The Paranormal Phenomena Classification System (PPCS)

Visit the PPCS Utility
Table of Contents
2
3

Preface

For centuries, human beings have reported encounters with strange lights, unexplained voices, apparitions, and presences that defy the ordinary laws of physics and biology. These accounts appear in folklore, religious traditions, battlefield diaries, private letters, and modern investigation reports. While compelling, they share a fatal flaw: inconsistency. One witness might describe a “spirit,” another a “phantom,” and another a “shadow man.” Without a common language, how can such accounts be compared or studied scientifically?

The Paranormal Phenomena Classification System (PPCS) was designed to solve this problem. It provides a structured taxonomy for the paranormal, one that allows investigators to classify and document phenomena with precision. Like medical codes or forensic catalogues, PPCS is not a belief system; it is a neutral language of description. Its purpose is not to explain what ghosts are, but to help us record what people actually experience in the clearest way possible.

This field manual presents the full PPCS system, organized across eleven domains of paranormal activity. Each domain is broken into subcategories and specific codes, with detailed definitions, case examples, investigative protocols, and natural explanations to rule out. In addition, the manual provides tools for cross-domain analysis, case file integration, investigator checklists, and professional ethics.

Whether you are a professional researcher or simply a curious reader, the PPCS offers a way to transform stories into data, and to approach the unknown with rigor, respect, and clarity.

Part I: Foundations of PPCS

Chapter 1: The Need for Classification

Reports of paranormal activity are nearly universal, but they are rarely standardized. An investigator in Savannah may describe “a soldier’s ghost,” while one in London might note “a phantom figure.” Folklorists, priests, and parapsychologists all use different language, creating a fragmented body of knowledge.

Without classification, we lose three things: clarity, consistency, and comparability. Vague terms invite skepticism and make it impossible to recognize patterns across multiple cases. For example, hundreds of reports of “strange noises” across decades may seem unrelated, but if classified precisely as “responsive knocks,” “looped replay cannon fire,” or “disembodied conversational voices,” a clear pattern might emerge.

The PPCS exists to provide that clarity. Its purpose is descriptive, not interpretive. By focusing on what happened rather than why it happened, the PPCS allows researchers and enthusiasts alike to share a common language of the unexplained.

Chapter 2: Anatomy of a PPCS Code

Every PPCS entry is written as a simple code:

Domain – Subcategory – Specifier – Modifier

The domain defines the broad category of event: apparitions, entities, environmental disturbances, and so on. Each domain is divided into subcategories, which narrow the description further, and then into specifiers, which describe the exact manifestation. Modifiers are optional tags that provide context, such as whether the event repeated, was witnessed by multiple people, or was captured on equipment.

For example, the code ENT-MAN-ATT-MLT describes:

  • Entity (ENT) phenomena,

  • involving Manipulation (MAN),

  • specifically an Attachment Attempt (ATT),

  • with Multiple Witnesses (MLT).

Translated into plain language, this means: “An intelligent entity engaged in manipulative behavior, attempting to attach itself to a witness, confirmed by multiple observers.”

By breaking down every report in this manner, investigators ensure clarity and allow comparisons between cases separated by years or continents.

Chapter 3: Using PPCS in the Field

Applying PPCS in the field requires discipline. Investigators begin by establishing baseline conditions: temperature, electromagnetic fields, pressure, humidity, lighting, and background noise. These measurements provide the control data against which anomalies can be judged.

When phenomena occur, they must be recorded in neutral, descriptive language. Instead of “a ghost grabbed me,” the log should read: “Sensation of hand gripping right shoulder, lasting three seconds, leaving no physical marks.” Instead of “spirit appeared,” write: “Full-form humanlike figure observed at end of hallway, translucent, visible for 12 seconds.”

Once observations are recorded, the investigator applies the relevant PPCS code(s). If multiple phenomena occur simultaneously, multiple codes are logged. For example, a translucent female figure seen by three witnesses, accompanied by a cold spot and oppressive dread, would be logged as:

  • APP-VIS-TRN-MLT (Translucent apparition, multiple witnesses),

  • ENV-TMP-COL (Localized cold spot),

  • BIO-FEA-OPP (Oppressive dread).

This precise classification allows later researchers to recognize patterns, such as the frequent pairing of apparitions with environmental temperature anomalies.

Chapter 4: Tools and Techniques

PPCS is only as reliable as the evidence it classifies. Investigators should use a combination of human testimony and instrumental data.

Core instruments include:

  • Audio recorders for capturing voices, noises, and EVPs.

  • Cameras (infrared, low-light, and full-spectrum) for apparitions and visual anomalies.

  • EMF meters for electromagnetic disturbances.

  • Thermometers (digital and infrared) for cold or hot spots.

  • Barometers and hygrometers for pressure and humidity changes.

  • Motion detectors and trigger objects for testing intelligent interaction.

Equally important are witness forms, where each observer independently records their perception. This prevents group contamination of testimony.

Finally, investigators must always test natural explanations first. Many classic “ghostly” effects have mundane causes: reflections in glass, pipes knocking, drafts through old walls, or psychological suggestion. Only when these are ruled out should PPCS codes be applied with confidence.

Part II: Domain 1 — Apparitional Phenomena (APP)

Chapter 5: Understanding Apparitions

Apparitional phenomena are perhaps the most iconic of paranormal experiences. They are the figures in doorways, the voices in empty halls, the cold presence felt in the dark. While folklore often frames apparitions as “ghosts,” the Paranormal Phenomena Classification System (PPCS) deliberately avoids such labels. Instead, it classifies what is observed: whether the apparition is visual, auditory, sensory, or a full-formed figure.

The APP domain is divided into four branches: Visual (VIS), Auditory (AUD), Sensory (SEN), and Full-Form (FUL). Each is further subdivided into specific codes describing the form the apparition takes. The goal of classification is not to interpret intent or identity, but to describe precisely what appeared to happen.

5.1 Visual Apparitions (APP-VIS)

Visual apparitions are figures or fragments perceived by sight. They may be fleeting or sustained, translucent or solid, human or animal. Visual apparitions are among the most reported forms, but also among the most easily misinterpreted. Shadows, reflections, and pareidolia (the tendency to see patterns where none exist) are frequent culprits.

Partial apparitions (APP-VIS-PAR) are those where only a fragment of a figure is visible: a hand reaching around a doorframe, a face hovering in a window, or a torso without legs. These events are often disturbing precisely because they defy natural expectation. Investigators should be careful to rule out visual illusions caused by mirrors, reflections, or peripheral vision before applying this code.

When a complete figure is observed, the event is classified as a full visual apparition (APP-VIS-FUL). Witnesses often mistake these for living people until the figure vanishes or passes through solid objects. Historical examples abound, such as soldiers seen on battlefields long after their deaths. Here, investigators must confirm that no intruders or reenactors were present before labeling the event.

Animal apparitions (APP-VIS-ANI) are also reported. These include spectral horses at battlefields, phantom cats in family homes, or folklore creatures such as the black dog of English legend. Investigators must ensure no living animals were present at the site when these are logged.

In some cases, multiple apparitions appear simultaneously (APP-VIS-MUL). Entire groups of monks chanting, soldiers marching in formation, or several figures seen in a corridor fall into this category. Unlike solitary apparitions, these often point toward residual phenomena — replays of past events.

The visual quality of apparitions varies. Some are translucent (APP-VIS-TRN), with background visible through them. Others appear completely solid (APP-VIS-SOL), indistinguishable from the living. Some apparitions fade gradually (APP-VIS-FAD), while others appear suddenly (APP-VIS-APP). These distinctions are important because they may suggest different underlying processes, whether psychological, environmental, or paranormal.

5.2 Auditory Apparitions (APP-AUD)

Auditory apparitions involve unexplained voices or sounds perceived by the ear. Unlike EVPs (electronic voice phenomena), APP-AUD events are heard directly, in real time.

The most common is the whisper (APP-AUD-WHI) — faint, indistinct murmurs that seem to come from empty rooms. These may be mistaken for drafts in ducts or distant voices carried by wind. A stronger form is the clear voice (APP-AUD-VOI), audible as if someone were speaking directly to the witness.

Especially striking are name-calling phenomena (APP-AUD-NAM), when an apparition calls a specific witness by name. These events carry a sense of awareness and intention, though classification remains strictly descriptive.

Sometimes, witnesses hear conversations (APP-AUD-CON) between two or more unseen voices. These are usually residual, replaying events of the past, but they may also be interactive.

Other common auditory apparitions include phantom footsteps (APP-AUD-FTS), crying or sobbing (APP-AUD-CRY), and laughter (APP-AUD-LAU). Each must be carefully documented with time, location, and environmental conditions. Pipes, structural settling, and wildlife can mimic these sounds, and should be ruled out.

5.3 Sensory Apparitions (APP-SEN)

Sensory apparitions are experiences perceived through feeling rather than sight or hearing. These are highly subjective, but they are consistently reported across cultures and eras.

The most basic is the presence sensation (APP-SEN-PRS), the strong impression that someone is nearby. Witnesses may describe the air “thickening” or the sense that “someone is standing behind me.” A related but more specific sensation is being watched (APP-SEN-OBS), where the perception is not just presence but directed attention.

Other sensory codes include the companion sensation (APP-SEN-CMP), where witnesses feel as though an unseen entity walks beside them, often in step with their own. Some report subtle touches (APP-SEN-TOU) like a hand brushing their arm, though without physical marks. Finally, a less common but notable phenomenon is vibrational presence (APP-SEN-VIB) — the feeling of buzzing or shaking associated with apparitional contact.

Investigators should cross-check these reports with environmental data, particularly electromagnetic fields and infrasound, both of which can induce sensations of presence or observation.

5.4 Full-Form Apparitions (APP-FUL)

Full-form apparitions represent the culmination of APP phenomena: complete, structured figures. Unlike APP-VIS-FUL, which simply records the visual completeness of a figure, APP-FUL codes describe how the apparition behaves and how it is interpreted by witnesses.

If the figure engages with witnesses, making eye contact, gesturing, or even speaking, it is coded as interactive (APP-FUL-INT). These are among the most compelling reports, as they suggest awareness of the living.

If the apparition appears but does not interact, moving as though unaware of observers, it is logged as non-interactive (APP-FUL-NON). Many such reports resemble historical replays: soldiers marching, women climbing stairs, monks in prayer.

When an apparition is identified as a specific individual (APP-FUL-IDN) — for example, a deceased relative or a historically documented figure — the identification must be recorded carefully, along with evidence supporting the recognition. Most, however, fall into the category of unknown apparitions (APP-FUL-UNK), where details are indistinct or generic.

Finally, apparitions can take full animal form (APP-FUL-ANI), such as ghostly dogs, cats, or horses. These are coded separately from APP-VIS-ANI to emphasize their completeness and structure.

5.5 Investigating Apparitions

When documenting apparitional phenomena, investigators must remain rigorously neutral. Instead of assuming “ghost,” they record: “translucent female figure, 15 seconds, faded gradually.” Instead of writing “a presence touched me,” they note: “sensation of hand on right arm, no physical marks.”

The recommended process is:

  1. Describe the phenomenon neutrally.

  2. Apply the precise PPCS code.

  3. Cross-reference with other domains (e.g., cold spots, EMF spikes, fear responses).

  4. Rule out natural causes (shadows, drafts, hallucinations).

  5. Archive evidence in case files for later analysis.

5.6 Common Cross-Domain Overlaps

  • Visual apparitions (APP-VIS) often coincide with ENV-TMP-COL cold spots.

  • Auditory apparitions (APP-AUD) sometimes overlap with INT-EVP (captured on recorders simultaneously).

  • Sensory apparitions (APP-SEN) correlate with BIO-FEA-SUD sudden fear.

5.7 Conclusion: The Weight of Appearances

Apparitional phenomena form the foundation of paranormal research. They are the images and sounds that populate folklore and inspire investigation. By breaking them into APP-VIS, APP-AUD, APP-SEN, and APP-FUL, the PPCS ensures that apparitions are not just “ghosts,” but carefully recorded events with measurable attributes.

A hand on the shoulder, a voice in the dark, a figure in the hallway — each can now be coded precisely. Each becomes a data point, comparable to thousands of others. And in that accumulation of precise detail lies the possibility of moving from mere story to structured knowledge.

Part II: Domain 2 — Entity Phenomena (ENT)

Chapter 6: Encounters with Entities

While apparitions (APP) represent structured appearances, entities (ENT) go further: they appear to act with intelligence, agency, and intention. Where an apparition might walk past a doorway without acknowledgement, an entity may stop, look directly at a witness, or even reach out. These cases form the core of some of the most dramatic and unsettling paranormal reports, often provoking long-term folklore about “spirits that haunt” specific places.

The Entity domain is divided into four branches: Communication (ENT-COM), Physical Interaction (ENT-PHYS), Visible Manifestation (ENT-VIS), and Manipulation & Control (ENT-MAN). Each represents a distinct way in which entities are said to interact with the living and the environment.

6.1 Entity Communication (ENT-COM)

Entities are often described as attempting to communicate with the living. This can take several forms, ranging from simple auditory speech to symbolic markings or even messages through modern digital devices.

The most direct form is auditory communication (ENT-COM-AUD), in which a voice is heard aloud, speaking in real time to witnesses. Unlike APP-AUD-VOI, which is simply a voice heard, ENT-COM-AUD implies directed dialogue — a response to a question, a greeting, or a warning. Famous examples include the Bell Witch of Tennessee, where the entity was reported to hold full conversations with family members. Investigators must take extreme care to secure sites from external contamination before applying this code, as human voices can carry surprisingly far.

Entities may also communicate visually (ENT-COM-VIS), gesturing, pointing, or signaling. A figure nodding “yes” or beckoning a witness forward falls into this classification. The meaning must be carefully documented, and multiple witnesses should describe the gesture independently to confirm it was not a product of expectation bias.

A more mediated form of communication occurs through mediumship (ENT-COM-MED), when a human intermediary enters trance or automatic writing states. Here, the challenge for investigators is distinguishing between subconscious projection and true anomalous communication. Controlled protocols, such as blind targets and independent verification of information unknown to the medium, are critical.

Sometimes, entities use symbols or markings (ENT-COM-SYM) to deliver messages. This may include scratches forming words, symbols appearing on walls, or repeated shapes drawn by mediums. Because vandalism and apophenia (seeing patterns where none exist) are risks, investigators should always photograph and verify that markings were not present before the event.

Finally, in modern contexts, entities have been reported to use digital means (ENT-COM-DIG). Witnesses report receiving text messages from deceased individuals, unexplained computer entries, or phantom phone calls. While these reports may sound implausible, they are surprisingly consistent across modern case files. Investigators must preserve metadata, SIM card records, and carrier logs to exclude hacking or technical malfunctions.

6.2 Entity Physical Interaction (ENT-PHYS)

Entities are also reported to interact physically with the environment and witnesses. While object manipulation is covered in the OBJ domain, ENT-PHYS codes apply when the movement or action is clearly linked to an entity’s presence and intent.

The most common form is object movement (ENT-PHYS-MOV): chairs sliding, doors opening, or items shifting in direct response to a command or an entity’s presence. This is distinct from OBJ-MOV-SLF because here, the context suggests conscious intention.

Entities may also touch (ENT-PHYS-TOU) witnesses. Unlike APP-SEN-TOU (a subtle sensation of ghostly touch), ENT-PHYS-TOU usually feels stronger, deliberate, and unmistakably external. The Bell Witch case again provides examples, with family members slapped or pinched. Investigators must check for static electricity, muscle spasms, or insects before classifying.

Some reports describe entities actively obstructing (ENT-PHYS-OBT) — locking doors, jamming objects, or preventing access. Historical accounts often describe prisoners or guards being locked into or out of areas, seemingly by unseen hands. Here, mechanical failures must be thoroughly ruled out.

In more extreme cases, entities cause paralysis (ENT-PHYS-PRL). Witnesses describe being unable to move while an entity looms nearby. Unlike BIO-PAR-STD (ordinary sleep paralysis), this code is reserved for situations where the experience occurs while fully awake and is perceived as entity-driven.

Finally, some report vibrational phenomena (ENT-PHYS-VIB), in which a localized vibration or buzzing is felt in association with an entity. Tables shaking during séances, furniture vibrating as a figure appears, or witnesses describing their own bodies “humming” are examples. Investigators should always check for seismic or structural vibration before applying this code.

6.3 Entity Visible Manifestations (ENT-VIS)

Although apparitions are common, not all visual manifestations are created equal. The ENT-VIS branch is reserved for entities that demonstrate awareness and intelligence while visible.

A figure that remains visible for several minutes is coded as sustained manifestation (ENT-VIS-SUS). This differs from fleeting APP-VIS-FUL events. Sustained apparitions offer the best opportunity for documentation, as multiple observers and instruments can be engaged.

Sometimes entities appear in response to requests (ENT-VIS-MAN). For example, an investigator calls out, “Can you show yourself?” and a figure appears seconds later. This is considered a strong indicator of intelligent agency, provided the timing is carefully logged.

There are also cases of multiple entities appearing together (ENT-VIS-MUL). Unlike APP-VIS-MUL, which often describes residual group scenes, ENT-VIS-MUL implies that multiple entities are visible at once and interacting with each other or with witnesses. These are extremely rare but compelling cases when properly documented.

Finally, some entities appear to alter form during manifestation (ENT-VIS-ALT). Witnesses describe figures shifting shape, growing taller, changing sex, or transforming into animals. While this may also be a perceptual effect, recurring reports across cultures suggest it should be classified distinctly.

6.4 Entity Manipulation and Control (ENT-MAN)

Perhaps the most controversial and unsettling category, ENT-MAN codes are applied when entities exert influence over people or environments in manipulative or oppressive ways.

Coercion (ENT-MAN-COE) describes situations in which witnesses feel pressured or compelled to act against their will — to leave a room, to remain in place, or to take an action. This compulsion is more forceful than ordinary fear and is often experienced collectively.

Oppression (ENT-MAN-OPP) involves a prolonged sense of emotional or psychological heaviness attributed to an entity’s presence. Entire households sometimes describe oppressive atmospheres that persist over weeks or months. Investigators must rule out environmental stressors such as mold or low oxygen, both of which can produce oppressive sensations.

In more extreme cases, entities attempt attachment (ENT-MAN-ATT) — linking themselves to a person so that the individual feels followed home, watched, or influenced long after leaving the haunted site. If attachment escalates, it may result in possession (ENT-MAN-POS), where the entity overtakes the witness’s voice, behavior, or physical control. These cases require extreme caution, both ethically and medically.

Another reported phenomenon is energy drain (ENT-MAN-DRN), where witnesses suddenly feel profoundly exhausted, sometimes all at once. Groups reporting simultaneous energy loss, particularly when EMF anomalies are present, may log this code.

Finally, some locations suffer infestation (ENT-MAN-INF) — a long-term escalation of disturbances linked to one or more entities. Infestations are not one-off events but patterns of repeated manipulation: scratching, voices, moving objects, oppressive atmospheres. They often require extensive documentation and cross-domain coding.

6.5 Investigating Entity Phenomena

Entity encounters demand a higher standard of evidence because they imply intelligence. Investigators must:

  • Secure locations to rule out human interference.

  • Record multiple independent witness statements.

  • Use redundant instruments to verify physical changes.

  • Document timing carefully, especially if interaction was responsive.

Ethically, investigators should exercise great care when labeling an event ENT-MAN-POS (possession). Medical and psychological evaluations must be prioritized, and no classification should ever be used to stigmatize or endanger witnesses.

6.6 Cross-Domain Links

Entities often overlap with other domains:

  • APP codes if the entity appears as a figure.

  • INT codes if the entity responds to direct questions.

  • ENV codes if environmental changes accompany manifestations.

  • BIO codes if witnesses suffer dread, nausea, or altered states during entity events.

Recognizing these overlaps is crucial to building accurate case profiles.

6.7 Conclusion: The Presence That Watches Back

Entities mark the point where the paranormal becomes personal. They do not simply appear and vanish; they watch, respond, and sometimes attempt to control. By dividing them into communication, physical interaction, visible manifestation, and manipulation, the PPCS provides a framework for distinguishing the many ways entities are reported to act.

To the investigator, the key lesson is this: when something in the dark not only appears, but also appears to notice you, the event has shifted from apparition to entity. How you classify it may determine whether it becomes folklore — or data.

Part II: Domain 3 — Intelligent Interaction (INT)

Chapter 7: Signs of Response

Of all categories in the Paranormal Phenomena Classification System (PPCS), intelligent interactions are the ones investigators most actively seek. If an anomaly responds to a question, mimics a sound, or interacts with equipment on cue, it demonstrates behavior that cannot easily be attributed to random environmental effects.

The INT domain is divided into four branches: Electronic Voice Phenomena (EVP), Instrumental Trans-Communication (ITC), Direct Responses (RSP), and Trigger Object Interactions (TRG). Together, these cover voices recorded electronically, messages through devices, knocks and signals in reply to questions, and manipulations of deliberately placed objects.

7.1 Electronic Voice Phenomena (INT-EVP)

Electronic Voice Phenomena, or EVPs, are sounds or voices captured on recording devices that were not heard by the human ear at the time. EVPs are among the most studied aspects of paranormal research, with documentation dating back to the 1950s when Friedrich Jürgenson reported voices on his reel-to-reel tapes.

EVPs are classified by clarity:

  • Class A (INT-EVP-CLA1): Clear, direct, and intelligible voices. Several listeners can agree on the words without prompting. These are the strongest examples, often consisting of simple responses such as “yes,” “help,” or the name of an investigator.

  • Class B (INT-EVP-CLA2): Audible but faint voices, often requiring amplification. Listeners may generally agree on the words, but interpretation is less certain.

  • Class C (INT-EVP-CLA3): Extremely faint or distorted recordings, often open to interpretation. These are considered supportive evidence only and should not be presented as conclusive.

There are also specialized EVP codes. Reversed speech (INT-EVP-REV) refers to recordings where the message is intelligible only when played backward. Musical EVPs (INT-EVP-MUS) describe tones, notes, or fragments of melody rather than words. Both require careful scrutiny to rule out equipment artifacts or interference.

Investigators should always use redundant recorders, leave pauses after questions, and have multiple independent reviewers listen to the recordings without being told what to expect. Only when a majority independently identify the same word should it be classified as Class A or B.

7.2 Instrumental Trans-Communication (INT-ITC)

Where EVPs are passive captures, Instrumental Trans-Communication (ITC) refers to entities allegedly using modern devices to communicate in real time.

The most common is through radio-based methods (INT-ITC-RAD) such as spirit boxes or frequency sweeps. Here, fragments of speech are pulled from radio static. Critics argue that this is simply random syllables strung together, but when responses are contextually appropriate, classification as INT-ITC-RAD is warranted.

Television or video (INT-ITC-TVC) anomalies involve faces, shapes, or messages appearing in visual static or feedback loops. These must be distinguished from pareidolia and signal interference.

Digital communication (INT-ITC-DIG) includes messages typed on computers, unexplained texts, or strange app activity. Finally, telephone anomalies (INT-ITC-PHN) — often referred to as “phone calls from the dead” — have been reported since the early 20th century.

Protocols for ITC require strict controls: logging frequency sweeps, archiving unedited video frames, and preserving metadata from devices. Investigators should always rule out hacking, glitches, and bleed-through signals.

7.3 Direct Responses (INT-RSP)

Perhaps the most dramatic evidence of intelligent interaction comes from direct responses to investigator cues.

Knock responses (INT-RSP-KNO) occur when knocks or taps are heard in reply to a question. If an investigator asks, “Can you knock twice if you hear me?” and two clear knocks follow, this is logged as INT-RSP-KNO. Investigators must vary their requests to rule out coincidence.

Pattern mimicry (INT-RSP-PAT) occurs when rhythms are repeated — for example, clapping three times and hearing three knocks repeated back. Acoustic echo tests should be performed to ensure the response is not a natural reflection.

Voice responses (INT-RSP-VOI) are disembodied voices answering questions audibly. These differ from APP-AUD-VOI because they are clearly responsive.

Finally, entities sometimes use lights (INT-RSP-LIG) to respond, such as flashing once for “yes” and twice for “no.” All electrical systems must be tested to exclude faulty wiring before logging such responses.

7.4 Trigger Object Interactions (INT-TRG)

Trigger objects are items placed specifically to test interaction. They may be toys, coins, balls, or electronic devices set up to capture movement.

When lights are activated (INT-TRG-LIG), such as flashlight tests, investigators must verify that the device is not malfunctioning or loosely connected. Objects deliberately placed may be moved (INT-TRG-OBJ) in direct response to requests.

Sensors such as motion detectors or EMF pods (INT-TRG-SEN) may activate anomalously, especially when no one is near them. In some cases, child-related objects (INT-TRG-TOY) — dolls, toy cars, or music boxes — are reported to activate spontaneously, sometimes in historical sites associated with children.

Trigger object tests should always be documented with continuous video, and multiple devices should be placed in view to rule out false positives.

7.5 Investigating Intelligent Interactions

The great strength of INT phenomena is testability. Investigators can:

  • Ask questions and record whether responses occur consistently.

  • Use redundant devices to confirm results.

  • Design experiments to reduce bias, such as blind questioning or randomized rhythms.

Natural explanations must always be tested first. Pipes knock, radios bleed, flashlights malfunction. But when anomalies consistently respond in real time with contextual accuracy, the data becomes compelling.

7.6 Cross-Domain Links

INT phenomena often overlap with other domains. Apparitions (APP) may speak in tandem with EVPs. Entities (ENT) often manipulate trigger objects. Environmental changes (ENV) may spike simultaneously with responsive knocks. Intelligent interaction is rarely isolated, and its strength lies in correlation.

7.7 Conclusion: Toward Dialogue

The INT domain represents the shift from passive haunting to active dialogue. When something unseen not only appears but also answers, repeats, or activates equipment in direct response, the boundary between environment and intelligence is crossed.

For investigators, these are the moments that transform stories into tests, and tests into data. By applying PPCS codes rigorously, we can preserve the integrity of these fleeting dialogues and compare them across cases worldwide.

Part II: Domain 4 — Environmental Disturbances (ENV)

Chapter 8: Shifts in the Atmosphere

When people speak of a haunted place feeling “different,” they often describe environmental changes: a sudden chill, a room falling unnaturally silent, or the air itself thickening. In many cultures, such changes are taken as precursors to a spirit’s arrival. In the PPCS framework, these are catalogued as Environmental Disturbances (ENV) — measurable or perceivable changes in temperature, electromagnetic fields, light, or atmosphere without natural explanation.

The ENV domain is divided into four branches: Temperature Anomalies (TMP), Electromagnetic Field Anomalies (EMF), Light Anomalies (LGT), and Atmospheric Disturbances (ATM). Each captures a different way in which the environment seems to react to the unseen.

8.1 Temperature Anomalies (ENV-TMP)

The most familiar environmental disturbance is the cold spot (ENV-TMP-COL) — a sudden, localized drop in temperature, often reported during apparitional sightings. These drops may be as dramatic as 15–20 degrees in a confined area, while surrounding conditions remain stable. Though popular in ghost lore, investigators must be cautious: drafts, HVAC systems, and poor insulation can all create cold patches. Proper documentation requires using multiple thermometers, both digital and analog, and mapping the cold zone’s boundaries.

Less common but equally striking are hot spots (ENV-TMP-HOT) — areas of inexplicable warmth. Witnesses sometimes report pockets of “burning air” in otherwise cold environments, occasionally coinciding with burn-like marks (cross-coded with PHY-SCR-BRN). Investigators should check carefully for hidden pipes, heaters, or electrical equipment.

Other cases involve fluctuating temperatures (ENV-TMP-FLU), where rapid swings between hot and cold occur within seconds. These should be distinguished from HVAC cycling or sensor error. The rarest but most intriguing are temperature differentials (ENV-TMP-DIF), where two sides of a room maintain different stable temperatures without natural cause, creating a “boundary line” effect.

8.2 Electromagnetic Field Anomalies (ENV-EMF)

Electromagnetic field disturbances are among the most studied aspects of hauntings. Localized EMF spikes (ENV-EMF-LOC) are measured in confined areas where no wiring or power sources exist. Mobile EMF anomalies (ENV-EMF-MOB) describe readings that drift through space, as though an invisible bubble is moving. Patterned EMF fluctuations (ENV-EMF-PAT) repeat in rhythmic intervals, suggesting cycling phenomena. Finally, unknown persistent EMF fields (ENV-EMF-UNK) remain elevated over time without clear electrical explanation.

Research in neuropsychology has shown that high EMF exposure can induce sensations of presence, dread, or visual anomalies. Thus, investigators must test carefully to distinguish between paranormal anomalies and natural environmental factors such as transformers or wiring. The strength of EMF as evidence lies not in isolated spikes, but in correlation with other events — for instance, an apparition appearing simultaneously with an EMF bubble moving across a room.

8.3 Light Anomalies (ENV-LGT)

Light has long been associated with hauntings, from will-o’-the-wisps in folklore to modern orb phenomena. The PPCS distinguishes between apparitional forms (APP-VIS) and ambient light anomalies (ENV-LGT), which are often free-floating or diffuse.

Flashes (ENV-LGT-FLS) resemble camera bulbs or lightning in enclosed spaces. Orbs (ENV-LGT-ORB) in this domain refer to glowing spheres visible to the naked eye, not photographic artifacts. Beams (ENV-LGT-BEA) describe focused rays of light appearing indoors without source, while glows or luminous mists (ENV-LGT-GLO) take the form of diffuse haze or fog that emits its own light. Finally, spark phenomena (ENV-LGT-SPR) appear as electrical bursts or static-like emissions in midair.

Each of these must be carefully checked against natural sources: headlights, flashlights, insects, dust, and reflections are the most common culprits. Investigators should always cross-check with simultaneous witness accounts: an orb seen only on camera but not by eye is most likely an artifact.

8.4 Atmospheric Disturbances (ENV-ATM)

The final branch, atmospheric anomalies, covers subtler shifts in the environment. Pressure changes (ENV-ATM-PRS) may be felt as ears popping or chest heaviness, sometimes corroborated by barometer readings. Unnatural silence (ENV-ATM-SIL) occurs when all ambient noise — crickets, birds, wind — stops abruptly, creating a “vacuum” of sound often described before apparitional events. Indoor drafts or winds (ENV-ATM-WND) occur in sealed environments, while unexplained mists (ENV-ATM-MIS) may form indoors, sometimes preceding the appearance of a figure.

These anomalies are especially prone to natural explanations: barometric shifts, predators silencing wildlife, building ventilation, or condensation. But when they occur in conjunction with apparitional or entity events, they become important cross-domain markers.

8.5 Investigating Environmental Disturbances

Investigating ENV phenomena demands rigor. Baseline readings should be taken at multiple points before the investigation begins, and all instruments should be calibrated. Events should be logged in both descriptive terms (“localized 12°F drop, corner of Room 4”) and PPCS codes (ENV-TMP-COL).

Whenever possible, natural causes must be ruled out systematically: drafts tested with smoke, EMF checked against wiring, silence compared with predator activity, mists measured against humidity. Only after these steps should ENV codes be applied confidently.

8.6 Cross-Domain Links

ENV anomalies rarely occur in isolation.

  • APP and ENT often coincide with temperature drops and EMF spikes.

  • INT responses sometimes occur simultaneously with light flashes or sensor anomalies.

  • BIO effects such as fear or nausea often correlate with ENV changes, particularly EMF and pressure shifts.

Documenting these overlaps is essential for building strong case files.

8.7 Conclusion: The Haunted Environment

Environmental disturbances form the scientific backbone of paranormal investigation. They are measurable, testable, and repeatable in ways that apparitions and voices are not. By coding cold spots, EMF spikes, flashes of light, and unnatural silences with precision, investigators create data that can be compared across locations and decades.

A room that grows suddenly cold, a hall that falls silent, a light that bursts in darkness — these are not just eerie experiences. In the PPCS, they are ENV-TMP-COL, ENV-ATM-SIL, and ENV-LGT-FLS: specific, documented anomalies that can be studied alongside hundreds of others.

Part II: Domain 5 — Physical Contact (PHY)

Chapter 9: When the Unseen Touches

Few experiences unsettle witnesses more than being physically touched by something they cannot see. Unlike apparitions glimpsed in corners or sounds heard in empty halls, physical contact phenomena cross into the intimate space of the body itself. For this reason, they are among the most feared, but also the most evidential, categories in paranormal research.

The PPCS classifies physical contact under four branches: Touches (TOU), Pressure (PRS), Scratches and Marks (SCR), and Forced Movement (MOB). Each reflects a different way in which the body becomes the focus of paranormal interaction.

9.1 Touches (PHY-TOU)

The first and most common category is simple touch. Light taps and brushes (PHY-TOU-TAP) are described as faint pokes, flicks, or sensations of someone brushing against clothing or hair. Witnesses often report these as though “a finger tapped my shoulder.” Investigators must first exclude natural causes such as fabric shifting, insects, or muscle twitches.

Stronger contact is recorded as grabs or holds (PHY-TOU-GRB). Here, witnesses feel restrained — wrists seized, shoulders gripped, arms held back. These are rarer but more disturbing, often leaving red marks or impressions. Investigators should document immediately with timestamped photographs.

A subtler but often comforting variation is patting or stroking (PHY-TOU-PAT). These are described as soft pats on the head, back, or hands, often by witnesses who believe a loved one is reaching out. Distinguishing between psychosomatic sensations and true external contact is difficult, but careful documentation and correlation with other phenomena are essential.

9.2 Pressure (PHY-PRS)

Beyond touch lies pressure: sensations of weight applied to the body. Light pressure (PHY-PRS-LIG) may feel like a small animal settling on a bed or a hand resting lightly on the chest. By contrast, heavy pressure (PHY-PRS-HVY) involves force so strong that it feels oppressive, pinning the witness in place.

The most alarming is chest compression (PHY-PRS-CHS), where witnesses feel a crushing weight on their chest, often describing difficulty breathing. Folklore calls this the “Old Hag” phenomenon. Medical causes such as sleep apnea, asthma, or panic attacks must always be considered first. But when multiple people in the same location report identical chest pressure without medical conditions, the case warrants PPCS classification.

9.3 Scratches, Burns, and Marks (PHY-SCR)

Perhaps the most evidential physical phenomena are those that leave visible marks. Single scratches (PHY-SCR-SIN) appear suddenly, often in locations inaccessible to the witness themselves. Multiple scratches (PHY-SCR-MUL) are even more striking, particularly when forming symbolic or parallel patterns — three lines across the back, for instance.

In some cases, scratches appear progressively (PHY-SCR-PRG) while witnesses watch, forming line by line in real time. These should always be captured on video if possible.

Even more extreme are burn-like marks (PHY-SCR-BRN): red welts, blisters, or hand-shaped imprints that resemble thermal burns but appear without heat sources. Investigators must photograph immediately, document time of appearance, and recommend medical evaluation.

9.4 Forced Movement (PHY-MOB)

The most dramatic physical contact phenomena involve witnesses being moved. Shoves (PHY-MOB-SHV) are described as sudden pushes from behind or to the side, often causing loss of balance. Pulls (PHY-MOB-PUL) usually involve hair, clothing, or limbs tugged sharply. Both must be carefully distinguished from accidents, tripping, or pranks.

The rarest and most extreme code is levitation (PHY-MOB-LEV), in which witnesses report being lifted off the ground or suspended without support. These events are exceptionally rare and prone to exaggeration or hoaxing. To classify, multiple independent witnesses or video documentation are essential.

9.5 Investigating Physical Contact

Because PHY events cross into the realm of direct bodily evidence, investigators must handle them with rigor:

  • Immediate Documentation: Photograph or video any marks as soon as possible, with timestamps.

  • Witness Mapping: Use diagrams to note precise locations of touches, scratches, or pressure sensations.

  • Medical Assessment: Ensure that witnesses with significant marks or breathing difficulty receive medical evaluation before paranormal attribution.

  • Environmental Testing: Rule out irritants (fiberglass insulation, pets, insects), drafts, structural causes (floor tilt causing “push”), or psychological effects (sleep paralysis).

9.6 Cross-Domain Links

Physical contact often occurs in conjunction with other phenomena:

  • BIO codes: Fear, nausea, or paralysis frequently coincide with physical touches.

  • ENT-PHYS: Entity attribution overlaps when contact seems intelligent or responsive.

  • OBJ-MOV: Objects moving simultaneously with shoves or pulls may indicate poltergeist activity.

9.7 Conclusion: The Hand You Cannot See

Of all the categories in PPCS, physical contact may be the most profound. An apparition glimpsed can be dismissed as a trick of the eye, a voice as an echo — but when unseen hands press on your chest, scratch your skin, or shove you across a room, the experience becomes personal and undeniable.

The PPCS provides a framework for documenting these events precisely. Whether coded as PHY-TOU-TAP for a simple poke or PHY-MOB-LEV for full levitation, each case can be compared with others worldwide. Only through this careful, neutral documentation can researchers begin to understand whether such experiences are isolated hallucinations, psychological projections, or truly unexplained interactions with the unseen.

Part II: Domain 6 — Object Manipulation (OBJ)

Chapter 10: When the World Moves

Few paranormal experiences provoke as much alarm as seeing an object shift, lift, or break without human interference. Unlike subjective experiences of fear or presence, object manipulation involves external, observable, and often measurable events. Whether subtle — a book sliding across a table — or violent — dishes thrown across a room — such disturbances have long been associated with hauntings, poltergeists, and entity activity.

The Object Manipulation domain in PPCS is divided into four branches: Movement (MOV), Levitation (LEV), Displacement/Disappearance (DIS), and Breakage/Alteration (BRK). Each captures a different way in which matter itself seems to be affected.

10.1 Object Movement (OBJ-MOV)

The simplest form of manipulation is self-movement (OBJ-MOV-SLF), where an object slides, shifts, or rolls without external force. Books that slide across tables or chairs that inch backward fall into this category. Investigators must always test for natural causes: uneven floors, vibrations from traffic, or subtle air currents can produce surprising results.

A more forceful expression is thrown objects (OBJ-MOV-THR), where items are propelled violently across rooms. These events are commonly reported in poltergeist cases and are sometimes accompanied by audible crashes. It is vital to secure investigation sites to rule out human trickery before applying this classification.

A rarer category is lifted objects (OBJ-MOV-LIF), where items rise briefly before falling. This differs from levitation (OBJ-LEV) in that the lift is short and incomplete. A pen hopping off a desk or keys bouncing upward before dropping would qualify.

10.2 Levitation (OBJ-LEV)

Levitation is one of the most striking and controversial forms of object manipulation. Sustained levitation (OBJ-LEV-SUS) refers to objects floating for extended durations — chairs hanging inches above the ground, tables hovering during séances. Brief levitation (OBJ-LEV-BRF) describes short-term rises lasting seconds before gravity resumes its hold.

Because levitation can be staged with wires, magnets, or camera tricks, investigators must treat such claims with extraordinary caution. Documentation from multiple angles, independent witnesses, and continuous video recording are essential.

10.3 Displacement and Disappearance (OBJ-DIS)

Displacement refers to objects vanishing and reappearing in unexpected locations. Disappearance (OBJ-DIS-APP) occurs when an item simply vanishes from where it was last placed. Reappearance (OBJ-DIS-REP) is when the item turns up later in an improbable location — locked drawers, sealed rooms, or places already searched. Alteration (OBJ-DIS-ALT) describes cases where the object reappears changed in form — burned, broken, or distorted.

These events are sometimes called “apports” in spiritualist literature. They must be investigated carefully to rule out misplacement, theft, or unnoticed human movement. Still, recurring displacement phenomena form a consistent thread in haunting case histories.

10.4 Breakage and Alteration (OBJ-BRK)

The final branch covers objects that break or change state without apparent cause. Sudden breakage (OBJ-BRK-SUD) includes glass shattering, wood splitting, or ceramics exploding spontaneously. Investigators must test for thermal stress, structural weakness, or pressure changes before applying the code.

More anomalous are melted or warped objects (OBJ-BRK-MEL), where plastic, candles, or toys become deformed without heat sources present. Finally, disintegration (OBJ-BRK-DIS) describes objects rapidly decaying or crumbling — books turning to dust, fabric deteriorating instantly. These are rare and must be handled with strict evidence protocols, including collecting samples for lab testing.

10.5 Investigating Object Manipulation

Because OBJ events involve physical matter, investigators have unique opportunities to gather evidence. Best practices include:

  • Securing the environment: Lock doors, control access, and monitor with static cameras to rule out tampering.

  • Marking objects: Place coins, balls, or small items in known positions, photographing them before and after sessions.

  • Measuring displacement: Use rulers or digital logs to measure distances moved.

  • Chain of custody: If an object vanishes and reappears altered, preserve it in sealed evidence bags for analysis.

Cross-domain coding is crucial. Many object manipulations coincide with ENT-PHYS-MOV (entity attribution), INT-TRG-OBJ (trigger experiments), or PAT-PHN-LGT/SND (recurring patterns).

10.6 Cross-Domain Links

Object phenomena rarely occur in isolation.

  • Poltergeist cases typically combine OBJ with PHY-SCR (scratches), AUD-NOI-KNO (knocks), and ENT-MAN-INF (infestation).

  • Apparitional events may include objects moving simultaneously (APP + OBJ).

  • Recurring hauntings often show displacement at the same site repeatedly (PAT-LOC-SIT).

10.7 Conclusion: The Poltergeist Problem

Object manipulation is at the heart of the “poltergeist” debate. Skeptics argue such events are always hoaxes, pranks, or misinterpretations. Believers counter that cases of multiple witnesses, simultaneous documentation, and dramatic movements defy natural explanation.

The PPCS does not attempt to answer why these events occur. It provides the framework to document them precisely: a chair sliding (OBJ-MOV-SLF), a glass thrown (OBJ-MOV-THR), a book vanishing and reappearing in a locked drawer (OBJ-DIS-REP). Each classification allows data to accumulate, patterns to emerge, and evidence to be compared scientifically.

When the world itself moves, PPCS ensures that the record does not.

Part II: Domain 7 — Auditory Phenomena (AUD)

Chapter 11: Voices in the Silence

Sound is one of the most powerful sensory triggers of fear and wonder. In haunted sites, people describe hearing voices when no one is present, footsteps on empty stairs, or the laughter of unseen children. Such phenomena are categorized under the Auditory Phenomena (AUD) domain of the PPCS.

This domain is divided into four branches: Voices (VOI), Noises (NOI), Music (MUS), and Animal Sounds (ANI). Together, they encompass the range of unexplained auditory experiences documented across cultures and centuries.

11.1 Disembodied Voices (AUD-VOI)

Perhaps the most striking auditory phenomena are voices that appear without a speaker. Unlike EVPs (classified under INT-EVP), these voices are heard in real time by the human ear, often startling witnesses.

A single disembodied voice (AUD-VOI-SIN) is the simplest form. A clear “hello” spoken in an empty hallway, or a man’s voice calling out when no one is nearby. Investigators must secure the environment and confirm no humans could have produced the sound.

Multiple voices (AUD-VOI-MUL) occur when two or more voices are heard together. These can be overlapping whispers or full conversations. More distinct is the conversational phenomenon (AUD-VOI-CON), where witnesses overhear dialogue between unseen individuals. Such conversations may sound residual, as if replaying a past moment.

One of the most unsettling forms is name calling (AUD-VOI-NAM), when a voice audibly calls a specific witness by name. Reports often describe this as deeply personal, leaving the witness shaken. Care must be taken to verify that no living individual was responsible, and to confirm whether multiple witnesses heard the same name.

11.2 Unexplained Noises (AUD-NOI)

Not all auditory phenomena are words. Many reports involve non-verbal sounds: knocks, footsteps, crashes. These are coded separately from INT-RSP, because they occur without clear responsiveness.

Phantom footsteps (AUD-NOI-FTS) are among the most common. Heavy boots crossing upstairs, pacing heard in attics, or running sounds down corridors are reported frequently in both domestic and historical settings. Investigators must rule out structural creaks, rodents, and external traffic before applying this code.

Knocks and bangs (AUD-NOI-KNO) are sudden, percussive sounds. Unlike INT-RSP-KNO, these are random and not in answer to questions.

Dragging and scraping noises (AUD-NOI-CRA) are another recurring theme. Witnesses describe the sound of furniture moving when no objects have shifted. Old wooden buildings often creak naturally, so such sounds require careful corroboration.

Finally, crashing sounds (AUD-NOI-CRS) resemble objects falling or breaking, yet upon inspection, nothing is disturbed. These “phantom crashes” are alarming and well-documented in both folklore and modern cases.

11.3 Musical Phenomena (AUD-MUS)

Music and song are often tied to locations of cultural or emotional resonance: churches, theaters, schools. Reports include:

  • Instrumental music (AUD-MUS-INST): Phantom pianos, violins, or pipe organs playing without musicians.

  • Singing voices (AUD-MUS-SONG): Human voices, often hymns or lullabies, heard in deserted spaces.

  • Melodies or humming (AUD-MUS-MEL): Simple tunes, whistling, or humming sounds with no source.

Such phenomena may be residual replays of past performances, though investigators must rule out hidden radios, external music, or wind producing tonal effects.

11.4 Animal Sounds (AUD-ANI)

Finally, there are auditory phenomena involving animals. These include:

  • Phantom dogs (AUD-ANI-DOG): Growls, barking, or whining when no dogs are present.

  • Phantom cats (AUD-ANI-CAT): Meows, hissing, or purring sounds, sometimes associated with deceased pets.

  • Phantom horses (AUD-ANI-HRS): Hoofbeats, neighing, or bridle sounds, especially on battlefields.

  • Phantom birds (AUD-ANI-BRD): Birdsong or wing flutters inside sealed buildings.

These reports often correlate with historical or cultural associations. For example, phantom cavalry sounds are common in war zones, while phantom bird calls are tied to omens in folklore.

11.5 Investigating Auditory Phenomena

When investigating auditory phenomena, investigators should:

  • Use multiple audio recorders to capture sounds from different locations.

  • Confirm whether the sound was heard by ear or only captured on equipment (APP-AUD vs. INT-EVP vs. AUD codes).

  • Compare witness accounts independently to check consistency.

  • Rule out natural sources: pipes, animals, traffic, and external human voices.

Whenever possible, use directional microphones and stereo recording to pinpoint origin. A sound triangulated across devices carries more weight than a single faint report.

11.6 Cross-Domain Links

Auditory phenomena often accompany other domains:

  • APP-VIS apparitions sometimes appear with simultaneous voices.

  • PHY-MOB-SHV shoves are often preceded by loud bangs.

  • PAT-PHN-SND recurring auditory events form cyclical patterns.

11.7 Conclusion: The Voice That Should Not Be There

Hearing a sound with no source is one of the most unnerving paranormal experiences. Unlike visual anomalies, which can be fleeting and uncertain, a voice or noise is unmistakably real to the ear. The PPCS ensures these experiences are documented precisely, whether a single whispered name (AUD-VOI-NAM), heavy footsteps on empty stairs (AUD-NOI-FTS), or a phantom piano echoing in an abandoned hall (AUD-MUS-INST).

In the end, auditory phenomena remind us of the liminal space between presence and absence: the sound of someone there, when no one is.

Part II: Domain 8 — Visual Phenomena (VIS)

Chapter 12: Shapes in the Dark

The human eye is drawn to light and shadow. For this reason, many of the most frequently reported paranormal events are visual anomalies: glowing orbs, darting shadows, flashes of light, or partial body fragments appearing and vanishing.

The PPCS recognizes these as Visual Phenomena (VIS), distinct from structured apparitions. Each has specific subcodes describing its form: Orbs (ORB), Shadows (SHA), Lights (LGT), and Apparitional Fragments (APP). Together, they represent the liminal space between environment and entity — phenomena that appear real, yet resist simple classification.

12.1 Orbs (VIS-ORB)

The orb is one of the most controversial categories in paranormal investigation. Most orb photographs are explained by dust, insects, or lens flare — yet reports persist of orbs visible to the naked eye, glowing, moving with purpose, or illuminating their surroundings. These cases merit classification under PPCS.

Bright orbs (VIS-ORB-BRI) are luminous spheres seen clearly in real time. Witnesses describe them as glowing balls of light, sometimes casting illumination on nearby walls or floors. Dim orbs (VIS-ORB-DIM) are faint, hovering lights visible in low illumination. Multiple orbs (VIS-ORB-MUL) refer to situations where several orbs appear simultaneously, sometimes drifting in groups.

Investigators must always confirm whether the orb was seen with the naked eye or only on camera. Camera-only orbs should not be coded VIS-ORB, as they are most likely artifacts. Naked-eye orbs, especially when seen by multiple witnesses, remain among the most compelling light anomalies.

12.2 Shadows (VIS-SHA)

Shadow phenomena are widely reported and often described as the most frightening form of visual anomaly. Unlike ordinary shadows, these figures are described as darker than the surrounding darkness, often moving independently of light sources.

Humanoid shadow figures (VIS-SHA-HUM) are among the most famous, particularly the “Hat Man” or tall, featureless silhouettes seen globally. Animal shadows (VIS-SHA-ANI) involve non-human shapes such as dogs or cats moving through space with no physical cause. Mass shadows (VIS-SHA-MAS) refer to large, amorphous dark shapes that engulf corners or entire sections of a room, blotting out light.

Because shadows are easily misinterpreted, investigators must carefully map all possible light sources. Still, when multiple witnesses independently describe the same shape moving against lighting logic, classification as VIS-SHA is warranted.

12.3 Light Anomalies (VIS-LGT)

Light is another frequent medium of paranormal report. Unlike environmental light anomalies (ENV-LGT), which are often atmospheric, VIS-LGT codes describe visual experiences of light forms perceived as anomalies.

Streaks of light (VIS-LGT-STR) resemble shooting stars darting across rooms or hallways. Glowing mists (VIS-LGT-GLO) are hazes or fogs emitting their own light, sometimes forming before apparitional sightings. Flashes (VIS-LGT-FLA) are sudden bursts of light, blue-white or golden, illuminating spaces without a source. Finally, light shapes (VIS-LGT-SHP) describe structured luminous forms: crosses, figures, or symbols formed entirely of light.

These events are particularly challenging because natural light reflections, headlights, and camera flashes can mimic them. The key is corroboration: multiple naked-eye witnesses and simultaneous environmental readings strengthen the case for classification.

12.4 Apparitional Fragments (VIS-APP)

In rare cases, only part of a figure appears visually — a hand, a face, or a leg — without a full body. Though technically “apparitional,” these are coded as VIS-APP to distinguish them from structured full apparitions.

Disembodied hands (VIS-APP-HND) are reported grasping doorknobs or reaching from walls. Faces (VIS-APP-FAC) appear in mirrors, windows, or in midair, sometimes recognized by witnesses. Limbs (VIS-APP-LIM) include legs or arms moving independently of a body, often described as “phantom parts.”

Pareidolia and reflection are constant risks in these cases. Investigators must seek multiple independent descriptions and, when possible, capture photographic evidence from more than one angle.

12.5 Investigating Visual Phenomena

Visual anomalies are uniquely susceptible to misinterpretation. Dust, insects, smoke, light reflections, and psychological suggestion can all create false positives. Therefore, investigators must:

  • Use multiple cameras from different angles to capture events.

  • Document whether anomalies were seen by the naked eye or only in photos.

  • Take control photos of the same area with and without flash.

  • Log the movement patterns of shadows or lights.

Natural explanations must always be eliminated before applying VIS codes. A flash seen only by one person in peripheral vision may be a retinal effect; an orb visible only on camera is likely dust. But an orb seen by several witnesses simultaneously, illuminating the space around it? That is a VIS-ORB-BRI.