Skip to main content

Are there limits to what you can do in a dream?

Researchers are very interested in figuring out how memory works, as well as what consciousness is. In order to gather more insight into these areas, they are studying the phenomenon of lucid dreaming in which people are aware, within a dream, that they are within a dream. Lucid dreaming can be accompanied by the ability to alter the dreaming environment at will.

I'm not yet one of the people who can control how often they have lucid dreams, yet last night I had one. After the initial testing to check if it was indeed a dream (poking a hard surface and seeing it bend around my finger), and the inevitable playing out of certain "quick scenarios that could not happen in real life" (leave that to the imagination), I proceeded to do a few in-dream experiments.

I tried to see just how much I can alter within the dream, and what the limitations are.

1. After continuously altering everything in the environment for a few seconds, it became too difficult to continue. I got fatigued and changing things because more difficult.
2. Arbitrary elements persisted in the environment unless I specifically removed them - i.e. there is a stock background. It is easier to put things in than isolate them and take them out.
3. Just like in The Matrix, you have to believe in what you are attempting to create. If you doubt yourself it takes longer to change a chair for example into an armchair.

Pending question: are the experiences perceived in dreams purely replicas of experiences already lived, or can they be generated anew, and therefore stay unique to the dream world?

Comments

Post a Comment

Comment...

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons Google's Calico Won't "Solve Death"

The on-line world has been taken ablaze by Calico's bid to end ageing, and thus death itself, but is this what they will actually focus on, and will they achieve it? The fact is ageing will be reversed, and death by "natural causes" will go with it. The questions are "When?" and "By whom?". Until recently, not a lot was known about the approach Calico would take in this venture dubbed "moonshot thinking" - a term touted by Google as the source of all considerable human progress throughout history. This we don't doubt, but is this what Calico is all about? CNN's Dan Primack has revealed details about Calico's plan , which hint at a less-than-moonshot thinking approach, and cast a serious question mark on its ability to deliver the punchy TIME headline. Here is why: 1. The man with the idea, Bill Maris, arrived at the conclusion that the root of all death-causing disease is simply ageing itself. Not only is this widely ...
11 comments
Read more

First Blog, Ever.

Before we start to explore evolution, let me outline what this blog is about, and what approaches it will take. Most people are aware of the theory of evolution. However, the predominant context of it has been restricted to the animal kingdom, and the most obvious animal of all has been ommitted: you, the human. Us, Homo sapiens. Articles of so-called "evolutionary psychology" may jump up in your head right now. Something about the colours women wear, or the jobs men want. Something about sex, something about money. Something silly. This blog aims to explore the fundamental principles of life and evolution, and apply them to the surrounding world, with an emphasis on humans. This blog aims to challenge evolutionary psychology with evolutionary biology. This blog aims to cast light on many dark areas such as: What is the cause, course and effect of life? Are there principles which apply to all forms of life, on Earth and other places in the Universe? Can we predict life fo...
4 comments
Read more

The "Purpose" of the Female Orgasm

I read on Wikipedia today that the female orgasm has no reproductive use, whereas the male orgasm does. Who the hell comes up with this bollo**s? Firstly, orgasms by themselves cannot be directly related to reproduction, since the vast, vast, vast majority of living things reproduce just fine without them. Secondly, there is no such thing as purpose in evolution. Our idea of purpose is something preconceived to serve a function. For example, a chair is made to be sat on. A typewriter is made to be typed with. A blog post is written to be read and shared. Evolution does not work that way. Nothing is ever made to serve any function because nothing is made according to a function, before that function exists. The concept of function itself is tightly dependent on the environment. A function is the relationship between two things which are connected to each other by cause, effect and time. The only reason most things have a function in living things is because those that did...
5 comments
Read more