ARV Research Update June 6, 1999 & September 30, 1999

Update June 6, 1999

I have just recently completed adding the results from my 1030th Associative Remote Viewing (ARV) trial to my database. Please accept my apologies for failing to keep these research updates as regular as I promised when I first started, but they do take some time to prepare and I have been quite busy with a ton of other things including regular ARV series experiments involving risking capital in the futures markets.

For this update, I have prepared a summary of all ARV series experiments including predictions and actual outcomes to date. This is the first time I have actually taken a close look at the big picture - the summarized results from all of the arv series experiments since I started more than a year ago. I think you will be surprised at the outcome! I will also summarize the data base of individual trials and present a couple of very interesting histograms that compare the effect size with a some possible external causal factors - Local Sidereal time, and lunar phase. As usual, I'll start out with some definitions and outline the protocol for those unfamiliar with ARV.

Definitions and Protocol:

Remote Viewing - Simply put, remote viewing is a method of gathering data by transponding space and time by using a mental process. Yes, remote viewing is about 'psychic' abilities, but it's really more about carefully controlled scientific experiments designed to 'measure' psychic ability - not subjective opinions, here say and stories full of fantasy and coincidence.

Associative Remote Viewing - If we can actually measure a tiny amount of 'psychic ability' using remote viewing, then ARV is simply a process by which we can leverage this small amount of psychic ability and predict the outcome of a random future event with some degree of confidence. The way in which we do that is by associating the two possible binary outcomes of a future event with two random photographic 'targets'. The remote viewer is told that he/she will be shown one of these two targets after the future event has happened (which one depends upon the outcome of the event as per the prior associations). Without being privy to the photos, the remote viewer is then asked to 'psychically' describe the photograph that he will be eventually shown. A judge will then compare the remote viewer's description with both potential photos and attempt to predict which one he thinks the remote viewer will be shown after the future event has occurred. This diagram explains the process quite well. The photographs are randomly chosen by a computer application from a library of over 30,000 images. The identity of the images as well as which one is associated with which outcome is kept hidden from all participants including the remote viewer until judging, or for the remote viewer, until after the future event has occurred. This step by step slide show also explains the process.

ARV Trial - An ARV trial is one single ARV experiment - that is, one future event with two possible outcomes, and two random photographic targets - each one associated with each of the two possible outcomes.

ARV Series - An ARV series is more than one ARV trial where each of the two photos in each trial is associated with the outcome of the SAME future event. A series of ARV trials is used to derive a prediction with some degree of confidence whereas the outcome of a single ARV trial would not represent any reliable degree of confidence. An ARV series typically consists of from 12 to 100 arv trials, and one single binary question about the future. Each ARV trial in the series contains two random photographs, and each photo is randomly associated with each of the two possible future event outcomes. The remote viewer is asked to describe one photo from each and every trial (target set) that he will be shown after the future event has occurred. After comparing all descriptions for each and every trial with each target set, and attempting to choose which photo the viewer will be shown, we can then analyze the entire data set and determine the actual outcome of the future event with a measurable degree of confidence. This illustration shows the ARV process as it relates to a series.

Trial Score - When the judge compares the remote viewer's description of a target with the two possible photographs in the trial, he attempts to choose which one he thinks the remote viewer will be shown, and then assigns his decision a subjective score from 0 to 4 that reflects how confident he is that he has chosen the correct photo. It is important to remember at this point that the judge is NOT privy to the associations until AFTER he has chosen a photo and assigned a score to his choice. When the judging of the all the trials in the series is completed, the scores that the judge assigned will add weight to the target choice associated with the more accurate remote viewing description.

Final Analysis of a Series - After judging has been completed for every trial in a series, we sum the scores for all trials predicting outcome 'A' and separately, all trials predicting outcome 'B'. If the total sum of scores for one potential outcome far exceeds the total sum of scores for the other outcome, then a final outcome choice can be made, and a prediction can be made with a degree of confidence.

Series Summary

OK - now onto the good stuff. Following is a table that summarizes all of the ARV series experiments to date. Each series is comprised of between 12 to 100 trials and each series attempts to predict the outcome of a single event. The events are mostly commodity prices and in every case, capital was risked upon the prediction and a profit incurred (or loss, although that doesn't happen often). A typical ARV series event question related to commodities is "On Aug 12, 1989 between 1:00 pm to 2:00 pm, will the S&P futures contract rise in price or fall in price?" To determine the actual outcome, the price of the S&P is sampled at exactly 1:00 pm and then again at 2:00 pm. If the price at 2:00 pm is higher than the price sampled at 1:00 pm, then the answer is "RISE". Following is a brief summary of each column in the table:

A) Series Event - What the future event was that I was trying to predict the outcome of.

B) Date - The approximate date that the future event took place

C) # of trials in Series - The total number of trials in that particular series

D) Sum of Scores Predicting X - The total sum of scores in the series for an association predicting one outcome - the actual outcome varies with each question, and so I have simply assigned ALL outcomes with a "X" or "Y"

E) Sum of Scores Predicting Y - The total sum of scores in the series for the other association "Y"

F) Final Prediction - The predicted outcome - either "X" or "Y". This is always the outcome that has the highest score sum.

G) Confidence Rating - This is the sum of the predicted outcome divided by the total of the two outcomes scores. It is showing what percentage of the total score available is due to the outcome that is predicted.

H) Actual Outcome - This is the actual, true outcome of the future event.

I) Correct = 1, Incorrect = 0 - If the Final Prediction (F) matched the Actual Outcome (H), then the arv series is successful, the prediction was correct, and it is assigned a "1", if not, then the prediction was wrong and the series is assigned a "0"

A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I
Series Event	Date	# of trials	Sum of scores predicting X	Sum of scores predicting Y	Final Prediction	Confidence Rating F/(D+E)	Actual Outcome	Correct=1 Incorrect=0
S&P	May, 98	25	32	21	X	60%	X	1
S&P	June, 98	42	53	45.5	X	54%	X	1
S&P	June, 98	53	66.3	42.1	X	61%	X	1
S&P	June, 98	12	22.5	5.25	X	81%	X	1
S&P	July, 98	30	34.25	26.35	X	57%	X	1
S&P	Aug, 98	30	28	20.5	X	58%	X	1
Wheat, Bonds	Oct, 98	75	65.25	63.25	X	51%	X	1
Yen, Corn	Nov, 98	50	55	35.5	X	61%	X	1
Grey Cup	Nov, 98	6	8.5	5	X	63%	X	1
Natural Gas	Dec, 98	72	54.25	37	X	59%	Y	0
Lotto #'s	Dec, 98	45	41.25	35	X	54%	X	1
S&P	Jan, 99	30	49.75	20.25	X	71%	X	1
S&P	Jan, 99	30	29	27.25	X	52%	Y	0
Gold	Jan, 99	48	48.75	30.5	X	62%	X	1
Super Bowl	Feb, 99	6	7.75	1	X	89%	X	1
T Bonds	Feb, 99	48	45.25	31.75	X	59%	X	1
Yen, Corn	April, 99	118	112.5	87.25	X	56%	Y	0
S&P	March, 99	48	51.5	27.5	X	65%	X	1
Roulette	March, 99	12	8.75	6.25	X	58%	X	1
S&P	April, 99	25	23	11	X	68%	X	1
S&P	June, 99	54	60.75	43	X	59%	X	1
S&P	May, 99	12	18.75	3.5	X	84%	X	1
Roulette	May, 99	40	40.5	33.75	X	55%	X	1
S&P	June, 99	36	29.75	18.75	X	61%	X	1
S&P	June, 99	20	22.5	12.25	X	65%	X	1
S&P	June, 99	16	23	7.25	X	76%	X	1
								88%

ARV Series Summary Discussion

So from the analysis of the series data it appears that ARV really does work. From 23 successful predictions in 26 attempts (88% correct), a binomial approximation yields a z score of +3.73 which results in odds against chance of less than 1 in 23,000 - highly significant.

ARV Trial Database Analysis

The entire database consists of 1030 individual trials that make up the majority of the series shown in this table. Each and every trial recorded in the database includes the date and time at which the remote viewer did his/her mentation (actual remote viewing session), the date and time of target feedback (when the remote viewer was shown the 'correct' target photograph), a score (from 0 to 4), and if that trial was correct or incorrect in predicting the actual future event. Upon analysis, the entire database yields some fascinating information.

The histogram below uses the trial score as a filter and shows the effect size as a percentage correct. The entire database counting each and every single trial is 55% correct (still significant with odds against chance of less than 1 in 1600), but as you can see, once we start filtering out low scores, the % correct increases to a high of over 85% correct for all trials scoring 3.5 or higher. The bottom line here is that the more accurate remote viewing perceptions (higher scores) are much more likely to be valid 'psychic' perceptions and not just chance coincidences.

Moon Phase Correlation

Legends and folklore through the ages have firmly established our superstition in the full moon and the new moon. Out of curiosity, I calculated what phase the moon was in during remote viewing mentation for all 1030 trials. I then divided a complete moon cycle (from full to new, then back to full) into 10 phases. The following histogram shows the effect size per moon phase (each bin shows the sum of all the scores for trials that occurred during that lunar phase). It shows the highest effect during the full moon and a BELOW mean effect at the new moon. I am not sure how unlikely these results would be by chance alone, but they do correlate quite nicely with historical superstition.

ARV Research Update September 30, 1999

I have just recently completed adding the results from my 1250th Associative Remote Viewing (ARV) trial to my database, adding about 250 trials since the last update. I've had mostly winning series, but a couple of losers which prompted me to take another look at the Sidereal Time and effect size correlation. It seemed that the unsuccessful sessions were predominantly conducted at the poor sideral times.

Many of you might be familiar with the Sidereal Time/ Psi Effect Size research by James Spottiswoode. He found that he could increase the average effect size of 4000 remote viewing trials from various universities and research institutes by more than 300% if he looked at only those trials that occurred around 13:30 sidereal time. At 12:00 noon Local Sidereal Time (LST) each day you would be facing the same part of the universe, the same stars, etc.

I used a star charting software package and double checked it's accuracy. It took a while, but I found something that is very startling and may explain the increase and decrease in effect sizes at certain LST times. I accidentally turned on an option that plotted a line on the celestial sky called the Galactic Equator. That is a line that crosses the sky and lies directly over the milky way galaxy. It represents the plane of the milky way galaxy. At two times during the day, the Galactic Equator line will lie DIRECTLY overhead - a line that lies straight from horizon to horizon, directly up, above your head. At other times during the day, the line will curve around you.

What is most interesting about what I have found is that in my data, I have two effect size peaks and one big effect size trough. The two peaks happen EXACTLY at BOTH times the galactic equator is straight and overhead. The one major trough happens when the equator line is the furthest from directly overhead. The correlation is dramatic and seems to make some logical sense as well. Here is an image of the sky that shows gamma-ray photons that are more than 40 million times more energetic than light photons. The gamma-ray glow from the plane (the Galactic equator) is clearly shown across the middle.

Gamma Ray All Sky Map
Picture Credit: NASA, Compton Gamma Ray Observatory

If you could see gamma-rays, the above image is what the sky would look like when the milky way plane (the galactic equator) is directly over head. Here are some other images of the galactic plane.

Infrared Image from http://www.adc.gsfc.nasa.gov/mw/milkyway.html

Optical Image from http://www.adc.gsfc.nasa.gov/mw/milkyway.html

Here are some images that show graphic representation of the sky at key local sidereal times and also a bar to the right of each image that shows the measured ARV effect size at that time. The blue line is the Galactic Equator.

Here is the sky at exactly 04:00 LST. The blue line depicts the Galactic Equator. Note that is is directly overhead and straight. Also note that the ARV effect size measured at this time is almost 7 units.	Here is the sky at exactly 09:00 hours LST. Note that the effect size has dropped off, and also that the Galactic Equator has curved away.
Here is the sky at exactly 13:00 LST. The galactic equator is at it's furthest distance from overhead and the ARV effect size is at it's lowest point - actually BELOW mean.	Here is the sky at exactly 21:00 LST. The galactic equator is once again straight and overhead. Also the ARV effect size measured is near it's maximum.
images are from a shareware version of CyberSky by Stephen Michael Schimpf http://www.cybersky.com/

I have prepared an html slide show and a quick time video showing every hour of the Sidereal day with the corresponding ARV effect size.

ARV LST Quicktime video
ARV LST html slide show

Commonly Asked Questions and Answers

Q. Why do you think certain Local Sidereal Times are related to your ARV success?

A. I believe it might have something to do with my effect size peaking exactly when the milky way arm (the galactic equator) is directly over head and my lowest effect size is when the galactic equator is at it's lowest position, near the horizon. The galactic equator is the plane of our milky way galaxy and it represents a line that is extremely dense with stars - billions and billions of stars emitting all sorts of radio waves, light particles and who knows what else. Something that is either being emitted from the galaxy plane or being shielded by the galaxy plane or emissions from the plane might be responsible for moderating psi.

Q. Why do you think the moon phase is related to your ARV success?

A. I really have no idea. As far as I know, the only thing that differentiates a full moon is where the earth is in relation to the sun and the moon - why that has anything to do with psi ability I just don't know. And I have no idea how that all fit's in with the LST correlation.

Q. Why do you think that James Spottiswoodes LST data is different - almost opposite of yours?

A. I don't really know. I have randomly split my data into two chunks and the LST correlation graph is similar between the two halfs meaning that the effect is probably legitimate. The reason for the differences might be found by examining the differences between our two databases. James database represented psi experiment results from hundreds of different subjects whereas my database contains data from one subject - me. James database also contains data from research that was conducted all over the world, whereas my data is generated from experiments done almost exclusively here in Calgary, Alberta where I am based. The effect found in James database may be a 'group' fingerprint, whereas each of us may have our own specific fingerprints that may be due to various sensitivities to cosmological events and formations. When the individual fingerprints are combined, the resulting group fingerprint may not necessarily reflect the majority of the individual patterns.

Q. Will you do public speaking?

A. I have not yet, but would like to. I'm just waiting for an invitation.

Q. Is remote viewing a natural skill that you have and if so does it mean that perhaps I or others who do not have a similar level of natural ability cannot accomplish the level of success that you have been able to demonstrate?

A. To some extent yes, but I have been teaching the ARV protocol for a year now - and the vast majority of those students can demonstrate a similar level of remote viewing proficiency as I do. The biggest obstacle for most is rather typical I'm afraid. Many are unwilling or unable to devote the kind of effort required to properly conduct the ARV protocol fully, and to commit to it for some period of time. As with most difficult challenges in life, it takes persistence and dedication to achieve your goals - Accurately predicting the future by accomplishing proficiency using the ARV protocol is no different.

Q. Can I see some examples of typical remote viewing sessions?

A. I have posted some remote viewing transcripts at my web site. http://www.remote-viewing.com/outtakes/index.html The examples that I have chosen aren't typical - they are probably a little better than average.

Q. Does the type of future event itself make a difference to your success rate?

A. NO - absolutely not. I've tested almost every 'type' of future event imaginable from the most random to the most deterministically predictable - the type of event does not matter. Futures prices, flip of a coin, random quantum events (radio active decay), sporting events, etc. The future IS the future is the future. Period. Future events may be premembered just like past events can be remembered. Time flows both ways relative to how you want to see it. For further discussion of time, please refer to this essay.

Q. If a random future event can be predicted with certainty, then all of the 'causal' events that must happen in order for the final predicted future event must also be considered and must be part of that prediction. If that's so, then the logical conclusion would be that a question, or even an answer would not be required before the remote viewing process began. Is that true?

A. Yes that's correct. A question about the future, or the two answers associated with that question is NOT required BEFORE the ARV process is finished. For example, I can set up 20 arv trials with 20 target sets, each target in each set associated with a 'symbolic' answer of "A" or "B". The question about the future is not required at this point. I can then remote view which of the two photos I will be shown after some event happens, and the judge can complete the analysis - we can, with confidence predict that the answer will be "A" (for example). Then we can derive a question and randomly assign the two potential answers to either "A" or "B". Since we already know what the answer is - "A", we have our prediction.

Q. If the future is predictable then that means that it's all predetermined and that means that I do not possess free-will. I find that kind of depressing.

A. Yes - in a way, the future is predetermined, but the past has also been determined and you don't find that depressing do you? Most people find this difficult to comprehend, and I find it even harder to explain but I'll try. If you look at a transcript of all that you did yesterday you cannot deny that you exercised your free will all day long right? You did what you wanted to do at every turn and yet from today's perspective, as you look at your transcript - you can't change anything you did yesterday. It's etched in stone - a done deal. Well - look at the future the same way. If you view tomorrow from the perspective of tomorrow's tomorrow, you can see why freewill and determinism can co-exist. In short - do what ever you want to do, but once you've done it, it's determined.

Q. When you 'predict' the future do you really predict it or do you make it?

A. Good question. It really 'feels' like we predict a future event, but when you really think about it the logical conclusion is that we actually create our futures - here's why: If the future is predetermined which it has to be, or we would not be able to predict it, then how is it that I am able to predict the outcome of some future event, and then be able to position myself to take advantage of that knowledge (by taking a position in the stock market for example)? If I can do that, and my research is showing that I can, then I think the logical conclusion might be that I am actually creating that event in some way, some how.

Q. What has been your financial return?

A. With commodities and futures a return on invested capital is very difficult to calculate. When trading a futures contract, you are really not 'investing' any money as such. The return is directly related to the risk. If I am correct in my prediction, the more I risk, the more I make, and visa versa.

Q. Why is science main stream still so skeptical with regard to remote viewing and ARV?

A. Perhaps is has a lot to do with a lack of a reasonable explanation for HOW it works. There's tons of evidence that it does work, but no theories with any evidence at all as to WHY or HOW. Science knows that a certain drug works, and science can also explain HOW it works and so science embraces the drug and the data that suggests that it works. If you find anything at all with proof that it works without a reason for HOW it works, you will find little or no scientific backing for it. It's a shame because gravity works and we have absolutely no idea how it works. (That's why I personally don't believe in gravity)

Q. If I want to predict whether or not the stock market will go up tomorrow, why can't I just directly remote view the outcome rather than spending all of this effect and time with the ARV protocol?

A. Well, I suppose you could simply directly remote view the outcome of the event, but most of us don't possess the level of natural psychic skill that would be required to make any kind of confident prediction. ARV is for the average person with an average level of natural ability. That's why we incorporate a series of trials in our task rather than just one or two. It allows us to leverage small amounts of psi and gather confidence by remote viewing a lot of different targets all related to the same outcome.

Q. I recently finished learning a controlled remote viewing methodology. Can I use this approach with the ARV protocol?

A. Certainly! You'll have to do it a lot quicker though - either that or use less trials per series. Using some of the more detailed methodologies available, it would take a century to finish 100 targets in a series. Typically, I will think about my target for about 5 minutes, and record everything I think of and then move on to the next target. I can remote view 12 targets in a hour this way and it works quite for me.

Q. Where can I learn more?

A. At my web site there are a list of books that I have read and reviewed on quantum physics, psi (remote viewing), and spiritual topics. http://www.remote-viewing.com/books.html Also at my web site I offer a free on-line ARV training course. Details can be found at: http://www.remote-viewing.com/coursemain.html And as always, I can be reached by email at greg@ideamachine.com I welcome your questions and comments!

ARV Research Update October, 1999

For details on what ARV is, the ARV protocol and how experiments are conducted, please also read the previous report: ARVupdateJune6.html

IMPORTANT: Solar wind found to be a causal factor of psi performance in ARV database

Research has long pointed to an inverse correlation between psi performance and the earth's geomagnetic field (GMF). According to Dean Radin, payout percentages from 4 years of Las Vegas casino data was significantly inversely correlated with average daily GMF. High GMF inhibits psi performance and low GMF enhances psi performance. Other research that examines the Michigan state lottery, as well as the French and Russian National lotteries also indicate a similar relationship between GMF and psi performance (The Conscious Universe by Dean Radin). James Spottiswoode has also found an inverse correlation between GMF and psi functioning in a database containing 2879 psi trials. (http://www.jsasoc.com/library.html).

I recently ran my ARV database through two years of geomagnetic index data and also found a similar inverse correlation. (High GMF values yielded poor psi). However, I found a much greater and more significant inverse correlation between solar wind speed and ARV effect size.

Solar plasma (also known as solar wind) is created by the sun and for the most part is reflected around the earth by the earth's protective magnetosphere. Solar wind is a causal factor in the daily fluctuations of the geomagnetic field (GMF). Some solar plasma also 'leaks' into our atmosphere through the 'holes' at the magnetic poles. Severe solar storm activity causes the northern lights phenomenon.

Various satellites measure solar wind and report values back to earth-based stations on a minute by minute basis throughout the day. The information is important to us because increased solar activity can be detrimental to satellite electronics. One of the values measured is called solar wind speed, which is really proton speed measured in km/hour.

When I average the results from trials conducted when solar wind speed is high, psi performance is low. When I average the results from trails conducted when solar wind speed is low, psi performance is increased - dramatically. The following link is a graph that shows the effect size from 2 years worth of ARV trials (1300 trials) compared with increasing solar wind speeds. Note the effect size drops dramatically as solar wind speeds increase (left to right).

The following graph shows a 200 period moving average of the last two years worth of ARV data and the resulting effect size (blue line). The dates run along the bottom axis. Superimposed on the graph is a 200 period moving average of solar wind speed values (red line). Note that as the red line drops, solar wind speed INCREASES and ARV effect size drops (the solar wind speed scale is inverse so that you can see the obvious correlation)

An interesting side note for those involved with remote viewing and/or research is that we are approaching a 12-year solar cycle maximum sometime within the next year or two. As we approach the top of the cycle, the average daily sunspot numbers will increase, resulting in higher average daily solar activity which in turn will result in higher solar wind speeds. Higher solar wind speeds WILL result in reduced psi performance. This graph shows our current position in solar cycle number 23: http://science.msfc.nasa.gov/ssl/pad/solar/images/ssn_predict_l.gif

The following graph shows ARV effect size compared with average 2 hours standard deviation of 5-minute solar wind speed values. It indicates that it may not be the absolute value of the solar wind speed, but it's relative 'stability'. The higher numbers to the right along the bottom axis indicate greater INSTABILITY (higher average fluctuations), and the lower numbers along the left of the bottom axis indicate greater STABILITY (lower average fluctuations).

THE LUNAR PHASE EFFECT MAY BE SECONDARY TO SOLAR WIND SPEED

As you may know, I have also been following a strong correlation between lunar phase and ARV effect size. My effect size peaks at the full moon and troughs at the new moon. According to Dean Radin from "The Conscious Universe", plenty of research has indicated that the moon phase is highly correlated with geomagnetic fluctuations and solar wind. Comparing my data to both lunar phase and wind speed, it appears as though wind speeds are generally lower during full moons, thus resulting in an increase in psi performance. It is not known if the moon itself is a partial 'cause' of lower wind speeds or completely secondary. At full moon, the moon actually enters the earth's magnetosphere. This may have some sort of calming or dampening effect on the magnetosphere. The cycle lengths of the moon and the sun are also very close - that may play a significant role in the correlation as well.

THE LOCAL SIDEREAL TIME EFFECT MAY BE SECONDARY TO SOLAR WIND SPEED

The correlation that I have found with Local Sidereal Time and the effect size in my database MAY indeed be due only to the fact that solar wind speed averages were higher or lower during those LST hours. I am uncertain as to weather the correlation between solar wind speed and LST time is coincidental or if certain LST hours tend to 'cause' various changes in solar wind speed. This graph depicting the ARV effect size and solar wind speeds from the last 2 years clearly shows that as we advance through the sidereal day (from left to right), as solar wind speed increases (red line moving DOWN), ARV effect decreases. As solar wind speed decreases (red line moving UP - solar speed scale is inverse), ARV effect increases.

It is interesting to note that the ARV effect seems to LEAD the wind speed - blue ARV effect line moves up and down BEFORE red wind speed line. This might indicate that the actual 'cause' is something that LEADS the measurement of the wind speed. Perhaps the originating solar activity is ejecting some particle that is moving faster than the speed of light and reaching earth BEFORE we measure the plasma speed (which takes about 8 minutes to travel from the sun to the earth).

Here is a graph that updates automatically throughout the day showing various real time solar wind data. The graph second from the bottom labeled "SPEED" shows the proton speed in km/hour. According to my database, low values from 300 to 430 are suitable for psi. Wind speeds that exceed 600 also seem to be conducive to psi, but I do not have enough data to confirm that observation. Please also remember that my database measures ME as the subject at my specific geographical location. Psi performance results due to variations in solar wind speed MAY differ for subjects other than myself at geographical locations other than the location that was used in my research. http://sec.noaa.gov/ace/MAG_SWEPAM_2h.html Here is another link that shows daily values http://umtof.umd.edu/pm/

Here are some other useful links:

Plot or download historical plasma data http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/omniweb/form/dx1.html

Space weather forecast http://sec.noaa.gov/today.html

Daily sunspot predictions gopher://solar.sec.noaa.gov:70/00/weekly/Predict

Real time minute by minute solar plasma speed text data gopher://solar.sec.noaa.gov:70/00/lists/ace/ace_swepam_1m

Daily space weather http://www.spaceweather.com/

Information on Sunspots http://www.sunspotcycle.com/

Sunspot cycle chart gopher://solar.sec.noaa.gov:70/I9/weekly/sunspot

Another sunspot cycle chart http://www.estec.esa.nl/wmwww/wma/noaa/ssn_plot.html

Geomagnetic index chart http://www.estec.esa.nl/wmwww/wma/noaa/ap_plot.html