AkashicNET · Selected public-source notebook · 21 September 2026

IONS research

Statistics with their sources. Possibilities with their limits.

A collection of figures and research leads gathered for AkashicPSI, with source access and denominators kept visible. This is not a census of all IONS research or an institutional impact report.

The research notebook

Research leadStatistic or reportSource statusInterpretation limit
Telephone study participants ↗177 completed at least one trial; 105 completed all 12 trials.Published abstract checked 21 September 2026.Participants and trials are different denominators.
Telephone accuracy ↗Pre-selected: 50.0% / 210 completer trials, p < .001. Post-selected: 31.9% / 630 trials, p = .61. Chance: 33.3%.Published abstract checked.Mixed results. Protocol changes and conventional explanations remain relevant.
Telephone associations ↗Communication frequency: p = .03. Emotional closeness: p = .06.Exploratory analyses in the published abstract.Association is not a demonstrated causal mechanism; emotional closeness did not meet .05.
Prospective channeling design ↗3 channelers, 10 purported groups; 30 sessions in the presentation, with a 28-question protocol.Publication summary and presentation-level reporting.30 sessions are not 30 independent people. Companion analyses are not independent replications.
Prospective semantic similarity ↗0.65–0.79 across channelers for the same purported group; 0.75–0.88 within a channeler across groups after residualization.Published abstract-level reporting.Different comparisons and processing. Neither range is a factual-accuracy rate or proof of source identity.
Retrospective archive comparison ↗Reported semantic similarity: 0.66–0.88 on selected questions.Carried forward from the linked magazine source review.UFODex is a mixed ufological archive, not collectively verified military evidence. Cultural overlap remains an alternative.
External verification ↗Independently checkable details were reported as consistently declined.IONS explanatory article.This leaves external verification unmet; it does not establish fabrication.
Bonded-pairs Zoom task ↗100 pairs and an above-chance claim in the supplied episode notes.Episode-reported; primary methods not matched here.Effect size, blinding and leakage controls remain unverified. Separate from the telephone study.
Broad prevalence claim ↗Approximately 8 in 10 in the supplied episode summary.Exact survey and denominator remain unmatched.Not a general-population demonstration of channeling ability.
Energy medicine / Reiki ↗Reported well-being changes and experiences of guides; no pooled effect estimate assigned here.Exact pilot trials remain to be matched.No established clinical efficacy, mechanism or independent replication inferred.

Missing primary-source matches stay visible. Similarity, statistical significance, reported experience and clinical benefit are not interchangeable.

Collaboration proposal · No partnership agreed

A catalyst for inquiry, not a cure

AkashicNET could help make public research easier to find, compare and discuss. A useful collaboration would join clear provenance, reproducible methods and compassionate engagement with experiencers.

  • Accessible research atlas: trace claims to publications, methods, samples and open questions. Benefit: less time searching for context.
  • A small replication and interpretation pilot: select a few publicly documented claims and compare assessments. Benefit: identify where disagreement comes from.
  • Researcher–experiencer dialogue: respectful listening with clear evidence categories and consent. Benefit: preserve dignity without requiring agreement about causes.
  • Art-led public learning: visual explainers and reflective reading experiences. Benefit: broaden participation without turning metaphor into proof.

A global paradigm shift?

That can be an aspiration. It is not a promised outcome or an established consequence of these studies. The first useful milestone is a bounded public pilot that improves understanding, welcomes contrary evidence and can be independently reviewed.

This proposal is not a treatment or a promise of healing. No collaboration with IONS, TSC or named researchers has been agreed. BQ001 and other open questions remain unresolved.

Continue the inquiry

AkashicPSI Part 2 · 49-slide IONS presentation review · IONS publications · TSC2026 journal

Independent, AI-assisted AkashicNET editorial work. No institutional endorsement implied.