Thursday, January 7, 2016

The Voice

-'NeuroWeapons Testing on American Citizens"' 
John J. McMurtrey, M. S., Copyright 2003, 6 Apr. 2005

Inner voice transmission development by ultrasound and microwave technique is reviewed as well as target tracking literature. References recognizing behavioral influence technologies are surveyed along with reported instances of the use of microwave and ultrasound energy forms on people. Many aspects of the considered literature directly contradict professional presumptions, particularly within the psychological and psychiatric communities.


People discerning remote manipulation corresponding to technology capable of such influence have formed protest organizations across the world. Educated society is uninformed regarding authentic documentation of the development and existence of these technologies, and is without appreciation of the hazard. Complaint of ‘hearing voices’ and perception of other remote manipulation must receive appropriate scientific and legal investigation with protection. Professional awareness is virtually absent with eminent texts and opinion being presumptive, without appraisal of the evide
Herein is substan
1. The development of remote wireless ultrasound and microwave internal voice transmission. 

2.References recognizing behavioral influence capabilities and the use of such technologies against humans. 


Because of conducting medium non-linearity, sound can be scattered by sounds of different frequencies, which produces entirely new tones, and this was originally observed in air as the Tartini tones during the eighteenth century. [5] The same phenomenon occurs for ultrasound sonar systems called parametric arrays in a manner that is highly directional. Mathematical basis for such sonar effects were developed, which predicted the generation of sound waves that are of audible low frequencies. [6] [7] [8] A subsequent more general and complete analysis predicted not only simple tones, but an ‘envelope’ of modulated low frequency sound, which could encompass voice within the hearing range. [9] Despite rumors of failed classified air experiments, [10] abstract reports of air generated acoustic tones by parametric array ultrasound beams began appearing, [11] [12] [13] and then had more complete publication, [14] though unrecognized was an earlier, less extensive report. [15] This ability to produce sound is utilized to construct loudspeakers for directionally projecting audio sound, [16] which have further characterization [17] with sound modulation improvement, [18] and mathematical prediction compared to experimental results. [19] [20] Basic methods for such speakers are described in the Audio Engineering Handbook. [21] The connotation of ‘loudspeaker’ is somewhat misleading as a term for these speakers, since virtual point sources of sound are generated within the ultrasound beams [22] without scattering outside the beam intersection. 15 Recently parametric array emitter [23] and directivity [24] improvement, as well as less cumbersome mathematical descriptions for circular [25] or rectangular sources [26] are reported. These sound projection techniques are internally perceived by a recipient without directional orientation as described from demonstrations, and patents for non-lethal weapon applications. 

Lowrey patent # 6052336 “Apparatus and method of broadcasting audible sound using ultrasonic sound as a carrier” clearly focuses on non-lethal weapon application against crowds or as directed at an individual. [27] Communication is understood as an inner voice with loss of the directional quality of sound perception. “Since most cultures attribute inner voices either as a sign of madness, or as messages from spirits or demons, both of which . . . evoke powerful emotional reactions”, quotes the effect on people. Replaying speech, with a delay impedes talking and causes stuttering. Normal brain wave patterns can be changed (or entrained), which “may cause temporary incapacitation, intense feelings of discomfort.” Entrainment technique is detailed by Monroe Patent # 5356368 “Method of and apparatus for inducing desired states of consciousness”, as accomplished by an auditory replication of brainwave patterns to entrain the EEG. [28] Interstate Industries licensed this patent. 

The Norris patent # 5889870 “Acoustic heterodyne device and method” produces sound particularly within cavities such as the ear canal. [29] An individual readily understands communication across a noisy crowed room without nearby discernment. Sound can also be produced from mid-air or as reflecting from surfaces. 

American Technology Corporation (ATC) licensed this latter patent, and commercially sells their HyperSonic Sound® system, which has a technical treatment available 10 and been presented at a professional meeting. [30] This company also has an acoustic non-lethal weapons system [31] called the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRADTM). The LRAD is being integrated into the Navy’s radar situational awareness surveillance systems, accounts for 60% of military sales, [32] and has a reported 80 % efficacy in deterring wayward Persian Gulf vessels. [33] Besides the Navy the device is also deployed to the Army, Coast Guard, and Marine Corps [34] as well as ground troops in Iraq [35] [36] [37] and Afghanistan. [38] [39] The Miami police used the LRAD for the free trade conference, [40] while the New York Police obtained it for the Republican Convention. 33 [41] The inner nature of sound perception is described from demonstrations for the Audio Engineering Society, [42] an engineering news article, [43] and Popular Science. [44] Some description of more obnoxious sound effects is available. [45] A similar ultrasound method capable of limiting sound to one person, Audio Spotlight® has peer reviewed publication,[46] and is marketed. The Audio Spotlight has had exhibition at Boston’s Museum of Science, [47] the General Motors display at Disney’s Epcot Center, [48] the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum, and other public venues. [49] The American Technology Corporation and Audio Spotlight devices feature in science news and technology articles. [50] [51] [52] [53] A non-lethal weapons program director confirms the lack of nearby discernment on ultrasound voice transmission. [54] Other acoustic influence methods may utilize ultrasound. [55] [c] 


There are early references to “radiofrequency hallucination” [56] and of reaction to radio wave energy [57] [58] by Italian authors that may have observed radio frequency hearing phenomena, but the observations were poorly characterized, at least in available English publications. However sound perception was known through radar technicians in World War II [59] [60] and the late 1940’s, [61] who had microwave hearing effect anecdotes. Though most literature on the hearing effect refers to microwave hearing, the phenomenon extends below microwave frequencies, and radio frequency hearing is also an appropriate term. 60 Allan H. Frey was the first to substantially characterize the microwave hearing effect in a series of articles beginning in 1961. [62] [63] Subjects can hear appropriately pulsed microwaves at least up to thousands of feet from the transmitter. [64] Transmitter parameters above those producing the effect result in a severe buffeting of the head, while parameters below the effect induce a pins and needles sensation. Peak power is the major determinant of loudness, though there is some dependence on pulse width. 63 Pulse modulation appears to influence pitch and timbre. Microwave hearing is described as perceived within or near the head. 59 The hearing effect can be produced from radio frequency components of magnetic resonance scanners. [65] 

Direct microwave hearing experience by many microwave workers, and the phenomenon’s well replicated animal definition makes this the most accepted of low power microwave effects. 61 Review of human and animal microwave hearing confirmation by independent investigators establishes validity. 58 59 60 [66] [67] [68] [69] Designs for scaring birds away from aircraft or other hazards by microwave hearing [70] and induction of vertigo [71] exist. [72] 

While working for the Advanced Research Projects Agency at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Sharp and Grove discovered “receiverless” and “wireless” voice transmission. [73] Their method was simple: the negative deflections of voiceprints from recorded spoken numbers were caused to trigger microwave pulses. Upon illumination by such verbally modulated energy, the words were understood remotely. The discovery’s applications are “obviously not limited to therapeutic medicine” according to James C. Lin in Microwave Auditory Effects and Applications. [74] 

A Defense Intelligence Agency Communist literature review affirms microwave sound and indicates voice transmission. The report states: “Sounds and possibly even words which appear to be originating intracranially (within the head) can be induced by signal modulation at very low average power densities.” [75] Among weapon implications are “great potential for development into a system for disorientating or disrupting the behavior patterns of military or diplomatic personnel.” An Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Command report affirms microwave speech transmission with applications of “camouflage, decoy, and deception operations.” [76] “One decoy and deception concept presently being considered is to remotely create noise in the heads of personnel by exposing them to low power, pulsed microwaves . . . By proper choice of pulse characteristics, intelligible speech may be created” quotes the report. 

The Brunkan Patent # 4877027 “Hearing system” is a device for verbal microwave hearing. [77] The invention converts speech with remote introduction into the head by parabolic antenna. The microwave spectrum granted by the patent is from 100 to 10,000 MHz (0.1-10 GHz) with pulse width from 10 nanoseconds to 1 microsecond, and bursts of such pulses lasting from 500 nanoseconds to 100 microseconds. Preferred operation is at 1000 MHz, which is the frequency of optimal tissue penetration. [78] Bursts of narrowly grouped, evenly spaced pulses determine sound intensity by their amount per unit time. A similar German patent for remote antenna microwave voice transmission is also based on microwave bursts. [79] A microwave voice transmission patent with a non-remote transducer that is based on microwave bursts is “designed in such a way that the burst frequencies are at least virtually equal to the sound frequencies of the sounds picked up by the microphone.” [80] 

Microwave hearing literature confirms an ability to reproduce sound characteristics, and aspects of these patents. Though loudness is modulated by pulse power, 63 [81] closely spaced pulses also increase sound intensity, [82] [83] or lower the perception threshold. 65 Pulse width affects tonal quality with longer pulses producing lower frequency sound. 59 Microwave pulse width differentially influences cat cochlear nucleus auditory units that are responsive to different tones [84] over sound frequencies from 931 Hz to 25.5 kHz. [85] The responses dependent on the separation of twin pulses 85 have at least some analogy to the parameters of human pitch discrimination. [86] Lin extends the range of microwave hearing to frequencies into the ‘tens of gigahertz.’ 59 

There are numerous patents for microwave voice transmission with non-remote transducers [87] with one based on multiple microwave frequencies. [88] The first inventor of non-remote radio frequency voice transmission had a patent held up for five years by a Defense Intelligence Agency secrecy order, [89] but the device is now for sale over the internet as the Neurophone. [90] [91] Two separate devices with non-remote transducers show efficacy in peer reviewed publication either by independent analysis of operation, [92] [93] [94] or the developers demonstrating improved speech discrimination. [95] [96] Although this latter report’s title features electrotherapy, radio frequency hearing had just previously been considered as electrophonic hearing, [97] with the report stating a radio frequency method, while referring equipment description to an Air Force Systems Command commissioned study. [98] This 1964 Air Force study is the first report of radio frequency voice transmission with improved word discrimination in 9 hearing impaired patients. 

Descriptions in some of the patents attribute microwave hearing to direct neural influence. However in review, the most accepted mechanism is by thermoelastic expansion, which results in sound waves 67 that most likely induces bone conducted hearing. The cochlea does appear to be involved, but not the middle ear. 69 

“Communicating Via the Microwave Auditory Effect” is the title of a small business contract for the Department of Defense. Communication initial results are: “The feasibility of the concept has been established” using both low and high power systems. [99] A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request as to the project’s final outcome met with denial on the part of the Air Force, on the grounds that disclosure “could reasonably be expected to cause damage to national security.” [100] Though the Air Force denied this FOIA disclosure, such a contract’s purpose is elaborated by the Air Force’s “New World Vistas” report: “It would also appear possible to create high fidelity speech in the human body, raising the possibility of covert suggestion and psychological direction . . . . If a pulse stream is used, it should be possible to create an internal acoustic field in the 5-15 kilohertz range, which is audible. Thus it may be possible to ‘talk’ to selected adversaries in a fashion that would be most disturbing to them.” [101] [102] Means to actualize such communication ‘possibility’ is evident in patents [103] [104] assigned to the Air Force without royalty payment. These patents describe demodulation of speech at the head of a recipient without a proximate emitter, and no beneficial use presumed. The process involves amplitude modulation where the carrier wave’s influence is fully suppressed, high frequency speech components are filtered, and further distortion preventing processing. The inventors are Air Force employees who have received awards from the Directed Energy Directorate, apparently both for assistance in developing the millimeter wave area denial system later discussed. [105] [106] Robert O. Becker, whose eminence was enough to have been twice nominated for the Nobel Prize in biological electromagnetic fields research, is explicit regarding clandestine use of radio frequency voice transmission: “Such a device has obvious applications in covert operations designed to drive a target crazy with “voices” or deliver undetectable instructions to a programmed assassin.” [107] 

For years the Center for Army Lessons Learned acknowledged microwave hearing voice transmission as a non-lethal weapon in a 'voice to skull devices' weapons thesaurus entry, but this entry was excluded subsequent to request for congressional investigation of such development, and any implementation or misuse thereof. [108] [d] An article from a magazine that publishes notably non-mainstream views details microwave inner voice device demonstration by Dr. Dave Morgan at a 1993 classified Johns Hopkins sponsored non-lethal weapon conference, manufacture by Lockheed-Sanders, and implies use by the CIA, who call the process ‘voice synthesis’ or ‘synthetic telepathy.’ [109] 

When electromagnetic signatures of spoken words are applied to the head at very low field levels (1 microTorr), word choice is significantly affected along the same emotional dimensions as the applied word. [110] Though inspired by microwave hearing, this report is not of direct auditory perception. The author suggests that such an influence, even though weak, could shift the direction of group decisions in large populations, and has previously elaborated on the possibility of less specific electromagnetic influence on populations. [111] 


The maintenance of isolated hearing effects on people requires obstacle penetration and target tracking. Internal voice capable energy forms penetrate obstruction and can be localized. Sound transmission through enclosures is a common experience. Human tracking ability is not nearly as apparent for ultrasound as for microwave radar, but ultrasound is being developed to discern movement through walls.[112] [113] [114] Though ultrasound is unnoticed even at high intensity and can pass through walls, a significant portion of the encoded sound from ultrasound speakers reflects audibly upon striking hard flat surfaces. 

Common technology utilizes the radio frequency hearing spectrum, which encompasses cell phone, [115] [116] TV, and radar frequencies. [117] A variety of antennae localize the structurally penetrating radiation with collimation or focusing. [118] [119] The Luneburg lens emits parallel rays and has over 50 years utilization.[120] Masers are another method of collimation. [121] 

Military radar systems listing human tracking capability include: Advanced Radar Surveillance System (ARSS-1) by Telephonics; [122] Beagle Portable Ground Surveillance Radar by Pro Patria; [123] AN/PPS-5D Man-Portable Battlefield Surveillance Radar by Syracuse Research Corp.; [124] Squire LPI Ground Surveillance Radar by MSSC Corp.; [125] and Manportable Surveillance and Target Acquisition Radar (MSTAR) by Systems & Electronics, Inc., [126] which have ranges from 7-12 km for personnel tracking. Some of these internet examinable references extend their capability from that listed in the 2000-2001 Jane’s Radar and Electronic Warfare Systems, which lists 13 target acquisition or tracking systems specifying such capability on personnel, purchased by militaries of some 27 countries. [127] Besides Russian manufacture there are also East European producers of such systems. 127 [128] 

The most widely deployed system is the Rasit ground surveillance radar by Thomson CSF AIRSYS, which lists 20 km as 90% probability of detection for humans.127 Earlier systems have been in use since the Vietnam War. [129] Basic operation of these systems involves a track initiation processor acquiring a target, while a data association filter maintains a tracking lock on the target. [130] The above designs feature infantry portability or mobile forward deployment, and cannot be regarded as the limit of capability, since larger radars have a range of 100 miles, [131] though lacking human tracking specification. 

A quarter of a century ago, Jane’s Weapon Systems listed some 32 weapons fire control designs whereby aiming was entirely determined by radar tracking data with at least 10 systems primarily designed for control of one weapon system. [132] Eight weapons guidance systems utilized microwave target illumination by a dedicated surface beam (called semi-active homing). 132 Sensors for more recent active guidance systems also illuminate targets for both laser [133] microwave radar [134] [135] units that are compact enough to be onboard the missile, and so inexpensive as to be disposable with the weapon. Target illumination tracking systems have nanosecond to microsecond response times. Such responses do not require a wide scan area to lock illumination upon a person at achievable speeds. At 90 miles per hour an auto travels less than 1/100 of an inch in a microsecond. 

Rowan Patent # 4893815 “Interactive transector device commercial and military grade” describes the acquisition, locking onto, and tracking of human targets. [136] Stated therein: “Potentially dangerous individuals can be efficiently subdued, apprehended and appropriately detained.” The capability of “isolating suspected terrorists from their hostages . . . or individuals within a group without affecting other members of the group” is stated. Laser, radar, infrared, and acoustic sensor fusion is utilized to identify, seek, and locate targets. Locking illumination upon the target until weapons engagement accomplishes tracking. Among available non-lethal weapons is an incapacitating electromagnetic painful pulse. Tracking data automatically aims weapons, and the system even provides remote physiological stress assessment during attack. 

Microwave methods of assessing life by detecting breathing and heartbeat rates had full description in 1967, [137] and are reviewed respecting medical and possible rescue use. [138] The technique can differentiate hypovolemic from normal rabbits. [139] The US Military has an interest in a non-contact vital signs monitor. [140] The capacity is evaluated for obtaining covert polygraph information for lie detection. [141] [142] [143] 

Hablov Patent # 5448501 “Electronic life detection system” describes radar that detects vital organ motion, and distinguishes individuals through obstruction. [144] Therein is stated: “the modulated component of the reflected microwave signal . . . subjected to frequency analysis . . . forms a type of “electronic fingerprint“ of the living being with characteristic features, which . . . permits a distinction between different living beings.” Though this patent applies to trapped victim rescue, another Hablov et. al. Patent # 5530429 “Electronic surveillance system” detects interlopers with security emphasis. [145] Individual variance of human radar signatures is otherwise known [146] than these patents, and gait [147] [148] or heartbeat [149] [150] have consideration as biometric identifiers. 

Battlefield human tracking specifications are not expected to consider obstruction. Some indication of radar capability through obstruction can be gleaned from the adaptation of military technology to through-wall surveillance, [151] which has been spurred by declassifications of the Clinton administration, and Homeland Security initiatives. Surveys or overviews of through-the-wall radar open literature are available.[152] [153] [154] Most materials negligibly attenuate radar at the lower microwave frequencies. High frequencies in the millimeter wavelengths (95 GHz =3 mm) can provide detailed imaging of humans, but are not suitable for brick and concrete. 152 Though without detail, some human image can be obtained at frequencies as low as 10 GHz, which also has good building material penetration. 152 Image resolution is enhanced by increased antenna aperture, [155] which can be synthetic without dependence on a single antenna’s size. [156] Humans are actually emissive of millimeter wavelengths,[157] and otherwise have good reflectance, 154 with a radar cross section of one square meter, [158] which approximates the two dimensional profile. Human emmissivity at millimeter wavelengths even allows some measure of passive detection through walls, 152 though weapons detection through clothing is most developed. [159] [160] 

Many through-the-wall radars simply detect gross motion, a frequent state of awake humans. Raytheon’s Enhanced Motion and Ranging System is battery operated, briefcase sized, lists maximum range as 100 feet, provides two dimensional tracking, and can report range to motion of up to 16 targets. [161] [162] [163] Defense Research and Development Canada of their Defense Department commissioned a consulting company to examine the feasibility of constructing an Ultra Wide-Band (UWB) through-the-wall radar from off the shelf components. [164] Subsequent demonstrations show that such systems can locate a moving target within a building from 60 meters away with methods being refined to provide building layout, and denote non-moving targets. [165] UWB radars decrease interference with commercial signals, [166] and makes radar utilization more difficult to detect. A portable, battery operated radar can detect an individual through 3 walls. [167] Another UWB radar detects personnel through several intervening walls, and an extended range system can track human targets in excess of 1000 feet, with tracking data used to point a camera in the target direction. [168] 

Some through-the-wall surveillance (TWS) radars have considerable commercial development. Fullerton et al. Patent # 6400307 “System and method for intrusion detection using a time domain radar array” [169] is licensed to Time Domain, [170] which has Federal Communications Commission approval for sale of 2,500 of it’s RadarVision units in the US. [171] [172] RadarVision is marketed internationally, [173] has police or fire fighter target markets, [174] and the company is developing a SoldierVision unit for the US Army. [175] [176] Georgia Tech is developing their Radar Flashlight for security and rescue applications. [177] [178] Both of these TWS systems operate by detecting vital organ motion, being battery operated, highly compact (10 pounds or less) models for the widest commercial potential, thus limiting range. RadarVision detects within 30 feet, while Radar Flashlight has a 10 foot range. 

Other commercial TWS system developers are Patriot Scientific Corporation, [179] AKELA, Inc., [180] SRI International, [181] and Hughes Missile Systems Co. 131 Radar detection software for personal computer display is sold. [182] A Russian report describes an ability to record the frequency spectrum of speech besides heartbeat and respiration.[183] Since through-wall surveillance systems evident in the open literature are subject to commercial regulatory, pricing, portability, imaging, and multiple subject observation constraints, they cannot be regarded as the limit of capability especially regarding radars for less economically constrained security markets or not featuring portable design. 


Though not necessarily only involving voice transmission, references to behavioral influence weapons by government bodies and international organizations are numerous. Negotiation submissions to the United Nations Committee on Disarmament affirm the reality of microwave weapon nervous system effects. [184] European Parliament passage of resolutions calling for conventions regulating non-lethal weapons and the banning of “weapons which might enable any form of manipulation of human beings” [185] includes neuro-influence capability. [186] A resolution relates to the US High Frequency Active Auroral Research Project (HAARP), which can have environmental consequences, and although utilizing high frequency, ionospheric extra low frequency (ELF) emanation results. Since ELF is within brain wave frequencies the project has capacity to influence whole populations. 111 [187] President Carter’s National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, predicted development of such capacity. [188] A US draft law prohibiting land, sea, or space-based weapons using electromagnetic, psychotronic (behavioral influence), and sound technologies “directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind control” has not yet passed. [189] Use of electromagnetic devices against people or electronics in Michigan is a serious felony. [190] Russian electromagnetic standards are nearly 1000 times lower than the West, so their weapon law forbidding electromagnetic weapons exceeding Health Department parameters is strict. [191] A Russian draft law explicitly references behavioral influence non-lethal weapons, and development in several countries. [192] Resolutions by the International Union of Radio Science recognize criminal use of electromagnetic technology, particularly against infrastructure. [193] 

No comments:

Post a Comment