Hey readers, I’m getting all worked up prepping for conference going in a couple weeks, and that involves helping a couple people get their websites ready to go for the occasion! So I’ve got a few friends who’ve volunteered to cover for me. One is Olga Mecking, my friend across the pond. She’s been here before with a Polish curd cheese post. Olga told me about this “famous” rice experiment that I had never heard of even though it was in some positive thinking movie and all over Facebook. I must conclude my brain automatically filters possibly poorly-conducted voodoo “science” experiments.
The Rice Experiment has been making the rounds on the Internet for a while. What’s the rice experiment, you’re asking me? Glad you asked. Masaru Emoto, a Japanese Professor of Alternative Studies (Really? Really? To me, the words “professor” and “alternative” used in one sentence just don’t work well together), who somehow got the idea that our thoughts affect reality.
In his latest so called “experiment,” Emoto prepared three jars with rice. He wrote: “I love you” on the first one, “You idiot” on the other one and ignored the third one. After a month, the first jar of rice went sour, and there was mould on the rice in the second and third jar. The rice that got ignored had the most mould. Emoto concluded that…the things he said to the rice actually had an impact on the rice, causing fermentation or mould to appear. Because you know, it couldn’t be anything else, like.. fungi? But I am getting ahead of myself.
Now I wouldn’t even have thought that this could be somehow mistaken for science. Then, someone in a group I belong to shared it and is actually following the experiment, getting the same results. It turns out, it has been reproduced quite a few times, each time getting the same results (of course I can’t speak for the instances where the experiment failed and no one mentioned it).
I searched the Internet for a logical explanation. Unfortunately, I didn’t find much, probably because the scientific community wouldn’t bother with a silly thing like this. But they should be, because people actually believe this stuff.
Now what would I even care about this? First of all, I am the daughter of two scientists and I believe science (real science) is exciting. I sometimes make my own sourdough – not from rice, but from rye- and know a little bit about how it works.
There are a lot of bacteria and viruses and yeast in the air. They’re everywhere. Scary, isn’t it? Some of it gives us ugly infections. Some of it works miracles in our food, making ordinary flour into something amazing- that is the REAL miracle, not the wacky stuff Emoto would have us believe. What happened with the rice or the flour basically depends on which type of bug gets into it- and also depends on how we handle the rice and the equipment.
With the first bowl, the rice, (that has been cooked and poured warm into the jar) is practically sterile, but there could be only one lonely little yeast cell in it- that’s enough to start fermentation. The rice goes into the jar; there is no oxygen, and assuming that the jar is sterile as well, fermentation happens. While you’re busy transferring the rice to the first jar, it cools off a little, and fungi from the air begin to land on it. Then you put rice with the fungi into the second jar and the fungi cells begin to multiply, causing the mould to appear. Then you put the rice into the third jar and there is even more weird stuff in it- more fungi, more mould.
No amount of talking, singing, praying or reciting poetry would have changed that- it all depends on what bug goes into the jar with the rice. If yeast goes into the rice, it begins to ferment. If it’s mould (another kind of fungi), it begins to rot. It is as simple as that.
You honestly don’t need all that touchy-feely alternative stuff to make a fun and educational experiment that shows all the different things that can grow on pretty much anything- milk, rice, flour, or fruit. You can experiment with temperatures, humidity and see what grows where. That is the cool stuff.
Now it could all be true and our words and thought could actually make mould grow or cause fermentation, but that’s rather unlikely- and anyway, the rice experiment totally fails to do so.
What are your thoughts on whether you can influence mold with your thoughts? I wonder if anybody’s conducted the experiment where they labeled the jars in reverse order.
This is just the oddest experiment.
I think words and thoughts can be used to spread positivity, but I don’t need a science experiment to prove it.
I just really try very hard to put my theory into practice. 🙂
Olga @The EuropeanMama says
Well yes there is plenty of proof that a positive outlook on life can help, but it will not affect what will grow on the rice. The experiment is so badly done I can’t even. Thanks for the comment!
Tell that to strands of DNA they unwound the same way. Quantum effect – tunneling I believe.
The Thunderer says
Thank you Nina, there are myriad repeatable examples of phenomenon such as this. Considering the Quantum variable is a serious explanation. For someone so scientifically based, Olga, your debunking was purely conjecture. For shame.
You’re just stating that thoughts can’t affect rice. No where in your post do you actually disprove anything
I tried the rice experiment and I after 4days my love rice had one small amount mold and the hate rice was still white. I don’t know if its because while sending love to the love rice while I was stressed was it or if negative energy bounced off into it. One thing for sure I’m a lil disappointed
Gustavo E. Laffitte says
The rebuttal that the same “1” bug got into every jar labeled hate & no bugs got into the jars labeled hate is a sad attempt at debunking this. He also did it with water molecules. If you’re truly scientific than you should know by now that science (as is defined today) is wholly poor equipped to “run test” on the un-seen. If you can’t re-create it in a lab it doesn’t exist is today’s science mantra & yet everyday we see signs that there exist much more than we know. However, lets keep this “scientific” & explain how this would not in some way correlate the “Double Slit Experiment” which essentially concludes that our thoughts have substance & can change reality as is scientifically Proven with the double slit experiment. If you stop & think this makes a lot of sense, “when it rains it pours” is a term we’ve all heard as well as “I’m on a role”. Perhaps something started that person off on a bad day & he was in a negative mood for the rest of the day ccausing/attracting more negative things & vice versa. We know everything is energy just vibrating at different frequencies, & we know like energy attracts like energy. That is scientific fact, the rest is 2+2=4….
Sarah at Journeys of The Zoo says
I have admit that I never actually heard of this experiment until your post. I think I’ll go back to living under my rock. Less crazies around there.
Blogger at Journeys of The Zoo
Food Retro says
I am glad I’m not the only one, Sarah!
Olga @The EuropeanMama says
Hi Sarah, yeah that sounds like a good idea. I’ll crawl under mine. Too much crazy in this world.
Calling differing opinions to your own, “crazy”…. well, that is kind of offensive to your readers and harmful to your own potential to grow.
Being trapped “under a rock” in order to avoid newness…. THAT is CRAZY.
Anna Fitfunner says
Hi there! A couple of comments. First of all, a technical note: the youtube videos to which you’ve linked are now marked private. So without an invite no one can view them.
Secondly, the rice experiment is a classic case of selection bias. As you note, no one seems to report the incidence of negative results (that is the fungi shows up in the “positive” jar). If this experiment was done in a truly randomized way, in a large enough sample size, then the rice experiment would not show the results claimed. It’s likely that the results across all of the people trying the experiment actually refute the Professor’s hypothesis, but that people experiencing failures are not reporting the failures as energetically as the people reporting the successes. This kind of false positive effect is why large and importance experiments (like developing a drug) are performed using rigorous statistics. Otherwise one spends huge amounts of time chasing after wrong ideas.
So the rice experiment is a cute fairy tale, kind of like phlogiston or Leprechauns or the Loch Ness Monster. But Nessie is better looking than rice fungus.
Food Retro says
Hi Anna, thanks for the note on the videos. We are looking for replacements 🙂
Olga @The EuropeanMama says
Hi thanks for letting me know about the videos. A pity they didn’t work because the guy did a really great job of explaining why this experiment is so wrong. But check out the critical analysis of “What the Bleep do we Know”, where a similar “experiment” by the same “researcher” was featured.
Klas H. says
“If this experiment was done in a truly randomized way, in a large enough sample size, then the rice experiment would not show the results claimed”
Only if consciousness can’t affect the rice. But if it can, you will find that the negative rice will rot quicker – as the experiments tend to show. Try it at home to see for yourself if you dare to have your presupposed world view shattered 😉
Olga @The EuropeanMama says
The thing is that in the experiments that were really well done- where all the jars were sterilized etc, there was little difference in how the rice in all the jars ended up, which makes it clear that all growth on the rice came from funghal and bacterial contamination.This is a badly done experiment and doesn’t really prove anything at all.
But that’s not true…an instance I saw was pretty good, randomized the jar, rotated their position, some vacuum sealed and a control group with sliced apples in the jar.
Result was same negative turned black, nice rice kept….but not in the vacuum sealed.
Result were repeatable as long as the jar.had air
Its ironic. This experiment will only work for open minded individuals who are not “polarized” subconsciously toward skepticism in these “alternative” subjects.
Consider that you were let down (repeatedly) real hard by some “misbelief” in the past, and that it has left a subconscious impression that secretly fuels your skepticism.
Such individuals really have no power to charge the “LOVE” or “HOPE” jar with actual love or hope in my observations. In fact they tend to grasp so tightly to disbelief, facts partaining to “alternative” subjects, have to be repeated and dissected endlessly before they can be accepted.
Same can be said of Optimists who automatically rule out anything that will “break” any proof that they come to rely on.
That is obvious no?
I am a natural skeptic too, but i can admit that “public” science is seriously outdated and is in need of some updates! ESPECIALLY in the WATER department!
“Little difference” is still a difference. And that difference is the whole point.
So was there zero change or little?
If you’re neglecting any change based on what you’re expecting to see, that’s your bias.
Instead of debunking videos, DO the experiment! That’s why I came to your page!
You prove nothing either.
(Also, you’re snarky and childish in your parentheticals. It cheapens your point.)
Miracles are not contrary to nature, only contrary to what we know about nature.
Olga @The EuropeanMama says
Please explain how this relates to my post? This experiment is no miracle, just a badly done “experiment” that shows absolutely nothing.
Rev. Kitty M. Nelson says
actually you’re incorrect. firstly, Dr. Emoto was a Doctor of Alternative medicine and President of the International Water for Life Foundation. I think his credentials as an author and researcher stand up. if you study his actual workings with regard to the experiment, uncooked rice is used, with the beakers (not sealed jars) open to the air. His is not the first of this kind when dealing with how thoughts or words create a condition. Russians back in the 50’s or 60’s were working with plants and how they perceive energies, thoughts, actions. How “alive” and “sentient” they really were.
The experiment is meant to cause one to further think on how they treat others, how their thoughts actually create and shape their reality. It isn’t a miracle. It’s meant to teach you to use your mind and live from your heart.
Olga to you it’d be a miracle if thoughts and emotions could change materials no?
So yes, positive results in experiments like these can be likened to miracles! Especially to a skeptic!
Now try again to see the wisdom in Morgan’s comment.
“Miracles are not contrary to nature, only contrary to what we know about nature.”
What would be an accurate way to test the effects of energetic frequencies from human thoughts/emotions on reality? Since I do not have a strong background in science, I would love to hear some ideas from you.
Olga @The EuropeanMama says
Jessica, there were studies done on telepathy, showing that it doesn’t exist, so even the idea of human frequencies from human thoughts is difficult. But this is a good explanation: https://explorable.com/conduct-science-experiments.
learn something says
Not so fast, experimental physicists have observed photons behaving different depending on whether or not they are being observed.
karen widener says
The first experiment l ever heard remotely like this l heard in the 70s. They had 2 groups of dogs, spoke badly to one and loving to the other over time, then tested their bone marrow. One had healthy pink bone marrow, the other grey, with poor health.
My sister and I tried this experiment months ago, only with 2 plastic containers, the rice filled with water. one saying ‘I hate you’ and other ‘Thank you’… Literally in 5 days the ‘I hate you’ rice I was seeing signs of rotting at the top. The ‘Thank you; rice was still fresh and nothing had happened to it. It remained that way onwards. both containers were untouched and sealed correctly. Decide for yourself. I think water reacts to it’s enviroment for sure. There is scienfic proof out there for it. Just give it a go and make sure your intentions are true to each container. and it’ll work.
I have personally tried this experiment several times with several different labels emotions and words and different types of stuff rice, cooked and non cooked, fruit, flour and even cold and hot cereal and in almost every experiment with the rice that I am kind to will grow beautiful green fluffy mold (unless its already dead) I find this to be a great experience for my children teaching them that words have such an important impact everything and sometimes a substance can be more resilient than others but in the end words will eventually hurt that too
I have done the experiment with two samples of rice placed in non sealing but identical containers.
One sample I ignore and without label, the other I labelled the word ‘Love’ . I also offered prayers to the sample with ‘Love’. After 3 days you could see the difference. The ignored rice started to rot and the loved rice started to ferment. BTW, I let the rice cool down before I placed them into new identical containers. I didn’t record which come first.
Brecken Chinn, Ph.D. says
I’m a college professor who has conducted this experiment over 200 times across three institutions with my students. We have carefully controlled protocols — the cups are identical (and brand new), the rice is from the same batch, the water is from the same pitcher, one person spoons the rice into all cups, one person pours the water, one person labels the rice cups (4 letters each — LOVE — HATE — CTRL), and each of the sets of cups is handled identically. We have been clean, skeptical, and meticulous with protocols, and I’ve never attained such replicable results — the control rice (that has no intention sent to it whatsoever) dissolves or wastes more than the other cups each time. Students do not handle the cups, and in fact intention sent at a distance appears to work just as well (if not better) than intention sent from nearby. I have a full Powerpoint and ample photos to demonstrate the effects. If you’d like to engage with me about this research, please do so in a truly curious scientific manner. You are also welcome to observe our next trial, either in person or by Skype.
Hello Professor Chin, i would like to know the correct directions of the experiment. I would love to try it wih my children. Thank you very much.
Please email me. [email protected]
I’d also like to try this experiment out – for myself but also for my children. I am skeptical because it’s true, the original experiment seems flawed, but I have a few ideas I’d like to try for myself. Because while I am skeptical, I can see the huge implications if it is indeed true – that our intentions impact our environment. I would love to see your results and how you have done your experiments, Professor Chin! If you could email me ( [email protected] ), I’d love to hear from you! It’s a fascinating experiment, even if it is poorly made. I’m most amazed that his results have been replicated!
*IF it’s true. Damn typos.
Scrap that, got it right the first time. LOL! Why is the writing in this comment box so tiny and faint? I can’t see what I’m writing!
Stefan Wilson says
I am beginning my PhD in Holland as of March 1st. I would like to involve my supervisors and colleagues in this experiment. I work in the statistical department of a research institution. This provides a good opportunity to adapt for statistical variability (using mixed effects models), and do the experiment many times under the right conditions.
One tough aspect to make it scientific is the measure of strength of the intention and how genuine the intention is. This is not a quantifiable measure and makes this experiment scientifically challenging. However maybe a statistical mixed effect model can capture the variability from this measure.
I would like to co-operate with you on this work to prove or disprove this theory once and for all in a publishable format.
Email me at … [email protected]
Thank you for your truthful and well stated experience on this argument. I appreciate you coming in knowing the people disagree. Thank you much!
Anyway I collect photos and such to show my 10 year old son before we experiment ourselves?
I am deeply interested in the method you used to conduct this experiment. Please contact me! I have many questions regarding this.
A friend took 3 identical glass jars. Marked one with a cross, one with a tick, the other unmarked. One part uncooked rice, two parts water. Did not touch the jars, but sent good & bad thoughts/words to the appropriate jars. The result after 2 months was incredible. The “bad jar” had decomposing rice with a pinkish stain. The ignored jar was similar, but not as bad . The “good jar” had white, clean rice with clear water. I found this so amazing, I tried it myself. Three identical sterilised jars. Before the rice was put in, my kids stuck labels on with pictures depicting bad/hate and good/love – then we put in equal amounts of uncooked rice & water. The jars are placed together on a shelf, they are not handled. Every day words are spoken to the bad and good jars, and already after a couple of weeks, the hate jar is cloudy, the good jar is clear, the ignored jar cloudy but not as much as the hate jar. To me, that’s a result that I cannot argue with. Three different jars, each doing different things, each responding to their labels and the words spoken to them. An amazing demonstration of the power of our words.
Did you also try the experiment with cooked rice? I think that when I do it, I will set up 6 jars, maybe even 8 – a love jar, a hate jar, an ignored jar and a jar that has no intentions directed at it, just random words. And then another set of jars that I may try using no words with. I wonder if just directing intentions without vocalisation would achieve different results? Either way – it’s a really fascinating idea and one that would be life changing for many people if proven true.
I think more than anything we can clearly see Olga’s viewpoint on things that are not totally understood by western science. You even go on to dismiss telepathy completely. Just reading your own blog readers comments you can see a clear disconnect with your audience. Time and time again people have tried this experiment with consistent results. Olga, you are looking at the world from a very limited perspective. Open your mind.
did you actually do the experiment?
do it, and when it fails, debunke it.
Janet Elaine says
You are so annoying and entitled. whether the experiment is true or not, your negativity is gross. What’s the worst possible outcome of people believing that positivity affects themselves and those around them….people working to be more…positive? How dare they.
Sigh. How do I explain this to you. I have nothing against people getting more optimistic, all the more power to them. But if they do it though a so called “experiment” that has nothing to do with science at all, then they’re actually mistaken. I also have nothing against doing experiment to prove or disapprove the link between the power of thoughts and reality. But this experiment simply cannot prove it in any way because stuff growing on rice is too random a process and thus it cannot be proven that the growth of lactobacteria (which is what happens to the rice that went sour) and mold is too random unless performed in a highly controlled environment that can’t really be achieved at home.
That’s exactly the sort of trite skeptical thinking that is so common with New Atheists.
Everything is a coincidence and explained away through dry scientific “facts” and random random processes.
How about seeing some sense that it is in fact intentionality and intelligence that is actually the fundamental force behind the phenoemena we see around as and not just blind random probability.
Open your eyes.
Food Retro says
I think you’re making a lot of assumptions about the religious practices. 🙂
And you are making a lot of assumptions about how our reality operates.
Food Retro says
Assumptions aren’t required. That’s what science is for.
Whats the point in science if it doesn’t check out at home?
Do you honestly wait for some (official) scientists to tell you whats what before you start trying things out for yourself?
And lastly for everyone who would switch personal observation for scientific publications, how can you trust ANY MAJOR INSTITUTION…. especially if they are AMERICAN! In case you haven’t noticed your governing bodies are your ENEMIES!
Everyone with internet knows this by now! Or is that kind of fact too “alternative”?
Forgive my sarcasm and hard tone. I’m actually quite timid and you truly seem innocent and nice, but truth is precious and you reach serious amounts of people with your posts!
Also don’t be afraid to try “ALTERNATIVE” methods, historians, scientists, and news sources if you really want to discover anything groundbreaking.
Did you not read what those DRs had to say?
Espen Monserud says
The belief that present day science can explain everything is scientific hubris, and leads to ignorance. On the other hand, explaining things only with (new age) philosophy is speculative, and leads to more ignorance. From my research with rice, water crystals and other subjects of thought, I’m in no doubt about the power of consciousness and it’s effects on the micro cosmos. But I dare not speculate on how it works.
Espen, would you be up for some conversation/brainstorming on what might be causing “how it works.” I’ve achieved repeated demonstrable results from the rice experiment and have been working on figuring out “what’s going on.”
I’d love to explore ideas with anyone interested!
It is true that the rice experiment does not conform to the scientific method. The reasons stated within the post are very likely when this experiment is not performed in a controlled environment.
Having said that, dealing with consciousness is a very subjective matter. Science always require measurable, repeatable and verifiable results. It is obsessed with physicality and matter, whereas the physical is only 4% of the known universe. Even what science has not been able to comprehend and grasp, it is terming as “dark matter”. By referring it to as “matter”, it is keeping it in the bounds of physicality.
So, this experiment will require the person experimenting it to have certain mastery over his or her mind. Just cause one wrote “I love you” or “I hate you” does not necessarily mean much, if the person was agitated at the time of putting on the tags. In today’s world, people have shortened attention spans and they suffer from mental diarrhea. Combined with the reasons stated in the post and the subjective nature, will make it almost difficult to withstand scientific scrutiny.
P.S Only pseudo scientists think that science is complete and whole. And people’s believe in science is based on the technological marvels that it has been able to churn out. And if science was complete, it would not require the constant striving of scientists towards improving upon or changing scientific theories. Science always goes along with the theory that allows for increased accuracy in repetition.
The poster most likely also doesn’t believe food and mood effects your health. Is depression fake too? Should we all be zoned out on prescription drugs? The power of the mind is actually quite scientific. Additionally, God and science complement one another. One does not negate the other.
A real scientist would make the experiment himself,thats called the scientific approach,not justcomplaning in some forum .I did the experiment and the result is the same,i didmt placed the names on the jars but i really loved the one for 5 min 2 times a day and ignored the other.The result was surprising for me too,it was the same result.
Does anyone have comments on the possibility of there being a correlation between the results of the experiment and the belief/disbelief of the one performing the experiment? If the one doing the experiment is doing it to prove conscious intention DOES affect our reality vs. doing the experiment to disprove the possibility, does that affect the outcome?
I definitely think this correlation exists. The power of the thought has to be associated with the individuals prior beliefs. That’s why I believe this experiment has shown consistent results with classrooms of young children, who are more inclined to believe and give genuine thouhts, as oppose to a skeptic who is just going through the motions without genuine intent.
One day when I have time I would really like to conduct the experiment, and pool data from other experiments, and analyse it statistically with the assumption that the hidden variable of ïntent”may play a role. I unfortunately won’t have time for quite a while to do so. So I’m just here to agree with your idea.
I did the experiment to proof is not working but i was looking for the real answer and used my emotions,the result was surprising for me.
Richard R. says
I’m curious if the words were the same, but the emotions were different if the experiment would be the same. So, if one said “I love you” with an angry tone, and “I hate you” with a loving and affectionate tone.
i don’t think this person actually tried the experiment because it works every time. if it were simply some random mold vs yeast falling into it, then it wouldn’t always work.
L. Preston says
After additional Google searches I found this page. Being a skeptic by nature, I was happy to read an explanation following a line of reasoning which coincides with my own. Human nature being what it is today, with plentiful, wishful, polly-annish thinking of prevalence, rather than clear headed open mindedness it didn’t surprise me to see this experiment presented in numerous web sites as being a fundamental truth. Oh my, I really do feel badly for our future as a country.
Why is it that people can’t just leave things alone. If it is bringing positive reactions. If it is showing children to use their words carefully or even adults. Just let it be. It is not causing harm to anyone. Sometimes it is ok to just believe.
If this is your opinion than why not lable the first jar I hate you? That could prove your theory.
grover c says
Do people doing this actually love one jar of rice and hate the other? How can you love rice? Especially plain white rice and why would you try? My guess is that you are lying to that rice and leading it on. What did you do with your love rice eventually? You dumped it like trash! Get over yourselves, and be nice to actual people.
Did anyone consider that maybe mold growing on wet rice is what’s supposed to happen and that maybe there’s something wrong with rice that doesn’t grow mold on it? I mean it’s only our human aesthetic sense that makes month old wet pristine white rice “better” that moldy rice. As far as mother nature’s concerned moldy rice is probably healthier for the planet.
I 100% agree with you, but what makes people believe these things, is the photographic documentation and “proof” – why don’t you do the same, to refute these shoddy results?!
Chantal T. says
Question: i am performing this experiment in class. don’t get me started, the professor is already driving me up the tree with her teaching methods, i am not going to get into how she wants us to write a 10 page research paper on rice. but anyway. we were given access to different articles and research/findings on Dr. Emoto. Before his rice experiment, Emoto had hundreds of petri dishes with water molecules and such in them. he had the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ ones, to which he would treat respectively. After however long, he would have them frozen or something and created into crystals. in the end, he has many photographs of these water molecules. it was actually quite interesting, because the ones that were mistreated–and the evidence was pretty consistent–were not formed, round, ugly. the water that had been prayed to and loved had formed a solid shape, like a snow flake, and had actual structure. Dr. Emoto’s rice experiment was supposed to show that negative words/energies (i doubt you believe in energy, but as a researching psychologist i believe that yes, we emit ‘energy’ in every day life, our brains work with it’s own electricity, and can emit and receive this electricity/energy). anyway, Emoto was showing that when we use these mean/bad words, it is absorbed through the water, not the rice. the rice was just a capsule to harness the energy and manifest it however it does. In my own experience with the rice experiment, the reason why it fails is because the operator/ experimenter does not do the experiment correctly, they do not say the right things or consistently. it is an experiment that needs daily interaction.
though i completely understand your point of view and i will cheer you on, i believe that there is more to the rice experiment than just watching rice mold. it is to show that when we say mean things to humans it is absorbed into them and affects them. In my paper, i compare the ‘hate’, ‘love’ and ‘apathy’ jar to the four types of parenting styles, authoritative, neglectful, permissive, and authoritarian, and how they affect children on a psychosocial, cognitive, and emotional level.
though the rice experiment is a flimsy concept, i like to apply it to how humans treat each other and hope that it can change someone’s point of view on the human experience.
thank you for your post! it made me think.
Baback D. says
Well said, The experiment started with water and rice was in fact a more visible and simpler secondary experiment so that the public would be able to see and understand the effect everyday behavior can have on others.
Regardless if it is a hoax. I’m no scientist, but I know how to spell mold!
Food Retro says
Mould is spelled correctly in British/Canadian English.
You are wrong, check the experiments of sound on sand, when they emmit soundwaves on a flat surface with sand, flour, etc on it, the material takes differnet shapes and forms, this is not fantasy, check it on youtube, and we re talking about simple frequencies, not music or words expressed with emotion like Dr Emoto did, i m sure the music of bethoven on water can create much more complex patterns, you should be more open minded and if not you should not try to drag people in your own very narrow mindset, bye.
Baback D. says
That’s what I’m talking about, Exactly !! Well said my friend
I did the rice experiment for 12 days and though the water condensation on the inside of each jar did differ it actually looks like there is actually more and darker mold in the I love you jar vs the I hate you jar.
Off course we would not want the ‘crazy’ people thinking their thoughts and emotions affect the world around them. How horrible would it be to have a bunch of people going around secretly blessing you, thanking you and loving you hoping to stimulate some kind of effect on the water cells in your body. No I much prefer science that likes to poison the air, water and food sources, create test-tube babies, test on animals and off course spend a whole lot of money attempting to ‘cure’ diseases that can be cured with a simple lifestyle and diet change that the scientists could never admit because then who would fund them? Not the pharmaceutical companies or the big business thats for sure. Thank you for words, I love you <3
Do you say ‘ignorance is bliss” …… probably…..isn’t that dangerous for your followers?
You would have to be ignorant to believe thought vibration is a myth.
When we begin to accept that thought is a powerful vibration, a manifestation of energy, a powerful magnet that attracts to itself similar vibrations, we will then see how important it is to control our thoughts. The fact that these vibrations are not evidenced by our five senses is no proof that they do not exist. Do more research.
Baback D. says
What kind of a science do you believe in exactly? what you’re taught in schools and universities? the kind of science that is not even open to debate?
Dr. Emoto’s experiment goes well beyond rice jars and if you and every other person who has commented here cares to dig into it, you’ll be shocked of how magnificent it is. As you know, about three fourth of our body composition is made up of water and that’s the whole point here. Open your eyes, do some real research for your sake at least
Saying an experiment is flawed does not equal “debunking.” Your vicious eagerness for this topic’s dismissal shines a light not only the agenda of your financiers, but also on your flawed logic.
Food Retro says
Believe it or not, neither of us are getting paid by men in black to express our skepticism. Sure would be nice if we were.
I distrust people who cannot fathom “alternative” anything.
I’m a true believer….
One thing about the experiment is the one saying I love you or I hate you must really mean what they are saying. If you are just saying the words with out believing what you are saying they are just words.
It’s been said that if you go in thinking “this will not work”, “this is dumb” or “this is stupid”, you won’t be able to actually emit the directed energy towards each jar. do it with a control, in a scientific approved way., with genuine thoughts of positivity and negativity towards each jar. and then get back to us.
If you don’t believe in it then why not do the experiment yourself and see if you can make all three turn out the same way? If you’re the daughter of two scientists why not use that and show us?
Marcus Balck says
Well I just finished my second attempt at the expiriment and both times it worked like it was supposed to with the I love you jar having no mold and the i hate you jar being full of it. Both times I tried adjusting the expiriment parameters in order to get a more accurate test. In both tests the jars used were filled in a random order, and in the first test, the jars were placed a few feet from each other and in the second they were across the room. I’m not saying that I’ve proved this expiriment definitively, but maybe you should try this expiriment yourself before completely shooting it down, otherwise you look quite uneducated.
One obvious problem, which nobody to my knowledge has mentioned, is what exactly are you professing love and hate FOR? The only active organic material in the jars is mould, so why would that be inhibited by love? Why would mould, which is an organism, thrive on hate? Essentially, even if there was something in it, you could expect the opposite results to those being claimed. Alternatively, if you insist on saying you express love and hate for the rice, then repeating the experiment professing love and hate for the mould should yield the opposite results. I think we need to admit that this experiment proves nothing.
Adam Fontana says
This whole experiment is not valid. For instance, if thoughts did in anyway produce a frequency at which this intelligent rice could receive, how far do these frequencies travel,? Wouldn’t the other jars “hear” the frequency as well? My original thoughts to this experiment were that it had to do with what’s in the air, and after reading that someone else coincidentally thought the exact same thing is more proof to me that that is what Indeed is happening here. There is nothing wrong with believing this, just please don’t try to convince ANYONE else of this insanity and maybe they won’t practice voodoo later in their lives! Careful, the rice can hear you!
When i did the experiment with my daughter and a friend we boiled 3 new jars in water to sterilize and boiled rice. We put same rice into the three jars and sealed the lids. I gave my daughter a pen and she wrote love, hate and ignore on the lids. We did not label the first jar love and so on. We found the jar we gave love to stayed white. The ignore went yellow and a little mouldy and the hate went so mould and disgusting. The hardest bit was trying to hate! I found love is what God feels like to me so that was easier. The ignore rice i believe is influenced by general energy in the place. If you don’t believe rice works try a big man yelling at you telling you how useless you are and see if that doesn’t make you feel crap. Love is much better. I believe it’s the water in the rice feeling the energy. We are also made up of water..and a few other things.