PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE FOUR-STATE ELECTRONIc RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 15
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 5, 2003
• Sequence Number: 2
• Content Type: NOTES

PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE USE OF THE FOUR-STATE
ELECTRONIC RANDOM STIMULUS GENERATOR *
The following notes are based solely upon my experience and I there-
fore make no claim that they are generalizable to other persons. Since
I am still learning about ESP phenomena, I am confident that additional .,
work in this area will expand, modify, and refine the perceptual processes
discussed below. While I have tried to describe these experiential
processes with as much precision as possible, the use of seemingly precise
language should not leave the impression that the perceptions themselves
were equally precise. To the contrary, I found these perceptions to be
delicate, transient and ephemeral---and yet, at the same ti.e--rand somewhat
surprisi.ngly--unmista.ka.bly real.
1. Perceptual. Processes
Working with the ESP machine proved to be a venture into unfamiliar
perceptual territory which functioned according to new and different
rules. It took some time (five hours or so with the ESP machine) to begin
to learn not only which perceptual processes would work but, equally
important which would not work. There was clearly a learning process
in finding those delicate and subtle internal cues that wcojld allow me
to make perceptually based choices. After approximately 1000 trials
with the ESP machine, five dominant perceptual modes emerged. Subsequent
Prepared by a policy research analyst a . SRI, who was
a ha , -sc?Annrofi edjeocrtR"4 81164/(kV#k%r (jWRYt 7 Uc~8Oe9OT 2-2-aindu n
stimulus gelierat or
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
work with the machine seemed to essentially expand and refine these
perceptual processes that emerged initially.
Direct Knowing (Used approximately 5 to 15 percent of the time)--This
perceptual cue came as a "gift" that I did not have to?work for. This
is not to say that this "cue" was always right, but when. there was a
direct. perception of the appropriate response unmediated by any of the
other cues described below, my chances of being right seemed quite high
(say 75 percent of the time). Internally, this was simply the feeling''
that I should push one specific button and the knowing was almost
immediate. If it were not immediate then, typically, one of the other
cues would be used.
"(jlosure Cues" (Used perhaps 75 percent of the time)--This cue
manifested itself in a variety of ways; a sense of "fullness"' with respect
to a particular button, an internal anticipation of the bell ringing, a
sense of "hardness" or "firmness" and a sense of being "locked into" the
correct response,. The validity of this cue could be tested-by acting
and thinking as if I were going to push.a particular button and then
noting the extent to which these "closure cues" became present. This
sense of active intentionality----both physically and psychologically--
seems important in that it allowed me to sort out many real from imagined
r?
perceptions. Also, this cue often gave a kind of veto power; i.e., it
did not necessarily assure me as to the right answer but it would tend
to tell me if I had picked the wrong one, i.e., I would not experience
the aforementioned cues.
Pattern Recognition (Negligible use initially, but then used
approximate 75 percent of the tame during Phase IV)---Although I used
this perceptual mode very infrequently during the initial stages of the
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
expw
to
was
res}
rats
Here
dire
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
experiment, it emerged rather naturally toward the end. This was similar
to the "direct knowing" but not isolated to a single button; rather, there
was a sense of the next two to three buttons that would be the correct
responses. These perceptual cues were obtained in a less objective/
rational way and in more of a meditative state, highly concentrated but
without specific focus on a particular button. Interestingly, in using
this perceptual process, I was able to go somewhat faster and have greater
access to all of the buttons in an equivalent way (see the second point
under Section 2 next page). Thus, this mode had the advantage of loosening
habituated perceptual patterns but it also made selections less amenable
to conscious control and testing. This process proved to be either highly
accurate or highly inaccurate. Accuracy seemed to be a function of the
degree to which I could become synchronized with the evolving pattern of
machine selected choices-and it was easy to get out of phase/sequence
with this pattern.
ltati..onal Guessing (Used approximately 5 percent of the time)-Although
I virtually never did try to superimpose some rationally predicted pattern
upon the random, machine selection of buttons, I would sometimes temper
my selections (very seldom for the better) by noting that one button had
come up too often for it to be likely on the next trial or, conversely,
it had come up so seldom that it should be given special consideration
as a likely possibility on the next trial. Again, although this was a
tempting strategy, I found that random processes were not amenable to
rational anticipations and my rational guesses seemed often to be wrong.
Tension/Vector Analysis (Used approximately 75 percent of the time)---
Here the cue was manifested as a sense of tension(s) pulling in one
direction or another with the selection buttons as the locus for that
tension. The cue was also manifested as a feeling of "emptiness" and
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
conversely as a sense of "fullness." To describe this process further,
it felt analogous to vector analysis'in physics where, in sorting out
competing tugs and pulls, one finds the "dominant" vector; i.e., the one
with the strongest "pull" or the one that best "balances" the other vector
`~Y.Y.. .
tensions. Figure A-1 illustrates this phenomenon.
Although the tension/vector cues were very useful and among the
most reliable of all the cues, I found them to be at times-quite mis-
leading. The source of confusion stemmed from the role of time as a
variable rather than. a constant in extrasensory reality (discussed in
more detail under section "Comments on Perceptual Processes"). If my
assumptions as to the temporal nature of my perceptions did not fit with
then the perceptions were quite
the actual nature of those perceptions.
misleading. (Recall that precognition refers here to a button that will
be selected in the future--typically the next: trial). The nine-cell
matrix shown in Figure A-2 may clarify the complexity of the perceptual
process, the need for discriminating awareness and the possibility for
error. Out-of nine possible combinations of the assumed/actual nature
of perceptions, only three are matched or congruent and yield accurate
understandings. Each of these primary cases is discussed below:
Clairvoyant--Here the feeling which allows sorting and
selection is like that described in Figure A-l.
a Precognitive--The feeling, sorting, and selection is like
that described in Figure A-1 with clairvoyance; the primary
difference being a shift in the time dimension to refer, not
to the present target of the machine, but to the one to be
selected next. To act on this perception I would press the
pass button to bring the future into the present and then
press the button that corresponded to my precognitive per-
ceptions.
Clairvoyant and Precognitive---The perception is of a pattern
of buttons, distributed through time, that are and will be
selected by the machine--the "pattern" usually consisted of
two to three buttons. Again, the time variable was most
Approved For Release 2003/09/09: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
LIGHT PULL/UNBALANCED
FIGURE A-1 ILLUSTRATION OF TENSION/VECTOR ANALYSIS IN OPERATION
With Button C being the one selected using these cues.
ACTUAL
NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
ASSUMED
NATURE OF
PERCEPTIONS
STRONG PULL OR/BALANCE
Correct
Perception
Precognitive I Misperception
Precognitive
FIGURE A-2 MATRIX SHOWING CORRECT PERCEPTION AND MISPERCEPTION IN THE USE
OF TENSION/VECTOR CUES VIA THE INTERFACE BETWEEN ASSUMED AND
ACTUAL NATURE OF PERCEPTIONS
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
troublesome--typically with greater difficulty in determining
the order in which the buttons would appear as targets and
lesser difficulty in determining which buttons were targets.
__.Confusion and error would. arise when I assumed the tension/vector
perceptions were clairvoyant when in fact they were (say) clairvoyant
and. precognitive. To-explain. how this felt, refer back to Figure A-l.
If the-actual sequence of correct answers were Buttons B and D, and if
I=were assuming the perceptions were clairvoyant only, then it was not
uncommon to have the perception that the intervening button (C) was the
correct choice. The rationale for this perception was that it felt like
a balance point between Buttons B (present target) and D (next target).
In retrospect, when I am more rationally aware of the room for
error in the use of this cue mechanism, I airs somewhat surprised as to
how useful it was in operation.
It should be clear from the preceding descriptions that selections
were made by avaric-t;y of processes which were used sometimes in isolation
and oftentimes in combination. A typical sequence in the selection
process was: (1) Check for "direct knowing" cues, if not there, then
(2) Use "tension/vector" cues, then (3) Make final selection with "closure
cues.
+-2. Comments on Perceptual Processes
Rather than work rapidly, I chose to work deliberately, consciously,
and therefore slowly. I would typically take five to thirty seconds
to select a button---enough time to have a firm.and conscious sense of
my internal cues and what I thought they meant. The typical sequence
would be as follows:
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
o ' Observe various cues
Rationally interact with cues to sort them out
Select a button and press it
? -Integrate feedback from response
Clear mind and become-quiet.
-Except during "pattern recognition," when all buttons seemed equally
accessible., I.found that the top two buttons on the machine were much
more accessible than the bottom two. Three plausible expl.ana'itions emerge
to account for this. First (and least 1-ikely-I thank) is a psychological .j
predisposition against the bottom two buttons----perhaps because of the
.color of the buttons or because of the pictures associated with the tar-
gets. Second is the possibility that the circuitry of the ESP machine
in some way favors the top two buttons or obscures the bottom two. Third
(and most plausible to me) is the possibility that to the extent I used
the "tension/vector" cue, then the bottom two buttons would be without
a vector below them--making it more difficult to "bracket" the bottom two
buttons with this perceptual process. In later phases of the experiment,
I was more able to access the bottom two buttons and this seemed to cor-
respond with increasing use of the "pattern recognition" cues and the
decreasing use of tension/vector cues.
The longer I worked with the ESP machine, the. more apparent it be-
came that, in an extrasensory perception reality, time becomes fluid.
In other words, although the experiment was designed to test clairvoyance
(selecting the current target) only, I found that the perceptual cues
would oftentimes be equally applicable to precognition (selecting a future
target---usually the next one). Therefore, making a correct selection
required doing two things; first, finding the correct "pattern" of buttons
that would be randomly selected by the machine (typically the pattern
consisted of two to three buttons) and second, associating a time component
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
with the buttons in that pattern. Stated differently, the same cues
discussed above held equally well for precognition or for clairvoyance--
so the problem of making a selection was compounded by the additional
difficulty of having to determine whether a perceptual cue was associated
with the button that had already been selected by the machine or the
button that would be selected in the next or even subsequent trial. I
definitely felt that if I could consisi:ently separate clairvoyant from
precognitive dimensions of identical cues, that I could substantially
increase the accuracy of overall scores.
The cues were not always consistent in their presence and meaning.
For example, I might be obtaining good results with the use of tension/
vector cues and then find them becominc* ambiguous, with a commensurate
decline inriy score. Then I would rely more heavily upon other cues.
Or, the cues might work well for clairvoyant perceptions for a while but
then shift to operate for precognition--then I would-have to "recalibrate"
myself to the cue mechanisms. So, it was a fluid, dynamic perceptual
process which required flexibility and patience. Highly significant
scores and perceptions seemed to go in spurts of ten trials or so, then
I would fall back to a chance level until I could resynchronize myself
.Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
I tend to agree with the notion that it might be more appropriate
to call these processes "extraconceptual perception" rather than "extra-
sensory perception." The perceptual cues were definitely present and
they had sensory dimensions even though they do not fit into our traditional
.sensory catogor ies Just "where" and "how" these sensory . cues were present
isnot clear to zne---but these are essentially conceptual rather than
sensory issues.
.A7basic problem in using the ESP machine was not so much the obtaining
of perceptual data as the translating of those data into sufficient
information to ,tl.ow the action of selecting? the correct button. While
the act itself is so simple as to be trivial, the information processes
(gathering, filtering, dynamically translating) underlying that act
seemed to me very substantial. It is within this unseen and unrecorded
portion of the ESP testing process that most of the "action" takes place.
From this vantage point I would like to suggest two impediments that
might partially account for relatively low scores.
First, I am still not fluent in the "language" of extrasensory
perceptions,-_analogouily, it is like hearing many separate commands in
Russian (or another unfamiliar language), each time spoken in slightly
different ways and with different intonations and inflections. The
call for action may be clearly heard but the translation of that command
into operational reality is an imprecise process until the language can
be better understood.
Second is the problem created by shifting back sand forth between
rational and intuitive knowledge processes during the course of the
experiment. In selecting a single button I would use intuitive knowledge
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
processes for' Perception and oftentimes, rational or semirational knowledge
processes to interpret those perceptions. This is not to say that the
rational component is absolutely necessary, but it dId seem to be useful
for me. In any event, since the experiment covers thousands of trials
(button selections) it required thousands of translations from one knowledge
mode to another. Although the rational mode did seem helpful for inter-
pretation, it was also "costly" (i.e., by shifting to a rational mode,
I could be thrown slightly off-balance in maintaining contact with the
subtle and delicate intuitive processes--thereby introducing.an additional
element of ambiguity and error).
Related to "the problem of differential knowledge processes is the
problem of having to translate between states of consciousness in order
to act upon extrasensory perceptions. LeShan " analyzed the experiential
properties of what he has termed Clairvoyant Reality and found that while
certain events (such as telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance) are
"normal" to this reality, certain other events (such as being able to take
directed action toward a goal) are "paranormal." For me this was manifested
experientially as the feeling that when I obtain extrasensory perceptions,
I am so much a part of, and immersed in. the Clairvoyant Reality. that in
order to act, I must causally separate myself from the Clairvoyant Reality
and enter the dualistic, subject/object Reality that LeSban terms "Sensory
Reality." Encouragingly, the "pattern recognition" process seemed to
offer a means of both perception and action, which did not require the
same degree of transfer between these subtly different states of con-
sciousness..
Lawrence Le Shan, The Medium, The Mystic and the Physicist (Viking Pres
New York, 1974).
" Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
'ho--preceding-points suggest that one difficulty in testing and
assessing.extrasensory perception may be the apparent need to translate
It into ~..an._output-that is not-isomorphic with the perceptions themselves--
a person must translate the perceptual "language" to a familiar form,
across rational and intuitive dimensions, and relatedly, from one state
of awareness to another. Is it possible, then, that our means for testing
ESP may not bo highly congruent with the nature of the phenomenon, and
this may inherently reduce the significance of the test results that
can be obtained? -
I suspect that, to an external observer, my work with the ESP machine
might appear as fairly consistent scoring slightly above chance--the
logical inference could then be matte that it small. amount of extrasensory
perception was mixed with a substantial amount of pure guessing.* While
the scoring data may support this inference, my awareness of the input
process does not. Consider the following: on the first run, a person
could get six "hits" out of twenty-five by pushing buttons at random; then
on the second run, he could get six "hits" out of twenty-five by using
extrasensory perception. To the statistician who looks only at the output,
the scores are identical--they are: no more than would occur by chance--
and the logical inference would be that the input processes were identical
or at least very similar. However alike they might appear externally,
Internally they could feel like quite different runs. In the second
instance, the chance level of scoring would be the result of an imperfect
but operative extrasensory perception process. Obviously, then, measure--
Went of ESP by statistical output alone obscures the nature and extent
of the extrasensory input. A relatively modest score on the ESP machine
can----I think---substantially understate the amount of learning and perceptual
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
ievelopment that actually occurs. The foregoing is consistent with my
impression that my scores, though statistically significant, still did
not. reflect the actual. amount of learning that had occurred.
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
5. Supportive Mind Set
There emerged, after a time, what seemed to be a series of pre-
conditions to good performance 'in terms-of mind set. These were:
0 A highlevel of motivation seemed essential. The task of
pushing one of four buttons over thousands of trials could
be rather boring--enough to allow one?:s attention to wander.
Witheach trial, it was necessary to have a high level of
motivation to ensure adequate levels of concentration and
focused attention,
? Although motivation, concentration, and attention were
important, it was also necessary not to be too concerned
with the success or failure associated with each selection.
If I became "attached" to the outcome of a previous trial,
whether a success or a failure, it could divert a significant
amount of attention from the present trial. Therefore, each
trial must be separate/fresh/clear/unconditioned by the actual
success or failure of previous trials and separate from the
imagined successes or failures of upcoming-trials.
A relatively stable, undisturbed emotional state also seems
important. I noticed the most substantial. fluctuation in
ray scores when I was emotionally stressed (angry, hassled,
and so on).
Feeling rested physically also seemed important. This was
particularly true if I were to work with the machine for aft
hour or two---as this required a substantial amount of energy.
A positive attitude--a feeling that I could do well and could
always score at least at the chance level'---was also important.
A corollary to this was that I found I did better when I
"always liked myself" even if I did poorly. Self-deprecation
seemed to be a sure way of rapidly diminishing the accuracy
of the perceptual processes.
There were attributes of the surrounding environment that seemed
to enhance the accuracy of my selections. The more significant factors
seemed to be the following:
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
It was helpful to have a relatively quiet working environ-
ment. Or, if there were noises, to have them of a sort--
fairly constant ones that remained in the background--that
could be readily filtered out of my consciousness. My
"impression was that external sensory information.---particularly
sounds--could readily overload/override subtle and delicate
.internal sensory information.
It also seemed to help to have low light levels---I would
always turn out the overhead lights in the testing room. I
experimented with closing my eyes to further reduce external
sensory stimulation and I found that this would increase the
sensitivity of sensory cues, but this increase in sensitivity
was offset by a lack of visually based feedback to verify
the accuracy of the selections. As a consequence, I chose
to keep my eyes open.
I :found it essential to work with the ESP machine by sitting
somewhat above it so that I could look down on the face of
tlic mach.ue. For some reason, perceptual discrimination seemed
much more difficult when I would sit at a lower level which
placed the buttons in a plane more nearly horizontal to my
face and upper body.
1. Transferability of Processe
The perceptual learning gained in this experiment seemed generally
transferable to other situations where I might use ESP abilities, in
particular, telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance. The inference
is that a process or faculty is being developed which has numerous appli-
cations in other situations which would rely upon ESP. Analogously,
just as jogging could exercise muscles to make a person more adept at
playing football, dancing, swimming, and the like, the use and development
of these "psychic" muscles seems to have some degree of transference to
Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-007'87R000100090002-2
 Approved For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2
$r Conclusions
I found the experiment to he a very substantial learning experience
in which, I feel, I learned much more than was reflected in the scores.
It allowed me to begin to identify an ability which I presume was largely
latent within--never having had a.prior opportunity for overt expression.
Finally, it suggests to me that this must be a common ability among many
people 'that they simply do not recognize--primarily because they have
never had the opportunity to explore it as a legitimate and "real"
phenomenon.
Appro'tied For Release 2003/09/09 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100090002-2.