2019/02/14 05:42:34

機密事項 // ptw36cooper482vj // NOFORN











Remote Participation.jpg

2019/02/14 05:42:34
Remote Participation

TOP SECRET // ptw36cooper482vj // NOFORN

Memorandum INTERNAL

Director [REDACTED],

Our recent experimental data re: Remote Viewing is v. exciting. My working theory is that our subjects are engaged in some manner of "psychic" data collection. They are somehow detecting the electrical signals in the target's visual cortex, and replicating those signals in their own heads to simulate what the target is seeing. I honestly have no earthly idea how this is being achieved, but the level of detail recorded in our Remote Viewing sessions seems all but irrefutable.

Obviously, there's the question of the medium of transference: What is facilitating this instantaneous, mind-to-mind transfer across great distances? But our subjects are doing more than just pulling data from a remote source... they somehow intuitively know the difference between visual signals and other kinds of sensory input, and are able to isolate just the information that they're looking for. That kind of nuanced understanding of cranial function is beyond all current neuroscientific research that I'm aware of. Even our most advanced computers wouldn't

But what if we could? Could we alter the way we think? Could we alter the way other people think? And then I hit on the real brain-buster: Would we be able to use this technology to effectively turn one person into another person?

Some neuroscientists believe that our "identity" is really only a pattern of synaptic connections in our brain. If it were possible to fully map those connections, our subjects might be able to remotely rewire another human brain to, in effect, turn one person's mind into that of their own. At that point, they would be more than just remote viewers... they would be remote participants.

The practical applications of this technology would be almost limitless. Now, the ethics of Remote Participation are another matter altogether. Some of my more reactionary colleagues have gone so far as to call it "mind control"... and I'm not entirely sure I disagree with them. Add a bit more here -- make this a really long redaction like he's really going into the ethics of it.

I would also expect there to be deleterious long-term psychological effects on Remote Participants, from prolonged inhabitation of a physical form other than t But what those effects might be are impossible to predict absent actual field data.

Of course, at the moment, this is all a thought experiment at best. I don't anticipate having the necessary tech to tackle this one for 30 years at least. If ever. But this is why you hired me: Never let it be said that Stein Lightman doesn't think things all the way through to their logical conclusion!

- Stein