My Dream Theory

[Eana Ketuwong]

Kaltxì! So, I've been pondering how dreams work lately...not in a scientific sense, but in a different manner.

My theory:
Your dreams are a part of a universe that is alternate of our world, and is created inside of your head. It's not entirely real, and you can't access it at all times, so it's not a functioning world. (It could be.) So basically, inside your head is the "Dream World" which is yours and yours alone...and the only people that can access it are the ones that you put in there and you.

Am I making sense? Please comment below and tell me what you think.

[Lolet]

Interesting theory... but I hope it's not true, because I would have the lamest dream universe ever. 

[Eana Ketuwong]

Interesting theory... but I hope it's not true, because I would have the lamest dream universe ever. 

Hrh, so would I except it's filled with hot guys..I guess that's not lame then, is it? But true, oh so true.

[Tsyal Maktoyu]

Sounds plausable. The "real world" is completely inside our heads, as well. It is simply a reconstruction of the sensory information gathered by our five senses. Without one or more of these, our world, the "real world", is incomplete. The only difference is that dreams are reconstructed from internalized, self-made "sensory" information.

[Eana Ketuwong]

Sounds plausable. The "real world" is completely inside our heads, as well. It is simply a reconstruction of the sensory information gathered by our five senses. Without one or more of these, our world, the "real world", is incomplete. The only difference is that dreams are reconstructed from internalized, self-made "sensory" information.

Ah-see? Yes! That's what I was getting at!

[guest2859]

Just watch the movie "Inception" and I think that has it covered, except the link of 2+ minds.

[bommel]

Interesting theory... but I hope it's not true, because I would have the lamest dream universe ever. 

Me too because I can't remember when I had a dream the last time. Usually I sleep like a stone and all hell has to break loose to wake me up again

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Go learn lucid dreaming (lucidity.org) and you'll be an expert on dreams.

Dreams are NOT an alternate world, they are an alternate WORLD MODEL. Other people CANNOT ACCESS IT. If you know you are dreaming WHILE you are dreaming, you can change the dream at will - for example you can just imagine a door is a teleporter and walk through it - bang and you are on Pandora! 

Anyway, Inception is a very bad representation of dreams:

1. Time does not flow differently in dreams. Scientific experiments have conclusively demonstrated that this is not the case.
2. You cannot have two or more people in dreams.
3. You do not need guns to kill people in dreams.
4. Your thoughts do not end up in safes in dreams. It would be cool if Inception was true. Think of a NARF sneaking into your dreams and emptying a safe of all of the flashcards and Taronyu's dictionary - when you wake up, you won't even remember what Kaltxì means!
5. Changing dreams will not make the "projections" converge. In fact you can change the DCs (dream chars) in the dream as easily as the environment

And on and on...

Also visit dreamviews.org, but beware, there are a lot of pseudoscience baloney in the "Beyond Dreaming" section.

[Tsyal Maktoyu]

Time can flow at the same rate in dreams as it does in real life, but there are techniques I have heard that are tossed around that claim to be able to stretch time in lucid dreams. The one I remember most vividely is to imagine a clock and change the face, an indirect way to will the rate of time flow into changing. There's a lot of evidence on both sides. I'm good at dream recall, and I personally do have coherent memories of about a days worth of dream time (split over several dreams) occuring in a single night. It's probably a matter of YMMV, and the mindset one has when they do lucid dream. That's the big variable in trying to quantify dream time through the outside world. In the experiment with the lucid dreamer signaling those outside the dream to evaulate dream time, the dreamer's personal expectations play a major role in the outcome. There are of course limits, though. Limbo obviously being one. Though again, YMMV.

They were sharing dreams through the PASIV dream machine, not through spiritual shared dreaming or something, if that was what you were implying. My theory is that they transfered neural information through wires in the IV or something. Seems like a plausible technology, too, given where mind-computer interfacing is headed. Neuroscience is becoming more and more complex each day. Artificial telepathy is already becoming a plaything (Mattel Mindflex). It's only a matter of time before we will be able to cross two or more dreaming minds with the aid of computers (maybe one conveniently hidden in a briefcase ).

No you don't need guns in dreams, but it's always fun, no?

You can if you want, it's all a matter of how you choose to build your lucid dreams. In common dreams the subconscious shows through other means (environment, events, etc), that's how people are able to interpret dreams. It seems plausable that someone would be able to compartamentalize certain thoughts into safes or vaults if they did it purposely. The limits to environment building in lucid dreams are endless.

No, but I've had strange stuff happen to me when I've gained lucidity. I was once in a dream where I was in class, got lucid, and everyone just stared at me. Once I had a dream where the entire room flooded right after gaining lucidity. I've only had a handful of LDs, and this is how most ended (or I fly away). I guess it all comes down to dream control. There's all sorts of ways that dreams can collapse, and getting attacked by a mob sounds like one possibility.

I like dreamviews. Became a member a week ago. But that's a little harsh on people who believe in more spiritual aspects of dreaming, don't you think? You might not believe in stuff like that (I personally don't), but respect those that do. Alright?

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

What I mean isn't that there are spiritual theories. It is only that their theories do not have any tiny little piece of evidence. For example, shared dreaming... it would be extremely easy to set up an experiment to test it, but every time I mention it, the shared dream believers just circumlocute it in absurd ways, like "shared dreaming in a lab is impossible" and "science is only an approximation."

Another very absurd theory is that you can share a dream with somebody in the future or the past, or that people sleeping in different time zones can share the same dream. However, if you DID share a dream with somebody in the past, you would have no free will, since what you would do is already dictated by the dream that ALREADY HAPPENED in the past. The SD skxawngs just shrug this off and say "time is just relative."

I am not trying to insult their personal opinions on non-essential untestable aspects like whether our soul is inside our body when we are dreaming. I am only stating that they purposefully evade testings of their theories and do not believe in logic.

By the way, my username on DreamViews is "ludr." What is yours?

P.S. I am writing a paper on how paranormal experiences (OBEs, shared dreams, glossolalia) are explained better by known scientific phenomena. If you want the chapter on dreams (which I have already finished) PM me.

[Tsyal Maktoyu]

It's TsyalMakto.

Tbh I really haven't read much yet about shared dreaming, but from what I have read, a good portion are at least trying to follow the scientific method. They try to set up experiments, albeit that's a bit difficult with something with as many variables and as esoteric as dreaming. I didn't see anyone talking about shared dreaming from the past or future, where'd you see that? Seems like common sense that that would be impossible, even for something as outside the norm as SDing. Those people must be the fringes.

Though I find it funny how you are trying not to insult them, but you call them skxawngs.  Maybe it's time to start practicing other Na'vi words...

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

I am not calling shared dreamers skxawngs; I am calling those shared dreamers who don't use the scientific method skxawngs.

Yes, they use a vaguely scientifical method with LOTS OF LOOPHOLES which include the placebo effect, retroactive memory, etc.

The simple way to do things would be to teach the other shared dreamer about something they don't know, like your password or Na'vi . Then, immediately after waking up and not talking anything, make the other person type in the password or list all of the Na'vi pronouns.

The above method has been mentioned by me and innumerable other science-oriented DreamViews forum users. Unfortunately, the SD skxawngs Na'viya always brush them away with the esoteric arguments I have described.

BTW, I personally believe that a machine that can connect dreams would be possible but unnecessary. Kind of like doing math homework in octal and then writing a formula on the top of the page about how to convert your answers to the correct ones. It would be much easier to make a totally immersive online virtual world than to connect brains, which would probably involve heavy and expensive machines.

Edit: did I write the word for "people" correctly?

[Clarke]

BTW, I personally believe that a machine that can connect dreams would be possible but unnecessary. Kind of like doing math homework in octal and then writing a formula on the top of the page about how to convert your answers to the correct ones. It would be much easier to make a totally immersive online virtual world than to connect brains, which would probably involve heavy and expensive machines.

It wouldn't be too heavy if you surgically added something to read the brain, rather than doing it with an MRI-style machine. Another issue is that doing it wirelessly might not give you the bandwidth you'd need, so in that case you'd have to have a cable(s) coming out of the person's head.

...That sounds familiar... 

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

The software would have to be complex.

Okay. So here is a sample prototype protocol implementation, written in pseudocode, decades before it is translated into code...

Assume that dreamer A controls the environment of the dream.

Read right eye image from visual cortex of dreamer A into variable a-r
Read left eye image from visual cortex of dreamer A into variable a-l

Now comes the funny part. It is quite impossible to read the world image directly, but reading from the visual cortex should be possible. Thus, you get a right eye image and a left eye image. This, of course, can be monitored with 3D glasses, but that wouldn't be sharing dreams.

Let's assume that in the future there is some sort of magic technology that can reconstruct an entire 3D scene as a mesh based on nothing but the view from two eyes. So,

Magically convert a-r and a-l into mesh variable "worldmodel"

Now we have the worldmodel, we can put dreamer B inside it. So,

Randomly generates a location for dreamer B nearby dreamer A
Render the view of mesh "worldmodel" from location

Now, we have the first frame of the shared dream. However, what would happen if one of the dreamer moves?

If dreamer A moves,

Spoiler

Read eye images from dreamer A
Calculate worldmodel from eye images
Calculate position of dreamer A in worldmodel mesh
Read posture of body from motor cortex of dreamer A
Calculate posture of body
Render model of dreamer A (be it a Na'vi or a tawtute)
Calculate image of dreamer A's model from viewpoint of dreamer B
Store worldmodel from viewpoint of B into temp memory
Overlay image of dreamer A into worldmodel image in temp memory
Render temp memory into visual cortex of dreamer B.

As you can see, this is a long and drawn-out process. What's more, network lag and packet loss would be a big problem. Additionally, the resolution needs to be ~5000p and ~120fps, with lossless 24-bit audio perfectly rendered, and tons of sensory information that I have just thrown away here for purposes of demonstration.


IN A NUTSHELL, shared dreaming is not simply making two people see, feel, and hear the same things from the same viewpoint. That would be fairly easy. However, that technology, which would of course include external input to the visual and audio cortices, would be very useful too. Imagine watching tutorials on Na'vi and also the Avatar movie in 1080p hi-res while asleep! Good use of time...

[Clarke]

Whereas if you read the mind directly, (however you do it) you can just pull the "world" out of... whatever's generating it. Though there'll probably be problems from the dreamer not knowing exactly what they're dreaming about and inventing it as they go along.

Actually, it's probably easier to just ape The Matrix, and let the computer control what actually goes on in the dreams.

[Tsyal Maktoyu]

I think you're overcomplicating this, Quantum, it's probably just a matter of copying the EEG readings of the dreamers, and copying/manipulating it in such a way as to render a projection of that person in the mind of the other dreamer, and vice versa. There is already plans for such a service online, which is being discussed at dream views. (Title is something about social dreaming, in the general dream discussion section). At first it will likely be very primitive, like the rendering as a hypnagogic image or similar. But it's a start.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Then the dreams aren't shared - i.e. we won't be in the same place. Maybe I am dreaming of Avatar  and you are dreaming of driving a car around 'Rrta. I don't want my image projected into your car and your image projected into my toruk. What I mean is that the dreams will not be shared - you won't teleport to Pandora, and neither would I teleport to your car.

Your solution, though, can be a great way to create a dream IM protocol. TeamSpeak while asleep, anyone?

[Tsyal Maktoyu]

Well, that's why I said it's a start. Getting EEGs to cross would set a pretty good precedent, no? Things will progress as the tech gets better.

[Clarke]

IMO, it's still easier to ape the Matrix and do it that way. Manipulating EEG doesn't actually help, since it'd be like manipulating a photograph. (Say hi to Fox's server farms.  ) AFAIK, you can't stick EEG readings back into your head.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

If you ape the Matrix you don't actually have to make the people go to sleep. Just get a pair of screen glasses, earphones, motion detectors, and then make them float around in space.  However, REM sleep has a benefit - the body is already paralyzed, so you don't need to worry about the participant crashing into walls because they can't see the real world.