scientific research proceeds as a result of the
investigation of machines such as pyramids and others
described in this book, you can rest assured that the new
fields of scientific research will indeed develop their own
jargon as factors and phenomena are identified and
quantified.
Be that as it may, in the case of pyramid phenom-
ena, it is obvious that the shape of the pyramid accelerates,
retards, or concentrates some physical factor that results in
change. Therefore, perhaps the word "energy may be
appropriate along with the word "radiation"
55
which applies to the carrier of change-causing energy that

creates action at a distance with no apparent intervening
physical means.
In the matter of razor sharpening, the affected
material is crystalline in nature. All metal alloys are. The
crystalline structure of razor blade steel is very small. The
atoms of iron, chromium, nickel, molybdenum, and other
elements that make up the alloy are locked together by
interatomic bonds in a lattice-like arrangement characteristic
of a crystal. (Some crystals such as diamonds, salt crystals,
gems, etc. are large enough to be readily visible.)
Research may confirm that water has a strong effect
upon the interatomic crystalline bonds of razor steel. Water
rather than comparatively soft protein material of hair may
be the factor that dulls the sharp crystalline edge of a razor.
Scientists who cany out research in solid-state
electronics know that nearly all the electronic phenomena
associated with transistors, diodes, etc., take place at or on
the surface of the crystalline solid-state material. On the
surface of any crystal, especially those which have been cut
from larger crystals, there are many loose or unattached
crystalline bonds that have been physically severed in the
cutting and/or polishing operation. The nature of crystal
surfaces is still an area of intense scientific study about
which little is yet known.
56
Pyramids
However, it is known exactly how much energy is

required to break a crystalline bond. In the microscopic
world on the edge of a razor blade, there are many severed
crystalline bonds created by the sharpening of the edge by
grinding. This produces a surface with unsatisfied bonds that
will link with anything, especially water. When a water
molecule bonds to the crystalline structure of razor steel, it
softens the steel. Research in this area has been done in
Germany.
In the case of the bond that develops between a
water molecule and anything else, the energy in the bond is
extremely small, being approximately 1.0 to 1.5 electron
volts (eV). Scientifically, this is the amount of energy
acquired by an electron when accelerated across a potential
difference of one volt. It is a veiy small amount of energy,
amounting to 1.602 x 10'19 to 2.4 x 10'19 watt-seconds. That's
16 or 24 with 18 zeroes in front of it before you get to the
decimal point.
This minute amount of energy is present all around
us in the form of "sferics" or the discharges that take place
between the Earth and its charged ionosphere. Lightning is
an intense form of sferics. Sferics have a broad radio
frequency spectrum; sferics are "noise" in the e-m envi-
ronment. The minute energy of sferics could be easily
concentrated or focused. There is indeed energy available
because there's a potential difference of about 100 volts per
foot in the vertical electrostatic field of the Earth. This
means that there is an electrical difference of 600
57
volts between the top of the head and the soles of the feet of
a 6-foot person standing on the surface of the Earth. This
potential difference is enough to be detected by suitable
solid-state electronic devices and used in a simple autopilot
to keep the wings level in radio controlled model airplanes,
for example.
Most sferics come from thunderstorms, and there
are about 300 thunderstorms in progress at any given
moment in the Earth's atmosphere.
Very well, if there is enough energy present in the
environment to break the crystalline bonds that may form
between the ground sharp edge of a razor blade and water
molecules, how does a pyramid shape affect this?
Speculation:
1. The pyramidal shape is a resonator to the fre-

quencies present in sferics. The bigger the pyramidal shape,
the broader the bandwidth of sferics to which it is resonant.
2. It isn't necessary that a pyramid be made of metal to
be an effective resonator of electromagnetic energy; it is
only necessary that its surface have a dielectric constant
that's different from the surrounding air because high-
frequency radio waves (including microwaves) can be bent
or reflected by anything having a dielectric constant
different than the surrounding air. (If this were not so, radar
wouldn't work.)
58
Pyramids
3. A pyramidal shape can therefore serve as enough of

a resonator of electromagnetic energy present in sferics to
break the crystalline bond between the razor blade steel alloy
and the water molecule, thereby restoring the original
crystalline structure of the edge. (Eventually, because the
pyramid shape cannot concentrate enough energy to break
all the steel-water bonds, the build up of softer steel-water
crystals on the edge causes the edge to become soft and
dull.)
The apparent ability of a pyramid shape to dehy-
drate or mummify organic material may be due to the ability
of the shape to concentrate, focus, or otherwise resonate
with the microwave frequencies of sferics. This can be
measured with modem instrumentation. And it should be.
The various characteristics of purified (distilled) water
placed in a pyramid shape should be investigated and
measured to determine such gross and easily-measured
factors as surface tension, which is a measure of the internal
energy of the water molecules. It should also be possible to
accurately measure the frequencies and intensities of
electromagnetic radiation at various points inside a pyramid
shape.
Much of this has been done, but little if it has been
openly reported in the scientific literature because of the "
peer review" process in which other scientists read and
comment upon all submitted scientific papers. It's quite
likely that most of this material has either been rejected with
the derisive snort, "Huh? Pyramid power!
59
Ridiculous!" Or it has been accepted and lies buried

unrecognized and uncorrelated somewhere in the enormous
mass of wall-to-wall data that characterizes modern
scientific research.
If the data isn't there, it should be gotten.
Conclusions:
1. It works.
2. There may be a simple physical explanation for it
if anyone bothers to look for it.
60
CHAPTER FOUR
THE ENERGY WHEEL
Basic Description:
The "energy wheel" is a small "wheel" or concentrically

balanced object made from extremely light material. This is
balanced horizontally on the sharp point of a needle or pin
held in a vertical position by a suitable base plate. The
operator places the device on a table, sits down, and places
both hands cupped horizontally around the energy wheel.
The objective is to "think" the lightweight
61
wheel into rotating in the desired direction (clockwise or

counterclockwise), to make it stop, or to make it stop and
change direction without any visible physical contact with
the wheel. The hypothesis of operation is often said to be
telekinesis or the ability to change the physical position or
motion of a material object by "thought waves" alone.
However, there may be other factors at work, too.
Historic Background:
Apparently, the first device similar (but perhaps

differing in construction) to the energy wheel was called a
"Biometre" and was developed by a Dr. Hippolyte Baraduc
of France (no biographical data can be located). It consisted
of a copper needle suspended horizontally by a thread from
the top center of a glass dome. Beneath the dome was a
horizontal dial marked off in circular degrees. The operator
would cup both hands around the glass dome and, by
"concentrated thought," rotate the needle left or right to the
number of degrees marked on the dial.
A. M. O. R. C. (Ancient and Mystical Order of the
Rose Cross, otherwise known as the Rosicrucian
Brotherhood) developed a similar device consisting of a
needle floating on water.
On page 222 of the 30 July 1922 issue of the famed
British medical journal, The Lancet, Dr. Charles Ross
authored an article entitled "An Instrument Which
62
The Energy Wheel
Figure 4-1: An early version of the energy wheel

was the sthenometer.
63
Is Set In Motion by Vision or by Proximity of the Human

Body. " This device was also called a "sthenometer. " It
consisted of a balanced needle suspended by a thread inside
a surrounding transparent shield, preferably made of quartz
(although glass was believed to be useable, too). A
horizontal dial marked off in degrees was placed below the
horizontally-suspended needle. The basic sthenometer is
shown in Figure 4-1. It was claimed by Dr. Ross that the
needle would respond instantly to the visual stimulus of a
gaze or to the proximity of a human body. Why this device,
described so carefully and completely in a respected medical
journal, was not investigated further is unknown.
A Czech engineer, Robert Pavlita, developed a large
number of similar "psychotronic generators" operating on
"shaped power" following World War II. The Czechs have
been very quiet about these devices and have revealed or
published little that can be evaluated properly.
Flanagan (see previous chapter) combined his
experiences in pyramid research with the devices of Ross
and Pavlita to produce a "pyramid psychotronic generator"
shown in Figure 4-2 and 4-2a.
Zenith TV engineer Gerald Loe developed a com-
mercial version of these devices, calling it the "Energy
Wheel®. " This little gem was introduced to me by Tag
Powell in about 1980. The rotor consisted of a cross stamped
from thin aluminum foil shown in Figure 4-3.
64
The Energy Wheel
Figure 4-2: Flanagan's "pyramid psychotronic

generator," a version of the energy wheel. Depend-
ing upon how the paper template is folded, the
generator can have a left- or right-handed twist.
The author first heard of the energy wheel device in

about 1955 from John Woods Campbell, Jr. (1910 -1971),
then editor of Astounding Science Fiction magazine
published at that time by Street & Smith. Campbell's name
will appear often herein because he was a technically-trained
man who'd attended MIT and graduated
65
Figure 4-2A: Dimensioned template for cutting

and folding a Flanagan "pyramid psychotronic
generator" from a sheet of paper.
with a degree in physics from Duke University. Campbell

was interested in everything in the Universe, including
things that were unexplained by science such as some of
the machines described in this book. The Campbell
66
The Energy Wheel
version of the energy wheel utilized a folded paper rotor
similar to the one fully described below as the experimental
device of this chapter.
The author's experiences with the Campbell energy
wheel in 1955-1956 were mixed. Sometimes I could get it to
work. Other times, I could not. The reactions of my friends
and colleagues working in the rocket and guided missile area
at White Sands missile testing range were also mixed.
Therefore, I didn't pay much attention to this device again
until Tag Powell gave me one of his energy wheels in 1980
(Fig. 4-3). I discovered I could cup my hands around the
device and make it spin in both directions, stop, and reverse
directions with great reliability and repeatability.
During a visit to my home by Tag Powell in 1983,
we spent most of a day conducting various experiments with
the energy wheel. The one we used is shown in Figure 4-3.
If you don't want to make an energy wheel, you can buy the
one shown. It's commercially available from Powell
Productions, 11701 Belcher Road South, Suite 123, Largo,
Florida 34643-5117.
We discovered that both of us could make it work
equally well if we placed it under an inverted water glass,
thereby shielding it from any air currents, including
subconsciously-directed breathing, that might cause it to
change its motion. But it would not work as well if placed
under an inverted drinking container made of clear
67
Figure 4-3: A commercially available Energy Wheel®.
polystyrene plastic. Both Powell and I could improve our

capability to make the energy wheel move as desired if we
coated our hands with a thin layer of Johnson's Baby Oil.
It therefore appears that there's something that makes
the energy wheel device operate, but further quantitative
testing has not been done by the author. However,
enough empirical testing was carried out to qualify it for
consideration in this book.
68
The Energy Wheel
Instructions for Fabrication
It's ridiculously simple to make an energy wheel.

However, the device uses a very sharp needle
pointing vertically upwards. It's possible to impale one's
hand on this very sharp needle. WARNING: Extreme care
should he taken to insure that you don't impale part of
yourself on the needle! Do not leave the energy wheel
assembled with the needle vertical and the wheel itself
removed. In fact, once you've finished working with the
energy wheel each time, disassemble it completely and put
the needle in a safe place. Or place a rubber stopper, cork, or
piece of clay atop the vertical needle point. Don't take
chances and get stuck with the needle.
Obviously, don't leave the energy wheel assembled
where small children may get to it, possibly play with it, and
possibly get hurt by the sharp needle point.
The following materials are required to make an
energy wheel:
1. A piece of writing or typewriter paper three
inches square. The paper should be as thin and light as
possible. Ordinary note paper is sufficient. Anything
between 15-pound and 20-pound paper, as it is technically
known, will work. Tissue paper is not recommended
because it may be too thin to permit it to be folded or to
retain its shape when folded.
69
Figure 4-4: Energy wheel template.

Make from light-weight typing paper.
Figure 4-5: Folding the energy wheel template.

Fold A-B and C-D down in the same direction
to make a tent-like shape as shown.
70
The Energy Wheel
Figure 4-6: Drawing of the completed simple energy

wheel. For ease of operation, you may want to set it
atop an inverted water glass.
2. A sewing needle about two inches long. The

reason for using a needle is to have a sharp, low-friction
needle-point bearing upon which the energy wheel can
rotate.
3. A base to hold the needle vertical. You can use a
kneaded rubber eraser, a lump of plasticene modelling clay,
or a small block of balsa wood 1/2-inch thick and about 2
inches square.
71
Other items you will need in order to conduct

experiments include a glass drinking tumbler and plastic
drinking tumbler, (both large enough to fit over the energy
wheel), some baby oil, and a notebook and pencil with
which to record the results of your experiments.
Cut the paper into a square three inches on each
side. (Fig. 44) It doesn't have to be precisely square, but it
will look better and balance better if it is. Use scissors, a
single-edge razor blade, or a modelling knife along with a
metal straight edge to insure straight cutting.
Fold the paper diagonally as shown (Fig. 4-5), then
unfold it and fold it again from the two other opposed
corners. Make both folds in the same direction so that you
end up with a tent-shaped, partially-flattened pyramidal
shape with a peak in the middle as shown.
Carefully insert the needle perpendicularly through
the eraser or base piece until about 1.5 inches of the pointed
end sticks out. Or mold a chunk of plasticene modelling clay
around the eye end of the needle to hold it vertically.
Gently place the folded paper square on the point of
the needle with the point nestled in the apex of the folds at
the center of the square.
Your energy wheel is now completed(Fig. 4-6).
72
The Energy Wheel
Find a quiet spot and place the energy wheel on a

table. Make sure it's not in the draft of an air conditioning
unit, window, or heater. Avoid any air currents because they
make the experiments more difficult.
Sit down at the table facing the energy wheel. Cup
both hands around both sides of it about a half-inch away
from it. Keep your hands steady by resting your elbows and
forearms on the table top. Look at the unit and think of it
revolving. At first it may wobble. It may revolve first in one
direction, then stop and start rotating in the opposite
direction. Concentrate on movement in one direction.
Some people can make the energy wheel operate
immediately. Others require a learning period ranging from
several minutes to several weeks with regular sessions of
five to fifteen minutes daily. (Other people can't make it
work at all. ) Don't be discouraged if you can't get it to
rotate. If you finally give up, try it on your friends. They
might surprise you.
Experiments:
There are several impromptu empirical experiments

that you can conduct with the energy wheel once you learn
to make it rotate.
73
If there is any question in your mind concerning

whether or not air currents are causing it to rotate, place an
inverted glass drinking tumbler over it. Cup your hands
around the glass and make it rotate in the enclosed space.
Once you have gained operational experience or
taken experimental data with the energy wheel enclosed
under an inverted glass tumbler, replace the glass unit with
the polystyrene plastic one. Cup your hands around the
plastic tumbler and make the energy wheel rotate.
The condition of the skin on your hands and palms
may be a contributing factor in whatever causes the energy
wheel to rotate. Try coating your palms with a thin layer of
baby oil. Then remove the oil by thoroughly washing your
hands and try again. Note any differences.
Try the energy wheel on several people, and keep
accurate experimental notes on who can make it rotate, stop,
and change directions best, and how long it took them to
learn how to do it.
How do you learn how to do it? Nobody knows.
You just have to keep trying until it happens (or doesn't).
There are many additional experiments that can and
should be carried out with the various forms of energy
wheels. The precise physical conditions of the environment
and the subject should be instrumented, measured, and
monitored for changes. These might include ambient air
temperature near the energy wheel
74
The Energy Wheel
(perhaps also above and below it), deep body temperature of
the subject, surface temperature of both palms, the galvanic
skin resistance of both palms, and the electric field present
between the palms. Instruments to measure these parameters
to great accuracy are available, but their cost may be beyond
the means of the amateur experimenter. But the
measurements need to be taken, the professional
bioelectronic engineers apparently haven't done it, and
therefore it's probably going to be up to the amateurs to
forge ahead.
You may not be able to get the energy wheel to do

anything you want it to do. It may not rotate at all. It may
rotate erratically. You may not have any conscious control
over it at all.
I'll repeat what I've already said numerous times in
this book: Some people can make it work, and some people
can't. (Some people can play the trumpet, and others can't.)
We don't know why this is so. But if some people can make
it work (and this can be demonstrated repeatedly), we should
try to find out why, shouldn't we?
Hypotheses:
The first hypothesis that comes to mind concerning

what makes the energy wheel rotate is: "thought waves," or
psychokinesis, or telekinesis. One of the rea-
75
sons why the rotating element of the energy wheel was

originally fabricated with such low mass was the belief that
such mental energy must be quite small and, since we
couldn't move things that were obviously massive, perhaps
"thought waves" could have some affect on bodies of
extremely low mass. But just because someone can hang a
name on a phenomenon doesn't mean that it's understood or
that it really operates by something related to
parapsychology (although it may, and that cannot be
completely ruled out).
However, one of the basic principles of scientific
investigation is called "Occams' Razor." This is a philo-
sophical statement of natural law that comes from William
of Ockham (c. 1280 -1349), an English schoolman who
proposed the dictum pluralites non est ponenda sine
necessitate ~ " multiplicity ought not to be posited without
necessity. " In other words, choose the simplest possible
solution or, in modern parlance, K. 1. S. S. (Keep It Simple,
Stupid.)
In applying Occam's Razor to the hypothesis that the
action of the energy wheel is the result of psychokinetics or
"thought waves," it must be pointed out that this hypothesis
is complex because nobody yet knows what thought waves
are or how they can be measured. Or can even agree that
such things exist, much less on the reality of some attempts
at detection and measurement of these phenomena.
Therefore, until psychotechnology progresses to the point
where we can hang numbers on
76
The Energy Wheel
things and get everyone to agree on the basis of repeat-able

experimentation, we'd better see if we can find other
hypotheses with simpler explanations based on whatever
part of the Universe we do indeed already understand well
enough to have measured accurately.
This, in turn, brings up another principle of science:
If you're going to propose a new theory, it must not only
account for newly observed phenomena but must also allow
for the existence of things that are already known. In
addition, it must also predict phenomena that are totally new
and unsuspected.
With these concepts in mind, let's look at some other
hypotheses that might account for the action of the energy
wheel. This may not be the only possible one nor the only
one that meets the qualification of William of Ockham, but
it's a point of departure that may make the energy wheel a
little less hokey.
The hypothesis that the wheel is being uncon-
sciously turned by selective unconscious direction of the
operator's breath is put to rest by the experiment in which
the rotor is operated while enclosed in an inverted glass
water tumbler.
On the basis of results of experiments conducted by
the author, the following hypothesis is put forward as a point
of departure. It may not be correct. But it offers somewhere
to start and something to be proven or disproven... or
replaced by a better hypothesis.
77
As discussed in the previous chapter, the planet that

we live on functions because of electric, magnetic, and
electromagnetic fields (and these three things are separate
phenomena; see any elementary physics text). The planet
Earth has an electrostatic field along with a magnetic field.
So does every living creature on Earth.
A human being exhibits a change in electrical
resistance of the skin which can be measured and which has
been previously correlated with emotional states and action
of the nervous system.
A human being is a complex electronic system with
a skin that has a definite dielectric constant, which in turn
can change because of emotional state (although there has
been little work done and reported concerning this factor).
A human being also has an electrostatic field that is
only partially the result of the body's immersion in the
Earth's electric field.
Since it is already known that the voluntary (and
involuntary) actions of the nervous system can alter the
electric and magnetic characteristics of the human body in a
highly localized manner - i.e., the galvanic skin resistance
can be different at different parts of the body - it therefore
follows that it is possible to voluntarily alter the electric
charge on each hand or on different parts of a single hand.
One of the first experiments in electricity that a
freshman physics student sees or carries out has to do with
the electrostatic attraction of oppositely-charged bod-
78
The Energy Wheel
ies and the mutual repulsion of bodies with the same

electrostatic charge. We experience it daily with some
plastic films that cling tenaciously to foods and other
materials, including themselves; with dust and dirt that is
electrostatically attracted to the front of a television set; with
electrostatic dust precipitators both in homes and on factory
chimneys; and with any cat that has had its fur rubbed
vigorously.
It does not take much energy in the form of an
electrostatic charge to make its presence known beyond the
shadow of a doubt. And our own personal experience
indicates that electrostatic forces, even small ones, can
exhibit pronounced physical effects.
The energy wheel may function because of the
operator's unconscious (but also, strangely, willed) ability to
alter the electric field at different points of the palm of the
hand or both hands. This should not appear to be a fantastic
hypothesis since it is already well-known that a person can
willfully alter the galvanic skin resistance and, therefore, the
body's electric field.
Thus, the energy wheel could be nothing more than
the bio-electric analog of the common, garden-variety,
everyday electric motor. The common squirrel-cage
induction motor used in fans and most small appliances is in
itself an impossible device unless one understands
alternating current theory. And it's interesting to note that
alternating current theory and therefore the squirrel-cage
induction motor depends entirely on a mathemati-
79
cal concept known as "i" which is the square root of minus-

1. This is a totally imaginary number that does not and
cannot exist in the real Universe! Yet it is absolutely
necessary in order to provide a theoretical foundation for the
electrical power of alternative currents that today run our
world.
The energy wheel may not have anything to do with
"thoughtwaves," butonly the mind's natural ability to alter
the electrical characteristics of the skin. This hypothesis
(which, by calling it a hypothesis, means that it is, at best,
only an educated guess waiting to be tested and proved)
satisfies the requirement that we continually wield Occam's
Razor.
Viewed from the standpoint of an electrical phe-
nomenon, the operating principle behind rotation of the rotor
is straightforward in nature. The rotor is at all times at
negative potential or charge, resting on an extension of the
surface of the negatively-charged Earth. The rotor has four
points or corners at which its negative electric charge is
concentrated. If an operator can alter the electric field of one
palm to make it positive while the fingers on the same hand
are negative, the difference in electric charge would cause
the rotor to turn.
This hypothesis can be checked by experimentation
and measurement.
All rotors of all energy wheel devices seen by the
author to date have been in cruciform (cross) shape or
possessed some sharp points around their peripheries.
80
The Energy Wheel
A critical experiment (the reader is invited to try it) is to

determine whether or not a circular rotor (i.e., one without
sharp corners) can also be made to rotate. The author has
tried it and challenges the reader to perform the same
experiment.
But why does a regular energy wheel appear to
work well under a glass tumbler and not under a tumbler
made of polystyrene plastic? Obviously, glass has a different
dielectric constant than does polystyrene plastic. Can glass
be given an electric charge more easily than plastic? The
author hasn't investigated these areas yet. They are ripe for
amateur experimentation.
From the professional or semi-professional scientific
research standpoint, the human operator should be
instrumented to measure galvanic skin resistance, skin
temperature, and electric field potential and gradient at
several locations on the skin, including critical points on the
hands and palms. Solid-state electronic devices available
today make such measurements possible where they were
patently impractical if not impossible a mere twenty years
ago. Such experimentation and measurement would serve to
answer the question of how a person manages to operate an
energy wheel and reveal the physical factors involved, but it
will not answer the question of how a human being actually
manages to change the electrical characteristics of the skin.
81
Conclusions:
The energy wheel is a simple device to make and,

for some people, a simple device to operate. Its simplicity
may mask a complex set of reasons why it works. How-
ever, its very simplicity permits a wide variety of experi-
mentation by amateur scientists and offers professional
researchers an opportunity to test and measure some
physical factors that may be involved in its mode of
operation. In the long run, both sorts of experimentation
may reveal a great deal about the human mind and body
that is currently either unknown or assigned to the realm
of the fantastic or the province of charlatans. However,
the simple fact that a large number of otherwise ordinary
people can make this simple device operate indicates that
it is not mystical in nature. Modern scientific procedures
and instrumentation can be applied in an attempt to
learn the mechanics of operation. Furthermore, proto-
sciences such as parapsychology need not be invoked to
provide an explanation of why it works.
82
CHAPTER FIVE
PENDULUMS
Basic Description:
In some respects, the two different pendulum types

described in this chapter are similar in operation to the
energy wheel of the previous chapter. Both consist of
very light masses suspended from supports by thin
threads . It is claimed that the action of volitional
thought can cause the pendulum to move. In the case of
the pendu-
83
lum, however, it appears to offer "yes-no" answers to

questions. It also appears that it can be used to indicate the
direction to a wanted object.
The first type of pendulum is hand-supported. It is
undoubtedly the easiest to operate. However, the possibility
of minute, subconscious movements on the part of the
operator casts considerable doubt on any claim that a hand-
supported pendulum is a "amazing mind machine" operating
because of as yet unknown operational principles.
The second type of pendulum is supported from a
rigid point such as a lampshade edge, desk lamp, or simple
tripod support made from wooden dowels. The
independently-supported pendulum eliminates the pos-
sibility that the human operator could control its swing by
unconscious and minute finger, hand, and/or arm
movements. The independently-supported pendulum may
also be operated under a transparent cover to eliminate the
possibility that air currents might affect its swing.
The operator "thinks" or concentrates on the
pendulum, asking a question that can be answered in a "yes-
no" manner. By previous agreement, the swing of the
pendulum to and away from the operator may mean "yes"
while a swing from left to right may mean "no." The
operator must announce prior to the start of the experiment
which direction of motion signifies affirmative and which
indicates the negative response.
84
Pendulums
To use the pendulum as a locator similar to detector
rods, the operator asks the pendulum to swing in the
direction of the object whose location is being sought. There
is, of course, an ambiguity in the fact that the unknown
object can be located in either direction that the pendulum
swings - i.e., if the pendulum swings in a north-south plane,
the object could be located either north or south of the
operator. Some operators appear to be extremely adept in
getting the pendulum to swing in a most unusual fashion
when in the locator mode: they can cause the pendulum to
swing from its vertical rest position to a displaced position in
the direction of the object, then cause the pendulum to swing
between the vertical rest position and the displaced position.
"The Magic Pendulum" has its origins lost in the

mists of prehistory. It has long been a device used by
wizards and shamins. Just because a device has a long
history doesn't mean that we, with our immensely increased
wisdom growing from a centuries-old legacy of scientific
progress, should both scoff at and ridicule such devices that
appear to have no rational explanation in terms of the
Universe as we know and believe it to be. All our ancestors
for several hundred thousand years not only believed in such
"magic" devices but conducted their affairs in accordance
with what these devices told
85
them. We know beyond the shadow of a doubt that their

reliance on these devices could not have been foolish and/or
disastrous because our ancestors lived and thrived and
produced progeny culminating in ourselves. If all our
ancestors were fools and we of the modern "scientific" age
are so smart, this would mean that the Mende-lian Laws of
genetics and heredity are plainly nonsense. But we also know
for a fact that these principles of biotechnology are indeed
valid, true, and (most important) pragmatically workable.
Ask any breeder of horses or dogs or any farmer who relies
on hybridized crops. Perhaps our forebears were not quite the
stupid clods we tend to believe, but possessed some evidence
that strange machines such as the pendulum did indeed have
some validity, even though they didn't understand why they
worked and therefore placed them in the "magic" clas-
sification.
Human beings are also eminently practical. If it
doesn't work, it's discarded. If it seems to work most of the
time or enough of the time to make it useful, it's used until
something better is discovered or developed.
Very little research work or further development has
been undertaken with this extremely simple machine. It
exists today in nearly the same form as it has for uncounted
centuries.
However, the social milieu has changed. In most of
the world today, you will not be burned at the stake as a
witch for experimenting with such devices as the
86
Pendulums
Figure 5-1: Hand-supported pendulum. Rest

your elbows on a table to steady your hands.
pendulum. (However, there are still some locales in the

United States where you would be well advised to be
somewhat circumspect in such experimentation simply
because America has all types of people in it, including
those who are still very superstitious, fearful, and violent.)
Author's Experiences:
I do not remember when I first tried using a

pendulum. It may have been when I was about twelve or
thirteen years old and became fascinated by a ouija board,
which led me to experiment with some of the other
87
devices of "witchcraft and sorcery" that my juvenile col-

leagues brought forth from time to time. Many of these
machines were "discovered" and subsequently experimented
with because we were at that age and that level of scholastic
sophistication where we were being introduced to the
Scientific Method and to the mysteries of the Universe
revealed by our resident scholastic magician, the junior high
school science teacher, one Donald John Obee at Cheyenne
Mountain School in Colorado Springs, Colorado. One thing
I can say for Mr. Obee: He made science and technology
fascinating, fun, and also frustrating enough to encourage
me out of curiosity to continue to be interested in science
and technology for the rest of my life. The mere idea that I
didn't have to be captive to the whims of nature but could, if
I understood enough about it, manipulate the Universe so
that I could do magic things like fly in the air and go to the
moon got me hooked at an early age because, even then, I
felt I had been jerked around enough by a capricious
Universe. I can make a hand-supported pendulum work. But
I don't always know whether or not it gives me the correct
"yes-no" answers because I haven't used it enough for that
purpose. The pendulum requires that the operator play the
game of "Twenty Questions. Doing this often takes longer to
answer a question than to either go look it up in a suitable
reference book or think it through and work it out myself.
And I've never really been certain that I wasn't
unconsciously making the pendulum swing
88
Pendulums
the way I wanted it to swing. I often have much the same
feeling about detector rods but in the case of that device,
there is absolutely no question in my mind that I am not
making those rods swing for the simple reason that the
response is so strong.
I can also make a self-supported, glass-enclosed
pendulum swing. I don't know why, although, as you will
see later, I do indeed have a hypothesis.
Observations of other people operating pendulums
of both sorts shows that about 80% of volunteer subjects can
make a hand-supported pendulum do something while about
50% of people can make the self-supported pendulum
operate. I don't know why.
This is one of the simplest of all mind machines to

build and operate.
The following materials are required:
1. A thumb tack, paper clip, or a minute pinch of
plasticene modelling clay to use as a pendulum bob.
2. A spool of sewing thread for the pendulum itself;
this can be made of nylon, silk, polyester, or any other
material.
3. Cellophane tape to use for affixing the upper end
of the pendulum to a support.
89
4. A pendulum support; this can be nothing

more sophisticated than the shade of a desk lamp, study
lamp, or table lamp; or the lower edge of a kitchen or
bathroom cabinet.
5. A glass water tumbler and a polystyrene plastic
water tumbler (this last item optional).
Cut an eighteen-inch length of thread (longer if your
pendulum support is higher than this distance from the table
or other horizontal surface; in fact, the longer the pendulum,
the more sensitive it will be).
Tie one end of the thread to the pendulum bob - the
paper clip or thumb tack - or mold a bean-sized lump of
plasticene modelling clay around the end of the thread.
No further fabrication is required for the hand-
supported pendulum.
An independently-supported pendulum can be made
by taping the free end to the lamp shade so that the
pendulum bob swings freely just above the surface of a
table.
The pendulum can also be fabricated inside the
water tumbler by taping the free end of the pendulum
support to the inside of the bottom of the glass so that the
pendulum bob swings freely inside the tumbler when it is
inverted. For a pendulum that's more sensitive, use one of
those tall conical beer glasses.
90
Pendulums
Figure 5-2: An independently-supported pendulum.

Any method of supporting the pendulum will work.
The longer the pendulum, the more sensitive the
pendulum will be.
91
Serious investigators may wish to fabricate a series

of pendulums having bobs of differing sizes, weights,
shapes, and densities; supports made from various thick-
nesses of thread and thread materials; and enclosures
consisting of cylindrical glass and lucite plastic tubes with
suitable supports or caps on their upper ends from which to
suspend the pendulum.
But the common, parlor-variety pendulum for
"quick-and-dirty" empirical experiments can be made in
satisfactory form with the very simple materials detailed
above.
Hand-supported pendulum:
Seat yourself in a comfortable chair at a table in a

location free of air currents from air conditioners, heaters,
fans, and drafts from open windows. Take the free end of the
pendulum support thread between the fingers of your hand,
and place both hands together to steady one another. (Fig. 5-
1) Place your elbows on the surface of the table to steady
them. Adjust the length of the pendulum until the bob swings
just clear of the table top. Determine the direction of the
pendulum swing in yes-no response to your questions. It is
normal in most
92
Pendulums
European cultures for the "yes" response to be a swing

toward and away from the body of the operator while a "no"
response is a side-to-side, left-right swing.
Determine what you wish to know. The questions
must be phrased so that they can be answered as "yes" or
"no." This often means framing a series of questions to
arrive at the desired answer. People who are experienced at
playing "Twenty Questions" will find it easier than someone
who is not.
Most people will get a pendulum response when it
is operated in this hand-supported mode.
Independent suspension mode:
Affix the free end of the pendulum thread with

cellophane tape to an overhanging support (Fig. 5-2) such as
a lamp shade or shelf in a location reasonably free of air
currents from air conditioners, fans, heaters, and drafts from
open windows. Adjust the pendulum length so that the
pendulum bob swings freely just above the surface of the
table or counter. Seat yourself comfortably in front of the
pendulum. With your hands, still the swing of the pendulum
that may have been produced in the act of suspending it.
Once the pendulum is hanging quietly, place your arms on
the table and cup your hands
93
around the pendulum bob about three to six inches away

from it. Novices may discover that it is easier to work the
pendulum with their hands cupped closer to it.
Operate the pendulum as described for the hand-
supported unit. Frame and ask your questions in the same
manner.
Experiments:
If the hand-supported pendulum experiment works

for you, try the independently suspended pendulum.
Once you have obtained results from the inde-
pendently-suspended pendulum, try making it swing without
cupping your hands around the pendulum bob.
As in the experiments with the energy wheel in the
previous chapter, try coating your palms with a thin film of
baby or bath oil to change the electrical characteristics and
dielectric constant of your skin. Or wash your hands
thoroughly and completely to remove as much natural skin
oil as possible.
If you suspect that air currents from your breath,
someone else's breath, or ambient air currents in the room
are the cause of pendulum action, perform the enclosed
pendulum experiment by suspending the pendulum inside an
inverted glass water tumbler. (Fig. 5-3) Cup your hands
around the outside of the tumbler and repeat the basic
operating instructions given above.
94
Pendulums
Figure 5-3: To eliminate any possibility of air

currents swinging the pendulum, mount it
inside an inverted water tumbler as shown.
95
If the pendulum works inside an inverted glass

tumbler, try the experiment with the pendulum inside the
polystyrene plastic water tumbler.
The longer the pendulum support thread, the more
sensitive the pendulum will be to any disturbing force. Try
extending the length of the pendulum thread and note the
results.
The heavier the pendulum bob, the less sensitive the
pendulum will be to any disturbing force. Replace the paper
clip or thumb tack with a blob of plasticene modelling clay.
Continue to decrease the amount of clay used for the bob to
increase the sensitivity. You will, of course, eventually reach
the point where the mass of the clay is insufficient to keep
the pendulum thread taut as well as permitting the pendulum
to swing due to the relative increase in the ratio between
forces on the bob and forces on the supporting thread.
Try a critical experiment: Arrange an independently-
supported pendulum in a location where the operator can cup
his hands around it but cannot see the pendulum, (a sheet of
cardboard will do nicely). A serious investigator may wish to
fabricate a transparent plastic cylinder to enclose the
pendulum, then paint one side of the cylinder so that it is
opaque. With the pendulum thus hidden from the operator,
an observer then notes and records the actions of the
pendulum in response to
96
Pendulums
questions asked verbally by the operator. The results should
be compared with those obtained when the operator could
see the pendulum.
If you get no response from the hand-supported

pendulum, you are certainly in the minority. However,
increase the sensitivity of the pendulum by decreasing the
mass of the pendulum bob as detailed in the experimental
section above.
It often helps to place a flat sheet of paper hori-
zontally on the table below and directly underneath the
pendulum bob. On the paper, draw a cross. Place the word
"yes" at both ends of the vertical bar of the cross and the
word "no" at either end of the horizontal bar of the cross.
This may assist you in concentrating and in keeping fully in
mind the direction the bob should swing in order to provide
"yes-no" answers.
If it doesn't work at all, put it away and try it again
later. We don't know what the effect of various moods,
biorhythms, emotions, state of rest, etc. has on the operation
of a pendulum. Could be you're just having a bad day
because we all have those.
If after many tries you can't get the hand-supported
pendulum to work for you, try it on a friend.
97
The same advice holds true for the other pendu-
lum experiments. However, for the independently-sus-
pended pendulum, try changing the electrical nature of
your palms by either washing your hands or by coating
them with baby or bath oil...or both in sequence.
Then, again, as I've pointed out time and again
in this book, you might not be able to get the pendulum
to work at all. And we don't know why.
Hypotheses:
As in the case of the energy wheel of the previous

chapter, we need not invoke bizarre hypotheses involv-
ing undiscovered radiations or waves. We are again dealing
with phenomena that can probably be explained reason-
ably well with the science and technology already known
to us.
As an important aside, however, it is also likely,
however far less probable, that there is indeed something
new and hitherto unsuspected involved in the operation
of the pendulum. 1 want to make it clear that I do not
wish to sound dogmatic when 1 present hypotheses. It
could very well be that it all happens because it pleases
the Great God Bog as part of his arcane if whimsical way
of running the Universe for his own amusement. But 1
really doubt it. I could be wrong, of course. One must
keep an open mind when dealing with these machines....
98
Pendulums
When Occam's Razor is applied to the hand-
supported pendulum, the simplest explanation is that the
operator is consciously or unconsciously affecting or
modulating the innate natural nervous tremor, the "noise" in
the human nervous system, possessed by everyone, thereby
causing the pendulum to swing.
However, there are other problems that are not
addressed or answered by this simplest and most straight-
forward of hypotheses. How does the operator know the
answer? What if the question doesn't involve an answer with
a high content of wishful thinking? What if the pendulum
taps the super-hyper-ultra-conscious or even the
subconscious? What if it's tapping "subconscious" or "racial"
memories? If it is indeed doing these things, it's doing them
better, a lot faster, and far more positively than any
psychiatrist or psychological technique I've ever known.
Obviously, in spite of a simplistic hypothesis that
resists the cutting edge of Occam's Razor, there must be
something more to the hand-held pendulum. I don't know
what it is. But it deserves more investigation.
With respect to the independently-suspended
pendulum, almost every freshman physics student is aware
of the demonstration or experiment in which a light object
such as a bit of paper or cork is attracted to a rubber or glass
rod which has been rubbed gently with silk or cat's fur. This
is an exhibition of electrification. In
99
the previous chapter, the first law of electrostatics was

stated: Objects that are similarly charged repel each other
while bodies with unlike charges attract each other.
In addition to various objects that have been given
an electrostatic charge by various means, the equipment
used to demonstrate this principle usually consists of a
small, light object suspended from a thread as a pendulum. It
is surprisingly easy to give an object enough electrostatic
charge to affect another object such as a suspended
lightweight pendulum bob.
We also saw in the previous chapter that the human
body carries an electrostatic charge on the surface of the skin
and that the action of the nervous system can change the
polarity and strength of this electrostatic field. In all people,
it is an unconscious phenomenon, which means that it is
accomplished without the person being aware of it in much
the same manner that people are unaware of their breathing
or heartbeat. However, like breathing or the heartbeat, it can
be voluntarily and willfully controlled.
Therefore, the operational hypothesis here is nearly
the same as that proposed for the energy wheel: The human
mind causes the nervous system to change the electrostatic
charge on the skin of the hands in such a way as to cause the
independently-suspended pendulum to swing. When the
charge on the right palm is plus and the other palm minus,
and if the pendulum carries a minus charge, it will swing
toward the right hand. The
100
Pendulums
mind then causes the electric charge on both palms to

reverse, in turn causing the pendulum to swing in the other
direction. To cause the pendulum to swing toward and away
from the experimenter, the charge on the heel of both hands
must be the same while that at both fingertips the same.
It would not take a very strong change in electro-
static charge of the skin of the palms to cause the pendulum
to swing.
Here again, the physical factors can be measured as
in the energy wheel tests. Solid-state electronic mea-
surement sensors exist that will detect and determine the
electric field.
But, again, this hypothesis begs the question...and it
is a most important question: How does the operator know
how to make the swinging pendulum answer the question for
which the operator has no conscious answer?
And, again, claiming that the pendulum triggers
racial memories or other deep-seated psychological factors
raises even more important questions that basically involve
the elusive "how": How can the simple pendulum
accomplish this so easily when it requires hours, weeks, or
even months of intense psychological therapy, treatment, or
investigation to dig these things out otherwise?
101
Conclusions:
Here is a very simple mind machine whose op-

erating principles appear to be both obscure and complex.
But the hypotheses may only appear to be complex because
the operating mechanism is still totally unknown. The device
works and will indeed answer questions with a reliability
that has been shown to be much better than random chance.
It is also a device that lends itself to experimentation
by amateurs. The instrumentation involved in measuring the
physical factors involved is not complex or expensive.
Furthermore, the instrumentation is totally within the current
state of the art.
We are perhaps confronting two separate phe-
nomena with the hand-supported pendulum and the
independently-supported pendulum. But, with the present
level of knowledge in this area, there did not appear to be
much to be gained by considering them separately.
102
CHAPTER SIX
THE HIERONYMOUS MACHINE
Basic Description:
The Hieronymous Machine is covered by United States

Patent No. 2,482,773 granted September 27, 1949 to Dr.
Thomas Galen Hieronymous, Advanced Sciences Research
& Development, Inc., P.O. Box 127, Lakemont, Georgia
30552. It is also covered by Canadian patent 486,008 and
British patent 663,978.
103
According to Dr. Hieronymous, the device is

intended for the detection and analysis of minerals utilizing
a new aspect of the physical universe discovered by him
which he calls "eloptic radiation."
The machine uses a simple pickup coil, an optical
prism rotated as a tuning device, an electronic amplifier, and
an output sensing device best described as a "tactile
detector."
The basic elements of a Hieronymous machine are
shown in Figure 6-1. The mineral or metal sample is placed
next to a pickup coil which is attached to a terminal inside
the machine. "Eloptic radiation" from the terminal is
refracted through a rotating prism where it is picked up by
another probe. This "signal" is then transmitted through an
electronic amplifier circuit whose output goes to the
detector, a coil of wire located underneath a flat plate of
glass, lucite, plexiglas, polystyrene, or other plastic.
The operator places the "sample" next to the pickup
coil, turns a knob which rotates the prism as well as a
graduated dial, and strokes the flat plate of the tactile
detector with their fingertips until the surface of the plate
"feels different." At this point, the machine is "tuned" and, if
the dial has been pre-calibrated so that the dial setting for
various elements is known in advance, the operator can
determine the presence of that element in the sample.
.04
The Hieronymous Machine
The Hieronymous machine described herein can be

used to determine the nature of the elements in the sample.
A more advanced version described in the basic patent will
permit the operator to determine the relative percentage of
each element in the sample by means of an attenuator circuit
not described herein. Therefore, the Hieronymous machine
is basically an analytical device.
However, it does not appear to operate according to
any known principles of physics.
In fact, it does not appear that it should work at all.
But it does.
The fact that it does indeed work has been inde-
pendently confirmed by many investigators who have built
the device according to written instructions without personal
instruction from or contact with the inventor and who have
obtained independent results confirming the inventor-
discoverer's claims.
The Hieronymous machine is not one of the
simpler strange devices. To build it in this form requires
tools, parts, and some knowledge of modern electronics (but
not much if you can follow instructions). However, there are
simpler versions of the device that will be discussed in detail
later.
105
As noted above, this device was first patented by Dr.

Hieronymous in 1949, which indicates that he had been
working on it for several years, perhaps as much as a decade
or more, prior to that date. There appears to be no prior
patented art utilizing his hypothesis of "eloptic radiation."
Full details of the Hieronymous machine were
published in Volume LVII Number 4, the June 1956 issue of
Astounding Science Fiction magazine with an illustrated
science article written by the editor, John W. Campbell, Jr.
There have been no published articles in national or
international magazines available to the general public since
that date. However, Dr. Hieronymous is a founding member
and a director of the United States Psychotronics
Association which meets regularly to discuss and
demonstrate devices such as the Hieronymous machine and
which publishes material on these devices.
The publication of the details of the Hieronymous

machine in Astounding Science Fiction magazine in 1956
and 1957 prompted me to construct one because all of my
academic education and my in-the-field training and
experience told me that the device couldn't possibly work
106
Figure 6-1: Block diagram,

Hieronymous machine.
at all. I had been corresponding with John W.Campbell, Jr.

since I was also writing science fiction stories during the
evenings; I was employed full-time as a general engineer at
the U.S. Naval Ordnance Missile Test Center at what was
then White Sands Proving Ground (now the White Sands
Missile Range), New Mexico. In the course of this
correspondence with Campbell, we engaged in the usual sort
of intellectual techno-scientific argument that Campbell
enjoyed instigating. I believed Campbell to be wrong in
several matters, and the opportunity to prove him to be
wrong in the case of the Hieronymous machine was too
great to ignore.
I was greatly surprised when my Hieronymous
machine worked exactly as Campbell had written in both the
magazine and in letters. I was a confirmed skeptic (and still
am), yet here was a device that worked
107
as predicted, and I had built it from written instructions and

without any personal contact whatsoever with the inventor.
In the ensuing months, I learned that my wife could
not get a response from the device (she can't work detector
rods, either), but more than 80% of the rocket and guided
missile scientists and engineers at White Sands who tried it
got a response. The most interesting response came from Dr.
Clyde W. Tombaugh, the astronomer who had discovered
the planet Pluto in 1930 and who was at that time involved
in searching for small natural satellites of the Earth. Dr.
Tombaugh reported, "The change in touch sensation on the
plate is there, but to me it is just at the threshold of
sensation, much like seeing fine details on planetary
surfaces."
I have since tried my Hieronymous machine with
many people and have confirmed that between 80% and
90% of those who try it get a response.
In all cases, I have not instructed the operator
concerning what sort of change could be anticipated in the
feeling of the tactile detector plate since this could amount to
suggestion that might prejudice the results. The instructions
given are as follows: "Tune it like a radio by turning this
knob. Stroke this plastic plate here. Tune it until the plate
feels different. Don't worry; you won't get an electric shock
because that plastic is thick
108
enough to be insulation against more than 50,000 volts.

Don't ask me what it should feel like. Tune it and tell me.
People have reported that the plate suddenly felt
slick, that it felt sort of like tar, that it felt like someone had
suddenly spilled orange juice over it, that it suddenly felt
like it was covered with thick grease that was slippery yet
sticky, that it felt furry like a kitten, that it suddenly became
warm, that the plate suddenly began to tingle, or that its
shape suddenly felt like it had changed from a flat plate to a
bowl. No two people appear to get precisely the same
reaction. One operator removed her fingers from the plate
with the comment that it suddenly felt like her fingers were
about to become immovably stuck to or glued to the plate.
Some reactions have been strong. Others, like that of Dr.
Tombaugh, were on the threshold of sensation.
From time to time, I have had to perform main-
tenance on a Hieronymous machine. These details will be
discussed later.
Construction of a Hieronymous machine as

described in this chapter requires a great deal of ingenuity,
access to a good electronics parts store, a reasonably well-
equipped workshop, the necessary tools, and skill in building
things. However, it can be built in less than ten
109
hours. It was much easier to build a Hieronymous machine

back in 1960 or 1970 because people then were not used to
building things from kits in which all parts were supplied
and complete, step-by-step instructions included.
Furthermore, many mail order electronic parts supply
companies have gone out of business since 1975, making it
difficult for enthusiasts to build electronic equipment if they
don't live in a city or town with a good electronic parts store.
Unfortunately, Tandy Radio Shack doesn't carry many of the
necessary components, although many parts can be located
there. There are two ways to locate a well-stocked electronic
parts firm: (a) check the Yellow Pages of the telephone book
under the category "Electronic Equipment & Supplies ~
Dealers," or (b) find a local amateur radio operator or "ham"
and ask him.
The original Hieronymous patent describes an
electronic device using vacuum tubes. It's increasingly
difficult to obtain the necessary parts for vacuum tube
electronic equipment these days because nearly all electronic
gear now uses either transistors or integrated circuit chips.
However, based on the author's experience, it shouldn't
make any difference whatsoever whether the Hieronymous
machine is made with vacuum tubes, transistors, or
integrated circuit "op amps" (operational amplifiers).
110
An analysis of the Hieronymous patent circuitry

indicates that the electronic amplifier is a "broad-band"
voltage amplifier with a circuit gain of 20 to 100. Since it's a
voltage amplifier, it cannot produce enough radio frequency
energy to even warm the fingertips, much less cause any
shock hazard in the well-insulated tactile detector.
Furthermore, the original patent shows a system that has an
operating frequency from about 500 kiloHerrz to 1.5
megaHertz, which is roughly the frequency spectrum of AM
broadcasting (500 kHz to 1500 kHz). This frequency range
presents absolutely no problem whatsoever to nearly all
modern transistors and integrated circuit op amps.
Although it may seem that it's no help at this point,
nothing about the Hieronymous machine seems to be critical
from an electronics standpoint. You can build a perfectly
good Hieronymous machine almost by "freelancing it,"
building any sort of amplifier system providing that the
basic elements of the block diagram of Figure 6-1 are
followed.
The pickup coil can be wound with 7 turns per inch
of #18 wire on the 1.5-inch diameter cardboard core from an
exhausted roll of bathroom tissue. Make the coil about 2
inches long. Solder the leads of a 0.01 microfarad capacitor
across the coil to produce a pickup sensor resonant at about
500 kHz.
111
The "eloptic shields" shown in Figure 6-1 can be

either aluminum sheet or polyfoam; it doesn't seem to make
much difference.
Finding the prism and its rotating dial may be the
most difficult task of making the Hieronymous machine.
Any sort of small glass prism will do. Edmund Scientific
Corporation (101 East Gloucester Pike, Barrington, NJ
08007) has a large selection of glass prisms available in a
wide variety of sizes and at low cost. Get an Edscorp catalog
and order the prism that's the right size for your
Hieronymous machine. You will have to find the place
where radio hams buy their parts in order to get a " National
Velvet Vernier Dial" assembly upon which to mount the
prism and thereby turn it so that its position can be read and
noted on the vernier dial.
Although the original vacuum tube amplifier circuit
of the original Hieronymous machine is shown in Figure 6-
2, you may find it easier to build the transistorized version
shown in Figure 6-3 or even the op amp version shown in
Figure 6-4. Parts for the various versions are available from
electronic supply stores. The advantage of the transistorized
and op amp versions is that they can be operated using
flashlight batteries for power, eliminating the need to build a
250-volt DC power supply required for the vacuum tube
version.
The output of the amplifier is wired to the detector,
which is another component you'll have to make from
scratch. (One of the difficulties of technical pioneer-
112
ing is the fact that you have to build so much from scratch
because there isn't much in the way of prefabricated
equipment available.)
The detector can be made from two sheets of 1/4
inch thick polystyrene or lucite plastic which can be
obtained from a plastic supply house (although some hobby
shops may have materials that can be substituted). Again,
find such a company in the Yellow Pages of the telephone
book. Two sheets of plastic, 4 inches square, are held apart
by a piece of cardboard 1 inch in diameter. Using plastic
cement or (carefully!) one of the acryloni-trile super glues,
assemble the two plastic sheets on either side of the central
cardboard core. When the cement has thoroughly set, wind a
coil of about 40 turns of #22 enameled copper wire in a
spiral around the core.
One side of the coil assembly becomes the tactile
detector plate. The output of the amplifier is connected to
the coil.
The entire assembly should be built into an alu-
minum or plastic chassis box. These are available at Tandy
Radio Shack or an electronic parts store. Again, since there
are many ways to assemble a Hieronymous machine and
many different size boxes available, make it your own way.
The only tiling to remember is the relationship between the
various components should be maintained as shown in the
block diagram. The position of the components with respect
to one another doesn't seem to be as important as
maintaining the integrity of
113
the relationships between the basic parts. It should be

assembled in such a way that the pickup coil is on the side of
the box so that samples can easily be placed near it. The
tuning knob should be in a position where it can easily be
turned with one hand while the tactile detector plate is in a
horizontal position where it can easily be stroked with the
fingers of the other hand at the same time.
Figure 6-2: Circuit schematic, vacuum tube

amplifier for a Hieronymous machine.
114
Figure 6-3: Circuit schematic, transistorized

Figure 6-4: Circuit schematic, integrated circuit

115
Obtain several pieces of metal of different types. An

aluminum kitchen pan can be one. A large bolt can be
another.
Place the Hieronymous machine on a table and turn
it on. Put the metallic sample next to the pickup coil.
With one hand, slowly turn the tuning knob.
With the other hand, gently stroke the surface of the
tactile detector with the fingertips.
Turn the tuning knob and stroke the tactile detector
until the surface of the detector plate feels different.
Turn the tuning knob back and forth to "zero in" on
the tuning point where the different feeling of the detector
plate is at its maximum.
Note the reading of the vernier dial in a notebook
for future reference.
Several points on the tuning dial may cause the
detector plate to feel different. Note the dial reading of each
point.
Try it again with a different sample next to the
pickup coil.
Note that these instructions specifically state that the
surface of the detector plate will feel "different." We have
done a reasonably good job in developing the English
language to describe sight and sound sensations. Describing
a tactile sensation is extremely difficult. It's similar to
attempting to describe the sensations of taste or
116
smell. Try describing the difference in flavor between a
peach and a banana, for example. On the other hand, we can
describe the appearance of a peach well enough to
differentiate it from a banana.
As noted above, many people report widely different
types of tactile sensations when using the Hieronymous
machine.
Experiments:
One of the first experiments that should be carried

out with the Hieronymous machine is to calibrate it. It
should exhibit a different dial reading for each different
element in a sample. Therefore, obtain samples of rea-
sonably pure elements such as iron, aluminum, copper, zinc,
silver, gold, etc. Most iron items these days are alloys of two
or more elements in addition to iron. The same holds true of
aluminum. Reasonably pure copper is available in the form
of copper piping. Coins should not be used as calibration
sources because today they are often made of alloys rather
than pure copper or silver. A piece of sterling silver
tableware can be used, and 24-carat gold jewelry will
provide a good calibration point for gold.
Each material should exhibit the maximum tactile
sensation at a given place on the dial. These should be
recorded for future reference.
117
Each person should experience the maximum tactile

sensation for, say, gold at the same place on the dial as other
people.
Once the machine is calibrated, a series of experi-
ments can be run by covering the dial and by hiding the
sample inside a cardboard box. The operator should
continue to obtain a maximum tactile signal at the same
place on the dial even though the operator cannot see the
dial or know what the sample consists of.
Electrical measurements should be made during the
operation of the Hieronymous machine. The electrical
characteristics at various places in the circuitry should be
monitored with both oscilloscopes and high-impedance
voltmeters. Some experimenters have reported that there
were no changes detectable in the electrical characteristics
of the circuitry when operators were getting maximum
responses from the tactile detector. This needs to be
confirmed by several investigators. I've confirmed it, but
much better and more sensitive instruments exist today than
when I did it in 1957.
Dr. Hieronymous claims that his "eloptic radiations"
can be captured by a photograph and that the detector will
react to a photograph of the sample just as it does to the
sample itself. Without reporting on my own results in such
an experiment, this is one that should be carried out because
on initial presentation it sounds far more impossible and
implausible than the Hieronymous machine itself.
118
The Hieronymous machine should be tried by a

large number of people because only 80% to 90% of those
who try it will get any response whatsoever from it. The
collection of data on who can operate it and who cannot is a
valid experiment, especially if it is carried out in such a way
that each person is given exactly the same instructions prior
to trying it. It may also be useful to record the operator's
verbal opinions after the initial operating attempt is made,
not before. It may be useful to know who steadfastly refused
to believe that the machine would or could work before it
was tried, and who among this group actually got a response.
The Hieronymous machine forms the starting point
for an entire series of fascinating experiments regarding the
effects of prior opinions and beliefs upon the results. Many
people approach a device such as the Hieronymous machine
with an open mind. How many of these get a response?
Others approach it with skepticism, and many of these get a
response which surprises them. Others approach it with the
attitude that it must be a fraud and cannot work...and it
doesn't. There are many ways to conduct such an
experiment.
The manner in which the Hieronymous machine is
presented to the novice operator may have a great deal to do
with the nature and strength of the response. For example, if
it is presented in an environment that appears to be scientific
and technical (i.e., in laboratory-like surroundings or in a
science fair, for example), it may
119
elicit a higher percentage of responses than if it is exhibited

in connection with astrology, the occult, or mysticism.
The Hieronymous machine is an excellent project
for a science fair because such an exhibition permits the
collection of a large amount of operational data from
spectators.
In fact, the Hieronymous machine may be far more
important and valuable as the vehicle for learning how to
design, carry out, and evaluate experiments.
Mine didn't until I found the badly soldered

electrical connection. Check for this.
Again, the continuing advice for this sort of re-
sponse is: Try it on someone else. Or try it tomorrow.
Or give it to someone else to use and to experiment
with the proviso that data be kept and reported.
The Hieronymous machine appears to work for such
a large percentage of people who try it that it's very unusual
for a person not to get a response from it.
120
Hypotheses:
In order to build and operate a Hieronymous

machine successfully, it is necessary to use the fundamental
proposition of the scientific method: In studying a
hypothesis, it must be accepted wholeheartedly and the
experimenter must follow through without quibbling. The
existence of Dr. Hieronymous' eloptic radiation must be
accepted as a working hypothesis regardless whether or not
you believe it to be utter nonsense. You have the perfect
right to be skeptical and to reserve judgement, but you do
not have the right to reserve action on the logical
consequences of the hypothesis while you're claiming to
make a test of it. If the test fails, you may then claim the
working hypothesis is invalid. If the test works, you can then
either accept the hypothesis or attempt to form a hypothesis
of your own. In both of the latter situations, the hypothesis
must not invalidate what we already know to be true and
workable, and it must even predict some phenomenon that
would not otherwise have been anticipated.
Dr. Hieronymous designed and built this machine to
apply his hypothesis of "eloptic radiation" to the detection
and analysis of minerals. He states that eloptic radiations are
emitted continuously by all elements, that each element
emits a different sort of eloptic radiation, and that these
eloptic radiations can be manipulated interchangeably either
as optical phenomena or electric
121
currents. His device operates on the principle, he states, that
the eloptic radiations can be picked up by electrical
components, passed through lenses and prisms, and
amplified electrically.
My own opinion based on building and testing
several different types of Hieronymous machines is that Dr.
Hieronymous' hypothesis is incorrect. Or perhaps his
terminology is imprecise. To me as a person educated in
physics, " radiation" is a specifically defined physical
phenomenon having specific characteristics involving wave-
length, frequency, propagation speed, energy content, ability
to function either as a particle or as a wave, and precisely
defined relationship with matter. It may also behave in
accordance with the principles of quantum mechanics. The
principles of "eloptic radiation" conflict with many of these
known, proven, and used principles of radiation. For
example, the tactile detector of the Hieronymous machine
makes absolutely no sense either in terms of the eloptic
radiation hypothesis or standard physics. Therefore, my
hunch is that whatever makes the Hieronymous machine
work is not radiation.
But I don't know what it is.
Conclusions:
The Hieronymous machine works even though we

may not understand why.
122
Dr. Hieronymous has a valid patent on a device that

is truly scientific in nature. By this, it is meant that a person
reading the patent and following its statements can construct
a device which performs as predicted in the patent.
Furthermore, others who have built the device can describe
it in writing in such a way that third parties who have seen
neither the patent nor have had individual contact can also
repeat the experiment successfully. There is no mysticism
about it. One does not have to seek the personal
enlightenment of gurus "skilled in the art" nor undertake
mystical or magic activities in order to achieve the predicted
results.
Furthermore, although the "eloptic radiation"
hypothesis of Dr. Hieronymous may or may not be valid, the
device apparently operates on a new principle that has been
discovered and applied by Dr. Hieronymous. But that new
scientific principle is still unknown because it probably is
not the one he discusses in his patent.
The Hieronymous machine may or may not be
useful as an quantitative and qualitative mineral analyzer,
but it is certainly a device that is amenable to
experimentation by both amateurs and professionals alike in
attempts to gain an understanding of how and why it
operates, which in turn may shed new light on hitherto
unsuspected new fields of scientific knowledge.
The Hieronymous machine, like many other mind
devices, reveals that with all our knowledge we still don't
know everything there is to know about the Universe.
123
Like many other devices, it will stimulate people to try to

learn these new secrets. And, in common with these other
devices, it shows that there is still plenty of room for
progress in science.
Most of all, it's an enormous challenge to those with
inquiring minds.
124
CHAPTER SEVEN
SYMBOLIC MACHINES
This chapter is a departure from the rigorous format of

the previous chapters because the devices and experi-
ments to be discussed here and in the remainder of the
book are of a somewhat different nature than the amaz-
ing mind machines discussed thus far.
Furthermore, it's necessary to break the continu-
ity in order to present some background information
and describe some experiments that are very unusual and
highly controversial but which tend to confirm some of
the hypotheses that follow.
125
It's also necessary because the amazing mind

machines of the remainder of the book are even more
unbelievable than those discussed thus far.
Be prepared for and be advised that what is dis-
cussed henceforth is pure and simple magic, keeping in
mind Arthur C. Clarke's admonition and Robert A.
Heinlein's observation.
It is not witchcraft, and one should not be afraid of
the modern consequences of the instructions (which are not
commandments) of Exodus 22:18: "Thou shalt not suffer a
witch to live." Apparently, the old Hebrew word meaning
"poisoner" was mis-translated as "witch.' And it's probably
not a bad idea to get rid of people who run around poisoning
other people. But if we do indeed agree that (a) magic is a
technology we don't yet understand, (b) we do not yet know
everything there is to know about the Universe, (c) the
Universe operates according to orderly principles that can be
discovered and learned, and (d) the primary task of "science"
is to make a series of successively more accurate
approximations to reality, then it must follow that there is no
such thing as witchcraft, sorcery, and the "arcane arts," only
science that isn't science yet.
But what we are talking about, is not mysticism
because it can be described in the English language, it does
not require personal training or contact to learn, and it can be
duplicated by a large percentage of the population.
Therefore, although it is not mysticism, it is
126
Symbolic Machines
still magic because we do not know the scientific principles
involved nor understand the technology. This doesn't make
what we are to discuss any the less real.
Thus far, this book has required an open mind of
the reader. Henceforth, it demands it. One of our themes
has been, "You don't have to believe or have faith, but you
cannot simply snort 'impossible' and turn away. You are
challenged to test and draw conclusions based on that solid
data rather than from emotional reactions based on what
someone else may have told you is true."
The purpose of this chapter is to address, attempt to
prove, and to discuss the following:
Hypothesis Number One:
Symbols have real, physical effects on human

beings.
Hypothesis Number Two:
Relationships between symbols can change or alter

the nature and intensity of these effects.
Note: One does not have to be symbol-minded to
conduct the experiments that will either prove or disprove
the validity of these two hypotheses.
127
For untold centuries, people have believed in the

power of symbols and the relationships between symbols.
The emotional effect of symbols on people is real.
People have killed other people because of symbols or in the
process of defending symbols. Some examples of this sort of
symbol: the cross, the star and crescent, the stars and stripes,
the hammer and sickle, the double-headed eagle, Britannia,
John Bull, Uncle Sam, Mother Russia, the rising sun, the
swastika, la belle France, the stars and bars... One of these
symbols or its equivalent is certainly capable of stirring
emotion within you.
People work for symbols - i.e., pieces of paper
bearing the symbol $, for example. A piece of paper with the
symbols "$1000" on it along with other authenticating
symbols will certainly give you power over other people in
such a way that they will willingly do what you want them
to do. The same sort of power resides in a rectangular piece
of embossed sheet plastic, often coated with a strip of
selectively magnetized iron oxide material, which can be
carried by the dozens in your pocket or purse. Can any
voodoo rite exercise this sort of power as regularly or as
reliably with little or no training on the part of the person in
possession of the symbol?
128
Symbolic Machines
Figure 7-1: Left-handed spiral.
129
People believe in and depend upon symbols such as

the curious ones you are viewing on this page which, strung
together and given meaning in your mind, form verbal
words in your brain which in turn are symbols standing for
something real or unreal.
Symbols give people power over other people in
other ways, too. Few uniformed policemen or deputy sheriffs
would go on duty without their shield or star badges. Do you
realize all the power over the lives of people that a single
silver star on a shirt collar possesses, to say nothing of a
crimson flag with a single star flying from a short staff on
the fender of a car? Or three cloth chevrons sewn on both
sleeves of a shirt?
There are few barns owned by my Pennsylvania
Dutch relatives in Pennsylvania and Ohio, that do not bear
symbols which are repainted annually. No Portuguese dingy
or fishing trawler puts to sea without symbolic eyes painted
on both sides of the bow to ward off evil. Do they do any
good? That doesn't matter. What does matter is that people
believe those symbols have power, and because of that the
symbols indeed do: they have power over the people who
painted the symbols there in the first place.
The relationships between symbols are also very
powerful. If you don't think so, wait until your Cousin
George dies intestate and leaves a five million dollar estate.
What is your relationship on the company organizational
chart to the vice president and what power
130
Symbolic Machines
Figure 7-2: Right-handed spiral.
131
does that relationship, which exists only on paper, have over

your life? Which is closer to the United States, Great Britain
or Cuba? Diplomatic protocol officers have as their life
work the analysis of precisely such relationships. The
position and relationship to other symbols of the simple
mark "." (or "," in some countries) can make the difference
of orders of magnitude. There is no question about it: The
relationships of both symbols and the world are real and
have immense importance.
With this background in mind, let's conduct a few
experiments that tend to verify the physical power of
symbols over the human body.
Symbols and Physical Strength:
The purpose of this experiment is to demonstrate the

effect of two different but similar symbols on the physical
strength of the muscles of the body.
Any person can conduct this experiment, but it takes
two people to do it. There's nothing harmful about it, but it
can cause some long-term bursitis-like discomfort if the
experiment isn't, in effect, "turned off."
The materials required are amazingly simple and
readily available.
The procedure is also simple and can be conducted
by anyone. Furthermore, the experiment is a valid scientific
one because it can be described in writing,
132
Symbolic Machines
carried out with no prior training, and produces vivid and

repeatable results in 99.999999999% of all cases. (There is
nothing in the Universe that can be counted on 100% except
death and taxes, of course.) Statistical analysis isn't
necessary. However, like any experiment, even firmer results
can be obtained through the use of double-blind techniques.
On a sheet of paper, draw with a ball-point pen or a
pencil a spiral such as shown in Figure 7-1. Accuracy, size,
or artistry are not important. What is important is the
direction of the spiral. As shown, it is a left-handed spiral.
On another sheet of paper, draw another spiral like
the one shown in Figure 7-2. Note that this is the mirror
image of the spiral of Figure 7-1. It is a right-handed spiral.
One person (the subject) stands and extends his/ her
arm (either arm may be used) horizontally out from the body
with the palm of the hand facing down. (Fig. 7-3)
The other person (the experimenter) stands facing
the subject, places one arm on the subject's shoulder and the
other arm on top of the subject's extended arm over the
wrist.
The experimenter then pushes down on the subject's
arm at the wrist. The subject must resist this force with the
muscles of the arm. The experimenter pushes down until his
actions overcome the resisting
133
muscle force of the subject. Both persons should note the

amount of force required to move the arm and to resist the
movement.
With his free hand, the subject now picks up the
piece of paper with the left-handed spiral drawn, on it and
holds the paper to his chest.
The muscle-force experiment is now repeated. It
should be slightly easier for the subject to resist the
downward force the experimenter is exerting on the
outstretched arm.
The subject then puts down the paper with the left-
handed spiral, picks up the paper with the right-handed
spiral, and holds the paper to his chest. The muscle-force
experiment is repeated.
The results are usually quite dramatic. The subject is
almost totally unable to resist the downward force being
applied to his arm by the experimenter.
For some reason unknown to us at this point in time,
the act of holding a left-handed spiral symbol against the
chest results in a weakening of the ability of the person to
resist a force being applied to the muscles of his body.
The experiment should be repeated by holding the
left-handed spiral again to the chest to confirm to both the
experimenter and subject that the apparent weakness was not
caused by fatigue brought about by the initial part
134
Symbolic Machines
Figure 7-3: Performing the

muscle strength test.
of the experiment. The reapplication of the left-handed

spiral symbol to the chest results in a regaining of the
muscle strength.
The experiment should also be repeated using
the subject's other arm, again to confirm that this phe-
nomenon doesn't depend upon using the right or the left
arm.
The results of this experiment are always striking.
Furthermore, they are repeatable.
135
The only caveat that applies to the experiment is

this: The final step in the experiment must be to "turn off"
whatever factor is weakening the arm muscles. The final step
must be to have the subject hold the left-handed spiral to his
chest while the experimenter repeats the arm displacement. I
discovered the hard way the consequences of performing the
right-handed spiral experiment last. Within a week, the
muscles of my arm became quite sore and I had trouble
raising my arm above the horizontal because of dull muscle
pains that I initially mistook for bursitis. When 1 mentioned
this to the experimenter who'd been working with me, we
realized what was probably taking place and then "turned
off" the experiment as described above. It was most dramatic
because the bursitis-like pain disappeared immediately. If
this is "psychosomatic" as many critics have claimed, it is
certainly the quickest, easiest, and cheapest way to get rid of
bursitis that I've ever encountered because that pain was as
real as any I've ever perceived.
Why does the holding of a scrawled symbol again
the chest produce such dramatic and striking results?
We don't know. It shouldn't work. But it does. It
qualifies in all respects along with the rest of the machines
herein as part of "protoscience," something which we can
demonstrate but cannot yet explain. In short, it is pure and
simple magic.
136
Symbolic Machines
The amount of force exerted on the subject's arm

can be both controlled and measured by using an experi-
mental device designed along the lines of a Nautilus
machine and instrumented with sensors which will measure
the exact forces involved. This can and should be done. It
may be done only by amateur experimenters because few if
any professional medical researchers are inclined to believe
that this is a real experiment.
The Sugar Test:
Another dramatic experiment can be conducted in

the same manner as the spiral experiment described above.
However, the symbols and the experimental
materials are different.
Instead of using the pieces of paper with symbols
drawn thereon, obtain a small package of cane or beet sugar
such as can be found in most restaurants. It doesn't make any
difference whether the material in the package is cane or
beet sugar. Both are basically dextrose.
Perform the initial arm displacement test with the
subject holding nothing.
Then perform the test again with the subject holding
the small package of sugar against his chest. (Note: Be sure
to "turn off" this test by holding a left-handed spiral symbol
against the chest and repeating the arm displacement.)
137
The results are as dramatic as the right-handed and

left-handed spiral symbol tests. The act of placing the
package of sugar against the chest acts in the same manner
as placing the right-handed spiral symbol against the chest.
Why?
We don't know. But we do know that the dextrose in
cane or beet sugar is a right-handed molecule.
The sugar test is a perfect experiment for double-
blind procedures. A test series can easily be devised using
unmarked but coded packets of identical size and appear-
ance, which contain sugar and a "placebo" material that
looks and feels like sugar but which is a non-handed
molecule. Neither the experimenter nor the subject should
know which is which. This series should determine whether
or not any pre-knowledge of the nature of material has any
effect upon the results.
Another series of experiments should be conducted
with only the experimenter knowing what is in each packet.
And yet another series with only the subject
knowing the contents.
The purpose of these experiments would be to
determine whether or not there is any suggestibility involved
or any information passing between experimenter and
subject by non-verbal or sub-treshold signals. Some people
may claim that the information is transmitted by thought
waves" or telepathy; if so, this is probably what
138
Symbolic Machines
is called both a "critical experiment" as well as an "elegant
experiment." If the design of the experiment is done in such
a way that non-verbal but visual/auditory signals can be
ruled out as causative factors, then it's probably the best
experiment yet devised to demonstrate telepathy. (Except the
"back scratching test" - i.e., if someone can always scratch
your back exactly where it itches without being told, it's
probably because of some manner of telepathy.)
However, I would be greatly surprised if telepathy
has anything to do with it. Occam's Razor must be applied.
There is probably a simpler explanation of hypothesis than
would be required if the totally unknown factor of telepathy
were postulated.
But I don't know what it is.
And I may be wrong in my honing of Occam's
Razor.
But three tilings are certain:
1. The spiral experiment is a dramatic demon-
stration of the physical effect of pure symbols on the muscle
strength of the human body.
2. All these experiments show that the relationship
between symbols and the human body is a factor. The
symbols and the sugar packet not held in close relationship
to the human body have no apparent effects, even though
they may be in plain view of both subject and experimenter
during the conduct of the tests. The symbols must be in
intimate physical relationship with the body.
139
3. These tests are of such a nature that they are
amenable to "rigorization", they involve methods and
procedures that can be instrumented for measurement of the
physical factors involved and designed to be conducted
under the most rigorous protocols. Mechanical devices can
be used to apply the required forces, eliminating the human
factor of the experimenter. The scope of these experiments
can be expanded - for example, do other muscles in the body
react in the same manner?
Some of the experiments are so simple in nature,
conduct, and protocols that they are prime candidates for
high school science fairs. Yet none of them are so complex
nor are any of their extensions or " rigorizations" so difficult
that they cannot be carried out by amateur investigators with
limited means. They can also be carried out, of course, by
professionals in research facilities. But, since the basic
knowledge of these experiments has been around for at least
several decades and since no professional organization has
yet looked into them, it seems unlikely that anyone except
amateurs will exhibit the willingness to undertake them.
These amateurs, of course, may well become the
non-amateur expert professionals of a totally new and
unanticipated field of scientific endeavor. Every field of
science was started by amateurs (by definition) and usually
with the scoffing (if not the opposition) of the established
professionals. The reasons are easy to discern. Many
professionals acquired their expertise at a young
140
Symbolic Machines
age and at great personal expense; many therefore will

unconsciously oppose anything which remotely threatens
their expertise and/or position. They would prefer to see
scientific progress made slowly and carefully in such a way
that it doesn't threaten them, that they can adapt to it, and
perhaps that they can be tenured or retired before their
expertise becomes obsolete.
But every great advance in mankind's knowledge of
the Universe has come about as the result of a bold, daring
generalization.
The "daring generalization" here is that symbols and
their relationships have a definite physical effect upon
human beings.
The amazing mind machines that will now be
discussed are further examples that tend to strengthen the
basic hypotheses stated earlier in this chapter.
What is different is that you don't have to believe in
anything in order to get them to work, just as belief played
absolutely no role in the simple physical experiments
described in this chapter. Belief apparently has little or
nothing to do with whether or not the devices work or the
experiments succeed. This is the most important factor that
separates what we are doing from mysticism.
However, the fact that it works and is apparently
real (if not understood) doesn't make it any the less puzzling,
frustrating, and/or disturbing.
141
142
CHAPTER EIGHT
THE SYMBOLIC HIERONYMOUS MACHINE
Basic Description:
This strange machine is strange indeed. It is a

Hieronymous machine consisting entirely of symbols
save for a few moving physical parts needed to rotate the
prism, the sensor coil, and the tactile detector. It is typical
of many inexplicable but operable devices made up of
symbols representing physical objects. These symbols
are arranged in the same relationship as the physical
143
devices in the original machine. It produces the same result

as the non-symbolic machine with about the same degree of
reliability and repeatability. Furthermore, it operates with no
apparent input of energy as energy is presently understood in
the physical sciences. However, it may not operate under
any of the presently-known principles of physical or
psychological sciences.
The symbolic Hieronymous machine consists of the
standard pickup coil or sensor of the non-symbolic machine,
the tactile detector plate, a means to rotate a symbolic prism
to tune the device, and all other elements of the machine
reduced to inked drawings on cardboard connected with
symbolic electrical wires made of thread. It is enclosed in a
standard electronics parts box. The model for use during
experiments also contains an AC power cable and plug, a
small transformer, a switch, and a pilot light, none of which
are connected to any of the symbolic circuitry inside the box.
The device behaves essentially as the original non-
symbolic Hieronymous machine does. Many people have
tried it and have gotten results fully equivalent to the results
obtained on the non-symbolic Hieronymous machine.
When John W. Campbell, Jr. began working in

1955-1956 with the original Hieronymous machine
described in Chapter Six, he discovered that it ceased to
144
The Symbolic Hieronymous Machine
work if a vacuum tube burned out - if the filament broke, if

the glass or metal envelope broke, or if the tube somehow
ceased to function effectively as an electronic device. He
also discovered that it wouldn't work if one of the wires
came un-soldered or broke.
But he accidentally discovered during an experi-
mental run with a volunteer subject that the Hieronymous
machine worked perfectly well even though he'd completely
forgotten to plug it into the 120-volt AC wall socket. In
other words, the Hieronymous machine would operate
without any power supply at all!
Campbell wrote, "I can't defend, or even describe,
the process by which I arrived at the hunch, 'These things
depend upon relationship-as-a-thing-in-itself.'" Campbell
then took that hunch as a postulate, did some deductive
thinking, and carried out some physical equipment tests. If
relationship only was involved, then the presence or absence
of a power supply in the Hieronymous machine should make
no difference because it wouldn't change the relationship of
the parts. But a burned-out tube or a broken connection
would make a difference; it would alter the relationship of
the parts.
He went directly to the purest form of this postulate.
He reasoned that the closer the experiment was to a pure
symbol, the less objective reality there would be and the
more nearly a perfectly pure relationship would exist. "The
letter A scratched in the mud is a symbol; it has precisely the
same symbolic properties as a letter A
145
made of reinforced concrete and standing forty feet high.

The material object structure has zero significance; only the
relationship pattern has meaning."
He built a Hieronymous machine leaving out most
of the material objects of the system by substituting symbols
which maintained the same relationship to one another.
Because he was also a realist and felt that the mind-set of
"impossible" or "possible" might strongly affect the initial
results a subject experienced, he added the totally non-
functional but equally totally misleading on-off switch and
pilot light. Externally, therefore, the symbolic Hieronymous
machine looked completely normal save for the unusual
tactile detector which, on the basis of his previous
experiments with the non-symbolic Hieronymous machine,
he knew that people would accept.
His first subject was his young daughter who'd
gotten results with the non-symbolic machine. She got a
response with the symbolic machine and reported a "tacky
feeling" at two points on the tuning dial. She was able to
retune to the same dial readings, plus or minus two percent,
on successive tries, even when her view of the dial was
blocked and the vernier returned to the zero point before
each trial run. After approximately a hundred additional
subjects had tried it, Campbell confirmed that the percentage
of subjects who got a reading was the same as with the non-
symbolic machine - approximately 80%. Additional data:
Children under the age of fifteen got consistently repeatable
results while professional re-
146
search scientists almost invariably got a clean, 100% no-

response record. Convinced mystics got wild responses all
over the dial.
Once a subject had gotten a response, Campbell
would open the machine and show them what was inside.
The most common reaction was, "Why, there's nothing
inside!" But nearly 90% of the subjects continued to get
responses even when they knew that the inside of the box
contained only symbolic components and that the pilot light
and "on-off" switch had absolutely no function whatsoever.
Campbell published the full instructions on how to
build a symbolic Hieronymous machine along with his
results and hypotheses in the February 1957 issue of
Astounding Science Fiction.
What was truly astounding was the resounding
silence that followed and has been maintained ever since.
No research laboratories have followed up on this discovery.
Perhaps some amateur researchers have carried on, but their
results have not seen general publication.
When I read the first Hieronymous Machine article

in the June 1956 issue of Astounding Science Fiction
magazine and built a non-symbolic Hieronymous machine,
the results I got were interesting because the machine
shouldn't have worked. Okay, I thought, the world is full of
weird machines that we really don't
147
understand yet, and 1 was intimately familiar with a lot of

them that went under the general title of rockets. But when I
read the February 1957 issue with Campbell's article on the
symbolic Hieronymous machine, that was too much for me.
Remember, I was educated as a physicist and trained in the
field as an engineer. The article was obviously a hoax. I
immediately set out to prove that it was a hoax by building a
symbolic Hieronymous machine myself. I carefully followed
the instructions given in Campbell's article.
It didn't work on the first try. I was about to write it
off when I decided that there was something wrong with the
circuit. There was no provision for a filament heater power
supply for the vacuum tube symbol. So I added a symbolic
filament inside the symbolic tube and "wired" it
symbolically to a symbolic filament battery.
I was then hugely surprised when my symbolic
Hieronymous machine worked!
My wife Barbara could get no response from it. But
about 80% of my scientific and engineering colleagues did
at White Sands Proving Ground and at the New Mexico
College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts.
I kept the machine and still have it. I take it out from
time to time to try it on a new and unsuspecting subject. I've
encountered two fascinating and inexplicable problems: (a)
every couple of years, I must re-ink the battery symbols
because the symbolic batteries appear to go "dead," and (b) I
have to re-ink the vacuum tube symbol every ten years to
put a "new and fresh" tube
148
Figure 8-1: The author's symbolic Hieronymous

machine built in 1956. It still works.
But why does it work in the first place?
in the system. My solid-state versions haven't been in

operation long enough to have encountered any failures
of the "circuit chips" which, if my computer is any typical
example, will exhibit outstanding reliability and long life
exemplary of solid-state electronic components in the
real world.
149
The symbolic Hieronymous machine is easier to construct

than one of the full-blown hardware types. However,
hardware is required:
1. An aluminum or plastic electronics component
box.
2. A National Velvet Vernier Dial of the sort used in
the standard Hieronymous machine.
3. A 4-inch by 5-inch piece of polystyrene or lucite
("Plexiglas") plastic sheet for the tactile detector plate.
4. A pickup coil - this can be wound as several turns
of #18 AWG solid wire to make a simple air-core coil.
5. A small triangular-shaped piece of clear plastic to
serve as a symbolic prism.
6. Various and sundry mounting and assembly
hardware - nuts and bolts, standoffs, insulators, etc.
If you wish to include the pilot light and "on-off'
switch, the following additional materials will be needed: a
single-pole single-throw toggle switch, a 12-volt power
transformer, a 12-volt panel-mounted pilot light and bulb,
and an AC line cord and plug, plus mounting hardware.
The symbolic circuitry can be inked onto white
cardboard or Crescent No. 201 Illustration Board (or
equivalent). The circuit board and the tactile detector's
150
coil can be cut out using a sharp modeling knife. Ordinary

sewing thread may be used to connect the circuit board to
the tactile detector coil board.
The precise size and shape of the symbolic com-
ponents are not important. The material used in making the
symbolic parts is not important. Workable models have been
built from cardboard, plastic, vinyl tiles, sheet metal, and a
host of other materials. Tiny pocket-sized machines have
been built. The actual electronic circuits used don't seem to
be important; a multi-staged transis-
Figure 8-2:
Symbolic Hieronymous machine's vacuum tube
amplifier circuit board. Drawing is full-sized for
author's machine, but size isn't important.
Following the drawing accurately from a
symbolic point of view seems to be critical.
151
tor amplifier seems to work as well as a single-transistor

unit. The precise type of symbolic op-amp circuit is ap-
parently irrelevant. The only important factor is the rela-
tionship between the components plus the fact that oper-
able circuits must be used - if actual physical electronic
circuits were built using actual hardware and the circuit
diagrams used in the symbolic machine, the physical
circuits would indeed work as amplifiers.
I have seen an operable symbolic Hieronymous
machine inked on the back of a 2-inch square of bath-
room tile with the slick fired-enamel surface of the tile
serving as the tactile detector.
Figure 8-3: Symbolic Hieronymous machine's

transistorized amplifier circuit board for the
"modern" solid-state version.
152
Figure 8-4: Symbolic Hieronymous machine's

integrated circuit amplifier board for the
latest state-of-the-art version.
So it doesn't seem to matter what you use to make

it, how big you make it, or how you put it together just as
long as the relationship between the symbolic parts re-
mains the same.
Figure 8-6: Inside the author's symbolic
Hieronymous machine showing placement of the prism
and amplifier board. Transfomer provides 12-volt power
for functionless "pilot light" because the device is "bat-
tery powered."
153
Figure 8-5: Detector coil layout drawing of the

author's symbolic Hieronymous machine. Neither
the number of turns nor the direction seem to be
critical. Dashed line is "ground" symbol.
The operating instructions for the symbolic

Hieronymous machine are the same as those for the
physical component Hieronymous machine ("the origi-
nal Hieronymous machine").
Experiments:
The symbolic Hieronymous machine can be used

for a wide variety of experiments.
154
Figure 8-6: Inside the author's symbolic

Hieronymous machine showing placement of the
prism and amplifier board. Transformer provides
12-volt power for functionless "pilot light"
because the device is "battery powered."
Some of these experiments can be done with the

internal symbolic systems of the machine itself since this
form of Hieronymous machine can be quickly and easily
modified.
For example, various sorts of symbolic transistor-
ized amplifier circuits should be tried ~ common base,
common emitter, common collector, PNP, NPN, direct-
155
coupled, wide-band, and other sorts of transistor amplifier

circuits can be inked onto plug-in boards to permit quick
change.
Various sorts of operational amplifiers and other
integrated circuit diagrams can be tested.
When it comes to testing the machine on human
subjects, you may wish to gather data on how many people
get responses when a dummy "on-off switch and pilot light
are used versus how many get a response when a "self-
contained battery powered" version is used.
A very critical experiment needs to be done and
verified by a large number of experimenters. Basically, it
amounts to this: To what level of simplicity in terms of
symbols can the Hieronymous machine be reduced before it
doesn't work any more? Can box symbols be used to indicate
circuits (the "black box" approach). I have done this myself,
but I don't wish to affect the results of experiments by
indicating the level to which I was able to reduce a
Hieronymous machine before it stopped working for me.
Remember: My original symbolic Hieronymous machine
would not work for me until I had satisfied, in my own
electronics-trained mind, that there was a proper battery
symbol for the symbolic vacuum tube filament. I "knew" that
a vacuum tube wouldn't work without a heated filament.
That obviously affected my ability to get a response. But, on
the other hand, I had built the machine. The absence of the
filament battery and filament symbol should not have had
any effect whatsoever on anyone operating the machine who
did
156
Figure 8-7: The other side of the interior of the

author's symbolic Hieronymous machine
showing placement of the spiral coil underneath
the plastic detector plate and the connection be-
tween the amplifier and the coil boards using
symbolic wires made from black thread.
not know what was inside the box! Campbell's original

symbolic Hieronymous machine without a vacuum tube
filament and battery worked fine for him and for the
people that were his subjects.
157
As originally pointed out by Campbell, professional

research scientists in physics and chemistry had an almost
perfect zero score in getting any response from the symbolic
Hieronymous machine, even when they didn't know what
was inside it.
If you build a symbolic Hieronymous machine and
cannot get it to work for you, you may have fallen victim to
this unknown and un-named syndrome. Maybe it just won't
work for you, period.
The first test is, of course, to try it on someone else,
preferably a child or a person who isn't a professional
researcher. In other words, try it on someone who doesn't
already "know" in the back of his/her mind that such a
device, no matter what's inside the box, can't possibly work
and is probably a hoax or a joke.
Be exceedingly careful in running experiments with
voluntary subjects lest you provide them with clues or hints
as to what you think the response should be, or what results
you might like them to get. People will sometimes (more
often than not) work very hard to produce the sort of results
someone else wants or that they've determined that someone
else wants.
If you don't get responses from anyone, or if you
want to check to make sure you've built the device properly
in the first place, go back and make sure that the
relationships between the symbolic parts are secure and as
they should be. Check to make sure that your pen
158
hasn't skipped and made an incomplete line while drawing

the circuit diagrams. Check the "polarity" of the symbolic
batteries and solid-state devices; you may have inadvertently
switched battery polarity so that a PNP or NPN transistor
symbol is wired in backwards and therefore couldn't work if
the symbolic circuit were used as a map to construct the
"real" physical circuit. Check to make sure that the threads
used as symbolic wires are secure and attached; make sure
they aren't touching one another and thereby symbolically
"shorting out" each other. Change the orientation of the
symbolic plastic prism by ninety degrees, test, and if no
response is achieved, rotate it another ninety degrees.
In my device, the symbolic battery went "dead" after
several years as "real' batteries are wont to do. I got my
device working again by re-inking the battery symbol,
thereby "recharging" or "replacing" the "dead" symbolic
battery.
As a last resort, give the machine to an acquaintance
and ask them to run experiments on other people without
your foreknowledge of who, what, and where. The results
should be interesting. To what extent were you affecting the
performance of the machine, if you had any effect at all.
And if so, why?
There is no reason why the symbolic Hieronymous
machine shouldn't work for at least some subjects, even if it
won't work for you. Data on who can and can't get a
response should be kept. It should be correlated with
personality and mood data of the subject.
159
We're plowing very fresh and very unusual ground

here. With the symbolic Hieronymous machine, we really
don't yet know what the important parameters are or what
measurements are important. Therefore, take as much data
as seems to be relevant.
We need some sort of organization or society,
perhaps computer networked, that can collect the experi-
mental results from amateur investigators and develop a
nationwide data base for experiments with thne symbolic
Hieronymous machine...and the other amazing mind
machines discussed in this book. But you organize it, not me.
If I organize it, it will be tainted from the beginning because
it may be claimed that I put it together in order to sell this
book. You do it; I'll be there to help.
Hypotheses:
Dr. T. Galen Hieronymous, the inventor of the

original Hieronymous machine, has developed a hypothesis
relating to the rationale for his device that invokes the
concept of "eloptic radiation" as discussed in the previous
chapter dealing with the Hieronymous machine.
The symbolic Hieronymous machine pretty well
demolishes the "eloptic radiation" hypothesis. No known
form of "radiation" and no aspect of the Universe that we
currently define as "radiation" could possibly be in-
160
voked to explain why symbolic marks and surrogates can

cause an apparent physical change in a plastic plate that
would be sensed by a human being.
As remarked previously, radiation is a sharply
defined class of entity having definite characteristics and
relationships with energy, which in turn can be converted
back and forth as many forms of energy ~ heat, light, etc.
Waves and radiations and particles cannot be
invoked in any hypothesis relating to the symbolic
Hieronymous machine.
Occam's Razor would quickly trim any hypothesis
based on extrasensory perception (ESP), "mental radiations,"
"thought waves," or even suggestibility. If the operation of
the Hieronymous machine can indeed be explained by any of
these hypothetical causes, it is therefore the first and most
powerful of the instruments to be used in parapsychological
research. If it does operate because of the subconscious
mind, telepathy, or even suggestibility, it is a powerful tool
for psychological research and should therefore immediately
be seized upon and put to work there. But it hasn't. And it's
been around long enough for the original patent protection to
have expired.
Details of both types of devices have been published in
a magazine with more than 100,000 circulation on a
worldwide basis. Dr. Hieronymous himself was not the
typical inventor who wished to maintain control of all rights
to his invention; in connection with the original
161
magazine article on the Hieronymous machine, he publicly

gave permission for investigators to build and investigate it.
Therefore, no one can give as an excuse that the machine
was (a) obscure because publication, if any, was in private
journals that weren't widely circulated, or (b) too tightly
controlled by the inventor, a factor that prohibited serious
investigators from looking into it for fear of legal action on
the part of the inventor. None of these two factors are true.
Nor can the operation of either Hieronymous
machines be easily fobbed off or explained away as a hoax.
It has operated successfully for far too many people.
Hieronymous machines of both types have been built and
operated by people who have had nothing more to follow
and learn from than the printed words and illustrations in a
magazine. Hieronymous machines have been built and
operated by high school students in science fairs as well as
high-technology engineers (and a few physical scientists).
It is patently apparent that we are here dealing with
a totally new and formerly unsuspected aspect of the
Universe.
I do not know what it is, and I cannot describe it to
you.
But I can make some WAGs (Wildly Assumed
Guesses) concerning it because one must have somewhere to
start. I will probably be proven wrong. But in
162
displacing my WAG, someone will have to come up with a

hypothesis, and it should be a testable hypothesis. My guess
is based upon data.
With both Hieronymous machines, I submit that we
are dealing with devices that are definitely not physical
science devices.
The physical power of pure symbols can be physi-
cally demonstrated and was in the previous chapter.
The Hieronymous machine is capable of being built
and operated on a purely symbolic basis. Therefore, it is not
a physical sciences device.
We are working on the level of pure symbolism. A
symbol is what it is because it is defined as being that
symbol which is further defined by us as having certain
powers. This fact, demonstrable by the Hieronymous
machine, makes the behavior of symbolic systems such as
this device completely capable of apparently violating one
of the basic laws of the physical sciences which states that
any object in the Universe must have the same
characteristics for any two observers.
That this principle doesn't apply to everything in the
Universe should come as no great surprise to those
researchers involved in the life sciences where it is widely
accepted that no two given organisms, even those with the
same genetic material, need have the same characteristics
for any two investigators. But a very large statistical
Universe of these organisms can and do operate in pre-
dictable manners as a population.
163
Conclusions:
I submit that Dr. T. Galen Hieronymous has indeed

discovered and put to use a totally new-to-us principle of the
real Universe that can and will, in time, be thoroughly
tested, defined, and proven as a theory and, eventually, as a
new Universal law. Furthermore, 1 submit that practically
none of the initial work will be carried out by professional
scientists as a professional inquiry because I know very few
professional scientists - even those with very open minds ~
who could easily afford to undertake such investigations for
fear of peer pressures. It will be done by amateurs such as
you and I because there are no professionals in this new
"proto-science" yet.
Further conclusion: I don't know what this new
Universal thing is, and 1 don't think anyone else knows
either. But it's certainly going to be challenging, fun, and
exciting to find out what's involved!
164
CHAPTER NINE
THE WISHING MACHINE
Basic Description:
The Wishing machine is a reasonably standard three-

transistor common-emitter RC-coupled audio frequency
amplifier with two simple flat copper plates on the input -
one at ground potential and the other connected to the high-
impedance input of the amplifier ~ and an output consisting
of a simple vertical rod antenna. It is powered by a 6-volt
battery.
165
The device appears to be effective in accelerating

growth or decay of reasonably simple life forms such as
viruses, bacteria, fungi, plants, insects, and lower animals.
When a symbolic sample - a photograph of a plant,
field, tree, or person, for example - is placed between the
two copper input plates and the amplifier is turned on, the
experimenter then consciously thinks of some change he
desires to occur or some wish concerning the object
symbolized in the sample placed between the plates.
The device has apparently been known to (a)
achieve a 90%+ kill ratio of Japanese beetles in 90 test plots
in tests conducted in the 1950s by the Pennsylvania State
Department of Agriculture; (b) achieve a 70% kill ratio
against corn borers in other tests conducted by the same
agency; (c) destroyed tent caterpillars in a tree 1200 miles
from the site of the device; (d) all but eliminated acne from
the skin of an adolescent girl; and (e) eliminated a large
number of severe warts on an infant girl. There may have
been other tests conducted and other results achieved, but
the author has some documentation on these.
The device apparently does not work in a destruc-
tive mode against other human beings. In other words, it is
not a murder machine, which is why it can be considered for
publication in this book. However, it appears to be a
member of a class of "Wishing ma-
166
The Wishing Machine
Figure 9-1: Block diagram of the wishing machine.
chines" in general, some of which can and apparently have

been used as such. This doesn't seem to be voodoo magic,
but it appears indeed to be magic under the definition of that
term as it has been used in this book.
Work on this particular machine apparently was

initiated in about 1946 by Colonel Henry Gross (Yale, 1906),
a banker and investor who was at that time head of the
selective service system for the state of Pennsylvania. He
was assisted by two other gentlemen named Upton and
Armstrong, both Princeton Class of 1905. Additional data on
these latter two men has not been located. Work began when
the wives of Upton and Armstrong both died of cancer
within two months of
167
one another in 1946, whereupon the three men decided that

if nothing known to science at that time could have saved
the two women, they should start looking beyond science.
All three pursued their goal as a hobby with no desire to
make money; they'd already done that. They apparently were
pure amateurs in this regard. The Pennsylvania tests were
apparently conducted in the early 1950's.
I heard about this Wishing machine in a private

communication from John W. Campbell, Jr. dated June 22,
1956. Apparently, Campbell's publication of the article
about the Hieronymous machine brought responses from a
large number of people working on or having had
experience with other such machines. Since this was such a
simple device (like the symbolic Hieronymous machine), I
built one.
My eldest child, Constance, was at that time less
than three years old and suffering badly from warts. Warts
are, of course, caused by any one of a number of different
viruses. She was especially susceptible because she had
warts everywhere, and we had grown increasingly concerned
about their locations and extent of growth. Medical
treatments had included such severe measures as direct
treatment of the warts with arsenic acid, a procedure that
seemed to me rife with hazard in an infant.
168
The Wishing Machine
I placed a photograph of my daughter between the input
plates of my Wishing machine, turned on the battery power,
and consciously thought about those warts going away,
about killing the virus that was causing the warts, and about
my daughter without them. I kept the Wishing amplifier
constantly operating on battery power, since from time to
time during the subsequent days I kept thinking about her
and those warts.
The result was frightening. Within three days, my
daughter's warts had decreased markedly, including those
that were beginning to grow inside her nostrils. Within four
weeks, she was free of warts and has not had anything like
them since.
I disassembled my Wishing amplifier because I was
afraid of what I might henceforth do with it. At that time in
my life, it seemed that this phenomenon involved too much
personal power of a sort that I didn't understand and felt that
it might not be controllable. I wasn't certain whether or not I
could handle it. All of us are secretly aware of the impulsive
beast that hides deep within us. Indeed, most of our rearing
and education is aimed toward demanding that we restrain
that beast in a mental cage in the deep recesses of our
mind...and please throw away the key.
The machine was also sheer, outright magic whose
consequences were far beyond those of machines such as the
dowsing rods and Hieronymous machine which were, by
comparison, almost parlor games.
169
In the years since, I have learned that such devices
(and there are many of them) can. be safely used by most
people because we have built-in "circuit breakers" or
"emotional fuses" that prevent most of us from using such
machines for destructive purposes. Furthermore, we've been
taught to use and depend upon them with dire consequences
for those who didn't.
Beyond that, however, appears to be an accumu-
lation of data that indicates such machines are useful only
against fairly simple living organisms which operate totally
on a pre-programmed or instinctual basis. Such organisms
behave as systems without feedback with only linear
programming; disrupt the programming and the system
stops. It does not work on human beings who can and do
over-ride instincts with higher thought processes.
I hesitated to include this device in this book for two
reasons: (a) it is probably the most atrocious and impossible
of all the amazing mind machines I've ever encountered and
one of a class of devices for which it is extremely difficult, if
not impossible, to either dismiss out of hand, explain away,
or even generate a reasonable hypothesis of how and why it
works at all, which it does; and (b) because of the total lack
of any concept of why and how it works, there is always a
serious question about whether or not the data on the
limitations of its effectiveness are complete and totally valid.
However, simply
170
The Wishing Machine
because of these two factors, it is necessary to get the
information out to amateur investigators so that some
additional experimentation may clarify the situation.
As discussed above, this device is a straightforward

transistorized audio amplifier. It may be operable on the
symbolic level in concert with other devices such as the
Hieronymous machine. Instructions given here are for the
physical parts unit, however.
A suitable transistorized amplifier circuit is shown in
Figure 9-1. The values of the components are called out. All
of the parts can be purchased at stores such as Tandy Radio
Shack. The amplifier can be built on an ordinary phenolic
board and enclosed, along with its battery and the antenna
mount, in an electronic component box. The two metal input
plates can be easily obtained at most craft and hobby shops.
Although copper was used in the original device built by the
author, any electrically conductive plate can be used.
Aluminum and brass sheets are available in most hobby
shops. The antenna is a simple collapsible rod that can be
taken from a scrapped portable transistor radio or CB trans-
ceiver. Or the antenna can be nothing more than a piece of
stiff wire.
171
Figure 9-2: Circuit schematic for a transistorized

audio amplifier that can be used in the wishing
machine. Actually, any audio amplifier can be used.
This one is presented as a suggestion only.
Question: Will the wishing machine work with
only the drawing of the amplifier as the
symbolic Hieronymous machine does?
The operating instructions are as deceptively

simple as the instructions for making this machine.
To be effective, the device must use some input
sample that is directly connected symbolically to the
object the experimenter wishes to be changed. For ex-
ample, a photograph of the insect-infested tree or field
172
The Wishing Machine
can be used. A leaf from the plant or a piece of paper
containing a drop of dried blood from the individual can be
used. The only factor affecting the operation of the
machine appears to be the direct causative connection
between the machine and the subject - i.e., light rays from
the tree fell upon the photographic negative, causing a
change in the chemical salts of the negative material. Place
the photograph or sample between the two input plates. Turn
on the amplifier. Make your wish. Leave the amplifier
turned on. From time to time, think about your wish or
desired action. As is typical of machines of this class,
distance has no effect upon its operation - i.e., the distance
between the machine and the actual subject or the distance
between the machine and the operator apparently have no
effect upon its operation.
Experiments:
If there was ever a mind machine that was super-

amenable to experimentation, this is it.
I have not been able to obtain the results from the
tests conducted by the Pennsylvania Department of
Agriculture in the early 1950's in which it is reported that
Japanese beetles were eliminated from 90 test plots in the
western part of the state when the machine and operator were
in the eastern part of the state. The results may languish in
some archives there or, most probably, were
173
tossed out years ago because any scientist in his right mind
knows that such a machine can't work and that the results
have somehow been rigged.
A number of definitive experiments suggest them-
selves and can be carried out simply and easily by amateur
scientists at the high school level. The easiest of these would
use numbered Petri dishes containing bread mold from a
common source. The experimenter should concentrate on
reducing the growth rate in a Petri dish with a given
identification number on it. A photograph of that Petri dish
should be placed between the input plates. The machine may
be located anywhere during this experiment, but the Petri
dishes should all be kept together in the same environment.
The growth of the bread mold in the various Petri dishes can
be visually determined, and a record should be kept.
Another experiment with bread mold growth can be
conducted when the operator is not the experimenter and
does not know the number of the Petri dish whose
photograph is between the plates, and who simply wishes
that the object whose photograph is at the input be changed.
Experimental organisms can also include bacteria,
insects, and plants.
Does this device have any effect upon the growth
rate of bean sprouts as in the pyramid experiments?
174
The Wishing Machine
If positive results are obtained, the experiment

should be repeated with the machine located in a remote site
to test the apparent fact that distance has no bearing on the
experimental results.
The Pennsylvania tests can and should be repeated
by many investigators. Choose a tree or a field with insect or
fungal infestation. Photograph it. Put the photograph
between the plates. Have an independent observer keep a
record of what happens to the test plant or field as well as to
a control plant or field nearby with similar infestation whose
location and condition is totally unknown to the
experimenter.
These experiments and others are simple, inex-
pensive, easy to conduct, easy to control, and easy to
evaluate. They can and should be made by a large number of
investigators. It is quite unlikely that they will be carried out
by professional researchers, but, if any are, it is also equally
likely that the results will turn out negative. That is why it is
necessary and desirable to have these experiments conducted
by amateurs who have nothing at stake except curiosity or a
flaming desire to prove that the author is stark, raving mad.
(This latter motivation was the one that got me started in this
whole tiling in the first place because I knew it had to be a
fraudulent hoax and it was so easy and cheap to run the
experiment to prove my point.)
175
If your Wishing machine doesn't work, there may be

one of several reasons:
1. You didn't build it right or you're not doing
something right when trying to use it. As the old saying
goes, "If at first you don't succeed, try reading the instruc-
tions."
2. There's a bad transistor, component, solder joint,
etc. in the machine that disturbs something that affects the
Hieronymous machine and probably affects the Wishing
machine: the relationship within the system has been
disrupted.
3. You're too impatient. Give it a couple of weeks.
Rome wasn't burned in a day....
4. Your personal circuit breakers are set very low
and you just can't operate such a device no matter how hard
you try; you're blocking yourself somehow. Let someone
else try it.
5. Subconsciously, you believe it's magic and it can't
work, or that you'll be discovered and burned as a witch.
Don't dismiss the powerful effect of our cultural
programming.
Since nobody really knows what's going on here in
the first place, maybe none of these reasons are basically
valid. Maybe you just can't get one to work, period. On the
other hand, others can and have.
176
The Wishing Machine
Hypotheses:
It's possible to come up with any number of

hypotheses concerning why the Wishing machine and its
general class of devices work. But it's totally impossible at
this point to effectively test any of the hypotheses because
we can't come up with any hypothesis based on what we
already know in science.
In the case of the detector rods, it was possible to
hypothesize some means of information transfer from the
object to the searcher that would cause a change that would
cause the rods to move. Not so here.
Pendulums and energy wheels may be explained by
hypotheses that include the well-known principles of
electrodynamics and the ability of people to willingly change
the electrical characteristics of their bodies. Not so here.
The actions of pyramids may be explicable on the
basis of extremely weak electromagnetic activity, the reso-
nant characteristics of the pyramid shape, and the low
energy levels required to affect molecular bonds in crys-
talline materials. But none of that appears to have any
bearing on Wishing machines.
The concept of "eloptic radiation" was one hy-
pothesis relating to the operation of the Hieronymous
machine, although the success of the purely symbolic
Hieronymous machine would seem to render any "ra-
177
diation" hypothesis invalid. In the first place, the basic

concept of" radiation" includes the concept of "distance,"
and "distance" apparently has little if any effect upon the
operation or effectiveness of Wishing machines. Therefore,
the concept of radiation cannot be invoked here. As with the
symbolic Hieronymous machine, we are beginning to get
into a totally unknown realm.
Unlike the previous devices, with the symbolic
machines such as the Wishing machine, we appear to be
dealing with phenomena that are truly out at the very fringe
of our Universe of knowledge. We may be unable to
formulate any hypothesis whatsoever for decades or perhaps
a century.
But, unless someone begins looking, we may never
find out at all and may forever be denying ourselves some
important bit of information about this Universe that could
be of enormous benefit to people.
No rational hypothesis can be formulated that would
even begin to take into account most of the experimental
data and reported phenomena of the Wishing machine.
Why is distance apparently not a factor when with
every other aspect of the Universe distance is indeed one of
the primary dimensions?
Why does the Wishing machine appear to operate
only on the level of organic life and then only on those
organisms with no volition, no ability to over-ride their
instinctual, genetic programming?
178
The Wishing Machine
The easiest way out is the Ostrich Syndrome: It's a

hoax. Then please explain what happened to those Japanese
beetles in those Pennsylvania fields... to that teenager's
acne... to my infant daughter's warts. Coincidence, you say?
If those were mere coincidences, they were indeed
fortuitous. And if the machine somehow affected these
coincidences or the probabilities thereof, it's far more
environmentally benign than insecticides and far more
effective than Clearasil and arsenic acid! And if it is
affecting the probabilities in these cases, how and why is it
acting this way and would it do something similar in Las
Vegas and Atlantic City?
Or one might excuse it away by claiming that it
simply operates to reinforce suggestibility. If it's that good at
it, this data should be extremely useful in psychology and
psychiatry because it's far superior to hypnosis and
conscious-altering drugs. And Madison Avenue would have
snapped it up long ago....
Saying it works because the operator believes it
works doesn't explain it and is no hypothesis, only an
admission that it does work and that this may be a reason.
Why does it work only if the operator believes it does?
According to what we think we know about the rest of the
Universe, this shouldn't be. It strikes at the very roots of
scientific inquiry.
Maybe that's basically all it's about anyway.
179
Conclusions:
These are conclusions reluctantly arrived at on the

basis of data in hand to date:
1. The Wishing machine works.
2. It works only against living organisms whose
nervous systems are not complex enough to include
volitional action as an operational mode.
3. Distance appears to be no factor in its effective-
ness.
4. There is no basis in current scientific knowledge
to support any hypothesis concerning why it works.
5. With continued experimentation, we can probably
learn why it works.
6. We must be willing to continue experimenting.
180
CHAPTER TEN
POSTSCRIPT
I've presented each device herein as an example of a

particular class or type of mind machines machine. You
may know of others.
I also tried to constrain the machines I discussed not
only to those which I had built and tested myself, but also
those that could be built and operated by anyone who could
read and follow instructions. Furthermore, none of them
require personalized instruction or train-
181
ing. This approach has always been the hallmark of scientific

inquiry as opposed to mysticism where the operator must be
personally trained by an adept.
Therefore, I didn't discuss such weird and wonderful
machines as the Drown machine and the De La Warr
machine. According to reports, both apparently work.
However, I have not seen one, built one, or operated one. In
addition, both machines require training by experts in their
use. Not everyone can operate them by reading an
instruction manual. I didn't exclude them on the basis that
the American Medical Association has declared them to be
hoaxes. I had no basis for deciding whether they were real or
shams.
However, the fact that something has been pooh-
poohed by experts was, is, and never will be any reason for
me to pooh-pooh it, too. An expert is another human being
just like thee and me. Said expert merely has acquired a
mass of expertise that thereafter he must jealously guard
because it may be the only prop supporting the person.
Here's the way to treat an " expert": Listen to them
to get the benefit of their expertise. They'll tell you what can
be done; and it undoubtedly can. When they tell you it can't
be done, try to do it anyway. When they begin to pontificate
on subjects outside their field of expertise, they pack no
more clout than you or me. I don't claim
182
Postscript
to be an expert on anything. I'm still learning. I'm an

amateur and proud of it. If there were more amateur
scientists, perhaps science would advance more rapidly.
Some readers may feel I've included some strange
machines herein that they consider mystical and whose
results they consider extremely subjective. Be advised that I
deliberately eliminated from consideration a very large
number of devices that are not understood and produce
questionable physical responses.
By now, you've realized that these eight strange
machines share several characteristics:
1. In light of everything we've been taught about the
Universe, these machines shouldn't work. But they do work
demonstrably and repeatedly for a significant number of
people. These devices are maddening because they work
well and reliably for some people and not for others. On
some days, they won't work at all even for adepts.
2. They can be built and operated successfully using
only written instructions without any personal contact with
the inventor or advocate.
3. They produce repeatable results with a large
enough percentage of subjects that the factor of random
chance cannot possibly be expected to affect the results or
play a part.
183
4. No accepted theory explains why each of them

works. In fact, there are no hypotheses concerning why or
how some of them work at all. This doesn't keep them from
working.
5. They are ignored by the professional community
of scientific investigators. Most scientists claim these
devices are hoaxes but have never spent any time inves-
tigating them with the same level of rigor they apply to their
own field of interest.
6. Because the causes for the operation of these
machines are unknown, they are and should become
legitimate targets of investigation by those who are inter-
ested in expanding the horizons of human knowledge and
our understanding of the Universe.
7. In the cases where these machines have utility,
what they do can be done at least as well by other devices
whose operation we more or less understand. For example,
many geological tools are available to help us locate
underground water. Yet dowsing rods have been used for
centuries and are indeed depended upon throughout the
world today. A razor blade may be re-sharpened by a
whetstone and leather strop. A mass spectrograph will not
only identify the elements present in a metallurgical sample
but provide quantitative data as well. However, utility isn't
at question here. The bothersome question is, "Why do the
damned things work in the first place?"
184
Postscript
My basic thesis in this book has been that we don't

know why they do or don't do, what they do or don't do, but
that they do indeed do it. Therefore, we should make a
serious attempt to find out why.
And if that isn't the basic purpose of legitimate
scientific inquiry, then what is?
Please note carefully that 1 do not advocate any
particular religious doctrine or cult of worship in connection
with any of these machines. Some religious cults and
"mental expansion sciences" may have adopted one of them
for their purposes. Some readers may identify one or more of
the strange machines herein as being the favorite tools or
toys of such groups. So what? This doesn't mean that it
should not be investigated, particularly if it works. Divorced
from cult context, the critical question remains: Does it work
or doesn't it? And, if it does, why?
I'm not selling the modern technological equivalent
of snake oil. I'm merely trying to get these strange machines
out in the open where inquiring minds can learn of them.
Faith has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the
operation of any of the devices in this book. I do not
maintain that you have to believe in anything except that
these machines can be investigated by scientific protocols
and explained in a fashion that is not inconsistent with the
rest of the Universe.
185
Since anyone can build and test them according to
the instructions herein, no one has any excuse to claim at the
outset that these devices are hoaxes or that they depend upon
suggestibility or gullibility. If they work because of
suggestibility, they should therefore have some utility in
psychology because the suggestibility is transferred not by
personal contact but remotely through written symbols on
paper: this book. And if this is indeed the case and if
suggestibility is the reason the devices work, we'd better find
out why they work by such remote-control suggestibility!
I have nothing to gain by writing this book except a
percentage of the book's sales price called a book royalty.
Book royalties rarely make authors rich. If they did, there
would be far more wealthy authors. If making a million
dollars had been my aim, I would have approached the
subject quite differently in a highly sensationalistic style and
manner. As it was, I tried to present the information in as
straightforward a manner as I could.
On the other hand, I do have something to lose by
writing this book. In more than forty years of writing, I've
built a reputation that has some semblance of truthfulness,
sobriety, and careful research. I've never espoused far-out
causes except ones that I knew perfectly well were within
the capabilities of science and technology like going to the
Moon and industrializing space. I do not wish to destroy that
hard-earned and carefully preserved
186
Postscript
reputation now. In fact, the possibility that I might do so

as a result of this book has been of concern to me through-
out its preparation.
This is why I reported only on strange machines
that I have personal experience in building and/or op-
erating. My formal academic science education continu-
ally reminds me that I should report publicly those phe-
nomena that I have carefully observed and thereafter
bare myself to peer review and criticism. The problem is
that while there are many scientists in the world, there
are few who have any experience in strange machines
and are therefore qualified to express opinions about
them. So I'm laying myself wide open to criticism from
experts who aren't but who think they are.
Our limited knowledge of ourselves and our
Universe has grown over the past five centuries. In the
eighteenth century, electricity and magnetism were mys-
tical phenomena. In the past, things we accept today
were greeted with jeers and outright derision. In 1807,
Thomas Jefferson who was then President of the Ameri-
can Philosophical Society (the equivalent of today's
American Association for the Advancement of Science)
reacted to a report of a discovery of a meteorite by two
Connecticut astronomers with the statement, "I could
more easily believe that two Yankee professors would lie
than stones fall from heaven." In the nineteenth century,
much of what is now twentieth-century science was
187
laughed at. The reknowned physicist and former President

of the British Royal Society, Lord Kelvin, stated in 1900,
"X-rays are a hoax."
We can probably expect no less from our reknowned
twentieth century savants when it comes to phenomena that
may well represent twenty-first century science.
On the basis of a long study of the history of science
and technology, however, I am convinced that somewhere
among these strange machines lies the foundation of the
science and technology of the twenty-first century.
Far too many people are still operating under the
obsolete philosophy of materialism that was developed
during the nineteenth century and dominated far too much in
the twentieth. One of the beliefs of materialism is that we
know everything there is to know about the Universe. But
scientific inquiry itself proves this assertion wrong every
day.
Science is not a static body of knowledge. It grows.
Here is a direction in which it can grow without requiring
millions of dollars of support in terms of grants. It can grow
under the aegis of amateurs. In fact, it must. This will,
however, infuriate some of the professional scientists who
may fear that, in spite of their skepticism, there just might be
something here after all.
188
Postscript
RCA engineer Harry Swartzburg stated, "The

validity of a science is its ability to predict." Well, maybe
these proto-sciences we're talking about aren't that far along
yet. But they're getting there. I can now write a book
describing some strange, unexplained machines so you and
thousands of others can build them and see for yourself.
That's a start. In fact, it's the first step in any potentially new
field of science.
Scientific fields of endeavor begin with such
unexplained phenomena as those we've discussed in
connection with strange machines. From the basic laws of
motion (dynamics) to the most modern theories of nuclear
structure and cosmology, each advance began with the
actions of an individual whose curiosity was piqued by a
strange and perhaps even accidental or fortuitous
phenomenon. They also had the belief that a reason for the
phenomenon existed and could be learned.
Therefore, the reason(s) why these strange devices
and others work can and will be discovered. In the process of
doing this, new and unsuspected fields of science and
knowledge will be uncovered.
Maybe this will be done by a reader of this book.
However, if I've piqued your curiosity and caused
you to investigate some of the amazing machines reported
herein, then I've done what I set out to do.
But, please, a few words of warning to those who
will enthusiastically undertake experiments with these
machines and others that they may come upon:
189
Don't write to ask me details of how to build or

operate the strange machines of this book. I've told you
everything I knew when I started working with them and
therefore everything you need to know to get started. Go
back and read the text carefully again. "If at flrst you don't
succeed, try reading the instructions."
And don't demand things of me. I'm just an amateur
like you. We all are. I don't get paid for investigating strange
machines. Nor am I in the business of selling them and
thereby keeping customers happy. These machines are
simple and safe enough that you can and should try them
your way and do a few experiments on your own.
Don't complain to me if something doesn't work
because, after all, even with the most complex of these
machines, you're out only a few dollars and a few hours'
time. What did you expect? I told you at the start that maybe
it wouldn't work but that there was a good probability it
would because it worked for me. The only promise held
forth by this book was that perhaps it would be found
entertaining. At worst, it could be infuriating.
But I hope you've learned a little something about
science, scientific investigation, and the conduct of scientific
experiments along the way. And maybe something about
how abysmally ignorant we are about the Universe.
190
Postscript
Don't write me enthusiastically about a machine

somebody else has invented that performs miracles unless
you yourself have built it, tested it, and confirmed the results
without personal contact with the inventor.
Don't write to me about the wonderful machine that
you've invented, that you've tried on thousands of people,
and that you've personally taught hundreds of people to
operate. Sorry, but it doesn't count. Close, but no cigar! The
world is full of miracle machines that won't and don't work
at all out of the hands of the inventor. (And I've seen
hundreds of these, too.)
But if you've invented a strange machine, written it
up, published the description and the experimental results,
had people build and operate it from that written description
without personal contact with you, and gotten reports that it
works, I'll gladly read your letter.
The same holds true if you've built a strange
machine from someone else's written instructions and had it
work.
Totally independent verification is a key element.
Don't complain to me that there's no place to publish
your work. Look harder. Even the prestigious New York
Academy of Sciences has published some pretty strange,
off-beat, and off-the-wall papers. Not all scientific
organizations are as stuffy and priest-like as you may have
gathered from what I've written here. A lot of good and
honest scientists are around. There are also
191
many places to publish your work. Maybe that fact that it's
continually rejected is no reflection upon the subject matter
but on the way you've written it up.
I'm a skeptic or I wouldn't have gotten involved with
strange machines more than a third of a century ago. And
you'd better be a skeptic, too, lest the rude hand of reality
rise up and smite thee right in the middle of thy cherished
beliefs.
But don't just read about these and other strange
machines and then dismiss them skeptically. Build them and
try them. Test them. Then and only then do you have the
right to an opinion on any given one of them, but not about
the ones you haven't built and tested.
Don't worry about the experts. They'll tell you only
what can't be done. It's up to you to go ahead and do it if it
really is possible. You'll never know unless you try.
Remember that the history of science and technology is
littered with the solemn pontifical pronouncements of
experts.
"The theory of germs is a ridiculous fiction," said
Pierre Pochet, professor of physiology in Toulouse, France,
when he learned of the germ theory of disease developed by
Louis Pasteur, who was a crystallographer, not a doctor.
Others even refused to look at his data.
"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will be
forever shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane
surgeon," said Sir John Eric Erichsen in 1837; he was later
to become Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria.
192
Postscript
The most famous "expert statement" of all came

from Charles H. Cuell, Commissioner of the U.S. Office of
Patents, who urged President William McKinley to abolish
the Patent Office in 1899 with the assertion, "Everything
that can be invented has been invented."
1 wonder what the experts are going to say about the
strange machines of this book? Frankly, 1 don't expect
anything different than what they've said in the past.
No matter what they say, many phenomena remain
unexplained. Innovation comes from individuals who see a
consistency in these phenomena that have been missed or
dismissed by others. This sort of innovation ought to be
encouraged, even at the risk of seeming to encourage
charlatans. The great leaps forward in our understanding of
the Universe and ourselves have come from just such
activities in the past. Once the leaps have been made, the
cautious scientists must then carefully fill in the added
decimal places.
You're hereby challenged to make the great scientific
breakthrough of the twenty-first century. Maybe it starts with
something from this book, and I will be mightily pleased if it
does. But I don't disabuse myself; probably it won't.
But even if you don't make the great scientific
breakthrough, you'll have some fun!
193
194
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bird, Christopher, The Divining Hand, New Age Press,

Black Mountain NC, 1979.
Campbell, John W., Jr., private correspondence, June
22,1956. '
Campbell, John W., Jr., "Psionic Machine, Type One,"
Astounding Science Fiction, Volume LVII, Number 4,
June 1956.
Campbell, John W., Jr., "Unprovable Speculation,"
Astounding Science Fiction, Volume LVIII, Number 6,
February 1957.
Campbell, John W., Jr., "Addendum On The Symbolic
Psionic Machine," Astounding Science Fiction, Volume
LIX, Number 4, June 1957.
Cerf, Christopher, and Navasky, Victor, The Experts
Speak, Pantheon Books, New York, 1984.
195
MIND MACHINES YOU CAN BUILD
Flanagan, G. Patrick, Pyramid Power, De Vorss & Co.,

1046 Princeton Drive, Marina del Rey CA 90291,1973.
Flanagan, G. Patrick, Pyramid Power II, Innergy Publica-
tions, P.O. Box 18224, Tucson AZ 85731, 1981.
Stine, G. Harry, The Hopeful Future, Macmillan Publish-
ing Company, New York, 1983.
—, Edmund Scientific Catalog, Edmund Scientific, 101
E. Glouchester Pike, Barrington NJ 08007, 1984.
—, The Radio Amateur's Handbook, American Radio
Relay League, Newington CT 06111, 1984.
196
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
G. Harry Stine graduated from Colorado College in

Colorado Springs, Colorado (his home town) with a B.A. in
physics in 1952. Before deciding on a degree in physics
(because of counselling from Robert A. Heinlein who
coached him in writing), he was within a semester of gaining
his bachelor's degree in psychology at the University of
Colorado. He spent the early 1950's at White Sands missile
range in New Mexico working with high altitude rockets and
rocket motor testing. He founded the international
hobby/sport of model rocketry in 1957. During the 1960's he
was the manager of an industrial research laboratory in New
England where he worked on many "far out" projects such
as neurophonics, Coanda
197
Effect, electrohydraulics, bioelectronics, and dynamic sys-
tems. In 1968, he was awarded a silver medal as one of 50
U.S. space pioneers by the Association of the U.S. Army.
He is the author of more than 50 books, numerous
scientific and technical papers, and hundreds of magazine
articles since 1951.
He is a Fellow of the Explorers Club and the British
Interplanetary Society, and a member of the New York
Academy of Sciences.
An instrument-rated private pilot who's been flying
since 1943, he owns his own airplane, a Piper Cherokee,
which he's flown across the United States and back many
times. He lives in Phoenix, Arizona, "in the midst of high
technology" with his wife, two Golden Retrievers and a cat.
He's listed in Who's Who In America as well as the
current editions of Who's Who In The West and Jane's Who's
Who In Aerospace.
198
Experimental Mind Machine Supplies
ENERGY WHEEL® by Gerald Loe As pictured on
page 68, complete with instructions. Easier to turn
because of less mass (?).
$5.95 plus $3.00 shipping
HIERONYMOUS TILE
2" X 2" Tile as described on page 152.
$3.00 includes shipping
SYMBOL EXPERIMENTERS PACK Contains Left-

Hand Spiral, Right-Hand Spiral, Special Strengthening
or Weakening test card (not shown in book) all printed
on 5.5" x 8.5" Vellum Bristol card stock.
$3.00 includes shipping
COMPLETE EXPERIMENTERS PACK Includes Loe

Energy Wheel®, Hieronymous Tile and Symbol Pack.
Special $9.95 plus $3.00 shipping
Check or M.O. payable to: Powell Productions

Send to:
TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN PUBLISHING
11701 South Belcher Road, #123
Largo, Florida 34643-5117
Fax 813 536-3681 Phone 813 530-0110
Fax, Phone or Write for FREE Catalog
199
NEW THOUGHT/SCIENCE $11.95
"A vastly entertaining book.
How would you like to move Certainly, one has to assume
that our universe is bursting
things with your mind? with scientific discoveries
These "impossible" Mind Machines still to be made, and my
are easy to build, and by all scientific good
standards should not work... but they friend G. Harry Stine offers
do. In some cases they seem to here much fun to all of us
amplify your mind power. And the fun who refuse to believe that ev-
part is, most of these amazing Mind erything worthwhile has by
Machines can be easily built from now been discovered."
-Gene Roddenberry
things you have around the house.
creator of Star Trek
Scientist G. Harry Stine
guides you step-by-step in the easy building and the using of
these Mind Machines. He then compares their seemingly unex-
plainable action to current scientific knowledge. The latest re-
search will help you to understand and use these centuries-old
items, like dowsing rods, pendulums, and pyramids.
You will explore modern-day Psychokinesis, moving things
with your mind, with the Independent Suspension Pendulum and
the Energy Wheel. Yes, you can move things with your mind.
You will learn how to make and use symbols that strengthen and
weaken the body. Learn how to detect a friend's illness living
miles away with the Hieronymous machine. And how to seem-
ingly amplify your mind power to make things happen with the
"unbelievable" Wishing machine.
Sound impossible? Build these amazing machines and
prove it to yourself. Science still doesn't know why some of
these machines work, but G. Harry Stine believes that finding
out may lead to one of the biggest scientific
breakthroughs of the twenty-first century!
G. HARRY STINE

Mind Machines You Can Build

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mind Machines You Can Build

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mind Machines You Can Build

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MIND

TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN PUBLISHING

Top Of The Mountain Publishing

Copyright 1992 by G. Harry Stine

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Manufactured in the United States

The intent of this book by my friend and colleague Harry

(Prof. Korff was professor emeritus, department of

THE REALIST'S DILEMMA

For more than thirty years, I've been working in high

Many people still believe or would like to believe

But I didn't write this for mystics or for those who

ing why; just get it built or working and in saleable

experiments that can be conducted. The only thing I'm

derstand and explain them some day. They can't and

This device consists of either a single stick, rod with a

The device had been primarily used for locating

Many readers will immediately recognize this device

The author built and experimented with his first pair

In 1961 and 1962, he witnessed the use of dowsing

Figure 2-1: Employee of the Milford, Connecticut,

This model is an expensive one that may be

Instructions for Fabrication,

This model is intended for long life, high reliabil-

Figure 2-2: Drawing of dowsing (detector) rod.

The Deluxe Model can be fabricated by anyone using

2. Remove the burrs on the cut ends of the tubing

Both the Economy Model and the Deluxe Model

Figure 2-3: Holding and using detector rods. To

most cases, the general alignment of either underground

It doesn't make any difference whether the rods are

If you misplace something, try using the rods to help

Experiments need to be conducted with a large

What If It Doesn't Work?

The existence of the dowsing rod phenomenon has

The author has seen dowsing rods used successfully

Tetrahedral pyramids made from electrically non-con-

Many advocates and proponents of "pyramid power"

eses, while at the same time opening their work to comment

patents are granted after an examination period of two to

pyramid phenomenon even though Nobel laureate (physics,

The author has built miniature pyramids with 6-inch

to repeat the Drbal experiment with razor blades since this

Figure 3-1: Experimental cardboard pyramids used

Figure 3-2: Template for constructing pyramid

A repeat experiment was conducted with six more

Instructions for Fabrication:

The fabrication of a miniature model of the Cheops'

TABLE 3-1: DIMENSIONS OF

Base Height Side Hole Dia Center of Hole

Figure 3-3: Basic three-view and isometric drawing of

To make it easier to gain access to the interior of the

Figure 3-4: This plastic pyramid matrix produced by

Lay the square base on the table and place the

If you have been careful while measuring and

Early experimenters such as Drbal maintained that a

The experiment may be conducted by either men or

The razor blade experiment is perhaps the

1. Growth of bean sprouts:

2. Decay of hamburger meat: