part ii - surreptitious acoustic signal modulation, voice projection, and direct brain...

7/31/2019 Part II - Surreptitious Acoustic Signal Modulation, Voice Projection, And Direct Brain Interface%0AAllen Barker, Aug. …

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/part-ii-surreptitious-acoustic-signal-modulation-voice-projection-and-direct 1/7

Part I - Models of Synthetic Telepathy | Part II - Acoustic Signal Modulation | Part III - Working Models Part IV - Bayesian Stopping Criterion

Part II - Surreptitious Acoustic Signal Modulation, Voice

Projection, and Direct Brain InterfaceAllen Barker, Aug. 19, 2002

This article deals with the technology to surreptitiously or overtly send "voic es" to people. This is a longtimedream of psychological warfare and operations people, and much research and development has gone into it.Huge sums of money have been spent developing ways to send voices, in any and all ways, to targetedpeople. Many technologies are openly known to exist, and more sophisticated ones no doubt exist in secret.One name for this is synthetic telepathy; another is voice-to-skull (v2s) technology. I also discuss methodsfor sensing brainwaves and converting these to voice signals, i.e., brainwave-to-voice (b2v) devices.

I assume the standard model of all technology, but at the end I mention the mixed model for those into that(and for the reasons I have outlined earlier). For the background of the model system on which this artic le isbased, see the previous article in the series, "Models of Synthetic Telepathy." Later articles in the series arelisted at the end.

I cover a lot of possibilit ies, which I hope is not confusing. But the reality is that under uncertainty you haveto keep all reasonably likely models in mind. As before, I do not cover the mental illness possibilit y becauseI have written about that elsewhere. I have gotten enough external confirms to know my case is not that.There are many other credible victims, there is a long history of US mind control abuses, there aredocumented victims still ignored, and all of the technology either exists in the open or likely exists in the

secret sector.

Subliminal and surreptitious voices

Of all the sounds that can be sent, why voices? Why the fascination with that, as opposed to other sounds?The obvious reason is deniability, since our society is currently set up so anyone claiming to experiencesuch things risks being called crazy, and anyone talking of such things risks being called a kook. Thedeeper reason is because human beings are social animals living in a society and communicating bylanguage. People tend to think in terms of language. People can be controlled by language. You can put avoice projector in a dog's brain and tell it to "sit" and "stay," but only humans can take complicated directionsin language. In this sense, humans are more vulnerable than other animals. Consider how language is usedby the con man, the hypnotist, the politician, the lawyer, and the preacher. The playground taunter. Words

can indeed hurt you.

There are many methods for sending surreptitious sound. Openly known devices exis t which can localizesounds to a particular location from 30 yards and more, for example. In a simple application, one could justhide a small piezo speaker to simulate high-frequency s ounds like bird songs and crick ets chirping. (Onemight also consider the effects of certain EM waves on real crickets and birds.)

One technique to hide subliminals is to mask them with ambient noise in the environment. This noise mightbe purposely created and disguised as ambient, like a fake bird call that is run for a while and then hassubliminal speech slipped in, or it may be naturally occurring noise that the voice modulated signal ismatched to in frequency. This is analogous to hiding the transmission frequency of an audio bug nearsomething like a radio station to make detection diffic ult. Another technique to hide subliminals is to processthe signal so it does not consciously register as a voice signal but has some subconscious effect. On

something like a direct brain send a very low "volume" signal may register subconsciously but notconsciously.



The main technique this article deals with is subliminal voices hidden in the natural sounds of appliances likeair conditioners, refrigerators, computer fans, and other electric devices, especially those with motors. Thisfollows largely from my own empirical study of the harassing voices I am bombarded with day and night, as

well as from listening to other victims . I speculate on some possible methods of modulating and s endingsuch voices. For a description of some experiments in this regard, see the web site [ .... ], where it isdescribed how a computer disk drive's sound can be modulated with transients on the power line. Acc ordingto a demonstration there by John Vincent, "transients and RF on 120VAC Neutral return and ground lines canand do induce annoying acoustic resonance into various appliances." Any sort of controllable acoustic

effect s can likely be voice-modulated. Sound might even be modulated onto the low-frequency signals ofacoustic s ources like large transformers, and thus carry over large distances. In a city there is almostnowhere you can go to escape the hum of motors and electrical devices.

For people who hear voices "in their head," try this just as an experiment. If y ou hear a voice, stop and listenclosely to the ambient noise, especially hums and rattles of electrical equipment. Turn your head slowly tosee if it has a directionality. In my case that turns out to almost always be the source of the "voic e." Itseems like it is in your head, but it may be externally sent to your "simulated third ear." The Russianacoustic psycho-correction devices were reported to use such an acoustic modulation technique to cause avoice that seemed to originate in a person's head (and the rights are currently owned by a Richmond, Va.company). Musicians and audiophiles may have a better ear for this, since they are used to picking out onepart of a sound from a soundscape. The sound is very directional to the sound source when you externalizeit.

Besides the ever-present electrical hum, there are other sources of sound like jets passing overhead thatmight be voice-modulated or have voice signals hidden under them. At least as early as Vietnam, psyopsounds were broadcast from helicopters, for example.

I mentioned possible power-line modulation methods above, but there are other possibilities. How might apulsed EM wave interact with an operating motor for example? The motor effec t might even be a side effectof another send technique. There are other methods of sending voice-to-skull, like pulsed microwavetechniques. These might be matched to the ambient noise in order to hide the signals, or even hidden in atinnitus-like signal, natural or artific ial. One technique may even be used to mask the use of another. ("Icouldn't discern the Frey signal voices because of the acoustic mask ing voices or frequencies. ") Acomplicated sound source like an electric motor driving a fan can have a fairly large spectrum. There mayeven be more than one voice layered in there at different frequency bands or with different modulations.

[I've been making a few recordings to try to capture these voices that harass and berate me day and nightnow. It is somewhat hard to evaluate the recordings, though, because they try to mess with your perceptions

when you listen. The real-world low f requencies permeate everything, even earplugs. I have even caughtthem at this a few times when listening to recordings. They send signals on the external ambient audio (and

whatever other s end technique) to deceive you as you listen. They cannot quite keep it up consistently,though. I can pull off my headphones real fast and catch the signal in the external ambient noise. You canactually hear that they turn up the external sources when you have on headphones to listen. They cannotquite synchronize with the digital recordings if you start at a random place or move it slightly, or if you repeatit enough times. (Once I forgot to turn on the microphone and they still tried to fake a signal there.) Theyeither want me to think something is there when it is not or they want me to not hear what is really there.]

Finally, suppose there really is no external modulation -- even though the signal seems highly directional and

sometimes blatantly obvious. This is a very important possibility to keep in mind. It may be that, rather thanmodulating the signal on the audio send , they are modulating it on the audio receive in your brain. If youassume a direct brain read , then you also need to consider a direct brain send , which I discuss in the nextsection. And of course keep in mind that there are multiple techniques which could be used simultaneouslyin a large-scale operation.

Direct brain interface (DBI)

Ass ume now a direct brain interface. The most likely model for this is s ome sort of miniaturized brainimplants, probably a distributed array of microsensors. Ass ume as one model that these microsensors areinjected or blasted into the auditory cortex and surrounding regions of the brain. Perhaps other sections also,like the visual cortex. They might just scattershot truly miniature sensors and have them self-organize viafeedback later. Perhaps a compressed air blast up the nostril, for example. Some mind control literature

mentions liquid crystals, or there may be ways to crystallize a fluid flowing in the bloodstream through thebrain such as by external EMF; this is an interesting hypothetical model. Other methods are possible andsurely under development, such as remote-sensing methods. It might also be something like some



subdermal EEG (and other signal) sensors. Or there may be some fairly easily readable sources forsubvocalized speech in other parts of the body, like the nerves to the voice box. For the purposes of thisarticle I will assume a brainwave reading capability over a significant portion of the auditory cortex.

From my empirical "studies" there already exists fast brainwave-to-voice (b2v) conversion software and thesensors to do it. At this stage I would assume brain implants, but the same software could probably beadapted to other sensing technologies as they became available. Note that in b2v the brainwaves representboth sounds heard through the ears (as with the cats they wired up in the 1960s) as well as subvocalized and

prevocalized "inner speech."

Extending this another step, one harassment technique is brainwave-to-voice-to-skull (b2v2s) where theyread your brainwaves and feed them back to you via the external channel as a harassment technique. I havepersonally experienced this harassment technique. Of course it is really b2v2(RTI/AP )2s so they canprocess the signal and add "commentary" along the way. There is a "man in the middle" of the signal path.It also seems as if they are working on some sort of brain cloning/modeling technique to "steal" a person'sthought patterns and predict what he or she will think. And as I mentioned in "Motives for Mind Control,"prediction is a fundamental part of control.

[I desc ribe what they do and write about it, as I have all along. I've explained that before. It helps mycredibility. About everything I've said before has turned out to be the case, hasn't it? I've had enoughexternal confirms to know it is not just in my head, and no protocol confirmation to conclude that they are

"friendlies." One has to always consider the effects of conditioned internals, though, with the Ewen Cameron-sty le psychic driving of SCPs and sleep deprivation. That and the ongoing trigger algorithm. It is not calledtorture for nothing.]

Consider a brainwave-to-voice-to-skull (b2v2s) send using, for example, electrical appliances such as withpower line modulation. This model accounts for victims' descriptions of people seeming to know what theyare thinking. The voice-to-skull is really voice-to-public, including the vic tim. Next time you are out on thestreet or in a store, pause and listen to all the background noise sources you typic ally do not notice. Somestreet theater "harassers" might have figured it out and become witting collaborators in a "game" of torture,

while others might be influenced subliminally. Some may even pick up the signal consciously but beunaware of its origin and think they are "psychic." Either way, it would be quite unnerving to vict ims. Thissort of "voice-to-public" wide-field send model is interesting to consider. It does require a conspiracy amongthe conscious voice hearers to not talk about "the voices" around the voice senders (or perhaps not even

amongst themselves). Aside from that it might explain a lot (and the send method could be any wide-fieldvoice projection device: acoustic, electromagnetic, or other).

Now, suppose the send is not auditory, but only seems like it. Once we assume brain implants the victimhas to suspect all sensory input, since deceivers are messing directly with the brain. This holds for anytechnology to directly alter the brain, implanted or remote. Suppose there is a self-organizing array ofminiature stimoceivers somehow implanted in the auditory portions of the brain. (Recall the tonotopic map,as the sounds are laid out by frequency in the brain.) If a sound is coming in, it will cause neural firingpatterns. Whatever frequency bands you hear, there will be increased neural activ ity there. So if thestimoceivers first sense the activation level and then send the signal only if the activity is above a threshold,the imposed sound will seem to be part of an external ambient noise source. (What can be concluded in thismodel about strongly directionalized sound sources with superimposed voice? Are there techniques where atargeted person would falsely attribute directionality to a signal, by falsely associating it with a real external

sound? Would a simple send proportional to activation level do that? Are there any remote or wide-field sendtechniques like EM methods that could also accomplish this sort of brain manipulation? This is an importantquestion to consider.)

One question is, if they are sending directly to the brain, at least part of the time, why would they bother tomake it sound like an external acoustic s ignal coming in through the ears? One reason is that in a noisyenvironment their signal must "compete" with natural external sounds, and so to be noticeable it has to fit in

with the rhythm and frequency. Another possible reason is that they do not want it to be too noticeable.They may try to hide such sounds in external ambient frequencies to give them more of a subliminal effect,so they don't stand out like a sore thumb in the mind. Another likely reason, in the case of a direct brainsend, is that they want to misdirect the victims to think it is an external acoustic modulation. This way thevictim may claim to hear things in external signals which others truly cannot hear, and will be less likely todetect or measure the true send signal. Finally, it may simply be a way to drive a vict im crazy and induce aschiz ophrenia-appearing condition in those susceptible to such conditioning. By repeatedly trauma-conditioning the victim to associate berating voices with external sounds, the victim will tend to anticipatethem even when hearing sounds without the overlaid harassment. (Can you imagine berating phrases --



psychologically tailored to psychologically harm you -- bombarding you for weeks and months at a time,hundreds of thousands of times, in a psychic driving fashion?)

Finally, c onsider direct brain-to-brain (b2b) interfaces. Consider that if the victims are implanted or otherwisehave a direct brain interface, there is a good chance that the harassers do also. In this c ase the undergroundbunker could be distributed, much like the victims' concentration camp system is distributed to each victim'sbrain and mind. What possibilit ies are available in this model that are not in a literal underground bunkermodel? For one thing, the perpetrators would be mobile, just like the vic tims , with a connection maintained

everywhere they go. This might allow for street theater.

With a direct brain interface the perpetrators would just have to "think" the harassment. The obviousasymmetry is that the victims are nonconsensual and do not have an on/off switch or a volume control. Theyare kept in the dark about what is happening by a real conspiracy of silence; a conspiracy that aids, abets,and allows their rape and torture. One could also consider direct hookups from one brain to another at theneural level, rather than the linguistic level. This might be used to "steal minds."

Suppose, hypothetically, that you had a brilliant scientist, no morals or ethics, and wanted to "clone" thisscientist's thinking. You get 100 volunteer privates in the secret police unit who agree to a direct hookup.Voila! After 10 years, maybe a few of them have picked up the skills of the nonconsensual (or evenconsensual) scientist. (Over time the patterns will likely self-organize to interpolate and resemble theimposed patterns.) What if you then start sending to the scientist? Visual? Auditory? Motor control? What

functions could then be controlled or influenced? There are various permutations on the theme. If this levelof direct brain connection has not yet been tried on humans it will not be too long before it is. And what aboutmachine simulation and modeling? Those ignorant of the current state of technology may scoff, but the timeis now to make sure that if such experiments are (or have been) done they are done humanely andconsensually. Human rights demands that all participants be consensual. (See "Motives for Mind Control,"for more on this sort of motive.)

One argument against the harassers running off direct brain interfaces themselves is that they don't soundlike real people thinking. They sound like machines simulating a playground taunting, feeding back on thevictims ' reactions and using profile information. That, or some goading moron at a microphone. Perhaps theRTIs actually receive training in "using" the devices or have a less invasive interface. Some RTIs may havedirect interfaces, but the communication network can have many nodes on it (just like an Ethernet). Imaginehooking up an autopig machine just like you'd hook up a printer to a network. And an RTI's microphone and

VR monitor at another node. The difference is that some of the "nodes" of this network are direct interfacesinto human brains. And some of the human beings are nonconsensual and are being purposely tortured.

General Thoughts on the Situation

Americans juvenilize human rights abuse. Look at COINTELPRO. Largely a bunch of sophomoric dirtytrick s applied against people to discredit and neutralize them. Juvenile as they are, to the victims they arenonetheless devastating. This juvenilization helps people to dismis s the abuses and the taunting ridicule.Another reason for the juvenilization and taunting is to regress people to a juvenile state. This is a commontechnique for interrogators and torturers. The intention is to make the person regress and be more childlikeso they accept the torturer (or the "good Nazi") as an authority figure to be obeyed. Cointelpro of the mind.

Another cover deception is that it's just children. Hmmm. Children who beam voices into people's brains to

drive them to suicide for amusement? How does that work, exactly ? Are they sitting at microphones or dothey have chips in their brains? They surely do not build or buy the technology. If an adult really made achild part of a torture operation then that child is a vic tim also. More likely it is a covert operation unit runninga deception operation. Just another psyc hological operation, a long-running cover, a theme for thedeception. Juveniliz e the victims . (And would it really matter in a model independent sense, when peopleare being tortured?)

The voices harassing me all speak English exclusively and all have similar, though differing, accents. Theysound like white men aged 18-40 or machine simulations thereof. As far as the indirect f eedback I get about

who seems to hear the voices, it seems to cut across all demographic boundaries. Men and women of allraces and ages -- and children also.

If the Russians did this it would be an act of war. It is nothing but psychological warfare against the

domestic population. Who are these people? Where are they? Did you vote for them? People are afraid toeven talk about them. These torturers cower in a literal or metaphorical underground bunker, harassingcitizens and trying to stir up trouble. They harass, goad, and torture. They rape people in public (if you



assume a model with an audience). They sadistic ally drive people to suicide for amusement. (How many?)

Once you know this to be reality, what other facts have to be updated in the truth database? Facts havelogical consequences. 2+2=4. If the logical consequences are hideous, many people turn away and go intodenial. They pretend they are living in the fantasy world and ignore the facts staring them in the face. Arethere any real men in this society?

Here is a useful model to consider, at least to clarify some ideas. It is something like the UCLA violenceproject, proposed in the early 1970s. Ass ume brain implants or some other sensor capable of reading somesignific ant aspect of brain functioning. The brainwaves are telemetered to the communication network(maybe low earth satellite or other), the communication network feeds to the underground bunker (literal ormetaphorical), the underground bunker processes the telemetered brainwaves to voice, the voice signal isfiltered through autopigs and RTIs, the processed signal is sent back out to the communication network, andthe final signal is sent to a targeted or wide-field voice-to-skull device. Most of this is basic engineering. (Acellphone network is a similar sort of setup.)

In the underground bunker there are the Auschwitz guard RTIs who do the actual sadistic harassing,computer aided by autopigs. They are commanded by Major Mengele, who has a master's degree inpsychology. He uses that and his torture experience to design new pet theories of torture, control, anddirection which he has the RTIs test on victims. Whether they "work" or not, the victim experiences torture.("When you pull all the legs off a fly it cannot hear." "The lobotomy cured the patient's hyperactivity.") Who

is the pig holding the leash of the man in the middle (Major Mengele's commander or his commander)? Howfar up does the command chain of torture go? Who profits? Those are the ones to hold most accountableand the ones to get. Not that the lower-level participants are not fully accountable.

Don't take your feedback from a bad monitor. As an electric guitar player I tend to think of the feedbacksound sources as amps. It is just my nonconsensual direct brain interface sent to the "effects loop" of theunderground bunker, and then sent back to "amps" around me to provide the final acoustic effect. (Of courseit may also be something other than an acoustic s ignal at the final voice-to-skull step.) This is actually afairly good analogy, except that the "amp" may be something like your refrigerator. If the effect s loop is evil,the feedback is intended to destroy you. Like a phase-locked loop, there is a tendency to lock in and entrain

when realtime direct feedback of your own thoughts is present. This may be us ed t o control a victim. Asidefrom gathering data, try not to lock onto such signals if y ou detect them. Don't slow down your thinking or

work to articulate it on a bad amp (unless you assume an audience model you are als o educating or you are

gathering data).

Reprogram the triggers. The trigger algorithm is a basic way they keep victims traumatized. Anything thatgets under your skin or that might get a reaction from you is a potential trigger. They will often use ababbling trigger search (BTS) algorithm where they go through a list that Major Mengele developed fromstudying the transcript of your harassment. They babble various phrases looking to see which ones get areaction. This algorithm may also be automated. When they find one -- a potential trigger -- they send it tothe trigger algorithm (TA) which applies it in almost a clockwork, machinelike fashion. The "success ful"triggers that cause trauma or distraction become autopig phrases to be pounded into the victim's brain with ahuge Cameron number. This psychic driving causes a form of brain damage where the victim tends to hearsuch phrases even where they are only hinted at (trigger abbreviation) or in random noises or anticipations. Ifthey try to trigger you with some phrase that they have associated to trauma or anger or distraction, try toreprogram it. Consciously ass ociate it with another concept, lik e human rights abuse or the trigger algorithm

itself. Each time you hear it, make that association to yourself to reprogram the trigger.

Assume an impostor. If you are under voice harassment, do not assume the source of the voices is local.If y ou are interacting in society, do not assume that those around you are the sources of the voices. Insome models they might be, but even in the mixed model they may well be long-range manipulating andharassing voices. In the underground bunker they always cower and look for ways to harass and goad andstir up trouble in the real world for the victims. They will impersonate anyone or, for that matter, feed back toyou anything they think you might buy. They try to induce anxiety, they try to distract, and they try to stir uptrouble. To say the harassment channel is unsecure and unauthenticated is an understatement -- at leastfrom the victim's viewpoint. Information warfare exploits such channels.

The permanent words of the day are asymmetry, belie, and nonlocality.

For more information, visit the website Mind Control: Technology, Techniques, and Politics athttp://www.datafilter.com/mc



In particular, see "Mental Firewalls" and "The Autopig".

"We've been watching you a long time. We know more about you than you think." -- What an RTI blurted out,angry, when I told him he was "powerless."

Optional Postscript: Mixed Model

In this final segment, I consider the above scenarios from the perspective of the mixed model of naturalpsychic abilities plus technology reverse-engineering such abilities and/or employing other methods. Caveat:I do not think this is the correct model, but that the standard technological model is. Feel free to skip therest of this article. I discuss the mixed model because some people do believe psychic powers are morethan just something like enhanced intuition, and thus may be vulnerable to psyops exploiting that beliefsys tem with technology. It is also useful just to think about, to get a different perspective. Who knows, itmight even turn out to be partly true. How would you know you had such abilities if they were being maskedby technology? Could you tell the difference (especially if you didn't know to look)? Please see "Models ofSynthetic Telepathy" for more explanation.

With that caveat out of the way, I discuss the above sorts of brainwave-to-voice-to-skull systems assumingthey are some sort of natural phenomenon.

First suppose an actual acoustic signal really is embedded in appliance noises, etc. How does it get there inthe natural model? Perhaps the electrical patterns in a person's brain somehow interfere with electricalequipment and impose a discernible pattern. Given the extremely low power levels of EM radiation put out bythe brain, it would have to be a very sensitive "detection device." Could your refrigerator be more sensitivethan SQUIDs in a laboratory? Maybe there are vibrational modes (like PDE solutions) that an extremely lowpower signal can shift between. Something like a transistor or a catalys t. This mode shift would have to belarge enough to produce an audible result. The results would somehow have to be interpretable as language.It would also have to operate over a fairly long range. For these reasons, this explanation does not seem verylikely at all if you assume standard physics. (And how would other people talk on your refrigerator? Why

would a natural ps ychic hide a signal in a refrigerator rattle?)

What if natural psychic powers result from an EM signal emanated from one brain and received by anotherbrain, like with microwave hearing? Justesen made some calculations in his paper that the power levels forthe effect, though low, are still too large for the brain's tiny natural microwave emissions. (See the end ofhttp://www.angelfire.com/or/mctrl/justesen.htm.) Perhaps some people are super-sensitive to this effect, orthere are other lower-power nonthermal effects which are currently unknown. This does not seem to accountfor the nature of the harassers, who badger and demean but never seem to think like real people would think.With the microwave hearing effect , this would also be just a voice effect. (And how could directional soundbe sent by such methods?)

Next, suppose some sort of direct brain interface at a neural level that somehow naturally occurs. Again, theproblem is the transmission method which must operate at extremely low power (and often over longdistances). Ass uming standard physics and biology, there is no known way for this to occur. Moreover, thescience departments at all the top universit ies ignore the "phenomenon." This implies a huge conspiracy tokeep the powers secret or else powers so weak and unreliable that they cannot be measured experimentally(and do not meet the v2s level of strong signals victims report). If people had these powers, wouldn't they

wonder how they work? Would they just think this is magic but they can learn about the eyes and ears in abiology book? Are none of these people scientist s? Can't someone design and conduct a convincing,repeatable statistical experiment to at least show information transmission by some unknown means? Arethese people not worried about the reverse engineering of this ability with technology in secret labs?

Given the above, this model does not seem likely. Nonetheless there are a few possibilities . It may be thatthe brain can be an extremely sensitiv e detector when strongly tuned to receive a signal. If one person'sbrain were "in sympathy" with another person's brain then some sort of extremely low power effect mightoccur. It would be like a pencil balanced on its t ip, which can be knocked over by a tiny force. The brainalso recognizes patterns it is conditioned with more readily than a random pattern (and hence oftenincorrectly). The anticipation feeds back with the sensory input. So these patterns may require lower powerlevels for reception. One could also postulate some sort of unknown biological quantum effect.

As I have mentioned before, the technology exis ts whether or not the natural model holds. Thus the purenatural model is obsolete and there is at most a mixed model with both technology and natural abilities.There could be weak "psychic " powers being masked by stronger technological signals. Note that if you



reverse-engineer a hypothetical natural psychic signal that operates on low power, you could likely turn up thepower tremendously when you plug the device into a wall socket.

Part I - Models of Synthetic Telepathy | Part II - Acoustic Signal Modulation | Part III - Working Models

Part IV - Bayesian Stopping Criterion

part ii - surreptitious acoustic signal modulation, voice projection, and direct brain...

Documents