Considera

All Things Considered in the Wake of the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident

Siegfried Luebke
From Acres Magazine December 1989

ACRES U.S.A. What happened to your farm when Chernobyl went up in smoke and radioactivity? More important, why were you interested in radiation enough to have detection equipment on hand in the first place?

LUEBKE. To make my answer meaningful, let me give some background information. In my studies of research publications in the field of microbiology, I came across the work of Professor Stoklasa. After 25 years of observations and studies on the dispersion of radioactive materials in the atmosphere, in the lithosphere and the hydrosphere, in the air, in the water and in the soil, and their effect on the biochemical life processes, he summarized his findings in his 1932 book, Biology of Radium and Uranium. Stoklasa lived in the CSSR and was head of the Federal Experimental Laboratories in Prague. He also was a member of the Scientific Committee of the Federal Radiologic Institute in Prague. His institute produced many valuable scientific papers on biochemical processes in the soil, and the orientation in his research did not only correspond with the then up and coming trend of the N-P-K mentality.

He dedicated his research to the history of mining in St. Joachimstal. This city had been well known since the middle ages for
its mining and metallurgy. The geological formations were known for their radioactivity and the Joachimstal has been known since 1901 as the oldest radium spa. Very few people know that the classical papers written 450 years ago by the physician and pharmacist Georg Agricola, the 12 Books About Mining and Metallurgy, were translated into English by the mining metallurgical engineer, Herbert Hoover, who later became president of the United States. It may interest your American readers to know that Joachimstal was the origin of the term for your currency—In the 16th century, the Joachimstal was the center of the major silver mining region where coins were struck. In 1519 the “Thaler” originated. It later became known as the “dollar.” Radium research developed in this area. Henri Bequerel proved that uranium salts independently and spontaneously emit a penetrating radiation. He thus discovered radioactivity in 1896. He instructed Madame Marie Curie, who worked in his laboratory, to investigate the substances which contain radioactivity. Madame Curie wrote her doctoral thesis on this subject: The Radioactivity of Various Substances. Professor Stoklasa reports in his book that in Joachimstal only uranium was separated from the pitchblende (uraninite) and that the alkaline residues remained unused, being considered a ballast substance. These alkaline ore residues—in which the uranium was present in exceedingly small quantities—were being thrown onto waste dumps and into the creek. Monsieur and Madame Curie asked the then president Dr. Euard Suess, to let them have a larger quantity of pitchblende and those alkaline uranium ore residues. The then Austrian Ministry of Agriculture (Ackerbauministerium) sent several freight cars of this “ballast substance” to Paris free of charge. In this “worthless” material Madame Curie succeeded in discovering—among many other elements—radium, for which discovery she received the Nobel prize. Professor Stoklasa also researched the influence of the various radioactive elements on the development, germination and the metabolic processes of the microbes. Our own observations showed that the microbial population in the soil is subject to strong fluctuations. After working through Professor Stoklasa’s books, I acquired a small Geiger counter. This was long before the reactor accident in Chernobyl. With this instrument I started to—initially on a test basis—probe the various forms of terrain. I intended to find which fluctuations could be detected from natural
radiation. For this purpose I scanned the terrain within the radius of approximately 5 km (3.125 miles). Over the course of months it was indeed possible to detect small variations, though these stayed within certain limits. For a more precise reexamination, certainly a highly sensitive instrument would have been required. As with all other experiments and tests, it was my aim to first examine concepts of a certain direction for the usefulness of results and its implications by way of preliminary testing. I tested periodically, and the results started to climb dramatically. I was unable to find an explanation for this rise. Most likely I was the only person who detected these changes in the open field because chance had led me into this direction of research at the time. Every day the radioactivity levels climbed higher, the measuring data being different with each geologic formation. On April 30 and 31 the instrument was at times not capable of recording and measuring data at various points. Sometimes the needle stayed on the highest level continuously and the instrument made noise incessantly. I was lost for an explanation. I expanded my tests over a larger area and came to realize that the measuring data were at the same high level within a wide radius. May 1, 1986 was a Thursday, a holiday in Austria. I wanted to call various government agencies in order to let them know about this
phenomenon. The government offices were closed, of course. On the eve of May 1, TV reported the first information on the reactor catastrophe at Chernobyl. In the wake of this news, total headlessness prevailed everywhere. Chernobyl made us realize that a model was needed for interferences like this in order to be able to take conceptive measures as to what had to be done after a reactor accident. Vegetables grown in the open field were banned from the market, at the same time, milk, meat—in short, all non-storable foods—were
subjected to very strict controls. In no time, all the produce grown and produced before Chernobyl sold out. We were not allowed to sell the sheep cheese we produce and had to destroy it. We received a small compensation from the government for the loss. Milk from sheep is known for assimilating cesium especially fast. Experiments had shown that certain amounts of these substances, after being injected into the aorta, can be detected in the milk within minutes. We had to have the milk tested and we had to wait until the values were lowered to within the officially established limits. Only then were we permitted to resume the sale of milk. The consequences of this disaster were to become obvious much later: there was a high mortality rate for young sheep in the spring of the following year, and the newborn sheep showed malformations. Our losses of sheep were very high. The government office kept working after the general hysteria had subsided. The levels of radioactivity kept diminishing slowly, as recorded with our instrument, but they stayed considerably above the level recorded months
before on the same spot. Only by my accidentally measuring the levels of radioactivity before the reactor accident was I enabled to make comparisons—likely I was the only person in the agricultural field to have done so. Solutions for agriculture were now heard from the experts. Some recommendations were to shave the ground down to 30 cm of its top soil and to store the used-up soil in earth rows. I studied the American recommendations for measures in agriculture after a nuclear accident (Agriculture Handbook Number 395). To store these enormous amounts of soil in earth rows would have been technically impossible. The theory turned into a chimera this way because vast areas in Europe
were contaminated. It would have been necessary to entirely encircle the cities with earth rows. On February 26 another official appeared at our farm and again took samples of the root vegetables still available. The vegetables were to be tested for cesium—Cs 134 and Cs 137—all
in the wake of the Chernobyl accident. We still had potatoes, carrots, black garden radishes and red beets stored, and the official took one sample of each. Three weeks later he returned with the results: the produce from our farm operation planted after the nuclear accident was free of cesium and the official informed us that this constituted an exception. Trying to find an explanation for this test result I passed this
test result on to the head of the Plantphysiological Institute in Vienna, Professor Kinzel. [It follows in part.]

Parenthetically, I would like to add that the government agencies tested for cesium on a broad scale, but the results were not made public. However, from the tests done in February they did inform us about our test results, with the additional comment that our cesium-free produce was the exception. The continual tests done by the government agencies were for residues or for contamination of various different kinds, whereby our produce tested free of these substances time and again. Many tests were run long before the Chernobyl accident, especially at the beginning of our work. The actual values from the cesium free results we only learned from the last test done in February.....

RADIATION AND THE PROSPERITY OF AGRICULTURE

BARRY LIA AND MARIA LINDER

BY THE TIME RUDOLF STEINER DELIVERED HIS LECTURES in 1924 on the Spiritual Foundations for the Prosperity of Agriculture* (the Agriculture Course), and in those lectures spoke in his idiosyncratic way about a transmutation of atomic elements, Marie Curie had already earned her Nobel Prizes in physics (1903) and in chemistry (1911). But radiation was not yet an issue for agriculture.

Nevertheless, developments in atomic physics during Rudolf Steiner’s own lifetime would eventually lead, by 1945, to weapons of mass destruction, which may well have brought an end to the war in the Pacific Theater, but then threatened to drop the curtain on the whole Theater Production Company—the world as we know it!

Until the partial test ban treaty in 1963, atmospheric fallout from our own above-ground atomic weapons testing in Nevada blanketed Idaho and central Montana and fanned out across the wheat and corn belts of the Midwest.

Now the “Peaceful Atom” is proving perhaps a more insidious threat. Nuclear power plant accidents at Three Mile Island in 1979 irradiated our East Coast; again at Chernobyl in 1986, the Ukraine and northwestward over Europe; and yet again at Fukushima Daiichi in 2011, cen- tral Japan and eastward over the Pacific. A plume of ra- dioactive isotopes drifting in ocean currents will soon span over that same Pacific Theater to our own West Coast.2

To round out the story of radiation threats to agricul- ture, an EPA-allowable level of radionuclides may be spread on fields in the form of phosphogypsum, a waste product of phosphate fertilizer production in which these naturally occurring elements are concentrated during the
processing of phosphate ore.3 Agricultural fields are often treated as waste disposal sites by industry. It is also the case that heavy metal-containing industrial wastes may be incorporated into modern fertilizer formulas.4 All the more reason for working with the farm individuality and without outside inputs from the agricultural suppliers.

BARREL COMPOST
In the Winter 2004/5 issue of Biodynamics, Nik Kramer told the story of the origin of Maria Thun’s barrel compost (BC) formulation, born out of concern for atmospheric fallout from above-ground nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s. Disturbing levels of the radioactive nuclear fission product strontium-90 were being found in animal bones and mothers’ milk. Scientists showed that plants grown on calcium-rich soils took up much less of the strontium fallout than did plants grown on sandy soils. Calcium competes with strontium for uptake and assimilation in the plant—and then into our food.

Working with Dr. Ehrenfried Pfeiffer until his death in 1961, Thun began in 1958 experimenting with basalt meal and various calcium-bearing substances that had passed through life processes. It was found that plants grown in Thun’s sandy soil after treatment with eggshells
and basalt meal apparently showed no trace of strontium-90. For application of this material—rich in calcium dynamics—in a potentized form practical for farmers to apply, Thun then tried making “horn preparations.” But she had settled by 1970 on the rhythmically shoveled BC
“cow-pat” preparation we know today.

Atomic weapons testing had by then gone underground, and BC’s intended use in the amelioration of fallout radiation was largely forgotten. ....

Barrel Compost - Bringing Harmony & Balance to the Farm

According to Nik Kramer’s article “Barrel Compost with Maria Thun” (Biodynamics, Winter 2004-2005), the origins of this technology are rooted in the atomic bomb tests of the 1950s. Thun was collaborating with Ehrenfried Pfeiffer to find a remedy to radioactive fallout, and to counter radioactive strontium, they looked at calcium sources. In part this was due to experiments at the Institute at Freiburg during the 1950s where it was found that plants growing on soils rich in calcium had less uptake of strontium 90 than in nearby sandy soils rich in silica. There is a well-known relationship between calcium and strontium in bone formation, so this was a logical deduction.

Next they field-tested nine potential calcium remedies to see if any would offer the plants protection via treating the soil. Of those nine calcium sources, only the eggshells and basalt were effective. They also tested Rudolf Steiner’s biodynamic preparations, but the preparations alone were not effective — this is an important point that was highlighted after the Chernobyl disaster, when only the biodynamic farms using barrel compost were protected from radioactive damage.....

...Russian scientists were able to demonstrate that the addition of basalt alters the molecularatomic lattice. This has a beneficial effect in neutralizing the ionizing radioactive fallout. These findings (demonstrated in a laboratory setting) agreed with the earlier findings of Maria Thun in the field, and demonstrate the importance of basalt in the remedy....

... Dr. Steiner was particularly interested in a certain type of basalt formation called pillar basalt. This basalt has condensed in tall five- to eight-sided pillars and demonstrates a higher paramagnetic reading and increased hardness than other forms of basalt. Steiner explained that the pillar formation is not due as much to crystalizing forces as it is to the action of the sun on the mineral. In other words, the sun force drew the basalt upward into pillars, just as today the sun draws the leaves and stems of plants in an upward direction from the earth. Here, according to Steiner, is the key to freeing the earth from certain detrimental forces that he called “excessive moon forces” (see George Adams & Olive Whicher, The Living Plant & the Science of Physical & Ethereal Spaces). Steiner also postulates that all minerals desire to evolve into plants, and in pillar basalt we see minerals in a transitional state that is somewhat plantlike already.....

...Maria Thun explained that the calcium in the inner skin of the eggshell is a “young” calcium. This is a very important concept in explaining the role it plays to revitalize matter. What does it mean when we use the term young to describe a mineral? These are minerals in a living state or that have just been transmuted from another element. This occurs in several manners — in eggshell formation it is a living process where the bird converts silica or magnesium into calcium. Ever since Prout demonstrated the increase in calcium during development of a chick, researchers have searched to explain its source. We now know it is converted from other elements that decrease in the developing embryo. This is termed biological transmutation to distinguish it from transmutations that occurs in non-living systems (see Biological Transmutations by L. Kervran). This, then, is an example of young calcium.

Dr. Steiner revealed “a great secret,” namely, “All healing forces have their origin in the rhythmic system.” In the plant this comprises the stem and leaves; in the farm organism it is the humus — nettle harmonizes both. A number of biodynamic practitioners (including us) feel that nettles greatly improve barrel compost. We use up to 50 percent nettles by volume. Nettles do have an animallike quality in their odor, and their sting.

They also contain histamine and formic acid — both are found in animals but are rare in plants. According to biodynamic concepts, plant poisons are due to “the Astral” working too strongly into the plant. In the nettle, these excessive A specially designed basalt pit for biodynamic compost preparation. Reprinted from F ebruary 2010 • Vol. 40, No. 2 astral forces have been controlled via the iron and zinc and thus “tamed,” resulting in formic acid, a substance that helps to bring dead materials back into the living stream. This puts the nettle in a very special place, one that makes it a universal plant for the rhythmic system of man, plants, animals and soils. It is the one plant for which Steiner said there was no substitute in the making of the preps, due to its unique position. On a more physical level, the nutritional profile of nettles shows it to be very high in calcium and magnesium and high in iron. In basalt, the main minerals are augite and pyrozene, both of which are rich in calcium, magnesium and iron. The high calcium, magnesium and iron in both basalt and nettles reveals another clue as to why they work in a complementary manner. Nettle is also described in Biodynamics as a carrier of the iron radiation that detoxifies and controls the calcium process. ...

___

Dr. William Shock is a retired large animal veterinarian who grows berries and medicinal herbs biodynamically with his wife, Lisa. Their current focus is sustainable agriculture and the etheric formative forces. To find out more about the Inland Northwest Biodymanic Group contact them at 79 Vertical Dr., Cocolalla, Idaho 83813, phone 208-265-0512.

On Biodynamics and Radiation

July 12, 2011

By Robert Karp Executive Director, Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association

The recent tragic events in Japan and news of increasing radiation fallout around the globe have led to a growing interest in past reports from Europe (primarily) of a possible role of the biodynamic preparations in protecting farms and food from radioactivity. Understandably, this is quite a “hot” topic in biodynamic circles, evoking much debate.

I am thrilled to report that recently two members of the Biodynamic Research Working Group (BDRWG), Maria Linder and Barry Lia, have agreed to procure and evaluate all the available research and reports relating to this question and to draft a synopsis that we will make available through our journal and website. The BDRWG will also take up the question, in its next meeting, of whether a new research project in this direction is warranted and if so, how it would be best undertaken. These are small but important steps.

Personally, I think we are dealing with a very delicate matter. On the one hand, I would suggest that there is good reason, from a spiritual scientific perspective, to believe that some biodynamic food, farms, and practices may (and I say MAY) offer a measure of protection from radioactive fallout or at least offer a kind of healing antidote. As such, this is indeed an important time to encourage people to intensify their work with biodynamics. On the other hand, I agree with many members of the BDRWG who believe that we should refrain from making any claims for biodynamic products or practices until we determine if we have a genuine foundation for such claims.

Let me elaborate.

The idea that biodynamics may address radiation derives from the perspective that the biodynamic preparations and methodologies are designed, in general, to stimulate what are called in biodynamics the “etheric formative forces” or “life forces” active in nature. These are forces that stand behind and are active within all biological life — whether in soil, plants, animals, or humans — but which have their source in a realm above that of purely physical matter.

Radiation, on the other hand — again from a spiritual scientific perspective — is active at a level below that of purely physical matter, and as such, could be called a “sub-natural force.” Speaking quite generally, sub-natural forces such as radiation and electricity have a destructive effect on matter. The etheric formative forces, on the other hand, which are stimulated through the biodynamic preparations and methods in general, have an up-building or life-giving effect on matter.

Rudolf Steiner pointed out that, as civilization makes greater and greater use of the sub-natural forces in our technologies, a counterbalance must be struck if human beings and the earth are not to perish. One way this counterbalance can be found is by developing technologies that work with the “etheric formative forces” rather than with the sub-natural forces. This is one of the main reasons why Rudolf Steiner brought biodynamics to the world at the time he did. Again, just as radiation releases an abundance of “death forces,” so are the biodynamic preparations and practices designed to stimulate and quicken an abundance of “life forces.”

Thus, from this point of view, it stands to reason that farms and gardens managed biodynamically MAY under the best of circumstances be better able to assimilate and transmute the effects of radiation, and that food from such farms MAY be able to help us do the same. From this perspective — all research and reports aside — the increased use of biodynamic methods in the wake of the nuclear meltdowns in Japan is indeed something to be encouraged.

On the other hand, if the above spiritual scientific insights are correct, it should be possible to demonstrate these effects, in some measure, through appropriate methods of traditional scientific research. Therefore, I think that making claims along these lines, without the necessary research and evidence to back us up, could easily lead to misunderstandings and weaken the credibility of the biodynamic movement.

I realize that there is a delicate balance to be struck here between a sense of urgency and a sense of sobriety, which we each must navigate out of our own sense of integrity. Hopefully, the work of the BDRWG and others across the world can, in the coming months and years, place all this work on a new and more solid footing.

I’m sure these thoughts won’t quell the debate. Part of the purpose of this blog is to open up a constructive conversation on the matter where different points of view can be heard. If you have thoughts you would like to share or a guest essay, or information on the topic you think would be relevant to the BDRWG, please get in touch with us.

Contact Robert Karp at robert.karp@biodynamics.com. Visit www.biodynamics.com/biodynamic-research for more information the BDRWG.

Exploring the Science of Alchemy in Life Processes
Barrel Compost with Maria Thun

By Nik Kramer, from the winter 2004/2005 edition of Biodynamics

Nik Kramer is a former intern at Stella Gardens and the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute. Two years ago he spent time on a biodynamic farm in Austria, returning to U.S. for the spring and part Of the summer before heading back to Europe to further explore biodynamics. He recently spent two weeks with Maria Thun and shared the following.

Barrel compost, as Maria Thun puts it, is the single most important substance the world has been given since 1924, when Rudolf Steiner first described the nine preparations we use in biodynamic farming. Little did she know when she began her work with barrel compost that her experimental preparation would become such a practical and useful for practitioners.

During the 1950s Russia and the United States began testing atomic bombs, exploding them in the earth's atmosphere. In monitoring the detonations, American and German scientists found the areas surrounding the test sites were saturated With strontium 90, a product Of radioactive decay present in atmospheric fallout. The greatest alarm came after strontium 90 was found in animal skulls and most disturbingly, mother's milk.

Researchers at the University Of Freiburg in Germany tested different plant species from regions Of varying soil types to find the degree to Which plants took up strontium 90 under differing soil conditions. The results showed that plants growing in sandy, siliceous soils seemed to be the most affected, while those growing in soils high in lime or calcium showed little or no trace of the radioactive element. If you look at the periodic table Of elements you will find that strontium and calcium are very similar. Therefore, it seems that in areas where calcium was available to the plants they chose calcium, while in areas With little available calcium the plants took up strontium 90 instead.

With this information in hand, Maria Thun began talks with Ehrenfried Pfeiffer, who was then working and conducting research in Spring Valley, New York. He too had looked extensively into the question of radioactive contamination, with results similar to those found in Germany. In 1958, Thun and Pfeiffer began experimenting with different plant species that showed susceptibility to radioactive contamination in an attempt to see whether they could use organic calcium substances to influence or perhaps block plant uptake of strontium 90. Maria Thun chose to work with oats, celery, and tomatoes grown in sandy soil that had been treated biodynamically for six years, although Dr. Pfeiffer was worried that the influence of the preparations might affect the experimental outcome. For the first experiment she chose nine different forms of organic calcium --- eggshells from ducks and chickens, bone meal, oak bark, wood ash, calcified algae, limestone, snail shells, and basalt meal.

The substances were spread in the seedbeds, and the plants sown and tended according to their nature. After harvest, the whole plants were analysed and it was found that those given the ground chicken eggshells and basalt meal showed no trace of strontium 90. At the time, these results seemed little less than miraculous.

Maria Thun next tried to find a means to supply both substances to plants in a way that would be practical for biodynamic farmers, She first made the material as one would make preparations 500 and 501, burying it in horns over winter and summer, mixing the finished substance with water, and spraying the resulting preparation after one hour of stirring. The spraying during vegetative growth had little effect, but when applied directly on the soil the plants reacted well. She knew she was on the right track. After further research, Thun chose cow manure as a carrier for the ground eggshells and basalt meal. She continued experimentation, trying out a range of mixtures for the compost preparations and different container shapes, finally settling on the approach given at the end of this article.

Thun finalized the resulting formula, still in use today, twelve years after her discussions began with Ehrenfried Pfeiffer. Sadly, he died before her research was completed in 1970, and could only enjoy the fruits Of his labour from another realm. In 1972, the recipe for barrel compost guidelines for its use were first given to the public in Thun's book, *Hinweise aus der Konstellationsforschung (Work on the Land and the Constellations)*, with a strong recommendation as to its usefulness, but without much mention of strontium 90.

Then, in 1986 came the nuclear reactor explosion at Chernobyl. Most Of Europe felt the effects Of the disaster. Even the biodynamic farms were found to be contaminated. Only those sprayed with barrel compost turned out to be clean.

The scientists monitoring the effects of the disaster couldn't or wouldn't believe their findings. They tried using different measuring instruments, with the same outcome. These results were never made public. Even in the early stages, Maria Thun knew her research would fall on deaf ears. A fellow scientist who had done the original plant and soil analyses burned the records of the results after Thun read them for fear of his name being attached to the research.

Her hypothesis regarding the use of calcium to counter uptake of strontium 90 had been proven. However, the full recognition of the wider effects of barrel compost in biodynamic agriculture was actually coincidental, and emerged over time. As research has continued through the years, barrel compost has begun to show its full potential as a tool for soil building. It has proven itself an excellent catalyst in the incorporation and subsequent breakdown of manure cover crops and other organic material. On Maria Thun's research plots, barrel compost is sprayed three times in conjunction with manuring and fall field cultivation.

Thun feels she cannot overemphasise the importance and effectiveness of spraying all of the preparations three times per year. Her son Matthias has developed a front-mounted spraying rig that runs off of a small pto-driven pump, which can be used in conjunction with their mouldboard plough. Since their fields are left in furrows over winter and only worked once, the spray rig is set up to spray a span of three passes at a time. Thus, each part of the field is actually sprayed three times during ploughing. Maria Thun emphasizes the fact that the breaking-down continues over winter and into spring. Unless one follows with a spraying of horn manure (BD#500), it is likely that this decay process can creep into the plant and cause fungus and disease problems. The numerous uses for barrel compost in a variety Of circumstances make it an excellent tool for biodynamic farmers.

Preparing barrel compost

Manure to be used for barrel compost should be of the same composition as that used in horn manure. A cow or two should be fed on good oat straw and hay for two weeks to produce well-digested manure with good solid form. Manure from pastures should not be used. Five buckets of manure are poured into a barrel large enough to accommodate stirring. One hundred grams of finely ground eggshells and five hundred grams Of basalt meal are added to the manure, which is then stirred for one hour. Half of the mixture is then poured into a barrel that has had both ends cut off and buried two feet (60 cm) into the ground. The first half is prepared with the five dry compost preparations with stinging nettle in the middle and the other four preparations surrounding it, as the sun is surrounded by the planets. Then the second half of the dynamized (stirred) manure is added to the barrel and again prepared as above. Finally, five drops of valerian are stirred in one litre of water for ten minutes and poured over the manure. The barrel is covered with a wooden board and left for four weeks, then given another quick stir. After two more weeks the barrel compost is ready for use. It should look like earth and should not smell Of manure. To prepare a solution for spraying one acre (~0.5 ha), twenty litres (five gallons) of water should be used. Maria Thun suggests that the barrel compost be added to water at a rate of sixty grams per acre (~120 g/ha) (double the rate used when mixing BD#500). The Thuns' research has shown that a stirring time of 20 minutes is ideal. Barrel compost is not a replacement for horn manure, which works directly with the plant. Rather, it stimulates soil organisms to break down organic matter. It should also be noted that it is not intended to be mixed with horn manure, because of their quite polar ("building-up" versus "breaking-down") effects.

For more on barrel compost, see Gita Henderson's article "Cow Pat Pit - Where Did It Come From" in Biodynamics #242-243/1. Late Summer/Autumn, 2002. The article was originally published in Harvests 55/2, Winter 2002.

From: Nik Kramer (2004) "Barrel Compost with Maria Thun" Biodynamics, Winter 2004-2005, pp. 17-19.