Thread: Password Shared Dreaming Experiment Part 2

Originally Posted by Indeed

What I'm getting at here is that it needs to be more than words. It needs to be something you can feel, smell, taste, etc. in order to make it more memorable and easier to communicate.

This is undermining the fact that it's apparent that in our dreams, our brain can give a pretty convincing stimulation of those senses, and based on one's suggestibility, just because of heightened senses, it does not mean it's necessary to figure out as simple two-word password.

We're trying to take baby steps here, in the experiment Mindraker set up, it's blatantly put out there that some people thought that adding more exceptions to an already simplified method would end up in chaos and possibly just a precognitive endeavor.

When you state that you utilize these senses to manifest a more compact and intense recall for the sake of ease of communication, you also have to realize that this adds way too many exceptions.

-Are those simulations of the 5 senses (and more) enough to prevent the possibility of it just being fabricated and false?

Unless you've read the results from the last experiment, which I made an Excel file for the participants and control variables, the simplicity of a two word password itself proved to be some potential.

If it were possible to have aa token of some sort eith it's own password (or name or whatever) and make sure it has something that can be perceived in any of the five senses.

Then the experiment would be focusing on the object that may be the medium of figuring out the password, and this is also placing a belief on an object rather than the person attempting to synch with other people.

Placing faith just on an object, and expect that it gives you these senses that can clue you in on the password completely eradicates the purpose of the experiment itself.

That type of objective promote a false endeavor in attempts to have precognitive dreams.

We are not trying to have precognitive analysis, we are trying to have shared dreaming analysis.

This means there has to be interaction with a being, if it's just an object, that introduces the possibility of that object releasing even more vague metaphors, which makes the whole desire to try and find mechanisms to have consistent results in interaction.

Now, if a person who is trying to "synch" with others has the object and gives it to that person personally (presumptively), then sure, your planning seems valid. But then again, there's no need to give them the object when the objective is to simply try and communicate to the person.

Now, how one communicates with that person ties in with the possibility that this is just a psi, or telepathy endeavor....and that itself has stinging debates that don't need to be introduced. It's just simply meeting someone in the dream state through the "synch" attempts.

Now, if you want to add perplexing motions stimulated by several senses, you have to take into account that our minds are way more clever than to abide by simple measures....one prime example, false awakenings. And also, it's fairly common sense that how the participants recall that dream is up to their own bodies, it's not that difficult to practice dream senses, there's many guides related to just that.

This experiment is attempting to make things as simple as possible (just following the format if you were lucid, what password was given, if it was given, time spent asleep, etc.).

This isn't supposed to be a revolutionary method, it's just being created to be simple as possible. Now as we come to the end of the experiment, the results itself guides us to other things to try out.

But honestly, the experiments themselves stems from the idea of passwords, and beings, people, to try and communicate giving that password, to imply that there may have been a shared dream.

Putting faith on a token, or any other object, without a being, a body vessel, makes the whole experiment useless.

It would be just finding the object rather than meeting the person. That is not abiding to the presumptive nature behind shared dreaming, which is simply the purpose of meeting a human being in the dream state, NOT an object you place faith to sublimate or trigger your "senses." Even though there can be possibilities of projections of the person you're finding, at least it's some attempt from the unconscious and subconscious to find a connection to meeting that person.

How a person collects those senses to make a strong memory from it is not rocket science. Generally, the subconscious works ideally through images rather than words, now how that person makes meaning to that is their interpretation from those broad visuals....and that itself is something they are responsible for.

If that weren't the case, than how could they recall it? I'm sure sight of words isn't enough, because there can be random collections of words in dreams. How that person can filter them out to try and find clues to the password and possibly finding the person with the password is sufficient.