Approved For Ifetease 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-W87R0002001 50003-3
PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE
OF THE FOUR-STATE
ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR *
The following notes are based solely upon my experience and
I there-
fore make no claim that they are generalizable to other persons.
Since
I am still learning about ESP phenomena,
I am confident that additional
work in this area will expand,
modify,
and refine the perceptual processes
discussed below.
While
I have tried
to describe these experiential
processes with as much precision as possible,
the use of seemingly precise
language should not leave the impression that the perceptions themselves
were equally precise.
To the contrary,
I
found these perceptions
to
be
delicate,
transient and ephemeral—and yet,
at the same time
and somewhat
surprisingly—unmistakably real.
1.
Perceptual Processes
Working with the ESP machine proved to be a venture into unfamiliar
perceptual territory which functioned according to new and different
rules.
It took some time
(five hours or so with
the ESP machine)
to begin
to learn not only which perceptual processes would work but,
equally
important which would not work.
There was clearly a learning process
in finding those delicate and subtle internal cues
that would allow me
to make perceptually based choices.
After approximately 1000 trials
. with the ESP machine,
five dominant perceptual modes emerged.
Subsequent
*
Prepared by
a policy research analyst at SRI,
who was
a high-scoring subject (p<10' 6
)
with the four-state electrouic
randoe.
stimulus 'generator.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
ujUlLJU.
j
Approved For Mease 2000/08/1 0
: CIA-RDP96-&tr87R0002001 50003-3
work with the machine seemed
to essentially expand and refine these
perceptual processes that emerged initially.
.
.
-
•
f.
-
.
"
7 I
I
Direct Knowing
(Used approximately
to 15 percent of the time)—This
perceptual cue came as a "gift"
that
I did not have
to. work for.
This
is not to say that this "cue" was always right,
but when, there was a
direct perception of the appropriate response unmediated by any of the
other cues described below,
my chances of being right seemed quite high
(say 75 percent of the
time).
Internally,
this was simply the
feelingf
•
.1
that
I should push one specific button and the knowing was almost
immediate.
If
it were not immediate
then,
typically,
one of the other
cues would be used.
"Closure Cues"
(Used perhaps
75 percent of the
time)—This cue
manifested itself
in a variety of ways;
a sense of "fullness" with respect
to a particular button,
an internal anticipation of the bell ringing,
a
sense of "hardness" or "firmness" and a sense of being "locked
into" the
•
correct response,.
The validity of this cue could be tested by acting
and thinking as
if
I were going to push
a particular button and then
noting the extent to which these "closure cues" became present.
This
sense of active intentionality—both physically and psychologically--
seems important in that
it allowed me
to
sort out many real from imagined
c
perceptions.
Also,
this cue often gave a kind of veto power;
i.e.,
it
did not necessarily assure me as to the right answer but
it would tend
to tell me if
I had picked
tfre wrong one,
i.e.,
I would not experience
the aforementioned cues.
Pattern Recognition (Negligible use initially,
but then used
approximately 75 percent of
the time during Phase
IV)—Although
I used
this perceptual mode very infrequently during the initial stages of the
.
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Rtfease 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-0S787ROOO2OO1 50003-3
experiment,
it emerged rather naturally toward the end.
This was similar
to the "direct knowing" but not isolated to
a single button;
rather,
there
was a sense of the next two to three buttons that would be the correct
responses.
These perceptual cues were obtained in a less objective/
rational way and
in more of
a meditative
state,
highly concentrated but
without specific
focus on a particular button.
Interestingly,
in using
this perceptual process,
I was able
to go somewhat faster and have greater
access to all of the buttons
in an equivalent way
(see the second point
under Section 2 next page)
.
Thus,
this mode had the advantage of loosening
habituated perceptual patterns but
it also made selections less amenable
to conscious control and testing.
This process proved to be either highly
accurate or highly inaccurate.
Accuracy seemed to
be a function of the
degree to which
I could become synchronized with
the evolving pattern of
machine selected choices—and it was easy to get out of phase/sequence
with this pattern.
Rational Guessing
(Used approximately
5 percent of the time) —Although
1 virtually never did try to superimpose some rationally predicted pattern
upon the random,
machine selection of buttons,
I would sometimes temper
my selections
(very seldom for the better)
by noting that one button had
come up too often for
it to be likely on the next trial
or,
conversely,
it had come up so seldom that
it should be given special consideration
as
a likely possibility on the next
trial.
Again,
although this was a
tempting strategy,
I
found that random processes were not amenable to
rational anticipations and my rational guesses seemed often to be wrong.
•
Tension/Vector Analysis
(Used approximately 75 percent of
the time)
Here the cue was manifested as a sense of tension(s)
pulling in one
direction or another with the selection buttons as
the locus
for that
tension.
The cue was also manifested as
a feeling of
emptiness
and
Approved For Release 2000/08/1 0
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-W87R0002001 50003-3
conversely as a sense of "fullness.”
To describe this process
further,
it felt analogous
to vector analysis in physics where,
in sorting out
competing tugs and pulls,
one finds the "dominant" vector;
i.e.,
the one
with the strongest "pull" or the one that best "balances"
the other vector
tensions.
Figure A-l illustrates this phenomenon.
Although the tension/vector cues were very useful and among the
most reliable of all
the
cues,
I
found them to be at times quite mis-
leading.
The source of confusion stemmed from the role of time as a
variable rather than a constant
in extrasensory reality
(discussed in
more~detail under section "Comments on Perceptual Processes").
If my
assumptions as to the temporal nature of my perceptions did not fit with
the actual nature of those perceptions,
then the perceptions were quite
misleading.
(Recall that precognition refers here to a button that will
be selected
in the future—typically the next: trial).
The nine-cell
matrix shown in Figure; A-2 may clarify the complexity of the perceptual
process,
the need for discriminating awareness and the possibility
for
'
error.
Out of nine possible combinations of the assumed/actual nature
of perceptions,
only three are matched or congruent and yield accurate
understandings.
Each of these primary cases
is discussed below;
•
Clairvoyant—Here the feeling which allows sorting and
selection is like that described in Figure A-l.
•
Precognitive—The feeling,
sorting,
and selection is like
'•
that described in Figure A-l with clairvoyance;
the primary
difference being a shift
in the time dimension
to refer,
not
to the present target of the machine,
but to the one to be
selected next.
To act on this perception
I would press the
pass button to bring the future into the present and then
press the button that corresponded to my precognitive per-
s
ceptions.
«
Clairvoyant
and Precognitive—The perception is of a pattern
of buttons,
distributed through time,
that are and will be
selected by the machine—the "pattern" usually consisted of
two
to three buttons.
Again,
the time variable was most
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
‘ CIA-RDP96-W87R0002001 50003-3
LIGHT PULL/UNBA LANCED
STRONG PULL OR/BALANCE
FIGURE A-1
ILLUSTRATION OF TENSION/VECTOR ANALYSIS
IN OPERATION
With Button C being the one
selected
using these
cues.
ACTUAL
NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Clairvoyant
Clairvoyant
Precognitive
and
Precognitive
ASSUMED
NATURE OF
Clairvoyant
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Misperception
PERCEPTIONS
»
Precognitive
Misperception
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Clairvoyant
and
Precog n it ive
Misperception
Misperception
Correct
Perception
SA-261 3-22
FIGURE A-2
MATRIX SHOWING CORRECT, PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION
IN THE USE
OF TENSION/VECTOR CUES VIA THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND
ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
-
,
J
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-0«if87R0002001 50003-3
*"
troublesome—-typically with greater difficulty in determining
the order
in which the buttons would appear as targets and
lesser difficulty in determining which buttons were targets.
cl ;
i
'Confusion and error would. arise when
I
assumed the tension/vector
perceptions were clairvoyant when
in fact they were
(say) clairvoyant
and' precognitive .
To-explain how, this
felt,
refer back to Figure A-l.
If
- the' actual sequence of correct answers were Buttons B and
D,
and if
I -were assuming the perceptions were clairvoyant only,
then it was not
uncommon to have
the perception that the intervening button
(C) was
the
correct choice.
The rationale for this perception was
that
it felt like
a balance point between Buttons B (present target)
and D
(next target).
In retrospect,
when
I
am more rationally aware of the room for
error
in the use of
this cue mechanism,
I am somewhat surprised as to
how useful
it was
in operation.
It should be clear from the preceding descriptions that selections
were made by
a .variety of processes which were used sometimes in isolation
and oftentimes in combination.
A typical sequence
in the selection
process was:
(1) Check for "direct knowing"
cues,
if not
there,
then
(2) Use "tension/vector"
cues,
then
(3) Make final selection with "closure
cues."
v2.
Comments on Perceptual Processes
Rather than work rapidly,
I chose to work deliberately,
consciously,
and therefore slowly.
I would typically take five to thirty seconds
to select a button—enough time
to have a firm and conscious sense of
my internal cues and what
I thought they meant.
The typical sequence
would be as follows:
•
Clear mind and become quiet
•
Concentrate internal awareness
»
...
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Ratease 2000/08/1 0
: CIA-RDP96-0WT87R0002001 50003-3
•
' Observe various cues
•
Rationally interact with cues
to sort them out
•
Select
a button and press
it
*"•
~
:r'
•
Integrate feedback from response
•
Clear mind and become quiet.
.
...
-Except during "pattern recognition," when all buttons seemed equally
accessible,
I found that the top two buttons on the machine were much
more accessible than the bottom
two.
Three plausible explanations emerge
to account for this.
First
(and least likely- 1 think)
is
a psychological
,,
‘
-A
predisposition against the bottom two buttons—perhaps because of the
color of the buttons or because of the pictures associated with the tar-
gets.
Second
is
the possibility that the circuitry of the ESP machine
in some way favors the top two buttons or obscures the bottom two.
Third
(and most plausible to me)
is the possibility that to the extent
I used
the
tension/vector
cue,
then the bottom two buttons would be without
a vector below them—making it more difficult to "bracket" the bottom two
buttons with this perceptual process.
In later phases of
the experiment,
I was more able to access the bottom two buttons and this seemed to cor-
respond with increasing use of the "pattern recognition" cues and the
decreasing use of tension/vector cues.
The longer
I worked with the ESP machine,
the more apparent
it be-
came that,
in an extrasensory perception reality,
time becomes
fluid.
In other words,
although the experiment was designed to test clairvoyance
(selecting the current target)
only,
I
found that the perceptual cues
would oftentimes
be equally applicable to precognition (selecting a future
target—usually the next one).
Therefore,
making a correct selection
required doing two things;
first,
finding the correct "pattern" of buttons
that would be randomly selected by the machine
(typically the pattern
consisted of
two
to
three buttons)
and
second,
associating a time component
'*
.
„
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-0«pr87R0002001 50003-3
with the buttons
in that pattern.
Stated differently,
the same cues
discussed above held equally well
for precognition or for clairvoyance
so the problem of making a selection was compounded by the additional
A
difficulty of having to determine whether a perceptual cue was associated
^Jiwith the button that had already been selected by
the machine or the
t /
button that would be selected in the next or even subsequent trial.
I
definitely felt that if
I could consistently separate clairvoyant from
precognitive dimensions of identical cues,
that
I could substantially
V
\ s
VjQ
it
increase the accuracy of overall scores.
The cues were not always consistent in their presence and meaning.
/1>
.a
,'$5
/
For example,
I might be obtaining good results with the use of tension/
vec '*:or cues and then find them becoming ambiguous,
with a commensurate
AAfr?
decline in my score.
Then
I would rely more heavily upon other cues.
A Iv
oj
Or,
the cues might work well
for clairvoyant perceptions for a while but
rtni
n
iv'
then shift to operate for precognition—then
I would -have to "recalibrate*
A
h'
L)
A
myself to the cue mechanisms.
So,
it was a fluid,
dynamic perceptual
process which required flexibility and patience.
Highly significant
scores and perceptions seemed
to go in spurts of ten trials or
so,
then
^
(k,
I would fall back to a chance level until
I could resynchronize myself
\A
r/A
,
H
^
.[i
~ith the machine and the character of my perceptual cues.
lA
V1 ^
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-G^87R0002001 50003-3
-*
It was helpful
to have a relatively quiet working environ-
ment.
Or,
if there were noises,
to have them of a
sort—
-
fairly constant ones
that remained in the background—that
could be readily filtered out of my consciousness.
My
impression was
that external sensory information—particularly
sounds—-could readily overload/override subtle and delicate
internal sensory information.
•
It also seemed to help to have low light levels— I would
always turn out the overhead
light.? in the testing room,
I
experimented with closing my eyes to further reduce external
sensory stimulation and
I
found
that this would increase the
sensitivity of sensory cues,
but this increase
in sensitivity
was offset by a lack of visually based feedback to verify
the accuracy of
the selections.
As
a consequence,
I chose
'
to keep my eyes open .
.
•
I found
it essential to work with the ESP machine by sitting
somewhat above
it
so
that
I could look down on the face of
the machine.
For some reason,
perceptual discrimination seemed
much more difficult when
I would
sit at a lower level which
placed the buttons in a plane more nearly horizontal
to my
.face and upper body.
.
..
'
j7. Transferability of Processes
‘
-
The perceptual learning gained
in this experiment seemed generally
transferable to other situations where
I might use ESP abilities,
in
particular,
telepathy,
precognition,
and clairvoyance.
The inference
is that a process or faculty
is being developed which has numerous appli-
k
cations
in other situations which would rely upon ESP.
Analogously,
just as jogging could exercise muscles
to make a person more adept at
playing football,
dancing,
swimming,
and
the
like,
the use and development
of these
psychic
muscles seems to have some degree of transference to
other situations.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96^J787R0002001 50003-3
8.
Conclusions
I
found the experiment to be a very substantial learning experience
in which,
I
feel,
I learned much more than was reflected
in the scores.
It allowed me to begin to identify an ability which
I presume was largely
latent within—never having had a prior opportunity for overt
expression.
Finally,
it suggests
to me that this must be
a common ability among many
people that they simply do not recognize—primarily because they have
never had the opportunity to explore
it as a legitimate and "real"
phenomenon.
'
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0002001 50003-3