The Global Consciousness

Many of you have heard David Icke and others refer to a global consciousness. It seems like an 'estoric' idea or a theology to 'believe' in. Yet there are scientists studying this global consciousness and proving that it is very real.

Note all the links inside the article below return to the originating website.

submitted by K~


The Global Consciousness Project

We do not feel that our minds are isolated within our bodies. In truth, we experience the world with beautiful immediacy, we know our loved ones from afar, and we leap in thought to the stars. Research on anomalies of consciousness shows that we may have direct communication links with each other, and that intentions can have effects in the world despite physical barriers and separations. Evidence compels us to accept correlations that we cannot yet explain. It appears that consciousness may sometimes produce something that resembles, at least metaphorically, a nonlocal field. The Global Consciousness Project (GCP) takes this possibility as a starting point for a speculation that such fields generated by individual consciousness would interact and combine, and ultimately have a global presence.

Usually, because we are busy with individual lives, there is little to produce structure in the field, so it is random and not detectable. But occasionally there are global-scale events that bring great numbers of us to a common focus and an unusual coherence of thought and feeling. To study the effects of a possible global consciousness, we have created a world-spanning network of detectors sensitive to coherence and resonance in the mental domain. Continuous streams of data are sent over the internet to be archived and correlated with events that may evoke a world-wide consciousness. Examples that appear to have done so include the funeral ceremonies of Princess Diana, a few minutes around midnight on any New Years Eve, the first hour of NATO bombing in Yugoslavia, several major earthquakes, and now the WTC disaster.

The GCP began recording data in August, 1998. It has grown to about 40 sites around the world, each generating and reporting second-by-second data. Here we describe all aspects of the project, and we provide public access to the data. The top banner buttons will connect you to sections of the site concerned with the project's background and development , experimental methods and the prediction registry, access to the data in various forms, momentary activity reports, and useful information for people who are interested in helping. You will find summaries of the formal analyses as well as links to interesting and thought-provoking explorations on the Current Results page.

Please accept the frequent references to "global consciousness" as a convenient metaphor. It is a label for a possible source for effects and correlations that remain essentially mysterious. All this is subtle, and we can at this point only report the data, hoping to understand its meaning better as we go along.


Terrorist Disaster, September 11 2001

On September 11, 2001, beginning at about 8:45 in the morning, a series of terrorist attacks destroyed the twin towers of the World Trade Center and severely damaged the Pentagon. The disaster is so great that in New York we have as yet, two days later, only guesses about how many thousands of people perished when the WTC towers collapsed. Commercial airliners were hijacked and flown directly into the three buildings. The first crashed into the North tower at 8:45, and about 18 minutes later the second airliner hit the South tower. At about 9:40, a third airliner crashed into the Pentagon. At about 9:58, the South tower collapsed, followed by the North tower at 10:28.

The following material shows the behavior of the Global Consciousness Project's network of 38 REG devices called "eggs" placed around the world as they responded during various periods of time surrounding September 11. These eggs generate random data continuously and send it for archiving and analysis to a dedicated server at Princeton University. We analyse the data to determine whether the normally random array of values shows structure correlated with global events. The underlying motivation for this work is to discover whether there is evidence for the existence of a global consciousness that might perceive and react to events with deep meaning.

The whole world reeled in disbelief and horror as the news of the terrorist attack and the unspeakable tragedy unfolded. The EGG network registered an unmistakable and profound response.

Introduction

I want to acknowledge that I like the idea of Global Consciousness, but that this idea is really a speculation and a metaphor. I don't think we have real grounds to claim that the statistics and graphs representing the data prove the existence of a global consciousness. On the other hand, we do have strong evidence of anomalous structure in what should be random data, and clear correlations of these unexplained departures from expectation with well-defined events that are of special importance to people. The events share a common feature, namely, that they engage our attention, and draw us in large numbers into a common focus.

This is a report of what we see in the data recorded on September 11, 2001 and the surrounding period. It is the best description we can give of measurements and effects that are essentially mysterious. We do not know how the correlations that arise between electronic random event generators and human concerns come to be, and yet, the results of our analyses are unequivocal. We cannot explain the presence of stark patterns in data that should be random, nor do we have any way of divining their ultimate meaning, yet there is an important and uniquely powerful message here. When we ask why the disaster in New York and Washington and Pennsylvania should appear to be responsible for a strong signal in our world-wide network of instruments designed to generate random noise, there is no obvious answer. When we look carefully and discover that the eggs might reflect our shock and dismay even before our minds and hearts express it, we confront a still deeper mystery. This network, which we designed as a metaphoric EEG for the planet, responded as if it were measuring brain waves on a planetary scale. We do not know if there is such a thing as a global consciousness, but if there is, it was moved by the events of September 11, 2001. We do not know how, but it appears that the coherence and intensity of our common reaction created a pulse of order in the random flow of numbers from our instruments. These patterns where there should be none look like reflections of our concentrated focus, as the riveting events drew us from our individual concerns and melded us into an extraordinary coherence. Maybe we became, briefly, a global consciousness.

These are pictures drawn from the data, with brief descriptions of the exact procedures for those who want to know the details. We use statistical and mathematical tools to visualize the structures that appear, and graphs to display them. But these are transparent images, pictures worth a thousand words.

Cumulative deviation of the mean

First, we show the results of our standard analysis, plotting the departures of the data from its expected behavior, which is a random walk centered on a horizontal path. The data from all the eggs are combined (as a Stouffer Z) in a single score for each second, these Z-scores are squared, and the cumulative deviation of the resulting sequence is plotted. More information about the methods of analysis is given in the Statistics Notes below. Many of the following graphs do not represent formal tests of a pre-specified hypothesis; the formal tests are identified.

This figure shows the period from September 7th to 13th, and the attack is marked with a black rectangle. You can see that shortly before the terrorist attack, the wandering line takes on a clear trend representing a persistent departure from what is expected of random data. A small probability envelope inserted at that point provides a scale to indicate the extraordinary increase in non-random deviation. The slope of the graph beginning just before the attack to the end of the 13th is extreme. An informal estimate for the probability can be made, and lies between 0.003 and 0.0003 (an odds ratio on the order of 1 in 1000). If we extrapolate the anomalous trend, it begins at about 04:00 (08:00 GMT), several hours before the first World Trade Center tower was hit.

Context graph:
Terrorist Attacks, September 11 2001

The same data are treated in a different way by Dean Radin in the following figures. Instead of a composite (Stouffer) Z across eggs, Dean first calculated the Z-score per egg and summed the squared Z-scores and degrees of freedom across eggs. He then compressed the per-second data for all eggs into per-minute data for all eggs for the period from September 3 - 13. The probabilities associated with the sums of Z-squares were then calculated, and converted to the Z-score equivalent. Finally, the odds against chance for the cumulative Z-square was plotted to produce this graph.

Dean says, "These effects are the most strikingly persuasive evidence I've seen so far that mass-mind attention/intention affects the physical world, perhaps because this event has also been the most horrific."

Terrorist Attacks, Dean Radin 1

Here is a more detailed view of data from September 11th alone. The original Z-square data show a big rise beginning at about 05:00, and then an extraordinary drop of 6.5 standard deviations in a period of 8 hours or less beginning at about 11:00, New York time. The probability of such a large change, determined by randomized permutation analysis applied to data from June 15 to Sept 18, is p = 0.002. Here is what those data look like plotted as the two-tailed odds against chance for the z scores.

Terrorist Attacks, Dean Radin 11th, odds detail

If we look at the data from September 11th in detail, using such exploratory methods to visualize the structure, it appears from several perspectives that there is a concentration of strong deviations around the major events. The next figure shows the raw odds against chance for the squared Stouffer Z-scores (the standard GCP treatment). The maximum Z-score is 4.81, and occurs at 10:12:47, EDT. A Z this large would appear by chance only once in about 2.4 years of seconds.

Other samples are provided in the extended analysis page.

One Hour
smoothing of odds: Terrorist Attacks, September 11 2001

This analysis is confirmed and enhanced in a similar presentation by Dean Radin which uses a 5-second composite instead of the raw, 1-second trials.

Odds against chance

Dean explored several views of the same data using variations of the basic calculations and smoothing or moving average techniques, as shown in the next figures, which use empirical instead of theoretical variance for the Z-score calculations. His description:

This graph shows results for a 6-hour sliding window, in terms of z scores, from Sept 6 - 13. In this graph, positive z's mean the RNGs became "more ordered" than expected by chance. Negative z's mean the RNGs became "more random" than expected by chance. The peak value in this graph is 9:10 AM, Sept 11. Between the beginning of the tragedy and 7 hours later this data shows a drop of 6.5 sigma (odds against chance of 29 billion to 1). Such large changes will eventually occur by chance, of course, but this particular change happened during an unprecedented event, suggesting that this "spike" and "rebound" were not coincidental.

Indeed a permutation analysis shows that the likelihood of getting a 6.5 sigma drop in z scores (based on a 6-hour sliding window) in one day, and within 8 hours of less (as observed) is p = 0.002.

For the next figure, 2-tailed probabilities were calculated (to register extreme decreases as well as increases in the deviations), and a larger smoothing window of six hours instead of three hours was used. In this case the odds against chance for the Chi-square was plotted. Again, there is an extraordinary spike at the time of the attacks. Though the display is very different, there is no ambiguity about the timing or the magnitude of the major spike.

Terrorist Attacks, Dean Radin 2

To help assure that there was no mistake in the processing, this same figure was recreated using algorithmically generated pseudo-random data instead of the real data generated by the truly random eggs located in countries all around the world. This figure speaks for itself.

Terrorist Attacks, Dean Radin 3

These are part of a large number of analyses we have been doing to gain more insight. One of the questions that quickly comes to mind is whether distance makes a difference. Dean Radin has done a careful analysis of results by location that is detailed in the context of validity checks on the procedures, and on the timing of the egg network response.

Variance of the Egg data

The next figure shows the cumulative deviation of a measure of the variability of scores (variance) among the 38 eggs over the course of the day of September 11. It was generated as a test of Dean Radin's prediction that the variance would show strong fluctuations: "I'd predict something like ripples of high and low variance, as the emotional shocks continue to reverberate for days and weeks." Although this was only a partial specification it is effectively a prediction that the variance around the time of the disaster should deviate from expectation. I added the necessary specifications for a formal prediction.

The variance measure shows a normal fluctuation around the horizontal line of expectation until about three or four hours before the attack, and then a steep and persistent rise indicating a great excess of variance, continuing until about 11:00. Shortly thereafter, a long period begins during which the data show an equally precipitous decrease of variance. No direct calculation of probability has been made for this figure, but the extreme excursion reaches a level of more than three sigma, which corresponds to odds of less than 1 in 1000, and this estimate is included in the formal database. It is at the conservative end of the range of probablilities found in extensive contextual analysis. This is uncertain. New basic calculations suggest the probability is not so extreme; more later.

For a visual indication of the likelihood that this is merely a random fluctuation, a comparison can be made with pseudo-data generated for the three days and plotted in the same format. In contrast to the real data, there are no long-sustained periods of strong deviation in the algorithmically generated data. Given the context of the surrounding days and the comparison with the pseudo-data, this figure shows that the variance measure is highly unusual around the time of the attacks.

In this figure, the times on the X-axis are Eastern Daylight Time, allowing a direct assessment of the timing of the strong deviations. The distinctive shape of the graph is suggestive of a classic "head and shoulders" graph seen in stock market analysis. As in the first figure showing the cumulative deviation of the Chisquare, there is an indication that the effects registered for this horrendous event might have begun several hours prior to the first attack. Again, the pseudo data are used for a direct comparison.

Terrorist Attacks,
September
11 2001

More on this topic, in the context of exploratory analyses, can be found on the extended analysis page.

Other Formal Predictions

The Global Consciousness Project has a standard protocol for testing the hypothesis that great events in the world may affect the eggs in a way that can be detected by statistical analysis. The formal prediction for this event is essentially the same as that made for the terrorist bombing in Africa in August 1998. That specified a period beginning a few minutes before the bombing, and including an aftermath of "a few hours." The actual time was from 10 minutes before the bombing to three hours after. We use in this case 10 minutes before the first crash to four hours after, which makes the aftermath period roughly the same following the last of the major cataclysmic events. The measure we use is the Chi-square representing the magnitude of the departure of the eggs' data from theoretical expectation, which is accumulated over the time defined for the analysis. See the Statistics Notes below below for more detail.

The resulting graph of data from the formal prediction shows a fluctuating deviation during the moments of the five major events, as ever-increasing numbers of people around the world are watching and hearing the news in stunned disbelief. Times of the major events are marked by boxes on the line of zero deviation. The uncertain fluctuation of the EGG data continues for almost half an hour after the fall of the second WTC tower. Then, at about 11:00, the cumulative deviation takes on a powerful trend that continues through the aftermath period and ultimately exceeds the significance criterion, with a final probability of 0.035 (Chi-square is 15314 on 15000 degrees of freedom. The number of eggs at the time of this analysis was 36.) As we have seen, this significant departure from expectation continues over many more hours, actually at least two full days. Our formal prediction of an aftermath of a few hours was obviously far too conservative.

Formal graph: 
Terrorist Attacks, September 11 2001

Since the horrible event, innumerable calls for prayer have been made. On the 14th of September there was a special emphasis on such collective spiritual moments, including major organized periods of silence in Europe and America. Doug Mast made a specific formal prediction for a deviation of the Chisquare "over the time periods 1000 to 1003 GMT, corresponding to a European organized mourning (http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/09/14/europe.mourning/) and the time period 1200 to 1203 EDT (1600 to 1603 GMT) corresponding to the beginning of the Washington service and many organized mourning events in the Eastern US." Here is the resulting graph.

Doug Mast Pred: 
Silent Prayer, September 14 2001

The result is very compelling, I think, although it does not confirm the formal prediction. Instead, the trend shows a marginally significant decrease in the deviations of the egg data. The Chisquare is 150.68 on 180 degrees of freedom, with probability 0.9455. The trend is steadily opposite to the usual (and specified) direction, but I think it somehow looks right -- symbolic of the moment's contrast to the preceding days.

Although there was no formal prediction made for a reaction of the EGG network to the event, we do not want to forget the heroic sacrifice that brought down the fourth hijacked plane. Exploratory analyses of the time prior to the crash itself suggest a poignant correlation ­ an extraordinary rise in the cumulative deviation followed by a precipitous fall.

Interpretation

One way to think of these startling correlations is to accept the possibility that the instruments have captured the reaction of a global consciousness beginning to form. The network was built to do just that: to see whether we could gather evidence of a communal, shared mind in which we are participants even if we don't know it.

Groups of people, including the group that is the whole world, have a place in consciousness space, and under special circumstances they ­ or we ­ become a new presence. Based on evidence that both individuals and groups manifest something we can tentatively call a consciousness field, we hypothesized that there could be a global consciousness capable of the same thing. Pursuing the speculation, it would seem that the new, integrated mind is just beginning to be active, paying attention only to events that inspire strong coherence of attention and feeling. Perhaps the best image is an infant slowly developing awareness, but already capable of strong emotions in response to the comfort of cuddling or to the discomfort of pain.

The hypothesis we set out to test is that the REG devices we use may respond to the concerted effect of large numbers of people turning their attention in one direction, becoming absorbed in the same focus. The terrible events of September 11 were a powerful magnet for our shared attention, and more than any event in the recent memory of the world they evoked the extraordinary emotions of horror and fear and comiseration and dismay.

The EGG network reacted in a powerful confirmation of this hypothesis. More important than any scientific question, however, is the question of meaning. What shall we learn, and what should we do in the face of compelling evidence that there is such a thing as global consciousness? In fact this is not a new question. The results from this scientific study are an apparent manifestation of the ancient idea that we are all interconnected, and that what we think and feel has effects on others, everywhere in the world. The implication of the GCP/EGG data reflecting our shock and dismay is in some sense quite obvious. It says that even insensate electronic random generators can see the effects of hatred born of pain and despair. It means that the earth cannot support us in comfort as things now are. It urges a new understanding that we must learn to accept each other and help and support each other, everywhere in the world, if we are to live in peace on this beautiful earth.

Statistics Notes

What is the procedure used to create the Chisquare and Variance graphs, and how should they be interpretated?

The Chisquare figures show the cumulative deviation of the second-by-second local deviations from expectation, compounded across the N eggs (N=36 to 38 at this time). That is, for each second, the Z's for all the N eggs are added and normalized by sqrt(N), then the resulting Z is squared to yield a Chisquare with 1 df, and finally the Chisquares-1 (Chisq=1 is the expectation) are cumulatively summed, to represent the departure from expectation. More details are available in exact descriptions of the GCP methods and procedures and in the extended analysis page.

The Variance figures show something similar, but instead of the compounded Z across eggs, the variance (squared standard deviation) is computed across the N eggs for each second. The sequence of Variance-50 (Var=50 is the expectation) is then cumulatively summed as before.

The Chisquare figure displays extreme departures, in either direction, of the trial scores of the egg from what is expected by chance. The Variance figure displays the degree of variability among the trial scores for the eggs. Chisquare addresses movement of the central value of the distribution, Variance represents changes in the range or width of the distribution.

What is the difference in the the analyses by Roger Nelson and Dean Radin?

The most important difference is in the treatment of the data at the finest scale. Neither way is superior, but there is a difference in what is expected or hypothesized about the behavior of the eggs in the presence of a possible influence. The two perspectives are complementary, and though they are not fully independent, using both contributes to our confidence that the apparent effects are not accidents or mistakes.

For each second, Roger calculates what is called a Stouffer Z across the eggs as described above. This means that in order to produce a large deviation, the eggs have to have a positive correlation to be doing the same thing. This composite Z is squared, so it does not matter whether the average value is shifted to the high or low direction, but there must be some excess deviation and there must be a tendency toward inter-egg consistency in the direction of deviation. The result is a single squared Z-score, which is Chi-square distributed, for each second.

Dean calculates a Z-score for each egg separately, and squares these individual Z-scores. He then sums the squared Z's across the eggs, producing a a single Chi-square for each second. In this case, the eggs are not expected to show a positive correlation, and a high score requires only that there is a tendency for excess deviation in either direction; no inter-egg consistency in the direction of deviation is predicted. Again, the result is a single squared Z-score, which is Chi-square distributed, for each second.

Dean's method of summing Z² is closely related to Roger's variance analysis.

More

Many other analyses and graphs have been generated, and some show certain details and perspectives that may interest you. The extended analysis page has most of the figures shown here, but in the context of the developing analysis program over the first few days following the tragedy. A question of particular interest is whether distance makes a difference. Dean Radin separated the results by location of the eggs in a careful analysis. There is also an Interpretations page in the works, and one that simply presents the flood of messages from people all over the world who are involved in the GCP/EGG project. For more details about the project itself, you can go to the GCP home page where you will find links to all aspects.



Related Research:

  

  




Back to the Table of Contents




FAIR USE NOTICE. This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

United States Code: Title 17, Section 107 http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/unframed/17/107.html Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include - (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.