11 ms·

people who have experienced what they refer to as "eternity", "multiple life times", "thousands of years", etc. They didn't "experience an eternity". They expe

by causi 3y ago

people who have experienced what they refer to as "eternity", "multiple life times", "thousands of years", etc. They didn't "experience an eternity". They experienced an emotional feeling they likened to an eternity. This is the difference between your computer running a program for a thousand years and you changing the date settings. These people did not go through an eternity of perception, processing, and thought; they had the label on their memories altered.

LoganDark 3y ago
> These people did not go through an eternity of perception, processing, and thought; they had the label on their memories altered. No, psychedelics really can speed up thought. It's not uncommon to experience a lot more in a much shorter amount of time than normal. For example, I've experienced this first-hand where I could not even finish a single sentence before I was so far ahead in thought that I completely forgot what I was originally trying to say. I used to call it "an entire universe happening between each instant" which, while inaccurate, is an apt enough description of how it feels, but also how it actually is, because the volume of thought is still much higher than normal.
- jabbany 3y ago
  The experience you described is no indicator of whether "volume of thought is still much higher than normal" though? You'd have the exact same experience if the actual mechanism is that "had the label on [your] memories altered". To scientifically test this, you'd need some normalized "benchmark task" of thought, and then compare the difference in progress on such a thought task between the control and psychedelic cases given the same amount of "real time". IIRC earlier papers (that I am too lazy to find) shared on HN that have done this seem to show the opposite, that there is no measurable difference on the task yet the participants reported a difference in their label of the experience. (I think the paper then was related to some form of creativity and showed that there was no post-hoc measured difference despite a significant reported experiential difference).
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    > The experience you described is no indicator of whether "volume of thought is still much higher than normal" though? You'd have the exact same experience if the actual mechanism is that "had the label on [your] memories altered". It's not the only evidence I have, but one of the main problems with trying to describe psychedelics is that the experience is... well, indescribable. As in, when I'm not on LSD, I can't even properly decode most of the memories I made with it. > To scientifically test this, you'd need some normalized "benchmark task" of thought, and then compare the difference in progress on such a thought task between the control and psychedelic cases given the same amount of "real time". LSD probably doesn't make it faster for me to process things. It just makes me jump between things more quickly so I have more distinct experiences at any given time. I know that while in voice chat with people, I would have moments where I would have a bunch of thoughts, completely forget what just happened, and only a couple seconds of real-world time had passed. In that scenario the other person is my time reference but I've also checked actual clocks and observed that effect. I don't think LSD makes me better at computation at all (in fact, it probably makes me a bit worse at computation).
    - jabbany 3y ago
      > more distinct experiences If well formulated I suppose this could be scientifically tested too. Given the right kind of task and measurement. My earlier point is only to tie to the parent about differentiating actually having "more distinct experiences" with just _feeling like_ you had them. This is something that, as the subject and knowing the intervention, you cannot determine by yourself. You'd need an experimenter doing a double-blind experiment to really test this out. As an anecdote there's nothing wrong --- subjective experiences aren't any less "real" to the experiencer --- just that claims about the mechanism and effect are probably not generalizable. > As in, when I'm not on LSD, I can't even properly decode most of the memories I made with it. There's also lots of metaphysical questions about whether indescribable experiences are "real" or not that are probably too long to get into on HN :)
      - LoganDark 3y ago
- mahathu 3y ago
  Sounds like your short term memory was impacted by the drug.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    Almost definitely. Though in all cases where I noticed that I forgot something, it was because I had some other train of thought that happened so quickly that it created a bunch of distance from the thing I forgot, even if very little real-time passed. Sometimes I could recall the thing after spending a lot of time backtracking, but sometimes not.
sneak 3y ago
That's a subjective interpretation, and I say that even as someone who believes in objective reality. There's no telling what time perception is "correct" or "real". It is actually within the realm of possibility that they did experience an eternity-scale (but sub-infinite, natch) amount of experiences.
- causi 3y ago
  That's a subjective interpretation, and I say that even as someone who believes in objective reality. Nonsense. Where's the thousand years of creative output? If my mind existed for a thousand years I'd be immediately filing patents and writing papers based off all the things I came up with during my eternity of thought. Further, if there was a simple chemical way to accelerate actual brain processing thousands of times, you don't think evolution would've built it into our brains? There is no difference between this and hypnotizing someone to believe they've lived an eternity.
  - carlmr 3y ago
    >Further, if there was a simple chemical way to accelerate actual brain processing thousands of times, you don't think evolution would've built it into our brains? Not OP, but I'd counter that evolution is doing an imperfect multivariate optimization over a pretty big state-space. Even if it might be easy to change one simple chemical and thus speed up processing, the question is whether the speed-up has other costs. E.g. the brain is already using a lot of energy, increasing processing speed which probably increases energy usage might not be optimal. We still don't understand sleep well, it could be that if you process faster more consistently you might need more sleep to organize your thoughts and memories, which is counterproductive if you don't want to be eaten. It's hard enough with our sleep requirements to keep up with nature. A third point is that evolution only needs to find good enough. We're already the apex predator due to our ability to think. Anything above what we currently have might just not be necessary so has no evolutionary pressure.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    I think the relevant questions are how are the brain measures time and of what the brain is processing. What if the only thing it's capable of doing is perceiving the passage of time? If the biological clock is the only measure of perceived time, then it feels like more time is elapsing. If the brain measures and feels time as sand slowly falling into a bucket, what happens when you dump a truckload of sand into the bucket? That doesn't mean that you're necessarily capable of doing more work in that time, but maybe you still feel the additional passage of time.
darkerside 3y ago
Do you have a basis for your speculation, or are you just sharing from personal experience?
- swayvil 3y ago
  Yes, it clearly needs more science. Can we get some test-tubes and white lab-coats in here? Because first-hand observation just isn't good enough.
  - darkerside 3y ago
    Actually, my guess was that parent poster had neither science nor experience to back him up and was just making shit up. Not sure exactly what point you are trying to make.
    - swayvil 3y ago
      It's called humor. A confusing human vanity.
Spkeat17 3y ago
It only generates false memories, reality is creative ideas that get into the memory system
thumbuddy 3y ago
[flagged]
- mahathu 3y ago
  > if you have a clean bill of health, your mind is in the right place, no family history of severe mental illness, and have a trusted sober friend And if you have all that you don't need to be doing mind altering drugs anymore.
  - robrenaud 3y ago
    I highly recommend trying mushrooms or acid for someone in a good place mentally who wants to improve themselves. Obviously one should do their own research for responsible consumption, and find a good set and setting. I went from drinking a consistent 1-2 alcoholic drinks a day (very rarely getting drunk tho, just loved homebrewing and craft beer), being nearly obese, with little cardiovascular/muscular fitness to being in a much better place. I now exercise regularly, have a resting heart rate of 54 bpm, lost 30 pounds, meditate every day, eat much more healthfully, rarely consume alcohol, and I am more patient and listen to my partner better. The increased neuroplasticity caused by physcadelics when combined with a desire to improve habits is a very powerful combination. There is also a legal, mushroom based therapy for anxiety and depression that has shown great results, available in Oregon. I really do believe society is much too welcoming of alcohol consumption, and much too resistant to physcadelics. We got this one so wrong.
  - unethical_ban 3y ago
    I sense judgement from you towards anyone who has found utility or enlightenment through mind-altering drugs. Just because I'm smart doesn't mean I stop reading. Just because I am fit doesn't mean I stop running. Just because I'm happy doesn't mean I can't dabble with new mental models. And finally, to clarify the OP's statement: "Mind in the right place" doesn't mean being perfectly happy or without stressors/depression. To me it suggests someone doesn't have mental illness or suicidal tendencies.
  - pegasus 3y ago
    You do if you want to "see for yourself". Which was GPs entire point.

by causi 3y ago

LoganDark 3y ago

> These people did not go through an eternity of perception, processing, and thought; they had the label on their memories altered. No, psychedelics really can speed up thought. It's not uncommon to experience a lot more in a much shorter amount of time than normal. For example, I've experienced this first-hand where I could not even finish a single sentence before I was so far ahead in thought that I completely forgot what I was originally trying to say. I used to call it "an entire universe happening between each instant" which, while inaccurate, is an apt enough description of how it feels, but also how it actually is, because the volume of thought is still much higher than normal.

jabbany 3y ago
The experience you described is no indicator of whether "volume of thought is still much higher than normal" though? You'd have the exact same experience if the actual mechanism is that "had the label on [your] memories altered". To scientifically test this, you'd need some normalized "benchmark task" of thought, and then compare the difference in progress on such a thought task between the control and psychedelic cases given the same amount of "real time". IIRC earlier papers (that I am too lazy to find) shared on HN that have done this seem to show the opposite, that there is no measurable difference on the task yet the participants reported a difference in their label of the experience. (I think the paper then was related to some form of creativity and showed that there was no post-hoc measured difference despite a significant reported experiential difference).
- LoganDark 3y ago
  > The experience you described is no indicator of whether "volume of thought is still much higher than normal" though? You'd have the exact same experience if the actual mechanism is that "had the label on [your] memories altered". It's not the only evidence I have, but one of the main problems with trying to describe psychedelics is that the experience is... well, indescribable. As in, when I'm not on LSD, I can't even properly decode most of the memories I made with it. > To scientifically test this, you'd need some normalized "benchmark task" of thought, and then compare the difference in progress on such a thought task between the control and psychedelic cases given the same amount of "real time". LSD probably doesn't make it faster for me to process things. It just makes me jump between things more quickly so I have more distinct experiences at any given time. I know that while in voice chat with people, I would have moments where I would have a bunch of thoughts, completely forget what just happened, and only a couple seconds of real-world time had passed. In that scenario the other person is my time reference but I've also checked actual clocks and observed that effect. I don't think LSD makes me better at computation at all (in fact, it probably makes me a bit worse at computation).
  - jabbany 3y ago
    > more distinct experiences If well formulated I suppose this could be scientifically tested too. Given the right kind of task and measurement. My earlier point is only to tie to the parent about differentiating actually having "more distinct experiences" with just _feeling like_ you had them. This is something that, as the subject and knowing the intervention, you cannot determine by yourself. You'd need an experimenter doing a double-blind experiment to really test this out. As an anecdote there's nothing wrong --- subjective experiences aren't any less "real" to the experiencer --- just that claims about the mechanism and effect are probably not generalizable. > As in, when I'm not on LSD, I can't even properly decode most of the memories I made with it. There's also lots of metaphysical questions about whether indescribable experiences are "real" or not that are probably too long to get into on HN :)
    - LoganDark 3y ago
mahathu 3y ago
Sounds like your short term memory was impacted by the drug.
- LoganDark 3y ago
  Almost definitely. Though in all cases where I noticed that I forgot something, it was because I had some other train of thought that happened so quickly that it created a bunch of distance from the thing I forgot, even if very little real-time passed. Sometimes I could recall the thing after spending a lot of time backtracking, but sometimes not.

sneak 3y ago

That's a subjective interpretation, and I say that even as someone who believes in objective reality. There's no telling what time perception is "correct" or "real". It is actually within the realm of possibility that they did experience an eternity-scale (but sub-infinite, natch) amount of experiences.

causi 3y ago
That's a subjective interpretation, and I say that even as someone who believes in objective reality. Nonsense. Where's the thousand years of creative output? If my mind existed for a thousand years I'd be immediately filing patents and writing papers based off all the things I came up with during my eternity of thought. Further, if there was a simple chemical way to accelerate actual brain processing thousands of times, you don't think evolution would've built it into our brains? There is no difference between this and hypnotizing someone to believe they've lived an eternity.
- carlmr 3y ago
  >Further, if there was a simple chemical way to accelerate actual brain processing thousands of times, you don't think evolution would've built it into our brains? Not OP, but I'd counter that evolution is doing an imperfect multivariate optimization over a pretty big state-space. Even if it might be easy to change one simple chemical and thus speed up processing, the question is whether the speed-up has other costs. E.g. the brain is already using a lot of energy, increasing processing speed which probably increases energy usage might not be optimal. We still don't understand sleep well, it could be that if you process faster more consistently you might need more sleep to organize your thoughts and memories, which is counterproductive if you don't want to be eaten. It's hard enough with our sleep requirements to keep up with nature. A third point is that evolution only needs to find good enough. We're already the apex predator due to our ability to think. Anything above what we currently have might just not be necessary so has no evolutionary pressure.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  I think the relevant questions are how are the brain measures time and of what the brain is processing. What if the only thing it's capable of doing is perceiving the passage of time? If the biological clock is the only measure of perceived time, then it feels like more time is elapsing. If the brain measures and feels time as sand slowly falling into a bucket, what happens when you dump a truckload of sand into the bucket? That doesn't mean that you're necessarily capable of doing more work in that time, but maybe you still feel the additional passage of time.

darkerside 3y ago

Do you have a basis for your speculation, or are you just sharing from personal experience?

swayvil 3y ago
Yes, it clearly needs more science. Can we get some test-tubes and white lab-coats in here? Because first-hand observation just isn't good enough.
- darkerside 3y ago
  Actually, my guess was that parent poster had neither science nor experience to back him up and was just making shit up. Not sure exactly what point you are trying to make.
  - swayvil 3y ago
    It's called humor. A confusing human vanity.

Spkeat17 3y ago

It only generates false memories, reality is creative ideas that get into the memory system

thumbuddy 3y ago

[flagged]

mahathu 3y ago
> if you have a clean bill of health, your mind is in the right place, no family history of severe mental illness, and have a trusted sober friend And if you have all that you don't need to be doing mind altering drugs anymore.
- robrenaud 3y ago
  I highly recommend trying mushrooms or acid for someone in a good place mentally who wants to improve themselves. Obviously one should do their own research for responsible consumption, and find a good set and setting. I went from drinking a consistent 1-2 alcoholic drinks a day (very rarely getting drunk tho, just loved homebrewing and craft beer), being nearly obese, with little cardiovascular/muscular fitness to being in a much better place. I now exercise regularly, have a resting heart rate of 54 bpm, lost 30 pounds, meditate every day, eat much more healthfully, rarely consume alcohol, and I am more patient and listen to my partner better. The increased neuroplasticity caused by physcadelics when combined with a desire to improve habits is a very powerful combination. There is also a legal, mushroom based therapy for anxiety and depression that has shown great results, available in Oregon. I really do believe society is much too welcoming of alcohol consumption, and much too resistant to physcadelics. We got this one so wrong.
- unethical_ban 3y ago
  I sense judgement from you towards anyone who has found utility or enlightenment through mind-altering drugs. Just because I'm smart doesn't mean I stop reading. Just because I am fit doesn't mean I stop running. Just because I'm happy doesn't mean I can't dabble with new mental models. And finally, to clarify the OP's statement: "Mind in the right place" doesn't mean being perfectly happy or without stressors/depression. To me it suggests someone doesn't have mental illness or suicidal tendencies.
- pegasus 3y ago
  You do if you want to "see for yourself". Which was GPs entire point.