100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Preying on science ignorance. | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Well darling, whats the difference between a electric field and an aura? From what Ive read thats what it is. Just to be clear, I have not spoken on the existence or non-existence of any kind of aura - I have spoken on the mis-representation of Kirlian photography. If you would like to consider an aura to be one and the same as that which physicist define an 'electric field', I have no objection. If you would like to believe that the human body has surrounding it an electric field, as of this writing I am absolutely open to this possibility. Kirlian photographs have nothing to do with the previous paragraph. Kirlian photographs do not give evidence to the existence of an electric field around human beings. (Nor do they give evidence against). Kirlian photographs show what happens when you apply and electric field to something which is in contact with a photographic plate. Are you talking about an energy field created by means other than human? Do you mean, 'when I speak of auras' or 'when I speak of Kirlian photos' or 'when I speak of electric fields' ? (Or something else) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Kirlian fields are evidence of an aura. X-rays are also taken by an external source... Yet the bones are not a result of the x-ray but rather can only be seen with it by human eyes(in their current form). What method is used to create the electrical field... could it be that the photographed fields are evidence of interaction. AdventureBegins, It seems like you are saying: because previously invisible bones are revealed by xrays, and bones are real -- and an image is created in Kirlian photographs, Kirlian photos may be evidence of auras ? Please forgive me if I misunderstood. You are correct that Kirlian photos are evidence of some kind of interaction between externally applied electric fields, a subject, and a photographic plate. But of what exactly? And what does this tell us about the subject when there is no external electric field? The phenomena is called, i think 'coronal discharge'. I don't know the details, but the way a body conducts the externally applied electric field seems to play a role in how the image is formed. So Kirlian photos do tell us something about the nature of the subject - for example, it might tell us a bit about 'how does the subject conduct an externally applied electric field?'. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just now finished reading other's comments,
EarthyTaurus, you asked many good questions! Please don't feel rushed off to the corner. I'm not sure what your thoughts on the matter are after your discussion with Bushido - but please do not hesitate to post more questions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Kirlian fields are evidence of an aura. X-rays are also taken by an external source... Yet the bones are not a result of the x-ray but rather can only be seen with it by human eyes(in their current form). What method is used to create the electrical field... could it be that the photographed fields are evidence of interaction. AdventureBegins, It seems like you are saying: because previously invisible bones are revealed by xrays, and bones are real -- and an image is created in Kirlian photographs, Kirlian photos may be evidence of auras ? Please forgive me if I misunderstood. You are correct that Kirlian photos are evidence of some kind of interaction between externally applied electric fields, a subject, and a photographic plate. But of what exactly? And what does this tell us about the subject when there is no external electric field? The phenomena is called, i think 'coronal discharge'. I don't know the details, but the way a body conducts the externally applied electric field seems to play a role in how the image is formed. So Kirlian photos do tell us something about the nature of the subject - for example, it might tell us a bit about 'how does the subject conduct an externally applied electric field?'. Please explane then how when one applies the technique to a cut section of a plant... The effect still shows the removed part as being present... ? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
massagetrade
on
Tue 07/28/09 07:27 PM
|
|
Please explane then how when one applies the technique to a cut section of a plant... The effect still shows the removed part as being present... ? AdventureBegins, Which image? Where? Taken by whom? Under what circumstance? Its quite possible that people have either been sloppy and did not clean the plate after taking the 'before' image (with a whole leaf), which left moisture on the plate which effect the 'after' image (with half a leaf). or, that the image is a result of charlatanism. I am aware that such images exist, and I am very curious about your source for this, as I would very much like to know how they address the topic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AdventureBegins,
Please tell me that you did not, for a second, consider such an image as evidence for Kirlian photos == auras ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that once a belief takes on a level of popularity, and there is a body of people who have already invested themselves in the belief - then it becomes hard to shake that belief, no matter how it originated.
I had read numerous sources which encouraged my previous view that Kirlian photos were representative of something which was happening 'all the time' before I finally came across the fact that an external electric field was applied to make the photo. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am definitely interested in new information. According to http://www.crystalinks.com/kirlian.html
Kirlian proposed and promoted the idea that the resulting images of living objects were a physical proof of the life force or aura which allegedly surrounds all living beings. This claim was said to be supported by experiments by the Kirlians that involved cutting part of a leaf off - the Kirlian images of such leaves, it was said, still showed the leaves as whole, as though the cutting had never happened. So the person who promotes the belief that these are aura photos is the person who delivers this image! What happens if someone else tries to do it? Researchers at Drexel University, however, have claimed that they were unable to reproduce the effect when the glass used to capture the original leaf was replaced with new glass before the freshly cut leaf was photographed, l Interesting, that. What does it all mean? leading them to conclude that the "cut leaf" phenomenon was caused by microscopic etching in the surface of the glass which occurred during preparing the images of the uncut leaf. They also reported on a number of demonstrable causes such as surface moisture and pressure which can account for much of the variations in color, shape, and size of the resulting image. From where I sit, I'm not saying there have never been a cut plant image that showed the missing plant piece in the image - I'm asking if there is a credible source that can reproduce such images with a fresh piece of glass. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
actually the chemistry of life including humans does produce electromagnetic fields and we can see it as light if the room
is dark enough and the right equipment is used!!  the science is real! we glow. we are also somewhat electrically conductive. so we affect the electromagnetic fields around us. and we have mass so we interact via gravitation too...  some distort spacetime more than others...  http://www.livescience.com/health/090722-body-glow.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Kirlian fields are evidence of an aura. X-rays are also taken by an external source... Yet the bones are not a result of the x-ray but rather can only be seen with it by human eyes(in their current form). What method is used to create the electrical field... could it be that the photographed fields are evidence of interaction. AdventureBegins, It seems like you are saying: because previously invisible bones are revealed by xrays, and bones are real -- and an image is created in Kirlian photographs, Kirlian photos may be evidence of auras ? Please forgive me if I misunderstood. You are correct that Kirlian photos are evidence of some kind of interaction between externally applied electric fields, a subject, and a photographic plate. But of what exactly? And what does this tell us about the subject when there is no external electric field? The phenomena is called, i think 'coronal discharge'. I don't know the details, but the way a body conducts the externally applied electric field seems to play a role in how the image is formed. So Kirlian photos do tell us something about the nature of the subject - for example, it might tell us a bit about 'how does the subject conduct an externally applied electric field?'. I appreciate it, no, for some reason, I was thinking that an aura can only appear around a human. I looked it up, and realised,no also objects, something I had forgotten. That was all, thanks again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bushidobillyclub
on
Wed 07/29/09 07:54 AM
|
|
actually the chemistry of life including humans does produce electromagnetic fields and we can see it as light if the room is dark enough and the right equipment is used!! the science is real! we glow. we are also somewhat electrically conductive. so we affect the electromagnetic fields around us. and we have mass so we interact via gravitation too... some distort spacetime more than others... http://www.livescience.com/health/090722-body-glow.html Also I do not think anyone said that humans do not interact with the EM field, we do not produce a magnetic field, the interactions cancel each other, due to being unordered, unlike ferrous materials which have well ordered atomic structure where the atoms align themselves to achieve a magnetic field around the total structure. All atoms interact with the EM field, it takes only a single electron. This is different then saying all macro objects produce magnetic fields, or that Kirlian photographs are proof of a human energy field.
|
|
|
|
|
