Tiller's "Intention Imprinting" Device?

I sent this. Do you think this will help?

from Greg Hanson < greegor47 at gmail >

to bill at tillerorg date Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:35 PM subject UED Schematic and parts list?

William A. Tiller Foundation For New Science

Dr.William A.Tiller, et alia:

Some associates of mine have taken an interest in your document entitled: "Steps for Moving Psychoenergetics Science Research Into the Hands of Interested General Public Researchers".

This paper is at:

Figure 1 on page 3 is 2 electronic schematic diagrams of devices you named UED or unimprinted electrical device for Intention-Host Device Research.

The schematic is blurry and unclear in critical areas. This is unusual for PDF documents.

Do you have a better digital copy of the schematics, and a parts list available online to the general public?

Greg Hanson Greegor47 at gmail

Just in case we have not beaten the dead horse sufficiently, I stumbled across legible copies of the schematic.

1) Turns out the device I was calling an 'oscillator' is just a 3 terminal 5V regulator. The mystery symbol connected to the !Write pin of the EEPROM is the oscillator. I am relieved that the good Dr. is not banging the power to the EEPROM as I earlier supposed. 2) The LED is not a Write indicator as I guessed previously. It glows continuously to indicate the presence of Vdd and will turn off to indicate that the battery needs to be recharged. The op amp and voltage divider mystery is solved.

The schematic is part of a 22 page document that starts on "Page 155". See figure 3 on "Page 160":

--Winston

Thanks, Winston, follow up sent.

from Greg Hanson < greegor47gmail >

to bill at tillerorg date Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:58 AM subject UED Schematic and parts list? addenda

William A. Tiller Foundation For New Science

Dr.William A.Tiller, et alia:

This is a follow up or addenda to an earlier e-mail. The first one is quoted at the bottom.

One of my associates found a slightly clearer version of the schematic at:

Still, do you have a more precise parts list?

I see the oscillators are 7.3 MHz for the one and

5, 8 and 9.3 MHz for the three. (Does the order matter?) Nothing says the make and models of the oscillators.

Which make and model of EEPROM chips were used?

Less important but for authenticity, what are the Resistor values , type of op amp, type of diode, and composition of capacitor?

Would you have some really close up photos of the circuit board showing all of the component types you used?

Have the newer NIMH rechargeable batteries functioned the same with this design?

Greg Hanson Greegor47 at gmail

ehsjr Inscribed thus:

In other words "Horseshit" !

--
Best Regards:
                     Baron.

I see Tiller wrote his paper 10 years after Dibble ??

Thanks for the link, this is getting more "interesting" all the time.

I will search thru my scrape box and see if I have any NMOS EEPROMs left over.

If anyone has actually read the text, is there any code in the EEPROM or just blank (all FFs) ?

The OSC symbols are kind of wrong, they look like crystals or resonators.

I guess scientists don't need to follow standards.

hamilton

Sorry if this was posted previously:

hamilton

Hi Greg,

Dr. Bill is unlikely to provide much more information than he has already. This is 'bad news for Science' but actually does not matter at all. I think we have a sufficiently good idea of the design intent that we can fill in the missing information.

1) As hamilton mentioned, the EEPROM devices are likely to be Intel 2864. The Intersil X28HC64 would probably work as well, (as would just about any parallel static RAM, provided you had a continuous supply of Vdd).

Select for low pin capacitance if you want a large range of 'imprinted' data values.

Of course the contents of each of these devices exposed to the same 'imprinting' session will be a function of the time varying electrostatic field integrated into the capacitance of each of the pins. A roomful of IIEDs are likely to contain wildly differing data from the same 'imprinting' session. It's the nature of asynchronously recording chaotic noise in wildly misleading sequence.

Grab the hot lead of a scope probe and observe the display. This is the source of the addresses and data. (Mostly EM fields from fluorescent lights, transformers, E fields from transmitters near and far, various switching pulses and the electrical discharges obtained by scooting two metal lab chairs together, for example.)

2) You can select oscillator values bounded by the minimum and maximum !Write pulse widths of the memory devices you choose. They are all asynchronous so any value that writes to the memor(ies) will do. The order does not matter.

3) Select the resistor values to provide < Vdd at the inverting input of the op amp when the battery discharges to within a few percent of the dropout voltage of the regulator.

4) Any low voltage op amp capable of single rail operation and ~> 4 mA of I(ol) will do.

5) Specify a 5V LED (with built-in dropping resistor) if you want to remain faithful to the documentation. If functionality and cost are more important to you, just grab any LED out of your junk box and install a series dropping resistor calculated to limit LED current below 60% of the I(ol) capability of the op amp.

6) Check the data sheet for your three terminal regulator for the specification of the output bypass capacitor.

7) Any secondary battery meeting the input voltage requirements of your 3 terminal regulator, capable of powering the circuit for the duration of 'imprinting' and data download will do.

8) Pay careless attention to PCB layout.

A UED PCB designed 'properly' will not yield 'imprinting' data values that differ significantly because of the lower impedance present on the address and data pins.

Ideal construction is 'ratsnest' with random length wires attached to each address and data pin to act as an antenna.

--Winston

(...)

Doesn't matter. Ideally one would start with all FFs, though 8K of garbage data is not qualitatively different from any other 8K of garbage data.

Yes. In the 'multiple oscillator' version, they are not even powered. :)

--Winston

Sometimes it is difficult to draw a distinction between useful adjuncts towards porcine whole body cleanliness and total hogwash.

I'll go with "looks like a duck, quacks like a duck" on this one.

--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster                          voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics   3860 West First Street   Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml   email: don@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

It's not the data in the EEPROM, it is the "subtle energy". In

he writes at PDF page 2:

| An alternative, and less passionate, test vehicle might be some type of | electrical device to act as an intermediate between the human and the | experiment. In such a case, the human energy field interaction would | produce some subtle level effects in the device that are not | distinguishable by any physical detectors presently available.

I think when reading this, you don't need to read the rest :-) Tiller has the idea, that there is some enery which can't be measured and an EEPROM can save something, so why not use it to save this energy? Of course, any pebble would do it, because you can't measure it anyway. So using an EEPROM is inrinsic illogical, even in the light of his absurd ideas, but cranks are not logical.

--
Frank Buss, fb@frank-buss.de
http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de

h > If anyone has actually read the text, is there h > any code in the EEPROM or just blank (all FFs) ?

W > Doesn't matter. Ideally one would start with all W > FFs, though 8K of garbage data is not W > qualitatively different from any other 8K of garbage data.

h > The OSC symbols are kind of wrong, they look like crystals or resonators.

W > Yes. =A0In the 'multiple oscillator' version, they are not even powered. :)

Isn't that particular oversight almost a convention for some designers?

Has this Intention Imprinting experiment been written up in The Journal of Irreproducible Results?

Hi again,

The osc is powered in the smaller schematic, the +V coming off C1 in fugure 3 of jse_13_2_dibble.pdf.

The three EEPROM version is missing this wire.

You will need to give credit to the designer for not cut-n-pasting correctly.

So squint your eyes a little and the wire will appear.

;-)

I do not think a RAM chip will work in this application.

If I remember correctly, didn't the Intel 28xxx family have an internal Vpp generator in it ??

If this circuit is going to generate odd signals, won't the Vpp generator be critical ??

I have google'd and still have not found an original Intel 2864 data wheel to check out. Does any one have a link to such a beast.

hamilton

Perhaps you didn't notice, but Dr. Tiller provides a Faraday cage with the device to shield against EMI.

Bob Gerber

Sure! Why wouldn't this work, for example?

Just keep toggling !Write and you are good to go.

Completely possible. (I dunno.)

Not at all. The memory merely records it's interpretation of the voltages that float on it's address and data pins.

Many many parts would serve the purpose IMHO.

--Winston

Then why bother 'imprinting' the memory at all?

I'm not being asked to throw away $250 here, am I?

Perish the thought.

--Winston

I noticed that the IIED is placed in a Faraday cage only during data collection and during the time that the device is not in use. During 'imprinting' the device is out in the real world.

From page 4 of

"The process began by placing the UED and its power converter (plugged into a 60 cycle wall outlet and to each other with the UED switched on) on a table-top around which the meditators sat quietly."

No Faraday cage in the picture. :)

--Winston

Any chance someone on the group could post an equivalent working circuit for this device, based upon the two published schematics below, and using commonly available parts?

Then anyone who wants to prove or disprove Dr. Tiller's claims can try it for themselves.

To my mind, that would be a worthwhile outcome for this discussion.

Bob Gerber

Tiller's claims are not worth investigating because they are inconsistent with observed reality and their own implications.

You know the cartoon with two lab-coated scientists at the blackboard covered with intricate equations, and one scientist points to a spot on the board and says to the other scientist "And here a miracle happens"?

Tiller's "miracle spot" is the channel whereby non-electromagnetic "intention" gets imprinted on the entirely electromagnetic PROM. (Think about it; if his gizmo actually works, then either "Intention" is at least partly an EM phenomenon, or PROMs have "souls".)

Describe that channel and you don't need no steenkin' PROM. In the process you'll have to account for the fact that "intentions" *don't* also get imprinted on *every* PROM ever made. All that crap about "practiced meditators" is just that, crap. *You* spend twenty or thirty hours dicking around with a memory circuit in the typical Engineer's Zone (a form of meditation), and see if you can get it to do something "funny".

Mark L. Fergerson

Yes, I would like to build one for my own testing.

I am still concerned that pin 1 (RDY) on the EEPROM points to a NMOS device.

So, to be consistent with the schematic, an NMOS 2864 would be needed.

If I were to use a CMOS RAM and it doesn't work, how would I know if the RAM is the wrong part.

I might wire it up wrong. ;-) I don't want to build this up more then once.

Testing the circuit as in, "Initial measurements on Evian water revealed large pH excursions as the water equilibrated with atmospheric CO2", should be easy enough.

hamilton