SSE’s October Babies are in Good Company

• October 7, 1885: Niels Bohr was born—the pioneering Danish physicist whose groundbreaking work reshaped our understanding of atomic structure and quantum theory. He introduced the Bohr model of the atom, proposing that electrons orbit the nucleus in discrete energy levels—a radical idea that earned him the 1922 Nobel Prize in Physics. Bohr also developed the principle of complementarity, which became a cornerstone of quantum mechanics, as well as founded the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, a hub for theoretical physics that influenced generations of scientists. His legacy lives on not just in textbooks, but in the very language of modern physics.

In a modern twist that would have intrigued Niels Bohr himself, researchers Tayzia Collesso, Maria Forrester, and Imants Barušs published a study in the 2021 Summer issue of the Journal of Scientific Exploration examining whether meditation and visualization could enable individuals to mentally influence a random event generator—a device designed to produce unpredictable outcomes. Remarkably, participants who engaged in these mental techniques demonstrated a statistically significant ability to shift the machine’s output in their intended direction.

While Bohr transformed our understanding of atomic structure and quantum behavior, today’s frontier scientists probe an even deeper mystery: can focused human intention interact with systems ruled by chance? Echoing Bohr’s principle of complementarity—which embraced paradox and uncertainty—this research invites us to consider that consciousness itself may play a subtle but measurable role in shaping physical reality. The spirit of quantum weirdness endures! Learn more at: https://doi.org/10.31275/20211891 

• October 5, 1923: Edwin Hubble discovered the vastness of the universe by uncovering the “standard candle” (a sort of “cosmic lightbulb with a known brightness”), a key to measuring cosmic distances. In space, astronomers use certain stars or exploding stars (like Cepheid variables or Type Ia supernovae) that always shine with a known brightness. By comparing how bright they appear from Earth, they can calculate how far away they are. This helped Hubble to discover that galaxies are moving away from us—and that the universe is expanding.

Of course, scientists still strive to uncover what all lurks within the cosmos. For instance, the 2018 Summer issue of the Journal of Scientific Exploration contained a survey of over 3,200 people who reported contact with non-human intelligent beings—sometimes linked to UFOs, but often involving telepathy, out-of-body experiences, or other non-physical events (“A Study on Reported Contact with Non-Human Intelligence Associated with Unidentified Aerial Phenomena” by Hernandez et al.), Surprisingly, most said the experience changed their lives for the better.

These results suggest that not all encounters fit the “alien abduction” mold. Instead, many may reflect a deeper, more complex phenomenon—one that challenges how we think about consciousness, reality, and our place in the ever-expanding universe. Read more details at: https://tinyurl.com/4thas7jv

As October brings its crisp air and flickering jack-o’-lanterns, we find ourselves literally steeped in the “spirit of the season”—a time when the veil between worlds feels thinner and our cultural curiosity about the unknown grows stronger. It’s fitting, then, that this month invites us to reflect on one of the most enduring and elusive topics in frontier science: GHOSTS.

Not just the kind that in linger in graveyards or rattle chains in Victorian mansions, but the metaphorical ghosts that haunt mainstream science itself… ghosts of discarded theories, ghosts of anomalous data, and ghosts of phenomena that defy easy scientific categorization or understanding. These are the specters that linger at the edges of consensus, whispering that perhaps we’ve missed something vital.

In many ways, the study of “ghosts”—whether literal apparitions or symbolic anomalies—mirrors the challenges that we face in scientific exploration. Here I’m talking about the discomfort with ambiguity...the tension between belief and evidence…and the tendency to dismiss what doesn’t fit neatly into existing frameworks. And yet, it’s precisely at and within these haunted margins that anomalistics and frontier science thrive and our collective intellectual knowledge advances.

October reminds us therefore that mystery isn’t the enemy of science—it’s the companion. The SSE likewise exists to illuminate the shadows, to ask the questions others won’t, and to welcome the strange with rigor and open-mindedness. Whether we’re investigating the nature and limits of the cosmos or all that it holds, we are, in essence, ghost-hunters of the intellectual kind.

So, let’s embrace the spirit of the season. Let’s honor the ghosts—not as “threats” to reason, but as “invitations” to expand it.

Happy H(a)unting!

Warmly,

James Houran, Ph.D.

Interim-President, SSE
Editor-in-Chief, JSE

Back to Top

Discover JSE’s Fall issue—Online now!

Our latest edition (https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse) dives into bold, boundary-pushing research that blends rigorous science with the mysteries at the edge of understanding. Here’s what awaits you

•  Psi Effects and Probability: A pilot study reveals that folks expecting lucky outcomes actually influenced quantum‐based game results—suggesting belief and emotion may tweak micro-psychokinesis.
• Laying of Hands and Wound Healing: Non-contact energy healing triggered measurable signs of inflammation and early skin repair, pointing toward a role for hands-off therapies in integrative medicine.
• New Hypothesis of Zodiac Killer: A fresh, evidence-driven analysis names Donald Lee Cheney—not Arthur Leigh Allen—as the prime suspect in the Zodiac case.
• Critical Thinking on Replication: A survey of psychology textbooks shows most mention replication, but few specify which findings hold up—an invitation to sharpen science teaching and skepticism.
• Terminal Lucidity and the “locked-in experience”: A startling case of full awareness during a medically induced coma upends assumptions about unconsciousness and calls for better care and deeper study of paradoxical consciousness.
• Psi and AI: Testing ChatGPT-4.1-mini found it picked future target cards above chance, opening provocative questions about AI access to non-local information.
• Mediumship and Schizophrenia: A review highlights how cultural and spiritual frameworks can shape interpretations of psychosis, suggesting culturally sensitive approaches might enrich mental-health support.
• Chemical Processes in Reincarnation: A novel, testable theory argues that consciousness could influence birthmark patterns linked to past-life memories via quantum biological processes.

Don’t miss this thrilling collection of studies that challenge conventional wisdom and chart new frontiers—check out the Fall issue today! https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse

Introducing MAVERICK Talks: Interactive Virtual Chats about Bold Ideas

MAVERICK = Monthly Adventures Via Exploration, Revealing Inquiry, Curiosity, and Knowledge Join us in shaping the future of scientific exploration—one bold idea at a time.

The SSE proudly presents MAVERICK Talks—a monthly virtual forum where SSE members can share works-in-progress, spark fresh inquiry, and receive thoughtful feedback from fellow explorers. Whether you're refining a method, testing a hypothesis, or navigating a controversial topic, this is your space to engage, reflect, and grow.

When & Where: Second Sunday of each month (unless a quarterly webinar is scheduled) 1-hour Zoom sessions at: 5 PM ET | 4 PM CT | 3 PM MT | 2 PM PT Upcoming: Nov 9 & Dec 14, 2025.

Want to Present? Submit your title, synopsis, and presenter info to: conference@scientificexploration.org, with the Subject line: “SSE2025-2026 MAVERICK Talks — [Your Name]” Deadline: Last day of the month prior to your talk.

Free for SSE Members. Register at least 24 hours in advance to receive the Zoom link.

SSE’s 2026 (44^th) Annual Conference in the Works

“Evidence & Encounters”—Two Paths to Exploring the Unexplained launches June 17–21 at the Denver Marriott Westminster Hotel (Broomfield, CO). The conference will      begin with a reception in the evening of June 17 (Wednesday), hold main program (talks, posters, expositions, and expeditions) June 18-20 (Thursday-Saturday), and commence with workshops on June 21 (Sunday). Field trips and other activities will be included.                                           

SSE’s 44th annual conference will explore two provocative tracks—one grounded in hard data, the other in personal experiences—each challenging the boundaries (or edges) of mainstream scientific knowledge. It welcomes scholars, students, specialists, and inquisitive thinkers to engage with frontier science through diverse theoretical frameworks and innovative empirical approaches that bridge experience and evidence. This year’s theme fosters bold inquiry, spirited debate, and hands-on exploration of scientific controversies in an era of accelerating technological innovation. 

Topics span anomalies in aerial (and aviation) spaces, consciousness, cryptozoology, healing and holistic practices, new physics, parapsychology, and more. By interweaving mental, material, and methodological perspectives, we aim to deepen our understanding of anomalous phenomena on the edges of mainstream scientific knowledge, their cross-disciplinary relevance, and their potential real-world impact. 

The Call for Abstracts and more conference details are coming soon, so stand by!

Is “Haunted People Syndrome (HP-S)” Real?

JSE’s Editor-in-Chief, James Houran and Managing Editor, Brian Laythe together have been researching the nature of “apparitions, hauntings, and poltergeists” (collectively called “ghostly episodes”) for almost a decade. You can read more about their grounded theory of HP-S in their 2025 Journal of Scientific Exploration study (https://doi.org/10.31275/20253479) or their double award-winning book, Ghosted! Exploring the Haunting Reality of Paranormal Encounters (available at Amazon: https://tinyurl.com/4pvheabr).

But not long ago, Houran and Laythe also presented the research underlying their HP-S idea to the popular Rhine Research Center (Durham, NC), which kindly allowed SSE to share the video presentation (thanks to Rhine Director, John G. Kruth). Fun fact— A much younger version of Houran attended the 1989 Summer Study Program at the Rhine as shown in the old photograph below (can you guess where he is?  Look at the bottom row, second from the left. Immediately behind him is Dr. Alok Saklani, his ole’ roommate for the summer).

Anyway, now back to ghosts and SSE stuff! Even if anomalous mechanisms like “psychokinesis or discarnate agency” are eventually proven to play a role in these occurrences, Houran and Laythe contend that HP-S is currently the most coherent and empirically tractable model for how cognitive functioning, social dynamics, and cultural forces jointly create the conditions for ghostly episodes to manifest.

Enjoy pondering their ideas and arguments at: https://scientificexploration.org/Ghostly-Episodes-Video 

Please Renew Your SSE Membership

It’s that time of year—ensure that you stay connected, informed, and supported by renewing your SSE membership today. Your continued participation keeps our community thriving and unlocks a host of benefits:

• ·       Receive discounted registration fees for the annual SSE conference and quarterly webinars
• ·       Help to subsidize JSE, a premier open access journal that covers all categories of anomalistics and frontier science
• ·       Get opportunities to serve on SSE’s leadership committees

While you’re renewing, please also take a moment to update your SSE profile. Add your newest publications, refine your research interests, and upload a fresh photo so colleagues can find and connect with you more easily.

Please don’t let your membership lapse—renew now to keep advancing both your career and our shared mission: https://scientificexploration.org/join-us

Back to Top

Meet Brian Laythe—a Full Member of SSE since 2022, who received his Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology with a focus on social psychology from the University of New Hampshire. He's the Director of the non-profit Institute for the Study of Religious and Anomalous Experience (i.S.R.A.E.), current Managing Editor of the Journal of Scientific Exploration, and Owner of a forensic psychology consultancy, partnering with lawyers for veteran’s disabilities and benefits.

Please talk about your career journey and what led you to your current work?

I've had an abundant love of the strange and paranormal since I was a child. I started my college career with the intent of entering the ministry and was a music major. Over the first couple of years, my focus fell on psychology as an undergraduate focus with philosophy. I ended up getting a degree in both. During that process, I discovered the Journal of Parapsychology, but was told by professors to avoid the topic at all costs, which was a fairly typical attitude in the early 90’s. As such, I turned to the psychology or religion as a focus topic, which ended up being my first series of published papers through graduate school and my early college career. Once I had settled into a regular teaching position, I made a decision to move into parapsychology, first focusing on hauntings, and subsequently into the development of quasi-laboratory studies of haunt phenomena. From there, and with the collaboration of many colleagues, we have greatly expanded across a variety of parapsychological topics, with a general focus of entity encounters and paranormal phenomena.

What do you find most rewarding about your research in frontier science?

I think the most enjoyable aspect of frontier science is the fact that it's a realm of "unknowns", a place where it's possible to truly find unique and new findings. Mainstream psychology is often rife with “discovering” small and tiny caveats to existing theories that often have dozens and dozens of existing papers. I've always felt that it's better to openly and clearly (in terms of methods, rigor, and express limitations) discover new and controversial relationships in new domains, rather than examine small and limited extensions of existing well-established findings. And frankly, I still love all things spiritual and spooky. I’d rather study something I love than study something I don’t.

What are some of the biggest challenges you’ve faced in your career, and how have you overcome them?

My graduate focus in experimental psychology was social psychology, and I took that research to heart. The core findings of the field are very reliable, and one of its most powerful and universal findings is that humans, regardless of position or achievement, have natural cognitive biases as a function of their culture and background. As such, I've always kept in mind my personal beliefs and the beliefs of others who do research in any academic field. Those beliefs color and shape the type of research that we produce and how we interpret it. I hold the old-fashioned opinion that science is supposed to be as neutral as possible. We don’t advocate, we openly and precisely measure and explore. We own our interpretations as interpretations, and we certainly don’t confuse data and findings with our personal ontologies. And sometimes we fail, and sometimes we're wrong. Such is the nature of science. The image of the all-knowing professor is a lie. It always has been.

I think my challenges have been many frontier scientist’s challenges. Many of the troubles that we all face come not necessarily from the quality of the work we produce, but from social, ideological, and ego driven groups we get labeled by. We can all get trapped by these labels, of mainstream versus fringe, believer versus skeptic, anomalist versus parapsychologist…the list goes on. Sadly, if you step back and look at your own positions versus other “groups”, these fights and disagreements are one of interpretation of the data and sometimes also ego. But notice, with some occasional overtly political and rhetorical submissions, that many of these debates don’t really involve the type, kind, or degree of actual evidence collected by the parties.

So my solution to these challenges is to be honest with my data and interpretations as much as possible, or as much as I can see, and whenever possible collaborate with colleagues rather than compete with them. There are too few of us, and competing views in collaboration often makes for better research.

How has being a part of SSE benefited you both professionally and personally?

I attended my first SSE conference nearly 10 years ago in Denver. I was new to the field, and the presentations and data shared there was inspiring. Subsequently, several years later, I moved into the Managing Editor role here at JSE. While it has been incredibly strenuous trying to manage fifteen or more submissions from accepted drafts to finalized and appropriately laid out publishable papers every three months, it has been an invaluable learning experience across a variety of professional domains. These last three years have definitely increased my skills and understanding of the field, and I’m thankful for the time I’ve spent here.

What advice would you give to someone just starting out in frontier science?

I’d emphasize three basic points. First, mainstream science is becoming increasingly more accepting of spiritual and parapsychological topics. As such, anyone entering this field should be knowledgeable about the mainstream primary areas in their particular field. After all, much of the theory used in frontier science didn't occur in a vacuum. Most of it directly derives from earlier research and theories in the mainstream. Second, spend the onerous time to understand both research methods and the mathematics involved, and what they actually do, measure and mean. For bonus points, spend some time with the philosophy of science, so that you are well prepared to defend and debate both the strengths and limits of the methods we use to study odd phenomena. Hidden in both of the former are massive gaps in the absolutist claims within scientism. Finally, if you expect to become popular or an influencer producing frontier science, you're going to be sorely disappointed. This field thrives with curmudgeonly introverts who have made peace with studying strange topics for the sole benefit of self-knowledge and the odd publication. If the love of scientific exploration of the spooky and weird is not enough to drive you, you've entered the wrong field.

Back to Top

A Farewell Funny

“Caught on camera—two-whey communication with ghosts!”