Intimate memoirs of Napoleon III, personal reminiscences of the man and the emperor Volume 1

This book was originally published prior to 1923, and represents a reproduction of an important historical work, maintaining the same format as the original work. While some publishers have opted to apply OCR (optical character recognition) technology to the process, we believe this leads to sub-optimal results (frequent typographical errors,… Continue reading

The Big Book of Pain: Torture & Punishment Through History

Explaining the mechanics of torture—even now a controversial topic—this history questions why so much effort has been put into causing pain to fellow human beings Taking readers into the ancient Roman coliseum, the medieval dungeon, the Inquisitional interrogation, the auto-da-fe, the witch-trial, and the most horrid of prisons, this is an exploration of the… Continue reading

Morals and Dogma of The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry: First Three Degrees

2011 Reprint of 1906 Edition. Full facsimile of the original edition, not reproduced with Optical Recognition Software. Fully describes the first three degrees of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. Pike is best known for his major work, “Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry”, originally… Continue reading

Mind Over Matter – Psychokinesis / Telekinesis

One
of the most well-researched and fascinating branches of psi science is
active-psi or Psychokinesis (PK).  Also
known as Telekinesis and mind over matter, PK is the ability to mentally
influence a physical system or object. 
The most common method to test for active-psi is to isolate a volunteer
from a target such as an inanimate object or a random system like a coin toss, dice
roll or radioactive decay, then see if the person can mentally influence the
target in a repeatable manner.


The
dice-tossing experiment is the epitome of simplicity.  A die face is chosen in advance, then one or
more dice are tossed while a person wishes for that face to turn up.  If the person’s intention matches the
resulting die face, then a ‘hit’ is scored. 
If more hits are obtained than expected by chance over many dice tosses,
that’s evidence for PK.  In 1989, when
psychologist Diane Ferrari and I were at Princeton University, we used
meta-analysis to assess the combined evidence for PK effects in dice
experiments.  We searched all the
relevant English-language journals for the dice experiments published from the
1930s to 1989 … We found 73 relevant publications, representing the efforts of
52 investigators from 1935 to 1987.  Over
that half-century, some 2,500 people attempted to mentally influence 2,600,000
dice throws in 148 different experiments, and just over 150,000 dice-throws in
31 control studies where no mental influence was applied to the dice … The odds
that the dice studies were due to chance alone were 10^96 to 1 (that’s 10 with
96 zeros after it).  By contrast, the
results of control experiments were well within chance expectation.  So something else was clearly going on.”
  -Dean Radin, “Entangled Minds” (149)

When self-professed
so-called rational, logically-minded “skeptics” hum and haw about the amazing
findings in psi-science, I like to visually show them the odds against chance
of various controlled and peer-reviewed studies.  Dean Radin and Diane Ferrari’s meta-analysis
of psychokinetic dice experiments yielded a ratio of
10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
to 1 odds against chance.  On what
grounds can such “rational skeptics” claim these odds to be mere coincidence?


If
all this is true, then why aren’t the casinos going out of business?  And why don’t prayers work more reliably? The
truth is that no one knows – yet.  These
experiments suggest that mind and matter are indeed related to a small degree
that is statistically repeatable under controlled conditions.  But we’ve barely scratched the surface of a
phenomenon that’s still profoundly mysterious. 
So offering answers to all the ‘but why’ questions evoked by these data,
given our present state of knowledge, is terribly premature.  I think a more reasonable question to ask at
this point is: If the results of the dice experiments suggest a genuine
mind-matter interaction, then there ought to be corroborating evidence from
similar experiments using other types of physical targets.  And there is
.”  -Dean Radin, “Entangled Minds” (153)

Another popular type of
PK experiment involves using Random Number Generators (RNGs) which are simple machines
that electronically generate up to thousands of random 0’s or 1’s (heads or
tails) every second moving an indicator light either one step clockwise or one
step counterclockwise.  A volunteer then attempts
to mentally influence the RNG outputs by willing more clockwise results (like
“heads” known as the “high aim condition”) or more counterclockwise results
(like “tails” called the “low aim condition”). 
In 1997, after 12 years of RNG experiments at their Princeton
Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory (PEAR Lab), lead engineer Robert Jahn
and his team formally published their findings. 
It seems when volunteers mentally intended for high aim conditions, the
RNG outputs invariably drifted more clockwise above chance expectation.  When volunteers intended for low aim
conditions, the outputs drifted more counterclockwise above chance
expectation.  And when withdrawing all
mental influence, the RNGs maintained an average baseline/control condition
well within chance expectation.  They
found that couples working in tandem affected the output more substantially
than individuals, and intimate couples affected the output six-fold.  In their final meta-analysis the PEAR team’s
RNG experiments yielded 35,000,000,000,000 to 1 odds against chance that their
volunteers can and did indeed intentionally influence the machines.

For nearly 30 years at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research
(PEAR) Laboratory, engineer Robert Jahn, his colleague Brenda Dunne, and their
team have investigated whether volunteers could affect the random sequences of
0s and 1s produced by electronic RNGs … The results showed conclusively that
such influence is real.  What’s important
to note is that they demonstrated that couples working together are able to
affect the RNG outcomes substantially more than either can do as
individuals.  And for a couple who are
emotionally bonded, the effects are six times those measured for each of
them.  In summarizing their vast archive
of experimental results demonstrating nonlocal human awareness, Jahn has said,
‘If people do not believe us after all the results we have produced, then they
never will.
’”  -Ervin Laszlo and Jude
Currivan, “Cosmos” (89)

Since
1997 the Global Consciousness Project has taken collective PK testing to a
whole new level by placing RNGs all over the world which run automatically and
incessantly in the background as indicators of collective mind-matter
occurrences.  The idea is that since RNGs
are designed to generate pure randomness, any fluctuations in that randomness
(i.e. sudden coalescent movement) can be observed and correlated with various
global phenomena.  The Global
Consciousness Project began rather by accident when a dozen consciousness
researchers with RNGs set up throughout the USA and Europe noticed a sudden
coalescence in combined outputs during Princess Diana’s world-wide live
televised funeral. 
These studies rely
on the fact that RNGs are designed to generate pure randomness, technically
known as entropy, and that fluctuations in entropy can be detected using simple
statistical procedures.  If it turns out that
the recorded entropy decreases when one of these random generators is placed
near groups engaged in high focused attention, like a group meditation or a
deeply engaging spiritual ritual, then we can infer something about the
presence of coherent minds possibly infusing the environment with an ordering
‘field’ that reduces entropy
.”  -Dean
Radin, “Entangled Minds” (182)

As of 2008 the Global Consciousness
Project had over 65 active RNGs all
over the world covering 6 continents and collected data from 185 events of global
interest.  These events tested and
verified by independent analysts included natural disasters, celebrity deaths,
mass meditations, outbreaks of war/peace, new year celebrations, sporting
events and many other occurrences with global influence.  The world-wide level of coalescent RNG output
during these 185 events showed a clear deviation from control/baseline outputs
with odds against chance of 36,400 to 1.

Perhaps
the most dramatic event examined by the project so far occurred on September
11, 2001.  On that day of infamy, now
known as 9/11, we found numerous striking changes in the randomness network …
In examining the results of this analysis, we noticed that something unusual
happened one day.  On September 11, 2001,
the curve deviated wildly as compared to all the other days we examined.  As it happened, this curve peaked nearly two
hours before a hijacked jet crashed into World Trade Tower 1 in New York City
at 8:46 a.m. EDT, and it dropped to its lowest point around 2 p.m., roughly
eight hours later.  There’s no easy
answer for why the peak in this curve occurred before the terrorist attacks
unfolded, although it is reminiscent of the data obtained in the presentiment
experiments … The huge drop in this curve within an eight-hour period was the
single largest drop for any day in the year 2001 … What caused this large
change?  Did the massive coherence of
mind on that day induce a massive coherence that was reflected in the RNGs?  It appears so
.”  -Dean Radin, “Entangled Minds” (202-4)

After 9/11 the Global
Consciousness Project published an article in the Foundation of Physics Letters
Journal focusing on the anomalous data gathered on that fateful day.  They proved with odds against chance of
1,000,000 to 1 that an “autocorrelation,” such as mass change in attention or
emotion, caused the normally random output to behave in a dramatically
non-random way.

Scientifically
and mathematically it has been documented and proven beyond reasonable doubt
that PK does exist.  Unfortunately our
collective understanding of how it works and our proficiency at using it is
very limited.  Some particularly gifted
people, however, have been able to elicit measurable and repeatable PK effects under laboratory conditions.  Russian
psychic Nina Kulagina stunned Western scientists in 1968 by moving a multitude
of stationary objects using her mind including matches, bread, bowls, cigar
tubes, and salt shakers.  She was also
able stop or alter the course of objects already in motion, make mental
impressions on film, and speed up or stop a frog’s heart!  Ingo Swann, a New York psychic can change the
temperature of objects near him and affect the magnetic field of a
magnetometer. 
In 2001 University
of Arizona psychology professor Gary Schwartz conducted a large-scale spoon-bending
experiment with his students resulting in over 60 bent forks and spoons!

Continue reading