快猫短视频

Editorial: 鈥淲hy we have to teleport disbelief鈥�

A Nobel prizewinner is reporting that DNA can be generated from its teleported 鈥渜uantum imprint鈥�

A STORM of scepticism has greeted experimental results emerging from the lab of a Nobel laureate which, if confirmed, would shake the foundations of several fields of science. 鈥淚f the results are correct,鈥� says theoretical chemist of the University of Sydney, Australia, 鈥渢hese would be the most significant experiments performed in the past 90 years, demanding re-evaluation of the whole conceptual framework of modern chemistry.鈥�

Luc Montagnier, who shared the for his part in establishing that HIV causes AIDS, says he has evidence that DNA can send spooky electromagnetic imprints of itself into distant cells and fluids. If that wasn鈥檛 heretical enough, he also suggests that enzymes can mistake the ghostly imprints for real DNA, and faithfully copy them to produce the real thing. In effect this would amount to a kind of quantum teleportation of the DNA.

Many researchers contacted for comment by 快猫短视频 reacted with disbelief. , who studies DNA conductance effects at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, compared it to 鈥減athological science鈥�. Jacqueline Barton, who does similar work at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, was equally sceptical. 鈥淭here aren鈥檛 a lot of data given, and I don鈥檛 buy the explanation,鈥� she says. One blogger has suggested .

Yet the results can鈥檛 be dismissed out of hand. 鈥淭he experimental methods used appear comprehensive,鈥� says Reimers. So what have Montagnier and his team actually found?

Full details of the experiments are not yet available, but the basic set-up is as follows. Two adjacent but physically separate test tubes were placed within a copper coil and subjected to a very weak extremely low frequency electromagnetic field of 7 hertz. The apparatus was isolated from Earth鈥檚 natural magnetic field to stop it interfering with the experiment. One tube contained a fragment of DNA around 100 bases long; the second tube contained pure water.

After 16 to 18 hours, both samples were independently subjected to the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), a method routinely used to amplify traces of DNA by using enzymes to make many copies of the original material. The gene fragment was apparently recovered from both tubes, even though one should have contained just water (see diagram).

DNA was only recovered if the original solution of DNA 鈥� whose concentration has not been revealed 鈥� had been subjected to several dilution cycles before being placed in the magnetic field. In each cycle it was diluted 10-fold, and 鈥済host鈥� DNA was only recovered after between seven and 12 dilutions of the original. It was not found at the ultra-high dilutions used in homeopathy.

Physicists in Montagnier鈥檚 team suggest that DNA emits low-frequency electromagnetic waves which imprint the structure of the molecule onto the water. This structure, they claim, is preserved and amplified through quantum coherence effects, and because it mimics the shape of the original DNA, the enzymes in the PCR process mistake it for DNA itself, and somehow use it as a template to make DNA matching that which 鈥渟ent鈥� the signal ().

鈥淭he biological experiments do seem intriguing, and I wouldn鈥檛 dismiss them,鈥� says Greg Scholes of the University of Toronto in Canada, who last year demonstrated that quantum effects occur in plants. Yet according to Klaus Gerwert, who studies interactions between water and biomolecules at the Ruhr University in Bochum, Germany, 鈥淚t is hard to understand how the information can be stored within water over a timescale longer than picoseconds.鈥�

鈥淚t is hard to understand how the information can be stored in water for more than picoseconds鈥�

鈥淭he structure would be destroyed instantly,鈥� agrees , a retired academic chemist in London who has studied water for many years. Franks was involved as a peer reviewer in the debunking of a controversial study in 1988 which claimed that water had a memory (see 鈥淗ow 鈥榞host molecules鈥� were exorcised鈥�). 鈥淲ater has no 鈥榤emory鈥�,鈥� he says now. 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 make an imprint in it and recover it later.鈥�

Despite the scepticism over Montagnier鈥檚 explanation, the consensus was that the results deserve to be investigated further. Montagnier鈥檚 colleague, theoretical physicist Giuseppe Vitiello of the University of Salerno in Italy, is confident that the result is reliable. 鈥淚 would exclude that it鈥檚 contamination,鈥� he says. 鈥淚t鈥檚 very important that other groups repeat it.鈥�

In a paper last year (), Montagnier described how he discovered the apparent ability of DNA fragments and entire bacteria both to produce weak electromagnetic fields and to 鈥渞egenerate鈥� themselves in previously uninfected cells. Montagnier strained a solution of the bacterium Mycoplasma pirum through a filter with pores small enough to prevent the bacteria penetrating. The filtered water emitted the same frequency of electromagnetic signal as the bacteria themselves. He says he has evidence that many species of bacteria and many viruses give out the electromagnetic signals, as do some diseased human cells.

Montagnier says that the full details of his latest experiments will not be disclosed until the paper is accepted for publication. 鈥淪urely you are aware that investigators do not reveal the detailed content of their experimental work before its first appearance in peer-reviewed journals,鈥� he says.