AN EXPERIMENT TO EXAMINE THE POSSIBLE EXISTENCE OF REMOTE ACTION EFFECTS IN PIEZOELECTRIC STRAIN GAUGES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: STARGATE
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 83
• Document Creation Date: November 4, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 14, 1998
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
ks~o
Final Report- -Objective E, Task 8
December 1986
2Oc7
AN EXPERIMENT TO EXAMINE THE POSSIBLE
EXISTENCE OF REMOTE ACTION EFFECTS IN
PIEZOELECTRIC STRAIN GAUGES
By: G. SCOTT HUBBARD
SRI International
JULIAN D. ISAACS
John F. Kennedy University
PETER J. McNELIS, DSW
CONTRACTING OFFICER'S TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, California 94025 U.S.A.
[phone]
Cable: SRI INTL MPK
TW X : 910-373-2046
i?ved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 ed For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Final Report- -Objective E, Task 8 December 1986
Covering the Period 1 October 1985 to 30 September 1986
AN EXPERIMENT I V LAAMint Inc rvaamir.
O EXISTENCE OF REMOTE ACTION EFFECTS IN
STRAIN GAUGES
PIEZOELECTRIC
By: SCOTT HUBBARD
SRI International
l
SRI International
JULIAN D. ISAACS
John F. Kennedy University
PETER J. McNELIS, DSW
CONTRACTING OFFICER'S TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE
ROBERT S. LEONARD, Executive Director
Geoscience and Engineering Center
333 Ravenswood Avenue ? Menlo Park, California 94025 ? U.S.A.
[phone] ? Cable: SRI INTL MPK ? TWX: 910-373-2046
ved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
ABSTRACT
Five individuals designated by researchers from JFK University have participated in a
series of remote action (RA) experiments conducted at SRI International. Each participant
was asked to influence one of a pair of piezoelectric strain gauges, operating in differential
mode, in order to produce an event above a predetermined threshold. Under those
conditions, one of the participants produced a total of 11 signals above threshold. No
equivalent, uncorrelated events above threshold were detected in control periods. Known
sources of electromagnetic, acoustic, mechanical, infrared disturbance were considered and
wherever possible controlled, minimized, or measured. However, some potential, but unlikely,
sources of artifact such as cosmic rays or low-frequency magnetic fields were excluded from
consideration in this initial series of experiments. The preliminary nature of these sessions
cannot be stressed too strongly, especially because all possible sources of artifact have not
been excluded. Nonetheless, our conclusion at this time is that sufficient data have been
collected to warrant further investigation.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ..................................................................iii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS AND TABLES ...................................... vii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................... ix
I INTRODUCTION .................................................... 1
II METHOD OF APPROACH ............................................ 3
A. Participant Selection and Training .................................. 3
B. Hypotheses and Variables ......................................... 3
C. Hardware Construction ........................................... 5
III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................ 17
A. Individual Results ............................................... 17
B. Control Trials .................................................. 20
C. Possible Sources of Experimental Artifact ...... ................... 20
IV CONCLUSIONS .................................................... 27
APPENDIX A--STRAIN GAUGE REMOTE ACTION SCREENING DEVICE .......... 29
APPENDIX B--ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION
DETAILS OF A PIEZOELECTRIC SENSOR SYSTEM ................ 35
APPENDIX C--FINAL REPORT JFK 1986 ACTION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES ........ 45
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS AND TABLES
FIGURE
1 Functional Diagram of RA Apparatus ....................................... 7
2 RA Apparatus for PZT Experiment ......................................... 8
3 Sensor Enclosure (Open) ................................................ 10
4 Sensor Enclosure (Closed) ............................................... 11
5 Schematic of Experimental Area for PZT RA ............................... 14
6 October, 1986, 10:38 a.m., Participant: 032 ................................ 19
7 Typical Control-Session Data ............................................. 21
C-1 Screening Results ....................................................... 55
C-2 Participant Piezo-RA Training Sessions ..................................... 63
TABLE
1 Table of Results ....................................................... 17
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
For over a hundred years, reports have appeared in the psychical literature that claim
interactions with physical apparatus by mental means alone. If true, such effects will have
far-reaching implications. The most direct way to examine this purported phenomenon was to
attempt to replicate a claimed effect in our laboratories at SRI International. We began the
process of selecting a candidate experiment by first reviewing published laboratory research on
remote action (RA) *, placing particular emphasis on recent work which appeared to utilize
modern instrumentation.t From our review of the literature, we selected as the most
promising experiment, work claiming an interaction with a piezoelectric strain gauge. The
basis for our selection was threefold: (1) A nonstatistical effect was claimed, (2) effects were
supposedly produced with the subject at a distance from the sensor, and (3) a method of
subject selection and training was claimed.
In the published reports, a piezoelectric strain-gauge crystal was suspended several
meters from the subject. The experimenter claimed that several RA "agents" could
consistently produce signals, by mental means alone, which were at least five times the
background noise level. Occasional events of as much as 100 times background were also
claimed. Although other experimenters have also reported nonstatistical RA effects, we were
favorably impressed by the emphasis on artifact detection, at least within an extremely limited
equipment budget. In subsequent conversations, the experimenter, J. Isaacs, was very willing
to discuss additional potential sources of artifact and methods of control.
We formulated a "joint-venture" approach to replicating these claims by awarding a
subcontract to John F. Kennedy (JFK) University where J. Isaacs is currently teaching. The
task was to screen, assess, train and make available to SRI International promising RA
subjects. SRI International retained the task of designing and constructing all experimental
hardware. In addition, a series of trials that would be conducted at SRI, under SRI's
supervision, were required at the end of the contract year. We agreed in advance that the
*In the parapsychological literature, such effects are usually associated with the term psychokinesis (PK).
However, to be consistent and parallel with remote viewing, we have adopted the term remote action.
t Radin, D. I., May, E. C., and Thomson, M. J., "Psi Experiments with Random Number Generators:
Meta-Analysis Part I," Proceedings of the 28th Annual Convention of the Parapsychological Association,
pp. 199-234, Tufts University, Meford, MA (August 1985).
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
outcome of those trials would determine whether the evidence was sufficient to warrant
proceeding with further experiments.
In considering the problem of validating (or invalidating) controversial claims for the
existence of paranormal phenomena, SRI recognized two distinct but related, obstacles: (1)
No single experiment, no matter how impressive the results, could serve to prove or disprove
the existence of RA, and (2) no single initial experiment, no matter how cleverly contrived,
could claim to have eliminated or controlled all possible sources of artifactual data. This
realization prompted us to adopt a modest goal that we believe is realistic as well as cost
effective: We required the hardware and protocols to be sufficiently rigorous such that the
presence of any uncorrelated events would warrant continued investigations. Our working
definition of "uncorrelated events" was any signal that could not be ascribed to a source
normally occurring in the laboratory environment. We did not believe that, at that time,
there was sufficient evidence of an RA. effect to justify the enormous expenditure of funds and
effort required to address every conceivable source of artifact. Our null hypothesis was that
no uncorrelated events should be detected, at least for those factors with a routine origin. At
no time did we conceive of this effort as "proof" of the existence of RA. Examples of such
sources of artifact and the method of control are:
SOURCE
REMEDY
ac-line transients
Battery power for critical
components, fiber-optic signal
links, shielded enclosures
Audible-frequency acoustic artifacts
Sensor isolation in another room,
enclosed sensors, audio taping
of all sessions
Motor-frequency (30-Hz) mechanical
Three types of vibration-damping
vibrations
mounts for isolation above 10 Hz
rf transmissions
EMI-shielded sensor enclosures
and windows
A total of 20 trials, each lasting about 90 minutes, were conducted at SRI. Five subjects
provided by JFK participated in those experiments. During those trials we detected 11 events
that exceeded our determined threshold (six times the noise background) and that did not
correlate with any of the sources of artifact we examined. In approximately 30 hours of
control trials, conducted under the same circumstances except for the absence of humans, no
equivalent uncorrelated events were recorded. As a consequence we concluded that we had
collected sufficient evidence to justify investigating this phenomenon further.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The overall objective of this experiment was to determine whether remote action (RA)
effects can be induced in a piezoelectric (PZT) strain gauge.' The parapsychological
literature usually refers to mental effects on material objects as psychokinesis (often
abbreviated PK). However, for the balance of this report we shall refer to these putative
effects as remote action.
In general, these types of RA experiments consist of four basic elements:
(1) Some system or apparatus (often a transducer) the output of which is to
be affected.
(2) An individual who intends to "modify" by mental means alone the
output of the apparatus.
(3) A feedback mechanism that displays the output of the apparatus either
in real-time or after the session.
(4) An a priori defined analysis procedure.
A single trial that encompasses these elements might proceed as follows: The apparatus
has been previously actuated, and baseline data collection has been taken in advance of the
effort period. In most experiments, a sequence of effort and rest periods then follows when
the participant is present. The data record is then displayed to the participant as feedback,
and where appropriate, some statistical quantity such as a simple z-score is computed. During
a period after the participant has departed, additional control or baseline trials are taken to
determine the "normal" characteristics of the apparatus.
RA studies have traditionally been divided into two categories: (1) statistical experiments
(sometimes called micro-RA) in which small effects are observed over many thousands of
samples, and Macro-RA experiments in which large effects were claimed, usually on the basis
of a very few trials. Although the statistical experiments have generally been the more
rigorous in both protocol and hardware design, interpretation of the results is difficult. In any
study in which the test of the null hypothesis is statistical, a causal relationship cannot be
This report constitutes Objective A, Task 8, "An Experiment to Examine the Possible Existence of Remote
Action Effects in Piezoelectric Strain Gauges."
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
assumed to exist.* As a consequence, we have surveyed the literature for examples of
nonstatistical effects for which the experimental protocol also appeared sufficiently rigorous to
justify further study.
The experiment we are reporting is an extension of earlier work by J. Isaacs.t In our
review of published work on RA, his experiments with PZT strain gauges appeared to meet
the criteria for attempting replication. In addition, Isaacs claimed to have developed
procedures for selecting and training individuals who could produce these effects. In FY
1986, SRI International awarded a subcontract to John F. Kennedy University (JFK), where
Isaacs is currently teaching, for the purpose of reproducing the earlier work. During the
subcontract negotiations, it was decided that the experiments would be a joint venture, in
which SRI designs, engineers and constructs the hardware, and JFK provides the participants.
In addition we agreed that a series of trials at the end of the contract year would be carried
out at SRI. The rationale for such an arrangement was to make maximum use of expertise at
each institution and to protect against conscious or unconscious deception. By using the same
participants and hardware at two institutions, effects might be detected at both facilities, thus
providing the basis for future "built-in" replication.
The FY 1986 program consisted of a screening and preparation phase in order to refine
the protocol and select participants, an evaluation phase to select the most promising
individuals from the screening and preparation phase and a series of trials with those
individuals in a study at SRI.
*
May, E. C., Radin, D., Hubbard, G., Humphrey, B., and Utts, J., "Psi Experiments with Random
Number Generators: An Informational Model," Proceedings of the 28th Annual Parapsychological
Association Convention, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts (1985).
t Isaacs, J., "A Twelve Session Study of Micro-PKMB Training," Research in Parapsychology, pp. 31-34
(see Appendix A).
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
II METHOD OF APPROACH
A. Participant Selection and Training
Staff from JFK screened and prepared interested persons to provide participants and
protocols for the evaluation phase. The details of the screening, training, and evaluation
procedures may be found in Appendix C. In summary, lectures on RA were given to
interested groups, followed by a "hands-on" period during which members of the audience
were given an opportunity to use portable RA devices (described in Section Cl). Individuals
showing apparent RA ability were invited to participate further.
The JFK staff then began to train participants in RA using a prototype version of the
laboratory instrument (described in Section C2) to prepare them for the evaluation portion of
the program. The essential elements of the training rely heavily on the concepts of operant
conditioning and bio-feedback. Isaacs' hypothesis is that providing immediate auditory and
visual feedback about the state of the PZT sensor can enhance latent RA ability. In addition
to training, the following items were defined during the preparatory studies: the RA effect,
the thresholds for events of interest, valid data (i.e., circumstances of invalidation), and the
analysis and measures of success.
Using the final version of the laboratory hardware constructed at SRI for JFK, the
participants who successfully completed the first two phases were given further training and
evaluation. Those individuals who performed the best were asked to participate in the series
of experiments at SRI.
B. Hypotheses and Variables
In the absence of environmental interference, we postulated that selected participants
would be able to modify the normal output of a PZT strain gauge nonstatistically; that is, the
signal to noise ratio (SNR) was required to be substantially greater than 1, for an event to be
of interest.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The independent variable was time. The dependent variable in this experiment was the
overall measure of a psychoenergetic effect, as determined from the electrical output of the
PZT gauge. The specific criteria were developed during the screening and preparatory phases
at JFK and in calibration trials at SRI. From long baseline trials (i.e., 4 to 8 hours for a
single trial) with the apparatus, we determined that the system noise was - 4 mV. We
decided on an SNR of - 6:1 as the threshold for events of interest and, therefore, set the
lower level discriminator at 25 mV. As will be discussed later, the system was always
operated in differential mode as a mechanism for rejecting artifact. That is, the absolute
value of the voltage difference in the output of the two sensors was defined as the signal of
interest. Although, for psychological reasons, the participants were told to focus their
attention on only one sensor, the experimenters had agreed to accept any event above the
differential threshold. It was, therefore, not critical which sensor the participant actually
affected, if any. It was further agreed that the only sessions that would meet the criteria for
considering events of interest would be those in which the participant and sensor were located
in separate, but adjacent, rooms and in which no invalidating acoustic signals were recorded
on the tape-recorder.
Three types of controls were employed:
(1)
The SRI formal phase experiments: environmental monitoring or
shielding or both were used.
(2)
Global controls:
system stability.
extended runs between sessions to rensure long-term
(3)
Local controls:
data were collected just before or after or before and
after an effort session to ensure short-term stability of the system.
In future control trials, we will also collect data with an individual in the room whose
attention is not focused on the sensors.
During the testing and installation of the laboratory instrument, it became clear that it
was not possible to test for, to monitor for, or to shield against all possible sources of artifact
in the initial series of experiments. Therefore, some potential, but unlikely sources of artifact
such as cosmic rays or extremely low-frequency magnetic fields were excluded from
immediate consideration. Our goal was to be sufficiently rigorous to determine whether
further investigation into this form of RA is justified. The null hypothesis under test was that
no events uncorrelated with obvious artifacts would be observed.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
C. Hardware Construction
1. The Screening Device
The purpose of the PK screening device (SD) was to facilitate the selection of
subjects exhibiting psychokinetic ability. Shielding against artifact, although of concern, was
not the principal design consideration for the SD. In order to allow screening of a large
number of subjects, the SD is portable and fairly rugged when packed into two typewriter-size
carrying cases. It is quickly and easily assembled on a table or desk top.
The SD consists of two parts, a strain gauge sensor and preamplifier assembly and
a processing and display unit. The strain gauge sensor and preamplifier assembly are
suspended from a stand to provide some degree of mechanical isolation. Miniature coaxial
cables connect the sensor assembly to the desktop display unit. The display unit contains the
processing and display hardware and the batteries that supply the entire system. The front
panel of the display unit has a digital voltmeter (DVM) that displays voltage in millivolts and a
twenty-element linear LED bar graph that shows the voltage graphically on a 0- to 2-volt
scale. Headphone jacks, volume controls, battery test pushbuttons, and a remote handset
jack are located on the right side of the panel.
There are three forms of feedback: two visual and one audio. A DVM displays
the voltage held by the peak hold circuit of the selected channel, while a twenty-element LED
bar display shows the voltage in a bar graph fashion. The selected peak hold output is
simultaneously converted to an audio tone that is played into two sets of headphones; one for
the subject and one for the operator. Individual volume controls are provided. Once above
this threshold, the frequency of the tone increases linearly with the peak held voltage. The
two peak holds (signal and control) are reset by a single pushbutton. Both the "reset" and
the "channel select" pushbuttons are mounted on a small hand-held cylinder connected to
the processing and display unit by a 12-foot cord.
The potential participant is told to focus his attention on the suspended strain
gauge and by whatever mental strategy seems appropriate, to cause the frequency of the tone
to increase and the LED bar graph to rise. More details of construction of these devices may
be found in Appendix A. Additional details on their use in the field may be found in
Appendix C.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
2. The Laboratory Apparatus
A schematic overview of the laboratory RA apparatus is shown in Figure 1. The
actual apparatus may be seen in Figure 2. In designing and constructing this instrument a
number of considerations had to be satisfied:
(1) Major sources of artifact had to be shielded against and or eliminated
through proper engineering.
(2) A complex system of graduated auditory and visual feedback was
required.
(3) Computer printout and outputs for a chart recorder were both needed to
provide a permanent data record.
(4) The need to adjust almost all session parameters (e.g. threshold, gain,
etc.) required that the system be microprocessor based for maximum
flexibility.
A brief description of each of the system elements is given below. More detail
may found in Appendix B.
Since it was impossible to anticipate every possible source of artifactual data,
we elected to use two PZT sensors operating in differential mode as an additional method of
artifact rejection. In this mode, the absolute value of the difference between the output of
the two sensors was defined as the signal of interest. An event above threshold would be
detected when one of the sensors was perturbed to a greater degree than the other. The
intent of this approach was to reject any unshielded transients (e.g., low-frequency magnetic
fields, wide area acoustic artifacts, or building movements) that could presumably influence
the sensors in a nearly equivalent manner.
Each of the two PZT crystals are suspended from a lead mass. Each of the
lead masses contains a charge-sensitive preamplifier that drives a fiber-optic link. The PZTs
are coated with a silicone insulator to provide electrical insulation and silver paint to provide
EMI/RFI shielding.
The two PZTs/preamps/drivers are housed in a Hoffman EMI/RFI shielded
enclosure of dimensions 20 x 16 x 6 inches. A shielded window (combining wire mesh and a
transparent conductive coating) of dimensions 13 x 3 inches was installed so the sensor could
be seen: a requirement that the JFK staff believed was psychologically important.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Rechargeable batteries supply the power for all the PZT instrumentation within the shielded
enclosure.
MICROPROCESSOR
CONTROL
UNIT
VISUAL
FEEDBACK
UNIT
CASSETTE
PLAYER
(AUDIO)
a
AUDIO FEEDBACK
(HEADPHONES)
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Figures 3 and 4 show the entire sensor system. Details of the construction
and engineering are found in Appendix B.
b. Signal Processing
The STD bus BASIC controller is responsible for all the operator interface,
real time clock control, feedback control, and transmittal of data to both printer and TRS
Model 102 computer. The data consist of time, voltage from sensor one (V1), voltage from
sensor two (V2), and the absolute value of the difference between V1 and V2. These data
are fed to two serial ports on the back of the STD controller. One port is connected to the
printer, and the other is connected to the TRS Model 102 computer which stores them for
future processing. The STD controller also provides chart recorder output for each of the two
sensors.
The signals from the PZT sensor preamplifier are transmitted to the STD
controller via two fiber optic cables. This effectively isolates the battery powered sensor and
its circuitry from the line powered STD controller circuitry. The STD controller converts
these signals back into voltages. This is accomplished with a fiber optic receiver followed by a
frequency to voltage convertor. The signals are then filtered and full wave rectified. The
software can select the high pass filter time constant, is either 100 ms or 30 ms. The low
pass filter bandwidth is fixed at 1 kHz. After filtering and rectification, the signals are fed to
fast attack slow decay circuits. These pulse stretcher circuits have a decay time constant of a
few seconds. This is slow enough to allow both subject and operator to "view" the sensor
output via the feedback, which is derived directly from the stretched signals. The chart
recorder outputs are derived from the pulse stretchers as well.
At this point the two channels are digitized and the remainder of the
processing is done in software. A 25-kHz analog-to-digital convertor samples the channels in
rapid succession. Because of the long decay time of the pulse stretcher circuits the two
channels need not be sampled in a true simultaneous fashion.
There are three different modes of operation to drive the feedback: Channel
A, Channel B, or differential. Channel A mode uses only the signal from Sensor A to drive
the feedback. Channel B mode selects the signal from Sensor B for feedback. Differential
mode drives the feedback from the absolute value of IA - 131. Regardless of the feedback
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved, For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
mode selected, the data output to the printer and TRS Model 102 computer is as described
above.
For the purposes of feedback three thresholds are chosen: TO, Ti, or T2
where T1 is greater than TO, and T2 is greater than Ti. These threshold values can be
selected by the software. These three thresholds divide the signal amplitude into four
categories: s < TO, TO < s < T1, T1 < s < T2, and s > T2. For signal values below TO, there
is no feedback and no data are generated. For signal values between TO and Ti, the audio
feedback generated is pink noise of increasing volume. The visual display is not active below
T1. For signals between Ti and T2 both the audio and visual feedback become active. The
audio feedback is a tone of increasing pitch beginning with middle C and going up an octave.
The 8 colored bars of the visual display are illuminated with their respective tones. The
update rate for the feedback is such that the decaying signal can be clearly seen and heard as
a series of tones with decreasing pitch. Signals with an amplitude above T2 activate a cassette
tape recorder and play a tape selected by the subject. The cassette will remain on for a
preselected period during which time all signals from the sensors are ignored.
3. Experimental Protocol
Figure 5, shown below, displays the physical arrangement used during the RA
experimental series at SRI. The only variations from this layout were during the first 12
sessions when the sensor box was located in the same room as the participant. The final eight
sessions were conducted as shown in Figure 5.
A typical RA session lasted approximately 90 minutes. The sequence of
events is shown below:
? Before the JFK experimenter/participant team arrived, the SRI session
monitor checked the equipment for correct functioning and, where
scheduling permitted, collected control data just before the participant.
arrived.
? The period of the experiment comprised three trial periods of
approximately 20 minutes and two rest periods of 10 to 15 minutes each.
Rest periods were generally taken outside of the immediate area. The
participant's instructions were always to attempt to affect only the left
sensor.
? Following the experimental period, the SRI monitor again checked the
equipment for proper functioning and, if scheduling permitted, collected
more control data before the next session.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
During the experimental session, the tasks of the SRI monitor were as
All session record-keeping, such as time, conditions, personnel, and the
like were entered into a laboratory notebook.
An audio, cassette tape-recorder with two microphones was employed to
monitor the last 11 sessions for possible acoustic artifactual sources of
signals. Recording was begun at the start of the first trial and continued
through through the end of the session. The only gap in the record was
the few seconds necessary to turn over the cassette.
The monitor observed closely all aspects of the session, ensuring that the
JFK team was always accompanied during the breaks and that all
experimental rooms were locked when unattended.
The history of parapsychology is replete with examples of conscious and
unconscious deception, particularly when large-scale effects have been claimed (e.g.,
macro-RA). For this reason, the principal duty of the SRI monitor was to ensure that there
were no substantive deviations from the agreed-upon protocol while simultaneously preserving
an atmosphere of friendliness and encouragement. This requirement was met in part by
allowing the participants to interact with the system at three levels of increasing rigor. Those
three conditions are listed and discussed below. Only data collected under Condition III were
considered to be of interest.
? Condition I--Sensors in the same room with the participant, door to the
sensor enclosure open. There is no question that artifactual events are
easily produced in this condition. However a key feature of the JFK
approach to training RA ability is to build confidence by starting the
participant with the most sensitive feedback condition possible and then
by gradually introducing more restrictions. Because moving from the
JFK to the SRI facility was a dramatic change in psychological setting, a
few participants used this condition once as a "warm-up." Obviously
data from this condition were not considered.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
OUBLE PANE
WINDOW
t-
t- TAPE
RECORDER
FIBER OPTICS
CABLE
FIGURE 5 SCHEMATIC OF EXPERIMENTAL AREA FOR PZT RA.
The experimenter is designated by "E," the participant by "P,"
and the session monitor by "M." Microphones are located at
Positions 1 and 2. Ambient noise was recorded by the microphones
at Position 2, audible noise or body movement by the
participant was recorded by the midrophone at Position 1.
? Condition II--Sensors in the same room as the participant with the
enclosure sealed. This condition was artifact free as long as the
individuals were silent and relatively still. Although in principle one
could monitor sound and motion artifact induction through appropriate
video-tape recording, it was believed that such a procedure would be
invasive and probably inhibitory. Because it is impossible for any human
monitor to observe all possible activities of the individuals in the room,
SENSOR
BOX
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
events over threshold in Condition II were discussed.
? Condition III--Sensors located in a temperature controlled computer
room adjacent to the participant's room, enclosure sealed. The sensor
enclosure was still visible through a double-pane glass window especially
constructed for this purpose (cf Figure 5), a feature considered by JFK
to be psychologically necessary. Considerable noise and movement could
now be tolerated in the participant's area without triggering an event over
threshold. However, the SRI staff felt that possible effects of combined
mechanical and acoustical resonances were not well understood. As a
consequence, any audio signal on the tape-recorders correlated with an
RA event invalidated that data. The presence of such signals invalidated
several events collected in Condition III for Subject 034. None of the
other 4 participants produced any events in Condition III trial sessions
even though 2 of them generated noises. Again, we wish to reiterate our
null hypothesis. Based on our testing of the instrumentation during
Condition III, we hypothesized that no candidate events would be
produced in Condition III that were not rejected by our instrumentation
or invalidated by our audio recording. The presence of any residual
events would not be considered as evidence for RA but rather as
motivation for continued experimentation.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Researchers from JFK, under subcontract from SRI, provided five participants for a
series of RA experiments conducted at SRI under SRI supervision. Each participant was
asked to influence one of a pair of PZT strain gauges, operating in differential mode, to
produce an event above a predetermined threshold. The threshold was defined as a system
output of 25 mV, where 4 mV is the normal system noise. Altogether, the five participants
took part in 20 sessions, each lasting approximately 90 minutes and consisting of three effort
and rest periods. The last eight sessions were conducted under Condition III, in which the
sensor enclosure was located in a locked room adjacent to the participant's area. At that
point, the participant was approximately 3 meters from the pair of sensors. Under those
conditions, one of the participants produced a total of 11 events above threshold. Those
events, the largest of which was 33 mV, were in three separate efforts over two sessions on
different days. Overall results for the five participants are shown below in Table 1. Because
any given sessions might have trials conducted under differing conditions, we have displayed
the results by trial period.
Subject ID
Trials
Condition I
Trials
Condition II
Trials
Condition III
Candidate
Events*
031
0
7
2
0
032
1
14
15
11
033
1
2
3
0
034
0
6
3
0
035
1
3
2
0
For an event to be considered, it must be over the threshold in Condition III, and not correlated with an
acoustic signal.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
As is obvious from Table 1, the number of sessions was not equally distributed across
participants. The experimental time was heavily weighted in favor of Subject 032, who was
the best participant in the preliminary trials at JFK and ultimately produced the only
candidate events at SRI. Because we were seeking evidence that would support the existence
of an effect we consider that we are quite justified in our division of experimental time.
Should the effect continue to be observed we will of course design the experiments that have
balanced conditions across subjects.
Figure 6 displays the computer printout from one of the two sessions with Participant
032 in which valid events were detected. The events of interest, which occurred in the first
and third trials, are time stamped. No events occurred during the rest periods. The events
are printed in the following order; left sensor output, right sensor output, absolute value of the
difference. (The following letter "R" has no meaning and may be ignored.) The units in
which the data are printed are computer ADC conversion units. To get millivolts, multiply by
2.5. Thus, the first event in Figure 6 is equal to 30 mV, (12 x 2.5). As mentioned earlier,
the instructions to the participant were to attempt to affect the left sensor only. That this was
the actual outcome is of interest although the absolute value of the difference was defined as
the threshold, and therefore, either sensor could have been selectively affected to meet the
event criteria.
It should be pointed out that the candidate signals occurred in clusters of 4, 4 and 3
events, respectively. In each group, the signals all appeared within 1 to 2 seconds.
Therefore, the most conservative evaluation would be to say that there were 3 events rather
than 11. During any subsequent experiments, we will record the above threshold voltage as a
function of a shorter time scale (e.g., milliseconds) in order to more clearly identify events of
interest.
During the early sessions, it was found that the chart recorder created a substantial
amount of background noise, which was distracting to the participants. It had been agreed
that only that data that were above the threshold as processed by the computer ADC would
count as an event of interest. We therefore elected to disconnect the chart recorder for this
initial series of trials to minimize the environmental distractions and reduce another source of
potential acoustic artifact.
Using the charge output equations supplied by the PZT manufacturer, we have
calculated the amount of energy necessary to produce an event of 30 mV from the PZT
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
10
:47
:39
13
1
12 R
TRIAL 1
10
:47
:40
13
1
12 R
10
:47
:40
12
1
11 R
J
CANDIDATE
EVENTS
10
:47
:40
11
0
11 R
GO> C
please enter subject's name (up to 20 characters) REST I
please enter experimentor's name (up to 20 characters) t
please enter the session number =
?Redo
GO) H
GO> H 1 TRIAL 2
END OF SESSION NO EVENTS
GO) H
GO) c
please enter subject's name (up to 20 characters) t REST 2
please enter experimentor's name (up to 20 characters) t
please enter the session number t
?Redo
GO) M
GO) H
GO) C
please enter subject's name (up to 20 characters) t TRIAL 3
please enter experimenter's name (up to 20 characters) .
please enter the session number
?Redo
11
t49 t24
13
2
11
R
TRIAL 3
11
:49 t24
12
0
12
R
CANDIDATE EVENTS
11
:49 :25
13
1
12
R
OCTOBER, 1986, 10:38 A.M., PARTICIPANT: 032
1.9
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
(including, of course amplifier gains). Such an event would require about 1.4 x 10-16 joules,
or around 900 eV. If the source of this energy were radiation, that would correspond to a
low energy x-ray.
During control trials conducted after the first few experimental sessions, a building
resonance that triggered events over threshold was discovered. This resonance could be
excited by personnel walking in a specific area of the hallway. By additional vibration
isolation (a partially inflated inner tube) between the sensor enclosure and its floor stand, this
source of artifact was eliminated. For the balance of the experimental series, control trials of
up to six hours in length were recorded with no one present in the experimental room but
with normal activity in the rest of the building. No uncorrelated events above threshold
equivalent to those detected in the experimental trials were detected in those control periods.
A typical example of the chart record obtained during these control periods is shown in Figure
7. Note that the left sensor is somewhat noisier than the right. This extra noise probably
results from small differences in the electrical contacts between the preamps and sensors.
However, this small difference should riot be significant because the threshold is set a factor
of six above the noise of the left sensor. Certainly in any future hardware development we
will attempt to further reduce contact noise.
C. Possible Sources Of Experimental Artifact
The sensor must be isolated from mechanical vibration conducted to it from the
surrounding structures. Second, the sensor must be shielded from acoustic vibrations
transmitted through the air. Third, thermal influences resulting from either conducted,
convected, or radiated heat must be removed. Finally, because the signal of interest is an
electrical charge, any external influence caused by electric or magnetic fields must be isolated.
The sensor is in a laboratory environment, coexisting with many humans and
equipment such as elevators, motor-driven machinery, vehicles, and the like. The building is
in an urban area in which large truck and train traffic, as well as aircraft, pass nearby.
Because considerable motion vibration exists in the floor of the room in which the sensor is
located, the sensor had to be isolated.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
20 mV/div LEFT SENSOR-
RIGHT SENSOR
FT-
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The first level of isolation is the sensor enclosure shock mounts. These mounts
consist of four commercial elastomeric pads. The enclosure weighs about 100 lbs, including
the internal batteries. Weight per mount, resonant frequency, spring rate, static deflection,
and isolation efficiency entered into the selection. The enclosure/mount resonance frequency
is no more than 10 Hz to ensure reasonable isolation of rotating machinery components at 30
The next level of isolation is the sensor suspension system, which is a spring-mass
type with a much lower resonance frequency than the enclosure. The sensor is attached to a
bob weight that is suspended from the top of the enclosure via a spring. The weight is about
2 lbs; the spring rate was selected to provide a resonance frequency of about 2 Hz. This
provides an additional isolation factor of about 12 dB (6 dB/octave) at the enclosure
resonance frequency assumed to be about 10 Hz. Beyond 10 Hz, the overall isolation is the
sum of the two (12 dB/octave).
Extension springs are not characterized for torsional spring rate; however, a check
of nearly identical size torsion and extension springs does yield an estimate. For the metallic
spring selected above, the torsional spring constant is about 0.1 lb-ft/radian. Assuming that
the sensor weight is a 2-lb lead sphere, the rotational moment of inertia is about 1.0 x 10-4
lb-ft-sect, which implies that the rotational harmonic frequency is around 5 Hz.
Isolation from low-frequency vibrations (such as those induced by footsteps and
vehicle road "rumble") is not easy to provide. In this case, the assumption is that the energy
below 10 Hz (the electrical signal lower frequency cutoff point) will not be so large that it
masks the noise that will be visible above 10 Hz. As mentioned earlier an extra vibration
isolation element was added to eliminate some specific ambient artifacts.
Just as for mechanical vibration, acoustic energy can easily cause the PZT sensor
to produce noise signals if the sounds are allowed to impinge upon the PZT element directly.
Since this is the case, it would seem obvious that the PZT sensors should be
heavily isolated, perhaps by being encased in lead or other sound deadening material. This
approach could not be followed since it was considered a necessity that the participant be in
visual contact with the sensors.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
As the participants gain confidence in interacting with the apparatus, it is
contemplated that more restrictions can be introduced. For the present experiment however,
we believe that we were successful in controlling acoustic artifact through the following steps:
? Isolation of the sensors in a hard, steel enclosure that reflects
higher frequency sounds.
? Isolation of the entire sensor enclosure in another room (Condition
III).
? Tape recording of all Condition III sessions.
The final step of rejecting any acoustic correlated events was added as a measure
of extra caution. Qualitative experimentation demonstrated that, in Condition III, a
substantial amount of noise and movement was required to trigger an artifact from inside the
participant's room. However, we could not quantitatively measure the audible sound pressure
level and frequencies necessary to generate an artifact at the time of the experiment.
Consequently, the use of the tape recorder to reject any events correlated with room noise
appeared an appropriately conservative measure.
A small amount of conformal coat elastomeric rubber was also applied as a
sound-absorbing skin. In addition, the external silver-paint coat (which serves for EMI
protection) serves in a small way as an acoustic reflector at the highest frequencies.
Proof of the efficacy of all these measures may be found in the control trials and
testing. During the course of the testing, we duplicated all the normal ambient noises
occurring outside the room (i.e., doors slamming, people talking, etc.). None of these was
correlated with any artifact production.
3. Heat-Induced Variations
All of the elements that make up the analog portion of the sensor hardware are
sensitive to heat in various ways. The sensor is the most critical because its physical size
(mass) is very small, which means that the thermal time constant is low also. Hence, any
thermal input such as an infrared "pulse" (from the subject's hand moving past the viewing
window) may induce a response in the sensor if the pulse has significant spectral energy above
the system high-pass filter response of 10 Hz.
Because IR is long-wave energy, it penetrates many materials and is difficult to
shield. The only direct protection is the silver paint applied to the outside of the sensor over
the rubber coating. However, the shielded window of the enclosure is covered by an
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
anti-reflective coating that reduces the IR transmission. A test of waving one's hand in front
of the sealed enclosure does not produce any IR artifact. Further IR isolation was provided
by the isolation of participant and sensor in Condition III (see Figure 5).
4. Electro-Magnetic Isolation
Because the entire sensor system is electronic, it must be shielded from both
electric and magnetic field influences. No high-voltage or large-current devices are near the
sensor enclosure, and all electrical devices within 100 feet meet the FCC minimum
requirements for RFI emission suppression. The primary danger from stray fields
(field-to-cable coupling outside our shielded enclosure) is eliminated entirely by using fiber
optics cables to carry the signal to the external hardware.
The primary shield against EM signals which might affect the PZTs is the basic
sensor enclosure, which is a standard industrial NEMA 12 steel RFI-specified box. According
to the manufacturer's data book, this box provides up to 95 dB of magnetic-field shielding
from 14 kHz up to 1 MHz, and over 1100 dB of shielding for electric fields from 14 kHz up
to at least 450 MHz. These levels of performance are degraded if any openings are made in
the steel case. The viewing window in the front of the box is of a special EMI/RFI material
(metallized and containing an embedded metal mesh). The manufacturer's specification for
the shielding effectiveness (SE) for electric fields is about 80 dB up to 10 MHz. The SE for
magnetic fields varies from about 10 dB at 100 kHz to about 45 dB at 10 MHz. Clearly, low
frequency magnetic fields directly in front of the window could be a problem. However, the
PZT is a capacitive element, not resistive and, therefore, should be relatively insensitive to
such fields. In future studies, as the participants gain confidence, we should be able to use an
unmodified windowless enclosure. Power resides inside the box in the form of chemical
batteries, and the only other holes through the shell are two 1/4-inch openings for the
fiber-optic cables. A straightforward calculation can demonstrate that signals must be greater
than about 10 GHz to propagate through these openings.
Because of internally generated EM fields (from the dc to dc convertors and the
fiber-optic driver electronics), the sensor and preamplifier are totally enclosed within a
metallic shield. This shield is a combination of the lead bob weight or the silver-paint coat;
neither of which afford any magnetic shielding. Because all interconnect wires are shielded
coaxial or multiconductor cables, they are relatively immune to extraneous fields. A
single-point common "ground" was used to minimize "ground loop currents" and the
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
associated signal noise voltages. The critical low-noise preamplifier is powered from batteries
only.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
IV CONCLUSIONS
Five individuals designated by researchers from JFK University have participated in a
series of RA experiments conducted at SRI. Each participant was asked to influence one of a
pair of piezoelectric strain gauges, operating in differential mode, to produce an event above a
predetermined threshold. Altogether, the five participants contributed 20 sessions, each
lasting approximately 90 minutes. The last 8 sessions were conducted in Condition III, in
which the sensor enclosure was located in a locked room adjacent to the participant's area.
At that point the participant was approximately 3 meters from the sensor pair. Under those
conditions, one of the participants produced a total of 11 events above threshold. Those
events, the largest of which was 33 mV, were distributed into three separate effort periods
over two sessions on different days.
Known sources of artifacts (electromagnetic, acoustic, mechanical, and infra-red) were
considered and, wherever possible, controlled, minimized, or measured. However, some
potential but unlikely sources of artifact such as cosmic rays and low-frequency magnetic
fields were excluded from consideration in this initial series of experiments.
The preliminary and pilot nature of these sessions cannot be stressed too strongly,
especially since all possible sources of artifact have not been excluded. Nonetheless, our
conclusion at this time is that sufficient data have been collected to warrant further
investigation,
Future studies will heavily emphasize further shielding, detection of rare events that may
produce artifacts, possible testing of the apparatus against standard EMI specifications such as
MIL STD-461b or TEMPEST, and detection of subaudible acoustic artifact production.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Appendix A
STRAIN GAUGE REMOTE ACTION SCREENING DEVICE
by
Steven M. Ohriner
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The purpose of the RA screening device (SD) is to facilitate selecting the subjects
exhibiting RA ability. The individuals selected using the SD are to be subsequently tested and
trained using the RA laboratory instrument.
Shielding against artifact, although of concern, is not the principal design consideration
for the SD. So that a large number of subjects can be easily screened, the SD is portable
and fairly rugged when packed into its two typewriter-size carrying cases. It is quickly and
easily assembled on a table or desk top.
The SD consists of two parts: a strain gauge sensor and preamplifier assembly and
a processing and display unit. The strain gauge sensor and preamplifier assembly are
suspended from a stand to provide some degree of mechanical isolation. Miniature coaxial
cables connect the sensor assembly to the desktop display unit. The display unit contains the
processing and display hardware and the batteries that supply the entire system. The front
panel of the display unit has a digital volt meter (DVM) that displays voltage in millivolts, and
a twenty-element linear LED bar graph that shows the voltage graphically on a 0-to-2-volt
scale. Headphone jacks, volume controls, battery test pushbuttons and remote handset jack
are located on the right side panel.
Strain Gauge Sensor and Preamplifier:
The strain gauge sensor is an aluminum strip (3 inches x 3/4 inches x .016 inches)
on which two Omega Y series foil strain gauges have been mounted. These strain gauges
have a coefficient of thermal expansion matched to aluminum. The gauges are mounted side
by side and oriented parallel to the long (3-inch) axis. The aluminum strip is anchored to a
shielded aluminum enclosure (1 inch x 3 inches x 5 inches) that houses the preamplifier
circuitry. A small coaxial cable connects each of the two gauges to the bridge and
preamplifier circuitry located inside the shielded enclosure. These cables were kept short (2
inches) to minimize sensitivity to electromagnetic fields.
The two gauges are connected in serial to make up one leg of the bridge. The three other
legs are made up of 240-Ohm resistors. The bridge output is ac-coupled to a Burr Brown
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
INA-110 instrumentation amplifier. The INA-110 has a common mode rejection (CMR) of
106 dB and is configured for the maximum gain of 500 using precision trimmed internal
resistors. In addition to providing gain, the INA-110 converts the differential signal from the
bridge to a single ended signal. An additional gain of 100 is applied by a TL064 operational
amplifier followed by a unity gain buffer to serve as a line driver. Thus, the sensor
preamplifier applies an overall gain of 50,000.
At room temperature, the thermal noise of a 240-f resistor is 2 nV\/Hz. The noise
voltage of the INA-110 is 10 nV Hz. Clearly, the noise voltage of the instrumentation
amplifier is a factor of five greater than the thermal noise of the sensor. System tests showed
that the noise floor is limited, not by the INA-110 but by the sensor environment
(mechanical vibrations and audio noise).
A high-pass filter with a 100-msec. time constant, and a low-pass filter with a 0.1-msec
time constant preceed the instrumentation amplifier. The high-pass filter rejects artifacts that
are caused by differences in expansion coefficients between the aluminum strip and the strain
gauge due to variations in room temperature. The low-pass filter rejects noise as well as
pulses shorter than 0.1 msec. The resonant frequency of the aluminum strip is approximately
20 Hz. Exciting the sensor strip mechanically with a pulse narrower than 0.1 msec (which is
the low-pass filter bandwidth) will produce a response with an envelope at the resonant
frequency of the strip or 20 Hz. This is within the bandwidth of the low-pass filter.
The circuitry described above is that for the signal channel. There is also a control
channel. The control channel is identical to the signal channel with this exception: the two
strain gauges are replaced by two 240-l resistors. Elements of one channel are located in
close proximity to those of the other channel so that any signals induced by local
electromagnetic (EM) fields disturb each channel equally. The two resistors used in place of
the strain gauges are mounted next to the strain gauges on the aluminum strip.
Batteries provide the power to drive the sensor circuitry in the processing and display
unit. An 8-volt regulator in the sensor enclosure is used to derive the bridge voltage. By
connecting the two strain gauges in series, the voltage across them is kept to only 4 volts, well
below the 9 volt maximum specified.
Processing And Display Unit:
The function of the processing and display unit is to take the sensor outputs from the
preamplifiers and feed them back to the operator in real time. The amplified signals from the
sensor preamplifiers enter the processing and display unit and are again amplified by a factor
of three for an overall gain of 150,000. After amplification, the signals are injected into a
low-pass filter 660 Hz with a rolloff of 12 dB per octave. To complete the signal processing,
a full wave rectification and peak hold are done on each channel.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The signal processing functions described above are realized by two identical channels of
hardware: one for the signal channel, and one for control. From this point on the hardware
is shared between the two channels. The operator chooses the desired channel with a
pushbutton toggle switch.
There are three forms of feedback: two visual and one audio. A DVM displays the
voltage held by the peak hold circuit of the selected channel, while a twenty-element LED
bar display shows the voltage in a bar graph fashion. The selected peak hold output is
simultaneously converted to an audio tone (using a V to F converter), which is played into
two sets of headphones: one for the subject and one for the operator. Individual volume
controls are provided. The threshold for the tone can be is adjusted via an internal resistor.
Once above this threshold, the frequency of the tone increases linearly with the peak held
voltage. The two peak holds (signal and control) are reset by a single pushbutton. Both the
"reset" and the "channel select" pushbuttons are mounted on a small hand-held cylinder
connected to the processing and display unit by a 12-foot cord.
The screening device is powered by three different batteries. A 9-volt alkaline battery
with a lifetime of 6 months powers the DVM. The negative 12 is supplied by two 12-volt
smoke alarm batteries connected in parallel. These provide 25 hours of continuous operation.
A 12-volt 2.6-amp hour rechargeable gel cell supplies the +12 and +5 volts. A fully charged
battery will provide 10 to 20 hours of operation depending on LED usage. A battery test
pushbutton and a battery select switch (+12 or -12 volt) display the selected battery voltage
on the front panel DVM. The DVM is equipped with a "low battery" indicator for the 9-volt
alkaline cell that powers it.
Testing in the Geoscience And Engineering Center demonstrated that with the high
degree of sensitivity built into the electronics, noise tended to be a problem. By reducing the
low pass filter bandwith to 660 Hz, thermal noise at the output is theoretically reduced to
200 mV. With a 2-volt full-scale voltage, this poses some obvious problems. Fortunately
because random thermal noise will be present on both channels, the control channel can
provide a baseline to which the signal channel may be compared. With the SD on a table in
our laboratory, which is not a particularly quiet environment readings as high as 300 mV were
recorded. We believe these signals were produced by the ventillation system and ambient
noise.
Aside from thermal noise, there is of course mechanical vibration of the table on which
the sensor stand rests as well as acoustic noise. The sensitivity of the screening device is such
that air currents, particularly those normal to the aluminum strip surface, produce measurable
strain. These effects can be minimized by training the operators prior to subject testing.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The effect of electromagnetic fields on the screening device proves to be minimal.
Keeping the connections between the gauges and preamplifiers short, the use of coaxial cable,
and shielding the sensor circuitry in its enclosure, together provide good electromagnetic
isolation.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Appendix B
ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OF A
PIEZOELECTRIC SENSOR SYSTEM
By
Philip B. Bentley
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Background
The requirement for an RA phenomena measurement and for the monitor set has been
established, and most functional and some aspects for form and fit have been delineated.
This technical note describes the design details of the sensor section of the instrument.
The sensor is a version of the standard commercial PZT ceramic element offered by
several manufacturers in a variety of shapes, sizes, and configurations for applications ranging
from high-voltage generators to low-level sound pickups.
The sensor is a Piezoelectric Products R101S, with dimensions 1 x 0.125 x 0.005 inches.
This PZT is designed to produce an electric charge when it is flexed laterally and so it is
assumed that such motion (or its equivalent) is the mechanism by which the RA agent
influences it. Mounting the element is therefore in keeping with that mode of physical
motion.
The mechano electrical characteristics are given in the data sheets; the salient
? Electric Charge output vs. force F (free-flexure mode) (0.18 x 10-3) x
(L)2 ?C/N
? Electric Charge output vs. deflection z,
23/L ?C/mm,
where L is the node-to-node beam length in mm.
The free-flexure mode assumes a fundamental symmetrical flexing about two nodes near
the free ends. The driving force is considered to be applied at the center of the "beam."
The applied force F is in newtons, whereas the deflection z is in millimeters. As can be
seen, the output charge is very small, especially when one calculates the allowable deflection z
to remain in the safe linear operating range. For example, using an element 10 mm long (L),
1 = 5.5 mm and the center deflection z must be limited to a small fraction
(< 0.01) of that length. Thus, the largest charge from the element is about 0.04 micro ?C.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The minimum charge (hence deflection) is dependent upon the noise contribution of the
amplifier used to bring the signal response up to a usable level.
The sensor has natural fundamental and harmonic resonance frequencies that can be
calculated once the physical dimensions are known. Again, using the size numbers from the
preceding paragraph, a typical fundamental nodal-support frequency is around 85 kHz.
However, it is of no importance to the present application because the expected RA source
driving function "duration" (at least the observed one) is in the range of a few milliseconds to
a few tens of milliseconds. Thus, the sensor appears as a virtual flat-amplitude charge
generator with respect to the frequency bands of interest (10 Hz to 1 kHz).
Signal Amplification
Because the sensor is a charge generator that has essentially a pure capacitive source
impedance (well below resonance), the most appropriate signal amplifier is an operational
amplifier configured as a charge amplifier. The feedback elements were chosen to effect both
the low- and high-pass filter corner (-3 dB) frequencies of 1 kHz and 10 Hz, respectively.
Because the charge quantities involved are very small, the amplifier input bias and noise
currents are as small as possible.
Again, because there was no specification as to the level of the RA-induced deflection
that could be expected, the approach was to choose the very best low-noise operational
amplifier available and calculate the minimum equivalent deflection "noise." The equation for
a charge amplifier using a 10 pF feedback capacitor yields a transfer gain of 0.1 V/pC.
Assuming a 1000 pF coupling capacitor and a 20 M-f bias feedback resistor, we obtain a
high-pass filter corner frequency of 8 Hz and a low-pass filter corner frequency of 800 Hz.
The configuration yields unity voltage gain and a current transfer gain of 20 V/gA.
A high-quality, low-noise, low-bias-current operational amplifier has an equivalent input
noise voltage of a few microvolts rms. Hence, the output noise voltage will be the same (unity
voltage gain). However, the output noise voltage due to the input noise current can be larger
depending upon the value of the feedback resistor. An achievable value for the noise current
of 30 fA for the 0.3-to-10-Hz band and 100 fA for the 10-Hz-to-10-kHz band implies that
the output noise voltage will be about 2 gV. In this case, the noise contribution due to the
input noise current is about the same order of magnitude as the contribution from the input
noise voltage.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
In any case, the equivalent noise voltage is less than about 5 ?V rms, which established
the sensor/amplifier sensitivity limit. Using the transfer gain value of 0.1 V/pC, the charge
sensitivity is then 50 x 10-18 C rms. Using a detection noise threshold of 14 dB minimum, the
minimum detectable charge is 250 x 10-t8 C. Because the flexure-mode PZT element has a
mechano electrical transfer constant of about 4?C/mm, the equivalent motion for a minimum
detectable signal is about 6 x 10-14 meters. A more useful interpretation is that the electronic
noise is orders of magnitude smaller than the environmental noise from the PZT sensor.
Environment Isolation
As explained in the previous paragraphs, the sensor/amplifier combination allows for
measuring extremely small mechanical motion. Concommitant, it is clear that for RA
measurements, unless the ambient physical environmental effects are excluded from the
sensor, performance is compromised.
First, and foremost, the sensor must be isolated from mechanical vibration conducted to
it from the surrounding structures. Second, it must be shielded from acoustic vibrations
transmitted through the air. Third, thermal influences resulting from either conducted,
convected, or radiated heat must be removed. Finally, because the signal of interest is an
electrical charge, it must be isolated from any external influence due to either electric or
magnetic fields.
The sensor is in a laboratory environment, in which there are with many humans and
and pieces of equipment such as elevators, motor-driven machinery, vehicles, and the like.
The building is in an urban area in which trucks and trains, as well as aircraft, pass nearby.
Considerable motion fromo mechanical vibration exists in the floor of the room where the
sensor is located; those motions had to be isolated.
The first level of isolation is to shock-mount the sensor enclosure of commercial
elastomeric pads. The enclosure weighs about 100 lbs, including the internal batteries.
Weight per mount, resonant frequency, spring rate, static deflection, and isolation efficiency
entered into the selection. The enclosure/mount resonance frequency is no more than 10 Hz
to ensure reasonable isolation of rotating machinery components at 30 Hz.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The next level of isolation is the sensor suspension system, which is a spring-mass type
with a much lower resonance frequency than the enclosure. The sensor is attached to a bob
weight that is suspended from the top of the enclosure via a spring. The weight is about 2
lbs; the spring rate was selected to provide a resonance frequency of about 2 Hz. This
provides an additional isolation factor of about 12 dB (6 dB/octave) at the enclosure
resonance frequency assumed to be about 10 Hz. Beyond 10 Hz, the overall isolation is the
sum of the two (12 dB/octave).
The above considers only the vertical motion. There are horizontal and, to a lesser
degree, torsional vibration inputs from the external environment. At the present time,
horizontal inputs are damped by using a pendulum mode to support of the sensor. Because
the suspended arm length is 8 inches maximum, the pendulum fundamental harmonic motion
frequency is about 1 Hz, which is commensurate with the vertical frequency.
The sensor/bob combination places the sensor away from the bob on a relatively long
lever arm. This implies that higher-order pendulum motion is possible in the form of
bob-weight rotation about the common center of mass with the sensor "swinging" laterally
below. The suspension is "soft" and allows this different mode, and any lateral motion
transient of the enclosure transmits this lateral mode down the spring to the bob and acts at a
rotational impulse exciting this special mode.
Metallic coil springs also have their own spring-mass lateral and longitudinal motion
resonances. The lateral is the simple "pinned-end beam" mode, and the longitudinal is a
compressional mode. Either or both can cause energy coupling that an ideal mass-less spring
does not have. (Because the overall performance was difficult to predict, the only obvious
alternative was a light-weight elastomer rubber spring.)
Extension springs are not characterized for torsional spring rate; however, a check of
nearly identical size torsion and extension springs does yield an estimate. For the metallic
spring selected above, the torsional spring constant is about 0.1 lb-ft/radian. Assuming that
the sensor weight is a 2-lb lead sphere, the rotational moment of inertia is about 1.0 x 10-4,
which implies that the rotational harmonic frequency is around 5 Hz. Again, this is low
enough to ensure some isolation from machinery-induced vibrations.
Isolation from low-frequency vibrations (such as those induced by footsteps and vehicle
road "rumble") is not easy to provide. In this case, the only hope is that the energy below
10 Hz (the electrical signal lower frequency cut-off point) will not be so large that it will mask
the noise that will be visible above 10 Hz.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Just as for mechanical vibration, acoustic energy can cause the PZT sensor to produce
noise signals. There is a normal level of audible signals in the room in which the sensor
enclosure is located; the level is that for normal voice speech or probably less than 70 dBA.
There are other types of acoustic signals/noise, but those have associated mechanical
vibrations in the room structure that are of more concern (e.g., doors slammed). Some
degree of isolation was necessary to provide protection from sound energy in the test
instrumentation area.
The first level of protection is to ensure that the work area is quiet. It may be assumed
that the ambient noise could be suppressed to 60 dBA, but on-site measurements are needed
to confirm the degree of suppression. The second level of protection is that provided by the
steel sensor enclosure. Any hard-material barrier reflects sound, but the degree of
transmission isolation depends upon the material type, thickness, and support. Of course, the
wavelength (i.e., frequency) also enters in as the lower tones are reflected less than higher
ones for a given barrier thickness.
Sound absorbing material can be employed to enhance the isolation performance for the
enclosure. An extremely effective material is lead due to its softness. Commercial sound
absorbing panels designed for aircraft and other critical noise reduction applications can be
applied to either the interior or exterior of the enclosure.
The third level of protection was to place the sound reflective /absorptive material around
the sensor/preamplifier unit itself. Because the mechanical support system calls for a bob
weight for the spring/mass isolation system, that weight can take the form of a hollow lead bob
within which is placed the preamplifier and associate circuit components that may be
microphonic.
Unfortunately, the sensor itself must be "visible" and, therefore, cannot be placed inside
the lead bob weight. Only a small amount of conformal-coat elastomeric rubber was applied
as a sound-absorbing skin. The external silver-paint coat (which serves as protection against
EMI) also serves in a small way as an acoustic reflector. However, the thickness of these
"skins" is quite small and does not provide much reduction in acoustic energy except at the
highest frequencies.
Of course, the ultimate sound elimination method would be to place the sensor in an
evacuated chamber such as a light bulb. The limitation of this approach is that conductive
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
wires must exit the bulb and, therefore, constitute a sound (albeit mechanical) transmission
medium. Previous work indicated that the cost and bother of such an approach was too high
relative to the degree of performance obtained.
All of the elements that make up the analog portion of the sensor hardware are sensitive
to heat in various ways. The sensor is the most critical because its physical size (mass) is very
small which means that the thermal time constant is low also. Hence, any thermal input such
as an infrared (IR) "pulse" (from the subject's hand moving past the viewing window) can
induce a response in the sensor that has significant spectral energy above the system high-pass
filter response of 10 Hz. Because IR is long-wave energy, it penetrates many materials and is
difficult to shield. The only protection for the sensor itself is the silver paint applied to the
outside over the rubber coating.
The preamplifier is also very sensitive to thermal changes, as well as the discrete
components (resistances and capacitances) that make up the feedback and coupling circuitry.
Here, the best isolation is provided by tying all of those elements to the lead bob weight either
directly or via thermally conductive materials. So long as the rate-of-change of the bias
current is less than a few picoamperes per second, no effect is visible in the final signal
bandwidth output. Because the preamplifier is operated as a current amplifier, it has unity
voltage gain; therefore, offset voltage drift with temperature is not a major factor but still can
be a problem. A typical drift rate is 50 ?V/deg C, which means that the temperature
rate-of-change must be less than 1 deg/sec to assure that the transient is less than the rms
noise (about 2 ?V). Good thermal bonding of the circuitry to the lead mass appeared to
preclude any problems.
Electromagnetic Isolation
Because the entire sensor system is electronic, it must be shielded from both electric and
magnetic field influences. No high-voltage or large-current devices are near the sensor
enclosure, and all electrical devices within 100 ft meet the FCC minimum requirements for
RFI emission suppression. Such an assumption may not always be correct and so it is
recommended that potential areas in which the instrument will be used in the future be
surveyed for large EM fields over the full electromagnetic spectrum (at least from 14 kHz to 1
GHz).
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07: CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The primary shield for EM signals is the basic sensor enclosure, which is a standard
industry NEMA 12 steel RFI-specified box. According to the manufacturer's data book, this
box provides up to 95 dB of magnetic-field shielding from 14 kHz up to 1 MHz, and over
100 dB of shielding for electric fields from 14 kHz up to at least 450 MHz. These levels of
performance are degraded if any openings are made in the steel case. The viewing window in
the front of the box is of a special RFI reflective material (either metallized or with an
embedded metal mesh). Power resides inside the box in the form of chemical batteries, and
the only other holes through the shell are two 1/4-inch openings for the fiber optic cables.
Because of internally generated EM fields (from the dc to dc convertors and the
fiber-optic driver electronics), the sensor and preamplifier are totally enclosed in a metallic
shield. This shield is a combination of the lead bob weight or the silver-paint coat; neither of
which afford any magnetic shielding. If necessary, the dc to dc convertor units could be
mounted in steel (or mu-metal) boxes to contain any switching magnetic fields. Because all
interconnect wires are shielded coaxial or multiconductor cables, they are relatively immune to
extraneous fields. A single-point common "ground" was used to minimize "ground loop
currents" and the associated signal noise voltages. The critical low-noise preamplifier is
powered from batteries only.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Appendix C
FINAL REPORT
JFK 1986 REMOTE ACTION RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
By
JULIAN ISSACS
THE REMOTE ACTION PROJECT
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CONSCIOUSNESS STUDIES
JOHN F. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY
ORINDA, CALIFORNIA
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
I INTRODUCTION
Recapitulating the Statement of Work,' which describes the year's research in outline,
the task was to recruit and train a number of potential piezo remote action (Piezo-RA) agents
in preparation for a formal Piezo-RA evaluation study to be undertaken at John F. Kennedy
University (JFK). The best seven Piezo-RA agents from this study were to be made available
for participation in an SRI-based evaluation study designed to provide high-quality evidence
of the existence of the Piezo-RA effect. In order to accomplish this task,
population-screening procedures were to be undertaken and Piezo-RA training sessions were
to be conducted. The functional designs of suitable instrumentation for screening and
evaluation purposes were also to be supplied to SRI.
The research activities were, as has been freely acknowledged by the SRI and JFK
personnel involved, heavily affected by the various unforeseen delays that accompanied many
phases of the task. The evaluation devices were delivered in working order on 18 September
1986. This left too little time available with the high-grade instrumentation to conduct a
sufficient Piezo-RA training with participants to ensure the high-level performance of trainee
Piezo-RA agents or to pursue a JFK-based formal evaluation.
Therefore, the decision was made to select those participants who seemed most likely to
succeed in producing Piezo-RA effects and run multiple sessions at SRI with this elite group,
assigning a variable number of sessions to different participants on the basis of their availability
and apparent likelihood of producing results. Abandoning of the formal evaluation in the
present research cycle and adopting this highly pragmatic approach were necessitated by the
goal of optimizing the chances of obtaining (within the time frame of this contract) some
preliminary indications at SRI that the Piezo-RA effect is a reality.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
II POPULATION SCREENING
a. Screening Methodology
The technique of population screening for Piezo-RA ability was developed by Julian
Isaacs in England and is described in detail elsewhere.2 The basic approach used in the
California screenings remains the same, but the procedure was further developed and
optimized for use by a group of investigators in the American setting.
Because one of the conditions of the contract was that the link with SRI not be generally
broadcast, the population screenings (which had to be publicized in order to attract
participants) were advertised as being initiated by JFK. The title of "The Remote Action
Project" was selected as the public title for the research activities. The screening technique in
its current form used a three-stage process and seems likely to be more effective than the
original form.
The first stage consists of a one-hour presentation about remote action (RA),
metal-bending, Piezo-RA, and the Remote Action Project. During the first stage, several
visualization exercises are performed to induce ostensible macroscopic psychokinetic
metal-bending (Macro-PKMB) effects to occur. The overt purpose of the first stage is to
present information about the topic areas and to provide the opportunity for those who
respond to the visualization exercises to produce Macro-PKMB effects. The covert purpose is
to change the audience's mood to a relaxed nonanalytical state, to induce the audience to
accept the reality of RA effects and to increase expectancy of success at the later RA tasks.
The second stage consists of the move to a "RA Party" format, which is a technique
orginated by G. Houck3 for inducing ostensible Macro-PKMB effects. The audience forms a
group that is instructed to collectively perform a visualization exercise while holding a piece of
flatware. The flatware is subsequently "tested" for ostensibly paranormal softening by pressure
being exerted on it, and by being bent while in the softened state.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The third stage comprises the instrumental screening of the group. Typically, several
screening devices are set up, either in the room in which the stage one presentation is given
or in adjoining rooms. Each machine is operated by two persons. One person's role is to
interact with the screenees and orient them to the task, collect each Participant Information
Form (PIF) (Section III.), and supervise the line of screenees waiting their turn at the
device. The other person supervises the trials and records the results on the PIFs, which are
retained by the screening team.
b. The Screenings
Four screenings were held. The first was held in Mountain View, California, at the
Trellis Singles Club on 1 March 1986. The purpose of using a location away from the JFK
laboratory was to permit the first screening to be a training session for the screening team. It
was felt that screenings should only be held with local groups after it was certain that the
screening procedure had been successfully modified to suit the new screening team and
context. The instruments used for this screening were three systems built in England, which
were pressed into service because the screening instruments from SRI had not yet been built.
The audience at the 'Trellis screening was far from ideal. To optimize the number of
potential Piezo-RA agents found, groups used for screening should have pre-existing interest
in psi or experience of psi practices: "New Age," spiritually inclined, and psi-oriented and
arts-based groups are optimal. The Trellis group was composed of preponderantly male
semiconductor engineers and scientists (the Trellis premises are close to the Santa Clara,
California or "Silicon" Valley), who were interested in the presentation, but who remained
resolutely analytical and somewhat skeptical in their orientation.
The three following screenings (on 8 May, 12 June, and 11 July 1986) were at JFK and
used the screening devices built at SRI. The first two of this series of three were held at the
Village Campus. They were publicized by a flyer mailed to the members of the mailing list of
the Graduate School of Consciousness Studies. The third, held at the Walnut Creek Del
Valle Campus, was less well attended than the first two and was publicized by a flyer sent to
the members of the School of Law and the School of Business Studies. The success of these
screenings in generating interest and enthusiasm was attested to by the fact that several
individuals attended more than one screening.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
c. Criteria for Participant Selection
The screening technique has not been formalized and is not a rigid procedure; it has to
be adapted to suit different situations and groups. The overall goal, which is essentially
utilitarian and pragmatic, seems to be adequately met by the procedure that has been
developed. Its purpose is to select from a large group of possible Piezo-RA agents those
individuals who are probably capable of RA and who are prepared to participate in the
experimental process. The style of presentation made by the speaker, the particular sequence
of events during the screening process, and the responses of the screened group can all
reasonably be expected to affect the number of individuals who are induced to produce RA
effects. It is unrealistic to expect a 100% yield of those individuals who have RA ability to
result from the screening process; for some of the screened group, the induction procedures
will be ineffective.
Additionally, no pretense is made that the screening process is anything other than a
very informal indication of possible RA ability. The procedure is certainly not resistant to
cheating on the part of audience members, particularly with regard to the ostensible
Macro-PKMB phenomena. Screenees who produce ostensible phenomena at a screening may
subsequently show no RA ability, so that a second level of screening procedure, based on
actual performance in the Piezo-RA training situation, has to be used.
The selection of prospective Piezo-RA trainees in the screenings was based on three
criteria, which were used in a convergent fashion. The first criterion was the responses on the
Participant Information Form (PIF) (see Annex 1), the second was the performance at an
instrumented RA task, and the third was the Macro-PKMB performance.
The PIF is an inventory (of ostensible psi-related experiences) that has been formulated
specifically to focus on spontaneous psi experiences thought to involve elements of RA effects.
The PIF was modified twice: one modification was made between the first and second
screenings, and the second between the third and fourth screenings. These changes were
almost entirely of form and typographical detail, however. The first two versions had to be
used in conjunction with another form, the availability form, which asked potential participants
to indicate their availability for Piezo-RA training, their address, and their willingness to
participate in experimentation. The final version of the PIF eliminated the separate
Availability Form and combined this information on the front page with (a) a self-report
about the screenee's Macro-PKMB attempts, (b) the evaluator's impression of the person as a
potential RA trainee; (c) the interviewer's evaluation of the screenee's Macro-PKMB
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
phenomena; and (d) the person's highest score on the instrumented test, if this merited
recording.
The first 17 questions of the PIF attempt to elicit information about spontaneous psi
experiences. Responses are categorized into four types: "No" indicates that the screenee has
never had the experience cited in the question; "I" indicates that the experience has occurred
once; "2" indicates "more than once, several times;" "3" indicates "often, frequently." Eight
of the 17 questions are RA-specific (questions 1 through 6, 8, and 14). Questions 20, 21,
and 22 request information about the person's prior practice of mental skills of various sorts
(e.g., meditation, visualization, and the like), the screenee's sports, dance, and martial arts
preferences, if any, and religious orientation.
The analysis of the PIF data on spontaneous psi functioning was formalized around two
key concepts. The first was the concept of a "psychic" (P) profile of responses, which
divided the interested persons into "psychic" and "nonpsychic" groups. The criterion of entry
into the P profile was that at least seven responses in Category "2" and an additional one
response in Category " 1" (see preceding paragraph) should be made to the first 17 questions.
It should be noted that, this definition of the P group is fairly extreme and represents the
selection of a group showing high levels of ostensible spontaneous psi functioning.
The second was the concept of "belief," or the degree of belief evinced by the
interested person in the reality of RA, both generally, and specifically with regard to their own
ability to perform RA. Question 18 asked, "Do you think it is possible to affect physical
objects without touching them?" Question 19 asked, "Do you think that you can affect
physical objects without touching them?" The two belief questions offer a scale of 1 to 5 to
be circled for responses, with 1 being "definitely no," and 5 being "definitely yes." To enter
the "belief" (B) profile population, interested persons had to respond with a value of 4 or
more on question 18, and a value of 3 or more on question 19.
The use of the two profiles, B and P, creates the possibility of an elite classification
"PB," in which interested persons match both profiles. Generally, participants would be
accepted for Piezo-RA training only if they scored within the PB profile. The PIF data have
been divided to show the P, B, and PB groups' micro-RA performance (on the screening
devices) and the macro-RA (visible metal-bending) performance. This may offer the
possibility of a more fine-grained analysis of the results from the screenings (see below).
The second criterion used in selecting prospective RA trainees was the score achieved by
each interested person on the screening device during his or her attempt to influence it. The
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
screening devices were sufficiently noisy so that scores spontaneously fluctuated over a range.
Because the devices showed individual differences, any attempt to produce frequency plots of
spontaneously occurring scores would have necessitated long runs with each device to obtain
histograms of score distributions. Some pilot attempts to compile score histograms were made,
and it was found that the settings in which the machines were operated affected the
distribution of scores. Additionally, it was realized that the peak reading obtained would be
affected by the duration of the trial and the noise spectrum of the devices.
If calibration histograms were to be compiled, they would have to be compiled for a
sufficient range of durations to cover the actual durations of all screening trials likely to be
performed, and the period of each trial during the screening would have to be timed. This
would have considerably complicated the screener's job, because no provision for automatic
timing existed, and there are good psychological reasons for permitting variable trial lengths to
be performed in the instrumental screening procedure. It was realized that in order to
provide calibration data that would give well-controlled estimates of the probabilities of
low-end scores (i.e., scores near the noise floor of the devices), the devices would have to be
recalibrated at the screening site, in the presence of the group during the actual screening,
because the group's activities (especially walking, moving chairs, and the like) might affect the
devices.
Given the nonformal nature of the rest of the screening process, it was, therefore felt
that it was not worth the large amount of time and effort required to produce adequate
calibration histogram data, especially because there was good reason to believe that real-time
on-site calibration runs would be necessary, under actual screening conditions, if the
calibration data were to be really meaningful.
It was decided that scores above 380 would be regarded as candidate RA, and scores at
or near this level were to be regarded as suggestive of RA. Scores in this region and above
were, therefore, recorded on the PIF by the screener in charge of the device. In the
tabulated data, the criterion score, which allowed entry into the microeffect (MIC) category,
was set at a device reading of 380.
The third criterion used to select prospective trainees, which was given less weight than
the other two, was the account of the person's Macro-PKMB effects and the appearance of
his or her deformed flatware. It has been frequently observed that persons do not reliably
estimate the amount of physical force they exert on cutlery. Nor, often, do they appreciate
how little physical force is necessary to produce deformations. The ostensible Macro-PKMB
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
effects are, therefore, evaluated very cautiously. For the purposes of the tabulated data, the
persons producing deformed cutlery were assigned to the MAC category. Those producing
effects on the screening devices and on cutlery were assigned to the "MIC+MAC" category.
d. Results of Screenings
Table A-1 shows the results of the four screenings. These are labelled T (Trellis) and
K1 (Kennedy first screening) through K3 (Kennedy third screening). A total of 189
individuals returned usable PIFs; the return rate was about 85%. The screenee categories are
in ascending order of suitability for RA training, with the elite (PB MIC+MAC) group
occupying top position, and those showing no evidence of RA, no psychic profile, and no
belief, are the "residual" group at the bottom of the table.
The results are surprisingly positive overall, but of course the data must be regarded
cautiously. Although the chances of successful cheating at the micro task were slight, some of
the readings, were marginal and may be artifactual. It is very likely that the numbers of the
B MAC and PB MAC groups are artificially inflated by believers who unknowingly bent their
cutlery purely by physical force. Some 58% of the elite PB group showed some form of
effect, although 25% of the group showing neither a psychic profile nor belief also produced
effects. It should be remembered that the psychic profile will identify only those showing
strong spontaneous psi functioning, so that the "non-psi" group may include individuals who
are psi-capable.
The strongest effect in the data, which was anticipated, and which is of importance in
practice, is the difference between groups. Thus 13% of the Trellis group produced some
form of effect, whereas 66% of the combined Kennedy groups produced some form of effect.
When this performance measure is confined to those individuals who produced microeffects
on the instrumentation, only 6.5% of the Trellis group produced these effects, compared to
30% of the combined Kennedy groups. These numbers may be misleading, however, because
the instrumentation used in the Trellis screening was different from that used for the Kennedy
screenings. However, using another measure, the size of the residual groups, a clear
difference is shown between the Trellis and Kennedy populations. The Trellis residual group
constituted 38% of the overall Trellis group, whereas the combined Kennedy residual was only
7%. These results, taken as a whole, tend to indicate that the careful choice of groups to
screen will maximize the yield of potential RA agents found.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Categories
Groups Screened Consolidated Results
of
Screenees
T
K1
K2
K3
Subtls
Totals
Percent
P.B. MIC+MAC
0
5
2
4
11
P.B. MIC
1
2
1
3
7
39
20.6 %
P.B. MAC
4
6
8
3
21
P. MIC+MAC
0
0
0
1
1
P. MIC
0
1
0
0
1
3
1.5 %
P. MAC
0
0
1
0
1
B. MIC+MAC
0
0
0
2
2
B. MIC
2
4
1
2
9
30
15.8 %
B. MAC
1
4
11
3
19
MIC+MAC
1
1
0
3
5
MIC
1
0
0
2
3
13
6.8 %
MAC
0
1
4
0
5
P.B.
17
6
3
2
28
14.8 %
P.
4
0
1
0
5
2.6 %
B.
16
6
8
2
32
17.0 %
Residual
29
2
5
3
39
20.6 %
Group Totals
76
38
45
30
189
B. = Believer Profile MIC+MAC = Micro + Macro Effects
P. = Psychic Profile MIC = Micro Effects Only
P.B. = Psychic-+ Believer Profile MAC = Macro Effects Only
TABLE A-1 SCREENING RESULTS
55
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
The data seem to show a slight effect of belief on performance. Taking the microeffects
recorded, which presumably will not be inflated by cheating, and which should show equal
incidence of artifact across groups, the percentage of individuals for all groups showing belief
who also produced the microeffect, 22%, slightly exceeded the percentage of individuals
producing microeffects who did not show belief, 16%.
The Trellis screening did identify a number of individuals who appear to be
promising potential participants and who live near SRI and who might be available for
research. The JFK screenings should supply a number of participants for future studies.
Only three of the 10 participants in the training sessions under review were recruited
through the screening process. However, of those three, two were good enough to go to SRI
(HW and ZK). All but one of the JFK participants fulfill the PIF PB profile. The screenings
performed at JFK will be of considerable use in the upcoming research cycle. To be efficient,
the Piezo-RA training process requires individuals showing reasonably fast learning. The need
for replacement participants for those showing poor learning performance requires the periodic
intake of fresh participants; the fact that a group of potential RA trainees have already been
identified by the JFK screenings will render the replacement process much more efficient.
The apparent association of good Piezo-RA performance with the PB profile perhaps
suggests that a reasonable fraction of those individuals currently participating in SRI-based
parapsychological studies may prove successful at the Piezo-RA task, assuming that they too
show the PB profile.
f. Conclusions Regarding Selection
In practice, for purpose of selecting potential trainees, the criteria for assessment of the
responses to both the PIF profile questions are complex and informal. Furthermore, a
person's willingness to participate, freedom to schedule training sessions during the weekdays,
place of domicile (and hence journey time to the JFK laboratory in Walnut Creek), and
general attitudes, are all non-psi factors that pragmatically affect the probability of their
selection.
The approach of the JFK-based research group towards participant selection and training
appears to be very similar to that developed at SRI. Because a long-term commitment to
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
participation is required, adult participants who are in stable social and domestic situations are
preferentially selected. This approach contrasts greatly with the one-shot use of college
students that seems very common in many psychological and parapsychological studies.
The recruitment of outstanding Piezo-RA agents for long periods of research at JFK
would be greatly facilitated if they could be paid a stipend for participation in research. This
issue has already been raised by some participants in the first phase of this research.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
III REMOTE ACTION TRAINING SESSIONS
a. Training Sessions with Modified Screening Device
The modified screening device (MSD) proved of great service in the RA training
process. The feedback characteristics (audible "click" feedback, with the click rate tied to
the output of the selectable crystal channel) are very suitable for RA training, because
feedback from the noise floor of the system is available. Some 50 training sessions were held
using this device, and the participants seemed to enjoy using it.
The MSD is very sensitive to sound and vibration and the two channels are not well
matched in sensitivity. As a result, the sessions using this device cannot be used for formal
data recovery. When the device is used in the same room as the participant, slight
movements or noises create measurable outputs from the device. When used in a separate
room, slight outputs are generated by distant doors being slammed, or movement of the
participant or experimenter in the adjacent room may create small outputs.
The MSD could rather easily be revised to provide a more artifact-free response; it is
suggested that improvement would be a very worthwhile investment. If the present light plastic
enclosure were replaced with a massive airtight glass cover, if the cabling were replaced with a
much longer cable of a more compliant type, and if a vibration-resistant mounting were
developed and a sound-attenuating shield assembled around it, the device would provide an
excellent training facility for beginning RA trainees.
b. Training Sessions with Twenty-Tone Device
About 20 training sessions were held using the twenty-tone device (TTD), which was
built in England, and which provided the model for the design of the evaluation device (ED)
feedback system. The TTD employs one piezoelectric crystal sensor strip, that is mounted
near its preamplifier, that is connected by cable to the separate main signal processing unit.
The TTD provides a white noise feedback signal from near the noise floor to a fixed lower
threshold. From the fixed lower threshold to a selectable upper threshold, the device
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
produces 20 tones of the tempered musical. scale. Participant response to the feedback
characteristics of the TTD has been universally very positive.
The TTD was designed to be used in conjunction with a stereo cassette tape recording
system, one stereo channel being dedicated to the device, the other to a microphone placed
in the vicinity of the sensor, which is normally mounted remotely from the TTD main signal
processing unit. Scoring is normally done by an automatic instrumental analysis of the tape
sections on which candidate events are recorded.
In the training sessions under review, the TTD was used as a supplement to the twin
sensor device. Because it was used on this informal, irregular basis, formal data were not
collected.
c. Training Sessions with Evaluation Device
Although the EDs did not function correctly when first received, they were used for
about a week before being returned for modification, because it took a week for the problems
to become clearly identified. They were then modified and returned to service on 18
September 1986. Counting all sessions, including those when the EDs were not functioning
satisfactorily, some 30 training sessions were held using the EDs.
Because the EDs do not provide satisfactory audio feedback, especially at subthreshold
levels, two feedback devices were configured (from previously constructed equipment) that
provide click-rate feedback from the EL) noise floor. The addition of this extra feedback
channel was very much appreciated by participants, because they and the experimental team
had experienced a great deal of frustration caused by the lack of feedback from the EDs,
especially in the first phase of their usage when the feedback algorithm was based on peak
detection.
Unfortunately, although some participants had reached the stage of just starting to
function effectively with the MSD in the next room, the frustrations and generally negative
effect caused by the EDs when they first arrived seriously affected the RA performance of all
of the participants. The ability to create ostensible distant effects was seemingly lost by the
individuals who had previously exhibited this capacity with the MSD. It is arguable that the
RA performance of some participants has still not fully recovered from this setback. This
incident must be regarded as an important lesson for the JFK research team. Instrumentation
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
must be released for use with participants only after it has been proven fully functional and
after the operators have received sufficient training.
Participants varied greatly in their response to the rather noisy printers functioning during
the trial period, so the download capability of the Model 102 computers used as terminals
proved to be a crucial facility for those participants who would otherwise have found the noise
intolerable.
The ED systems have been used in three configurations: (1) the "Open" (0) condition,
in which the front window is left open; (2) the "Closed" (C) condition, in which the front
window is secured; and (3) the "Next Room" (NR) condition, in which the system was placed
in a room adjacent to the participant.
The NR condition was dropped after it was found that the participants' RA performance
had regressed as a result of the instabilities and frustrations of the early phase of ED usage, so
that they could no longer produce effects in adjacent rooms. In the 0 condition, artifacts
caused by acoustic events (principally speech) are readily recorded at low threshold settings
(10). In the C condition, acoustic artifacts of above threshold magnitude are seldom
produced by normal speech. Because many sessions were held in the 0 condition, and some
sessions with other equipment were of necessity interleaved with the ED sessions, formal data
are not available for the ED training sessions held at JFK. Some sessions were held under
the C condition in which over-threshold (threshold of 10) events were obtained.
d. Criteria for Continuance of Training
Originally, the decision regarding the continuance of participant training after the three
preliminary sessions was planned to be based on a formal and invariant criterion applied to
the performance reached by participants in these sessions. However, the use of three
different and essentially noncomparable training devices in the early training phases
(unmodified screening device, modified screening device, and twenty-tone device),
necessitated by the delay in the delivery of the evaluation devices made it impossible to apply
a formal criterion.
The criterion used was that the participant's trainer had to be convinced that the
participant had produced at least two events that were highly suggestive of Piezo-RA before
further training. Because every participant met this criterion, all were retained.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Since that time, one participant (WE) has withdrawn because of the demands of his JFK
courses, one participant (RS) will be dropped because of poor RA performance, one (HW)
will be working in Argentina for three months, and two (SN and JA) may be dropped on
account of poor RA performance, unless this improves within their next three RA sessions.
SN, JA, and RM have all shown a powerful negative effect from the first phase of use of the
evaluation devices, and RM and JA have made only a slow recovery. In this context, it is
interesting that both RM and JA have been trained by Julian Isaacs, who was probably most
directly affected by the effects of the nonfunctioning evaluation devices.
One of these less successful participants (JA) is currently undergoing remedial
biofeedback training during his experimental sessions under the control of another
experimenter (MM) in order to explore the possibility that those RA agents who perform
poorly, apparently because of excessive striving, may be able to improve their RA performance
after supplementary training at a biofeedback task.
Although no formal data are available from this phase of research, certain conclusions
can informally be suggested. Table A-2 shows the number of sessions performed by each
participant.
Referring to Table A-2, the basic postulate (that repeated trial sessions produces
increments in performance for some participants) seems to be upheld by the results. Five of
the 10 participants showed definite increases in Piezo-RA output per session (WA, CR, HW,
ZK, and JM). These results are significantly better than the English results,4 which suggested
that perhaps only one in seven participants in training would show marked increases in RA
performance with training (the English ;participants were also much less carefully selected). Of
the five less successful participants, it seems that three may yet show a learning effect,
although it seems likely that the other two will probably not.
Second, the results seem to suggest that session number is an important determinant of
performance. Referring to Table A-2, it can be seen that the successful group of five
performed a total of 94 sessions, whereas the less successful group of five performed 58
sessions--only just over half of the successful group's sessions. Although this difference in
performance with increasing number of sessions may partly reflect motivational factors as well
as learning, it certainly appears to be an important variable, whatever interpretation is given to
it.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Experimenter
Participant
Number of Sessions
D.M.
S.N.
7 (+5)**
J . M.
W.E.
10
M.M.
J.M.
7 (+12)*
* Estimated sessions conducted prior to Remote Action Project
** Previous sessions run by M.M. and J.J.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
IV INSTRUMENTAL DESIGN
a. Psychological Requirements
The specifications for the functional design of the SD and the ED were outlined in detail
in the description of the devices' functional designs, which has already been tendered to SRI.
Because the psychological requirements of the training instrumentation are crucial to the
Piezo-RA training process, a recent paper by this authors is quoted here; these paragraphs
specify some centrally important considerations relating to the feedback properties that are
necessary for RA learning.
"...The phenomenology of DDPK training appears closely to conform to the
principles of operant conditioning where a behavior which is an approximation to
the required behavior must be emitted first, and then reinforced, before further,
more optimal behaviors, are then emitted and can be reinforced. In practice this
leads to what at first sight appears to be a paradox, that subjects should essentially
be presented with a "noisy" system, but the rationale for this relates closely, in my
view, to the reason why it seems relatively easy to obtain PK on REG types of
systems.
If we ask the question of what behaviors should be reinforced in order to start the
process of operant conditioning in the PK training process, clearly the answer must
be PK behaviors, or at least PK-like behaviors. Typically, a DDPK agent may at
first produce only relatively few PK events, or even none, over the threshold which
defines events as candidate DDPK (in practice the threshold is set high enough for
some under-threshold events to be likely to be PK rather than noise or artifact4).
But if feedback is only supplied for the over-threshold events, the operant
conditioning process will be very slow and a risk is generated that due to lack of
frequency of reinforcement, motivation may fail and the PK response may even be
extinguished. It thus becomes necessary to provide a feedback signal which is
sufficiently sensitive to the state of the system to be able to relay the intrinsic noise
of the system in perceptible form to the DDPK agent in training. This will ensure
that however slight the trainee's PK responses may be, reinforcement will occur.
Usually, what happens in DDPK training is that the agent's signals start out by
mostly being in the range of the noise of the system, but over the course of several
DDPK training sessions [typically six sessions in the English studies2 4 with
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
successful subjects, the signal magnitudes climb out of the noise until many
over-threshold events occur in each session. This kind of phenomenology is very
compatible with the operant conditioning paradigm, and the crucial point to
appreciate, from that perspective, is that in order for the subject to emit a PK-like
behavior, the feedback system must be sensitive enough to be able to signal
perturbations which are at, or very near, the intrinsic noise level of the DDPK
detection system.
The psychology of DDPK training can be examined at different levels of discourse,
using different models, since there are other non-paranormal learning models
which can be applied as analogues to DDPK training in addition to operant
conditioning. So far, I have used the language of operant conditioning, but a more
cognitive approach is possible. K.J. Batcheldor's formulation falls into this
category.6 His principle hypothesis is that PK is elicited by a particular type of
situationally triggered "instant" belief state which is induced by the subject being
exposed to a stimulus which they interpret as indicating that PK is already
occurring. This is the rationale for Batcheldor's "artifact induction (of PK)
hypothesis." ...From this cognitive perspective, relaying the noise from a DDPK
detection system allows the PK trainee to construe (or misconstrue) the system's
fluctuations as being due to his or her influence, analogously to the situation I have
hypothesized as occurring with the REG. This then may create the "instant"
PK-producing belief state, which creates more reinforcing feedback, and so on.
Diana Robinson has discussed the possibly psi facilitating role that a subject's felt
sense of control could have in maintaining high levels of motivation in the absence
of high anxiety or high striving.? In support of this analysis, it should be
mentioned that an apparently universal preference shown by DDPK trainees is that
they must, through experience of the feedback signal, feel "in touch" with the
piezo crystal itself, which is interpretable as implying that the feedback system
should be responsive to the slightest alteration in state of the piezo sensor.
... In terms of DDPK methodology the lessons from this analysis seem clear--the
feedback system must be capable of wide excursions from the instrumental "noise
floor" up to several magnitudes above noise-- yet still provide sensorally
descriminable and aesthetically pleasing results. Presumably too, for motivational
optimization, the feedback modality should fit the preferences and cognitive style
of the PK trainee, although this too remains unverified by experimentation."
The current ED instrumentation does not yet fulfill these requirements, because its
"white noise" audio output does not seem to be aesthetically acceptable to participants, nor
does it provide accurate and fast information regarding the occurrence or magnitude of
under-threshold RA events. This deficiency was ameliorated in both the SRI-based sessions
and the JFK ED training sessions by the use of supplementary audio feedback from devices
(one was loaned to SR.I) modified for this purpose.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Additionally, it is clear, comparing the ED with an analog audio feedback system, that
the response time of the ED is presently too slow to allow its audio feedback to accurately
track complex incoming RA signals. Psychologically, participants are faced with a device that
fails to provide essential and motivating feedback at the low end of the RA range and that
does not give a smooth and well-graded response to RA effects. These properties are crucial
in a device intended for training purposes.
b. Recommended Evaluation Device Modifications
JFK recommends the following modifications to the ED produced by SRI:
(1) Software
(a) If software modification can increase the speed of response of the
feedback, this would be useful. It may be that no significant increase in
feedback response speed can be achieved by software modifications,
given that the STD system uses an interpreted BASIC. In this case,
substitution of an analog feedback system driven by the chart recorder
output would definitely correct the problem.
(b) All data, especially the system status check information, should be
displayed by the terminal. At present the system check data is only
output via the serial printer port.
(c) The printer output becomes unreadable under conditions of RA activity
because the print becomes displaced from its normal position and
overprinting occurs. Perhaps buffering of printer output might correct
this without incurring a significant overhead.
(d) The "white noise" feedback is very unpleasant to listen to because it has
a "pumped" quality, in which increases in volume occur as discrete
steps, happening at irregular intervals (because of program execution
time variations due to competing tasks for the CPU). Finer gradation of
volume increases, or an analog feedback system, is necessary to remove
this characteristic.
(e) The white noise also still contains 60-Hz components. Substitution of a
true white noise source and the careful sculpting of its
amplitude /frequency characteristics would correct the problem of the
subjective acceptability of the white noise.
(f) At present, only three trial periods per session are allowed by the system
if automatic timing of sessions is required. It was originally requested
that up to six trial and six rest periods be software selectable per session.
At present, the printout does not seem to consistently label printed-out
events as "R" or "T."
(g) The software clock providing the automatic timing is clearly inaccurate,
even over short periods. Substitution of hardware clock would correct
this.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
(h) The "beep" must gol The automatic timer beep is annoying to
participants and experimenters.
(i) The date should be input as a normal date, not as a Julian date.
(j) The system should be restartable under software control. Having to
switch it off and on to reset it probably shortens the system's life.
(k) As a substitute for the beep, it would be helpful to have an onscreen
display of available time left per trial or rest period. This display could
be updated at minute intervals and left onscreen until the next update.
(1) Documentation for the system outlining the generic operating system
commands would be helpful.
(m) A facility allowing comments to be input to the data set generated during
the session, in an online mode, would also be helpful, because the
system is not automatically self-validating, necessitating the commentary
of a human witness to assure that the events are not due to fraud or
artifact.
(2) Hardware
(a) As recommended in (a) of the preceding "Software" section, provision of
analog feedback (certainly at sub-threshold levels) would greatly improve
the system's feedback characteristics for RA training purposes.
(b) Longer optical fiber links are needed to enable the ED systems to be
located at longer distances from the participants.
(c) A cooperative JFK/SRI attempt to improve the isolation of the ED would
be of great benefit. Construction of a multilayer vibration-resistant
mounting would be helpful. It would also be possible to construct a
sound-attenuating shield in which to enclose the ED.
(d) The JFK group is considering the possibility of locating the ED target
systems in nonadjacent rooms--locations where a "buffer" room is
interposed between participants and the target systems. This should
reduce problems of artifact to vanishing point.
(e) An extension of Item (c) above would be to attempt long-distance RA
training, using telephone lines to convey the feedback from the ED
system to the remote participants. This would require inclusion of
telephone equipment and expenses as part of the budget.
c. Screening Device Characteristics
The SD seems to be successful in its application environment. The noisiness of the
strain gauge front end remains a problem, because it creates a zone of uncertainty in
interpreting the scores obtained with its use. However, it well fulfills the important
requirements of robustness, portability, and ease of use. Psychologically, the SD seems to be
well accepted.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
Several tentative conclusions seem to emerge from consideration of the period under
review. The mass screening technique does seem to work in the United States and can be
adapted for use by a screening team, rather than an individual screener. The student
population of JFK appears to show some considerable potential as a source of "psychic"
profile individuals, some of whom may be suitable for Piezo-RA training. There also appear
to be several individuals, at least, who live near enough to SRI to consider as experimental
participants (who were identified as possible RA trainees by the Trellis screening).
The Piezo-RA training technique also seems to function effectively in the United States,
and the preliminary informal results look very promising, with the American RA trainees
showing a response to training that is superior to the English RA trainee group. The
techniques for RA training also seem successfully transferable to other individuals, and there
seems good reason to expect that Scott Hubbard, for example, would easily be able to learn
the RA training technique. The preliminary data indicate that performance is dependent upon
the number of training sessions performed. The relevance of the elite PIF "PB" profile to
good RA performance has not yet been clearly demonstrated, but the results so far certainly
do not appear to contradict the use of this profile as one of a number of factors to be
weighed in selecting possible RA trainees. Changes in training conditions that disrupt the
participants' environment have been shown, at least informally, to be detrimental to RA
learning. The crucial importance of appropriate feedback from RA detection instrumentation
also is indicated by the results.
For formal studies, it seems essential that the Piezo-RA agents be trained to the point
where they become capable of affecting instrumentation that is distant from them. Because
some participants prefer to make noise while producing ostensible Piezo-RA effects, good
isolation (by distance and shielding) of Piezo-RA detection systems from environmental noise
and vibration seems essential.
The development of methods of improving the efficiency of participant selection certainly
seems worth investigating. The present PIF represents a first attempt to develop one element
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
of this approach. The further development of participant profiling might well prove fruitful.
Equally, there may well be remedial or facilitating techniques that could improve the learning
performance of Piezo--RA trainees, and these would be worth investigating also. An
examination of the effects of feedback system characteristics and RA psychological induction
strategies might also lead to the development of superior feedback and RA elicitation
techniques that might improve RA performance. Of special interest would be the application
of behavioral therapy techniques (used for ameliorating phobic behavior) for reducing RA task
anxiety and inhibition due to formal, witnessed, or novel conditions. The characterization of
RA production states seems an important goal. Electrophysiological studies of RA agents
when producing effects could be very useful, because if characteristic states correlated with RA
production, biofeedback devices could then be produced to train individuals to achieve the
requisite states.
Finally, the major challenge faced in the upcoming cycle's activities is to retain the drive
and motivation of the participants and the experimental team. This will require careful
goal-setting and the provision of carefully graded, but successively more challenging Piezo-RA
tasks for participants, which is consistent with the overall aim of achieving increasingly
high-quality evidence of the existence of the Piezo-RA effect.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
1. SRI International, Services Contract No. C-11488.
2. Issacs, J., "A Mass Screening Technique For Locating Pkmb Agents," Psychoenergetic
Systems, 4, pp. 125-158 (1981).
3. Houck, G., "pk Party Format And Materials Required," Unpublished Monograph, New
Port Beach (1982).
4. Isaacs, J., "Some Aspects Of Performance At A Psychokinetic Task," Unpublished
Ph.D. Dissertation, University Of Aston, Birmingham, England (1984).
5. Isaacs, J., "Directly Detectable Psychokinetic Effects: A New Category Of
Psychokinesis," Paper Presented At The 1986 Parapsychological Foundation Conference
("Parapsychology And Human Nature"), In Press.
6. Batcheldor, K. J., "Contributions To The Theory Of Pk Induction From Sitter-group
Work," Journal Of The American Society For Psychical Research, 78, 2, pp. 105-122
(1984).
7. Robinson, D., "Motivation In Parapsychology: Competence, Control, And The Choice
Effect," Journal Of Parapsychology, 45, 3, pp. 215-232 (1981).
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Annex 1
THE PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FORM
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 J OH N41 'prdF fr TJJD I ES
REMOTE ACTION PROJECT: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
Thank you very much for aiding our study ! Please answer all the questions
on the top half of this page and on the other pages now. Your answers are
strictly voluntary and will be kept confidential - no information you have
given will be released without your written permission. If you have any
questions, please feel free to ask.
Name Date
Address
31. If you are unsure whether to answer the question below "yes", please
answer this question after you have heard the presentation, and
participated in the remote action session. Please don't forget to answer.
May we have your permission to contact you regarding participation
in the Remote Action Project or other parapsychology studies
at John F. Kennedy University? YES NO
Please Indicate your Availability
NOW TURN OVER THE PAGE AND PLEASE CONTINUE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS
ANSWER THIS SECTION AFTER THE METAL-BENDING AND REMOTE ACTION SESSIONS
Please check the appropriate answers. NO YES
Did you bend any cutlery ?
If yes, how much physical force did you have to use to make it bend ?
Great Moderate Little None
Did you experience any of the following while bending ?
Metal getting hot ? Suddeness of bend ? Metal going soft ?
Feelings of bodily heat ? Tingling in hands or body ?
Was your attention on the metal when it happened ? On Off
What was your mental state when the bending occurred ?
Laughing ? Distracted ? Concentrating ? Other
-------------------TO BE FILLED OUT BY THE EXPERIMENTER------------------------
Screening: Screener: Referral/Other:
Machine No. Macro Events
Machine Results
Intuitive Hit/impressions: 75
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 PIF1
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
HAVE YOU EVER EXPERIENCED ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PHENOMENA ?
If "NO", place a check mark on the line under "no":
If "YES", please circle how often:
1 equals 'once',
2 equals 'more than once, several times', or
3 equals 'often, frequently'.
1 Have ou ever tried to do anything physical with the power
y
of your mind? 1 2 3
2. Have you ever had raps, bangs, footsteps, or other unusual
noises occur ?
3. Have you had doors or windows open or close, or lights
turn on or off without physical cause ? 1 2 3
4. Have you ever had objects disappear or appear in new
places when you were certain of their location or have you
ever felt that they moved without physical cause?
5. Does normally functioning equipment occasionally fail to
operate for you or does malfunctioning equipment work
unexpectedly for you ?
6. Have clocks or watches stopped or changed speed,or have
metal objects bent without physical force in your
7.
8.
?
presence
Have you ever felt that you had received information
an object ?
om touchin
t f
about
1
2 3
g
r
a person or even
n unusual strength experience ?
d
h
1.
2 3
a
a
Have you ever
9. Have you ever had any of the following experiences while
awake: The feeling or thought that an unexpected event a)
had happened, b) was happening, or c) was going to happen
- and later learned that you were right ?
10. Have you ever felt that you received information about
something which happened before, during, or after a dream
which you did not know about or did not expect at the time
of the dream ? (veridical dream, symbolic dream)
11. Have you ever had an experience while awake in which you
felt you were located outside of or away from your
physical body ?
12. Have you ever felt you have seen a location or event at a
distance ?
13. Have you ever had, while awake, a vivid impression of
seeing or being touched by another being, or a sensation
of cold, which you felt was not due to any external
physical or natural cause ?
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/41/07 : CIA-RDP'96-0q~%~PP??90100001-6
14. Have y u ever practiced or fe that you ave
from spiritual or psychic healing ? I `'
15. Have you had an experience when you were thought to be
dead and them came back to life, and had memories of
experiences such as voices, light, other beings ?
16 Have you ever experienced unusual ectasy,"oneness with
? nature", or the phenomenon of "unity" ? 1 2 3
17. Have you had any other unusual experiences you feel might
be of interest to us ? Please briefly mention the type:
Please circle the numbers on the scale, from 1 equals 'Definitely No' to 5
equals 'Definitely Yes', that best represents your answers to the two
questions:
Definitely Definitely
No Yes
18. Do you think its possible to affect
physical objects without touching them ?
19. Do you think that you can affect
physical objects without touching them?
1
2
3
4 5
1
2
3
4 5
20. Please check the mental techniques which you have used, if any:
affirmations concentration meditation biofeedback
relaxation visualization hypnosis or self-hypnosis
yoga bodywork therapy psychotherapy or counseling
21. In what sport, dance, or martial art do you actively participate,
if any:
22. To which religion do you feel closest?
23. Date of Birth (Month, Day, Year) 24. Sex M F
77
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
 Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6
THE JFK COMMITTEE FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS
The JFK Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (CPHS) was created during
the period under review so that the university will have an internal review board (IRB) that
conforms to the DHHS requirements for IRBs. It has held two meetings to date and
approved the research described in this report at its second meeting. The membership of the
committee reflects a wide range of JFK faculty and local representatives. Continuing liaison
has been maintained with Marvin Ziegler, the CPHS chairman.
Approved For Release 2001/03/07 : CIA-RDP96-00789R002200100001-6