8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
1/29
Remote ViewingScientific Proof and Evidence
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
2/29
Remote Viewing and QuantumMechanics
explanations for consciousness and itsenigmatic features.
Critics deride this comparison as a mere"minimization of mysteries" and quicklypoint out that the brain is too warm forquantum computation which in thetechnological realm requires extreme cold toavoid "decoherence", loss of seemingly
delicate quantum states by interaction withthe environment.
However quantum computation would surelybe advantageous from an evolutionaryperspective, and biology has had 4 billion
years to solve the decoherence problem andevolve quantum mechanisms.2
The essence of consciousness and its
place in the universe remain a mystery.
Classical models view consciousness as
computation among the brain's
neurons yet they fail to address its
enigmatic nature.
At the same time quantum processes(superposition of states, non-locality,
entanglement) also remain mysterious, y e t a r e be i ng ha rne s s e d i nr e v o l u t i o n a r y i n f o r m a t i o ntechnologies (quantum computation,quantum cryptography and quantumteleportation).In order to comprehend events in the
phenomenal world, one needed to
introduce a major variable that haduntil then been ignored: Theconsciousness (self reflective thought)of the observer. Without theperception of a material world by aconscious entity, there were greatdoubts as to the existence of thatmaterial reality independently of itsobservation.1
A relation between consciousness andquantum effects has been ponderedfor nearly a century, and in the pastdecades quantum processes in thebra in have been invoked a sexplanations for consciousness and itsenigmatic features. Critics deride thiscomparison as a mere "minimizationof mysteries" and quickly point out
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
3/29
Furthermore, quantum non-locality occurring in conscious and subconscious brainfunction has been discovered in recent experiments. What is becoming even moreapparent are specific functional quantum processes in molecular biology.
What Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Remote Viewing (RV) have in common is thatthey both involve entanglement- where in QM it refers to particle entanglement and
in RV to consciousness entanglement.
QM deals with particles such as electrons and particles of light, called photons.Particle entanglement means that local measurements by an experimenter on aparticle will instantaneously interact with an entangled particle - no matter howfar apart the particles are. Einstein's famous insight that mass cannot travel fasterthan the speed of light (this is the "local" environment) does not extend toinformation about entangled particles...some information transfer does occurinstantaneously.
RV deals with target informationprocessed by human consciousnesssuch as sights, sounds, smells,feelings, tastes and concepts.Consciousness entanglementmeans that local intentions by a
viewer on target information willinstantaneously interact withentangled target information - nomatter how far apart the viewerand target are. Information fromentangled consciousness appearsavailable all the time.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
states:
"Quantum entanglement is a physicalresource, like energy, associated with thepeculiar nonclassical correlations that arepossible between separated quantumsystems. Entanglement can be measured,transformed, and purified.
Information from the Future and theTransactional Model of QM
Remote Viewing deals directly withinformation processed by consciousness. If
you take your memory as an example -- take as your target a time and place in your childhoodbedroom -- do that now. Look around the room, beaware of your conscious experience. You areconsciously processing previously entangled/storedinformation about your direct experience as a child.You are the viewer and your entangled experience isthe target. Memory fits very nicely with the simplelinear model of time that we have come to accept as
the only reality based on our experience.
3
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
4/29
Technical Note PEAR 8900
Within the constellation of activities
c o m p r i s i n g t h e P r i n c e t o nEngineering Anomalies Research
laboratory, a program addressing
precognitive remote perception
( P R P ) e x p e r i m e n t s a n da n a l y t i c a l m e t h o d o l o g yprovides important indicatorsof the basic nature of thec o n s c i o u s n e s s - r e l a t e dphenomena under study. As theproject has evolved, the binary
scoring techniques used to quantifythe PRP results have been refined to
preclude a hierarchy of possible
strategic or computational artifacts,
t h e r e b y p e r m i t t i n g m o r e
discriminating assessment of the
experimental data, the design of
more effective experiments, and the
formulation of more appropriate
theoretical models.
In this report are presented acomplete update of the PRP data,
descriptions of the analytical
refinements, and a summary of
the salient results. In brief, the
PRP protocol continues to prove a
viable means for achievement of
a n o m a l o u s i n f o r m a t i o n
acquisition about remote physical
targets by a broad range of
volunteer participants. The full
data base consists of
411 trials, 336 of
w h i c h m e e t t h e
criteria for formaldata, generated by 48
individuals over a
p e r i o d o f
approximately ten
years. Effects are
found to compound
incrementally over a
l a r g e n u m b e r o f
experiments, rather than being
dominated by a few outstanding
efforts or a few exceptionalpart ic ipants . The y ie ld i s
statistically insensitive to the mode
of target selection, to the number
of percipients addressing a given
target, and, over the ranges tested,
to the spatial separation of the
percipient from the target and
even to the temporal separation of
the perception effort from the time
of target visitation. Overall results
are unlikely by chance to the order
of 10E-10.
B. J. Dunne, Y. H.
Dobyns, and S. M.
Intner
Princeton
Engineering
Anomalies Research,
Princeton University,
Princeton, NJ 08544
Precognitive Remote Perception III:Complete Binary Data Base with Analytical
Refinements
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
5/29
4
Here is an extract from John Cramer'spaper, The Transactional Interpretationof Quantum Mechanics, where hisTransactional Quantum MechanicsModel interpretation supports the ideaabout precognition.
"A new interpretation of theformalism of quantum mechanics, theTransactional Interpretation (TI), ispresented. The basic element of TI isthe transaction describing a quantumevent as an exchange of advanced{backward in time} and retarded{forward in time} waves, as implied
by the work of Wheeler andFeynman, Dirac, and others. The TIis explicitly nonlocal and therebyconsistent with recent tests of the BellInequality, yet is relativistically
invariant and fully causal. The TIpermits quantum mechanical wavefunctions to be interpreted as realwaves physically present in spacerather than as "mathematicalrepresentations of knowledge". TheTI is shown to provide insight into thecomplex character of the quantummechanical state vector and themechanism associated with its"collapse". The TI also leads in anatural way to justification of theHeisenberg uncertainty principle."4
This model is different from other models
in a way that it employs a two-wayexchange, a "handshake", between wavestraveling forward and backward in space-time.
Remote Viewing experimental result from Princeton University show that nonlocal
precognitive (future information) connections are, in fact, also part of our reality.
http://mist.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.htmlhttp://mist.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.htmlhttp://mist.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.htmlhttp://mist.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
6/29
Later on Cramer publishedAnO v e r v i e w o f t h eT r a n s a c t i o n a l Interpretation where he
explains the nature of ahandshake:
"This advanced-retardedhandshake is the basis for thetransactional interpretation ofquantum mechanics. It is atwo-way contract between thefuture and the past for thepurpose of transferring energy,m o m e n t u m , e t c , w h i l eo b s e r v i n g a l l o f t h ec o n s e r v a t i o n l a w s a n dquant i za t i on cond i t i onsimposed at the emitter/a b s o r b e r t e r m i n a t i n g ` ` b o u n d a r i e s ' ' o f t h etransaction. The transaction isexplicitly nonlocal because the
future is, in a limited way,affecting the past (at the levelof enforcing correlations). Italso alters the way in which wem u s t l o o k a t p h y s i c a lphenomena. When we stand inthe dark and look at a star ahundred light years away, notonly have the retarded light
waves {forward in time from Ein sketch} from the star beentraveling for a hundred yearsto reach our eyes, but theadvanced waves {backward intime from A in sketch}generated by absorptionprocesses within our eyes havereached a hundred years into
the past, completing thetransaction that permitted thestar to shine in our direction."5
The ske tch be low i s arepresentation of the waveswhere the vertical axis istime and the horizontaldirection represents space.Note that the current QMformulation does have anexact cancel lation ofwaves that limits any usual
faster than the speed ofl i g h t ( s u p e r l u m i n a l )communication.
Also, Cramer in a paperentitled Quantum Non-l o c a l i t y a n d t h e
P o s s i b i l i t y o f Superluminal Effects in a
section entitled NonlinearQuantum Mechanics AndSuperluminal Loopholes, says:
"However, this prohibition isbroken if quantum mechanicsis allowed to be slightly "non-linear", a technical termmeaning that when quantumwaves are superimposed theymay generate a small cross-term not present in thestandard formalism. Steven
Weinberg, Nobel laureate forhis theoretical work in unifyingthe electromagnetic and weakinteractions, investigated atheory which introduces smallnon-linear corrections to
S c h e m a t i cr e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f general transactionmodel.
(a) Emitter E (say, a star)
sends out an "offer wave" inboth time directions.
(b) Absorber A (say, your
consciousness) responds bysending a "confirmationwave" back to emittercanceling the incidentwave.
(c) Process continues untilthe "transaction" or
"handshake" is completedwith a l l waves be ingcancelled outside of the Eto A time-frame, similar tos tand ing waves in aconfined volume.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
7/29
standard quantum mechanics [13]. Theonset of non-linear behavior is seen inother areas of physics, e.g., laser light incertain media, and, he suggested, mightalso be present but unnoticed in quantummechanics. ... Two years after Weinberg's
non-linear QM theory was published, Joseph Polchinski published a paperdemonstrating that ... Through the newn o n - l i n e a r e f f e c t s , s e p a r a t e dmeasurements on the same quantumsystem begin to 'talk' to each other andfaster-than-light and/or backward-
i n - t i m e s i g n a l i n g b e c o m e s
possible."6
Even though the non-linear QuantumMechanics model has not been
experimentally verified in physics
laboratories as yet, RV precognition
experimental data support the notion
of backward-in-time signaling.
Science does seem to be making
progress toward comprehending the
reality of precognition and maybe
consciousness will be the link for thevery small and the very large.7
Gerald ODonnel, one of the most
experienced experts in Remote Viewing
states on his website: This is not magic:
black nor white. The spiritual aspect and
the comprehension of what is happening
is within every human being. Each and
everyone has access to it. Quantum
physics has only brushed experimentally
the big question: has matter created mind
or mind created matter? Even though the
...faster-than-light and/or backward-in-time signaling
becomes possible.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
8/29
Five years after Wheeler outlined whathe called the delayed-choice experiment,it was carried out independently bygroups at the University of Maryland andthe University of Munich. They aimed alaser beam not at a plate with two slitsbut at a beam splitter, a mirror coated
with just enough silver to reflect half ofthe photons impinging on it and let theother half pass through. After divergingat the beam splitter the two beams wereguided back together by mirrors and fedinto a detector.This initial setup provided no way for theinvestigators to test whether anyindividual photon had gone right or leftat the beam splitter. Consequently, eachphoton went both ways splitting into twowavelets that ended up interfering witheach other at the detector.
Then the workers installed a customizedcrystal called a Pockels Cell in the middle
of one route. When an electric currentwas applied to the Pockels Cell, itdiffracted photons to an auxiliary
detector. Otherwise, photons passedthrough the cell unhindered. A randomsignal generator made it possible to turnthe cell on or off after the photon hadalready passed the beam splitter butbefore it reached the detector as Wheelerhad specified.
When the Pockels-cell detector wasswitched on, the photon would behavelike a particle and travel one route or theother, triggering either the auxiliarydetector or the primary detector, buy notboth at once. If the Pockels-cell detectorwas off ,an interference pattern wouldappear in the detector at the end of bothpaths, indicating that the photon hadtravelled both routes.
The astronomers choice of how toobserve photons from the quasar here inthe present apparently determineswhether each photon took both paths or
just one path around the gravitationallens-billions of years ago. As theyapproached the galactic beam splitter thephotons must have had something like a
premonition telling them how to behavein order to satisfy a choice to be made byunborn beings on a still nonexistentplanet.
From: Quantum Philosophy
by John Horgan Scientific American July 92
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
9/29
later is strongly hinted at, the real
proof is within the laboratory of one's
own mind. Not within an external
technological laboratory apparatus.
Although time and space have been
experimentally bridged within majorresearch physics labs recently, the
implications have yet to seep through
mankind's psyche.
In one famous laboratory experimentof modern quantum physics called
"the delayed choice experiment" even
the past was changed in order to fit
the present. Which means that instead
of the normal cause-and-effect logic
that we are accustomed to, in that
case the effect chosen caused the
cause to change accordingly. This
means that our present choices
changes the memory of our past. This
original experiment first proposed by
the physicist John A. Wheeler in 1978
as a thought experiment, was
confirmed experimentally in 1988
under strict laboratory conditions
using electronic, ultra-fast pocket
cells, by two groups of physicistsworking at the University of
Maryland and at the University of
Munich.
Gerald ODonell isone of the worldsmost famous RemoteV i e w i n g T e a c h e r s
says:
This is not magic:
black nor white. Thespiritual aspect and
the comprehension of
what is happening iswithin every human
being. Each and
everyone has access
to i t
Gerald ODonnel
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
10/29
Stanford Research InstituteExperiments
undertaken for over twenty yearsto create a trainable, repeatable,operational and if at all possible,accurate method of psychicspying or information gatheringfor the U.S. Military and intel.)
The person at Stanford ResearchInstitute (SRI) chosen to oversee
this project (called BiofieldMeasurements Program) wasHal Puthoff, at that time workingon laser research at SRI. Joininghim later would be a colleague(from laser research and alsow i t h a n i n t e r e s t i nparapsychology), Russell Targ.
We concentrated on what weconsider to be our primaryresponsibility -- to resolve underconditions as unambiguous aspossible the basic issue ofwhether a certain class ofp a r a n o r m a l p e r c e p t i o nphenomena exis ts . So we
Two people behind
SRI Experiments
Russell Targ
H. Puthoff
Stanford Research Institute (SRI)
conducted series of investigations intothe human mind's capacity for expandedawareness, later called remote viewing,the ability that allows an idividualperceive a target, a person or an objectthat is located remotely in space. Theexperiments began in 1972.
For two decades SRI's research wassupported by the CIA and othergovernment agencies (One of them wasa project called Project Stargate - the
collective name for advanced psychicfunct ioning or Remote viewingexperiments and programs that were
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
11/29
conducted our experiments withsufficient control, utilizing visual,acoustic and electrical shielding, toensure that all conventional paths ofsensory input were blocked. At all timeswe took measures to prevent sensory
leakage and to prevent deception,whether intentional or unintentional.
First, we conducted experiments withMr. Uri Geller in which we examinedhis ability, while located in anelectrically shielded room, to reproducetarget pictures drawn by experimenterslocated at remote locations. Second, we
conducted double-blind experimentswith Mr. Pat Price, in which wemeasured his ability to describe remoteoutdoor scenes many miles from hisphysical location.
Our task was to learn to understandpsychic abilities, and to use these
abilities to gather information about theSoviet Union during the Cold War.
Here are the results of experimentssuggesting the existence of one or more
perceptual modalities through whichindividuals obtain information abouttheir environment, although thisinformation is not presented to anyknown sense. We present mostimportant extracts from H. E. Puthoff sCIA-Initiated Remote Viewing At
Stanford Research Institute and
Russe l l Targs "In formati on
Transmission under Conditions
of Sensory Shielding."
Uri Geller at SRI Ur Geller
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
12/29
...We have found from years of experience that people can quickly learn to do remote viewing,and can frequently incorporate this directknowing of the world -- both present andfuture -- into their lives.R. Targ
The Experiments
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
13/29
Here is what R. Targ anf H.Puthoff write about theexperiments conducted withGeller in their study8:
Geller was at all times visually,
acoustically, and electricallyshielded from personnel andmaterial at the target location.Only fo l l owing Ge l l e r ' si s o l a t i o n f r o m t h eexperimenters was a targetchosen and drawn, a proceduredesigned to eliminate pre-e x p e r i m e n t c u e i n g .Furthermore, to eliminate thepossibility of pre-experimenttarget forcing, Geller was keptignorant as to the identity ofthe person selecting the targetand as to the method of targetselection.Three different techniqueswere used in the experiments:
(1)pseudo-random technique ofo p e n i n g a d i c t i o n a r yarbitrarily and choosing thefirst word that could bedrawn
(2) t a r g e t s , b l i n d t o
experimenters and subject,prepared independently bySRI scientists outside thee x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p(following Geller's isolation)a n d p r o v i d e d t o t h eexperimenters during thecourse of the experiment
(3) arbitrary selection from a
target pool decided upon ina d v a n c e o f d a i l ye x p e r i m e n t a t i o n a n ddesigned to provide dataconcerning informationcontent for use in testingspecific hypotheses.
Targ continues in his study:
Remote Viewer:
Uri Geller
These trials was
carried out with
Russell Targ in
1974.
Uri Geller
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
14/29
Geller's task was to reproducewith pen on paper the linedrawing generated at the targetlocation. Following a period ofeffort ranging from a fewminutes to half an hour, Gellereither passed (when he did notfeel confident) or indicated hewas ready to submit a drawing tothe experimenters, in which casethe drawing was collected before Gellerwas permitted to see the target.
And concludes:
Geller was successful in
obtaining information under
conditions in which no persons
were knowledgeable of the
target. A double-blind
experiment was performed in
which a single 3/4 inch die was
placed in a 3 x 4 x 5 inch steel
box. The box was then
vigorously shaken by one of the
experimenters and placed on the
table, a technique found in
control runs to produce a
distribution of die faces differing
non significantly from chance.
The orientation of the die within
the box was unknown to the
experimenters at that time.
Geller would then write down
which die face was uppermost.
The target pool was known, but
the targets were individually
TELEPHONE(123) 456-7890
Experiments:Targetsandresponses
prepared in a manner blind to all persons
involved in the experiment. This experiment
was performed ten times, with Geller
passing twice and giving a response eight
times. In the eight times in which he gave a
response, he was correct each time. The
distribution of responses consisted of three
2s, one 4, two 5s, and two 6s. The
probability of this occurring by chance is
approximately one in 10 to the power 6.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
15/29
Here is the summary Targgives about the experiments:A study by Osis 5 led us todetermine whether a subjectcould describe randomlychosen geographical siteslocated several miles from thes u b j e c t ' s p o s i t i o n a n dd e m a r c a t e d b y s o m eappropriate means (remote
viewing). This experimentcarried out with Price, aformer Cali fornia policec o m m i s s i o n e r a n d c i t ycouncilman, consisted of as e r i e s o f d o u b l e - b l i n d ,demonstration-of-ability testsinvolving local targets in theSan Francisco Bay area which
could be documented byseveral independent judges. Weplanned the exper imentconsidering that naturalgeographical places or man-made sites that have existed for
a long time are more potentt a r g e t s f o r p a r a n o r m a lperception experiments thanare artificial targets prepared inthe laboratory. This is based onsubject opinions that the use ofartificial targets involves a'trivialization of the ability' ascom par e d w i t h na t ura lpreexisting targets.
In each of nine experimentsinvolving Price as subject andSRI experimenters as a targetdemarcation team, a remotelocation was chosen in adouble-blind protocol. Price,who remained at SRI, wasasked to describe this remote
location, as well as whateveractivities might be going onthere.Several descriptions yieldedsignificantly correct data
Remote Viewer:
Pat Price.
These trials was
carried out with
Russell Targ in
1974.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
16/29
pertaining to and descriptive of the target
location.
In the experiments a set of twelve targetlocations clearly differentiated from eachother and within 30 minutes driving timefrom SRI had been chosen from a target-rich environment (more than 100 targetsof the type used in the experimentalseries) prior to the experimental series byan individual in SRI management, thedirector of the Information Science andEngineering Division, not otherwiseassociated with the experiment. Both theexperimenters and the subject were keptblind as to the contents of the target pool,which were used without replacement.
An experimenter was closeted with Priceat SRI to wait 30 minutes to begin the
narrative description of the remotelocation. The SRI locations from whichthe subject viewed the remote locationscons i s t e d o f an ou tdoor pa rk (Experiments 1, 2),- the double-walledcopper-screen Faraday cage discussedearlier (Experiments 3, 4, and 6-9), andan office (Experiment 5). A secondexperimenter would then obtain a target
location from the Division Director froma set of traveling orders previouslyprepared and randomised by the Directorand kept under his control. The targetdemarcation team (two to four SRIexperimenters) then proceeded directly tothe target by automobile withoutcommunicating with the subject orexperimenter remaining behind. Since
the experimenter remaining with the
subject at SRI was in ignorance both asto the particular target and as to thetarget pool, he was free to question Priceto clar i fy his descr ipt ions . Thedemarcation team then remained at thetarget site for 30 minutes after the 30minutes allotted for travel. During theobservation period, the remote-viewingsubject would describe his impressions ofthe target site into a tape recorder. Acomparison was then made when thedemarcation team returned.
Price's ability to describe correctly
buildings, docks, roads, gardens,
and so on, including structural
materials, color, ambiance, and
activity, sometimes in great detail,
indicated the functioning of a
remote perceptual ability.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
17/29
D r a w i n g o f agantry crane at the
secret Soviet R&D
s i t e a t
Semipalatinsk. Its
s h o w i n g
r e m a r k a b l e
agreement with a
CIA drawing based
o n s a t e l l i t e
photography. For
example, that bothcranes have eight
wheels.
Below: Artist tracings of a satellite photograph of the
Semipalatinsk target site.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
18/29
Targs comments about
t h i s e x p e r i m e n t :Livermore Val ley
Foothi l l s Windmil l
Farm target site photo,
with sketch by Viewer a
hundred miles away,
showing poles, hills,
"moving electricity in
the form of a grid" and
"halo probably not
visible to the eye," at
the top of the poles.
( R e m o t e V i e w e r :
Joseph McMoneagle.
This trial was carried
out with Dr. Edwin C.
May in 1987.)9
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
19/29
Sketch produced
by Russell Targ,
w h e n h e
spontaneously took
the role of remote
v i e w e r i n t h e
absence of psychic
Pat Price . The
photograph shows
the target, which
was an airport on
an island off SanAndres, Columbia.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
20/29
Following Geller's isolation,t h e t a r g e t s f o r t h e s eexperiments were chosen bycomputer laboratory personnelnot otherwise associated with
either the experiment or Geller,and the experimenters andsubject were kept blind as tothe contents of the targetpool.10
The conditions and results forthe 10 experiments carried outin the shielded room are
displayed in Fig. 1. Allexperiments except 4 and 5were conducted with Gellerinside the shielded room. InExperiments 4 and 5, theprocedure was reversed. Forthose experiments in whichGeller was inside the shieldedroom, the target location wasin an adjacent room at a
distance of about 4 m, exceptfor Experiments 3 and 8, inwhich the target locations were,
A response was obtained in allexperiments except Numbers5-7. In Experiment 5, the
person-to-person link waseliminated by arranging for ascientist outside the usualexperimental group to draw apicture, lock it in the shieldedroom before Geller's arrival atSRI, and leave the area. Gellerw a s t h e n l e d b y t h eexperimenters to the shielded
room and asked to draw thepicture located inside theroom.11
M o r e
E x p e r i m e n t s
conducted with
Uri Geller
Fig1 Fig. 2
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
21/29
From these experiments we concludethat:
- A channel exists wherebyinformation about a remotelocation can be obtained by meansof an as yet unidentified perceptualmodality.- As with all biological systems, theinformation channel appears to beimperfect, containing noise alongwith the signal.-While a quantitative signal-to-
noise ratio in the information-theoretical sense cannot as yet bedetermined, the results of ourexperiments indicate that thefunctioning is at the level of usefulinformation transfer.
-It may be that remote perceptualability is widely distributed in the
general population, but because theperception is generally below anindividuals level of awareness, it isrepressed or not noticed. Forexample, two of our subjects (H.H.and P.P.) had not consideredthemselves to have unusualperceptual ability before theirparticipation in these experiments.
Our observation of the phenomenal e a d s u s t o c o n c l u d e t h a texperiments in the area of so-calledparanormal phenomena can bescientifically conducted, and it isour hope that other laboratorieswill initiate additional research toattempt to replicate these findings.12
H. E. Puthoff, Ph.D. in his CIA-Initiated
Remote Viewing At Stanford Research Institutesays:Regardless of one's a priori position,however, an unimpassioned observercannot help but attest to the followingfact. Despite the ambiguities inherent inthe type of exploration covered in theseprograms, the integrated results appear toprovide unequivocal evidence of a
human capacity to access events remotein space and time, however falteringly, bysome cognit ive process not yetunderstood. My years of involvement as aresearch manager in these programs haveleft me with the conviction that this factmust be taken into account in anyattempt to develop an unbiased picture ofthe structure of reality.
Following is an abstract from theJournal
of Scientific Exploration, Volume 10,
Number 1:
Research on psychic functioning,conducted over a two decade period, isexamined to determine whether or notthe phenomenon has been scientificallyestablished. A secondary question iswhether or not it is useful for governmentpurposes. The primary work examined inthis report was government sponsoredresearch conducted at Stanford ResearchI ns t i tu t e , l a t e r known a s S R II n t e r n a t i o n a l , a n d a t S c i e n c e
Applications International Corporation,known as SAIC. Using the standardsapplied to any other area of science, it is
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
22/29
concluded that psychic functioning hasbeen well established. The statisticalresults of the studies examined are farbeyond what is expected by chance.
Arguments that these results could be dueto methodologica l flaws in theexperiments are soundly refuted. Effectsof similar magnitude to those found ingovernment-sponsored research at SRIand SAIC have been replicated at anumber of laboratories across the world.Such consistency cannot be readilyexplained by claims of flaws or fraud.
The magnitude of psychic functioningexhibited appears to be in the rangebetween what social scientists call a smalland medium effect. That means that it isreliable enough to be replicated inproperly conducted experiments, withsufficient trials to achieve the long-runstatistical results needed for replicability.
A number of other patterns have been
found, suggestive of how to conductmore productive experiments and appliedpsychic functioning. For instance, itdoesn't appear that a sender is needed.Precognition, in which the answer isknown to no one until a future time,
appears to work quite well. Recentexperiments suggest that if there is apsychic sense then it works much like ourother five senses, by detecting change.Given that physicists are
c u r r e n t l y g r a p p l i n g w i t h a nunderstanding of time, it may be that apsychic sense exists that scans the futurefor major change, much as our eyes scanthe environment for visual change or ourears allow us to respond to suddenchanges in sound. It is recommended
that future experiments focus onu n d e r s t a n d i n g h o w t h i s
phenomenon works, and on how to
make it as useful as possible. There
is little benefit to continuing experimentsdesigned to offer proof, since there is littlemore to be offered to anyone who doesnot accept the current collection ofdata.13
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
23/29
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
24/29
According to Russell Targ, wecan be certain that remoteViewing is working and presentshis findings as follows:
Accuracy and Reliability of
Remote Viewing:
Finding the target: Remote viewers can often contact,experience and describe ahidden object, or a remotenatural or architectural site,based on the presence of acooperative person at thel o c a t i o n , g e o g r a p h i c a lcoordinates, or some other targetdemarcation, which we call anaddress. We have shown that it isnot necessary for someone toknow the correct answer at thetime of the viewing. Forexample, in precognitive remote
viewing, the target may not evenbe chosen at the time of theexperimental trial, but of course,the viewer will get to see the
feedback later.
Target attributes most often
sensed:
Shape, form and color aredescribed much more reliably byinexperienced viewers than the
Rhoncus tempor placerat.
What do we Know About Remote Viewing?
target's function, or other analytical information.In addition to visual imagery, viewers sometimesdescribe associated feelings, sounds, smells andeven electrical or magnetic fields.
It is even possible for viewers to experienceaspects of a target which are not actuallymanifested. For example, some viewers canreliably describe the color of an object which isinside an opaque box where there is no light togive it any color at all.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
25/29
Temporal sensing:
Viewers can sense present, pastand future activities at target sites.In 1982, nine remote viewingforecasts were made four days inadvance for changes in the price ofsilver futures on the COMEXcommodity exchange, and all ninewere correct. There is not a dropof evidence to indicate that it is
more difficult to look slightly intothe future, than it is to describe anobject in a box in front of you.
Actually, it's better not to look atthe box when you are doingremote viewing, because you maybe tempted to try to see the targetby pretending that you have x-ray
vision, which, in our experience,
does not work.
Accuracy and reliability:
Blueprint accuracy can sometimesbe achieved, and reliability in aseries can be as high as 80%.Unlike card-guessing or otherforced-choice experiments, morethan two decades of remote
viewing research have shown nodecline in people's remote viewingperformance over time. Withp r a c t i c e , p e o p l e b e c o m eincreasingly able to separate outthe psychic signal from the mentalnoise of memory and imagination.
Spatial accuracy:
Targets and target details as smallas 1 mm can be sensed. HellaHammid successfully describedmicroscopic picture targets assmall as one millimeter square inan experimental series at SRI in1979.[1] Shealso correctlyident ified a
silver pin anda s p o o l o f thread insidean aluminumfilm can.
In the 1890s, Annie Besantworked with psychic C. W.
Leadbeater in an imaginativestudy to describe the structure ofatoms. In this early research at theEnglish Theosophical Society,Leadbeater was the first person inthe world to describe thedistinctive nuclear structure of thethree isotopes of hydrogen. In hisbook Occult Chemistry published in1 8 9 8 , h e w r o t e t h a t h eclairvoyantly saw that a given atomof hydrogen could have one, two,or three particles in its nucleus,and still be hydrogen. Isotopes hadnot yet been discovered bychemists. Leadbeater was the firstto report that atoms of different
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
26/29
atomic weights could still retain theirchemical identity.
Distance effects:
Again and again we have seen thataccuracy and resolution of remote
viewing targets are not sensitive to variations in distance of up to 10,000miles. An example of such long-distance
viewing is described in Chapter 2 withDjuna Davitashvili in the 1984 Moscow -San Francisco remote viewing.
Electrical shielding:
Faraday-cage screen rooms andunderwater shielding have no negativeeffects on remote viewing. In fact, some
viewers very much like to work in anelectrically-shielded environment. Thewell-known psychic Eileen Garrettshowed me such a room that she had built
for her own use, in her offices at theParapsychology Foundation, on 57thStreet in New York City. Pat Price did hisfine description of the Rinconada ParkSwimming Pool Complex and severalother sites from inside SRI's shieldedroom. In fact, recent findings fromPhysicist James Spottiswoode** show thatelectromagnetic radiation from our milky
way galaxy and the electromagneticeffects of solar flares both degrade psychicfunctioning. Electrical shielding seems tohelp performance, and so does carryingout experiments when the galacticradiation is at a minimum at yourlocation. When the milky way is below
your position of the earth, rather thanabove your head, you have a two hour
window of opportunity. This occurs at1300 hours sidereal time, but it is stillpossible to be abundantly psychic any
time of the day or night.
In 1978, Hella Hammid and Ingo Swannsuccessfully received messages sent fromPalo Alto, while they were inside of asubmarine submerged in 500 feet of seawater, 500 miles away. Hella and Ingoeach had five file cards to look at later,with a target location description writtenon one side, and a submarine type of
instruction on the other, as a sort of codedevice. For example, the five targets werea large oak tree, an indoor shoppingplaza, etc.; and the messages were thekind of thing you might communicate toa submerged sub that was out of radiocontact because of the salt water, such as,"Remain submerged, Return to port, Fireat priority targets," etc. In each case my
colleague and I would hide ourselves inPalo Alto at a specified time, and the
viewers in the sub would have to describethe location where we were. They wouldthen look at each of the five cards to seewhich one best matched their remote
viewing experience, and the message to besent was found on the back of the card.Both trials in this experiment were
successful. (The statistical significancewould be found by multiplying togetherthe two 1-in-5 events, to give a probabilityof p = 0.04, or less than four times in ahundred occurring by chance, whichmany would consider a significantresult.)14
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
27/29
In 1977, Targ and Puthoff published abook Mind-Reach in which they
presented the results of their remoteviewing experiments. They also evaluatedthe ways in which remote viewing couldbe put to practical use.
They listed:
(a) Survival value many spontaneousOBE's occur at the time of a serious
accident, injury or during surgery. "It is inprimarily life-threatening situations thatexceptional spontaneous functioningseems to occur" they say;
(b) Executive ESP use of remoteviewing and other anomalous abilities in
the business world;(c) Futuristic predictions;
(d) Medical diagnosis; and
(e) Space exploration.
8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
28/29
Now that you know what remote viewing is about,
you're ready to use it in your life for wealth, health, and joy.
Just click here to discover how and enjoy the most up
to date resources on matrix, your subconscious, and
remote viewing.
http://www.oneuniversalmind.com/Productshttp://www.oneuniversalmind.com/Productshttp://www.oneuniversalmind.com/Productshttp://www.oneuniversalmind.com/Productshttp://www.oneuniversalmind.com/Productshttp://www.oneuniversalmind.com/Products8/8/2019 Remote viewing Scientific Proof and Evidence
29/29
1 Gerald ODonnel Scientific Explanation of Remote Viewing, Propable Future,www.probablefuture.com
2 Physics-Intuition-Applications Online Magazine, Remote Viewing and psi Applications http://p-i-a.com/
3 Physics-Intuition-Applications Online Magazine, Remote Viewing and psi Applications http://p-i-a.com/
4 Reviews of Modern Physics 58, 647-688, July (1986)
5 International Journal of Theoretical Physics 27, 227 (1988)6 Proceedings of the NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop, Cleveland, OH, August
12-14, 1997 Physics-Intuition-Applications Online Magazine, Remote Viewing and psi Applications http://p-i-a.com/
8 "Information Transmission under Conditions of Sensory Shielding." Nature (October 1974)10 "Information Transmission under Conditions of Sensory Shielding." Nature (October 1974)11 "Information Transmission under Conditions of Sensory Shielding." Nature (October 1974)12 "Information Transmission under Conditions of Sensory Shielding." Nature (October 1974)13 An Assessment of the Evidence for Psychic Functioning by Jessica Utts, Division of Statistics,University of California, Davis, CA 95616, Volume 10 Number 1: Page 3.
14 From Miracles of Mind by Russell Targ and Jane Katra, http://www.espresearch.com/
Other:
Resources found at: One Universal Mind, http://www.oneuniversalmind.com
Berger, Arthur S., and Joyce Berger. The Encyclopedia of Parapsychology and Psychical Research.
New York: Paragon House, 1991.
Pleasants, Helene, ed. Biographical Dictionary of Parapsychology. New York: Helix Press, 1964.
Ed Damess Website: https://eddamespredictions.com
Puthoff, Harold E., and Russell Targ. Mind-Reach: Scientists Look at Psychic Ability. New York:Delacorte Press, 1977.
Targ, Russell. The Mind Race: Understanding and Using Psychic Abilities. New York: Villard
Books, 1984.
Targ, Russel, and Harold E. Puthoff. "ESP Experiments with Uri Geller." In Research in
Parapsychology 1973. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1974.
https://eddamespredictions.com/https://eddamespredictions.com/http://www.oneuniversalmind.com/http://www.espresearch.com/http://p-i-a.com/https://eddamespredictions.com/https://eddamespredictions.com/http://www.oneuniversalmind.com/http://www.oneuniversalmind.com/http://www.espresearch.com/http://www.espresearch.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://p-i-a.com/http://www.probablefuture.com/http://www.probablefuture.com/