STANFORD RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Menlo Park, California 94025
• U.S.A.
31 October
1974
Progress Report
No.
Covering the Period
1 April
to
1 August
1974
Stanford Research Institute Project 3183
PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES
by
Harold
E.
Puthoff
Russell Targ
Electronics
and Bioengineering Laboratory
Client
Private
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
CONTENTS
I
OBJECTIVE
II
PROGRESS DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD
A.
Applied Research
1.
Remote Viewing
(a)
Project Atlas Remote Viewing. ......
(b)
Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment.
.
.
(c)
Local Targets with Mid- Test
Feedback.
.
,
(d)
Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing. ...
B.
Basic Research
1.
Criteria for the Determination of Gifted
Individuals. ........
(a)
Remote Viewing
of Natural Targets ....
(b)
Line Drawings
(c)
Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus
Generator ...
.....
2.
Identification
of Measurable Characteristics
Possessed by Gifted Subjects
(20%)
(a)
Medical Evaluation.
(b)
Psychological Evaluation
(c)
Neuropsychological Evaluation
3.
Identification
of Neurophysiological
Correlates Which Relate to Paranormal
Activities
(20%)
(a)
Bilateral EEG Measurements—Remote
Strobe
Experiment
(b)
Physiological Correlates
of Remote
Viewing
.
.
.
4.
Identif ication
of
the Nature
of Paranormal
Phenomena and Energy
(10%)
(a)
Univei*sal Randomization Protocol
(b)
Experiments with Develco Superconducting
Differential Magnetometer
(Gradiometer)
.
ii
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
(c)
Experiments with Laser-Monitored
Torsion Pendulum
(d)
Experiments with Geiger Counter
5.
Basic Research Summary
Appendix
1—RANDOMNESS TESTS OF FOUR- STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM
STIMULUS GENERATOR.
.
Appendix 2—PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE
FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
.
Appendix 3— SAMPLE OF RAW DATA—MEDICAL EVALUATION OF
SUBJECT
Appendix 4—PRELIMINARY NOTES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING. ...
103
iii
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
I
OBJECTIVE
The purpose
of
the program
is
to determine
the characteristics
of
those perceptual modalities
through which individuals obtain information
about
their environment, wherein such information
is not presented to
any
known sense.
The program
is divided into two categories
of
investigation of
approximately equal effort,
applied research
and basic research.
The
purpose
of
the
applied research effort
is
to explore experimentally the
potential for applications
of perceptual
abilities
of
interest,
with
special attention given to accuracy and reliability.
The purpose of
the
basic research effort
is
to identify the characteristics
of
individuals
possessing such abilities,
and to identify neurophysiological correlates
and basic mechanisms involved
in such functioning.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
II
PROGRESS DURING THE REPORTING PERIOD
A.
Applied Research
1*
Remote Viewing
(a)
Project Atlas Remote Viewing
A remote-viewing experiment
has been carried out
on
a
client-designated target
of
interest,
a European R&D test
facility.
The
experiment ,
carried out
in three phases,
had
as
its
goal
the determina-
tion
of
the utility
of
remote-viewing under operational
conditions.
In Phase
I,
map coordinates were furnished to
the experi-
menters,
the only additional information provided being the designation
of
the target
as
an R&D test facility.
The experimenters then carried
*
out
a remote viewing experiment with Subject
on
a double-blind basis.
The results
of
the experiment were turned over to client representatives
for data evaluation.
Figure
shows
the
level
of
detail for
a sample early
effort
at building
layout,
and Figure
shows
the
subject's first effort
at drawing
a gantry crane he observed,
both results being obtained on
a
double-blind basis before exposure
to client-held information.
An artist's
conception
of
the
site
as
known to the client
(but
not
to contract per-
sonnel)
prior to the experiment
is shown in Figure
3.
Numerical designations
for
subjects
are discussed
in Section
B.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
miorn
T*.
t
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Were
the results
not promising,
the experiment would have
stopped
at
this point.
The results were
judged
to be
of
sufficiently good quality
however,
that Phase
II was entered
in which the
subject was made witting
by client
representatives.
A second round
of
experimentation ensued with participation
of
client
representatives.
The Phase
II effort was focussed
on the generation
of
physical data which could
be client-verified,
providing
a calibration in
the process.
The end
of Phase
II
gradually evolved into the
first
part
of
Phase
III,
the
generation of unverifiable data not
available to
the client
but
of
interest
nonetheless.
Evaluation
of
the data by the
client
is
under
way.
(b)
Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment
Subjects
and
4 participated
in
a long-distance experiment
involving
a Central American target
series.
In this experiment,
one
of
the experimenters
(Dr.
Puthoff)
spent
a week traveling through Costa Rica
on
a combination business/pleasure
trip.
That
is
all that
was
known to
the subjects
about
the traveler
1 s
itinerary.
The experiment
called
for
Dr.
Puthoff
to keep
a detailed record
of his
location
and activities,
including photographs,
each day
at
1330 PDT.
Six daily responses were
obtained from Subject
1,
five from Subject
4.
The results were
of high quality
and
are presently being
evaluated
in detail,
containing
as they did
a large
amount
of material.
Samples
of
that
data
are
as follows.
Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject
4,
two
were
in good agreement,
two had elements
in common but were not
clear
correspondences,
and one was clearly
a miss.
In the
first
of
the
two
reasonably good matches,
Dr.
Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain
at
the
base
of
a volcano and the
subject
f s response was
"large bare
table
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
mountain,
jungle below,
dark cool moist
atmosphere,"
a reasonable corre-
spondence both with regard to topography and
ambience.
In the second
match the
subject
submitted that
all
she
got was
a
picture
of
Dr.
sitting
in
a beach chair by
a pool," which was entirely correct.
The
transcript data will
be examined further
to determine
fine
structure,
resolution,
etc.
(c)
Local Targets with Mid-Test
Feedback
In this
series
of experiments,
designed to give immediate
data to experimenters,
a subject
is
asked to take part
in
a remote viewing
experiment under
the following conditions.
The
subject
and two experimenters
(one
of whom was R.T.)
are in
a first floor laboratory
in Building 30
at
SRI.
A second experi-
menter
(H.P.
)
leaves the
area and proceeds
to
a remote location of
his
choosing.
None
of
the experimenters with the
subject
knew
of
the remote
target
location.
H.P.
and R.T.
are
in two-way radio communication via
walkie-talkie
(a)
to provide the experimenter
at
the target
location
time data
and
(b)
to give
the
subject
immediate feedback after he has made
his assessment
of
the
target.
By this means the subject has
, an opportunity
to learn to separate real from imagined images.
This
is not
considered
to be
a demonstration-of-ability test,
but rather
a training step on
a
gradient
scale
of
ability.
In many
of these experiments we monitor
physiological correlates
as discussed
in Section B.3
(b)
.
(Nine
of
these
experiments have been completed to date,
seven with the measurements
of
physiological
correlates.)
The following is
a sample
of
an experiment with Subject
in this experiment we monitored physiological correlates of the remote
viewing activity.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
FIGURE
ZIGZAG
WATERWAY
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
R.T.
:
WATER,
WE CAN'T TELL.
IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE
VEGETATION—NO VEGETATION AROUND.
.
.
S-4:
Mostly concrete.
.
.
R.T.
:
IT'S MOSTLY CONCRETE...
S-4:
He's standing on concrete....
R.T .
YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE.
OVER.
H.P.,
IT CERTAINLY IS TRUE THAT THIS
IS SHINY AND
IN MY NEAR VICINITY
IT
IS BARREN AND CONCRETE OR CONCRETE-COLORED EARTH.
SHE SAID
THAT IT LOOKED LIKE STEEL OR WATER.
CAN SHE MAKE THE DIFFERENTIA-
TION BETWEEN THE TWO?
R.T.
:
He wants
to know whether
it
looks more
like
steel
or water.
S-4:
it
seems to have movement— that
’ s why
I would deduce that
it's
water.
R.T.
What
if you try to look at the whole thing.
S-4:
I'm trying to
get
an eagle's eye view.
That's
a waterworks.
R.T.
Why does
it
look like
a waterworks?
In what way?
S-4:
There
seems
to
be
a man-made
layout
of channels
and connections
to conduct
it.
R.T.
S-4 SEES MOVEMENT
IN THE ZIGZAG THING,
SO SHE THINKS THAT
IT'S
WATER,
AND A KIND OF LAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH
IT WAS
A MAN-
MADE WATERWORKS WITH WATER RUNNING
IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS.
OVER.
H.P.:
THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT.
IT
IS A ZIGZAG MAN-MADE CHANNEL WITH
CONCRETE SIDES.
OVER.
S-4:
I
can't
believe
it.
The
above
is
an excerpt
from an early experiment,
and
is
typical,
rather
a sample
of exceptionally good quality.
That experiment
continued with four more
site descriptions,
three
of which were
of equal
quality.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
One experiment
of
this nature has been carried out with
Subject
1,
one with
Subject
2,
two with Subject
3,
and five with
Subject
4.
A number
of descriptions were essentially free
of
error
and with
no
feedback other than verification following the remote viewer's description.
A complete analysis
is
to be carried
out
on these trans-
cripts following more experimentation.
To date
it
appears
that
the
viewing
is weak in the following areas:
(a)
perspective
and dimension
are often distorted
(an 8-foot
tower
is taken to be
50 feet tall,
a 20-
foot
separation between buildings may appear
to be
100 feet,
etc.),
and
(b) written material generally cannot
be
read.
(d)
Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing
In two remote viewing experiments,
the second of which was
clearly correct
from
a descriptive
standpoint,
an effort was made
to de-
termine whether
in driving
the
subject
around
the
area
it would be possible
to determine
the
location of
the target team by triangulation with
a
bearing compass.
The triangulation lines were essentially uncorrelated
with each other and with
the
target
location,
and therefore provided
a
null result.
B.
Basic Research
In addition
to the testing
of
individuals under conditions which
yield data indicating the feasibility
of
the application of paranormal
abilities
to operational
needs,
50 percent
of
the effort
is devoted
to:
(1)
Identification
of measurable characteristics possessed by
gifted individuals
(20%)
.
(2)
Identification
of neurophysiological correlates which
relate to paranormal
activities
(20%).
(3)
Identification of
the nature of paranormal phenomena
and
energy
(10%).
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
To meet
these objectives four specific requirements must
be fulfilled
during
the
course
of experimentation:
(1)
establish
and apply criteria
to differentiate between those for whom paranormal
ability
is considered
to be functional
and those
for whom it
is
not;
(2)
obtain sufficient
medical
and psychological data to establish baseline profiles against
which
(a)
one
individual may be compared with another,
and
(b)
an in-
dividual may be compared
to himself
at
different times
to determine
whether paranormal functioning occurs
in
an altered neurophysiological
state;
(3)
specific validation experiments must
be conducted with suffi-
cient
control
to ensure
that
all conventional communication paths
are
blocked,
with outcomes
sufficiently unambiguous
to determine whether
paranormal functioning occurred;
(4)
obtain neurophysiological data during
experimentation
to determine those
correlates,
if
any,
which relate
to
paranormal
activity.
In the following paragraphs,
each
of these
items
is considered
in
turn and the progress to date reported.
The milestone chart
for
the basic
research program
is
shown in Table
1.
The work is progressing in accor-
dance with the
schedule prepared for this program,
and the remaining time
and funds
are
sufficient
to meet
all program objectives.
1,
Criteria
for
the Determination
of Gifted
Individuals
One
of
the
key issues
in
the program is
the establishment
of
criteria capable
of differentiating individuals who
are
apparently gifted
in paranormal functioning from those who
are
not.
Three experimental paradigms were
chosen
to
act
as
screening
tests
on
the basis
that
these tests had been useful for
such purposes
prior to this program
(in the
sense that certain apparently gifted
in-
dividuals
did exceedingly well
on
at
least
one
of
the
tests,
whereas
the
results
of unselected volunteers
did not
differ significantly from chance
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
PROGRAM
SCHEDULE
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Prepare
final
report
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
expectation).
The
tests
are
(a)
remote viewing of natural targets,
(b)
reproduction
of
simple
line drawings hidden from the
subject
but
viewed by
an experimenter,
and
(c)
determination
of
the
state
of
a four-
state electronic random stimulus
generator.
The first test constitutes
a so-called
”free-response" paradigm
in which the
subject originates freely about contents
of his awareness;
furthermore,
the channel
in general may involve both direct perception
of
the remote
site
and perception of
the mental contents
of
an observer
at the
site.
The second test
is more constrained than
the
first
in that
the target
information
is more analytical or
abstract,
being associated
with
a graphical representation of
an item of
interest rather than the
item itself.
The third test
is
the most constrained in that
the target
is blind to
all participants in the experiment
and the subject's choice
is precisely constrained.
The details
of
these tests
are
given below.
For
the purpose
of
screening,
the criteria
as
to what constitutes
a paranormal result was chosen arbitrarily,
viz.
For the purpose
of
screening
a result
is to
be considered paranormal
if the
a priori
probability for
the occurrence
of the result
by chance,
under the null hypothesis,
is
-6
P<
.
Although the
above requirement
is exceedingly strict
by usual psycho-
physiological
standards,
it
is chosen here
(a)
because the controversial
nature
of the subject requires
strict handling,
and
(b)
in our work and
elsewhere,
a bimodal distribution has been observed empirically
in which
a subset
of
individuals participating in paranormal research produce
re-
sults
at
a level
of
statistical
significance
p * l<f®
in comparison with
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
the bulk
of
individuals who cluster
about
the mean
as expected.
There-
fore,
we base
our criteria on
an observable natural division into clearly
functional
and nonfunctional
categories.
Six subjects have been chosen for
the
study to date,
subjects
l ?
,
and
considered gifted,
subjects
4,
5,
and
6 acting
as
learners
*
or
controls.
Subject
1 qualifies
as
a gifted subject
on the basis
of remote
viewing;
subject
2 qualifies
as gifted on the basis
of
the random generator
test;
subject
is tentatively classed
as gifted in remote viewing,
al-
though not
yet
completing the
screening series,
based on client evaluation
of highly successful remote-viewing experiments carried out
for
the client
-6
in the previous program,
and also
on the basis
of meeting the
p <
criterion
in experimentation
at
another
laboratory.
Subject
(learner/control)
,
a male,
age
54,
is paired with
gifted subject
1,
a male,
age
55.
Learner/control
subject
6,
a female,
age
34,
is
by
age,
background,
and temperament paired with gifted subject
2,
a male,
age
31.
Learner subject
(female,
age
53)
and gifted subject
(male,
age
41)
are paired on the basis
of
artistic occupations
(pro-
fessional photographer and painter,
respectively)
and similar emotional
and psychological makeup.
^Earlier
in the program nine
subjects were
to be placed in three cate-
gories,
three subjects each:
gifted subjects,
learners,
and controls.
However
experience
in
the early part
of
the program indicated that
(a)
a best effort would require spending more time with fewer people,
and
(b)
the distinction between learners
and controls was
arbitrary
in
comparison with the distinction between these categories
and that
of
gifted subjects
as defined
above.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
( a )
Remote Viewing
of Natural
Targets
The first
screening test
is based
on previous
SRI research
results which indicate
that
it
is possible
for
a- subject
to describe ran-
domly chosen geographical
sites
located
several miles from the subject’s
position and demarcated by
some
appropriate means.
This experiment consists
of
a series
of double-blind tests
involving
local targets in the
San Francisco Bay area which can be docu-
mented by independent
judging.
Target
locations within
30 minutes driving
time from SRI
are randomly chosen from
a
list
of targets
kept
blind
to
subject
and experimenters
and used without
replacement.
To begin
an experiment,
an experimenter
is closeted with
a subject
at
SRI
to wait
30 minutes
to begin
a narrative description
of
the remote
location.
A second experimenter obtains
a target
location from
the target pool
and proceeds directly to the
target without communicating
with the
subject
or experimenter remaining behind.
The
second experi-
menter remains
at
the target
site for
an agreed-upon 30-minute period
following the
30 minutes
allotted
for
travel.
During
the observation
period^
the remote viewing subject
is
asked to describe his impressions
of
the
target
site
into
a tape recorder.
A comparison
is made when the
experimenter returns.
Following
a series
of
nine experiments,
the results
are
subjected to independent judging
on
a blind basis
by five
SRI
scientists
not
otherwise associated with
the research.
The judges
are
asked to
blind match
locations,
independently visited,
against
typed manuscripts
of tape-recorded narratives
of
the remote viewer.
A given narrative can
be assigned to more than one target
location.
A correct match requires
that
a transcript
of
a given date
be
associated with
the
target
of
that
date.
Probability calculations
are
on the basis
of
the
a priori
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
probability
of
the obtained series
of matches by chance,
conservatively
assuming assignment without replacement
on the part
of
the
judges.
As indicated
in Report No.
1,
Subject
1 has completed this
"10
,
series,
obtaining
a result
significant
at the
p =
X
level.
Ex
perimentation is
in progress with Subjects
and
4,
two transcripts
having been obtained from each to date.
(b)
Line Drawings
A pool
of
simple
line drawings
of everyday objects has
been drawn,
randomized,
and placed in
a secure
location.
During experimentation,
experimenters
and subject
are
separated by either
an experimenter
or
subject entering
a shielded room
so that from that
time forward the
subject
is
at
all times visually,
acoustically,
and electrically shielded from personnel
and material
at
the target
location.
Following isolation
a target
is chosen by means
of
the
universal randomization protocol technique described
in Section 4
(a),
used in this case
to generate
a two-digit number modulo
50.
The
subject's
task is then to reproduce with pen on paper the
line drawing now displayed
at the
target
location.
Following
a period
of effort
not
to exceed half
an hour,
the
subject may either pass
(when he does not
feel
confident)
or indicate
he
is ready
to submit
a drawing to the experimenters,
in which case
the
drawing
is collected by an experimenter before
the
subject
is permitted
to see
the target.
The experiment
is then repeated with replacement
until
ten drawings have been obtained from the
subject.
To obtain
an independent evaluation
of
the correlation
between target
and response
data,
the experimenters
submit
the
data for
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
judging on
a blind basis by
two
SRI
scientists not
otherwise
associated
with
the research.
The judges
are
asked
to match the response data with
the corresponding target
data
(without replacement).
Such experimentation
is presently
in progress,
a number
of
drawings having been obtained from several
of
the
subjects
but
have not
yet been submitted for
judging.
(c)
Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator
The determination of
the
state
of
a four-state electronic
random stimulus
generator comprises
the third
screening
test.
The target
is
in the form of
one
of
four
art
slides chosen randomly
(p
=
1/4)
by
an
electronic random generator.
The generator does
not
indicate
its choice
until
the
subject
indicates his choice
to the machine
by pressing
a button
(see Figure
5).
As
soon
as
the
subject
indicates his
choice,
the
target
slide
is illuminated to provide visual
and auditory
(bell
if
correct)
feedback
as
to the correctness
or incorrectness
of his
choice.
Until
that
time
both subject
and experimenter remain ignorant
of the machine's
choice,
so the experiment
is
of
the double-blind type.
Five
legends
at
the
top
of
the machine face
are
illuminated
one
at
a time with increasing
correct
choices
(6,
8,
10,
...)
to provide additional reinforcement.
The
machine choice,
subject
choice,
cumulative trial number,
and cumulative
hit number
are recorded automatically
on
a printer.
Following trial
number
25,
the machine must
be
reset manually by depressing
a RESET
button.
A methodological
feature
of
the machine
is that
the choice
of
a target
is not
forced.
That
is,
a subject may press
a PASS button
when he wishes
not
to guess,
in which case
the machine
indicates what
its
choice
was,
and neither
a hit
nor
a trial
is
scored
by
the machine,
which
then goes
on to make
its next
selection.
Thus,
the
subject
does not
have
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Figure
5 #
ESP Teaching Machine used
in this experiment.
An
incorrect choice
of target
is
indicated.
Two of
the
five "encouragement lights"
at
the
top of the
machine
are
illuminated.
The printer to
the right
of
the machine
records data on fan-fold paper tape.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
f%:
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791 R0001 00430001-0
to guess
at targets when he does not
feel that he has an idea
as to which
to choose.
Under the null hypothesis
of random binomial
choices with
probability 1/4 and no learning,
the probability
of observing sk successes
in n trials
is approximated by the probability
of
a normal distribution
value
4 -!-
For
the purpose
of
screening,
each subject
is required to
complete
100 25-trial runs
(i.e.
,
a total
of 2,500 trials).
To date
Subjects
1,
2,
and
6 have completed this phase
of the
screening program,
and their results
are tabulated
in Table
2.
Subject
4 has completed
2,100 trials with mean scores
of
25.71
(p
= 0.20).
Table
SCREENING DATA:
FOUR- STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
Subject
Mean Score/100 Trials
Over
2.500 Trials
Binomial Probability
25.76
0.22
-7
29.36
X
25.40
0.33
On the basis
of
this test
Subject
2,
whose
scores
are
plotted
in Figure
6,
qualifies
as
a gifted individual,
having satisfied
the criterion
of producing
a result whose
a priori probability under the
null hypothesis
is p <
lo"
.
Of further interest
are this
subject's
personal observations
of
subjective experiences during the
screening test
presented
in Appendix
2.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
RUN NUMBER
- 100 Trials/Run
p =
4 per trial
FIGURE
DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
2.
Identification
of Measurable Characteristics Possessed by
Gifted Subjects
(20%)
(a)
Medical Evaluation
The medical evaluation
of program participants has been
assigned to
the Palo Alto Medical Clinic.
Coordination
of
the program
is
being handled by
Dr.
Robert Armbruster,
Director
of
the Clinic’s Depart-
ment
of Environmental Medicine.
The Clinic,
in turn,
has
subcontracted
certain special tests to the
Stanford Medical Center,
Stanford University.
One visual sensitivity test
is being administered by the Bioengineering
Group
of
the Electronics
and Bioengineering Laboratory
of
SRI.
The testing procedures,
outlined in Table
3,
fall
into
seven categories:
(1)
General physical examination,
including complete
medical
and family history.
(2)
Laboratory examinations,
including SMA-12 panel
blood chemistries,
protein electrophoresis,
blood lipid profile,
urinalysis,
serology,
blood
type
and
factor,
pulmonary function screening,
and 12-lead electrocardiogram.
(3)
Neurological examination,
including comprehen-
sive
and electroencephalogram
(sleeping
and
routine)
.
(4)
Audiometric examination,
including comprehensive,
Bekesy bone
conduction,
speech discrimination,
and impedance bridge
test.
(5)
Ophthalmologist examination,
including compre-
hensive,
card testing,
peripheral field
test,
muscle
test,
dilation funduscope,
and indirect
ophthalmoscopic
and fundus examination.
(6)
Special visual examinations,
including electro-
retinogram,
dark adaptation
test,
and visual
contrast
sensitivity.
(7)
EMI
brain
scan.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
MEDICAL
EXAMINATION
Table
CO
2P30o
XQu0
fid0
CD
I
CQPO
*n
42am
a)
ft
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
CO p
a
i
•H
8 .
X0
da
•H0
,
Oh
•H
ftP0
•H
5=1
*
d
S
O
.0
•H
ft
rH
•H
O
O
ft
O
P
•s
•rl
O
•rl
O
CO
d,
a
P
*H
O
P
ft
p
rH
d
d
P
•H
d
O
rH
o
•H
ft
O P
O
•H
d
O
a
a
bO
H
d
rH
•H
,0
a P
p
•H
d
d
O
a
d
a
rH
P
ft
X
rH
d
3 H
o
d
ft
ft
O
bO
w
d
X
O
a
•H
ft
X
p
a
O
w
O
•H
O
w
rH
o
•H
rH
> a
S>
ft
0 P
P
d
•H
o
•H
O
a
rH
•H
ft
q
o
•H
•H
JH
a
a
d
•H
ft
O
•rl
O
a*
•H
>»
>> H
O
bO
P
0 P
p
P
rH
>»
bO p
d
O
O
>%
d
<N
•H
rH
O
ft
rH
ft
a
t>>
i—i
.
rH
ft
rH
d
rH
'O p
. o
ft P
ft
O
a
•H
o
P
O
S
o
ft
&
o
•H
a
B
O
O
•H
ft
rH
a
a
O
d
d
Jg;
ft
rH
ft
rH
rH
rH
a
a
Ph
h3
CO
0a
CQ P
CO
P3 P M
S25 u H
< o
P3
CO
0a
•HP3O
ft
73Sd
bo
aHa
bO
•H
ft
0O
&
- w.
CO
8HP
d3
•Had
X
M.
p
•H
b0|
.0
r—
I
i
r—
I
d
43P
o
p
0p
-H
>
bO P
•n
p
*H H
3 p
d
ft p
0 P
ft
& H
a
73 p
o
S
ft
O
d
o a
04 s
a
o0
"O33P
3O
•HPd
rH
•rl
fi
3O
•rHPd3
•HadX0
013
' TJ
P
§
o
•Ha
oo
CQ
rHd
43p
.
a
o
po
•rl
d
•H
o
8J
co
CD
730
/-N
S
JH
tf
CO
4 w
OP
3dP
CO
>>p
•rl
>
•rlP
•rl
P
p
3OHPdpa
d
o
T$
d3
•H>
3dO
CO
d
ft
ca
P3
co
ft0p
30O
dO
•rl
730
JH
OP
3dp
CO
O
•rl
•rl
dO
•rl
S
OP
rH
<c
o
rHd
Ph
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
As
indicated
in Table
3,
medical
testing is currently
in
progress.
To date the return information
is
sparse,
having to be collated
from several clinics before
a comprehensive analysis can
be completed.
To provide
an indication of
the type
of raw data that
is to be
collated,
a small
sample of data obtained on Subject
is presented in Appendix
3.
As indicated,
the EMI computerized brain scan reveals
a slight enlarge-
ment
of
the entire right
lateral ventricle,
while
the
left
appears normal
in
size.
An asymmetry
in alpha development between left
and right
hemi-
spheres
is also indicated.
Also noted
is
some concern about the EKG sug-
gesting
a cororiary
artery problem.
The
significance
of these factors
for
our interest will
be developed under the direction
of
Dr.
Armbruster
and
made available
to the client
as
available.
(b)
Psychological Evaluation
The psychological evaluation
of program participants
con-
sists
of both baseline personality evaluation,
and
of ongoing testing
associated with daily experimentation.
The collection
of baseline
data
(e.g.,
in-depth interview,
W.A.I.S.,
etc.)
is
for
the purpose
of
identi-
fying baseline characteristics possessed by gifted
subjects.
The
ongoing
testing associated with daily experimentation
(e.g..
Mood Adjective Check-
lists)
is for the purpose
of identifying psychological correlates
of
successful versus unsuccessful performance
tasks.
(1)
Baseline Data
The bulk of
the baseline evaluation has been assigned
to the Palo Alto Medical Clinic.
Coordination
of
the program is being
handled by Dr.
J.
E.
Heenan,
Chief Clinical Psychologist
of
the Department
of Psychiatry.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
sists
Of
The baseline evaluation,
outlined in Table
4,
con-
(1)
In-depth interviews,
including objective
events
and subjective views relating to
the discovery
and enhancement
of paranormal
capacities;
socioeconomic,
cultural,
familial,
religious environment;
outstanding
peaks,
traumas;
values,
motivation,
inter-
personal
style.
(2)
Wechsler Adult
Intelligence
Scale
(W.A.I.S.).
(3)
Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory
(M.M.P.I.).
(4)
Benton Visual Memory Test
and Wechsler
Memory
Scale.
(5)
Thematic Apperception Test
(T.A.T.)
and
Rorschach projective
tests.
(6)
Bender Gestalt
Test.
(7)
Luscher color test.
(8)
Strong Aptitude/Values Test.
(9)
Cognitive
Style Preference Test.
As indicated
in Table
4,
the psychological testing
is well under way.
There
is
of
course,
a considerable
lag between
testing and results.
To date,
only
a partial analysis
of data from
Subject
is
available.
We present
these data
in Appendix
as
a
sample
of
the type
of
analysis that will become
available.
(2)
Cognitive
Style Preference Test
In connection with testing hypotheses associated with
hemispheric specialization of
the
brain,
Dr.
Robert Ornstein
of
the
Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric
Institute,
University
of California,
San
Francisco,
has been brought
into the program
as
a consultant.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/(Sfeftff :^CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
Personnel #1
-
3.
subjects;
#4-6 learners/controls; #7-8,
experimenters.
#4
O
O
o
o
o°
o
o
o°
o
o
o
o s
#5 o°o° o° o° o° o°1 mo°
#6 o°ESSo° o° o°
o o6°PC
«#7
O
O
O 0
o
o
o
o
o
o
H
#8 ESSQ_o o'
SB m9
o°
Palo Alto Medical Clinic
Approved For Release 2000/08/fG
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
In his capacity
as consultant,
Dr.
Ornstein has pro-
vided
an instrument named the Cognitive
Style Preference Test.
This
test
was developed for use
in differentiating between individuals preferring
a structure-oriented cognitive
style
as compared with
a verbally oriented
cognitive
style.
For
the purpose
of
the program,
this instrument
is
ad-
ministered to determine whether individuals exhibiting paranormal func-
tioning prefer,
as
a group,
one
style
of cognitive functioning predomi-
nantly
as compared with individuals
in
a control
group.
The test
is
administered once
to each individual.
A sample
of
the test
is included
below.
Preliminary results
indicate
some preference
for
a
verbally oriented cognitive
style on the part
of
good subjects
(Figure
7),
but further data
are required before
any significance
is
to be
attached
to the results tabulated thus
far.
Should
a correlation
of
test results with paranormal
functioning be
found,
it would be appropriate
in later work to determine
whether
this
test
instrument would be useful
as
a screening device,
i.e.,
to determine whether other individuals sharing the profile
also exhibit
paranormal functioning.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBJECT:
COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE TEST
Please do not turn over the pages until
I
ask
you
to do
so.
On each
page of this booklet
there
are sets
of
three
items
arranged
in rows.
Two
of them are alike
or fit
together in some way.
Your task
is
to
select
which one
is
different
and doesn't belong with the other two.
The two
columns on the
first page
are samples.
There are three designs
or shapes
in each row.
Each design
has
a word printed on
it.
In the
first row of
the first column all the words
are the same.
Most people would say that
the first and second shapes go together and the third one doesn’t belong.
Would you agree?
(If not,
explain.)
Mark the third one with
an X
then.
In
the second row most people would say that
the first
one
is different
and the
last
two go together.
Do you agree?
Then mark
the
first one
with
an X.
In the third row the shapes
are
all
the
same,
but
the words HORSE
and SADDLE go together and the world FAULT doesn't belong.
Do you agree?
Clf not,
explain.)
Mark
the third one with an X.
Which would you pick
as
the odd one
in the 4th row?
[Color
(2nd
one) ]
In
the 5th row you could choose either a word that doesn't belong
or
a shape that doesn't belong.
Which
is
the odd word?
(TROUT- )
Which
is
the odd shape? [the CIRCLE
(DIME)]
Either one
of
these
answers
is
right.
Mark either one of them.
The
last
row also has
two possible right
answers.
Which
is
the odd
word?
(SHIRT.)
Which
is
the odd shape? [The second one
(DOG)]
Mark
either one of them with
an X.
On some
of these sets people find
it easier or more natural
to pick
out the odd word,
and one some
they
find
it easier to pick
out
the odd
shape.
Either way
is correct.
We want
you
to make your selections
whichever way seems most comfortable and natural to
you.
Mark only once
in each row,
and go
as
fast
as you can.
Any questions
so far?
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
The second column has more samples.
When
I
say begin,
please mark
an odd member
in each row,
and say
,r STOP
,f
as
soon
as
you finish
this
sample column.
BEGIN.
(Check
forced choices—
)
Any questions?
Then when
I
say
trBEGIN
tf turn over
the next page.
Work
as
fast
as
you
can,
and continue until you have finished the booklet,
then say "STOP"
.
Ready?
BEGIN.
\
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0 50 40 30 20 10 No, Verbal Preferences 10 20 30 40 Structure Preferences 50 No, 1 2 3 4 5 6 vi 8 ‘ nessa atmmenmnmmanll mae Gifted Subjects Learners/Controls Experimenters FIGURE 7 SUMMARY ON COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE 34 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00791R000100430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
(3)
Mid-Testing
(SRI -Administered)
Ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation
is carried
out to provide indicators
as
to the effects
of mood
and con-
ceptualization on success in experimentation.
Conclusions will
be drawn
in the final
stage
of project effort.
Test:
Mood Adjective Checklist
Source:
Psychology Department,
Stanford University
(Hypnosis
Lab)
Purpose:
The Mood Adjective Checklist
is
one
of
a number
of
pre-
experiment
instruments designed
to provide
a measure
of
a
subject's feelings
of
the moment
as he enters
the experi-
mental
situation.
The purpose
is to determine whether
measures
of
success in the experimental phase correlate
with pre-experiment mood indicators.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
MOOD ADJECTIVE CHECKLIST
Each
of
the words in the following list describes
feelines or mood.
Please use
the list
to describe your
feelings at
this moment,
Mark
each word according
to
these instructions:
If the word definitely describes how you feel at
the moment you read
it,
circle the double check (W)
to
the ri?ht
of the word.
For example,
if the word
is calm and you are definitely feeling calm at
the moment,
circle the double check
as
follows:
calm
v
no
(This means you definitely
feel calm at this moment.)
If
the word only slightly applies
to your feelings at the moment,
circle
the single check as
follows:
calm
w
?
no
(This means you feel
slightly calm at this
moment .
)
If the word
is not clear
to you or if you cannot decide v7hether or not
it describes your feelings,
circle the question mark as follows:
calm
w
v
(T)
no
(This means you cannot
decide whether you are
calm or not.)
If you clearly decide that the word does
riot apply
to your feelinys at
this moment,
circle the no
as follows:
calm
w
v
?
(fo)
(This means you are sure
vou are not calm at this
moment,
T.;0rk rapidly.
Your first reaction is best.
Work down the
first column
before
ftoin^ to
the next.
Please mark all
the vjords.
This should
take
only
a few minutes.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
angry
w
V
no
energetic
VV
V
?
no
concentrating
w
V
no
playful
w
V
no
drowsy
w
V
no
suspicious
w
V
no
affectionate
w
V
no
startled
w
V
no
apprehensive
w
V
no
relaxed
w
V
?
no
blue
w
V
no
defiant
vv
V
?
no
boastful
w
V
no
engaged in
thought
vv
V
?
no
elated
w
V
no
active
w
V
?
no
pleased
w
V
?
no
noncha] ant
w
V
?
no
tired
w
V
?
no
skeptical
w
V
no
fearful
w
V
?
no
shocked
w
V
no
regretful
w
V
no
calm
w
V
no
egotistic
w
V
no
bold
vv
V
no
overjoyed
w
V
no
earnest
w
V
?
no
vigorous
w
V
no
sluggish
w
V
?
no
witty
w
V
?
no
forgiving
w
V
no
serene
W
V
no
clutched
up
w
V
?
no
rebellious
w
V
?
no
lonely
w
V
no
serious
w
V
no
cocky
vv
V
?
no
warmhearted w
V
no
lighthearted
w
•
no
insecure
w
V
?
no
quiet
w
V
no
self-
centered
w
V
?
no
still
w
V
no
t
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Test:
Semantic Differential Checklist
Source:
SRI Urban
and
Social
Systems Division
Purpose:
The
Semantic Differential Checklist
is one
of
a number
of
pre-experiment
instruments designed to provide
a measure
of
subject
conceptualization about
an experiment
in which he
is
about
to participate.
The purpose
is
to determine whether
measures
of
success
in the experiment
correlate with pre-
experiment
conceptualization.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Releasetmtomimt&h&RSlBQ&Mmi R0001 00430001 -0
The purpose of
this
rating sheet
is
to obtain your candid reactions
regarding the conditions surrounding the experiment.
For each numbered item you will
find
a concept
to be judged. You are to
rate each in order.
This
is how you are
to use the scales:
If you feel
that
the concept
is highly or closely related
to one
end of the scale,
you should place your
checkmark as follows;
impractical
j/_
practical
impractical
practical
If your feelings on the concept are neutral,
place your checkmark in
the
middle space,
etc.
Work at fairly high speed
through
this rating sheet.
Do not puzzle over
individual
items.
Give your first impressions,
your immediate feelings about
each item.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
9.
satisfying
disappointing
10.
unprepared
prepared
My involvement
in experiment
1.
good
2.
useless
3.
stimulating
4.
positive
5.. passive
6.
capable
7.
important
8.
unsuccessful
9.
prepared
10.
impractical
bad
valuable
dull
. negative
active
incapable
unimportant
successful
unprepared
practical
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
(c)
Neuropsychological Evaluation
In addition to
the measurement
of
the physiological
com-
ponents
of
the neurological
system covered
in the medical evaluation,
a
neuropsychological profile
is being obtained by the
administration of
the
Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychology Test Battery,
which includes the Category
Recognition Test,
Tactual Performance
Test,
Halstead-Wepman Aphasia
Screening Test,
and other appropriate measures.
This phase
of
the program
is being handled by Dr.
Donald Lim of
the Palo Alto Veteran' s Administra-
tion Hospital,
who has personally consulted with Dr.
Reitan on testing
procedures
and interpretation.
The neuropsychological evaluation program
is
scheduled for
the
first
half
of
September.
,
Identification
of Neurophysiological Correlates Which Relate
to Paranormal Activities
(20%)
High
on
the
list
of priorities
for
the program
is
the
identifi-
cation
of neurophysiological correlates accompanying paranormal
activity.
The purpose
of
this part
of
the
study
is twofold:
(a)
to obtain informa-
tion
about
the neurophysiological
state
associated with paranormal
ac-
tivity
in general,
and
(b)
to obtain indicators which differentiate
be-
tween correct
and incorrect responses
to
a paranormally applied stimulus,
so
that
an independently determined bias factor
can be
applied during the
generation
of data by the
subject.
Two facilities
are
in use
for the purposes described
above.
One
is
a standard EEG facility under
the direction
of
Dr,
Jerry Lukas,
head
of
SRI's
Sleep
Studies program.
This facility consists
of
two
sound-isolated rooms with appropriate
signal
lead connections,
an eight-
channel polygraph
for visual recording,
and
a magnetic tape/computer
processing/printer readout which provides on-line processing of
the poly-
graph data.
In our configuration we
obtain
a hardcopy printout
of
5-second
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
averages
of eight channels
of polygraph information
15 minutes following
a
15 minute
run.
At present
we monitor broad alpha
(7-14 Hz)
and beta
(14-34 Hz)
brainwave
components from the
left
and right
occipital regions,
galvanic
skin response,
and two channels
of plethysmograph data
(blood
volume
and pulse height).
The second facility is
a smaller semiportable,
four-channel
polygraph with
a GSR channel,
ref lected-light plethysmograph indicating
blood volume/pulse height,
one channel
of unfiltered EEG activity,
and
a fourth EEG channel with zero-crossing digital filtering.
The
last per-
mits percent-time measurements in any band, with upper
and lower band
edge
settings
in 1-Hz increments.
Considerable data have been obtained with both facilities.
The
bulk of the data awaits further analysis which will
occur
at completion
of various
series under way.
However,
several results have been obtained
which we describe below.
(a)
Bilateral EEG Measurements—Remote
Strobe Experiment
As discussed
in Report No.
2,
a variety
of evidence from
clinical
and neurosurgical
sources indicates that
the two hemispheres
of
the human brain are
specialized for different cognitive functions.
The
left hemisphere
is predominantly involved in verbal and other analytic
functioning,
the right
in spatial
and other holistic processing.
In consultation with
Dr.
Robert Ornstein of
the Langley
Porter Neuropsychiatric
Institute,
an hypothesis was formed based on
certain observed characteristics that paranormal functioning might
in-
volve right hemispheric
specialization.
To test
this hypothesis,
the
EEG remote
strobeflash experiment,
discussed
in the original proposal
and
in the paper attached to Report
No.
1,
was repeated with Subject
4 three
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
times
in the
sleep
lab under
the direction
of
Dr.
Lukas with monitoring
of right
and
left
occipital regions.
Each experiment
consisted of twenty
15-second
trials,
with ten no-flash trials,
and ten
16-Hz trials randomly
intermixed.
Reduction
of
alpha activity
(arousal response)
correlated
with remote
stimuli was observed
as
in previous experiments,
but essen-
tially only
in the
right hemisphere
(average
alpha reduction
16 percent
in right hemisphere,
2 percent
in
left,
during the
16-Hz trials
as
com-
pared with the no-flash trials).
The
tr ial-to-trial variation
is
larger
than
in previous work,
however,
due to use
of
a wider-band filter
for
the
alpha band,
and therefore
the
system
is being modified before further
work.
(b)
Physiological Correlates
of Remote Viewing
In this
series
of experiments
a subject
takes part
in
a
remote viewing protocol
as described
in Section A.l
(c)
(Remote Viewing
with Feedback).
In this
case,
however,
the
subject
is connected
to
the
physiological recording instruments
of
the
smaller
semiportable
four-
channel polygraph described
above.
Baseline
and experimental measures
of
the following observables
are made:
(1)
galvanic
skin response
(GSR)
is recorded using finger electrodes taped
in place on second
and fourth
fingers;
(2)
blood volume/pulse height
is recorded using
a reflected-
light plethysmograph;
(3)
unfiltered EEG
is recorded from the right
occipital region;
(4)
percent-time
in alpha
(8-12
Hz)
is recorded on the
fourth channel.
The
alpha filter
is
a sharp cutoff digital type with
essentially zero-pass outside
the prescribed bandpass
limits.
During the course
of
an experiment,
the
subject
is
asked
to describe his perceptions
as
to the nature
of
the remote
target.
His
comments
are tape-recorded
and noted on the polygraph,
along with the
time.
A correlation is then attempted between those descriptions which
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
are
found
to
be uniquely correct
and accurate,
and the corresponding
sec-
tions
of polygraph recording.
In our investigations to date we have
not
found
a strong
correlation between the observed physiological
states
and
the
subjects
descriptions.
Of
the
correlates being monitored,
the
one which
seems
the
most promising
is
the unfiltered EEG.
In our preliminary analysis
of
the
data
it
appears
that
there
is
often
an overall reduction
in EEG power
in
the 20-second period just
before
a subject
renders
a correct description.
Subsequent
to this observation,
we have
learned that
Ms,
Janet Mitchell
at
the
American Society for Psychical Research made
similar observations
in her work with
Subject
3,
also
in remote viewing experiments.
A
sample
chart
record
is
shown
in Figure
8,
(Time runs from right
to
left.)
The
traces,
top
to bottom,
are
the unfiltered EEG,
blood
volume/pulse height,
GSR,
and filtered
(alpha)
EEG.
Protocol,
verbal
description,
and photograph
of
the
location accompanying this chart
are
given
in Section
A. 1
(c)
.
Seven experiments
of
this type
have been completed
as
a
pilot
study.
Upon completion
of
the
analysis
of these
data,
any findings
will
be tested under rigorous no-feedback conditions.
4 .
Identification
of
the Nature
of Paranormal Phenomena and
Energy
(10%)
This portion
of
the program
is devoted to efforts to understand
the nature
and scope
of paranormal phenomena,
including investigation
of
the physical
and psychological
laws underlying the phenomena,
determina-
tion of
the manner
and degree to which known processes
are mediated by
little understood or undiscovered mechanisms
or energies,
definition
of
the precise nature
of
the channels
involved,
etc.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
44U
TUT
TTT
_|_
i
t n
rrn-
T ”
:
•
|
'TT
i
i
-j
T"-T
]
I
nrT]
Ti^u.
i
(
I
i
|
!
!
....
j
j...
i
i
i t~Mi
j
|
44U
j
i
TTa[TTrrH
i
.
L
ApjJ''
i
i
V
i /
:
V
f THfTl”
;|]|
/TP*
i
i W,
W r+-M
]
j_
!
yfw/Nr
-m-
i
i 4—
!
i
]
:
T-
i
I
:
;
T
-j—
i—
; rrr444
i W
PErceMtalPHA
-J—i— L-
i-
{5 sec
-J
l M
INTEGRATI ON)
r 1
j
i
{
!
!
i -4-Tf~i~
j
:
:
T-f----
j—
|—
f—
i
j
i
Lti
!
:
-H-H-r
j
!
—
1——
)-Tj
"iT
—!~
-J-
-\—r-
i
4---
i
4-i
!
-11"hr
TT7T
!
•
! 1-
!
! ti
j_
—
r
!
!
i
~L_.
..
..L.T~
i
i—
j
i
-
;
i
i
I
:
t
TT T~~T
~i—1—1—1—L
I
j
+4-
;
j
__L
i
i
!
j
i
i
i
i—
t"
|
;
j
l!i
-j—
j—f
i
-}—
i—
1—
i
~TT
i
J
J
j
i
<
1 nn
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
i
!
l
!
I
!
!
!
I
I
I
!
I
I
f
I
I
!
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
SA-3183-10
FIGURE 8
POLYGRAPH DATA
Correct verbal description given during time interval
tAB
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved F6r Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
At
this point
in the effort
three
"psychokinetic"
tasks have
been investigated beyond
the pilot
stage,
and
are reported below.
(a)
Universal Randomization Protocol
It was deemed desirable
in our work to establish
a uni-
versal randomization protocol
independent
of
the particular experiment
under consideration.
The only exceptions were
to be
automated experi-
ments where
target selection
is determined by radioactive decay or elec-
tronic randomization.
The randomization procedure
is designed around
a ten-unit
base,
e.g.,
ten targets,
ten work periods,
etc.
A ten-digit
sequence
governing
an experiment
is blind to both experimenter
and subject,
and
is uncovered by means
of
the following procedure.
A three-page RAND
Table
of Random Digits
(Table
5)
is entered to obtain the ten-digit
sequence,
the entrance point
being determined by four throws
of
a die,
the
first
1,
2,
or
3 determining page,
the
next
1,
2,
3,
or
4 determining
column block,
and the
final
throw determining from which
of
the
first
six
rows
in the block the
ten-digit
sequence
is to be taken.
An opaque
card
with
a single-digit window
is then moved across
the row
to uncover digits
one
at
a
time.
If
a multiplicity
of
targets exist,
the digits
0 through
are employed directly.
If
a binary command
is required
(e.g.,
increase/
decrease
or activity/no activity)
the parity of
the
digit
(even
or
odd)
is employed.
*
A technique found
in control runs
to produce
a distribution
of
die
faces
differing nonsignificant ly from chance expectation.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
-
*
Approved For Release 2000/08/1 0
: CIA-RDP96-00791 R0001 00430001 -0
CPYRGHT
Table
Table of Random Digits
*
16 43 63 18
21 21 59 17
10 43 84 44 82
36 79 22 62 36
73 94 40 47 73
49 56 31 28 72
64 20 84 82 37
51 48 67 28 75
99 75 62 63 60
71 32 55 52
65 28 59 71 98
17 26 45 73 27
95 63 99
97 54
61 55 57
64 04
78 13 79 87 68
62 49 09 92 15
24 21 66 34 44
16 97 59 54 28
59 13 83 95 42
29 47
85 96 52
96 15 59 50 09
29 62 16 65 83
12 63
97 52 91
14 54 43 71 34
*"83 40 38 88 27
67 64 20 52 04
64 04 19 90 11
17 04 89 45
93 03 98 94 16
82 24 43 43 92
96 99 05 52 44
09 11 97 48 03
57 66 64 12 04
46 49 26 15
08 43 31
91 72
10 01 17
50 04
92 42 06 54 31
35 54 25 58 65
86 59 52 62 47
72 11 53 49 85
75 06 13 76 74
76 83 15
86 78
66 55 83 76 49
26 66 65 83
12 03 25 14 14
14 06 39 31 04
41 70
38 60 52 93 41
64 51 61 79 71
13 01
29 07
12 13 85 30 10
38 22 42 93 01
31 19 99 25 58
86 21 01 18 08
04 68 98 71 30
84 98 72
87 59
21 28 30 70 44
33 22 65 59 03
71 16 85 76 09
50 41 43 19 66
27 42 97
29 18
62 96 61
24 68
71 02 01 72 65
54 71 40 24 01
09 83 41 13 33
30 69 74 48 06
61 04 02 73 09
97 44 45 99 04
52 79 51 06 31
96 60 71 72 20
70 69 32 52 55
97 30 38 87
26 72 95
82 72
08 32 02 08 39
86 05 44 11
16 53 00 55 47
07 30 44 70 10
18 55
22 94 91
58 03 69 91
•60
;31
-61
:52
40 94 15
73 50 58 34 72
39 41
21 60 13
99 47
67 48
83 45 91 99
91 40
27 72 27
58 29 98 38 80
40 68 49 99 48
86 42 98
34 55 63 98 61
65 99 05 70 48
16 38
11 50 69
52 45
88 88 80
33 00 78 56 07
38 71
58 72 20
36* 78
26 18 86 94 97
12 89 35 40 48
33 18 68 13 46
79 89 32 94 48
48 44
51 02
94 20 50 42 59
38 64 80 92 78
04 29 24 60
17 02 64
48 07 07 68 48
30 15
99 54 50
12 14 89 22 31
73 83
87 70
73 54 74 37
27 79 32
65 12 84
38 71 66
13 80
31 92
17 64 58
82 74 64
94 10 90
94 93
20 75
' 70
N> CDl 53
i 781 43 95
23 53 73 61
69 95
86 09 16
95 31 79
11 44 28 93 20
54 62 74 85 11
15 46 98 22 85
79 51 62 10 07
20 12 51 07
33 88 07
64 13
08 07 46 20 55
88 26 77
60 68
25 06 77
75 71
25 41 68 78 75
78 35
26 79 13
92 00 84 48
08 58 86
19 18 66
96 02
51 35 14 77
25 58 61 49
85 09 53 72 82
88 39
25 42 11
44 12 61 94 38
68 98 35 05 61
81 31
37 74 00
75 66
62 69 54
21 39
02 53 19 77
83 77
84 61 15
36 16 06 50
24 86 39 75 76
23 95 55
79 42 12
49 32 80 98
20 50
73 72 00
61 48 75
08 53 16
15 78
02 33 00 24 76
72 61
66 28
26 65 43 78 51
• This
table
appears
through
the
courtesy
of The RAND
Corporation
and
the
McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Inc. and
is reprinted by permission from The Compleat
Strategyst, by J. D. Williams, pp. 219-221
[44],
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
CPYRGHT
07 42 85 88 63
96 02 38 89 36
92 94 12 20
86 43 19 44 85
35 37 92 79 22
28 90 65 50 13
40 56 83 32 22
40 48 69
10 98 22 28 07
10 92 02 62 99
41 48 39
29 35
17 06
82 52
90 12 73 33 41
80 61
24 46
93 04 06 64 76
24 99 04 10
63 00 21 29 90
23 51 06
87 74
86 93
93 00
80 75 04
40 77
98 63 82
48 45 46 52 69
02 98 25 79 91
50 76 59 19 30
43 21 61 26 08
18 16 78 46 31
94 47
65 00
39 17 00 66
96 16 76 43 75
74 10 89 36 43
52 29
58 22
95 96 69 09 47
70 97 56 26 93
35 68 47
03 68 40 36 OO
52 83 15 53
85 81 26 18 75
23 57
57 54
58 93 92 83 66
86 76 56 74 65
37 10 06 24 92
63 64 24 76 38
54 72 35 65
53 07
63 82 35
53 40 61 38 55
38 51
92 95 00
84 82 88 12 48
25 54 83 40 75
55 17 28 15 56
18 85 65 90 43
65 79 90 19 14
81 36 30 51 73
40 35 38 48 07
47 76 74 68 90
91 73
85 49
17 08
18 89 90 96 12
54 15 76 75
26 90 78 81 73
18 92 83 77
68 14 12 53 40
92 55 11 13
68 05
26 54 22
88 46 00 63 52
51 55 99 11 59
81 31 06 32 51
42 58 76
81 49
88 14 79
97 00
92 21 43 33 86
73 45
93 59
65 54 16
20 50 51
15 08 95 05 57
33 16 68 70
53 29 58 71 33
26 49 47 08
96 46 10 06 04
12 02 22 54
23 01 19 41 08
29 19 66 51
28 17 74 41 11
15 70 57 38 35
75 76 84 95 49
24 54 36 32 85
66 95 34 47
81 12 70 74 93
86 66
87 03 41
66 46 07
56 43
19 71 22 72 63
84 57
54 98
56 72
20 36
50 34 73
21r
68 75 66 47
19 98 79 22 22
80 10
09 61 70 44 08
75 02 26 53 32
98 60 62 94 51
99 46 90 72
35 49 30
11 32 37 00 69
98 92 66
02 98 59 53 03
25 01 66
55 20 86 34 70
18 15 82 52 83
89 96 51 02 06
83 09 54 06
11 47 40
05 59 46 70 45
45 58 72
98 57
94 24
81 42 28 68 42
60 99 77
96 69
01 07
85 30
74 30
57 75 09
21 77
17 59 63
15 19 02 74
20 96
14 29 33 91 94
42 27
21 60
61 42 78
04 98 26 84 70
51 54 80
69 76 01 14
63 24 73
20 96
19 74 02 46
05 68 63 02 43
34 13 40
29 36
50 19 77
98 69
86 49 76
87 09
52 99 24 66 50
89 91 05 73 95
95 46
75 36
28 96
19 36
94 51
89 39 84
81 47 86 77 50
82 54
26 76
12 34 98 99
00 18 47
78 90
54 89
61 79 88 16 00
80 01
88 47 42
87 46 26 31 65
81 66
16 30
66 62 90
80 14
88 69 25
34 81 76
29 80 56 49 94
26 22 30
20 09 44 29 62
67 68
06 71 13 49 39
19 59 97
62 47
60 93 58 15 04
50 52, 08
21 53
13 93 44 68 85
58 31 58 83 66
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
CPYRGHT
51 39 28 59 36
43 89 85 05 96
28 54 99
' 83
99 94 32 53 77
54 23 94 19 18
79 52 64 62 74
18 03
25 76 75 54 84
57 89 27 33 94
16 09 02 62
47 70 43 83 55
71 70 88 01
02 33 07 47 36
27 44 44 68
62 61
11 96 98
09 30 42 92 65
76 11 52 92 47
55 34
25 12 99
03 04 78 39
91 60 92 67
63 31 28 18 86
29 08 52 01 01
26 46 05 05 01
31 73
89 38
27 63
15 70
45 64
01 76 42 59 59
69 29 38 98 75
06 33 56
44 01 45
25 67
11 76 25 48 06
02 65 15 29 12
64 14 28 76 76
21 35 88
87 73
31 73 63 16 95
11 52 36 42 13
28 43 62 54 68
75 23
53 70
15 54
87 06
52 23 92 18 31
09 52 28 38 55
31 58 88
31 18 14 96 72
23 70 40 24
93 71 41 54 14
93 71
27 42
32 11 58 26 83
18 28
90 30
15 68 15 35 99
58 18 57
38 40
07 06
59 47
71 74 36 92 85
77 71
22 39 14
08 90 74
26 62
27 41
16 69
67 48
78 45 35 48 44
61 50 90 12 45
02 80 55 26 76
22 51
94 78 48
24 86 06 82 84
19 36 72 90 73
32 30 15
04 19 33 01 42
37 28 40 68 44
78 88 75 72 76
26 33 95 69 09
39 33 14 21 01
35 48 85 24 73
63 43
25 69
27 40
95 08
81 01 24 24 13
51 59 55 99 09
35 22 34 49
53 96 32
09 77 79 88 00
90 66 03 51 71
30 02 19 11
36 11 64 21
65 40 19 41
47 50 50 20 08
20 30 08 71 88
96 19 50 70 59
13 26 63 13 89
13 35 00 84 14
64 04 99 43 77
22 40 89 49 58
19 09 55 80 35
33 00 69
26 90
69 24 89 74 43
53 89 62 35 08
16 22 75 69 29
21 66 38 86
06 80 41 18 61
22 56 50 24 75
00 25
90 18
21 99 12 62 28
14 80 11 91 92
49 43 82 07 72
60 84 66
97 32
71 02 52 82 12
10 47 42 75 22
65 62 03 46 84
00 21 00 48 63
65 52 21 52 42
84 55 47 45 60
20 24 62 69 41
41 29 80 47
97 55 49 23
90 65 00 61 70
09 43 30 91
16 63
27 31
07 30 00
97 04
36 09 96 15 77
95 55
27 34 56
88 81 40
54 35 71 36 89
19 56 90 38 14
76 05 30 51 50
69 12 56 94 42
00 97 70 44 81
42 04 40 86 49
34 82
23 58 43
78 46 88 23 80
13 92 07
12 31 19 28 08
07 75 30 40 73
58 52 08 00 22
08 39 53 70 43
37 88 03 41 72
04 20 49 44 34
62 79 88 19 02
46 16 66 72 06
01 61 94 37
96 77
94 40
29 70 04
87 76 77 76 07
03 74 20 16 13
65 98 96
28 43
10 91 73 44 58
29 88 09 52 88
21 64 44 65
06 64 49 47
66 99 56 18 12
36 24
83 66 66
14 89 45 92 73
88 95 04 60 77
34 65
11 20 38
12 38 62 96 56
30 47 42 59 64
21 48 29 54 22
02 00
23 36 71
52 06
87 38 01
52 18 81 94
13 76 10 39
02 00 66 99 13
41 72 75
21 71
56 71
90 60 54
98 44 18 15 29
59 60 76 52 25
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
(b)
Experiments with Develco Superconducting Differential
Magnetometer
(Gradiometer)
One of the first psychoenergetically produced physical
effects observed by
SRI personnel
in early research
(1972)
was the
apparent
perturbation of
a Josephson effect magnetometer.
The conditions of
that
pilot
study,
involving
a few hours use of
an instrument
committed
to
other research,
prevented
a proper investigation.
The number
of data
samples was too few to permit meaningful
statistical
analysis,
and the
lack of readily available multiple recording equipment prevented investi-
gation
of possible
"recorder only"
effects.
Therefore,
at
the
suggestion of
the client,
a series
of
experiments were carried out using
a client-supplied Develco Model 8805
superconducting second—derivative
gradiometer manufactured by Develco,
Inc.
, Mountain View,
California.
The assembled device
is shown in Figure
9.
Basically,
the gradiometer
is
a four-coil Josephson effect
magnetometer device consisting of
a pair
of
coil pairs wound
so
as
to
provide
a
series connection of
two opposing first— derivative gradiometers,
yielding
a second-derivative gradiometer
(i.e.
,
a device sensitive only
to second and higher order derivative fields).
As
a result,
the device
is relatively insensitive to uniform fields
and to uniform gradients.
This arrangement
allows for sensitive measurement
of fields from nearby
sources while discriminating against relatively uniform magnetic fields
produced by remote
sources.
The device
is ordinarily used
to measure
magnetic fields originating from processes within the human body,
such
as
action currents
in the heart which produce magnetocardiograms.
The
sensi-
tive tip
of the instrument
is simply placed near
the body area
of
interest.
In our
application,
however,
the
subject
is located
at
a
distance
of four meters from the gradiometer probe.
As
a result
the
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
FIGURE
SUPERCONDUCTING DIFFERENTIAL MAGNETOMETER
Approved For Release 2000/08/10 3CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
subject
is
located
in
a zone
of relative
insensitivity;
e.g.,
standing
up,
sitting down,
leaning forward,
and arm and leg movements produce
no
signals.
From this
location the
subject
is
asked,
as
a mental task,
to
affect
the probe.
The results
of his efforts
are available
to him
as
feedback from three
sources:
an oscilloscope,
a panel meter,
and
a chart
recorder,
the
last providing
a permanent record.
After initial difficulty with the instrument due to RF
interference effects,
which required modification by the manufacturer,
the gradiometer was available for use
by the contractor from
10 June
to
June.
Some RF
interference effects remained,
due
in part to environ-
mental proximity to other instrumentation,
but
the device was usable
nonetheless.
Protocol
for subject participation was instituted
as fol-
lows.
The
subject removes
all metal
objects,
and the effects
of body
movements
are checked
at
the
start
of each experimental period.
The
sub-
ject then works with the machine
in
a learning mode,
observing effects
being produced,
if
any,
via feedback from the
instrumentation.
Once
satisfied that
a possibility exists
of producing effects on command under
experimenter control,
the experimenter announces the start
of
the experi-
ment.
The universal randomization protocol
(discussed in previous
sec-
tion)
is then used to generate ten activity/no activity periods
of equal
length
(e.g.,
seconds)
predetermined by the experimenter.
A sample run
(Run
1,
Subject
1)
is
shown
in Figure
10.
The randomly generated ON
(activity)
periods
are Nos.
2,
8,
and
9.
As
observed,
signals appear in each
of
these three periods.
The
signal
appearing
in period
9 was
strong enough to cause loss
of continuous
tracking.
This
latter type
of
signals
can be
the result
of
an excep-
tionally strong flux change,
or
an RF burst whether subject— generated
or
artif actual,
and
are handled on the basis
of
statistical correlation
as
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Z!ac
30m
o
O
30>a
o
m—
I
m
D
>
BASELINE
END
OFF
ON
ON
OFF
TRUCK
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
ON
• OFF
-BASELINE
- START
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
discussed below.
An artifact
due
to
the passage
of
a truck in the
parking
lot
adjacent
to the laboratory
(under continuous
surveillance
by
the experimenter)
is noted
in period
6.
Each
of
the
signals
on scale
-9
corresponds
to
an input ~1
. 6
X
Gauss/cm
(second derivative
B /d
)
z
z
-7
which
is equivalent to~3.5
X
Gauss referred to one pickup
coil.
The interpretation
of
such observations must
be subjected
to careful
analysis.
For example,
the emphasis
on "corresponds
to"
is
based on the following:
although
the probe
is designed
to register mag-
netic
fields,
and
the
simplest hypothesis
is
that
an observed signal
is
such,
in
a task
as potentially complex
as "psychokinesis,"
one must
be
cautious
about
assigning
a given observed effect
to
a specific cause.
Therefore,
without multiple measurement employing equally sensitive
apparatus, which time
and lack of
instrument
availability did not
permit,
one
can only conclude that
generation of
a magnetic field
is the most
probable
cause.
With regard to
signal display,
the signal was observed
simultaneously on three recording devices,
and thus
a "recorder only"
effect
can be considered low probability,
although an electronics inter-
ference effect
ahead
of
all
display cannot
be ruled
out.
We therefore
treat
the magnetic
cause
as
tentative,
although most probable,
and con-
centrate
our
attention
on whether
a correlation exists between system
disturbances
and subject efforts.
Subject
logged the most
time
in controlled runs,
ten-
*
trial
runs.
Each of
the ten trials
in the run lasted
50 seconds
each,
the
activity/no-activity command for each trial being generated by the
universal randomization protocol
technique.
In the
X
=
130 trials,
consisting
of
a random distribution
of
activity and 66 no-activity
periods,
63 events
of
signal-to-noise ratio >
1 were observed.
Of
these
With
the exception
of
the first
run where 25-second trials were
used.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
63 events,
42 were distributed among the
activity periods,
among the
no-activity periods,
a correlation significant
at
the
p
= 0.004
level.
Subjects
and
6 also interacted with the
device*
Al-
though subject
efforts
and observed perturbations
sometimes coincided,
activity was generally
low
and did not
appear
to be
that
of
a signature
of correlated activity under control.
A controlled ten-trial run with
Subject
and two
such runs with
Subject
6 yielded nonsignificant
results.
Given the
limited availability
of
the
instrument
and
some-
what noisy environment,
from our best effort
we nonetheless conclude
that
for
Subject
the observed number
of precisely timed events
in pilot work
coupled with the
statistically significant
(p
= 0.004)
correlation be-
tween subject
effort
and signal output
in controlled runs
indicate
a
highly probable cause-effect relationship.
Thus
it
appears
that
a gifted
subject can interact with
a second derivative magnetic gradiometer
of
-9
sensitivity —10
*
Gauss/cm
from
a distance
of
four meters.
Further work
would be required to determine
absolutely the precise nature
of
the
inter-
action,
although given the equipment design the
generation of
a magnetic
field
is
the most probable mechanism.
(c)
Experiments with Laser-Monitored Torsion Pendulum
In this
series
of experiments we examine
the possibility
that
a subject may be
able to exert
a physical influence
on
a remotely
located physical
system.
The
target
is
a torsion pendulum suspended by
a metal fiber
inside
a sealed glass bell
jar.
The pendulum consists
of
three
100-gram balls
arranged symmetrically
at
120°
angles
on
a 2-cm
radius.
The entire
apparatus
is shock mounted,
and protected from air
currents
by the enclosing bell
jar.
The
angular position
of
the pendulum
is measured by means
of
an optical readout
system.
The
system consists
of
a laser beam from
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
a low power argon laser
reflected from
a small mirror on the pendulum
onto
a position sensing silicon detector*
1.5 meters from the pendulum.
The detector yields
an output voltage proportional
to
spot
position.
The output from the detector
is monitored by
a chart recorder*
which
provides
a continuous
sine wave record of pendulum position.
The
system exhibits
a sensitivity
of
approximately
microradians.
Under typical experimental conditions random acoustical
fluctuations drive
the pendulum in its torsional normal mode
of
10 second
period
to
a level ~100 microradians angular deviation.
During control
runs the pendulum executes harmonic motion with
a maximum variation
in
amplitude
of ±10 percent
over
an hour period.
Sudden vibrational pertur-
bations
in the environment produce oscillation of
the pendulum in the
vertical plane
at
a frequency
of
Hz,
as contrasted with the torsional
mode
in the horizontal plane
at
0.1
Hz.
The
subject
is
asked,
as
a mental task,
to affect
the
pendulum motion,
the results
of which would be
available
as feedback
from the
chart
recorder.
The
subject
is then encouraged to work with the
pendulum from
a distance
of
1 meter,
observing effects being produced.
If
satisfied that there
is
a possibility of producing effects
(typically
following
a week's
activity,
a couple
of hours per day),
an experiment
is begun.
As
in other experiments,
subject efforts
to increase
or
decrease oscillation amplitude
are determined by
an experimenter utilizing
the universal randomization protocol described
in
(a).
Each experiment
Spectra Physics Model
262.
tUnited Detector Technology Model
SC/10.
* Brush Model Mark 200.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
lasts
one hour
and consists
of
six 5-minute work periods alternated with
six 5-minute rest periods.
In later work,
the
subject
is removed
to
a room 12 meters
down the hall with three intervening office
spaces to determine whether
effects
can be produced from
a remote
location.
The
subject
is provided
feedback
at
the remote
location either by closed circuit video or by
a
second chart recorder
in parallel with the recorder
in the enclosed tar-
get
laboratory.
The remote aspect was
instituted both to prevent
arti-
factual effects from body heat,
etc.,
and also to determine whether energy
*
can be
coupled with the remote viewing channel
to
a remote
location.
In pilot
studies we observed considerable evidence
indi-
cating that
a gifted subject
located
in the
same room
is
able,
by con-
centration,
to increase
or decrease pendulum motion on command while
sitting
quietly one meter from the bell
jar.
The change-to-baseline ratio
is often
5:1
or better
so the effects
are not
small.
A
sample
chart
showing
a rest
period followed by
a decrease period
is given
in Figure
11.
Vibrational artifacts
can be ruled out
on the basis that
when such inputs
occur,,
a marked 1-Hz oscillation signal
due
to vertical
motion
is
superimposed on the 0,1-Hz torsional motion.
Especially
in-
teresting are
the decreases
that
take the motion below that
generally
observed due to environmental noise driving.
Such observations indicate
the
application of
a constraint which couples energy
out
of
the pendulum
motion.
Similar observations have been observed with the
subject removed
Both experimental evidence
and theoretical work indicate
that
distance
may not
be
a strong factor
in paranormal phenomena.
See,
for example,
E.
H.
Walker "Properties
of Hidden Variables
in Quantum Theory:
Impli-
cations
for Paraphysics,”
U.S.
Army Ballistic Research Laboratories,
Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: ClA-RDP96-00791R000'j00430001-0
gWH
i
W
PM
W
J=>o
w
<
3oMQ
^A^proved For Release 2000/08/10
: CI^DP96&0791R000|I 00430001$
0)
"ao&
cti
ao
*H
COuo
fcs]
Pd
o
co
"d
aoa
CO
cuuuoa
ao
•H
4-J
•H
O)
>
<D
X)2
P-j
aj
tdj
O)
hJ
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
to the
second location
12 meters
away.
Although
less pronounced
(change-
t o-baseline ratios typically 2:1),
the effect
remains easily observable.
The universal randomization protocol
is used throughout
to determine increase/decrease periods.
Control run data
are being col-
lected to be
subjected to
the
same
analysis.
Multiple recording
is used
throughout
to rule
out
artifacts due to recorder effects.
Finally,
an
electrometer with the base
of
the bell
jar serving as
one electrode
is
monitored
to record acoustic vibration independently.
Due to the potential
significance
of
such findings,
considerable data are being taken
in order
that
the matter can be subjected to
statistical
analysis
over
a
large
sample
involving hundreds
of work periods.
A few hundred data samples
have
already been collected
for this purpose,
and the results will
be
published when available.
(d)
Experiments with Geiger Counter
As part
of
a continuing search for mechanisms
involved
in
paranormal phenomena,
a series
of experiments were conducted with Subject
to determine whether
a Geiger counter
in the y-ray mode
(i.e.,
beta
shield
in place)
would register
subject-directed efforts.
The output
of
a Geiger counter,
fed
into
a Monsanto Model
1020
counter/timer,
indicates
a background count
due to cosmic rays ^35
counts/minute.
Experimental protocol requires
the
subject
to try to
change
the registered count
by concentration on the Geiger counter probe
from
a distance ~0.5 meters.
Each run consists
of fifteen 60-second
trials,
with 10-second
separations between
the
trials.
Preceding each
subject run
is
a control run of equal
duration.
OCDM Item No.
CD V-700,
Model
No.
66,
Electro-Neutronics,
Inc.,
Oakland,
California.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
In four runs
to date
the results,
shown in Table
8,
indi-
cate
no effect
of
statistical
significance,
either
in the mean or
standard
deviation
of
counts*
Table
GEIGER COUNTER EXPERIMENT
Control Runs
Experimental Runs
Run
Mean
Standard Deviation
Mean
Standard Deviation
36.07
5.73
35.33
6,00
34.87
6.23
33.87
7.27
33.87
5.88
34.00
5.25
35.20
5.09
35.67
5,77
5.
Basic Research Summary
The basic research program to date has been spread over
a number
of
subjects
and over
a number of
activities,
generating
a considerable
amount
of
data.
It was deemed desirable
in the
first
half
of
the research
program to cover
as much material
as possible
in
a horizontal development
to determine the best
subjects
and the fruitful directions for concentrated
effort
in
the second half
of
the
program.
We
intend
to concentrate on analysis
of the
large
amounts
of
data already obtained while
subjects
are involved in extramural medical
and psychological
testing.
Based on the
findings,
a few carefully-chosen
items will
be
culled for final
specific testing following discussion with
client representatives.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Appendix
RANDOMNESS TESTS OF FOUR- STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Appendix
RANDOMNESS TESTS OF FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
The design objective was
to build
a four-state machine,
with each
state equally likely
to occhr on each trial,
independent
of
the past
sequence
of
states.
If
the machine meets this objective,
it
should not
be possible
to devise
a rule for future play that
significantly differs
from chance.
A simple example
of
such
a rule would be
to select
the
machine
state observed
in the preceding trial;
if this
strategy were
to
produce
scores significantly above chance
(25 percent
hits)
,
we would
reject
the hypothesis
of randomness
of
the machine under
test.
Before experimentation,
four machines,
purchased from Aquarius
Electronics,
Albion,
California,
were extensively tested for randomness.
Data were
analyzed on
a CDC-6400 computer,
and the three machines finally
selected for use
in screening met established criteria for randomness.
In developing randomness tests,
we
are guided
in part by
a knowledge
of
the machine
logic.
When one
of the four choice keys
or the pass
key
is depressed,
the current machine
state
is displayed;
then a brief
time
after release
of
the
key,
a new machine
state
is established
(but
not
shown to the
subject)
by sampling the instantaneous
state
of
a high-speed
four-state electronic counter.
For the machine
to be random,
the times
of
dwell
of
the counter
in each
of
the four
states must
be precisely
equal;
otherwise,
the distribution of outcomes will be biased.
The first
randomness test
is thus based on tallying the number
of occurrences
of
each
of
the
four
states.
This test
should detect
a stable bias,
yet may
miss
a drifting bias.
To test for this second possibility we
also tally
the distribution
of
outcomes
in each group
of
100 trials,
then compute
a
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
likelihood ratio test
statistic
(see below)
for each
group.
Under
the
null hypothesis
of equal
likelihood
of
the
four
states,
these
statistic
values
are distributed approximately
as chi-square with three degrees
of
freedom and their
sum for m groups distributed approximately
as chi-square
•with three m degrees
of
freedom.
This test may also detect
stable bias,
but
is
not
as powerful for this purpose
as the
first
test.
Variable
bias
of
still
a shorter period,
if
substantial,
can be tested
for
by
tallying the frequency with which the previous machine
state
is
repeated;
an overall repeat ratio
("all")
significantly
above 0.25
is indicative
of
such bias.
If
for
any reason the machine were
to fail to sample
the
counter
to
establish
a new
state,
the previous machine
state would be repeated.
To
test
for this possibility,
we tally the number
of
repeats following the
depression of each
key.
A repeat ratio significantly greater than 0.25
should be considered
a danger
signal.
We
also tally the
initial machine
states following reset
and
the
transitions between states.
In each
case,
the number
of occurrences
of
each of
the
four possible outcomes
should be approximately equal.
When
repeats
are deleted from the
sequence
of
trials
(
,T nondiagonal transi-
tions"),
the four
states
should
also be approximately equal
in frequency.
In testing the null hypothesis
of
four equally
likely outcomes
of
a trial,
a likelihood ratio test
is
used.
The
statistic
under
the null hypothesis
is distributed approximately
as chi-square
with three degrees
of freedom,
with rejection for
large values
of
this
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
*
statistic.
The
computer program used
in testing randomness
includes
a
subroutine
for computing the probability
of
a chi-square value
as
large
or
larger
than that
observed.
In testing the
null hypothesis
that
the probability
of
a repeat
is
0.25,
the binomial probability
of obtaining the
observed number
K or more
repeats
in N trials
is
computed.
For
K greater than
1000,
a normal
dis-
tribution approximation
is computed,
assuming the statistic
/K_^_l/2 _
X OZ
\
N
/ V 3/16
to be
approximately normal with mean zero
and standard deviation
one.
The typical test pattern used was
six passes followed by
25 choices
of
one color,
repeating this
for each
of the four
colors.
In this way
each of
the
five
keys other than rest were
given approximately equal
use.
Typically,
2000
to 6000 trials were made
in each sitting.
In the
absence
of
any unusual results
in the randomness
tests,
a minimum of
10,000 trials
were made before using
a machine with experimental
subjects.
With 10,000
trials,
the expected fraction
of repeats
is 0.25 with
a standard deviation
of 3/200
= 0.00866.
A sample
computer listing
of
the results
of randomness tests on
Machine
is
included
in Table A-l.
Of
the four machines tested,
three
were found suitable
for use
in screening activity.
The fourth machine
was returned to the manufacturer
for adjustment.
Alexander Mood,
Introduction to the Theory
of
Statistics
(McGraw Hill,
New York,
1950).
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
RANDOMNESS
TESTS—
-MACHINE
Randomness
in
groups
of
100
trials:
Chi-square
Probability
=
0.9628.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0
Appendix
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE FOUR-STATE
ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00791R0001 00430001-0