As promised, this includes an account of the weirdest day of my life.

If I read it, cold, I would not believe it either but it did really happen and it forced me to reconsider my views on just about everything, especially the frailty of human perception. Although I have "seen ghosts" before (particularly during re-furbishment of my 17th century oak-beamed cottage back in Kent), nothing could have prepared me for the events of July 4th 2000. What do you do when somebody "beams down" (as in Star Trek) into your living room?

My reaction was anger at the intrusion into my privacy. This moderated into wonder and amusement when the entity spent so much time just studying the flush toilet (well, you would if you had been projected into the 20th century from the 15th!). Knowing how difficult it can be to access parts of my site, I'm sending you the page now. It is an incredible story and I don't expect to be believed. The events described were preceeded by three days of hallucinations which would not go away, no matter what I did. I repeat that nothing could have prepared me for what occured.

When I shut my eyes, there were vivid Disney-like scenes, endlessly changing, like on an acid-trip but I was pretty much sober. When I opened them there were swirling pin-point dots of bright red and I suspected something like a stroke was coming on but that wasn't it either. I became gradually aware that there was a 'prescence' in my flat. Somebody was "definitely" standing next to me but if I looked directly at them, they disappeared. Apparently, this is absolutely classic of "visitations'' but I didn't know that at the time.

All of my life I have been a huge fan of Leonardo Da Vinci. When I was a kid I had a kind of flash vision (I was about 8 at the time - 1955). It was like being told something by a whisper from behind. It was to be my life's ambition and job to "make toys for the children who travel in spaceships"... A strange thing to imagine for an eight-year-old but it was not frightening; more inspiring. I was, despite attending a C of E school what you would have to call an atheist. I remained of that persuasion until the heady days of hippy-dom, when I dropped out, turned on and got severe religious confusion for a few years. (I'm fine now although some would most probably dispute that!)

In 1969 I wrote a song called "My Friend Leonardo" - I've played in bands since school days and the guitar-fixing thing turned into a full-time career by default in 1974 when the flat where I lived got burned down and I could no longer take guitar repairs home to do on the kitchen table top (the squat where I was forced to live temporarily wasn't secure). I started putting strings on boxes at the age of eight (again) and had always made all sorts of guitar-like things - it was my "thing". Also, I'm afraid, I've always been more than open-minded about UFO's and things related. In 1970/71 I got to know David Bowie since he was a local lad (but I wasn't a fan - I just lived with his ex-girlfriend) and when he asked me: "what did I want to do with my musical talent?", I replied that I never saw myself as star but rather would like to get involved with perhaps children's TV. His reply to that was that I shouldn't ever be afraid of stardom but should, instead aim for the top, the absolute top, shining star.

A week later he called to say that he'd written a song inspired by our conversation: "There's a Star Man, waiting in the skies.. he'd like to come and meet us but he thinks he'd blow our minds..."

He told me; "Let the children boogie, Let the children boogie..."

So now you know where that came from. But to return to Leonardo Da Vinci. Last year I was working on a commissioned portrait . It had been a very harrowing few months of communication with the MOD (Ministry of Defence - who would not discuss sonoluminescence) trying to get them to take me seriously - a waste of time without letters after my name - and I was having a struggle with the painting, trying to capture a likeness in secret (difficult, even if you know the subject). Suddenly, out of the blue and in broad daylight, there was somebody standing in my flat. In fact there were four people standing in my flat, who weren't actually there at all, like in Star Trek when somebody 'beams down' and materialises out of thin air but not quite completing the process.

This was a bit of a shock and a gross invasion of privacy, to say the least. I got angry and told them in no uncertain terms to go away. Three of them did (after some fierce disagreement). One appeared to be a kind of civil servant - type character, complete with briefcase and clipboard, some kind of inspector; another was some kind of engineer or technician in an 'overalls' work suit; another was a woman who appeared to be a Russian or Eastern European working class lady (but seconded in for her remote viewing capability, I think - well that's the impression I got) - and the last character appeared to be two people in one person's 'body' - a male (predominantly) and a female side-addition, like a Siamese twin spirit. This was the only totally benign being out of the whole crew. The others seemed intimidating.

My feelings were utterly shot. This kind of thing only happens in films, I thought. A Buddhist once told me you could dispel demons by shouting "fat!" at them, so I tried it and was left 'alone' with the double character. To be honest I was extremely rude to the woman first and she just evaporated in shock - if she was a remote viewer, I probably killed her. The double man/woman reminded me of the Da Vinci cartoon of 'The Virgin with St. Anne', if you know it.

(my version, by the way; in acrylics on canvas)

'He' appeared to be able to talk to me direct mentally but could 'hear' what I was saying aloud and the ensuing conversation went along these lines:

steve: "Is this anything to do with the MOD correspondence and my work on sonoluminescence?"

body: (appears to jump into better contrast - more viewable; - if I look directly at it, it vanishes; I have to observe out of the corner of my eye. I take this as an answer: "yes"). I get the very strong feeling that this 'spirit' knows all there is to know about painting.

steve: "How do I get the fire-horses in the sky in my painting to work?"

body: (words form in my head) "Move the brush quickly around and all the time think of the subject you want to appear and it will appear. Keep moving the brush quickly! Like the dancing, swirling red dots you've been seeing". I follwed the "instructions" and bingo... (although this photo isn't as clear as it could have been) ~

steve: "I notice that you are very interested in the technical stuff in my room (recording studio, electric guitars etc.,) and that you seem to know a lot about art. Tell me... are you from the present time?"

body: nil response... (I take that as a "No" - body jumps clearer again - I take that as "affirm no")

steve: "- then you are from the past?"

body: (jumps clearer again but more so this time) ("yes")

steve: "- so would you be from the last century?"

body: "(nil response - "no")

steve: " you wouldn't be from the 15th/16th century?"

body: "YES" (gets brighter and clearer)

steve: " are you Leonardo Da Vinci?" At this point the 'body' jumps, full-bodied into material world; real enough to touch (but I didn't try! )

Leonardo: (now) "YES!!!" : In my room, standing there before me, is a young and sprightly man, full of youth and vigour. Not the Leonardo of the self portrait, with the wizened face and beard that we all think of in that connection, but smartly dressed in a jerkin, velvet and linen shirt, tights, beautifully crafted shoes and belt work, buttons and 'flounce'. Picture the Michaelangelo statue of David and you're there. Most of all, I'm struck by the strength of good humoured self-confidence. Further conversation ensues (by this time I'm quite used to the idea but still very excited and still a little bit frightened)

steve: "why are you here? ... it's not to teach me how to paint horses, surely? I am your biggest fan ever. This is very humbling. I'm so very amazed and pleased to meet you! I've got piles of books just about you!"

Leonardo: "To the contrary, my friend; I am your biggest fan! You are right about the sonoluminescence. It is recorded in history: at this date, this time, this place, you got it right. I am here to tell you that every time civilisation reaches the point you have now reached, a man arises who knows about strings and that is the only way to crack the code. That man this time around is you."

"Leonardo" then becomes 'transparent' again and proceeds to wander around my flat, spends a good ten minutes just inspecting the flush toilet. Well, I suppose you would, if you were him, in that situation. I tell him that I really wish he could stick around so I could somehow organise a trip in a helicopter for him. When he comes back into the room (and I'm thinking 'Bloody Hell!') I show him how I make samples on my hard disk recorder, thinking; "I don't have any choice but to go with the flow on this one". Then I tell him I've got to go out to play a gig (at somebody's wedding - the worst gig I've ever done, understandably!) - and would he like to watch television while I'm out?

Of course, I hadn't thought it through... (how would you?) - he couldn't affect anything materially, so wouldn't be able change channels or switch it off, even. Silly me. As it turns out he came to the gig with me, which I actually regret, since my performance was total shit. Nobody else could see him; if you have seen the film 'Predator', remember how the alien could only be seen by the light diffraction phase interference he caused when moving about - that was exactly how it was with Leo. I made the mistake over the following few days of telling some of my friends what was happening and got some extremely derogatory comments, as you would. Fierce rumours quickly spread around town regarding my doubtful sanity.

After the first few hours of his visit I really started to dread his departure; he was so very funny to be with. Known historically to be a great wit and prankster, he eventually came out to the pub with me when I got home (retired hurt and early from the dismal flop of a gig) and played tricks on the barmaid behind the bar. She was used to people claiming strange things, doing the job she does, so accepted that I actually did have some disembodied spirit with me, at my side. Weird stuff! The whole experience was unforgettable, humbling and thoroughly amazing. I run clean out of adjectives when I try to describe these events and don't expect to be believed.

Also, I struggle to piece together the actual sequence of things on the day chronologically. Being the rational, reasoning being that I am though, I tried to make some sort of sense of the thing for my own peace of mind and one set of conclusions that I came to was that;-

a) the technology definitely did not exist in 1504 to project a person through time...

b) the technology definitely does not exist now to project a person through time...

c) inevitably, if these events were 'real' then they had to be a projection from the 'future', which raises the question of the overall direction of time itself...

---

If you've got this far, then you'll see that these events would confuse just about anybody. I had spent several weeks in communication with the UK Ministry Of Defence. What I am describing in my pages is, apart from anything else, an extremely powerful weapon, so it was my legal obligation to inform them first. To do otherwise would still constitute High Treason (the only remaining capital offence). They did not understand the thing at all and told me to 'go away', rubbishing the entire thing. I had to ask them for 'carte-blanche' to publish and they (grudgingly) did just that, eventually.

Here's what they wrote...

Dear Mr. Acworth, Thank you for your letter of the 24th June 2000 requesting a reply in absolute terms. We have tried, in all our correspondence, to be polite and open-minded in our consideration of your idea. However, in response to your request we are of the opinion that your idea lacks any scientific basis and that you should have listened to what others have been telling you over the past decades. You have to realise that the MOD will only consider ideas that may be beneficial to military operations; many good ideas have been rejected if a suitable military application for it could not be identified. In this instance we were unable to identify an operational application because we could not understand what you were trying to achieve and for what purpose you persist with an idea that so many people have obviously dismissed. Regrettably, I have to advise you that from a military point of view there is absolutely no interest in your idea and that no purpose will be served by continuing this correspondence.

They would not even discuss sonoluminescence; I don't think they'd ever even heard of it. They had previously gone to great lengths to explain to me how guitars work!...

Mr. Acworth's jump from the particle physics world 'Superstring Theory' to music strings is a quantum leap in the wrong direction, and I'm afraid a perfect example of the old proverb 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'. Superstrings were nothing to do with musical string or any other strings for that matter, the word was used as a convenient description of the matter that forms the basic building blocks of the universe. Using a coiled magnetic field to contain plasma is not a new idea; it is the basis of the dream of cheap electricity from ZETA to the present day 'Tokomaks'. An open-ended coil will not contain plasma; the system must be a toroid. Apart from anything else a wound string built on the basis of a music string would not have the required strength. I cannot see any future in pursuing this idea. A wound musical string such as a guitar string relies on the central core for its strength. The coiled section is there to add weight, and therefor lower the frequency; it adds nothing to the strength of the string. The only use for the 'flat' wound string is to enable a rock and roll guitarist to slide his or her fingers over the fret board more quickly. The sustain properties of a musical instrument depend upon the material of which the instrument is made and the manner of playing, rather than the string. A violin has sustain because the bow constantly vibrates the string; indeed the body of a violin is heavily varnished in an attempt to quieten the instrument. On the other hand an acoustic guitar has poor sustain and is only lightly varnished so as not to kill any sustain that there is; there have also been many many experiments with different shaped back and side panels to eliminate dead spots and areas where sound can be 'trapped'.

I would refer Mr. Acworth to the experiments by Leo Fender and Les Paul, who independently found that a guitar string had more sustain when used on a solid body. Hence, the development of the solid bodied electric guitar. The majority of these are made of a hard wood and the best have steel or brass inserts under the bridge to increase sustain. The feedback Mr. Acworth mentions is no more than the effect of taking an electric guitar close to its associated speaker, when feedback or 'howl round' becomes obvious.

I have departed from Mr. Acworth's plasma containment idea to discuss his other concepts. I defer to his knowledge of music strings, but I am sure that he will agree with me that a string is only as good as the instrument it is fitted to. I do not wish to appear flippant, but knowledge of the acoustic properties of catgut and brass does not explain Beethoven's fifth symphony. Likewise knowledge of musical string construction does not add to the theory of particle physics..."

Once again thank you for for sending such a well-supported explanation of your idea to support a speaking length of ionising gas plasma within a composite music string. It is with regret that I have to send what I know will be a disappointing reply but as previously stated our knowledge of music string behaviour is limited. On the other hand the basics of particle physics is fully understood but not as a combined concept within a composite wound music string. Yours sincerely...

---

Now, here's a conundrum! What do you do when you've invented, or at least rediscovered, the water engine?

We've all heard the apocryphal story about the guy who invents the pill that you put in a bucket of water and the resulting mixture works like petrol. Result? He gets 'silenced' by the oil companies and global, oil-based economy is safe. This time around though, the information is out there on the Internet... except that nobody, despite the best and most articulate efforts of the inventor, seems to understand the idea. This is very strange and frustrating, considering that it is so very simple. It is not a 'petrol pill', though, this time around. It is a small, handheld device which, from the latent energy in one drop of water, generates an immensely powerful laser (and gravity-distorting fields?). Why would anybody believe this? It doesn't sound very likely, does it?

If you would like a working, practical and functioning 'flying saucer', for instance, who would you ask for information? No point approaching 'Area 51'. They don't know . If they did, we wouldn't be still using wings and jet engines or rockets to power our very best Defence craft. To begin with, somebody will have to actually grasp the practical notion and begin development.

Is this the work of a crank? I spent a long and successful career as a music string mechanic and it was through an intimate knowledge of string mechanics and dynamics that I broke into the field of the controlled probability of chained sonoluminescence: energy generated from water by vibration. Somebody out there has to stop just 'reading from the card', put their brain in gear and understand what I'm talking about. My hypothesis really is very simple.

The alternative is that I get rich first and put my money where my mouth is.

Cheers, steve.>o<

index.htm