jeffma (02/26/83)
Is Kirlian photography a means of photographing psychic energy? Auras?
Astral bodies? There seem to be a lot of believers out there: the fact
is, there isn't a shred of scientific evidence to support such ridicu-
lous conclusions.
The few mainstream scientific investigators who are looking into the
"Kirlian Effect" have found no mysterious processes. Anyone with a
shred of physics training will recognize that the equipment used for
these photos is exactly what one would use to generate and photograph a
CORONA DISCHARGE around the object in question. Corona discharge
involves the passage of electrons through a gaseous atmosphere in
response to a high-intensity electric field. The result is a glow (both
visible and ultra-violet) which does not necessarily include conven-
tional "sparks". If you've ever seen high-tension power lines glowing
at night, you've seen this type of discharge. Now, if you think this
represents a "simple" explanation for Kirlian photography, you're wrong.
The physics of this type of discharge, and how other physical parameters
influence it, is quite complex. It does, however, represent a NON-
MYSTERIOUS explanation (and hence a useful one).
Cooper and Alt (Department of Physics, California State College)
reasoned that, if the image was indeed that of a corona, then it would
not appear if the atmosphere surrounding the object was removed. To
test their hypothesis they tried to make a Kirlian photograph in a
vacuum. Guess what? No auras. Of course, this observation does not
PRECLUDE "psychic energy", because decades of "parapsychology research"
(cough cough) have not yielded even a scrap of consistent information
about its properties. So the smug psi-cotic might remark that auras do
not form in a vacuum (which perhaps implies that your "astral body" must
don an "astral spacesuit" before buzzing off to Jupiter, ad nauseum).
A corona discharge produced and photographed with a Kirlian device would
have an appearance dictated by a large number of physical parameters.
These include moisture, voltage, photographic plate characteristics,
electrode characteristics, air temperature and pressure, insulator
characteristics, and so on. Thus explaining the exact shape of any
individual photograph using the corona model would be a lot like trying
to describe exactly how the tea leaves left in your cup happened to
assume a funny shape (ask a physicist about how easy it is to use fluid-
ics to solve real-world problems). But again, a complex phenomenon does
not demand the invocation of mysterious forces (it only makes them
easier to IMAGINE).
But wait, you say, what about all those mysterious colors? William Eid-
son, Harry Kyler, David Faust, and J.O. Pehek of Drexel University
discovered that the color of the photographed discharge was a by-product
of the mechanics of photographic plates. The three color-sensitive
layers in common color film are blue, green, and red, arranged from top
to bottom (the actual substances which generate the color are arranged
in the subtractive primaries cyan, magenta, and yellow):
finger or whatever
_____________________________________________
blue-sensitive layer + yellow dye
=============================================<yellow filter
green-sensitive layer + magenta dye
=============================================<gel interlayer
red-sensitive layer + cyan dye
_____________________________________________
backing (transparent or opaque)
_____________________________________________
a little space for air
_____________________________________________
Kirlian machine insulator
Most of the time the discharge will penetrate the top layer, and, amaz-
ingly enough, most color Kirlian photographs are dominated by a bluish
hue. An unusual amount of moisture, however, can result in a corona
discharge on the UNDERSIDE of the film plate, between the backing and
the insulator. The investigators at Drexel discovered that, if the
backing was transparent, they could get some reddish colors in their
photographs. If opaque, no reds or yellows. This is exactly what you
would expect from the corona model, and the discharge has indeed been
observed on the back of the plate. So the next time you get a Kirlian
photograph of your finger with lots of red blobs around it, don't assume
it's your "sexual energy" showing up in your aura. It's probably your
sexual energy showing up in the fact that you have a sweaty finger.
The "phantom leaf effect" is a much-lauded proof that Kirlian photo-
graphs involve some sort of psychic energy. In fact, it does not
represent proof of ANYTHING (for the uninitiated: the phantom leaf
effect is illustrated by some Kirlian photographs of a leaf with a small
section cut off, showing what appears to be a ghostly trace of the miss-
ing piece). The behavior of the discharge at the freshly-cut edge of a
leaf is likely to be different than at other points, and the image will
probably exhibit extended discharge because of the presence of exposed
plant fluids. The fact that the "phantom" goes away shortly after the
cut is made would tend to support this theory (it should also be pointed
out that a dramatic effect along these lines could probably be produced
by bad technique, such as by first laying the entire leaf on the photo
plate and performing the surgery in situ--leaving a moisture pattern
behind where the missing piece was). An additional suspicious aspect of
this "proof" is that the "phantom" effect is not cited in other objects,
and is not consistently demonstrable--a supposed strong-point of Kirlian
photography in general. Let's see a Kirlian photograph of a person's
severed hand, made by placing the stump on the photo plate (I've heard
all sorts of psychic hogwash about people retaining the "aura" of the
severed limb, because the "spiritual body" is separate from the physical
one). You'll also notice that just about anything, including the
kitchen sink, registers an image using the Kirlian technique. Perhaps
the "spiritual energy" theorists are suggesting a bizarre form of ani-
mism here. In short, psychic "research" tends to use a lot of hand-
waving when it comes to their "solid" proof. Give me a break.
I should emphasize that the scientific examination of Kirlian photogra-
phy is not yet complete; but the strong signal at this point is that the
processes involved are mundane, non-mysterious ones. People who claim
that Kirlian photography shows your "aura" are doing so in the absence
of real evidence, and hence are FOOLISH. Those who believe that the
process might provide insights into biological organisms via physical
parameters, in a manner similar to polygraphs (i.e. galvanic skin
response, etc.), might be closer to the real world, but are also further
from "mysterious" explanations. What I've described here is a potential
scientific explanation which has yet to be shown inadequate.
For more on this topic read "Kirlian Photography", chapter 13 of "Sci-
ence and the Paranormal" (New York: Scribner and Sons, 1981), edited by
George O. Abell and Barry Singer (Singer wrote the chapter on Kirlian
stuff).
Jeff Mayhew
Tektronix
P.S.: Hold your water, dowsers. I'll get back to you.