Scientists extract images from people's thoughts

camera

fMRI scans used in murder trial sentencing

Scale of justice. Image: Wikipedia

(PhysOrg.com) -- Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) scans have been used, possibly for the first time, in the sentencing phase of a murder trial in Chicago in the US.

Ads by Google

Electronic Lab Notebook - Go Paperless, Increase productivity Information access & sharing - www.systat.us

The defendant, Brian Dugan, was convicted for the 1983 kidnapping, rape and murder of a 10-year-old girl, Jeanine Nicarico. Dugan had pleaded guilty in July this year, while serving life sentences for two other murders. Prosecutors at the trial asked for the death penalty to be imposed.

The defense lawyers believed Dugan had suffered from a mental illness -- psychopathy -- from birth and asked for fMRI scans to be presented as evidence in the sentencing phase. Lead defense attorney Steve Greeberg said the fMRI scans indicated Dugan had a brain disorder in keeping with psychopathy, and his mental illness meant his ability to control his psychopathic urges was reduced.

Dugan had been given a standard diagnostic test for psychopathy and scored 37 out of a possible 40, which placed him in the 99.5th percentile, according to neuroscientist Kent Kiehl of the University of Mexico, who was an expert witness for the defense.

Kiehl runs fMRI and other brain scans on inmates in prisons in New Mexico, as they perform a series of activities, including tests involving moral reasoning. Kiehl testified that Dugan's fMRI scans showed similar features to those of other psychopaths.

An expert witness for the prosecution, Jonathan Brodie of New York University, said the evidence presented by the scans was irrelevant since they could not indicate Dugan's thought processes in 1983, when the murder was committed.

After 10 hours of deliberation the jury returned with the death sentence, apparently after a change of mind in at least one juror who had wanted Dugan to receive a life sentence instead. Greenberg said the last minute change was highly irregular, and he is planning to appeal.

In previous cases PET scans have been used as evidence of brain disorders, but the Dugan case is believed to be the first in which fMRI scans have been used. Professor Hank Greely of Stanford Law School said the standards required for evidence in the sentencing phase were less stringent than during the trial, especially in capital cases when the law makes special dispensation to allow the defendant to introduce almost any evidence that might save him from the death penalty.

� 2009 PhysOrg.com

EVP: Voices from the other side or the inside ?:

            News/Updates   |   Articles  |   Membership   |   Members' Area   |   Big Circle
      About AA-EVP   |   FAQ   |   Examples   |   Techniques   |   Resources   |   Links   |   Contact Us   |   Site Map   |   Research

Meta-model (NLP)

Telepathy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

For other uses, see Telepathy (disambiguation).

This article is about the paranormal phenomenon. For the magical act, see mentalism.

Telepathy

Terminology
TP
An experiment in sensory deprivation aiming to demonstrate TP
Coined by	Fredric W. H. Myers (1882) [1]
Definition	The transference of thoughts or feelings between two or more subjects through Psi
Signature	One subject said to gain information from another that was shielded from their traditional senses by distance, time, or physical barriers.
See also	Extra-sensory perception, Anomalous cognition, Ganzfeld experiment

Telepathy (Greek τηλε, tele meaning "distant" and πάθεια, patheia meaning "to be affected by",^[2]) is supposed to be the transfer of information on thoughts or feelings between individuals by means other than the five senses (See Psi).^[1][3] The term was coined in 1882 by the classical scholar Fredric W. H. Myers, a founder of the Society for Psychical Research,^[1] specifically to replace the earlier expression thought-transference.^[1][3] A person who is able to make use of telepathy is said to be able to read the thoughts and stored information in the brain of others. Telepathy, along with psychokinesis forms the main branches of parapsychological research, and many studies seeking to detect, understand, utilize telepathy have been done within the field.

There is no accepted mechanism by which telepathy can work, and there is no definition which unambiguously distinguishes it from a number of other related concepts such as clairvoyance, so the concept is not accepted by the scientific community.^[4]

Telepathy is a common theme in modern fiction and science fiction, with many superheroes and supervillains having telepathic abilities. Such abilities include sensing the thoughts of others.

Contents [hide] 1 Origins of the concept 2 Telepathy in parapsychology 2.1 Types of telepathy 3 Skepticism and controversy 4 Telepathy in popular culture 5 Technologically enabled telepathy 6 See also 7 Notes 8 External links

Muscle reading

Design Firm Shows Gadgets From the Near Future

A radio without any knobs. A bathroom where a clear display wirelessly streams vital statistics on your health. And a user interface that takes brain waves and translates them into commands for a computer.

These are some of the products in development by Cambridge Consultants, a product design and development company. It showed off some of its latest inventions at a daylong event last week in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Check out these sweet ideas, many of which are set to hit retail shelves in the next few weeks.

Cube Radio (above)

As devices become more complex to use, designers are striving for simplicity in form. The Q2 Cube internet radio tries to innovate in terms of how users can interact with it. It’s the first dial-free radio, say Cambridge Consultants and the Armour Group, which co-developed it. The cube-shaped device lets users choose radio stations or change the volume by moving the device itself. To select one of the four pre-set radio stations, turn the Cube onto one of its ‘faces.’ Tilting it forward turns the volume up, and tilting it backwards turns it down. The device took about nine months to develop from concept to prototype.

Though pricing for it has not yet been announced, the Cube is expected to be available in some retail stores in the U.K. in time for Christmas.

Implantable Antenna

Patient care is set to go beyond the doctor’s office. New low-power wireless technologies make it possible to implant monitoring devices in people’s bodies, to help keep an eye on blood pressure, metabolism and other vital statistics.

But one of the challenges of these new wireless devices is designing a suitable antenna that can operate within the human body where fat, muscle and skin tissue create challenging conditions for wireless signals.

This implantable antenna uses the 402-405MHz Medical Implant Communications Service (MICS) frequency band. Combined with a custom integrated chip or a system on a chip, device makers can use the antenna in pacemakers, neurostimulation devices, and swallowable imaging and diagnostic systems.

Connected Patient

There’s no dearth of health and fitness equipment, from the basic digital scale to sophisticated heart and blood pressure monitors. But most of these devices work independently with no easy way to share the data or discern patterns in it.

Now picture the bathroom of the future, where these devices can talk to each other and wirelessly stream information onto a single screen. It’s easy to do it with the Bluetooth Health Device Profile and the IEEE Personal Health Data specification.

In the past, communication between medical devices was based on ad-hoc and proprietary standards, which offered limited or no interoperability. The latest Bluetooth and IEEE standards developed specifically for medical use changes that. For a user, it means, a better overall picture of your fitness and medical information

Related Articles

• GERD Patient Satisfaction Hinges On Medication, Bedside Manner
• NAVTEQ Completes Its Acquisition of T-Systems Traffic, GmbH
• Fujitsu PalmSecure and HT Systems' PatientSecure Selected By BayCare Health System to Protect Patient Confidentiality and Prevent Medical Identity Theft
• More Than Two-Thirds of Newly-Diagnosed Patients Who Are Prescribed Medications for OCD Receive Inadequate Therapy
• eAnytime(TM) Announces Its Next-Generation Medication Dispensing System, Featuring Patient-Empowered Information and Medication Dispensing Stations - The Future of Medication Dispensing
• Patients don't accurately gauge medical care: study
• Latest Technology Enhances Patient Experience at Family Medical Care Center
• Etransmedia Technology, Inc. And Misys Healthcare Systems Align to Provide Electronic Medical Records Solution to Medical Practices
• Akos Technologies, LLC and Misys Healthcare Systems Align to Provide Electronic Medical Records Solution to Medical Practices
• Patient Dies in VA Medical Study

Brain Fingerprinting
Brief Summary of the Technology

Lawrence A. Farwell, PhD
President and Chief Scientist
Brain Wave Science
Former Faculty Member
Harvard University

Satyam eva jayate --
Truth ever triumphs."
May 9, 2000

Brain Wave Science

http://www.brainwavescience.com/

Human Brain Research Laboratory, Inc.

2000 North Court Street, Building 18A, Fairfield, IA 52556

Email: Farwell@... Phone: (515) 469-5649

Brain Fingerprinting: Brief Summary of the Technology

1. A patented new technique of proven accuracy in US government tests

Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 120 tests, including tests on FBI agents, tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy, and tests on real-life situations including actual crimes.

2. Brain Fingerprinting catches a serial killer

On August 5, 1999 Dr. Farwell used Brain Fingerprinting to prove that suspected serial killer James B. Grinder had raped and murdered Julie Helton 15 years earlier. Faced with an almost certain conviction and probable death sentence, Grinder pleaded guilty one week later in exchange for a sentence of life in prison without parole. He is currently serving that sentence, and has confessed to several other murders of young women.

3. Brain Fingerprinting exonerates an innocent man falsely convicted of murder

On April 25, 2000, Dr. Farwell used Brain Fingerprinting to exonerate an innocent man who has spent 22 years in prison for a murder that he did not commit. Terry Harrington was convicted in 1978 of the murder of a retired policeman who was working as a security guard, based primarily on the testimony of an alleged witness who was himself involved in the crime. Harrington was a 17-year-old black youth at the time of the crime.

Brain Fingerprinting proved that Harrington's brain did not contain details of the crime that would be known to the perpetrator. Brain Fingerprinting proved not only that there was not a match between the information stored in Harrington's brain and the details of the crime, but also that there was a match between the information stored in Harrington's brain and the details of the accounts of the evening of the crime given by several alibi witnesses, who testified that Harrington was elsewhere at the time of the crime.

Dr. Drew Richardson of the FBI Laboratory (phone 703-632-6704) assisted Dr. Farwell in developing the test for Harrington. Legal efforts to obtain Harrington's freedom based on Brain Fingerprinting and other newly discovered exculpatory evidence are ongoing.

4. Scientific detection of the record of the crime in the perpetrator’s brain

Farwell Brain Fingerprinting is based on the principle that the brain is central to all human acts. In a criminal act, there may or may not be many kinds of peripheral evidence, but the brain is always there, planning, executing, and recording the crime. The fundamental difference between a perpetrator and a falsely accused, innocent person is that the perpetrator, having committed the crime, has the details of the crime stored in his brain, and the innocent suspect does not. This is what Farwell Brain Fingerprinting detects scientifically.

5. Matching evidence from a crime scene with evidence on the perpetrator

Farwell Brain Fingerprinting matches evidence from a crime scene with evidence stored in the brain of the perpetrator, similarly to the way conventional fingerprinting matches fingerprints at the crime scene with the fingers of the perpetrator, and DNA fingerprinting matches biological samples from the crime scene with the DNA in the body of the perpetrator.

6. How Brain Fingerprinting works

Farwell Brain Fingerprinting works as follows. Words or pictures relevant to a crime are flashed on a computer screen, along with other, irrelevant words or pictures. Electrical brain responses are measured non-invasively through a patented headband equipped with sensors. Dr. Farwell has discovered that a specific brain-wave response called a MERMER (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response) is elicited when the brain processes noteworthy information it recognizes. Thus, when details of the crime that only the perpetrator would know are presented, a MERMER is emitted by the brain of a perpetrator, but not by the brain of an innocent suspect. In Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a computer analyzes the brain response to detect the MERMER, and thus determines scientifically whether or not the specific crime-relevant information is stored in the brain of the suspect.

7. Comparison with other technologies

Conventional fingerprinting and DNA match physical evidence from a crime scene with evidence on the person of the perpetrator. Similarly, Brain Fingerprinting matches informational evidence from the crime scene with evidence stored in the brain. Fingerprints and DNA are available in only 1% of crimes. The brain is always there, planning, executing, and recording the suspect's actions.

Brain Fingerprinting has nothing to do with lie detection. Rather, it is a scientific way to determine if someone has committed a specific crime or other act. No questions are asked and no answers are given during Farwell Brain Fingerprinting. As with DNA and fingerprints, the results are the same whether the person has lied or told the truth at any time.

8. Admissibility of Brain Fingerprinting in court

The admissibility of Brain Fingerprinting in court has not yet been established. The following well established features of Brain Fingerprinting, however, will be relevant when the question of admissibility is tested in court. 1) Brain Fingerprinting has been thoroughly and scientifically tested. 2) The theory and application of Brain Fingerprinting have been subject to peer review and publication. 3) The rate of error is extremely low -- virtually nonexistent -- and clear standards governing scientific techniques of operation of the technology have been established and published. 4) The theory and practice of Brain Fingerprinting have gained general acceptance in the relevant scientific community. 5) Brain Fingerprinting is non-invasive and non-testimonial.

9. Conclusion

Brain Fingerprinting is a revolutionary new scientific technology for solving crimes, identifying perpetrators, and exonerating innocent suspects, with a record of 100% accuracy in research with US government agencies, actual criminal cases, and other applications. The technology fulfills an urgent need for governments, law enforcement agencies, corporations, investigators, crime victims, and falsely accused, innocent suspects. For more information, see Brain Wave Science at http://www.brainwavescience.com/