Saint-Petersburg Federal Technical University “SPIFMO”
Preprint No 36
The Kirlian Effect – current state and perspectives
Konstantin Korotkov, Alexander Kouznetsov
Preface: The Kirlian study as a science
The medical diagnostics always was regarded as the most interesting and eagerly anticipated practical application of the Kirlian effect. However far advanced in the study of the phenomenon, we are still in the beginning stage of the developing it into a practically useful tool for the diagnostics. The intuitive perceptions make us to regard the acquired data as very promising – otherwise it is not reasonable to take the labor of this study at all. The Kirlian Effect – current state and perspectives:
It happened so that the study of the Kirlian effect as a diagnostics instrument was always short for proper statistical foundation. Partially it could be explained by the existing difficulties and time-consuming procedures of the Kirlian images’ fixation. The modern equipment provides us with new facilities for massive experimental study, but that is not the only problem.
Hopefully we showed that it is not enough to establish reliable correlations between the diseases and certain characteristics of the Kirlian images. The Kirlian effect could be proved valid for the purpose of diagnostics (even in a very narrow selected area) only by following the whole way of the development of a diagnostics system through. Just after that one can make a judgment if the Kirlian image analysis has any pragmatical value or not, assess the diagnostical weights of the signs and define the classes to be identified by this approach.
It comes clear that in order to make a next step we should have a common view on the situation and definite a kind of master-plan for the further study. The standardization is a necessary pre-condition for it, but it is only one of several restrictions, violation of which could makes the whole study sterile.
Certainly the standardization is absolutely necessary for the measurements of the parameters of Kirlian images as diagnostically signs, but this demand is too weak to provide us with a solution automatically. We should speak about the standardization in an extended sense: the standardization of the research techniques, the unification of the whole approach to the study. In full accordance with the definition of the term, we should establish a paradigm of the researches, i.e. to turn the Kirlian study from an intuitive science to the next phase – paradigm or “normal” science.
To make Kirlian diagnostics wide-spread we should understand its advantages over existing techniques. This is a first tool that let us to visualize the distribution of human’s fields, and to make it easily, reproducibly, and graphically.
At this stage of scientific development this feature will contribute to the common trend in biophysics from the comprehension of biological objects as solid stable structures to the perception of their dynamic spatial field essence. But in the recent past just this advantage prevented conventional scientists from comprehension of the Kirlian Effect.
That is why we see our task not as a development of one more diagnostic instrument, but as a step to a new understanding of Reality.
We need a basic concept, and the development of this concept could be regarded as the main goal of our efforts at this stage. This very difficult task could be solved only through the synergetic cooperation of many different fields of sciences. One of the first steps should be the development of commonly accepted perceptions and terminology in order to describe the whole problem properly and recognize its position in the general hierarchy of the scientific knowledge.
Standardization of the Kirlian Visualization Process
Standardization Approach
There is a lot of high-class specialists all over the world, who managed to establish their own principles of Kirlian Diagnostics. We can mention the names of P. Mandel, A. Lerner, I. Dumitresku, H. Oldfield and a lot of others. Practically all of them have been using the Kirlian equipment of their own design, keeping it as a know-how, and interpreting the pictures in purely descriptive way. Discrepancy of approaches together with inconvenience of photo-technique, necessity of dark room, have prevented the practical applications in medicine and biology. A lot of people have heard of Kirlian Effect, but quite a few serious practitioners have been bold enough to spend their time to study this elusive technique. Now we need to join the efforts of all the researchers, working in the field, establish a concord approach, use the best results achieved and introduce to the world a practically significant and scientifically proven technique.
One of the main steps should be standardization of results, produced in different parts of the world, with using different instruments (photo, Xerox and TV techniques). The base of this approach should be in the use of computer image processing for evaluation of picture’s parameters. This should be the unified procedure, agreed and accepted as a Recommendation of International Unit for Bioelectography. The same as we have the agreed decisions on standards of meter, gram, second, and the process of their evaluation, the same should be in Kirlian process. Then we will be able to compare the results of different Kirlian researchers. We should not restrict the frequencies, design and interpretation used, but we should establish the base for comparison.
Visualization System Parameters
Amplitude of Voltage
Type of Gas Discharge
Frequency (Impulse Parameters)
Power of Kirlian Generator
Design of Visualization System
Exposure
Distribution of Electrical Field on the Surface of an Object
Picture Carrier
Picture Processing
Atmosphere and Environmental Conditions
Air Composition and Pressure
Humidity and Temperature
Fig.1 shows the main parameters of the Visualization System. As it was shown in different works, the picture may be visualized using a wide range of parameters, and in any case we can extract a lot of information on the object under study. So it does not make sense to select a single approach or technique and to establish a monopolistic directive design of the Visualization System, but it is much better to develop a method of comparison of final result – Kirlian picture itself (Fig.2).
Vizualization System
Kirlian Picture
Computer Processing
So the task of standardization is to calculate the parameters of Kirlian picture III of the test-object II by standard computer processing IV and through this to evaluate the condition of Visualization System I as a whole unit, including computer processing. For this we need to choose the standard object for visualization and standard method of comparison.
The standard test-object should meet the following demands:
Stable, unchangeable in time characteristics;
Independence from the environmental conditions;
Convenience for operation;
Easy control of parameters;
Easy reproducibility;
Stability in gas discharge under highest possible parameters.
From these demands it is clear, that this should be inanimate object, metal or dielectric.
We have tested a lot of different test-objects: metal wires, needles, balls and cylinders, glass test-tubes, both empty and with solutions (Fig.3).
It was found out that the most stable and easily reproducible are the metal objects, from them most convenient are balls and cylinders, as they change their properties to less extend after long exposure in gas discharge. One of the main object in Kirlian study is human’s finger, that is why we propose to choose as a test-object metal (brass) cylinder, diameter 15 + 0.1 mm, height 40 + 0.1 mm (Fig.4). When this object is connected with one of the poles of Kirlian generator (presumable grounded) its image parameters are practically stable. Easily reproducible in any laboratories, this test-object will be absolutely identical.
Gas Discharge picture of this object may be used both for comparison of Visualization System parameters and for metrology testing and control of this System during operation.
To make this comparison a routine operation all over the world we need to establish the second component of metrology process:
Set of parameters of a picture of the test-object to be measured and the technique of their quantitization.
The Kirlian Effect – current state and perspectives
Here we should use the results and ideas of the Theory of Image Processing operating with geometrical parameters of different pictures. At the practical level all these ideas are represented through computer processing of quantitized pictures. The latter may be done with scanner, TV camera, modem or direct input of Kirlian picture into computer. In our approach the way of input is insignificant, it is one of the parameters of the visualization system, which we are estimating. In other words, this is a part of Box I at fig.3.
Kirlian picture of the test-object is presented at fig.5. This is a dark ring with unsmooth edges. After computer processing at this picture may be accentuated some characteristic elements, for example, the following:
Ring thickness R;
Unstability of R = ( R;
Area of the ring S;
Length of outer contour L;
Fractality of the picture Q = q L2 / S2 ;
Distribution of “brightness”;
Ununiformity of “brightness”;
The density of a “noise”;
“Noise” contrast;
Stability of these parameters.
Ideal test-picture should have no “noise” at all, distribution of “brightness” should decrease from the inner edge of the ring to the outer edge. At the outer edge may be represented the thin fractal structure of little discharge branches. All parameters strongly depend on the Visualization System parameters. The list of parameters may be changed and increased.
For every particular Visualization System we can calculate a set of parameters of test-picture, that may be measured and kept as characteristic standard for checking the System operation and picture processing.
Instead of using a set of generator’s parameters, which may be different for every technique and model used, we can use these parameters of the test-picture and make estimation of the visualization process itself. For particular producer or customer it will be the criteria for metrological testing of instruments at the production line or during periodical tests at work.
From the other hand, this will allow us to check the influence of environmental conditions on the Visualization System. All significant changes of conditions will be represented at the test-pictures.
So the first step of everyday operation with Kirlian Effect should be the verification of the equipment and environmental conditions with the test-object.
In our practical work we have been doing it for the last five years.
One of the main parameters of the test-pictures is their reproducibility. There are some unavoidable variations of the picture parameters caused by stochastic character of gas discharge and unstability of Visualization System elements. Special experiments have revealed, that for the instruments of the “Crown” type variation (error) of test-picture parameters do not exceed 4 – 5 % with error of electronic tract less than 1 % . This feature should be tested for every system. If the error is much more than 5%, the system should be checked and corrected.
Proposed technique of picture parameters calculation.
The question is: if there are so many different parameters of the test-picture, as it is mentioned above, how to measure them and which ones are to be compared ? We solved this problem by creating a special software complex.
Specially developed software program “Kirlian Image Standardization System” (KISS) calculates mentioned above parameters automatically for the pictures in BMP, PCX, TIF formats (and print them out as a table if necessary). Then the program makes processing in the following steps:
1) Compares every individual parameter of test-picture under study with the bench-mark picture or previous picture. If the variation is less then particular value for every individual parameter, the program prints out the comment “Test is Passed”. If individual errors are bigger then that, the program comes to the second step.
2) Individual comparison is possible, if there are a few parameters only. When we are using a set of parameters, it is necessary to compare them all as a whole. For this let us imagine, that parameters form a multy-dimensional Space of Parameters, where every parameter has its own individual coordinate Wi. The test-picture may be represented as an object in this Space with coordinates {W1, W2, W3, … Wn}. Another picture of the same object will have another coordinates {W1′, W2′, … Wn’}. The “distance” W between two “objects” will be as follows:
W = ( [ G1(W1 – W1′)2 + G2(W2 – W2′)2 + … + Gn(Wn – Wn’)2] or
W = ( ( Gk(Wk – Wk’)2
where Gk – is a statistical weight of the particular parameter.
The “distance” W shows the degree of variation of the current test-picture from the control one (Fig.6).
On the practical level the process of testing is very simple: it is necessary to get a Kirlian picture of the test-object, then input it to the program “KIS” and press the button “COMPARE”. The program will ask: “Compare with benchmark picture (OK) or other picture ?” For the letter it is necessary to input the name of the picture for comparison. After pressing OK the calculations will be done and result report will appear at the screen.
The same approach may be used in practical applications for comparison of different Kirlian pictures of the same object. It is necessary for tracking of object’s parameters in time or after some influence at the object. The process is the same, but a set of parameters may be different. Later on we will give an examples of practical applications of this approach.