This can have implications for skill and knowledge acquisition. Imagine if a different smell is released for every new branch of activity you perform on a compu

This can have implications for skill and knowledge acquisition. Imagine if a different smell is released for every new branch of activity you perform on a computer or digital device (memorizing an anatomy text, playing a new keyboard concerto, learning to code Python, watching finance lectures). At night, you wear an EEG headband connected to a scent machine which releases scents connected with the activities of the day. The more important the task, the more you are exposed to the corresponding scent (kind of like spaced repetition but with smell). Here are some questions I have in light of the study, assuming it can be replicated: - Is this technique biased towards certain types of knowledge, such as tangible, locational knowledge as opposed to abstract skill acquisition? - Can a certain smell be over-saturated with knowledge, such that it becomes less effective for knowledge reinforcement? If so, can the “saturation point” be predicted using measurable variables? - Does this technique only work for many discrete pieces of knowledge, or does it also work for branches of knowledge? (in the example of the finance lecture, there might be 30 major discrete facts throughout the lecture, but they can be bucketed into three major concepts - it might only be practical to use three scents). - Are more recent associations with a scent significantly more salient to the brain than older ones, or do we subconsciously cycle through the old associations with roughly equal weight? - Can we synthesize related knowledge sets by broadcasting multiple scents simultaneously? I am fascinated by the possibilities here. We are advanced primates after all. Our brains are “designed” for more basic things than most of what we do. Paradoxically, it seems possible to supercharge the abstract by engaging the primordial. Brb, I’m buying wallflowers at Bed Bath and Beyond.