Download PDF
Homeopathy 2003; 92(01): 35-43
DOI: 10.1054/homp.2002.0070
Education and Debate
Copyright © The Faculty of Homeopathy 2003

Patient–practitioner–remedy (PPR) entanglement. Part 2: extending the metaphor for homeopathy using molecular quantum theory

LR Milgrom
Subject Editor:
Further Information

Publication History

Received25 May 2002
revised08 October 2002

accepted14 October 2002

Publication Date:
27 December 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

A quantum metaphor developed previously for homeopathy, involving triadic patient–practitioner–remedy (PPR) entanglement, is extended by importing concepts used in chemistry to describe the electronic structures of molecules. In particular, the electronic energy states of triangular tri-atomic molecules are used metaphorically to predict that (a) the more a homeopathic medicine is potentised, the deeper the level of cure is likely to be, and (b) the practitioner can be included as a beneficiary of the therapeutic process. The model also predicts that remedy attenuation and degree of PRR interaction could (in the quantum theoretical sense) represent a pair of complementary conjugate variables.

Keywords

molecular orbital theory - tri-atomic molecules - quantum mechanics - PPR entanglement - remedy potency
 

  • References

  • 1 Milgrom LR. Patient–practitioner–remedy (PPR) entanglement: a qualitative non-local metaphor for homeopathy based on quantum theory. Homeopathy 2002; 91: 239-248
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cramer JG. The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics. Rev Mod Phys 1986; 58: 647-687
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N. Can a quantum mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?. Phys Rev 1935; 47: 777-780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Atkins PW. Physical Chemistry. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998. p. 283–387
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Jean Y, Volatron F, Burdett J. An Introduction to Molecular Orbitals. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Gribbon J. Q is for Quantum. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Wooters WK. Quantum entanglement as a quantifiable resource. Phil Trans R Soc Lond ser A 1998; 356: 1717-1731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Woolley RJ. Must a molecule have a shape?. J Amr Chem Soc 1978; 100: 1073-1078
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Woollins JD. Non-Metal Rings, Cages, and Clusters. Chichester: Wiley; 1988
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Kaku, M, Wave Function of the Universe(s), http://deoxy.org/h_kaku2.htm.
    PubMed
  • 11 Walach H. Magic of signs: a non-local interpretation of homeopathy. Brit Hom J 2000; 89: 127-140
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kent JT. Lectures on Homeopathic Philosophy. Sittingbourne: Homeopathic Book Service; 1990
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Vithoulkas G. The Science of Homeopathy. London: Thorsons (an imprint of HarperCollins); 1986
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Myss C. Anatomy of the Spirit. London: Transworld Publishers; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Laing RD. The Self, Others. London: Pelican Books; 1971
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Greenberger DM, Horne M, Zeilinger A. Going beyond Bell's Theorem. In: Kafatos M.. (ed). Fundam Theories Phys. 37 1989: 69-72
    Google Scholar