The Telepathy Game – I ---Evolutionary Aspects

Introduction. We consider the evolutionary perspective on verbal telepathy, brain waves, and the potential for non-verbal telepathic communication. In this report, we posit verbal telepathy to be rather unlikely. In the second part we take up a form of telepathy that may be more realistic, even if relatively rare. Thus, our goal is first to deny telepathy on an evolutionary basis, but then support it in another, though weaker, form.

The concept of telepathy, direct mind-to-mind communication without sensory intermediaries, has long captivated human imagination, from ancient myths to modern science fiction. While verbal language is a cornerstone of human communication, it is a relatively recent evolutionary development, emerging roughly 50,000–100,000 years ago in Homo sapiens. In contrast, the human brain’s capacity for synchronized neural activity, including brain waves like alpha waves (8–12 Hz), has roots in much older evolutionary processes. We explore why verbal telepathy may not have evolved due to the recency of language, while non-verbal telepathy, potentially mediated by brain waves or other neural mechanisms, could theoretically have deeper evolutionary origins, though no definitive evidence supports its existence. It is even possible that any strong form of telepathy involving direct information transmission may have diminished in favor of the emergence of language, a more reliable and accurate method for information transfer.

Verbal Language Evolution.  Language, as a complex system of symbolic communication, is a unique human trait that emerged late in evolutionary history. Fossil evidence, such as the development of the hyoid bone and vocal tract anatomy in Homo sapiens, suggests that the capacity for articulate speech likely developed around 100,000 years ago, with fully modern language emerging during the Upper Paleolithic period (50,000–40,000 years ago). This recency is significant because evolutionary adaptations require long timescales, often millions of years, to develop complex traits through natural selection. Verbal telepathy, the direct transmission of linguistic thoughts between minds, would require not only a mechanism for encoding and decoding language-based thoughts but also selective pressures favoring such a trait over existing communication methods. Several factors argue against the evolution of verbal telepathy. These include

• Sufficiency of Vocal Communication: Once language evolved, it provided an extraordinarily efficient means of sharing complex ideas, emotions, and intentions. Spoken language, paired with gestures and facial expressions, met the social and survival needs of early humans, such as coordinating hunts, sharing knowledge, or forming alliances. The absence of a strong selective pressure to bypass sensory communication likely diminished the need for verbal telepathy.
• Cognitive and Energetic Costs: Evolving a mechanism for verbal telepathy would require significant neural and energetic resources. The brain, already energy-intensive (consuming about 20% of the body’s energy), would need specialized structures to transmit and receive linguistic signals directly. Without clear survival advantages over spoken language, such a costly trait would be unlikely to evolve in the short timeframe since language emerged.
• Lack of a Physical Mechanism: Verbal telepathy would require a biological means to encode linguistic information (e.g., syntax, semantics) into a transmissible signal and decode it in another brain. No evidence suggests the human brain can project electromagnetic signals (like brain waves) with sufficient strength or specificity to carry complex linguistic data across distances, nor that brains can receive and interpret such signals without sensory input.
• Mental Overload: It seems clear that if communicative telepathy in any form was the general order of humans, it would need to be accompanied by an array filters so that the brain would not suffer some form of mental overload. As well, it would be necessary for the brain to direct and/or limit transmissions, lest it be fully open to all “listeners.” Verbal language allows both.

Given the recency of language and the effectiveness of spoken communication, verbal telepathy likely had neither the time nor the evolutionary incentive to develop, unless, of course, what once was became diminished by language itself.

Earlier Evolution of Non-Verbal Telepathy. In contrast, non-verbal telepathy, potentially mediated by brain waves or other neural synchronization mechanisms, could theoretically have evolved earlier in the lineage of mammals or primates, as brain waves are a far older phenomenon. Brain waves, including alpha, theta, and gamma oscillations, reflect synchronized neural activity and are present in all mammals, suggesting an evolutionary origin millions of years ago. These oscillations regulate attention, memory, and sensory processing, raising the speculative possibility that they could have served as a foundation for non-verbal telepathic communication under specific evolutionary conditions. Consider several arguments to support the idea that non-verbal telepathy could have deeper evolutionary roots.

• Ancient Neural Mechanisms: Brain waves arise from synchronized firing of neurons, a feature conserved across mammals and likely present in early primates or even earlier vertebrates. If telepathy were to exist, it might leverage these ancient oscillatory patterns to transmit basic emotional or intentional states (e.g., fear, alertness) rather than complex linguistic content. Such a system could have evolved in social species to enhance group coordination, similar to how flocking birds or schooling fish synchronize behavior without verbal cues.
• Social Bonding and Synchronization: Studies show that social animals, including humans, exhibit neural synchrony during cooperative tasks. For example, EEG studies have demonstrated synchronized alpha or gamma wave patterns between individuals during eye contact or joint activities. This phenomenon, observed in mother-infant interactions or between romantic partners, suggests an evolutionary basis for non-verbal communication through shared brain states. In early hominids, such synchrony could have enhanced group cohesion or predator detection, potentially resembling a rudimentary form of telepathy.
• Electromagnetic Hypotheses: Some speculative theories suggest that brain waves could generate weak electromagnetic fields capable of influencing nearby brains. While the fields produced by neural activity (measured in femto-teslas) are far too weak to transmit complex information, early mammals living in close-knit groups might have evolved sensitivity to subtle neural cues, amplifying group survival. This idea, while unproven, aligns with the longer evolutionary timeline of brain wave activity compared to language.

The plausibility of these arguments is not proof, and the notion of non-verbal telepathy is still speculative. Despite the theoretical possibility, several challenges explain why even non-verbal telepathy may not have evolved:

• Lack of Evidence: Decades of parapsychological research, including studies on alpha waves and telepathy (e.g., Ganzfeld experiments), have produced no replicable evidence of direct mind-to-mind communication. Claims of telepathy are often explained by psychological factors like empathy, intuition, or statistical coincidence. Of course, this is a negative conclusion of disinterested communication.
• Alternative Communication Systems: Non-verbal communication, such as body language, pheromones, or vocalizations, already provided effective means for social coordination in early mammals and primates. These systems likely outcompeted any nascent telepathic mechanisms, which would have required complex adaptations to encode, transmit, and decode neural signals. After all, some predators coordinate attacks with highly organized precision without any evidence of language. Moreover, there is evidence that some primates cannot learn certain tasks, as cracking open a coconut shell, beyond a certain age, indicating diminished ability to learn. Or to be taught?
• Physical Constraints: Today’s brain electromagnetic fields are extremely weak and dissipate rapidly outside the skull. Evolving a system to amplify, direct, and interpret these signals for telepathy would require significant biological adaptations, with no clear fossil or genetic evidence to support such a development. Yet, the study of ancient humans is still in its early days. Moreover, it is entirely unclear whether fossil evidence could be available.

Modern Thinking. Recent advances in neuroscience and technology highlight why telepathy, verbal or non-verbal, remains elusive. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can detect alpha waves and other neural signals to control devices or transmit simple data (e.g., a 2014 study where EEG signals were used to send a binary message via the internet). However, these systems rely on external technology, not natural telepathic abilities. On platforms like X (as of July 24, 2025), discussions about alpha waves often focus on meditation or neurofeedback, with occasional fringe claims about telepathy that lack scientific backing.

As well, there are other ideas such as quantum effects through quantum entanglement, or more simply the notion of synchronicity, resonance, sometimes called chemistry. Together with the “distance” effect, we take these up in the next chapter.

Conclusions. The recency of verbal language, emerging only 50,000–100,000 years ago, makes it unlikely that verbal telepathy evolved, as spoken communication already met human needs efficiently. In contrast, non-verbal telepathy, potentially based on ancient brain wave mechanisms like alpha waves, could theoretically have deeper evolutionary roots, given the long history of neural oscillations in mammals. However, the absence of a viable physical mechanism, coupled with the effectiveness of existing communication methods, suggests uncertainty. While brain waves facilitate internal neural coordination and may underpin phenomena like interpersonal synchrony, they do not support direct mind-to-mind communication. Future research into neural interfaces may simulate telepathic-like effects, but natural telepathy, verbal or otherwise, remains a speculative idea unsupported by current evidence.  Finally, let me suggest a thought experiment. Anyone can play. Assuming that some form of telepathy was present millennia ago and is now diminished or absent. Then, why did this happen? For example, the human senses of hearing and smell have almost certainly diminished over the millennia.

 References. Like you, I am not a scholar of this subject, but find it fascinating. Thus, much of the short essay above has been researched from various sources, some of which are listed below. Also, check Wikipedia, a valuable reference.

1.      Fitch, W. T. (2010). The Evolution of Language. Cambridge University Press.

2.      Berwick, R. C., & Chomsky, N. (2016). Why Only Us: Language and Evolution. MIT Press.

3.      Buzsáki, G. (2006). Rhythms of the Brain. Oxford University Press.

4.      Hasson, U., Ghazanfar, A. A., Galantucci, B., Garrod, S., & Keysers, C. (2012). “Brain-to-brain coupling: A mechanism for creating and sharing a social world.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.007

5.      Radin, D. (1997). The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena. HarperOne.

6.      Carter, C. (2012). Science and Psychic Phenomena: The Fall of the House of Skeptics. Inner Traditions.

7.      Grau, C., Ginhoux, R., Riera, A., Nguyen, T. L., Chauvat, H., Berg, M., ... & Ruffini, G. (2014). “Conscious brain-to-brain communication in humans using non-invasive technologies.” PLoS ONE, 9(8), e105225. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105225

8.      McFadden, J. (2002). “Synchronous firing and its influence on the brain’s electromagnetic field: Evidence for an electromagnetic field theory of consciousness.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9(4), 23–50.

-----------------------------

Appendix A. The exact point at which language developed in human evolution is unknown, but based on current scientific understanding, we can outline a rough or perhaps likely timeline and contributing factors. This seems to indicate that if telepathy transmits information, it evolved more recently than language, giving evolution very little time to work. These timelines are available anywhere, with variations. (I combined a couple of them.)

·       2 to 3 million years ago – Pre-language communication. Homo habilis and early Homo erectus likely used proto-language such as gestures, facial expressions, and vocalizations. There is no evidence of structured grammar or symbolic thought.

·       500,000 to 1 million years ago – Emergence of vocal control. Homo heidelbergensis or late Homo erectus may have had basic vocal communication systems. Brain and throat anatomy (like the descended larynx) suggest growing capacity for spoken language. Use of complex tools and group hunting suggest some coordinated communication. Emergence of the hyoid bone, essential for articulated speech. Curiously, most of our pets, exhibiting a variety of sounds, have a hyoid bone.

·       200,000–300,000 years ago – Early Homo sapiens appear. Anatomically modern humans evolve in Africa. Their brain size and structure allow for symbolic thinking and memory. It is a likely period for emergence of fully modern language capacity, though still without direct evidence.

·       70,000–100,000 years ago – Behavioral modernity. We see

• Rapid advancement in symbolic art, burial rituals, and tool diversity.
• Likely correlated with the use of complex language.
• This period includes the so-called “Cognitive Revolution.”

·       40,000–50,000 years ago – Cultural explosion. Language is almost certainly present by now. Sophisticated cave art, musical instruments, trade, and myths suggest widespread symbolic communication.

·       Evidence Supporting Language Evolution.  The following events are notable.

1.     Anatomy. Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas in the brain (language centers) exist in Homo sapiens and Neanderthals. FOXP2 gene, critical for speech and language, is present in modern humans and Neanderthals.

2.     Archaeology. Symbolic artifacts (e.g., beads, carvings) show up ~80,000–100,000 years ago. Indicates abstract and shared meaning—a key aspect of language.

3.     Social & Cognitive Need. Growing group sizes and social structures may have driven the need for better communication.

4.     Tool-making and teaching likely required instructional communication.

5.     Comparative Evidence. Great apes show limited capacity for symbolic gestures and signs. Humans far exceed this, indicating a major evolutionary leap.

Language likely evolved gradually over hundreds of thousands of years, with modern linguistic ability emerging between 100,000–200,000 years ago, likely concurrent with the rise of Homo sapiens. It is one of the defining traits that separates us from all other species—supporting abstract thinking, planning, culture, and civilization itself.

 

 

 

 

© 2025 G Donald Allen