Transmutation of Oxygen into Sulphur

In the building of saltpeter, or potassium nitrate, the nitrogen of the air took a major part. How was the oxygen of the atmosphere affected by the interplanetary discharges?

It has been observed since ancient times that lightnings are attended by an odor of sulphur. In the twelfth book of the Odyssey, Homer says:

“Zeus thundered and hurled his bolt upon the ship, and she quivered from stem to stern, smitten by the bolt of Zeus, and was filled with sulphurous smoke.”

Again, in the Iliad: “When beneath the blast of father Zeus an oak falleth uprooted, and a dread reek of brimstone ariseth therefrom,—then verily courage no longer possesseth him that looketh thereon. . .”

And: “[Zeus] thundered horribly and let loose the shimmering lightning and dashed it to the ground in front of the horses of Diomedes, and a ghastly blaze of flaming sulphur shot up, and the horses, terrified, both cringed away against the chariot.”

The same observation is put into a scientific prose by Pliny: “Lightning and thunder are attended with a strong smell of sulphur, and the light produced by them is of a sulphurous complexion.” The second part of Pliny’s sentence is also correct: pioneer work on electrical discharges in modern times was produced using globes of sulphur in rotation. Sulphur is one of the best insulators and static electricity, when accumulated on it, discharges in electrical sparks toward objects brought close to it.

Electrical discharges produced without the help of sulphur are also accompanied by the smell of it. This odor was referred to by Benjamin Franklin who, comparing lightning and electricity, wrote to the Royal Society in London that both phenomena are attended by a sulphurous smell. This he mentioned among twelve other properties which suggested that lightning is an electrical discharge. No importance was attributed by him or by anyone else since to this sulphurous smell. The smell of ozone is different from the smell of vaporized sulphur or sulphurous compounds, and the supposition that the ancients were unable to distinguish between the two disregards the fact that besides the smell of ozone a sulphurous smell follows an electric discharge.

This suggests to me that sulphur is actually produced from the air by the passage of an electrical discharge. The quantity of sulphur must be detectable in a careful laboratory experiment.

Quite possibly the detection of sulphur produced by a strong electrical discharge, by means other than smell, has already been fulfilled. A very strong discharge of electricity passing through the air formed solid sulphur. The bolt of electricity that fell upon the plain of the Pentapolis was of a magnitude sufficient to cause a transmutation of elements on a great scale. It rained “brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven.” The overturned plain became full of sulphurous deposits—"the whole land thereof is brimstone, and salt [probably potash], and burning” —and when later in another great upheaval the plain became covered by the Dead Sea, sulphurous springs continued to flow into the valley of the Jordan and into the Dead Sea from submerged strata and from the springs on the shores.

At the end of the eighth century and the beginning of the seventh century before the present era, when every fifteen years Mars was approaching dangerously close to the Earth, Isaiah prophesied “the day of the Lord’s vengeance,” in which day “the streams [of Idumea] shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch.” A curse upon man and his land was that “brimstone shall be scattered upon his habitation.” “Upon the wicked he shall rain pitch, fire and brimstone, and a horrible tempest.” This eschatological vision was alive with Ezekiel in the days of the Babylonian Exile. He spoke about “an overflowing rain, and great hailstones [meteorites], fire and brimstone.”

These stories of sulphur raining from the sky and the fearful expectations built upon them could be taken as fictions of an imaginative mind, were not the smell of sulphur an indication of its presence in the air following the passage of a discharge, and were not also the presence of sulphur deposits around the Dead Sea, thrust in deep below the ocean level, a substantiation of the story of the cataclysm.

Is the atomic source of sulphur generated by a discharge in oxygen, or does the nitrogen of the air participate also in the building of sulphur? It seems more probable that two atoms of oxygen are smashed into one atom of sulphur. If the atomic weight of sulphur obtained by electrical discharge will be found to be more than 32 (that of sulphur is 32.06) it might be due to the presence of some atoms of oxygen of the atomic weight 17. This heavy oxygen is the product of a nitrogen atom transmuted by the bombardment of alpha particles. We must reckon with the possibility that a proton from broken atoms of oxygen or ozone or nitrogen enters the new combination, or that electrons which cause the perturbation are able by themselves to change the atomic weight of the elements.

[Source: Immanuel Velikovsky - In the Beginning ]

monoatomic elements

Transition Group Elements

— Description —

There is a group of elements found in the middle of the periodic table known as the "transition group elements":

1) One category of these is called the precious elements:

Silver, and the "light platinum group" ( palladium, rhodium, and ruthenium). These are called 3d transition group elements.

Gold, and the "heavy platinum group" ( platinum, iridium, and osmium). These are called 4d transition, group elements.

2) Another category of these are the non precious elements:

Copper, cobalt and nickel. These are called 2d transition group elements.

These elements are known as "transition group elements". They are in an uncertain state as regards their positive or negative electro-charge behavior, hence the name "transition". Their valence. electron orbitals are always half filled or half empty. (Electrons in the outer shells of an atom are referred to as valence electrons. Different orbital states for electrons can hold only certain numbers of electrons. ) Elements with fewer electrons in the outer shells tend to be electro-positive, and those with more electrons in the outer shells tend to be electro-negative.

These transition elements possess a unique property in that the electrons in the Partially filled outer orbitals can interchange under the right conditions with electrons in the partially filled inner orbitals (d). This is the underlying basis of catalytic reactions. (A catalytic reaction is a chemical reaction that occurs much more rapidly than normal without the catalyst itself participating in the reaction.)

Transition Group Elements

Atom Clustering and The Monoatomic State

Most atoms cluster in groups of at least two or more atoms. However, the transition group elements, because of their unique properties, can be found already existing, or can be created and are able to remain, in a stable single atom state. This is achieved by having no nearest neighbor closer than four angstroms and, therefore, by not being able to chemically bind with other atoms. This is called a "monoatomic" state.

In this state, these atoms interact in two dimensions, in a unique continuous linear movement between a strong repulsive force when close enough to each other, and a strong attractive force when moved apart at a certain distance. Only when the repulsive force is overcome, will these atoms aggregate to form a metallic union.

In metals, during the process of going from a many atom state to a monoatomic state, there is a disaggregation of the metal-metal bonds and a loss of the properties characteristically assigned to the description of a metal. Different transition elements have different critical atom cluster size which determine their metal characteristics and behavior. These characteristic physical properties are lost at different rates depending on the element involved. (For example, the critical cluster size for rhodium is five atoms; for iridium it is nine atoms.

Two or more atoms, up to thirty-three, of the same transition group element, when clustered together, are called "metal-metal" bonded. In these cluster sizes, they can not be called truly metallic. It takes a twelve atom cluster before they become electrically conductive. It takes thirteen atoms for their true metallic properties to begin to appear. It takes a cluster of thirty-three atoms before they become fully metallic, and will grow all by themselves. At thirty-three form a "face center cubic", a first basic growth structure of three dimensions solidly formed like a cube. In all these quasi metallic and fully metallic states, the atoms interact in three dimensions. In the monoatomic state, they are referred to as non-metallic and they interact in two dimensions.

In the monoatomic state, these elements have unique and consistent behavior. This is their true elemental state.

Transition Group Elements

Superdeformed Nuclei, High Spin Low Energy in the Monoatomic State:

In the monoatomic state, the atoms of the transition group elements lose their chemical reactivity and change the configuration of the nucleus. This change in nuclear configuration seems to cause the electrical change that pacifies the chemical effect. It may be considered as the mono-atom internally compensating for the highly reactive chemical state.

The nuclear configuration changes because there is a correlation between the nuclear orbitals and the electron orbitals as to how full they are. In the nucleus, totally filled orbitals (harmonic) exclude the partially filled orbitals (anharmonic) by pushing them away. The nucleus almost divides into one filled, and one half filled. This is known as the "liquid drop" theory.

This condition is unique to these atoms. The newly shaped nucleus is called "superdeformed". Nuclear physicists have recently confirmed that these atoms will change their proton and neutron configurations when they have no nearest neighbor to di-pole and di-pole react with. They can observe one atom at a time in linear accelerators.

A normal nucleus is shaped non spherically (deformed) at a vertical (length) to horizontal (width) ratio of 1.3 to 1. It is very stable and is held together by the strong force. It takes one million electron volts to knock a proton out of the nucleus!

The nucleons of these monoatomic elements adjust their positions in the nucleus, such that the ratio of their length to width becomes 2 to 1. These "soft" nuclei (those having a number of protons within a certain range and half filled orbitals) deform more easily than normal nuclei. 0nly ten electron volts are needed to cause a superdeformed nucleus to break apart, and this can be done with a mere DC arc! (See discussion of gamma emission below.)

The presence of a superdeformed nucleus is directly correlated to a change in its spin state; it passes from a low spin state to a high spin state. It has been found that the nuclei of these elements have a higher total energy in a low spin state (their internal temperature is higher) than when they are in a high spin state (their internal temperature is lower). This causes the mono-atom to seek the high spin state because that state has the total lowest energy. Furthermore, this high spin state will continue to exist until such time as a nearest neighbor atom is able to transfer energy into the nucleus and convert it back to the higher energy low spin state. (This is called "pinning" in the superconducting industry.)


David Hudson's Discoveries

David Hudson discovered that the monoatomic state can exist naturally and remain in a stable state in the transitional group elements. (ORME) He also discovered that in this state, the atoms can join to become a many atom resonance coupled system of quantum oscillators, resonating in two dimensions, indeed perfect superconductors, at room temperature. (S-ORME)

Hudson discovered that the precious elements, in the group of transitional elements, could be found in a monoatomic form in certain ores and that by a chemical method, he could separate them out from these ores. The high spin low energy state is stable and naturally maintained. it needs no external manmade manipulation. The internal temperature of the atom is measured to be almost zero degrees Kelvin .(approximately three degrees). This is a naturally cold state. It is, in fact, a perfect superconductor.

Hudson also discovered that he could prepare these mono-atoms from commercial metallic forms of the transitional group elements as well, and maintain them in this state by removing the chemical and crystalline energy. This is achieved by providing another element that is highly reactive and which has a chemical affinity for the transition element. When they react, they form a compound of the two elements. Through a process of replacement chemistry, hydrogen is exchanged for the reactive metal. The hydrogen transition metal compound is chemically removed from the solution and the hydrogen is thermally annealed from the sample. It is inherent in these precious elements to convert to the high spin state if this particular sequence is followed. This process is permanent and does not have to be continuously applied. It is also infinitely less expensive than the traditional refrigeration process.


SUPERDEFORMATION OF NUCLEI [“New Radioactivities,” Walter Greiner and Aurel Sandulescu, Scientific American, March 1990, pages 58-67]:

“An atomic nucleus can spontaneously restructure itself, occasionally ejecting rare clusters of protons and neutrons.” These clusters can be any number of nucleons, e.g. 14 or 24; but the emission of a cluster of nucleons other than say an alpha particle (a He nucleus composed of two protons and two neutrons) is much rarer than alpha emission. “The structure of the nucleus arises from two types of interactions: strong and electromagnetic. As a result of the strong interaction, or nuclear force, protons bind to neutrons and to each other. The nuclear force binds nucleons very tightly but acts over a very short range. To separate two neutrons that are one fermi [10-15 meter] apart, for instance, requires an energy of about one million electron volts [1 Mev]. On the other hand, only about 10 electron volts is needed to dissociate two nucleons that are 10 fermis apart. As a result of the electromagnetic interaction, or Coulomb force, protons repel other protons. Although the Coulomb force is weaker than the nuclear force, it acts over a much longer range. If two protons are one fermi apart, the Coulomb force is about 100 times weaker than the nuclear force. Yet at a distance of 10 fermis, the Coulomb force is about 10 times stronger than the nuclear force.”


The nuclei of different elements consist of shells occupied by a certain number of protons and neutrons, much in the manner of the electron shell structure surrounding the nucleus. “If the shells of a nucleus are completely filled, as are those of calcium and lead, the nucleus is stable and consequently spherical.” “Stable nuclei usually consist of a ‘magic number’ of protons or neutrons; that is, they have 2, 8, 20, 28, 40, 50, 82, 126, or 184 protons or neutrons. Nuclei that have double magic numbers are particularly stable -- for example, calcium-48 (20 protons and 28 neutrons) or lead 208 (82 protons and 126 neutrons).” The Pauli exclusion principle “holds that a proton cannot occupy an energy state filled by another proton. The same is true of neutrons. As a result, each proton fills one energy state, starting with the state that has the least energy and filling as many states as there are protons. The neutrons fill another set of energy states.”

When the outermost shell of either protons or neutrons is not filled, and the number of protons and/or neutrons depart from the ‘magic numbers’, the nuclear structure is unstable. This can result in superasymmetric fission of the element. “Superasymmetric fission produces two fragments that differ greatly in mass and charge. The emission of the smaller of these two fragments produces radiation known as cluster radioactivity. The cluster is usually several times larger than an alpha particle.” What physicists call “the collective model holds that the outer part of the nucleus can deform when the outer nucleons move with respect to the nucleons of the inner nucleus. [Thus] this collective motion, or deformation, derives from the liquid-drop model. Cold fission can also be expected, as a nucleus splits into two ‘unexcited’ nuclei.” “Unlike the ordinary (hot) process, the energy released in cold fission does not excite the emitted nuclei into high-energy states. The nuclear fragments from cold fission are therefore more spherical and less elongated than the nuclear fragments from ordinary fission.”


QUANTUM SIZE EFFECTS IN RAPIDLY ROTATING NUCLEI [Y. R. Shimizu and R. A. Broglia, Physical Review C, April 1990, pages 1865-1868.]:

“It has been conjectured that the usual Cooper instability will not exist any more in small particles containing a reduced number of fermions, like, e.g., metallic particles. Therefore, superconductivity should disappear for particles in the quantal size effects (QSE’s) regime, when the energy difference between two discrete one-electron states is comparable to the energy gap of the superconducting state. This means that small superconductors with fewer than about 104 to 105 electrons as well as, e.g. atomic nuclei should be strongly affected by quantal size effects.” “The transition from pair-correlated to normal system with increasing angular momentum involves the coupling between the bands associated with the ground state and the excited states representing fluctuations in the pairing field. The understanding of the role played by pairing fluctuations in nuclei, which is one of the central questions of high-spin physics...”

[Under magnetic fields in the range of 700,000 gauss, it has been observed that high-spin states allow for transferring energy from nucleus to nucleus without loss of energy. This implies the existence of high-spin states (even without magnetic fields) which may lead to superconductivity. Example: The (relatively high temperature, 93 oK) superconductor, Yttrium Barium Copper Oxide (YBa2Cu3O7), is formed by repeated healing and cooling of the compound. This heating and cooling results in water vapor from the atmosphere bleeding into the compound to combine hydrogen and oxygen elements in such a way that some of the copper is left in a monoatomic state, and thus available for superconductivity. In this respect, the implication is for an asymmetric high spin nucleus, arranged in a line some 6.3 Angstroms apart, resonating in two dimensions, to perpetuate the wave and achieve superconductivity. The atoms seem to space themselves automatically, and form the nuclear equivalent of Cooper Pairs. The nucleons screen the electrons, allowing them to pair, and thereby losing their particle aspects -- the fermions thus become Bosons (Bose Condensation). What one achieves is a nucleus with light flowing, instead of electrons.]


teaching vs meta-teaching

[...] you cannot use the word ‘teacher’ for martial arts uh? It’s impossible. ‘Teacher’ is for school, you teach; in Japanese this is Kyoshi, ‘master’ is Shisho – a master. The master never teaches, he transmits, he doesn’t say ‘a, b, c, d… you put your hands like this…’ A master pushes you to develop the more deeply how to see things, the art of looking and observation – because if he teaches and explains to you everything he shuts down your capacity to survive and to adapt yourself, for a warrior this is impossible and, if you apply this to Ninjutsu, it’s more deeper. You cannot teach, if you teach it’s like a condemnation if you want, you put him in a place where he cannot do anything. It’s like if you help someone to eat, you always cut up his food and after he always waits for that, because humans are like this, we take automatism very quickly. So first, there is no teacher – teacher is for fixed things, sports things, school; this is reason why the word Ryu cannot be translated as school, because primary master and foundator of ryu never acted like teacher, he never had a dojo. He was the dojo: wherever place he goes.



[...]First of all: what is work? Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth's surface relatively to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid. The second kind is capable of indefinite extension: there are not only those who give orders, but those who give advice as to what orders should be given. Usually two opposite kinds of advice are given simultaneously by two organized bodies of men; this is called politics. The skill required for this kind of work is not knowledge of the subjects as to which advice is given, but knowledge of the art of persuasive speaking and writing, i.e. of advertising.

[...]From the beginning of civilization until the Industrial Revolution, a man could, as a rule, produce by hard work little more than was required for the subsistence of himself and his family, although his wife worked at least as hard as he did, and his children added their labor as soon as they were old enough to do so. The small surplus above bare necessaries was not left to those who produced it, but was appropriated by warriors and priests. In times of famine there was no surplus; the warriors and priests, however, still secured as much as at other times, with the result that many of the workers died of hunger. This system persisted in Russia until 1917, and still persists in the East; in England, in spite of the Industrial Revolution, it remained in full force throughout the Napoleonic wars, and until a hundred years ago, when the new class of manufacturers acquired power. In America, the system came to an end with the Revolution, except in the South, where it persisted until the Civil War. A system which lasted so long and ended so recently has naturally left a profound impress upon men's thoughts and opinions. Much that we take for granted about the desirability of work is derived from this system, and, being pre-industrial, is not adapted to the modern world. Modern technique has made it possible for leisure, within limits, to be not the prerogative of small privileged classes, but a right evenly distributed throughout the community. The morality of work is the morality of slaves, and the modern world has no need of slavery.

[...]Modern technique has made it possible to diminish enormously the amount of labor required to secure the necessaries of life for everyone. This was made obvious during the war. At that time all the men in the armed forces, and all the men and women engaged in the production of munitions, all the men and women engaged in spying, war propaganda, or Government offices connected with the war, were withdrawn from productive occupations. In spite of this, the general level of well-being among unskilled wage-earners on the side of the Allies was higher than before or since. The significance of this fact was concealed by finance: borrowing made it appear as if the future was nourishing the present. But that, of course, would have been impossible; a man cannot eat a loaf of bread that does not yet exist. The war showed conclusively that, by the scientific organization of production, it is possible to keep modern populations in fair comfort on a small part of the working capacity of the modern world. If, at the end of the war, the scientific organization, which had been created in order to liberate men for fighting and munition work, had been preserved, and the hours of the week had been cut down to four, all would have been well. Instead of that the old chaos was restored, those whose work was demanded were made to work long hours, and the rest were left to starve as unemployed. Why? Because work is a duty, and a man should not receive wages in proportion to what he has produced, but in proportion to his virtue as exemplified by his industry.

This is the morality of the Slave State, applied in circumstances totally unlike those in which it arose. No wonder the result has been disastrous. Let us take an illustration. Suppose that, at a given moment, a certain number of people are engaged in the manufacture of pins. They make as many pins as the world needs, working (say) eight hours a day. Someone makes an invention by which the same number of men can make twice as many pins: pins are already so cheap that hardly any more will be bought at a lower price. In a sensible world, everybody concerned in the manufacturing of pins would take to working four hours instead of eight, and everything else would go on as before. But in the actual world this would be thought demoralizing. The men still work eight hours, there are too many pins, some employers go bankrupt, and half the men previously concerned in making pins are thrown out of work. There is, in the end, just as much leisure as on the other plan, but half the men are totally idle while half are still overworked. In this way, it is insured that the unavoidable leisure shall cause misery all round instead of being a universal source of happiness. Can anything more insane be imagined?

[Source: Bertrand Russell - In Praise of Idleness (1932)]

The Nature of Law

Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place. What Is Law ? What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. Each of us has a natural right--from God--to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two.

For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend -- even by force -- his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right -- its reason for existing, its lawfulness -- is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force -- for the same reason -- cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all. [..]

Property and Plunder

Man can live and satisfy his wants only by ceaseless labor; by the ceaseless application of his faculties to natural resources. This process is the origin of property. But it is also true that a man may live and satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others. This process is the origin of plunder. Now since man is naturally inclined to avoid pain -- and since labor is pain in itself -it follows that men will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly. And under these conditions, neither religion nor morality can stop it. When, then, does plunder stop? It stops when it becomes more painful and more dangerous than labor. It is evident, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of to work. All the measures of the law should protect property and punish plunder.

But, generally, the law is made by one man or one class of men. And since law cannot operate without the sanction and support of a dominating force, this force must be entrusted to those who make the laws. This fact, combined with the fatal tendency that exists in the heart of man to satisfy his wants with the least possible effort, explains the almost universal perversion of the law. Thus it is easy to understand how law, instead of checking injustice, becomes the invincible weapon of injustice. It is easy to understand why the law is used by the legislator to destroy in varying degrees among the rest of the people, their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppression, and their property by plunder. This is done for the benefit of the person who makes the law, and in proportion to the power that he holds. Victims of Lawful Plunder Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter -- by peaceful or revolutionary means -- into the making of laws. According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it.

Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws! Until that happens, the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons. But then, participation in the making of law becomes universal. And then, men seek to balance their conflicting interests by universal plunder. Instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general. As soon as the plundered classes gain political power, they establish a system of reprisals against other classes. They do not abolish legal plunder. (This objective would demand more enlightenment than they possess.) Instead, they emulate their evil predecessors by participating in this legal plunder, even though it is against their own interests. It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution -- some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding.

The Results of Legal Plunder

It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder. What are the consequences of such a perversion? It would require volumes to describe them all. Thus we must content ourselves with pointing out the most striking. In the first place, it erases from everyone's conscience the distinction between justice and injustice. No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because law makes them so. Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it. [...]

[...]Can the law -- which necessarily requires the use of force -- rationally be used for anything except protecting the rights of everyone? I defy anyone to extend it beyond this purpose without perverting it and, consequently, turning might against right. This is the most fatal and most illogical social perversion that can possibly be imagined. It must be admitted that the true solution -- so long searched for in the area of social relationships -- is contained in these simple words: Law is organized justice. Now this must be said: When justice is organized by law -- that is, by force -- this excludes the idea of using law (force) to organize any human activity whatever, whether it be labor, charity, agriculture, commerce, industry, education, art, or religion. The organizing by law of any one of these would inevitably destroy the essential organization -- justice. For truly, how can we imagine force being used against the liberty of citizens without it also being used against justice, and thus acting against its proper purpose?

[...]Law Is Force

Since the law organizes justice, the socialists ask why the law should not also organize labor, education, and religion. Why should not law be used for these purposes? Because it could not organize labor, education, and religion without destroying justice. We must remember that law is force, and that, consequently, the proper functions of the law cannot lawfully extend beyond the proper functions of force. When law and force keep a person within the bounds of justice, they impose nothing but a mere negation. They oblige him only to abstain from harming others. They violate neither his personality, his liberty, nor his property. They safeguard all of these. They are defensive; they defend equally the rights of all.

Law Is a Negative Concept

The harmlessness of the mission performed by law and lawful defense is self-evident; the usefulness is obvious; and the legitimacy cannot be disputed. As a friend of mine once remarked, this negative concept of law is so true that the statement, the purpose of the law is to cause justice to reign, is not a rigorously accurate statement. It ought to be stated that the purpose of the law is to prevent injustice from reigning. In fact, it is injustice, instead of justice, that has an existence of its own. Justice is achieved only when injustice is absent. But when the law, by means of its necessary agent, force, imposes upon men a regulation of labor, a method or a subject of education, a religious faith or creed -then the law is no longer negative; it acts positively upon people. It substitutes the will of the legislator for their own wills; the initiative of the legislator for their own initiatives. When this happens, the people no longer need to discuss, to compare, to plan ahead; the law does all this for them. Intelligence becomes a useless prop for the people; they cease to be men; they lose their personality, their liberty, their property. Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice.

[...]Proper Legislative Functions

It is not true that the legislator has absolute power over our persons and property. The existence of persons and property preceded the existence of the legislator, and his function is only to guarantee their safety. It is not true that the function of law is to regulate our consciences, our ideas, our wills, our education, our opinions, our work, our trade, our talents, or our pleasures. The function of law is to protect the free exercise of these rights, and to prevent any person from interfering with the free exercise of these same rights by any other person. Since law necessarily requires the support of force, its lawful domain is only in the areas where the use of force is necessary. This is justice.

Every individual has the right to use force for lawful self- defense. It is for this reason that the collective force -- which is only the organized combination of the individual forces -- may lawfully be used for the same purpose; and it cannot be used legitimately for any other purpose. Law is solely the organization of the individual right of self-defense which existed before law was formalized. Law is justice.

[Source: Frederick Bastiat - The Law]