Lap EN Marnie TUTE TS a a df lA ROSE Fr got Approved For Release 2000/08/40 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200090024-7 eo: boaa , 4 ; Rn es oi catches aa ICED a GANS ciara NC AL Volume 251 October 18, 1974 - We AS ep fay hrase), This in itself might be sufficient to it aa) WHES (to use one phrase). This in itself might be sulicien. te i WesnigacwIyg . raise doubt that the experiments have demonstrated tite existence of a new channel of communication which does tine paranormal not involve the use of the senses. (4) Two of the referees felt that it was a pity that the We publish this week a paper by Drs R. Targ and H. paper, instead of concentrating in detail and with meti- Puthof (page 662) which is bound to create something of culous care on one particular approach to eéxtra-sensory a stir in the scientific community. The claim is made that phenomena, produced a mixture of different experimenss, information can be transferred by some channel whose using different subjects in unconnected circumstances und characteristics appear to fall “outside the range of known with only a tenuous overall theme, At the best these were perceptual modalities”. Or, more bluntly, some people can more “a series of pilot siudies . . . than a report of a read thoughts or see things remotely. completed experiment”. Such a claim is, of course, bound to be greeted with a On their own these highly critical comments could he preconditioned reaction amongst many scientists. To some grounds for rejection of the paper, but it was felt thet it simply confirms what they have always known of other points needed to be taken into account before a final believed. To others it is beyond the laws of science and decision could be made. therefore necessarily unacceptable. But to a few—though (1) Despite its shortcomings, the paper is presented as a perhaps to more than is realised—the questions are still scientific document by two qualified scientists, writipg unanswered, and any evidence of high quality is worth a from a major research establishment appacenily with the + critical examination. unqualified backing of the research institute itself. “4 The issue, then, is whether the evidence is of sufficient (2) Fhe authors have ck rly attempted fo investigate ~ quality to be taken seriously. In trying to answer this, we under laboratory conditions phenomena which, while have been fortunate in having the help of three indepen- highly implausible to many scientists, would nevertheless dent referees who have done their utmost to sce the paper seem to be worthy of investigation even if, in the final as a potentially important sejentific communication and analysis, negative findings are revealed, Hf scientists dispute not as a challenge to or confirmation of prejudices. We and debate the reality of extra-sensory perception, then thank them for the considerable effort they have put in to the subject is clearly a matter for scientiic study and helping us, and we also thank Dr Christopher Evans of the reportage. National Physical laboratory whose continued advice on the (3) Very considerable advance publicity: it 6s fair to subject is reflected in the content of this leading article. say mot generated by the authors or their. institule-—-has A general indication of the referees’ comments may be preceded the presentation of this report. As a result many helpful to readers in reaching their own assessment of the scientists and very large numbers of nen-scientists believe. paper. Of the three, one believed we should not publish, as the result of anecdote and hearsay, that the Stanford one did not feel strongly either way and the third was Research Institute (SRI) was engaged in a maior research guardedly in favour of publication. We first summarise the programme into parapsychological matters and had even arguments against the paper. been the scene of u remarkable breakthrough in this field. (1) There was agreement that the paper was weak in The publication of this paner, with its muted claims, sug- design and presentation, to the extent that details given as gestions of a limited research programme, and modest data, to the precise way in which the experiment was carried out is. we believe. likely to nut the whole mutter in more reason- were disconcertingly vague. The referees felt that insuf- able perspective. ficient account had been taken of the established method- (4) The claims that have been made by. or on behalf of, ology of experimental psychology and that in the form one of the subjects, Mr Uri Geller, have been hailed pub- originally submitted the paper would be unlikely to be lichy as indicating total acceptance by the SRI of allegedly accepted for publication in a psychological journal on these sensational powers und may also perhaps now be seen in grounds alone. Two referees also felt that the authors had true perspective. It must be a matter of interest to scientists not taken into account the lessons learnt in the past by to note that, contrary to very widespread rumour, the parapsychologists researching this tricky and complicated paper does not present any evidence whatsoever for area, : Geller’s alleged abilities to bend metal rods by strosing (2) The three referees were particularly critical of the them, influence magnets at a distance, make watches stop method of target selection used, pointing out that the or start by some psychokinetic force and so on, The publt- choice of a target by “opening a dictionary at random” 1s eation of the paper would be justified on the grounds of a naive, vague and unnecessarily controversial approach to - allowing scientists the opportunity to discriminate between randomisation, Parapsychologists have long rejected such the cautious, limited and suil highly debatable experi- methods of target selection and, as one referee put it, mental data, and extravagant’ rumour, fed in recent days weaknesses of this kind reveal “a lack of skill in their by inaccurate attempts in some newspape>s at precegnition experiments, which might have caused them to make some of the contents of the paper. Sther mistake which is less evident from their writing”. (5) Two of the referees also fett thar the paper should (3) All the referees felt that the detaiis given of various be published because it would allow parapsychoingists, ard safeguards and precautions introduced against the pos- all other scientists interested in researching Uns arguable a sibility ofAwoppeen yy CONSCIOUS al taki de A ae ib Gl al? fel Q. wuwe the. quality of the Stanford researe and “vis iagsprdved FOP RElease 2andiDaltd': CIA REPSE ad ¥arRUbdacdaabOREFs-
Lo nant kin eatin nse tinal oqo SUB ALLL beak Tica A A Race te emer sarardentuiads So wine ee ead attendees tes AHN hic: pith AF ‘api st dese aie Be hb it NE Sin pA aa ad : 60 most respected journals cannot afford to live on respect- ability. We belicve that our readers expect us to be a home for the occasional ‘high-risk’ type of paper. This is hardly to — assert that we regularly fly in the face of referees’ recom- mendations (we always consider the possibility of publishing, as in this case, a summary of their objections). Tt is to say that the unusual must now and then be allowed a toe-hold in the’ literature, sometimes to flourish, more often to be forgotten within a year or two. The critical comments above were sent to the authors who have modified their manuscript in response to them. We have also corresponded informally with the authors on one or two issues such as whether the targets could have been forced by standard magical tricks, and are convinced that this is not the case. As a result of these exchanges and the above considerations we have decided to publish in the belief that, however flawed the experimental pro- cedure and however difficult the process of distilling the essence of a complex series of events into a scientific manuscript, it was on balance preferable to publish and maybe stimulate and advance the controversy rather than keep it out of circulation for a further period. Publishing in a scientific journal is not a process of receiving a seal of approval from the establishment: rather it is the serving of notice on the community that there is something worthy of their attention and scrutiny. And this Nature Vol. 251 October 18 1974 * (#) vataP proved For R elease 2000/0 8/10.: CIA;RPR963007871R00020009002 4edre amongst some to repeat the experiments with even more caution. To this end the New Scientist does a service by publishing this week the results of Dr Joe Hanlon’s own investiga- tions into a wide range of phenomena surrounding Mfr Geller. If the subject is to be investigated further—and no scientist is likely to accept more than that the SRI experi- ments provide a prima facie case for more invesligalions— the experimental technique will have to take account of Dr Hanlon’s strictures, those of our own referees and those, doubtless, of others who will be looking for alternative explanations. Perhaps the most important issue raised by the circum- stances surrounding the publication of this paper is whether science has yet developed the competence to confront claims of the paranormal. Supposedly paranormal events frequently cannot be investigated in the calm, controlled and meticulous way that scientists are expected to work, and so there is always a danger that the investigator, swept up in the confusion that surrounds many experiments, abandons his initial intentions in order to go along with his subject’s desires. It may be that all experiments of this sort should be exactly prescribed beforehand by one group, done by another unassociated group and evaluated in terms of performance by the first group. Only by increasing austerity of approach by scientists will there be any major progress in this ficld. or those in peril on the factory floor In thts article Peter J. Smith argues that a greater commitment (in deed as well @\. word) to community science by the Scientific Establish- ment might helpsie world of science regain some of thepublic respect it has lost. THE question of who speaks or should speak, on behalf of the scientific com- munity has been debated on many oc- casions, most often without result.NOn the face of it, such lack of resolutic is hardly unexpected, for scientists and scientific institutions are not noted for their ready ability to achieve con- sensus. Yet there is no doubt that they can put up a pretty collective front when they feel so moved. The one famous occasion on which a near con- sensus was reached was when the risk financially by the Rothschild pro- posals. Then individuals and instityé tions miraculously found a con fon cause of self-prescrvation. But when it comes to the derence of less privileged groups it ig quite a dif- ferent story; the voi of the British scientific community is seldom to be heard, wheiher-faking a moral stance, exerting hunrfnitarian pressure, supply- ing expertise or even simply providing information. A good case in point is Pro ided by a new Socialist Worker scientific community saw itself put Aes histories of the title hints, the object of Socialist Worker is nothing less than the com- plete overthrow of the capitalist system: and one of the ways of achieving this aim, it seems, is to give strident publi- city to defects in the capitalist-indus- trial system. Fortunately, one can easily avoid a sharp turn to the left and still admit that what some British workers have been subjected to in the name of asbestos production is beyond the limit of acceptability in a humani- 7 tarian society. For what clearly emerges fro hetoric of the pamphlet in gu€stion is apicture of men and w wien reacting in some bewilderment4od the long-term il effésts of 2 efoto activity. The chie& cons€quence is, of course, asbestosis—sx’ killing disease acquired by breattingNin asbestos fibres. The butk.6F the pamphlet is devoted to en to whom asbes- tosis has come as shock after a decade or so in the indwstry. But more instructively, there is also a short ac- ccount of the fight for safety put up by a small group of the 7/162 ilasgow insulation workers’ branch of_ the Transport and General Workers Uriion against the obstruction of the asbestds companies, the indifference of politi- cians, the weakness of the Factory Inspectorate, the silence of much of the press, the impotence of health authorities, the equivocal official stance asbestos workers themselves. ) And there is certainly something to fight about. According tg~Patrick Kinnersly (The Hazards of Work: How to Fight Them, Pluty-Press, 1973), asbestosis is taking aff increasing toll: 64 are known have died in 1965, 107 in 1970-4nd 113 in 1971. The number new cases diagnosed rose from 8% in 1965 to 153 in 1970. Mofcover, asbestosis is only one of e asbestos-induced diseases. Lung cancer appears to require a smalier exposure to asbestos. There is also another form of cancer known as mesothelioma which involves growths in the linings of the lungs and stomach. Almost all mesotheliomas are caused by asbestos: but no one knows how many workers in Britain are killed by them, partly because they take so long to develop and partly because they are not always identified. The TUC Cen- tenary Institute of Occupational Health has suggested that, 30 years after first exposure, about one in 200 will be found to have died of mesothelioma: but Dr Irving J. Selikoff of Mount Sinai Hospital in New York is af parently more pessimistic. He has recently been quoted as saving Unat, for every 100,000 workers entering the shestos industry under Ue satholy staadards obtaining in the United States as recently as F971, he would expect\20,000 to dic of lung cancer, af | sa! Bee eA Tae R AIGA 20bMNOH ND CIA RENE Bos Roodods0034-7— —_
~ 1) UMMM ee Mase ba oe os waecbe Mem ccd daly dole AL. JULI : i i é i A ‘ 60 work from the mixing of two ideal gases in an isolated system of constant total volume. It is elementary that if the mixture is allowed to form by merely withdrawing a partition between the gases we have a good example of a completely irreversible process with maximal entropy creation (+11.53 J K7? if we started with 1 mol of cach at 300 K) and no performance or storage of work. On the other hand, by introducing into the system a suitable machine, the uniform mixture could be allowed to form in such a way that a weight within the system was raised. (The machine described by Planck (ref. 8, page 219) may be readily adapted for this purpose.) At the end of the latter mixing process the isolated system would accordingly contain more mechanical energy than it did at the begin- ning. From the First Law it follows that the system must necessarily contain less thermal energy: that is, its tempera- ture must have fallen. In the limit, where the mixing was reversible, the maximum possible work would have been performed and transferred to the weight (2,769 J if the gases were monatomic) and the temperature would have falfen to 189 K. In this reversible case the change in entropy arising from mixing (+11.53 J K™') is exactly counterbalanced by that attributable to cooling (—11.53 J K7*):no entropy is created, ‘ At this point it might be objected that the change in the gases is not exactly the same as if they had mixed irreversibly, because their thermal energy and temperature have decreased. This is a simple consequence of the First Law which applies equally no matter whether one is considering an isolated system, a non-isolated one or the whole Universe. If a change is conducted in such a. way that a weight is lifted then all the other bodies involved cannot possibly end up in the same state as if the weight had not been lifted. Failure to apply to nonisothermal systems. Legon ex- ‘presses doubts about the validity of the equation for entropy creation (refs 3 and 4) save for “the trivial case for which the temperature 7. of the environment is equal to the temperature T of the system throughout the process’”. On what grounds are these doubts based? Legon does not discuss, let alone dismiss. any of the sources quoted in my article’. Other relevant scurces which should be considered are Keenan and Hatsopoulos™ and the classic accounts by Maxwell’? and by Gouy™. Legon’s quotation from Planck (ref. 8, page 104) con- cerning “dissipated energy” deserves close consideration. It scems to state that the maximum work is a definite quantity only for isothermal processes. If true this would directly contradict the views of Thomson” (later Lord Kelvin) “On a universal tendency in Nature to the dissi- pation of mechanical energy”. On pages {13-117 of ref. 8, however, Planck discusses his own statement (ref. 8, page 104) and we see that there is in fact no contradiction. What Planck demonstrates is that although the change in Helm- holtz free energy, ~dA=—d(U—TS), measures wmax under isothermal conditions, it cannot conveniently be used to determine war under nonisothermal conditions because the term § dT that then appears is frequently indeterminate. The same point has already been made in a footnote by Gouy (ref. 15, page 506) who had also given the correct equation for determining wmax under nonisothermal con- ditions, Accordingly I find no substance in Legon’s objec- tions under this heading. If it is thought that there is conflict between the ‘work’ view of thermodynamics and the ‘entropy’ view it is high time that the idea was abandoned. The two views are different, but symmetrical, aspects of the same reality. Spontaneous processes of all kinds fall somewhere within the pattern shown in Table 1, their position depending on th of w Nature Vol. 251 October /8 1974 * Leon PRroved Far, Release 2000/08/10 5. CIA-RDP96-00787R000200090024-R. Witxte Department of Physiology, University College London, Gower Street, London WCIE 6BT, UK Received December 3, 1973; revised June 4, 1974. 1 Bridgman, P. W., The Nature of Thermodynemics, 116 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 19-43). Everett, D. H., Chemical Thermodynamics, 216 (Longman, London, 1971). Legon, A. C., Nature, 244, 431 (1973). Wilkie, D. R., Nature, 242, 606 (1973). Wilkie, D. R., Nature, 245, 457 (1973). ; Butler, J. A. V.. Chemical Thermodynamics, (Macmillan, 1955). Carnot, 8., Reflections on the motive power of fire (1824), translation (Dover, New York, 1960). ; Planck, M., Treatise on Therinodynamics, third ed., trans. from seventh German ed., 1922 (Dover, New York, 1958). ® Joule, J. P., Phil. Mag., Series 4, 5, 1 (1853). 1 Maxwell, J. C., Theory of Heat, fifth ed., chapter XIT (Long- mans Green, London, 1877). 1. Thomson, W., Phil. Mag.. Series 4, §, 102 (1853). 2 Guggenheim, E. A., Thermodynamics, third ed. (North Hol- land, Amsterdam, 1957). Keenan, J. H., and Hatsopoulos, G. N,, Principles of General Thermodynamics (Wiley, New York, 1965), “ Gouy, M., J. de Phys., 2 serie, t.VIIT (Novembre 1889), * Thomson, W., Phil. Mag., Series 4, 4, 304 (1852); corrections in ibid, 5, viii. re maakt fourth ed. ” Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding WE present results of experiments suggesting the existence of one or more perceptual modalities through which individuals obtain information about their environment, although this information is not presented to any known sense. The litera- ture’? and our observations lead us to conclude that such abilities can be studied under laboratory conditions. We have investigated the ability of certain people to describe graphical material or remote scenes shicided against ordinary perception. In addition, we performed pilot studies to determine if electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings might indicate perception of remote happenings even in the absence of correct overt responses. We concentrated on what we consider to be our primary responsibility—-to resolve under conditions as unambiguous as possible the basic issue of whether a certain class of para- normal perception phenomena exists. So we conducted our experiments with sufficient control, utilising visual, acoustic and electrical shielding, to ensure that all conventional paths of sensory input were blocked. At all times we took measures to prevent sensory leakage and to prevent deception, whether intentional or unintentional. Our goal is not just to catalogue interesting events, but to uncover patterns of cause-effect relationships that lend them- selves to analysis and hypothesis in the forms with which we are familiar in scientitic study. The results preserned here constitute a first step towards that goal: we have established under known conditions a data base from which departures as a function of physical and psychological variables can be studied in future work. REMOTE PERCEPTION OF GRAPHIC MATERIAL First, we conducted experiments with Mr Uri Geller in which we examined his ability, while located in an electrically shickled room, to reproduce target pictures drawn by experi: menters located at remote locations. Second, we conducted double-blind experiments with Mr Pat Price, in which we measured his ability to describe remote outdoor scenes many Oproved PEP HelsasS SdG0/08/10 : C1A-RDP9G:00787RO0G2DODSGORAnT coniucted pre.
We Nature Vol. 251 October 18 1974 Jdeminary * whether a subject could perceive the presence of the light, even if only at a noncognitive level of awareness, In preliminary testing Geller apparently demonstrated an ability to reproduce simple pictures (line drawings) which had been drawn and placed in opaque sealed envelopes which he was not permitted to handle, But since each of the targets was known to at least one experimenter in the room with Geller, it was not possible on the basis of the preliminary testing to discriminate between Geller’s direct perception of envelope contents and perception through some mechanism involving the experimenters, whether paranormal or subliminal. So we examined the phenomenon under conditions designed to climinate all conventional information channels, overt or subliminal. Geller was separated from both the target material and anyone knowledgeable of the material, as in the experiments of ref. 4. In the first part of the study a series of 13 separate drawing experiments were carried out over 7 days. No experiments are deleted from the results presented here. At the beginning of the experiment either Geller or the experimenters entered a shielded room so that from that time forward Geller was at all times visually, acoustically and electrically shielded from personnel and material at the target location. Only following Geller’s isolation from the experi- menters was a target chosen and drawn, a procedure designed to eliminate pre-experiment cucing. Furthermore, to eliminate the possibility of pre-experiment target forcing, Geller was kept ignorant as to the identity of the person selecting the target and as to the method of target selection. This was accomplished by the use of three different techniques: (1) pseudo-random technique of opening a dictionary arbitrarily and choosing the first word that could be drawn (Experiments 1-4); (2) targets, blind to experimenters and subject, prepared independently by pEevit. TARGET RESPONSE 1 Nos + wy 2D Se RESPONSE 2 TARGET RESPONSE b Sonne yt ro Sadan Cyt SF ce, TARGET, ~y Oo 0) TARGET 4, \ - RESPONSE RESPONSE d e and caenane Approved For Release SuOuIdBIT TARGET RESPONSE 1 603 minaey wearavEY FoF REBAR IO MCRITO CIRRMPYE: ONT MOH IUONIOO Sanders durine the course of the experiment (Experiments 5-7, 11-13); and (3) arbitrary selection from a target pool decided upon in advance of daily experimentation and designed to provide data concern- ing information content for use in testing specific hypotheses (Experiments 8-10). Geller’s task was to reproduce with pen on paper the line drawing generated at the target location. Following a period of effort ranging from a few minutes to half an hour, Geller either passed (when he did not feel con- fident) or indicated he was ready to submit a drawing to the experimenters, in which case the drawing was collected before Geller was permitted to see the target. To prevent sensory cueing of the target information, Experiments 1 through 10 were carried out using a shielded room in SRI’s facility for EEG research. The acoustic and visual isolation is provided by a double-walled steel room, locked by means of an inner and outer door, each of which is secured with a refrigerator-type locking mechanism. Following target selection when Geller was inside the roam, a one-way audio monitor, operating only from the inside to the outside, was activated to monitor Geller during his efforts. The target picture was never discussed by the experimenters aller the picture was drawn and brought near the shielded room, In our detailed examination of the shielded room and the protocol! used in these experiments, no sensory leakage has been found. — . The conditions and results for the 10 experiments carried out in the shielded room are displayed in Table 1 and Fig. 1, All experiments except 4 and 5, were conducted with Geller inside the shielded room. In Experiments 4 and 5, the procedure was reversed, For those experiments in which Geller was inside the shielded room, the target location was in an adjacent room at a distance of about 4 m, except for Experiments 3 and 8, in which the target locations were, respec- tively, an office at a distance of 475 m and a room at a distance of about 7 m. A response was obtained in all experiments except Numbers §-7, In Experiment 5, the person-to-person link was eliminated by arranging for a scientist outside the usual experimental group to draw a picture, lock it in the shielded room before Geller’s arrival at SRI, and leave the area. Geller was then led J RESPONSE 3 RESPONSE 2 a, AO een : | GELLEG: UPI GELS BA RESPONSE TARGET =: RESPONSE f g GIA RD PIE U7 87R060200090024-7
The. wae wo bell ULL 60 ————— Nature Vol. 251 October 18 1974 4 ‘ Table 1 Remote perception Of graphic Mar 87R000200090024-7 _ SLI SAIk i ena EE Experiment Date Geller Location Target Location Target Figure (month, day, year) i 8/4/73 Shielded room 1* Adjacent room (4.1 m)t Firecracker la 2 8/4/73 Shielded room 1 Adjacent room (4.1 m) Grapes 1b 3 8/5/73 Shielded room 1 Office (475 m) Devil le 4 8/3/73 Room adjacent to Shielded room ! Solar system Id shielded room | (3.2 m) . : 5 8/6/73 Room adjacent to Shielded room 1 Rabbit No drawing shielded room | (3.2 m) . 6 8/7/73 Shielded room | Adjacent room (4.1 m) Tree No drawing 7 8/7/73 Shielded room Adjacent room (4.1 m) Envelope No drawing 8 8/8/73 Shielded room 1 Remote room (6.75 m) Camel le 9 8/8/73 Shielded room 1 Adjacent room (4.1 m) Bridge If 10 8/8/73 Shielded room 1 Adjacent room (4,1 m) Seagull lg iW 8/9/73 Shielded room 2 Computer (54 m) Kite (computer CRT) 2a 12 8/10/73 Shielded room 2 Computer (54 m) Church (computer memory) 2b 13 8/10/73 Shielded room 2 Computer (54 m) Arrow through heart 2c (computer CRT, zero intensity) es *EEG Facility shielded room (sce text). tPerceiver—target distances measured in metres. {SRI Radio Systems Laboratory shielded room (see text). by the experimenters to the shielded room and asked to draw the picture located inside the room. He said that he got no clear impression and therefore did not submit a drawing. The elimina- tion of the person-to-person link was examined further in the second series of experiments with this subject. Experiments 6 and 7 were carried out while we attempted to record Geller’s EEG during his efforts to perceive the target pictures. The target pictures were, respectively, a tree and an envelope. He found it difficult to hold adequately still for good EEG records, said that he experienced difficulty in getting impressions of the targets and again submitted no drawings. Experiments 11 through 13 were carried out in SRI’s Engin- ecring Building, to make use of the computer facilities available there. For these experimenters, Geller was secured in a double- walled, copper-screen Faraday cage 54 m down the hall and around the corner from the computer room. The Faraday cage provides 120 dB attenuation for plane wave radio frequency radiation over a range of 15 kHz to | GHz. For magnetic fields the attenuation is 68 dB at 15 kHz and decreases to 3 dB at 60 Hz. Following Geller's isolation, the targets for these experiments were chosen by computer laboratory personnel not otherwise associated with either the experiment or Geller, and the experimenters and subject were kept blind as to the contents of the target pool. For Experiment 11, a picture of a kite was drawn on the face of a cathode ray tube display screen, driven by the computer's graphics program. For Experiment 12, a picture of a church was drawn and stored in the memory of the computer. In Experiment 13, the target drawing, an arrow through a heart (Fig. 2c), was drawn on the face of the cathode ray tube and then the display intensity was turned off so that no picture was visible. To obtain an independent evaluation of the correlation be- _ tween target and response data, the experimenters submitted the data for judging on a ‘blind’ basis by two SRI scientists who were not otherwise associated with the research. For the 10 cases in which Geller provided a response, the judges were asked to match the response data with the corresponding target data (without replacement), In those cases in which Geller made more than one drawing as his response to the target, all the drawings were combined as a set for judging. The two judges each matched the target data to the response data with no error. For either judge such a correspondence has an a priori probability, under the null hypothesis of no in- formation channel, of P = (10!? = 3x 107. A second series of experiments was carried out to determine whether direct perception of envelope contents was possible without some person knowing of the target picture. One hundred target pictures of everyday objects were drawn envelopes containing black cardboard. The hundred targets were divided randomly into groups of 20 for use in each of the three days’ experiments. On each of the three days of these experiments, Geller passed. That is, he declined to associate any envelope with a drawing that he made, expressing dissatisfaction with the existence of such a large target pool. On cach day he made approximately 12 recognisable drawings, which he felt were associated with the entire target pool of 100, On each of the three days, two of his drawings could reasonably be associated with two of the 20 daily targets. On the third day, two of his drawings were very close replications of two of that day’s target pictures. The drawings resulting from this experiment do not depart signific- antly from what would be expected by chance. In a simpler experiment Geller was successful in obtaining information under conditions in which no persons were know- ledgeable of the target. A double-blind experiment was per- formed in which a single 3/4 inch die was placed ina3 x 4 x 5 inch steel box. The box was then vigorously shaken by one of the experimenters and placed on the table, a technique found in control runs to produce a distribution of die faces differing non- significantly from chance. The orientation of the die within the box was unknown to the experimenters at that time. Geller would then write down which die face was uppermost. The target pool was known, but the targets were individually pre- pared in a manner blind to all persons involved in the experi- ment, This experiment was performed ten times, with Geller passing twice and giving a response cight times. In the cight times in which he gave a response, he was correct each time. The distribution of responses consisted of three 2s, one 4, two 5s, and two 6s. The probability of this occurring by chance is approximately one in 10°. In certain situations significant information transmission can take place under shielded conditions. Factors which appear to be important and therefore candidates for future investigation include whether the subject knows the set of targets in the target pool, the actual number of targets in the target pool at any given time, and whether the target is known by any of the experimenters. It has been widely reported that Geller has demonstrated the ability to bend metal by paranormal means. Although metal bending by Geller has been observed in our laboratory, we have not been able to combine such observations with adequately controlled experiments to obtain data sufficient to suppart the paranormal hypothesis. REMOTE VIEWING OF NATURAL TARGETS A study by Osis® led us to determine whether a subject could describe randomly chosen geographical sttes located oev eral by an Approved for Release 20008MO-CIA-ROPSR.U7B7RODODIODGUDSE
see mh "Nature. Vol. 251 October 18 1974 . appropt ¢ proved For Release.2000/08/10 +. IAZRRP 982000 87RQ00200090024-fing as to out with Price, a former California police commissioner and city councilman, consisted of a series of double-blind, demon- stration-of-ability tests involving local targets in the San Francisco Bay area which could be documented by several inde- “pendent judges. We planned the experiment considering that natural geographical places or man-made sites that have existed for a long time are more potent targets for paranormal perception experiments than are artificial targets prepared in the laboratory. This is based on subject opinions that the use of artificial targets involves a ‘trivialisation of the ability’ as com- pared with natural pre-existing targets. In each of nine experiments involving Price as subject and SRI experimenters as a target demarcation team, a remote location was chosen in a double-blind protocol. Price, who remained at SRI, was asked to describe this remote location, as well as whatever activities might be going on there. Several descriptions yielded significantly correct data per- taining to and descriptive of the target location. In the experiments a set of twelve target locations clearly differentiated from each other and within 30 min driving time from SRI had been chosen from a target-rich environment (more than 100 targets of the type used in the experimental series) prior to the experimental series by an individual in SRI manage- ment, the director of the Information Science and Engineering Division, not otherwise associated with the experiment, Both TARGET RESPONSE 1 ys RESPONSE RESPONSE 2 a. b 605 the contents of the target pool, which were used without replace- ment. An experimenter was closeted with Price at SRI to wait 30 min to begin the narrative description of the remote location. The SRI locations from which the subject viewed the remote locations con- sisted of an outdoor park (Experiments 1, 2), the double-walled copper-screen Faraday cage discussed earlier (Experiments 3. 4. and 6-9), and an office (Experiment S.A second experimenter would then obtain a target location from the Division Director from a set of travelling orders previously prepared and randomised by the Director and kept under his control. The target demarcation team (two to four SRI experimenters) then proceeded directly to the target by automobile without communicating with the subject or experimenter remaining behind. Since the experimenter remaining with the subiect at SRI was in ignorance both as to the particular target and as to the target pool, he was free to question Price to clarify his descrip- tions. The demarcation team then remained at the target sie for 30 min after the 30 min allotted for travel. During the observation period, the remote-viewing subject would describe his impressions of the target site into a tape recorder. A comparison was then made when the demarcation team returned. . Price's ability to describe correctly buildings, docks, roads, gardens and so on, including structural materials, colour, ambience and activity, sometimes in great detail, indicated the functioning of a remote perceptual ability. But the descriptions contained inaccuracies as well as correct statements. To obtain a numerical evaluation of the accuracy of the remote viewing experiment, the experimental results were subjected to inde- pendent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientists who were TARGET RESPONSE 1 RESPONSE 2 c FAD proved For Ruease 2 nDWSI sds CLA RORSE-T Recrannte (tye & pyc drawing stored in
Descriptions chosen by judges > BO S os Ne Lee y Hoover Tower Baylands Nature Preserve Radio Telescupe Redwood City Marin4 Bridge Toll Plaza Drive-In Theatre Arts and Crafts Garden Plaza Church Rinconada Park WW O~T A tr Bh et CE Nature Vol. 251 October [8 1974 Jeble 2 Distribution of correct selections by judges A, B, C, D, and E in remote viewing experiments Places visited by judges 4 5 6 7 8 9 D dD’ D BE ABDE E ABD NCE A Cc E ABCE Cc AB AB Of the 45 selections judges, 9 choices), 24 were correct. Bold type indicates the description chosen most often for each place visited. Correct choices lie on the mun diagonal. The number of correct matches by Judges A through E is 7, 6, 5, 3, and 3, respectively. The expected nuinber of correct matches from the five judges was five; in the experiment 24 such matches were obtained. The a priort probability of such an occurrence by chance, conservatively assuming assignment without replacement on the part of the judges, is P == 8.10. | not otherwise associated with the research. The judges were asked to match the nine locations, which they independently visited, against the typed manuscripts of the tape-recorded nar- ratives of the remote viewer, The transcripts were unlabelled and presented in random order. The judges were asked to find a narrative which they would consider the best match for each f the places they visited, A given narrative could be assigned fo more than one target location. A correct match requires that the transcript of a #iven date be associated with the target of that date. Table 2 shows the distribution of the judges’ choices. Among all possible analyses, the most conservative isa per- mutation analysis of the plurality vote of the judges’ selections assuming assignment without replacement, an approach inde- pendent of the number of judges. By plurality vote, six of the ning descriptions and locations were correctly matched. Under the null hypothesis (no remote viewing and a random selection of descriptions without replacement), this outcome has an a priori probability of P = 5.6 x 10-4, since, among all possible permutations of the integers one through nine, the probability of six or more being 'n their natural position in the list has that Value. Therefore, although Price’s descriptions contain in- kecuracies, the descriptions are sufficiently accurate to. permit the judges to differentiate among the various targets to the degree indicated. EEG EXPERIMENTS An &xperiment was undertaken to determine whether a Bliysidlogical measure such as EEG activity could be used as an indicator of information transmission between an isolated Subject and a remote stimulus. We hypothesised that perception Gould be indicated by such a measure even in the absence of Yerbal or other overt indicators.®7, t Was dssumed (hat the application of remote stimuli would Fesult in responses similar to those obtained under conditions CF direct stimulation. For example, when normal subjects are Stimulated with a lashing light, their EEG typically shows a Wecrease in the amplitude of the resting rhythm and a driving Gf the brain waves at the frequency of the flashes*. We hypothe- Sised that if we stimulated one subject in this manner (a sender), the EEG of another subject in a remote room with no flash present (a receiver), might show changes in alpha (9-11 Hz) activity, and possibly EEG driving similar to that of the sender. _ We informed our subject that at certain times a light was to be flashed in a sender's eyes in a distant room, and if the subject perceived that event, consciously or unconsciously, it might be evident from chanses in his EEG output. The receiver was seated in the visually opaque, acoustically and electrically shielded double-walled steel room previously described. The Sender was seated in a room about 7 m from the receiver. To find subjects who were responsive to such a remote ‘stimulus, we initially worked with four female and two male : thiects, all of whom_believed that success in the ‘receivers’. The senders were either other subjects or the experimenters. We decided beforehand to run one or two sessions of 36 trials each with each subject in this selection procedure, and to do a more extensive study with any subject whose results were positive. A Grass PS-2 photostimulator placed about I m in front of the sender was used to present fash trains of {0s duration. The receiver’s EEG activity from the occipital region (Oz), referenced to linked mastoids, was amplified with a Grass 5P-1 preamplifier and associated driver amplifier with a bandpass of 1-120 Hz, The EEG data were recorded on magnetic tape with an Ampex SP 300 recorder, On each trial, a tone burst of fixed frequency was presented to both sender and receiver and was followed in one second by either a 10s train of flashes or a null flash interval presented to the sender, Thirty- six such trials were given in an experimental session, consisting of 12 null trials—no flashes following the tone—12 trials of flashes at 6 f.p.s. and 12 trials of flashes at 16 f.p.s., all randomly intermixed, deter- mined by entries from a table of random numbers, Each of the trials generated an 11-s EEG epoch. The last 4s of the epoch was selected for analysis to minimise the desynchronising action of the warning cue. This 4-s segment was subjected to Fourier analysis on a LINC 8 computer, Spectrum analyses gave no evidence of EEG driving in any recciver, although in contro} runs the receivers did exhibit driving when physically stimulated with the flashes. But of the six subjects studied initially, one subject (H. H.) showed a consistent alpha blocking effect. We therefore undertook further study with this subject. Data from seven sets of 36 trials each were collected from this subject on three separate days. This comprises all the data collected to date with this subject under the test conditions described above. The alpha band was identified from average spectra, then scores of average power and peak power were obtained from individual trials and subjected to statistical analysis. Of our six subjects, H. H. had by far the most monochromatic EEG spectrum. Figure 3 shows an overlay of the three averaged spectra from one of this subject’s 36-trial runs, displaying changes in her alpha activity for the three stimulus conditions. Mean values for the average power and peak power for each Table 3 EEG data for H.H. showing average power and peak power in the 9-11 Hz band, as a function of flash frequency and sender Flash : - Frequency 0 6 16 0 6 16 Sender Average Power Peak Power IL. 94.8 84.1 76.8 357.7 329.2 289.6 R.T. 41.3 45.5 37.0 160.7 161.0 125.0 No sender (subject . informed) 25.1 35.7 28.2 87.5 95.7 81.7 JL. 54.2 55.3 44.8 191.4 170.5 149.3 JL. 56.8 50.9 32.8 240.6 178.0 104.6 R.T. 39.8 24.9 30.3 145.2 74.2 122.1 No sender (subject not * 86.0 53.0 52.1 318.1 180.6 202.3 informed) Averages 56.8 49.9 43.1 214.5 169.8 153.5 12% —24°%( P< 0.04) —21%—28 %(P < 0,03) volintet Approved.hor Release.2000/08/101: CIA-RDPIGUOZE7ROOUAIONGOO AAT
* measures W Nature Vol. 251 October 18 1974 ofshe seveh experimental sets are_given in Table 3. The power Approved for Release 2000/08/10 seven peak power measures and in six out of seven average power measures. Note also the reduced effect in the case in which the subject was informed that no sender was present (Run 3). It seems that overall alpha production was reduced for this run in conjunction with the subject’s expressed appre- hension about conducting the experiment without a sender. This is in contrast to the case (Run 7) in which the subject was not informed. Siegel’s two-tailed ¢ approximation to the nonparametric randomi- sation test® was applied to the data from all sets, which included two sessions in which the sender was removed. Average power on trials associated with the occurrence of 16 f.p.s. was significantly less than when there were no flashes (¢ = 2.09, d.f. = 118, P<0.04), The second measure, peak power, was also significantly less in the 16 f.p.s, conditions than in the null condition (¢ = 2.16. df. = 118, P< 0.03). The average response in the 6 f.p.s. condition was in the same direc- tion as that associated with 16 f.p.s., but the effect was not statistically significant. Spectrum analyses of control recordings made from saline with a 12 kQ resistance in place of the subject with and without the addi- tion of a 10 Hz, 50 pV test signal applied to the saline solution, revealed no indications of flash frequencies, nor perturbations of the 10 Hz signal. These controls suggest that the results were nol duc to system artefacts. Further tests also gave no evidence of radio fre- quency energy associated with the stimulus. Subjects were asked to indicate their conscious assessment for each trial as to which stimulus was generated. They made their guesses known to the experimenter via one-way telegraphic communication. An analysis of these guesses has shown them to be at chance, in- dicating the absence of any supraliminal cueing, so arousal as evid- enced by significant alpha blocking occurred only at the noncognitive level of awareness. We hypothesise that the protocol described here may prove to be useful as a screening procedure for latent remote perceptual ability in the general population. Potential (arbitrary units) shez 10 Hz 1S Hz Fig. 3 Occipital EEG spectra, 0-20 Hz, for one subject (H. H.) acting as receiver, showing amplitude changes in the 9-11 Hz band as a function of strobe frequency. Three cases: 0, 6, and 16 f.p.s. (12 trial averages). CONCLUSION From these experiments we conclude that: @Achannel exists whereby information about a remote location can be obtained by means of an as yet unidentified perceptual modality. @As with all biological systems, the information channel appears to be imperfect, containing noise along with the Signal, @While a quantitative signal-to-noise ratio in the information- theoretical sense cannot as yet be determined, the results of our experiments indicate that the functioning is at the level of useful information transfer. _ it may be that remote perceptual ability is widely distributed In the general population, but because the perception is generally below an individual's level of awareness, it is repressed or not noticed. For example, two of our subjects (H. H. and P. P.) had AOL considered themselves to have unusual perceptual ability before their Participation in these experiments. Our observation of the phenomena leads us to conclude that Oui experiments in the area of so-called paranormal phenomena can DR96-00787R000200090024-7hat other laboratories will initiate additional research to attempt to replicate these findings. This research was sponsored by The Foundation for Parasen- sory Investigation, New York City. We thank Mrs Judith Skutch, Dr Edgar D. Mitchell of the Institute of Noetic Sciences—as well as our SRI associates, Mr Bonnar Cox, Mr Earle Jones and Dr Dean Brown—for support and encouragement. Constructive suggestions by Mrs Jean Mayo, Dr Charles Tart, University of California, and Dr Robert Ornstein and Dr David Galin of the Langley Porter Neuro- psychiatric Institute are acknowledged. ; RUSSELL TARG HAROLD PUTHOFF Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory, Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California 94025 Received March 11; revised July 8, 1974. 1 Pratt, J., Rhine, J. B., Stuart, C., and Greenwood, J., Extra Sensory Perception after Sixty Years (Henry Holt, New York, 1940). 2-Soal, S., and Bateman, F., Modern Experiments in Telepathy (Faber and Faber, London, 1954). Vasilliev, L. L., Experiments in Mental Suggestion (ISMI Pub- lications, Hampshire, England, 1963). 4 Musso, J. R., and Granero, M., J. Parapsychology, 37, 13-37 (1973). Osis, K., ASPR Newsletter, No. 14 (1972). Tart, C. T., Physiological Correlates of Psi Cognition, Int. J. Parapsychology, V, No. 4 (1963). Dean, E. D., Int. J. Neuropsychiatry, 2 (1966). Hill, D., and Parr, G., Electroencephalography : A Symposium on its Various Aspects (Macmillan, New York, 1963). Siegel, S., Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 152-156 (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1956). w aa oon The stability of a feasible random ecosystem THE weight of the evidence, and the beliefs of most biologists, seem to support the view! that ecosystems tend to be more stable, the larger the number of interacting species they con- tain. It is puzzling, therefore, that a variety of mathematical models of complex ecosystems appear to give the contrary answer: that complexity makes for instability? Prominent among such models is the complex system with random interactions, studied in various forms by Gardner and | Ashby? and May?; but their results cannot be applied as they stand to ecological systems. In an ecosystem, the interacting variables are species populations (or species biomass) which cannot take on negative values. Thus, for example, the equili- brium population values must be positive, and it is convenient to denote this necessary property of an ecosystem model by saying that it must be ‘feasible’. The work referred to imposed no such constraint on equili- brium populations in the samples considered. It is of some interest, therefore, to examine the stability of a random model capable of representing ecosystems, by imposing the restriction that the sample be feasible. I report here the results of computer calculations on such a model. The interaction equations were of the well-known quasi-linear type, in which the rate of fractional increase of a species population is a linear function of the current populations in all T species. That is, the number N; in the ‘th species obeys dNi/d = Ni (bh, 4- zy ary N)). All birth rates &, were taken as 1, and the self-regulating coefficients a, aS ~—1. The feasibility requirement was that the Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200090024-7
ana RY? Sec atusidl Mona tbe wes aN He theless ep weatct beam A OTTERS: Editor: Or Bernard Dixon Geputy Editor (Science): Dr Peter Stubbs Deputy Editor (Technology): Nicholas Valéry fMenaging Editor: Richard Fifield Science Policy Editor: Dr Martin Sherwood Science Editor: Dr Roger Lewin Assistant Science Editor: Dr Robert Walgate Soclai Editor: lan Low Technology Editor: Michael Kenward Technology Policy Editor: Dr Joseph Hanlon Technology News Editor: Lawrence McGinty Art Editor: Margaret Webb Assistant Art Editer: Alan Middleton Artists: Neil Hysfop, Michael Peyton US Editor: Graham Chedd 72 Addington Rd, Brookline, Massachusetts 02146 Consullants Biochemistry: Or Robert Freedman Computers: Hedley Voysey - Education: John Delin Environment: Jon Tinker Marine: Tony Loftas Psychology: Dr Nick Humphrey Soviet Science: Dr Sarah White Telecommunicatians: Ron Brown Adverficement manager: Roy Edwards Advisory Panel Or Monty Finniston FRS Sir William Glanville FRS Or Basil Mason FRS o> Professor Sir Michael Swann FRS PUBLISHED WEEKLY Publisher's subscription rate, Inland: £10-80 Overseas surface mail: £11-95 USA end Cerneca (eidreigni) €27-89 Back numbers (cash with order) up including posiage {ram IPC Magazines Ltd, 86-53 Great Queen Street, London WC2E 50D Registered at The Post Office as a newspaper and prinied in England . ?nd class postage paid at Jamaica NY, 11431 Airfrecght and mailing in the USA by Publications Expediting Inc., 200 d For Avenue, Elmont, Approve © IPC Magazines (td, 1974 omega rr APRE OYE EOF RE| OVERSEAS ADVERTISEMENTS REPRESENTATIVES ease 2000/08/10:;.C1A-RDP96-00787R000200090024-7 128 Long Acre, London WC2E 9QH . Telephone: 01-836 2468 Cables: Newscient London WC2 Telex: 27253 Subscription inquiries: 01-242 4477 17 October 1974 Volume 64 Number 919 Monitor 165 Technology review 186 Energy file 198 Feedback 269 . Westminster scene 202 - New York view 202 Paris notebook 203 EEC notebook 203 Venture 204 Pig-ignorant 205 7 A groundling’s notebook 205 Tantalizer 206 ~ Letters 212 Grimbledon Down 212 ‘ . Ariadne 252 ere nr rn EAC CO I Comment Or Roger Lewin, Adrian Hope, Dr Michael Schwab 163 ae etme reper amr Uri Geller and Science A New Scientist special investigation by Dr Joseph Hanlon Generalisations Professor Guy Ourisson talks to Dr Martin Sherwood 450 How safe are North Sea platforms? Keith Attfield 192 ts the North Sea bubble bursting? Lawrence McGinty 195 eee ER _— Review Professor Leslie Audus, Dr Marie Boas Hali, Dr Andrew Miller, _ Dr Martin Sherwood, Dr Clive Wood, David Dickson, Dr William N. Beesley, Lawrence McGinty, et Al 207 CEE TLC CA CR USA; Jobson, Jordan, Harrison & Schulz Inc., 57 Post Street, Suite 712-715, San Francisco, Caliiornia $4104 (415) 292-6794, and 1901 West Eighth Street, Los Angeles, California 90057 (243) 483-8550 East Coastund Mid Vvest William F. Strute & Associates Inc, 220 Pars Avenue, theve York, NY¥ 10017 (212) 685-7452 CANADA: Clement Dick, Chimney Copse, RR No 1, Churchill, Ontario, Canada. (705) 456 2341 JAPAN: Internationa! Media Representatives Lid, f, Shiba-Kotohiracho, Minatoku, . _ + Tokyo, Japan, Tel: 502-0656, Teiex: 22633 For Releasq Paeinent CHA RP PIGOTT REDO ZCUSCO2aET YO