Biophoton Emission Outside Visible Range

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the emission of biophotons and bioluminescence, particularly focusing on the absence of fluorescent proteins that emit outside the visible range, including radio waves. Participants explore the biological implications, the physical principles behind fluorescence, and the potential for engineered proteins.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why fluorescent proteins emitting above or below the visible range have not been found, suggesting potential biological and scientific benefits of such proteins.
  • There is a discussion about whether the 'visible range' refers to human perception or includes other species, with references to the evolutionary advantages of bioluminescence.
  • One participant explains that fluorescence is limited to specific energy differences between electronic levels, restricting emissions to the near IR to UV range, and longer wavelengths may not be practical for biological systems.
  • A suggestion is made about the possibility of engineering a voltage-sensitive radio fluorescent protein, raising concerns about sensitivity.
  • Participants clarify that biophotons are faint emissions from biochemical reactions, distinct from bioluminescence, and require specialized equipment to detect.
  • There is mention of CIDNP spectroscopy and its relation to radio wave emissions, with some participants noting that such emissions are not part of natural biological processes.
  • Discussion includes the potential for electric discharges from organisms like electric eels to emit RF frequencies, with varying opinions on the strength of such discharges.
  • One participant elaborates on the conditions under which electromagnetic waves become self-propagating, linking this to the discussion of biological emissions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of biological emissions of radio waves, with some arguing against the likelihood of such phenomena occurring naturally, while others propose hypothetical scenarios. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the potential for engineered solutions and the biological implications of radio wave emissions.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of biophotons and bioluminescence, as well as the unresolved nature of the biological mechanisms that could potentially emit radio waves.

Gnomie27
Messages
21
Reaction score
2
There are a lot of florescent proteins in the visible range, but why haven't we fount any above or below that range?
I think a protein that emits radio waves could be very helpful both biologically and scientifically. Are we not looking for such proteins, or do they not exist?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Is this 'visible range' human or do we include other species?

Here is a discussion of the evolution of the spectra of bioluminescent oragamisms:
http://www.photobiology.info/Lee-Vysotski.html

Marine organisms by far the most common bioluminescent species.
Humans are trichromats - we use three pigments to perceive light, many marine species have more - fairy shrimp have 12.

Lets assume that BL (bioluminescence) has some sort of advantage, and that it has to be perceived somewhere somehow by some mechanism to convey an advantage. Radio waves have looong wavelengths compared to UV->visible->near infared spectra. There are no simple organic pigment molecules that can pick up radio waves because the molecule is tiny compared to the wavlengths. Radio wavelengths are on the order of centimeters to meters, the near-visible wavelengths are in nanometers, on a scale with pigment molecules. Somebody here at PF can explain how antennas work, and no known organisms appear to have antennas capable of 'seeing' 20m radio waves.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gnomie27
Fluorescence comes about from the movement of electrons between electronic levels in an atom/molecule. The energy differences between these electronic levels correspond to light in the near IR to UV range, so fluorescence can only emit photons in this range. Significantly shorter wavelentghs of light are energetic enough to begin breaking chemical bonds, so they would not be practical in a biological system. Significantly longer wavelengths of light correspond to energies comparable to the thermal energy available in the environment, which would make detecting these wavelengths difficult (see this post for an extended explanation).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gnomie27
Thank you both very much, those where incredibly helpful answers!

It appears that this could not emerge biologically due to the receiving end... Do you think a voltage sensitive radio fluorescent protein could be engineered, or would it be over sensitive?
 
Biophotons are not the same as bioluminescence. Biophotons are so so faint they can't be seen with the naked eye. You need photomultiplier tubes and 15-minute exposures. They are an incidental product of biochemical reactions in plants and animals. They are non-thermal, and involve both visible light and UV.

Like the Schumann resonances, they have been hijacked by the pseudoscience people.
 
Oh, my bad. I thought that it was just a general term for a photon released in a biological process. Thank you for clarifying that, I don't want to make that mistake again!
 
There are not that many chemical reactions which go in hand with the emission of radio waves. The only example I am aware of, is from CIDNP spectroscopy, where strong magnetic fields are required.
 
I believe CIDNP causes emissions from the nucleus like MRI machines and NMR. So the emission isn't part of the natural process.
 
It is true that CIDNP is measured in NMR Spectrometers, usually. However, it does not require excitation by external radio fields but the radio frequency field generated is due to the chemical reaction taking place. The high magnetic fields required are admittedly not very physiological.
 
  • #10
Wow, that's still very cool!
 
  • #11
DrDu said:
There are not that many chemical reactions which go in hand with the emission of radio waves.
I know that this isn't exactly within the confines of the intended subject matter, but wouldn't the discharge of an electric eel or ray emit RF frequencies?
 
  • #12
You are correct, electric discharge can release RF, which can be observed in lightning.
However, I'm not sure electrocytes and neurons produce a strong enough discharge...
On the other hand, if they are strong enough, then perhaps the studies of lightning could
identify the frequencies emitted?
 
  • #13
Gnomie27 said:
On the other hand, if they are strong enough, then perhaps the studies of lightning could
identify the frequencies emitted?
No. Ever seen a biological object creating a lightning flash? It just does not happen.

Gnomie27 said:
However, I'm not sure electrocytes and neurons produce a strong enough discharge...
They cannot.
 
  • #14
It's not just the amplitude but also the frequency. Electromagnetic waves don't become electromagnetic radiation until they are about two wavelengths away from the source. Until then they depend on the source for their energy. After two wavelengths they become self-propagating. That's also about where virtual photons turn into actual photons. The lower the frequency the more energy you need to sustain the waves until they can propagate by themselves. Sparks, on the other hand, generally produce radio waves.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
5K