journal of animal consciousness issue 1 vol 1 febuary 2015
TRANSCRIPT
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 1/26
Inaugural Issue Issue 1, Vol 1
C o n s c i o u s n e s s i s a
conten t ious sub jec t in
scientific circles. Indeed,
p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y
consciousness is considered
the ‘hard problem.’ It is
subjective thus relegated to
the phenomenological and is
rather difficult to isolate and
meas ure s c ien t i f i c a l l y .
Nevertheless, i t is thecornerstone of existence and
ontologically speaking it
i n f o r m s t h e c r e a t i v e
endeavor. Lacking a universal
definition makes it all the
more elusive. Recent events
have begun to change the
materialist world view of
animals and consciousness.
Launching the Journal of
Animal Consciousness is the
dawn of a new era. One that
embraces the integration ofontology and epistemology.
Chiara Marrapodi
J o u r n
a l Of
AnimalConsciousness
The Journal of Animal Consciousness is edited and produced by Chiara Marrapodi Founder of
The Society for Animal Consciousness.
The Journal of Animal Consciousness is produced free to the community. It is the first Journal ofits kind and incorporates an integral approach. Providing a blend of scientific and philosophicaltheses on Animal Consciousness and related topics.
2015
The Society for AnimalConsciousness™
Issue 1, Vol 1, February 2015.
Table of Contents:Editors Note
1
Introductory Comment -Dr Thomas G. Brophy, PhD
2
Why Animal Consciousness? -Chiara Marrapodi
2
Animal Emotions, do animals
think and feel? - Dr Marc Bekoff,PhD 3
Consciousness and the Equine
Mind - Susan Gordan
6
Do Probiotic Bacteria have Subjectivity -Chiara Marrapodi 9
Welcome to the inaugural Journalof Animal Consciousness!
www.societyforanimalconsciousness.org
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 2/26
Why Animal Consciousness?
Humans and animals are indelibly
ntertwined. Animals provide a great
service to human society whether they are
domesticated or wild. They are a fabric of
he Natural World that has fascinated
humans throughout the ages. Educational
departments and human careers have
arisen from the exploration of natural
habitats and the flora and fauna therein.
The domestication of animals has resulted
n practices of animal husbandry for
companionship and as sustenance. We
are deeply connected to Nature despite
he illusive separation we have created
ntellectually and physically. And yet
philosophically and scientifically humans
have not been able to shed light on the
most pragmatic and yet elusive aspect of
ife - consciousness. Consciousness a
state, an experience that is so common
and yet intangible in the physical world.Consciousness that directly informs the
scientific endeavor and the myriad of
creations in contemporary society. Why
you may ask is the pursui t of
understanding animal consciousness of
any consequence?
mplications
The idea that humans are the only beings
on the planet with the potential to
experience, feel and even think beyond
instinctual driving forces has been flatly
dismissed until very recently. The
compartmentalization of scientific fields
lends itself to focus on target areas of
study. This is indeed applaudable as
many breakthroughs and understandings
have resulted. Nonetheless, this reduces
the potential for casting a wider net of
understanding. The monist view is the
belief that one true pattern exists in
nature. Does it though? The Natural
Wor ld is a complex of web- l ike
interconnections and interpenetrations,
how then can a uni-dimensional view
capture it’s true essence? The Earth is
not flat is it? Hence, a multi-faceted
approach accepts the notion that more
expanded, less hierarchical explanations
may pave the way to make sense of what
are unknown artifacts of science. The
spookiness so to speak! Thus a pluralist
approach marrying the epistemological
and ontological aspects of consciousnessmay lead to essential findings beyond the
current reductionist model. Such an
expanded worldview necessitates a
r e f r e s h e d o b s e r v a t i o n o f w h a t
consciousness may be, embracing
anecdotal and cur rent sc ient i f ic
knowledge. This Journal and The Society
for Animal Consciousness is the inception
of such a worldview.
Chiara Marrapodi
The mystery of consciousness, how sentience exists at all, is the central unsolved issue of thebiological sciences.
That it is an unresolved problem should make it worthy of more attention, notless, to scientists and philosophers.
And given the unsettled nature of even the existence ofconsciousness, we would be well served to investigate more carefully certain commonly presumedbut little examined notions about the various manifestations of consciousness.
As we may be poised
during this century to make progress on the central mystery of consciousness, investigations andclarifying discussions of the phenomenal appearances of consciousness will become of increasinginterest.
Animal consciousness and the relation and differences of animal and humanconsciousness is one such field of fruitful endeavor, and as such it is well-served by the efforts of thisnew Journal of Animal Consciousness .-Thomas G. Brophy, PhD
Introductory Comments - Dr Thomas G. Brophy, PhD
Chiara Marrapodi, BSc Psych, MA
Integral Health Candidate Californi
Institute for Human Sciences.
Revisiting the animalconsciousness debate
The Society for AnimConsciousness™
2015
2
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 3/26
Didn't we already know this? Yes, we did.
Every now and again I receive an email message I ignore after reading the
subject line. I know I'm not alone in following this rule of thumb, but today I
broke down and opened a message the subject line of which read "Scientists
Declare: Nonhuman Animals Are Conscious". I honestly thought it was a joke
likely from one of my favorite newspapers, The Onion . However, it wasn't.
My colleague Michael Mountain published a summary of a recent meeting held
in Cambridge, England at which "Science leaders have reached a critica
consensus: Humans are not the only conscious beings; other animals
specifically mammals and birds, are indeed conscious, too." At this gathering
called The Francis Crick Memorial Conference, a number of scientists
presented evidence that led to this self-obvious conclusion. It's difficult to
believe that those who have shared their homes with companion animals didn'
already know this. And, of course, many renowned and award-winning field
researchers had reached the same conclusion years ago.
Michael Mountain was as incredulous as I and many others about something
we already knew. It's interesting to note that of the 15 notables who spoke at
this conference only one has actually done studies of wild animals. It would
have been nice to hear from researchers who have conducted long-term
studies of wild animals, including great apes, other nonhuman primates, socia
carnivores, cetaceans, rodents, and birds, for example, to add to the database
Be that as it may, I applaud their not so surprising conclusion and now I hope it
will be used to protect animals from being treated abusively and inhumanely.
Revisiting the animalconsciousness debate.
Photographic Credit and copyrightwww.freedigitalphotos.net Ia
Source: http://fcmconference.org/#talks
Animal
Emotions
- doanimals
think and
feel?Dr Marc Bekoff, PhD
Proclamation of the Cambridge
Declaration on Consciousness in Non-
Human Animals at the Francis Crick
Memorial Conference, Churchill
College, University of Cambridge
University, Cambridge 7 July 2012,
watch video below.
The Society for AnimalConsciousness™
2015
3
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 4/26
Some might say we didn't really know that other animals
were conscious but this is an incredibly naive view given
what we know about the neurobiology and cognitive and
emotional lives of other animals. Indeed, it was appeals to
these very data that led to the conclusions of this group of
scientists . But did we really need a group of internationally
recognized scientists to tell us that the data are reallyokay? Yes and no, but let's thank them for doing this.
I agree with Michael Mountain that "It’s a really important
statement that will be used as evidence by those who are
pushing for scientists to develop a more humane
relationship with animals. It’s harder, for example, to justify
experiments on nonhumans when you know that they are
conscious beings and not just biological machines. Some
of the conclusions reached in this declaration are the
product of scientists who, to this day, still conduct
experiments on animals in captivity, including dolphins,
who are among the most intelligent species on Earth. Their
own declaration will now be used as evidence that it’s time
to stop using these animals in captivity and start finding
new ways of making a living."
The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness
The scientists went as far as to write up what's called The
Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness that basically
declares that this prominent international group of
scientists agree that "Convergent evidence indicates that
non-human animals have the neuroanatomical,
neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of
conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit
intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of
evidence indicates that humans are not unique in
possessing the neurological substrates that generate
consciousness. Non-human animals, including all
mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including
octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates."
They could also have included fish, for whom the evidence
supporting sentience and consciousness is also
compelling.
So, what are we going to do with what we know (and
have known)?
It's fair to ask what are these scientists and others going to
do now that they agree that consciousness is widespread
in the animal kingdom. We know, for example, that mice
rats, and chickens display empathy but this knowledge
hasn't been factored into the Federal Animal Welfare Act in
the United States.
I'm frankly astounded that these data and many other
findings about animal cognition and animal emotions have
been ignored by those who decide on regulations abou
the use and abuse of other animals. However, the Treaty
of Lisbon, passed by member states of the European
Union that went into force on December 1, 2009
recognizes that "In formulating and implementing the
Union's agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market
research and technological development and space
policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since
animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare
requirements of animals, while respecting the legislative o
administrative provisions and customs of the Member
States relating in particular to religious rites, cultura
traditions and regional heritage."
Let 's applaud The Cambridge Declarat ion on
Consciousness and The Treaty of Lisbon and work hard to
get animals the protection from invasive research and
other forms of abuse, in many cases horrifically inhumane
they deserve.
Some recent essays I've written point out that there stil
are some people who feel comfortable killing individuals
who they call "unneeded" or "surplus" animals and at leas
one animal welfarist, Oxford University's Marian Dawkins
continued as of a few months ago to claim we still don't
know if other animals are conscious and that we should
4
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 5/26
"remain skeptical and agnostic [about consciousness] ...
Militantly agnostic if necessary, because this keeps alive
the possibility that a large number of species have some
sort of conscious experiences ... For all we know, many
animals, not just the clever ones and not just the overtly
emotional ones, also have conscious experiences."
Perhaps what I call "Dawkins' Dangerous Idea" will now
finally be shelved given the conclusions of the Cambridge
gathering. I frankly don't see how anyone who has worked
closely with any of a wide array of animals or who lives
with a companion animal(s) could remain uncertain and
agnostic about whether they are conscious.
It's said that repetition is boring conversation but there's
now a wealth of scientific data that makes skepticism, andsurely agnosticism, to be anti-science and harmful to
animals. Now, at last, the prestigious Cambridge group
shows this to be so. Bravo for them! So, let's all work
together to use this information to stop the abuse of
millions upon millions of conscious animals in the name of
science, education, food, amusement and entertainment,
and clothing. We really owe it to them to use what we
know on their behalf and to factor compassion and
empathy into our treatment of these amazing beings.
About the Author
Mark Bekoff, PhD
Marc Bekoff, Ph.D., is a former Professor of Ecology and
Evolutionary Biology at the University of Colorado,
Boulder, and co-founder with Jane Goodall of Ethologists
for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. He has won many
awards for his scientific research including the Exemplar
Award from the Animal Behavior Society and a
Guggenheim Fellowship. Marc has published more tha
1000 essays (popular, scientific, and book chapters), 30
books, and has edited three encyclopedias. His book
include the Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Anima
Welfare, The Ten Trusts (with Jane Goodall), the
Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior, the Encyclopedia o
Human-Animal Relationships, Minding Animals, Anima
Passions and Beastly Virtues: Reflections on
Redecorating Nature, The Emotional Lives of Animals
Animals Matter, Animals at Play: Rules of the Game (a
children's book), Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animal
(with Jessica Pierce), The Animal Manifesto: Six Reason
For Increasing Our Compassion Footprint, Ignoring
Nature No More: The Case For Compassionate
Conservation, Jasper's Story: Saving Moon Bears (wit
Jill Robinson), Why Dogs Hump and B ees Ge
Depressed: T he Fascinating Science o f Anima
Intelligence, Emotions, Friendship, and Conservation
and Rewilding Our Hearts: Building Pathways o
Compassion and Coexistence . In 2005 Marc wa
presented with The Bank One Faculty Community Service
Award for the work he has done with children, senio
citizens, and prisoners. In 2009 he was presented with the
St. Francis of Assisi Award by the New Zealand SPCA
His homepage is marcbekoff.com and with Jane
Goodall http://www.ethologicalethics.org/. Twitter.
5
Revisiting the animalconsciousness debate.
The Society for AnimalConsciousness™
2015
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 6/26
There are 1000 pounds underneath me. For the sport I am
competing in, it is necessary. “It”, however, is not an “it.” It
is not a machine or an inanimate object. It is a “she.” She
has a brain and a heart, and is made of flesh and blood,
and a set of chemicals, just like I am. She has a name, Ali.
She does not speak my language though, so we
communicate by feel. I cannot see her facial expressions
when I am on her back, so I watch her ears, and feel forher bodily responses not only to my signals, but also what
she is conveying to me about her perceptions of the
immediate environment. We are each required to make
split-second decisions for the next few minutes of our ride,
and one mistake or mistimed cue could spell disaster for
both of us. We have to rely on our finely honed
relationship in order to survive this test of bravery,
strength, and stamina.
The starting bell rings and before I can apply the leg aids
to switch from trot to canter, my chestnut ex-racehorse
surges into the faster gait. Her powerful muscles ripple
underneath my seat. She has an awareness of the task
ahead. The eyes of hundreds of people are on us, as it is
the jump-off for a gold medal in this regional
championship. I shut out the audience and tune into my
horse, listening to the even footfalls of her cadence
carefully scanning the distances between fences and
noting where we will make the tight turns to ensure a fas
round. There is no more time to think. We just “do.” As my
eyes focus on the next jump, Ali also focuses, takes a hold
of the reins and pulls, telling me she will indeed get us
both off the ground. Our trust and confidence in each
other is a fragile thing. She trusts me to keep my handssoft and give them forwards over the fence so she can use
her neck and back to leap safely. I must balance my body
so as not to disturb her balance. I trust her to pick all fou
legs up high enough so as not to get us tangled in the rails
of the jump, and then land on one foot, as jumpers do
keep her balance, and continue on to the next obstacle.
I am counting the strides between fences. One, two, three
four, five… jump! Trying to remember to breathe. If I did
not breathe in a rhythm, it would upset Ali, as she is tha
sensitive. I am working every muscle in my body in
coordination with that of my horse. Beyond the physica
sensations are the set of subconscious responses that are
the result of years of training and eons of sensory
evolution of sentient beings. We gallop to fence afte
fence, clearing the rails, the water obstacle, the
combinations, and we coordinate as one force with two
Consciousness
and the
Equine MindSusan A. Gordon
Photographic Credit and copyrightwww.freedigitalphotos.net bk images
6
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 7/26
minds working in sync. We cross the finish line and race
through the timers with a clear round. Ali settles back into
a trot, then a walk, and I can drop the reins and give her a
good scratch on her withers as she now knows we are
finished the jumping phase. We are both hot and sweaty,
breathing hard, and very tired. We have won the gold.
I have never failed to marvel at the process. Not only does
a prey animal with herd instincts allow me to sit on her
back and give her directions by squeezing and releasing
pressure with my hands and legs, she does something
completely against her nature by running at big, colorful
obstacles, lifting both of us off the ground at high speed,
time after time. Did Ali want to jump? Did she enjoy it?
How did she feel about this kind of athletic intensity? It is
far beyond what a horse would have to do to go about its
basic existence in the wild.
What do horses think? Do they reason and thereby exhibit
intellectual abilities? Or do they simply react based on
fear and other instinctive behaviors with an inclination to
run away from perceived danger? Science is beginning to
supply us with answers as to the mechanisms of
consciousness in animals and their remarkable capability
for communicating with us in ways we never thought
possible.
Not that long ago the explanation for this kind of
communication with an animal would have been more
esoteric. The Cambridge Declaration on consciousness
has opened the doors for serious studies that are using
modern technologies to confirm even more sensitivity and
awareness in animals than previously thought, largely due
to similar brain chemistry and structure 2.
I was drawn to horses from the time I was five years old...
almost 50 years ago. I spoke to them as though they
could understand me, because it never occurred to me
that they could not. Throughout my life from junior to
amateur to professional, I have continued this two-way
conversation with horses, refining the process to an
extremely subtle, non-verbal level. Thanks to pioneers in
herd dynamics, such as Mary Ann Simonds
(www.maryannsimonds.com), there are numerous
teachers and programs introducing people from all walksof life to the benefits of that silent equine language. Now
we are approaching an era in which quantum computing
will likely become a reality 3. There may even be a
convergence point at which consciousness is understood
at the subatomic level, and perhaps leading to a
quantifiable definition for interspecies communication.
The simple act of touching a horse with love and
compassion, quietly listening to their body language as
they subtly study ours, can be an extremely awakening
process for some people. There is a precognitive process
that takes place in the moments before the actual physica
contact occurs, if the human is able to sufficiently calm
their busy mind state and slow down to a level at which
the horse can communicate without tension. In this
collaborative moment, a kind of bonding can possibly
occur, opening the door for further interactions, such as
compassionate training and riding that further enhances
the bond and the physical, athletic capabilities of both
horse and rider. However, riding without placing undue
stress on the animal requires years of study, practice, and
working with masters of equitation. Trust is easily lost with
a horse if they are ridden while in pain or otherwise
traumatized. The neuroplasticity of the brain works in both
directions. That is, if a human creates pain in the horse
those memories will remain, as will the more pleasant
residual memories. We find many similarities between
traumatized people and traumatized animals.
I believe we are on the cusp of an entirely new frontier in
recognizing and responding to the sentience of al
7
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 8/26
animals. What is unique about horses is that they are the
one animal we connect with by riding on its back and
relaying directional instructions strictly through feel. As the
economy continues to improve and some wealth is
regenerated among an aging population, it appears
horses are returning to favor in both the recreational and
sport aspects. As Dr. Schoen and I have written in TheCompassionate Equestrian , it is our wish that all those
who are newcomers or returning to equestrian activities
receive a thorough and correct education by first of all,
acknowledging the sentience of all beings and putting
compassion at the base of their equine training and
handling. There are many paths to take insofar as
equestrian education is concerned, especially nowadays
thanks to social media and entertainment venues
involving horses. Unfortunately there is also a lot of
misinformation and incomplete techniques leading
unsuspecting horse lovers astray from methods that are
most conducive to correct training and riding that produce
sound, healthy and safe horses. We highly recommend
learning through formal programs provided by governing
bodies such as Equine Canada, the United States
Equestrian Federation and British Horse Society, and
working with trainers certified through those organizations
and their affiliates. All of these organizations have specific
protocols for equine welfare in place to ensure the highest
regard for horse care in stables and at shows.
With the most productive combination of love, compassion,
common sense, good education, and appropriate
responses to the consciousness of all beings, we could
potentially be headed for the greatest advancements
mankind has ever known in regards to interspecies
communication. And it is a great thing to be able to look
forward to a happy future for all horses and their humans!
About the Author
Susan A. Gordon
Susan Gordon is an author and
blogger with over 25 years o
professional horse t raining
experience. After many years o
apprenticing with top show
jumping, eventing, and dressage trainers, she became a
specialist in evaluating and re-schooling difficult horses
including many off-track thoroughbreds and horses tha
presented with challenging resistances. After retiring from
full-time riding in 2002, Susan concentrated on furthe
development of her methods including aspects o
mindfulness, energy medicine and holistic practices
inspiring riders of all ages to find joy and accomplishmen
with their horses, whether they were interested in hunters
equitation, jumpers, dressage, eventing, or recreationa
riding.
Susan is also an avid runner and consistent age-
group and series winner at the 5K, 8K, 10K, and half
marathon distances. She is currently ranked 2nd in
Canada in her age group at 8K and 10K for 2014.
Her first book, The Compassionate Equestrian
(coauthored with Dr. Allen Schoen, DVM), will be released
April 15, 2015, by Trafalgar Square Books. She may be
reached via e-mail at [email protected], a
The Compassionate Equestrian on Facebook, and on the
blog at http://www.thecompassionateequestrian.net.
8
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 9/26
Do probiotic
bacteria have
subjectivity?Chiara Marrapodi & Dr
Thomas Brophy
Photographic Credit and copyrightwww.freedigitalphotos.net cuteimage.
Abstract
The phenomenon of light transduction influences a myriad of biological systems, upon which entire ecosystems depend
(Farquhar, Von Caemmere & Berry, 2001). Indeed, all organisms emit light and these quanta packets of light are called
photons (Popp, 2003). The biochemical theory posits that biological organisms emit biophotons during metabolic
processes at the cellular level (Popp, 2003). Chemical reactions require a photon from the surrounding electromagnetic
field to excite the ‘transition state complex’ after which it returns to equilibrium (Cilento,1982). Popp (2003) postulates that
photons are implicated not only in regulation but also cellular communication. Additionally, biophotons have a high
degree of order (coherence) which is required for clear communications to be effected (Popp, 1999, 2003, 2006). This
research aims to ascertain whether probiotic organisms show coherence. Furthermore, it investigates the potential for
microbial subjectivity by exposing two different samples to the intentions of love, gratitude and hate measured by
biophoton radiance intensity. To further corroborate findings probiotics are exposed to sound (classical and heavy metal)
to ascertain whether music affects biological organisms, causing more or less stress. Findings suggest QuantaBiotica ®
showed signs of coherence and potential subjectivity at source baseline and during intention exposure. However, sound
exposure yielded conflicting results in both samples. This preliminary study highlights the potential for microbia
subjectivity and the effects of emotional states on stress levels (QuantaBiotica ®). The implications relating to the body-
mind complex are emphasized as the human physical form is composed of more microbial cells (90%) than human cells
(10%). Indeed, it suggests host emotional states potentially affect enteric microbial colonies. Further research is required
to investigate these preliminary findings that may elucidate important aspects of consciousness in the future (Romjin,
2002).
Keywords:
Awareness, biophoton, probiotics, sound, intention, consciousness, effects of intention on microbes, subjectivity,
interiority.
9
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 10/26
Introduction
Light is universal. Indeed, as Popp (2001) suggests “we
are swimming in an ocean of light” (Popp, 2006). It is the
giver of information, knowledge and life (Popp, 2003; Yip &
Madl, 2007). The windows through which one views the
world are designed to absorb light; as photons are
absorbed by photoreceptor cells in the retina of the eye a
cascade of reactions occur, providing the basis of the
visual sense (Popp, 2003). Conscious evaluation of this
visible electromagnetic radiation is a result of the primary
visual cortex found in the occipital lobe (Schacter, Gilbert &
Wegner, 2009). Thus the phenomenon of light is crucial
for understanding one’s external world and ultimately for
survival (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2009). In the natural
world, for example, birds attract their mates based on the
vibrance of their plumage, ensuring species propagation
and survival (Bennett, Cuthill, Patridge & Lunau, 1997).
Therefore light is used to create the external world and is
the interface between organisms and their environment
(Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2009; Popp, 2006). Indeed
plants, for example, are an integral part of the life cycle
and are iconic examples of l ight transduction
(photosynthesis) (Farquhar, Von Caemmere & Berry,
2001). They convert light into chemical energy providing
sustenance for a myriad of biological systems, upon which
entire ecosystems depend (Farquhar et al., 2001).
Photosynthesis is not isolated to plants alone, however,
many other forms of life use a similar process with slight
variations due to molecular structure (Roose, 2014).
Cynobacteria, for example, although structurally different
from the plant, “have a double outer membrane and a
separate internal thylakoid membrane system for
photosynthesis” (Roose, 2014). Therefore light is the
center of planetary existence, indeed, when natural
sunlight is not available humans have developed artificial
versions to continue their activities (Popp, 2001).
From a scientific perspective, the phenomenon of
light is described as electromagnetic radiation. According
to electromagnetic wave theory, visible light is one portion
of the variety of electromagnetic waves in the cosmos
(Ryer, 1998). Optical radiation is found between radio
waves and x-rays on the spectrum, each possessing an
array of properties ranging from wave to particle, including
quantum aspects (Figure 1. Ryer, 1998). As highlighted in
Figure 1, the x-ray portion of the electromagnetic spectrum
yields shorter wavelengths and are more particle-like in
nature (Dyer, 1998). Conversely, radio waves are muchlonger and are more like waves (Dyer, 1998).
Interestingly, in the visible area of the electromagnetic
spectrum, between 260-800nm range (Figure 2), quanta
packets of light are found with wave-particle duality
properties (Dyer, 1998; Popp, 2001). These quanta
packets, according to Popp (2001), emit a low intensity o
light, and are called photons. Etymologically, photon
means light and was coined by Gilbert N. Lewis in 1926
(Dyer, 1998; Popp, 2001). Photons are singular units of an
electromagnetic field and are not to be confused with
bioluminescence which requires a chemical reaction
involving a luciferin/luciferace enzymatic catalyst (Popp
2001).
Figure 1. The visible (optical) part of the electromagnetic
spectrum
Source: http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/emspectrum.html
Figure 2 . Electromagnetic Spectrum of light and measurements.
Source: http://9-4fordham.wikispaces.com/Electro+Magnetic+Spectrum+and+light
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 11/26
Indeed, photons are said to move at c (the speed of light in
a vacuum), are massless and can be created and
destroyed through interactions with each other, however
they do not decay (Popp, 2001, 2003).
Biophotons relate to the emission of photons from
biological systems (Popp, 2003). The word biophoton is
derived from the Greek equivalents meaning life and light(Popp, 2003). It is believed that all biological systems emit
biophotons (Popp, 2003). Measurements suggest that
emission rates range from a few to hundreds of photons
per surface area centimeter squared within the spectral
range from 260nm to 800nm (Popp, 2003). Biophotons
occur as ultra-weak bioluminescence, sometimes referred
to as dark luminenscence and are non-thermal in origin
(Popp, 2003). Gurwitsch is well-known for his discovery of
“mitogenetic radiation” (Popp, 2003 p. 391) demonstrating
that cell division rates increased significantly in onion roots
when they were placed perpendicular to each other (Popp,
2003; Yip & Madle, 2007). This was only observed when
quartz glass was placed between the onion roots (quartz
glass is transparent to UV light ranging approximately
260nm) (Popp, 2003, p. 391; Yip & Madl, 2007). Scientific
theories relating to biology and photons are rather
controversial (Popp, 2003, 2006). Indeed, there is little
consensus in mainstream circles relating to the role light
plays in biological systems (Popp, 2003, 2006).
Nevertheless, biophoton emission is viewed from two
broad theoretical perspectives; the biochemical and the
coherence theories (Popp, 2003). The biochemical theory
(BCT) states that biophoton emission is merely the result
of metabolic wastes being released by the cell (Popp,
2003). The metabolic activity of a cell is understood to be
105 reactions per second, this means that 100 000
reactions per second occur at the cellular level (Popp,
2003; 2006). Cilento (1982) demonstrated that chemical
reactions require a photon from the surrounding
electromagnetic field, it excites the ‘transition state
complex’ after which equilibrium is returned. As photons
do not decay it can be reused for the subsequent reactions
(Cilento, 1982; Popp, 1999, 2003; 2006). Consequently
one photon is able to trigger approximately 109 reactions
per second (Popp, 2003). Furthermore, Popp (1999
2003, 2006) postulates that a relatively low photon
intensity is required, therefore cell reactions appear to be
much faster than those observed under therma
equilibrium conditions (Popp, 1999, 2003, p.4; 2006)Indeed, when electrons move between energy states
during chemical reactions, photons are either absorbed o
emitted (Creath & Schwartz, 2005). Studies show tha
catabolic reactions (breaking down of larger molecules into
smaller ones) result in chemical by-products and photon
emission; whilst, anabolic (smaller molecules to larger
reactions show the opposite effect (Creath & Schwartz
2005). According to Popp (1999, 2003; 2006) toxicity
scrambles biophotonic function at the cellular leve
resulting in organism stress (Slawinski, Ezzahir
Godlewski, Kwiecinska, Rajfur, Sitko, & Wierzuchowska
1992). Indeed, wounding, chilling/freezing or salt and
drought are all examples of stress inducing environmenta
stimuli (Creath & Schwartz, 2005). Exposure to such
environmental stimuli are associated with increased
cellular oxidative stress and higher photon radiance
(Creath & Schwartz, 2005; Bokkon, Salari, Tuszynski &
Antal, 2010). The importance of the BCT theory as it ties
into conventional scientific understanding is crucial
however, another theory may elucidate an alternative view
The coherence theory (CT) suggests the “release
of low intensity light displays sub-Poissonian photocount
statistics and provides the means for communication in
optically dense biological systems” (Popp, 1999, p. 3)
Controversy surrounds the CT as it is difficult to ascertain
whether emissions are coherent or chaotic in nature
(Popp, 2003). Coherence is defined as “electromagnetic
waves maintaining a fixed or predictable phase
rel ati ons hip with each other over a peri od o
time” (Dictionary.com, 2014). Inherently, the signature o
coherence is stability and predictability and the ability to
exhibit interference (Popp,1999, 2003; 2006; Mayburov
11
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 12/26
2012). Inteference, with reference to light waves, means
that two or more light waves are added together resulting
in a new wave pattern (Popp,1999, 2003; 2006; Mayburov,
2012). According to Popp, (1999, 2003, 2006) biophotons
have a high degree of order (coherence) which is required
for clear communications within the cell. Popp (1999,
2003, 2006) further postulates the presence of lesscoherence results in weak communication. More
specifically, he suggests that coherent fields result in
destructive and constructive interference and are the basis
of regulation and communication (Popp, 2003). He further
explains that based on the law of energy conservation
areas of destruction are compensated by areas of
construction.
Figure 3. Constructive and deconstructive interference.
Source: Popp, F.A. (2003). Properties of biophotons and their theoretical implications. Indian Journal of
Experimental Biology, 41 pp. 396..
This is explained in more detail by Dicke (1954)
suggesting a propensity for “constructive interference
(super-radiance) in the initial phase of interaction between
radiation and non-randomly oriented matter, while
destructive interference (sub-radiance) is the tendency
after longer periods of time” (Popp, 2003, p. 396). Studies
using Daphnia magna Strauss (freshwater flea)
corroborate this idea with tendencies towards destructive
interference resulting in a lower intensity than expected
(Popp, 2003). Indeed, ontologically a linear increase is
expected, that is, an increase in freshwater fleas would
result in increased photon intensity, however, this was not
the case (Popp, 2003). After increasing flea numbers to
more than 110 subjects photon emission decreased (Popp
2003). This therefore suggests that total intensity reduces
due to active photon absorption by the biological system
involved (Popp, 2003). Accordingly, research shows tha
high density populations of bacteria stimulates
intercommunications between them (known as quorum
sensing) (Yip & Madl, 2007). Interestingly, this iscorroborated in photo research by Yip & Madl (2007) who
found two separate colonies of luminescent dinoflagellate
Gonyanlax polyedra (marine organisms) synchronized ligh
flashing when in optical contact (Yip & Madl, 2007). This
suggests that when in optical proximity organisms work
synergistically and synchronously (Popp, 2003; Yip &
Madl, 2007; Yanick, 2009; 2012). Indeed, according to Yip
and Madle (2007, p. 1) “the coherent property of the
biophotonic field [the electromagnetic field] is a
communicative tool without which the state of each cel
both in single cellular and multicellular organisms could no
communicate [with] it’s surroundings.” They add tha
biophotons are indeed, the key ingredients to inter and
intra specific cooperation and are essential for the order o
life (Yip & Madl, 2007).
Microbiota
Microbiota found in the human gastrointestina
tract consists of gut bacteria in varying ratios known to
contribute to host well-being (Collins & Gibson 1999; De
Vrese & Schrezenmeir, 2008; Yanick, 2009; 2012). Of the
microbiota that have been identified via fecal, and in-vitro
investigation probiotics are well recognized (Collins &
Gibson, 1999). However, the full spectrum of microbiota
making up the totality of the human gut and/or body are
hitherto unknown (Yanick, 2009; 2012). Indeed, the
human body is composed of ninety percent microbial and
ten percent human cells, therefore attention to microbia
health is synergistically critical to host and bacteria alike
(Yanick, 2009, 2012). Probiotics are defined as viable
microorganisms in amounts sufficient enough to exer
positive health effects in the gastrointestinal tract (De
Vrese & Schrezenmeir, 2008). They are live microbia
12
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 13/26
additions to food substrates most notably fermented milks
(Gibson, 2002). Some of the commonest probiotics are
Lactobacillus and Bafidobacterium (Gibson, 2002). By
comparison, a prebiotic is described as “a selectively
fermented ingredient that allows specific changes, both in
the composition and/or activity in the gastrointestinal
microflora that confers benefits upon host well-being andhealth” (De Vrese & Schrezenmeir, 2008, p. 1). For the
purposes of clarity and completeness, prebiotics are
known to stimulate the growth and activity of bacteria in
the colon, whilst, synergistic combinations of pro and
prebiot ics are cal led synbiot ics (De vrese &
Schrezenemeir, 2008; Gibson, 2002). According to Yanick
(2009; 2012) human beings are a composite of species, a
symbiotic ecosystem of commensal and human cells.
Microbial cells that work in synergy with the host are often
referred to as commensal cells (Yanick, 2009; 2012).
According to Yanick (2009; 2012) commensal cells perform
indispensable functions, for example, they assist in food
digestion, in the production of vitamins and other nutrients
that have immune modulating effects (Gibson, 2002;
Yanick 2009, 2012). For this study only probiotics will be
used in all conditions.
Study Rationale
Notwithstanding var ious studies l ink ing
biophotonic radiance with physiological processes, few
have investigated the effects of intention on biological
organisms and its relation to biophoton radiance. Romjin
(2002) posits that photons are elementary carriers of
awareness. Epistemologically, investigating whether
biophotons are related to awareness poses some difficulty
as the mechanics and phenomenological aspects of
awareness are yet to be fully defined (Romjin, 2002).
Acceptance of a universal awareness also implies that
living creatures with ever complex holonic structures
(single cell to more complex cells i.e., organs and
systems) are capable of subjective experiences
(panpsychism) (Romjin, 2002). According to Tiller (2009,
p. 5) “consciousness, intention, emotion, mind or spirit can
significantly influence a well-designed target experiment in
physical reality.” Indeed, Tiller’s (2009b) research shows
that the alkalinity/acidity balance (pH) of water can be
changed with intention. There is a paucity of research
investigating the effects of intention and sound on bacteria
organisms as related to photon radiance. Additionally, few
linkages have been drawn between potential bacteriaawareness and biophoton radiance (Romjin, 2002)
Therefore the purpose of this preliminary study is to
investigate whether intention (love, gratitude and hate) and
sound (specifically classical music and heavy metal music)
affects bacterial organisms (probiotics). Furthermore
biophotonic radiance will be used to assess whethe
organisms exhibit less or more stress as a result of the
various exposures (see attached hypotheses and aims for
more detail) (Slawinski et al., 1992).
Definitions
For the purpose of this study the word subjectivity relates
to the phenomenon of experience and awareness
(Merriam-webster, 2014).
For the purpose of this study the word intention refers to
“directing oneself to a state of mind” (love and gratitude or
hate) (Merriam-webster, 2014).
Reference to ‘noise signal’ relates to photon detection
without the presence of a subject or object whilst ‘source
signal’ refers to photon emission from an object or subject.
Hypotheses and Specific Aims
To carry out this study the following hypotheses and aims
are outlined:-
1. A high probability compared to chance that the Q pil
shows more coherence than the O pill.
2. A high probability compared to chance that exposure to
the intention of Love and Gratitude will reduce
biophoton radiance in both the Q pill and O pill
respectively.
3. A high probability compared to chance that exposure to
the intention of Hate will increase biophoton radiance in
both the Q and O pills, respectively.
13
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 14/26
4. A high probability compared to chance that exposure to
classical music (J.S. Bach, Overture 3: Air) will reduce
biophoton radiance in both the Q and O pills,
respectively.
5. Finally, a high probability compared to chance that
exposure to heavy metal music (Metallica, Hate Train)
will increase biophoton radiance in both the Q and Opills, respectively.
Methods
Choice of Probiotics
QuantaBiotica® consists of an 8-strain commensal
microbial cell colonizer (Yanick, 2014). Each dose or
capsule contains over 60 billion organisms that are gastri-
resistant, lactic acid-bile salt tolerant thus maximizing
enteric colonization (Yanick, 2014). These factors greatly
eliminate microbe-to-microbe competition that commonly
occurs in other probiotic products. Additionally, this
proprietary blend of probiotics is exposed to a mold-free
culturing process and uses select organisms (Yanick,
2014). QuantaBiotica ® is a quorum fermented product
using a novel fermentation process (Yanick, 2007). More
specifically, Yanick (2007, p. 70) describes QuantaBiotica ®
as follows “the combination of commensals with
appropriate prebiotics produce powerful nutrient-dense
foods, rich in quorum fermented nutrients. These nutrients
are pre-digested and reduced in weight from 60,000
daltons in whole foods to only 320 daltons.”
Conversely, the alternative probiotic was
purchased from a local grocery store and is a generic
over-the-counter product (Grocey Store Multi-Flora). No
further information is available regards production other
than that available on the product label (see materials
section for details).
Materials
Product 1 - QuantaFoods QuantaBiotica ® (Q).
QuantaFoods QuantaBiotica ® consisting of an 8-strain
proprietary Quorum Fermented™ blend of Lactobacillus
salivarius, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus casel
Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifodobacterium breve
Bifidobacterium bifidum, Bifidobacterium longum and
Lactobacillus plantarum and SPT energized Psyillum
Husks (Plantago psyillum ). The probiotics are housed in a
white plastic container within individual vegetable capsules
totaling 30. The number of cells per serving was disclosedby the manufacturer as 60 billion.
Product 2 - Over the Counter Probiotics (O).
The over the counter Five Beneficial Strains Multi-Flora
Probiotic consists of Lactobacilus acidophilus (grown on
lactose milk) 4 billion cells per serving, Lactobacius lactis -
500 million cells per serving, Lactobacilus reuteri - 500
million cells per serving, Lactobacilus plantarum - 2 billion
cells per serving and Bifidobacterium bifidum (grown on
soy) - 1 billion cells per serving. Other disclosed
ingredients are Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus
tuberosus), vegetable capsule (modified cellulose)
cellulose, medium chain triglycerides and water
Probiotics are housed in a brown tinted glass container
within individual vegetable capsules totaling 50.
All probiotic pills were kept in their original containers in
the refrigerator between -3 and -6 degrees celsius.
Design
As a preliminary study basic descriptive statistics
were implemented to describe the data. Probabilities o
events occurring due to random chance were assessed
using Poisson distributions. This information will provide
valuable information for potential future research. Al
experimentation was carried out by two experimenters.
Conditions
1. Baseline
2. Intention Exposure
3. Sound Exposure
4. Microwave Exposure
Set Up and Apparatus
The photomultiplier was housed in a custom made
faraday chamber at the California Institute for Human
Sciences (CIHS). The faraday chamber was housed in a
14
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 15/26
dedicated laboratory. The laboratory was cooled to
temperatures between 66 - 68 degrees celsius. The
faraday chamber consisted of an independent, shielded,
copper reinforced chamber. The photomultiplier was
placed on an independent wooden box shelf in the right
hand corner of the faraday chamber. Refer to Appendix A,
for a schematic of the materials set up in the faradaychamber and the CIHS laboratory. A black material
covered stand was placed directly in front of the
photomultiplier upon which the samples were placed.
Photomultiplier.
A Fluke PM6690 Frequency Counter/Timer/
Analyzer was used for this study. This photomultiplier is a
period counter detecting the intervals between successive
pulses (T1, T2, T3,.....TN-1, TN) and calculates the
frequency as follows:-
a) Average period of the pulse intervals detected within
the Gate Time: Tavg= (t1+t2+T3+....+TN-1+tN)N (sec).
b) Frequency is calculated for the Gate Time T=FT=1/
Tavg(1/sec)
The Gate Time was set to long enough to have enough
large number of pulses. If this is not taken into account an
abnormal large number of counts/sec considered an
extreme possible case will be obtained.
A 5 sec interval was selected, 40 trials for a total of 200
seconds per observation was used for all recordings.
Procedure
Trial 1.
One refrigerated probiotic vegetable capsule was
taken from each of their respective containers (Q1 and O1,
respectively). Each was placed in a paper plate, covered
with a paper towel and transported immediately to the
laboratory room. They were kept at a temperature
between 66-68 degrees celsius. All readings were taken
at 5 second intervals for a total of 200 seconds (40
events). In trial one, two baseline readings were taken
with the photomultiplier cap on, all black covers on (5 black
material covers and 1 velvet cover) were recorded.
Subsequently, two baseline readings without the cap on
and all black covers were recorded. These baselines
served to record levels of noise signal within the faraday
chamber without samples.
O1 was taken to the faraday chamber in a pape
towel to prevent contamination. Using a ruler the probiotic
pill was placed 1.5cm from the edge of the sample stand
directly in front of the photomultiplier. A paper towel wasused for placement to ensure experimenter contamination
was reduced. Approximately 5 black towels and a velve
cover were placed over the detector and the sample. Two
baseline readings were recorded. This method will be
referred to a the standard procedure.
The standard procedure was repeated for the Q1 probiotic
pill.
Trial 2.
All readings were taken at 5 second intervals for a
total of 200 seconds (40 events). O3 probiotic pill was
placed in paper towel and the experimenter focused their
intention of love and gratitude and the infusion of love and
gratitude into the O3 sample. The sample was cradled in
towel held by the experimenters hands for two minutes
The O3 sample was placed 1.5cm from the edge of the
sample holder, all covers replaced (cap off) and 2 readings
were recorded. This was repeated with the intention o
infusing hate in the probiotic O3 sample. Two readings
were recorded.
The above procedure (Trial 2) was repeated for Q3
sample.
Both O3 and Q3 were placed in steryfoam cup using a
paper towel and transported to the microwave. The cup
was placed in the center of the microwave plate and the
microwave was turned on at the highest wattage for 2
minutes. It was noted the plate of the microwave was no
turning properly. On removal of the cup with both O3 and
Q3 samples it was noted that O3 was completely burnt
while Q3 remained intact. Both samples were placed in
the faraday chamber for two weeks. After two weeks they
were placed on the sample stand individually (as per
15
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 16/26
above standard procedure) and two readings each were
recorded (O3 and Q3).
Trial 3.
All readings were taken at 5 second intervals for a
total of 200 seconds (40 events). The procedure
established for trial one was repeated with O3 and Q3
samples. A baseline signal from the source, O3 sample,with cap off all covers on, is established all parameters
were maintained. A MacBook Pro was placed in on the
holding shelf to the right of the photomultiplier. Using
iTunes Overture no: 3 Air by J.S. Bach was selected and
played on repeat. A period of 4 minutes was observed to
allow for the computer screen to engage sleep mode. It
was noted that the battery light flashed periodically in this
mode. The faraday chamber door was closed and two
readings were recorded. After which all parameters were
maintained excepting the choice of song.
The second part of the experiment the song Hate Train by
Metallica was played and two readings were recorded.
The above procedure (Trial 3) was repeated for
the Q3 sample. This trial was repeated twice with O4, O5
and Q4 and Q5. Due to an abnormally increased
biophoton emission reading during Q5 exposure to Hate
Train by Metallica one additional reading (total of 3) was
recorded. To ascertain whether the increased biophoton
emission was due to exposure to Metallica’s Hate train, the
music was switched back to Overture no: 3 Air by J. S.
Bach. A further 3 readings were recorded from a new
probiotic pill sample to immediately compare readings
(Q6). A variation of this trial was repeated using a new
sample Q7 employing the same procedure as laid out
above (Trial 3). Q7 was also left for a period of thirty
minutes enclosed in the faraday chamber with continuous
exposure to Hate Train by Metallica.
Baseline Trials.
Baseline trials were carried out to assess the variability of
noise signal and signal from non-biological sources.
These were carried out using the standard procedure.
Observed Baselines.
1. Cap on covers on; cap off covers on. These were
repeated on all days the experiments were carried out.
2. After music played cap off all covers on (Q7).
3. After music trials cap off all covers on lights in
laboratory off (Q7).
4. After music trials cap on all covers on lights in
laboratory on (Q7).5. After music trials cap off all covers on, after powe
device turned off for 2 minutes (Q7).
6. After music trials cap off all covers on faraday
chamber door slightly open for 1 minute (Q7).
7. Q7 no computer or music (Q7).
8. Q7 with computer screen off. This was to ascertain the
effects of the flashing battery light during power saving
mode as noted in Trial 2.
Observations with Q7 sample were initiated as a
control measure condition. Various baseline observations
inclusive of Q7 sample and computer were observed to
understand the impact of the computer, the computer
battery light at rest and whether the dimmed screen
emitted high levels of photon radiation.
Results
Analysis Procedure
Biophoton signals are detected with a photo
multiplier tube and have an average signal noise of
between 10 and 14 counts per second, which necessitates
background noise correction to obtain the properties of
source signal. Observations are performed by detecting
spontaneous signals by counting photons in 40 contiguous
intervals of 5 seconds intervals. The outcomes constitute
a series of integer photon counts (0,1,2,3...) for bin size of
5 secs.
All collected data were converted for use in
Microsoft Excel 2011. For each 200 second data
observation trial (at 5 second intervals, 40 events)
recorded the sum and mean was calculated. During al
data analysis the second observation in each trial was
16
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 17/26
used to reduce potential for extraneous signal inclusions
(fluorescence for example). A minimum of two baseline
measurements were made, with the exception of the 17th
of July 2014 when only one was taken. The average of
two baseline readings were taken for all other dates.
Individual readings in each trial were plotted on a
line graph for both O and Q samples. Bar graphs werealso used to illustrate potential photon emission
differences between O and Q samples, respectively. Both
data frequency (x*bin) and poissonian frequencies were
calculated (x, mean, cumulative, FALSE). Poisson
distributions were normalized. Poissonian and frequency
distribution comparisons served to establish whether
source signal varied considerably from probability.
Pill Size Adjustment Calculation
Due to pill size discrepancies between the O and Q
samples a mathematical adjustment was carried out as
follows:-
Measurements.
Q pill length = 2.40cm
Q pill width = 0.90cm
O pill length = 2.00cm
O pill width = 0.70cm
The surface area for each pill was calculated as follows:-
Q pill = 2.40cm x 0.90cm = 2.16cm2
O pill = 2.00cm x 0.70cm = 1.4cm2
The ratio of the surface area’s were factored for all signal
calculations to adjust for the O sample as follows:-
Surface area Q Pill/surface area of O pill = 1.54
All O sample source signals were factored by 1.54 to
account for pill size difference.
Baselines
Actual source signal baseline observations as
graphed in Figure 4, show photon counts per second for
Q2 and O2 (40 trials, 200 seconds). Ontologically, this line
graphs shows the difference between biophoton emissions
from each sample, respectively (m = 17.56 photons per
second and m = 15.66 photons per second, all averages
are expressed as photons per second from this point
forward). The average noise signal without source shows
considerable variation over the experimentation period
from 14th of July 2014 to the 22nd of August 2014 (Figure
5 ). The average noise signal counts were in the ranges o
between 10 to 14 counts per second, respectively. On
average, the inter-day differences in noise signal is 1 counper second. Conversely, overall intra-day noise signa
variability was greater, between 10 to 14 counts per
second.
Intention
O3 and Q3 samples were individually exposed to
the focused intention of love and gratitude and hate for a
two minute period (respectively). Actual source signa
observations as graphed in Figure 7 and 8 (love and
gratitude intention), show photon counts per second for Q3
and O3 (40 trials, 200 seconds). Ontologically, this line
graphs shows the difference between photon emissions
from each sample, respectively (m = 16.02 and m =
16.52, respectively). A summary of the average photon
counts during exposure are graphed in Figure 6. Noise
baseline is set at m = 10.77. The data show, on average
the O3 pill radiated more photons per second when
exposed to love and gratitude (m = 16.52) as compared to
Q3 (m = 16.02). Furthermore, during the love & gratitude
exposure trial, on average, O3 seemed to produce slightly
!
"#$!
%$#!!
&&#$!
'!#!!
% ( " %! %' %) %* && &$ &+ '% '( '" (!
!" $ %" &'()*+,-'.
/ 0 ' 1 ' . - & ' 2 . 1 - / 3 + 4 3 5 '
. 6
72(83+ '9 :+,*;-
,
-
Figure 4 . Actual source signal observations showing
photon counts per second in the baseline condition forQ2 and O2.
17
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 18/26
less photon radiance than at baseline (baseline m = 17.56,
trial m = 16.52).
As predicted, ontological comparisons between the Q3
frequency and the poisson distribution for love and grat
exposure show the likelihood of the observing Q3 so
photon radiance by chance (Figure 7). These compari
show that it is improbable these observations would b
result of chance alone, thus suggesting that exposure of Q
the intention of love and gratitude produced an observeffect. The comparison between O3 data frequency
poisson shows that in the love and gratitude trial O3 ph
emission is plausibly consistent with poisson. However, t
are too few data points to provide definitive evidence (F
8).
!"!!
$"!!
%"!!
&"!!
'"!!
(!"!!
($"!!
(%"!!
(&"!!
! " # $ & ' ( ) ( $ * ( + $ ) , & " - . " / ( $ 0
1#,"23$", 4 56 7+28 56 )( 99 :+;+,) 56
Figure 5 . Average baselines (Mean ± SEM) from the 14th of
August 2014 to the 22nd of August 2014. Bar 1, is baseline cap
off and all covers on 14 July 2014 (m = 10.77), bar 2 is baseline
cap off and all covers on 7 August 2014 (m = 12.32), bar 3 is
baseline cap off and all covers on 7 August 2014 (m = 11.96), bar
4 is cap on all covers on observations 1 - 19 august 2014 (m =
13.71), bar 5 is cap off all covers on observations 2 - 19 August
2014 (m = 12.95), bar 6 is baseline cap off all covers onobservation 1 - 22 August 2014 (m = 13.16) and bar 7 is baseline
cap off all covers on observation 2 - 22 August 2014 (m = 14.00).
The values are ± SEM (n = 40).
Figure 6 . This bar graph shows the average observations for Q and
O pill exposure to the intention of love and gratitude and hate,
respectively. Baseline averages show noise to source signal data
observations. Included are also baseline data for Q and O pills,
respectively. Data points for the microwave condition is included for
completeness and to offer observational comparison only.
!"!!
$"!!
%!"!!
%$"!!
&!"!!
&$"!!
'!"!!
()*+,-* .,/*012*
3145 6,7 89 ,2:
68)*+*: ;<0= %>
()*+,-* ?& &2:
+*,:12- ;<0= %>
()*+,-* @& &2:
+*,:12- ;<0= %>
()*+,-* ?' A8)*
,2: B+,C4<:*
&2: +*,:12- ;<0=
%>
()*+,-* @' 08)*
,2: -+,C4<:*
&2: +*,:12- ;<0=
%>
()*+,-* ?' 5,4*
&2: +*,:12- ;<0=
%>
()*+,-* @' 5,4*
/*682: +*,:12-
;<0= %>
()*+,-* ?'
D16+83,)* &2:
+*,:12- ;<0= %>
()*+,-* @'
D16+83,)* &2:
+*,:12- ;<0= %>
! " # $ # % '
# ( % $ ) ! * + , * - # % .
/0*+12* !"#$#% '#(%$ 3#+ 4%$*%5#% 678#)(+*
Figure 7. Comparison between data frequency distribution a
poisson distribution for Q3 exposure to the intention of love gratitude - 22 July 2014.
!
%#"$
'#$!
$#&$
"#!!
% ' $ " * %% %' %$ %" %* &% &' &$ &
%< ='>3 $ ?+*1,1263 "" @2;A "BC
7 2 ( 8 3 + E 3 . - , 1 A
&'2.1- /3+ 435'.6
--- Frequency
--- Poisson No
Figure 8 . Comparison between data frequency distribution and
distribution for O3 exposure to the intention of love and gratitude
July 2014.
!
&#!!
(#!!
)#!!
+#!!
% ' $ " * %% %' %$ %" %* &% &' &$ &"
!< ='>3 $ ?+*1,1263 "" @2;A "BC
7 2 (
8 3 + E 3 . - , 1 A
&'2.1- /3+ 435'.6
--- Frequency
--- Poisson No
18
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 19/26
Actual source signal observations as graphed in Figure 9
(hate intention trial), show photon counts per second for
Q3 and O3 (40 trials, 200 seconds). Ontologically, the line
graphs shows the difference between photon emissions
from each sample, respectively (Q3 m = 20.20 and O3 m =
16.00, respectively). As expected, ontological
comparisons between Q3 data frequency and poissondistributions show the improbability that observed Q3
photon radiance when exposed to hate is due to chance
(Figure 10).
Additionally, ontological comparisons between O3 data
frequency and poisson distributions show that the
observed O3 photon radiance occurring by chance was
improbable, therefore this suggests a potentially
observable effect (Figure 11). However, O3 produced a
surprise photon radiation observation in the opposing
direction to hypothesis; photon radiance reduced inintensity during the hate condition.
However, O3 produced a surprise photon radiation
observation in the opposing direction to hypothesis; photon
radiance reduced in intensity during the hate condition.
Further observations of the data suggest, when
exposed to the intention of hate, on average, O3 produced
slightly more photon radiance (m = 16.00) compared to
baseline (m = 15.66). On the other hand, Q3 seemed to
produce less photon radiance when exposed to love and
gratitude (m = 16.02) and produced more photon radiance
when exposed to hate (m = 20.20). Additionally, compared
to baseline (m = 21.41) Q3 produced less photon radiance
when exposed to love and gratitude (m = 16.02) as
compared to hate (m = 20.20).
Sound Exposure
From the 7th of August 2014 to the 22nd of Augus
2014, several O and Q samples were exposed to classica
music (J.S. Bach, Overture Number: 3 “Air”) and heavy
metal music (Metallica’s Hate Train), respectively. A
!
"#$!
%$#!!
&&#$!
'!#!!
% ( " %! %' %) %* && &$ &+ '% '( '" (!
!< $ %< &'()*+,-'. F G*13
/ 0 ' 1 ' . & ' 2 . 1 - / 3 + 4 3 5 ' . 6
72(83+ '9 :+,*;-
--- O3
--- Q3
Figure 9. Actual source signal observations showing
photon counts per second in the hate condition for Q3
and O3.
!
&#&$
(#$!
)#"$
*#!!
% ' $ " * %% %' %$ %" %* &% &' &$ &" &*
%< G*13 "" @2;A "BCD
7 2 ( 8 3 + E 3 . - , 1 A
&'2.1- /3+ 435'.6
Figure 10. Comparison between data frequency distribution
and poisson distribution for Q3 exposure to the intention of
hate - 22 July 2014.
--- Frequency
--- Poisson Normalized
!
'#"$
"#$!
%%#&$
%$#!!
% ' $ " * %% % ' %$ % " %* & % &' & $ &" & *
!< G*13 "" @2;A "BCD
7 2 ( 8 3 + E 3 .
- , 1 A
&'2.1- /3+ 435'.6
--- Frequency
--- Poisson Norm
Figure 11. Comparison between data
frequency distribution and poisson distribution
for O3 exposure to the intention of hate - 22
July 2014.
19
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 20/26
summary of the ontological comparisons between noise
signal baseline (7 August 2014, m = 12.14; 19 August
2014, m = 13.35) and average photon radiance readings is
provided in Figure 12. The bar graph shows variability in
the photon radiance between Q4 (m = 14.42 on repeat and
m = 15.02 no repeat), Q5 (m = 19.17) and Q6 (m = 14.96)
exposed to J.S. Bach, Overture Number: 3 “Air”. Morespecifically, Q4 shows a slight variation in photon emission
between inconsistent exposure to classical music (m =
15.02) compared to continued exposure for a period of 200
seconds per trial (m = 14.42). Observations suggest that
Q4‘s continued exposure resulted in a reduction of photon
emission for that trial. However, the lowest observation
recorded was when Q6 was exposed to J.S. Bach,
Overture Number: 3 “Air” repeatedly (m = 14.96). The
ontological differences between Q4 observations are
minimal, conversely, the difference between Q4 and Q6 is
approximately less than 1 photon count per second. Q6
acted as a control to test the validity of the Q5
observations to Hate Train. Q6 average photon radiance
was found to be slightly lower than averages of both Q4
and Q5 (m = 14.42; m = 19.17, respectively).
Interestingly, when Q5 was exposed to heavy
metal music (Metallica, Hate Train) repeatedly anomalous
photon emission was observed. Indeed, the graph shows
exponentially high photon radiance above expected (m =
113.15), despite all conditions in the trial being kept
constant. Although this follows expected hypotheses, the
unusually high photon radiance is questionable. It was
noted that, on average, Q5 photon emission (m = 19.17)
was slightly higher than both Q4 exposed to J. S. Bach,
Overture Number: 3 “Air” on repeat (m = 14.42) and Q6 (m
= 14.96).
By contrast, on average O5 shows slightly higher
photon emission (m = 17.19) when exposed to J. S. Bach,
Overture Number: 3 “Air” compared to Q5 in the same
condition. Furthermore, a reduction in photon radiance
was observed during exposure to Metallica’s Hate Train,
both of these observations directly oppose the stated
expectations. Ontological comparisons to Q5 during the
same exposure to Hate Train are unadvisable given the
anomalous observations.
As highlighted in Figure 13 there was a sligh
difference (approximately 1.24 photon counts per second)
in photon radiance between Q7 second and third baseline
observations (reading two and Q7 no computer, no music
22 August 2014) (m = 17.36 and m = 16.15, respectively)
However, the addition of the computer with dimmed screen
resulted in a slightly elevated photon radiance (m = 16.91)
with only slight increases with repeated exposure to
classical (J. S. Bach Overture Number: 3 “Air”) and heavy
metal music (Metallica Hate Train; m = 17.03 and m =
17.00, respectively). Finally, Q7 was exposed to Metallica
Hate Train or a period of thirty minutes, photon radiance
reduced by approximately by 0.76 photon counts pe
second (m = 17.00 and m = 16.24, respectively).
!
#!
$!
%!
&!
'!!
'#!
($ )*+, -./0-
12*3/45 # 46 0272*89
: .;5 '$
($ )*+, -./0- 1272*8
: .;5 '$
<= )*+, ./0 172*8
12*3/45 > '? .;5 '$
(= )*+, ./0 0272*8
12*3/45 > '? .;5 '$
<= @*82 A0*/4 1272*8
12*3/45 > '? .;5 '$
(= @*82 A0*/4 1272*8
12*3/45 > '? .;5 '$
(= )*+, ./0 .B20
@*82 80*/4 1272*8
12*3/45 % '? .;5 '$
(%
12*3
! " # $ # % '
# ( % $ ) ! * + , * - # % .
/()0- 123#)(+* 4 5(6 789: $# 77 5(6 789:
Figure 12. Bar graph showing the observed photon radiance for
O4, Q4, O5, Q5 and Q6 and exposure to classical music (J. S. Ba
Overture Number 3: Air and Metallica Hate Train) for the period 7
August 2014 to 19 August 2014, respectively.
*Note all blue bars are representative of noise signal baseline (m
12.14 7 August 2014; m = 13.35 19 August 2014). Other colors a
source signal observations as marked (O is orange and Q is gree
20
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 21/26
Microwave
O3 and Q3 samples were exposed to microwave
radiation for two minutes on the 22nd of July 2014. As
shown in Figure 14, average photon radiance is
remarkably higher in Q3 (m = 28.42) compared to O3 (m =
27.36) (average noise signal baseline (m = 14.90)).
However, Q3 showed slightly higher photon radiance
compared to O3. Observations of both samples after two
weeks of rest show a considerable drop in photon
radiance, with Q3 demonstrating a slightly lower emission
rate, on average (Q3 m = 14.90; O3 m = 15.77).
Discussion
Biophoton research is considered to be rather
controversial (Popp, 1999). The photon phenomenon has
initiated a myriad of philosophical and scientific questions
some of which oppose current assumptions about nature
(Popp, 1999). The natural world is awash with microbial
life, indeed research shows the human body is a delicate
ecosystem of microbial organisms working synergistically
towards a unified whole (the body) (Yanick, 2007, 2009
2012). Current biophoton research focuses on
investigating the mechanics of photon radiance from
biological systems, however, few have considered
evaluating whether biological organisms sense and areaffected by directed intention (Popp, 1999). More
specifically, whether microbial organisms, such as
probiotics, experience subjectivity (Romjin, 2002). Thus
this preliminary study initiates research relating to potentia
effects of intention on non-human biological organisms
(probiotics). Furthermore, the potential effects of sound
exposure on microbial organisms (probiotics) is also
evaluated.
Baselines
The array of baseline observations show high
intra-day noise signal variability. This means that noise
signal before subject placement is continually fluctuating
Indeed, if the actual noise signal at baseline was constant
all source observations would reflect true source signa
data. This variability increases noise to source signa
uncertainty and limits interpretation and comparisons
(Mayburov, 2012). The potential reasons for these intra-
day fluctuations are multiple. The sensitivity of the device
instrument noise, thermal radiation from the device itsel
and perhaps the fluctuations in laboratory tempora
conditions may all contribute (Popp, 1999, 2003
Mayburov, 2012). Finally, shot noise may also be
implicated, this type of noise originates from the particle
nature of light.
Intention Exposure
According to these findings the first stated
hypothesis may have validity suggesting that Q sample
may exhibit more coherent behavior than the O sample in
both the source baseline and intention conditions
Nonetheless, the assumption that Q sample is more
coherent is speculatory at best, for more certainty it would
require the ability to maintain and measure a biologica
!"!!
$"!!
%"!!
&"!!
'"!!
(!"!!
($"!!
(%"!!
(&"!!
('"!!
$!"!!
)*+,-./, 0*1 23
*-- 425,6+ 2/
7,*8./9 $ : $$;<9
=> )*+,-./,
7,*8./9 $ : $$
;<9 (%
=> ?2
42@1<A,6 26
@<+.4 B*+,-./, :$$ ;<9 (%
=> C.AD
02@1<A,6
E46,,/ 23 : $$;<9 (%
=> )*4D ;.6 2/
7,1,*A 7,*8./9
$ : $$ *<9 (%
=> F*A, G6*./
2/ 7,1,*A
7,*8./9 H : $$;<9 (%
=> D*A, A6*./ 2/
6,1,*A I26 D*-I
*/ D2<6 7,*8./9$ : $$ ;<9 (%
! " # $ # % '
# ( % $ ) ! * + , * - # % .
/0 '#(%$) 1()2- 345#)(+*
Figure 13. Bar graph showing Q7 data following exposure to J.
S. Bach, Overture Number: 3 “Air” and Metallica Hate Train
repeated over differing time frames. Baselines were included
with computer and source present in differing scenarios.
!"!!
$"!!
%!"!!
%$"!!
&!"!!
&$"!!
'!"!!
()*+,-* .,/*012* % 3 (4- %5 ()*+,-* 6' &27 +*,712-
819+:;,)* && <40= %5
()*+,-* >' &27 ?*,712-
@19+:;,)* && <40= %5
()*+,-* 6' ?*A,B* ?*,712- & C 3
(4- %5
()*+,-* >' ?*A,B* ?*,712- % C 3
(4- %5
!"#$%&# ()*+,- .)$ /01$)2%"# 345)-*$#
Figure 14. Bar graph showing average photon counts for O3
and Q3 after exposure to microwave radiation for 2 minutes
and repeated observations two weeks later (O3 and Q3 werecovered and housed in the faraday cage in relative darkness
for two weeks before the repeated measure in August 2014.
21
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 22/26
system in a stationary state (Popp, 1999). Nonetheless,
Popp (1999, p. 6) suggests “all living systems display
hyperbolic relaxations of dynamics rather than an
exponential one......there is already proof of the coherence
of biphotonic emission.” A closer investigation relating to
the probiotic cell cycle would yield more understanding
and validity (Yip & Madl, 2007). Overall, the results show that Q sample probiotics
are sensitive to positive and negative intentions, more
specifically in this study, love, gratitude and hate.
Throughout the intention exposure condition Q sample
performed as expected with lower photon emission during
the love and gratitude trial compared to the hate trial.
Additionally, comparisons between the data frequency and
poisson distributions show it is highly unlikely these
findings are due to chance. These results provide a
persuasive argument in favor of biological organisms,
more specifically, probiotics potentially exhibiting
subjectivity (Romjin, 2002). Furthermore, they corroborate
Popp’s (1999, 2006) findings suggesting more photons are
released from stressed biological systems with the
opposite being found when in a relaxed state.
Furthermore, these findings have implications relating to
the body/mind connection (Tiller, 2009, 2009b). Indeed, if
intention and thoughts affect the photon radiance in
bacteria and ninety percent of the human body is
composed of microbes, the question arises as to whether
the microbial ecosystem is affected by the host’s state of
mind? More specifically, does it affect microbial efficiency,
longevity and productivity?
Despite the aforementioned favorable findings
these were not corroborated by probiotic sample O. The
observed results in both conditions for this sample (love
and gratitude and hate) did not satisfy the posited
hypotheses and aims. Rather findings showed the
opposite; that is exposure to the intention of love and
gratitude resulted in an increased photon emission, whilst
exposure to the intention of hate decreased photon
emission. This presents a veritable conundrum. It is
suggested that perhaps the Q sample is more coherent in
nature than the O sample. Indeed, Yanick (2007, 2009
2012) suggests that the ratio of bacteria in the
manufactured probiotic is crucial for gut colonization
furthermore, the fermentation process requires specificity
Additionally, the ‘quorum fermentation’ process purportedly
results in a mold free product reducing the potential forextraneous organisms (Yanick, 2007, 2009, 2012)
Although the exact fermentation method used has not
been divulged, perhaps ‘quorum fermentation’ results in
more coherence (Yanick, 2007, 2009, 2012)? The
inclusion of only Pysllium husk and no other additives to
the probiotic ensemble (Q) may also reflect the observed
variation in the O probiotic samples. Finally, an unusually
large background noise effect may have also affected
results.
Sound Exposure
The sound exposure condition Q yielded some
interesting findings. Overall, when initially exposed to J. S
Bach Overture Number: 3 “Air” photon emission reduced
(compared to signal baseline), however, when exposed to
Metallica Hate Train unusually high photon radiance was
recorded. Although these findings support hypotheses the
extraordinary photon intensity suggests extraneous factors
were at play. No changes were made during the trial and
conditions were kept constant, therefore there is no known
reasons for this exception. Various baselines were
recorded with additional Q samples testing for
repeatability, however, this extraordinary intensity was no
found. Interestingly, this conclusion is corroborated by
recordings of a subsequent sample (Q7) which did not
yield the same results when exposed to Metallica’s Hate
Train over thirty minutes. Indeed, photon emissions
reduced over that time period suggesting that music does
not have a significant effect on probiotics based on photon
intensity. Furthermore, organism light absorption is an
aspect that has not been corrected for adequately and
may have affected results.
22
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 23/26
The O sample, on the other hand, displayed
similar unusual results as those in the intention condition.
Photon emission was more intense when exposed to
Metallica’s Hate Train compared to J.S. Bach Overture
Number: 3 “Air”. It is reasonable to suggest that reduced
O sample coherence may have influenced results.
Microwave Both samples (O and Q) showed increased
intensity of photon emission following exposure to
microwave radiation. Notwithstanding, these results may
have been confounded by the increased thermal
emission following exposure to high microwave radiation
as this was not accounted for.
Recommendations
A more rigorous methodological design is
recommended. More specifically, a repeated measures
design with pre-post conditions is suggested. The use of
a rigorous procedure is crucial to eliminate potential
confounding factors, therefore some changes in the
procedure are advised. Namely, using gloves to handle
all specimens, the use of quartz cuvettes in the place of
vegetarian pillules ensuring the number of organisms
used is equal in each condition, thus reducing the use of
mathematical adjustment for pill size. Repeatability is
one of the foundations of the scientific paradigm, it is
therefore recommended that multiple samples from each
probiotic batch be used in succession to quantify genuine
significance. Furthermore, the use of a significance test,
either the C-test or E-test, is suggested. This will provide
a more solid understanding of significant differences
between probiotic subjects and their biophoton radiance
in each condi tion. Given the current resul ts,
experimenter intention should be taken into account
ensuring all those present clear their thought processes
to mitigate any potential experimenter effects (Tiller,
2009, 2009b). Fluctuations in temperature may have
contributed to the variations in noise signal differences,
therefore consistent temporal conditions are in the
laboratory are imperative. All baselines related to
materials/devices used in experimentation should be
performed at the outset to establish intra-day noise signa
variability. Intra-day baseline variability increases noise
to source signal uncertainty and limits interpretation and
comparisons. The efficiency of the photomultiplier is
crucial for photon detection and recording, therefore it is
suggested the device be calibrated before researchinitiation (Popp, 2003). Furthermore, it is suggested the
device be powered off and cooled at regular intervals to
reduce thermal interference. The filter installed to
minimize instrument noise should also be tested and
calibrated to ensure efficiency. Microbial and chemica
analysis would permit a more in depth understanding o
actual sample components and microbial densities thus
reducing potential extraneous factors influencing
outcomes. Moreover, organism light absorption is
another known phenomenon that has not been evaluated
adequately and may have affected results (Popp, 2003)
Finally, additional analysis such as biophotonic imaging
would provide added validity to findings of photon
radiance (Creath & Schwartz, 2005).
Future Research
Despite the mixed findings this research shows
the potential for microbial subjectivity (Romjin, 2002)
This discovery elucidates the potential for further
considerations relating to the body-mind complex. In
particular, whether quorum sensing is mediated by the
host’s emotional state and whether different samples of
bacteria are affected when in optical proximity. This may
be extended to investigate the effects of distal intention
on bacteria. Finally, with more chemical substance
analysis the potential of toxins such as heavy metals and
chemical contaminants may yield a better understanding
of the effects of these substances on photon intensity
Furthermore, it may provide invaluable knowledge abou
gut microbial efficiency, productivity and longevity.
Summary
Despite some curious findings, given the overal
results in all conditions the O sample trials did not support
23
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 24/26
hypotheses related to intention and sound exposure.
However, O sample trial results suggest hypotheses
related to its reduced coherence may be supported.
Conversely, Q samples supported the hypotheses
suggesting this sample is more coherent and is affected
by the intentions of love, gratitude and hate. These
findings have noteworthy implications relating toawareness and questions about microbial subjectivity
(Romjin, 2002). Indeed, further research may begin to
sc ient ifical l y d isentangle the e lus ive web of
consciousness and alter the way humans see themselves
and connect to the ecosystem within their own physical
form (Romjin, 2002). After all one of the greatest
scientists of all time, stated “look deep into nature, and
then you will understand everything better,” Einstein.
Acknowledgements: Thanks to the California Institute for
Human Science for the use of the biophoton machine and
experimental lab.
References
Bennett, A. T. D., Cuthill, I. C., Patridge, J. D., & Lunau,
K. (1997). Ultraviolet plumage co lo rs p re di c t ma te
preference in starlings. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
94 (16), 8618-8621.
Bokkon, I., Salari, V., Tuszynski, J. A., & Antal, I. (2010).
Estimation of the number of biophotons involved in the
visual perception of a single-object image: Biophoton
intensity can be considerably higher inside cells than
outside. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B:
Biology, 100( 3), 160-166.
Cilento, G. (1982). Chemical and Biological Generation
of Excited States. (Eds. Adam, W.). Academic Press:
New York.
Collins, M. D., & Gibson, G. R. (1999). Probiotics,
prebiotics, and synbiotics: approaches for modulating the
microbial ecology of the gut. Americal Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 69 (5), 1052-1057.
Creath, K., & Schwartz, G. E. (2005). What Biophoton
Images of Plants Can Tell Us about B iofie lds and
Healing. Journal of Scientific Exploration, 19 (4)
531-550.
De Vrese, M., & Schrezenmeir, J. (2008). Probiotics
prebiotics and synbiotics. Advanced Biochemistry
Enginee ring and Biotechnology, 111, 1-66.Dicke, R. H. (1954). Coherence in spontaneous radiation
processes. Physiological Review, 99 , pp. 99.
Dictionary.com. (2014). Retrieved 10 September 2014
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coherence?s=t.
Farquhar, G. D., Von Caemmere, S., & Berry, J. A
(2001). Models of Photosynthesis, Plant Physiology
125 (1), 42-45.
Gibson, G. R.. (2002) (Eds. Hart, A. L., Stagg, A. J.
Graffner, H., Glise, H., Falk, P., & Kamm, M. A.) Gu
Ecology . London: Martin Dunitz Ltd, a member of the
Taylor & Francis Group.
Merriam-Webster. (2014). Retrieved 10 September 2014
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intention
Merriam-Webster. (2014). Retrieved 10 September 2014
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subjectivity.
Paschotta, R. (2006). Coherence Length of Ultrashor
Pulses. The Photonics S p o t l i g h t . R e t r i e v e d 1 0
September 2014 ht tp: / /www.rp-photonics.com
spotlight_2006_09_22.html.
Popp, F.A. (1999). About the Coherence of Biophotons
Macroscopic Quantum Coherence, Proceedings of an
International Conference on the Boston University.
Popp, F.A. (2003). Properties of biophotons and thei
theoretical implications. Indian Journal of Experimenta
Biology, 41, 391-402.
Popp, F.A. (2006). Biophotons Popp Interview Part 1
Retrieved 10 September 2014 http://www.youtube.com/
watchv=trycaZzwMeo&index=4&list=PLNHyuB3oUlV94G
OpIzOC8jRUpgO3jWxdi.
Racine, D., Rastogi, A., & Bajpai, R. P. (2013). Hints a
Quantum Characteristics of Light Signals Measured from
a Human Subject. Chinese Medicine, 4, 72-78.
24
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 25/26
Romjin, H. (2002). Are Virtual Photons the Elementary
Carriers of Consciousness? J o u r n a l o f
consciousness Studies, 9 (1), 61-81.
Roose, J. (2014). Photosynthesis not just for plants.
R e t r i e v e d 8 S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 4 h t t p : / / newunderthesunblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/20/ photosynthesis-not-just- for-plants/.
Ryer, A. (1998). Light Measurement Handbook. Technical
Publ icat ions Dept . , In ternat ional L ight , Inc:
Massachusetts.
Schacter, D. L., Gilbert, D. L. & Wegner, D. M. (2009).
Psychology . (2nd ed.). New York (NY): Worth Publishers.
Slawinski, J., Ezzahir, A., Godlewski, T., Kwiecinska, T.,
Rajfur, Z., Sitko, D., & Wierzuchowska, D. (1992) .
Stress- induced photon emission from perturbed
organisms. Experientia, 48, 1041- 1058.
Yanick, P. (2007). The Forgotten River of Health.
Nevada: QuantaFoods LLC.
Yanick, P. (2009). Quorum SuperHealing. Canada:
Trafford Publishing.
Yanick. P. (2012). The Inner Physician. QuantaFoods
Association.
Tiller, W. A. (2009). It is time for a Consiousness-Inclusive
Science. The William A. Tiller Foundation, White Paper
IV, 1-18.
Tiller, W. A., & Dibble, W. E. (2009b). A Brief Introduction
to Intention-Host Device Research. The William A. Tiller
Foundation, White Paper I, 1-16.
Yip, M., & Madl, P. (2007). Biophotons - The Light of
Life. Proc. of 6th Biosemiotics Gathering, Umweb,
Helsinky , 303-311.
Williams, N.T. (2010). Probiotics. American Journal of
Health-System Pharmacy , 67(6), 449-458.
The Society for AnimalConsciousness™
2015
Revisiting the animalconsciousness debate.
“Do no go where the pathmay lead, go instead
where there is no path andleave a trail.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Do you want your articlepublished in The Journal of
Animal Consciousness?
Email Chiara Marrapodi at
chiara@societyforanimalco
nsciousness.org
25
8/9/2019 Journal of Animal Consciousness Issue 1 Vol 1 Febuary 2015
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/journal-of-animal-consciousness-issue-1-vol-1-febuary-2015 26/26
A Journal for a paradigm shift from a uni-dimensional perspective to a
multi-faceted approach about the natural world and consciousness.
What is consciousness and do animals and plants have it?
Think you have an article that adds value to understanding consciousness?
Then send it to [email protected]!
The Journal of Animal Consciousness is edited and produced by Chiara Marrapodi Founder of
The Society for Animal Consciousness.
The Journal of Animal Consciousness is produced free to the community. It is the first Journal of
The Society for AnimalConsciousness™
J o u r n
a l Of
AnimalConsciousness