Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
control,
the experimenter announces
the start
of the experiment.
T
universal randomization protocol
(discussed
in previous section)
is then
used to generate ten activity/no activity periods
of equal length
(e.g.,
twenty-five seconds) pre-determined by the experimenter.
A sample run
(Run
1,
Subject
1)
is shown in Figure
13.
The
randomly-generated ON
(activity) periods
are Nos.
2,
8 ,
and
9.
As
observed,
signals appear
in each of
these three periods.
The sigpal
appearing in period
9 was strong enough to cause loss
of continuous
tracking.
This
latter type of signal can be the result
of an exceptionally
^
strong flux change,
or
an RF burst whether subject-generated or art ifactual,
and are handled on the basis' of statistical correlation as 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 corresponds, to an
input
~ 1.6 x 10-9 Gauss/cm
(second derivative $Bj |
)
,
equivalent
to
^ 3.5 x 10-7 Gauss referred to one pickup coil.
The interpretation of such observations must be subjected to careful
V
T
analysis.
For example,
the emphasis
on ’’corresponds
to’’
is based on the
following:
although the probe
is designed to register magnetic 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 onlj^conclude
that
generation of
a magnetic field
is
the most probable_cause .
With
dev ices,
and thus
a ’’recorder only" effect can be considered
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
low probability,
although an electronics
interference effect ahead of all
display cannot be ruled out.
We therefore treat the magnetic cause
as
tentative,
although most probable,
and concentrate our attention on
whether a correlation exists between system disturbances and subject
efforts.
Subject
1 logged the most time
in controlled runs,
thirteen ten-trial
runs.
Each of the ten trials
in the run lasted fifty seconds each,*
the activity/no activity command for each trial being generated by the
universal randomization protocol technique.
In the
13 x
10 = 130 trials,
consisting of
a random distribution of
64 activity and 66 ho-activity
periods,
63 events
of signal-to-noise ratio >
1 were observed.
Ofjhese
63 events,
42 were distributed among the activity periods,
21 among the
no-activity periods,
a correlation significant
at the p = 0.004
level.
Subjects
2 and
6 also interacted with the device.
Although subject
efforts and observed perturbations sometimes coincided,
activity was
generally low and did not appear to be
a signature of correlated activity
under control.
'-.A controlled ten-trial run with Subject
2 and two such
runs with Subject
6 yielded non-significant results.
a/*
Given the
limited availability
of the instrument
and somewhat ^
L
,Y
noisy environment,
from our best effort we nonetheless conclude that
for Subject
1 the observed number of precisely timed events
in pilot
work coupled with the statistically significant
(p
0.004)
correlation
between subject
effort and signal output
in controlled runs
indicate
a
&
,
.
p
j_-i
25—second
trials were used.
* With the exception of the first run wnerc
ze
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/1 0
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001 -0
highly probable cause-effect relationship.
Thus
it appears
that
a gifted
subject can interact with a second derivative magnetic gradiometer of
sensitivity - lo"
9 Gauss/cm
2 from a distance
of four meters.
Further work
would be required to determine absolutely the precise nature
of
the
|
interaction,
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 symetrically
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 a lo
power argon
laser
1" reflected from a small mirror on the pendulum onto a
position sensing silicon detector
"
1"
1.5 meters from the pendulum.
The
detector yields
an output voltage proportional
to spot position.
The
ttt
output from the detector
is monitored by
a chart recorder
which provides
a continuous! sine wave record of pendulum position.
+ /Spectra Physics Model 262
tt United Detector Technology Model SC/10
ttt' Brush Model Mark
200
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
The system exhibits
a sensitivity
of approximately
10 microradians
Under typical experimental conditions random accoustical fluctuations
drive
the pendulum in its torsional normal mode of
10 second period to
a level ~ 100 microradians angular deviation.
During control r
the pendulum executes harmonic motion with a maximum variation in-
amplitude of
±
10 percent over an hour period.
Sudden vibrational
perturbations
in the environment produce oscillation of the pendulum
in the vertical plane
at
a frequency of
1 Hb,
as contrasted with the
torsional mode
in the horizontal plane
at 0.1 Hz.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
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 uni-
versal randomization protocol described in
(a)
.
Each experiment
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 produded 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 target laboratory.
The remote
aspect was instituted both to prevent artifactual effects from
body heat,
etc.,
and also to determine whether energy can be coupled v±a
the remote viewing channel
to
a remote location.
+
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-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
In pilot studies we observed considerable evidence
indicating that
a
gifted subject located in the
same room is
able,
by concentration,
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 14.
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
i
on the 0.1 Hz torsional motion.
What
is especially interesting
are the
decreases which take
the motion below that generally observed due to en-
vironmental noise driving.
Such observations indicate
the application of
a constraint which couples energy out of the pendulum motion.
Similar ob- —
servations have been observed with the subject removed to the second location
12 meters away.
Although less pronounced (change-to-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 collected to be sub-
jected 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
is 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,
an
the results will b^published when
available.
]
Approved For Release 2000/08/1 0'TieiA,RDP96-OO/8^O001^20001 -0
a f& fy ae [e) & 8 ue} pe fue ct Gc Pu om a ist) q He ith} 7 bs fo} Bb Q o) ne) n ® mn i] [o} a) Qu LCs] “et me) he m N rt ° ia i>) fae 3 & pa ED - ° Qu fry) NOILOW WO INGNTd 4 SUNITA aeaeevestoentetesterts sesperrnascrssbtesstzestssccsersea: accecececsressteves iis on eau i Bear caaceensaerees i! eH _ i Eni ‘ H Ht : ie 1 Sens sae i E H Et H tH H H ae HH a fs ul : a HN EEE tert a o Ht ett poe Loa states peenas erate t+ rh Et aaa A | ame
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
(d)
Experiments with Geiger Counter
As
part of
a continuing search for mechanisms involved
xn para-
normal phenomena,
a series of experiments were conducted with Subject
to determine whether
a geiger counter
in the
y
- ray
mode
(x.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 15 60-second
trials, with 10-second separations between the trials.
Preceding each
subject run is a control run of equal duration.
In four runs
to date
the results,
shown in Table
6,
indicate
no effect of statistical^^^
nei^gjl^^e mean nor standard
deviation of counts
f
OCDM Item No. CD V-700,
Model No.
66,
Electro-Neutronics ,
Inc.
Oakland,
CA.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
RS IS
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
TABLE
Geiger Counter Experiment
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
5.
Basic Research Summary
The basic research program to date has been spread over a number
of subjects and over 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 in order
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 psy-
chological 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-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
APPENDIX
Randomne ss Tests of Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator
The design objective was to build a four-state machine,
with each
state equally likely to occur 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 three machines finally
selected for use
in screening met established criteria for randomness.
In developing randomness tests,
we rare 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 elec-
tronic 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.
Ihis
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
test^should^ dete^t^a
S
s t^iblG^bias i
*> teSt *“
this second possibility we also tally the distribution of outcome in each
group of 100 trials,
then compute a 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 approxi-
mately 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 shorter period,
if substantial,
can be tested for by
tallying the frequency with which the previous machine
state
is repeated;
an
oiCTn-ificantlv above 0.25 is indicative of such bias,
overall repeat ratio
( all
)
significantly aoove
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 con-
sidered a danger signal.
We
also tally the
initial machine
states following reset and the
tran-
sitions between states..
In each case,
the number of occurrences of each of
the
four possible outcomes should be approximately equal.
When rep
» tviiis
("nondiagonal transitions")
,
the
four states
deleted from the sequence of trials
( nonaxa^u
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
Alexander Mood ,
Introductdoil_to_Jd]eJTh22£)Li^
(HcGrawHIU,
New York,
1950)
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
under the null hypothesis
is distributed approximately as chi-square with
three degrees of
freedom,
with rejection for large values
of
this statis-
tic.
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 distribution approximation
is computed,
assuming the statistic
zr1 -
°* 25 )J^
to be approximately normal with mean zero and standard deviation one.
The typical test pattern used was
six passes
followed by
twenty-five 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,
2,000
to 6,000 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 re-
peats
is 0.25 with a standard deviation of 3/200 = 0.00866.
A
sample computer listing
of
the results
of randomness
.
.
iTc,v,io
i
Of
the four machines
tested,
tests on Machine
is
included
in Table
1.
ut
tne
x
tteee were found suitable
for use
in screening activity.
The
fourth machine
was returned to the manufacturer for adjustment.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
; CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Table
RANDOMNESS TESTS—-MACHINE 4
Yellow
|
Green
|
Blue
Red
B inom
.
Prob.
Initial states
|
107
Transitions
All states
Nondiagonal
transitions
Diagonal
transitions
3175
3312
3264
3047
3197
3155
3247
13110
1.996
2.573
6.745
1.158
5.667
|
0.18
2340
2412
2341
2426
9519
0.45
0.46
0.08
0.76
0.41
N-Trials
|
Repeats
Ratio
Binomial
Prob
Chi-sq.
= 299.6141
Randomness
in groups of 100 trials
F.
= 345
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Appendix
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.
.
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 electronic random stimulus generator.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
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
assumpt ions 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-
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-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
FIGURE A-1
ILLUSTRATION OF TENSION/VECTOR ANALYSIS
IN OPERATION
With
Button C
being
the one
selected
using
these
cues.
ASSUMED
nature of
PERCEPTIONS
ACTUAL
NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Clairvoyant
Precognitive
Clairvoyant
and
Precognitive
Clairvoyant
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Misperception
Precognitive
Misperception —
Correct
Perception
Misperception
Clairvoyant
and
Precognitive
Misperception
Misperception
Correct
Perception
SA-261 3-22
IGURE A-
mathiv qnnwlNG CORRECT PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION
IN THE USE
“ TENSION/V^OR CUES V,A THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND
ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0
troublesome—typically with Greater difficulty in ^-mlntug
the order
ih which the buttons would appear as targ
lesser difficulty in determining which buttons were targets.
Confusion and error would arise when
I assumed the tension/.ector
perceptions were clairvoyant when
in fact they were
(say) Clair
y
and precognitive.
To explain how this
felt,
refer bach to Figure A-l.
If
the actual sequence of correct
answer's were Buttons B and
D,
and if
1 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
.
r 2
«
Comments on Perceptual Processes
Rather than work rapidly,
I chose to work deliberately,
consciously,
and therefore slowly.
I would typically take five to thirty seconds
to select
a button-enough time
to have a firm and conscious sense of
my internal cues
and what
I thought they meant.
The typical sequence
would be
as follows;
•
Clear mind and become quiet
Concentrate internal awareness
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
•
Observe various cues
•
Rationally interact with cues
to sort them out
•
Select
a button and press
it
•
Integrate feedback from response
•
Clear mind and become quiet.
Except during
"pattern recognition," when all buttons
seemed equally
accessible,
I
found that
the
top
two buttons on the machine were much
more accessible than the bottom
two.
Three plausible explanations emerge
to account
for this.
First
(and least likely
I
think)
is
a psychological
.
predisposition against
the bottom two buttons—perhaps because of the
color of the buttons or because of the pictures associated with the tar-
gets.
Second
is
the possibility that
the circuitry of
the ESP machine
in some way favors
the
top two buttons or obscures the bottom two.
Third
(and most plausible to me)
is the possibility that
to
the extent
I used
the "tension/vector"
cue,
then the bottom
two buttons would
be without
a vector below them—making
it more difficult
to "bracket”
the bottom two
buttons with this perceptual process.
In later phases of
the experiment,
I was more able
to access the bottom
two buttons and this
seemed to 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-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0
with the buttons
in that pattern.
Stated differently,
the
same cues
discussed above held equally well
for precognition or for clairvoyance
so the problem of making
a selection was compounded
by
the additional
difficulty of having to determine whether
a perceptual
cue was associated
with
the button that had already been selected
by
the machine or the
button that would be selected
in the next or even subsequent
trial.
I
definitely felt
that
if
I
could consistently separate clairvoyant from
precogniti.ve dimensions of identical cues,
that
I could substantially
increase the accuracy of overall
scores.
The cues were not always consistent in their presence and meaning.
For example,
I might be obtaining good results with the use of tension/
vector cues and then find them becoming ambiguous,
with a commensurate
decline
in my
score.
Then
I would rely more heavily upon other cues.
Or,
the cues might work well
for clairvoyant perceptions
for
a while but
then shift
to operate
for precognition—then
I would have
to "recalibrate
myself to
the cue mechanisms.
So,
it was
a fluid,
dynamic perceptual
process which required flexibility and patience.
Highly significant
scores
and perceptions seemed to go in spurts of ten trials or
so,
then
I would
fall back to
a chance level until
I could resynchronize myself
ith the machine and the character of my perceptual cues.
tend to agree with the notion that
it might
be more appropriate
to call
these processes "extraconceptual perception
rather than
extra-
sensory perception."
The perceptual
cues were definitely present and
they had sensory dimensions even though they do not
fit
into our traditional
sensory categories.
Just
"where" and
how
these sensory cues were present
is not clear
to me—but these are essentially conceptual rather than
sensory
issues.
Approved For Release 2000/08/10
: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0