Printable View
Hi all,
How many people here think LUCI will work. The company has close to $200,000 already, so what do you think? Can the lucid dreaming community trust GXP Technologies? What's stopping them from making a working product?
Just a word of warning -- I'm not sure how the polling option works, I'll still be selecting it... but yeah don't know.
I am very optimistic. The concept is just fine and in overall terms it seems to be superior to motion detection techs, although the wire can be a potential problem.
EILD, i think, will make LDing a global entertainment and technology will only develop further.
I am waiting to see any advancements.
I don't think LD should be for global entertainment ....it should be to achieve inner piece and enlightment ....I don't support this at all ....
If someone can bring LDing with some degree of reliability to the general public with a device they'll make a bazillion.Quote:
Originally Posted by VagalTone
Well - very interesting!
Basically - you have a simple EEG on your head and once it detects REM you get "This is a dream. Take control" over your headphones.
Sounds much more promising than these detectors, which lie in your bed and try to detect REM per your body movements.
And also better than trying to let you know, that you are dreaming per light-flashes over a mask - Iīve read, that you just dream of something flashing then.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/...jpg?1380080664
With some electronics in addition to this headset - and maybe connection to a pc will be possible:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/...jpg?1381374432
Looking forward to their results - they want to have it on the market by February - Iīm sure weīll get to know how it works for members on here not much after they release it.
To answer the question - yes - I think this could work.
The question, if you miss out on some personal and psychological gains from achieving lucidity on your own - the answer might be yes to a certain extent. Or maybe not!
Maybe such psychological development can also follow the fact that you are dreaming lucidly.
It doesnīt take away the necessity of working on dream-control, awareness and memory - if you want to have enjoyable lucid dreams - or even induce personal growth and insight by lucid dreaming and remember them in the first place - you will still have to work on these things with your mind only. Nobody and nothing can do that for you or take it away from you.
By the way and off topic - my husband has a very early commercial version of an EEG and eye-muscle movement detector, with which you can play simple computer games.
The thing with the eye-muscles is relatively easy to learn - but going by consciously manipulating EEG waves was beyond me - or lets say beyond my patience and interest - but he can do it.
It's actually an exciting possibility. And there's obvious high interest in the community, this and Remee end up well funded on kickstarter. This project seems much better than the Remee which doesn't actually contain a REM detector. Frankly, it's all about the dreams, exactly how one gets lucid is not important in comparison. Getting lucid a lot is important so that you can practice working on your memory and self-awareness. Anything that helps getting lucid reliably, especially in the beginning, would be incredibly valuable.
Lucid dreaming is a tool available to any person. People can find that they have the talent by accident so limiting it to achieve inner piece and enlightenment seems a little bit like you only want people to use it the way you use it. It can be used for so many things, and entertainment is one of them so I don't see why it would be a problem ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloky
That is a choice, not an imposition, just like the choice to care about dreams or not. I think lucid dreaming can be a spiritual practice, and it is for me in some way, but i donīt think most people are concerned only about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloky
Lucid dreaming is for everybody and for whatever reason you want, and entertainment is just the most obvious one.
If you want to make a poll - click that option on the bottom - then type in the number of options you want to give.
Like - I think it works for most - it is welcome/is not - I think it only works for some - welcome/not - I think it will not work.
That would be 5 options.
You have to click post thread - no preview for this, like with threads and posts - be courageous! It will ask for the words for the option after that.
It will give you fields to write in - then click post again and you have your poll!
Btw..
:)
Of course it will work. It will work just as well as the rest of the REM-sensing biofeedback machines that have been invented and marketed over the last 20 years or more. There is no new technology here, only new customers/investors unfamiliar what what already exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by DynoTAP
But it will only work in terms of detecting REM and sending you a signal. Recognizing the signal, and having the self-awareness in place to become lucid, are just as much up to you as they ever were. I just said this on another thread, but the real irony here is that if you have done enough mental prep to recognize a machine's prompt, you very likely will have done enough mental prep to become lucid on your own. Go figure.
So yeah, it'll work, but only if you've already done the real work.
Also, I would bet that anyone buying one of these machines will likely have at least one placebo-based LD just out of the excitement of trying it out... does that still count as working?
Donīt know - I will get there without - is my affirmation.
I was there before.
Edit: But my husband wasnīt - and he would like - and he is a nerd - and has unfortunately Sleep Apnoe which doesnīt exactly help.
Oh my bad - looking like science fiction in the house again - I can picture it ..lol
But he does meditate, and I donīt. Yet.
^^ By the power of suggestion alone, EILD machines work well on nerds, so something like Luci or a NovaDreamer might be a good for him... Sleep apnea will still be a problem, though.. :(
That things looks uncomfortable.
maybe available to everyone unfortunately .....like nuclear power and weapons are available to everyone but nor everybody use it for a good cause .......Quote:
Originally Posted by Araishu
Hm - I definitively donīt have access to nuclear power and my weapons would be kitchen knifes, if I needed something in my reach.
A blade-less world is quite a leap of the imagination as to what is practical.
What could be done with lucid dreaming, if "everyone" had access (isnīt that actually the natural state, which would be desirable?), that would cause suffering for individuals or groups of individuals?
^^ I know you did not ask me, but one thought leaped into mind when you asked the question:
If the natural state of nightly sleep included lucid dreaming for all, I think there would be an extreme risk of a great number of people allowing their LD worlds to become their lives' priority, and as they get lost in their own little universes, they would lose touch and emotional ties with their waking-life friends and family, and their lives would become very empty, very closed to the surprises of reality and social activity that encourage mental and spiritual growth.
This sort of thing -- this abandonment of "difficult" things like love, learning, and surprise (and their commensurate joy) already happens to many, many people in waking life without lucid dreaming; I think that if you opened the LD'ing door to those people -- and to the people struggling to keep their lives open to change, love and growth -- you might discover a substantial chunk of the population simply folding up into themselves and socially disappearing.
This is not a new argument, as it has been made on the onsets of (for instance) TV, video games, and the internet. Unfortunately, I believe the power of LD'ing is geometrically greater than the power of all three of those game-changers, combined -- so too would the risks to those who experience it without a good sense of self or mental and spiritual discipline.
I can't imagine anything else being a problem, and the benefits of "everyone" LD'ing might vastly outweigh the risks, but I had that thought and figured I'd share...
^^Absolutely Sageous, I wholeheartedly agree! The effort it takes and the things I have learned is benefiting me in waking life...things I may not have tried before...realizations I may not have come to for many more years perhaps(thank you, Sageous, for your help by the way!)...If it were too easy, it could be abused like drugs as a way to escape a "miserable life." What a strange juxtaposition(?), it can improve a less-than-ideal life if it comes with effort and self-growth or it can give the opposite effect when it is too easy if it is also abused.
Welcome StephL! Some of your previous posts have convinced me that you are going to be a great addition to the DV community as long as you keep coming back, which I hope you do.
I would like to see more statistics and information released personally.
The 2-week trials are not enough I feel. Too sketchy at best.
There is nothing about what time the lucid was or the duration. What REM period was it for example?
I guess people’s funds have been used to design the fancy logo and to get the trademark too.
Attachment 5794
(Image from the L-K home page)
The third-party amplifier shown is an Audio amplifier which uses the TDA7293 I.C. It is generally intended for Hi-Fi applications.
If you do a Google image search then you will find it is actually a TDA7293 Parallel 250W Mono Power Amp Board.
Here is the spec.
TDA7293 pdf, TDA7293 description, TDA7293 datasheets, TDA7293 view ::: ALLDATASHEET :::
I would like to see a proper block diagram for this project. What are the specs. CMR, etc?
Also for example, I do not see any description or mention of a ‘reference’ electrode?
Presumably the designer’s behind this project had challenges with artifacts, mains hum and electrical interference, inc. mobile phones, computers .etc. where they will have to use good quality shielding, screening, and low noise components.
Safety:
The proposed device shows a power adapter dc input (6-12 v?) to run the device. It would be safer to use batteries.
From the on site comments it seems that the headphones are one of the main issues, plus a USB connectivity option should there be enough funds.
^^ Sounds like you might not be one of the investors! ;)
Good for the inventor/marketeer, I suppose, that the investors were not as mindful of where they were pledging their money...
Perhaps not this time. I think even the panel on 'Dragons Den' (UK TV programme) would have probably rejected it.
I would like an idea for this to work. The webpage seems more about claims and glossy content/design over actual substance to me. I was always told in my Physics lesson to 'show the workings out' and not just the answer. I feel this is an example.
It is early days, but the technology is out there.
Maybe the guy's behind the project can loan one out to one of the DV dreamguides here for an impartial evaluation/test.
Maybe do the 'first off' QA product test when the production line starts rolling. :)
Very interesting Highlander - always great to have access to insights from people knowing what they are looking at - the technical background - and also convey a sense of how to look at the project from itīs appearance-aspect - and deduct like you did.
It makes very much sense what you have to say - and I agree - a great idea to have a DV quality testing.
Is this possible, though - with this site not allowing "competition" in which form it might be defined - not sure there - not allowing direct links?
Oh - in a sense I did ask you - and I have been thinking about it before myself, actually - just forgot in this context, because I sensed a completely different line of attack in Karlokyīs posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Yeah - why is it, that evolution does not make it easy to reach this state?
Probably because of the reasons you described above - that was basically what I came up with as well.
I have to take my above statement back - or at least put it in very theoretical terms of a mankind farther along the line of development overall - if such a state of affairs would be possible is a completely different question again.
Thank you for your kind words fogelbise!Quote:
Originally Posted by fogelbise
This place has numerous fantastic people - and a quite unique openness - I feel, here people of very different mindsets are able to positively communicate and contribute to each otherīs understanding. At the very least this is attempted time and again.
I am sure, Iīll keep coming back!
It would of course be great if something like this could work. That hope is probably what fuels the investors. I myself (relative LD newbie, but not a novice) feel like I just need the smallest of nudges to become lucid, I've only had a handful of LDs so far and certainly am interested in anything that can boost that frequency.
A 50% (about one every two days) LD for two weeks success rate is a remarkable ("unheard of"?) frequency for LD novices. It does bring into question the reliability of the information.
Although that is a very good point, I don't see what makes those of us who have experienced it by chance and looked it up any different from the general public. The kind of people who are willing to make Lucid Dreaming their only priority in life are most likely already occupied by things like video games and the sort. Lucid dreaming does not cause people to lack feelings of responsibility in real life, it simply gives those who already lack those feelings another medium to escape through.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Lucid dreaming is unimaginably exciting the first few times you achieve it and it's often all you can think about for a few days after. However, after a while it becomes a tool open for use for whatever you want and the obsession is dropped. It becomes a part of your reality rather than becoming your reality. At least, that's what I think anyway.
Excellent question. Here's my totally arguable take:Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
I think the simple answer to this is that LD'ing is a fundamentally unnatural event. It isn't that evolution doesn't allow easy LD'ing as much as it is the case that there is simply no "natural" inclusion of self-awareness in the mechanisms of sleep and dreams. At all.
To expand this a bit, I'm not even sure that self-awareness was meant to exist in waking-life either. Sentience may just be an accident of natural evolution (or God's plan, depending on your perspective) that came about as a side-effect of the amazing complexity of our brains. In other words, our brains became so powerful we became self-aware -- just like Skynet (only we're taking a skosh more time to destroy the planet than the machines did in Terminator ;)). This is why we still have a lot of trouble realizing we exist during waking-life, much less the dream state.
Come to think of it, we might not have ever been meant to dream at all, so it makes sense that dreaming is normally a quickly-forgotten jumble of generally meaningless events* (at least until we wake up and start interpreting them) that occurs not for some evolutionary purpose but simply because that supercomputer in our skulls keeps whirring away long after sleep has ensued. Indeed, about the only thing nature seems to have done is create barriers to your waking-life self when sleeping, like denying access to memory, to keep this accidental thing called sentience out of the "natural" process of sleep.
Because of all this, bringing our self-awareness into dreams, or LD'ing, is a very unnatural process. But, just as bringing self-awareness into waking life has become routine for many, there is no reason LD'ing can't eventually be routine as well... we just have to get nature accustomed to the concept. Or, to be on topic, we just need to trick nature with machines or drugs. So we might ultimately counter natural evolution with an evolutionary step of our own making; one of mind -- our own intellectual evolution might pick up where nature left off (or screwed up).
This unnatural condition is not necessarily a bad thing though: Since LD'ing is not a tool created by nature, it might possibly be able to do more than nature allowed (or never programmed at all, as it were) to effect our dreams, explore our unconscious, and perhaps tweak that supercomputer to do even more amazing things.
tl;dr: We are not naturally meant to lucid dream, so our effort to do so is an uphill battle against nature (or God's plan) itself. Which kind of sucks, but also might point to LD'ing as a powerful tool for growth of the same scope that self-awareness i waking-life is.
* Quick note about meaning, before folks chime in to correct me: Yes, given that that same sentience is sourced in the unconscious, there is an excellent chance that some of the stuff popping up in dreams are relevant to your life and your mind's current unconscious concerns swimming around in the otherwise random projections of dreams...but this too is an accident of nature, I think, not its intention. By extension: If they exist, things like dream-sharing, AP, etc, are also either accidents or rather very carefully produced events of self-awareness holding no place in nature at all (which again is not a bad thing, just another hurdle).
All true. But keep in mind that folks (like me as well) who stumble upon LD'ing are likely already intellectually prepared on some level to cope with and work with the novelty and escapism potentials of lucidity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Araishu
Because we were able to draw the conclusion that "this is a dream" based on our own existent self-awareness and mental wherewithal, we were able to temper our reaction and make thoughtful decisions about working to learn more, explore more, or walk away, without much negative effect on our waking lives. Not everyone is equipped to do that, and if LD'ing suddenly becomes available to all without any mental or work prerequisites, there likely will be a large group of people who could be swept up by the activity... in an even more effective manner than what happened with TV, the internet, and video games.
Of course I could be wrong...
Of course Luci could work, but it's in a very raw form as described in Kickstarter. For a start there is very little about how they intend to detect REM. It's not that difficult, but nor is it trivial. I now that with the Zeo headband, which works in a similar way, they spent ages developing the algorithms to detect REM from the EEG signals.
Also, as Sageous has said, recognising the sound signal is also very difficult. They haven't said what sound signal either. Most people will either wake up, or not become aware. It's not a sure-fire way to induce an LD.
Thanks StephL for that.
I did have to do some research on The Internet trying find, double-check and cross reference information which took a little time. Hey, but if it makes people think deeper ard read between the lines then I would like to think that my post has served a purpose.
I do have a background in Electronics and testing however, although it is a while ago so I'm quite rusty now as I haven't been following the trends, etc. This has wetted my appetite however!
I don't think it is off topic as such. In fact I have got an NIA myself. I did try the EOG function post-WBTB one time where it did 'detect' eye muscle movements (and occasional artifacts.)Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
However you needed the patience of a Saint as you had to keep your head reasonably still. The setup/wiring was uncomfortable, plus with the computer wirring away in the background and being on the bed upside down didn't help matters.
My main computer went into powesave mode after 20 min which ruined the test which was to produce a 'bleep' (either left/right) depending on sensitivity levels and the EOG NIA settings.
The good thing is you didn't have to worry about the calibration, which is more of an issue with the EEG part of the NIA.
I would like to try a hack or another go when I get more time as this sort of thing fascinates me. :)
I don't really see an issue providing you don't add the website link. I'm pretty sure people have posted their experiences and thoughts on the REMee dream mask (and other lucid dream-related devices) on the forum before now.Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
It gives other like-minded people an idea of how the product performs in the real world, and not that of the boardroom. At the end of the day you could be helping other member's with time and money. It would provide feedback to improve or modify the said (or updated) product should there be any issues.
Providing you're not (as a poster or contributor) blatantly advertising and work for the company then there shouldn't be a problem.
Whether the company would release a product early for a popular LD forum to test is another matter. :)
Ah - thanks for this post again Highlander!
I might actually dig the NIA out of my husbandīs den and take a look again - and ask him, for how long heīs been at it in one stretch.
Heīs from a mathematics/informatics background and was fantasizing about hacking the thing as well.
And he became quite amazingly good, too - he also regularly meditates - that might help with such things, I guess.
In the moment - Iīm not really interested in technology for LD - maybe my husband - and I will report if he does test something one day - but that would first be him digging deep in The Internet and choosing hopefully well.
Edit: Iīm working on further responses..
I really like that first statement - something to do with justice and equality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Araishu
And Sageous is basically saying, if I understand him correctly there - itīs the more potent agens in a variety of contexts of escapism.
And accordingly - the potential damage is significantly higher.
I fully agree on the point of potency - and that with only less than a handful of experiences (as an adult..?).
So - from a glimpse alone.
My question is now though - could not maybe the very act of becoming skilled in the art of LD sort of have a spill-over good effect on waking life quality?
Maybe even most of the cases?
Maybe it can lead people from escaping where ever and however they usually do - towards filling their actual real lives with meaning and awareness over the bridge of evolving their consciousness in LD?
This definition sounds like Iīm in for life-long passion!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Araishu
As I am with playing darts - just on a level in no way comparable.
And - who drops off drops off because of not evolving enough to make it worth it?
So - they can safely go back play video games.
Hm - what is my opinion now??
I do not know.
Agreed not only on the last sentence..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
But - I have one misgiving - evolution in my view is not something, that allows or not allows something - it throws it out as random mutations and puts the combinatorics to the test of time in a habitat (which follows the laws of physics..) - well - as I understand it - without proper post-preparation - I admit.
It also has no meaning or higher plan for us - from which we could ever deviate - it just doesnīt work that way.
Okay - a god would indeed work that way.
So there we have the questions..
Are you theist or a leaning agnostic? In this context I could understand.
I tend to think, everything we do and perceive - also our technological philosophical and cultural phenomena is our evolution.
It is all one thing.
Well - there goes a question of itīs own right in disguise..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
At the point of meaning in evolution/creation once more - and at the point of a culture of lucid dreaming before recorded time possibly presenting an incentive even, like power functions in the form of shamans and priests - not (all) celibate - surely!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Actually - doesnīt evolution keep the option in relatively easy reach?
If you want to - you can learn it!
I mean - if you get sex for it - come on!
Could be..
Also the "simply" might be debatable - it is not random, but the brain actually consolidats and archives memories into long time store while sleeping - I will post studies - if they are not already here somewhere ..
There is something in evolution, though, which leads to convergence.
And this can give very much the impression of pre-planned meaning.
But there might indeed be rules.
Like life being likely around suns, which emit light, which can be used by compound or camera-type eyes best - so besides some other 3 or so ways of analysing optics - the latter esp. have been evolving over and over independently on earth.
Even using the same chemical crystals, but from different sources - because they can be used - thatīs another level of "because"..
Just next door in my "What We Still Donīt Know" - we would be close to the 3 videos towards I have to restrain myself to refer in detail here now..
We can go on as in - are we a simulation..?
Yes - to your statement I put in bold - and nobody suggests for real that enhancement of general waking life awareness - meditation - could be a bad thing - nobody - it even brings brain-cells to grow!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
These "barriers" might just as well be a cultural phenomenon.
I actually could well imagine that - lets say in the stone-age - there might not have been a much stronger and more culturally evolved lucid dreaming skill abound, than we might not be able to imagine?
Pet theory of mine - fresh from my mind..
I am afraid I disagree - it is a tool in natureīs box - it has been thrown out and is still active - it works - see many people profiting from it with the surrounding work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
But with your conclusions - I full-heartedly agree - lets grow!!
Well - here is meaning as in what does a dream mean - agreed on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
It is connected and it also somewhere has came about with evolution, that this it is so.
Why dream at all?
There is a function I believe - not a meaning.
Well - I stumbled on lucidity as a child for the first time, I am pretty much convinced..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Am I something special in any meaningful sense here?
Hope not!
Didnīt you say, even with technology - you canīt ever circumvent the mental preparation and awareness-practice needed for it not only to set on - but continue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Last two nights I had two futile onsets - looking at my hands - maybe that is what you can get the short-cut to..?
And the rest up to you as per usual?
Gaah - I should sleep - or meditate! Both would maybe be asking too much .. :sleepmeditate2:
But I enjoy debating loads as well!
I hope I do not overly much have the desire to edit "tomorrow" - I start rambling - itīs late - I just press submit now!
I wanted to leave a comment on the L-K site, addressing some of my concerns about the product and lack of information. However you have to be a backer in order to do so. :(
Even then it appears a lot of questions and concerns (from backers) are not being answered by GXP (for whatever reason?) which is causing a bit of angst.
Hm - sounds not so good - but I always smile when I find "angst" - or other things like "schadenfreude" or "gestalt" used in English!
But good, that such a product testing would be possible and such was done on here before..
Bit scared to re-read my above post - will do that later..
The ability to make choices and be responsible for your own actions is the brilliant thing about being conscious. The risk factor is always there with every single choice we make, but that doesn't mean we should not be allowed to make choices for ourselves. If somebody does choose to disassociate from society, that is their choice and they should be free to make it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
Mastering LD does have many positive impacts on waking life which is one of the aspects that drew me towards it so it could certainly be seen as good thing if it were to be discovered by more people.Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
Indeed. If you choose to do so, you keep the skill for the rest of your days. You are in control of how you use it/for what reasons :)Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
I don't think it's a case of not evolving enough though. Anybody can master it so long as they actually want to. :shadewink:
Sorry about all that; I agree completely. Evolution is certainly not an entity, has no plans, and no actual long-term designs about which we know. I am a writer by trade, and I guess I did a little anthropomorphizing there just to make the words flow a little better. My bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
Although at first I would repeat that my phrasing was more style than deeper meaning, your question made me pause.Quote:
Okay - a god would indeed work that way.
So there we have the questions..
Are you theist or a leaning agnostic? In this context I could understand.
I am neither a theist nor agnostic as classically defined (I like to think we're all agnostic, given that, when the truth finally presents itself to us, we will be capable of accepting it and adapting to it). I don't really care how things were created or who might've been in charge, and I like to think that we are responsible for creating and nurturing our own "immortal souls" through the energy of our thoughts and the quality of our actions, with that soul being the vessel for my consciousness after death... God, or His plans, doesn't fit well into this, so for now there isn't much reason for faith.
But then there's context: In writing that post I had thought I was offering the gamut of sources for evolution of mind to illustrate that this idea works regardless of whether you're a fan of evolution or God, or both. But, upon rereading my post, I can't help but see the fact that I was born and raised a Catholic (including all my schooling in catholic institutions) announcing itself quite clearly. I guess the idea of God's plan is so engrained in me that I can't avoid including it in my opinions -- even when I don't hold that opinion anymore!
It is now.Quote:
I tend to think, everything we do and perceive - also our technological philosophical and cultural phenomena is our evolution. It is all one thing.
That may have been my point: this sort of evolution -- one driven by our thoughts, controlled by our deeds -- is extremely new, and runs fully anathema to the natural evolutionary process of successful random mutation. And, instead of following nature's pattern of random mutations taking thousands or millions of years to update or create a new species, we are creating this change in a matter of decades.
So yes, it is all one thing, but it is our thing this time, and not just another natural event.
... not even me! Just as bringing self-awareness into waking-life is not harmful at all, bringing self-awareness into a dream will be a harmless event as well, and to do so would certainly be a growth event.Quote:
Yes - to your statement ["But, just as bringing self-awareness into waking life has become routine for many, there is no reason LD'ing can't eventually be routine as well."] - and nobody suggests for real that enhancement of general waking life awareness - meditation - could be a bad thing - nobody - it even brings brain-cells to grow!
I'm not so sure of that. Though it may be a pleasant bit of nostalgia to imagine that human cultures were once more "in touch" with their inner selves before all this modern complication and materialism threw us culturally off our spiritual paths, I honestly think that we are currently at a pinnacle of conscious development (indeed, we are always at a pinnacle, as the development only improves from generation to generation). Yes, lucid dreaming has probably existed exactly as long as sentience has, but those lucid-dreaming cavemen may have been aware that they were dreaming, but they were not yet able to work with that awareness as we are now...humans simply hadn't collectively learned enough yet. Indeed, I would imagine that quite a bit of religion and mythology can be sourced in dreams, as very early shaman struggled to attach some meaning to their experiences (and yes, "cash in" on them).Quote:
These "barriers" might just as well be a cultural phenomenon.
I actually could well imagine that - lets say in the stone-age - there might not have been a much stronger and more culturally evolved lucid dreaming skill abound, than we might not be able to imagine?
Pet theory of mine - fresh from my mind..
In other words, our primitive ancestors certainly had lucid dreams, but they did not yet understand what was going on, and the explanations of what was going on tended to be much farther removed from the truth than our explanations today (even though we likely still don't really know yet -- but we will).
Well, disagreement here is okay, as I'm used to it; and I very well may be wrong.Quote:
I am afraid I disagree - it is a tool in natureīs box - it has been thrown out and is still active - it works - see many people profiting from it with the surrounding work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous:This unnatural condition is not necessarily a bad thing though: Since LD'ing is not a tool created by nature, it might possibly be able to do more than nature allowed (or never programmed at all, as it were) to effect our dreams, explore our unconscious, and perhaps tweak that supercomputer to do even more amazing things.
But with your conclusions - I full-heartedly agree - lets grow!!
Given that most higher animals dream, there likely is a function to it. Maybe "function" is the wrong word. Perhaps instead dreams are representative -- a side-effect -- of some other function, like the process of storing long-term memory or even an opposing process of cleansing the brain of all the loose scraps of information it gathered during the previous day.Quote:
Why dream at all? There is a function I believe - not a meaning.
Sleep could also be the time that our unconscious mind does whatever global repair work it can do on its lesser, often miscreant conscious counterpart. Dreams then might represent our mind's metaphoric attempt to talk to itself... that might even explain people's innate need to attach meaning to their dreams (and that caveman's attachment of mythology or religion to his dreams, because he knew they had to mean something).
But I think when you put part one (debris from your brain's memory processing/day residue cleanup) beside part two (communications from your unconscious), you'll find part one the far larger bit, and from that it's easy to conclude that most dreams are likely just random, meaningless images until we attach meaning to them later (which is not a bad thing).
Sadly not. I think most, if not all people, stumble on a form of lucidity during childhood. There is something about a child's incomplete view of waking life that makes it easier for her to realize she is dreaming. By incomplete I mean that she is still in the process of defining a world that may still mostly be very much like a dream -- everything beyond things like Mommy, Daddy, Home, and school don't really have solid definition yet, and a child still sees herself as the center of her universe; just like a dream. Keep in mind though that, just as a child lacks true self-awareness in waking-life, she is not truly self-aware in the dreams -- it's just that, consciously-speaking, her dream-life is so close to waking-life that being in a dream isn't a real problem. In other words, by the nature of their incomplete wiring kids are likely to sort of lucid dream.Quote:
Well - I stumbled on lucidity as a child for the first time, I am pretty much convinced..
Am I something special in any meaningful sense here?
The special part, though, is remembering later in life that you did so, and feeling a need to "know" you are dreaming again -- this time with your more mature Self in the formula. Holding that thought is very special, given how few people do it.
Yes, I did say that, and still do: all the machines and the drugs in the world will do nothing for you if you have not prepared yourself to lucid dream. If you are prepared, and your self-awareness, memory, and expectation/intentions are all set for LD'ing, then yes, the machines might be a shortcut to lucidity, but you were going to get there anyway.Quote:
Didnīt you say, even with technology - you canīt ever circumvent the mental preparation and awareness-practice needed for it not only to set on - but continue.
Last two nights I had two futile onsets - looking at my hands - maybe that is what you can get the short-cut to..?
And the rest up to you as per usual?
And no, the machines won't even get you to look at your hands -- you are doing that yourself as well. All they can do is help remind you to look at your hands -- you still must hold them up and realize what you're looking at.
I just found out about the LUCI yesterday and I admit I was very excited for it! Although I have my own techniques that work fairly well when I have time to focus on LDing, I still may give the LUCI a crack once it comes out and I know it's not a scam. Looks very promising though!
I love your answer - there are not enough like buttons in this whole thread to express just how much I love it!
Wow - just heartfelt WOW!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Sneaky thing, how constructs, which get deeply ingrained - esp. in childhood - even after having been thrown overboard - still manage to find their ways into our very style and language..
This is true - I think, I should really de-simplify my concept there - we are indeed going about our evolution in a totally novel and - I also agree there after giving it some thought - unnatural way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
To see this - I actually would only have to have taken into account the temporal overdrive of change, we bring about without a putting to the test of time and environment in any adequate synchrony.
This is also why I sadly think, we could manage to destroy our planet before going about - well everything - in an enlightened way - meaning driven by true insight.
Thanks for making me aware of my short-sightedness there.
I think, I might open an anonymous poll - if possible - asking who on here feels that LD is taking over their lives in a drug-addiction like destructiveness..Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Oh yes - I am not sure as well - actually I fully agree with the point of not having an understanding of it even close to ours now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Might be really this sort of nostalgia - while I actually try to cultivate a scepticism on this account - :roll:
My point was more, that dream-control could have been more developed - but on second thoughts - rather not.
My line of thinking being, that once you accept the dream to be coming from outside your minds - gods, demons, whoever living on that plane - would not exactly be conductive to this control.
I fully agree with you there now.
This might be true - yepp - it actually seems likely to me, that the majority is random flickerings - I see your point - okaay - we are getting somewhere in terms of reassessing our ideas and expressions - this is wonderful!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
One thing, I heard in Youngīs video yesterday I found interesting.
OBEīs also are common in near-death situations - and when he stated, animals would do it very often - he said, this could be natureīs very own anaesthetic - if the endorphins are not enough any more.
Makes sense to me to dissociate from perceptions - incl. pain - where it does not make sense to perceive them in the sense of alarming/warning..
Not sure there, though, if I follow him along completely.
This is true I think - didnīt consider it in this way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
But I have thought something like this before - or read it.
Seems in the 60s while hippieness etc. - some children were given LSD.
With the "amazing" - but explainable result - that they didnīt think a lot of it.
Reporting life wasnīt really that different from how it usually was. Need a source for this - might find one, even.
For me - it only dawned on me later - but I did tell my mother back then, which is practical - I actually called her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
She was on an esoteric self-discovery trip, switching believe-systems on almost a monthly basis back then.
And such of course concluded back then, I was something special..
This she had to tell me now, though, I forgot.
But I know, she later said such often - she wanted to believe a lot - might have been good or not so good for me, who knows.
When I was a teen, I made it a hobby to crash her castles in an almost wicked way - she always built a new one - still does.
Sort of admirable.
Anyway - after this sort of rebellion - I came back to searching for the supernatural, for itīs sheer sensationality.
It fitted my general goings abouts back then - I read Castaneda and that was what brought me back.
I tend to rant - but - like next door - got to admit, if it hadnīt been for his books - I wouldnīt be here highly probably.
So - I got to be thankful for this - with a bit of teeth-grinding.
Yes and I fully agree - not on a basis like yours of course - reaching such a state of expertise is my long-term goal, though!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Oh - and lovely you are using the "she" - I should start my alternating as well, as I used to in the past!
That was a wonderful response, StephL, and a great exchange; thanks!
Just a couple very small things
That's not a bad idea, and though I wonder if we'd be surprised by the results, I have a feeling we'd be enlightened by the subsequent conversation about people's unnecessary but real fears of this sort of takeover.Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
I'm not sure I would equate an OBE with the natural anesthesia that happens when an animal faces sudden traumatic death. I think Young was making a point about potentials, and offering a nice jump-off point for attempting (or at least understanding) OBE's and not necessarily saying that animals are having them. I may have misunderstood this, but if I did I would then say he might be mistaken, or has misinterpreted the literature surrounding neurological reaction to trauma.Quote:
One thing, I heard in Youngīs video yesterday I found interesting. OBEīs also are common in near-death situations - and when he stated, animals would do it very often - he said, this could be natureīs very own anaesthetic - if the endorphins are not enough any more. Makes sense to me to dissociate from perceptions - incl. pain - where it does not make sense to perceive them in the sense of alarming/warning. Not sure there, though, if I follow him along completely.
I think he may instead have been trying to instill the Vipassana-esque point of view, which is one of non-dual observation, if that makes any sense at all... and if that's the case he was spot on, and well worth listening to at length.
I hope you'll post here if you do find one, as it would help unravel a lot of misunderstanding on these forums regarding childhood LD'ing.Quote:
This is true I think - didnīt consider it in this way.
But I have thought something like this before - or read it.
Seems in the 60s while hippieness etc. - some children were given LSD.
With the "amazing" - but explainable result - that they didnīt think a lot of it.
Reporting life wasnīt really that different from how it usually was. Need a source for this - might find one, even.
That is a great relationship -- especially for you; you mother must be a simultaneously curious and patient person, which is an excellent combination... I hope you thank her now and then!Quote:
For me - it only dawned on me later - but I did tell my mother back then, which is practical - I actually called her.
She was on an esoteric self-discovery trip, switching believe-systems on almost a monthly basis back then.
And such of course concluded back then, I was something special..
This she had to tell me now, though, I forgot.
But I know, she later said such often - she wanted to believe a lot - might have been good or not so good for me, who knows.
When I was a teen, I made it a hobby to crash her castles in an almost wicked way - she always built a new one - still does.
Sort of admirable.
Anyway - after this sort of rebellion - I came back to searching for the supernatural, for itīs sheer sensationality.
It fitted my general goings abouts back then - I read Castaneda and that was what brought me back.
I tend to rant - but - like next door - got to admit, if it hadnīt been for his books - I wouldnīt be here highly probably.
So - I got to be thankful for this - with a bit of teeth-grinding.
Very good point(s) - will call my mother later once more!
^^ Tell her I said "Hi!" ;)
From the Luci-Kickstarter home page:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/...jpg?1382669389
A simple third-party signal amplifier (TDA7293) used for testing the prototype.
(N.B. Note that the Kickstarter page NOW refers to the TDA7293 itself.)
Quote - Creator GXP Technologies about 9 hours ago
The TDA7293 amplifier (shown) is overkill for an audio signal to a set of standard earphones.Quote:
Yes, we used a TDA7293 mono amp in our prototype. Hence the note below the image of the TDA7293. It works extremely well to amplify the signal coming from the electrode. In actuality, there are 2 electrodes. One of them, located in the front of the head provides the neutral reference signal.
It is useless as a front-end EEG amplifier.
Note also that a 'reference' electrode is NOW mentioned. This is clearly not shown on the headband photographs below. (It should be at the front according to GXP.)
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/...jpg?1381373712
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/...jpg?1380501180
No reference electrode is shown in the original design sketch; let alone mentioned. An oversight perhaps? Or...
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ksr/assets/...gif?1379993721
Source: WikipediaQuote:
A typical adult human EEG signal is about 10 ĩV to 100 ĩV in amplitude when measured from the scalp.
Here's what the front-end amp has to do.
Source: WikipediaQuote:
Each electrode is connected to one input of a differential amplifier (one amplifier per pair of electrodes); a common system reference electrode is connected to the other input of each differential amplifier. These amplifiers amplify the voltage between the active electrode and the reference (typically 1,000–100,000 times, or 60–100 dB of voltage gain).
Data for a typical high gain component used in various general EEG projects:
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ina114.pdf
Goalposts ... moving...
^^ Great work, Highlander! I hope the creator appreciates your input, and I know his customers ultimately will (especially if that 2nd electrode found its way into the unit because of you).
I'm wondering how well the rear electrode will be able to pick up electrical activity through hair. Typical EEG procedures (in which shaving the head is not an option) involve the use of conductance gel and physically moving as much hair out of the way as possible in order to get a good signal. An amplifier is mentioned, which I guess must help by boosting the amplitude of whatever waves the electrode can pick up, but that leaves me wondering why all EEG isn't done with such an amplifier - thus negating the requirement for conductance gel and time consuming prep work. Unless of course all EEG is done with an amplifier (makes sense) and still requires gel. Although, this could be a much more sensitive electrode than I've seen before; I don't keep well-enough up to date with the technology.
I personally think IamCoder is the one to credit, because he raised his concerns directly on the Kickstarter comments page. GXP were forced to answer his valid concerns.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
The information about the second electrode was then mentioned in their counter-argument.
It still remains about the vadility of the original design however.
I asked about it in the comment section, since I'm a backer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Highlander
I want to know why they only just started mentionning this second electrode, and why it doesn't show up on the first sketch, as well as the photos of prototypes.
They intend to use a 'dry' electrode which has little points on it to contact the skin. It does not need conducting gel. Like you say a good contact is needed to minimise noise, artifacts, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by J.D.
There are different designs of amplifier, depending on requirements. It all boils down to time and money at the end of the day I guess.
Aaha!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
I quote you here, Sageous, but I read - and believe to have understood you Highlander - well, well, hm!
And agreed - great that "we" on here seem to be taken note of - and such possibly being influential.
Well done - it really looks, you have rattled their cages Highlander!!
Yours would be a most positive spin, Sageous - there being an exchange of knowledge and expertise..
Canīt see it (yet?) - canīt see them commenting on here, for example..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
I did call her just now, and it was great - she sends you greetings back and she listened to me and was very interested in LD, but she said, she now is in sort of an equanimity and likes it - and she stopped searching, being curious in such a direction, and building castles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
That is fine with me as well - I need not worry - and we laughed a lot!
Thank you!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
I will not forget to do this - and I also expect a result, where addiction is by no means the typical thing to happen - will be interesting, I hope!
Thatīs where I might not follow him either - but seen from a view of a higher animal indeed having a "higher" consciousness, than we tend to believe - in the sense of a point of view, on which can be reflected - then it would make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Then there would be this need of dissociating this point of view from the body-awareness.
This "non-dual observation" - wow - the content-list for chapters on Wikipedia of different philosophical context is overwhelming - so no - I am not sure, how exactly you mean it. Since connected with Vipassana - there seems to have been a philosophical collision on a complicated framework historically - after some mini-research of mine - I backed out.
Maybe this: "seeing things clearly, free from projection and obsessive attitudes, with calm and insight into heart, mind and body"?
I am not putting it beyond higher animals - but there we are once more what is "higher" - I had to spend hours probably, and wouldnīt come to an opinion...?
Noted down under - well - "LD Stuff"..:yddd:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sageous
Alright, about the second electrode, GXP just answered me in the comment section, here's their reply:
"The second electrode is in the front and the very thin wire is hidden under the folded edge of the headband and comes down along the same wire as the main electrode. Can't see it in the photos."
That is partially it, but this "seeing" is done with the understanding, the confidence, that there is not a "you" separately encountering your reality, as is the standard stance of the duality we naturally practice, but that you are one with reality. This same sense of non-duality can exist when looking inward, too, where you can realize that there is no conscious/unconscious, no Id/Ego/Superego, no mind/body...only You. Non-duality is a very difficult concept, much less a functional perspective, for humans, especially for those of us from the Western world, whose philosophies, religions, and sciences have preached and assured duality for millennia.Quote:
Originally Posted by StephL
From this non-dual perspective comes a certain clarity, especially in dreams, where you are not only one with reality, but you literally are that reality. By contrast, looking at a dream from a duality perspective is unhelpful to lucidity, as it amplifies the waking-life assumption that the real world is a place separate from you and thus innately unapproachable by you. This amplification makes you think that the dreamworld you are encountering is real, and separate from you, your will, and your imagination. Non-duality is a central tenet of dream yoga, BTW.
In terms of OBE, and the video, I think he was using the natural shock reaction of traumatized animals to show that we are all already wired to change our perspective when necessary, to the point where our consciousness can be apparently observing events from an external, safe, place while terrible things happen to our body. This can happen because, since we are already one with reality, shifting our consciousness to another position in that reality is not only possible, but quite natural.
Here's the catch, though: you might shift your perspective, but your consciousness hasn't actually "gone" anywhere. Just as the consciousness of that doomed critter in the video is still very much encased in its traumatized skull, a person experiencing an OBE isn't really going anywhere; she's just shifting her perspective a bit. Though this perspective shift should not be difficult in a non-dual environment, it is made difficult -- and exciting -- by the paradoxical attachment of duality to the experience. In other words, a person experiencing an OBE tends to be impressed (or frightened, as it were) not by the shift in perspective, but by the alarms set off by her duality-engine incorrectly announcing that she is in a different place than her body.
Did that help, or did I make things worse?
Also, though I don't intentionally practice it, Vipassana meditation seems a great foundation for lucid dreaming and its cohorts (OBE, AP), and well worth the research.
Quote - Creator GXP Technologies about 7 hours ago
http://www2.ensc.sfu.ca/~ljilja/ENSC...ures/lab2a.jpgQuote:
BTW, detecting eye movement with an EOG monitor was the very first thing we tried. The results were extremely inconsistent. And the reference electrode didn't need to be mentioned since it doesn't serve any purpose as for the input. We will still call LUCI a single-electrode device since it reads from only one electrode.
The clue is in the name - a reference!
No Sageous - that does definitively not make it worse!
It actually sheds a lot of light on it!
Thank you!
And what else comes to my mind on topic - "hypocrisy-alert"..
Apparently LUCI's gone from kickstarter now. What a farce.
Kickstarted Luci Lucid dream inducer's creators leave backers deserted and cancel funding, completely contradicting with previous statements made less than a day earlier. : LucidDreaming
Nope - I did some research and this is not, as I remembered it.Quote:
...
Seems in the 60s while hippieness etc. - some children were given LSD.
With the "amazing" - but explainable result - that they didnīt think a lot of it.
Reporting life wasnīt really that different from how it usually was. Need a source for this - might find one, even.
There were very young childrenīs case reports up to older kids - mostly anecdotal - but seems the very young kids (two cases of babies even) started screaming and being afraid of things - at least at the onset, while the older the children were - the more the similarities to what adults tend to report.
But no indifference or failing to recognize a vast difference to normal reality.
Ranging from intense bad trips to an 8-year-old girl expressing herself amazingly well and reporting transcendental/religious epiphany.
What is very interesting, though - while the initial above line of thinking seems not tenable at all - there have been studies done on autistic children and ones with very early onset schizophrenia with seemingly great success.
These are two old studies - logically they canīt be followed up nowadays, since it is a class 1 prohibited substance almost everywhere in the world - mainly due to commercial treaties with the USA, who force this classification on all partners.
So - you have to hold up doubts concerning these studies - not large groups - probably not properly done according to guidelines of drug-testing these days.
So I will refrain from linking up - and express the in my eyes justified reluctance to blindly accept any of it, until further confirmation (next millennium maybe..?).
Youīll find, if you look!
So if im not getting this wrong, (please tell me if i do) luci makes a sound when you're in REM and that will make you lucid since you're suppose to hear it in your dream. Why cant you just make a app that does the same thing? I know luci has a brainwave thing that sees when you're in REM but cant you just try to find out when you actually are in REM instead of spending 100$+? If theres anything else that ive missed please tell me!
Sorry for my spelling, English is not my language and im writing this on my phone
App for that already exists. Search DreamZ on your smartphone for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethral
Thing is - LUCI was a scam - it didn't record any brain-waves - and it even could't have ever - after how it was supposedly technically set up - but again - it was a scam to pull money off people over a crowd-funding regime. There never even existed a prototype.
It turns out that timing the signal from your machine or app to sync with the onset of REM is not so easy, and the best way to trigger that signal is to have it keyed on specific REM-related physical changes, like eye movement or brain waves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethral
So, if you are able to pinpoint the onset of your REM periods, there is indeed an app for that. But if you are like pretty much everybody and can't accurately guess ahead of time when you'll start a REM period, then a detecting device (i.e., the NovaDreamer) would be most helpful in sending you a signal at the right time.
