Are there any things people have tried over and over again in their LDs and have never managed to do?
Printable View
Are there any things people have tried over and over again in their LDs and have never managed to do?
You can do ANYTHING if you just believe you can.
For now, summoning people. I can never summon anything, nor fly by just thinking that by jumping up I will fly.
i know that summoning things is very hard (at least for some people) so I try just everytime I can. Same with flying.
A lot of people have trouble with activities that require the rapid generation of a large amount information to specific parameters. Canonically, turning on a light in a dark room is difficult for many, however I have heard from a few people that if one envisions the room in one's imagination before turning on the light, it can become much easier.
If you are interested, Stephen LaBerge and Lynne Levitan did a small study on the 'light switch' task: http://www.lucidity.com/NL52.LightandMirror.html
They got some data from a group of lucid dreamers on some dream control tasks:
http://www.lucidity.com/images/Light...rrorTable1.gif
From the discussion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaBerge
Dreams are really just detailed and interactive day-dreams. If you can do it in a day-dream you can do it in a lucid, therefore: yes. You can do everything you want in a lucid.
Off-topic: I've heard LaBerge mentioned in a few posts, is he the 'go too guy of lucid dreaming' so to speak? Can you recommend this book or anyother book by him?
EDIT - Are you taking about our experiences or LDing in general? If you're taking about our own personal experiences then no, there is nothing I've tried that I just can't do. In saying that I've only really ever tried to fly which doesn't always work (I sometimes get nervous if I'm high up and so don't even try). The one thing that I've never actually tried while dreaming but am always annoyed when I wake up that I didn't do is just looking around, taking in the scenery and making it more vivid. When I wake up my LDs tend to be sketchy.
It really depends on the dreamers control point. This is very subjective like for me my control point is forward motion. I can fly and recently jump into things like computer screens...:D. But making things appear and disappear...impossible at will. Fortunately there is a way around it like using devices to do it barely...:P.Quote:
Originally Posted by LucidFreedoM
IMJ
The only thing I can think of is the 100-year ream. Having a dream that lasts indefinetely, one where time distortion puts you in the dream for what seems like true weeks or months. I've never done that, nor have I heard a credible account of it.
Inventing a new color has drawn (pun) some arguements on whether or not it is possible.
I had some trouble with flying in the start, but in my latest lucid-dream, I had complete control of flying. The next things I'm going to try is summoning, but I think this will be relatively easy for me, so right now I have no ability-"nemesis".
Summon my Dream Guide.
Talk in my sleep.Quote:
Originally Posted by LucidFreedoM
Apparently there's an illegal drug that makes you think thousands of years go by in a few hours. That's what I heard once. I don't know which one it was. You should try them all to be safe :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Abra
That'd be cyanied. Highly recommend it, I'll sell you some and if you're not satisfied with the results I've a 100% money-back garuntee :DQuote:
Originally Posted by drewmandan
Yeah. it would definately work. I don't know whether you'd be satisfied though but then again it would be quite hard to complain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachmall
The thing with this is that colors follow science, i.e., the electromagnetic spectrum. The photoreceptors in your eyes can only pick up ROYGBIV colors, and if you've forgotten your 1st grade education, that's Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, Violet. So any mix of those, plus or minus brightness and saturation, are the colors that you can see. One could imagine that there ARE different colors, such as if one could somehow see higher- or lower-frequency wavelengths, but your human eyes can't do that. Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by i make it rain
I'd like to see how there are arguments on that.
everyone says that you can do anything in a lucid dream, but I will go ahead and revise that to "you can do anything within the limits of your imagination"
so I guess inventing a new color is out unless somewhere deep down in your imagination, you have an idea for one. Which isn't likely.
but if you can imagine yourself flying, then you can do it.
it just might take a bit of practice and confidence to get there first.
Well you kind of gave an arguement against it in your last few sentences. In a dream, theoretically you could make yourself see in these frequencies. I agree, though, I don't believe it is possible. I don't think someone's imagination could come up with a new color.Quote:
Originally Posted by csol
Here is an old thread on it:
http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...venting+colors
I'm too lazy to find something more recent.
Yes, allow myself to control anything within the dream... I doesn't like to control things <.<
Our eyes have proteins that sense red, green, and blue. Every other color we perceive is a mixture of these. White is all three when very saturated, black is the absence of all three, and gray is all three in equal proportions.Quote:
Originally Posted by csol
There are birds that can see UV light, so I don't think it would be beyond the capacity of the human brain to perceive new colors, if only we had the sensory equipment . . . Any of you boys (with your defective Y chromosomes;)) have red/green color blindness? If so, do you see an extra color in your dreams that you don't see in waking life?
He's well respected by many LDers, and is one of the few researchers who specialise in the phenomenon of lucid dreaming. Sort of a pioneer. That book is really good, I recommend it to anyone interested in LDing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachmall
I know that you can do 'anything' in a dream but thats just pretty much stating the obvious.:)
I was talking about personal experiences, where your concious mind wouldnt really fully give you control, whether because of a lack of confidence, confusion, too low lucidity or whatever other reasons, and you couldnt accomplish something in a dream.
i've had times where i couldn't take total control but i've always been able to do whatever i was wanting to do in the dreamQuote:
Originally Posted by LucidFreedoM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sain
I have been able to do everything that I have tried so far( flying, walking through walls) except summoning people and objects. Can't seem to get it.
This book (affectionately referred to as EWOLD around here) is generally considered on this site to be the lucid dreaming Bible. Anyone who is serious about lucid dreaming should own a copy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachmall
While this is certainly the accepted lore regarding dream control, it's been my experience that confidence and expectations are not the whole story. For example, I have been flying in my lucid dreams for nearly 3 years now. Needless to say, confidence is no longer an issue. However, even to this day, on occasion I will spontaneously lose my ability to fly. Sometimes I will gain it back later in the same dream, sometimes I won't. It's just one more random element of dreams. Another example is walking through walls. This works probably 60% of the time for me - for the other 40% of the time, I simply smack into the wall and feel foolish.Quote:
Originally Posted by MRooney
The truth is, dreams are inherently random and unpredictable, and dream control is, to a certain extent, subject to this same unpredictability. Lucid dreams are not "The Matrix." Confidence and expectations are a very important factor, but they are not the whole story.
Summoning people and objects is actually really easy. The trick is, that you cant summon them in front of your eyes. Either turn back and say to yourself, that when you turn back again, the object or person will be there. Or use doors, I always use doors, its the easiest method for me. For example I want to get into my room and summon my brother. So I find some door and imagine my room with my brother behind that door. And when I open them, it works... Or simply close your eyes and imagine, that when you open them, the object/person/environment will be there.
Something you can't do is get over emotional, well you can sometimes but it is very risky.
Seeing extra colors would be awesome! I've never thought to try that. I have read articles on tertrachromats - people with the ability to detect a 'fourth primary' within the spectrum that most of us pick up three(RGB) I'll see if i can't dig up an article
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06256/721190-114.stm
The hundreds of shades and tones that you and I could ever see are minute in comparison to what these people see every single day.
awesome stuff.
Thats crazy..I wonder what itd be likeQuote:
Originally Posted by poliganometry
But isnt seeing extra colours in a dream, and the link you posted too entirely different things?
I thought people who talked about 'extra colours' in dreams were talking about colours you cant even comprehend when your awake.
Well, yeah - I just wanted to give backing to the argument that the brain can comprehend more than the RGB spectrum if it is given the right tools. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by LucidFreedoM
As mentioned before really the only limit you have is yourself. Myself, I have a good deal of trouble speaking for some reason. It usually doesn't matter, the point tends to get across seemingly telepathically, though I'm not purposefully trying to be telepathic. I wonder if maybe it's not that I'm not speaking, just not hearing myself? Come to think of it I can't recall the sound of any of my most favorite dreaming moments, lucid or not. I can't remember anyone's voice, the wind, anything. That is most interesting! This is going to require some thought. Oh and on the color thing, that is a really cool concept. I'd tend to lean towards it's impossible, but I my argument would be that most things you see or can make in a dream are a sum of, distortion of, mixture of etc some real world element. But I could counterpoint that easily, people invent crap that's never been thought of before. What I said before about being parts of reality is too basic. Maybe on the surface yes, but deeper down no. I have seen and felt things in dreams that can't be measured in worldly units or words. So I've argued myself into believing you could invent a color. Ha it's late I'm going in circles and rambling. I'm going to go to bed now and invent the opposite of purple. No not the one opposite on the color wheel, not the one that clashes with purple, not the mathematical inverse of the RGB value of purple. That brings a thought to mind though. In computers generally you represent a color as a mixture of RGB. A brilliant purple would be R255,G0,B255. What if you had a negative saturation of one or more colors. Like R-255, G0, B-255 ... wouldn't that be the REAL opposite of purple? The one THEY don't want you to know about!?
Good night.
Edit: I just can't shut up, but I can imagine someone saying if you tell a computer to set a color's saturation to a negative number it would not work/crash/explode/etc. Obviously the computer's in this real world are not advanced enough to display the opposite of purple. Not yet! If I wanted to get esoteric, if Red 255 in mathematics would represent the total stimulation of the red receptors (no I'm not gonna look up the word or which rod or cone it is!) and Red 0 the complete lack there of, to have a negative value or an "opposite" you would need to have some sort of reverse stimulation of that receptor. Bah I'm really thinking too much, now I'm going to go dream of odd kaleidoscopes and fractals and not the things I want to!
Human tetrachromacy has yet to be verified, but if it occurs, it would not allow tetrachromats to see colors 'outside' of the usual spectrum, but would simply increase their ability to differentiate between colors that a normal human may perceive as identical.Quote:
Originally Posted by poliganometry
Studies have shown that some women do possess a fourth photopigment cone. The controversy lies in whether or not their brains have developed the means of utilizing the cone correctly.
I assume you are getting your information from wikipedia - which isn't the most reliable source of up to date information. There was a study in the early 1990's that ran women through color testing, in it there was at least one who came out with results that only a tetrachromat could have achieved. - here I'll do a quick google search http://www.cs.utk.edu/~evers/documents/tetraChromat.txt : there are several of other articles out there
And as for the ability to differentiate between colors - thats all that seing new color is! How would you explain what the world looks like to somebody with a red/green deficiency? You couldn't! Those pigments(and the shades within) are totally foreign to them. By the same token, how would we percieve the colors that a tetrachromat sees as their fourth primary? We have no idea what the colors look like to them, because to us, they are just shades inbetween.
Quote:
Originally Posted by archdreamer
I considered this when I went to sleep last night. I could be totally off on this I've done no research but if indeed there was a fourth primary color, then two colors that looked identical to me could look quite different a so called "tetrachromat" if they contained different saturations of the fourth pigment that I cannot discern. Even in the RGB color space there are infinite possibilities; you could have saturation values in the decimal places out to infinity. Can the human eye discern the difference between Red with a saturation of 155 and red with a saturation of 155.000000000000000000000000001? Probably not, but the difference would be there. Adding a fourth primary would certainly change the color space for those able to perceive it, and they would be able to discern more colors, but there wouldn't really be more per se.
My question is, and I really should research this before running my mouth (I honestly usually do, but I'm in a hurry at the moment lol), scanning the eyes of a suspected perceiver of a fourth primary is one thing, developing a real world test... another. An objective test would be necessary not to prove the receptors were there, but functional. I would imagine a test like the ones that we already use to determine colorblindness. But wouldn't one have to already be a tetrachromat in order to develop such a test? I can't mix an image to where it has a letter "hidden" by printing it in the fourth primary color if I can't already discern that color to manipulate it can I? Lastly, and this applies to the making a new color in your dreams as well, and mentioned above, how would you quantify it if you did? If I indeed create a new color in a dream, I can't imagine describing it! Obviously you couldn't be like "Well it's kinda like a mixture of red and cerulean" Yeah that would be in the RGB color space and not "invented" at all. So even if some of us did succeed in dreaming up a color, could we ever really explain it? I wonder.Quote:
Originally Posted by poliganometry
Big edit Okay I went and read your cited article like I SHOULD HAVE to begin with. The colored lights test is intriguing, still it's not scientifically rock solid in my mind.
I would normally say when I'm being chased I can never run away, but last night I was able to run away when I was being chased although the chasers were faster than me. I can always run, but my running in a dream was like someone else trying to walk slowly. Until last night that is.
I've noticed that in my dreams, including my lucid ones, the more "urgently" I'm trying to do something, the more exponentially ineffective it will be. For example, running madly through a field with no purpose? Easy. Running at any decent speed when fleeing a large, angry, dreambeast? Not so easy.
Thanks for this. Really, really interesting. Unfortunately it doesn't look like there's enough evidence to call this "fact" yet. Well, one or two women identified isn't enough for me. But what this does mean for the rest of us is that, depending on our DNA we see a specific shade of red or green that may be slightly different than the shade of red or green that someone else is seeing. Meaning that we all see colors that others don't see and don't see colors that others do see. It also means that there are many women who see two slightly different shades of red (so slight that it doesn't make any noticeable difference). Technically, it should also be possible to find tetrachromacy in chimeras.Quote:
Originally Posted by poliganometry
As an unrelated note, I sometimes notice that each of my eyes perceives color slightly differently. A trick of lighting?
holy smokes me too! I always figured it was because I had knee'd myself on the eye while on a trampolene really, really hard one day- my right eye sees everything a little more red tinged, and my left sees everything a little 'glowier blue'Quote:
As an unrelated note, I sometimes notice that each of my eyes perceives color slightly differently. A trick of lighting?
I agree. I am using the term 'tetrachromat' in the same sense as Jameson et al.Quote:
Originally Posted by poliganometry
Although there is considerable evidence that females with this genetic trait do percieve color differently, I have yet to see conclusive evidence that tetrachromacy in the sense above occurs in humans. If there is more recent confirmation of tetrachromacy in this sense, then please link, because it's pretty interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jameson et al
Without getting into a debate about qualia and what does or does not constitute a novel color, suffice to say that by 'outside', I meant 'outside the frequency range of typically visible light'.Quote:
And as for the ability to differentiate between colors - thats all that seing new color is!
For those interested in the color vision of humans with four photopigment cones, the sources I'm going by are:
http://www.klab.caltech.edu/cns186/papers/Jameson01.pdf - Jameson paper
http://vision.psychol.cam.ac.uk/jdmo...n_Carriers.pdf - Jordan paper
EDIT:
Hey, me too. My right eye always seems to perceive richer color, while my left eye has better night vision. I always assumed that this was due to differing ratios of rod and cone photoreceptors in my eyes, but I never really researched it. Anyone know?Quote:
As an unrelated note, I sometimes notice that each of my eyes perceives color slightly differently. A trick of lighting?
EDIT AGAIN: We seemed to have hijacked the thread. If anyone wishes to discuss this further, might I suggest we move to a new thread in the Lounge, and link to it from here?