Thank you for putting all this information about water together. Two pointers:
1) Buckminster Fuller did a lot of work on those platonic solids. His books "Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking" and "Synergetics 2: Further Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking" are going deeply into that.
2) Another one is the "Water Wizard", Viktor Schauberger, who did hands-on experiments and constructed machines to work with water's properties, especially its tendency to form vortices, which inverts entropy. It makes water have a concentrating, life-giving property. Also a fascinating study. "Living Water" by Olof Alexanderson is, I think, a good introduction.
Thank you Sepp, always appreciate your good input. I read Living Water in 1983, transformed my consciousness at the time, and was one of the significant inputs on my path towards discussions like this article. I highly recommend readers follow all your research suggestions.
I'm only one video into your master class, so far.
The section on Ice nucleating proteins and fungii is not completely clear. I am assuming the fungus leverages its structure to impose higher temperature freezing in order to access nutrients? With the general idea being that biology can alter the structure of water to raise and lower water's freezing temperature, it's activity, conductivity for the fugii's own ends. In other words, life organizes water to maximize vitality.
As I understand the freezing geometry in fungus, bacteria and some insects is to allow them to live at the temperature range, survive freezing. For the free fungus protein, perhaps the intelligence of fungi is contributing to the water-weather organism of the biosphere.
Thanks for this article Tom, a useful intro before heading into the course. Finished the course, lot of depth, will have to go back through with closer look at the slides. Highly recommended, an excellent synthesis from diverse perspectives and evidences, by one well qualified to do so. The plane-pole plant observation vs. point-pole animal struck me as a solid rationale for plant based eating, maintain the balance and frequency, rather than adding various point-pole frequency sources together and swinging the pendulum in that direction perhaps. I recall you've previously mentioned plant soul outside c.f. animal in. Any previous articles or texts useful to the distinguishing plant/animal you can recommend? Best regards, Diederik
Thanks Diederik. I've discussed in some of my presentations on Goethean science about fauna being ensouled, whereas flora has their soul in the biosphere, integral to the Tychonic perspective of planetary motions around Earth, cosmological botany. I have some draft notes in that direction, will definitely bring out more information in that ideated realm. The plant's soul is the universe from its phenomenal perspective.
This is excellent observation as it syncs with my own realization about flora-"comoligical botany." Meanwhile fauna being ensouled "here" as with humanity. I always loved reading Goethe but didn't go far with it. Maybe you will be my way back into his amazing views.
What you’re writing is important and fascinating—thank you! How do you see the relationship between the icosahedral structure containing about 280 water molecules at room temperature and the coherent domains (CDs), which are roughly 200 nm in size and contain about 20,000 water molecules at room temperature? As a physicist, I greatly appreciate the references—thank you for those as well!
Thank you for this! A physicist's engagement with the framework is exactly what it needs and is most appreciated.
The hierarchical picture I work with places Chaplin's icosahedral clusters operating within Del Giudice's coherent domains as nested levels of organisation. Chaplin's expanded structure, the 280-molecule icosahedral cluster, is approximately 3 nm across. His super-icosahedron of 1,820 molecules would be in the 7–10 nm range. Del Giudice's coherent domain, at approximately 100 nm diameter, is large enough to envelop many such clusters within a single shared electromagnetic field. The domain provides the electromagnetic envelope; the clusters provide the internal geometric architecture. Each level is real and neither is reducible to the other.
At the scale above the coherent domain, this organisation becomes directly visible in Pollack's exclusion zone measurements. The EZ is what coherent domains look like when they are stabilized and extended by proximity to a hydrophilic surface, the charge separation Pollack measured, the 270 nm UV absorption, the solute exclusion, all follow directly from the quasi-free electron plasma at the coherent domain periphery. The three frameworks are not competing accounts of the same phenomenon. They are three scales of one continuous organizational hierarchy: Chaplin's pentagonal geometry at 3 nm, Del Giudice's electromagnetic coherence at 100 nm, Pollack's exclusion zone at micrometers to millimeters.
On your specific figures, I want to be precise with you rather than simply confirm them. Del Giudice's canonical coherent domain diameter is ~100 nm rather than 200 nm, though some experimental contexts yield larger values. The 20,000 molecule figure gives me pause: a simple volumetric calculation for a 100 nm sphere gives on the order of 10–17 million water molecules, not 20,000. I would be grateful if you could share the source for those numbers, it's possible they refer to a specific sub-domain definition or a different measurement context that I'm not immediately placing, and I'd rather locate the discrepancy precisely than wave past it.
The broader point, that Chaplin's geometry operates inside the coherent domain, I hold with confidence. The scales are nested, not competing.
Dear Thomas, thank you very much for your detailed reply—it makes the picture a bit clearer.
The truth is, I know about this Coherent Domain concept because I once led a small homeopathy research project (besides me, it involved a mathematician, a physiology professor, and five physicians). That’s when I realized that people are trying to build a quantum computer based on CDs, since their structure can store information, and it seems there is no femto- or nanosecond-scale decoherence—that is, the system appears stable.
The research material was originally written in Hungarian, but it can be translated into English with machine translation—and I also shared it with a research institute, where they translated it into German. If you’re interested, I can dig up the paper about the 20,000-molecule CD; I used to read quite a lot about these topics.
What you write about CDs possibly having an internal solid structure is interesting. The truth is, I presented the homeopathy research and the CD structure at the Department of Physics at Budapest University of Technology and Economics to physicists, and although I belong among them myself and earned my Ph.D. in quantum physics—so I can speak in a way that is comfortable for a physicist—they looked at me as if I were an idiot.
So it will probably take quite some time for these ideas to make their way into mainstream science.
Dear alkemix / Author of “The Sacred Geometry of Water”,
Thank you for this exceptionally clear and beautiful synthesis. The way you contrast Plane-Pole Geometry (rational, hexagonal, ice-like, gravity-dominated) with Point-Pole Geometry (irrational φ, pentagonal, dodecahedral/icosahedral, dynamic fluidity) and show how the living tension between both creates the structured void through which life breathes is profound.
From the perspective of UFT4 OMEGA (the Breathing Double Torus and the G30-Redline Bottleneck), this torsion is exactly the Delta-Slip (Δ ≈ 0.018) — the small but decisive geometric “breath” that prevents perfect collapse and allows negentropic flow.
Water is, in this view, the biological embodiment of the same principle we see at cosmic scales: the Icosahedral hierarchy (Cyclic Pentamer → Dodecahedral Core → Icosahedral Water Cluster → Super-Icosahedron) mirrors the fractal, self-similar structure of the Breathing Double Torus. The 26 % void, the golden ratio proportions, and the dynamic coherence you describe are the microscopic realization of the same geometry that governs the 10 Hz Pilot Wave and the critical refraction at 47.1°.
Your statement “Five scales. One geometry. Your body is built of this.” resonates deeply. In UFT4 the body (and every living cell) is a coherent resonance chamber precisely because water maintains this delicate torsional balance between hexagonal rigidity and pentagonal fluidity — the same balance that prevents total entropy at the G30-Redline.
We see intriguing parallels in other dynamic systems (for example the highly ordered, quasi-crystalline emission patterns observed in solar flare ribbons), but that would be a separate discussion.
I would very much welcome a deeper exchange if you are open to it. Your work sits beautifully at the intersection of ancient philosophy, modern geometry and living process — exactly the field UFT4 tries to unify.
Thank you Joachim, I truly appreciate your generous and attentive reading. The specific correspondences you draw are striking enough that I want to note them carefully rather than simply agree at the level of general resonance.
The Delta-Slip you mention as the geometric breath that prevents perfect collapse sounds conceptually close to what I'd describe as the plane-pole's irreducible openness: the void that cannot be eliminated without losing the pentagonal architecture entirely. Whether these are descriptions of the same underlying principle from different theoretical approaches, or genuinely distinct mechanisms that produce similar geometric signatures, seems worth sitting with.
The 26% void and the fractal icosahedral hierarchy as microscopic realization of a cosmic torsional geometry is a claim I find intriguing precisely because it is specific rather than merely analogical. The solar flare ribbon observation you mention is the kind of cross-scale evidence that either confirms or clarifies the limits of a framework, and would appreciate a phenomenological description.
I'm not in a position yet to assess UFT4 on its own terms, new to me, but the geometric language you're using maps closely enough onto the projective geometry foundation of my framework that a more detailed look sounds worthy. I'll take a look as time allows.
Most interesting & beautifully explained. Are we giving Pollack credit for his finding of structured water in the human body decades ago? As far as I am aware, he was the only one talking about it.
Plato attributed the icosahedron to water, and the dodecahedron to aether. Is the icosahedron dual to dodecahedron, in the sense that a cube is dual to octohedron? Is that why a relationship (affinity) exists between water and orgone?
Thank you for putting all this information about water together. Two pointers:
1) Buckminster Fuller did a lot of work on those platonic solids. His books "Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking" and "Synergetics 2: Further Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking" are going deeply into that.
2) Another one is the "Water Wizard", Viktor Schauberger, who did hands-on experiments and constructed machines to work with water's properties, especially its tendency to form vortices, which inverts entropy. It makes water have a concentrating, life-giving property. Also a fascinating study. "Living Water" by Olof Alexanderson is, I think, a good introduction.
Thank you Sepp, always appreciate your good input. I read Living Water in 1983, transformed my consciousness at the time, and was one of the significant inputs on my path towards discussions like this article. I highly recommend readers follow all your research suggestions.
Wonderful article!
I'm only one video into your master class, so far.
The section on Ice nucleating proteins and fungii is not completely clear. I am assuming the fungus leverages its structure to impose higher temperature freezing in order to access nutrients? With the general idea being that biology can alter the structure of water to raise and lower water's freezing temperature, it's activity, conductivity for the fugii's own ends. In other words, life organizes water to maximize vitality.
As I understand the freezing geometry in fungus, bacteria and some insects is to allow them to live at the temperature range, survive freezing. For the free fungus protein, perhaps the intelligence of fungi is contributing to the water-weather organism of the biosphere.
Thanks for this article Tom, a useful intro before heading into the course. Finished the course, lot of depth, will have to go back through with closer look at the slides. Highly recommended, an excellent synthesis from diverse perspectives and evidences, by one well qualified to do so. The plane-pole plant observation vs. point-pole animal struck me as a solid rationale for plant based eating, maintain the balance and frequency, rather than adding various point-pole frequency sources together and swinging the pendulum in that direction perhaps. I recall you've previously mentioned plant soul outside c.f. animal in. Any previous articles or texts useful to the distinguishing plant/animal you can recommend? Best regards, Diederik
Thanks Diederik. I've discussed in some of my presentations on Goethean science about fauna being ensouled, whereas flora has their soul in the biosphere, integral to the Tychonic perspective of planetary motions around Earth, cosmological botany. I have some draft notes in that direction, will definitely bring out more information in that ideated realm. The plant's soul is the universe from its phenomenal perspective.
This is excellent observation as it syncs with my own realization about flora-"comoligical botany." Meanwhile fauna being ensouled "here" as with humanity. I always loved reading Goethe but didn't go far with it. Maybe you will be my way back into his amazing views.
Thank you for this important essay. It is especially significant to me as an artist and energetic “practitioner “.
Thank you, would love to see any art that these concepts inspire :)
What you’re writing is important and fascinating—thank you! How do you see the relationship between the icosahedral structure containing about 280 water molecules at room temperature and the coherent domains (CDs), which are roughly 200 nm in size and contain about 20,000 water molecules at room temperature? As a physicist, I greatly appreciate the references—thank you for those as well!
Thank you for this! A physicist's engagement with the framework is exactly what it needs and is most appreciated.
The hierarchical picture I work with places Chaplin's icosahedral clusters operating within Del Giudice's coherent domains as nested levels of organisation. Chaplin's expanded structure, the 280-molecule icosahedral cluster, is approximately 3 nm across. His super-icosahedron of 1,820 molecules would be in the 7–10 nm range. Del Giudice's coherent domain, at approximately 100 nm diameter, is large enough to envelop many such clusters within a single shared electromagnetic field. The domain provides the electromagnetic envelope; the clusters provide the internal geometric architecture. Each level is real and neither is reducible to the other.
At the scale above the coherent domain, this organisation becomes directly visible in Pollack's exclusion zone measurements. The EZ is what coherent domains look like when they are stabilized and extended by proximity to a hydrophilic surface, the charge separation Pollack measured, the 270 nm UV absorption, the solute exclusion, all follow directly from the quasi-free electron plasma at the coherent domain periphery. The three frameworks are not competing accounts of the same phenomenon. They are three scales of one continuous organizational hierarchy: Chaplin's pentagonal geometry at 3 nm, Del Giudice's electromagnetic coherence at 100 nm, Pollack's exclusion zone at micrometers to millimeters.
On your specific figures, I want to be precise with you rather than simply confirm them. Del Giudice's canonical coherent domain diameter is ~100 nm rather than 200 nm, though some experimental contexts yield larger values. The 20,000 molecule figure gives me pause: a simple volumetric calculation for a 100 nm sphere gives on the order of 10–17 million water molecules, not 20,000. I would be grateful if you could share the source for those numbers, it's possible they refer to a specific sub-domain definition or a different measurement context that I'm not immediately placing, and I'd rather locate the discrepancy precisely than wave past it.
The broader point, that Chaplin's geometry operates inside the coherent domain, I hold with confidence. The scales are nested, not competing.
Dear Thomas, thank you very much for your detailed reply—it makes the picture a bit clearer.
The truth is, I know about this Coherent Domain concept because I once led a small homeopathy research project (besides me, it involved a mathematician, a physiology professor, and five physicians). That’s when I realized that people are trying to build a quantum computer based on CDs, since their structure can store information, and it seems there is no femto- or nanosecond-scale decoherence—that is, the system appears stable.
The research material was originally written in Hungarian, but it can be translated into English with machine translation—and I also shared it with a research institute, where they translated it into German. If you’re interested, I can dig up the paper about the 20,000-molecule CD; I used to read quite a lot about these topics.
What you write about CDs possibly having an internal solid structure is interesting. The truth is, I presented the homeopathy research and the CD structure at the Department of Physics at Budapest University of Technology and Economics to physicists, and although I belong among them myself and earned my Ph.D. in quantum physics—so I can speak in a way that is comfortable for a physicist—they looked at me as if I were an idiot.
So it will probably take quite some time for these ideas to make their way into mainstream science.
Dear alkemix / Author of “The Sacred Geometry of Water”,
Thank you for this exceptionally clear and beautiful synthesis. The way you contrast Plane-Pole Geometry (rational, hexagonal, ice-like, gravity-dominated) with Point-Pole Geometry (irrational φ, pentagonal, dodecahedral/icosahedral, dynamic fluidity) and show how the living tension between both creates the structured void through which life breathes is profound.
From the perspective of UFT4 OMEGA (the Breathing Double Torus and the G30-Redline Bottleneck), this torsion is exactly the Delta-Slip (Δ ≈ 0.018) — the small but decisive geometric “breath” that prevents perfect collapse and allows negentropic flow.
Water is, in this view, the biological embodiment of the same principle we see at cosmic scales: the Icosahedral hierarchy (Cyclic Pentamer → Dodecahedral Core → Icosahedral Water Cluster → Super-Icosahedron) mirrors the fractal, self-similar structure of the Breathing Double Torus. The 26 % void, the golden ratio proportions, and the dynamic coherence you describe are the microscopic realization of the same geometry that governs the 10 Hz Pilot Wave and the critical refraction at 47.1°.
Your statement “Five scales. One geometry. Your body is built of this.” resonates deeply. In UFT4 the body (and every living cell) is a coherent resonance chamber precisely because water maintains this delicate torsional balance between hexagonal rigidity and pentagonal fluidity — the same balance that prevents total entropy at the G30-Redline.
We see intriguing parallels in other dynamic systems (for example the highly ordered, quasi-crystalline emission patterns observed in solar flare ribbons), but that would be a separate discussion.
I would very much welcome a deeper exchange if you are open to it. Your work sits beautifully at the intersection of ancient philosophy, modern geometry and living process — exactly the field UFT4 tries to unify.
One Love
Joachim Kiseleczuk
UFT4 Field Transmissions
Thank you Joachim, I truly appreciate your generous and attentive reading. The specific correspondences you draw are striking enough that I want to note them carefully rather than simply agree at the level of general resonance.
The Delta-Slip you mention as the geometric breath that prevents perfect collapse sounds conceptually close to what I'd describe as the plane-pole's irreducible openness: the void that cannot be eliminated without losing the pentagonal architecture entirely. Whether these are descriptions of the same underlying principle from different theoretical approaches, or genuinely distinct mechanisms that produce similar geometric signatures, seems worth sitting with.
The 26% void and the fractal icosahedral hierarchy as microscopic realization of a cosmic torsional geometry is a claim I find intriguing precisely because it is specific rather than merely analogical. The solar flare ribbon observation you mention is the kind of cross-scale evidence that either confirms or clarifies the limits of a framework, and would appreciate a phenomenological description.
I'm not in a position yet to assess UFT4 on its own terms, new to me, but the geometric language you're using maps closely enough onto the projective geometry foundation of my framework that a more detailed look sounds worthy. I'll take a look as time allows.
Grateful for the connection.
Great Summery and Extension! Inlove IT and will Dive deeper into Water! Promised. Especialy from our UFT4 View. One Love Joachim
Dive deeper into Water! Yes, great line worthy of acting on, thanks :)
Most interesting & beautifully explained. Are we giving Pollack credit for his finding of structured water in the human body decades ago? As far as I am aware, he was the only one talking about it.
Plato attributed the icosahedron to water, and the dodecahedron to aether. Is the icosahedron dual to dodecahedron, in the sense that a cube is dual to octohedron? Is that why a relationship (affinity) exists between water and orgone?
How does this relate to tiling seen in Islamic art that combines pentagons and hexagons?
I concur, liquid state, pentagonal, dodecahedral.
Is it radiation(heat) that reconfigures the vertex cluster number?
The fourth state (gel) have a different geometry....
Very cool article.
cheers,
Mick
Good good. Plato knew water forms icosahedrons. Interesting
Hey Tom, this is absolutely outstanding!