Post by ARENIS on Oct 28, 2018 15:46:57 GMT
There have been lots of studies of EEG or MRT brain states correlations. Especially measuered between people who have a close relationship or who meditate together (or both).
E.g. if one person is 'excited' with stimuli and the brain is measured in one room, the other person shows the same brain (EEG) reaction in a distant room or location.
Dean Radin, researcher at the IONS institute, made a list on his blog in 2010 about the many studies (so far, they might be more now!):
Brain Correlation Experiments
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 narrowband 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.
Brain Correlation Experiments
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 narrowband 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.
I did a post in that same year also on the AstralDynamics forum. Many of the links given are now broken though.
Example 1:
Abstract:
"Alpha rhythms have been elicited in one of a pair of identical twins as
a result of evoking these rhythms in a conventional manner solely in
the other."
Source:
Duane TD, Behrendt T. (Department of Ophthalmology, Jefferson Medical College. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania):
"Extrasensory Electroencephalographic Induction between Identical Twins". Science 1965;150:367.
www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/a ... 0/3694/367
www.pap-imi.de/twins.jpg
Example 2:
"Objective: To determine whether correlated event-related potentials
(ERPs) can be detected between the brains of spatially and sensory
isolated human subjects.
Design and setting: Simultaneous digitized electroencephalograms (EEGs)
were recorded from the occipital area in pairs of human subjects placed
in sound attenuated rooms separated by 10 meters. One person relaxed in
one of the rooms while the other received visual stimulation while in
the other room. Prior to each experiment, members of the pair were
randomly designated as sender and receiver. Sessions were subsequently
repeated with subjects reversing their roles. Previous to each session,
the sender was instructed "to attempt sending an image/thought." The
receiver was instructed "to remain open to receive any image/thought
from his/her partner." Alternating stimulus-on/stimulus-off conditions
were presented throughout the session to the sender, while a
stimulus-off condition was presented to the receiver.
Subjects: Thirty-seven (37) female, and 23 male subjects (n = 60; 30
pairs) participated in the study. Subjects knew each other well and
claimed to have previous experience of being emotionally/psychologically
connected to one another.
Outcome measures: A Runs test was applied to compare EEG "hits" in the
receiver's EEG during the sender' stimulus-on condition versus sender's
stimulus-off conditions. Test results at p < 0.01 were considered
evidence of correlated brain signals. Pairs in whom at least one member
had significant results were invited back for replication.
Results: Of the 60 subjects tested, 5 (4 women/1 man) showed
significantly higher brain activation (p < 0.01) during their sending
partner's stimulus-on condition as compared to stimulus-off condition.
Using the Stouffer z meta-analytic method all receiver EEG results
across all 60 subjects were combined by transforming the individual
session p values into z scores. Data analyses showed overall significant
results for EEG data recorded during the flickering condition (z
=-3.28, p = 0.0005) as well as nonsignificant results for data recorded
during the static condition (z = 0.35, p = 0.64). Four pairs
participated in a replication experiment during which one pair
replicated the effect.
Conclusions: These results indicate that in some pairs of human subjects
a signal may be detected in the brain of a distant member of the pair
when the brain of the other member is visually stimulated. These data
support the findings of similar studies performed in seven laboratories
reported in the peer-reviewed literature since 1963. Research in this
area should now proceed with investigation of its physical and biologic
mechanism, its generalizability to varying populations and
relationships, and its clinical application."
Source:
Leanna J. Standish, Leila Kozak, L. Clark Johnson, Todd Richards:
"Electroencephalographic Evidence of Correlated Event-Related Signals
Between the Brains of Spatially and Sensory Isolated Human Subjects"
The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. April 2004, 10(2): 307-314. doi:10.1089/107555304323062293.
Bastyr University/University of Washington Consciousness Science Laboratory, Bastyr University, Kenmore, WA.
www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10 ... 4323062293
Example 3:
"Objectives: Previous electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments
have suggested that correlated neural signals may be detected in the brains of individuals who are
physically and sensorily isolated from each other. Functional MRI and EEG methods were used in the present
study in an attempt to replicate these findings.
Design/settings: Subjects were electrically and magnetically shielded
because of the characteristic surroundings of the scanner room. During
the experiment, the nonstimulated subject was placed in the scanner with
sensory isolating goggles covering the subject’s eyes. The stimulated
subject was placed 30 feet away and sat in front of a video monitor
that presented an alternating schedule of six stimulus-on/stimulus-off
conditions. The stimulus- on condition consisted of a flickering
checkerboard pattern whereas the stimulus-off condition consisted of a
static checkerboard. Stimulus-on/-off conditions were presented in the
sequence on/off/on/off/on/off. The duration of these intervals was
randomly assigned but consistently provided a total of 150 seconds of
flicker and 150 seconds of static. Sessions were repeated twice to
assess possible replication of the phenomenon.
Outcome measures: Changes in fMRI brain activation (relating to blood
oxygenation) and EEG signals were measured in the nonstimulated
subjects. Changes occurring during stimulus-on conditions were
statistically compared to changes occurring during the stimulus-off
conditions.
Results: Statistically significant changes in fMRI brain activation and
EEG signals were observed when comparing the stimulus-on condition to
the stimulus-off condition in nonstimulated subjects (p 0.001, corrected
for multiple comparisons). For fMRI, these changes were observed in visual brain areas 18 and 19 (Brodmann
areas). One of the subjects replicated the results.
Conclusions: These data replicate previous findings suggesting that correlated neural signals may be detected
by fMRI and EEG in the brains of subjects who are physically and sensorily isolated from each other."
Source:
2005, Richards / Kozak / Standish - "Replicable Functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging Evidence of Correlated Brain Signals Between
Physically and Sensory Isolated Subjects"
THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE; Volume 11, Number 6, 2005, pp. 955-963
www.scribd.com/doc/25805973/MRI- ... hards-2005
Example 4:
"Under certain conditions, the EEG of a sensorially isolated human subject can become correlated
with event-related potentials in a distant person's EEG. This suggests
the presence of an unknown form of energetic or informational
interaction.
(...)
The central hypothesis in this experiment is that there is some form of
unknown informational or energetic connection between isolated people.
To test this idea, it is necessary to exclude all known sensory
linkages. This was accomplished through the use of a heavily shielded
chamber, and through controls for artifacts. We therefore know that the
observed correlation was not caused by EEG amplifier cross-talk, or to
participants’ anticipatory responses, or to spontaneous EEG
correlations that may arise between isolated autocorrelated sequences,
or to biases introduced through subjective identification of EEG
artifacts.
If not because of known facts or artifacts, how else may we understand
this correlation? One approach is to look for physical principles that
might provide theoretical support for the observed connections. In that
spirit, the relationship observed in this study is reminiscent of
quantum entanglement (QE). This refers to a class of properties in which
isolated physical systems display correlated behavior indicating that
they are not as separate as they appear to be (Kwiat et al., 2001; Pan
et al., 2000; Rowe et al., 2001). If macroscopic physical objects,
including the brain, can exhibit QE properties for even short periods of
time, as suggested by Hagan et al., (2002), Josephson and
Pallikari-Viras (1991), Stapp (1988, 1997) and others, then it is
conceivable that entangled brains might support correlations like those
observed in this experiment." - Dean Radin
Source:
THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Volume 10, Number 2, 2004, pp. 315-323
www.psiarcade.com/research/EEGcorrelations.pdf
Example 5:
"Our results indicate macroscopic entanglement may be conspicuously
evident during simultaneous quantitative electroencephalographic
activity of two brains separated by substantial distance and being
observed simultaneously by two experimenters."
Source:
Blake T. Dotta, Bryce P. Mulligan, Mathew D. Hunter and Michael A.
Persinger: "Evidence of Macroscopic Quantum Entanglement During Double
Quantitative Electroencephalographic Measurements of Friends vs
Strangers"
NeuroQuantology | December 2009 | Vol 7 | Issue 4| Page 548-551
Biophysics Section, Behavioural Neuroscience Laboratory,
Departments of Biology and Psychology, Laurentian University
(link takes some time since adobe pdf has problems with it, but it loads!)
parapsykologi.se/Notiser/Persingeretal.pdf
Example 6:
"The results indicate that at times when the senders are stimulated with
photic flashes the EEG of the receivers shows changes in α-power in
the same direction as that seen when participants are themselves
stimulated with photic flashes, i.e. phase-locked α-power increases
during the post-stimulus period.
Assensory stimulation for the receivers is homogenous throughout the
experimental period, the significant difference between remote photic
stimulation epochs and control epochs in log-ratios of post-/prestimulus
α-power, suggests the presence of an anomalous effect during the
remote photic stimulation periods. The lack of such a difference in the
group of receivers who were not paired with a sender, further suggests
that this effect is dependent on sensory stimulation of another
participant, and cannot be attributed to a general methodological flaw,
or to direct extra-sensory perception of the remote stimuli. The
parietal/occipital locus of the effect is consistent with what would be
expected from the alpha component of a visual evoked response, and
further suggests the presence of a remote response.."
Source:
DISTANT PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL INTERACTION EFFECTS
BETWEEN RELATED AND UNRELATED PARTICIPANTS
Marios Kittenis, Peter G. Caryl, & Paul Stevens Koestler,
Parapsychology Unit, University of Edinburgh, Psychology Department, University of Edinburgh
www.parapsych.org/papers/06.pdf
Example 7:
"The experiment conducted by neurophysiologist Grinberg-Zylberbaum ...
demonstrate the existence of a macroscopic quantum system in the
human brain through the demonstration of ... non-local correlation
between brains ... In this experiment two subjects ... meditated
together for twenty minutes. A total of seven pairs of subjects of both
sexes, with ages from 20-44 years participated in the study. After
meditation and while maintaining their "direct communication" (without
speech), they were placed in semi-silent, electro-magnetically shielded
chambers separated by 45 feet. ... Both subjects were connected to EEG
instruments and 100 random flashes of light were presented to subject A,
while both remained reclined with semi-closed eyes. Subject B was not
told when the light was flashed for subject A, and control correlation
checks were also made at random times with no light flashes. The results
indicated that, "after a meditative interaction between two people who
were instructed to maintain direct communication (i.e. to feel each
other's presence even at a distance), in about one out of four cases
when one of the subjects was stimulated in such a way that his/her brain
responded clearly (with a distinct evoked potential), the brain of the
nonstimulated subject also reacted and showed a transferred potential of
a similar morphology...." - F. Thaheld
Source: V. Lommel 2008 / F. Thaheld
arxiv.org/ftp/q-bio/papers/0510/0510039.pdf
www.valdostamuseum.org/hamsmith/ ... ml#grinzyl
"(...) there may be subtle correlations between brain states of two
separated subjects (a) caused by a yet unknown mechanism and (b)
manifesting themselves when one of the brains responds to an
environmental stimulus (...)"
www.uniklinik-freiburg.de/iuk/li ... anjo_2.pdf
www.mindmatter.de/mmpdf/wackermann.pdf
Sources:
Wackermann J, Seiter C, Keibel H, Walach H: "Correlations between brain
electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects",
Neurosci Lett, 2003; 336: 60-64
"Dyadic Correlations between Brain Functional States: Present Facts and Future Perspectives"
Jiri Wackermann, Department of Empirical and Analytical Psychophysics
Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology and Mental Health, Freiburg, Germany
"In spite of its fundamental importance for our concepts of
communication/interaction between living systems, the problem is
virtually ignored by the mainstream of neuroscience. (...) Many
researchers working in this field are obviously biased towards positive
findings of brain state correlations, since these seemingly provide
"objective" support for their preconceived notions ("telepathy" in
parapsychology,"connectedness" in transpersonal psychology, or the
diffuse notion of "non-locality" used in particular theories of
consciousness")"
"We are facing a phenomenon which is neither easy to dismiss as a
methodical failure or a technical artefact nor understood as to its
nature."
Abstract:
"Alpha rhythms have been elicited in one of a pair of identical twins as
a result of evoking these rhythms in a conventional manner solely in
the other."
Source:
Duane TD, Behrendt T. (Department of Ophthalmology, Jefferson Medical College. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania):
"Extrasensory Electroencephalographic Induction between Identical Twins". Science 1965;150:367.
www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/a ... 0/3694/367
www.pap-imi.de/twins.jpg
Example 2:
"Objective: To determine whether correlated event-related potentials
(ERPs) can be detected between the brains of spatially and sensory
isolated human subjects.
Design and setting: Simultaneous digitized electroencephalograms (EEGs)
were recorded from the occipital area in pairs of human subjects placed
in sound attenuated rooms separated by 10 meters. One person relaxed in
one of the rooms while the other received visual stimulation while in
the other room. Prior to each experiment, members of the pair were
randomly designated as sender and receiver. Sessions were subsequently
repeated with subjects reversing their roles. Previous to each session,
the sender was instructed "to attempt sending an image/thought." The
receiver was instructed "to remain open to receive any image/thought
from his/her partner." Alternating stimulus-on/stimulus-off conditions
were presented throughout the session to the sender, while a
stimulus-off condition was presented to the receiver.
Subjects: Thirty-seven (37) female, and 23 male subjects (n = 60; 30
pairs) participated in the study. Subjects knew each other well and
claimed to have previous experience of being emotionally/psychologically
connected to one another.
Outcome measures: A Runs test was applied to compare EEG "hits" in the
receiver's EEG during the sender' stimulus-on condition versus sender's
stimulus-off conditions. Test results at p < 0.01 were considered
evidence of correlated brain signals. Pairs in whom at least one member
had significant results were invited back for replication.
Results: Of the 60 subjects tested, 5 (4 women/1 man) showed
significantly higher brain activation (p < 0.01) during their sending
partner's stimulus-on condition as compared to stimulus-off condition.
Using the Stouffer z meta-analytic method all receiver EEG results
across all 60 subjects were combined by transforming the individual
session p values into z scores. Data analyses showed overall significant
results for EEG data recorded during the flickering condition (z
=-3.28, p = 0.0005) as well as nonsignificant results for data recorded
during the static condition (z = 0.35, p = 0.64). Four pairs
participated in a replication experiment during which one pair
replicated the effect.
Conclusions: These results indicate that in some pairs of human subjects
a signal may be detected in the brain of a distant member of the pair
when the brain of the other member is visually stimulated. These data
support the findings of similar studies performed in seven laboratories
reported in the peer-reviewed literature since 1963. Research in this
area should now proceed with investigation of its physical and biologic
mechanism, its generalizability to varying populations and
relationships, and its clinical application."
Source:
Leanna J. Standish, Leila Kozak, L. Clark Johnson, Todd Richards:
"Electroencephalographic Evidence of Correlated Event-Related Signals
Between the Brains of Spatially and Sensory Isolated Human Subjects"
The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. April 2004, 10(2): 307-314. doi:10.1089/107555304323062293.
Bastyr University/University of Washington Consciousness Science Laboratory, Bastyr University, Kenmore, WA.
www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10 ... 4323062293
Example 3:
"Objectives: Previous electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiments
have suggested that correlated neural signals may be detected in the brains of individuals who are
physically and sensorily isolated from each other. Functional MRI and EEG methods were used in the present
study in an attempt to replicate these findings.
Design/settings: Subjects were electrically and magnetically shielded
because of the characteristic surroundings of the scanner room. During
the experiment, the nonstimulated subject was placed in the scanner with
sensory isolating goggles covering the subject’s eyes. The stimulated
subject was placed 30 feet away and sat in front of a video monitor
that presented an alternating schedule of six stimulus-on/stimulus-off
conditions. The stimulus- on condition consisted of a flickering
checkerboard pattern whereas the stimulus-off condition consisted of a
static checkerboard. Stimulus-on/-off conditions were presented in the
sequence on/off/on/off/on/off. The duration of these intervals was
randomly assigned but consistently provided a total of 150 seconds of
flicker and 150 seconds of static. Sessions were repeated twice to
assess possible replication of the phenomenon.
Outcome measures: Changes in fMRI brain activation (relating to blood
oxygenation) and EEG signals were measured in the nonstimulated
subjects. Changes occurring during stimulus-on conditions were
statistically compared to changes occurring during the stimulus-off
conditions.
Results: Statistically significant changes in fMRI brain activation and
EEG signals were observed when comparing the stimulus-on condition to
the stimulus-off condition in nonstimulated subjects (p 0.001, corrected
for multiple comparisons). For fMRI, these changes were observed in visual brain areas 18 and 19 (Brodmann
areas). One of the subjects replicated the results.
Conclusions: These data replicate previous findings suggesting that correlated neural signals may be detected
by fMRI and EEG in the brains of subjects who are physically and sensorily isolated from each other."
Source:
2005, Richards / Kozak / Standish - "Replicable Functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging Evidence of Correlated Brain Signals Between
Physically and Sensory Isolated Subjects"
THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE; Volume 11, Number 6, 2005, pp. 955-963
www.scribd.com/doc/25805973/MRI- ... hards-2005
Example 4:
"Under certain conditions, the EEG of a sensorially isolated human subject can become correlated
with event-related potentials in a distant person's EEG. This suggests
the presence of an unknown form of energetic or informational
interaction.
(...)
The central hypothesis in this experiment is that there is some form of
unknown informational or energetic connection between isolated people.
To test this idea, it is necessary to exclude all known sensory
linkages. This was accomplished through the use of a heavily shielded
chamber, and through controls for artifacts. We therefore know that the
observed correlation was not caused by EEG amplifier cross-talk, or to
participants’ anticipatory responses, or to spontaneous EEG
correlations that may arise between isolated autocorrelated sequences,
or to biases introduced through subjective identification of EEG
artifacts.
If not because of known facts or artifacts, how else may we understand
this correlation? One approach is to look for physical principles that
might provide theoretical support for the observed connections. In that
spirit, the relationship observed in this study is reminiscent of
quantum entanglement (QE). This refers to a class of properties in which
isolated physical systems display correlated behavior indicating that
they are not as separate as they appear to be (Kwiat et al., 2001; Pan
et al., 2000; Rowe et al., 2001). If macroscopic physical objects,
including the brain, can exhibit QE properties for even short periods of
time, as suggested by Hagan et al., (2002), Josephson and
Pallikari-Viras (1991), Stapp (1988, 1997) and others, then it is
conceivable that entangled brains might support correlations like those
observed in this experiment." - Dean Radin
Source:
THE JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Volume 10, Number 2, 2004, pp. 315-323
www.psiarcade.com/research/EEGcorrelations.pdf
Example 5:
"Our results indicate macroscopic entanglement may be conspicuously
evident during simultaneous quantitative electroencephalographic
activity of two brains separated by substantial distance and being
observed simultaneously by two experimenters."
Source:
Blake T. Dotta, Bryce P. Mulligan, Mathew D. Hunter and Michael A.
Persinger: "Evidence of Macroscopic Quantum Entanglement During Double
Quantitative Electroencephalographic Measurements of Friends vs
Strangers"
NeuroQuantology | December 2009 | Vol 7 | Issue 4| Page 548-551
Biophysics Section, Behavioural Neuroscience Laboratory,
Departments of Biology and Psychology, Laurentian University
(link takes some time since adobe pdf has problems with it, but it loads!)
parapsykologi.se/Notiser/Persingeretal.pdf
Example 6:
"The results indicate that at times when the senders are stimulated with
photic flashes the EEG of the receivers shows changes in α-power in
the same direction as that seen when participants are themselves
stimulated with photic flashes, i.e. phase-locked α-power increases
during the post-stimulus period.
Assensory stimulation for the receivers is homogenous throughout the
experimental period, the significant difference between remote photic
stimulation epochs and control epochs in log-ratios of post-/prestimulus
α-power, suggests the presence of an anomalous effect during the
remote photic stimulation periods. The lack of such a difference in the
group of receivers who were not paired with a sender, further suggests
that this effect is dependent on sensory stimulation of another
participant, and cannot be attributed to a general methodological flaw,
or to direct extra-sensory perception of the remote stimuli. The
parietal/occipital locus of the effect is consistent with what would be
expected from the alpha component of a visual evoked response, and
further suggests the presence of a remote response.."
Source:
DISTANT PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL INTERACTION EFFECTS
BETWEEN RELATED AND UNRELATED PARTICIPANTS
Marios Kittenis, Peter G. Caryl, & Paul Stevens Koestler,
Parapsychology Unit, University of Edinburgh, Psychology Department, University of Edinburgh
www.parapsych.org/papers/06.pdf
Example 7:
"The experiment conducted by neurophysiologist Grinberg-Zylberbaum ...
demonstrate the existence of a macroscopic quantum system in the
human brain through the demonstration of ... non-local correlation
between brains ... In this experiment two subjects ... meditated
together for twenty minutes. A total of seven pairs of subjects of both
sexes, with ages from 20-44 years participated in the study. After
meditation and while maintaining their "direct communication" (without
speech), they were placed in semi-silent, electro-magnetically shielded
chambers separated by 45 feet. ... Both subjects were connected to EEG
instruments and 100 random flashes of light were presented to subject A,
while both remained reclined with semi-closed eyes. Subject B was not
told when the light was flashed for subject A, and control correlation
checks were also made at random times with no light flashes. The results
indicated that, "after a meditative interaction between two people who
were instructed to maintain direct communication (i.e. to feel each
other's presence even at a distance), in about one out of four cases
when one of the subjects was stimulated in such a way that his/her brain
responded clearly (with a distinct evoked potential), the brain of the
nonstimulated subject also reacted and showed a transferred potential of
a similar morphology...." - F. Thaheld
Source: V. Lommel 2008 / F. Thaheld
arxiv.org/ftp/q-bio/papers/0510/0510039.pdf
www.valdostamuseum.org/hamsmith/ ... ml#grinzyl
"(...) there may be subtle correlations between brain states of two
separated subjects (a) caused by a yet unknown mechanism and (b)
manifesting themselves when one of the brains responds to an
environmental stimulus (...)"
www.uniklinik-freiburg.de/iuk/li ... anjo_2.pdf
www.mindmatter.de/mmpdf/wackermann.pdf
Sources:
Wackermann J, Seiter C, Keibel H, Walach H: "Correlations between brain
electrical activities of two spatially separated human subjects",
Neurosci Lett, 2003; 336: 60-64
"Dyadic Correlations between Brain Functional States: Present Facts and Future Perspectives"
Jiri Wackermann, Department of Empirical and Analytical Psychophysics
Institute for Frontier Areas of Psychology and Mental Health, Freiburg, Germany
"In spite of its fundamental importance for our concepts of
communication/interaction between living systems, the problem is
virtually ignored by the mainstream of neuroscience. (...) Many
researchers working in this field are obviously biased towards positive
findings of brain state correlations, since these seemingly provide
"objective" support for their preconceived notions ("telepathy" in
parapsychology,"connectedness" in transpersonal psychology, or the
diffuse notion of "non-locality" used in particular theories of
consciousness")"
"We are facing a phenomenon which is neither easy to dismiss as a
methodical failure or a technical artefact nor understood as to its
nature."