Journal of Parapsychology
REG Outcome in an Alarm Situation in Zebra finches/Produccion De Un Dispositivo REG En Una Situacion De Alarma En El Mandarin listado/Resultat D'un GEA Dans Une Situation D'alarme Pour Des Diamants mandarins/Das Ergebnis Eines Zufallsgenerators Bei Alarmierten Zebrafinken
Fernando Álvarez
Abstract
Devices known as random event generators (REGs) depend upon quantum effects, and although they are designed to produce a stream of purely random numbers, when people direct their attention to a single focus (not specifically intending to influence the REGs), a surprising reduction of randomness occurs. This nondirectional effect was demonstrated when the attention of an audience (size from one person to 3 billion people) was concentrated on a single matter, be it a human disaster, a personal growth workshop, a comedy show, a poltergeist event, or a praying service (Bierman, 1996; Blasband, 2000; Mason & Patterson, 2007; Nelson, 2001, 2003; Radin, 1997; Radin, Rebman, & Cross, 1996; Williams, 2010). When individual subjects were tested in an attempt to detect any effect of induced emotions on REG outcome, a reduction of randomness resulted during anger induction (Lumsden-Cook, 2005a), especially during anger and sadness dissipation (Lumsden-Cook, 2005b). One question we may ask ourselves is whether attention or emotional states by nonhumans would also affect the random functioning of REGs. Although the prospect for enhanced experimental manipulation would be higher with nonhuman subjects, work with them is very scant. The only two studies of which I am aware dealing with the potential influence on up-to-date, reliable REG devices used soil nematodes and young chickens in the experiment. The first one explored the role of the presence of different genetic lines of a nematode species on REG output, yielding marginally significant results in relation to output variance (Franklin, Kendall, & Vassilieva, 2005). In the second one, a small self-propelled robot on which chicks had been previously imprinted, and driven by an internal REG to manoeuvre randomly, moved significantly more often than chance toward the chicks' location, denoting a reduction in randomness in the output of the REG and suggesting psychokinesis (PK) by the birds (Peoc'h, 1995). My hypothesis, based on the results of these studies, is that a nondirectional reduction in randomness in REG production will occur specifically during the presentation of a disturbing stimulus to birds. At the same time, an observer manipulation will be introduced into the experiment, in order to explore the existence of a psi observer effect. Method The animal species used was the zebra finch (Taeni-0pygia guttata). This bird is one of the most common subjects of research in many scientific disciplines, both in the wild and in the laboratory (Zann, 1996), serving as a model for investigation in neurology, behavior development, and environmental variables that impact human health, and it also appears to be gifted with the ability for short-term precognition (Alvarez, 2010a). All subjects (80 adult male and female zebra finches) lived in two unisexual adult groups of conspecifics in 3 x 3 x 2 m aviaria near Seville, Spain, where water and food (seeds and vegetables) were supplied ad libitum. The 70 x 35 x 35 cm testing cage was provided with four perches and a TFT screen at one end, where a still background image of red tiles was always on display during the experimental sessions. During the sessions, an Orion REG device was permanently in position on the centre of the cage floor and provided the data relative to output randomness. The laptop computer controlling the presentation of the stimulus on the TFT screen and storing the information from the REG was located in an adjacent compartment and was connected to the devices by two long cables. The same scene was shown at the same time on the TFT screen beside the testing cage and on the screen of the laptop computer in the observer compartment. Three conditions were tested: (a) Bird Alone: the test was applied to 40 birds while the observer had gone away from the experimental area (5 to 25 m from the testing cage) ; (b) Bird Plus Observer: while the tests to 40 other birds were taking place, the observer (who knew in advance the time of stimulus presentation) was continuously receiving the same stimulation as the birds on a laptop screen and was intently waiting for the stimulus to appear; (c) Observer Alone: the same as in b (40 tests), but the testing cage was empty. …