Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

original article

Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

Menas C. Kafatos, PhD; Gaétan Chevalier, PhD; Deepak Chopra, MD; John Hubacher, MA; Subhash Kak, PhD;
Content designated
Neil D. Theise, MD as open access

Author Affiliations Evidence for the existence of the biofield now Correspondence
Menas C. Kafatos, PhD
Chapman University, Orange, California (Dr Kafatos); exists, and current theoretical foundations are now
[email protected]
The Earthing Institute and Psy-Tek Laboratory, Encinitas, being developed.1,2 The term biofield describes “a field of
California (Dr Chevalier); Chopra Foundation and energy and information, both putative and subtle, that Citation
University of California, San Diego (Dr Chopra); Pantheon regulates the homeodynamic function of living organ- Global Adv Health Med.
2015;4(suppl):25-34.
Research Inc, Culver City, California (Mr Hubacher); isms and may play a substantial role in understanding DOI: 10.7453/
School of Electrical and Computer Engineer­ing, Oklahoma and guiding health processes.”3 Another definition gahmj.2015.011.suppl
State University, Stillwater (Dr Kak); Mount Sinai Beth describes it as
Key Words
Israel Medical Center, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount
Biofield, quantum
Sinai, New York, New York (Dr Theise). an organizing principle for the dynamic informa- mechanics, physics
tion flow that regulates biological function and
homeostasis. Biofield interactions can organize Disclosures
The authors completed
Abstract spatiotemporal biological processes across hierar- the ICMJE Form for
This article briefly reviews the biofield hypothesis chical levels: from the subatomic, atomic, molecu- Potential Conflicts of
and its scientific literature. Evidence for the existence lar, cellular, organismic, to the interpersonal and Interest and disclosed
of the biofield now exists, and current theoretical foun- cosmic levels. As such, biofield interactions can the following: Dr
Chevalier is a consultant
dations are now being developed. A review of the bio- influence a variety of biological pathways, includ- for Psy-Tek Laboratory
field and related topics from the perspective of physical ing biochemical, neurological and cellular pro- outside the submitted
science is needed to identify a common body of knowl- cesses related to electromagnetism, correlated work. Dr Chopra
disclosed that he is
edge and evaluate possible underlying principles of quantum information flow, and perhaps other
co-owner of the Chopra
origin of the biofield. The properties of such a field means for modulating activity and information Center for Wellbeing as
could be based on electromagnetic fields, coherent flow across hierarchical levels of biology.4 well as payments and
states, biophotons, quantum and quantum-like pro- royalties for activities
outside the submitted
cesses, and ultimately the quantum vacuum. Given Unified and coherent characteristics of the biofield work. The other
this evidence, we intend to inquire and discuss how the imply a strong and perhaps unique role for quantum authors had no
existence of the biofield challenges reductionist models. A review from the viewpoint of physical science conflicts to disclose.

approaches and presents its own challenges regarding is needed in order to identify a common body of knowl-
the origin and source of the biofield, the specific evi- edge and evaluate possible underlying principles of ori-
dence for its existence, its relation to biology, and last gin of the biofield. To that end, the review presented here
but not least, how it may inform an integrated under- surveys current models including electromagnetic pro-
standing of consciousness and the living universe. cesses and quantum models. We go on to speculate on
processes that are not currently well understood. Central
Introduction to the possible role of quantum theory, for example, we
Conventional biology is based on molecular pro- discuss quantum biology and its manifestations in such
cesses—ie, biochemical interactions that ultimately processes such as photosynthesis, avian navigation,
reduce to macromolecules such as DNA and RNA. Even olfactory reception, regeneration, microtubule interac-
organismal biology, which concerns itself with address- tions, brain dynamics, and cognition.
ing organisms as wholes, still relies on the reductionist It has been hypothesized that biology could ulti-
approach of understanding the whole by analyzing mately be built from more fundamental underlying
how the parts fit together. These approaches, although quantum physics. This assumption is implicit in many
very successful in specific scientific and medical appli- approaches to molecular biology, genetics, and various
cations, fail to address phenomena that by their nature applications in medicine and health but is often more
are holistic—ie, they may need to be explained from a honored in the breach. If biology truly derives from
whole organism context, crossing boundaries of scale, physics, then biology should be an extension of quan-
and thereby including quantum and conventional tum physics, the most accurate and fundamental physi-
fields, mind, and relationship to environment. It seems cal theory at our disposal. While quantum biology is an
that biology, despite the great successes it has achieved emerging branch of science, most practicing biologists
and the multitude of applications in theory as well as don’t take it into account. Conventional biology and
in practice, has still not undergone the types of revolu- biophysics derive predominately from a biochemical
tions that shook physics over the last 100 years. and Newtonian physics standard, but biological effects

Original Article Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach 25

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

that cannot be understood without reference to quan- both physics and biology can be demonstrated, then we
tum phenomena are accumulating, as in avian magne- will discuss in this article how the biofield itself may be
toreception, olfaction, and plant photosynthesis. an important—and perhaps to-date, crucial but
However, very recent work1 describes a theoretical ignored—missing link. In other words, if quantum-like is
foundation for biology, suggesting that biology can be defined as the more general framework embracing biol-
put on an equal footing with physics and not simply ogy and physics, then macroscopic quantum processes
reduced to biochemical processes. Living matter would such as entanglement (where multiple objects exist in
then be seen as following basic principles and laws that the same quantum state and so are linked together) and
are not reducible to conventional physics, though coherence (ordering of the phase angles between the
would be smoothly interwoven with quantum physi- components of a system in a quantum superposition)
cal processes. In this view, we would assert that the across a single organism and beyond would be crucial
generic science of biology is complementary to the signposts marking what lies ahead, coherence as such
generic science of physics (ie, the 2 are closely related being a bridge between micro- and macroscales.9,10 The
but not identical). Possibly both are anchored to mutu- recent discovery of macroscopic entanglement in 2 dia-
al processes through the underlying quantum vacuum. mond crystals could also be pointing to the likelihood
In this regard, the evidence for the existence of the that quantum-like phenomena may, in some cases, lit-
biofield holds the promise of significant growth in sci- erally be propagation of quantum level phenomena
entific understanding and for developing applications into the macroscopic scale.11 These recent issues will be
in medicine, health, and healing. This line of research briefly addressed in the current work.
and application of quantum physics perspective Ultimately, for any quantum discussion, the prob-
approaches living organisms through “an emergent lem of observation à la von Neumann arises.6 The so-
and potentially all-encompassing biofield”2 that entails called “von Neumann cut,” or the point of separation
the existence of long-range interactions, most likely of between the observer and the observed system, suggests
a coherent nature. Even as experimental evidence is an essential role for the observer with clear relevance to
accumulating for the existence of precisely such a long- how biofield interactions may be connected to brain
range, coherent biofield, theoretical understanding is structure and processes. Where is the observer situated,
still lacking. Various hurdles exist: The concept of the in the brain? What is the role of mind and conscious-
biofield has many aspects, the concept often means dif- ness itself in biofield interactions? One can speculate on
ferent things to different workers, and a clear language the many possibilities that exist with regard to the
for the description of biofield interactions hasn’t been interaction of an observer with observed systems, where
agreed upon. Further complicating the situation is that the cut may be (if anywhere) in biological systems, serv-
a host of relevant terms and concepts (eg, bioplasma, ing as a connection to the activity of the biofield. We
bioelectromagnetics, quantum vacuum) are being must consider consciousness as an integral part of bio-
widely used in a variety of different contexts. field theory and experimentation, as any discussion of
Does the theoretical understanding of biofield quantum biology directly implicates the question of the
involve a few dominant theories? Do they depend on observer and the observer requires consciousness.
specific phenomena? Can such understanding be part The review presented here is meant as a compre-
of existing field theories (such as electromagnetism) or hensive introduction to many aspects already known
is new physics a necessary outcome of studies of the while also highlighting issues remaining and speculat-
biofield? From the viewpoint of classical physics, anoth- ing upon conceptual developments that are needed to
er possibility that has been suggested is that the biofield develop a theoretical framework for the copious body
consists of electromagnetic emanations from molecular of data on biofield phenomena. We also refer the reader
transitions in living matter. This possibility is not viable to the extensive discussion presented in the excellent
due to associated short timescales. From this perspec- compendium of relevant works in Popp and
tive, electromagnetic field (EMF) coherence might be an Beloussov.12 This book discusses in detailed chapters
essential requirement for biofield interactions to orga- the idea of biophysics as being quantum biological,
nize biological processes.5 Because quantum physics developmental biology and morphology and field the-
underlies all electromagnetic theories and thus bio- ory, biophotonic emission studies, mitogenetic radia-
chemistry and neurobiology, quantum mechanical pro- tion as a biofield phenomena, and life and conscious-
cesses, the role of the vacuum, and interpretations con- ness as relevant aspects to biophysics and integrative
cerning the role of the mind itself6 are important biophysics as being inclusive of this.
aspects to consider. Also we shall discuss in greater
detail below how other “quantum-like” properties of Historical and Theoretical Conceptions for
the biofield may play a key role in biofield interactions the Biofield
(by quantum-like, we intend macroscopic and biological The concept of a biofield has been emerging steadi-
correlates of quantum phenomena such as nonlocality, ly, with the work of several groups indicating that part
superposition, complementarity,7,8 etc). If the workings of a living organism’s energy is “integrated into a sort of
of generalized, mesoscopic (molecules to mm in size) an all-inclusive, long range and to a certain degree coher-
and macroscopic quantum-like processes that span ent field.”2 This suggests that fundamental properties

26 Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach Original Article

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

like coherence, integrative function, and various long- based. Instead, a central aspect of integrative biophys-
range influences on the organism are all potentially ics is modeling of the organism built completely upon
associated with the biofield. A number of scientists the field concept—this forms a common thread
have historically proposed that a biological field exists throughout integrative biophysics and phenomena
in a holistic or global organizing form.13-15 The details associated with biophotons.
are different, but in general, such propositions involve
coherence in electromagnetic waves,15 biophotons,16 Quantum mechanics has established the primacy
or going beyond electromagnetism, human inten- of the unseparable whole. For this reason, the basis
tion.17 In some suppositions, an “electromagnetic of the new biophysics must be the insight into the
body” or “subtle body” is invoked, as related to acu- fundamental interconnectedness within the organ-
puncture meridians in traditional Chinese medicine18 ism as well as between organisms, and that of the
and chakras, the subtle energy centers in the Indian organism with the environment. This will be an
esoteric tradition.17 As Liboff notes, “Once the organ- integral biophysics. . . . The existence of a pre-
ism is described as an electromagnetic entity, this physical, unobservable domain of potentiality in
strongly suggests the reason for the efficacy of the vari- quantum theory, which forms the basis of the fun-
ous electromagnetic therapies, namely as the most damental interconnectedness and wholeness of
direct means of restoring the body’s impacted electro- reality and from which arise the patterns of the
magnetic field to its normal state.”19 material world, may provide a new model for
From a recent perspective, the term biofield was understanding the holistic features of organisms,
coined in 1994 by a panel on manual medicine modal- such as morphogenesis and regeneration, and thus
ities convened at the National Institutes of Health provide a foundation for integral biophysics.12
(NIH) to discuss complementary and alternative med-
icine (CAM).20 As result, the NIH, through the As a starting point, evidence of bioelectromagnet-
National Center for Complementary and Alternative ic fields and the biological effects of external EMFs
Medicine, issued a request for applications for grant have historically lagged behind the successes of bio-
proposals to study a variety of biofield therapies, chemistry, resulting in a delayed start in understand-
including Reiki, healing touch, qigong, and other ing the ubiquitous nature of biofields in living organ-
subtle energy healing interactions.15 As a result of isms. The historical emphasis on reductionist molecu-
this research focus, much of the physiological evi- lar biological explanations has been practical and
dence for the biofield has come through the applica- allowed for the gains of current biomedicine.
tion of various CAM techniques of healing. Organismal and biofield biology and their multifaceted
To get at its nature in terms of fields explored in mechanisms and forms may also offer a host of useful
classical physics, the biofield has been defined as “the approaches for investigating and unlocking the mys-
endogenous, complex dynamic EMF resulting from teries of life that have been neglected.
the superposition of component EMFs of the organism The need for general principles in biology has
that is proposed to be involved in self-organization been pointed out by Bizzarri, Palombo, and Cucina24
and bioregulation of the organisms.”15 A classical and by Grandpierre, Chopra, and Kafatos.1 Instead of
electromagnetic-based definition such as this one can looking on a more integrated approach like systems
serve as an important starting point, insofar as it biology as merely an extension of molecular biology,
involves the concept of bioinformation.15 However, as these investigators strongly suggest that integrated
we will see below, any electromagnetic-based defini- biology and biophysics operate beyond the reduction-
tion is limiting, since it does not encompass quantum ist approach. For example, these authors are challeng-
and holistic effects. EMF theories are also themselves ing genetics as being the sole discipline for explaining
special cases of quantum field theories, the latter being evolution. We hope that integrative biophysics and
more natural and general, and therefore able to associated field processes, including EMFs, biophotons,
account for the properties of coherence, nonlocality, and possible quantum interactions, will soon be seen as
and entanglement,21,22 which are strikingly relevant necessary, fundamental, and complementary aspects of
to living organisms. molecular biology and biochemistry. New vistas for
understanding evolution will emerge when these com-
Methodological Issues: “Integrative plementary approaches are accepted.
Biophysics”
Before turning our attention to the specifics of the Electromagnetic Fields
biofield and the underlying physics, we will examine We now turn our attention to specific aspects of
the general role of “integrative biophysics,” a term biofield, beginning with EMFs. An EMF is a physical
coined by Popp and Beloussov that refers to different field produced by electrically charged particles in
aspects of nonconventional biophysics and biology.12 motion. We refer to the work of Jerman, Leskovar, and
Specifically, the term indicates a departure from equi- Krašovec2 for many of the details. A widely applicable
librium thermodynamics, the foundation of classical notion of the biofield is associated with endogenous
physics and chemistry23 on which most of biology is EMFs of organisms.5,2 Every living cell membrane “has

Original Article Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach 27

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

an electric field of very high intensity (around 107 V/m) In summary, the electromagnetic basis includes
though of a rather low voltage . . . one of the basic fea- the presence of at least 2 field sources: “one (static
tures of life.”2 Biomedical researchers and clinicians electric-transmembrane potential) that has been
routinely gather meaningful data from the manifesta- known for long, and the other, a high frequency oscil-
tions of endogenous EMFs through the use of skin sur- lating and more or less coherent EMF.”2 The latter can
face measurements like electroencephalograms (EEGs) be considered to have 2 further aspects manifesting in
and electrocardiograms (ECGs).25 The human body different energy or frequency ranges: (1) a microwave
also includes classical acoustic energy fields due, for to MHz and lower frequency range coherence, which
example, to muscular contraction.26 Coherence is often we can simply refer to as the Frölich field, and (2) a vis-
observed in EEG, which would indicate self-organizing ible/infrared/near ultraviolet diffuse field, which we
systems.27 Such coherence has been shown to increase can refer to as the Popp photon field. The former has
during meditative states of settled awareness.28,29 been observed but at lower frequencies than predicted;
Applying very–low power coherent EMFs at spe- the latter is supported empirically by observations of
cific frequencies in the mm range to biological systems the statistical coherence of biophotons, which produce
results in a resonance-like behavior that supports the emission spectra that are distinctly different from
theoretical prediction of polar coherent modes in a byproducts of biochemical reactions.40 This appears to
manner comparable to Bose condensation.30 Polar be related to quantum mechanical squeezed states.40,41
coherent modes are predicted to result from the high- Squeezed states of light belong to the class of nonclassi-
intensity field across cell membranes, that when driven cal states of light and indicate quantum coherent
by metabolism, create coherent microwave oscillation. states. As such, quantum mechanical effects are clearly
A Bose-Einstein condensate is a state of matter of a indicated through coherence and squeezed states in
dilute gas of bosons cooled to temperatures very close both the Fröhlich and Popp fields; therefore, they con-
to absolute zero. Under such conditions, macroscopic stitute nonclassical fields with their own particular
quantum phenomena become apparent. Such macro- properties (see next section). Recently it has been sug-
scopic quantum phenomena are hypothesized as quali- gested that the Fröhlich field and the Popp field are
ties of the biofield. Moreover, according to Fröhlich,27 interconnected through strong mode coupling in liv-
these polar coherent modes represent the basis for ing systems.2 An experimental and theoretical basis for
electromagnetic oscillations at cellular levels in the defining the existence of a macroscopic coherent quan-
organism. The existence of endogenous EMFs at the tum system in living things is being developed here
predicted Fröhlich frequencies has not yet been proven and extended subsequently. This has profound impli-
experimentally, and their coherent nature in the body cations for biology and medicine.
is only inferred.2 However, the discovery of an endoge- Coherent EMFs may indeed be the organizing
nous EMF at much lower MHz frequencies in microtu- agent of cellular processes, which would indicate that
bules is significant because it suggests a form of coher- the biophoton source is nonbiochemical.42 It is of
ent electromagnetic activity that may play a role in course possible that these ultraweak photon fields are
biofield signaling, thus lending some support to the somehow related to biochemical processes, although
theory coherent modes of Fröhlich but at much lower concensus42 is that they may be guiding the entire cel-
frequencies than predicted theoretically.31 lular physiology. Biofield interactions could also be
Other indirect indications of endogenous EMFs responsible for the organization of cellular microtubu-
come from biophotonics,2 with foundations in the pio- lar networks43 and biological regulation processes that
neering work of Popp and collaborators on coherent have been shown to occur via endogenous EMFs with-
ultraweak light emissions from cells.12,32-34 Bischof in microtubular cytoskeleton such as the following:
describes the biophoton field,35 summarizing 90 years the regulation of the dynamics of mitosis and meio-
of peer-reviewed published research, as follows: “All liv- sis44,45; chromosome packing during the mitotic phase
ing organisms, including humans, emit a low-intensity of the cell-cycle44; and interactions between ion chan-
glow that cannot be seen by the naked eye, but can be nel activity and the phosphorylation status of binding
measured by photomultipliers that amplify the weak molecules such as MAP2 and CaMKII, which act modu-
signals several million times and enable the research- late cytoskeletal structure and connectivity.46 These
ers to register it in the form of a diagram. As long as experimental data are supported by theoretical predic-
they live, cells and whole organisms give off a pulsat- tion of classical and quantum information processing
ing glow with a mean intensity of several up to a few in microtubules.47,48 The coherent photon field, on the
ten thousand photons per second and square centime- other hand, could be the dominant factor in cellular
ter,” also known as “cellular glow” or “ultraweak biolu- physiology,49 a conclusion supported by experimental
minescence.”34 These biophotonic phenomena could observations of cell-to-cell signaling via coherent bio-
point to long-range interactions between biological photon activity.36-39
organisms. This possibility is supported by observa- It is of course important to also consider that nei-
tions of intercellular signaling mediated by biopho- ther biophotons nor biomolecular physiology are pri-
tons.36-39 via a field containing coherent states32-34,40 in marily causative but are instead tightly coupled pro-
agreement with the pioneering conjectures of Fröhlich. cesses arising codependently within biological systems.

28 Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach Original Article

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

In this vein, it should be recognized that individual directly observed, are a direct consequence of both clas-
cellular or multicellular organisms, while temporally sical, relativistic, and quantum theories.
and spatially separate from each other when regarded For example, because the wave equations derived
from customary investigative points of view, actually from Maxwell’s equations (ie, classical electromagnetic
have no strict and definable boundaries between them- theory) are symmetric in time, solutions exist for both
selves.50 In complex ways, living organisms form colo- the “advanced” and “retarded” electromagnetic poten-
nies and populations, merge with influences from the tials, propagating backwards and forwards in time,
environment as they eat and breathe, behave according respectively.52 Other field quantities that propagate at
to shared genetic inheritance, and are inhabited by faster-than-light speeds, such as pilot waves, follow
innumerable microorganisms known collectively as directly from calculations in both classical and relativ-
the microbiome, which makes even a marked visual istic electrodynamics.53 In relativistic quantum theory,
boundary like the skin quite tenuous. It is just as solutions to the Dirac equation successfully predicted
important to consider the entire biosphere as a single the (now experimentally confirmed) existence of the
evolving living structure comprising all seemingly positron, requiring a formulation in which the arrow
separate “beings.”50 of time is reversed.54 “Longitudinal” or “scalar” waves
have also been suggested to be primary aspects of the
Beyond Bioelectromagnetics biofield.24 In contrast to the transverse vector waves of
Moving beyond classical EMF descriptions, the classical EMF theory, such scalar waves are hypothe-
general CAM approach aims to modulate the endoge- sized to result from superposition of electromagnetic
nous fields. It has been suggested that this aim must waves—eg, when 2 waves cancel each other, a transfor-
include modulation of nonclassical and quantum mation of energy into vacuum potentiality is thought
forms of energy.25 Indeed, it is a logical necessity to to occur.25 Such scalar fields, which are not mediated
consider that the collective biofield consists of (at least) by electric dipoles or electron transitions, propagate far
electromagnetic, optical, acoustic, and nonclassical from equilibrium25 and clearly don’t constitute known
energy fields associated with biological entities: cells, electromagnetic-based structures.
bodies, perhaps ecosystems, and even Gaia as a whole.25 These connections with nonclassical fields have
As stated above, the coherence of endogenous EMFs led several scientists to consider the body as function-
suggest, specifically that nonclassical fields are existing ing as a macroscopic quantum system.9,25,55-58 The
in biological entities.40,41 It has been proposed that the existence of macroscopic biological processes linked to
biofield may be applicable in complementary medical QM leads to quantum biology and as we will see below,
therapies and healing.51 to a biofield conception beyond both quanta and bio-
Potentially such therapies could be directed non- logical entities to the underlying vacuum and even
invasively at enhancing or stimulating the body’s heal- further. In an integrated quantum description of the
ing process, reducing pain and anxiety, and a variety of body, bioinformation must play a fundamental role.
other conditions. Many of these applications reflect the The implications for biomedicine are profound. Such a
influence of mind/body interactions, suggesting that system would create a model for the origin and cause of
the role of the observer in quantum mechanics (QM) broad physiological regulatory behavior that we cur-
may be of central importance to understanding mind/ rently lack, primary to molecular biology. Practical
body therapies and the role of mind and emotions in control of this system would lead to deep insights for
health and wellbeing. To what extent “mind” may also healing, regeneration, morphology, disease elimina-
be related to the biofield lies outside the scope of this tion, growth, and mind/body interaction, as well as
review, but we have been describing some of the basic insights into the fundamental questions of what is life,
physical biofield processes that could explain the effi- what is consciousness, and what the full mechanisms
cacy of complementary medical therapies. underlying evolution are. It may describe a new,
All physics, including electromagnetic theory, unique, quantum mechanical and electrically based
rests upon a nonclassical foundation. For example, the physiological system that interfaces with both the
electromagnetic potential field (comprising the vector quantum world, quantum vacuum, and biochemical
potential, A, and scalar potential, φ, which are the world. It may be the key to integrating the science of
sources of EMFs) mediates the classical EMFs described consciousness and biology. It would certainly be an
by Maxwell’s equations and quantum levels described epochal paradigm shift for science.
by the Schrödinger equation.22 The electromagnetipo-
tential acts by modulating the phase of charged parti- Quantum Physics and Quantum Biology
cle wave functions; field interactions can occur in Quantum physics provides a theoretical entry to
regions of zero electric and magnetic fields, yet non- attempt to explain the existence of the biofield and how
zero A and φ.21 Thus the electromagnetic potential is it interacts with the body. There are qualifications to this
itself a nonclassical field functioning through a modu- assumption, however. Bischof indicates the fundamen-
lation of quantum phase rather than via a classical field tal sense that quantum physics has implicitly replaced
of force. The case for other nonclassical fields has been the old reductionist and molecular view of science with
summarized by Rein,25 and such fields, while not yet a holistic one in which materiality forms an unbroken

Original Article Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach 29

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

whole.23 Likewise, the most persistent paradigm in neu- the less precisely can its momentum be known (ie,
roscience considers the mind as an emergent property of wavelength or wave-like aspect). Thus the type of mea-
a large and complex physical brain that mediates aware- surement chosen by the observer determines the out-
ness and remembrance.58,59 In this orthodox view, come of experiments, suggesting a participatory role
“mind” appeared in the evolutionary chain because of for the observer.
the development of nervous systems in general, central In von Neumann’s view, there is a universal wave
nervous systems in particular, or only in primates and function.6 However, as in the CI, there is also collapse
perhaps just homo sapiens.60 through conscious observation. For von Neumann, the
In contrast, a view closely linked to the role of state transformation due to measurement (process 1) is
observation in quantum measurements assigns a role distinct from that due to time evolution (process 2) as
to subjectivity in keeping with the Copenhagen described by the Schrödinger time-dependent equa-
Interpretation (CI) and particularly its revision by John tion: Time evolution is deterministic and unitary
von Neumann, known as the orthodox quantum view.6 whereas measurement is nondeterministic and non-
It holds that consciousness provides the individual unitary.6,58 Von Neumann’s interpretation is the gold
observer with agency and freedom.61-63 As such, quan- standard against which all other interpretations must
tum measurement theory has yielded to what Wheeler be compared.63 Von Neumann’s nondeterministic
refers to as the “participatory universe.” The conun- interpretation of measurement gives a psychological
drum of whether or not the falling tree would make a component to reality itself, casting the observer in the
noise in the forest is irrelevant if no conscious observ- role of an active participant in the creation of events.
ers were around to hear it. From this participatory This viewpoint, that the observer’s participation
viewpoint, properties of quanta and quantum systems plays an essential role in the outcome of events, has
in general are “contextual”: They don’t exist by them- fundamental implications for biofield science and
selves but are intrinsically tied to acts of observation. mind/body therapies. It has the potential for under-
In von Neumann’s view, nature exhibits free choice standing how many such therapies operate. In the
of response to an act of observation by an observer. The same breath, the issue of efficacy arises. There is a wide
time evolution of a quantum system is described by the range of response to all medical interventions, wheth-
wave function, which fully characterizes such systems er in complementary or conventional scientific medi-
through the deterministically evolving Schrödinger cine. No 2 patients respond alike, and uncertainty is
equation.6 However, what value will result following an always present. Mind and body are fundamentally
actual experimental choice is not known. Once an connected. Thus, the primary connection of the
experiment is conducted, a single value in the probabil- observer and the observed system, as understood in
ity space described by the wave function results, and this QM, has profound implications for the nature of the
is the famous “collapse of the wave function.”64 Quantum biofield: We cannot take the living body as an entity
theory presents us with a world following a completely existing independent of the biofield to which it
different order from the world of everyday experience.63 belongs and independent of the practitioner and the
In what constitutes the underlying reality, quanta are receiving subject in CAM treatments.
entangled in both space and time, and nonlocality is The primary shortcoming of molecular biology is
implied in quantum measurements.64 that the “holistic” character of the physical world now
By extension, a number of quantum physicists recognized in quantum theory is either not acknowl-
take participation to be an absolute requirement, hold- edged by the bioengineers or rejected as irrelevant.23,69
ing that the world is primarily mental, since mental The world view of QM is much richer and more holistic
decisions implicitly play the primary role in the col- than molecular biology would have. It is no surprise
lapse of the wave function.6,57,64-66 In the CI of quan- that many of the founders of QM understood the impli-
tum theory, the wave function is not considered to be cations of wholeness in both physics and biology. For
real. Rather, it is only a prescription of determining example, Planck held that wholeness must be intro-
probabilistic potential outcomes, which are described duced into physics as in biology.70 Bohr understood the
by the square of the absolute value of the wave func- significance of complementarity beyond QM and how
tion, as proposed by Born.67,68 However, the variables it was paramount to biology.67,68 Schrödinger wrote an
measured must conform to macroscale classical ana- important work with the title “What is Life?” in which
logues, since any apparatus in the lab would be a classi- he approached the holistic view for both QM and life as
cal system. Thus the CI has a duality built into it. Not similar.71 For example, primary colors are not a funda-
all physical variables of a quantum system can be mental property of light but are related to the physio-
simultaneously known (according to the Heisenberg logical response of the eye to light. Moreover,
Uncertainty Principle). In the CI, quantum systems Heisenberg also held that mind plays a fundamental
behave in a complementary manner, either as particles role in the universe.72
or waves (Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity). This Today, the evidence of macroscopic quantum
complementary relationship manifests in the act of effects in biology has yielded a plethora of phenomena
observation itself. For example, the more precisely a that can be understood through the application of quan-
particle’s position (particle-like aspect) is measured, tum physics. They include understandings of the role of

30 Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach Original Article

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

coherence in photosynthesis,73,74 the avian compass quantum biology91 to account for the physical, men-
through which birds navigate,74 the sense of smell,75 tal, and biological realms,92 with the biological domain
quantum coherence in microtubules,56,76 regenera- characterized by huge complexity and different levels
tion,77 and quantum processes in brain dynamics.78-80 of information rates.1

Quantum-like Processes The Quantum Vacuum

The application of quantum microphysics to mac- In interpersonal field phenomena,23 the presence
roscopic scales is natural and yet at the same time sur- of nonelectromagnetic fields is indicated. These may be
prising. The naturalness is because QM is the most electromagnetic potential fields, which Aharonov and
complete theory of physical reality that we have where Bohm21 showed are very real. Tiller has suggested that
classical physics is incomplete. The surprise is because these potential fields mediate between EMFs, the mac-
most QM effects occurring in the microcosm, such as roscopic quantum states of matter, and the physical
entanglement and nonlocality, don’t readily apply to vacuum.22 We agree with Bischof that “all the features
everyday experience. In what follows, we refer to of unbroken wholeness of reality implicit in quantum
Kafatos63 as it applies to bridging the microscopic and theory—non-separability, non-locality, fundamental
macroscopic domains. connectedness—which are so fundamental for biologi-
By quantum-like effects are meant (1) phenomena cal understanding, are an expression of the properties
that are clearly related to QM but apply at macroscopic of the vacuum.”23 According to this view, the vacuum
scales where normally they would not be expected and organizes the structure of space-time through macro-
(2) phenomena that should be seen as extensions scopic EMFs, and the phase-controlling property of the
beyond current orthodox QM, in particular those electromagnetic potentials plays a central role.23 The
involving life processes that cannot be accounted for importance of phase-relations for complex biosystems,
by standard biochemistry, biology, or quantum theory. consisting of many oscillating fields coupled nonlin-
The Hilbert space formalism of QM, Schrödinger’s early by their phase-relations, points to the importance
wave mechanics, and Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics of the vacuum for the biofield itself.
don’t directly address life processes. Quantum-like pro- Relatedly, the coherence of biophoton emission
cesses have been theoretically invoked in a host of life has been suggested to arise from “potential informa-
processes and macroscopic physics (such as brain tion” in the organism that is virtual and nonmeasur-
dynamics).7,8 “Quantum-like” indicates that the prin- able23 and a “superfluid vacuum model” has been pro-
ciples of QM apply at all scales, not just the micro- posed for biophoton emission of seeds and its connec-
scopic, and as such, they provide fundamental insights tion to their vitality.93 This model characterizes the
to phenomena in fields outside physics, such as those vacuum as a superfluid Bose-condensate of photons in
already touched upon—biology, neuroscience, and which virtual fields in the vacuum state are involved in
medicine—and potentially extending to other areas the manner posited by Grandpierre and Kafatos.94
like psychology and even anomalous psi phenomena, Zeiger and Bischof make clear “that there is significant-
where one might apply QM phenomena such as entan- ly more to the quantum vacuum than just the electro-
glement and nonlocality.81 magnetic vacuum (the zero-point fluctuations),” and
Reflecting on these concepts from the perspective
of complexity theory, it becomes clear that many of the need for assuming a pre-physical dimension of
the “peculiar” effects observed at the quantum level potentiality for the understanding of organisms, and
have biological forms: for example, biological comple- for the creation of the new discipline of vacuum bio-
mentarity50 and uncertainty.82,83 Extending QM con- physics as a basis of biophysical understanding, is
cepts in this way leads to biological scale, quantum- postulated . . . The fundamental quantum mechani-
like nonlocality, recursion, and entanglement. These cal nature of biological phenomena will only be fully
extensions are more than analogies or metaphors. understood if the vacuum is taken into full and
Beyond a scope usually considered as peculiar to the explicit consideration as the essence and ground of
quantum world and not occurring in the “real world” these phenomena. The quantum vacuum may serve
of classical physics, we suggest that if the observable as a framework for a unification program in biology
universe at its foundation is quantum mechanical, as aimed at incorporating all relevant aspects of life
held in standard orthodox QM,6,58,84,85 then nonlocal- into a physical picture of the organism.93
ity could indeed be one of the signature aspects of an
underlying mental world. This has been referred to as In agreement with views presented above, Zeiger
the “conscious universe.”64,85-88 Such a universe, and Bischof also recognize the role of the observer and
where consciousness is primary, would entail qualia of of consciousness itself in QM.92 In addition,
experience, where the qualities of the experienced Grandpierre and Kafatos and Grandpierre, Chopra,
world describe reality with the validity of conven- and Kafatos have provided arguments for the funda-
tional science and yet go much further by including mental role of the quantum vacuum in biology, in the
every aspect of mind.89,90 Quantum-like can thus be autonomy or free choice of organisms and as the driver
understood as the (future) extension of both QM and of biological evolution.94

Original Article Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach 31

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

Preliminary Results for “Phantom Leaf

Effect”: A Model System for Biofield
Research?
An intriguing experimental result, known as “the
phantom leaf effect,” if fully verified, may be an example
of some or even all of these biofield processes. In these
experiments, coronal discharge95 or the Kirlian photo-
graphic effect reveals a field effect in the morphological
form of an intact living leaf even after part of the leaf is
severed.96 This suggests an analogy to the subjective
experience of a phantom limb reported by patients after
the limb has been amputated. There might be a persist-
ing biofield that represents the amputated limb. First
described by Adamenko and reported by Tiller96 and by
Ostrander and Schroeder,97 more recent validating
experiments have been performed with detection meth-
ods of greater precision; these are summarized in
Hubacher.98 In his most recent publication, Hubacher
performed the experiment with highest definition pho-
tographic samples using the largest number of samples
to date.98 Of 137 leaves severed and imaged, 96 (70%)
demonstrated clear phantoms (example in the Figure).98
In these experiments the phantom structure (1)
appears as an integral and coherent whole, (2) is inde-
pendent spatially of the organism, (3) interacts with Figure Example of the phantom leaf effect from Hubacher (2015).
both magnetic and electric fields and conducts cur-
rent, and (4) represents the precise anatomy of the gest a robust effect that can arise from a very broad
original physical leaf.98 Hubacher concludes that the array of interwoven field phenomena.
phantom leaf, being electroconductive, may carry In the images obtained, it is electron flux that cre-
both information and energy and therefore possibly ates the image. These data point to the existence of an
represents a true biofield manifestation that regulates intact, integral, and conductive system permeating the
physiological processes. original leaf. Given the absence of any conductive physi-
An early explanation of this effect questioned cal structures in the severed area, the coronal discharge
whether the phantom leaf effect might result from appears to be under the influence of a quantum-level,
moisture emission from the cut portion driven into the nonphysical field functioning below the level of EMFs,
space from which the cut section had been removed by in order to support and structure those EMFs. Vacuum
the power of the field emission process. However, the phantom effects have also been proposed at the molecu-
most recent data do not support this explanation, as lar level for DNA.99,100 We note also that the quantum
the precise and complex anatomical replication of the vacuum produces real measurable effects such as the
original leaf is present in minute detail. Lamb shift,100 the Casimir effect (which occurs when
On the other hand, it is also unclear why the effect charged parallel electrodes are closely adjacent101), and
is not seen 100% of the time (though it is more repro- the Bose condensation mentioned above.30
ducible in this current cohort than it has been before). The mechanisms are as yet unknown, but the vari-
Hubacher suggests that ous findings point to aspects that would be expected
from the postulated biofield. It can be asked, then,
some parameter or group of parameters is proba- whether a phantom structure functions like a true
bly needed beyond what is understood, to reliably physiological system, as has been suggested for the
reproduce these results. These include such things biofield. A functioning system of this nature has been
as frequency, waveform, dielectric spacing, pulse postulated to deliver energy and/or information sys-
widths, and types of grounding. Other variables temically throughout an organism using electromag-
can include film types, gases in the electrode mecha- netic signals and forces.9
nism, humidity, power sources, times of year, plant In this regard, it appears that the phantom leaf
species, [and] chemically influenced specimens, eg, effect may provide an excellent model through which to
perfusion with chloroform prior to photography.98 explore the manifestations of a truly observable biofield
(or of overlapping, interactive biofields). At the very
Further work is clearly needed to determine the least, the opportunity to explore biofield mechanisms at
impact of these variables, but the fact remains that the level of EMF or below, into subtler quantum realms,
phantom leaves have been demonstrated using a vari- is intriguing. The fact that the phantom leaf effect is
ety of techniques. The remarkable results strongly sug- highly robust in recent trials97 suggests that further

32 Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach Original Article

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

work will identify confounding variables, which will invisibly affect us every day, and science has long
likely uncover some of the underlying principles. searched for a bridge between the quantum and
classical world. If these worlds turn out to be unit-
Discussion and Conclusions ed in a very practical way through the phenome-
Our examination of the evidence for the biofield non of life itself, the biofield will be far more than
indicates the need for explanations to go beyond con- theoretical. It will redefine what human life consti-
ventional classical physics and biology. In particular, tutes, where we belong in the panoply of life on the
one needs the consideration of holistic approaches and planet, and ultimately how we should live in a
coherent processes. Biofields may be carried by EMFs, wider, even cosmic, context.
quantum and quantum-like processes, and other funda-
mental coherent states. Further research must be done Acknowledgments
on the physical origins of the biofield and how it relates We would like to thank Glen Rein, David
to an integrated understanding of consciousness and the Muehsam, Beverly Rubik, and Rick Leskowitz for use-
“living universe.” Our recommendations include new ful input and suggestions, including Leskowitz’s work
investigations that address the comprehensive issues on phantom limbs.
listed below, some of which are currently speculative.
References
1. Grandpierre A, Chopra D, Kafatos MC. The universal principle of biology: deter-
•• What is the role of observation in the structure of minism, quantum physics and spontaneity. NeuroQuantology. 2014;12(3):364-373.
the biofield? Does the state of the practitioner affect 2. Jerman I, Leskovar RT, Krašovec R. Evidence for biofield. In: Zerovnik E, Markic
O, Ule A, editors. Philosophical insights about modern science. Hauppauge, NY:
the structure of the biofield in medical applications,
Nova Science Publishers; 2009:199-216.
for example? Even for the same subject receiving dif- 3. Jain S, Rapgay L, Daubenmier, J, Muehsam, D, Rapgay, L, Chopra, D. Indo-
ferent CAMs at different times, would the biofield Tibetan philosophical and medical systems: perspectives on the biofield.
Global Adv Health Med. 2015;4(suppl):16-24.
depend on the person administering the treatment? 4. Muehsam D, Chevalier G, Barsotti T, Gurfein BT. An overview of biofield devic-
•• Is the coherence seen in biofield, and particularly in es. Global Adv Health Med. 2015;4(suppl):42-51.
biophoton emissions, indicative of the basic 5. Fröhlich H. Long-range coherence and energy storage in biological systems. Int
J Quant Chem. 1968; 2(5):641-9.
quantum(like) nature of life? Similarly, do nonlocali- 6. von Neumann J. Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics. Princeton,
ty and entanglement and other quantum properties NJ: Princeton University Press; 1955.
apply among different interacting organisms? 7. Roy S, Kafatos M. Complementarity principle and cognition process. Physics
Essays. 1999;12(4):662-8.
•• In CAM, how is the endogenous and all-­ 8. Roy S, Kafatos M. Quantum processes and functional geometry: new perspec-
encompassing nature of the biofield in an individ- tives in brain dynamics. Forma. 2004;19:69-84.
ual tied to the biofield of the practitioner and to all 9. Ho MW, Popp FA, Warnke U, editors. Bioelectrodynamics and biocommunica-
tion. London: World Scientific; 1994.
biofields of living entities? For example, do bio- 10. Li HK. Coherence–A bridge between micro- and macro-systems. In: Belusov LV,
fields linking every living entity exist at all scales? Popp FA, editors. Biophotonics–non-equilibrium and coherent systems in biol-
How would we show this experimentally and what ogy, biophysics and biotechnology. Moscow: Bioinform Services; 1995:99-114.
11. Lee KC, Sprague MR, Sussman BJ, et al. Entangling macroscopic diamonds at
would the consequences be? room temperature. Science. 2011;334(6060):1253-6.
•• If entanglements across “different” biofields are real, 12. Popp FA, Beloussov L, editors. Integrative biophysics: biophotonics. Dordrecht,
the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic; 2003.
how might CAM modalities be developed to deliver
13. Burr HS, Northrop FS. The electro-dynamic theory of life. Q Rev Biol.
the maximum beneficial effects to the patient? 1935;10(3):322-3.
•• Can the use of CAM take advantage of the nonlocal 14. Burr HS. Blueprint for immortality: the electric patterns of life. Trowbridge,
England: The C.W. Daniel Company Limited; 1988.
nature of the biofield (eg, along with hands-on 15. Rubik B. The biofield hypothesis: its biophysical basis and role in medicine. J
healing, distant healing, as in Reiki, could be equal- Altern Complement Med. 2002;8(6):703-17.
ly effective)? 16. Popp FA. Evolution as the expansion of coherent states. In: Zhang L, Popp FA,
Bischof M, editors. Current development of biophysics: the stage from an ugly
•• Can the biofield be understood as ultimately ema- duckling to a beautiful swan. Hangzhou, China: Hangzhou University Press;
nating from the quantum vacuum? Would this open 1996:252-64.
up new vistas for energetic healing transmission? 17. Savva S. Toward a cybernetic model of the organism. Adv Mind-body Med.
1998;14:292-301.
For example, would the persistence of biofield be uti- 18. Zhang CL. Standing wave, meridians and collaterals, coherent electromagnetic
lized for health benefits across space-time? field and wholistic thinking in Chinese traditional medicine. J Yunnan Coll
•• Can we devise scientific experiments to study spe- Trad Med. 1996;19:27-30. Chinese.
19. Liboff AR. Toward an electromagnetic paradigm for biology and medicine. J
cific quantum-like properties of the biofield that Altern Complement Med. 2004;10(1):41-7.
would be useful in CAM? 20. Rubik B, Pavek R, Ward R, et al. Manual healing methods. Alternative medicine:
•• The phantom leaf effect may represent an easily expanding medical horizons. Washington, DC: US Government Printing
Office; 1994:45-65.
performed and reproducible model system for 21. Aharonov Y, Bohm D. Significance of electromagnetic potentials in the quan-
exploring not only the primary nature of the bio- tum theory. Phys Rev. 1959;115(3):485-491.
22. Tiller WA. What are subtle energies? J Sci Explor. 1993;7(3):293-304.
field but also how CAM interventions might inter-
23. Bischof M. Introduction to integrative biophysics. In: Popp FA, Beloussov L, edi-
act with it or even change it. tors. Integrative biophysics: biophotonics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic;
•• Finally, what makes biofield research so fascinating 2003:1-115.
24. Bizzarri M, Palombo A, Cucina A. Theoretical aspects of systems biology. Progr
is its immediate impact on human beings. We are Biophys Mol Biol. 2013;112(1-2):33-43.
living entities imbedded in the fields described by 25. Rein G. Bioinformation within the biofield: beyond bioelectromagnetics. J
classical and quantum physics. Nature’s forces Altern Complement Med. 2004;10(1):59-68.

Original Article Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach 33

 Biofield Science: Current Physics Perspectives

26. Barry DT. Muscle sounds from evoked twitches in the hand. Arch Phys Med 64. Kafatos M, Nadeau R. The conscious universe. New York: Springer Verlag;
Rehabil. 1991;72(8):573-81. 1991, 2000.
27. Frölich H. Theoretical physics and biology. In: Frölich H, editor. Biological 65. Kafatos MC. The conscious universe. In: Chopra D, editor. Brain, mind, cosmos:
coherence and response to external stimuli. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1988:1-24. the nature of our existence and the universe. Ebook: Amazon; 2013.
28. Tiller WA, McCraty R, Atkinson M. Cardiac coherence: a new, noninvasive measure 66. Goswami A. The self-aware universe. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam; 1993.
of autonomic nervous system order. Altern Ther Health Med. 1996;2(1):52-65. 67. Bohr N. Atomic theory and the description of nature. Cambridge: Cambridge
29. Travis F, Tecce J, Arenander A, Wallace AK. Patterns of EEG coherence, power University Press; 1934.
and contingent negative variation characterize the integration of transcenden- 68. Bohr N. Atomic physics and human knowledge. New York: Wiley; 1958.
tal and waking states. Biol Psychol. 2002;61(3):293-319. 69. Primas H. Chemistry, quantum mechanics, and reductionism. Lecture notes in
30. Frölich H. Evidence for Bose condensation-like excitation of coherent modes in chemistry. Vol. 24. Berlin: Springer; 1981.
biological systems. Physics Lett A. 1975;51(1):21-2. 70. Planck M. Where is science going? London: G. Allen and Unwins; 1933.
31. Pokorny J. Excitations of vibrations in microtubules in living cells. 71. Schrödinger E. What is life? The physical aspect of the living cell. Cambridge:
Bioelectrochemistry. 2004;63(1-2):321-6. Cambridge University Press; 1944.
32. Popp FA, Nagl W, Li KH, Scholz W, Weingärtner O, Wolf R. Biophoton emission. 72. Heisenberg W. Physics and philosophy. New York: Harper; 1958.
New evidence for coherence and DNA as a source. Cell Biophys. 1984;6(1):33-52. 73. Engel GS, Calhoun TR, Read EL, et al. Evidence for wavelike energy transfer
33. Popp FA, Nagl W. Concerning the question of coherence in biological systems. through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems. Nature.
Cell Biophys. 1988;13(3):218-20. 2007;446(7137):782-6.
34. Popp FA, Li KH. Hyperbolic relaxation as a sufficient condition of a fully coher- 74. Ishizaki A, Fleming GR. Theoretical examination of quantum coherence in a
ent ergodic field. Int J Theoret Phys. 1993;32(9):1573-83. photosynthetic system at physiological temperature. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
To view or download
the full-text article, visit: 35. Bischof M. Biophotons: The lights in our cells. http://www.international-light- 2009;106(41):17255-60.
www.gahmj.com/doi/full/ association.eu/PDF/Biophotons.pdf. Accessed September 8, 2015. 75. Lloyd S. Quantum coherence in biological systems. J Phys Conf Ser.
10.7453/gahmj.2015.011. 36. van Wijk R. Bio-photons and bio-communication. J Sci Explor. 2001;15(2):183-97. 2011;302(012037):1-5.
suppl
37. Fels D. Cellular communication through light. PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5086. 76. Jibu M, Hagan S, Hameroff SR, Pribram KH, Yasue K. Quantum optical coher-
38. Fels D. Analogy between quantum and cell relations. Axiomathes. ence in cytoskeletal microtubules: implications for brain function. Biosystems.
2012;22(4):509-20. 1994;32(3):195-209.
39. Scholkmann F, Fels D, Cifra M. Non-chemical and non-contact cell-to-cell com- 77. Levin M. Bioelectric mechanisms in regeneration: Unique aspects and future
munication: a short review. Am J Transl Res. 2013;5(6):586-93. perspectives. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2009;20(5):543-56.
40. Popp FA, Chang JJ, Herzog A, et al. Evidence of non-classical (squeezed) light in 78. Eccles JC. Do mental events cause neural events analogously to the probability
biological systems. Phys Lett A. 2002;293(1-2):98-102. fields of quantum mechanics? Proc R Soc Lond. 1986; 227(1249):411-28.
41. Bajpai RP. Squeezed state description of spectral decompositions of a biophoton 79. Rein G. Modulation of neurotransmitter function by quantum fields. In:
signal. Physics Letters A. 2005;337(4-6):265-73. Pribram KH, editor. Behavioral neurodynamics. Washington DC: International
42. Cohen S, Popp FA. Biophoton emission of the human body. J Photochem Neural Network Society; 1993.
Photobiol B Biol. 1997;40(2):187-9. 80. Freeman WJ, Vitiello G. Dissipation and spontaneous symmetry breaking in
43. Hameroff S, Penrose R. Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain brain dynamics. J Physics A Math Theoret. 2008;41(30):304042.
microtubules: a model of consciousness. Math Comp Sim. 1996;40(3-4):453-80. 81. Tressoldi PE, Storm L, Radin D. Extrasensory perception and quantum models
44. Zhao Y, Zhan Q. Electric fields generated by synchronized oscillations of micro- of cognition. Neuroquantology. 2010;8(4 Suppl 1):581-7.
tubules, centrosomes and chromosomes regulate the dynamics of mitosis and 82. Theise ND. Now you see it, now you don’t. Nature. 2005;435(7046):1165.
meiosis. Theor Biol Med Model. 2012 Jul 2;9:26. 83. Theise ND. Implications of “post-modern biology” for pathology: the Cell
45. Plankar M, Brezan S, Jerman I. The principle of coherence in multi-level brain Doctrine. Lab Invest. 2006;86(4):335-44.
information processing. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2013;111(1):8-29. 84. Stapp HP. Retrocausal effects as a consequence of orthodox quantum mechan-
46. Glass L. Synchronization and rhythmic processes in physiology. Nature. ics refined to accommodate the principle of sufficient reason. In: Sheehan DP,
2001;410(6825):277-84. editor. Quantum retrocausation: Theory and experiment. 2011;1408:31-44.
47. Hameroff S, Nip A, Porter M, Tuszynski J. Conduction pathways in microtu- 85. Stapp HP. Benevolent universe? eBook ISBN: 978-1-105-56456-7; 2012.
bules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness. Biosystems. 86. Nadeau R, Kafatos M. The non-local universe: The new physics and matters of
2002;64(1-3):149-68. the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.
48. Havelka D, Cifra M, Kucera O, Pokorny J, Vrba J. High-frequency electric field 87. Radin D. The conscious universe: the scientific truth of psychic Phenomena .
and radiation characteristics of cellular microtubule network. J Theor Biol. New York: Harper One;1997.
2011;286(1):31-40. 88. Radin D. Entangled minds: extrasensory experiences in a quantum reality. New
49. van Wijk R, van Wijk E. Human biophoton emission. Rec Res Devel York: Simon & Schuster; 2006.
Photochem Photobiol. 2004;7:139-173. 89. Kafatos M, Tanzi RE, Chopra D. How consciousness becomes the physical uni-
50. Theise ND, Kafatos MC. Complementarity in biological systems: a complexity verse. J Cosmol. 2011;14:3-14.
view. Complexity. 2013;18(6):11-20. 90. Chopra D, Kafatos MC, Tanzi RE. A consciousness-based science: From quanta
51. Hammerschlag R, Jain S, Baldwin AL, et al. Biofield research: a roundtable dis- to qualia. In: Chopra D, editor. Brain, mind, cosmos: The nature of our existence
cussion of scientific and methodological issues. J Altern Complement Med. and the universe. eBook: Amazon; 2013.
2012;18(12):1081-6. 91. Lambert N, Chen YN, Cheng YC, Li CM, Chen GY, Nori F. Quantum biology.
52. Wheeler JA, Feynman RP. Interaction with the absorber as the mechanism of Nat Phys. 2013;9(1):10-8.
radiation. Rev Mod Phys. 1945;17:157-81. 92. Theise ND, Kafatos MD. Non-dual conscious realism: fundamental principles
53. Eisberg RM. Fundamentals of modern physics. New York, NY: John Wiley and of the non-material, self-organizing universe. Science and Non-Duality
Sons; 1961. Conference; 2014.
54. Feynman RP. The theory of positrons. Phys Rev. 1949;76(6):749-59. 93. Zeiger BF, Bischof M. The quantum vacuum in biology. Paper presented at: 3rd
55. Popp FA, Warnke U, Konig, HL, editors. Electromagnetic bio-information. International Hombroich Symposium on Biophysics, International Institute of
Munich: Urban & Schwarzenberg; 1979. Biophysics, (IIB); August 21, 1998; Neuss, Germany.
56. Hameroff SR. Quantum coherence in microtubules: a neural basis for emergent 94. Grandpierre A, Kafatos M. Biological autonomy. Philos Stud. 2012;2(9):631-49.
consciousness? J Conscious Stud. 1994;1(1):91-118. 95. Loeb LB. Electrical coronas, their basic physical mechanisms. Berkeley:
57. Rauscher EA, Rubik BA. Human volitional effects on a model bacterial system. California Press; 1965.
PSI Res. 1983;2:38-47. 96. Tiller WA. Some energy field observations of man and nature. In: Krippner
58. Stapp HP. Mind, matter and quantum mechanics. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 2009. S, Rubin D, editors. Galaxies of life: The human aura in acupuncture and kir-
59. Kafatos M, Kak S. Veiled Nonlocality and cosmic censorship. Physics Essays. lian photography. New York: Gordon and Breach; 1973:71-112.
2015;28:182-187. And arXiv. 2014;1401.2180. 97. Ostrander S, Schroeder L. Psychic discoveries behind the iron curtain.
60. Theise ND, Kafatos MC. Sentience everywhere: Complexity theory, panpsy- Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1970.
chism & the role of sentience in self-organization of the universe. J Conscious 98. Hubacher J. The phantom leaf effect: a replication, part 1 J Altern
Explor Res. 2013;4(4):378-90. Complement Med. 2015;21(2):83-90.
61. Kak S. The universe, quantum physics, and consciousness. Cosmology. 99. Gariaev P, Poponin V. Anomalous phenomena in DNA interaction with elec-
2009;3:500-10. tromagnetic radiation: Vacuum DNA phantom effect and it possible rational
62. Kak S, Chopra D, Kafatos MC. Perceived reality, quantum mechanics, and con- explanation. Bull Lebedev Phys Instit. 1992;12:24-30.
sciousness. Cosmology. 2014;18:231-45. 100. Glab WL, Ng K, Yao D, Nayfeh NH. Spectroscopy between parabolic states in
63. Kafatos MC. Physics and consciousness: quantum measurement, observation hydrogen: Enhancement of the Stark-induced resonances in its photoioniza-
and experience. White paper in the workshop Frontiers of Consciousness tion. Phys Rev A. 1985;31(6):3677-84.
Research, March 4th and 5th, 2014, National Academy of Science’s Beckman 101. Jaffe RL. Casimir effect and the quantum vacuum. Phys Rev D.
Center at the University of California, Irvine (UCI), 2014. 2005;72:021301(R).

34 Biofield Science and Healing: Toward a Transdisciplinary Approach Original Article