Mass Consciousness Perturbed Randomness Hours Before First Plane Struck on 911

Random Number Generators around the world that were taking part in the Global Consciousness Project at Princeton, became less random as the moment approached for the first plane to hit the World Trade Center towers on the morning of September 11th, 2001.

Exploratory Block Analysis of Field Consciousness Effects on Global RNGs on September 11, 2001
by Bryan J. Williams - August 12, 2002 - Department of Psychology / University of New Mexico

And... September 11 2001: Exploratory and Contextual Analyses
by Roger Nelson, Director, GCP

On September 11, 2001, beginning at about 8:45 in the morning, a series of terrorist attacks destroyed the twin towers of the World Trade Center and severely damaged the Pentagon. The disaster is so great that in New York we have as yet, two days later, only guesses about how many thousands of people perished when the WTC towers collapsed. Commercial airliners were hijacked and flown directly into the three buildings. The first crashed into the North tower at 8:45, and about 18 minutes later the second airliner hit the South tower. At about 9:40, a third airliner crashed into the Pentagon. At about 9:58, the South tower collapsed, followed by the North tower at 10:28.

The following material shows the behavior of the Global Consciousness Project's network of 37 REG devices called "eggs" placed around the world as they responded during various periods of time surrounding September 11. A book chapter gives a compact summary. These eggs generate random data continuously and send it for archiving and analysis to a dedicated server in Princeton, New Jersey, USA. We analyse the data to determine whether the normally random array of values shows structure correlated with global events. This page shows a wide range of exploratory analyses that provide context for the formal hypothesis testing related to the events on September 11. A number of people have done supplementary and complementary analyses, as well as direct replications. Links to these are provided below. An especially interesting effort was undertaken by Bryan Williams, who used data in 15-minute blocks, to compare with the seconds resolution used in the formal analyses. To the extent his results are similar, this provides some response to the question whether a general, external influence is at work, as opposed to an "experimenter effect" operating via fortuitous (albeit anomalous) selection of the analysis specifications.

Read More Here