The Fourth Phase of Water with Gerald Pollack (2021 NOFA Summer Conference)

School children learn that water has three phases: solid, liquid and vapor. But we have recently uncovered a fourth phase. This phase occurs next to water-loving (hydrophilic) surfaces. It is surprisingly extensive, projecting out from the surface by up to millions of molecular layers. And, its properties differ markedly from those of bulk water. The talk will present evidence for the existence of this phase of water - how come nobody’s seen it before? It will also consider the potentially broad implications of this phase for health.
Presenter:
Gerald Pollack received his PhD in biomedical engineering from the University of Pennsylvania in 1968 . He then joined the University of Washington faculty and is now professor of Bioengineering . He is also Founding Editor-in-Chief of the journal, WATER, convener of the Annual Conference on the Physics, Chemistry and Biology of Water, and Executive Director of the Institute for Venture Science.
This workshop recording comes from the 2021 NOFA Summer Conference. Visit nofasummerconference.org to learn more.

[@hip2datyea]

Excellent. Gerald Pollack is a pioneer. Absolute respect.

[@marcelma]

Absolutely fascinating! What really puzzles me is that this has not yet become a visible main stream research effort. The potential implications are breath taking.

[@plaiche]

You could copy paste this plenty of game changing nooks and crannies these days. They still trot out dismissive Pollack/Fourth phase hit pieces in the main stream here and there.
Most generous take is, we aren't good at change.

[@basar_nae]

Mind blowing lecture. Thank you for uploading it!

[@lilibrun1769]

I greatly enjoyed this interview
From New Brunswick Canada

[@yongcho8632]

This is the best lecture about EZ water! Thanks a lot!

[@h.gonyaulax2190]

Pollack's illustration of hexagonal clusters (26:45) contains numerous errors and violates elementary chemical principles. Doesn't this trained audience notice that?
1) In his "honeycomb" the "expert" equates covalent bonds within the molecules and hydrogen bonds between the molecules. Oxygen would therefore be 3-bonded and hydrogen 2-bonded. Massive violation of bonding rules, even some high school students recognize this mistake. Actually, the model is already dead.
But further:
2a) Water clusters cannot have a regular hexagonal shape (honeycomb). The bond angle in the molecule is 104.5°, the bond distance is about 96.5 pm. To the H-bridges there is an angle of about 180° and a distance of about 180 pm. Honeycomb adé.
2b) Since 6 hydrogens then project at a 104° angle to the six sides of the cluster and this is also true for the neighboring clusters, a regular connection to a compound becomes difficult, moreover the 6 hydrogens are also positively polarized.
2c) For the same reasons, a multilayer of clusters also becomes problematic. It cannot be directly overlaid as shown under any circumstances.
3) The hexagonal honeycomb is based on the dipole character of the water molecules, which can thus form hydrogen bonds. These are immediately destroyed again by the ubiquitous Brownian molecular motion (lifetime in the range of picoseconds (10 -12 s).
4) If these clusters exist in any form at all, they would be destroyed in the stomach at the latest. They would be protonated by the extremely acidic stomach contents, partially receive a positive ionic charge and decompose themselves.
5) I am a biochemist myself and work with vital life processes. If it were possible to produce water with such a much better quality by "swirling", "hexagonalizing" etc., all medical or biological laboratories worldwide would prepare their bacteria, algae, animal or cell cultures only with such water. I do not know anyone who does this.
But with Polack's findings, water is "energized" worldwide and millions are taken out of the pockets of the faithful.

[@binathere2574]

It's simpler than that lol.

[@spiritlevelstudios]

n00b

[@Pedro-un3mk]

Awesome lecture!!!! I would, kindly , like to get more info such as links and references….besides my homework of doing a Google search…
Tks and Regards

[@faanvanniekerk2411]

Thanks !!!!

[@michaeljlangford]

Gerald, I'm so glad that you are continuing research to thwart those scientists who squelch science.

[@h.gonyaulax2190]

However, he invents his own chemistry, which violates all professional rules.

[@SolvingTornadoes]

@@h.gonyaulax2190 yep. Unfortunately, so did Linus Pauling way back in the 1950s. Except for myself, nobody notices.

[@h.gonyaulax2190]

@@SolvingTornadoes If you mean the DNA structure elucidation, Pauling did not violate basic chemical rules, but simply made a mistake in his thinking, which he soon (but then too late) recognized.
Pollack did not make a forgivable error of reasoning, but invented a new chemistry to fit his theory.

[@SolvingTornadoes]

@@h.gonyaulax2190 For some reason my response was erased. I don't know why. YT thought police, I suppose.
I am talking about mistakes made by Pauling that leave the study of water a mess.

[@h.gonyaulax2190]

@@SolvingTornadoes Then why don't you be specific and not make such a secret of it?

[@MrVladanbajic]

respect

[@michaelweber2566]

Wonderful info but I find the speaker painful to listen to. Too much digression and useless detail. Get to the point!

[@adrianareynoso618]

Woowww!