• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ

The Big and Dandy DMT Thread - The Fourth Dimension

Status
Not open for further replies.
Psychedelics_r_best said:
Does anyone here know much about the philosophical issues raised by quantum mechanics?

I have used a fair portion of DMT in my lifetime, and the aggregate of all that I learned during my trips (not just on DMT, but DMT contributed a great deal) formulated into a hypothesis of mine that I found out later to be the principle philosophical issue in quantum mechanics, or, basically, everything.

I believe the experience triggered by DMT is intrinsic with this problem, and that surely, there is something much much more to existence than we have established as of yet.

And I believe DMT can help us in it's understanding.
Click to expand...


Do tell, I am intrigued....I find quantum physics etc. extremely interesting, if not baffling.
 
hell yea me too
In fact I have had a very 'quantum physicy' trip on DMT before where I seemed to be able to see down to extremely small scales in completely empty space where I witnessed particles burst into existence as in with the uncertainty principle
 
Psychedelics_r_best said:
Does anyone here know much about the philosophical issues raised by quantum mechanics?
Click to expand...
The central philosophical issue raised by QM in my thinking is the consequence of Bell's argument for the philosophical position of realism. If you run a search on these two terms together you'll find an explanation. Basically the outcome of experiments like the Aspect experiment imply that the relationship of the paired particles in the experiment cannot be explained by a direct causal relationship (cue ball hits 9, 9 moves) or a common cause causal relationship (two street lights turn on at the same time, one light turning on didn't cause the other to turn on, they were both turned on because of their connection to a common grid.)

The states of the paired particles in the experiment are always the same no matter how far apart they travel from one another (even light years), so what explains this? Each cannot be exchanging information about their state to the other because such information cannot travel faster than light (i.e. there's no direct cause.) Likewise, the logical entailment of the outcome of these experiments means that the particles cannot start with a common "instruction set" that determines their states at a future time to explain their shared state (angle of polarization) at all times. Salmon (sp?) argues that if a correlation between two events cannot be explained by direct cause, or arising by chance, it must be explained in terms of a common cause. QM predicts the outcome of the Aspect experiment, yet the experiment completely defies common sense. One solution is to posit that the two particles are actually a unity (and thus have a common cause) in a higher dimensional space.

I've experienced higher spatial perception on a combination of ayahuasca and salvia but I believe the experience owes to an extreme aberration of the perceptual processes underlying my sense of three dimensional space rather than to a glimpse into any actually existing reality.
 
Last edited:
ok well i'm getting some pharmahuasca and the guy said not to take amphetamines for a couple of weeks before taking the maoi...would it be ok if i took amphetamine 2 weeks before taking the maoi? online it says there must be a minimum of 2 weeks between taking the two... i mean amphetamines stay in your system for like 3 days so i would be ok, right? someone that knows anything please shed some light on my question.
thanks
 
Two weeks is defnately OK. Even a week should be enough time to completely have it out of your system.
 
A very good book for learning about the unbiased basics of what quantum mechanics implies about reality is a book called "The Quantum Enigma" by Fred Kuttner and Bruce Rosenblum.

To start out every object both exists as a particle and a wavelength synonymously, there is no difference between the existence of an object in these two states from a photon, to an electron, to an atom, to a molecule, to a biological being.

This is an actual experiment that can be accomplished and has been by numerous physicists. You can split the wavelength of a single object, say an atom into two "boxes" by using a semi transparent crystal mirror. The wavelength is directed into two boxes as some passes through the mirror and some is deflected.

Now you can do either one of two things. Open up the boxes one at a time. If you do this you will find the atom in either one of the two boxes. If it is not in the first you will find it the second. Or, you can open the boxes at the same time and the atom will be released towards an attractive screen. You can see where it lands. It will land in only certain areas designated by an interference pattern. An interference pattern is caused when wave crests and and troughs summate or cancel. The atom will land only on the screen dictated by the interference pattern. This is in a sense probability. The probability of where the object will be, just as it was a probability of finding it in one of the two boxes is. The problem is an interference pattern can only indicate can only imply the atom was in all the boxes simultaneously as a probability produced by its wavelength function. The wavelength function and the particle are synonymous, by the location of the particle is only dictated by where you observe the particle to be. The wavelength function seems to be the probability of where you will observe the atom. Not the probability of where the atom is, the probability that you as a conscious observer will view the particle to be. Before you viewed it at the particles location it was a probability floating as a wave through the air.

This obviously implies that the conscious observer has an integral part in the existence of a material reality.

I will add more later.
 
^ Wowzers

That coincides with my theory that the physical universe only exists through perspective at any moment. That there is no true objectivity and that the universe only exists through subjectivity (in the physical plane we find ourselves in). Please add more and I will check out this book.
 
fact is: when a quantum object is measured, it's wave function collapses, and you get a random result, the probability distribution of the possible results is just what the wave function describes. most interpretations of quantum mechanics don't need consciousness, however: a measurement is just defined as an interaction with a much larger system that can be described classically (i.e. not quantum theoretically).

on the other hand, there are ongoing debates on which interpretation of QM is correct, of course.
 
This information is delicious. It furthers my suspicions about the dualistic realities that we are normally only fit to perceive half of. We are confined to a certain frequency that we are willing to accept, only it blinds us from realizing the other half of "what" acts on our existence.

There is more than 50% (now believed to be 95%) of matter in the universe that is not matter, but any sort of dark matter. Scientists were first led onto dark matter's existence because they could not explain, with our basic knowledge of the physical, what else could be affecting gravitational pulls and orbits in galaxies.

What does this other plane of existence do in its own time? Are we experiencing some of it on DMT? What is this dark halo of matter that lubricates between our physical matter and what changes does it create? Is it merely a "solid" manifestation of our energies, spirits, or essences or beings?

Blah blah blah...

ak7cqo.jpg
 
shamans say (i believe it was mexican shamans, all my shaman info gets tangled together into my cumulative practices) that as a shadow gives a feel for the identity of the object casting it,

so does our percieved reality give a feel of the occurances within the spirit realm (ie our reality is the 2d shadow) :) :)
 
and yeah, i was recently reading that physicists think that our matter only fills about 5-10% of the universes components. with dark matter being greater, and dark energy being the most concentrated i believe.
 
So is it light that converts the wave to a particle? Or is a particle just a point or snapshot of the wave? Intriguing subject quantum physics, also very mind boggling!
 
ungelesene_bettlek said:
fact is: when a quantum object is measured, it's wave function collapses, and you get a random result, the probability distribution of the possible results is just what the wave function describes. most interpretations of quantum mechanics don't need consciousness, however: a measurement is just defined as an interaction with a much larger system that can be described classically (i.e. not quantum theoretically).

on the other hand, there are ongoing debates on which interpretation of QM is correct, of course.
Click to expand...

i think the random result is determined by forces we cannot study because only we can study ourselves on that leve. it is the level of desire and choice. our observation, when that is what makes the wave colapses, is directly linked to the way it behaves. this may explain karma, love, god, etc...
 
SanGaz said:
So is it light that converts the wave to a particle? Or is a particle just a point or snapshot of the wave? Intriguing subject quantum physics, also very mind boggling!
Click to expand...

My understanding of it is the that it is the observation of the light photons that creates the change, not simply the light itself.

It must be remembered that the double-slit experiments were conducted and had to then conform to the notion of Einsteins that something can never travel faster then light. Thus when the photons reacted simulataneously and instantaneously with each other, the proposition is that they were not serpeate particles or photons communicating faster then light, but simply the same one, viewed from a different perspective- like a hologram.

Taking that thought up from a quantum level, things like synchronicity become almost manageable. If two objects that appear to be seperate in space and time (such as light) are actually one and the same, with the only difference being perpsective, I wonder how many other seemingly unrelated objects are actually merely different views of each other? Its common on DMT to see and feel connections between things that would normally seem nonsenical...who knows, perhpas DMT allows more interpretation and concious processing of the quantum nature of all things, allowing one to perceive similarities in objects where one could not previously; similarities, not because they are vaguely conceptually related, but similar in that they are the same things.

End blather.

edit: all in all, it is interesting to note that science has essentially 'proven' that something can appear to be in two places in space and time at once- or that the concept of "space and time" is utterly erroneous. I imagine relaity as being more folded onto itself rather then as a sphere.....so the andromedan galaxy could be five metres to my right if only I could focus the correct super-energy.
 
SanGaz said:
So is it light that converts the wave to a particle? Or is a particle just a point or snapshot of the wave? Intriguing subject quantum physics, also very mind boggling!
Click to expand...

Your seeing the photon bounce off the atom ensures that the atom is in the place where you saw it, and will be forever (until all interactions, termed entanglement, ceases.) The fact you saw that photon bounce off that atom entangles that atom with you. You saw it there. Therefore that atom is interacting with every other atom in your body.

Your observation of an atom creates a history of it dictated by the most probable interactions that rely on quantum probability. This reality is very locked in place by how severely entangled everything is. Photons are bouncing off things at the speed of light and entangle everything into its most probable position. (This last paragraph is a bit of my own interpretation.)

This means the big question is.....how did it all start?
 
DMT...enjoyable?

I've been wanting to try DMT for quite some time now. I've done shrooms 3 times, and acid at least 10 times, so I'm fairly experienced with tripping (and absolutely love it). DMT being as intense as it is, is it actually fun?
 
I think DMT is way more fun than both acid and mushrooms, personally.

the thing is, it doesn't hit you like a traditional, longer-lasting psychedelic does. You take your hits, maybe feel anxious and apprehensive for some 30 seconds to 1 minute as the effects start to creep up on you, and then just......float awaayyyyy. All of a sudden you're just gone.

one thing that's different about DMT -- and a lot of people will agree with me on this -- is that it kinda takes care of you. Even if you start off scared, it will show you a good time. It will make sure you have a fun, distinctly personalized experience. This may not be true for absolutely everyone, but with you having done your fair share of psychedelics already, I imagine you will be fine.

be safe!
 
Thanks! I really, really, really love laughing gas while on acid/shrooms, so I don't mind a short, intense trip.
 
try smoking DMT on acid sometime. I just got around to doing that for the first time ever, perhaps a week ago, and it was outstanding. My acid visuals doubled in breadth for like an hour and a half afterwards, it was sick.

;)
 
nbsp said:
try smoking DMT on acid sometime. I just got around to doing that for the first time ever, perhaps a week ago, and it was outstanding. My acid visuals doubled in breadth for like an hour and a half afterwards, it was sick.

;)
Click to expand...

I wish it was that easy, but I can't even do acid anymore, I simply can't afford to get caught with drugs again after going to rehab. But I move out in a year, so that's what I'm waiting for.

But I definitely want to try that, more so, DMT plus laughing gas. 8o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top