The Rice Experiment

 

On Thursday, June 27, 2013, we began a small research experiment (inspired by Doctor Masaru Emoto) to determine what impact our thoughts, spoken words, and written words actually have. The study was conducted by myself (Amber) and fellow Upriser, Colette.photo 5-3

The purpose of our experiment was not only to prove, and further back up, Dr. Emoto’s research, but to show in greater detail the impact of specific words, tones, thoughts, feelings, and emotions. We wanted to visually see the difference between a blessing and a curse. We wanted to show evidence of what a simple lie is capable of. We wanted to see the difference between something done in love and something done in hate. We each came up with our own hypotheses  and documented the study through writing notes and taking photographs of the process.

I hope you find this as fascinating as we do, and even if this article only makes a difference in one single person, the study will have been more than worth it (though I have a great and wonderful feeling that it will reach many people). If you are a skeptic (like me), please don’t discount this as false, a hoax, a coincidence, or anything of that nature without reading the entire article, studying Dr. Emoto’s initial research, and then conducting your very own experiment– I will even teach you how to do it.

Let it be known that we fully intend for this to be only “Part 1″ of our entire “Rice Experiment.” We have a series of Rice Experiments that we will perform. We would love to hear from you if you have any suggestions as to what we should include in our future experiments.

What exactly is the Experiment?

  •  We cooked plain white Basmati rice in filtered water with Real Salt for dinner on Wednesday evening, June 26, 2013.
  • The left over plain rice was distributed into clean (and brand new) identical glass jars on Thursday night, June 27, 2013.

photo 3-1

  • We put matching green circle labels on the top of each container to label them with letters (A-M).

photo 4-2

  • We decided on the exact experiments we wanted to conduct and labeled them accordingly in a note pad.
  • We used identical white labels to label specific jars of rice with positive or negative words/phrases according to the specific experiments.

photo 4

  • We recorded each of our Hypotheses in the notepad.
  • We spoke to and channeled thoughts and emotions towards specific containers as instructed a total of 2 times throughout the week.

photo 5-2

  • We took photographs for visual evidence of the process and the conclusions.
  • Lastly we are publishing it here.

The EXACT specifics of each of the experiments:

1. Jars “A” and “B”
This experiment is to determine what happens if someone says one thing, but means something different. Essentially, this is to see if a lie is a lie, or if intent still outweighs the spoken word.

  • A: Spoken to negatively, but thought of positively.
  • B: Spoken to positively, but thought of negatively.

2. Jars “C” and “D”
This experiment is to determine what happens when the jar has something negative written on it, but is thought of positively (and vice versa). There is zero speaking in this experiment.

  • C: Positive writing. Negative thinking.
  • D: Negative writing. Positive thinking.

3. Jars “E” and “F”

This experiment is to determine what happens when the jar has something negative written on it, but the jar is thought of positively AND spoken to positively (and vice versa).

  • E: Negative writing. Positive thinking and positive speaking.
  • F: Positive writing. Negative thinking and negative speaking.

4. Jars “G” and “H”

This experiment is to determine if there is a difference between telling someone “no-no” in a sweet-tone with a protective intent (example: when you tell your toddler “no-no.”), and telling someone “NO!” in a harsh tone with an angry emotion.

  • G: No-No
  • H: NO!

5. Jars “I,” “J,” and “K

This is the initial basic experiment that Dr. Emoto did that inspired us to further experiment.

  • I: Written, spoken, and thought of positively.
  • J: Written, spoken, and thought of negatively.
  • K: Completely neglected and ignored. This jar has no writing on it, and we did not think about it or speak to it.

6: Jars “L” and “M

This experiment we titled: “The Blessing and the Curse.” We wanted to know exactly what happens with a simple written “God Bless You” VS “God Damn It.”

  • L: We wrote “God Bless You” on this jar. We did not speak to it, nor did we think of it.
  • M: We wrote, “God Damn It” on this jar. We did not speak to it, nor did we think of it.

 

Our Hypotheses:

Amber:

  • The intent, the thought, the emotion will have the greatest effect. The spoken word will have the second greatest effect, and the written word will have the least effect of the three.
  • Neglect will be the worst and decay the fastest.
  • The “no-no” VS “NO!” will show that “no-no” said with a loving intent will decay less than the harsh and angry “NO!”
  • The “Blessing VS Curse” experiment will show that the curse has a more negative effect than the blessing even though it is only written words with no feelings/emotions/spoken words.

Colette:

  • The intent, the thought, the emotion will have the greatest effect. The spoken word will have the second greatest effect, and the written word will have the least effect of the three.
  • Neglect will be the worst and decay the fastest.
  • The “no-no” VS “NO!” will show that they decay at the same rate and there will be no difference.
  • The “Blessing VS Curse” experiment will show that the curse has a more negative effect than the blessing even though it is only written words with no feelings/emotions/spoken words.

 

The process….

Once the jars were filled with rice and labeled appropriately, we set all of them on the same shelf (none of them touching each other), and this is where they resided for the entirety of the experiment. The jars that required our interaction, received interaction a total of 2 times throughout the experiment. The experiment was conducted from Thursday night, June 27, 2013, until Friday morning, July 5, 2013.

Because the experiment is a very visual one, I will keep text to a minimum at this point (aside from my explanations where needed/my occasional opinions) and let the photographs speak for themselves. Keep in mind, the pictures aren’t nearly as amazing as seeing this in real life! If you are amazed and shocked at the differences based on the photographs you are about to witness, I encourage you to conduct your own experiments to see it happen in real life!

On Monday, July 1, 2013 we checked on the jars.

What we found was incredible. We thought the process would surely take a long time, but the experiment was well on its way already. We spoke to/thought of the specific jars that required interaction, and photographed them again that day (Monday) and Tuesday.

Here are a few photos of select jars:

Jar B: Spoken to Positively, but thought of negatively. Essentially, a lie. There is decay showing already.

Jar “B”: Spoken to Positively, but thought of negatively. Essentially, a lie. There is decay showing already. Jar “A” is next to it on the left, and is also showing signs of decay.

Negative writing. Positive thinking. No speaking at all.

Jar “D” Negative writing. Positive thinking. No speaking at all.

Positive writing, negative thinking. No speaking at all.

Jar “C” Positive writing, negative thinking. No speaking at all.

 

Jar "E" currently has zero signs of decay. It has negative writing on it, but it was thought of AND spoken to positively.

Jar “E” currently has zero signs of decay. It has negative writing on it, but it was thought of AND spoken to positively.

photo 4-1

Jar “F” has positive writing on the front of it, but it was thought of and spoken to negatively. Not the small black spot of decay already starting.

Jar "G" is showing a lot of fuzzy mold. This jar was thought of in a protective way and spoken to in a gentle "no-no" fashion (like a parent speaking to their toddler. "No-no" to protect them).

Jar “G” is showing a lot of fuzzy mold. This jar was thought of in a protective way and spoken to in a gentle “no-no” fashion (like a parent speaking to their toddler. “No-no” to protect them).

Jar "H" is showing a lot of black mold along with other various mold colors. It seems to have a lot of huge clumps of mold throughout. This jar was yelled at "NO!" in an angry tone.

Jar “H” is showing a lot of black mold along with other various mold colors. It seems to have a lot of huge clumps of mold throughout. This jar was yelled at “NO!” in an angry tone.

 

Jar "I" had everything positive (writing, speaking, thinking). It is showing a tiny spot of decay, but otherwise is all normal rice.

Jar “I” has everything positive (writing, speaking, thinking). It is showing a tiny spot of decay, but otherwise is all normal rice.

Jar "J" has everything negative (writing, speaking, thinking), has more decay, though it is hard to see from this photograph.

Jar “J” has everything negative (writing, speaking, thinking), has more decay, though it is hard to see from this photograph.

Jar "K" was completely ignored and neglected. ALL of the rice is beginning to decay.

Jar “K” was completely ignored and neglected. ALL of the rice is beginning to decay.

Jar "L" has "God Bless You" written on it. Nothing else was done with the jar. We did not speak to it, nor did we think of it. It has some decay at the bottom, but otherwise untouched.

Jar “L” has “God Bless You” written on it. Nothing else was done with the jar. We did not speak to it, nor did we think of it. It has some decay at the bottom, but otherwise untouched.

photo 3

Jar “M” has “God Damn It” written on it. We did not speak to it at all, nor did we think of it at all. This jar has been completely overtaken with mold, fuzz, and decay.

photo 4

Another photograph of Jar “M.” Here you can see a tiny bit of rice against the glass. I think I see three grains of rice. All other rice has been completely overtaken.

The Final Conclusions….

Friday, July 5, 2013, we photographed each jar to conclude the experiment.

Jars/experiments listed in order:

1. Jars “A” and “B”
This experiment is to determine what happens if someone says one thing, but means something different. Essentially, this is to see if a lie is a lie, or if intent still outweighs the spoken word.

  • A: Spoken to negatively, but thought of positively.
  • B: Spoken to positively ,but thought of negatively.
Jar "A" on Friday, July 5, 2013 (conclusion of experiment)

Jar “A” on Friday, July 5, 2013, (conclusion of experiment). Spoken to Negatively and thought of positively. Could this be an example of what harmful effects lies have? Even if it is a little white lie? Definitely something to ponder…

Jar "A" on Friday, July 5, 2013 (conclusion of experiment)

Jar “A” on Friday, July 5, 2013, (conclusion of experiment). Spoken to Negatively and thought of positively. Could this be an example of what harmful effects lies have? Even if it is a little white lie? Definitely something to ponder…

Jar "B" on Friday, July 5, 2013 (conclusion of experiment)

Jar “B” on Friday, July 5, 2013, (conclusion of experiment). Spoken to Positively and thought of Negatively. Could this be an example of what harmful effect lies have? Even if it is a little white lie? Definitely something to ponder…

2. Jars “C” and “D”
This experiment is to determine what happens when the jar has something negative written on it, but is thought of positively (and vice versa). There is zero speaking in this experiment.

  • C: Positive writing. Negative thinking.
  • D: Negative writing. Positive thinking.
Jar "C" on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar “C” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar "C" on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar “C” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

 

Jar "D" on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar “D” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar "D" on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar “D” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar "D" on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

Jar “D” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent has much more power than the written word.

 

3. Jars “E” and “F”

This experiment is to determine what happens when the jar has something negative written on it, but the jar is thought of positively AND spoken to positively (and vice versa).

  • E: Negative writing. Positive thinking and positive speaking.
  • F: Positive writing. Negative thinking and negative speaking.
Jar “E” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking and Positive speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “E” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking and Positive speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “E” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking and Positive speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “E” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking and Positive speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “E” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking and Positive speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “E” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Negative writing and Positive thinking and Positive speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “F” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking and Negative speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “F” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking and Negative speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “F” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking and Negative speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “F” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking and Negative speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “F” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking and Negative speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

Jar “F” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Positive writing and Negative thinking and Negative speaking. This really seems to show that thoughts/emotions/intent combined with the spoken word have an incredible amount of power compared to the written word.

4. Jars “G” and “H”

This experiment is to determine if there is a difference between telling someone “no-no” in a sweet-tone with a protective intent (example: when you tell your toddler “no-no.”), and telling someone “NO!” in a harsh tone with an angry emotion.

  • G: No-No
  • H: NO!
Jar “G” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. "No-No," even in a protective tone still appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with fuzzy mold. While its counter partner (harsh "NO!") definitely has uglier clots of mold, I think it is safe to assume that "No" is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a "positive reinforcement" system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “G” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. “No-No,” even in a protective tone still appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with fuzzy mold. While its counter partner (harsh “NO!”) definitely has uglier clots of mold, I think it is safe to assume that “No” is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a “positive reinforcement” system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “G” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. "No-No," even in a protective tone still appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with fuzzy mold. While its counter partner (harsh "NO!") definitely has uglier clots of mold, I think it is safe to assume that "No" is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a "positive reinforcement" system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “G” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. “No-No,” even in a protective tone still appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with fuzzy mold. While its counter partner (harsh “NO!”) definitely has uglier clots of mold, I think it is safe to assume that “No” is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a “positive reinforcement” system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “H” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. "No!"  in an angry or hateful tone appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with disgusting clots of multi-color and black mold along with some kind of sponge-like growths as well. While its counter partner (protective "No-No") isn't as ugly, I think it is safe to assume that "No" is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a "positive reinforcement" system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “H” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. “No!” in an angry or hateful tone appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with disgusting clots of multi-color and black mold along with some kind of sponge-like growths as well. While its counter partner (protective “No-No”) isn’t as ugly, I think it is safe to assume that “No” is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a “positive reinforcement” system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “H” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. "No!"  in an angry or hateful tone appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with disgusting clots of multi-color and black mold along with some kind of sponge-like growths as well. While its counter partner (protective "No-No") isn't as ugly, I think it is safe to assume that "No" is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a "positive reinforcement" system really does seem to be the right option.

Jar “H” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. “No!” in an angry or hateful tone appears to be incredibly harmful. This jar is filled with disgusting clots of multi-color and black mold along with some kind of sponge-like growths as well. While its counter partner (protective “No-No”) isn’t as ugly, I think it is safe to assume that “No” is generally received negatively when discipline is the topic. Choosing a “positive reinforcement” system really does seem to be the right option.

 

5. Jars “I,” “J,” and “K

This is the initial basic experiment that Dr. Emoto did that inspired us to further experiment.

  • I: Written, spoken, and thought of positively.
  • J: Written, spoken, and thought of negatively.
  • K: Completely neglected and ignored. This jar has no writing on it, and we did not think about it or speak to it.
Jar “I” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Everything Positive (writing, speaking, and thought). While there are a couple of spots of a colored mold (blue-green), the rice as a whole seems to be fine.

Jar “I” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Everything Positive (writing, speaking, and thought). While there are a couple of spots of a colored mold (blue-green), the majority of the rice looks normal.

Jar “I” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment. Everything Positive (writing, speaking, and thought). While there are a couple of spots of a colored mold (blue-green), the rice as a whole seems to be fine.

Jar “I” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Everything Positive (writing, speaking, and thought). While there are a couple of spots of a colored mold (blue-green), the majority of the rice looks normal.

Jar “J” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment.  Everything Negative (writing, spoken word, and thoughts). This jar has a huge black growth that has overtaken most of the jar from the backside.

Jar “J” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Everything Negative (writing, spoken word, and thoughts). This jar has a huge black growth that has overtaken most of the jar from the backside.

Jar “J” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment.  Everything Negative (writing, spoken word, and thoughts). This jar has a huge black growth that has overtaken most of the jar from the backside.

Jar “J” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Everything Negative (writing, spoken word, and thoughts). This jar has a huge black growth that has overtaken most of the jar from the backside.

 

Jar “K” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment.  This jar was completely neglected. We did not speak to it, we did not think about it, we did not have anything positive or negative written on it. Interesting note is that the decay in this jar is FAR worse than the decay of the "Everything Positive (Jar "I")" or the "Everything Negative (Jar "J")" jars. This jar actually has ALL types of mold that any of the other showed, plus more. Clearly, neglect is even worse than negative attention. Conclusion in this section of the study? Negative attention (though harmful) is better than zero attention.

Jar “K” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. This jar was completely neglected. We did not speak to it, we did not think about it, we did not have anything positive or negative written on it. Interesting note is that the decay in this jar is FAR worse than the decay of the “Everything Positive (Jar “I”)” or the “Everything Negative (Jar “J”)” jars. This jar actually has ALL types of mold that any of the other showed, plus more. Clearly, neglect is even worse than negative attention. Conclusion in this section of the study? Negative attention (though harmful) is better than zero attention.

Jar “K” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment.  This jar was completely neglected. We did not speak to it, we did not think about it, we did not have anything positive or negative written on it. Interesting note is that the decay in this jar is FAR worse than the decay of the "Everything Positive (Jar "I")" or the "Everything Negative (Jar "J")" jars. This jar actually has ALL types of mold that any of the other showed, plus more. Clearly, neglect is even worse than negative attention. Conclusion in this section of the study? Negative attention (though harmful) is better than zero attention.

Jar “K” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. This jar was completely neglected. We did not speak to it, we did not think about it, we did not have anything positive or negative written on it. Interesting note is that the decay in this jar is FAR worse than the decay of the “Everything Positive (Jar “I”)” or the “Everything Negative (Jar “J”)” jars. This jar actually has ALL types of mold that any of the other showed, plus more. Clearly, neglect is even worse than negative attention. Conclusion in this section of the study? Negative attention (though harmful) is better than zero attention.

Jar “K” on Friday, July 5, 2013 at conclusion of experiment.  This jar was completely neglected. We did not speak to it, we did not think about it, we did not have anything positive or negative written on it. Interesting note is that the decay in this jar is FAR worse than the decay of the "Everything Positive (Jar "I")" or the "Everything Negative (Jar "J")" jars. This jar actually has ALL types of mold that any of the other showed, plus more. Clearly, neglect is even worse than negative attention. Conclusion in this section of the study? Negative attention (though harmful) is better than zero attention.

Jar “K” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. This jar was completely neglected. We did not speak to it, we did not think about it, we did not have anything positive or negative written on it. Interesting note is that the decay in this jar is FAR worse than the decay of the “Everything Positive (Jar “I”)” or the “Everything Negative (Jar “J”)” jars. This jar actually has ALL types of mold that any of the other showed, plus more. Clearly, neglect is even worse than negative attention. Conclusion in this section of the study? Negative attention (though harmful) is better than zero attention.

6: Jars “L” and “M

This experiment we titled: “The Blessing and the Curse.” We wanted to know exactly what happens with a simple written “God Bless You” VS “God Damn It.”

  • L: We wrote “God Bless You” on this jar. We did not speak to it, nor did we think of it.
  • M: We wrote, “God Damn It” on this jar. We did not speak to it, nor did we think of it.
Jar “L” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment.  There is a spot of colored mold on the bottom of the jar and a small spot at the top of the jar. The rest of the rice is untouched.

Jar “L” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. There is a spot of colored mold on the bottom of the jar and a small spot at the top of the jar. The rest of the rice is untouched.

Jar “M” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment.  The entire jar has been overtaken with black and grey fuzzy mold. There is not even a single grain of rice left to be seen.

Jar “M” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. The entire jar has been overtaken with black and grey fuzzy mold. There is not even a single grain of rice left to be seen.

 

Jars “L” and "M" on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Side-by-side comparison.

Jars “L” and “M” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Side-by-side comparison.

Jars “L” and "M"  on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Side-by-side comparison.

Jars “L” and “M” on Friday, July 5, 2013, at conclusion of experiment. Side-by-side comparison.

 

Amber’s background…

I am the owner, operator, writer, and editor of OrganicUprising.com. I want to take a moment to express how thankful I am that you took time out of your day to read this article. This is incredibly important to me. I spent the last week and a half working hard conducting the experiment and compiling all of the information into this article for you! I have worked in the Behavior Therapy field for the last 5 years. Applied Behavior Analysis teaches a positive reinforcement model. I think this experiment will further prove the fact that positive reinforcement is the more effective way to shape and mold behavior, teach skills, and positively connect with people. I hope this experiment teaches us the dangers of negativity and the preservation and safety of positivity.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or would like any more information. I also encourage you to check out Dr. Emoto’s research. You also might enjoy the documentary titled “Structured Water: The Future of Medicine.” This documentary features Dr. Emoto’s research in many ways (including his water experiments and rice experiments).

I hope you will consider just how powerful your thoughts, emotions, and words are. I believe (and this experiment seems to back this up) that if you’re constantly negative, negative things will continue to happen to your life. Allow positivity to overtake your life, and maybe, JUST MAYBE, you’ll see a difference.

I encourage you to do your own study! Please note that if your polarities are “off,” your results could come out the exact opposite of what should happen. You can do further reading/research into how to “reset” your polarities.

photo 

3 comments for “The Rice Experiment

  1. D
    April 6, 2014 at 3:43 pm

    I am surprise that the positive jar, “I”, had mold. How far apart where the jars when you did the experiment. I read that they needed to be at Le st a foot apart.

    • April 7, 2014 at 11:47 am

      Hi D!

      Yes we found out that ours were far too close together, but we still got results that were pretty straight on track!

Give feedback or join the conversation!