A few days ago there were various news reports that scientists gained an ability to transmit a sound to someone without devices.. without anyone else hearing it.. It would just appear INSIDE YOUR HEAD..
In a paper published on Friday in the journal Optics Letters, the MIT team describes how it developed two different methods to transmit tones, music, and recorded speech via a laser.
Getting into the details of how this is happening: For one of their methods, the researchers “swept” a laser beam at the speed of sound, changing the length of the sweeps to encode different audible pitches.
This technique allowed them to transmit sound to a person more than 8.2 feet away at a volume of 60 decibels — about the loudness of background music or a conversation in a restaurant — without anyone between the source of the sound and the target hearing it.
For the other method, they encoded an audio message by adjusting a laser beam’s power. They said this technique produced a quieter but clearer result.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k8VTZEt0bc]
Here is a YOUTUBE video on this very topic..
Jian Liang Wall Street Insider’s Absolute Mind Control Testimony 19Dec 2018
Dateline early 2018: Non-lethal yet still horribly unpleasant weapons are all the rage these days, from puke rays to pink tasers. What’s the next step? How about a beam that inserts voices into your head? Yes, you could be minding your own business looting a Best Buy during a riot and all of the sudden there’s a voice coming from inside your own brain saying “We’re really disappointed with you.” Enter the SCHIZO BEAM..
Now the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is jumping on the bandwagon with their new “Sonic Projector” program: The goal of the Sonic Projector program is to provide Special Forces with a method of surreptitious audio communication at distances over 1 km. Sonic Projector technology is based on the non-linear interaction of sound in air translating an ultrasonic signal into audible sound. The Sonic Projector will be designed to be a man-deployable system, using high power acoustic transducer technology and signal processing algorithms which result in no, or unintelligible, sound everywhere but at the intended target. The Sonic Projector system could be used to conceal communications for special operations forces and hostage rescue missions, and to disrupt enemy activities.
X X X X
Today, however, this presumption might no longer hold. Sophisticated neuroimaging machines and brain-computer interfaces detect the electrical activity of neurons, enabling us to decode and even alter the nervous system signals that accompany mental processes. Whereas these advances have a great potential for research and medicine, they pose a fundamental ethical, legal and social challenge: determining whether or under what conditions it is legitimate to gain access to or interfere with another person’s neural activity.
This question has special social relevance because many neurotechnologies have moved away from a medical setting and into the commercial domain. Attempts to decode mental information via imaging are also occurring in court cases, sometimes in a scientifically questionable way.
The danger is in the fact that these newer “stealth” technologies could be used at any time – and the person being targeted would not even know they were being targeted.
This technology could potentially be used against people who object to mandatory vaccination, medical kidnapping, the nationalization of our private health data, the use of toxic chemicals in food, mandatory indoctrination of children in the public education system, mainstream media brainwashing, the collection of information about our religious and political beliefs, the denial of the right to assemble in peaceful protests against the overreaching power of national and state government, to name just a few.
Brain-reading technology can be seen as just another unavoidable trend that erodes a bit more of our personal space in the digital world. But given the sanctity of our mental privacy, we might not be so willing to accept this intrusion. People could, in fact, look at this technology as something that requires the reconceptualization of basic human rights and even the creation of neurospecific rights.
I am sure that if there is any reason to create an addendum to the fourth amendment it would be to detail neurospecific rights. We would have to add that beyond unlawful search and seizure of your effects we would have to declare that any and all neurosearches or mental controlling for interrogation or for any reason should be declared unconstitutional.
The future is now. Or was it then?
When did we get the ability to beam me up Scotty.. or at least hear SCOTTY being told to beam up?