Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
November 4, 2016
Document Release Date: 
March 22, 2000
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
January 1, 1974
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4.pdf4.58 MB
STANFORD RESEARCH INSTITUTE Menlo Park, California 94025 ? U.S.A. Progress Report No. 3 Covering the Period 1 April to 1 August 1974 Stanford Research Institute Project 3183 PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES . by Harold E. Puthoff Client Private Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 New Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 OBJECTIVE The purpose of the program is to determine the characteristics of those perceptual modalities through which individuals obtain information about their environment, wherein such information is not presented to any known sense. The program is divided into two categories of investigation of approximately equal effort, applied research and basic research. The purpose of the applied research effort is to explore experimentally the potential for applications of perceptual abilities of interest, with special attention given t6 accuracy and reliability. The purpose of the basic research effort is to identify the characteristics of individUals possessing such abilities, and to identify neurophysiological correlates and basic mechanisms involved ,in such functioning. Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 A. Applied Research 1. Remote Viewing (a) Project Atlas Remote Viewing A remote-viewing experiment has been carried out on a client- designated target of interest, a European R&D test facility. The experiment, carried out in three phases, had as its goal the determination of the utility of remote-viewing under operational conditions. In phase I, map coordinates Were furnished to the experimenters, the only additional information provided being the designation of the target as an R&D test facility. The experimenters then carried out a remote viewing experiment with Subject 1,t2wOmm) on a double-blind basis. The results of the experiment were turned over to client representatives for data evaluation. Figure 1 shows the level of detail for a sample early effort at building layout, and Figure 2 shows the subject's first effort at drawing a gantry crane he observed, both results being obtained on a double-blind basis before exposure to client-held information. An artist's conception of the site as known to the client (but not to contract personnel)prior to the experiment is shown in Figure 3. Were the results not promising, the experiment would have stopped at this point. The results were judged Co be of sufficiently good quality, however, that Phase II was entered in which the subject was made witting by client representatives. A second round of experimentation ensued with participation * Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 UI Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 ? a ? ? 6 4* ? a ex a ib fro Ant Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Rele -2"-` 08110- : CIA= -- 4,,, ? 200010007-4 iv- "Ve e A: . via I - w ?? , t - I" -,--6--------___n r? ? V ????? - k / FIGURE 2 SUBJECT EFFORT AT CRANE. CONSTRUCTION Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 -4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 of client representatives. The Phase II effort was focussed on the generation of physical data which could be client-verified, providing a calibration in the process. The enct,of Phase II gradually evolved into the first part of Phase III, the generation of unverifiable data not available to the client, but of interest nonetheless. Evaluation of the data by the client is under- way. (b) Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment Subjects L:1 and 4 participated in a long-distance experiment involving a Central American target series. In this experiment, one of the experimenters (Dr. Puthoff) spent a week traveling through Costa Rica on a combination business/pleasure trip. That is all that was known to the subjects about the traveler's itinerary. The experiment called for Dr. Puthoff to keep a detailed record of his location And activities, including photographs, each day at 1330 PDT. Six daily responses were obtained from Subject 1, five from Subject 4. The results were of high quality and are presently being eval ated in detail, containing as they did a large amount of material. of that data are as follows. Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject 4, two Were in excellent agreement, two had elements in common but were not clear correspondences, and one was clearly a miss. In the first of the two matches, Dr. Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain at the base of a volcano (Figure 4) and the subject's response was "large bare table mountain, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96709\18/74R00020 f"-4 v e below, dark cool moist atmosphere," a match both with regard to topography and ambience. In the second match the subject submitted that all she got was a "picture of Dr. Puthoff sitting in a beach chair by a pool," which was entirely correct. _ During the course of the Central America experiment, on one occasion when the test subject was.unavailable, an experimenter volunteered a drawing of an image he obtained at the beginning of one of the daily ex- periments. (The target for that day was an airport, an unexpected target associated with.a Side excursion at midpoint of the week's activity.) The match was good, as shOwn in Figures 5 andA. The transcript data will be examined further to determine fine structure, resolution, etc. (c) Local Targets with Feedback In this series of experiments, designed to give immediate data to experimenters, a subject is asked to take part in a remote viewing experiment under the following conditions. The subject and two experimenters (one of whom was R.T.) are in a first floor laboratory in building 30 at SRI. A second experimenter (H.P.) leaves the area and proceeds to a remote location-of his choosing. None of the experimenters with the subject knew of the remote target location- H.P. and R.T. are in two-way radio communication via walkie-talkie, (a) to provide the experimenter at the target location real-time data and (b) to give the subject immediate feedback after he has made his assessment of the target, Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 FIGURE 4 TERRAIN AT BASE OF VOLCANO USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET FIGURE 5 AIRPORT IN SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET SA-2613-19 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 SA-2613-20 FIGURE 6 SKETCH PRODUCED BY SUBJECT FROM SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, AIRPORT USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 By this means the subject has an opportunity to learn to separate real from imagined images. This is not considered to be a demonstration-of-ability test, but rather a training step on a gradient scale of ability. In many of these experiments we monitor physiological correlates as discussed in Section B.3 (b). (Nine of these experiments have been completed to date, seven with the measurements of physiological correlates.) The following is a sample of an experiment with Subject 4. In this experiment we monitored physiolocial.correlates of the remote viewing activity. As is apparent in the following text, the subject initially had only a fragmentary picture of the remote site, but with what we judge to be a small amount of feedback, the subject was able to put images together into a correct description. Accompanying the verbal description presented below is a photograph of the actual scene at the remote location (Fig. 7). The experimenter with the subject (R.T.) was, as always, kept ignorant of the target location to prevent guidance in the questioning. The capital letters signify walkie-talkie communication. R.T.: It is now 12:35. S-4: ....very strong a zigzag that goes thiswway,- vertically. R.T.; 5-4's FIRST IMPRESSION IS OF A VERY STRONG DIAGONAL ZIGZAG THAT'S GOING .VERTICALLY. OVER. (Talking on walkie talkie to HOP,) H.P.: THERE IS A STRONG ZIGZAG AT MY PLACE, BUT IT IS NOT VERTICAL BUT RATHER HORIZONTAL; BUT IF SHE IS LOOKING FROM THE AIR, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE, OVER, R.T.: Can you tell what the zigzag is attached to? Whether it's part of a building or a fence on the ground? Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 R.T.: It's 12:41. 5-4: My head gets in the way now that he's said that it's horizontal. I usually think of a fence. R.T.: Why don't you go up and look down and view the whole thing from above and see if you can get the whole gestalt of where he is. 5-4: definitely a non-yegetation...almost no vegetation around. It's mostly concrete and whatever that zigzag is--either water or steel--shiny, zigzag,..definitely shiny. R.T.: 7267, THE ZIGZAG IS A SHINY THING WHETHER rr's STEEL OR 5-4: Water.. R.T.: WATER, WE CAN'T TELL. IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VEGETATION--NO VEGETATION AROUND:,.. 5-4: Mostly concrete. . R.T.: IT'S MOSTLY CONCRETE... S-4: He's standing on concrete.... R.T: YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE. OVER, H.P.: IT CERTAINLY IS TRUE THAT THIS IS SHINY AND IN MY NEAR VICINITY IT IS BARREN AND CONCRETE OR CONCRETE-COLORED EARTH, SHE SAID THAT IT LOOKED LIKE STEEL OR WATER. CAN SHE MAKE THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE TWO? R.T.: He wants to know whether it looks more like steel or water. S-4: It seems to have movement--that's why I would deduce that it's water. R.T.: What if you try to look at the whole thing, S-4: I'm trying to get an eagle's eye view. That's a waterworks. Why does it look like a waterworks? In what way? S-4: There seems to be a man-made layout of channels and connections to conduct it. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 R.T.: 5-4 SEES MOMENT IN THE ZIGZAG THING, SO SHE THINKS THAT IT'S WATER, AND A KIND OF LAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH IT WAS A MAN-MADE WATERWORKS WITH WATER RUNNING IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS. OVER. H.P. THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT. IT IS A ZIGZAG MAN-MADE WATER CHANNEL WITH CONCRETE SIDES. OVER. 5-4: I can't believe it. rigaThe above is an excerpt from an early experiment, and is typical, rather VI a sample of exceptionally good quality. That experiment continued with four more site descriptions, three of which were of equal quality. One experiment of this nature has been carried out with Subject 1, one with Subject 2, two with Subject 3, and five with Subject 4. A number of descriptions were essentially free of error and with no feedback other than verification following the remote viewer's description. A complete analysis is to be carried out on these transcripts following more experimentation. To date it appears that the viewing is weak in the following areas: (a) perspective and dimension are often distorted (an :eight foot tower is taken to be 50 feet tall, a 20 foot separation between buildings may appear to be 100 feet, etc,) and, (b) written material generally cannot be read. (d) Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing In two remote viewing experiments, the second of which was clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort was made to determine whether in driving the subject around the area it would be possible to determine the location of the target team by triangulation with a bearing compass. The triangulation lines were essentially uncorrelated with each other and with the target location, and therefore provided a null result. Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 B. Basic Research In addition to the testing of individuals under conditions which yield data indicating the feasibility of the application of paranormal abilities to operational needs, fifty percent of the effort is devoted to:. 1. Identification of measurable characteristics possessed by gifted individuals (20%); 2. Identification of neurophysiological correlates which relate to paranormal activities (207); 3. Identification of the nature of paranormal phenomena and energy (10%). To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be ful- filled during thecourse of experimentation: 1) establish3and apply criteria to differentiate between those for whom paranormal ability is considered :to be functional and those for whom it is not; 2) obtain sufficient medical and psychological data to establish baseline profiles against which (a) one individual may be compared with another, and (b) an individual may be compared to himself at different times to determine whether para- normal functioning Occurs in an altered neurophysiological state, 3) specific validation experiments must be conducted with sufficient control to ensure that all conventional communication paths are blocked, and with outcomes sufficiently unambiguous to determine whether paranormal functioning occurred; 4) obtain neurophysicological data during experimentation to Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 RS 18 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 CIA-RDP96,00187R000200010007-4 '7 I_ ASS, FiCATION determine those correlates, if any, which relate to paranormal activity. 1 I In the following paragraphs, each of these items is considered in turn and the progress to date reported. The milestone chart for the basic re- search program is shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accordance With the schedule prepared for this program, and the remaining time and 1 funds are sufficient to meet all program objectives. 1. Criteria for the Determination of Gifted Individuals One of the key issues in the program is the establishment of criteria capable of differentiating individuals apparently gifted i paranormal functioning from those who are not. Three experimental paradigms were chosen to act as screening. ,tests on the basis that these tests had been useful for such purposes 'prior tO this program ( in the sense that certain apparently gifted ? individuals did exceedingly well on at least one of the tests, whereas the results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from chance expectation). The. tests are (a) remote viewing of natural targets, (b) reproduction of simple line drawings hidden from the subject but vie1jed ly an experimenter, and (c) determination of the state of a four-state elec- . i tronic random stimulus generator. - The first test Constitutes a so-called "free-response" paradigm in which the subject originates freely about contents of his awareness; furthermore, the channel in general may involve both direct perception of the remote site and perception of the Mental contents of an observer ON Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Cs! CO 9 CDCO Cs! a) L_ 0 u_ -a 0. TABLE 1 PROGRAM SCHEDULE - 11 FMAMJJASONDJr MO Tllo 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1. Set up neurophysiological lab with computer /II processing debugged. 2. W.A.I.S. testing of subjects by client rill1111111 . Measure neurophysiological correlates during paranormal experimentation a) paranormal EEG experiments b) other paranormal experimentation I MOM igli 1111111 OM= 4. Work to determine nature of energies involved (gradiometer, etc.) 5. Medical testing, including special testing II 11111 . Neuropsychological testing 1111 1111 . Psychological testing, including in-depth interview IIIIIIIIIIII II fill 8. Correlate data and consider theoretical models I II 1111911 9. Prepare final report III Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000200010007-4 at the site. The second test is more constrained than the first in that the target information is more analytical or abstract, being associated with a graphical representation of an item of interest rather than the item itself. The third test is the most constrained in that the target is blind to all participants in the experiment and the subject's choice is precisely constrained. The details of these tests are given below. For the purpose of screening the criteria as to what constitutes a paranormal result was chosen arbitrarily, viz: For the purpose of screening a result is to be considered paranormal if the a priori probability for the occurrence of the result by chance, 1 p