Greetings from /x/
http://www.google.com/patents/US6506148
We stumbled upon this, anyone can tell us if it could work, or give us any info in the guy who made it Hendricus G. Loos.
Plz we are kind of paranoid, and any info could help us.
>expecting anything from /sci/ neckbeards
No.
Not gonna read that whole fuckin thing right now. I don't know what you mean by "work", but the theory (based on what I skimmed through) is fine. IIRC it's a known effect that strong magnetic fields can induce neural activity within people, even causing them to hear sounds without actual external auditorial stimulation.
>>7962214
The claim that 0.5 Hz or 2.4 Hz EM fields effect humans is horseshit. There's no evidence of this.
>>7962225
Sorry, just looked a bit closer and that's not what this is. In which case, probably not real. You need really fucking strong magnetic fields to do what I was talking about and monitors wouldn't produce that. Probably gonna call BS on this one.
>>7962221
Just a read and a link to a paper by the inventor, mind control using vibrations and pulsating images does sound interesting, but is above the /x/ lurkers.
>>>/x/17517016
Pretty sure the frequency emitted by monitors is way higher than 2.4Hz, electromagnetic fields can have effects on humans but it would probably take a way stronger source than a computer screen to be significant, and not be as sophisticated as mind control.
>>7962214
>Greetings from /x/
Stopped reading there.
>>7962227
Fast color changes and pulsating images can trigger photosensitive epilepsy, maybe it can work with hormone secretion.
The patent is real and he made a ton of them, there's also the experiments by Jose Delgado.
I'm more interested if anyone in the scientific community has ever heard of the guy.
http://www.patentgenius.com/inventedby/LoosHendricusGLagunaBeachCA.html
Here are more patents by him.
http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/5800481.html
Thermal excitation.
http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/6017302.html
Acoustic manipulation.
http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/5995954.html
Method and apparatus for associative memory
>>7962247
Curiosity is just curiosity.
You can turn it into a scientific discovery, or a borderline schizophrenia.
The line is thinner than you think.
Thanks for your time, we are gonna try to find the guy and some evidence of his experiments.
Maybe he did it for real, if he did, the implications are fascinating.
>>7962277
https://papers.nips.cc/paper/51-reflexive-associative-memories.pdf
Why would the Defense Advanced research projects agency, finance a research in the capacity of Hopfield memory?
This is one slow board.
We have found some stuff about the guy and the experiments.
We found his military contract and a software that he make.
I'm currently searching for test subjects, we are gonna test it /x/ style, just make a dozen guys shit their pants and call it a success.
When the internet police comes for me, I'm gonna say that I asked you first.
>>>/x/17517508
>>7963102
you guys are fucking retarded
>>7963106
If you are so smart, will you be so kind to supervise the experiment?
We have to rule out suggestion and placebo effect.
>>>/x/17519024
Not very scientific, but who cares, better than chasing ghost and reptilians.
>>7963126
>We have to rule out suggestion and placebo effect.
stop making threads about it then
>>7963126
Unfortunately he is right on this one. Any kind of experiment will not produce tangible results, let alone verifiable ones. This is just BS at this point, stop wasting your times. Of course the government is interested in mind control techniques, but that doesn't mean they will work effectively. We are still quite far from that kind of advanced manipulation. Find something else to dig up.
>>7963126
inb4 malware or epilepsy crisis caused by flashing lights
Did what it said it does, but I can't rule out suggestion.
Barely shit my pants.
I can't notice the change in colors.
Was a retarded useless experiment, gonna wait for more idiots to try it.
>>7963248
yo what the fuck kind of gui is that
windows 8 alpha?
you dont have to have a working prototype to get a patent, just a novel application of theory
>>7963102
This board is actually fast. Some threads already 404 within 24 hours, and I wish it was as slow as it was years ago. If I want a board that goes faster than your paranoid schizo mind, I could always go to /a/.
>>7963270
i wish this thread would 404 in 24 hours...
Besides the obvious ad hominens about my mental state what do you think of the program?
I'm pretty sure that it works but I was expecting it to work so my opinion is invalid.
>>7962385
Probably for the same reasons they fund other neurocomputing and robotics projects.
Which isn't (just) killer robots, by the way. Sure, they'd like killer robots too, but there are a shitload of other potential applications for this stuff.
>>7963307
Do you have an LCD monitor? Then it definitely doesn't work.
The patent seems to only be talking about CRT monitors, which do at least have high-voltage circuitry and big honking electromagnetic coils in them.
While I really doubt CRT monitors could possibly leak strong enough RF no matter how badly you abuse them, let alone at such low frequencies, to induce the required voltages, there is absolutely no way in hell an LCD monitor leaks that kind of field.
>>7963381
The software works with fast color changes, it's not the same as the patent, also sound, the machine he described is not what the program tests, but the program has a wide range of aplications we haven't tested.
there's just not enough info on it, the inventor was working with the military then made a corporation, probably attempted to fund his research and he got old so he didn't care anymore,
Released the software when he accepted that he wasn't going to sell it, or wanted to have as much test subjects as possible.
Weak electromagnetic fields, could work in theory, dolphins and whales use electromagnetic fields for navigation, but i presume that he wanted something more subtle that could be used remotely, in any case his research is intriguing to say the least.
>>7963404
>Weak electromagnetic fields, could work in theory, dolphins and whales use electromagnetic fields for navigation,
Yes, but they have specialized sensory organs for that. The patent is talking about stimulation of skin neurons through electric fields, which is a specific real thing often referred to as electrotactile stimulation.
Reading some of the other referenced patents, I'm not convinced that the methodology used to determine the existence of this effect was particularly rigorous. It appears that they just put electrodes on or near people and scanned through frequencies until the subject reported something interesting, which could be anything from drowsiness to sexual arousal to better sleep. This seems like a case where it would be VERY easy to induce false effects though suggestion inadvertently, and there's no mention of blinded tests. "I'm going to put these electrodes on you and twiddle this knob; tell me when you feel something, anything weird or different."
As they note, these fields are absolutely TINY - they reported results with a a 7 nV/cm peak field applied by an AA battery and some skin electrodes! By their own calculation, that's just a handful of nanovolts across the membrane of the neurons, and still less than a microvolt throwing in a factor-of-ten fudge factor. The membrane voltages required to trigger neurons are in the tens of millivolts, more than ten thousand times greater. They have some hypotheses for how this could work, but nothing really solid. Between the extremely wide variety of noted effects, the lack of a solid physical mechanism, and the potential for sloppy research, I think there's a real possibility that the effect simply doesn't exist.
>>7963504
if micropotentials like that could actually affect human emotion then every human should be a gibbering emotional wreck at all times as all the extant electromagnetic fields in their environment switch their emotions on and off like a speak and say operated by sonic the hedgehog
Well you guys were wrong and /x/ was right.
It does work and is dangerous.
>>7964198
Thanks for all that hard evidence, I guess.
This was on the software.
>>7964201
Some people have used it and reported nausea and mild disorientation.
I tested it for a short while and it actually does something, then I tested it in my brother that didn't know what i was doing and experienced the same effects in a lapse under 6 minutes.
You can test it too but I bet you will get the same results if you follow the intructions correctly.
>>7964214
Don't believe that, test the program.
To be honest I have no fucking on how it works.
>>7964214
>>7964198
i tried it
doesn't do shit, captain
>>7964217
https://web.archive.org/web/20041209055209/http://cuewave.com/zeta/WebClass1.ASP?WCI=template6&WCU
Here is the link.
No trojan or malware on it, we asked /g/.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but
>The frequency of the photon waves emitted by the electromagnetic field of a monitor is around 50Hz, not 2.4-
>Going down to 2.4Hz would imply severely undervolting the computer, since you're using a program, the OS would probably not allow that. And even if you managed to do it the computer would probably shut down or be damaged.
It's been a while since my last Circuits and System + Electricity courses so I might be wrong, but reducing the frequency that low seems weird to me.
>>7962214
Look at the date on the patent, he's talking about CRTs. LCD monitors produce less electrical noise to the surrounding, so it's likely this effect wouldn't work.
Even if you're using a CRT, the range of the effect would be severely limited, and the effect of them would be very minor.
If you're really that concerned, you can always buy a wire net to put over your monitor (like a metal mosquito net or something). In one of the labs I worked in, the noise from the CRTs were enough to alter our data, but with a wire net covering them, the effect left.
>>7964227
Apprently it's about the image displayed and not the voltage of the screen.
The fuck if I know.
I'm more worried about the implications and the persistent warnings in the program.
Maybe it was an hoax but is kind of old for that.
Also it's way to complex.
It's not that hard to stage a mass sugestion especially given the circumstances and the people involved, but the paper and the specific research intrigues me.
>>7964240
Also if it was an staged mass suggestion, well, that's one type of mind control doesn't it?
The testing continues in /x/ on gullible, susceptible paranoids.
There's no stoping pseudo science.
We will prevail.
>>7962243
This guy gets it.
>>7962214
>Hendricus G. Loos
He gets pood in a lot, so he has to live in India.
https://www.google.ca/patents/US3009080?dq=hendricus+loos&hl=es&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjv4660qujLAhWDG5AKHZU0DmoQ6AEILjAC
This is his oldest patent, has anyone heard of this?
If you build a decent tinfoil hat it will protect you.
>>7962214
This has been claimed as an explanation for haunted houses for years because someone noticed the link between haunted houses being really old and having faulty electrics.
>>7967236
I have a really good one.
https://www.google.ca/search?tbm=pts&q=hendricus+loos&gws_rd=cr&ei=YJH7VsP4FsO7jgS7qo-IDg
He's quoted in a lot of patents, meaning that there' were people that read his work, thougt that he wasn't bat-shit insane and worked from it.
His works on applied electromagnetic fields looks average at least.
So, he has some street credibility.
Ok /sci/ after a lot of inconclusive research, I'm faced with a couple of options.
I'm taking this back to /pol/, with the software.
In a faster board the results could be different.
I'm not gonna tell them about the thread on /x/ or this one, so I can see them react, If they ask, I have a ton of half-assed conclusions and some valid research on the inventor.
if a board is more gullible susceptible and paranoid than /x/, that is /pol/.
If this doesn't work, as logic dictates, we still have the problem, that even if this particular research doesn't give the desired results, there's still the chance that someone else take this as a starting point and creates something that does the job.
I used you as a control group, someone mentioned that you will never take me seriously if I came from /x/, he was right.
Given that you showed no reaction, we can conclude that it doesn't do nothing significant, besides the suggestion.
/x/ got paranoid and psychosomatic, bussiness as usual down there.
I'll, wait for /pol/ reactions, to crack some percentages, and speaking of percentages, a simple experiment like this can work on susceptible people, what percentage of the population will you consider susceptible?
How much can actually do an elaborated hoax on our current society?
All this stuff most be a lot better documented somewhere, so I'm going to read some.
