Approved For Release 200 ON Ee BO P98 -00788R001300210001-5 (Ss) mechanical model of the diode was developed and found to match direct measurement to within i percent error, This model enabled us, by Monte Carlo methods, to ~ simulate temperature fluctuations and assess their influence upon the statistical output. We found that temperature changes of +20.0 C did not effect the statistical, single bit probability of the binary sequence, which was the expected effect of the 200-kHz bandpass filtering of the diode output. Likewise, large temperature changes in the radioactive source would have added electronic noise to the electron signal, but would not have affected the single bit probability. Considering the isolation precautions and the extensive random source testing described in May and Hubbard ,~° we concluded that the sources were stable against usual and in some cases (magnetic fields, for example), large environmental changes, * We monitored the output from the sources with global and local control trials throughout the course of the 3~month experiment. Because no long=- or short-term . statistical changes were observed, we concluded that both sources were stable with time, * We saved a complete record of the sample~by=-sample raw data for both the formal experiment effort as well as for the local control trials. These data were archived with the client organization, * We conducted the entire experiment in a classified vault: at no time did the subjects have unsupervised access to the room, (U) The experiment described in this report is more complete with the addition of parameters described above. We have enumerated the individual results for local control, formal, and postsession runs in the previous section, Although the combined results for each of these three categories cannot be reported formally in terms of the protocol ,>* they merit some discussion, nonetheless. (U) The combined result for the local control runs (63 successes for | 675 trials) is not significant, whereas the total across all subjects for 34 Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300210001-5 my, ‘
Approved For Release EPREE TA S'S TETE TS O88 R00 1900210001-5 (U) the formal experiment is. Five of the seven subjects produced runs above chance expectation (ten successes), which contributed to the overall formal score of 87 successes out of 700 trials (p = 0,021). The odds that such a deviation would occur by chance alone are greater than 47:1. Note that none of the formal trials were invalidated under the guidelines of the protocol, (U) The overall total for the postsession runs is significantly too low (53 successes for 670 trials, p = 0.028). In the protocol we noted that the postsession trials were used as a check on the claim of a linger effect: it has been noted in past experiments that after a significant deviation was observed during a subject's effort period, postsession trials taken just after his effort tended to deviate Significantly as well, Usually, these trials would "decay" back to the expected value in a short period of time, We see no evidence of such a correlation in our data, but we note here the significantly low overall result for the sake of completeness, ~ (U) We conclude that we have observed an anomalous and, as yet, unexplained effect upon an electronic system, which cannot be accounted for easily by simple engineering considerations because * The magnitude of our results is commensurate with previous reported studies, * Precautions and controls Significantly exceeded any former experiments, “(U) If we assume, then, that we have verified our initial hypothesis that an anomalous RP phenomenon exists, we must then examine the possible mechanisms for this effect. (U) The first such potential mechanism, and that which is frequently “wentioned in the data base, is some form of remote perturbation--that is, UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300210001-5
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300210001-5 UNCLASSIFIED (U) a physical change in a system that occurs without a subject's physical intervention, In this model, a subject through his volutional control * literally "forces" a random source to change its behavior. Although this kind of RP interaction has been reported variously by 5000 years of human culture, it has appeared to be at odds with currently accepted ideas of physics. However, in a recent paper, Y, Aharonov and M. Verdi describe that under specific conditions, "|. if one checks by continuous observation if a given quantum system evolves from some initial state, to some other final state, along a specific trajectory in Hilbert space, the result is always positive, whether or not the system would have done so on its own accord.’” Aharonov's and Verdi's reference to "continuous observation" is a critical point in the paper. They note that to enforce a change of state by con- tinuous observation, the time between successive measurements is many orders of magnitude smaller than is presently possible for real measuring devices, Furthermore, it is a long way from a highly speculative con- sideration about the nature of a quantum system to a physical explanation for a given experiment, We are not claiming that remote perturbation is the correct or only mechanism for what we have observed in this experiment, put rather that it may have some merit in terms of developing theories in physics. (U) A second possible mechanism, which was mentioned in Schmidt? entails some form of psychoenergetic data selection (PDS). In this mode of operation, the subject scans the unperturbed binary sequence ahead in time and selects the proper time. to initiate the trial. This strategy enables him to take advantage of an unperturbed, yet significantly deviant subsequence and achieve a success for that trial. At first thought, this idea also seems inconsistent with current thinking in 36 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300210001-5 nen
Approved For Release HNWCLA SOE Hy0788R001 300210001-5 (U) physics because it involves obtaining information about a future state of a random system with virtually an infinite number of possible future states available. (U) Many physicists have speculated upon the time-reversed information flow for quantum systems, but the most detailed discussion has been presented by 0. Costa de Beauregard’® 5” , He shows, by using strict covariant formalism, that advanced probability waves can carry information from some future state of a system backward in time to the present. De Beauregard concludes: -». What would the phenomenology of advanced waves, decreasing probability, blind statistical retrodiction, and information as organizing power, look like? Exactly to what parapsychologists call precognition and/or psychokinesis, Logically these phenomena should show up, no less than thermodynamical pro- gressing fluctuations--which indeed they are,"°"* Within the physics community the concept of gaining information from future events may not be inconsistent with current ideas of quantum physics. Even if such physics speculations of de Beauregard should prove to be true, there are many unanswered questions: how does the subject "receive" such information and in what manner does this information reach the subject's conscious awareness? We must emphasize here that de Beauregard's hypothesis should not be regarded as proof of mechanism, but only as interesting speculation, (U) In our experiment, it was premature to attempt to determine what mechanism was involved, The first part of the objective simply entailed the verification of the existence of the phenomenon under nearly ideal conditions. Since this objective was met, future work in the area should (U) The emphasis is de Beauregard's. 37 UNCLASSIFIED Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300210001-5
o Approved For Release 2000/08/07; -RDP96-00788R001300210001-5 (U) focus attention in differentiating between these two possible mechanisms and in searching for others, Le ogy The second part of the program objective was to determine how _ the RP phenomenon might be utilized for Army-designated applications. A particular application potential depends on the type of RP mechanism, and the degree to which Army personnel can be trained to use that mechanism, Figure 4 shows a number of possible application areas that might be con- sidered under each of the two main hypotheses described above. RNG EFFECT PSYCHOENERGETIC DATA SELECTION REMOTE PERTURBATION OTHER SYSTEMS ? WEAPONS FIRE CONTROL WAR GAMES (MONTE CARLO SIMULATION) RV GUIDANC SYsTeMe INTRUSION DETECTION SECRET FIGURE 4 (S) RP APPLICATION POTENTIAL 38 SECRETE Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R001300210001-5