|
|
|
|
|
|
vu experience to listen to Hella's tape-recorded description of the Stanford University Hospital gardens, just as we were walking through them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the recurring questions in precognition research concerns the source of the mental images that the viewer experiences. Are they from the target, or are they from the feedback? A very clear example of this kind of phenomenon is described in the wonderful book, An Experiment in Time, by English engineer. J.W. Dunne. Dunne's book, published in 1927, is a treasure trove of precognition data. In one of many examples of his precognitive dreams, he reports that he had a clear impression of a volcanic eruption in which 4,000 people were killed. The next morning he read of that very event in the newspaper, including a report of the fatalities. It wasn't until he prepared his book for publication, and looked again at the article, that he discovered it actually referred to 40,000 people, and not the 4,000 that he originally misread. As it turned out, the number of lives lost in the eruption was different from both these numbers. Dunne writes of this incident: |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
Now when the next batch of papers arrived, these gave the exact estimates of what the actual loss of life had been, and I discovered that the true figure had nothing in common with the arrangement of fours and naughts I had both dreamed of, and gathered from the first report. So, my wonderful "clairvoyant" vision had been wrong in its most insistent particular! But, it was clear that its wrongness was likely to prove a matter just as important as its rightness. For whence in the dream did I get the idea of 4000? Clearly it must have come into my mind because of the newspaper paragraph.
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most comprehensive laboratory examination of precognition was done by Robert Jahn, Brenda Dunne, and Roger Nelson at Princeton University.18 They conducted 227 formal experiments in which a viewer was asked to describe where one of the researchers would be hiding at some preselected later time. They discovered, much to their surprise, that the accuracy of the description was the same whether the viewer had to look hours, days, or weeks into the future. The overall statistical significance of the combined experiments departed from what you would expect from chance by a probability of I in 100 billion! Their findings are so strong, that it |
|
|
|
|
|