Mechanism of correlation

It is outside of the legitimate bounds of Considera's experiment to hazard a guess at a possible mechanism between the rhythms of the heavens and plant life. However, let's not kid ourselves: all investigators assume this neutral position, a false naivety, when attempting objectivity in relation to an experiment and, within limits, this is appropriate. But drug companies don't go into drug trials without a stab at pharmacodynamics.

But what could be the connection of planets and cosmic geometry (heliometry? cosmometry?) on plant life? It can't be gravity; the presence of the gardener is much more of a gravitational influence than jupiter. My own answer is - 'I don't know'.

However, I would be pleased if the result of Considera's experiment is positive because, amongst other things, I suspect it would then fit in with other work that I admire for its quality and liberating perspective. So if I were to sketch in my conjecture lurking in the background of the experiment, I would do it, in pencil, along the following lines:

- there are relevant activities in the world whose origin is not from a centre (such as the centre of gravity, a magnetic pole etc), but that originate in the periphery. This is clarified by the research and published works of George Adams and Olive Whicher, Dr Steiner, Nick Thomas, and Laurence Edwards.
- the world of plant growth is dominated by the interplay of the four 'etheric forces' (eg Wachsmuth, G. (1932). The Etheric Formative Forces in Cosmos, Earth and Man. Anthroposophic Press; London, U.K.) which, when modulated by higher forces, are known as the etheric formative forces (Ernst Marti 1984. The Four Ethers. Schaumberg Publications).
- these pre-manifestation forces are intensified and diminished in correspondence with the positions of the celestial bodies.
- the resulting plants can be regarded as bio-assays that give an indication of the activity of these forces at the time of planting.

It may be that the correlative mechanism may not be manifest in time and space! Is that a cop-out? Perhaps!

But if not, it is a spur to deeper re-evaluation of our assumptions. The assumptions that I would recommend are exhumed first are those concerning space. If the knower is back in the loop of understanding and not merely a detached and passive observer, if space is not just a Euclidean stage but a property of the things, and if there are forces which have their origin in the periphery working into centres - 3 big 'ifs' to chew on - then does this not open up the field to scientific exploration of correlations not manifest in time and space?

I have put together an article based on a talk I gave recently which makes an attempt to clarify some of this.