EVPs

[Brian JohnsonPPI]

 I have had this theory that evps may not be the voices of the dead. I think they could possibly be the deepest most subconscious thoughts of our mind. They say we only use like 30% of our minds right. What are your thoughts?

[asmith]

That is a good possibility. I believe we have to be in the "right frame of mind" to see and hear the paranormal.
I think we are hearing a form of residual haunting with EVPs. Sound waves are constantly travelling and never dissipate, from what I understand. (Radio Waves are constantly travelling throughout the universe). That could explain one version of EVPs, a "recording" in time.
However, what about the EVPs that seem to be reactions to questions or interact with other people. These could be evidence of an intelligent haunting that is channeling through those that are present...hmmmm

[PPI Karl]

Sorry for the relative silence from me lately, guys.  I tried to transmit this reply telepathically to test your theories, but, apparently, that didn't work.

I recall from the first investigation I did with you both in San Ysidro, I questioned whether the voices were coming from the empty spaces or from the internal spaces.  Think about how much babbling in our own voices and in other people's voices we do subconsciously and unconsciously in our sleep.  And states of consciousness, as is well documented, are measured in waves--alpha waves, beta waves, etc.  Does anyone know if the word "waves" is used in its literal sense by these scientists?  Is the brain actually generating a pattern of waves, or are they using the term figuratively to describe the patterns displayed on a monitor that measures sleep activity?

I raise this point only because, if it is the former, and the brain is literally the source of a carrier wave of information, then you could be right, Brian:  a lot of our EVP might be nothing more than a subconscious form of Tourettes Syndrome.  On the other hand, if our consciousness actually lies in those waves (and, Tony, I believe this is a theory you summarized for me some months back), then the sum of what we are is contained in these incorporeal utterances, and EVP are the voices of wandering "souls".

Telling apart, though, the wheat from the chaff--the subconscious thoughts from the external and incorporeal sources--would be a bloody nightmare unless some difference in the wave, itself, can be pinned down.  (Of course, not knowing whether or not these waves literally exist at this point, I'm just talking rubbish.)

[PPI Brian]

Sorry for the relative silence from me lately, guys.? I tried to transmit this reply telepathically to test your theories, but, apparently, that didn't work.

I recall from the first investigation I did with you both in San Ysidro, I questioned whether the voices were coming from the empty spaces or from the internal spaces.? Think about how much babbling in our own voices and in other people's voices we do subconsciously and unconsciously in our sleep.? And states of consciousness, as is well documented, are measured in waves--alpha waves, beta waves, etc.? Does anyone know if the word "waves" is used in its literal sense by these scientists?? Is the brain actually generating a pattern of waves, or are they using the term figuratively to describe the patterns displayed on a monitor that measures sleep activity?

I raise this point only because, if it is the former, and the brain is literally the source of a carrier wave of information, then you could be right, Brian:? a lot of our EVP might be nothing more than a subconscious form of Tourettes Syndrome.? On the other hand, if our consciousness actually lies in those waves (and, Tony, I believe this is a theory you summarized for me some months back), then the sum of what we are is contained in these incorporeal utterances, and EVP are the voices of wandering "souls".

Telling apart, though, the wheat from the chaff--the subconscious thoughts from the external and incorporeal sources--would be a bloody nightmare unless some difference in the wave, itself, can be pinned down.? (Of course, not knowing whether or not these waves literally exist at this point, I'm just talking rubbish.)

Interesting thread. From my limited knowledge on the subject, the term "brain waves" actually reflect the oscillation of electrical impulses in the brain during specific activity. Different brain waves are identified by their frequency. Here is an interesting article that explains it better than I possibly can:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroencephalography

Although brain waves don?t appear to ?contain? our consciousness in a literal sense, their measurable activity indicates that we are indeed conscious, and that our brain is accessing ?files? like a computer?s hard drive. Here?s a link you might find amusing: 

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,72528-0.html?tw=rss.index

MRI studies have been conducted that show that our brains are firing in the same location when we perform specific activities, such as listening to music through headphones and then ?listening? to ?music? in your head. And scientists have demonstrated that it is possible for disabled people to move artificial limbs by thought alone when special chips are implanted in their brains that intercept specific electrical impulses in their brains.

I have always believed that our bodies are simply life support units for our brains; through our bodies we are able to tell our brains where we are, and even who we are. But the human mind is something else entirely, isn?t it? Scientists have been trying to describe the basic attributes of the human mind for decades without any real success. There are those who describe the human brain as a biological equivalent of a quantum computer:

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/

This raises all kinds of possibilities regarding the study of paranormal phenomena, from EVP, to the Stone Wall Recorder Theory, and even the survival hypothesis that the mind continues to exist after the demise of the body, doesn?t it?

Just a thought?

Regards,

Brian Miller

[PPI Brian]

Hi Everyone,

Just a few more random thoughts on the subject of EVPs. I have been reading a lot of ?theories? about EVP being composed of either ultrasonic or infrasonic sound waves. The problem with these ?theories? is that they are purely non-scientific speculation that ignore the basic mechanics of acoustic energy. Sound is characterized by the properties of sound waves, which are frequency, wavelength, period, amplitude and speed. Although the human ear is capable of detecting sound between 20Hz and 20,000Hz, the ear is most sensitive to sound waves that register between 1000Hz and 3,500Hz. Most human speech occupies a range between 200Hz and 8000Hz. So if EVP is truly ?speech? as we know it, isn?t it logical to assume that EVP should occur only in that narrow frequency range?

When I was in college I studied commercial music. We had access to a very cool synthesizer lab. We had the ability to produce both ultrasonic (above 20,000Hz) and infrasonic (below 20Hz) sounds, and view their waveforms on an oscilloscope. We also had a 4 track reel-to-reel tape recorder in the lab. (This was back in the day when personal computers did not commonly use hard drives to load their operating systems! Yes, I know, it?s hard to believe such things existed?)

Anyway, I recorded both infrasonic and ultrasonic sounds directly to tape from their source, and I also recorded them with microphones that had frequency responses that allowed such sounds to be recorded. When I played back these sounds on the tapes they were still inaudible. I would crank the volume up and all I could hear was the hiss of the speakers. I could see their waveforms remained unchanged on the oscilloscope, so I knew the sound had been recorded, but I could not hear them. However, there was an odd sense of uneasiness in the room when these sounds were being played back, so I deduced that I could ?sense? the ultrasonic and infrasonic sounds even though I could not hear them. If I increased or decreased the playback speed of the tape it would eventually reveal the sounds that were otherwise inaudible. 

So when I read these ?theories? that EVP are composed of either ultrasonic or infrasonic sound, and they only become audible upon playback, I have a hard time believing it. Playback in and of itself does not change the pitch of a recorded sound wave. So what in the heck ARE EVPs? I am puzzled?

Regards, 

Brian Miller

[PPI Brian]

I thought I would share this archive article from The Anomalist on the subject of EVP:

http://www.anomalist.com/features/evp.html

This article is very interesting. I was intrigued by the report of "e-mail" from a person who claimed he was writing them from the past:

The most incredible case of EVP on computer occurred in the tiny village of Doddleston, England, during the years 1984-1986. Ken and Debbie Webster began receiving messages from a man named Thomas Harden, who claimed he was writing to them from the year 1545, during the reign of Henry VIII. The language of his messages was pre-Shakespearean in construction and was studied by at least one linguistic expert who found the writings all-but-flawless, and who thought it inconceivable that they might have been faked, even by the most skilful Elizabethan linguist. In all, the Websters received more than 250 such messages, many accompanied by poltergeist phenomena.

Pretty cool, eh? Wonder if there is any credibility to this article?

[PPI Brian]

I have had this theory that evps may not be the voices of the dead. I think they could possibly be the deepest most subconscious thoughts of our mind. They say we only use like 30% of our minds right. What are your thoughts?

Excellent point, Brian. I am familiar with this theory, and it has been extensively debated in the EVP community for many moons. Back in 1936 Attila von Szalay, along with others, tried unsuccessfully to record the voices they heard clairaudiently. Based on such experiments, I'm inclined to believe that EVP are actually a form of acoustic energy.

Just my two cents...

Brian Miller

[PPI Matt]

i am puzzled why sometimes you can have multiple recorders in a room, but only one recorder will catch the evp.  i loved the brainwave theory. as if the brain is a big radio with an antenna, and it is sending out and receiving messages all the time.  it gives credibility to the idea of telepathic communication.  considering both parties were transmitting and receiving on the same frequencies.  why the voices sometimes appear on one recorder but not the other though.  is the entity speaking directly into the microphone (is this thing on?)  are digital recorders or analog recorders better for evp's?

i have a digital recorder that is pretty cheap, and one time i was recording one event, and the stupid thing actually never deleted the previous file, so just lilke haveing an old school pocket recorder poorly taping over the previous recording, and i got overlap.  on a digital recorder!

does anyone ever use audio tape any more or am i totally dating myself?  (i hope i pick up the check, cause this date was a nightmare)

[PPI Brian]

i am puzzled why sometimes you can have multiple recorders in a room, but only one recorder will catch the evp.  i loved the brainwave theory. as if the brain is a big radio with an antenna, and it is sending out and receiving messages all the time.  it gives credibility to the idea of telepathic communication.  considering both parties were transmitting and receiving on the same frequencies.  why the voices sometimes appear on one recorder but not the other though.  is the entity speaking directly into the microphone (is this thing on?)  are digital recorders or analog recorders better for evp's?

i have a digital recorder that is pretty cheap, and one time i was recording one event, and the stupid thing actually never deleted the previous file, so just lilke haveing an old school pocket recorder poorly taping over the previous recording, and i got overlap.  on a digital recorder!

does anyone ever use audio tape any more or am i totally dating myself?  (i hope i pick up the check, cause this date was a nightmare)

Hi Matt,

I am also intrigued by the fact that multiple recorders in a room can sometimes capture the same EVP and other times they cannot. My personal belief is that this occurs because the EVP "source" is closer to a particular recorder during a vigil. The unique acoustics of a venue must also play a factor in EVP captures on multiple sources. When we're out in the field I mount one of my recorders to the boom of the IR extender for my Hi-8 camera and I synch the audio and video when reviewing my evidence. This results in two recorders pointed in different directions, and has given us some pretty compelling evidence that indicates the apparent location of an EVP source on several investigations. This has also helped me debunk some of the "hissy" class C EVPs because the frequency response of the digital recorders is narrower than the Hi-8's.

I have been devising a simple experiment to test this hypothesis using my two digital recorders in a known setting using a known sound source (myself). If I  whisper very quietly near one recorder and then the other, and experiment with the orientation of the mics on the recorders and then whisper quietly in the middle of the room, will it be detectable on both recorders? If so, how many decibels does a sound have to be to be picked up on both recorders? I will let everyone on the forums know it turns out.

Sorry to hear that you got "overlap" between recordings. What type of digital recorder do you use? My Olympus recorders have never done that.

I still carry two of my trusty old analog voice recorders on investigations, but downloading is just too tedious compared to my USB capable models. No worries, dude; you're not the only "old timer" that used analog audio tape for EVP research! If we make any return trips to a known "vocal" location, I'll be sure to break them out and give them a go.

There are many schools of thought regarding the "quality" of recorders used for EVP capture. Although the digital models were supposed to have superior frequency response compared to the analog models, I found this was not always the case. The analog models had a lot more internal noise, but that was easy enough to overcome by using a decent external mic. Some folx say the cheaper recorders are better because their internal noise or the digital artifacts inherent in their frequency response provide "white noise" for any entities to use to modulate their words. Others say that only high quality recorders should be used because they provide evidence that is free of background noise and digital artifacts that can be mistaken for true EVPs. Again I would like to put this to the test using a variety of recorders from analog to low and high quality digitals in a known setting using a known sound source. 

Just my two cents

Regards,

Brian Miller

[ttjoon]

i am puzzled why sometimes you can have multiple recorders in a room, but only one recorder will catch the evp.  i loved the brainwave theory. as if the brain is a big radio with an antenna, and it is sending out and receiving messages all the time.  it gives credibility to the idea of telepathic communication.  considering both parties were transmitting and receiving on the same frequencies.  why the voices sometimes appear on one recorder but not the other though.  is the entity speaking directly into the microphone (is this thing on?)  are digital recorders or analog recorders better for evp's?

i have a digital recorder that is pretty cheap, and one time i was recording one event, and the stupid thing actually never deleted the previous file, so just lilke haveing an old school pocket recorder poorly taping over the previous recording, and i got overlap.  on a digital recorder!

does anyone ever use audio tape any more or am i totally dating myself?  (i hope i pick up the check, cause this date was a nightmare)

Hey Matt.  This is an interesting topic and has come up for a few of us on a recent case.  Brian Miller had his High 8 (I think it was that) pointing right at me.  I wasn't talking and there wasn't another female in the house.  You heard this woman's whisper say, "yeah".  I was no more than 3 feet away and my Olympus VN4100 (which is a good recorder) didn't even pick it up.  Yet Miller did. Leslie (you'll meet her soon) and I were on the same case.  Brian J., Leslie and myself were about 3 feet apart from each other in a room with the door closed.  It was very quiet and not noise outside at that moment.  You can hear me ask a question and then Brian J. make a statement.  Between me talking and him talking there was about a 3 second silence.  In that time span, you could hear a male whisper, very clearly one single word.  My recorder picked it up, yet Leslie's didn't.  How do you explain these?  I can't but it is interesting to discuss.  I just don't know what the answer is.  When all of your team has top equipment and it is in perfect working order, how does this happen?  It has the same answer as the age old question, "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Tootsie Pop"?.......The World May Never Know!

[MichaelF (FPIE)]

I have a few theories about EVPs myself, not even sure which one I buy into myself.

First though, let's talk about sound.  In a place with no obstructions and a vacuum, you could theorize that sound travels forever, but that isn't really true in a realistic scenario.  Sound has a couple of limiting factors, mostly propagation loss and spreading.  Spreading depends on your enviroment, and there are different kinds, but in general terms it's the sound fanning out and becoming less concentrated.  Propagation loss is the loss of sound energy, its caused by lots of stuff.  Simple movement through the air causes loss, everytime sound bounces off something it loses energy.  So while it is true that energy is neither created or destroyed, at some point all the sound energy has transfered into another form.  Hopefully this makes sense, trying to keep this simple.

So in short, it's not really feasible to think that the words that somebody spoke 100 years ago are still floating around a room.  So let's look at other possiblities.

There are many theories that the actual EVP itself is said outside our range of hearing then in some fashion "carried" down into a spectrum that can be recorded then listened too.  Sound does a lot of interesting stuff, and carrier waves, harmonic families, and many other things can move sound around a spectrum.  The science of this is possible, but I don't like this theory because it ignores the fact that some ghosts can be heard with the naked ear.  Saying that some ghosts can talk in the normal spectrum, yet others in some freaky frequency doesn't sit well with me.  I prefer unified theories that fit all facts.

"Time Rifts"  are another theory, and they do well to explain certain EVP's.  Basically some feature allows people from different times to communicate with each other.  I support this idea, and it really deserves it's own thread.  However, I believe that this can be one cause of EVP's but is not the only one.

I see some plausability in the "it was just to quiet to hear and was said next to the recorder," theory.  Anything a spirit does may take energy, if they are really low in energy, perhaps all they can do is a very low mumble.  It's a possibility, but for interactive EVP's it means the Ghost would actually need to know what the recorder is, and whisper next to it.  The disheartening problem with this theory is that there could be tons of communcation going on that we just never hear.

My favorite theory is electronic manipulation.  There is a lot of evidence showing that the "living" human mind can have an effect on electronics, I don't see why a "dead" one couldn't as well.  For some reason the Ghost may not have enough energy to talk normally, but really has something to say.  This intent could subconciously imprint on a recording device.  Strong enough intent could get multiple recorders, smaller could get just one.  This could also coincide with the theory that investigators can "make" their own EVP's.  If you want a response badly enough, perhaps your subconcious mind affects the recorder.  Both could be true.

I probably missed a few theories, but that is how I feel about those.

Mike

[johnny]

Hey Michael, to go more off the TIME RIFT theory, I just saw this video by Richard Senate on the relationship of apparitions and time, I found his theory interesting:

Richard Senate on Ghosts and Time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQivG1sVd28      - part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2IR5BHXfFo      - part 2

[PPI Brian]

Hi Mike,

Yepper, we've been tossing these ideas around for a very long time, but we never seem to get tired of discussing this topic. I am endlessly fascinated by this subject, because I believe it has provided some of the most compelling evidence of paranormal activity to date. The other aspect of EVP that fascinates me is that anybody can do it; the phenomenon is available to anyone willing to spend the time and effort to try to capture and analyze it. Although EVP in and of itself does not prove or disprove claims of a haunting, it is fascinating because it appears to surround us.

There are many "theories" out there regarding EVP, but very few of them can be called "theories" in a true scientific sense; they are simply unproven speculation that require further study and field experimentation.  Although it's true that a majority of field investigations are conducted by non-scientists, it does not mean that these groups are incapable of conducting true science or gathering evidence in accordance with the principles of scientific methodology. As wikipedia so eloquently states: Scientific method refers to the body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

The testing of these hypotheses is where most paranormal groups fall short. From a pragmatic standpoint a lot of theories about EVPs are pretty wild. In science we know that simplicity rules. And so far the most compelling evidence seems to support the hypothesis that EVP is a form of acoustic energy.

We know that audio recorders are capable of recording acoustic energy. This can be repeated over and over again. I can record my voice and play it back and others can hear it. I can give the recorder to someone else and they can record their voice and play it back and I can hear it. This proves that a recorder can capture acoustic energy within a certain frequency range. Does this mean that the recorder cannot record ultrasonic or infrasonic frequencies? Not necessarily; the feasibility of recording sound above and/or below the human range of hearing would be determined by the frequency response of the recorder's microphone. Most mics on commercially available recorders are not designed to pick up sounds above or below the human range of hearing. Their specs are available on the paperwork that comes with the recorders. 

Also from that same pragmatic standpoint I had to remind myself that playback in and of itself will not change the frequency of a recorded sound. You would have to alter the pitch of the captured sound using a program like Audacity to make the sounds audible. That makes the "theories" that EVP are not heard at the time of capture because they are infrasonic or ultrasonic not very likely. The same can be said for words somehow lingering in a room for centuries after they are spoken, or that words can be "imprinted" on the recording media by some unknown mental process. The former is just silly, but the latter has been attempted many times over the last 50 years in controlled settings without much success. The same can be said for time slips. Although my knowledge of quantum physics is limited, the premise for us existing in a multiverse could potentially explain a lot of the activity we currently label as "paranormal".   

For these reasons (any many others) I have come to the conclusion that EVP must be a form of acoustic energy. I really don't have an explanation regarding the mechanics of creating acoustic energy from "nothingness", but working under this premise just makes sense in a very simplistic way. And those who know me know that I like simplicity. 

When we conduct an EVP vigil we go out of our way to explain why we are there and what we are trying to accomplish. We also explain to any entity that might be present what our devices are and what they do, and invite them to come close to us and make their presence known. We go to great lengths to be polite and respectful, and we apologize if they are speaking to us and we can't hear them. This always seems to result in EVPs that appear to be direct responses to our questions, and because they appear to interact with the investigators I believe that makes these captures more compelling than just residual mumbling or whispering in an empty room. Sometimes we detect environmental anomalies that seem to correlate with our EVP captures, including "static electricity" fields, cold chills, auto focus anomalies, EMF and temperature spikes, and I believe that also lends another dimension of credibility to our EVP captures.

Just my two cents...

Regards,

Brian Miller

[MichaelF (FPIE)]

I do wish that I was present with you guys on an EVP vigil, that would give me a little more insight on your process.  Do you guys look for "smart" spots in a room for your mics and recorders for example?  Sound doesn't travel in a straight line, it ducts and channels, so smart placement can allow you to possible pick up EVP's that may not be whispered right next to a mic.

I don't disagree that EVP's may be acoutsic energy, like I said, this is my second favorite theory in fact.  Yet a few things concern me about it, you could have two identical recorders right on top of each other, one picks up the EVP the other doesn't.  Also some EVP's, assuming they are not fraud are pretty dang loud, so loud in fact that it's hard to believe the person holding the recorder would not hear them.  It's these couple of things that make me wonder about EVP's just being really quiet whispers.

While it's true that nobody has managed to record "thought's" on a recording device during controlled experiments, people have managed to manipulate machinery and other electronics with mind power alone.  I don't find it a stretch to think that a being of pure energy "ghost" may be better at it.  Also when you add desperation to communicate, it could give them more "power."  Hmmmm, that's an interesting thought, I wonder if anybody ever tried to get EVP's in a room with a comatose person or somebody who is 100% paralyzed and can't even talk.

When you think about how a recorder, whether analog, digital, or whatever works, there is a lot of room for "manipulation."  The mic picks up the signal, that signal is converted, then written on some medium, whether that be a magnetic tape or a hard disk.  At many points in this process energy is manipulated and even changed, there is plenty of room for a being of energy to manipulate things, even if it doesn't know how it works.  In quantum physics they are finding out that different people have different results with identical experiments, simply by some form of mental (or whatever) manipulation that nobody understands.  They don't know how they do it, but they do.  Not saying this idea is right and the others are wrong, to me is just seems to fit all the "facts" the best.  An EVP is picked up on one recorder, because there was only enough energy to affect one recorder, it was picked up on 5 because there was enough energy for 5.  It was heard by the naked ear because there was enough energy (or it wasn't actually heard by the ear, it was psycically imprinted, but that's another discussion,) because there was enough energy.  Energy = results.  That to me is the simplest answer, I like simple too  .

Bah, I could literally go on about this forever.  Much better discussion over beer and steak.

[MichaelF (FPIE)]

Hey Brian, I had an inspiration last night, I thought of a way that given a properly created device (I hereby dub thee the Michael & Brian Meter,) we could actually prove if EVPs are sound energy or not.

The experiment would need to assume a few things.  First, if it is some type of electronic manipulation (not sound,) the "ghosts" don't have an intimate knowledge of how recorders work, such imprinting comes from a strong desire to communicate, which affects the recorders in some way.

To do the experiment, you have a recording device, but it has an extra feature.  It has a microphone "monitor," that perceives raw changes and effects on the microphone itself.  This feature runs parrallel to the recording network and is in no way related to recording or that process.  This device could have the ability to prove that EVP's are not acoustic energy.

If an EVP is received and the microphone was never utilized, then you know that some type of electronic manipulation was used on the device.  Unfortunately, you couldn't use it to disprove electronic manipulation because that could impact the microphone.

However, I think being able to say with some confidence that EVP's are not acoustic energy would be a step forward.

Thoughts?

[PPI Brian]

Interesting idea, Mike. 

I think there may be a simple way to achieve the basic premise of your experiment; remove the microphone from a recorder, then experiment in the field with it. If you pick up any words or phrases, you would be able to effectively rule out the possibility that they were caused by acoustic energy, but it wouldn't answer any of the other questions. I have read reports from other EVP researchers who have done this, but I can't seem to locate any of their accounts online at the moment. 

And no, I'm not willing to destroy any of my digital recorders to test this theory.  But I'm sure I could modify an old cassette recorder from a second hand store.

[MichaelF (FPIE)]

I was thinking the same thing, the device wouldn't actually be small.  The mic would need to be sorta large so you could tap into it.

The no Mic theory would accomplish about the same thing result wise.  It would certainly be an easier test.  However, part of me doesn't like it.  Ok going to stretch out into the wackiness zone for a bit, yet afterall, we have no idea how such "intent" works.  If I say this is a communication device (sorta lying,) and you believe it is a communication device, would the fact that the reality is that it's a half broken communication device affect anything?  I don't know.  It's kind of like giving a piece of paper but no pencil to somebody and saying write a message.

I know I'm kind of talking in circles here, contrary to my own Energy Manipulation theory, because if such was true, the mic doesn't matter.  Yet there is simply to many unknown variables.  The ghost may think it is actually talking, even though it can't because it has no vocal chords, so it might sense deceit or trickery in us trying to get it to use the no mic device.  Blah I don't know.

I'm all for trying the "easy" way, but I feel better about the other.