seed as nearly identical as possible, without the possibility of having an external contributionfrom some mineral, show that there is, in a very significant way, a "creation of matter","appearance" of an element, thus an atomic "transmutation", which is confirmed by variousmethods of analysis utilizing the most sensitive, most specific, and most modern techniques of physics.I limited myself to studying variations in the amount of calcium without studying what elementor elements could have given rise to this variation by this atomic modification. Such a researchproject could be very complex indeed because there could be several origins as a function of thespecies of vegetation (or animals, higher or lower, even microbial), confirmed experimentally:the calcium could come from potassium, from magnesium, or from silicon, by either separate orsimultaneous reactions. So we have there a completely different point of view. I wished to limitthe subject so as to produce irrefutable evidence that there is indeed in life forms a phenomenonwhich too many people have wished to deny for untenable reasons. I will demonstrate it andlimit the study to the variation of calcium in a single cultured species, oats, in order to firmlyshow that such experiments can be reproduced, that the conclusions result from hundreds of experiments and thousands of analyses and are amply demonstrated. Accordingly, we areconcerned here with an objective contribution [apport] and not with a subjective deduction.Next is shown an example of explanation placing itself in the framework of the most recentatomic theory, that of "neutral currents" already sketched in the last chapter of my work of 1975cited previously which included a "Terminal Note" of 1974 from the great French physicist of international stature, Oliver Costa de Beauregard, theory confirmed by a specialist in elementary
particles, Bernard d’Espagnat, director of the Laboratory of Particle Physics of Paris. We are
concerned here with a very young branch of nuclear physics which is evolving very rapidly and Icannot even dream of following its most recent discoveries, out-of-date before being printed. Iwill make a very condensed review of the situation in this science toward the beginning of 1981,keeping in mind that the authors of basic principles of this theory received the Nobel Prize forPhysics at the end of 1979. That is to say that this aspect of weak energy interactions is nowadopted by International Science. This section seemed indispensable to me because too manyphysicists, and along with them scientists from various other disciplines, consider transmutationsonly a phenomenon which recapitulates strong interactions. Blinded by the atomic bomb, theyhave not thought that there were also low energy transmutations, from which they produce astubborn and sterile opposition to my work.Here I give only the current status of a theory that is rapidly evolving. It will probably besuperceded in a few years, or more or less revised, but it is necessary to show that it is notrejected by nuclear physics avant-garde, that if I have been correct too soon (for them),nevertheless the transmutation of certain elements by a biological action is in no way mystical; itis an explicable reality in conformance with a theory which is now very classical and official andstill ignored by too many scientists. Here they will find an incentive to study more deeply thisnew entry into particle physics, unfortunately not possible to lay out in detail because new factsare turning up all the time: in 1980 did not one come, does it not seem, to produce evidence thatneutrinos (basic particles of weak energy transmutations) have weight when all calculations priorto 1980 were conducted under the hypothesis of a null mass?