The formation of supercritical fluids (SCFs) occurs when a substance is subjected to conditions above its critical temperature and pressure. At these elevated conditions, the distinction between liquid and gas phases of the substance become less distinct, resulting in the formation of a supercritical fluid. In this supercritical state, the fluid exhibits a combination of properties, displaying the diffusion characteristics of a gas while simultaneously exhibiting solvent power comparable to that of a liquid. This property is advantageous in applications such as CO2 extraction for essential oils or caffeine removal in coffee.[1] While SCFs have a wide range of industrial applications, a particular essential connection has yet to be contemplated: is it possible to categorise ghosts as supercritical solvents?
The aforementioned diffusion ability theoretically suggests that SCFs could penetrate porous materials or exist in otherwise inaccessible environments. Some accounts of ghost sightings describe movements through walls or manifestations in unexpected places, behaviours analogous to the penetrative potential of supercritical fluids.
However, the specific environmental requirements of SCFs challenge their viability as a basis for ghostly phenomena. SCFs require precise, stable conditions, typically extreme temperatures and pressures. For instance, carbon dioxide becomes supercritical only at temperatures above 304.1K and pressures exceeding 73.8 bar.[2] These conditions do not naturally occur in everyday settings where ghost sightings are reported, such as historical buildings or homes, which are generally at atmospheric pressure and ambient temperatures far below supercritical thresholds.
This presents a clear limitation: ghosts are typically described as manifesting in standard atmospheric conditions, a setting incompatible with supercritical fluids. Without these stringent conditions, any supercritical state would revert to a standard gas or liquid, making stable appearances under typical ghost-sighting conditions implausible. It can be reasonably deduced that the substance which constitutes ghosts is in a supercritical state under atmospheric conditions. If such a substance could be captured and analysed, it would have the potential to facilitate revolutionary industrial progress, resulting in substantial cost reductions and improvements in energy efficiency across numerous processes. Despite the current minimal levels of interest in this supernatural area, it is recommended that additional resources and time be allocated to researching and identifying the underlying properties of the ghost’s substance.
One potential counterpoint is that SCFs have a variable density and can exhibit a transparent, almost ethereal quality, which might align with descriptions of ghostly translucency. For instance, supercritical CO2 is transparent and colourless, with properties that might account for a ghost-like appearance. However, this transparency is a physical phenomenon rather than a spectral one. It lacks the inherent variability and complexity in appearance that ghost sightings describe, such as the detailed forms or human-like figures reported by witnesses.[3] Nevertheless, in the absence of concrete proof of such a human-like appearance, it may be merely a product of the imagination. This further illustrates the necessity to re-examine our current understanding of ghosts.
A further scientific consideration is the observed absence of electromagnetic or radioactive emissions from SCFs. This is a notable observation, given that ghosts are frequently linked with electromagnetic anomalies or fluctuations in local energy fields.[4] It has been demonstrated that supercritical fluids do not emit radiation or electromagnetic signals that can be detected. Therefore, they do not explain the electromagnetic field (EMF) fluctuations that have been observed during ghost sightings, which proponents claim as evidence of a “ghostly presence”. While fluctuations of this nature can often be attributed to environmental factors or electronic interference, SCFs offer no mechanism for producing such effects. It could therefore be the case that there are different classes of ghosts, which would also be an explanation for the differences between different sightings.
[1] Sihvonen, M., et al. (1999). Advances in supercritical carbon dioxide technologies. Trends in Food Science \& Technology, 10(6–7), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-2244(99)00049-7
[2] Sihvonen, M., et al. (1999). Advances in supercritical carbon dioxide technologies. Trends in Food Science \& Technology, 10(6–7), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-2244(99)00049-7
[3] Wikipedia contributors. (2024, 22. Oktober). Ghost. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost
[4] Parsons, S. (2024, 24. Oktober). Electromagnetism and Paranormal Phenomena | Psi Encyclopedia. https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/electromagnetism-and-paranormal-phenomena
