Too Woo for You

Global Consciousness & Random Numbers

A few weeks back, I was listening to the Telepathy Tapes podcast, in which she interviewed a man named Adam Curry. in this episode (embedded below), they discus “psi research,” the Entangled app, the impact of psi on the future of AI, and a number of other topics.

One of the subjects that came up, particularly intrigued me. it was the work of the Global Consciousness Project, and their work on tracking the coherence between multiple Random Number Generator servers scattered around the world.

The Global Consciousness Project (GCP) theorizes that large-scale human consciousness has an effect on the Random Number Generators RNGs, and may cause a deviation from true randomness, or an increase in coherence.

Coherence, in this context, refers to the degree of synchronized and predictable behavior of the RNGs across multiple systems. Coherence is not a desirable effect in the field of RNGs, as they are necessary for cryptography, secure authentication, statistical sampling, even gambling, and other applications.

It’s important to understand that this is considered “fringe science,” and critics abound. While there may be evidence of deviations that defy probability during global events (excluding elections and sports contests, oddly enough), there are others who argue that “…the result is due to an anomalous effect associated with persons directly engaged with the experiment.”

The bottom line: Some people claim that a large enough group of people with a coherent surge of thoughts & emotions (whether positive or negative), will have a measurable effect on the output of RNGs across the planet, causing an output that is non-random. The more intense the emotion, the greater the variance from the mean. While others claim that it’s all a bunch of hogwash; and the reported seven standard deviations from random expectations, can be explained by interference by individuals who have an interest in the outcome.

What do you think, is there anything to all this?

I don’t know enough to argue one way or another. So I’m going to follow along at a distance, and see if there is anything to these claims. But I’m not going to download another app. Instead, I got Google Gemini to write me a little script that polls two separate RNGs every 15 minutes, then averages the output to find global deviation, and coherence, as well as a graph of the output.

• https://qrng.anu.edu.au/ – Australia-based server that generates random numbers by “measuring the quantum fluctuations of the vacuum.”
• https://www.random.org/ – Server based in Ireland, whose randomness comes from atmospheric noise.

I’ve embedded the table below from Google Sheets. There are three tabs:

• Sheet1 – the output, formatted as neatly as possible, scroll to the right to see the entire display of information.
• Archive – data older than seven days gets moved to the archive sheet to insure things stay nimble.
• Reference – the explanation of the output, and trigger points.

If the Rolling Average Deviation (RAD) is greater than 30 AND the coherence score is greater than 75, I will get an email alerting me to the outliers.

Use the scroll bar at the bottom to shift the view left/right:

Interesting side note: “outliers” in RNG systems are “values that are significantly distant from the expected distribution of generated numbers” according to Gemini. You don’t see it as often these days, but common outliers used to be 42 and 69. I’ll let you ponder that one yourself.

Sure Jones. But what does it mean?

Maybe nothing. But I’ve known people who seemed to be able to sense the “vibe” in a room when they walk in, before hearing a word. I have witnessed it, and observed that this intuitive ability is real. We call people like this “empaths,” and they are much more attuned to the emotions that emanate from others than am I. Like a microphone, with the gain turned up higher than normal. It’s more sensitive to sound, but also plagued by feedback, because of its increased sensitivity.

Maybe something. Based on my observational experience, I feel it warrants paying attention to. I built the spreadsheet, and had Gemini develop the script. After several iterations (the output seems satisfactory to me at version 2.2), it is functioning as designed. IF there is anything to it, it should be similar in function to the “predictive linguistics” of Clif High, albeit with less specificity. Like a fishing line with bells on it, set up around the perimeter of the campsite. When the bells ring, you won’t know what caused it, but you have a heads up that something is proximate.