Global Consciousness ProjectGlobal Consciousness Projecthttp://noosphere.princeton.eduhttp://noosphere.princeton.edu

Anomalous Anticipatory ResponsesAnomalous Anticipatory ResponsesIn Networked Random DataIn Networked Random Data

Roger NelsonPrinceton, New Jersey

Frontiers of Time: Reverse Causation -- Experiment and TheoryAAAS Symposium, University of San Diego, June 2006

Global Consciousness Project

(aka The EGG Project)The People: An international collaboration of 100 Scientists, Engineers, Researchers

The Tools: REG technology, Field applications, Internet communication, Canonical statistics

The Question: Is there evidence for Non-random Structure where there should be none?

Random Event Generator – REGReverse Current in Diode: White Noise

Electron Tunneling – A Quantum ProcessSample Resulting Voltage, Record 200-Bit Sums

Binomial Distribution of DataCompared to Theoretical Normal

Trial Scores: 100 ± 7.071Plotted as a sequence, 1 trial per sec

100 is expected mean

It is like flipping 200 coins and counting the heads

A World Spanning NetworkYellow dots are host sites for Eggs

http://noosphere.princeton.edu

Internet Transfer to Data Archive in Princeton

Here are data plotted as sequences of 15-minute block means, for a whole day, from 48 eggs

We begin to see what’s happening If we plot the Cumulative Deviations

If we average the cumulative deviations Across REGs we may see a meaningful trend

ExpectedTrend isLevelRandomWalk

Cumulative deviation is a Graphical tool to detect change

Process control engineering

A Replication Series Of Formal Tests The Hypothesis:Global Events Correlate withStructure in the Random Data

Test Procedure:Pre-defined events,Standardized AnalysisBottom Line:Composite Statistical Yield

Current Result: Formal Database, 7.5 Years 204 Rigorously Defined Global Events

Odds: About 1 part in 300,000

9/11

Now we proceed to new questionsFirst, how good are the data?

Equipment: Research quality Design, Materials, Shielding, XOR, Calibration standards

Errors and Corrections: Electrical supply failure, component failure. Rare but identifiable

Empirical vs Theoretical: Mean is theoretical, but tiny differences in Variance (expected)

Normalization: All data standardized; empirical parameters facilitate comparison and interpretation

Identify and exclude “Bad Trials” <55 or >145 Identify and exclude device failures, “Rotten Eggs”

Identify Individual “Rotten Egg”

Effect of “Rotten Eggs” on the Full Network Fully vetted, normalized data

Calculate Empirical Variance for Individual Eggs

REG device failure REG device failure

REG device failure REG device failure

Theoretical vs Empirical Distribution (We also assess pseudorandom clone data,

and use resampling and permutation analyses)

Negative differenceMeans that formal

Tests are conservative

Note: These are (0,1)Note: These are (0,1)Normal Z-scoresNormal Z-scores

The Diffs are The Diffs are TINYTINY

Three Independent statistics 

The netvar is Mean(zz). It measures the average pair correlation of the regs:

<zz> = <z[i]*z[k]>where i & k are different regs and z is trials for one second.

The devvar is Var(z) the variance across regs Calculated for each second.

The covar is Var(zz). It represents the variance of the reg pair products:

{ z[i]*z[k] - <zz>}^2 

Suggestions of precursor effectsSept 11 2001 Terror Attacks

Stouffer Z across REGs per secondStouffer Z across REGs per second Cumulative sum of deviations from expectationCumulative sum of deviations from expectation

Variance across REGs per secondVariance across REGs per secondCumulative sum of deviations from expectationCumulative sum of deviations from expectation

Moderately persuasive suggestion Moderately persuasive suggestion that trend may begin before eventthat trend may begin before event

Strong and precise indication that Strong and precise indication that change begins 4 hours before eventchange begins 4 hours before event

AttacksAttacks

AttacksAttacksAttacksAttacksAttacksAttacks

And very recently, the Indonesian earthquake on May 27 this year also seems to show

evidence of a precursor response

To go further we need a better database

Suggestive single cases but low S/N ratio

Need replication in multiple samples

“Impulse” events are sharply defined

E.g. crashes, bombs, earthquakes

Subset of formal series: 51 impulse events Epoch average for covar and devvar may

Depart from expectation prior to T=0

The suggestion of early shift isclearest in covar

Netvar

DevvarCovar

51 Impulse events, Covar epoch averageDeviation may begin ~ 2 hours before T=0

Approx Slope

Impulse events vary -- We need consistencyEarthquakes are a precisely defined,

Prolific subset of impulse events They show similar responses

Impulse events shown as Red, Earthquakes as Blue trace

Netvar Covar

Earthquakes: Important to People, Numerous, Accurately Located,

Rigorously Scaled, Precisely Timed

All Earthquakes, Richter 6 or More Select those on Land with People and Eggs

Eggs shown asorange spots

Selected regions outlined in orange Included quakes shown as grey dots

Controls shown as blue dots

In the Earthquake database, the covar measure appears to be the most useful

of our three independent statistics

For quakes R>6 (grey dots) the covar measure Responds before and after the primary temblor

Average location of quakes in grid square marked as a colored pointSize is cum Z-score; Red: positive; Blue: negative; Green: no calc, less than 2 quakes

-8 hrs

+8 hrs

BeforeMostlyNegative

AfterMostlyPositive

Strong covar response in populated Land areas where we have eggs

North America and Eurasia

Symmetrical, Significant Z-scores Pre & post

Null covar response in unpopulated Regions (ocean) and areas where we have few eggs

Control: Quakes in the Oceans

All Z-scores less than 0.5

Major earthquakes in populated areasCompared with quakes in the oceans

Covar measure, epoch average Cum Dev T=0 ± 30 hours

Ocean QuakesNo structure around T=0

Scale of departure ~ 40 units

North America and EurasiaSignificant structure around T=0

Scale of departure ~ 80 units

Closer look: T=0 +/- 10 hours

North America Europe and Asia

Significant structure around T=0Scale of departure > 50 units

No structure around T=0Scale of departure ~ 20 units

Unpopulated Ocean regions

Data split: T=0 ± 8 Hrs North American vs Eurasian Quakes

Similar structure, independent subsets

T=0 ± 50 hrRaw data

Magnified central portion

Same data as a cumulative deviation

Estimating significance:Estimating significance:The drop between T-7 Hrs and T=0The drop between T-7 Hrs and T=0Corresponds to a Z score of 4.6 Corresponds to a Z score of 4.6 After Bonferroni correctionAfter Bonferroni correction

Compare slope with 3 Compare slope with 3 envelope envelope

The case for an anticipatory response

T=0

3-Hour Gaussian smooth

Many questions remain, e.g., Fatal quakes should be test case.

Subset with N > 5 fatalities and R > 5 The picture is less clear.

CAUTIONARY NOTESCAUTIONARY NOTESThe effects we see are very small, buried in a sea

of noise. Is “signal” an appropriate term?

Statistical and correlational measures. Need to understand inconsistencies.

Fundamental questions remain unanswered. (e.g., effects of N of eggs, Distance, Time).

Selectivity of analyses needs balance of independent perspectives and replication.

We invite efforts to confirm or deny these indications.

POSSIBILITIESPOSSIBILITIESThe GCP database of networked random events is

unique. No other resource like it exists.

Opportunity for useful questions and answers. Probably holds surprises.

Fundamental questions that should be asked are known (e. g., N of eggs, Distance, Time).

A couple of years of supported analytical research would break new ground.

GCP Homepage

StatusDay Sum ResultsExtract

Special Links

Complementary Perspectives

http://noosphere.princeton.edu

Web DesignRick Berger

The following are extras. Some are explanatory, some provide additional info.

An example of new perspectives:Is there evidence of periodicity?

The generalized short answer is no. But formal events may show FFT spikes

Fourier Spectra and Event EchoesDec 26 2004 Tsunami vs Pseudo Data

Analysis by William Treurniet

The pre-event frame shows a substantial peak (black trace) Compared with the pseudorandom data (right panel).And check out post-event frame 3 (pale bluegreen).

EGG Network Response (Quakes on Land) Cumulative Deviation of Covariance

Primary Temblor +/– 30 Hours

Control Data: Oceans &Low Population Zones

North America and Eurasia

Note: This is an early figure with somewhat differentCircumscription and hence a different N of quakes.

Epoch or Signal AveragingA tool for revealing structure

In repeated low S/N ratio events

Graphical presentation: Cumulative Deviation

Used in Statistical Process Control Engineering

Begin CumBegin CumDev from Dev from ExpectationExpectation

Example, Raw dataExample, Raw data

Dev from ExpectationDev from Expectation

The crossover is exactly at T=0The crossover is exactly at T=0The minimum is -3 sigma and The minimum is -3 sigma and

The maximum is +3 sigmaThe maximum is +3 sigma

Raw data and Gaussian smoothed

data Quakes on land

T=0 ± 30 hours

Largest spikes are near T=0Largest spikes are near T=0

Raw

3 Hour

1 Hour

Cumulative deviation of covar for unpopulated regions (ocean) and areas where we have fewer eggs

South America Nippon, East Asia

Control: Quakes in the Oceans

No trends, andNo structureRelated to T=0

Range is 1/2 to 1/3 of Land quakes

A very early suggestion that the REG data might show evidence of

Precursor response to major events-5 minutes T = 0 +5-5 minutes T = 0 +5

95% confidence

Expectation

Assassination of Prime Minister Rabin, 1995

Cumulative DeviationFrom Expectation