Thread: Going to other dreams

How would any of this work with science .-.

Certainly interesting to discuss.
I appreciate that most societies have always had a mix of science and superstition, and I'm sure that will continue for some time, but it would be nice to think that we are advancing by being able to uncover more of the real science, and lay to rest the myths and superstition.
In order to do that though, we have to have good education, so that the real facts are taught and not the myths (at least not as if they are facts - I don't mind teaching of myths as myths of course! There is a beautiful world if fantasy out there).

I don't like the idea of thinking of the unconscious as some sort of magical thing though.
The is plenty to learn about the unconscious without imagining some paranormal dimension.
I'll ask another question, what plausible mechanism could there be that would allow two minds (conscious or unconscious) to communicate?
At the moment I can't think of one, but I'm very open to any suggestions.

Originally Posted by Him

How would any of this work with science .-.

By proposing a hypothesis and then coming up with a theory to test it.
Just because the test failed doesn't mean the hypothesis is wrong. If the test passes it can be good evidence to support the hypothesis though, so long as the results are statistically valid, i. e. not just chance.

Science is not the "bad guy", it's just trying to understand the real world!

Originally Posted by Goldenspark

By proposing a hypothesis and then coming up with a theory to test it.
Just because the test failed doesn't mean the hypothesis is wrong. If the test passes it can be good evidence to support the hypothesis though, so long as the results are statistically valid, i. e. not just chance.

Science is not the "bad guy", it's just trying to understand the real world!

Yes indeed, to get the science proof bit is the great rubber stamp I guess. Did you hear about the researcher Stephen Le Berge? He managed to prove that a person can be conscious in a lucid dream by devising a test using eye movement. When the person became conscious in the dream, they were to make specific amount of eye movements left and right in their lucid dream (since eyes are the only body part that are able to move in REM sleep/lucid dream, due to sleep paralysis), which they did so.

The person woke in the dream and was able to signal to the EEG monitors and the team of researchers - I think one of them was quoted as "it was like getting a signal from another universe", so ecstatic they were to get this proof.

You can google this if you have heard of it, I believe it was conducted in the mid 80s.

Originally Posted by Beluga

Yes indeed, to get the science proof bit is the great rubber stamp I guess. Did you hear about the researcher Stephen Le Berge? He managed to prove that a person can be conscious in a lucid dream by devising a test using eye movement. When the person became conscious in the dream, they were to make specific amount of eye movements left and right in their lucid dream (since eyes are the only body part that are able to move in REM sleep/lucid dream, due to sleep paralysis), which they did so.

The person woke in the dream and was able to signal to the EEG monitors and the team of researchers - I think one of them was quoted as "it was like getting a signal from another universe", so ecstatic they were to get this proof.

You can google this if you have heard of it, I believe it was conducted in the mid 80s.

Actually, LaBerge was only repeating the test that Dr Keith Hearne conducted in 1975, but that's a good example of how to prove something. Not only did Keith Hearne do it, but Stephen LaBerge could repeat it.

Have you read ETWOLD (exploring the world of lucid dreaming) by LaBerge? Definitely worth a read if you haven't.

http://www.dreamviews.com/beyond-dre...ce-advice.html

Anecdotes and pointing to the double slit experiment is not evidence for shared dreaming.
The anecdotes suggest a possible effect, and that is the basis to look for a hypothesis that can then be tested, but so far we don't have the hypothesis (the theory of how shared dreaming might work), and no positive experimental results.

I would love it to be true, but so far, it's not.

The main problem with shared dreaming is that it relies on the same sort of potential mechanism as telepathy, which doesn't have a good press!

I guess like with a lot of things, its what one phrase means to someone and what it means to someone else. . . ie: 'dream sharing'

Perhaps it is something more like, eg: during the day, Im with someone I know well, we both have the same thought to buy a chicken sandwich at a particular place for lunch.

One could view that is coincidence? or even basic 'telepathy' (whatever it means)

Or if it is analysed a bit we might realise, well, it could be all of those - but also, we often meet for lunch a few times a week and a few times before have bought this chicken sandwich from the same place together . . . :-) so the thought already exists between us of the same idea, although we think indepdently with our own minds, we recognise what is the same thought.

I wonder if it is possible a similar scenario in dreams, except this is at a much more subconscious level and also dealing with deeper more complex thoughts and ideas, that then create a similar or nearly identical dream theme and scenario, in which the same ideas and 'thoughts' express themselves? So not so much a dream 'sharing' as such perhaps? Just the same them, plot and even remembrance of a conversation or something like this, whatever the content is.

Then it would be easy to wake up and think, oh, we had the same dream!

The simple explanations are usually correct (but maybe not so interesting).

Originally Posted by Goldenspark

The simple explanations are usually correct (but maybe not so interesting).

Indeed, perhaps these things are tricky to explain. I have heard of even reoccurring dreams that are identical and between two or more