1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

December 2014 Q&A

Discussion in 'The Cave' started by caroline, Dec 14, 2014.

  1. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    'Effects of a Psychedelic, Tropical Tea, Ayahuasca, on the Electroencephalographic (EEG) Activity of the Human Brain During a Shamanistic Ritual' -- http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v11n1/11125hof.html

    Sidenote: I love what the MAPS guys are doing. Rick Doblin is finally seeing some headway after many decades​

    That study I linked to talked about how DMT in particular caused increased Theta rhythms (common in REM sleep) as well as Alpha rhythms (common in meditative and flow states), with no change to Beta frequency activity. So in other words, you can perceive the "dream world" with your waking senses.

    The similarity of Ayahuasca and DMT (isolated in pure form) experiences possibly hints at the idea of a shared collective waveform which your brain becomes resonant with when putting out the frequencies described in the study above.

    Example of similar experiences: many people seem to report a similar "Mother Goddess" experience on Ayahuasca. This also seems to be true despite changing setting (eg: Jungles of Peru vs Mountains of California)​

    A unique song of noise and resonance created by interference between the shared waveform and a particular person's unique combination of the different brainwave frequencies, could then give rise to the unique experience of the individual under DMT.

    In my ideal world, I'd use compounds like DMT as a unique tool which forcibly changes the electric and magnetic output and input of the brain, by which we can add other compounds/interventions in an attempt to discover deterministic effects, which would also give us an answer to how much "information locality" is required for consciousness.

    Examples: what happens with DMT plus excess carbohydrate metabolism due to nn-EMF? What about with ketones? What about if you put a schumann generator? What if done with ECT? With HBOT? Is there a way to completely inhibit the effects of DMT using magnetic stimulation? What happens if you forcibly reverse the DC current to induce sleep while on DMT? etc ..... Those modifications would allow you to see the specific changes, both to the brain and the rest of the body.

    Now I wish DMT weren't illegal as fuck and closed off from biohacks :mad:
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2014
    Josh (Paleo Osteo) likes this.
  2. Sue-UK

    Sue-UK New Member

    Might be interesting to compare to nocebo.....:)
  3. av8r

    av8r New Member

    Isn’t sleep is a primordial state?

    Whether I am sleep or awake my reality is reduced to the electromagnetic signals in my brain; while awake my senses are transducing the outside world to electromagnetic signals in my brain… How do I even know the outside world really exist? If the electromagnetic signals in my brain are entangled waves (entangled with what?) then that just hurts my head to think about it… :)
    NeilBB likes this.
  4. NeilBB

    NeilBB New Member

    Solipsism is pretty much self-refuting in the history of philosophy, as the ultimate skepticism, but it's true that your own sensations and perceptions are the given whatever generates them. So, how do you know what they represent? All human conceptual knowledge has to start with epistemological validation. That is the process. Epistemology is not only the foundation of philosophy but of all science. It has rules.

    It is specifically because of the very bad philosophical/epistemological foundations of most of the founders of quantum theory, that I believe we ended up in the situation that we are in today. An epistemological crisis in which physicists have "replaced theories with equations," engineers have adapted those and altered everything about our environment for our "advancement," biologists have isolated themselves and invented detached complex fictions to explain effects they can't fathom, and doctors and patients are left at the mercy of meaningless and biased randomized controlled trials to get very average results in a declining human ecosystem...
    patgrif@hotmail.com and av8r like this.
  5. You say that reality is an electromagnetic brainwave, yet try as we may, we cannot find an objective quality that accounts for subjective experience. Experience is the true reality, it trumps anything objective that can be only on the perceived side of the equation. This is exactly why n=1 is the only way to find your optimal.
    av8r likes this.
  6. So your questions are;
    Who is this "I" who calls the brain "his"?

    To whom is the transduced information presented via a brainwave, who is the one who perceives this as a picture?

    Is it then really an outside world, if it only exists within you (as you say as an EM signal?) Close your eyes and listen to the birds, or touch the carpet. Where does that sensation actually take place?
    You know the feel of carpet or the sound of birds only through experience.

    Reality is consciousness and its contents. The perceived bodymind is the context for the contents.
  7. By the way that is not solipsism, solipsism can only be attributed to identifying with a self
  8. sjoshua

    sjoshua New Member

    Excellent trail :) I've been pondering similar, this was a neat documentary on it for the curious (although, they are approaching from experience view, not 'scientific analysis'):

    legality is merely a small space/time away...
  9. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

  10. sjoshua

    sjoshua New Member

    So, I'm not the only one who talks to their future self? That's good to know... :)

    My thought on this is, the only future self that can exist is aligned with your current trajectory at any moment. So the more you heed your future self, the stronger that future self potential will become, and the stronger the intuitions will be since the future you is more likely and therefore stronger themselves.

    Changing life trajectories would throw a wrench in this significantly.

    An observation I've made over the last few nights:

    Background: My girlfriend has cystic fibrosis, and is currently on at-home IV meds, some of which must be administered at varying times in the middle of the night. Also, I tend to sleep with an eye mask and ear plugs, but if I'm cuddling and fall sleep before putting them on, I'll go without.

    The last three nights in a row, the background situation above has been applicable. All three nights, I have fallen asleep before putting on eye mask and ear plugs. All three nights, I have inexplicably woken up mere minutes BEFORE the various IV alarms have gone off, and put on my eye mask and ear plugs....

    Is future me hookin' a brotha up? Someone's tapping me on the shoulder (..brain? ..field?) at the right moment to avoid an impending shock awakening :)

    She has a couple more week's of these IV's and I have off work for a while, so I will attempt to continue replicating this, ha.
  11. Neil wrote "It is specifically because of the very bad philosophical/epistemological foundations of most of the founders of quantum theory, that I believe we ended up in the situation that we are in today. An epistemological crisis in which physicists have "replaced theories with equations,"

    I find that fascinating Neil and something I have kind of inchoately felt but have never seen expressed before. I am not 'promoting' philosophy but it stuck me some philosophers like Kant in particular were VERY thorough and scrupulous about their 'thinking'. Though I am far from an 'expert' I did not feel the same way about Heisenberg et al. Philosophically they seemed 'sloppy' but the thing was they were 'armed' with experiments and equations which magically put them into a more 'acceptable' realm.

    I was struck by something similar watching the recent bio-pic about Stephen Hawking. To me he was doing 'philosophy' but armed with experiments and equations which seemed to give him credibility. One time he decides the universe is finite, has a beginning and I presume end. Later he thinks it is without 'boundaries' has no beginning and no end. Both theories bolstered by 'experiments' and 'equations'

    As Dr Kruse is showing us there is a huge reality to QED but still imo it needs to be used a little carefully. I am still struggling with 'entangled electrons' and what it really means. But will keep working on it....................
  12. Da-mo

    Da-mo Gold

    reminded me of this . . .
    and in terms of biohacking the ancient pathways . . .
    from CPC 4
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2014
  13. yewwei.tan

    yewwei.tan Gold

    Was listening to John Kiefer's Body.IO podcast with Paul Jaminet, just cause I wanted to hear what Jaminet's position was these days -- http://body.io/body-io-fm-41-dr-paul-jaminet/

    Almost all of his points I disagree with, but despite that, one stray mention was still interesting -- he mentioned that Stem Cells put into the extracellular matrix will somehow know how to differentiate to the correct cell based on extracellular matrix signalling.

    Some papers talking about this (I have not read them yet :oops:):
    Paul cites this as an important reason to include sufficient dietary carbs, since the extracellular matrix contains carbohydrate building blocks (paraphrased from his words).

    But ignoring that and getting back to actual mechanics, this is obviously a case of information being sent via the mechanical, electromagnetic, and electric highway which the extracellular matrix provides. I have zero understanding of how stem cells differentiate, but it's probably something that is pretty fundamental to the way DNA and cell membranes work.
  14. haven't had the chance to listen to it yet…
    but to follow with the up with the weird dreams and some sort of shared intuition… I have been having good sleep and all kind of racing half dreamy visions.
    Like tuesday morning I wake up to the tune of "ABC 123 You and Me…" Only it was "A -U -C"…"290" "U and V" and nucleotides were swirling in EZ to form loops and Birkeland currents...:)
    Josh (Paleo Osteo) likes this.
  15. NeilBB

    NeilBB New Member

    I would not equate "objective" with "intrinsic" as has been done for much of the history of philosophy. I believe the conventional notion of "objectivity" is a straw man, easy to demolish... But if all experience were truly "subjective," then there would no reason for us to even talk, because any and all knowledge would be impossible. There is a third alternative... The key is to distinguish "objectivity" from "intrinsicism" in epistemology.
  16. NeilBB

    NeilBB New Member

    All I would say is this Jack, don't disdain "philosophy," disdain "philosophers." The same way you disdain physicists and biologists, and try to rescue the fields they have corrupted. The same can be said for philosophy, in my opinion, there is validity there, under all the chaos...

    I strongly agree with Thornhill here...
  17. Again I think that's very well said Neil. Philosophy has gone out of style and sometimes I have felt 'ashamed' to have a degree in it. But I am surprised by the poor 'thinking' shown by a lot of the 'specialists' and that includes physics (at times). Come to think of it I was 'supposed' to get a medical degree but instinctively balked at the idea of it or more seeing the reality of it. My sister is a medical doctor and I am often still surprised by her 'poor thinking' For example she espouses very low fat diet and now suffers from 'vertigo' and her husband who goes along with her has several degrees of heart problem, afib etc etc.

    Philosophy just means 'love of wisdom' which should never go out of style. Also 'modernism' in all it's guises tends to shove all previous stuff out of the way but then we realize our 'evolution' is more actually 'devolution' so all bets are off. As Dr Kruse said there is no actual 'standard' at to what good 'science' is or not. But that is not to abandon the search for it of the idea of it
    NeilBB likes this.
  18. Good article from thornhill
    The way i see it is that we have observed, created tools to observe further, created a (limited) language to describe what we observe, then said that the way everything works IS this language. Currently QED is exciting because they are mature enough to say "we dont know therefore we will observe more" taking it back to experience again in a way.
    NeilBB likes this.
  19. Every particle, wave, force, even the fabric of space and time, derives its meaning and significance from apparatus elicited answers to questions that we ask.

    Schroedinger, in Nature and the Greeks, says that the Greeks decided to look at the objective, and science has followed ever since. The Greeks wrote the observer out of the equation from the start. Modern scientific method that gives us empirical data that can be measured in units of mass and energy may not be all that there is to reality, because we have forgotten to seek WHO is asking the question.

    Philosophy and modern QED appear to be similar to me in that they are ok with the question "what if?" whereas most modern science is not.

Share This Page