Approved For Release 2000*rtjp(r ft [ f nP96-00788r001 300260001 -0
II
INTRODUCTION
Should countermeasures
(CM) against psychoenergetic intrusion exist,
they will
be accomplished by physical
or by mental processes.
Physical
countermeasures,
such
as various
forms
of
shielding,
implicitly assume
the existence of psychoenergetic interactions with
the physical world.
In the parapsychological
literature,
such interactions are referred to
as
remote perturbation
(RP)
,
psychokinesis
(PK)
, telekinesis
(TK)
,
etc.
Countermeasures accomplished by mental processes are difficult
to define
and even more difficult
to investigate.
Like
jamming
a radar signal,
mental CM would most
likely use the
same process
as
that
of the intrusion.
Examples
of potential mental CM drawn from the occult
literature are
"psychic attack
, "
r,hexes
,
M and the
like.
This report
focuses upon physi-
cal
CM.
To determine the feasibility of
a physical CM device, we must
first
assess whether simple intrusion detection
is possible.
The mechanism
underlying such
a detector would then serve
as
the basis for the develop-
ment
of
a CM device.
Psychoenergetic intrusion may be classified into two categories:
(1)
Material objects
are affected
(2)
Information only is obtained from the remote
location.
We have surveyed the
literature and evaluated the most recent
laboratory
experiments
that address
both types
of intrusion.
This report
summarizes
that
investigation
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Release 2000/CJJ£||fl5pP96-00788r001 300260001-0
III
LITERATURE SURVEY AND EVALUATION
To achieve our objective,
we have conducted
a
complete survey of the
most recent ten years
of parapsychological
literature in five different
journals.
We have
limited the period surveyed:
•
To ensure
that
the threat assessment
of psychoenergetic
intrusion
is
relevant to modern facilities.
•
To make
the survey chronologically compatible with
a
previously completed survey of random number generator
(RNG)
RP.
Sixty-five papers were identified that pertain to RP ,
exclusive of RNG
studies.
Combined with the papers reviewed
in a previous report1
we now
have
a
data
base
of approximately 100 laboratory publications
of experi-
ments
that
suggest the probability of
mental intrusion.
These reports
fall into categories
(Table
1)
that
can be arranged
into
a hierarchy of
the magnitude of intrusive effect.
This
same organi-
zation yields
a parallel hierarchy of
credibility that
is determined by
soundness
of methodology and replicability.
In general, phenomena
reported at
the beginning
of
the table
[e.g.,
effects
on RNG,
dice experi-
ments,
remote viewing]
tend to
be characterized by rigorous experimental
design.
Remote perturbation effects
listed at the end of the table
(metal
bending,
levitation)
are more difficult to assess
because of incomplete
descriptions
of
controls and
the near anecdotal nature
of the reports.
Most
of the papers
claiming evidence of physical effects are not
subject
*These
journals were
the
Journal of Parapsychology
,
the Journal
of American
Society
for Psychical Research,
the
Journal of
the Society for Psychical
Research,
the European Journal
of Parapsychology
,
and Research in
Paraps ychology
.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Release 2000/«9£@££)UaP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Table
MENTAL INTRUSION
Type
of
Intrusion and Examples
pffect
of Intrusion
I
Data gathering
Mi nimal
•
Remote viewing
(RV)
•
Out-of-body experiences
(OOBE)
•
Psychoenergetic data selection
(PDS)
Pseudorandom number generator
True random number generator
II
Perturbation
of systems and objects
Some physical effect
•
Transient
systems
Dice throwing
Random number generators
Thoughtography
Spinning
coin
•
Biological systems
-
Paramecia
Small animals
-
Humans
(physiology and movement)
•
Stable systems
Strain gauge
Thermometry
Magnetometer
-
Bubble
chamber
•
Static objects
Metal bending
Compass needle deflection
-
Moving plastic tubes,
small
jars,
etc.
Table levitation
III
Unusual
or rare RP
Large
scale effect
•
Materializations
•
Large scale
levitations and RP
D
.
D
,
Home
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Release 2000/Q£AQ7^tt£aP96-00788r001 300260001-0
to evaluation because the descriptions
of the experiments are incomplete
in one or more aspects.
To consider the possibility of physical
CM, we
are forced to assume that all reports are true,
and to exercise caution
in drawing conclusions
from the data base.
In analyzing the data-gathering form of intrusion, we find ample
evidence
in both the open and classified literature 2
’ 3
that
RV may be a
valuable information-gathering technology.
Because no reported perturba-
tion occur at
the time
of RV data acquisition, we are unable to recommend
a physical
countermeasure.
However,
evidence from two OOBE4
>
suggests
that there may be
a concomitant remote perturbation that
can be detected
at
the time
of
the OOBE.
Whether RV produces
similar detectable effects
remains
to be determined.
Analysis
of
the remaining forms
of intrusion presented in Table
revealed that
virtually none
of the papers
discussed effects
at distances
greater than
a few meters
•
(For example
,
almost all of the metal bending
reported occurred with the subject actually touching
the object
in quest!
These observations
suggest that
the simplest form of countermeasure
in
these
cases may be distance between sensitive equipment and a putative
RP agent
.
Some
forms
of RP may be accomplished by unusual
(but
not psycho-
energetic)
human abilities.
(For example,
some authors
have suggested
that
RP on static objects may be explained by the subject's ability to
generate electric fields
. )
In such cases
,
standard shielding techniques
would serve
as an adequate countermeasure
.
noth
T\ON)
NO
CM
FOR.
CM-
veep peo
n.
)
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Release 2000tf^Jgj|g^P96-00788r001 300260001-0
IV
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR PS YCHOENERGET I C INTRUSION
Theoretical understanding of psychoenergetic processes
is still
in
its
infancy.
With one possible exception, 6
all suggestions
for mechanisms
must
be categorized as
"plausibility" arguments.
Table
shows
the current theoretical
ideas with a brief description
of each.
In order to suggest
possible countermeasures, we must assume that
a
given mechanism is responsible for the phenomena.
From Table
2,
we see
that Mechanisms
1 and
6 are
"normal" because they involve well understood
physical processes and thus have recognizable countermeasures.
The
re-
maining mechanisms,
however,
have
no known physical
CM*
Yet,
to disallow
the possibility of
some form of mental CM would be premature.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
P
ysic
ist
suqaesnoos
^
%
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Table
SUGGESTED PSYCHOENERGETIC MECHANISMS
Mechanism
j
Description
Possible Countermeasure
(i)
Extremely low
frequency
(ELF)
Low frequency electromagnetic radia-
tion emanating from the
~10 Hz
component
of normal brain functioning
acts
as
information carrier.
Standard ELF shielding procedures
(superconductivity and seawater)
(2)
EPR paradox
Quantum mechanical argument for
nonlorentzian
(fas ter-than-light
)
"communication” between separated
quantum systems
Unknown physical CM or mental CM
(3)
Hypergeometry
The distance between points
in normal
3-space vanishes
in hyperspace.
Thus
the
case of access
to "remote”
information.
Unknown physical CM or mental CM
(4)
General quantum
mechanics
Human consciousness
is intimately
involved in the wave function
collapse
Unknown physical CM or mental CM
(5)
Advanced waves in
Hilbert space
Information propagates backward in
time because
of the time symmetries
of the equations
of quantum
mechanics
Unknown physical CM or mental CM
(6)
Other exceptional
,
but nonpsychoenergetic
human functioning
The ability to modify8
>9
normal body
functioning in exceptional ways
(e.g.,
large skin potentials,
exceptional strength, ultrasonic
generation and the
like).
Standard physical shielding
techniques
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Release 20Gfifl&fi£JfcfiJkfiP96-00788r001 300260001-0
V
RECOMMENDATIONS
Because considerable evidence
for the information-gathering form of
psychoenergetic intrusion exist s
and because evidence also exists
that
some forms
of
this intrusion incidentally affect physical objects, we
recommend that
a countermeasure program be initiated.
To optimize the
likelihood that such
a program will have definitive results, we outline
here
a systematic,
but
limited effort.
Several considerations beyond those
of
the survey must
influence
the design of
a physical CM program.
They are:
•
Devices
must
be chosen that have demonstrated
susceptibility to
RP.
•
Devices must
be sensitive,
yet
isolated from the
environment
.
•
Engineering
(hardware/software)
should be kept at
a minimum.
•
The approach should be systematic and should follow
some
of the earlier reported efforts.
Given these constraints
,
three types
of hardware are suggested for
study in a physical CM program:
(1)
A RNG device
(2)
Temperature sensing elements.
(3)
Film detectors.
A RNG device was selected because such devices have been under study for
10 years.
It
is
clear from this
data base and from one study1
conducted
at
SRI
International
that
some form of psychoenergetic interaction exists
To isolate the form of interaction and to assess
the usefulness
of
RNGs
as
potential intrusion detectors,
a modest redesign of the existing RNG
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Release 2000il^^|^|RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
device
is necessary.
Little or no effort
is required to update our proven
analytical system.
Although there are other devices
(e.g,,
strain gauges, magnetometers,
etc.)
that have also been reported as
susceptible
to RP,
we
chose tempera-
ture sensing hardware and film detectors because
of engineering
considerations.
In summary,
we recommend that an RNG device,
temperature sensing
elements,
and film detectors
be investigated with regard to their sus-
ceptibility to RP as an initial step toward intrusion detection and physical
countermeasures
.
cmt:
this
stoov
suoold
HASie.
oio
u?
sou-
R\), 4
*
this
B6 A
UOCilCAU
KAGiT CES-
SION}
.
RpsrVESL
VT Appels
that ms
IOAS
THTZCilOKJ
TO GeTVOL TO
Repcr to
TN Q2.J
pn e>3
Boooaer
Problems
uom*
COKXiRESS
J/2.& MftN &1
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For Re\ease\2^Qfflfr$$/\$QE&-00788r00'\ 300260001 -0
REFERENCES
1.
E.
C. May,
B.
S. Humphrey,
and
G.
S.
Hubbard,
"Electronic System
Perturbation Techniques," Final Report on SRI Project
8585,
SRI
International, Menlo Park,
CA
(September
1980),
SECRET.
2.
H.
E.
Puthoff and
R.
Targ,
"A Perceptual Channel
for Information
Transfer over Kilometer Distances:
Historical Perspective and Recent
Research,”
Proc.
IEEE
,
Vol.
64,
No.
3,
pp.
329-354
(March 1976).
3.
H.
E.
Puthoff,
R.
Targ,
E.
C. May and
I. Swann,
"Advanced Threat
Technique Assessment,” Final Report,
SRI
Project 5309,
SRI
International,
Menlo Park,
CA
(October
1978),
SECRET,
4.
R.
L. Morris,
"The Use of Detectors
for Out-of-Body Experiences,"
Res, in Parapsy.
1973
,
pp.
114-116.
5.
W.
G.
Roll,
R.
L.
Morris,
B.
Harary,
R. Wells
and
J.
Hartwell,
"Further OOBE Experiments with a Cat
as Detector," Res,
in Parapsy .
1974 ,
pp.
55-56.
6.
K.
Osis and D. McCormick,
"Kinetic Effects
at the Ostensible Location
of an Out-of-Body Projection During Perceptual Testing,"
J.
Amer.
Soc,
Psychical Res .,
Vol.
(July 1980).
7.
B.
Stevens,
L.
Burton and W.
Joines
,
"Charge Build-Up on the Body
as
a Basis
for the
'Human Aura'
and Certain PK Events,"
Res
.
in
Parapsy.
1974
,
pp.
77-80.
8.
I.
M.
Kogan,
"Is Telepathy Possible?," Radio Eng .
,
Vol.
21,
p.
(January 1966).
9.
M.
A.
Persinger,
"Geophysical Models
for Parapsychological Experiences,"
Psychoenergetic Systems,
Vol.
1,
No.
2,
pp.
63-74
(1975).
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0
Approved For ReleasetfC^pa/Q2 cOW-ePpW-00788r001 300260001-0
BIBLIOGRAPHY BY CATEGORY
A.
RP OF STATIC OBJECTS
I
.
Table of Levitation
Brooks-Smith,
C.
,
"Data-Tape Recorded Experimental PK Phenomena
,
"
J.
Soc.
Psychical Res.,
Vol.
48, No.
756
(June
1973).
Brooks-Smith,
C.,
"Paranormal Electrical Conductance Phenomena,"
J,
Soc,
Psychical Res .,
Vol.
48,
No.
764
(June
1975).
Brooks-Smith,
C.
and
D.
W.
Hunt,
"Some Experiments
in Psychokinesis,"
J.
Soc.
Psychical Res.,
Vol.
45,
No.
744
(June
1970).
2.
Miscellaneous
Static Objects
Cassirer,
M,
,
"Experiments with Nina Kulagina,"
J.
Soc,
Psychical
Res .,
Vol.
47,
No.
759
(March 1974).
Honorton,
C.
,
"Apparent
Psychokinesis
on Static Objects
by a Gifted
Subject," Res,
in Para,
1973
,
pp.
129-131.
Kei 1 ,
H.H.J.
and
J. Fahler
,
"Nina
S.
Kulagina:
A Strong Case for PK
Involving Directly Observable Movements
of Objects Recorded on
Cine Film," Res
in Para
.
1974
,
pp.
66-69.
Pratt,
J.
G.
and H.H.J. Keil,
"Firsthand Observations
of Nina
S. Kulagina
Suggestive
of
PK Upon Static Objects,"
J. Amer.
Soc.
Psychical Res
.
Watkins,
G.
K.
and A.
M. Watkins,
"Apparent Psychokinesis
on Static Objects
by a Gifted Subject:
A Laboratory Demonstration," Res,
in Para.
1973
,
pp,
132-134.
B,
METAL BENDING
(Exclusive of Strain Gauge)
Bender,
H.,
nFurther
Investigations
of Spontaneous
and Experimental PK
by the Freiburg
Institute, " Res,
in Para,
1976
,
pp,
202-203,
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
: CIA-RDP96-00788r001 300260001-0