journal # 100 - imune
TRANSCRIPT
Journal # 100
Quantum Entwinement as a
Principal of Human
Communication 2014 Abstract:
A research study first done in 1973 is being redone forty years later in 2013-2014.
Volunteer subject teams were chose for their intimacy relationships. Mothers and
child, marital partners, and close friends each in a pair are chosen. One member
is isolated in a dark room with a stroboscope in front of their face. The other is
hooked to an EEG device (the Eductor). The Eductor measures their Brain wave,
heart electrical pattern, skin resistance and the VARHOPE of their body electric. At
random intervals the strobe light in the room with the remote subject will flash
for 30 sec. this will make a subtle shock to the system of the person and induce an
ocular evoked potential. In the original experiment in 1973 the system shock to
the one member of the pair provoked a similar evoked potential to the other.
In our 2013-2014 study we had 33 teams. In twenty eight of the subjects there
was an evoked potential at a distance detected in the VARHOPE of the receiver on
the first stimulation. On the second strobe stimulation there was a reduced but
measurable evoked potential. Verbal mind guesses were inaccurate but a
bioelectric response was demonstrated.
This can be explained thru a type on quantum entwinement/entanglement
principle of the body electric. But since this process is beneath the reticular
activating system and thus not connected to the word area. Over emphasis of the
word area in science has prevented us from truly accepting the ability of
telepathy. Over 20 different research scientists have validated this incredible
result in independent medical supervised studies.
Introduction:
Quantum entanglement occurs when particles such as photons, electrons, molecules as large as bucky
balls,[1][2]
and even small diamonds[3][4]
interact physically and then become separated; the type of
interaction is such that each resulting member of a pair is properly described by the same quantum
mechanical description (state), which is indefinite in terms of important factors such
as position,[5]
momentum, spin, polarization, etc. This behavior is consistent with quantum-mechanical
theory, has been demonstrated experimentally, and it is now finally accepted by the physics community.
Research into quantum entanglement was initiated by a 1935 paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky,
and Nathan Rosen describing the EPR paradox[13]
and several papers by Erwin Schrödinger shortly
thereafter.[14][15]
Although these first studies focused on the counterintuitive properties of entanglement,
with the aim of criticizing quantum mechanics, eventually entanglement was verified
experimentally,[16]
and recognized as a valid, fundamental feature of quantum mechanics. The focus of
the research has now changed to its utilization as a resource for communication and computation.
Extrasensory perception (ESP) involves reception of information not gained through the recognized
physical senses but sensed with the mind. The term was adopted by Duke University psychologist J. B.
Rhine to denote psychic abilities such as telepathy, clairaudience, and clairvoyance, and their trans-
temporal operation as precognition or retro-cognition. ESP is also sometimes casually referred to as
a sixth sense, gut instinct or hunch, which are historical English idioms. It is also sometimes referred to
as intuition. The term implies acquisition of information by means external to the basic limiting
assumptions of science, such as that organisms can only receive information from the past to the present.
Parapsychology is the pseudoscientific[17]
study of paranormal psychic phenomena, including ESP.
Parapsychologists generally regard such tests as the ganzfield experiment as providing compelling
evidence for the existence of ESP. The scientific community rejects ESP due to the absence of an
evidence base, the lack of a theory which would explain ESP, and the lack of experimental techniques
which can provide reliably positive results.[18]19][20][21][22]
In physics, non-locality or action at a distance is the direct interaction of two objects that are separated
in space without an intermediate agency or mechanism. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) considered gravity-
action-at-a-distance "so great an Absurdity that I believe no Man who has in philosophical Matters a
competent Faculty of thinking can ever fall into it". Quantum non-locality refers to what Einstein called the
"spooky action at a distance" of quantum entanglement.
The reticular formation is a region in the brainstem that is involved in filtering incoming stimuli to
discriminate irrelevant background stimuli.[23]
It is essential for governing some of the basic functions of
higher organisms. It filters and directs signals to the word area versus the other areas of the brain.
The reticular formation is one of the phylogenetically oldest portions of the brain.
The reticular formation consists of more than 100 small neural networks, with varied functions including
the following:
1. Somatic motor control - Some motor neurons send their axons to the reticular formation nuclei, giving
rise to the reticulospinal tracts of the spinal cord. These tracts function in maintaining tone, balance, and
posture--especially during body movements. The reticular formation also relays eye and ear signals to the
cerebellum so that the cerebellum can integrate visual, auditory, and vestibular stimuli in voluntary motor
coordination under verbal conscious direction. Sensory data from our olfactory or shape receptor area are
directed to nonverbal unconscious areas. Other motor nuclei include gaze centers, which enable the eyes
to track and fixate objects, and central pattern generators, which produce rhythmic signals to the muscles
of breathing and swallowing.
2. Cardiovascular control - The reticular formation includes the cardiac and vasomotor centers of
the medulla oblongata.
3. Pain modulation - The reticular formation is one means by which pain signals from the lower body
reach the cerebral cortex. It is also the origin of the descending analgesic pathways. The nerve fibers in
these pathways act in the spinal cord to block the transmission of some pain signals to the brain.
4. Sleep and consciousness - The reticular formation has projections to the thalamus and cerebral cortex
that allow it to exert some control over which sensory signals reach the cerebrum and come to our
conscious attention. It plays a central role in states of consciousness like conscious verbal mind
alertness and non-verbal unconscious sleep. Injury to the reticular formation can result in
irreversible coma.
5. Habituation - This is a process in which the brain learns to ignore repetitive, meaningless stimuli while
remaining sensitive to others. A good example of this is when a person can sleep through loud traffic in a
large city, but is awakened promptly due to the sound of an alarm or crying baby. Reticular formation
nuclei that modulate activity of the cerebral cortex are part of the reticular activating system.
6. Olfactory stimulus is not wired to the RAS. A fire smell will not wake you up. We need smoke detectors.
If you fart while your mate is sleeping they will not know. Olfactory data is mostly wired to the non-verbal
gestalt areas of the brain.
An evoked potential or evoked response is an electrical potential recorded from the nervous system of
a human or other animal following presentation of a stimulus, as distinct from spontaneous potentials as
detected by electroencephalography (EEG), electromyography (EMG), or other electrophysiological
recording method.
Evoked potential amplitudes tend to be low, ranging from less than a microvolt to several microvolts,
compared to tens of microvolts for EEG, millivolts for EMG, and often close to a volt for ECG. To resolve
these low-amplitude potentials against the background of ongoing EEG, ECG, EMG, and other biological
signals and ambient noise, signal averaging is usually required. The signal is time-locked to the stimulus
and most of the noise occurs randomly, allowing the noise to be averaged out with averaging of repeated
responses.[24]
Evoked potential feedback
This technique allows the SSEP to directly control the stimulus that elicits the SSEP without the
conscious intervention of the experimental subject.[24][17]
For example, the running average of the SSEP
can be arranged to increase the luminance of a checkerboard stimulus if the amplitude of the SSEP falls
below some predetermined value, and to decrease luminance if it rises above this value. The amplitude of
the SSEP then hovers about this predetermined value. Now the wavelength (color) of the stimulus is
progressively changed. The resulting plot of stimulus luminance versus wavelength is a plot of the
spectral sensitivity of the visual system.[25][27]
Visual evoked potential
In 1934, Adrian and Matthew noticed potential changes of the occipital EEG can be observed under
stimulation of light. Ciganek developed the first nomenclature for occipital EEG components in 1961.
During that same year, Hirsch and colleagues recorded a visual evoked potential (VEP) on the occipital
lobe (externally and internally), and they discovered amplitudes recorded along the calcarine fissure were
the largest. In 1965, Spehlmann used a checkerboard stimulation to describe human VEPs. An attempt to
localize structures in the primary visual pathway was completed by Szikla and colleagues. Halliday and
colleagues completed the first clinical investigations using VEP by recording delayed VEPs in a patient
with retrobulbar neuritis in 1972. A wide variety of extensive research to improve procedures and theories
has been conducted from the 1970s to today.
There is a distinct dichotomy of the brain in a word area (left hemispheric logic) versus a Intuitive body
electric a global Gestalt systemically wired Holistic nonverbal mind. The word area’s logic has dominated
over the last few centuries. New developments in Insight Creativity have shown it occurs elsewhere in a
nonverbal mind.
As we can see, there are basic barriers to acceptance of ESP. most of these barriers are intellectual and
come from the verbal mind. First is a lack of a logical plausible explanation for the word area of the
minds of limited thinking scientists to comfort. The basic idea of Quantum Entwinement/Entanglement
has now offered us such a plausible explanation. But the word area of limited verbal minded scientist
struggle with this. Einstein struggled with this and called it “Spooky Action at a Distance”. And indeed
most all things beneath verbal minded analysis are spooky indeed. But most of our societies and their
inhabitants have held fast to their beliefs in spooky action at a distance. Who does not have a story of a
thought or communication from someone at a distance? More than 75% of the people believe in ESP
communication. Studies have shown its effect but not its reliability or at least its verbal reliability.
We did this study in 1973 at Youngstown State University, and hence printed it in the graduate
department publication. Forty years of further research into the components in the face of incredible
resistance has led to a complete analysis of the concerning factors. Now with the advent of a new
technology we have repeated the experiment. And now that modern science of Quantum Electro
Dynamics has caught up with us a scientific explanation is apparent. And the belief of the masses has
been verified. In fact with quantum entwinement/entanglement the ability of close people to
communicate nonverbally at a distance is expected.
Equipment Used for Brain Wave Entwinement Measured:
Strobe Stimulation:
One member of each subject team is isolated in a dark room with a stroboscope in front of their
face. The strobe stimulation room is placed in a different building, to remove the electrical
interference effect. At random intervals over an hour the strobe light in the room with the
remote subject will flash for 30 sec. Hypothetically this will make a subtle shock to the system
of the person and induce an ocular evoked potential. Verbal guesses had no results.
The other member of the study team is hooked to an EEG device (the Eductor). The Eductor
measures their Brain wave, heart electrical pattern, skin resistance and the VARHOPE of their
body electric. In the original experiment in 1973 the system shock to the one member of the
pair provoked a similar evoked potential to the other.
Result processes: measures of attention were the moments of stimulus beginning and
discontinuation, 1-2 seconds, in the measured subjects’ EEGs. An affirmative relationship was
hypothesized to appear between the collective modification of the stimulated subjects’ EEGs
versus an strobe stimulated subjects. Control data using the same equipment and test
conditions, but normal subjects tested, was collected to see if there was equipment and
systematic artifacts.
Results: The placebo test resulted in a correlation of r 5 20.05, p 5 0.61; the experimental test
resulted in r 5 0.25, p 5 0.0005.
Twenty eight (28) of the 33 pairs of participants showed independently significant correlations.
Five (5) of the 33 pairs of participants showed no significant reactions.
Inspection of the stimulated subjects’ event-related evoked potentials showed that the
stronger their responses in the theta band.
The analytical procedure was as followed:
1. Determine for each S period j the maximum value from the onset or offset of each stimulus
up to one second post partner stimulus; call these maximum values max.
2. Identify those S period where max values were larger than a maximum threshold value
selected to identify at least 50 such periods; call this subset of periods {max}.
3. Find the peak value of the R ensemble variance array v, that is, variance across all Rs, from
each stimulus up to 1 second afterwards; call the time where this peak occurred p and the
associated variance value vp.
4. Determine the R ensemble variance array v for the subset of {max} periods identified
Brainwave frequencies drifting towards the theta band were found. And a slight change in volt
potential max reading was displayed.
Conclusion: Under certain conditions, the EEG of a sensorial isolated human subject can
influence event-related evoked potentials of their meaningful other at a distant. Showing a
quantum entwinement of people at a distance.
Discussion:
In this study we reproduced the 1973 results showing that there was indeed spooky action at a distance
between intimate pairs. Things once so joined maintain a level of communication regardless of distance.
LIFE
Telepathy Between Couples:
Is It Real? FEB 12, 2013 06:00 PM ET // BY SHEILA M. ELDRED
When Julie Beischel met Mark Boccuzzi at a conference and agreed to participate in an
experiment on telepathy, she didn’t immediately tell him about the powerful connections
she’d felt to him; after all, they were strangers.
Now married, however, Beischel and Boccuzzi credit telepathy for helping them meet and
fall in love.
“It was like nothing I had ever encountered,” Beischel said.
Can these two read each other's minds?
VIDEO: Smooching Across Cultures
The data from the experiment backed up her perception, however, and the couple
eventually asked Dean Radin, senior scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS)
that conducted the summer study program, to marry them. Now, they are co-writing a
book, Psychic Intimacy: A Handbook for Couples, that will highlight practical applications
of telepathy for couples. In fact, they’ve suggested that Radin turn the experiment into a
dating service.
The field of parapsychology can be tricky for scientists to navigate. At best, they’re
known as a fringe group; at worst, they’re lumped together with astrologers and fortune
tellers. NIH funding is hard to come by. People were often surprised that Beischel, a
“hard-core” scientist with a PhD in pharmacology and toxicology, wrote a book about
mediums.
But Beischel, Radin and many others are confident in their ability to answer most
skeptics’ question affirmatively: Is telepathy real?
Radin tells the story of Hans Berger, the German who recorded the first human
electroencephalogram (EEG) in 1924, who fell while riding a horse and was almost run
over by a team of horses racing down the road inches from his head. His sister, many
miles away, sensed the danger and insisted that her father send a telegram to find out
what was wrong. She had never sent a telegram before, and the experience left Burger so
curious that he switched from studying math and astronomy to medicine hoping to
discover the source of that psychic energy.
About 100 years later, the explanation is still largely a mystery, but about 200 published
experiments reveal mental connections that are “way beyond chance,” Radin said. Not
knowing how it works, though, is uncomfortable for many scientists.
“Looking at the experiments and the data, it’s very clear something is going on,” Radin
said. “There is doubt because we don’t have a good explanation for it yet.”
Still, even his most skeptical friends have shifted their thinking; while they may not
believe it’s real, they no longer feel as strongly that it’s not, Radin said.
References
1. ^ Nature: Wave–particle duality of C60 molecules, 14 October 1999. Abstract, subscription needed for full
text
2. ^ Olaf Nairz, Markus Arndt, and Anton Zeilinger, "Quantum interference experiments with large molecules",
American Journal of Physics, 71 (April 2003) 319-325.
3. ^ K. C. Lee, M. R. Sprague, B. J. Sussman, J. Nunn, N. K. Langford, X.-M. Jin, T. Champion, P.
Michelberger, K. F. Reim, D. England, D. Jaksch, I. A. Walmsley (2 December 2011). "Entangling
macroscopic diamonds at room temperature". Science 334(6060): 1253–
1256. doi:10.1126/science.1211914. Lay summary.
4. ^ sciencemag.org, supplementary materials
5. ^ "Wave functions could describe combinations of different states, so-called superpositions. For example,
an electron could be in a superposition of several different locations", from Max Tegmark; John Archibald
Wheeler (2001). "100 Years of the Quantum".Sci.Am.:,; Spektrum Wiss. Dossier N1:6-14 284 (2003): 68–
75.arXiv:quant-ph/0101077.
6. ^ Brian Greene, The Fabric of the Cosmos, p. 11 speaks of "an instantaneous bond between what happens
at widely separated locations."
7. ^ "Decoherence was worked out in great detail by Los Alamos scientist Wojciech Zurek, Zeh and others
over the following decades. They found that coherent quantum superpositions persist only as long as they
remain secret from the rest of the world." fromMax Tegmark; John Archibald Wheeler (2001). "100 Years of
the Quantum". Scientific American 284 (2003): 68–75. arXiv:quant-
ph/0101077. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0201-68.
8. ^ Matson, John. Quantum teleportation achieved over record distances, Nature, 13 August 2012
9. ^ Francis, Matthew. Quantum entanglement shows that reality can't be local, Ars Technica, 30 October
2012
10. ^ Juan Yin [1]
11. ^ Brian Dodson [2]
12. ^ Physicist John Bell depicts the Einstein camp in this debate in his article entitled "Bertlmann's socks and
the nature of reality", p. 142 ofSpeakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics: "For EPR that would be
an unthinkable 'spooky action at a distance'. To avoid such action at a distance they have to attribute, to the
space-time regions in question, real properties in advance of observation, correlated properties, which
predetermine the outcomes of these particular observations. Since these real properties, fixed in advance of
observation, are not contained in quantum formalism, that formalism for EPR is incomplete. It may be
correct, as far as it goes, but the usual quantum formalism cannot be the whole story." And again on p. 144
Bell says: "Einstein had no difficulty accepting that affairs in different places could be correlated. What he
could not accept was that an intervention at one place could influence, immediately, affairs at the other."
Downloaded 5 July 2011
fromhttp://philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu/faculty/wuthrich/GSSPP09/Files/BellJohnS1981Speakable_Bertlman
nsSocks.pdf
13. ^ a b c Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N (1935). "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality
Be Considered Complete?". Phys. Rev. 47 (10): 777–
780.Bibcode:1935PhRv...47..777E. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777.
14. ^ a b Schrödinger E; Born, M. (1935). "Discussion of probability relations between separated
systems". Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 (4): 555–
563.doi:10.1017/S0305004100013554.
15. ^ Schrödinger E; Dirac, P. A. M. (1936). "Probability relations between separated systems". Mathematical
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 32 (3): 446–452.doi:10.1017/S0305004100019137.
16. ^ 75 years of entanglement | Science News
17. ^ Cordón, Luis A. (2005). Popular psychology: an encyclopedia. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
p. 182. ISBN 0-313-32457-3. "The essential problem is that a large portion of the scientific community, including
most research psychologists, regards parapsychology as a pseudoscience, due largely to its failure to move
beyond null results in the way science usually does. Ordinarily, when experimental evidence fails repeatedly to
support a hypothesis, that hypothesis is abandoned. Within parapsychology, however, more than a century of
experimentation has failed even to conclusively demonstrate the mere existence of paranormal phenomenon, yet
parapsychologists continue to pursue that elusive goal."
18. ^ Gracely, Ph.D., Ed J. (1998). "Why Extraordinary Claims Demand Extraordinary Proof". PhACT. Retrieved
2007-07-31.
19. ^ Britannica Online Encyclopedia, Retrieved October 7, 2007.
20. ^ "Glossary of Key Words Frequently Used in Parapsychology". Parapsychological Association. Retrieved
2006-12-24.
21. ^ a b c d The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena by Dean I. Radin Harper
Edge, ISBN 0-06-251502-0
22. ^ Robert Todd Carroll. "ESP (extrasensory perception)". Skeptic's Dictionary!. Retrieved 2007-06-23.
23. ^ Tindall SC (1990). "Level of consciousness". In Walker HK, Hall WD, Hurst JW. Clinical Methods: The
History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations. Butterworth Publishers. Retrieved 2008-07-04.
24. ^ a b c Regan D (1966). "Some characteristics of average steady–state and transient responses evoked by
modulated light".Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 20 (3): 238–48. doi:10.1016/0013-
4694(66)90088-5. PMID 4160391.
25. ^ O’Shea, R. P., Roeber, U., & Bach, M. (2010). Evoked potentials: Vision. In E. B. Goldstein (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Perception (Vol. 1, pp. 399-400, xli). Los Angeles: Sage. ISBN 978-1-4129-4081-8
26. ^ a b c d Regan D (1975). "Colour coding of pattern responses in man investigated by evoked potential
feedback and direct plot techniques". Vision Research 15 (2): 175–183. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(75)90205-
9. PMID 1129975.
27. ^ Nelson J. I., Seiple W. H., Kupersmith M. J., Carr R. E. (1984). "A rapid evoked potential index of cortical
adaptation". Investigative Ophthalmology and Vision Science 59 (6): 454–464. doi:10.1016/0168-
5597(84)90004-2. PMID 6209112.
28. Additional
a. ^ Alisa Bokulich, Gregg Jaeger, Philosophy of Quantum Information and Entanglement, Cambridge
University Press, 2010, xv.
b. ^ Letter from Einstein to Max Born, 3 March 1947; The Born-Einstein Letters; Correspondence between
Albert Einstein and Max and Hedwig Born from 1916 to 1955, Walker, New York, 1971. (cited in M. P.
Hobson; et. al.. "Quantum Entanglement and Communication Complexity (1998)".
pp. 1/13. CiteSeerX: 10.1.1.20.8324.)
c. ^ J. S. Bell (1964). "On the Einstein- Poldolsky-Rosen paradox".Physics.
d. ^ Freedman, Stuart J.; Clauser, John F. (1972). "Experimental Test of Local Hidden-Variable
Theories". Physical Review Letters 28 (14): 938–
941. Bibcode:1972PhRvL..28..938F.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.28.938.
e. ^ A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger (1982). "Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-
Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell's Inequalities".Physical Review Letters 49 (2): 91–
94.Bibcode:1982PhRvL..49...91A. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.91.
f. ^ How the Hippies Saved Physics: Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival. W. W. Norton.
2011. ISBN 978-0-393-07636-3.
g. ^ Asher Peres, Quantum Theory, Concepts and Methods, Kluwer, 1993; ISBN 0-7923-2549-4 p. 115.
h. ^ Cirel'son, B. S. (1980). "Quantum generalizations of Bell's inequality". Letters in Mathematical
Physics 4 (2): 93–100.Bibcode:1980LMaPh...4...93C. doi:10.1007/BF00417500.
i. ^ H. Zbinden, et.al. (2001). "Experimental test of nonlocal quantum correlations in relativistic
configurations". Phys. Rev. A.doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.63.022111.
j. ^ Some of the history of both referenced Zbinden, et. al. experiments is provided in Gilder, L., The Age of
Entanglement, Vintage Books, 2008, pp. 321-324.
k. ^ Xiao-song Ma, Stefan Zotter, Johannes Kofler, Rupert Ursin, Thomas Jennewein, Časlav Brukner &
Anton Zeilinger (26 April 2012). "Experimental delayed-choice entanglement swapping".Nature
Physics. doi:10.1038/nphys2294.
l. ^ The Stanford encyclopedia (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-epr/) says that Niels Bohr distinguished
between "mechanical disturbances" and "an influence on the very conditions which define the possible
types of predictions regarding the future behavior of [the other half of an entangled] system."
m. ^ Sidney Coleman: Quantum Mechanics in Your Face – A lecture given by Sidney Coleman at the New
England sectional meeting of the American Physical Society (Apr. 9,
1994).http://media.physics.harvard.edu/video/?id=SidneyColeman_QMIYF
n. ^ Locality in the Everett Interpretation of Heisenberg-Picture Quantum Mechanics http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-
ph/0103079
o. ^ Werner, R.F. (1989). "Quantum States with Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-
variable model". Physical Review A 40 (8): 4277–4281. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.40.4277.PMID 9902666.
p. ^ Jaeger G, Shimony A, Vaidman L (1995). "Two Interferometric Complementarities". Phys. Rev. 51 (1):
54–67.Bibcode:1995PhRvA..51...54J. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.51.54.
q. ^ Nielsen, Michael A.; Chuang, Isaac L. (2000). Quantum Computation and Quantum
Information. Cambridge University Press. pp. 112–113. ISBN 0-521-63503-9.
r. ^ Gurvits L (2003). "Classical deterministic complexity of Edmonds' Problem and quantum
entanglement". Proceedings of the thirty-fifth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing:
10.doi:10.1145/780542.780545. ISBN 1-58113-674-9.
s. ^ Horodecki M, Horodecki P, Horodecki R (1996). "Separability of mixed states: necessary and sufficient
conditions". Physics Letters A223: 210. arXiv:quant-
ph/9605038.Bibcode:1996PhLA..223....1H. doi:10.1016/S0375-9601(96)00706-2.
t. ^ Dirac, P. A. M. (2008). "Note on Exchange Phenomena in the Thomas Atom". Mathematical Proceedings
of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 26 (3):
376. Bibcode:1930PCPS...26..376D.doi:10.1017/S0305004100016108.
u. ^ Fan, H; Korepin V, Roychowdhury V (2004-11-26). "Entanglement in a Valence-Bond Solid
State". Physical Review Letters 93 (22): 227203. arXiv:quant-
ph/0406067.Bibcode:2004PhRvL..93v7203F.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.227203. PMID 15601113.
v. ^ Franchini, F.; Its, A. R.; Korepin, V. E.; Takhtajan, L. A. (2010). "Spectrum of the density matrix of a
large block of spins of the XY model in one dimension". Quantum Information Processing 10 (3): 325–
341. arXiv:1002.2931. doi:10.1007/s11128-010-0197-7.
w. ^ Cerf, Nicolas J.; Cleve, Richard. "Information-theoretic interpretation of quantum error-correcting codes".
x. ^ Plenio; Virmani (2007). "An introduction to entanglement measures". Quant. Inf. Comp. 1: 1–
51. arXiv:quant-ph/0504163.Bibcode:2005quant.ph..4163P.
y. ^ Dik Bouwmeester, Jian-Wei Pan, Klaus Mattle, Manfred Eibl, Harald Weinfurter & Anton Zeilinger,
Experimental Quantum Teleportation, Nature vol.390, 11 Dec 1997, pp.575. (Summarized atunivie.ac.at[dead
link])
z. ^ Richard Jozsa; Noah Linden (2002). "On the role of entanglement in quantum computational speed-
up". Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 459(2036):
2011–2032. arXiv:quant-ph/0201143.Bibcode:2003RSPSA.459.2011J. doi:10.1098/rspa.2002.1097.
aa. ^ Ekert, Artur K. (1991). "Quantum cryptography based on Bell's theorem". Physical Review Letters 67 (6):
661–663.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.661. PMID 10044956.
bb. ^ Karol Horodecki; Michal Horodecki; Pawel Horodecki; Ryszard Horodecki; Marcin Pawlowski; Mohamed
Bourennane (2010). "Contextuality offers device-independent security".arXiv:1006.0468 [quant-ph].
cc. ^ Database error - Qwiki
dd. ^ Masahiro Kitagawa and Masahito Ueda, "Squeezed Spin States", Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138–5143 (1993).
ee. ^ Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1355 (1993): Interferometric detection of optical phase shifts at the Heisenberg limit
ff. ^ Horodecki R, Horodecki P, Horodecki M, Horodecki K (2007). "Quantum entanglement". Rev. Mod.
Phys. 81 (2): 865–942.arXiv:quant-
ph/0702225. Bibcode:2009RvMP...81..865H.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.81.865.
Other References
1. ^ "Osmosis". Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2nd ed. 1989.
2. ^ Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, "The IEEE standard dictionary of electrical and
electronics terms". 6th ed. New York, N.Y., Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, c1997. IEEE
Std 100-1996. ISBN 1-55937-833-6 [ed. Standards Coordinating Committee 10, Terms and Definitions;
Jane Radatz, (chair)]
3. ^ Mollon B, da Silva V, Busse JW, Einhorn TA, Bhandari M (November 2008). "Electrical stimulation for
long-bone fracture-healing: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials". J Bone Joint Surg Am 90 (11):
2322–30. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00111.PMID 18978400.
4. ^ Licht, Sidney Herman., "History of Electrotherapy", in Therapeutic Electricity and Ultraviolet Radiation,
2nd ed., ed. Sidney Licht, New Haven: E. Licht, 1967, Pp. 1-70.
5. ^ Licht, "History of Electrotherapy"
6. ^ a b Gardner SE, Frantz RA, Schmidt FL (1999). "Effect of electrical stimulation on chronic wound healing:
a meta-analysis". Wound Repair Regen 7 (6): 495–503.doi:10.1046/j.1524-
475X.1999.00495.x. PMID 10633009.
7. ^ Bouter LM (March 2000). "[Insufficient scientific evidence for efficacy of widely used laser therapy, and
ultrasound treatment in physiotherapy]" (in Dutch; Flemish). Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 144 (11): 502–
5. PMID 10735134.
8. ^ Nicolakis P, Kollmitzer J, Crevenna R, Bittner C, Erdogmus CB, Nicolakis J (Aug 2002).Wien Klin
Wochenschr. 114. pp. 21–22. PMID 12602111.
9. ^ Robinson AJ, Snyder-Mackler, L. Clinical electrophysiology: electrotherapy and electrophysiologic testing
3rd ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2008;151-196, 198-237, 239-274
10. ^ Alon G et al. Electrotherapeutic Terminology in Physical Therapy; Section on Clinical Electrophysiology.
Alexandria, VA: American Physical Therapy Association, 2005
11. ^ Olyaee Manesh A, Flemming K, Cullum NA, Ravaghi H (2006). Olyaee Manesh, Alireza. ed.
"Electromagnetic therapy for treating pressure ulcers". Cochrane Database Syst Rev(2):
CD002930. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002930.pub3. PMID 16625564.
12. ^ Ravaghi H, Flemming K, Cullum N, Olyaee Manesh A (2006). Ravaghi, Hamid. ed. "Electromagnetic
therapy for treating venous leg ulcers". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2):
CD002933. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002933.pub3. PMID 16625565.
13. Dubounet, D. ISBN 978-615-5169-13-7 Injury and Sport Medicine from IMUNE press
14. Environmental Medicine by Dr. Med. Rainer Mutschler and Dr. Andreas Kott, Umweltmedizin,
09/07
15. Antibiotics as a Primary Co-factor in AIDS Progression, by William Nelson L.P.C.C. M.D. and Eva
Toth, M.D., Homeodiagnostica, Budapest, Hungary, Vorsomarty ter 3. presented at the 1st
International Conference of the Mor Kaposi Research Foundation, Convergence of AIDS and
Cancer Research, Budapest, Hungary, August 27, 1996.
16. Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation and Fibromyalgia, Marshall F. Gilula, Expert Rev. Med.
Devices 4 (4), (2007).
17. Complementary and alternative therapy use in adult survivors of childhood cancer: a report the
Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, Mertens A. Sencer S., Myers CD, Recklitis C, Kadan-Lottick N.,
Whitton J, Marina N., Robison L.L., Zeltzer L. Pediatr. Blood Cancer, 2008, January, 50(1): 90-7
18. A study to detect the efficacy of Micro-current Electrical Therapy on Decubitus Wound,
M.O.Ullah, Med. Sci. 7(8) 1320-1324, 15 November 2007.
19. SCIO technology - An inverted ovarian tumor on the left side, Stephanie Heliger and Matthias
Heliger M.D.
20. Sacred Birthing, Extensive Research of the EPFX-QXCI was done to show it effective in helping
the Natural Birth, Kauai, Hawaii
21. 978-615-5169-01-4 The Body Electric Simplified, IMUNE Press
22. 978-615-5169-02-1 Energetic Medicine - Science over Convention, IMUNE Press
23. 978-615-5169-13-7 Injury and Sport Medicine, IMUNE Press
24. 978-615-5169-17-5 VARHOPE (Voltage, Amperage, Resistance, Oxidation, Hydration, Proton and Electron
pressure, the body electric's vital signs) , IMUNE Press
25. 978-615-5169-19-9 TVEP and Medication Testing (the research) , IMUNE Press
26. 978-615-5169-24-3 Electro-Acupuncture with Energetic Cybernetic Therapy, IMUNE Press
27. 978-615-5169-43-4 The Electro Sense of Sharks and Humans, IMUNE Press
Additional
1. TVEP The Clinical Experience complete, IMUNE Press Clinical Review of Biofeedback Stress
Therapy with the EPFX Biofeedback Device 1996, Vol.XV.1. - 2000 Neurology ISSN 2041-4293
2. VARHOPE Changes in a SCIO Session, Vol.XXI.3. - 2006 Sport Medicine ISSN 2041-4293
3. Clinical Review Of Biofeedback Stress Therapy with the QXCI Biofeedback Device, Vol.XVI.1. -
2001 Biofeedback ISSN 2041-4293
4. VARHOPE (Voltage, Amperage, Resistance, Oxidation, Hydration, Proton and Electron pressure,
the body electric's vital signs), 978-615-5169-17-5, IMUNE Press 2011
5. VARHOPE and STRESS, Vol.XXV.1. 2010 VARHOPE and Stress ISSN 2041-4293
6. SCIO’s ability to increase Body Wellness, Vol.XXV.1. 2010 VARHOPE and Stress ISSN 2041-4293
7. VARHOPE Large scale study, Vol.XXV.1. 2010 VARHOPE and Stress ISSN 2041-4293
8. Varhope Improvements in a Clinical Setting, Vol.XXV.1. 2010 VARHOPE and Stress ISSN 2041-
4293
9. Large Scale Studies of the SCIO, Vol.XXIII.1. - 2008 The Large Scale Study of the SCIO ISSN 2041-
4293
The International Journal of the Medical Science of Homeopathy, Naturopathy and Energetic
Medicine, IJMSHNE
- 1973 Dr.Nelson's Work published in 1974 YSU Post Graduate research journal, and 1982 ISSN 2041-4293
The Trivector Signature of Human Beings as a Basis of Psychic Communication
Vol.VI. IJMSHNE - 1990 QED and Bioluminiscence ISSN 2041-4293
Electromagnetic Bio - Information and Water
Endogenous Electromagnetic Field Corrects the Immunodeficiency of Chernobyl Mice
Energetic Resonance and Interference Technology (ERIT) - Existing herapeutical
Applications and Other Possibilities
Energetic Resonance and Interference Technology (ERIT) Existing Therapeutical
Applications and Other Possibilities
Introduction to Energetic Medicine
Magnetic Therapy's Need for Controlled Statistical Validation of Anecdotal Clinical
Observations
Cancer Seen Through Quantum Biology
Increasing the Energy and Information Storage Effects of a Homeopathic
Plant Tissue Culture and Cloning Techniques for Pharmaceutical Product Stability
Quantum Coherency and Reactivity - The Need for a Real Matter Test Kit in Medication
Testing
The Rare Electron Gas A Allopathic Evaluation
Vol.VII.1. - IJMSHNE 1991 Annals of Behavioral Medicine
The Evolution of SBM Publications - Annals of Behavioral Medicine Volume 13
Toward an Improved Behavioral Medicine - Annals of Behavioral Medicine-Volume 19
Vol.VII.2. - IJMSHNE - 1991 Volt-Ammetry ISSN 2041-4293
A Realistic Assessment of the Danger in Electromagnetic Fields Pollution
Conductance Resonance in Homeopathy
Immunological and Electrophysiological Reactivity of Patients with HIV Infection
Neurochemical Analysis of the Conscious Brain - Voltammetry and Push-Pull Perfusion
Voltammetric Analysis of Selected Hydrocarbons Containing Carbon-Carbon Multiple
Bonds
Voltammetry Retrospective
What is Reactivity
Vol.IX.1. - IJMSHNE - 1993 Acupuncture ISSN 2041-4293
510 (k) Notification - Acupuncture Needle
Acupuncture Needle 510(k)
FDA Gives Nod to Acupuncture
Richard Atkinson Acupuncture Study - Airedale Local Research Ethics Committee
Project Submission
Vol.IX.2. - IJMSHNE - 1993 Biofeedback, Chaos, Fractals, Etc. ISSN 2041-4293
A Brief Monologue on Twilight Learning
Biofeedback Brain Lateralization and Re-Scripting
Biofeedback Theta Training Coupled with Subliminal Audio Suggestions in the
Treatment of Alcoholism - Double Blind Study
Chaos Theory, Causality from Chaos
Electrical Sensitivities in Allergy Patients
Mastering Chaos
New Way to Kill Viruses- Shake Them to Death
QXCI and The Long-term Pathological Findings of the Camelford Toxicity Group
Towards a Theory of Living State
Vol.IX.3. – IJMSHNE- 1993 Nosodes- Using Microorganism Endotoxins ISSN 2041-4293
Annales Immunologiae Hungaricae 1968
CRF-Dependent and CRF - Independent Mechanisms Involved in Hypophysial
Adrenal System Activation by Bacterial Endotoxin
Effect of Radiodetoxified Endotoxin and Trace Elements on Reticulo-Endothelial System
Damaged by Ethanol in Rats
Experientia - A Tribute to Hans Selye by His Students and Associates
Forum on Immunomodulators
Immunological Properties of Detoxified Lipolysaccharides
Immunological Studies on the Origin of the Precursor Cells in Waldenstrom's
Macroglobulinemia
Interactions of Radio-Detoxified Escherichia Coli Endotoxin Preparations with the
Complement System
Modulating Bacterial Virulence
Stimulation of Human Peripheral Lymphocytes with Endotoxin and Radiodetoxified
Endotoxin
Studies of the Pathogenesis of the Edema Disease of Swine
Studies on the Alteration of Species-Specific Resistance by Ethionine-Induced Ihibition
of Protein Metabolism
Study on Bacterial Endotoxins
The Effect of Various Experimental Pathophysiological Conditions on the Antibody
Production
Toward a Unified Theory of Immune Dysfunction and Its Management
Traumatic Injury, Infection and Other Immunologic Sequelae
A Protocol Review of the Homeopathic Treatment of Herpes and Similar Conditions
About Vaccines
Electrical Reactivity as a Prescreen of HIV Infection Patients
ENDOTOXIN Stimulation of the Immune system - Immune Stimulation as a Substitute
for Antibiotics
Homeopathic Immunization Program
Homeopathic Treatment of Treponema Infections (Rabbit Model)
Nosodal Treatment - Infection
Nosodes - Homeopathy for Acupuncturists, Chiropractors and Naturopaths
Oligo Elements
Sarcodes - Homeopathy for Acupuncturists, Chiropractors and Naturopaths
Thymus Disorders
Treating Polyps and Adhesions with Complex Homeopathy
Stress and the General Adaptation Syndrome by Hans Selye - British Medical Journal
Vol.X. – IJMSHNE- 1994 Updated Miscellaneous Studies on Various Topics of Alternative
Medicine ISSN 2041-4293
Alternative Practitioners Urged to Introduce Self-Regulation
Psycho-dermatological Psoriasis Research, Soma-psychic or Psych-somatic
Psychometric Evidence That Mercury from Silver Dental Fillings May Be an Etiological
factor in Depression, Excessive Anger and Anxiety
Specific Poisons
QXCI - SCIO - EPFX Heart Analysis Study
QXCI-EPFX Mechanism of Bio-resonance Interactions or How May Quantum States Be
Attributed to Living Systems
QXCI and Thermodynamic and Kinetic Characteristics of Albumin and Nucleoproteid
Complexes from Human Blood Serum after Bio-resonance Treatment
Vol.XII.1. - IJMSHNE - 1997 Electro Physiological Reactivity, the Xrroid Effect ISSN
2041-4293
1997 1 The Xrroid
Book List
Vol.XII.2. - 1997 Cancer Studies ISSN 2041-4293
Blastodermic Layer - Hammer Herd
Book List
Cancer Assignment
Cancer Seen Through Quantum Biology
DNA and Disease
Experimental Evidence for Homeopathic Treatment of Cancer in Cell
Culture and Animal Populations Study
Immune Stimulation
Immune System
Journal List
Special Issue for the Homeopathic Treatment of Cancer and Pre-cancer
States
Tumor Classification - (Histological)
Vol.XIII.1. - IJMSHNE - 1998 Basic Complex Homeopathy ISSN 2041-4293
1998 1 Basic Complex Homeopathy
The Fuzzy Arithmetic Of Uncertainty
A Clinical Study of Glandular Efficacy
A Comparison Study of Electro Physiological Reactivity to Hair Analysis
The Measurement of Action Potentials with Electrodes Placed on the Surface of Injured
or Irritated Tissue
Three Parts of Nutrition
Using The QXCI Medical Device for Excess Adipose Tissue on Patients
Understanding Homeopathic Information Transfer with Algebraic Topology
Vol.XIII.2. - IJMSHNE - 1998 Nosodes, AIDS and Antibiotics ISSN 2041-4293
1998 2 Nosodes AIDS Homeopathy
Homeopathic Immunization
HIV and Alternative Medicine
Book List
Journal List
Natural Remedies for Inflammation
Urinary Tract Infection
Homeopathic Immunization program
Inflammation A Review for Biofeedback Therapists
HIV subtypes
Vol.XIII.4. - IJMSHNE – 1998-- Royal Society of Medicine 1992 presentation ISSN 2041-
4293
Royal Society Of Medicine 1992
Book List
Journal List
Royal Society of Medicine - Introduction 1998 4
Vol.XIII.5. - IJMSHNE - 1998 Electro-acupuncture ISSN 2041-4293
Basic Energetic Medicine
Oriental Formulas
Book List
Journal List
Acupuncture Explained in Quantic Terms ( Energetic Interchanges cycled through
Meridians)
Using The QXCI Medical Device for Excess Adipose Tissue In Patients
Electrical Reactance and its' Correlates in Biological Systems
A Short Review of the Experimental Work on Electrical Reactivity
The Electromotive Connection to Biology
Homeopathic Treatment of Pain
Quantum Energy (Energy Regulation)
Chinese Herbology and Homeopathy - Homeopathy For Acupuncturists, Chiropractors &
Naturopaths
Diagnosing and Treating Injured Tissue with the Energetic Medicine of the QXCI - The
Measurement of Action Potentials with Electrodes Placed on the Surface of Patients with
Injured or Irritated Tissue
Electroacupuncture - ElectroAcupuncture with Energetic Cybernetic Therapy
Valuable Notes and Tips for Healers
Increasing the Energy And Information Storage Effects of a Homeopathic (Effects of a
Patented Process on Water's Electrical Retention)
Lymph Disorders, Lymphatic Congestion
The Electronic Signature of Homeopathy - The Trivector Analysis of Homeopathic
Medications
The Great Subspace Attractor of Life (What sets the Limits of Biology)
Towards a Biological Unified Field Theory (consciousness of the Universe as connection
of subspace)
Tunneling, the Wormhole Thesis (A Possible Explanation for Psychic Phenomena)
Vol.XIII.6. - IJMSHNE - 1998 Cellular Information Transfer ISSN 2041-4293
Afflictions Produced by Damaged Communication among Cells
Electro Reactivity Measures of Psychic State Transfer
The Chemical Circuits of Calcium as an Intracellular Carrier of Info
The Electromotive Connection to Biology
The Molecular Foundation of Communication inside the Cell
The Xrroid Effect
Electrical Reactance and its' Correlates in Biological Systems
A Short Review of the Experimental Work on Electrical Reactivity
Concepts in Energetic Dentistry
The Electronic Signature of Homeopathy - Trivector Analysis of Homeopathic
Medications
Vol.XIV.1. - I-II -IJMSHNE -1999 Haematology ISSN 2041-4293
The Chiroliquicrystal Microscope Technique of Freezing Analysis of the Polymorphic
Shape Structure of a Homeopathic (Freezing as a Technique of Analyzing the Clath Rate
Structure of a Water-Based Homeopathic)
Vol.XV.1. - IJMSHNE - 2000 Neurology ISSN 2041-4293
Autonomic Nervous System and Energetic Medicine - Bioenergetic and Psychosomatic
Causes for Health and Illness
Clinical Review of Biofeedback Stress Therapy with the EPFX Biofeedback Device 1996
Vol.XV.7.- IJMSHNE - 2000 S Death of the Point Probe ISSN 2041-4293
2000 1S Death Of The Point Probe
Book List
Journal List
Facilitated Diagnostics - Subtle Muscle Control as Fraud in Kinesiology and
Electro-Acupuncture
Scientific Evaluation of Subtle Muscle Control Therapies - Subtle Muscle Control as
Fraud in Kinesiology and Electro-acupuncture
The Point Probe - The Simplest of Truths
Vol.XVI.1. - IJMSHNE - 2001 Biofeedback ISSN 2041-4293
2001 1 Biofeedback
Basic Biofeedback Physiology
Biofeedback Early Research
Patient Advice
QXCI and Superlearning
Book List
Journal List
The Unconscious and Its Role in Biofeedback Processes
Clinical Review Of Biofeedback Stress Therapy with the QXCI Biofeedback Device
Nelson Medicine-What the QXCI Device can do for you-Our Contract For Health
Homeopathic Treatment of Pain
Positive Thinking Works
Transcendence Diagram
Homeopathic Immunization Program
Wellness Biofeedback Consultation Waiver
QXCI Channels of Information
Dealing with Addictions
Dealing with Alcoholism
QXCI - How Long and How Often to Treat
Physiological, Neuroanatomical and Electrical Basics Of Biofeedback (QXCI
Electrophysiological Reactivity as Biofeedback)
Vol.XVI.1.- IJMSHNE - 2001 Biofeedback ISSN 2041-4293
2001 1 Biofeedback
Basic Biofeedback Physiology
Biofeedback Early Research
Patient Advice
QXCI and Superlearning
Book List
Journal List
The Unconscious and Its Role in Biofeedback Processes
Clinical Review Of Biofeedback Stress Therapy with the QXCI Biofeedback
Device
Nelson Medicine-What the QXCI Device can do for you-Our Contract For
Health
Homeopathic Treatment of Pain
Positive Thinking Works
Transcendence Diagram
Homeopathic Immunization Program
Wellness Biofeedback Consultation Waiver
QXCI Channels of Information
Dealing with Addictions
Dealing with Alcoholism
QXCI - How Long and How Often to Treat
Physiological, Neuroanatomical and Electrical Basics Of Biofeedback
(QXCI
Vol.XVII.2. - IJMSHNE - 2002 EPR Advanced ISSN 2041-4293
2001 1 Biofeedback
2002 2 EPR
Basic Energetic Medicine
Biofeedback Early Research
Harmonic Resonance
QXCI and Superlearning
Book List
Journal List
Treatment of Alzheimer Disease With Energetic Medicine
Clinical Review of Biofeedback Stress Therapy with the QXCI Biofeedback Device
Electric Reactance And It's Correlates in Biological Systems
A Short Review of the Experimental Work Electrical Reactivity
Understanding Homeopathic Information Transfer with Algebraic Topology
The Observations and Effects of Math phobia in Natural Health Practitioners
Pain Treatment with TENS
Clinical Review of Biofeedback Stress Therapy with the EPFX Biofeedback Device
Electro-acupuncture (Electro-Acupuncture with Energetic Cybernetic Therapy)
Physiological, Neuroanatomical and Electrical Basis Of Biofeedback (QXCI Electro-
physiological-reactivity as Biofeedback)
Vol.XVII.5.- IJMSHNE - 2002 Quantum Quality Control, Quantum Electro Dynamics - A
Truly Modern Medicine ISSN 2041-4293
Voltammetry Retrospective
Book List
Discrepancies in Quantum Electro Dynamics
Quantum Electro Dynamics
1997 1 The Xrroid
EPFX Story 2008
FDA justification pathway
Journal List
The Electrochemistry of the Trivector
Autism and the Immune Connection
Fractals, Chaos Theory and the SCIO Device
Quantum Electro Dynamics - QED as a Basis for Biology - Light Interacts with Matter
The Scientific Proof of Non-Locality - The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and Bell's
Theorem
QQC, A Device for Measuring the Electronic Signature of Homeopathy - The Trivector
Analysis of Homeopathic Medications
Quantum Electro Dynamics 0 the Science of Life - Brief review
Four Decades of the Trivector - Review of the Trivector 1961 till 2009
Clinical Review of the History of the QQC Volt-Ammetric Trivector and EPR (Electro-
Physiological-Reactivity) in Blood Analysis
A Study of High Field Quantum Electrodynamics in the Collision of High Energy
Electrons with a Terawatt Laser
The Integral Details of the Body Electric Simplified for SCIO Therapists
The Trivector Analysis of Homeopathy - A Three-Dimensional Description of
Voltammetric Polarographic Measures
Quantum Electro Dynamics and the Volt-Ammetric Trivector Signature for Dummies
Quantum Quality Control - DOUBLE Q C - A Device for Testing the Trivector Electrical
Signature of Homeopathic Items
Correlative Infection Comparison to SCIO Xrroid Reactivity Revised 1989-1994-2001-
2007
Vol.XVII.7.- IJMSHNE - 2002 Special Issue on Psychoneuroimmunology ISSN 2041-4293
A Bright Future for PNI
A new take on psychoneuroimmunology
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and PNIS
Cortisol, Stress and Health
Creative Consulting Psychoneuroimmunology, the Mindbody
Inflammation and the Pathophysiology of Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders
Misconceptions in Biofeedback
PNI Theory in Brief
Psychological Influences in Critical Care Perspectives from Psychoineuroimmunology
About Psychoneuroimmunology
Psychoneuroimmunology - An Overview
Psychoneuroimmunology and Natural Healing by the Brain
Psychoneuroimmunology and Psychosomatic Medicine - Back to the Future
Psychoneuroimmunology - Can We Control Our Immune Systems
psychoneuroimmunology - Connecting Mind, Body and Spirit
Psychoneuroimmunology - Framework Guides Nursing Research
Psychoneuroimmunology - How the Brain and the Immune System Communicate with
each other
Psychoneuroimmunology of Depression
Psychoneuroimmunology - Stress Effects on Pathogenesis and Immunity during Infection
Psychoneuroimmunology - Stress Reduction to Prevent Cancer Recurrence
Psychoneuroimmunology Study
Psychoneuroimmunology - The Bridge Between Science and Spirit
Psychoneuroimmunology
Psychoneuroimmunology - Encyclopedia Data
PsychoNeuroImmunoSomology PNIS References
Psycho-oncology and Cancer, Psychoneuroimmunology and Cancer
Stress and the Immune System
Stress Detection and Stress Reduction as new medicine
Stress Management
Stress, Cortisol and the Immune System What Makes Us Get Sick
Stress, Fear Increase Cancer Recurrence Risk, Study Says
The Mind Body Connection
The Nature of Stress
Threads of Psychoneuroimmunology in Sport
To Investigation Committee of the Energy Commission
Transitional Medicine and Psychoneuroimmunology
Use and thus Claims for the EPFX
Warts and Herpes PNI Effects on System
Future Directions in Psychoneuroimmunology - Psychoelectroneuroimmunology
Immunological Research in Clinical Psychiatry - Report on the Consensus Debate During
the 7th Expert Meeting on Psychiatry and Immunology
An Overview Of Psychoneuroimmunology (PNI) - Psychosocial Factors that Weaken and
Strengthen the Immune System
Psychoneuroimmunology (PNI) (Mind-Body-Spirit Medicine)
Psychoneuroimmunology - A Brief Review
Psychoneuroimmunology - The Mind Body Connection - Implications for Aroma
Therapy
Psychoneuroimmunology - Historical Precedents
Psychoneuroimmunology - Medical Research Council Health Services Research
Collaboration, University of Bristol
Psychoneuroimmunology - A New facet of the Mind Body Dialogue
PsychoNeuroimmunology - Then and Now
Psychoneuroimmunology - Validation of the Biopsychosocial Model
Vol.XVIII. - IJMSHNE - 2003 S The Promorpheus ISSN 2041-4293
Quantum Biology
Transformation
Virtual Photons
Photodynamics
Mitogenic Radiation
Long-Range Forces
The Minimal Dose
Introduction
The Promorpheus 1
Book List
Journal List
An Advanced Treatise in Quantum Biology - Bibliography
Indeterminism vs. Determinism
Molecular Indeterminacy
Fractals (Disproving Reductionism)
Vions
The Determinate Pool of the Body
An Advanced Treatise in Quantum Biology - Bio-Electronogram
A New Description of Neural Activity
Aging
Cancer Seen Through Quantum Biology
Energetic Medicine and Meridian Theory
A Proper Medicine for Our New Biology
Vol.XX.4. – IJMSHNE- 2005 Basic Body Electric ISSN 2041-4293
Environmental Medicine German-English Version
Book List
Journal List
The Body Electric Simplified for Therapist
Autonomic Nervous System and Energetic Medicine
The Adrenal Medulla, Catecholamines and Stress as a Cause of Hypoadrenia
Vol.XXI.3. - IJMSHNE - 2006 Sport Medicine ISSN 2041-4293
Bio-Energetic Strategies for Obesity Dr Drake Budapest
Bio-terrain Theory & BF Overview Cancun 2005
SCIO- BIO-Electronic Supported Elimination of Toxic Substances from the Human Body
Partnership Helps Handicapped Kids
Book List
Journal List
Obesity Epidemic RBC Toronto Nov 13 2003
SCIO Quantum Biofeedback and Enhancement of Olympic Athletic Performance
A Short Review of Fatty Acids in Treatment of pH Disturbance
FRACTURES SCIO STUDY
Human Growth Hormone
HYPOADRENIA - WEAK ADRENALS- STRESS SYNDROME - SCIO STUDY
Inflammation A Review for Biofeedback Therapists
INJURED OR DISEASED TISSUE SCIO STUDY
Diagnosing and Treating Injured Tissue with the Energetic Medicine of the QXCI - The
Measurement of Action Potentials with Electrodes Placed on the Surface of Patients with
Injured or Irritated Tissue
Natural Remedies for Inflammation
Nutritional Support for Sport inflammation - Natural Oxygenation Stimulation Formula
and Additional Fatty Acids Support
Nutrition - Related Knowledge, Attitude, and Dietary Intake of College Track Athletes
SCIO Functions
Stimulation of Sports performance and Relief of Sports Pain with a Natural Herbal Yeast
Formula
VARHOPE Changes in a SCIO Session
CASE FILE - Elbow pain - Little League elbow - in 13-year-old baseball pitcher
Vol.XXI.4. - IJMSHNE - 2006 Quantum Electro Dynamics and Cancer ISSN 2041-4293
Biofeedback Instructors Clinical Pearls and Strategies
Great Shakes
Level 4 - Disaster Relief Biofeedback Training South Africa Mar 15 2005
Quantum Relief In Covering letter Q-PODS
QXCI Benefits and Features2
QXCI Biofeedback Cancer by Dr Drake Aug 2003
SCIO- BIO-Electronic Supported Elimination of Toxic substances from the Human Body
Book List
Journal List
Bio-terrain Theory and Biofeedback Overview Cancun 2005
Clinical Pearls and Strategies QXCI
Symposium der DGEIM Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Energetische and
Informationsmedizin e.V
Homeopathic Treatment of Breast Cancer - Clinical of Complex Homeopathic Treatment
Mastopathy (Fibroadenomatosis) of Mammae in Comparison with results of Traditional
Medicamental Treatment
Cancer Seen Through Quantum Biology
Cancer Assignment
Experimental Evidence for Homeopathic Treatment of Cancer in Cell Culture and
Animal Populations Study
CANCER SCIO STUDY
ENDOMETRIOSIS SCIO STUDY
INJURED OR DISEASED TISSUE SCIO STUDY
LEUKEMIA SCIO STUDY
Vol.XXI.5. – IJMSHNE- 2006 IMUNE Conference - The Future of Natural Medicine St.
Maarten ISSN 2041-4293
Using the SCIO Medical Device for Excess Adipose Tissue on Patients - A Review and
An Update
Allergy Treatment - A Complete Text on Naturopathic Management of Allergies
The Observations and Effects of Math phobia in Natural Health Practitioners
Using the SCIO Medical Device as an Adjunct for Excess Adipose Tissue on Patients - A
Review and an Update
Vol.XXII.1. - IJMSHNE - 2007 Electro-acupuncture Advanced ISSN 2041-4293
Book List
Journal List
Basic SCIO System Description
Electro Acupuncture - A Brief History
Electro-Acupuncture as a Safe and Effective Therapy
Electro-acupuncture with Energetic Cybernetic Therapy
SCIO Functions
VARHOPE Changes in a SCIO Session
Use of Electro-acupuncture for Treatment of Chronic Sciatic Pain
EPFX Short form
Vol.XXII.3. - IJMSHNE - 2007 Review of the Trivector ISSN 2041-4293
New Way to Kill Viruses- Shake Them to Death
Book List
Journal List
Voltammetry Retrospective
Vol.XXIII.1. - IJMSHNE - 2008 The Large Scale Study of the SCIO ISSN 2041-4293
Book List
Journal List
SCIO Study 11-11 2007
Use and thus Claims for the EPFX
Natural Homeopathic and SCIO Treatment of Otitis Media in Children
ACNE VULGARIS SCIO STUDY
ACROPARESTHESIA SCIO STUDY
AIDS SCIO STUDY
ALCOHOLISM SCIO STUDY
ALLERSODE THERAPY SCIO STUDY
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE SCIO Study
ANEMIA SCIO STUDY
ANXIETY UNSPECIFIED SCIO
ASTHMA SCIO Study
BACTERIA INFECTION SCIO Study
BICARB DEFICIENCY SCIO
BRAIN FATIGUE UNSPECIFIED SCIO
BRAIN WAVE DETECTION AND CORRECTION SCIO STUDY
CANCER SCIO STUDY
CARDIAC ARRHYTHMIA - SCIO STUDY
CIRCULATION DISORDERS SCIO STUDY
COMMON COLD SCIO STUDY
DEPRESSION - SCIO STUDY
DIGESTIVE DISORDERS SCIO STUDY
Electro-Acupuncture as a Safe and Effective Therapy
ENDOMETRIOSIS SCIO STUDY
ENTEROCOLITIS SCIO STUDY
ESOPHAGITIS - GASTRIC REFLUX SCIO STUDY
FEMALE DISORDERS SCIO STUDY
FLEXIBILITY, RESTRICTED RANGE OF MOTION SCIO STUDY
FRACTURES SCIO STUDY
GASTRIC REFLUX, ESOPHAGEAL, HIATAL HERNIA SCIO STUDY
HAY FEVER - ALLERGIC RHINITIS SCIO STUDY
HEADACHE SCIO STUDY
HERNIATED DISK SCIO STUDY
HYPERTRONIA SCIO STUDY
HYPOADRENIA - WEAK ADRENALS- STRESS SYNDROME - SCIO STUDY
HYPOGLYCEMIA SCIO STUDY
HYPOTHYROID SCIO STUDY
HYSTERIA SCIO STUDY
IMPOTENCE SCIO STUDY
INDIGESTION SCIO STUDY
INFECTION SCIO STUDY
INJURED OR DISEASED TISSUE SCIO STUDY
INSOMNIA SCIO STUDY
IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME SCIO STUDY
ITCHING UNSPECIFIED SCIO STUDY
KIDNEY DISORDERS SCIO STUDY
Large Scale Stress SCIO Study
LEUKEMIA SCIO STUDY
LIVER PROBLEMS UNSPECIFIED SCIO STUDY
LOW BACK PAIN SCIO STUDY
LYMPH DISORDERS SCIO STUDY
MALABSORPTION SYNDROME SCIO STUDY
METACARPAL TUNNEL SCIO STUDY
OSTEOPOROSIS SCIO STUDY
OTITIS MEDIA SCIO STUDY
PAIN UNSPECIFIED SCIO STUDY
POLYCYSTIC OVARIES SCIO STUDY
PROSTATITIS - SCIO STUDY
STRESS Study 1996
TENDON CALCIFICATION SCIO STUDY
THYMUS DISORDERS SCIO STUDY
TRANSIENT ISCHEMIC ATTACK SCIO STUDY
WEIGHT LOSS SCIO STUDY
Vol.XXIII.3. - IJMSHNE - 2008 S Special Issue on Voltammetry ISSN 2041-4293
Neurochemical Analysis of the Conscious Brain - Voltammetry and Push-Pull Perfusion
Voltammetric Analysis of Selected Hydrocarbons Containing Carbon-Carbon Multiple
Bonds
Voltammetry Retrospective
The Trivector Analysis of Homeopathy - A Three-Dimensional Description of
Voltammetric Polarographic Measures
Discrepancies in Quantum Electro Dynamics
Dorsal and Ventral Distribution of Excitable and Synaptic Properties of Neurons of the
Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis
QQC Trivector 2008
Quantum Electrodynamics
Study in QED
VOLTAMETRY ELECTRO-CHEMISTRY of HOMEOPATHY
A Cyclic Voltammetry Primer
Analytical Chemistry VoltAmmetry
Review of the literature of methods of making transcutaneous voltammetric electro
potential sensors
Voltammetry
Voltammetry and Antigens Article List
Voltammetry and Nosodes Article List
Voltammetry and Vitamins Article List
A sensitive determination of estrogens with a Pt nano-clusters-multi-walled carbon
nanotubes modified glassy carbon electrode
Amperometric immunosensors based on layer-by-layer assembly of gold nanoparticles
and methylene blue on thiourea modified glassy carbon electrode for determination of
human chorionic gonadotrophin
Closed head injury in the rat induces whole body oxidative stress - overall reducing
antioxidant profile
Continuous amperometric detection of co-released serotonin and melatonin from the
mucosa in the ileum
Cyclic voltammetry study of glucose and insulin interactions with supported lipid
membrane
Determination of melatonin in galenic preparations by LC and voltammetry
Differential pulse adsorptive stripping voltammetry of osmium-modified peptides
Effect of estrogen on dopamine release evoked by electric stimulation of central
amygdaloid nucleus
Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy for the study of juvenile hormones-
Extracellular dopamine in the anterior nucleus accumbens is distinctly affected by ventral
tegmental area administration of cholecystokinin and apomorphine - data from in vivo
voltammetry
Hippocampal norepinephrine-like voltammetric responses following infusion of
corticotropin-releasing factor into the locus coeruleus
Increased dopamine release in vivo by estradiol benzoate from the central amygdaloid
nucleus of Parkinson's disease model rats
Inhibition by arachidonic acid and other fatty acids of dopamine uptake at the human
dopamine transporter
Intracerebroventricular infusion of CRF increases extracellular concentrations of
norepinephrine in the hippocampus and cortex as determined by in vivo voltammetry
Mechanistic and comparative studies of melatonin and classic antioxidants in terms of
their interactions with the ABTS cation radical
N1-acetyl-N2-formyl-5-methoxykynuramine, a biogenic amine and melatonin metabolite,
functions as a potent antioxidant
Quantitative analysis of the response of an electrochemical biosensor for progesterone in
Quantitative evaluation of oxidative stress, chronic inflammatory indices and leptin in
cancer patients - correlation with stage and performance status
Sodium depletion and aldosterone decrease dopamine transporter activity in nucleus
accumbens but not striatum
Synthesis, pharmacological evaluation and electrochemical studies of novel 6-nitro-3,4 -
methylenedioxyphenyl-N-acylhydrazone derivatives - Discovery of LASSBio-881
The influence of cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide on electrochemical properties of
thyroxine reduction at carbon nanotubes modified electrode
Tyrosine side chains as an electrochemical probe of stacked beta-sheet protein
conformations
Voltammetric determination of ethinylestradiol at a carbon paste electrode in the
Voltammetric investigation of beta-estradiol
Developmental origin of shark electrosensory organs
Electrosensory Frequency Intensity Discrimination in the Wave-TYpe Electric Fish
Eigenmannia
Neuroethology and life history adaptations of the elasmobranch electric sense
Signals and Noise in Electrosensensory System
Voltametry Website Data
Voltammetry and Enzymes Article List
Voltammetry and Hormones article list
Electroreception
Electrosense
Interval-specific event related potentials to omitted stimuli in the electro-sensory pathway
in elasmobranchs an elementary form of expectation
A Study of High Field Quantum Electrodynamics in the Collision of High Energy
Electrons with a Terawatt Laser
Clinical Review of the History of the QQC Volt-Ammetric Trivector and EPR (Electro-
Physiological-Reactivity) in Blood Analysis
Correlative Infection Comparison to SCIO Xrroid Reactivity Revised 1989-1994-2001-
2007
Four Decades of the Trivector - Review of the Trivector 1961 till 2009
QQC, A Device for Measuring the Electronic Signature of Homeopathy - The Trivector
Analysis of Homeopathic Medications
Quantum Electro Dynamics - QED as a Basis for Biology - Light Interacts with Matter
Quantum Electro Dynamics 0 the Science of Life - Brief review
Quantum Electro Dynamics and the Volt-Ammetric Trivector Signature for Dummies
Quantum Electro Dynamics
Quantum Quality Control - DOUBLE Q C - A Device for Testing the Trivector Electrical
Signature of Homeopathic Items
The Electrochemistry of the Trivector
The Integral Details of the Body Electric Simplified for SCIO Therapists
The Scientific Proof of Non-Locality - The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and Bell's
Theorem
Review of the Electro-Physiological Reactivity of the Xrroid
Vol.XXIII.4. - IJMSHNE - 2008 The NaHinga Project ISSN 2041-4293
1998 2 Nosodes AIDS Homeopathy
Aids Home assignment
NaHinga Protocol
Natural Medicine HIV
Peer Review Board of IMUNE New Mexico
Phytolacca Dodecandra
Yerba Santa Brief Scientific Review
Informed Consent
AIDS Analysis of Xrroid Reactivity Readings of AIDS Patients in Budapest
The End of Degenerative Disease
Natural Remedies of Nahinga
HIV subtypes
Vol.XXIV.5. - IJMSHNE - 2009 S Pre-release Aging Special Issue ISSN 2041-4293
Aging and Inflammation
Basic SCIO System Description
Boosting Vitamin D May Have Long term Benefits for Inflammation
Human Growth Hormone
Natural Remedies for Inflammation
The Relationship of Glucose and Aging
Suggestions for Quantum Anti-Aging Therapies
Book List
Journal List
Using The QXCI Medical Device for Excess Adipose Tissue on Patients
Aging as a Treatable Disease
Treatment of Alzheimer Disease with Energetic Medicine
Using The QXCI Medical Device for Excess Adipose Tissue In Patients
BRAIN WAVE DETECTION AND CORRECTION SCIO STUDY
Vol.XXIV.7. - IJMSHNE - 2009 Special Issue Dedicated to Debbi Drake ISSN 2041-4293
QBFRP Q-Pod Workbook I - Master Research Design Aug 17 2005
Autism & Learning Disorders - LA Nov 20 2003 Dr Drake
Bio-Energetic Strategies for Obesity 2 Dr Drake Budapest Ap
Biofeedback Instructors Clinical Pearls & Strategies
Bio-terrain Theory & BF Overview Cancun 2005
HMT Detox Dental carmel blank background
QXCI Biofeedback Cancer by Dr Drake Aug 2003
Level 4 - Disaster Relief Biofeedback Training South Africa Mar 15 2005
GREAT SHAKES
Biofeedback Consultation Waiver
Hearing Loss, Prosthetics and Effects on Communication
Vol.XXV.1. - IJMSHNE - 2010 VARHOPE and Stress ISSN 2041-4293
Intro letter of Journal on Charged Stability
CPT CODES
Clinical and Scientific Evaluation of Charge Stability and the SCIO
Electrical potential across the membrane
Electromyography
Large Scale Stress SCIO Study
SCIO’s ability to increase Body Wellness
VARHOPE and STRESS
Varhope Improvements in a Clinical Setting
VARHOPE Large scale study
Vol.XXVI.1. - IJMSHNE - 2011 Issue SCIO Research ISSN 2041-4293
TVEP Literature Review and the Most Recent Research
Clinical and Scientific Evaluation of Charge Stability and the SCIO
SCIO’s Effect on Body Osmosis
Quantum Medicine, Modern Integrated Concept of TCM in the
Informational Age
A double blind placebo-controlled study of the application of Eclosion EPFX/SCIO therapy for
stress reduction clinical study protocol
A double blind placebo-controlled study of the application of the SCIO Universal
Electrophysiological Biofeedback System for statistical evaluation of the SCIO’s ability to
increase Body Wellness after one 45-minute session
MCES and Addiction Control – A Double Blind Clinical Study and Lit Review
Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation and Fibromyalgia
SCIO’s Ability to Increase Charge Stability and Redox Potential
Stimulating Eye Hand Coordination with SCIO VARHOPE
The SCIO is 85% to 95% accurate
Bill Cunningham Case Study
Trauma Sport Pain Electro Healing with SCIO
Double Blind Study of Sport Performance with the SCIO device versus Placebo Control
TVEP reactivity scores to Allersode compounds measure
Two decades plus of Imponderable Voltammetric Homeopathy and Emotional Balance
TVEP reactivity scores to isode compounds measured
TVEP reactivity scores to Nosode compounds measured
TVEP reactivity scores to compounds measured
TVEP Validity Study
Vol.XXVII.1. - IJMSHNE - 2012 Contemporary Research ISSN 2041-4293
TVEP Literature Review and 2012 New Research
Voltammetric Sarcode Hormone Streaming of Testosterone – Update 2012
Two decades Plus of Imponderable Voltammetric Homeopathy and Emotional Balance – 2012
Update
2012 New Studies Validating the SCIO Auto-focusing Cybernetic Loop
Dr. Paul Drouin’s Work on SCIO and Blood Cell Motility
VARHOPE Changes in a SCIO Session – 2012 Update
TVEP Reactivity Scores to Allersode Compounds measure – 2012 Update
Stimulating Eye Hand Coordination with SCIO VARHOPE – update 2012
TVEP reactivity scores to compounds measured – update 2012
TVEP reactivity scores to Nosode compounds measured – update 2012
SCIO’s Effect on Body Osmosis – 2012 Update
Double Blind Study of Sport Performance with the SCIO device versus Placebo control – 2012
Update
Voltammetric Sarcode Hormone Streaming of Testosterone – 2012 Update
MCES and Addiction Control a Dbl Blind Clinical Study – 2012 Update
SCIO Effects on Oxygenation/Oxidation
MCES and Addiction Control a Dbl Blind Clinical Study and Literature Review
Trauma Sport Pain Electro Healing with SCIO – 2012 Update
Other sources
Environmental Medicine by Dr. Med. Rainer Mutschler and Dr. Andreas Kott, Umweltmedizin,
09/07
Antibiotics as a Primary Co-factor in AIDS Progression, by William Nelson L.P.C.C. M.D. and Eva
Toth, M.D., Homeodiagnostica, Budapest, Hungary, Vorsomarty ter 3. presented at the 1st
International Conference of the Mor Kaposi Research Foundation, Convergence of AIDS and
Cancer Research, Budapest, Hungary, August 27, 1996.
Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation and Fibromyalgia, Marshall F. Gilula, Expert Rev. Med.
Devices 4 (4), (2007).
Complementary and alternative therapy use in adult survivors of childhood cancer: a report the
Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, Mertens A. Sencer S., Myers CD, Recklitis C, Kadan-Lottick N.,
Whitton J, Marina N., Robison L.L., Zeltzer L. Pediatr. Blood Cancer, 2008, January, 50(1): 90-7
A study to detect the efficacy of Micro-current Electrical Therapy on Decubitus Wound,
M.O.Ullah, Med. Sci. 7(8) 1320-1324, 15 November 2007.
SCIO technology - An inverted ovarian tumor on the left side, Stephanie Heliger and Matthias
Heliger M.D.
Sacred Birthing, Extensive Research of the EPFX-QXCI was done to show it effective in helping
the Natural Birth, Kauai, Hawaii
Article:
Loophole in Spooky Quantum Entanglement Theory is Closed Tia Ghose, LiveScience Staff Writer
Date: 17 April 2013 Time: 03:44 PM ET
inShare1
According to quantum mechanics, two or more particles
can become "entangled" so that even after they are
separated in space, when an action is performed on one
particle, the other particle responds immediately.
(Shown here, two entangled mechanical oscillators
made up of two pairs of trapped ions.) CREDIT: John Jost and Jason Amini
The weird way entangled particles stay connected even when separated by large distances — a
phenomenon Albert Einstein called "spooky" — has been confirmed once again, this time with a key
loophole in the experiment eliminated.
The results from the new experiment confirm one of the wildest predictions of quantum mechanics:
that a pair of"entangled" particles, once measured, can somehow instantly communicate with each
other so that their states always match.
"Quantum mechanics is a wonderful theory that scientists use very successfully," said study co-author
Marissa Giustina, a physicist at the University of Vienna. "But it makes some strange predictions."
[How Quantum Entanglement Works (Infographic)]
But the new experiment goes further than past studies by eliminating one of the major loopholes in
entanglement experiments.
The findings were published April 14 in the journal Nature.
Spooky phenomenon
Since the 1930s, physicists have been troubled by some of the bizarre implications of quantum
mechanics. Namely, when they measured the wave orientation of a particle, such as a photon, as
horizontal, its entangled partner would have a correlated orientation— such as an opposite, vertical
orientation — at the same instant.
The implications were that individual entangled particles don't exist in a particular state until they are
measured, and that, once measured, the particles could somehow communicate their state to each
other at a rate faster than the speed of light — which seemed to violate Einstein's theory of relativity.
(Recent research suggests the entangled particles interact at a speed that's 10,000 times faster than
the speed of light.)
In a 1935 paper, Einstein and his colleagues noted that one way to get around spooky action at a
distance would be to assume that each particle always traveled with some hidden knowledge of the
other's state before the particles were measured.
But in 1964, Irish physicist John Stewart Bell proposed a mathematical way to check whether hidden
variables or weird non-locality (the idea that entangled particles can communicate faster than the
speed of light) explained the behaviors. Since then, scientists have used Bell's tests to demonstrate
non-locality.
But all of these tests relied on three assumptions, or loopholes: that the source of the photons and the
detector weren't somehow communicating, that the photon detectors weren't communicating, and that
the particles physicists measured were representative of the ones that they didn’t measure. If any of
the assumptions was wrong, in theory, the hidden-variables explanation could still be right.
Better detector
For the current study, Giustina and her colleagues redid the experiment with entangled photons, or
particles of light. This time, however, they didn't have to rely on the assumption that the photons they
caught were representative of the ones that got away.
The physicists were able to eliminate the loophole using a different version of Bell’s check so that it
didn't require an assumption of fair sampling. They also eliminated the loophole by catching many
more photons using ultrasensitive, superconducting photon detectors kept near absolute zero. Every
time a photon hit the detector, it caused an increase in the electrical resistance to current.
And although most physicists now accept the strange laws of quantum mechanics, the new
experiment makes it even harder to claim that hidden variables — those yet to be dreamed up by
scientists — explain particles' strange behavior.
Follow Tia Ghose on Twitter @tiaghose. Follow LiveScience @livescience, Facebook & Google+.
Original article on LiveScience.com.
The First Image Ever of a
Hydrogen Atom's Orbital Structure
Thursday, 6 June 2013
The First Image Ever of a Hydrogen Atom's Orbital Structure
You’re looking at is the first direct look of an atom’s electron orbits which can be mathematically described by Atom's Real wave function! To take the photo, Scientists utilized A quantum microscope — an incredibly Innovative device that helps scientists to look into the quantum world.! An orbital structure is the space in an atom that’s occupied by an electron. But describing these super-microscopic properties of matter, scientists have to depend on wave functions — a
mathematical way of describing the quantum states of particles, basically, quantum physicists use formulas like the Schrödinger equation to describe these states, often coming up with complex numbers and Strange graphs! Up until this point, scientists have never been able to actually observe the electron orbit. Trying to get an atom’s exact position or the momentum of its alone electron direct observations have this obstacle of quantum coherence. So to get a full quantum state We need tool that can statistically average many measurements over time And to magnify this results scientists needs the quantum microscope — a device that uses photoionization microscopy to visualize atomic structures directly. Aneta Stodolna of the FOM Institute for Atomic and Molecular Physics (AMOLF) in the Netherlands describes how she and her team get a picture of the nodal structure of an electronic orbital of a hydrogen atom placed in a static (dc) electric field in Physical Reviw Letter..
After zapping the atom with laser pulses, ionized electrons escaped and followed a particular trajectory to a 2D detector (dual microchannel plate [MCP] detector placed perpendicular to the field itself). There are many trajectories that can be taken by the electrons to reach the same point on the detector, thus Scientist got the set of interference patterns — patterns that shows the nodal structure of the wave function. And the they have done this by using an electrostatic lens that magnified the outgoing electron wave more than 20,000 times.
Image: Examples of four atomic hydrogen states. The middle column shows the experimental measurements, while the column at right shows the time-dependent Schrödinger equation calculations.
MORPHIC RESONANCE AND
MORPHIC FIELDS
an Introduction
by Rupert Sheldrake
In the hypothesis of formative causation, discussed in detail in my books A NEW SCIENCE OF LIFE and THE PRESENCE OF THE PAST, I propose that memory is inherent in nature. Most of the so-called laws of
nature are more like habits.
My interest in evolutionary habits arose when I was engaged in research in developmental biology, and was reinforced by reading Charles Darwin, for whom the habits of organisms were of central importance. As
Francis Huxley has pointed out, Darwin’s most famous book could more appropriately have been entitled The Origin of Habits.
Morphic fields in biology
Over the course of fifteen years of research on plant development, I came to the conclusion that for understanding the development of plants, their morphogenesis, genes and gene products are not enough.
Morphogenesis also depends on organizing fields. The same arguments apply to the development of animals.
Since the 1920s many developmental biologists have proposed that biological organization depends on fields, variously called biological fields, or developmental fields, or positional fields, or morphogenetic fields.
All cells come from other cells, and all cells inherit fields of organization. Genes are part of this organization.
They play an essential role. But they do not explain the organization itself. Why not?
Thanks to molecular biology, we know what genes do. They enable organisms to make particular proteins. Other genes are involved in the control of protein synthesis. Identifiable genes are switched on and particular
proteins made at the beginning of new developmental processes. Some of these developmental switch genes, like the Hox genes in fruit flies, worms, fish and mammals, are very similar. In evolutionary terms, they are highly
conserved. But switching on genes such as these cannot in itself determine form, otherwise fruit flies would not look different from us.
Many organisms live as free cells, including many yeasts, bacteria and amoebas. Some form complex mineral skeletons, as in diatoms and radiolarians, spectacularly pictured in the nineteenth century by Ernst Haeckel.
Just making the right proteins at the right times cannot explain the complex skeletons of such structures without many other forces coming into play, including the organizing activity of cell membranes and
microtubules.
Ernst Haeckel Tafel_06
Most developmental biologists accept the need for a holistic or integrative conception of living organization. Otherwise biology will go on floundering, even drowning, in oceans of data, as yet more genomes are sequenced,
genes are cloned and proteins are characterized.
I suggest that morphogenetic fields work by imposing patterns on otherwise random or indeterminate patterns of activity. For example they cause microtubules to crystallize in one part of the cell rather than another, even
though the subunits from which they are made are present throughout the cell.
Morphogenetic fields are not fixed forever, but evolve. The fields of Afghan hounds and poodles have become different from those of their common ancestors, wolves. How are these fields inherited? I propose that that they are transmitted from past members of the species through a kind of non-local resonance, called morphic
resonance.
The fields organizing the activity of the nervous system are likewise inherited through morphic resonance,
conveying a collective, instinctive memory. Each individual both draws upon and contributes to the collective memory of the species. This means that new patterns of behaviour can spread more rapidly than would
otherwise be possible. For example, if rats of a particular breed learn a new trick in Harvard, then rats of that breed should be able to learn the same trick faster all over the world, say in Edinburgh and Melbourne. There is already evidence from laboratory experiments (discussed in A NEW SCIENCE OF LIFE) that this actually
happens.
The resonance of a brain with its own past states also helps to explain the memories of individual animals and humans. There is no need for all memories to be “stored” inside the brain.
Social groups are likewise organized by fields, as in schools of fish and flocks of birds. Human societies have
memories that are transmitted through the culture of the group, and are most explicitly communicated through the ritual re-enactment of a founding story or myth, as in the Jewish Passover celebration, the Christian Holy Communion and the American thanksgiving dinner, through which the past become present through a kind of
resonance with those who have performed the same rituals before.
The memory of nature From the point of view of the hypothesis of morphic resonance, there is no need to suppose that all the laws of nature sprang into being fully formed at the moment of the Big Bang, like a kind of cosmic Napoleonic code, or
that they exist in a metaphysical realm beyond time and space.
Before the general acceptance of the Big Bang theory in the 1960s, eternal laws seemed to make sense. The universe itself was thought to be eternal and evolution was confined to the biological realm. But we now live
in a radically evolutionary universe.
If we want to stick to the idea of natural laws, we could say that as nature itself evolves, the laws of nature also evolve, just as human laws evolve over time. But then how would natural laws be remembered or
enforced? The law metaphor is embarrassingly anthropomorphic. Habits are less human-centred. Many kinds of organisms have habits, but only humans have laws. The habits of nature depend on non-local similarity
reinforcement. Through morphic resonance, the patterns of activity in self-organizing systems are influenced by similar patterns in the past, giving each species and each kind of self-organizing system a collective memory.
I believe that the natural selection of habits will play an essential part in any integrated theory of evolution,
including not just biological evolution, but also physical, chemical, cosmic, social, mental and cultural evolution (as discussed in THE PRESENCE OF THE PAST ).
Habits are subject to natural selection; and the more often they are repeated, the more probable they become, other things being equal. Animals inherit the successful habits of their species as instincts. We inherit bodily,
emotional, mental and cultural habits, including the habits of our languages.
Fields of the mind Morphic fields underlie our mental activity and our perceptions, and lead to a new theory of vision, as
discussed in THE SENSE OF BEING STARED AT. The existence of these fields is experimentally testable through the sense of being stared at itself. There is already much evidence that this sense really exists Papers on
Staring
You can take part in a staring experiment yourself through this web site. Staring Experiments
The morphic fields of social groups connect together members of the group even when they are many miles apart, and provide channels of communication through which organisms can stay in touch at a distance. They
help provide an explanation for telepathy. There is now good evidence that many species of animals are telepathic, and telepathy seems to be a normal means of animal communication, as discussed in my book DOGS
THAT KNOW WHEN THEIR OWNERS ARE COMING HOME. Telepathy is normal not paranormal, natural not supernatural, and is also common between people, especially people who know each other well.
In the modern world, the commonest kind of human telepathy occurs in connection with telephone calls. More than 80% of the population say they have thought of someone for no apparent reason, who then called; or that
they have known who was calling before picking up the phone in a way that seems telepathic. Controlled experiments on telephone telepathy have given repeatable positive results that are highly significant
statistically, as summarized in THE SENSE OF BEING STARED AT and described in detailed technical papers which you can read on this web site. Papers on Telepathy Telepathy also occurs in connection with
emails, and anyone who is interested can now test how telepathic they are in the online telepathy test. Experiments Online
The morphic fields of mental activity are not confined to the insides of our heads. They extend far beyond our brain though intention and attention. We are already familiar with the idea of fields extending beyond the
material objects in which they are rooted: for example magnetic fields extend beyond the surfaces of magnets; the earth’s gravitational field extends far beyond the surface of the earth, keeping the moon in its orbit; and the fields of a cell phone stretch out far beyond the phone itself. Likewise the fields of our minds extend far
beyond our brains.
February 2005
RUPERT SHELDRAKE’S THEORIES. PART 1: MORPHIC FIELDS AND THE MEMORY OF
NATURE.
Rupert Sheldrake’s theories
Part 1: Morphic Fields and the Memory of Nature
Rupert Sheldrake, Ph.D, born 28th June 1942, is a British biologist and author. Drawing on the work of
French philosopher Henri Bergson to develop the theory of morphic resonance[1], which makes use of the
older notion of morphogenetic fields, he has researched and written on topics such as animal and plant
development and behaviour, telepathy, perception and metaphysics.
Most biologists take it for granted that living organisms are nothing but complex machines,
governed only by the known laws of physics and chemistry. I myself used to share this point of
view. But over a period of several years I came to see that such an assumption is difficult to justify.
For when so little is actually understood, there is an open possibility that at least some of the
phenomena of life depend on laws or factors as yet unrecognized by the physical sciences.
With these words biologist Rupert Sheldrake introduced his first book, A New Science of Life: The
Hypothesis of Formative Causation, published in 1981. It met with a mixed response: while
welcomed as "challenging and stimulating" by some, the journal Nature dismissed it as an
"infuriating tract . . . the best candidate for burning there has been for many years." Sheldrake
developed his ideas further in The Presence of the Past. Morphic Resonance and the Habits of
Nature (1988) and The Rebirth of Nature: The Greening of Science and God (1991).
His basic argument is that natural systems, or morphic units, at all levels of complexity -- atoms,
molecules, crystals, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, and societies of organisms -- are animated,
organized, and coordinated by morphic fields, which contain an inherent memory. Natural systems
inherit this collective memory from all previous things of their kind by a process called morphic
resonance, with the result that patterns of development and behavior become increasingly habitual
through repetition. Sheldrake suggests that there is a continuous spectrum of morphic fields,
including morphogenetic fields, behavioral fields, mental fields, and social and cultural fields.
Morphogenesis -- literally, the "coming into being" (genesis) of "form" (morphe) -- is something of a
mystery. How do complex living organisms arise from much simpler structures such as seeds or
eggs? How does an acorn manage to grow into an oak tree, or a fertilized human egg into an adult
human being? A striking characteristic of living organisms is the capacity to regenerate, ranging
from the healing of wounds to the replacement of lost limbs or tails. Organisms are clearly more
than just complex machines: no machine has ever been known to grow spontaneously from a
machine egg or to regenerate after damage! Unlike machines, organisms are more than the sum of
their parts; there is something within them that is holistic and purposive, directing their
development toward certain goals.
The role of genes is vastly overrated by mechanistic biologists. The genetic code in the DNA
molecules determines the sequence of amino acids in proteins; it does not specify the way the
proteins are arranged in cells, cells in tissues, tissues in organs, and organs in organisms.
The fact that all the cells of an organism have the same genetic code yet somehow behave
differently and form tissues and organs of different structures clearly indicates that some formative
influence other than DNA must be shaping the developing organs and limbs. Developmental
biologists acknowledge this, but their mechanistic explanations peter out into vague statements
about "complex spatio-temporal patterns of physico-chemical interaction not yet fully understood."
According to Sheldrake, the development and maintenance of the bodies of organisms are guided
by morphogenetic fields. The concept of morphogenetic fields has been widely adopted in
developmental biology, but the nature of these fields has remained obscure, and they are often
conceived of in conventional physical and chemical terms. According to Sheldrake, they are a new
kind of field so far unknown to physics. They are localized within and around the systems they
organize, and contain a kind of collective memory on which each member of the species draws and
to which it in turn contributes. The fields themselves therefore evolve. Each morphic unit has its
own characteristic morphogenetic field, nested in that of a higher-level morphic unit which helps to
coordinate the arrangement of its parts.
Before considering other types of morphic fields, it is worth examining exactly what a morphic field
is supposed to be. Sheldrake describes them as "fields of information," saying that they are neither
a type of matter nor of energy and are detectable only by their effects on material systems.
However, if morphic fields were completely nonmaterial, that would imply that they were pure
nothingness, and it is hard to see how fields of nothingness could possibly have any effect on the
material world!
In a discussion with David Bohm, Sheldrake does in fact concede that morphic fields may have a
subtle energy, but not in any "normal" (physical) sense of the term, since morphic fields can
propagate across space and time and do not fade out noticeably over distance (A New Science of
Life, p. 245). In this sense morphic fields would be a subtler form of energy-substance, too ethereal
to be detectable by scientific instruments. Sheldrake also suggests that morphic fields may be very
closely connected with quantum matter fields (The Presence of the Past, p. 120). According to
science, the universal quantum field forms the substratum of the physical world and is pulsating
with energy and vitality; it amounts to the resurrection of the concept of ether, a medium of subtle
matter pervading all of space.
According to Sheldrake, habitual and instinctive behavior is organized by behavioral fields, while mental
activity, conscious and unconscious, takes place within and through mental fields. Instincts are the
behavioral habits of the species and depend on the inheritance of behavioral fields, and with them a
collective memory, from previous members of the species by morphic resonance. The building up of an
animal's own habits also depends on morphic resonance. It is possible for habits acquired by some animals
to facilitate the acquisition of the same habits by other similar animals, even in the absence of any known
means of connection or communication. This explains how after rats have learned a new trick in one place,
other rats elsewhere seem to be able to learn it more easily.
Memory poses a thorny problem for materialists. Attempts to locate memory-traces within the brain
have so far proved unsuccessful. Experiments have shown that memory is both everywhere and
nowhere in particular. Sheldrake suggests that the reason for the recurrent failure to find memory-
traces in brains is very simple: they do not exist there. It is true that damage to specific areas of
the brain can impair memory in certain ways, but this does not prove that the relevant memories
were stored in the damaged tissues.
Sheldrake suggests that memories are associated with morphic fields and that remembering
depends on morphic resonance with these fields. He says that individual memory is due to the fact
that organisms resonate most strongly with their own past, but that organisms are also influenced
by morphic resonance from others of their kind through a sort of pooled memory, similar to the
concept of the collective unconscious put forward by Jung and other depth psychologists.
According to Sheldrake, morphic resonance involves the transfer of information but not of energy.
But it is difficult to see how the one can take place without the other, though the type of energy
involved may well be supraphysical. In theosophical terms, the physical world is interpenetrated by
a series of increasingly ethereal worlds or planes, composed of energy-substances beyond our range
of perception, sometimes called the akasa. Its lower levels are referred to as the astral light. An
impression of every thought, deed, and event is imprinted on the akasa, which therefore forms a
sort of memory of nature. Likewise, within and around the physical body there is a series of subtler
"bodies" composed of these more ethereal states of matter.
Memories, then, are impressed on the etheric substance of supraphysical planes, and we gain access to
these records by vibrational synchrony, these vibrations being transmitted through the astral light.
Sheldrake, however, rejects the idea of morphic resonance being transmitted through a "morphogenetic
aether," saying that "a more satisfactory approach may be to think of the past as pressed up, as it were,
against the present, and as potentially present everywhere" (The Presence of the Past, p. 112). But it is
hard to see why such a hazy notion is more satisfactory than that of nonphysical energies being transmitted
through an etheric medium.
Social organization is also impossible to understand in reductionist and mechanistic terms. Societies
of termites, ants, wasps, and bees can contain thousands or even millions of individual insects. They
can build large elaborate nests, exhibit a complex division of labor, and reproduce themselves. Such
societies have often been compared to organisms at a higher level of organization, or
superorganisms.
Sheldrake suggests that such colonies are organized by social fields, embracing all the individuals
within them. This would also help to explain the behavior of shoals of fish, flocks of birds, and herds
or packs of animals, whose coordination has so far also defied explanation. Social morphic fields can
be thought of as coordinating all patterns of social behavior, including human societies. This would
throw light on such things as crowd behavior, panics, fashions, crazes, and cults. Social fields are
closely allied with cultural fields, which govern the inheritance and transmission of cultural
traditions.
According to Sheldrake, then, human beings consist of a physical body, whose shape and structure
are organized by a hierarchy of morphogenetic fields, one for every atom, molecule, cell, and organ
up to the body as a whole. Our habitual activities are organized by behavioral fields, one for each
pattern of behavior, and our mental activity by mental fields, one for each thought or idea.
Sheldrake also suggests that our conscious self may be regarded either as the subjective aspect of
the morphic fields that organize the brain, or as a higher level of our being which interacts with the
lower fields and serves as the creative ground through which new fields arise (Presence of the Past,
p. 213).
According to Sheldrake we are also influenced by social and cultural fields contained within the
overall field of the earth. In theosophy we are said to contribute thoughts and ideas to the pooled
memory of the astral light and attract from it those ideas and thoughts with which we resonate
most strongly. The astral light may be considered to be the astral body of the earth, and plays a
role similar to what Sheldrake calls the morphic field of Gaia.
Sheldrake admits that his terminology of morphic fields could be replaced by occult terms such as
akasa and subtle bodies (The Presence of the Past, p. 307). Whatever the limitations of his ideas,
however, Sheldrake has dealt a significant blow to materialistic science with his forceful arguments
exposing the inadequacy of physical factors alone to account for the phenomena of life, mind, and
evolution, and in support of the idea that memory is intrinsic in nature.
The Observer effect
Observer effect (physics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In physics, the term observer effect refers to changes that the act of observation will make on
the phenomenon being observed. This is often the result of instruments that, by necessity, alter the state of what
they measure in some manner. A commonplace example is checking the pressure in an automobile tire; this is
difficult to do without letting out some of the air, thus changing the pressure. This effect can be observed in many
domains of physics. The mind of the observer can affect things.
Computing
To measure software, it is often needed to alter it in some way, even if only in the memory of the computer, changing
the behavior of the software itself. Defects that are hard to detect for this reason got nicknamed heisenbug.
Particle physics
For an electron to become detectable, a photon must first interact with it, and this interaction will change the path
of that electron. It is also possible for other, less direct means of measurement to affect the electron.(see subspace
book experiments)
Electronics
In electronics, ammeters and voltmeters need to be connected to the circuit, and so by their very presence
affect the current or the voltage they are measuring by way of presenting an additional real or complex load to the
circuit, thus changing the transfer function and behaviour of the circuit itself. Happens in biofeedback devices
Thermodynamics
In thermodynamics, a standard mercury-in-glass thermometer must absorb some thermal energy to
record a temperature, and therefore changes the temperature of the body which it is measuring.
Quantum mechanics
A commonly debated use of the term refers to quantum mechanics, where, if the outcome of an event has not
been observed, it exists in a state of 'superposition', which is akin to being in all possible states at once. In the
famous thought experiment known as Schrödinger's cat the cat is supposedly neither alive nor dead until
observed. However, most quantum physicists,[who?]
in resolving Schrödinger's seeming paradox, now understand
that the acts of 'observation' and 'measurement' must also be defined in quantum terms before the question makes
sense.[citation needed]
From this point of view, there is no 'observer effect', only one vastly entangled quantum
system.[citation needed]
A significant minority[who?]
still find the equations point to an observer; Wheeler, who probably
worked more deeply on this subject than any physicist thus far[citation needed]
, devised a graphic in which the universe
was represented by a "U" with an eye on one end, turned around and viewing itself, to describe his understanding.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is also frequently confused with the "observer effect". The uncertainty
principle actually describes how precisely we may measure the position and momentum of a particle at the same time
— if we increase the precision in measuring one quantity, we are forced to lose precision in measuring the other.[
Thus, the uncertainty principle deals with measurement, and not observation.[ The idea that the Uncertainty Principle
is caused by disturbance (and hence by observation) is not considered to be valid by some,[who?]
although it was
extant in the early years of quantum mechanics, and is often repeated in popular treatments.
There is a related issue in quantum mechanics relating to whether systems have pre-existing — prior to
measurement, that is — properties corresponding to all measurements that could possibly be made on them. The
assumption that they do is often referred to as "realism" in the literature, although it has been argued that the word
"realism" is being used in a more restricted sense than philosophical realism.[1]
A recent experiment in the realm
of quantum physics has been quoted as meaning that we have to "say goodbye" to realism, although the author of
the paper states only that "we would [..] have to give up certain intuitive features of realism".[2][3]
These experiments
demonstrate a puzzling relationship between the act of measurement and the system being measured, although it is
clear from experiment that an "observer" consisting of a single electron is sufficient—the observer need not be a
conscious observer.[citation needed]
Also, note that Bell's Theorem suggests strongly that the idea that the state of a
system exists independently of its observer may be false.[citation needed]
Note that the special role given to observation (the claim that it affects the system being observed, regardless of the
specific method used for observation) is a defining feature of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum
mechanics. Other interpretations resolve the apparent paradoxes from experimental results in other ways. For
instance, the Many-Worlds Interpretation posits the existence of multiple universes in which an observed
system displays all possible states to all possible observers. In this model, observation of a system does not change
the behavior of the system—it simply answers the question of which universe(s) the observer(s) is(are) located in: In
some universes the observer would observe one result from one state of the system, and in others the observer
would observe a different result from a different state of the system.[citation needed]
The impact of observation on quantum systems has been demonstrated experimentally.[4]
References
1. ^ Norsen, T. Against "Realism"
2. ^ Quantum physics says goodbye to reality
3. ^ An experimental test of non-local realism
4. ^ Science Daily
Primary Perception Research
Recent studies have proven plants have
feelings, too In response to, "Vegetarians have reasons for why they don't eat meat" (Dec. 8), perhaps Mr. Zufall should update his research before claiming that vegetables and plants are incapable of feeling pain and not subject to his scruples regarding eating sentient beings. Researchers from Michigan State University have discovered that plants have a rudimentary nerve structure, which allows them to feel pain. According to the peer-reviewed journal Plant Physiology, plants are capable of identifying danger, signaling that danger to other plants and marshaling defenses against perceived threats. According to botanist Bill Williams of the Helvetica Institute, "plants not only seem to be aware and to feel pain, they can even communicate."
This research has prompted the Swiss government to pass the first-ever Plant Bill of Rights. It concludes that plants have moral and legal protections, and Swiss citizens have to treat them appropriately. The Penn State Vegetarians Club would do well to investigate this data before claiming to be superior to those of us who do not subscribe to the idea that eating meat is morally wrong.
Stephen Johnson
Primary Perception research
(These are excerpts from a talk that researcher Cleve Backster gave at a Silva convention in 1995. For more information, you can read the book, The Secret Life of Your Cells by Robert B. Stone, about Backster's research and its relationship to Jose Silva's mind training systems. This talk is copyright 1995 by Cleve Backster and used with his permission.) by Cleve Backster This is the original plant that was attached back on February 2, 1966, in my lab back in New York City.
For whatever reason, it occurred to me that it would be interesting to see how long it took the water to get from the root area of this plant, all the way up this long trunk and out and down to the leaves. After doing a saturation watering of the plant, I thought, "Well gee whiz, I've got a lot of polygraph equipment around; let me hook the galvanic skin response section of the polygraph onto the leaf." Now this is a whetstone bridge circuit that is designed to measure resistance changes, and I felt that as the contaminated water came up the trunk and down into the leaf that the leaf becoming more saturated and a better conductor it would give me the rising time of the water....I would be able to get that on the polygraph chart tracing. Well this was the thing that started it. Now the thing trended downward rather than upward, which amazed me a little bit because it should have been going slowly upward on the tracings, if it was going to show a drop in resistance. I moved it up here - this was my move - and then it came down again, and this is the thing that amazed me right here because this contour right away...I'm looking and thinking, "That's got the contour of a human being tested, reacting when you are asking a question that could get them in trouble." So I forgot about the rising water time and said, Wow, this thing wants to show me people-like reactions. "What can I do that will be a threat to the well being of the plant," similar to the fact that a relevant question regarding a crime could be a threat to a person taking a polygraph test if they're lying. About 15 minutes along - 13 minutes and 55 seconds along in this initial observation...I had tried different things to try to get a reaction from this plant - I had even dipped a neighboring leaf into a cup of rather warm coffee - and the plant didn't show me anything like a reaction. It showed me, if anything, boredom, and just continued to go downwards. If this thing were an individual, the fact that they were getting bored and sleepy.
But over here, the idea occurred to me, the idea occurred to me - and only the idea - "I know what I am going to do: I am going to burn that plant leaf, that very leaf that's attached to the polygraph." Now I didn't have matches in the room. I wasn't touching the plant in any way. I was maybe five feet away from the desk. I was essentially away from the plant. The only new thing that occurred was my intent to burn that plant leaf. Right here, split second-wise, was when I thought of burning that plant leaf and the image entered my mind. I wasn't using words at all. And up that the thing went into a wild agitation. Now this was very late at night and towards morning. The building was empty and there was just no other reason for this
reaction. This had been going along at a fairly stable level all the way up to this point. So this amazed me. This, I would say, would be a very high quality observation, and my consciousness hasn't been the same since. And this happened in 1966. I thought, "Wow! This thing read my mind!" It was that obvious to me right then. So then I went to get some matches from the next room. The secretary was a smoker, and I got some matches out of her desk and brought them in. The next will show where I came back in the room, right about here. I lit the match. I was even into burning a neighboring leaf rather than the leaf I had hook up. Somehow that was already a special leaf already. Even before I had a chance to do this I thought, "Well, this massive degree of reaction that I'm getting here, I wouldn't be able to see any additional reaction if it did occur." So I thought, "Well, let me reverse the process and remove the threat from the room." So I took the matches back out of the room here, came back in at this point, and the thing just evened right out again, which really rounded it out and gave me a very, very high quality observation. Now when my partner in the polygraph school we were running at the time came in, he was able to do the same thing also, as long as he intended to burn the plant leaf. If he pretended to burn the plant leaf, it wouldn't react. It could tell the difference between pretending you are going to, and you are actually doing it, which is quite interesting in itself from a plant psychology standpoint - not industrial plants that I am talking about.
Review of the book "Primary Perception" by Hal Fox If you are a medical doctor, a physician or surgeon, or a professional who deals with human beings and their problems, this book is a must-read. For the rest of the intelligent population, this book is a should-read. Personally, this reviewer highly recommends that you buy and read this interesting report by Cleve Backster about Cleve Backster's life's work.
This reviewer's first information about Cleve Backster came from reading about his early work in Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird's The Secret Life of Plants. It was amazing to me then, and still is, that a person skilled in the use of a polygraph (equipment used for lie-detection) would think to hook up the polygraph to a plant to measure the plant's response. Backster was about to water a Dracaena plant in the office and wondered whether he could measure the movement of the water into the plant leaves. From such an initial thought came a life's work and changes in the way we must view universal life. You will enjoy the story as told by Backster. From viewing the traces of the polygraph sensor, the results were different than Backster expected and he noted a surge response that was somewhat like one would measure when questioning a person. As Backster relates: "Well, if this plant wants to show me some people-like reactions, I've got to use some people like rules on it and see it I can get this to happen again." Later Backster decided to try something that the plant could really feel like using a flame to burn a leaf. It was astonishing to note that it was the THOUGHT of burning a leaf to which the polygraph showed an immediate response! From this bit of history, it must be stated that science now has years of data on plant, animal, and even microscopic life forms and their ability to respond to thought processes. One interesting example was Backster's observation of a plant's reaction on the polygraph when he poured boiling water down the sink. What could hot water going down a sink have to do with a response from his measurements? The answer led into a new series of investigations. It had to be that live microscopic organisms in the drain were killed by the hot water - thus the response. Astonishing that bacteria could emit signals that could be received many feet away by another life form. As a scientist I can understand why it has taken so long for the enormously important discoveries being made by Cleve Backster to begin to be accepted by the scientific community. It is strongly a part of science's understanding of life that some type of a brain or nervous system would be required to respond to (or emit) stimuli. How could a plant, an egg, a cup of yogurt, or just some white cells from a person's mouth either respond to or emit detectable stimuli? Cleve Backster's book is both a trail of discovery and the slow and grudging partial acceptance by some scientists of the fact that all living cells appear to have some sensitivity to the well-being of other life forms. Science has not, as yet, accepted Backster's discoveries. A scientific fact is best defined as: A series of observations of the same phenomena. This definition implies replication. Backster's book reports on a variety of replications of his work both by other investigators and by military laboratories. At the beginning of Chapter 8, Backster includes the following quote from Max Planck: A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and the new generation grows up that's familiar with it. Unfortunately, even the best of scientists among us have some problems with accepting dramatic changes resulting from new discoveries. This author is well acquainted with the difficulty of "teaching old dogs new tricks." We become so immersed in making incremental advances in our own scientific specialties that we often lose sight of the dramatic changes that are being discovered and, hopefully, gradually accepted.
Backster ends with a discussion of what is needed for the further development and acceptance of bio-communication. What is needed is inexpensive monitoring devices (so that high school students, for example, can replicate and/or extend some of Backster's work). Simple sensing devices are pretty well developed. Yards of chart paper is expensive and so are chart-type recorders. This reviewer suggests that the use of some of the megabytes of computer memory can store an enormous amount of data and should be used for recording and display of sensory changes. In the Secret Life of Plants, this reviewer read about how a carrot being sliced could emit signals that could be picked up by another life form being monitored. However, if prayer was first used, then the carrot did not emit such signals. Perhaps, the bible has some interesting reason for suggesting that one prayer over the food. Do you pray before slicing your carrots? You may want to after reading Cleve Backster's life's work. Backster also indicates how some cells also go silent under some other circumstances. This effect sometimes makes it more difficult to replicate a given experiment. Again, this reviewer strongly recommends that you read about bio-communication. It may just change the way you view all of the living world. You may become nicer to your plants.
Review of Primary By Brian O'Leary
Cleve Backster is no ordinary scientist. His path to discovery, so well described in his autobiographical
book Primary Perception, brings together both the human and objective elements into a gripping
detective story, leading to insights many scientists would not want to touch because the implications
are so profound and in some respects contradictory to the materialistic world view that grips
contemporary science.
The subtitle well expresses his breakthroughs: Bio-communication with plants, living foods and
human cells. Backster's courage and humility in breaking out of the traditional box of Western science
provides an inspiration for the rest of us.
As a physics faculty member at Princeton University during the 1970s, I began to have some
experiences that shattered my own materialistic paradigm. I became hungry for experiments which
would reveal the mysteries of consciousness, of measuring communications of intent with other living
beings as a force that transcends ordinary physics and biology.
When Backster's experiments came to my attention, I spent time in his laboratory verifying the
extraordinary phenomena on the influence of human intent on the electrical activity of target cells. I
was so inspired, I used Backster's work in the lead to my book, Exploring Inner and Outer Space.
The process of Backster's discoveries revealed in Primary Perception is required reading for anyone
interested in how science could be done in a better world. Ironically, the humility with which he took
on the task made him better qualified to do the work than prestigious scientists at leading universities
who have vested interests in traditional science and have avoided this kind of research for fear of
being ostracized by their peers.
It takes great courage to break out of the old, comfortable modes of research (I call it the box of
materialism) and go for the truth for what it is, rather than for more limited truths inside the box.
Backster's independence is a key to his success, because he is not trying to impress anybody or placate
funding sources; he's an authentic truth-seeker, intelligent, honest, transparent, generous with his
time, childlike in his sense of awe and wonder with the phenomena, and willing to take the path of
discovery wherever it leads.
This book can be easily understood by almost anyone. It's a great read and an essential addition to
any library on new science.
Brian O'Leary, Ph.D.
'Primary Perception'—The Secret Life of Life
(Part 1)
An interview with Cleve Backster and a look at his seminal work on primary perception
By Ben Bendig
Epoch Times StaffCreated: Feb 12, 2010Last Updated: Sep 22, 2010
There exists a body of research poised to rend apart our modern paradigms—revealing consciousness in places we
might not have expected it, and connections between life forms that seem startling and impossible.
Imagine coming into a laboratory with a friend, and the experimenter tells you to simply start up a conversation. After
some time, the experimenter stops you and shows you a recording that was taken of the conversation. The audio is
of the conversation, but the video is of a line that looks something like a seismograph—which is actually a measure of
electrical activity that was taking place in a plant that had been sitting in the corner of the room.
You see, perhaps to your amazement, that with every emotional moment between you and your friend, the plant
shows a reaction corresponding to the onset of, for example, surprise, disgust, or embarrassment.
And the reaction happens to look a lot like a person’s reaction to the same sort of event.
This is one variety of experiment that demonstrates the phenomenon of what has been dubbed “primary perception”
by Cleve Backster, who made the discovery in 1966 in a series of experiments with plants and other life forms. His
research suggests that a basic form of communication exists among all life, down to bacteria and constituent cells of
larger organisms, and hence may be “primary,” compared to commonly acknowledged forms of perception such as
vision or touch.
Backster, a genial and enthusiastic fellow of 85 years, is a former CIA lie detector specialist and has had a deep
involvement with scientific research in the polygraph community, where he is highly regarded. He developed the
Backster Zone Comparison test in the late 1950s, the technique that is still in general use in military and government
agencies for reading polygraphs, and he has run the Backster School of Lie Detection in downtown San Diego, Calif.,
for the last 30 years.
Backster had his work popularized in the book “The Secret Life of Plants” published in 1973, though he first published
his findings in 1968. After “The Secret Life of Plants” came out, Backster made appearances on several talk shows
and other media, featuring his perceiving plants. But he has also lectured extensively at scientific conferences. It was
his research that got people talking to their plants and spurred the phenomenon of the “houseplant.”
Beyond Plants
THE WINDOW TO PRIMARY PERCEPTION: Cleve Backster started his experiments with the plant Dracaena.
(Courtesy of Cleve Backster)
“The fascinating part of all this,” he tells me, “it may have started with plants, but it ended up with human cells. By
taking a human cell sample in a test tube and testing it remotely, those cells are attuned to the donor, and this to me
is amazing; I mean this has all kinds of implications.”
Indeed—Backster has found that our cells respond to our emotions when they are outside of our bodies, even as far
away as over 100 miles. When the donor experiences an emotional change, there is a coupled reaction in the cells,
which manifests electrically.
“Plants were really just a stumbling block that allowed me to stumble over the phenomenon, and then I kept chasing it
for everything that seemed to be causing a reaction in the plants, whether it be bacteria in yogurt, or eggs, and so
forth.”
Backster found that breaking an egg or dumping it in boiling water will cause a reaction in plants—as if they were
sensitive to nearby organisms suffering harm. While one might not think of eggs as having life, it appears they may
have some sort of biological activity.
Intriguingly, he also found plants reacting when people used the bathroom next door to his office—which he traced
back to urine coming into contact with the disinfectant in urinal cakes.
“I said, if it can cause a reaction, it should be reacting itself; let me figure out how to hook it up,” he says, laughing.
“So this is what led me right up the line.”
Backster went on to monitor bacteria, finding reactions similar to those of plants. He also measured electrical activity
in eggs, finding that they, too, seemed to respond to the environment. Ultimately, he measured activity in human
cells, such as white blood cells.
The Scientific Proof of Non-Locality
edited by Desire Dubounet Prof. Emeritus IMUNE
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and Bell's Theorem
" It is an illusion we are all separate, the universe at one mathematical level is still one. It is our job as humans to expand our circle of compassion to include all things" , “One can escape from this conclusion only by either assuming that the measurement of B (telepathically) changes the real situation at G or by denying independent real situations as such to things which are spatially separated from each other. Both alternatives appear to me entirely unacceptable. Non-Locality is an ever increasingly undeniable aspect of science”
Albert Einstein
“There is no such thing as noise, but only quantic shared information we do not understand. Such is the Nature of the universe that there is a shared subspace
dimension of all regular matter that generates non-locality" , " The universe at one mathematical subspace level is still one. It is our job as
humans to expand our circle of compassion to include all things, and our circle of compassion must begin with ourselfs. We must learn to forgive ourselfs, forgive others, and forgive God before we can expand our minds through expansion of
our compassion" Desire’ Dubounet
In our movie and treatise on the PROOF, we established 8 steps pf proof for the non-local universe. Here they are again. Bell's theore is but just #5. Proof Of the Powers of The Mind The most important argument in the world of science today is the clash between the people that believe in a Non-Local Universe versus those that believe in a Local Universe. Local people believe in the direct push pull, cause and effect action, and they do not believe in the power of the mind to effect things at a distance without a direct connection. They look for repeatability and worship statistics. Non-Local believers see a universe where there is prayer, spirit, a collective unconscious and a connection of all things . They know that there is a power of the mind to effect things and a level of connection of all things. The Steps of the Proof are : Step 1. The test of time: Humans have always felt the connection of mind and spirit. Every race of people and every tribe has had those who have greater abilities to use these powers of the mind. They know that there is a subtle but undeniable force of connection. The Bible, Koran, Bagavad Gita, the analects, and all of the religious beliefs are filled with every page referencing the power of spirit, prayer, faith, hope and God. This belief is Ageless , Universal, and Omnipresent. The test of time is met and if we had a vote on the conflict of Non-Local versus Local there would be landslide 99.9% for a Non-Local universe. Step 2. Quantum Theory : Physicists were shocked when they found that a very small quantic experiment could be influenced by the observer. This was called the observer effect and thus the world of science was changed forever when the Observer Effect was PROVED!!!!!. Step 3.Medicine’s Paranoiac need for Double Blind. Medicine was shocked when they discovered the placebo effect. The mind of the researcher was able to effect the results of an experiment. The mind of a doctor can effect the patient. The mind of a patient can effect himself.From then on a double blind experiment was required. Proof of the powers of the mind. Step 4. Fractal Complexity: What we do not know is so vast that it should be humbling. Fractal complexity has shown that reductionism is now no longer a valid process of examining complex situations. Non-Linear chaos mathematics are needed. When we use this type of analysis we can see that a small change might produce a large change. This is known as the ‘Butterfly Effect” and it allows for the powers of the mind. Step 5. Bell’s Theorem. This basic theorem of Quantum Electro Dynamics has shown that twin photons can have instantaneous effects on each other even when light years apart. This has been PROVED theoretically and experimentally to the utmost level of science. Step 6 . PEAR.= Princeton’s Engineering Anomalies Research :. After over a decade of research on the effects of the mind in a prestigious American university Princeton, there is undeniable proof of the power of the mind to effect things. The evidence is astounding for it’s quality and quantity and is without doubt PROOF. See the PEAR studies. Step 7. The disbelievers always get test results that deny the proof: The hypothesis of our theory is that the mind can effect things. This means that those who disbelieve or scoff at the theory will only be able to get tests results that confirm there own disbelief. Why is it that when a researcher does a study that it usually confirms his original belief is because there is an effect of the mind.
Step 8. The resistance to accepting the powers of the mind is great, in fact it is too great. The resistance is so incredibly great that it becomes PROOF : There appears that this resistance comes from such closed minded people and often psychologically unstable people. These critics will often shake and flush and get over compassionate in their attempt to dispel the powers of the mind. Their actions and reactions are so contrived and insecure that they cause wonder that perhaps there is an ulterior motive. Is there perhaps a plan to keep the powers of the mind away from the general public. This study will now more fully discuss Bell's Theorem.
The basis of Bell's theorem is this: if no local model of reality can explain the results of any particular experiment.: then reality is non-local, if there is non-locality anywhere then there is some nonlocality everywhere . To prove that white crows exist we only have to produce one white crow. All of the black crows are not proof that white crows do not exist. All we need is one. with non-locality it is
even more of the same, because if there is non-locality somewhere then there is some non-locality everywhere. Just how much is the part of the mystery of life.
Before we study what "non-locality" means, let's take a look at this particular experiment, called the EPR experiment (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox), which is the factual basis for Bell's fantastic result. Like so many other innovations in twentieth-century physics, the EPR experiment was conceived by Albert
Einstein. Although he helped put it together, Einstein was never satisfied with quantum theory. He didn't like
its intrinsic randomness ("I cannot believe that God plays dice with the universe"), but most of all he disliked the fact that quantum theory (as interpreted by Bohr and Heisenberg) implies that reality is observer-created. "I cannot imagine," Einstein once said, but as Nelson has said "What if God is the Dice? What if God is in the indeterminancy? Could this indeterminancy be the subspace? Could God be the subspace glue that penetrates the essence of the universe? Answer to all : Yes"
Albert Einstein
Nathan Rosen
"that a mouse could drastically change the universe by merely looking at it." Einstein accused Bohr and Heisenberg of attempting to restore man (and mouse) to the center of the cosmos from which Copernicus had ousted them nearly five hundred years ago. "The belief in an external world independent of the perceiving subject," Einstein maintained, "is the basis of all natural science." But man (and mouse) are the center of their own cosmos, relativity revisited, or at least the maximum twist of relativity.
Bohr responded by comparing Einstein to the critics of his own relativity theory. He pointed out that thanks to Einstein's work, physicists have come to realize that space and time are not absolute but relative to an observer's state of motion. In quantum theory we simply take this way of thinking one step further and recognize that reality itself (or at least its dynamic attributes) is also observer-dependent. Why did Einstein find it so difficult, Bohr wondered, to accept this natural extension of his own ideas?
"A good joke should not be repeated twice," Einstein quipped. Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein debated the quantum reality question for as long as they lived: Einstein
failed in his attempts to assault quantum theory head on, and reluctantly agreed with Bohr that quantum theory describes correctly all presently conceivable experiments—a conclusion that remains uncontested today. Einstein resorted instead to criticizing quantum theory on the grounds that it is incomplete.
Quantum theory may be sufficient to explain experiments, Einstein confessed, but experiments are only part of what goes on in the world. Because quantum theory makes only statistical predictions, it cannot help but leave out certain "elements of reality" which a more adequate theory of the world must include.
Niels Bohr, on the other hand, claimed that although quantum theory does give only statistical predictions, it is still complete. Quantum theory's indefiniteness is a virtue, not a weakness, because it corresponds to an indefiniteness that actually exists in the world. It is foolish to seek a precise description of an imprecise world; such misplaced precision is bound to miss the mark.
Einstein put forth his best argument for quantum theory's incompleteness in the form of a thought experiment involving two correlated quons. He devised this experiment at Princeton in 1935 with the help of two American physicists: Boris Podolsky, originally from southern Russia, and Brooklyn-born Nathan Rosen. The original Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) experiment concerned two momentum-correlated electrons, but physicists today repeat EPR's argument using David Bohm's conceptually simpler experiment involving two polarization-correlated photons.
If we compare a light beam to a series of balls (photons) thrown by a baseball pitcher. The two-valued photon polarization attribute was compared to a batter holding his bat at a certain angle 0 and getting either a hit or a miss. In the laboratory, photon polarization is measured with a calcite crystal which splits a light beam into up and down channels depending on whether its photons are polarized along or across the calcite's optic axis.
The EPR experiment is only slightly more complicated than this two-man ball game. The EPR source emits pairs of photons (Green and Blue) which travel in opposite directions to two distant detectors (also labeled Green and Blue) where their polarization P(¢) at a particular angle 0 can be measured. To visualize this EPR arrangement we imagine a pitcher who throws two balls at a time. First he throws a Green ball to home plate; then, without breaking rhythm, he turns and fires a Blue ball to second base where a second batter is waiting.
As in the previous game, the batters at home and at second can each measure the "polarization" of the baseball by holding their bats at a particular angle. A hit shows the ball to be polarized at the bat angle; a miss means polarization at right angles to the bat.
The pitcher fires off a pair of balls, rests for a moment, then throws another pair. For each pair of balls, the Green player measures his Green ball's polarization at some Green angle, while the Blue
player measures her Blue ball's polarization at some Blue angle. To understand the EPR experiment, it's not necessary actually to know what polarization really is —what polarization "really is" is a mystery to physicists too—but only the particular results of each pair of polarization measurements. Encoded in the pattern of these results is the gist of the EPR paradox as well as the core of Bell's theorem.
The EPR photon pairs are pitched in a special way; they come out of the light source in a particular phase-entangled state called the "state of parallel polarization." Because their phases are entangled with each other, each photon's phase depends on what the other photon is doing. Consequently, neither photon by itself is represented by a definite waveform; hence (according to quantum theory) neither photon possesses a definite polarization.
Observationally, not possessing a definite polarization means that no measurement of polarization will always give the same result. In fact, for this particular two-photon state the Green light and the Blue light are completely unpolarized—the maximum indefiniteness possible for a two-valued attribute. For each photon at any angle 0, a polarization measurement P(~) gives 50 percent up/50 percent down, results which occur at random, like flipping a coin.
Although each photon by itself does not possess a definite proxy wave, the two-photon state as a whole is represented by a definite wave, which means that certain two-particle attributes (which belong to the Green and Blue photon together) have a definite value. For photons in the state of parallel polarization, one such definite attribute is the photons' paired polarization.
To measure paired polarization P P * , at a particular angle 0, set both Green and Blue calcites at the same angle ˘ and look at their polarization values (up or down). Like polarization itself, the PP attribute can take two possible values: either both photons have the same P (match) or they have opposite P (miss).
Both quantum theory and quantum fact agree that for photons in the parallel polarization state, PP(() at all angles 0, always has the same value, namely match. This means that if you measure the Green polarization at angle 0 and the Blue polarization at the same angle, both polarizations are always the same. Furthermore the P of C will be the same as the P of B no matter how far apart the photons fly or which polarization happens to be measured first. For instance, you can measure the polarization of the Green photon immediately after it leaves the source and measure the Blue photon a year later (when it is one light year away from its source): the polarizations of both photons will be identical.
According to quantum theory, in the state of parallel polarization each photon by itself has no definite P. However, the PP of C and B together is definite: it's match in every direction. The polarization attributes of unmeasured photons in this state resemble the attributes of identical twins before conception. Each twin's attributes (sex, hair color, and so forth) are undecided but the status of their paired attributes is already known: the same for both. For this reason I call the state of parallel subspace polarization "the twin state.”
In terms of the two baseball players, the results of a long series of plays against a pitcher who always throws pairs of balls in the twin state is this:
I. At no matter what angle ø either player holds the bat, he/she always gets a 50-50 mixture of hits and misses;
II. If both players agree beforehand to hold their bats at the same angle (I call this move "measuring the PPO attribute), whatever happens to one player's ball (hit or miss) also happens to the other player's ball.
III. shared subspace interaction allows for a non-locality, "what God hath joined together let no man set apart"
QUANTUM THEORY AS A PARTIAL OR COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF REALITY "Obstacles occur only in the Mind" Helen Keller
One difference between human twins and a pair of photons in the twin state is that before conception the human twins are nonexistent, while before measurement the photons already exist. We know that they were emitted at a certain time from their source and are traveling with a certain velocity toward their respective detectors. For a pair of photons in the twin state, Einstein asked the question, "Is the P of photon G, after it's emitted but before it's actually measured, truly indefinite as Bohr's interpretation of quantum theory requires, or is it, like identical twins in the womb, really definite but unknown?" In other words, "Is our uncertainty concerning the unobserved polarizations a mat-ter of quantum or classical ignorance?” According to Bohr, the P of photon C does not even exist before we measure it. G's so-called attributes belong not to the photon itself but reside partly in "the entire experimental arrangement." Like the position of a rainbow, polarization is a relational attribute and does not come into existence until Green observer decides how he will deploy his apparatus at location G (and possibly elsewhere as well). It's nonsense to suppose that before a measurement, photon G has some definite polarization. Einstein argues that, on the contrary, not only does photon G have a definite P in some direction, it has a definite P in every direction. To dramatize the difference between Bohr and Einstein, let's imagine that Blue player moves closer to the mound so that she gets her Blue ball before Green player gets his. Suppose she holds her bat at zero degrees (vertically) and gets a hit, which means that her photon is V-polarized. We now switch our camera to home plate where the spirits of Bohr and Einstein are discussing the reality status of the as-yet-to-be measured Green photon presently hurtling toward the Green batter at the speed of light. To allow the great men time for debate, we imagine the usual passage of time to be temporarily suspended. BOHR: When I say that quantum theory is "complete," I mean that QT says everything that can possibly be said about the reality of that Green photon. If it's not in the theory, it's not in the photon either. EINSTEIN: If complete, What, then, does quantum theory say about this Green photon now approaching the Green batter? BOHR: In the first place, given that Blue's already measured a V photon, coupled with the fact that this pitcher throws nothing but twin-state photon pairs, quantum theory predicts that if Green chooses to hold his bat vertically, he will certainly get a hit; furthermore it also predicts that if he holds his bat horizontally, he will certainly get miss. EINSTEIN: I agree with you concerning what quantum theory predicts if Green makes either a horizontal or a vertical polarization measurement. Now, what is supposed to happen if Green holds his bat at some other angle? BOHR: For Green bat angles other than zero or ninety degrees, quantum theory gives no certain results, but only the relative probability of a hit. For instance, if Green should hold his bat at 45 degrees, the odds are 50-50 that he will get a hit. EINSTEIN: Yes. Quantum theory indeed gives only statistical predictions for intermediate angles. We seem to agree concerning the predictions of the theory and about the facts of the matter—namely, that quantum theory has never made a single incorrect prediction. We agree, as Kant would have put it, about the appearances and about the theory. But what, my dear Bohr, are you willing to say about the
reality of this particular Green photon magically suspended before us? BOHR: Because I believe that quantum theory describes all physical situations completely, I must say that before it is actually measured, this photon really has a definite polarization only in the V and H directions, but no others. To speak of a definite polarization in any other directions would be to talk nonsense. Thus I say that, in reality, this Green photon does not possess polarization attributes except perhaps at these exceptional angles. Even at these special angles, for which quantum theory gives certain results, I am not entirely convinced that these results represent a definite attribute belonging solely to the photon. I believe that all attributes are joint creations of photon and measuring device and do not belong to one or the other. EINSTEIN: Concerning this matter of completeness…As you know, my friend, I cannot refute your opinion that quantum theory is a complete theory of phenomena: it indeed seems to describe correctly the results of every experiment my poor head has been able to imagine. But I do not share your faith that quantum theory is a complete theory of reality . I believe that certain elements of reality exist in the world that are not described by the quantum formalism. In the case of this Green photon, for example, I say that it possesses a definite polarization attribute for every possible angle, not just for the V and H directions. BOHR: No, my friend, you are mistaken. Except perhaps in certain special situations where the outcome is not a matter of chance—such as the V and II directions in this case—the photon's polarization is a joint production of the entire experimental arrangement, and does not inhere in the photon by itself independent of a particular measurement context. EINSTEIN: Forgive me, Bohr, but I have never been able to understand your subtle reasoning in this matter. Indeed, for situations like this twin-state baseball game, I have, with my colleagues Podolsky and Rosen, devised a simple argument which convinces us that this Green photon hovering in front of us possesses a definite (but unknown) polarization attribute at every angle. Permit me to show you this argument. Our reasoning depends on a certain plausible assumption, which physicists nowadays call "the locality assumption": we assume that the real factual situation of the Green photon, after it's left the source, is not affected by how the Blue player chooses to hold her bat. In other words, we assume that Blue's batting stance does not affect the Green photon. This supposition seems reasonable since both photons are traveling in opposite directions at the speed of light. Therefore one photon cannot learn about the other's measurement situation except via signals that travel faster than light. BOHR: I am suspicious of this locality assumption but please continue. EINSTEIN: Here is our argument. For this present situation, Blue chose to hold her bat vertically and she got a hit. But if she had held her bat at some other angle, say 45 degrees, she would also have measured some-thing, either a hit or a miss, we do not know which. Because this photon pair is in the twin state we know that Green photon would be obliged to show the same polarization that Blue got at 45 degrees. In like manner Blue could have held her bat at any angle X and measured a certain polarization; Green photon is compelled to have an identical polarization at angle X. If Green photon must have a definite polarization for each Blue measurement choice, and if (by the locality assumption) Blue's measurement choice does not physically affect the Green photon, then the Green photon must already possess a definite polarization for each angle—polarizations that exist regardless of Blue's actual choice. Thus we believe we have shown that before it strikes the Green bat, this Green photon has already
"made up its mind" as to how it will act no matter how Green might choose to hold his bat. This Green photon must possess a sort of hit/miss list which tells it what to do for every bat angle. Quantum theory, on the other hand, certainly does not recognize any such list: except for the N and V directions, it considers these results to be "random," utterly unknown except in a probabilistic sense. Quantum the-ory is therefore "incomplete" because it leaves out some attributes—this hit/miss list, for example—which this photon seems to possess. BOHR: Your argument is clever but I cannot accept your conclusion. Of course there is no question of any mechanical influence traveling from Blue's bat to the Green photon, but there is essentially the question of an influence on the very conditions which define the possible types of predictions regarding the future behavior of the Green light. EINSTEIN: Yes, I remember your making that very statement in 1935 in response to our original EPR paper. I did not understand it then, and despite considerable effort, I must confess that I still cannot grasp the subtlety of your thought on this matter. Since the author seems to have frozen our intellects, like that time-suspended Green photon out there, into our ancient philosophical positions, I will answer your old quote with two of my own which sum up my thinking on the EPR experiment: "We are forced (via the EPR argument) to conclude that the quantum-mechanical description of physical reality given by wave functions is not complete”. "One can escape from this conclusion only by either assuming that the measurement of B (telepathically) changes the real situation at C, or by denying independent real situations as such to things which are spatially separated. Both alternatives appear to me entirely unacceptable”. Bohr, Einstein, and numerous other thinkers struggled with the EPR paradox but no generally acceptable solution could be found until Bell focused attention on the fragility of the locality assumption. Let's take a closer look at this locality assumption so essential to the argument of Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen.
LOCALITY ASSUMPTION
"Circumstances are like objects, they are not alive, you bring life to them" Nelson
The locality assumption does not mean that what happens at the Green bat has nothing to do with what happens at the Blue bat. Since the photons are correlated at the light source, the results at the Green and Blue measurement sites will likewise be correlated. What locality means is that no action on Blue's part (as she detects her Blue photon) can affect what Green player sees (when he detects his Green photon). Locality means that what happens at home plate is unaffected by how Blue holds her bat at second base. The locality assumption is necessary to EPR's argument because al-though Blue observer could have made any polarization measurement she pleased, she can in fact (for a single photon) make only one, because photon polarizations at different angles are incompatible attributes. As a homely example of EPR's reasoning, consider a shop (Enrico's Pizza Reale) which sells three different pizzas: Sicilian, Milanese, and Neapolitan. Whenever you order a pizza from Enrico's it arrives at your door in ten minutes. Since a pizza takes thirty minutes to bake, you know that the pizza you ordered must have been ready when you phoned. Suppose you order a pizza of your choice each night (but you can only afford one), and it's always delivered in ten minutes. Can you conclude that Enrico keeps on hand all three kinds of pizza?
Not without a kind of locality assumption. You have to assume that Enrico has no way of knowing what kind of pizza you are going to order that night. If he can discover your choice beforehand, he need keep only one pizza hot. Your nightly freedom of choice plus the (no pizza spies) "locality assumption" allows you to infer, on the basis of a series of one-pizza observations, that Enrico in reality keeps all three pizzas ready to go each night. The argument for preexisting polarizations is the same as for preexisting pizzas. Blue player's freedom to choose her single P measurement plus the locality assumption allows EPR to infer that all polarizations must be simultaneously present in the Green photon (in the form of a hit/miss list) before Green player makes his measurement. Hence, in the twin state, photon C already secretly knows how it will respond to any polarization measurement that Green player might care to make upon it. According to EPR's argument, Green photon's polarization attribute is not indefinite at all. Green photon's hit/miss list specifies its polarization at all measurement angles. Bohr asserts that photon C, before it's measured, is in an indefinite state of polarization: quantum theory does not recognize any such hit/ miss list. But Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen can prove that such a list exists in nature. Hence according to EPR, quantum theory is necessarily incomplete. It is important to realize what EPR did not do: Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen did not find an experimental situation where quantum theory is factually wrong. What EPR discovered was a simple logical argument (based on the experimental fact of perfect polarization correlation in a certain two-photon system) that indirectly demonstrates the existence of photon attributes which quantum theory fails to take into account. EPR then ask, "If quantum theory is a complete theory of reality, why does it omit these attributes?” What's at stake here is not whether quantum theory is a complete theory of phenomena (accounting correctly for all presently conceivable measurements) but whether it is a complete theory of reality (accounting correctly for whatever exists whether measurable or not). Many "refutations" of the EPR argument consist merely of demonstrating that quantum theory describes correctly all twin-state polarization measurements. EPR do not contest quantum theory's competence to describe phenomena; Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen claim, however, to have demonstrated the existence of certain "elements of reality" (in Einstein's words), parts of the world not directly observable which quantum theory simply leaves out. The EPR proof gives those who believe that what's real is only what can be observed an opportunity to put their convictions to the test. For such no-nonsense realists, the argument of EPR which purports to demonstrate the existence of an extra-observational reality must be mistaken. However, even those convinced beforehand of EPR's error found it surprisingly difficult to point out the fallacy in their reasoning. Hundreds of papers were published on the "EPR paradox." For thirty years physicists and philosophers beat their heads against this proof without either refuting EPR's logic or shedding further light on EPR's alleged "elements of reality. In 1964 the long-standing EPR stalemate was broken by the efforts of theorist John Bell. The basis of Bell's theorem is this: if no local model of reality can explain the results of any particular experiment.: then reality is non-local, if there is non-locality anywhere then there is nonlocality everywhere
Bell’s Interconnectedness Theorem
“Contagious magic is based upon the assumption that substances which were once joined together possess a continuing linkage; thus an act carried out upon a smaller unit will affect the larger unit even
though they are physically separate”. Sir James Frazer
John Stewart Bell was born and grew up in Belfast, Northern Ireland. He is now a theoretical physicist at CERN (a large accelerator center in Geneva financed by Western European countries) where he specializes in elementary particle physics. In 1964, while on sabbatical leave from CERN, Bell decided to investigate the quantum reality question, which had fascinated him since his undergraduate days. Bell began by looking at von Neumann's proof, which demonstrates the impossibility of neorealism. According to von Neumann, the world cannot be made of ordinary objects, which possess dynamic attributes of their own. Bell discovered that although this proof excludes objects whose attributes combine in "reasonable ways," it does not forbid objects which can change their attributes in response to their environment. This loophole in von Neumann's proof is what allows Bohm, de Broglie, and other neorealists to build explicit ordinary-object-based models of quantum reality: all these models contain objects whose attributes are context-sensitive. While preparing a review article on von Neumann's proof, Bell became interested in impossibility proofs in genera) and wondered whether a proof could be constructed which would conclusively exclude any model of reality that possessed certain physical characteristics. Bell himself managed to devise such a proof which rejects all models of reality possessing the property of "locality." This proof has since become known as Bell's theorem. It asserts that no local model of reality can underlie the quantum facts. Bell's theorem says that reality must be non-local. In a letter to the author, John Bell recalls his discovery: "I had for long been fascinated by EPR. Was there a paradox or not? I was deeply impressed by Einstein's reservations about quantum mechanics and his views of it as an incomplete theory. For several reasons the time was ripe for me to tackle the problem head on. The result was the reverse of what I had hoped. But I was delighted—in a region of wooliness and obscurity to have come upon something hard and clear”. The structure of Bell's proof is as follows. For a certain class of twoquon experiments (the EPR experiment and its variations), Bell assumes that a local reality exists. With a bit of arithmetic he shows that this locality assumption leads directly to a certain inequality (Bell's inequality) which the experimental results must satisfy. Whenever these experiments are done, they violate Bell's inequality. Hence the local-reality assumption is mistaken. Conclusion: any reality that underlies the EPR experiment must be non-local.
WHAT IS A LOCAL INTERACTION? "It is not the situation, but whether we react negatively or respond positively to the situation that is
important" Zig Ziglar
The essence of a local interaction is direct contact—as basic as a punch in the nose. Body A affects body B locally when it either touches B or touches something else that touches B. A gear train is a typical local mechanism. Motion passes from one gear wheel to another in an unbroken chain. Break the chain by taking out a single gear and the movement cannot continue. Without something there to mediate it, a local interaction cannot cross a gap. On the other hand, the essence of non-locality is unmediated action-at a-distance. A non-local interaction jumps from body A to body B without touching anything in between. Voodoo injury is an example of a non-local interaction. When a voodoo practitioner sticks a pin in her doll, the distant target is (supposedly) instantly wounded, although nothing actually travels from doll to
victim. Believers in voodoo claim that an action here causes an effect there; that's all there is to it. Without benefit of mediation, a non-local interaction effortlessly flashes across the void. The unruly nature of unmediated action has moved physicists from Galileo to Cell-Mann to unanimously reject non-local interactions as a basis for explaining what goes on in the world. No one has so vehemently expressed physicists' distaste for non-local interactions as Sir Isaac New-ton: "That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else . . is to me so great an absurdity, that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty for thinking, can ever fall into”. Given his antipathy for non-local forces, Newton was somewhat embarrassed by his own theory of gravity. If a non-local force is "so great an absurdity," how does the sun's gravity manage to cross millions of miles of empty space to hold the Earth in its orbit? Concerning the actual nature of gravity, Newton wisely held his tongue. "Hypotheses non lingo," he declared. "I frame no hypotheses”. Newton's faith in strictly local forces was vindicated by his successors, who explained gravity in terms of the field concept. The space between the sun and Earth is not empty, today's physicists say: it's filled with a gravitational field which exerts a force on any body it touches. The mod-ern field concept allows us to regard gravity as a strictly local interaction even though it acts across vast reaches of space. The sun's mass produces a gravity field; this field pulls on the Earth and mediates the sun-Earth interaction. Physicists today share Newton's belief that the world is tied together by strictly local connections. All presently known interactions can be explained in terms of only four fundamental forces (strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational). In every case these forces act as if they are mediated by fields. Since quantum theory has blurred the once sharp distinction between particle and field (both are quantumstuff now) we can equally well say these local forces are mediated by the exchange of parti-cles. Thus the sun attracts the Earth (and vice versa) via the gravity field or via an exchange of gravitons (the particle aspect of the gravity field). In actuality gravity (as is true for the other three fundamental forces as well) is carried neither by particle or field but by something that partakes of both, an innately quantum go-between whose mediation makes every one of nature's forces strictly local. Although the concept of locality does not strictly demand it, most forces diminish in strength as you move away from their source. It is conceivable that a local force might stay constant or even increase with distance from its source (the force of a stretched spring, for instance increases with distance). The big four forces that hold the world together happen, however, all to decrease with distance—gravity and electromagne tism diminish as the inverse square; the strong and weak forces fall of considerably faster. The toughest limitation on a local interaction is how fast it can travel When you move an object A, you stretch its attached field. This fielc distorts first near object A, then the field warp moves off to distant re gions. Einstein's special theory of relativity restricts the velocity of thi: field deformation to light speed or below. According to Einstein, no mate vial object can travel faster than light; not even the less material field war' can travel so fast. Non-local influences, if they existed, would not be mediated by fields o by anything else. When A connects to B non-locally, nothing crosses thl intervening space, hence no amount of interposed matter can shield thi interaction. Non-local influences do not diminish with distance. They are as poten at a million miles as at a millimeter. Non-local influences act instantaneously. The speed of their transmit sion is not limited by the velocity of light. A non-local interaction links up one location with another withou crossing space, without decay, and without delay. A non-local interactioi is, in short, unmediated, unmitigated, and immediate.
Despite physicists' traditional rejection of non-local interactions, de spite the fact that all known forces are incontestably local, despite Eir stein's prohibition against superluminal connections, and despite the fac that no experiment has ever shown a single case of unmediated faster than-light communication, Bell maintains that the world is filled wit innumerable non-local influences. Furthermore these unmediated tonne( tions are present not only in rare and exotic circumstances, but underlie a the events of everyday life. Non-local connections are ubiquitous because reality itself is non-local. Not all physicists believe Bell's proof to be an airtight demonstration of the necessary existence of non-local connections. But the alternatives these critics offer instead seem to me to be generally obscure and/or preposterous, Some physicists will go so far as to actually "deny reality itself" rather than accept Bell's audacious conclusion that quantum reality must be non-local.
BELL PROVED REALITY CANNOT BE LOCAL "Before you change your thinking you must change what goes into your mind" Zig Ziglar
To understand the import of Bell's theorem and the arguments of his critics, it's necessary to look at Bell's proof in some detail. Fortunately Bell's theorem is easier to prove than the Pythagorean theorem taught in every high school. The simplicity of Bell's proof opens it to everyone, not just physicists and mathematicians. Bell's proof is based on the same EPR experiment used by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen to demonstrate the existence of hidden "elements of reality" which quantum theory neglects to describe. The "EPR paradox" consists of the fact that for thirty years physicists have neither been able to refute EPR's argument nor shed further light on EPR's alleged "elements of reality”. The EPR experiment involves a source of light which produces pairs of photons (Green and Blue) in the "twin state." These photons travel in opposite directions to calcite detectors (G and B) which can measure their polarization attribute P(cb) at some angle O. In the twin state each beam by itself appears completely unpolarized—an unpredictably random 50-50 mixture of ups and downs at whatever angle you choose to measure. Though separately unpolarized, each photon's polarization is perfectly correlated with its partner's. If you measure the P of both photons at the same angle (a two-photon attribute I call paired polarization), these polarizations always match. For his proof, Bell considers another two-photon attribute called polarization correlation (PC) which can be measured on these photons. Attribute PC is measured the same way as attribute PP except that the calcites are set not at the same but at different angles. To measure PC(Ө), set Green calcite at a particular angle øG and Blue calcite at angle øB. Now compare Green and Blue polarizations for each pair of photons. If these
PS are the same (both up or both down), call this a match; if opposites, call this a miss. Angle Ө is the angle between the two calcites, namely Ө= øG - øB.
For photons in the twin state, quantum theory predicts that P C (øG - øB) depends only on the relative angle Ө between calcites and is independent of the separate settings øG and øB. Thus if the angle of the
Green calcite differs by 30° (in either direction) from that of the Blue calcite, the value of PC(30) will be the same, no matter how Green and Blue happen to be tilted. The fact that PC(Ө ) depends only on the difference between the two calcites has been amply verified by experiment. For each angle Ө between calcites, a PC measurement asks for the fraction of matches obtained in a long series of photon pairs. Thus PC = 1 means all matches (no misses) while P C = 0 means no matches (all misses). Bell's theorem is concerned with how this match fraction changes as we vary the angle between calcites from zero to ninety degrees. For our previous discussion of the twin state, we already know the value of PC at zero and ninety degrees. At a calcite separation of zero degrees, PC = 1. When both calcites are set at the same angle, a PC measurement is identical to what I've called a PP measurement, which for the twin state yields a 100 percent match at all angles. At a calcite separation of ninety degrees, PC = 0. When a calcite is turned through a right angle, its photon-sorting operation is merely re-versed: its up channel passes downs and vice versa. At ninety degrees a P meter behaves like the same P meter at zero degrees with its outputs relabeled. This calcite channel reversal plus the perfect correlation at zero degrees leads to a perfect anti-correlation when the calcite axes differ by ninety degrees. At zero degrees, PC = 1; at ninety degrees, PC = 0. In between, PC varies between 1 and 0 as the angle between calcites swings from zero to ninety degrees. The meat of Bell's proof is the actual shape of this variation. To dramatize what's happening in this EPR experiment, imagine that Green detector is on Earth, and Blue detector is on Betelgeuse (540 light-years away) while twin-state correlated light is coming from a spaceship parked halfway in between. Although in its laboratory versions the EPR experiment spans only a room-size distance, the immense dimensions of this thought experiment remind us that, in principle, photon correlations don't depend on distance. The spaceship acts as a kind of interstellar lighthouse directing a Green light beam to Earth, a Blue light beam to Betelgeuse in the opposite direction. Forget for the moment that Green and Blue detectors are measuring something called “polarization” and regard their outputs as coded messages from the spaceship. Two synchronized binary message sequences composed of ups and downs emerge from calcite crystals 500 light-years apart. How these two messages are connected is the concern of Bell's proof. When both calcites are set at the same angle (say, twelve o'clock), then PC = 1. Green polarization matches perfectly with Blue. Two typical synchronized sequences of distant P measurements might look like this: GREEN: U D U D D U D D D U U D U D D U BLUE: U D U D D U D D D U U D U D D U If we construe these polarization measurements as binary message sequences, then whenever the calcites are lined up, the Blue observer on Betelgeuse gets the same message as the Green observer on Earth. Since PC varies from 1 to 0 as we change the relative calcite angle, there will be some angle a at which PC = 3/4. At this angle, for every four photon pairs, the number of matches (on the average) is three while the number of misses is one. At this particular calcite separation, a sequence of P measurements might look like this: GREEN: U D D D D U D D D U D D U D D U BLUE: U D U D D D U D D U U D U D D U
At angle a, the messages received by Green and Blue are not the same but contain "errors"—G's message differs from B's message by one miss in every four marks. Now we are ready to demonstrate Bell's proof. Watch closely; this proof is so short that it goes by fast. Align the calcites at twelve o'clock. Observe that the messages are identical. Move the Green calcite by a degrees. Note that the messages are no longer the same but contain "errors"—one miss out of every four marks. Move the Green calcite back to twelve and these errors disappear; the messages are the same again. Whenever Green moves his calcite by a degrees in either direction, we see the messages differ by one character out of four. Moving the Green calcite hack to twelve noon restores the identity of the two messages. The same thing happens on Betelgeuse. With both calcites set at twelve noon, messages are identical. When Blue moves her calcite by a degrees in either direction, we see the messages differ by one part in four. Moving the Blue calcite back to twelve noon restores the identity of the two messages. Everything described so far concerns the results of certain correlation experiments which can be verified in the laboratory. Now we make an assumption about what might actually be going on—a supposition which cannot be directly verified: the locality assumption, which is the core of Bell's proof. We assume that turning the Blue calcite can change only the Blue message; likewise turning the Green calcite can change only the Green message. This is Bell's famous locality assumption. It is identical to the assumption Einstein made in his EPR paradox: that Blue observer's acts cannot affect Green observer's results. The locality assumption—that Blue's acts don't change Green's code—seems entirely reasonable: how could an action on Betelgeuse change what's happening right now on Earth? However, as we shall see, this "reasonable" assumption leads immediately to an experimental prediction which is contrary to fact. Let's see what this locality assumption forces us to conclude about the outcome of possible experiments. With both calcites originally set at twelve noon, turn Blue calcite by a degrees, and at the same time turn Green calcite in the opposite direction by a degrees. Now the calcites are misaligned by 2a degrees. What is the new error rate? Since turning Blue calcite a degrees puts one miss in the Blue sequence (for every four marks) and turning the Green calcite a degrees puts one miss in the Green sequence, we might naively guess that when we turn both calcites we will get exactly two misses per four marks. However, this guess ignores the possibility that a "Blue error" might fall on the same mark as a "Green error"—a coincidence which produces an apparent match and restores character identity. Taking into account the possibility of such "error-correcting overlaps," we revise our error estimate and predict that whenever the calcites are misaligned by 2a degrees, the error rate will be two misses—or less. This prediction is an example of a Bell inequality. This Bell inequality says: If the error rate at angle a is I/a, then the error rate at twice this angle cannot be greater than 2/4. This Bell inequality follows from the locality assumption and makes a definite prediction concerning the value of the PC attribute at a certain angle for photon pairs in the twin state. It predicts that when the calcites are misaligned by 2a degrees the difference between the Green and Blue polarization sequences will not exceed two misses out of four marks. The quantum facts, however, say otherwise. John Clauser and Stuart Freedman carried out this EPR experiment at Berkeley and showed that a calcite separation of 2a degrees gives three misses for every four marks—a quite substantial violation of the Bell inequality. Clauser's experiment conclusively violates the Bell inequality. Hence one of the assumptions that went into its derivation must be false. But Bell's argument uses mainly facts that can be verified—photon PCs at particular angles. The only assumption not experimentally accessible is the locality assumption. Since it leads to a prediction that strongly disagrees with experimental results, this locality assumption must
be wrong. To save the appearances, we must deny locality. Denying locality means accepting the conclusion that when Blue observer turns her calcite on Betelgeuse she instantly changes some of Green's code on Earth. In other words, locations B and C some five hundred light years apart are linked somehow by a non-local interaction. This experimental refutation of the locality assumption is the factual basis of Bell's theorem: no local reality can underlie the results of the EPR experiment. Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen used the locality assumption to demonstrate the existence of hidden "elements of reality" which quantum theory fails to take into account. However, if Blue and Green observers are linked by a non-local interaction, as the factual violation of the Bell inequality seems to imply, then EPR's argument is invalid by virtue of a false premise. The failure of their argument does not prove, of course, that no such "elements of reality" exist, but only that one cannot make a case for their existence by using EPR's reasoning. The logical necessity of non-local interactions resolves the EPR paradox (in Bell's words) "in the way which Einstein would have liked the least”. Reviewing the EPR paradox in his autobiography, Einstein reaffirmed his faith in locality: "On one supposition we should, in my opinion, absolutely hold fast: the real factual situation of the system (G) is independent of what is done with the system (B) which is spatially separated from the former." Einstein did not live to see Bell's proof and would certainly have been surprised by Bell's refutation of his cherished postulate. But I think he would have welcomed the strange news Bell's theorem brings us con-cerning the true nature of the quantum world. Bell's result vindicates Einstein's intuition that something funny is going on in quantum-correlated two-particle states. As in the case of the EPR paradox, it's important to realize what Bell did not do. He did not discover an experimental situation in which non local interactions are directly observed. Instead he invented a simple argument based on experimental results that indirectly demonstrates the necessary existence of non-local connections.
The phenomena displayed by photon pairs in the twin state are entirely local. The only spin-space
attribute accessible to Green observer is his Green photon polarization P(c). This attribute is always 50—50 random (unpolarized) no matter how Blue observer sets her calcite. Because what ever Blue does, Green can detect no change in his own photon's polarization, Blue observer can send no message—superluminal or otherwise from Betelgeuse to Earth via these correlated photons. However, if Bell's argument is correct, then the reality behind these seemingly local phenomena not only might be, but must be non-local. It’s not the mere fact of photon correlation that necessitates non-local connections, but the fact that twin-state photons are correlated so strongly. Many situations can be envisioned which show perfect correlation at Ө = 0 ° and perfect anti-correlation at Ө = 90 °, but whose in-between correlation varies so as actually to satisfy Bell's inequality. A few examples of such weakly correlated systems are shown in Fig. 5. Weak correlations can always be explained by strictly local interactions. On the other hand, strongly-correlated systems (such as Fig..4) violate the Bell inequality; their parts are lore synchronized than they have any right to be. To explain such highly operative behavior, no local model of reality will suffice. Bell's theorem gives those who share Newton's belief that non-local influences are "a great absurdity" an opportunity to put their convictions to the test. For As loyal to locality, the argument of Bell which purports to demonstrate le existence of hidden faster-than-light connections must be mistaken. Those convinced beforehand of Bell's error should be highly motivated to discover the fallacy in his reasoning. Later we will look at some recent tempts to invalidate Bell's argument and to recover a strictly local world. On the other hand, if Bell's reasoning is correct invisible non-local connections must truly exist. Can we then devise means of making these connections directly evident instead of relying on Bell's indirect argument? The possibility of practical superluminal communication via the quantum connection has been a possibility.
Bell proved his theorem for a particular two-photon system. What justification exists for extending his conclusion (the reality underlying the EPR experiment must be non-local) to the general case of everyday experience (the reality underlying everything must be non-local)? To expand the scope of Bell’s argument we turn to quantum theory.
In quantum theory's formalism, what accounts for strong photon carte-in in the twin state is phase entanglement. Whenever quantum system wets quantum system B, their phases get mixed up. Part of A's proxy wave goes off with B's wave and vice versa. Phase entanglement thereafter instantly connects any two quons which have once interacted. Before Bell’s discovery, this strong quantum connection had been recognized (especially by Schrodinger, who considered it quantum theory's most distinctive feature) but regarded by physicists as a kind of mathematical fiction with no roots in reality. Since Bell's theorem demands a superluminal connection and quantum theory provides one—in the form of ubiquitous but presumably "fictitious" phase connections—perhaps these quantum connections are not as fictitious as was once believed.
Since there is nothing that is not ultimately a quantum system, if the quantum phase connection is "real," then it links all systems that have once interacted at some time in the past—not just twin-state photons—into a single waveform whose remotest parts are joined in a manner unmediated, unmitigated, and immediate. The mechanism for this instant connectedness is not some invisible field that stretches from one part to the next, but the fact that a bit of each part's "being" is lodged in the other. Each quon leaves some of its "phase" in the other's care, and this phase exchange connects them forever after. What phase entanglement really is we may never know, but Bell's theorem tells us that it is no limp mathematical fiction but a reality to be reckoned with.
CLAUSER’S EXPERIMENT "Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any
experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion”. David Flume
In 1964, when Bell derived his inequality, no twin-state PC measurements existed against which it could be tested. However, the calculation of twin-state polarization is an elementary exercise in quantum theory. This calculation predicts that PC(Ө) = cos2
Ө, a correlation plotted as Fig. 4. The angle α at which misses = 1/4 for cos2
Ө is 30°. Bell's inequality consequently demands that the number of misses at 2α (60° in this case) shall be no greater than 2/4. However, at 60° this expression gives a miss fraction of 3/4. Since 3/4 is considerably greater than 2/4, the theoretical expression PC = cos2
Ө violates Bell's inequality. This violation marks the twin state as a strongly correlated system—a pair of entities linked tighter than any local reality can explain. The fact that this calculated result violates Bell's inequality implies that any system which obeys these quantum-theoretical predictions cannot be explained by a local reality. Before Bell's discovery, one could still imagine that a local reality lurked beneath the experimental facts; after 1964, one could blissfully believe in a strictly local world only by hoping that quantum theory was wrong in its predictions concerning photons in the twin state. Since it challenges one of physicists' most cherished beliefs—that the world is fundamentally local–one might have expected Bell's proof to explode like a bombshell in the corridors of science. Instead, Bell's proof, published in an obscure little journal, was largely ignored even by those physicists who managed
to find out about it. Most physicists are not impressed by Bell's proof because it deals with reality, not phenomena. The majority of physicists are phenomenalists—whose professional world is circumscribed by phenomena and mathematics. A phenomenalist perceives science as advancing in two directions: 1. new experiments uncover novel phenomena; 2. new mathematics explain or predict phenomena in original ways. Since it proposes no new experiments and derives no new phenomena-relevant mathematics, but merely puts certain constraints on an invisible reality, Bell's proof lies outside the fashionable formula for success in science and is generally dismissed by scientists as "mere philosophy”. Physicists' cool reception of Bell's proof is reminiscent of David Flume's famous prescription for separating truth from nonsense: "Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion”. In the midst of this climate of indifference toward theories of reality, John Clauser, a young Ph.D. from Columbia, proposed actually to measure twin-state photons to see whether their polarization correlation attribute satisfied Bell's inequality (world is local; quantum theory wrong) or not (world is non-local; quantum theory right). Clauser received no sup-port at Columbia for his proposal to put Bell's inequality to experimental test, and moved to Berkeley where apparatus already existed which he knew he could modify to measure twin-state photons. Many kinds of excited atoms emit pairs of twin-state photons as they return to their ground state. Most experiments carried out to test Bell's inequality have used either mercury atoms excited by electron impact or calcium atoms excited by laser light. Clauser's Berkeley mercury source operates like a mercury-vapor streetlamp—both emit Blue and Green twin-state light—but Clauser's source was smaller and more intense than the lamps which nightly flood Telegraph Avenue with photons in the twin state. Because real photon detectors are not 100 percent efficient—they count only about 10 percent of the photons which strike their phosphor faceplates—one cannot simply compare Bell's inequality to experimental results. Adapting Bell's original reasoning to existing experimental realities, Clauser and his colleagues derived a version of Bell's inequality (called the "CHSH inequality" after john F. Clauser, Michael A. Horne, Abner Shimony, and Richard A. Holt) which is testable with low-efficiency detectors. Clauser was motivated to test the Bell inequality by his strong faith that the world was ultimately local. If quantum theory predicts a result which conflicts (via Bell's proof) with locality, so much the worse for quantum theory. Clauser anticipated that his experiment would prove quantum theory wrong at least in this matter of twin-state polarization. The results proved otherwise. In 1972 Clauser announced that quantum theory had passed his test. Bell's inequality had been experimentally violated by Blue and Green photons at Berkeley. Now not merely quantum theory but quantum fact contradict the hypothesis that the world is linked up by strictly local lines. The basis of Bell's theorem is this: if no local model of reality can explain the results of any particular experiment.: then reality is non-local, if there is non-locality anywhere then there is some nonlocality everywhere
ASPECT’S EXPERIMENT "Human beings can choose the path and the destination"
Clauser's pioneer test of the Bell inequality contains a loophole through which a desperate logician might still derive a local world. To pinpoint this loophole, let's return to our imaginary EPR experiment in space. Clauser's mercury source sent Blue and Green light to opposite corners of a room. Our spaceship lighthouse shoots photons to Betelgeuse and Earth five hundred light-years apart.
Clauser switched the orientation of his P meters every 100 seconds. Clauser's switching time, translated to cosmic lighthouse scale, corresponds to keeping the P meters on Earth and Betelgeuse fixed for more than a bi l l ion years. Such leisurely P measurements would permit information on how distant P meters were set to leak between Earth and Betelgeuse at sublight speed (carried perhaps in the gossip of interstellar tourists)—information which could allow most of the photons to simulate strong correlations by strictly local means. To block the possibility of subluminal security leaks during long P-meter rests, the experimenter must be able to change the P meters while the photons are in flight. To change a calcite this fast in the lab means switching its orientation in a few billionths of a second. Unfortunately, mere matter just can't move that fast. However, physicist Alain Aspect at the University of Paris devised an experiment to test Bell's inequality which uses two acousto-optical switches to deflect each photon beam to one or the other of two preset calcite detectors. Instead of rapidly moving his calcites, Aspect moves his light beams. With his ultrafast switches, Aspect can measure a different polarization every 10 billionth of a second, fast enough to eliminate subluminal security leaks between Blue and Green P meters. If Aspect's twin-state photons violate Bell's inequality, the reality that underlies their strong correlation must connect Green and Blue measurement stations at a speed exceeding the velocity of light. Aspect completed his experiment in 1982, verifying the strongly correlated quantum theoretical predictions, hence violating Bell's inequality and supporting his contention that our phenomenally local world is in actuality supported by an invisible reality which is unmediated, unmitigated, and faster than light. Although Bell's theorem arose in the context of quantum theory, Bell's result does not depend on the truth of quantum theory. The Clauser-Aspect experiments show that Bell's inequality is violated by the facts. This means that even if quantum theory should someday fail, its successor theory must likewise violate Bell's inequality when it comes to explaining the twin state. Physics theories are not eternal. When quantum theory joins the ranks of phlogiston, caloric, and the luminiferous ether in the physics junkyard, Bell's theorem will still be valid. Because it's based on facts, Bell's theorem is here to stay. The basis of Bell's theorem is this: if no local model of reality can explain the results of any particular experiment.: then reality is non-local, if there is non-locality anywhere then there is some nonlocality everywhere
IMPOSSIBLE WORLDS "Reality is a way to teach us that we are small and must respect a power greater than ourselfs"
Nelson
Bell's theorem is an important tool for reality research because it enables folks who create imaginary worlds confidently to reject millions of impossible worlds at a single glance. Bell's theorem tells you right away: If it's local, it's hokum”. One of the worlds soundly obliterated by Bell's proof is the "disturbance model" of quantum reality. In this model—a species of neorealism —quantum entities actually possess attributes of their own whether measured or not, but the measuring device changes these attributes in an unpredictable and uncontrollable way. The inevitable disturbance of the quantum system by the device which measures it gives rise, in this model of reality, to quantum randomness, to the uncertainty principle and all the other quantum oddities. As a picture of how the quantum world might actually operate, many physicists who have not given much thought to the matter take refuge in some vague disturbance model of reality. For several years I avoided thinking about the quantum reality question by supposing that a disturbance model of some kind was sufficient to account for the strange quantum facts. Such a disturbance mode] would explain, for instance, the observed polarization of the Green photon in
the EPR experiment as a result of the Green calcite's "uncontrollable disturbance" of some intrinsic Green photon attribute. In other words, this model explains Green observer's results by appealing to a hypothetical mechanism which involves only the Green photon and the Green calcite. Bell's theorem shows that any such local mechanism, no matter how ingenious, simply fails to fit the quantum facts: Bell's proof knocks out the disturbance model because it's local. Facile popular expositions often invoke the disturbance model of measurement to justify Heisenberg's uncertainty principle: we cannot know a quantum entity as it is because we must inevitably disturb whatever we observe. Bell's result shows this notion of quantum measurement as local disturbance to be as outdated as the obsolete picture of the atom as miniature solar system. Another type of impossible world is the "classical style" reality symbolized by Newton's apple. Apples, and everything else in such a world, are truly ordinary objects which possess attributes all their own even when not being measured. When measured, whether by man, woman, or machine, a classical apple merely reveals some attributes which it previously possessed. Such an apple world (which experts call a "local non-contextual reality") is not inconceivable or illogical. But, according to Bell's theorem, apple world is impossible because it can't possibly fit the facts. As a model for the world we actually live in, apple world and all its local non-contextual cousins are, by virtue of their locality, sheer fantasy worlds. We obviously need to be more sophisticated in our choice of possible worlds. Let's imagine, for instance, a relational reality patterned after the notions of Niels Bohr. The entities that make up such a world are like rainbows: they do not possess definite attributes except under definite measurement conditions. Upon measurement, attributes do emerge but they are a joint possession of entity and M device. In such a rainbow reality (called "local contextual"), attributes are not innate to an entity but change when the conditions of observation change. The only restriction we place upon such observer-induced changes is that distant M de-vices cannot change an entity's condition if such an influence would re-quire a faster-than-light signal. In such a contextual, but local, reality, only nearby observers take part in the determination of an entity's apparent attributes. Like apple world, rainbow world is neither inconceivable nor illogical. It is simply, on account of its locality, not the sort of world we happen to live in. Bell's theorem rejects apple worlds; it also rejects rainbow worlds. What kinds of worlds does Bell's theorem allow?
A POSSIBLE WORLD "Anything is possible for the human mind, it is just a matter of time" Nelson
Imagine Joe Green, an inhabitant of a non-local contextual world. Up in his sky, Joe sees a rainbow made up of a glistening pattern of colored dots. Unlike the regular dots in a photographic halftone, Joe's rainbow's dots form a random array. On the other side of the same sun lies a counter-Earth, where Suzie Blue watches another rainbow in her counter-sky. Suzie's rainbow is like-wise composed of a random array of colored dots. When Joe Green moves his chair, his rainbow moves too (a rainbow's position attribute is contextual, not innate), but Suzie's rainbow stands still. However, when Joe moves his chair Suzie's random array 200 million miles away instantly changes into a different (but equally random) array of colored dots. Suzie is not aware of this change—one random array looks pretty much like any other—but this change actually happens whether she notices it or not. The phenomenon in this hypothetical world, whether the rainbow moves or not, is completely local: Suzie's rainbow doesn't move when Joe changes places. However, this world's real i ty—the array of little dots that make up both rainbows—is non-local: Suzie's dots change instantly when-ever Joe moves
his chair. Such a non-local contextual world, in which stable rainbows are woven upon a faster-than-light fabric, is an example of the kind of world permitted by Bell's theorem. A universe that displays local phenomena built upon a non-local reality is the only sort of world consistent with known facts and Bell's proof. Superluminal rainbow world could be the kind of world we live in. During the past twenty years Bell's theorem has been proved in many ways, some of which refer to photon attributes and some which don't. My version of Bell's proof makes no essential use of the concept of a photon or its attributes. Although Green and Blue photons and their polarization attributes are mentioned to familiarize you with the details of the EPR experiment, when it comes to the proof of Bell's theorem my argument is formulated entirely in terms of a pair of binary messages printed by particular macroscopic objects. I prove Bell's theorem here in terms of moves (orientations of calcite crystals) and marks (ups and downs on a data tape). Bell's theorem as a relation between moves and marks takes non-locality out of the inaccessible microworld and situates it squarely in the familiar world of cats and bathtubs. Expressed in thoroughly macroscopic language, Bell's theorem says: In reality, Green's move most change Blue's mark non-locally. From arguments based on phenomena alone (no appeal to hidden attributes) we conclude that clicks in a certain counter must be instantly connected to the movement of a distant crystal of calcite. For anyone interested in reality, Bell's theorem is a remarkable intellectual achievement. Starting with fact plus a bit of mathematics, Bell goes beyond the facts to describe the contours of reality itself. Although no one has ever seen or suspected a single non-local phenomenon, Bell proves conclusively that the world behind phenomena must be non-local. If all the world's phenomena are strictly local, what need is there to support local phenomena with a non-local fabric? Here we confront an alien design sense bizarre by human standards: the world seems strangely overbuilt. In addition the world's superluminal underpinning is almost completely concealed—non-locality would have been discovered long ago if it were more evident; it leaves its mark only indirectly through the impossibly strong correlations of certain obscure quantum systems. In his celebrated theorem, Bell does not merely suggest or hint that reality is non-local, he actually proves it, invoking the clarity and power of mathematical reasoning. This compulsory feature of Bell's proof particularly irks physicists whose taste in realities is strictly local.
John Stewart Bell CERN physicist John Stewart Bell, inventor of the interconnectedeness theorem, which establishes non-
locality as a general feature of this world.
The basis of Bell's theorem is this: if no local model of reality can explain the results of any particular experiment.: then reality is non-local, if there is non-locality anywhere then there is some nonlocality everywhere Bell's important proof has caused a furor in reality research comparable to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen scandal of 1935. On the one hand, Bell's theorem proves the existence of an invisible non-local reality. Those who prefer their realities to be local have so far not been able to refute Bell's argument. The fact that Bell's proof is remarkably clear and brief has not hastened its refutation. A subspace shared dimension of a mathematical convergence of multi-dimensional interactions in and past the tenth dimension. At one level of observation the universe is still just a single point. With this still shared existance perspective things can happen simultaneously, not faster than light, simultaneous. This is the Nelson subspace theory. see the PROMORPHEUS Although Bell's theorem indirectly necessitates a deep non-locality, Only Nelson has come up with a way to directly display this purported non-locality, such as a faster-than-light communication scheme based on these deep quantum connections. If reality research's bottom line is "Reality has consequences," then this Bell-mandated deep reality has so far failed to make a showing. What the future holds for Bell's instantly connected but as yet inaccessible deep reality is anyone's guess. Now this theroem has been proved with technology where in Switzerland researchers have succeeded in instantaneous twin photon communication over vast distances. see appendix. The sour grapes and twisting deceptive rationalization that scientist have towards this proof are but a defense mechanism that scientist use for their cognitive dissonance of being humiliated at being wrong. Science has been laughing at those that believe in non-locality for years. And to now have to accept proof that theyb were wrong is a hard pill to swallow. Most people know that the world is non-local. There are a vast amount of stories of a non-locality. Stories of psychic connection, telepathy, intuition, etc. the PEAR group has proved this beyond a shadow of doubt. but the scientist still hold fast. All we need is one white crow, and there are forty nine billion staring us in the face. But Motivation determines perception. So if you do not want to see non-locality or if your motivation is to protect your past stupidity, you will not see the non-local perspective no matter how evident it is. this is the last proof of non-locality. The mind effects things, and the mind can hide an inconvienient truth. A false belief is difficult to disperse. Max Plank once said that for a new idea in science to succeed all of the scientists with the old idea must die. I would hope that this is not true, but it seems to be true. When we all start to laugh at the scientist who resist new proofs, then and only then will they change, for only the insecure fear humiliation. Scientists can be very insecure. Some small minded people find cricticisms like there was a reward. Great spirits get incredible resistance from mediocre minds. The basis of Bell's theorem is this: if no local model of reality can explain the results of any particular experiment.: then reality is non-local, if there is non-locality anywhere then there is some nonlocality everywhere In our movie and treatise on the PROOF, we established 8 steps pf proof for the non-local universe. Here they are again. Bell's theore is but just #5. Jesus taught us that the Meek will inherit the Earth. But today the Geek have stolen the Earth. The lizard mind of the Geek has taken over every aspect of our lives. Paper pushing, picayune, petty minds that over analyze and over regulate our lives. This Geek mind is selfless, without compassion, loveless, over critical and over demanding. The Geek mind is lizard like. It is cold blooded and slithers with evil self serving control. Geeks do
not believe in God. They do not believe in prayer. They want to stop anyone from learning of the power of the mind. They will try to stop this book. They do not want a message about the powers of the mind, the seeds of sin in the mind, or the ability to transcend . Proof Of the Powers of The Mind The most important argument in the world of science today is the clash between the people that believe in a Non-Local Universe versus those that believe in a Local Universe. Local people believe in the direct push pull, cause and effect action, and they do not believe in the power of the mind to effect things at a distance without a direct connection. They look for repeatability and worship statistics. Non-Local believers see a universe where there is prayer, spirit, a collective unconscious and a connection of all things . They know that there is a power of the mind to effect things and a level of connection of all things. The Steps of the Proof are : Step 1. The test of time: Humans have always felt the connection of mind and spirit. Every race of people and every tribe has had those who have greater abilities to use these powers of the mind. They know that there is a subtle but undeniable force of connection. The Bible, Koran, Bagavad Gita, the analects, and all of the religious beliefs are filled with every page referencing the power of spirit, prayer, faith, hope and God. This belief is Ageless , Universal, and Omnipresent. The test of time is met and if we had a vote on the conflict of Non-Local versus Local there would be landslide 99.9% for a Non-Local universe. The small ,09% of the people who believe in a Local universe, however have manipulated themselfs into supreme power. The Geeks laugh at the rest of us for believing in God. They control our lives with their Geek ways. We must take back our planet. Step 2. Quantum Theory : Physicists were shocked when they found that a very small quantic experiment could be influenced by the observer. This was called the observer effect and thus the world of science was changed forever when the Observer Effect was PROVED!!!!!. But the Geek mind had to rationalize and twist away from this truth. But the proof existed non the less and science was changed, although the Geeks have been able to use treacherous and false-hearted ridicule to control the damage. They laugh at those who accept the observer effect. The Geeks also control the funding for science and they stop funding for the open minded scientist who see the Non-Local universe. But now the tables are turned as that we laugh at the closed minded anal retentive Geek who’s small petty mind is unable to see the truth. Step 3.Medicine’s Paranoiac need for Double Blind. Medicine was shocked when they discovered the placebo effect. The mind of the researcher was able to effect the results of an experiment. The mind of a doctor can effect the patient. The mind of a patient can effect himself.From then on a double blind experiment was required. Proof of the powers of the mind, but still the Geeks twist on. Step 4. Fractal Complexity: What we do not know is so vast that it should be humbling. But it takes a lot to humble a Geek. Fractal complexity has shown that reductionism is now no longer a valid process of examining complex situations. Non-Linear chaos mathematics are needed. When we use this type of analysis we can see that a small change might produce a large change. This is known as the ‘Butterfly Effect” and it allows for the powers of the mind. Step 5. Bell’s Theorem. This basic theorem of Quantum Electro Dynamics has shown that twin photons can have instantaneous effects on each other even when light years apart. This has been PROVED theoretically and experimentally to the utmost level of science. But the Geek small mind has extreme powers of rationalization and self deception. The Geek mind still resist admitting that the Local universe is a false belief. To do this would take courage and fortitude, things that most Geeks do not have.
Step 6 . PEAR.= Princeton’s Engineering Anomalies Research :. After over a decade of research on the effects of the mind in a prestigious American university Princeton, there is undeniable proof of the power of the mind to effect things. The evidence is astounding for it’s quality and quantity and is without doubt PROOF. Step 7. The disbelievers always get test results that deny the proof: The hypothesis of our theory is that the mind can effect things. This means that those who disbelieve or scoff at the theory will only be able to get tests results that confirm there own disbelief. Why is it that when a researcher does a study that it usually confirms his original belief is because there is an effect of the mind. The Geek mind is simply unable to admit that the Geek mind was wrong or is there a much more sinister reason for the Geek disbelief. Step 8. The resistance to accepting the powers of the mind is great, in fact it is too great. The resistance is so incredibly great that it becomes PROOF : There appears that this resistance comes from such closed minded people and often psychologically unstable people. These critics will often shake and flush and get over compassionate in their attempt to dispel the powers of the mind. Their actions and reactions are so contrived and insecure that they cause wonder that perhaps there is an ulterior motive. Is there perhaps a plan to keep the powers of the mind away from the general public. For the small minded Geek, fear of humiliation and thus loss of futre standing and funding is much stronger than the persuit of truth. The Geeks will distract, discredit, dispel, and delay any attempt to communicate the powers of the mind. Their excessive zeal and obvious hidden agenda is slowly breaking down this resistance. Bibliography Foundation of Quantum Mechanics: Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi” Course 49, Bernard d’Espagnat ed. New York: Academics Press (1971). The Philoshophy of Quantum Mechanics, Max. Jammer. New York: Wiley (1974). Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (Second Edition), Bernard d’Espagnat. Reading, Mass.: W.A. Benjamin (1976). Quantum Theory and Measurement, John Archibald Wheeler & Wojciech Hubert Zurek eds. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press (1983)/ Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, Niels Bohr. New York: Wiley (1963)/ “The Copenhagen Interpretation”, Henry Stapp. American Journal of Physics 40 1098 (1972). “Law without Law” (*), John Archibald Wheeler (see Wheeler and Zurek, Ref. #4, p.182). Wholeness and the Implicate Order, David Bohm. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul (1980). The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Bryce DeWitt & R. Neill Graham. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press (1973). “The Logic of Quantum Physics”, David Finkelstein. Transactions of the NY Academy of Science 25 #6 621 (1965). “Quantum Logic”, Carl G. Adler & James F. Wirth. American Journal of Physics 51 412 (1983). “Remarks on the Mind – body Question” (*) in The Scientist Speculates, I.J. Good, ed. ; New York: Basic Books (1962). “Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics”, Henry P. Stapp. Foundations of Physics 12 363 (1982). A Survey of Hidden-Variables Theories, Frederik J. Belinfante. Oxford: Pergamon Press (1973). Quanutm Reality, Beyond the New Physics, Nick HerbertAnchor Books, New York (1985). “Measurement Understood through the Quantum Potential Approach”, David Bohm and Basil Hiley. Foundation of Physics 14 225 (1984). Physics and Philosophy, Werner Heisenberg. New York: Harper & Brothers (1958).
QED, The strange theory of light and matter R. P. Feynman, Princeton University Press, New Jersey,
2006.
„The Promorpheus”, W. Nelson, Original text published in 1992 as the Quantum Biology by the Academy
Press, NM USA Reprint and edited in 1996 by the Academy Press Budapest, Hungary.
Power, E. A. and Thirunamachandran, T. (1978). On the Nature of Hamiltonian for the Interaction of
Radiation with Atoms and Molecules: (e/mc)p.A, - µ.E, and All That, Am. J. Phys.46, 370.
Andrews, D.L. and Thirunamachandran, T. (1977). On Three-dimensional Rotation Averages, J. Phys. A14, 1281.
A Princeton Lab on ESP Plans to Close Its Doors
Richard Perry/The New York Times
Robert G. Jahn founded a Princeton laboratory that is closing after almost 30 years of disputed research on telekinesis and
the ability of the mind to influence machines. Brenda Dunne is the laboratory’s manager. Published: February 10, 2007
PRINCETON, N.J., Feb. 6 — Over almost three decades, a small laboratory at Princeton
University managed to embarrass university administrators, outrage Nobel laureates, entice
the support of philanthropists and make headlines around the world with its efforts to prove
that thoughts can alter the course of events.
But at the end of the month, the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research laboratory, or
PEAR, will close, not because of controversy but because, its founder says, it is time.
The laboratory has conducted studies on extrasensory perception and telekinesis from its
cramped quarters in the basement of the university’s engineering building since 1979. Its
equipment is aging, its finances dwindling.
“For 28 years, we’ve done what we wanted to do, and there’s no reason to stay and generate
more of the same data,” said the laboratory’s founder, Robert G. Jahn, 76, former dean of
Princeton’s engineering school and an emeritus professor. “If people don’t believe us after
all the results we’ve produced, then they never will.”
Princeton made no official comment.
The closing will end one of the strangest tales in modern science, or science fiction,
depending on one’s point of view. The laboratory has long had a strained relationship with
the university. Many scientists have been openly dismissive of it.
“It’s been an embarrassment to science, and I think an embarrassment for Princeton,” said
Robert L. Park, a University of Maryland physicist who is the author of “Voodoo Science:
The Road From Foolishness to Fraud.” “Science has a substantial amount of credibility, but
this is the kind of thing that squanders it.”
PEAR has been an anomaly from the start, a ghost in the machine room of physical science
that was never acknowledged as substantial and yet never entirely banished. Its longevity
illustrates the strength and limitations of scientific peer review, the process by which
researchers appraise one another’s work.
“We know people have ideas beyond the mainstream,” said the sociologist Harriet
Zuckerman, author of “Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States” and senior vice
president of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, ”but if they want funds for research they
have to go through peer review, and the system is going to be very skeptical of ideas that are
inconsistent with what is already known.”
Dr. Jahn, one of the world’s foremost experts on jet propulsion, defied the system. He relied
not on university or government money but on private donations — more than $10 million
over the years, he estimated. The first and most generous donor was his friend James S.
McDonnell, a founder of the McDonnell Douglas Corporation.
Those gifts paid for a small staff and a gallery of random-motion machines, including a
pendulum with a lighted crystal at the end; a giant, wall-mounted pachinko-like machine
with a cascade of bouncing balls; and a variety of electronic boxes with digital number
displays.
In one of PEAR’s standard experiments, the study participant would sit in front of an
electronic box the size of a toaster oven, which flashed a random series of numbers just
above and just below 100. Staff members instructed the person to simply “think high” or
“think low” and watch the display. After thousands of repetitions — the equivalent of coin
flips — the researchers looked for differences between the machine’s output and random
chance.
Analyzing data from such trials, the PEAR team concluded that people could alter the
behavior of these machines very slightly, changing about 2 or 3 flips out of 10,000. If the
human mind could alter the behavior of such a machine, Dr. Jahn argued, then thought
could bring about changes in many other areas of life — helping to heal disease, for instance,
in oneself and others.
This kind of talk fascinated the public and attracted the curiosity of dozens of students, at
Princeton and elsewhere. But it left most scientists cold. A physics Ph.D. and an electrical
engineer joined Dr. Jahn’s project, but none of the university’s 700 or so professors did.
Prominent research journals declined to accept papers from PEAR. One editor famously
told Dr. Jahn that he would consider a paper “if you can telepathically communicate it to
me.”
6
Historical Background Formal Experiment Methods and Data Primary Outcome Extended Analysis
GCP Background
By Roger Nelson
Laboratory Research
The history of controlled laboratory research on interactions of human consciousness with physical random systems tracks the development of microelectronics and computers. The first large database experiments were conducted by Helmut Schmidt, at Boeing Laboratories, in the late ’60s and early ’70s. The number of experiments and investigators grew over the next decade, and in 1979, Robert Jahn, at Princeton University, established the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) laboratory to focus on an engineering approach to the question whether sensitive electronic devices including random components might be affected by special states of consciousness, including strong emotions and directed intention. I joined the PEAR group in 1980.
REG Experiments
At the PEAR lab, the primary experiment used a custom designed Random Event
Generator (REG or RNG) incorporating a well-developed commercial source of electronic white noise. This bench-top experiment provided control over parameters such as the speed and size of the samples drawn from the random sequence of bits. For example, it might be set to collect a 200 bit sample at a rate of 1000 bits per second, and to register a trial each second consisting of the sum of the 200 bits. The equipment displayed the current output trial value and a running mean as feedback to the operator. The experiment used a tripolar protocol, with instructions to maintain an intention to achieve either a high or a low mean, or to let the machine generate baseline data. Over more than a decade this basic experiment yielded an enormous database, with a bottom line indicating a small but significant effect of human intention on random data sequences. A paper describing 12 years of research at PEAR, using several different mind-machine interaction experiments, is available.
FieldREG
My job at PEAR was to coordinate the research, focusing on experimental design and analysis. An important task was to computerize the REG experiment for security and ease of data processing, and to allow greater flexibility in experimental design. I had proposed early on to record a continuously running random data stream, and to use that as a target for intention with a variety of timing and assignment schemes. Such a system was finally developed in the early 1990’s, when John Bradish built the first of a series of truly portable REG devices, and York Dobyns wrote software to record and index a continuous datastream of 200-bit trials, one per second, hour after hour and day after day. The continuous REG was used as a direct focus for some experiments, with intentions identified in the index, but we also could mark and later analyse data collected while something else was going on in the room—another experiment, or perhaps a small, intense meeting or group discussion.
Given portable REG devices and newly available laptop computers, we were inspired to take the experiment into the field, running a modified version of the continuous software called FieldREG. The name was a double entendre, since the purpose of the experiment was to monitor something that might be regarded as a consciousness field. The FieldREG experiment (1) did not have an intention, and indeed could be used to gather data in situations with little or no direct interest or attention from people. We looked for situations that might produce a group consciousness because people would be engaged in a common focus, resulting in a kind of coherence or resonance of thoughts and emotions. For contrast, we identified other, mundane situations we predicted would not bring people to a shared focus. A long series of FieldREG experiments
(2) produced striking, statistically significant results. As for those in the laboratory, the effects for these field experiments are small, but they have implications of substantial importance for studies of human consciousness, assuming the results represent what we believe they do.
Prototype Global Tests
Other investigators, including Dean Radin and Dick Bierman, began doing similar field experiments looking at a broad array of situations, and we set up collaborations. For example, Dean asked some colleagues to collect data during the O. J. Simpson trial, which was expected to garner attention from huge numbers of people. The combined data from several REGs showed an impressive departure from expectation at the time the verdict was announced. Other tests looked at data taken during the Oscars, with segregation of the data into periods of strong and weak interest. Again the difference was significant.
In December 1996 I met by chance two people who were organizing a global Gaiamind
Meditation. This meeting coincided with the developing idea of attempting to register some indication of a global consciousness, making a kind of FieldREG-style group consciousness experiment in the large scale. The coincidence led me to arrange a collaboration with colleages who could record REG data that might show evidence of
a consciousness field during the Gaiamind event. The composite of data from 14 independent REG systems showed a significant effect.
This work was a prelude for an attempt to register effects of the world-wide expression of compassion at Princess Diana's funeral in September of 1997, which, coincidentally, was followed exactly a week later by the memorial ceremonies for Mother Teresa. These were prototypical global events for the Global Consciousness Project, in that they were the focus of a great deal of attention, and especially in the case of Princess Diana, also occasions for an unusually widespread feeling of shared compassion.
Establishing the EGG Project
In November 1997, at a meeting of professional researchers in parapsychology and psychophysiology, the various component ideas for what ultimately became the Global Consciousnes Project (GCP) coalesced into a practical form. The technology was becoming available to create an Internet-based array of continuously recording REG nodes placed around the world. This would metaphorically resemble the placement of electrodes on a human head for Electroencephalogram or EEG recordings, though of course the data would not be fluctuating voltages, but randomly varying numbers. The resemblance led Greg Nelson, one of our sophisticated programmers, to suggest the network could be envisioned as an Electrogaiagram, and we began to call it the EGG Project. We later adopted the formal name Global Consciousness Project but continue to use an efficient terminology based on the EGG acronym and associations.
Hardware
Three kinds of random sources are used in the project. They all were developed for use in research and all are high quality sources that produce random data (bit sequences) meeting stringent criteria. The data are difficult to distinguish from theoretical expectation in calibration runs, although as real, physical devices, they cannot be perfectly random. All use a quantum level process, either thermal noise or electron tunneling for the fundamental source of random fluctuation. Each device is subjected to a rigorous calibration process based on at least one million 200-bit trials before being placed in service. They have shielding, and we also use a logical operation to eliminate bias from environmental influences such as electromagnetic fields, temperature changes, and component aging.
Software
The original software architecture for the project was designed by Greg Nelson, and refined by John Walker. It was well-considered, and has served with little modification since the beginning of the project. The primaryoperational software consists of two parts. At each of the host sites around the world an REG (or RNG) device is attached to a computer running the eggsh or egg.exe software (for Linux and Windows, respectively). The software collects one trial consisting of 200 bits each second, and stores the sum of the bits as the raw data. The indexed sequence of trials is recorded in a daily file on the
host computer. The computer is connected to the Internet, and sends a packet of data at regular intervals (5 mins) to a server located in Princeton, NJ, running a program called the basket, which writes the data as it arrives from each egg into a permanent archive. The software is open source and available for inspection.
Host Sites
When one of the qualified hardware random sources is combined with the project software running on an Internet-connected computer, we call the resulting unit an Egg, hosted by a volunteer contributor. Host computers also run a program that synchronizes their clocks to network timeservers, to keep the independent data sequences synchronized to the second. The early egg hosts were colleagues in Europe and the US. As word of the project spread, people from other parts of the world volunteered to host an egg, and we gradually built a fairly broad geographic coverage. Approximately 40 countries are represented, in most continents, and in most timezones with substantial populations.
Data Archive
At the heart of the research project is the archival database. The raw data are stored in a binary format with header information to identify the specific source and timing for every trial. A web-based data extract forminvokes scripts to decode the archive and present the specified data for inspection or analysis in a readable format. A completely normalized and standardized version of the data can be made available for well-defined research and analysis projects.
Website
The development and major features of the project are presented here on the GCP website, which is split into two tracks. One documents the rigorous scientific work we do to ensure the quality of the data and the analyses designed to identify and assess any anomalous structure that may appear in the data. The other branch presents a complementary, aesthetic approach to the project, fostering the subjective and interpretive perspectives that we believe are also valuable in efforts to study the subtle aspects of consciousness interacting with the physical world. In addition to the descriptions, the website is the repository for our primary analyses and summaries, and it provides access to the data.
Support
The GCP is affiliated with the Institute of Noetic Sciences, which manages our non-profit logistics, and hosts occasional meetings. The project has been supported from the beginning by generous contributions of time and expertise as well as money to defray expenses. A long list of people are responsible but I would like especially to note the help in various forms from Greg Nelson, John Walker, Dean Radin, Paul Bethke, Richard
Adams, Peter Bancel, and Rick Berger. The full list is much longer, and includes the egg
hosts as well.
The GCP Experiment
We begin the description of the Experiment with a short list of links to particular aspects. Some of this material is also found in later sections of this page, but this is a convenient menu of important items.
The hypothesis
Random sources
Normalizing data
Methodology
Data archive
Hypotheses
Formal results
Explorations
The GCP recorded its first data on August 4, 1998. Beginning with a few random sources, the network grew to about 10 instruments by the beginning of 1999, and to 28 by 2000. It has continued to grow, stabilizing at roughly 60 to 65 eggs by 2004.
The early experiment simply asked whether the network was affected when powerful events caused large numbers of people to pay attention to the same thing. This experiment was based on a hypothesis registryspecifying a priori for each event a period of time and an analysis method to examine the data for changes in statistical measures. Various other modes of analysis including attempts to find general correlations of GCP statistics with other longitudinal variables have been considered, and continue to be developed.
Purpose
In the most general sense, the purpose of the project was and is to create and document a consistent database of parallel streams of random numbers generated by high-quality physical sources. The goal is to determine whether any correlations might be detectable of statistics from these data with independent long-term physical or sociological variables. In the original experimental design we asked the more limited question whether there is a detectable correlation of deviations from randomness with the occurrence of major events in the world.
Hypothesis
Periods of collective attention or emotion in widely distributed populations will correlate with deviations from expectation in a global network of physical random number generators.
The formal hypothesis of the original event-based experiment is very broad. It posits that engaging global events will correlate with deviations in the data. We use operational definitions to establish unambigously what is done in the experiment. The identification of events and the times at which they occur are specified case by case, as are the statistical recipes. The approach explicitly preserves some latitude of choice, as is appropriate for an experiment exploring new territory. Accepting loose criteria for event identification allows exploration of a variety of categories, while the specification of a rigorous, simple hypothesis test for each event in the formal series assures valid statistics. These are combined to yield a confidence level for the composite of all formal trials. This bottom line constitutes a general test of the broadly defined formal hypothesis, and characterizes a well-understood database for further analysis.
Analytical Recipes
For a more up to date discussion of formal analysis, see The GCP Event Experiment by Bancel and Nelson, 2008, and Exploring Global Consciousness by Nelson and Bancel, 2010 (in press, actually—so the link will be dead for a while).
The formal events are fully specified in a hypothesis registry. Over the years, several different analysis recipes were invoked, though most analyses specify the network variance (Squared Stouffer Z). A few specify thedevice variance, which is the inter-RNG variance (Sum of Z^2). After the first few months, during which several statistical recipes were tried, the network variance (netvar) became the standard method which was adopted for almost all events in the formal series. The event-based experiment thus has explored several potentially useful analyses, but has focused primarily on the netvar.
The event statistics usually are calculated at the trial level—1 second—though other blocking is possible. The trial statistics are combined across the total time of the event to yield the formal result. The results table has links to details of the analyses, typically including a cumulative deviation graph tracing the history of the second-by-second deviations during the event, leading to the terminal value which is the test statistic. The following table shows the precise algorithms for the basic statistics used in the analyses.
Control Data
It is possible to generate various kinds of controls, including matched analysis with a time offset in the actual database, or matched analysis using a pseudorandom clone database. However, the most general control analysis is achieved by comparisons with the empirical distributions of the test statistics. The event data comprise less than 2% of the whole database, and the non-event data can be used for resampling to produce a distribution ofcontrol events with the parameters of the formal events, but random start times. These provide a rigorous control background and confirm the analytical results for the formal series of hypothesis tests. See the figure below, created by Peter Bancel using a reduced dataset beginning December 1998 and ending December 2009, which compares the cumulative formal result against a background of 500 resampled controls.
(click for larger image)
Compound Result
Over the 12 years since the inception of the project, over 325 replications of the basic hypothesis test have been accumulated. The composite result is a statistically significant departure from expectation of roughly 6 standard deviations as of late 2010. This strongly supports the formal hypothesis, but more important, it provides a sound basis for deeper analysis using refined methods to re-examine the original findings and extend them using other methods. These potentials are developed in recent papers, including The GCP Event Experiment by Bancel and Nelson, 2008. The full formal dataset as of April 2012 is shown in the next figure, where it is compared with a background of simulated pseudo-event sequences by drawing random Z-scores from the (0,1) normal distribution. As in the resampling case, it is obvious that the real data are from a different population. Note, however, that it takes a few dozen events to reach a point where the real score accumulation is clearly distinguishable from the simulations.
Sharpening the Focus
The focus of our effort turns now to a more comprehensive program of rigorous analyses and incisive questions intended to characterize the data more fully and to facilitate the identification of any non-random structure. We begin with thorough documentation of the analytical and methodological background for the main result, to provide a basis for new hypotheses and experiments. The goal is to increase both the depth and breadth of our assessments, to develop models that can help distinguish classes of potential explanations. Essentially, we are looking for good tools that will give us a better understanding of the data deviations.
Deeper Assessments
A variety of analyses have been undertaken to establish the quality of the data and characterize the output of individual devices and the network as a whole. The first stage is a careful search for any data that are problematic because of equipment failure or other mishap. Such data are removed. With all bad data removed, each individual REG or RNG can be characterized to provide empirical estimates for statistical parameters. This also allows a shift of analytical emphasis from the events to trial-level data in order to extract more structural information from the database. The approach is to convert the database into a normalized, completely reliable data resource that facilitates rigorous
analysis. The trial-level data allow a richer assessment of the multi-year database using sophisticated statistical and mathematical techniques. We can use a broader range of statistical tools to look for small but reliable changes from expected random distributions that may be correlated with natural or human-generated variables.
Real Devices vs Theory
Ideally, the trials recorded from the REGs follow the binomial [200, 0.5] distribution, with expected mean 100, variance 50. However, although they all are high-quality random sources, perfect theoretical performance is not expected for these real-world devices. A logical XOR of the raw bit-stream with a fixed pattern of bits with exactly 0.5 probability compensates mean biases of the regs.
After XOR'ing, the mean is guaranteed over the long run to fit theoretical expectation. The trial variances remain biased, however. The biases are small (about 1 part in 10,000) and generally stable on long timescales. We treat them as real, albeit tiny biases that need to be corrected by normalization for rigorous analysis. They are corrected by converting the trialsums for each individual egg to standard normal variables (z-scores), based on the emprirical standard deviations.
Deeper Analysis of the Event-based Experiment
The normalized and standardized data resource allows us to do a rigorous re-analysis of the experiment. The result is little different from the original analysis, but provides confidence in the foundation for new analytical investigations. These include the development of orthogonal, independent measures of structure in the event data, and examination of questions of temporal and spatial structure implicit in the general hypothesis. A 2008 assessment is detailed in The GCP Event Experiment by Bancel and Nelson, Journal of Scientific Exploration, March 2008.
A reader asked for references to papers on EEG correlation experiments between isolated people. The
following list may not be exhaustively complete, it is not in any particular order, and it includes a few
fMRI studies. I am aware of at least one other published paper by Grinberg-Zilberbaum et al, but I don't
have that reference handy. Study 5 is, I think, relevant but is not a psi study.
1. Achterberg, J., Cooke, K., Richards, T., Standish, L.J.,Leila Kozak, L. & Lake, J.. (2005). Evidence for
Correlations Between Distant Intentionality and Brain Function in Recipients: a Functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging Analysis. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 11, 6, 965–971.
2. Duane TD, Behrendt T. Extrasensory electroencephalographic induction between identical twins.
Science 1965, 150-367.
3. Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J. & Ramos, J. (1987). Patterns of interhemispheric correlation during human
communication. International Journal of Neuroscience, 36, 41-53.
4. Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J., Delaflor, M., Attie, L. & Goswami, L. (1994). The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen
paradox in the brain: The transferred potential. Physics Essays, 7,422–428
5. Hasson U., Nir Y., LevyI., Fuhrmann G., & Malach R. (2004). Intersubject synchronization of cortical
activity during natural vision. Science 303, 1634– 1640.
6. Hearne K. Visually evoked responses and ESP. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 1977, 49,
648-657.
7. Hearne K. Visually evoked responses and ESP: Failure to replicate previous findings. J Society for
Psychical Research 1981, 51, 145-147.
8. Kalitzin S. & Suffczynski P. (2003). Comments on “Correlations between brain electrical activities of
two spatially separated human subjects”. Neuroscience Letters 350, 193–194.
9. Kelly EF, Lenz J. EEG changes correlated with a remote stroboscopic stimulus: A preliminary study. In
Morris J, Roll W, Morris R. J (eds.). Research in Parapsychology 1975, Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, p.
58-63 (abstracted in Journal of Parapsychology, 1975, 39, 25) 1976.
10. Kittenis M, Carul P, Stevens P. Distant psychophysiological interaction effects between related and
unrelated participants, Proceedings of the Parapsychological Association Convention 2004, 67-
76(meeting held in Vienna, Austria, August 5-8, 2004).
11. Lloyd DH. Objective events in the brain correlating with psychic phenomena. New Horizons, 1973, 1,
69-75.
12. May, E. C., Targ, R. & Puthoff, H. E. (2002). EEG correlates to remote light flashes under conditions of
sensory shielding. In C. T. Tart, H. E. Puthoff & R. Targ (Eds.). Mind at large: IEEE symposia on the
nature of extrasensory perception. Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing Company, 1979/2002
13. Millar B. An attempted validation of the “Lloyd effect.” In Morris JD, Roll WG, Morris RL. (eds.).
Research in Parapsychology 1975, Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 25-27.Millay J. Multidimensional
Mind: Remote Viewing in Hyperspace. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books, 1999.
14. Moulton ST, Kosslyn SM. Using neuro-imaging to resolve the psi debate. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience. 2008; 20(1): 182-192.
15. (deleted -- it was a duplicate entry)
16. Orme-Johnson, D.W., Dillbeck, M.C., Wallace, R. K.& Landrith, G. S. (1982). Intersubject EEG
coherence: Is consciousness a field? International Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 203-209.
17. Radin D. Event-related electroencephalographic correlations between isolated human subjects. J
Altern Complement Med 2004, 10, 315–323.
18. Rebert, C. S. & Turner, A. (1974). EEG spectrum analysis techniques applied to the problem of psi
phenomena. Behavioral Neuropsychiatry, 6, 18–24
19. Richards TL, Kozak, L, Johnson LC, Standish LJ. (2005). Replicable functional magnetic resonance
imaging evidence of correlated brain signals between physically and sensory isolated subjects. Journal of
Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 11(6), 955–963.
20. Sabell, A., Clarke, C. & Fenwick, P. (2001). Inter-Subject EEG correlations at a distance—the
transferred potential. In: Alvarado, CS, ed. Proceedings of the 44th Annual Convention of the
Parapsychological Association, New York, NY, pp. 419–422
21. Schmidt, S., Schneider, R., Utts, J., Walach, H. (2004). Distant intentionality and the feeling of being
stared at: Two meta-analyses. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 235–247. [Note: This describes meta-
analyses of 3 dozen ANS tests, not CNS.]
22. Shealy CN, Smith T, Liss S, Borgmeyer V. EEG alterations during absent ‘healing.’ Subtle Energies
2000, 11(3), 241-248.
23. Standish L et al. J. Electroencephalographic evidence of correlated event-related signals between the
brains of spatially and sensory isolated human subjects. J. Alternative and Complementary Medicine
2004, 10(2), 307-314.
24. Standish L, Johnson LC, Richards T, Lozak L. Evidence of correlated functional MRI signals between
distant human brains. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 2003, 9, 122-128.
25. Sugano H, Uchida S, Kuramoto I. A new approach to the study of subtle energies. Subtle Energies
1994, 5(2), 143-165.
26. Targ, R & Puthoff, H. (1974). Information transmission under conditions of sensory shielding. Nature,
252, 602-607.
27. Tart, C. T. (1963). Possible physiological correlates of psi cognition. International Journal of
Parapsychology, 5, 375.386.
28. Vassy, Z. (1978). Method for measuring the probability of 1 bit extrasensory information transfer
between living organisms. Journal of Parapsychology, 42, 158-160;
29. Wackerman, J, Seiter, C, Keibel, Walach, H. Correlations between brain electrical activities of two
spatially separated human subjects. Neuroscience Letters 2003, 336, 60-64.
30. Wackermann J. (2003). Correlations between brain electrical activities of two spatially separated
human subjects. Reply to the commentary by S. Kalitzin and P. Suffczynski. Neuroscience Letters 350,
194.
31. Wackermann, J. (2004). Dyadic correlations between brain functional states: Present facts and future
perspectives. Mind and Matter, 2 (1), 105-122.
32. Walach H., Seiter C., and Keibel H. (2001). Transferred potentials – fact or artefact? Results of a pilot
study. In Bridging Worlds and Filling Gaps in the Science of Healing, Ed. R. A. Chez, Samueli Institute for
Information Biology, Hawaii, pp. 303–325.
33. Blake T. Dotta, Bryce P. Mulligan, Mathew D. Hunter, Michael A. Persinger (2009). Evidence of
macroscopic quantum entanglement during double quantitative electroencephalographic measurements
of friends vs strangers. NeuroQuantology, Vol 7, Issue 4, Page 548-551.
34. Michael A Persinger, Eric W Tsang, J Nicholas Booth, Stanley A Koren. (2008). Enhanced power
within a predicted narrow band of theta activity during stimulation of another by circumcerebral weak
magnetic fields after weekly spatial proximity: Evidence for macroscopic quantum entanglement?
NeuroQuantology, Vol 6, No 1, Page 7-21.
