Project Veilbreak
An open research framework by Code of Reality for documenting experimental protocols and collecting experiment data from community members — with a free public API. This is DannyGoler.org's independent analysis of that data.
Official site: veilbreak.ai · API docs: api.veilbreak.ai
What Veilbreak is
Veilbreak standardizes experimental protocols and captures quantitative and qualitative phenomenological data through structured questionnaires. Protocols specify parameters, methodology and equipment; participants submit results via the platform or API. It describes itself as part of the Code of Reality vision of "cognitive physics" (a proposed framework, not an established scientific discipline).
Public dashboard snapshot
82± experiments
total submitted records
8 protocols
different experimental setups
~56 "observed"
marked as seeing the phenomenon
Snapshot values are re-verified against the live registry on each review — never permanently hardcoded.
Why the raw count is not a replication rate
- Heterogeneous protocols: substances, wavelengths, durations and conditions vary across entries.
- Self-selection: people who see nothing may be less likely to file a report.
- No denominator discipline: we don't know how many total attempts each report represents.
- Outcome coding is loose: "Code Observed" spans very different kinds of experiences.
- Null results exist in the registry and matter — including sober-condition reports.
Data-quality tracker
Constructive documentation of potential issues, phrased as unresolved until independently resolved.
| Potential data-quality issue | Description | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Dose metadata | The original paper describes 1 g loaded into the projection device, while Veilbreak metadata may treat 1000 mg as the participant dose. | Potential data-quality issue (unresolved) |
| Projection distance | The paper and Veilbreak baseline metadata appear inconsistent on projection distance. | Potential data-quality issue (unresolved) |
| Unit anomalies | Some substance values appear incorrectly entered or converted. | Potential data-quality issue (unresolved) |
| Outcome coding | 'Code Observed' can include very different kinds of reports — from brief structured forms to detailed glyph sequences. | Known heterogeneity |
What would make this data decisive
Consistent outcome definitions, protocol-level denominators, blinding, and cross-subject comparison under matched stimuli — see the decisive-experiment design.