Home |
|
Journal Articles
The
Truth about Orbs?
by Dave Wood
PSI’s investigation into orbs began with the research note published in
the last Journal of Investigative Psychical Research that laid the
foundations for future research.
Since then PSI has received funding from the Association for the
Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena to scientifically establish the
causes of the orb phenomenon. It was anticipated that the study would be
complete for publication in the present journal, however the technical
detail of the subject has lead to the need for repeat tests and a
publication date of Spring 2007.
An in-depth study into technical aspects of photography has concluded
that orbs may be airborne particles located within a theoretical ‘orb
zone’ in front of a camera. The ‘orb zone’ has to satisfy the following
characteristics:
1. Within the field of view of the camera – what it can ‘see’ within its
environment;
2. An area with sufficient light intensity to illuminate particles –
usually the flash of a compact camera, but other light conditions
(including daylight) can occasionally provide enough intensity;
3. Behind the camera’s point of nearest focus – any particles beyond
this will appear ‘in focus’ and thus too small to be discernable;
4. In front of the camera’s point of visibility – anything behind this
will be too out-of-focus to be visible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In practice this ‘orb zone’ (shown in figure one) tends to be a very
small area some centremetres in front of a camera.
The experimental procedure used has been supported by academics at UK
Universities and has been designed to vary systematically:
1. The depth of field (allowing for the ‘orb zone’ to fall within the
area which is out of focus);
2. Operation of a camera flash;
3. Distance of the flash from the lens (the further the distance the
less light intensity is present to allow a larger ‘orb zone’);
4. The design of the camera (35mm/digital);
5. And the effective rate of megapixelage.
The results of these experiments have been independently judged and
subjected to inferential statistical tests to ensure the findings are
not a result of ‘fluke’.
The primary hurdle to overcome in the understanding of orbs as rational
is one of logic. For example, fifty photos are taken with the flash
activated and then – keeping all other conditions the same – another
fifty photos are taken with the flash not activated. If one can accept
that the resulting (say) twenty ‘orb’ photos in the flash condition and
zero in the non-flash condition tell us that orbs are a product of
camera flashes then the rationale makes sense; most orbs have no light
source independent of the camera flash.
One common perception of orbs relates to the idea that ‘some orbs’ are
caused by airborne particles and ‘some orbs’ are not. There is little
hope for theorists who make no distinction between the appearance of
these apparently different ‘types’ of orbs. If airborne particles can
produce one appearance of an orb, how can paranormal forces produce the
same type of orb? Others point to a more logical idea of different
appearances of orbs, which will be considered in the full article.
There are dozens of misperceptions and misattributions of the orb
phenomena. All such cases presented to the author so far are adequately
explained by the rational theory of orbs. However, readers are
encouraged to send to us any alternatives theories and supporting
photographs so the full range of the subject can be considered.
The full article will be available in the next edition of the journal,
followed by a full, dedicated website providing accessible study of the
orb phenomena.
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|