Characterizing the Effect of the Energy Emitted by Trinfinity8 on Human DNA

by Dr. Glen Rein, January 2012


SUMMARY

Three Trinfinity8 programs (Telomere Repair, Reverse Aging and Divine Alignment) were independently lab tested on human DNA under resonance conditions using certain excitation frequencies. The results showed they significantly increased the electrical conductivity of human DNA as compared to the non-treated control group Increased electrical conductivity is associated with increased ability of DNA to repair itself (Retel, 1993) and repaired DNA has 20-fold higher conductivity than the same DNA when damaged (Hartzell, 2003). On the other hand, large decreases in conductivity are associated with mismatched DNA strands (Hihath, 2005). It is therefore likely that the Trinfinity8 programs will have a profound effect on DNA and healing the body.

The results also indicate that the Reverse Aging program was the most effective of the three programs tested. It caused a 50-60% stimulation in the electrical conductivity of DNA using all three experiment conditions cited. The Telomere Repair program was the next most effective causing a significant increase in conductivity in two of the three experimental conditions. The Divine Alignment program was the least effective producing a significant increase in only one of the three conditions.

INTRODUCTION

The main goal of this research is to ascertain whether or not any of the three targeted Trinfinity8 programs resonates with and beneficially affects human DNA. A secondary goal is to develop an in-vitro bio-system to measure if any substantive healing energy is generated by the Trinfinity8 device. This proposal is based on the hypothesis that eachTrinfinity8 program has a uniquely associated energy defined by the information in the program and that the information is delivered to the body as an energy field broadcast via the quartz crystal rods.

Electrical measurements of the body are often most sensitive, since the body in general is fundamentally electrochemical in nature. DNA itself exhibits electrical properties and DNA has been previously shown to resonate with and is altered by a variety of healing energies (Rein, 1995, Rein, 2003). Therefore, the electrical property of DNA was chosen as the bio-assay to measure the energy emitted by the Trinfinity8 device.

Electrical Conductivity of Human DNA

Electrical conductivity of biomolecules is now being used to determine how their
electrical properties relate to their well-established physical-chemical properties and their functional role in the human body. Electrical conductivity of DNA, for example, is well known to occur along its central axis and across individual strands (Bakhshi, 1994). In the case of DNA, conductivity measures correlate to the functional activity of DNA repair. Increasing conductivity is associated with increased ability of DNA to repair itself (Retel, 1993) and repaired DNA has 20-fold higher conductivity than the same DNA when damaged (Hartzell, 2003). Increased conductivity of DNA is also associated with enhanced intrinsic self-assembly processes (Lintao, 2000). On the other hand, large decreases in conductivity are associated with mismatched DNA strands (Hihath, 2005). Thus, any treatment which increases electrical conductivity can be considered beneficial to the body.

One method for measuring electrical conductivity of biomolecules like DNA is to apply current at different frequencies and measure the response as voltage spikes. Other techniques apply electric fields at different frequencies and measure current spikes. These current-voltage techniques are used in several commercially available spectrophotometers including dielectric spectroscopy. In fact there are numerous methods now available to measure the electrical conductivity of DNA. Published studies using these techniques report that individual molecules of DNA can conduct electrons, protons and polarons.
These subatomic particles can travel down and through the DNA helix at varying rates. Depending on the type of DNA, its chemical and physical properties and its external environment (solvent properties), the charge transfer rate can be as slow as a multi-step non-conductor or as fast as a superconductor. Under resonance conditions, intrinsic energy fluctuations within DNA result in electron decoherence and charge transfer process occurs via a one-step coherent superexchange (Xin-Qi 2001). This superconductive process is believed to occur via a quantum tunneling mechanism (Zikic, 2006). Thus, the electrical conductivity of DNA can either occur as a classical (ohmic) multi-step, incoherent hopping process or via quantum tunneling. Although this is acknowledged by main stream science, the experimental conditions which encourage classical or quantum behavior is unknown.

Conductivity measurements taken by Del Giudice and Cyril Smith demonstrated discrete voltage jumps at specific resonance frequencies in lysozyme, a typical biomolecule (Del Giudice, 1989). They are considered resonance frequencies because when their extremely narrow bandwidths are consistent with Josephon-like behavior. Such measurements are believed to measure macroscopic quantum coherent behavior of biomolecules similar to Josephson-like behavior observed in superconductors. Del Giudice mathematically modeled this behavior as Josephson supercurrent mediated by intrinsic coherence domains (DelGiudice, 1988).

The Quantum Biology Research Lab’s Methodology
The QBRL method measures the electrical property of a DNA solution by applying a voltage at varying frequencies (from 25-100 kHz) and measuring the current response in nanoamps. The standard current-voltage measurement technique was modified using a proprietary method to increase the likelihood of measuring quantum superexchange. This is achieved in part by taking experimental measurements under resonance conditions. This novel technique has previously been used at QBRL to characterize the electrical properties of human DNA in general and its quantum properties in particular.

Such measurements have been shown to be extremely sensitive to external energies like electromagnetic energy (classical and non-classical), acoustic energy, bio-energy, paramagnetic energy and subtle energy stored in various commercial devices. The QBRL method for measuring electrical conductivity is extremely sensitive to weak (subtle) energies and is highly frequency dependent.

Laboratory Preparation
The presence of energies left behind by the previous experiment was minimized by the energetic clearing of lab. This was achieved by waiting several weeks and by playing higher frequency music and saging the lab. The experiment was set up with the following geometric relationships between the various devices.

Experimental Setup

Experimental Protocol
All measurements were obtained by placing a sample of DNA in a glass chamber containing two electrodes, one to excite the sample with a weak voltage surge and one to measure the current response. Stock solutions (30ug/ml) of human placental DNA (Sigma Chemical Co) were made in various solvent systems and diluted using the same solvent. Control measurements of the solvent alone and DNA in the solvent were taken before the Trinfinity8 device was introduced into the laboratory. The same experimental conditions that were used for control measurements were also used for all treatment programs. Conductivity values obtained for the solvent were subtracted from measurements of DNA (in solvent) to obtain the conductivity values associated with only the DNA molecules.

The following experimental variables were used to create resonant conditions:

A. DNA preparation
Addition of NaCl to the solvent at various concentrations (0.01- 1%)
dilution of stock DNA (1/10 to 1/100)

B. Spectrophotometer Settings and Measurement Setup
different excitation voltages (from 10-50 mV)
different excitation frequency (25-100 kHz)
orientation of crystal rods
separation of electrodes (2-20 mm)
exposure time (20- 75 minutes)

C. Data Analysis
amplitude vs. polarity vs. shape of current response
probabilistic measure of percent occurrence vs. signal strength

Using these variables, resonance conditions for the entire experimental setup (the five energies described below) were found so that optimal differences could be obtained between treated and untreated samples. Using these conditions, 15 sequential measurements were made. The current response measured (compared to baseline) varied enormously over the 15 measurements – 20% to 600% stimulation. More consistent data was obtained when the current response is calculated as the number of times the system responds, rather than the magnitude of the response. The percent occurrence was calculated as a percentage – the number of current responses divided by 15. This value was used in all data presented in the Results section.

For 30 minutes before and during the actual measurement, DNA was exposed to the energies of the Trinfinity8 system. These energies include:

1. Digital program information delivered via the crystal rods
2. Fractal program information delivered via the computer screen
3. Acoustic energy delivered via tonal music provided by the program

Additional energies present during a given treatment include the relatively weak geomagnetic field (lab elevation is 7000 ft) and the biofield of the experimenter (Dr. Rein). The experimenter, however, maintained a neutral state of mind throughout the measurement procedures to ensure no intentional bias was present during these experiments.

The 3 Treatment programs the DNA (plus solvent) were exposed to:

Telomere Repair
Divine Alignment
Reverse Aging

RESULTS
Varying the frequency and amplitude of the excitation signal over the range stated above, mostly resulted in current response values similar to those of the controls. Under these experimental conditions the Trinfinity8 programs were ineffective. Control values are obtained from untreated DNA and are graphically displayed as a dark horizontal line at its calculated value (percent occurrence). The error bars associated with the control values in each Figure correspond to the margin of error (twice the standard deviation). Experimental values greater than the margin of error are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (p=0.05). Thus, under three different experimental conditions, a statistical significant increase in electric conductivity is observed. The 3 graphs below show the current responses obtained under these three experimental conditions.


FIGURE 1
Excite DNA with 28kHz at 13 mV while being exposed to three Trinifinity8 programs. Error bars are 2σ (2x standard deviation).

FIGURE 2
Excite DNA with 45 kHz at 10 mV while being exposed to three Trinfinity8 programs. Error bars are 2σ (2x standard deviation).


FIGURE 3
Excite DNA with 63 kHz at 12 mV while being exposed to three Trinfinity8 programs. Error bars are 2σ (2x standard deviation). 

Discussion

The results in the three Figures indicate that under resonance conditions using certain excitation parameters (frequency and amplitude) the three Trinfinity8 programs increase the electrical conductivity of human DNA.

The fact that this occurs at certain excitation frequencies (and corresponding voltages) indicates that this frequency say, 45 kHz, can be considered the resonance frequency of the entire system. In these experiments, the entire system is composed of the three energies from the Trinfinity8 programs (described above), the geomagnetic field in Ridgway, CO and the biofield of the experimenter. These five energies are impinging on the DNA when (during the measurement) it is excited by yet another field, an electric field generated from the voltage spike at a particular frequency. When the excitation frequency happens to match the resonance frequency of the entire system, then the information from the Trinfinity8 programs can resonate with and alter the DNA molecules.

Thus at 45 kHz the resonance is strong and two of the three programs stimulate the electrical conductivity of DNA. Under these experimental conditions, the anti-aging program is the most effective, but the divine alignment program is not effective. At 28 kHz a similar pattern is seen, although under these experimental conditions, the telomere repair program becomes as effective as the anti-aging program, but the divine alignment program is still ineffective. In contrast, using the experimental conditions which include an excitation frequency of 63 kHz, the divine alignment program is now effective at stimulation the electric conductivity of DNA. Under these conditions, the anti-aging program remains highly effective, but the telomere program is no long effective.

The results also indicate that the anti-aging program was the most effective of the three programs tested. It caused a 50-60% stimulation in the electrical conductivity of DNA using all three experiment conditions. The telomere program was the next most effective causing a significant increase in conductivity in two of the three experimental conditions. The divine alignment program was the least effective producing a significant increase in only one of the three conditions.

As explained in the introduction, increased electrical conductivity is associated with and in some cases controls the functional properties of DNA in the cell. Since measurements are made under resonance conditions, conductivity of electrons is believed to be occurring via a unistep super-exchange mechanism involving quantum tunneling. Therefore we can also conclude that this particular quantum property of DNA is enhanced by all three Trinfinity8 programs. The ability of an external energy field (actually three interacting fields as described above) generated from the Trinfinity8 programs to stimulate DNA at the quantum level is of fundamental importance. It is therefore likely that the Trinfinity8 programs will have a profound effect on healing the body.

References

Bakhshi AK. “Investigation of electronic conduction in proteins and DNA.” Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 1994;61(3):187-253.

Del Giudice E, Preparata G et al. “Water as a free electric dipole laser”. Phys Rev Lett. 1988 Aug 29;61(9):1085-1088.
Del Giudice, Doglia S et al. “Magnetic flux quantization and Josephson behavior in living systems.” Physica Scripta 1989;40(1):786-791.

Hartzell B. “Comparative current–voltage characteristics of nicked and repaired λ-DNA” Appl. Phys. Lett. 82 (26), 4800 (2003)

Hihath J, Xu B, Zhang P, Tao N. Study of single-nucleotide polymorphisms by means of electrical conductance measurements. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:16979–16983.

Lintao Cai, Hitoshi Tabata, and Tomoji Kawai Self-assembled DNA networks and their electrical conductivity” Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 3105 (2000); doi:10.1063/1.1323546

Omura Y, et al. “Bi-directional transmission of molecular information by photon or electrons beams passing in the close vicinity of specific molecules, and its clinical and basic research applications…” Acupuncture Electrotherapy Res. 1992;17(1):29-46.
Rein G. “The in vitro effect of bioenergy on the conformational states of human DNA in aqueous solutions” J. Acupuncture & Electrotherapeutics Res. 20: 173-180, 1995

Rein G “Bio-information and non-local interactions between biological systems.” Proc. Society for Scientific Exploration, Boulder, CO. June, 2011

Rein G. “Utilization of a New In-Vitro Bioassay to Quantify the Effects of Conscious Intention of Healing Practitioners” The Science of Whole Person Healing, Vol.2, R.Roy (ed). Iuniverse Inc, Lincoln, NE, p222-236, 2003

J. Retel et al. “Mutational specificity of oxidative DNA damage”, Mutat. Res. 299 (1993), p. 165.

Xin-Qi, L et al. “A superexchange-mediated sequential hoping theory for charge transfer in DNA” J Phys Chem A 105, 9563-67, 2001

Zikic R et al. “Characterization of the tunneling conductance across DNA bases.” Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2006 Jul;74(1 Pt 1):011919.

_____________________________________________________________
Dr. Glen Rein is Director of the Quantum Biology Research Lab in Ridgway, Colorado where he conducts biomedical research. He was Senior Principle Scientist and Director for Estee Lauder, Research Scientist at Stanford University Medical Center and Assistant Professor at Mt. Sinai Hospital. He received his PhD in Bio(neuro)chemistry from the University of London.

Comments are closed.