Progress Report No. 3 Covering the Period 1 April to 1 August 1974 Stanford Research Institute Project 3183 PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES by Harold E. Puthoff Client Private Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08110 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 I OBJECTIVE aracteristics of The purpose of the program is to determine the eh those perdeptual~modalities through which individuals obtain information about their environment, wherein such information is hot presented to any known sense. The program is divided into two categories of investigation of approximately equal effort, applied research and basic research. The purpose of the applied research effort is to explore experimentally the potential for applications of perceptual abilities of interest, with special attention given to accuracy and reliability. The purpose of the basic 'research effort is to identify the characteristics of individuals possessing such abilities, and to identify neuraphysiological correlates and basic mechanisms involved,in such functioning. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010001-4 A. Applied Research i. Remote Viewing (a) project Atlas Remote Viewing A remote-viewing experiment has been carried out on a client- designated targe t of interest, a European R&D test facili.ty. The experiment, carried out in three phases, had as its goal the determination of the utility of remote-viewing under operational conditicns. In phase 1, map coordinates were furnished to the experimenters, the only additional information provided being the designation of the target as an R&D test facility. The experimenters then carried out a remote viewing experiment with Subject 1 JaWJW) on a double-blind basis. The results of the experiment were turned over to client,representatives for data evaluation. Figure 1 shows the level of detail for a sample early effort at building layout, and Figure 2 shows the subject's first effort at drawing a.gantry crane he observed, both results being obtained on a double-blind basis before exposure to client-held in-formation. An artist's conception of the site as known to the client (but not to contract personnel)prior to the experiment is shown in Figure 3. Were the results not promising,the experiment would have stopped at this point. The results were judged to be of sufficiently good quality, however, that Phase 11 was entered in which the subject was made witting by client representatives. A second round of experimentation ensued with participation Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 LU Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 r4 YA ;;.ft de 14 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Rele 6/10: CIA-, 07" 200010007-4 I ~q- FIGURE 2 SUBJECT EFFORT AT CRANE CONSTRUCTION Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 of client representatives. The Phase II effort was focussed on the generation of physical data which could be client-verified, providing a calibration in the process. The end~,of Phase 11 gradually evolved into the first part of Phase III, the generation of unverifiable data not available to the client, but of interest nonetheless. Evaluation of the data by the client is under- way. (b) Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment Subjects LL and 4 participated in a long-distance experiment involving a Central American target series. In this experiment, one of the experimenters (Dr. Puthoff) spent a week traveling through Costa Rica on a combination bu.siness/pleasure trip. That is all that was known to the subjects about the traveler's itinerary. The experiment called for Dr. Puthoff to keep a detailed record of his location and activities, including photographs, each day at 1330 PDT. Six daily responses were obtained from Subject 1,,five from Subject 4. The results were of high quality and are presently being eval ated in detail, containing as they did a large amount of material. Samples of that data are as follows. Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject 4, two were in excellent agreement, two had elements in common but were not clear correspondences, and one was clearly a miss. In the.first of the two matches, Dr. Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain at the base of a volcano (Figure 4) andthe subject's response was "large bare table mountain, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96 #ffljWooM*~00~-P_' j-ufig le below, dark cool moist atmosphere, a'match both with regard to r and ambience. In the second match the subject submitted that Opog_~~ I ~ all she got was a 'picture of Dr. Puthoff sitting in a beach chair by a pool," which was entirely correct. During the course of the Central America e~cperiment, on one occasion when the test subject was.unavailable, an experimenter volunteered a drawing of an image he obtained at the beginning of one of the daily ex- periments. (The target for that day was an airport, an unexpected target associated with:,a side excursion at midpoint of the week's activity.) The match was good, as shown in Figures 5 andi'~6. The transcript data will be examined further to determine fine structure, resolution, etc. (c) Local~Targets with Feedback In this series of experiments, designed to give immediate data to experimenters, a subject is asked to take part in a remote viewing experiment under the following conditions. 'C 11 The subject and two experimenters (one of whom was R.T.) are in a first floor laboratory in building 30 at SRI. A second experimenter (II.P.) leaves the area and proceeds to a remote locati.on-of his choosing. None of the experimenters with the subject knew of the remote target location. H.P. and R.T. are.in two-way radio communication via walkie-talkie, (a) to provide the experimenter at the target location real-time data and (b) to give the subject immediate feedback after he has made his assessment of the target, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 U) D z 6 0 > U- 0 U) z 0 cc it D 0 U. (D cc Z 3: Ui > w 0 cc cn < 0 LU cn D 0 0 cc z < z (n z cc 0 CL cc: LO w cr U- Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 SA-2613-20 FIGURE 6 SKETCH PRODUCED BY SUBJECT FROM SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, AIRPORT USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 By this means the subject has an opportunity to learn to separate real from imagined images. This is not considered to be a demonstration-of-ability test, but rather a training step on a gradient scale of ability. In many of these experiments we monitor physiological correlates as discussed.in Section B.3 (b). (Nine of these experiments have been completed to date, seven with the measurements of physiological correlatiE~s.) The following is a sample of an experiment with Subject 4. In this experiment we monitored physiolocial.correlates of the remote viewing activity. As is apparent in the following -text, the subject initially had only a fragmentary picture of the remote site, but with what we judge to be a small amount of feedback, the subject was able to put images together into a correct description. Accompanying the verbal doscription presented below is a photograph of the actual scene at the remote location (Fig. 7). The experimenter with the subject (R.T.) was, as always, kept ignorant of the target location to prevent guidance in the questioning. The capital letters signify walkie-talkie communication. R.T.: It is now 12:35. S-4: .... very strong diagonal .... like a zigzag that goes this~way, vertically. R.T.: S-4's FIRST IMPRESSION IS OF A VERY STRONG DIAGONAL ZIGZAG THAT'S GOING VERTICALLY. OVER. (Talking on walkie talkie to H.P.) H.P.: THERE IS A STRONG ZIGZAG AT MY PLACE, BUT IT IS NOT VERTICAL BUT RATHER HORIZONTAL; BUT IF SHE IS LOOKING FROM THE AIR, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT WCULD LOOK LIKE. OVER. R.T.: Can you tell what the zigzag is attached to? Whether it's part of a building or a fence on the ground? Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 R.T.: It's 12:41. S-4: My head gets in the way now that he's said that it's horizontal. I usually think of a fence. R.T.: Why don't you go up and look down and view the whole thing from above and see if you can get the whole gestalt of where he ii~,. S-4: ..... definitely a non-yegetation ... almost no vegetation around. It's mostly concrete and whatever that zigzag is--either water or steel--shiny, zigzag,..definitely shiny. R.T.: 7267, THE ZIGZAG IS A SHINY THING WHETHER IT'S STEEL OR S-4: Water.. R.T.: WATER, WE CAN'T TELL. IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VEGETATION-NO VEGETATION AROUND~ ... S-4: Mostly concrete . . . R.T.: IT'S MOSTLY CONCRETE... S-4: He's standing on concrete.... R.T.: YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE. OVER. H.P.: IT CERTAINLY IS TRUE THAT THIS IS SHINY AND IN 31Y NEAR VICINITY IT IS BARREN AND CONCRETE OR CONCRETE-COLORED EARTH. SHE SAID THAT IT LOOKED LIKE STEEL~OR WATER. CAN SHE MAKE THE DIFFERENTIATIO14 BETWEEN THE 770? R.T.: He wants to know whether it looks more like steel or water. S-4: It seems to have movement--that's why I would deduce that it's water. R.T.: What if you try to look at the whole thing. S-4:' I'm trying to get an eagle's eye view. That's a waterworks. R.-T. - Why does it look like a waterworks? In what way? S-4: There seems to be a inan-made layout of channels and connections to conduct it. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 C-IA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 R.T.: S-4 SEES MOVEMENT IN THE ZIGZAG THING, SO SHE THINKS THAT IT'S WATER, AND A KIND OF IAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH IT WAS A MAN-MADE WATERWORKS WITH WATER RUNNING IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS. OVER. H.P. THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT. IT IS A ZIGZAG MAN-MADE WATER CHANNEL WITH CONCRETE SIDES. OVER. S -4: 1 can't believe it. The above is an excerpt from an early experiment, and is typical, rather A(JLVl a sAmple of exceptionally good quality. That experiment continued with four more site ~descriptions, three of which were of equal quality. One experiment of this nature has been'carried out with Subject 1, one with Subject 2, two with Subject 3, and five with Subject 4.- A number of descriptions were essentially free of error and with -no feedback other than verification following the remote viewer's description. A complete analysis is to be carried out on these transcripts following more experimentation. To date it appears that the viewing is weak in the following areas: (a) perspective and dimension are often distorted (an. eight foot tower is taken to be 50 feet tall, a 20 foot separation between buildings may appear to be 100 feet, etc.) and, (b) written material generally cannot be read. (d) Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing In two remote viewing experiments, the second of which was clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort was made to determine whether in driving the subject around the area it would be possible to determine the location of the target team by triangulation with a bearing compass. The C> triangulation lines were es'sentiftlly uncorrelated with each other and with the target location, and therefore provided a null result. I Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO020001.0007-4 B. Basic Research In addLtion to the-testing of individuals under conditions which yield data indicating the feasibility o f the application of paranoi:"al abilities to operational needs, fifty percent of the effort is devoted to: 1. Identification of measurable characteristics possessed by gifted individuals (207o); 2. Identification of neurophysiological correlates which relate to paranormal activities (207o); 3. Identification of the nature of paranormal phenomena and energy To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be ful- filled during thecours,e of experimentation: 1) establish-,.and apply criteria to differentiate between those for whom paranormal ability is considered .to be functional and those for whom it is not; 2) obtain sufficient medical and psychological data to establish baseline profiles against which (a) one individual may be compared with another, and.(b) an individual may be compared to himself.at different times to determine whether para- normal functioning occurs in an altered neurophysiological state, 3) specific validation experiments must be conducted with sufficient control to ensure that all conventional communication paths are blocked, and with outcomes sufficiently unambiguous to determine whether paranormal functioning occurred; 4) obtain neurophysicological data during experimentation to. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release..20001(18/.10.-.--.-C]An,PDP--96--oon7ROO0200010007-4 CLASSIFICATION determine those correltLtes, if any, which relate to paranormal activity. In the following paragraphs, each of these items is considered in turn and the progress to date reported. The milestone chart for the basic re", search program is shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accordance with the schedule prepared for this program, and the remaining time and funds are sufficient to meet all program objectives. 1. Criteria for the Determination of Gifted Individuals One of the key issues in the program is the establishnient of criteria capable of differentiating individuals apparently gifted in paranormal functioning from those who are not. Three experimental paradigms were chosen to act as screening, tests on the basis that these tests had been useful for such purposes ~prior to this program in the sense that certain apparently gifted individuals did exceedingly well on at least one of the tests, whereas the results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from chance expectation). The tests are (a) remote viewing of natural targets, (b) reproduction of simple line drawings hidden from the subject but viewed ~y an experimenter, and (c) determination of the state of a four-state 0lea- tronic random stimulus generator. The first test constitutes a so-called "free-response" paradigm in which the subject originates freely about contents of his awareness; furthermore, the channel in general may involve both direct perception of the remote site and perception of the ijaental contents of an observer RS '18 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 CD CD V_ CD CD CD C*4 CD CD - CD 1. 00 CD 2. CD (L 3. .CD 4. o0 CD CD 5. 40 C*4 (D U) 6. . 77D 7. 0 LL 8. > 0 9 . CL Set processing W.A.I.S. Measure paranormal Work Medical F M A M J J A S .0N D J F TABLE 1 PROGRAM SCHEDULE 11 1 2 3 4 5 MO~T118 9 6 7 0 1 2 3 up neurophysiological lab with, computer 1 7 V debugged. testing of subjects by client ~ neurophysiological correlates during experimentation I V aranormal EEG experiments V a) V p . erimentation aranorm al ex th r b) o e p p of energies involved to determine nature . (gradiameter, etc.) testing, including special testing V - Neuropsychological testing V Psychological testing,-including in-depth interview Correlate data aftd consider theoretical models V V Prepare final report Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-007.87ROO0200010007-4 at the site. The second test is more constrained than the first in that the target information is more analytical or abstract, being associated with a graphical representation of an item of interest rather than the item itself. The third test is the most 'constrained in that the target is blind to all participants in the experiment and the subject's choice :Ls precisely constrained. The details of these tests are given below. For the purpose of screening the criteria as to what constitutes a paranormal result was chosen arbitrarily, viz: Although the above requirement is exceedingly strict by usual psycho- physiological stand ards, it is chosen here (a),because the controversial nature of the subject requires strict handling, and (b) in our work and elsewhere, a bimodal distribution has been observed empirically in which a subset of individuals participating in paranormal research produce re- -6 suits at a level of statistical significance p 10 in comparison with the bulk of individuals who cluster about the mean as expected. Therefore, we base our criteria on an observable natur~il division .into clearly functional and non-tunctional categories. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Six subjects have been chosen for the study to date, subjects 1 -3 considered gifted, subjects 4 - 6 acting as learners or controls. Subject 1 qualifies as a gifted subject on the basis of remote viewing subject 2 qualifies as gifted on the basis of the random generator test; subject 3 is tentatively classed as gifted in remote 'viewing, although not yet completing the screening series, based on client evaluation of highly successful remote-viewing experiments carried out for the client in the previous program, and also on -the basis~:of meeting the p< 10-6 criterion in experimentation at another laboratory. Subject 5 (learner/control), a male, age 54, is paired with gifted subject 1, a male, age 55. Learner/control subject 6, a female, age 34,. is by age, background, and temperament paired with gifted subject 2, a male, age 31. Learner subject 4 (female, age 53) and gifted subject 3 male, age 41) are paired on the,basis of artistic occupations (professional photographer and painter, respectively) and similar emotional and psychological makeup. Earlier in the program nine subjects were-to be placed in three categories, three subjects each; gifted subjects, learners, and controls. However, 'experience in the early part of the program indicated that (a) a best effort would require spending more time with fewer people, and (b) the distinction between learners and controls was arbitrary in comparison with the distinction between these categories and that of gifted subjects as defined above. RS 18 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved Fo Ir Release 2000/08110 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 (a) Remote Viewing of Natural Targets The first screening test is based on previous SRI research results which indicate that it is possible for a subject to describe randomly-chosen geographical sites located several miles from the subject's position and demarcated by some appropriate means. This experiment consists of a series of double-blind tests involving local targets in the San Francisco Bay area which can be docu- mentedby independent judging. Target locations within thirty minutes driving time from SRI are randomly chosen from a list of taxtets kppt blind to subject and experimenters and used without replacement. To begin an experiment, an experimenter is closeted with a subject at SRI to wait 30 minutes to begin a narrative description of the remote location. A:second experimenter obtains a target location from the target pool and proceeds directly to the target without communi- cating with the subject or experimenter remaining behind. The second experimenter remains at the target site for an agreed-upon thirty-minute period following the thirty minutes allotted for -travel. During the observation period, the remote vievAng subject is as1~ed to describe his impressions of the target site iAto a tape recorder.' A comparison is made when the experimenter returns. Following a series of nine experiments, the results are sub- jected to independent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the research.. The judges are asked to blind RS 1S Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 match locations, independently visited, against typed manuscripts of tape-recorded narratives of the remote viewer. A given narrative can be assigned to more than one target location. A correct match requires that a transcript of a given date be associated with the target of that date. Probability calculations are on the basis of the a priori proba- bility of the obtained series of matches by chance, conservatively assuming assignment without replacement on the part' of the judges. As indicated in Report # I Subject 1 has completed this series, obtaining a result significant at the p 8 x 10-10 level. Experimentation is in progress with Subjects 2 and 4, two transcripts having been obtained from each -to date. (b) Line Drawings A pool of fifty simple line.drawings of everyday objects has been drawn, randomized, and placed in a secure 1 ocation. During experimentation,~:experimenters and subject are separated by either an experimenter or subject entering a shielded room so that from that time forward the, subject is at all times visually, acoustically, and electrically shielded from personnel and material at the tar-et location. Following isolation a target is chosen by means of the universal randomization protocol technique described in Section 4(a), used in this case to generate a two-digit number modulo 50. The subject's task is then to'reproduce with pen on paper the line drawing now displayed at -the target location. RS 13 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000108110 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Following a period of effort not to exceed half an hour, the subject may either pass (when he does not feel confident) or indicate he is ready to submit a drawing to the experimenters, in which case the drawing is collected by an experimenter before the subject is permitted to see the target. The experiment is then repeated with replacement until ten drawings have been obtained from the subject. To obtain an independent evaluation of the correlation between target and response data, the experimenters submit the data for judging on a blind basis by two SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the research. The judges are asked to match the response data with the corresponding target data (without replacement). Such experimentation is presently in progress, a number of drastings having been obtained from several of the subjects but not yet submi-tted,for judging. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator The determination of the state of a four-state electronic random stimulus generator comprises the -third screening test. The target is in the form of one of four art slides chosen randomly (p by an ,~~Iectronic random generator. The generator does not indicate its choice- until the subject indicates his choice to the machine by pressing a button (See Figure 8 As soon as the subject indicates his choice, the. target slide is illuminated to provide visual and auditory (bell if correct) feedback as to the correctness or incorrectness of his choice. Until that time both subject and experimenter remain ignorant of the machine's choice, so the experiment is of the double-blind -type. Five legends at the top._~of the machine face are illuminated one at a time with increasing Cz, correct choices (6,8, 10, to provide additional reinforcement. The machine choice, subject. choice~,,cumulative trial number, and cumulative hit number are recorded automatically on a printer. Following trial number 25, the machine must be reset manually by depressing a RESET button. A methodological feature of the machine is that the choice of atarget is not forced. That is, a subject may press a PASS button when he wishes not to guess, in which case the machine indicates what its choice was, and neither a hit nor a trial is scored by the machine, which then go-es on to make its next selection. Thus the.subject does not have to guess at targets when he does not feel that he has an idea as to which to choose. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 I I Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 FigureS. ESP Teaching Machine used in this experiment. An incorrect choice of target is indicated. Two of the five "encouragement lights" at the top of the machine are illuminated. The printer to the right of the machine records data on fan-fold paper tape. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10.: CIA-RDP,96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Under the null hypothesis of random binomial choices with probability J'and no learning, the probability of observing k k successes in n trials is approximated by the probability of anormal distribution value n a:(k - 2 /13n/16' 4 For the purpose of screening, each subject is required to complete 100 25-trial runs (i.e., a total of 2500 trials). To date,,subjects,l, 2, and 6 have completed this phase of the screening program, and their results are tabulated in Table 2. Subject 4 has completed 2100 trials with mean scores of 25.71 (p = 0.20). Table 2 Screening Data: Four-state Electronic Random Stimulus Generator Subject mean Score/100 Trials Binomial Probability Over 2500 Trials 1 25.76 0.22 _7 2 29.36 3 x 10 6 25.40 0.33 _J On the basis of this test Subject 2,.whose scores are plotted in Fig. 9, qualifies as a gifted individual, having satisfied the criterion of producing a result whose~a priori probability under the null hypothesis is P C 10-6. Of further interest are this subject's personal observations of subjective experiences during the screening test, presented in Appendix 2. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 50 '10 H cd 4) 0 30 0 20 ca E-i w 10 0 0 10 20 30 RUN NUMBER 100 Trials/Run P per trial FIGURE 9 DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT 2 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2.000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 2. Identification of Measurable Characteristics Possessed by Gifted Subjects (20%). a) Medical Evaluation The medical evaluation of program participants has been assigned to the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. Coordination of the program is being handled by Dr. Robert Armbruster, Director of the Clinic:'s Department of Environmental Medicine. The Clinic, in turn, has subcontracted certain special tests to the Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University. One visual sensitivity test is being administered -by the Bioengineering Group of the Electronics and Bioen.-ineering Laboratory of SRI. The testing procedures, outlined inT.able 3,fall into seven categories: 1) General physical examination, including complete-medical and family history; 2) Laboratory examinations, including SNIA-12 panel blood chemistries, protein electrophoresis, blood lipid profile, urinalyses, serology, blood type and factor, pulmonary function screening, and 12-lead electrocardiogram; 3) Neurological examination, including comprehensive and electroencephalogram (sleeping and routine); 4) Audiometric examination, including comprehensive, Bekesy bone conduction, 4peech discrimination, and impedance bridge test; Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 TABLE 3 A MEDICAL EYkMINATION -Personnel #1 - 3, subjects; 6, learners/controls, .0 .0 9, experimenters. 0 1 Physical Examination 1. Genera Complete medical e; - Family history 2. Laboratory Examinations 0 0 1;", SMA-12 panel blood chemistries 0 Protein electrophoresis Blood lipid profile 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 '0 0 0 0 1 01 0 0 0 0 kES-'~ 0 0 0 0 0 #3 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 #4 4] ' 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 O 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 10 0 'O .0- 0 0 __ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 71 .-- 0 #7 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 a8 . 10 0 C" - 0 0 "8 0 CL CL Urinalyses Serology Blood type and factor Pulmonary function screening Electrocardiogram 12-lead 3. Neurological Examination Comprehensive and routine in n h ram slbe l t El a roe ec cep og g p , 4.- Audiometric Examination Comprehensive Bekesy bone conduction i i nat Speech discrim on. Impedance bridge test 5. Opthalmologist Examination Comprehensive Card testin- o Peripheral field test Muscle test Dilation funduscope Indirect opthalmoscopic and f undus examination G.. Special Visual Examinations Electroretinogram (Stanford Med.) +-Completed Dark ttdaptation test (Stanford Med.) 0 Scheduled isual contrast,sensitivity (SRI) 7. EMI Brain Scan Palo Stanford Medical Center SRI Alto Medical. Clinic Q Q Q Q C*4 Q Q Q 00 Q Q IL 00 Q C) Q Q C*4 W U) Cl) 77D 0 LL CD > 0 CL CL Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007.-4 5) Opthalmologist examination,. including comprehensive, card testing, peripheral field test, muscle test, dilation funduscope, and indirect opthalmoscopic and fundus examin- ation; 6) Spe~,-ial visual examinations, including electroretinogram, dark adaptation test, and visual contrast sensitivity; 7) EMI Brain scan. As indicated in Table 3, medical testing is currently in progress. To date the return information is sparse, having to be collated from several clinics before a complete analysis can be completed. To provide an indication of the type of raw data that is to be collated, a small sample of data obtained on Subject 1 is presented in Appendix 3. As indicated, the EMI computerized brain scan reveals a slight enlargement of the entire right lateral ventricle, while the left appears normal in size. An asymmetry in alpha development between left and right hemispheres is ..also indicated. Also noted is some concern about the EKG suggesting a coronary artery problem. The significance of these factors for our interest will be developed under the direction of Dr. Armbruster and made available to the client as available. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 b) Psychological Evaluation The psychological evaluation of program participants consists of both baseline personality evaluation, and of ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation. The collection of baseline data (e.g., in- depth interview, W.A.I.S., etc.) is for the purpose of identifying base- line characteristics possessed by gifted subjects. The ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation. (e.g.,, Mood Adjective Checklists) is for the purpose of identifying psychological correlates of successful versus unsuccessful performance tasks. 1) Baseline Data The bulk of the baseline evaluation has been assigned to the Palo Alto Medical Cli nic. Coordination of the program is being handled by Dr. J.E. Heenan, Chief Clinical Psychologist of the Department of Psychiatry. The baseline evaluation, outlined in Table 4, consists of (1) In depth interviews, including objective events and subjective views relating to the discovery and enhancement of paranormal capacities; socio-econ6mic, cultural, familial, rdligious environment; outstanding peaks, traumas; values, motivation, interpersonal style; (2) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (W.A.I.S'.); 3) Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (M.M.P.I.) Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000fM10 ~ CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 'PSYCHOLOGICAL EMUNATION Personnel #1 - 3, subjects; #4 O'learners/controls; #7'- 8, experimenters,. lip e;"' Y, y1; yj Ov yv C, 0111 C, Sy ej L V yj ^y CP C 4y 1 1 ej 0 (3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 .0 0 #2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 -1 01 0 (:)0 00 1000 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 #4 3- 0 0 0 0 0, 9 #5 0 0 0 . 0 (D 00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0--- 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 - !0d0 0 0 0 ~00- 0 #6 KDO O - (:) 00 o0 (D 00 00 0 1 -- 0 0 0 #7 (3 09 00 001 00 0000 --0 0 0 (0 #8 00 0 0 0 0 0 0- O 0 0 0 -- = O 01 0 CI 0. N SRI 0 Palo Alto Medical Clinic Client Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 (4) Benton Visual Memory Test and Wechsler Memory scale; (5) Thematic Apperception Test (T.A.T.) and Rorschach projective tests (6) Bender Gestalt Test, (7) Luscher color.test (8) Strong Aptitude/Values Test (9) Cognitive Style Preference Test As indicated in Table 4, the psychological testing is well underway. There is, of course,, a considerable lag between testing and results. To date, only a partial analysis of data from Subject 1 is available. We h-*s)data in Appendix 4 as a sample of the type of analysis that present i will become available. We note in passing that bhe data on Subject 1 from the W.A.I.S. appears to correlate with that obtained from the client-administered W.A.I.S., an indication of the uniformity of results available from such testing. Private communication. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08110: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 2) Cognitive style Preference Test in connection with testing hypotheses associated with hemispheric specialization of the braia, Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, San Francisco, has been brought into the program as a consultant. In his capacity as consultant, Dr. Ornstein has provided an instru- ment named the Cognitive Style Preference Test.~. This test was developed for use in differentiating between individuals preferring a gestalt- ,oriented cognitive style as compared with a verbally-oriented cognitive style. For the purpose of the program this instrument is administered to determine whether individuals exhibiting paranormal functioning prefer, as a group, one style of cognitive functioning predominantly as compared with individuals in a control group. The test is administered once to each individual. A sample of the test is included below. Preliminary results indicate some preference for a verbally-oriented cognitive style on the part of good subjects (Figure 10), but further dat required before any significance is to be attached to the results ,tab ated thus far. Should a correlation of test results with paranormal functioning be found, it would beappropriate in later work to determine whether this test instrument would be useful as a screening device, i.e., determine whether other individuals sharing the profile also exhibit paranormal functioning. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 50 40 ~30 20 cd 10 0 10 M (D 20 PH 30 4~ r-4 40 td 50 0 rj--tLf,-cL ouujec--Ls i4earners/uonzrois BxPerimenters FIGURE 10 SUDAMARY ON COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 I*pPMjVdTW RVO"03 2GW/OgtiV:SCTK-RDP96EU079MOO200010007-4 Please do not turn over the pages until I ask you to do so. On each page of this booklet there are sets of three items arranged in rows. Two of them are alike or fit together in some way. Your task is to select which one is different and doesn't belong with the other two. The two columns on the first page are samples. There are three designs or shapes in each row! Each design has a word printed on it. In the first row of the first column all the words are the same. Most people would say that the first and second shapes go together and the third one doesn't.belong. Would you agree? (If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X then. In the second row most people would say that the first one is different and the last two go together. Do you agree? Then mark the first.one with an X. in the third row the shapes are all the same, but the words HORSE and SADDL~E go together and the world FAULT doesn't belong. Do you agree? (If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X. Which would you pick as the odd one in the 4th row? [Color Und one)] In the 5th row you could choose either a word that doesn't belong or a shape that doesn't belong. Which is the odd word? (TROUT.) Which is the o.dd shape? [the CIRCLE (DIME)] Either one of these ans,~ers is right. Mark either one of them. The last row also has two possible right answers. Which is the odd word? (SHIRT.) Which is the odd shape? [The second one (DOG)] Mark either one of them with an X. On some of these sets people find it easier or more natural to pick out the odd word., and one some they find it easier -to pick out the odd shape. Either way is correct. We want you to make.your selections whichever way seems mo st comfortable-and natural to you. Mark only once in each row, and go as fast as y-ou.c". Any questions so far? Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 The second column has more samples. when I say begin, please mark an odd member in each row, and say "STOP" as soon as you finish this sample column. BEGIN. (ChecR forced choices--) Any questions? Then when I say "BEGIN't turn over the next pa.ge. Work as fast as you can, and continue until you-have finished the booklet, then say "STOP". Ready? BEGIN. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Oto 13 El 00 cairn Oalm 13 E3 00 00 00 because 0 0 0 0 wIndowo door 0 00 00 00 F-I Fd-]h [-k]. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 A Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 G~) Orl Gfp)y e~) gi~5 5) Eh A~tj /~~7 5G7 G~) S~) E> ~) e 6f~ ~ Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 rAi, < =.d f2b Fi-t1f -~q J90 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 d" =Y 60 ~5b Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 3) Midtesting (SRI-administered) Ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation is carried out to provide indicators as to the effects of mood and conceptualization on success in experimentation. Conclusions will be drawn in the final stage of project effort. Test:.Mood Adjective Checklist Source: Psychology Department, Stanford University (Hypnosis Lab) Purpose: The Mood Adjective Checklist is one of a number of pre-6xperiment instruments designed to provide 6 measure of'a subject's feelings of the moment as he enters the experimental situation. The purpose is to determine whether measures of success in the experimental phase correlate with pre-experiment mood indicators. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 200P/08/10,: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 MOOD ADJECTIVE CHECKLIST Each of the words in Cie follounin:-, list describes feelinps or mood. Please use the list to describe your feelin-s at this moment. Tfark each word accordinq to these instructions: If the word definitely describes ho,,, you feel at the moment vou read it, circle the double check (ATV) to the right of the word. Por exanole, if the word is calm and you are definitely feelinp.S~ at the no-nent, circle the double chech as follows: calm W'% '." V ? no (This means you definitely feel caLa at this moment.) If the word only slightly applies to your feelings at the moment, circle the single cheell: as follows: calm VV IV it ? no (This means you feel F V,4 slightly calm at this iroment. If the word is not clear you or if cannot decide whether or to you not it describes your feeling6, circle the question mark as follows: calm VV V. '.? no (This means you cannot decide i-~-iether you calm or not.) If you clearly decide thatthe word does not apply to your feelin.cs at this moment, circle the as follows: no calm VV V ? Ono (This means you are sure vou are not calm at this moment. Work rapidly. 'Your first reaction is best. Work down the first Column before going to the next. Please mark all the Words. This should take only a few minutes. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 angry VV v no energetic vv v no concentrating vv v ? -no playful vv v ? no drowsy vv v ? no suspicious vv v ? no affectionate vv v ? no startled vv v ? no apprehensive vv v ? no relaxed vV V ? no blue -4v v ? no defiant vv v ? no boastful vv v ? no en!~aRed in thouglit vv v ? no elated vv v ? no active vv v ? no pleased vv v ? no nonchalant vv v 7 no tired vv v ? no skeptical vv v ? no fearful vv v ? no shocked vv v ? no r e-retful vv v ? no calm vv v ? no egotistic vv v ? no bold vv' v ? no overjoyed vv v ? no earnest vV V ? no viporous Vv v ? no sluggish VV v ? no witty vv v ? no forgivin!, vv v ? no serene vv v ? no clutched up vv v no rebellious N-V v ? no lonely vv v no serious vv v ? no cocky vv v ? no T-Tarimheartedvv v ? no lighthearted I" ? no insecure vv v ? no quiet vv v ? no self- centered vv ? no still vv v ? P. 0 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Test: Semantic Differential Checklist Source: SRI Urban and Social Systems Division Purpose: The Semantic Differential Checklist is one of a number of pre- experiment instruments designed to provide a measure of subject conceptualization about an experiment in which he is about to participate. The purpose is to determine whether measures of success in the experiment correlate with pre-experiment conceptualization. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Semantic Differential Checkl ist The purpose of this rating sheet is to obtain your candid reactions regarding the conditions surrounding the experiment. For eadh numbered item you will find a concept to be judged. You are to rate each in order. This is how you are to use the scales: if you feel-that the concept is hi ghly or closely related to one end of the scale, you should place your checkmark as follows; impractical I,-' practical impractical practical If your feelings on the concept are neutral, place y our checkmark in the middle space, etc. Work at fairly high speed through this rating sheet. Do not puzzle ov er individual items. Give your first impressions, your immediate feelings about each item. Conditions surrounding experime I..good bad 2. unfriendly friendly 3. stimulating dull 4. positive negative 5. unhelpful helpful 6. right wrong "7. uninteresting interesting 8. unorganized organized Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787RO-00200010007-4 9. satisfying disappointing unprepared prepared My involvement in experiment 1. good bad 2. useless valuable 3. stimulating dull 4. positive negative 5.. passive active 6. capable incapable 7.. important unimportant 8. unsuccessful successful 9. prepared unprepared 10. impractical practical Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 (c) Neuropsychological Evaluation In addition to the measurement of the physiological components of the neurological system covered in the medical evaluation,. a neuro- psychological profile is being obtained by the administration of the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychology Test Battery, which includes the Category Recognition Testo Tactual Performance Test, Halstead-Wepman Aphasia it Screening Test, and 6ther.appropriate measures. This phase of the program is being handled by Dr. Donald Lim of the Palo Alto Veteran,"s Administration Hospital, who has personally consu Ited with Dr. Reitan on testing procedures and interpretation. The neuropsydiological evaluation program is scheduled for the first half of September. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 3. Identification of Neurophysiological Correlates WhicD Relate to Paranormal Activities High on the list of priorities for the program is the identification of neurophysiological correlates accompanying paranormal activity. The purpose of this part of the study is twofold: (a) to obtain information about the neurophysiological state associated with paranormal activity in general, and (b) to obtain indicators which differentiate between correct and incorrect responses to a paranormally applied stimulus, so that an independently-determined bias factor can be applied during the generation of data by the subject. Two facilities are in use for the purposes described above. One is a standard EEG facility under the direction of Dr. Jerry Lukas, head of SRI'sSleep Studies program. This facility consists of two somnd-isolated rooms with appropriate signal lead connections, an etght-channel polygraph for visual recording, and a magnetic tape/ computer processing/ printer readout which provides on-line processing of the polygraph data. In our configuration we obtain a hardeopy printout of 5-second averages of eight channels of polygraph information fifteen minutes following a :ffifteen minute run. At present Ave monitor broadoatta alpha (7-14 Hz) and beta (14-34 Hz) brainwave components from the left and right occipital regions, galvanic skin response, and two channels of plethysmograph data (blood volume and pulse height). Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 The second facility is a smaller semi-portable four-channel polygraph with a G.SR channel, reflected-light plethysmograph indicating blood volume/ pulse height, one channel of unfiltered EEG activity, and a fourth EEG channel with zero-crossing digital filtering. The latter permits percent-time measurements in any band, with upper and lower band edge settings in 1 Hz increments. Considerable data,--"haq'been obtained with both facilities. The bulk of the data awaits further analysis which will occurat completion of various.seriesf,underway. However, several results have been obtained which we describe below. (a) Bilateral EEG Measurements -- Remote Strobe Experiment As discussed in Report #2, a variety of evidence from clinical and neurosurgical sources indicates that the two hemisphexes of the human brain are specialized for different cognitive functions. The left hemisphere is predominantly involved in verbal and other analytic functioning, the,right in spatial and other holistic processing. In consultation with Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute, an hypothesis was formed based on certain observed characteristics that paranormal functioning might involve right hemispheric specialization. To test this hypothesis, the EEG remote strobeflash experiment, discussed in the original proposal and in the paper attached to Report #1, was repeated with Subject 4 three times in the sleep lab under the direction of Dr. Lukas with monitoring of right and loft occipital regions. Each experiment consisted of twenty 15-second trials, with ten no-flash trials, and ten 16-Hz trials randomly intermixed. Reduction of alpha activity (arousal response) correlated Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 O~ffl / 1e) -RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 rv d:CIA ApRr1qVQqgO~qrJ~pJq?p6 200 was as in previous experiments, but essentially only in the right hemisphere (average alpha reduction 16 percent in rilght hemisphere,, 2 percent in left, during the 16-Hz-" trials as compared with the no-flash. trials). The trial-to-trial variation is larger than ir- previous work, however, due to use of a wider-band filter -for the alpha band, and therefore the system is being modified before further worlK.. (b.~ Physiological Correlates of Remote Viewing In this series of experiments a subject takes part in a remote viewing protocol as. described in Section A.l. (c) (Remote Viewing with Feedb~Lck).., In this case.' however, the subject is connected to the. physiological recording instruments of the smaller semi-portable fo"r-channel, polygraph described above. Baseline and experimental measures of the following observables are made: 1) Galvanic slx-in response (GSR) is recorded using finger electrodes taped in place on second and fourth finger; '2) Blood volume/pulse height is recorded using a reflected-light plethysmograph; 3) Unfiltered EEG is recorded from.the right occipital region; 4) Percent-time in alpha (8-12 Hz) is recorded on the fourth channel. The alpha filter is a sharp cut-off digital tyDe with essentially zero-pass outside the prescribed bandpass limits. During the course of an experiment the subject is asRed to describe his perceptions as to the nature of the remote target. His comments are tape recorded and noted on the polygraph, a,long with the time. A correlation is then attempted between those descriptions which a-re found to be uniquely correct and accurate, and the corresponding sections of polygraph recording. Approved For Release 2000108110: CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 In our investigations to date we have not found a strong correlation between the observed physi6logical states and the subjects' descriptions. Of the correlates being monitored, the one which seems the most promising is the unfiltered EEG... In our preliminary analysis of the data it appears that there is often an overall reduction in EEG power in the twenty-second period just before a subject renders a correct description. Subsequent to this observation, we have learned that Janet Mitchell at the American Society for Psychical Research,made similax.observations in her work with Subject 3 also in.remote viewing experiments. A sample chart record is shown in Figure .11. (Time runs from right to left.): The traces, top to bottom, are the unfiltered EEG, blood volume/pulse height, GSR, and filtered (alpha) EEG. protocolky verbal description, and photograph of the location accompanying this chart are given in Section A. 1. (c). Seven experiments of this type have been completed as a pilot study. Upon completion of the analysis of this data, any findings will be tested under rigorous no-feedback conditions. 4. Identification of the Nature of Paranormal Phenomena and lbergy (10%) This portion of the program is devoted to efforts to understand the nature and scope of paranormal phenomena, including investigation of the physical and psychological laws underlying the phenomena, determination of the manner and degree to which known processes are mediated by little understood or undiscovered mechanisms or energies, definition of the prrcise nature of the.channels involved, etc. At this point in the effort three "psychokinetic" tasks have been investigated beyond the pilot stage, and are reported below. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For4ftlessia2OMMUM mONA-RIMM00787ROO0200010007-4 ~7+: L FITEE17 %, A 4 hill* ~_.. M-1 Vi - -7~ T_ P F F 7-[-- J7 :tt=_LL LU r=,::,, '; -Z t ft== E_ I HE ~~ VZ T-1 NY 4`71 14 L7:~_ ir 7: jf J_~77f -1-:: ----17-- FE ~E_ LL - Lt I - IIL P::F ~1~1 -I I A 77 J+ V 5 T I _LL U L L. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 (a) Universal Randomization Protocol It was deemed desirable in our work to establish a universal randomi- zation protocol independent of the particular experiment under consideration. The only exceptions were to be automated experiments where target selection is determined by radioactive decay or electronic randomization. The randomization procedure is designed around a ten-unit base, e.g,, ten targets, ten work periods, etc. A ten-digit sequence governing an experiment is blind to both experimenter and subject, and is uncovered by means of the following procedure. A three-page RAND Table of Random Digits (Table 5) is entered to obtain the ten-digit sequence, the entrance point being determined by four throws of a die, t the first 1, 2, or 3 determining page, the next 1, 2, 3, or 4 determining column block, and the final throw determining from which of the first six rows in the block the ten-digit sequence is to be taken. An opaque card with a single-digit window is then moved across, the row to uncover digits one at a time. If a multiplicity of targets exist, the digits 0 through 9 are employed directly. If a binary command is required (e.g. , incre ase/de crease or activity/no activity) the parity of the digit (even or odd) is employed. t A technique found in control runs to produce a distribution of die faces differing nonsignificantly from chance expectation.,__-- Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 TABLE 5 Table of Random Digits CPYRGHT. 11 16 43 63 IS 75 06 13 76 74 40 60 31 61 52 83 23 53 73 61 21 21 59 17 91 76 83 15 86 78 40 94 15 35 85 69 95 86 09 16 10 43 84 44 82 66 55 83 76 49 73 50 58 34 72 55 95 31 79 57 36 79 22 62 36 33 26 66 65 83 39 41 21 60 13 11 44 28 93 20 73 94 40 47 73 12 03 25 14 14 57 99 47 67 48 54 62 74 85 11 49 56 31 28 72 14 06 39 31 04 61 83 45 91 99 15 46 98 22 85 64 20 84 82 37 41 70 17 31 17 91 40 27 72 27 79 51 62 10 07 51 48 67 28 75 38 60 52 93 41 58 29 98 38 80 20 12 51 07 94 99 75 62 63 60 64 51 61 79 71 40 68 49 99 48 33 88 07 64 13 71 32 55 52 17 13 01 57 29 07 75 97 86 42 98 08 07 46 20 55 65 28 59 71 98 12 13 85 30 10 34 55 63 98 61 88 26 77 60 68 17 26 45 73 27 38 22 42 93 01 65 99 05 70 48 25 06 77 75 71 95 63 99 97 54 31 19 99 25 58 16 38 11 50 69 25 41 68 78 75 61 55 57 64 04 86 21 01 18 08 52 45 88 88 80 78 35 26 79 13 78 13 79 87 68 04 68 98 71 30 33 00 78 56 07 92 00 84 48 97 62 49 09 92 15 84 98 72 87 59 38 71 23 15 12 08 58 86 14 90 24 21 66 34 44 21 28 30 70 44 58 72 20 36'78 19 18 66 96 02 16 97 59 54 28 33 22 65 59 03 26 18 86 94 97 51 35 14 77 99 59 13 83 95 42 71 16 85 76 09 12 89 35 40 48 07 25 58 61 49 29 47 85 96 52 50 41 43 19 66 33 18 68 13 46 85 09 53 72 82 96 15 59 50 09 27 42 97 29 18 79 89 32 94 48 88 39 25 42 11 29 62 16 65 83 62 96 61 24 68 48 44 91 51 02 44 12 61 94 38 12 63 97 52 91 71 02 01 72 65 94 20 50 42 59 68 98 35 05 61 -14 54 43 71 34 54 71 40 24 01 38 64 80 92 78 St 31 37 74 00 83 40 38 88 27 09 83 41 13 33 04 29 24 60 28 75 66 62 69 54 67 64 20 52 04 30 69 74 48 06 17 02 64 97 37 85 87 51 21 39 64 04 19 90 11 61 04 02 73 09 48 07 07 68 48 02 53 19 77 37 17 04 89 45 23 97 44 45 99 04 30 15 99 54 50 83 77 84 61 15 93 03 98 94 16 52 79 51 06 31 12 14 89 22 31 31 36 16 06 50 82 24 43 43 92 96 60 71 72 20 73 83 87 70 67 24 86 39 75 76 96 99 05 52 44 70 69 32 52 55 73 54 74 37 59 95 63 23 95 55 09 11 97 48 03 97 30 38 87 01 07 27 79 32 17 79 42 12 17 69 57 66 64 12 04 47 58 97 83 64 65 12 84 83 34 07 49 32 80 98 46 49 26 15 94 26 72 95 82 72 38 71 66 13 80 60 21 20 50 99 08 43 31 91 72 08 32 02 08 39 31 92 17 64 58 73 72 00 86 57 10 01 17 50 04 86 05 44 11 90 57 23 82 74 64 61 48 75 23 29 92 42 06 54 31 16 53 00 55 47 24 21 94 10 90 08 53 16 15 78 35 54 25 58 65 07 30 " 70 10 31 30 94 93 87 02 33 00 24 76 86 59 52 62 47 18 55 22 94 91 20 75 09 70 24 72 61 96 66 28 72 It 53 49 85 58 03 69 91 37 28 53 78 43 95 26 65 43 78 51 This table appears through the courtesy of The RAND Corporation and the McGraw'Hill Bouk Company, Inc. and is reprinted by permission from The Compleat Strategyst, by J. D. Williams, pp. 219-221 [441. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 CPYRGHT 07 42 85 88 63 96 02 38 89 36 97 92 94 12 20 86 43 19 44 85 35 37 92 79 22 28 90 65 50 13 40 56 83 32 22 40 48 69 11 22 10 98 22 28 07 10 92 02 62 99 41 48 39 29 35 17 06 17 82 52 90 12 73 33 41 77 80 61 24 46 93 04 06 64 76 24 99 04 10 99 63 00 21 29 90 23 51 06 87 74 76 86 93 93 00 84 97 80 75 04 40 77 98 63 82 48 45 46 52 69 02 98 25 79 91 50 76 59 19 30 43 21 61 26 08 18 16 78 46 31 94 47 97 65 00 39 17 00 66 29 96 16 76 43 75 74 10 89 36 43 52 29 17 58 22 95 96 69 09 47 70 97 56 26 93 35 68 47 26 07 03 68 40 36 00 52 83 15 53 81 85 81 26 18 75 23 57 07 57 54 58 93 92 83 66 86 76 56 74 65 37 10 06 24 92 63 64 24 76 38 54 72 35 65 27 53 07 63 82 35 53 40 61 38 55 38 51 92 95 00 84 82 88 12 48 25 54 83 40 75 55 17 28 15 56 18 85 65 90 43 65 79 90 19 14 81 36 30 51 73 40 35 38 48 07 47 76 74 68 90 87 91 73 85 49 48 21 37 17 08 18 89 90 96 1:2 77 54 15 76 75 26 90 78 81 73 71 18 92 83 77 68 24 12 53 40 92 55 11 13 26 68 05 26 54 22 88 46 00 63 52 51 55 99 11 59 81 31 06 32 51 42 58 76 81 49 88 14 79 97 00 92 21 43 33 86 73 45 97 93 59 97 17 65 54 16 67 64 20 50 51 15 08 95 05 57 33 16 68 70 94 53 29 58 71 33 38 26 49 47 08 96 46 10 06 04 11 12 02 22 54 23 01 19 41 08 29 19 66 51 87 28 17 74 41 11 15 70 57 38 35 75 76 84 95 49 24 54 36 32 85 66 95 34 47 37 81 12 70 74 93 86 66 87 03 41 66 46 07 56 48 19 71 22 72 63 84 57 54 98 20 56 72 77 20 36 50 34 73 35 21 68 75 66 47 57 19 98 79 22 22 27 93 67 80 10 09 61 70 44 08 75 02 26 53 32 98 60 62 94 51 31 99 46 90 72 37 35 49 30 25 11 32 37 00 69 90 26 98 92 66 02 98 59 53 03 15 IS 25 01 66 55 20 86 34 70 .18 15 82 52 83 89 96 51 02 06 95 83 09 54 06 11 47 40 87 86 05 59 46 70 45 45 58 72 96 11 98 57 94 24 81 81 42 28 68 42 60 99 77 96 69 01 07 10 85 30 74 30 57 75 09 21 77 17 59 63 23 15 19 02 74 90 20 96 85 21 14 29 33 91 94 42 27 81 21 60 32 57 61 42 78 04 98 26 84 70 27 87 51 54 80 17 69 76 01 14 63 24 73 20 96 19 74 02 46 37 97 37 73 21 12 05 68 63 02 43 34 13 40 29 36 50 19 77 98 69 86 49 76 87 09 52 99 24 66 50 89 91 05 73 95 46 95 46 75 36 28 96 88 19 36 94 51 89 39 84 81 47 86 77 50 82 54 96 26 76 31 12 34 98 99 00 IS 47 21 86 78 90 67 54 89 61 79 88 16 00 80 01 88 47 42 187 46 26 31 65 79 81 66 16 30 57 66 62 90 55 46 51 80 14 87 88 69 25 87 16 12 27 34 81 76 29 80 56 49 94 66 87 26 22 30 20 09 44 29 62 41 38 21 67 68 06 71 13 49 39 19 59 97 62 47 60 93 58 15 04 50 52 08 21 53 13 93 44 68 85 58 31 58 83 66 2 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 CPYRGHT 51 39 28 59 36 43 89 85 05 96 28 54 99 83 27 99 94 32 53 77 54 23 94 19 18 79 52 64 62 74 40 87 16 18 03 25 76 75 54 84 57 89 27 33 94 07 16 09 02 62 47 70 43 83 55 71 70 88 01 17 02 33 07 47 36 53 27 44 44 68 62 61 11 96 99 09 30 42 92 65 76 11 52 92 47 55 34 25 12 99 03 04 78 39 81 11 91 60 92 67 63 31 28 IS 86 29 08 52 01 01 26 46 05 05 01 31 73 11 89 38 27 63 22 15 70 34 27 45 64 26 01 76 42 59 59 69 29 38 98 75 06 33 56 21 11 44 01 45 25 67 11 76 25 48 06 02 65 15 29 12 64 14 28 76 76 21 35 88 87 73 31 73 63 16 95 11 52 36 42 13 28 43 62 54 68 75 23 57 53 70 97 15 54 87 06 52 23 92 18 31 09 52 28 38 55 85 97 31 58 88 31 18 14 96 72 17 23 70 40 24 93 71 41 54 14 93 71 20 27 42 32 11 58 26 83 67 18 28 90 30 15 68 15 35 99 58 18 57 38 40 07 06 87 59 47 71 74 36 92 85 77 71 22 39 14 08 90 74 37 68 26 62 27 41 84 75 16 69 67 48 78 45 35 48 44 61 50 90 12 45 02 80 55 26 76 22 51 94 78 48 24 86 06 82 84 19 36 72 90 73 32 30 15 87 01 04 19 33 01 42 37 28 40 68 44 78 88 75 72 76 26 33 95 69 09 39 33 14 21 01 35 48 85 24 73 37 63 43 25 69 95 27 40 95 08 81 01 24 24 13 51 59 55 99 09 35 22 34 49 91 24 27 53 96 32 09 77 79 88 00 90 66 03 51 71 30 02 19 11 20 36 11 64 21 28 65 40 19 41 99 47 50 50 20 08 20 3C 08 71 88 96 19 50 70 59 13 26 63 13 89 13 35 00 84 14 64 04 99 43 77 22 40 89 49 58 19 09 55 80 35 33 00 69 26 90 69 24 89 74 43 53 89 62 35 08 16 22 75 69 29 55 21 66 38 86 06 80 41 18 61 22 56 50 24 75 00 25 87 90 18 21 99 12 62 28 14 80 11 91 92 49 43 82 07 72 60 84 66 97 32 71 02 52 82 12 10 47 42 75 22 65 62 03 46 84 00 21 00 48 63 65 52 21 52 42 84 55 47 45 60 20 24 62 69 41 41 29 80 47 63 27 97 55 49 23 90 65 00 61 70 09 43 30 91 67 35 16 63 27 31 07 30 00 97 04 36 09 96 15 77 95 55 27 34 56 16 57 88 81 40 54 35 71 36 89 19 56 90 38 14 76 05 30 51 50 69 12 56 94 42 00 97 70 44 81 42 04 40 86 49 34 82 23 58 43 78 46 88 23 80 13 92 07 87 61 12 31 19 28 08 07 75 30 40 73 58 52 08 00 22 08 39 53 70 43 37 88 03 41 72 04 20 49 44 34 62 79 88 19 02 46 16 66 72 06 01 61 94 37 69 96 77 01 94 40 29 70 04 20 93 87 76 77 76 07 03 74 20 16 13 65 98 96 28 43 10 91 73 44 58 29 88 09 52 88 21 64 44 65 87 06 64 49 47 84 66 99 56 IS 12 36 24 83 66 66 14 89 45 92 73 88 95 04 60 71 34 65 11 20 38 12 38 62 96 56 30 47 42 59 64 21 48 29 54 22 02 00 23 36 71 52 06 87 38 01 52 18 81 94 91 55 13 76 10 39 02 00 66 99 13 41 72 75 21 71 56 71 90 60 54 98 " 18 15 29 59 60 76 52 25 3 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 (b) Experiments with Develco-Superconducting Differential Magnet- ometer (Gradiometer) One of the first psychoenergetically-produced physical effects observed by SRI personnel in early research (1972) was the apparent perturbation of a Josephson.effect magnetometer. The conditions of that pilot study, involving a few hours use of an instrument committed to other research, prevented a proper investigation. The number of data samples was too few to permit meaningful statistical analysis, and the lack of readily available multiple recording equipments prevented in- vestigation of possible "recorder only" effects. Therefore, at the suggestion of,the client, a series of experiments,,were.earried out using a client-supplied Develco Model 8805 superconducting second-derivative gradiometer manufactured by Develco, Inc., Mountain View, California. The assembled device is .shown in Figure,12. .......... Basically, -the gradiometer is a four-coil Josephson effect magnetometer device consisting of a pair of coil pairs wound so as to provide a series conn ection of two opposing first-derivative gradiometers, yielding a second-derivative gr adiometer (i.e., a device sensitive only to second and higher order derivative fields). As a result, the device is relatively insensitive to uniform fields and to uniform gradients. This arrangement allows for sensitive measurement of fields from nearby sources while discriminating against relatively uniform magnetic fields produced by remote sources. The device is ordinarily Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 OR, t ,--'wk SUPERCONDUCTING DIFFERENTIAL MAGNETOMETER FIGURE 12 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 used to measure magnetic fields originating from processes within the human body, such as action currents in the heart which produce magnsto- cardiograms,. The sensitive tip of the instrument is simply placed near the body area of interest. In our applicationt however, the subject is located at a distance of four meters from the gradiometer probe. As a result the subject is located in a,zone of r0lative insensitivity; e.g., standing up, sitting down, leaning forward, and arm and leg movements produce no signals. From this location the subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the probe. The results of his efforts are available to him as feedback from three sources; an oscilloscope,, a panel meterl and a chart recorder, the latter providing a permanent record. After initial difficulty with the instrument due to RF interference effects, which required modificaton by the manufacturer, the -radiometer was available for use by the contractor from June 10 to June 21. Some RF interference effects remained, due in part to environmental proximity to other instrumentation, but the device was usable nonetheless. Protocol for subject paxticipation was instituted as follows. The subject removes all metal objects, and the effects of body movements are checked at the start of each experimental period. The subject then works with the machine in a learning mode, observing effects being produced, if any, via feedback from the instrumentation. Once satisfied that a possibility exists of pro&jcing effects on command under experimenter Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 control, the experimenter announces the start of the experiment. The 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 rand-omly-generated ON (activity) periods are Nos. 2, 8, and 9. As observed, signals appear in each of these three periods. The signal 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-ge-nerated or artifactual, 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 9 2 2 2 1.6 x 10- Gauss/cm (second derivative D B / ), equivalent to 3.5 x 10- Gau ss referred to one pickup coil. The interpretation of such observations must be subjected to careful analysis., For example, the emphasis on "corresponds to" is based on the following: although t.he 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 obaerved 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 only conclude that generation of a magnetic field is the most probable cause. With regard to signal display, the signal was observed simultaneously on three recording devices, and thus a "recorder only" effect can be considered Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 FIGURE 13 GRADIOMETER DATA Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 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 correlp.tion exists between system disturbances and subject efforts. Subject I 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 bvents of signal-to-noise ratio > I were observed. Of these 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. Given the limited availability of the instrument and somewhat noisy environment, from our best effort we nonetheless conclude that for Subject I 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 * With -the exception of the first run where 25-second trials were used. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08110 - CIA-RDP96-00787ROO0200010007-4 highly probable cause-effect relationship. Thus it appears that a gifted sx~bject can interact with a second derivative magnetic gradiometer of -9 2 sensitivity - 10 Gauss/cm 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) E?