From the physical point of view one is in the situation to consider whether one can add more results, in order to demonstrate more accurately the validity of the coherence theory and to reject the BCT. A list of results and arguments which display some inconsistencies of BCT and the complete agreement of CT with the known phenomena has been published elsewhere 2-3 and is not repeated here. There have also been some ideas and some physical models that can explain the molecular mechanism of coherent biophoton emission.2-3 The most likely candidate for biophoton emission is the chromatine of the cells in a non-equilibrium state where probably the exciplexes of the DNA are essentially involved. Actually, red blood cells which have no active chromatine are the only cells which do not emit biophotons. In addition there are clear correlations between biophoton emission and the intercalation of inert substances like ethidium bromide into the DNA.16-17 The most basic understanding of the coherence of biophotons can be derivated from Dicke's theory of subradiance and superradiance18 which is valid for optically dense media. Actually, the interaction of electromagnetic waves with large wavelengths compared to the antenna systems of a cell leads to non-exponential relaxation functions and, in particular for subradiance, to delayed luminescence. The phase-information within and between cells can hold then a rather important biological control parameter which may regulate the growth and differentiation of cells. If this is the case, one expects non-linear dependence of biophoton emission from biological functions, Actually, we found deviations from Beer-Lambert's law for light travelling through cellular layers. 19 A convincing result is the non-linear change of biophoton emission from Daphnia magna (Fig. 5a) 20 and the nonlinear change of delayed luminescence from normal - and cancer cells (Fig. 5 b).21-22 At the same time, the agreement with a hyperbolic relaxation dynamic increases with increasing cell density of normal cells and it decreases for malignant cells. All the results can not be interpreted in terms of the BCT, but can be well understood by using the CT. Of course, the capacity for destructive interference between the cells and consequently the preference for constructive interference within the cells provides a powerful communication system. As soon as mutual constructive interference of the specific wave patterns of the biophotons within the cells is optimized (and at the same time destructive interference outside is as perfect as possible) a rather unstable equilibrium is obtained where every perturbation works as a common signal of the highest possible signal/noise ratio.2 While normal tissue follows this optimization principle, tumor tissue has lost this capacity by a critical loss of coherence. As a consequence tumor cells are not more able to display destructive interference and not able to communicate.
Figure 5a
Biophoton Emission of Daphnia magna with increasing number of animals.
Figure 5b
Delayed luminescence of cancer cells (upper curve) and normal cells (lower curve) in dependence on the cell density.
Previous
1 Introduction
