In and among the vertebral disks2002-01-01
Some subjects discussed below:
The application of cybernetic technology for the repair of spinal damage was considered one important topic motivating this document. Hopefully some of the arguments are already obsolete. I havent followed all news releases or science programs. In the year 2001 there were some discussions about related things, although these things are always presented in a misleading manner. Some expert might state that they hope to be able to realize some type of function, while in reality more advanced things have existed for decades.
It is like reinventing the wheel over and over again.
In the interest of clarity I wish to explain that there are modern types of cybernetic technology that operates without the need for any action from the user or any contact with personnel. That is it is not necessary to have some clumsy object inserted, nor is there any need for replacing batteries. Further the modern types of this technology have the capacity to handle a large number of channels of information. This means a very refined type of control can be achieved, without any noticeable sideeffects. It is possible to create an almost ideal type of medical appliance out of this technology. There are also older types of the technology, that are presently offered to patients. The people who are involved in this type of medical practise are not be blamed. They are at least trying to do something although the services they offer are very far from the state of the art. Crudely speaking, patients are being offered 1960s level of cybernetic technology. The components used are of course of more recent date, however the actual performance isn't.
As I said, I hope this characterization of the situation is becoming obsolete and that this anachronistic condition will not last.
This paragraph is a bit technical and connects back to other things I have written about in earlier documents. It isn't vital to understand everything.
In the last year I have been trying to estimate various aspects of rf-communication involving microscopic RF units that were deemed necessary to explain some of the observations made by people subjected to involuntary experimentation with cybernetic control technology. I even went to such extremes as seriously contemplating single-quantum detection on the FM broadcast band using huge maser amplifiers. There is however no reason to beleive that such methods are of any practical use, due to the ever-present thermal noise that far exceeds the single quantum limit. It is no big deal in the case of the microwave region but on the FM broadcast band it would be quite exotic. If the scattered rf energy derives from the incoming wave, I have come to think that there are great difficulties to overcome for any conceivable type of scatterer, in particular when it has a microscopic size. It now appears to me more likely that one would want to use an internal source of rf energy and then switch it on and off with the incoming field in some predetermined fashion.
Let us consider the energy production in living cells, power per/unit weight or size.
Let the typical thermal energy production in living matter be 1 W/kg (I am making a crude guess) it corresponds to an average of 10-15 W/um3.
Assuming a size H in units of 10 um, and that a fraction f of the energy could be used to produce the wanted type of rf energy, in the form of a short pulse of duration t in units of ms, the resulting power P would be P=(f·H3/t)nW
When trying to estimate the bandwidth in the case of microwave frequencies, I obtained a lower limit of 0.5 kHz and an optimum pulse length on the order of milliseconds. It was assumed that the tiny scattering system was subjected to brownian motion due to disturbances from the molecular environment. Other effects might add further to the line width. I dont regard it as a very rigorous result.
Various complex arrangements where contemplated. One was to use the nerves to communicate between miniature devices in order to be able to use all of them at once for the transmission of data from each separate device thereby significantly increasing the signal strength. It's doubtful whether information can be added to the biological signals without seriously disturbing the system. It does seem likely however, that the biological system doesn't exhaust the full communication bandwidth of the network and that therefore an artifical system could piggyback on the usual traffic to some extent.
The natural continuation was to rationalize away the transmission from the tiny devices alltogether and use some centrally positioned transponder for that function, maybe mm sized,and connect it directly to the nerve bundles, somewhere near the neck. Or on several different locations in and among the vertebral disks.
If one critical component has to be large in comparison, the secret is already broken if that component is found. The need for tiny devices directly connected to the neurons in the brain is then limited to the type of effects that cannot be mediated through the spinal nerves. There are for example many reports of symptoms that cannot be mediated that way, such as those connected with hearing and vision. But in that case too, there are other ways to make the connection than to use the proper brain neurons. The nerve-ends near the sensory organs would seem to be a better placement. Only for the use of very sophisticated types of effects involving subtle higher-order functioning in the brain there might still be need for the direct connections in the brain, but I have no experience of anything that would indicate strongly that such methods are in use. Most everything I have heard about or experienced would be explicable by connections near the sensory organs and in the spine. But there are some observations that may indicate that brain centres are used. And also complex phenomena like stroboscopic visual meories(?) and many other isolated incidents that I am unable to put into context. I dont even recall everything at the moment of writing this. I suppose memories cannot be gotten other than through the proper brain neurons? (Supposedly those neurons connect to some type of protein chains where memories are stored? I haven't studied the subject but it seems incredible that our memories would be stored dynamically, which is actually hypothesized in older papers I have seen.)
There may still be secret technologies under development like nanotechnology which may realize some of the effects attributed to hypothetical microscopic rf-devices but it is possible that such devices would only communicate over very short distances, maybe only inside the person or animal where it is operating. And there would still be need for centrally positioned transponder units.
Even when the powerlevel from such a small device would allow shortrange communication it wouldn't be a very attractive solution.
One purported victim of mind control has reported having seen secret documents in 1977 showing
grain-sized transponders that were intended for mounting in peoples necks.
Since there are openly available grain-sized transponders for tracking there is a need for more detailed information.
It seems that many nonexperts like to endow radio waves with properties that they simply do not have.
There is no way to deconvolute the high frequency components of brain wave spectra in order to figure out what
nerve signals that caused the spectrum.
It is a classical example of irreversibility. Huge quantities of information are irretrievably lost beyond the
direct electrical contact with the nerves.
When I was contemplating various ways to connect to the spinal nerves, I suddenly remembered an odd occurrence from the autumn of 1989, when I had a seemingly inexplicable pain in my back and neck when I woke up one morning. It took me something like two hours before I managed to get out of bed. No matter how I tried to twist and turn, I didnt find any way that I could get out of bed without excessive pain. It is quite odd that I have overlooked this for so long. I guess I just didnt want to contemplate the possibility that I had been in this type of situation for so long before the events of 1992, without having noticed anything. The pain in the neck and back doesn't prove that anything was inserted at that particular location, but I now seriously suspect that something was done to me then that is connected with the cybernetic control system that has been in operation for many years now. In addition a lipoma suddenly appeared on the back of my arm at about the same time as the pain in the neck. In january 2001 a surgeon operated it and it turned out to weigh 171 grams. According to different doctors, a naturally caused lipoma does not emerge suddenly as was the case with this strange bulge. I am sure that somebody put it there on purpose, but I have no idea why. Maybe it was a practical joke.
Logically electronic connections can be made almost anywhere along the part of the nervous system
that relates the corresponding areas in body and brain.
Technically the neck seems like an optimum place to put it if a single crossection of the nerve bundles is desired.
It seems unreal that some type of fine mesh invading the spinal crossection would constitute the interface
through which a person can be remote controlled in such a sophisticated manner that is the case.
The next thing is to describe the type of control they can achieve.
Actually I am quite enthusiastic about the positive uses I have experienced for several years now.
This may sound at odds with the talk of torture and harassment which is also part of the picture.
The harassments have been going on many times in parallell with the positive uses.
The character of the harassment was much more severe in the earlier phases and things improved as I began
to protest and became an activist. I wasn't sure things would turn out that way, but I figured I didn't have much choice
since I was being tortured and regularly prevented from having a good nights sleep.
(Incidently it appears that they have, again, demonstrated a kind of clearly artificial sleep-deprivation in the period when this is written.)
They harassed me while I was taking courses at the university and elsewhere and at work. It was totally unacceptable.
At one particular period in before that, as I was being tortured for days in a row it became clear that they could control my internal organs
in a way that can be described as a kind of virtual reproduction of somebody elses nervous system.
It was a highly resolved experience of having a physical examination done inside the body despite the fact that I was alone
in the room.
The experience encompassed anomalies, for instance sometimes it felt as if the examination didnt follow the exact
extension of the body and even took part outside the body. It gives you the anomalous feeling that you can sense parts
of the body outside its physical extension where there are none.
Moreover it appears very certain that previous recordings of the internal state of my body were being replayed back and
forth, which resembles virtual rape, and this was probably intentional.
In a period when I was driven into an almost desperate state I shouted, 'when you can control my body like this why dont you
do something useful instead'. I was thinking of the health problem I had been suffering from for 15 years.
The general understanding of electronics may be one problem. It occurs that scientists in some branches of science
also have advanced electronics expertise relevant to the type of science, but this is quite rare.
There are many advanced technical tools in clinical use and there sure are experts in the high-tech companies that
develop and manufacture the equipment, but that expertise is not around in those situations when technologies
suited for clinical use are being assessed at an early stage.
In many military and civilian industrial applications a rational use of electronics becomes a necessity either because of the competitive pressure or because the problems are insoluble without it, which is often the case in advanced military applications.
This is why challenges are needed.
Without a good understanding of modern electronics, one may underestimate its power and simplicity,
resulting in a conservative clinging to older methods that aren't perceived as such.
And a very obsolete way of thinking, talking about many trivial uses of electronics
as 'science fiction' and the like.
What services does it offer then?
I'll tell you what little I know.
In the case of a single individual it can do everything that the natural system does,
but in addition it is possible to tweak the system, to increase the intensity and overall
performance in a manner that would never happen naturally, even for a young person.
This is a delicate issue.
Nevertheless, as I have stated before, the inherent qualities of this technology allows for a very high product integrity. It has a very reliable and predictable mode of operation and great versatility. This is my experience despite the fact that I have never consciously fed back a single comment about it. I have never cooperated in any way. And yet I am unable to point to anything that could be improved in this particular respect and that's certainly a sign of high product integrity.
As far as I can understand this, the feeling of lust and satisfaction is related to something as prosaic as repetition rates of nerve pulses in nerve fibres. And in principle all men and women can be compensated for their natural differences in this respect by adjustments of those repetition rates. Maybe I am oversimplifying a little bit but I think there is some degree of truth in that.
But Nature is never wrong.
If the government or say, the church would be able to control peoples sexuality generally by some means such as those
under discussion, where there is certainly great potential for control, it would
be possible to make married couples stay together for life.
They would only be able to find satisfaction with a single person.
As soon as two different IDs came too close together
Big Brother would block their sexual drives.
Some people would probably welcome that. And would in particular like to apply it
among underpriviledged groups of people where there is a lot of crime and lone parents.
And when pushing for the application and knowledge transfer of cybernetic technology for the purpose of repairing damaged nerves in connection with spinal damage, it is of some consequence that there exists fully functional technologies that are capable of handling more complicated tasks than needed in the case of spinal damage. In the case of electrosex, there is a need to adjust the repetion frequencies, according to some fairly elaborate scheme, whilst in the case of spinal damage all that is needed is to have the original signals propagate to the right place. A standard pulse of a type very easy to handle is to be repeated and sent to another location where the signal is connected to the other side of the damage. The difficulty is to identify the nerves.
The focus on spinal damage is not arbitrary since a broken nerve poses a comparatively simple type of problem. There are other types of handicaps for which cybernetics offers help, such as in case of hearing and vision. In the 1960s experiments with artificial vision where performed where the number of resolved elements where roughly the same as those discussed 30 years later.
The same reinventing of the wheel.
From what I know about hearing and vision (and I certainly dont claim to know enough!) as it applies to human beings, both those sensory systems pose far more complicated problems than repairing a broken nerve. That is why I have put the focus on spinal damage. Because, whith the knowledge I presently possess, it is the least complicated type of problem. In addition, even a limited degree of success may mean a lot to the affected patients.
I have the impression that this is the most complicated sensory system we have. Some types of damage may be simple to handle. Other problems may need a replacement of the whole set of sensory cells. Anyone can understand that such problems are vastly more difficult to solve. In addition there are already some examples of clinical uses of implants functioning as hearing aids. From what I have seen, they where battery powered. In that case improvements are probably possible if the doctors can get access to later versions of the technology.
Vision uses a high data transfer rate in the normal condition. In some cases that may need to be replaced artificially.
This poses problems distinct from the others discussed.
In cases such as these when we are dealing with extremely complex and varied types of conditions one has to find a balance between the wish to have an autonomous system and on the other hand the possibility to apply accurate trimming procedures to the system. When having a brain computer communication from the patient, it is possible to optimize the operation not only on average but in a most refined manner to a rich variety of external conditions. Then some individually chosen algorithm programmed into the cybernetic device could be deduced, by which the system would set its internal parameters under all occuring external conditions, for the best possible operation. Without this access to the system, the patient would probably have to accept a more modest performance. In the case of vision, it would be like having a camera of a simpler construction. To achieve the best in the case of hearing and vision, there is a need for continued scientific research concerning a wide range of problems. No-one knows where the most important breakthroughs are going to come. Cross-disciplinary work is necessary.
The military presently have lots of researchers having expertise that would be of use in the development of prosthesis methods. It is unavoidable that cross-disciplinary approaches have been in use there. Actually they could even develop new types of senses if we wanted that. This has indeed been mentioned in science programs on TV.
I will also take the opportunity to return to something I have mentioned before,
namely a little discussed aspect of scientific development.
What happens when some new types of technology suddenly provide lots of solutions to problems
that previously required much more elaborate methods and skills that took a lot of time to aquire.
What to do with all the knowhow? Is economy sometimes shrinking because technology becomes 'too'
Do note that this isn't the conventional opposition of old and unsophisticated vs new
and very advanced.
I am thinking of cases when technology becomes extremely well-fitted to the problem while previously
more general and consequently very complicated methods where used.
And what conclusions must be drawn? The last time I discussed that issue I suggested some kind
of compensation transferred to the older technologies, provided they represent advanced knowhow
that suddenly seems to be less needed.
The idea was to avoid obstacles for scientific development while on the same time avoiding the
destruction of knowhow, since I instinctively revolt against that kind of waste.