Absolutely unexpected application of ideas of light localization are found in the issues of quantum teleportation – instantaneous message “transmission” across randomly large distances. This promising area of research, having begun with works of [Bennet et al, 1993; Bouwmeester et al., 1997], attracts increasing attention from biologists. Let’s briefly remind the basic theses of classical quantum teleportation theory.
As is well known any wave functioning of photons’ couple (photon 2 and photon 3) each of which possesses two types of polarization (horizontal and vertical polarizations) can be divided/spread out onto four basic conditions (so-called Bell’s conditions) which form complete orthonorming system of functions 
state to that of photon 2, that is in the state of photon 1. Thereby teleportation of photon 1occurs from Alice to Bob irrespective of the distance between them. Teleportation occurs instantaneously.
The fact is that during such teleportation polarizational state if the photon 1 (being teleported) is not to Alice because photon 1 “mixes” with photon 2 resulting into condition.
The described procedure of teleportation is flawless from the point of view of quantum mechanics formalism. Nevertheless physical meaning (sense) of these basic conditions of Bell remains to be discovered, the same as ther is not certainty in resolving Einstein-Podolski-Rosen’s paradox (EPR-paradox) [Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, 1935] for solving of which these conditions/states were in fact derived/introduced. How to understand that when measuring polarization of one of the photons in, for instance, state, polarization of the other instantaneously becomes in spite of long distances in between them and any kind of information regarding the state of the second photon can be received by us some certain time period.
Photon couples described by conditions (2) or by their linear combinations are usually called EPR-photons or mixed up/jumbled photons. Until we fully comprehend physical nature of these instant correlations in properties of these photons we will not understand the physics of teleportation, regardless of immaculacy of all logical derivations.
Surprising as it may seem, the issues of ERP-paradox and teleportation can be approached from different aspect – from the focus of localized light. One of the versions of EPR-paradoxes can be as follows. One considers, for instance, s-dissipation of photon by spherical particle, that is the dissipated wave is spherically isotopic. (Fig.16.) Let the dispersedphoton approach a detector at point A (Alice). This act of registration allows us to conclude that at the very same moment this dissipated photon reaches a detector positioned in point B (Bob) being away however long distance from Alice. This is the case assuming that any information from B to A can be transmitted after only a certain time lapse. If we do not have recourse to super luminous speeds of signal propagation, this situation may be understood by: what if the act of registering incoming light in to A is connected not with dissipated photon, but with knocked off from “tube” AB localized “long” photon? We “capture” its left end. Then, that at the same time there is a registration occurring at point B of its “right” end, does not appear to be strange/unknown
No super luminous propagation of light occurs as no propagation of signal occurs at all. “Long” localized photon is “pulled out” from a plane for a reason of engagement of rigid Antoine’s rings of localized and dissipation photons. This engagement is analogous to the one outlined above in fractal cluster.
Let’s assume that there is no photon dissipating on a particle. Yet there is a “cavity”/space between Alice and Bob, filled in by localized in it photon. Alice sends in to this cavity her own photon. This photon captures/engages localized photon and presents it to Bob. Thereby as a result of this Bob in no time receives some information (yet we do not know what information) since many properties of localized photons are not known.
As we observe in here, for an instant transmission of the signal instead of EPR-correlateed photon couples it suffices to deal with one and only one localized photon (however if one wishes it may be taken as a cople of interacting virtual photons – photon of the upper shore and a photon of the lower shore Fig 1 and 2.) Moreover in [Bouwmeester et al., 1997] EPR-couple teleported Bob unknown photon from Alice. In our case Alice’s photon affected the left end of the unknown photon, and presents its right end to Bob. These are the similarities and the differences of the two mechanisms of teleportation.
Does the teleportation contradict to the basics of special theory of relativity which asserts that information transmission speed cannot be higher than light velocity? Obviously not. In the case of teleportation of Bennet’s [Bennet et al., 1993; Bouwmeester et al., 1997] type an unknown signal is instantly transmitted. within the confines of our model nothing at all is transmitted. Bob receives what is already next to him yet is not accessible by him until the time. The information as already preexisting. Alice instantly allows Bob to take it. Therefore such modification of quantum teleportation (nonlocality) we called permissive (from word “permission”). It is to be noted that such nonlocality spreads, seemingly further since the photons (modulated by the object) in our case instantly (nonlocally) turn into radio waves storing “photonic polarization information”. It is possible also that in our experiments the photons probing the object and interfering incoming photons record the dynamic polarizational hologram of the object, DNA for instance and turn it in to biologically active radio wave isomorphic photonic hologram.