Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0 to vector analysis in physics where, in sorting out competing tugs and pulls, one finds the "dominant" vector; i.e., the one with the strongest "pull" or the one that best "balances" the other vector tensions. Figure A-1 illustrates this phenomenon, Although the tension/vector cues were very useful and among the most reliable of all the cues, I found them to be at times quite misleading, The source of confusion stemmed from the role of time as a variable rather than a constant in extrasensory reality (discussed in more detail under Section 2, "Comments on Perceptual Processes’). If my assumptions as to the temporal nature of my perceptions did not fit with the actual nature of those perceptions, then the perceptions were quite misleading. (Re- call that precognition refers here to a button that will be selected in the future--typically the next trial.) The nine-cell matrix shown in Figure A-2 may clarify the complexity of the perceptual process, the need for discriminating awareness and the possibility for error, Out of nine possible combinations of the agssumed/actual nature of perceptions, only three are matched or congruent and yield accurate understandings, Each of these primary cases is discussed below: * Clairvoyant--Here the feeling which allows sorting and selection is like that described in Figure A-l. e Precognitive--The feeling, sorting, and selection is like that described in Figure A-1l with clairvoyance; the primary difference being a shift in the time dimension to refer, not to the present target of the machine, but to the one to be selected next. To act on this perception I would press the pass button to bring the future into the present and then press the button that corresponded to my precog~ nitive perceptions. e Clairvoyant and Precognitive--The perception is of a pat- tern of buttons, distributed through time, that are and will be selected by the machine--the "pattern" usually consisted of two to three buttons. Again, the time vari- able was most troublesome--typically with greater difficulty 70 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0 LIGHT PULL/UNBALANCED STRONG PULL OR BALANCE "EMPTY —g- (a) —- sa — eee meee LIGHT PULL/ UNBALANCED , SA-2613-21 FIGURE A-1 ILLUSTRATION OF TENSION/VECTOR ANALYSIS IN OPERATION With Button C being the one selected using these cues. ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS Clairvoyant Precognitive and Precognitive Clairvoyant Clairvoyant eee Misperception Misperception ASSUMED P NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS Correct Precogniti , ; recognitive Misperception Perception Misperception Clairvoyant and Misperception Misperception Correct Precognitive Perception SA-2613-22 \ FIGURE A-2) MATRIX SHOWING CORRECT PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION IN THE USE OF TENSION/VECTOR CUES VIA THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS 71 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
‘Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0 in determining the order in which the buttons would appear as targets and lesser difficulty in determining which buttons were targets. Confusion and error would arise when I assumed the tension/vector perceptions were clairvoyant when in fact they were (say) clairvoyant and precognitive. To explain how this felt, I refer back to Figure A-1l. If the actual sequence of correct answers were Buttons B and D, and if I were assuming the perceptions were clairvoyant only, then it was not un- common to have the perception that the intervening button (C) was the correct choice. The rationale for this perception was that it felt like a balance point between Buttons B (present target) and D (next target). In retrospect, when I am more rationally aware of the room for error in the use of this cue mechanism, I am somewhat surprised as to how useful it was in operation, It should be clear from the preceding descriptions that selections were made by a variety of processes which were used sometimes in isola- tion and oftentimes in combination, A typical sequence in the selection process was: (1) check for "direct knowing’ cues, if not there, then (2) use "tension/vector” cues, then (3) make final selection with "clo- sure cues," 2. Comments on Perceptual Processes Rather than work rapidly, I chose to work deliberately, consciously, and therefore slowly. I would typically take five to thirty seconds to select a button=--enough time to have a firm and conscious sense of my internal cues and what I thought they meant, The typical sequence would be as follows: e Clear mind and become quiet e Concentrate internal awareness 72 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0 e Observe various cues « Rationally interact with cues to sort them out e Select a button and press it « Integrate feedback from response « Clear mind and become quiet, Except during "pattern recognition,” when all buttons seemed equally accessible, I found that the top two buttons on the machine were much more accessible than the bottom two, Three plausible explanations emerge to account for this. First (and least likely I think) is a psychological predisposition against the bottom two buttons--perhaps because of the color of the buttons or because of the pictures associated with the tar- gets. Second is the possibility that the circuitry of the ESP machine in some way favors the top two buttons or obscures the bottom two. Third (and most plausible to me) is the possibility that to the extent I used the "tension/vector" cue, then the bottom two buttons would be without a vector below them-~-making it more difficult to "bracket" the bottom two buttons with this perceptual process, In later phases of the experiment, I was more able to access the bottom two buttons and this seemed to corre- spond with increasing use of the "pattern recognition" cues and the de- creasing use of tension/vector cues. The longer I workéd with the ESP machine, the more apparent it be- came that, in an extrasensory perception reality, time becomes fluid, In other words, although the experiment was designed to test clairvoyance (selecting the current target) only, I found that the perceptual cues would oftentimes be equally applicable to precognition (selecting a future target--usually the next one). Therefore, making a correct selec- tion required doing two things: first, finding the correct "pattern" of buttons that would be randomly selected by the machine (typically the pattern consisted of two to three buttons), and second, associating a 73 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0 time component with the buttons in that pattern. Stated differently, the same cues discussed above held equally well for precognition or for clairvoyance--so the problem of making a selection was compounded by the additional difficulty of having to determine whether a perceptual cue was associated with the button that had already been selected by the machine or the button that would be selected in the next or even subsequent trial. I definitely felt that if I could consistently separate clairvoyant from precognitive dimensions of identical cues, that I could substantially in- crease the accuracy of overall scores, The cues were not always consistent in their presence and meaning, For example, I might be obtaining good results with the use of tension/ vector cues and then find them become ambiguous, with a commensurate decline in my score, Then I would rely more heavily upon other cues. Or, the cues might work well for clairvoyant perceptions for a while but then shift to operate for precognition-~then I would have to "recalibrate" myself to the cue mechanisms. So, it was a fluid, dynamic perceptual process which required flexibility and patience, Highly significant scores and perceptions seemed to go in spurts of ten trials or so, then I would fall back to a chance level until I could resynchronize myself with the machine and the character of my perceptual cues, I tend to agree with the notion that it might be more appropriate to call these processes "“extraconceptual perception" rather than "extra- sensory perception." ‘The perceptual cues were definitely present and they had sensory dimensions even though they do not fit into our tradi- tional sensory categories, Just "where" and "how" these sensory cues were present is not clear to me--but these are essentially conceptual rather than sensory issues, 74 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0