Non-Locality changes in intercerebral theta band coherence between practitioners and subjects during distant Reiki procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated if changes in interbrain coherence as measured by quantitative electroencephalography occur during distant (non-local) Reiki procedures where the stimulus and response person who never met were separated by 50 m. Compared to sham-procedure pairs, Reiki pairs displayed increased shared transcerebral coherence within the theta band particularly within the left temporal lobes. There was evidence of maximum changes in strength of inter-brain coherence in the Reiki pairs after three minutes of the procedure that was not evident in sham procedure pairs. The magnitude of the increased coherence, although small, would be within the quantitative range associated with the changes in information when operations converge in neuronal systems. Although the potential access of Schumann resonances and the “cerebral field” generated within all human brains due to their immersion within the geomagnetic field offer potential solutions, the Pitkanen Topological Geometrodynamics (TGD) theory of consciousness allows a more palatable and potentially testable explanation for the apparent violations of space-time contiguity and causality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".