Final Report
May
198&
PHOTON PRODUCTION
(CHINESE REPLICATION)
(U)
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
Approved For Release 2000/0
0789R003200200001 -4
I
OBJECTIVE (U)
The objective of this task was to examine and
psychokinesis (PK)
replicate foreign work in
W-.I
Approved For Release 2P00/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
III INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND (U)
We have attempted to assess the possibility of constructing an intrusion detector
that would
t>e sensitive to remote viewing (RV) oHacilities.
In order to perform this task, we
have surveyed many reports of psychokinesis (PK)
While a few of these papers seemed to document genuine psychoenergetkTh^TIinSe
really served as an exact model for testing physical correlates at the site of RV activity.
Since
that survey was conducted, new reports of PK experiments by physicists in the People’s
Republic of China (PRC) have emerged.2-3
The two papers cited contain brief descriptions of
experiments in which individuals with | exceptional vision” affected physical systems
(film,
photomultiplier tubes, and plants) when correctly identifying Chinese language characters
hidden with the
test apparatus.
}
•
-
.
_
r
AS the ChineSe them|elves point out. the photomultiplier (PM) tube has the
best sensitivity,
stability, and response to transients of the three systems examined.
For these
reasons, we concluded that a replication of the PRC experiments (using SRI International RV
participants and a PM tube) afforded the most promising test of intrusion detection.
While
investigating the intrusion concept, we would be able to replicate foreign work in PK as well.
(U)
Specifically, the Chinesp reported that PM-tube-count rates of 10* to UP greater
than background rates have been produced during “exceptional vision."
Their signal
discriminators were set to produce^ background of about 15 counts/s.
Although the Chinese
claim to have eliminated sources of experimental artifact such as light leaks, electromagnetic
interference, and the
like, at least one report states that individuals “must touch the surface
of the light-proof material" or the effect
is not produced .2
This procedure seems such an
obvious potential source of artifact that we excluded touching entirely in pur investigations.
The PRC experiments also reported that the anomalous signals produced during exceptional
vision were primarily large-amplitude pulses which appeared rapidly (~l
s rise time).
s-:4x
•
:
Approved For Release 2j
; CJA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
• t-v
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
(U)
By following the above suggestions, we believe a more definitive investigation can be
conducted.
Despite our reservations about the large anomalies, the statistical correlations
observed represent the
first evidence that intrusion detection may be possible—even in
principle.
Therefore,
this work must be continued to confirm such a possibility.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-R&F96-00789R003200200001-4
03200200001-4
ved For Release 2000/08/08
Final Report-
December 1986
Covering the Period
October
1985 to 30 September
1986
REMOTE VIEWING EVALUATION TECHNIQUES
(U)
i
i
j
t
L.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
I INTRODUCTION (U)
• Since
the publication of the initial remote viewing
(RV)
effort
at
SRI
International* 1
,
two basic questions have remained
in evaluating
remote viewing data:
•
What
is
the definition of
the target site?
•
What
is
the definition of
the RV response?
In the development of meaningful evaluation procedures,
we must address
these two questions,
whether the RV task
is a research-oriented one
(in
which the target pool
is known)
,
or
mission
(in
which
the
target may not be known)
.
(U)
In the older, IEEE-style, outbound experiment, definitions of target and response
were particularly difficult to achieve.
The protocol for such an experiment dictated that an
experimenter travel to some randomly chosen location at a prearranged time; a viewer’s task
was to describe that location.
In trying to assess the quality of the RV descriptions
(in a
series of trials,
for example), an analyst visited each of the
sites and attempted to match
responses to them.
While standing at a
site, the analyst had to determine not only the
bounds of the
site, but also the
site details that were to be included in the analysis.
To cite a
specific example using this protocol:
if the analyst were to stand in the middle of the Golden
Gate Bridge, he/she would have to determine whether the buildings of downtown San
Francisco, which are clearly and prominently visible, were to be considered part of the
Golden Gate Bridge target.
The RV response to the Golden Gate Bridge target could be
equally troublesome, because responses of this sort were typically
15 pages of dream-like
free
associations.
A reasonable description of the bridge might be contained in the response— it
might be obfuscated, however, by a large amount of unrelated material.
How was an analyst
to approach this problem of response definition?
(U)
The
first attempt at quantitatively defining an RV response involved reducing the
raw transcript to a series of declarative statements called concepts.2
Initially,
it was
(U)
References are listed in order of appearance at the end of this report.
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIArRDP96-00789R003200200001-4
(U)
determined that a coherent concept should not be reduced to
its component parts.
For
example,
a small red VW car would be considered a single concept rather than four separate
concepts, small,
red, VW, and car.
Once a transcript had been “conceptualized," the
list of
concepts constituted, by definition, the RV response.
The analyst rated the concept
lists
against the sites.
Although this represented a major advance over previous methods, no
attempt was made to define the target site.
,
During an FY 1982 program,
a procedure was developed to define
both the target and response material. 3
It became evident
that before a
site can be quantified,
the overall remote viewing goal must be clearly
defined.
If the goal
is
simply to demonstrate
the existence of the RV
phenomena,
then anything that
is perceived at
the site
is
important.
But
if the goal
is
to gain information that
is useful
t then specific
items at
the site are
important while others
remain
insignificant.
For example,
let us assume
that an office
is a
hypothetical
target and that
a single computer
in
that office
is of
specific
interest.
Let us also assume,
hypothetically,
that a viewer gives
an accurate description of the shape of
the office,
provides
the serial
number of the
typewriter,
and gives a complete description of
the owner of
the office.
Although this kind of a response might provide excellent
evidence for remote viewing,
the
target of
interest
(the computer)
is
completely missed— this response,
therefore,
is of no
interest*
What
is needed
is a specific technique
to allow
assessments
that are mission-oriented.
<
(This report describes
a computerized RV evaluation procedure that
was
initially developed
in FY I9844 and has been expanded and refined
in FY
1986.*
In
its current evolution,
it
is an analysis
that has been aimed
primarily at simpler,
research-oriented tasks using a known target pool.
It
is anticipated,
however,
that future refinements
to existing procedures,
in addition to
the advances of proposed new technologies,
will allow
evaluation techniques
to begin
to address
the more complex
issue of
~
k RV
^collection.
*(U) This report constitutes Objective A, Task 4, “Remote Viewing Evaluation Techniques.
Approved For Release 2000/08/Gfc
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
C
_
* Finally , work will
bo initiated
to develop mission—specif ic
descriptor lists for technical site applications,
i
“
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
:
3glA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4
'Hffffir,
Approved For Release
-RDP96-00789R003200200001 -4
V CONCLUSIONS (U)
(U)
The FY 1986 evaluation effort has resulted in
(1) refinement and extension of
current techniques, and
(2)
identification of candidate new technologies for preliminary
research.
(U)
The mathematical formalism for the current evaluation procedure—the
figure of
merit analysis— is well understood and stable.
In addition to the system's ability to provide a
reasonable assessment of remote viewing data,
it has also provided a mechanism for systematic
examination of inter-analyst reliability factors.
(U)
The descriptor
lists that currently form the basis for the figure of merit analysis
have been evaluated on a post hoc basis.
Preliminary observations indicate that
lists designed
for novice responses require greater abstract descriptor capability, whereas
lists designed for
advanced responses
(i.e., higher-quality data) require greater concrete descriptor capability.
It
is anticipated that fuzzy set technology will assist in formalizing the interdependence
between abstract and concrete descriptors, by providing a mathematical framework through
which basis vector descriptors can be combined to form concrete descriptors.
(U)
Research into new technologies
for RV evaluation will begin in FY 1987.
One of
these approaches, the proposed “similarity" experiment, shows promise for identifying basis
vector descriptors. A second approach, using rule-based expert systems,
will explore a
different dimension by endeavoring to capture RV analysts’ expertise
in codifying targets.
Should this
initial effort in
artificial intelligence prove successful,
it
will be expanded to
address the more difficult problem of response interpretation.
It
is hoped
that
this multifaceted approach
to the refinement of
RV evaluation procedures will result
in increased capabilities
for
addressing the more complex problems of mission-oriented^
RV
.
«H
m
Approved For Release 2000/08/08
: CIA-RDP96-00789R003200200001-4