THE HIGH POTENCIES CONSIDERED STRICTLY SCIENTIFICALLY


Before going deeper into the subject, I want to emphasize that science is independent of any philosophy; it is an error to suppose that its tendency is necessarily materialistic; it is only positive because it is concerned with facts alone; it always puts out any hypothesis leading to contradictions with them.


The question of the high homoeopathic dilutions brings two main difficulties: first, beyond the clinical control, it is materially impossible to formally control the presence of the diluted substances; secondly, the study of this question is not yet accessible to a strictly scientific examination. Here is why:.

Remember that science, in general, consists in the experimental study of the phenomena of nature; they are all submitted to laws. It is Charles Henrys honor to have demonstrated that even biological phenomena could be submitted to calculations. The laws, however, are not always well known and the best are often empirical laws. Scholars define the laws with the aid of theoretical considerations, and do not always avoid the difficulties brought necessarily by metaphysics. Besides we always, in fact, observe results of ensemble and consequently the laws are the consequence of statistic results; the primary phenomenon is inaccessible to us.

Before going deeper into the subject, I want to emphasize that science is independent of any philosophy; it is an error to suppose that its tendency is necessarily materialistic; it is only positive because it is concerned with facts alone; it always puts out any hypothesis leading to contradictions with them.

Science demonstrates the granular structure of matter, the elements of which are molecules. Many hundreds of thousands of molecules are known; their association in big quantities make gases, liquids and solids, considered at a determined temperature and pressure — variations of these two quantities can modify their state. This large quantity of different molecules is the result of the association of 94 kinds of atoms, the isotopes of an atom being considered as one kind. The great gathering of atoms are also known under the three states, and can be modified according to the variation of pressure and temperature. The properties of atoms are not the same as those of the molecules.

Finally, atoms are complexes, the elements of which are identical for each atom; amongst those elements are the electron and the proton. We will put the others aside as not belonging to our subject.

Electrons and protons are the same, whatever the atom they come from. Of other large agglutinations of these two elements we only know those concerning the electrons, which are a constituent part of the high atmosphere whence they spread into space; they are replaced by the electrons extracted by radiation from the gases of the air immediately below.

Is it possible to decompose the electrons and protons into simpler elements? Science does not know; it can only guess in accord with certain observations.

Besides these elements — which are considered as material– science shows the existence of physical quantities attached to these elements, to wit: magnetism, electricity, it shows also that the displacements of these elements are dependent upon exchanges of energy, bringing into consideration the notion of masses and forces.

These quantities are bound to the elements I have described and they have never been found beyond them; there are well determined relationships between them.

In order to dispel certain fears, I will say that certain quantities have been considered, by necessity, the existence of which is purely conventional, for example: the entropy which is the quotient of an energy variation by the variation of the corresponding absolute temperature. I mention this distinction because certain authors sometimes carelessly bring forward purely subjective considerations.

But since did better than all of that. It has given us the magnitude of the elements and therefore demonstrated that in a small quantity of matter there is an enormous number of elements that is beyond our imagination. For example: in the millionth part of a cubic centimeter of a solution saturated with sodium chloride, there are 3.360 trillions of molecules of sodium chloride, i.e., more than three billions of millions.

Science has not only weighed the molecules, atoms and electrons, but has discovered the lower limits of the physical quantities I have mentioned. The limit has sometimes been called grain. So we consider the grain of electricity and the grain of matter; even the grain of action has been determined. Although these quantities are extraordinarily small, they are reached rapidly by means of homoeopathic dilutions (Hahnemanns method).

Let us consider a heap of sand 1 meter high, 1 meter wide and 100 meters long. Its first centesimal will be a heap of 1 cubic meter, the second centesimal will correspond to 10 litres, the third to 100 c.c. and the fourth to 1 c.c. only. Making the same calculation, if we now consider the dilutions, we see that after twelve operations only no more division is possible. However, practically, these operations are not made by thinking, and because of the lack of homogeneous, we have no means of knowing what happens.

This way of dividing matter is the image of Hahnemanns procedure. The application of the scientific method leads therefore to an uncertain result. I suggest the following experiment: Let us prepare simultaneously two different series of dilutions by Hahnemanns method and test them alternately; I advise making the tests mainly from the 12c. and on. This experience would show us if matter is more divisible as we think it is. It should even be done beyond that potency.

I said that there is no possible control of the existence of the substance in a high dilution; to speak of the 8c. only, here are a few deductions. If, for example, we have a method of determining a minimum of 1 / 10 of a mgm. of a certain substance, we shall have to concentrate 1,000,000 cubic meters of that 8c. in order to recover the 1 / 10 mgm. A quantity 100 times greater would be required for the 9c., and so on. Therefore, being already inaccessible for low dilutions, the control is a fortiori, the more so for high dilutions.

From the brief preceding statement it follows that in Hahnemanns method the sequence of the dilutions gives no guarantee of constancy, and from a certain time on the hazard plays the most important role, so that it becomes impossible to definite theoretically the value of a dilution.

Here are now a few considerations of Korsakoffs method. Without going into the detail of the division of matter, we know by experience that the deconcentration of substance — everything being equal otherwise– is not so rapid by this method. I have explained that deconcentration depends on many factors that can be made constant, but that it is necessarily different from one machine to another. Therefore medical experience can rightly appreciate the various states of the dilutions obtained in order to get the best results. It is true that science is not able in its actual state to discriminate what happens exactly, but makes us realize that the rational use of a given machine is good enough to obtain a constant preparation when the initial source is itself constant for a determined number of successive operations.

Taking into account the data of science and what has been said so far, we see that the difficulty concerning the knowledge of high dilutions depends first upon the recognized magnitude of the elements of matter which puts a short limit to the sequence of dilutions. However, if we remember the fact that dilutions may not necessarily follow the law attributed to them automatically, this limit might be remote. In the case of Korsakoffs method of dilution, the difficulty might be considered as solved, because the successive dilutions are only a little different one from the other.

As an example, I will mention that in the case of dilution of sea salt, if we admit that the dilutions obtained by machine differs one from the other of 1,000,000 molecules, 58,000,000 millions of successive operations can be made before exhausting all the molecules. If, instead of a difference of 1,000,000, we suppose a difference of a billion of molecules from one dilution to the other, the possible number of operations falls off to, 1,800,000.

Of course, we do not know the value of the successive differences, but we realize perfectly in practice that it is impossible to exhaust the initial substance by the Korsakoff method.

In the case of Hahnemanns method, however small the elements may be, the limit is reached very rapidly and there always will be the question of incertitude. Such are the various aspects of the question of high dilutions and of ordinary dilutions in the actual state of science. There are of course several metaphysical explanations, but none has any scientific value.

It is true that science has not said the last word, and the future will bring us better knowledge.

Referring to Charles Henrys works, I have explained how he was brought to consider the possible existence of biological resonators. It was the compulsory consequence of special observations of the phenomenon of radiation. Whereas an inert substance emits as much energy as it receives when the temperature is stationery, on the contrary a living particle, an animal, radiates more energy than that received in similar conditions, and the phenomenon of auto-regulation can be observed.

A. Berne