Protocol PHY‑03 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 for testing claimed intention‑based modulation of radioactive decay rates. Using two matched long‑lived sources, triple blinding, and a physically isolated dummy, the protocol targets a Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE) of 5σ above the combined Poisson‑Allan noise floor. Version 2.0 introduces mandatory muon veto, invar‑based geometry stabilisation with laser distance monitoring, analytical (non‑mechanical) trap definition, and dedicated trend analysis for operator fatigue. The aim is detection of reproducible deviations from the standard decay law or establishment of a quantitative upper bound.
Protocol PHY‑03 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 for testing claimed intention‑based modulation of radioactive decay rates. Using two matched long‑lived sources, triple blinding, and a physically isolated dummy, the protocol targets a Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE) of 5σ above the combined Poisson‑Allan noise floor. Version 2.0 introduces mandatory muon veto, invar‑based geometry stabilisation with laser distance monitoring, analytical (non‑mechanical) trap definition, and dedicated trend analysis for operator fatigue. The aim is detection of reproducible deviations from the standard decay law or establishment of a quantitative upper bound.
Protocol PHY‑02 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 for testing claimed macro‑psychokinesis (macro‑PK) — the alleged ability of human intention to produce measurable changes in the dynamics of a macroscopic mechanical resonator. The target system is a high‑Q resonator (tuning fork, quartz oscillator, or microcantilever) with amplitude, frequency, and phase as observables. The experimental architecture comprises physically isolated channels: an active resonator (target), a control resonator (dummy), and trap intervals. Version 2.0 introduces mandatory active temperature stabilisation, acoustic pressure monitoring, short‑time sliding‑window analysis, robust handling of non‑Gaussian noise, and extended kill criteria. Triple blinding, mandatory failure‑mode demonstration, multiverse analysis, and a Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE ≥ 5σ above the Allan‑deviation noise floor) establish an uncompromising metrological standard. The aim is detection of reproducible deviations from thermodynamic equilibrium or establishment of a quantitative upper bound, not confirmation of macro‑PK.
Protocol PHY‑11 v1.1 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 to test the claimed ability of human intention to alter the emission spectrum of a laser. Version 1.1 introduces independent wavelength meters for each laser, acoustic enclosures and increased operator distance (5 m), real‑time monitoring of back‑reflections, and a hysteresis test in the pilot phase to verify that the system is free from irreversible drifts. The protocol is designed for specialised optical laboratories with ultra‑stable lasers, high‑precision frequency metrology, and rigorous environmental control. Triple blinding, calibration perturbations, multiverse analysis, and a Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE) of 5σ above the Allan‑derived noise floor establish an uncompromising standard.
Protocol PHY‑07 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 to test the claimed ability of human intention to remotely alter the dynamics of a macroscopic pendulum. Version 2.0 incorporates a common invar baseplate for both pendulums to suppress differential vibrations, electrostatic shielding to eliminate charge‑induced artifacts, and a mandatory pilot phase with a fictitious operator to validate that the differential noise floor is indeed below the pre‑registered MDE. The protocol is designed for a specialised laboratory environment with active vibration isolation, high vacuum, and precision optical metrology. Triple blinding, calibration impulses, and multiverse analysis establish an uncompromising standard. The aim is detection of reproducible deviations from baseline or establishment of a quantitative upper bound on anomalous coupling.
Protocol TEC‑89 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 to test the claimed phenomenon of intention influence on quantum random number generators (QRNG) – the alleged ability of a person (the "intender") to bias the output of a true hardware‑based quantum random number generator (e.g., ID Quantique Quantis, ANU Quantum Numbers, or equivalent) through intention alone, without physical contact. The primary observable is the deviation of the QRNG bit distribution (mean z‑score) from the expected chance level (50/50) during active intention periods, compared to control periods (no intention, sham intention, or trap conditions). The experimental design includes a certified hardware QRNG (Quantis‑v10.10.08 or equivalent) with direct USB connection (no buffer), real‑time visual/audio feedback for the intender (to enhance engagement), continuous logging of all bits with time stamps, triple blinding (intender, experimenter, and analyst are blind to condition), trap conditions (the intender is told to "influence" but the QRNG is replaced by a deterministic pseudo‑RNG), sham conditions (the intender is told to "influence" but is actually resting), catch conditions (a known bias is introduced into the QRNG output to validate the measurement system's sensitivity), positive controls (known effects, e.g., varying the number of bits per trial, to calibrate the system), physiological monitoring (skin conductance, heart rate variability, EEG alpha/theta power) to correlate with intention states, comprehensive environmental monitoring (temperature, humidity, electromagnetic fields), and automated data logging. The protocol mandates a pilot phase to calibrate the QRNG, establish the baseline noise floor, and validate the blinding procedure. The primary analysis uses a Linear Mixed Model (LMM) or a Binomial GLM comparing the z‑score (or proportion of 1s) between active and control conditions, with α = 0.025 (two‑tailed) and power ≥ 0.90 for a small effect (Cohen's d ≥ 0.05). The sample size is N = 10,000 bits per block (baseline, with adaptive increase to N = 100,000 bits if pilot shows high variability). Statistical analyses are preregistered, include Bayesian inference (BF₁₀), permutation tests, and multiverse robustness checks (≥70% of 12 forks). The aim is to detect a reproducible intention‑induced QRNG bias or to establish an upper bound on the effect size with unprecedented rigor.
Protocol PHY‑12 v1.1 implements the unified metrological framework of Protocol 9.0 to test the claimed ability of human intention to alter the fluorescence properties of colloidal quantum dots (QDs). Version 1.1 introduces a common laser source with a beamsplitter for excitation, focus‑position monitoring, and a multivariate statistical approach (instead of univariate FDR) to handle multiple correlated observables. The protocol is designed for specialised optical laboratories with stringent control of QD stability, temperature, and environmental noise. Triple blinding, calibration perturbations, multiverse analysis, and a Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE) of 5σ above the Allan‑derived noise floor establish an uncompromising standard. The aggregation test is moved to a separate validation procedure.
This protocol is a concrete implementation of the unified metrological framework Protocol 9.0 applied to the claimed phenomenon of micro‑psychokinesis (μ‑PK) — the alleged ability of consciousness to produce a statistically significant deviation of the output of a quantum random number generator (QRNG) from the theoretically expected binomial distribution. The protocol is mechanism‑neutral. Its goal is either to detect a reproducible deviation ΔX from the null model (fair coin p0 = 0.5) or to establish a quantitative upper bound on the possible effect under strictly controlled conditions. The document contains the full experimental architecture (target, dummy, trap), a procedure for demonstrating failure modes, requirements for the minimum detectable effect (MDE ≥ 5σ), triple blinding, multiverse analysis, and validity/exclusion criteria.