Kirlian Photography

[pattern]

Code: Select all

http://skepdic.com/kirlian.html

Ok, so do you guys have an explanation why

"if a [Kirlian] photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears."


"If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum "


I must say im quite dissapointed in the disinformation given by the whole Kirlian stuff, I'm not saying aura's aren't real, but im saying the Kirlian thing is a scam, unless someone can offer an answer?

[Matt]

Perhaps the aura is propagated through ionized gas?

Einstein didn't come up with his theories over-night - he had to throw out all the bad ideas and things that didn't work in a trial and error process that lasted months and years. We know that Kirlian technology is showing something, and it has to do with ionized gas. Just because it doesn't appear in a vacuum doesn't mean it's not an aura.

When you look at something scientifically, you have to accept each new variable into account and try to explain it and what's happening. Eventually you will accumulate enough variables to say that "this is an aura caused by the human body," or "this is an effect caused by a reaction of humidity, electric pulses, and ionized gas." At this time, we do not have enough variables to have a definitive say either way - any scientist who discounts it at this stage is just as kooky as the man who swears by his life that it IS an aura.

[shezmear]

Code: Select all

http://skepdic.com/kirlian.html

Ok, so do you guys have an explanation why

"if a [Kirlian] photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears."


"If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum "


I must say im quite dissapointed in the disinformation given by the whole Kirlian stuff, I'm not saying aura's aren't real, but im saying the Kirlian thing is a scam, unless someone can offer an answer?

I`m not sure you could run it by tom and see what he thinks he`s right into the aura technology....

[ptex]

I would suggest to contact Prof. Korotkov's office but I'm sure that they and Tom Chalko too would laugh of the points these so called "skeptics" make. So I wouldn't really count on receiving an answer from any of them because it's basically a waste of time.

Nevertheless I'll try to point something. The first thing that comes to mind is that the base theory of their skepticism is "moister". Kirlian photography is used in objects (like rocks and metals) which have a very low or inexistent level of moisture. Kirlian photography photographs for example an object before and after intense concentration over it and we can see the differences. If these inanimated objects can register such differences in kirlian photography I'd be very skeptical myself as to their skeptic theory.

Kirlian photography thus doesn't seem to depend upon the level of moisture at all. Depending the level of moisture, skin electrical resistance and other factors is another type of technology called "biofeedback". They seem to confuse this technology with Kirlian photography and infer the same conclusions from it.

Something else I noticed is that nowhere did I see concrete scientific evidence that backs their claims. They don't accurately mention their sources so that we can validate the experiments that were done.

Most people don't bother to read beyond what's in front of their eyes and don't think for themselves. Kirlian technology has got more than 40 years of extensive research and the correlations that exist between physical and emotional states and the corresponding finger / foot (reflexology) areas are demonstrated beyond doubt. The sources are too numerous to list here but here's a good one to start: http://kirlianresearch.com/kirlian_principle.html

Please notice that to worthy advancements in science in whatever the direction, there will always be those that either seeing it as at threat or fearing something else, will do everything possible to put obstacles in the way.

For me this definition in the skeptics dictionary is not even worth the time spent reading it. It's neither scientifically coherent nor plausible in my opinion.

[bomohwkl]

Code: Select all

http://skepdic.com/kirlian.html

Ok, so do you guys have an explanation why

"if a [Kirlian] photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears."


"If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum "


I must say im quite dissapointed in the disinformation given by the whole Kirlian stuff, I'm not saying aura's aren't real, but im saying the Kirlian thing is a scam, unless someone can offer an answer?

Vacuum? If you put a living thing in a pure vacuum (lets say in space vacuum) it will die immediately. In space vacuum any volatile organic stuff will slowly vaporize.Volatile gas will be enaminating from the surface. High rlectric field applied by the Kirlian should be able to ionize the surrounding gas, however, the picture wouldn't be very clear as the density of ionized gas is low.
If you know your A level chemistry and physics,you can calculate how many gas molecules are there in 10^-5 Pa in a meter cube. 10^-5 is a typical vacuum can be achieved in the university and laboratory. You will be surprised there are a lot of molecules of gas there.
I strongly doubt that the person who quote the statement has yet really test it in vacuum.
Put a drop of water in vaccum and applied electric field, i have no doubt that the space around it will grow.
One very common instrument that glow in vacuum is Ionization Vacuum Gauge
further information can be obtained from
http://sst.pennnet.com/articles/article ... eview_ARCH

[bhuvan]

Do any one have a link to "scientific" study report which proves the accuracy of detecting diseases by kirlian photography is 98% as Tom claims in the bioresonant site?

[Robanan]

I certainly don't, even though I'm very intrested in that. I think we should contact Tom about it and ask him to point us to the evidence.