Last Updated on 2025 年 7 月 6 日 by 総合編集組
The Global Consciousness Project: Exploring the Interconnection of Mind and Matter
The Global Consciousness Project (GCP), also known interchangeably as the EGG Project, is a parapsychology experiment that commenced in 1998, building upon approximately 50 years of prior scientific inquiries into the relationship between human intention, mind, and the physical world.
The fundamental question driving this extensive research is the nature of the mind’s role in the physical world, specifically whether a direct, unmediated link exists between one’s intention and the behavior of physical systems.
Foundational Experiments and the Birth of GCP Early experiments in this field typically employed highly sensitive physical systems, such as coin flips, with participants asked to mentally influence outcomes (e.g., wishing for more heads or tails). While mechanical systems like coins presented tracking difficulties, the introduction of electronic circuits, specifically Random Number Generators (RNGs), in the 1960s revolutionized these studies. RNGs could perform the equivalent of coin flipping at high speeds, generating random bits (ones and zeros) that could be precisely recorded.
Prototypes of these experiments involved asking individuals to mentally compel an RNG to produce more ones or zeros, or to simply let it run as a calibration. Over extensive periods of study and numerous meta-analyses across various studies, consistent statistical biases were observed, indicating that systems designed to be random were no longer behaving as such.
A significant conceptual leap occurred in the 1990s when Roger Nelson, then associated with Princeton University, proposed that “attention” might be as critical as “intention” in influencing these physical systems. He theorized that coherent mental states, characterized by focused attention, could induce order within random systems. Initial experiments involved placing RNGs in the vicinity of groups engaged in meditation, hypothesizing that this would generate a substantial amount of coherent attention. Hundreds of such tests, conducted by Nelson and his colleagues, led to the conclusion that RNGs indeed became less random when mental coherence was inferred, sometimes solely due to collective attention.
A landmark experiment by Dean Radin in 1994, prior to the GCP’s formal inception, involved tracking five RNGs (four in the US, one in Europe) during the announcement of the O.J. Simpson murder trial verdict. This event was chosen due to the unprecedented global attention it garnered, with potentially a billion people focusing on the outcome. The results showed “very clear evidence” of a “sudden peak in order” in the random generators within seconds of the verdict’s live, worldwide broadcast.
Following this, the funeral of Princess Diana, an event also commanding vast global attention, similarly yielded a “significant deviation from Randomness towards order” in RNG data. These compelling findings provided the impetus for Nelson and his team to establish an automatically running, continuous, 24/7 global network of RNGs, anticipating that unpredicted global events could attract widespread attention and thus affect the RNGs. This vision materialized as the Global Consciousness Project.
Methodology and Core Hypothesis of the GCP The GCP’s methodology is predicated on the hypothesis that events which evoke widespread emotion or command the simultaneous attention of large populations can significantly impact the output of hardware random number generators. The project maintains a geographically distributed network of approximately 70 “Princeton Eggs,” which are electronic RNG circuits interfaced with computers across various cities worldwide. These devices continuously generate random bits at a rate of roughly 200 bits per second. The data streams are then synchronized and transmitted to a central server in Princeton, forming a comprehensive database of parallel random number sequences.
Operating as a replication experiment, the GCP aggregates the results of numerous distinct tests. For each “formal event”—whether predicted or observed post-hoc—a meticulous three-step protocol is followed: First, the event duration and the calculation algorithm are pre-specified and formally registered. Second, event data are extracted, and a Z-score, which quantifies the deviation from the null hypothesis (i.e., pure randomness), is computed. Third, this event’s Z-score is combined with those from preceding events to derive an overall experimental result.
The project’s central premise is that our collective consciousness has the capacity to subtly influence the physical world, causing the global RNG network to deviate from purely random behavior during moments of shared human experience and emotional coherence. This effect has been colloquially likened by both proponents and skeptics to detecting “a great disturbance in the Force”.
Compelling Findings and the Enigma of Pre-cognition Among the hundreds of events analyzed, the attacks of September 11, 2001, stand out as the most dramatic and widely discussed.
With 36 or 37 RNGs actively running at the time, subsequent analyses, even published in a physics journal, reported “unmistakable evidence” that the expected randomness in all generators diminished notably prior to the first plane impact, continued through the event, and then gradually returned to baseline. Specifically, approximately two to three hours before the official time of the first plane hitting the North Tower (8:46 AM EST), the entire random system began to exhibit anomalous, non-random order. This precognitive effect, where the statistical deviation occurred hours before the widely witnessed tragedy, remains a profound mystery for the GCP researchers.
This phenomenon echoes findings from individual-level experiments, such as those where participants’ physiological stress responses to emotionally charged images were recorded several seconds before the images were displayed. Similarly, brain signals initiating movement have been observed to emerge a few seconds before an individual consciously decides to move their hand, raising questions about free will.
Beyond 9/11, the GCP’s extensive database encompasses over 450 formal experiments as of early 2014, including responses to tsunamis, earthquakes, political events, celebrity deaths, New Year’s celebrations, the Concorde crash, the Madrid train bombing, and the Pope’s funeral. The composite statistical results across these diverse events consistently show cumulative deviations from what would be expected from pure chance. The project’s data, after 15 years of accumulation, indicated a “7-sigma departure from expectation,” translating to a probability of approximately 1 in a trillion that the observed correlations are merely random fluctuations.
Dean Radin specifically noted overall odds against chance exceeding “a million to one” for over 200 events. Furthermore, the GCP has identified other emergent patterns, such as non-zero pairwise correlations between geographically separated RNG devices, which are more pronounced during larger events and decrease with increasing geographical separation for smaller events. Diurnal variations also suggest that the effects are larger when more people are awake. While these findings do not definitively “prove” a global consciousness, they are considered highly suggestive, especially after ruling out conventional explanations like electromagnetic radiation or power grid strain.
Philosophical Parallels and Broader Implications The GCP’s research intersects with various philosophical and scientific concepts, including “noetic science,” a term introduced in 1973 to explore “inner wisdom” and the “supernatural elements of human consciousness”. The Institute of Noetic Sciences is, in fact, a private funder of the GCP. The concept of a “noosphere” suggests a collective mental sphere that influences matter. The project’s findings also resonate with the HeartMath Institute’s “Global Coherence Initiative,” which posits that strong heart-based emotions can generate magnetic fields with collective impacts.
Philosophically, particularly within Vedantic thought, the GCP’s observations align with the concept of Brahman as an all-pervading consciousness, akin to space, that observes and sustains the entire universe. Analogies such as the dream state, where consciousness itself projects and sustains the dream world through observation, are used to explain this. Similarly, the ocean-wave analogy illustrates how individual consciousness, like waves, can synchronize to form a “tsunami” of collective consciousness, leading to observable impacts on the physical world, such as the anomalies in RNG behavior. This suggests a profound, yet largely unexplained, connection between the human mind and physical reality.
Skepticism and Methodological Criticisms Despite the intriguing results, the Global Consciousness Project has faced substantial skepticism and criticism, primarily concerning its methodological rigor, data selection, and interpretation. Critics, including Robert T. Carroll and Claus Larsen, contend that the reported data anomalies are artifacts of “pattern matching” and “selection bias,” which undermine the claims of psi or global consciousness. The inherent difficulty in interpreting statistics, especially over long periods of random data, is frequently highlighted.
Independent analyses have challenged specific GCP claims. For instance, Edwin May and James Spottiswoode’s analysis of the 9/11 data concluded there was “no statistically significant change” in RNG randomness during the attacks, and any perceived deviation was confined to Nelson and Radin’s specific “chosen time window,” with alternative analysis methods yielding only chance deviations.
Critics emphasize that “spikes and fluctuations are to be expected in any random distribution of data,” and the GCP lacks a clear, “set time frame for how close a spike has to be to a given event” to claim a correlation. Jeffrey D. Scargle, a research astrophysicist, while respecting the GCP team’s scientific method, questions their results, noting that “the nature of randomness is that any pattern that you want to choose ahead of time will eventually show up” purely by chance. He argues that for results to be widely accepted, both Bayesian and classical p-value analyses must concur and show identical anomalous effects.
Further criticisms include the practice known as “data dredging” or “HARKing” (Hypothesizing After Results are Known), where hypotheses are formulated retrospectively after data collection. This practice is viewed as undermining scientific validity and increasing the likelihood of false positives, as illustrated by the analogy of finding spurious correlations in vast datasets like a state’s population attributes. Critics argue that the GCP’s experimental design is effectively “unfalsifiable,” meaning there is no clear way to disprove its hypothesis, thus ceasing to be genuine science.
The “non-specific” nature of the attributed anomalies is also a point of contention; without a clear causal mechanism, deviations could be arbitrarily attributed to phenomena like “sunspot radiation or gravitational fluctuations or the actions of invisible aliens”. The absence of objective controls—where a shielded RNG or a truly undisturbed baseline is maintained—is another significant methodological critique.
Robert Matthews concisely summarized this by stating that despite being “the most sophisticated attempt yet” to demonstrate psychokinesis, the project ultimately shows that “data without a theory is as meaningless as words without a narrative”. Even Roger Nelson acknowledged in 2007 that the data were “not solid enough for global consciousness to be said to exist at all,” and it was not yet possible to predict what the RNGs might be responding to. A 2017 article by Peter Bancel, reviewing the data, also concluded that it “do not support the global consciousness proposal” and instead suggested a “goal-oriented effect”.
The Global Consciousness Project 2.0 and Future Directions The Global Consciousness Project 2.0 (GCP 2.0), developed and maintained by the HeartMath Institute, represents the next phase of this ongoing research. This iteration is a data-driven global experiment specifically designed to investigate how human consciousness, particularly attention and emotions, correlates with changes in global consciousness and the physical world. GCP 2.0 employs “NextGen Random Number Generators” hosted by “citizen scientists” around the globe, allowing for real-time monitoring of “Device Coherence” and “Network Coherence”.
The objectives of GCP 2.0 are broadly framed: to deepen understanding of human interconnectivity with self, others, and nature through the global consciousness field; to demystify how large-scale shared emotional experiences (such as tragedies or love/compassion meditations) impact humanity and the natural world; and to inspire positive social change by exploring whether collective intentions can shift the global consciousness field to foster a better world for all.
Proponents believe that by making the “unseen” visible through data, humanity can “heal and thrive”. The underlying premise is that if consciousness can influence these electronic RNGs, it might also affect other physical systems, including living beings and natural phenomena, with potential for healing or harm based on collective intention. A larger network of devices is expected to enhance detection sensitivity and allow for topological analysis of how consciousness-related effects distribute globally during localized events.
Despite the scientific debates and the persistent ambiguity regarding the “arrow of causation” (i.e., whether human minds directly influence randomness, or if RNG shifts are a reflection of a broader “Collective mind” that encompasses matter and energy), the project continues to gather and analyze data. The implications of this research extend far beyond conventional science, touching upon profound questions in philosophy and religion.
While the GCP has amassed a significant dataset and reported statistically compelling results, the scientific community remains cautiously divided, emphasizing the rigorous demand for “extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims”. Nevertheless, the Global Consciousness Project stands as a pioneering, albeit controversial, endeavor to explore the subtle and potentially global reach of human consciousness and its mysterious interaction with the physical universe.
