Thread: My conclusions so far.

If anyone is wondering what area of lucid dreaming I'm working on right now, it's shared dreaming.

But there are complications, so wish me luck!

Glad I actually read that since it's like a book length wise, but it was full of good shit and got me thinking Would be sweet for the lucid dream invention stuff you talked about too

1. I agree that most dreams have some fragment of meaning because it's what our mind deems important, and I think sometimes it tests us by putting us in situations we fear to get us to form a plan of action. Then again if you allow for a certain amount of interpretation, all thoughts have meaning, which is essentially what dreams are, vivid thoughts. However some thoughts are so disorganized, they shouldn’t be thought of as having any "general" real meaning when many meanings come together in an unorganized way.

2. I agree with your idea of dream control, which has been proven to me time and time again. I’ve lost my fear of SP because I know that if something scary happens to appear, all I have to do is resist panic, and it will vanish. However just because something is in a dream, and people believe it, doesn’t let you call it real. Some people believe that dream guides are entities that do not limit themselves to your subconscious. By that definition, pink elephants, unicorns, and superman are all real. I know that people around here have some beliefs about lds which don’t apply to mine, such as, lights not working, or excitement ruining dreams, none of which apply for me as long as I focus on what I’m doing. If you don't let limits in the dream annoy you, you can overcome them much easier.

3. Again I agree, anyone who thinks there are layers isn’t really thinking logically, that seems to be something we might think well in the dream.

4. I think type 2 can be trained, type 1's may be just genetically at an advantage brainwise. However I think there is a method out there capable of making lucid dreaming happen almost every night, at least on an individual level.

5. I think it would be reather simple to make such a device (simple in terms of the great usefulness of it), ofcourse I don’t know all the subtleties of biological engineering. All a person would have to do is get the brain to enter the state of dreaming by making the brain look like it does well in REM. The quick transition would be enough to allow you to get a huge boost in lucidity at the very beginning, so instant virtual reality there.

Interesting surmise!

*sigh*

Damage control time.

Originally Posted by lucidmax15895

Hello again, DV.

For those of you who don't know me, I'm a natural lucid dreamer. I have been inactive from DV for quite a long while, but I have come to share my findings. I figured I should do my part in expanding the knowledge of lucid dreams, and share it.

Okay, cool.

Welcome back.

Please don't take anything I'm about to say as an attack on you personally. Just hear me out before responding. I took the time to read everything you wrote, so I hope you can afford me the same courtesy.

Originally Posted by lucidmax15895

1. Dreams are not random.

No matter how random dreams may be, there is always an underlying meaning to it. Our brains always, let me repeat, always try to communicate a message through dreams.

Sometimes this message is simple. Sometimes it's a very complex, subtle, underlying piece of thought. Mostly, our brains use, for a lack of a better word, a substitution cipher. Does that mean that there is a subconscious inside us trying to tell us something?

No. Dreams merely reflect our current emotional states. And encrypt the reflection. By trying to understand how it's encrypted, we can figure out what we really feel inside.

For example, consider an examination. Let's say you did well in it. Logically, you feel positive about it. You cross checked the answers with your friends and they matched, so you are expecting a high score. However, you dread results internally. You fear you will get a bad result.

The brain will not show you a dream of you getting high marks. Instead, you will see yourself failing. Keep in mind this is a very crude example, and real meanings of dreams are much more obscured. The more imaginative mind you have, the more complex the decryption tends to be.

If you do not agree with this, try to remember your last dream, figure out it's key elements, and try to make a connection with recent events. There is always a connection.

I'd really like to see the research material you've brought together to form this conclusion. From what I can see, you're on the right track, but you've jumped the gun a bit by boiling dream formation down to subconscious feelings and desires expressed by encrypted symbols.

Given you're assertions, you might be familiar with psychoanalytic theory. If not, I recommend reading up on it, as it parallels many of the ideas you've expressed here.

Unfortunately, this is a very outdated model (though arguably useful in certain situations). Generally speaking, approaching things from a cognitive viewpoint (collecting empirical data instead of relying on introspection) is a more widely accepted way to go about research.

For instance, you seem familiar with the concept of day residue. Well, if you wanted your statements to hold more merit, it might help to take the cognitive approach, and cite some research.

e.g. http://dreamscience.ca/en/documents/..._dream_lag.pdf

Still, this is just a symptom of dreaming. You'll notice the publication doesn't jump to any conclusions, like you have here.

To really nail down what causes dream formation, you have to look at this issue from as many sides, consider as many theories as possible, and test each one for validity.

A good example of this can be found here: - Google Scholar
Look up the article in whatever database is convenient.

Of course, we all know that there isn't a single widely accepted theory for dream formation. And for good reason. Yes, there's strong evidence for the day residue effect, but your conclusion, your theory, doesn't logically follow from this effect. That's the biggest issue many of these theories run into: finding evidence that support conclusions, while simultaneously looking for evidence that disproves them.

Given the nature of the dreaming, empirically finding the root of dream formation is difficult, but there's years of intensive, peer reviewed research out there trying to determine just that.

Originally Posted by lucidmax15895

2. Dream Guides is a real phenomenon.

I'm gonna be breaking this one down step by step.

Originally Posted by lucidmax15895

Yes, it's true. They aren't fantasies created by excited lucid dreamers. Or shall I say, they aren't fantasies ANYMORE.

You see, dreams are always based on expectation. By learning to control what you expect, what you believe, you can change the elements of a dream. This is known as dream control.

There's so much wrong with this assertion, I don't know where to begin.

Instead of outright explaining it (I've written numerous guides for that purpose), I'll pose a few questions to help get you started on a more complete understanding of dream control.

How are dream control and dream formation related?
How do you account for the innumerable reports that expectation alone failed to bring about desired results?
Following that, how do you account for the fact that many of the most experienced LDers report the same phenomena, despite having perfect expectations while performing a task they've successfully done thousands of times before?

There are two types of control. Conscious and subconscious. Conscious control is what we apply during lucid dreaming, while subconscious control is what we apply in nightmares, non-lucids, etc.

Again, questions.

Could you please explicitly define conscious and subconscious?
What are the different aspects of each type of control?
How do you account for people who exert lucid-like control without an explicit realization that they are dreaming?
What about people with decades of experiences and thousands of LDs under their belt who report a consistent state where they are intrinsically aware they are dreaming and can exert complete control without any explicit realization?

Let's look at this way. Suppose I was a highly respected researcher at lucid dreaming. And I told you, that there is a counterpart to a Dream Guide, a Dream Demon.

I'd ask to know if your paper on the subject had been published yet, and if so where. Then I'd look at your data myself and see if your conclusion followed your method.

If that idea picked up, and was shared by a sufficient amount of people who agree with it, you'll probably start to believe it. And thus, subconscious control will CREATE a Dream Demon to match YOUR expectation.

You're right. I totally and completely believe in all sufficiently popular religious dogma.

Oh, as an aside, have you met my pals Sam and Dean Winchester? They're pretty cool and the world they live in exactly reflects my dreaming world.

Baa.

Sorry. XP

Strawmen aside, my real argument will just take us back to your first point...

This is, I believe, what happened with the Dream Guide idea. However, another question pops up. Are Dream Guides really manifestations of your subconscious? Are they really a self-controlled reoccurring dream character that helps you around?

The answer is yes. Since you believed they are real, you also believed that definition. Hence, subconsciously, you created a physical manifestation of your subconscious. You created a character that had it's own mind, and made it help you around your way.

How do I know that? I experimented around an online site that was new to lucid dreaming (9gag.com) and told them that lucid dreams were dangerous. This idea was picked up by thousands of people across the world, and suddenly, people who tried it, reported negative experiences regarding lucid dreaming.

Alright, putting aside that your "experiment" (as you've presented it) is atrociously unethical, and not even an experiment (by the widely accepted definition), all of those concerns could be rationalized with the day residue effect, which you yourself touched on in your first point.

Think about it this way:

Throughout the day, you're worried lucid dreaming is going to be negative and scary.
You go to sleep, with that worry at the back of your mind.
You have an experience that reflects those negative thoughts.

That's just a basic example of day residue. All you've done here is try to provide evidence for something that's already been extensively studied, while simultaneously fucking up a ton of people's chances to enjoy and master lucidity.

Not cool.

This leads one to think that expectation, in one way, is the science, of how to manipulate your dreams. You can call it the theory of everything of dreams.

Again, this is simply drawing conclusions based on the day residue effect. You can't make wide-sweeping statements like this without broadening your scope and collecting real evidence.

3. Dreams do not have layers.

Sorry to burst anyone's dreams, but there is no such things as 'depths' in a dream, as suggested in Inception. The dream within a dream within a dream (times infinity) idea is fake. There will be many people who will disagree with me on accounts of personal experiences, but I have personally spent a good long time on it.

What I was able to conclude, is that what we think of as 'layers' are just different scenarios in the same dreams, with us losing dream consciousness while we think we 'fell asleep'.

Also, the time slowing down idea seems shaky, to say the least. Yes, our brain functions faster. Yes, dream time is different from real time. No, you can't be trapped for infinity inside a dream.

Why? Because there are LIMITATIONS. We are machines, our brains are computers. And just like a computer, there is a limit to it's performance. While the maximum specs are indeed, impressive, there is a limit to how fast our brains can perform. This is ALSO limited by other process the brain has to manage, like the digestion of food, breathing, and every other involuntary action your body has. A HUGE chunk of our brain capacity is used up in those.

I cannot say this for sure, because you cannot trust clocks in a dream, or your experience of time passing. As such, I may be totally wrong, but probability and a little logic tips the scale in my favor.

Your logic here is flawed, but I'm not going to argue about an idea that was conceived by popular fiction.

Also, please do some real research into how the brain and body functions (and computers, too, for that matter).

The computer metaphor is just an idea to help people understand certain aspects of how the brain functions (you see it used commonly with certain memory models). The big picture is way more complicated than most people can grasp, as evidenced by our limited progress in creating procedures to treat brain abnormalities, or even creating a fully realized simulation.

I don't claim to be an expert, but I can tell you right now that all those "lesser" bodily functions are handled by very specialized regions. Try searching for info on the the pons and medulla, and working from there to see what I'm getting.

4. There are two types of natural lucid dreamers.

Namely, those who naturally lucid dream, and those who naturally control their lucid dreams.

What's the difference? Type 1, let's call them natural lucid dreamers, need to make little to no effort in inducing LUCIDITY. For them, almost all their dreams begin with them being lucid.

Type 2, let's call them natural control lords (lol.), have near to perfect control of their lucid dreams. They usually do not have as frequent lucid dreams as Type 1, but when they do lucid dream, they have an unnatural level of control over it, as you would have total control of, let's say, your own body in real life. I am Type 2.

I'm not saying you are either Type 1 or Type 2, I'm saying that there is two distinct categories. A dreamer may be anywhere between them, or only on one side. When you are at the either extreme, that is known as natural lucid dreaming.

This is wrong:

I can cite a few examples of people who begin every dream lucid and have complete control in each one. However, most of the don't frequent DV, and providing you with the necessary information to seek them out is against the rules.

People like this do not exist within the set you've defined.

Therefore by counterexample, your categories are flawed.

5. Lucid dream induction is very close in the future.

Yes, you WILL be able to induce lucid dreams like in Inception soon in the future. It's a relatively simple process, and given enough time and money, we will eventually exploit ways to induce lucid dreams.

I would do it myself but there are complications. I am 16, and have no money or sponsors.
So it's unlikely I would invent anything. xD But I am fairly certain that someone with enough money and equipment will do it soon. Already we are starting to see breakthroughs in that area, so be optimistic.

Apply for a grant.

If you are as knowledgeable as you claim, it shouldn't take much to write a proposal, find a researcher who'd be willing to work with you (an maybe co-author the paper detailing your results), and start the process of making your idea a reality.

Age isn't an issue. I know a few people 18 and under who are involved in real research (both under and post-grad).

If anyone has any questions that are not yet answered (i.e., questions on the cutting edges of lucid dreaming), I would be happy to look into it and try to answer it, either by research, or using my own dreams and seeing what results I get.

Regards,
Max.

If you could answer the questions I've already posed, that'd be great.
Also, if you could provide citations of your research, that'd be awesome.

Text citations would suffice, but links would be preferable, if you have the time.

Hi Max,

Your conclusions are based in flawed logic and your understanding of the science of dreams is almost nonexistent. Mzz already pointed out what I would have to say about each conclusion.

Google IASD. You can join their forum for free, and you can become an official member at a discounted price as a student. They also fund research. Maybe you should send them your proposal. If what you have to say has any basis whatsoever in the existing science, I'm sure I'll see your name published in their journal soon. Good luck.

Mzzkc, I would like to point out, that the thread is titled 'My conclusions so far'. This, by no means, asserts that I am either, a trained professional at research, or am by any means presenting facts. I am merely stating what I have gathered based on MY experience, and hence am open to criticism. I didn't take the slightest offense.

Now.

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

I'd really like to see the research material you've brought together to form this conclusion. From what I can see, you're on the right track, but you've jumped the gun a bit by boiling dream formation down to subconscious feelings and desires expressed by encrypted symbols.

Given you're assertions, you might be familiar with psychoanalytic theory. If not, I recommend reading up on it, as it parallels many of the ideas you've expressed here.

Unfortunately, this is a very outdated model (though arguably useful in certain situations). Generally speaking, approaching things from a cognitive viewpoint (collecting empirical data instead of relying on introspection) is a more widely accepted way to go about research.

For instance, you seem familiar with the concept of day residue. Well, if you wanted your statements to hold more merit, it might help to take the cognitive approach, and cite some research.

e.g. http://dreamscience.ca/en/documents/..._dream_lag.pdf

Still, this is just a symptom of dreaming. You'll notice the publication doesn't jump to any conclusions, like you have here.

To really nail down what causes dream formation, you have to look at this issue from as many sides, consider as many theories as possible, and test each one for validity.

A good example of this can be found here: - Google Scholar
Look up the article in whatever database is convenient.

Of course, we all know that there isn't a single widely accepted theory for dream formation. And for good reason. Yes, there's strong evidence for the day residue effect, but your conclusion, your theory, doesn't logically follow from this effect. That's the biggest issue many of these theories run into: finding evidence that support conclusions, while simultaneously looking for evidence that disproves them.

Given the nature of the dreaming, empirically finding the root of dream formation is difficult, but there's years of intensive, peer reviewed research out there trying to determine just that.

I have to say I can't disagree with any of that. Maybe I was a bit bold with my vocabulary, but again, I am in no means 'jumping to conclusions'. This is why I posted this on DV, to hear opinions from more educated members.

Firstly, yes, I do realize my 'experiments' aren't really reliable either in their methods or in the theory which I base them on.

How did I come to this conclusion? (Since that seems to be the very first question you posted.)

Well, first, by observing my own dreams in a detailed manner. Note that I'm talking about non-lucids here (for obvious reasons).

What *I* observed, the dreams were almost always based on my previous experiences, or 'day residue'. However, I did share the idea with my friends, two of whom are frequent lucid dreamers. By collecting and sharing our dreams, and discussing them with each other, we were able to see an underlying pattern among almost all of those dreams. Most of the dreams seemed to be based on fears and/or emotions regarding their current lives. We have our dreams on paper, I would be happy to type out some of the dreams we shared.

Next, I began to ask around my school, family members, and any people I know. From questioning about 25 people, around 15 of them had recent dreams which could easily be linked to recent events.

But now that I think about it, weren't Sigmund Freud's theories tested and verified a long time ago? I might be totally on the wrong track, considering introspection REALLY doesn't stand well with modern researchers.

Originally Posted by Mzzkc

How are dream control and dream formation related?
How do you account for the innumerable reports that expectation alone failed to bring about desired results?
Following that, how do you account for the fact that many of the most experienced LDers report the same phenomena, despite having perfect expectations while performing a task they've successfully done thousands of times before?

Frankly, in my experience, expectation alone never fails to bring about desired results. I have ALWAYS been able to do what I wanted using expectation alone, sometimes on the first try, sometimes on the hundredth. But so far, I have never failed to create anything with expectation alone. But since you already pointed out the hole in my logic, the 'innumerable reports' certainly do hold a higher value from a research perspective. However, for what it's worth, I'd say that people aren't really trying hard enough, aren't really skilled at it, or haven't done it enough times to succeed frequently.

Following that, how do you account for the fact that many of the most experienced LDers report the same phenomena, despite having perfect expectations while performing a task they've successfully done thousands of times before?

I'm sorry, you lost me. What 'same' phenomena? Dream guides? Inability to create with expectation alone? Can you please rephrase this question?

Could you please explicitly define conscious and subconscious?
What are the different aspects of each type of control?
How do you account for people who exert lucid-like control without an explicit realization that they are dreaming?
What about people with decades of experiences and thousands of LDs under their belt who report a consistent state where they are intrinsically aware they are dreaming and can exert complete control without any explicit realization?

I was asserting two forms of control, one that we are aware of, and another that we are not. I believe I just stated the aspects of each type of control. I'm thinking you've not understood my point, I think I fail at expressing my thoughts. Second language English can only get you so far.

I was not implying that you cannot exhibit lucid-like control while being unaware of being in the dream state. I was merely stating that, I believe, we exhibit two types of control. I have personally experienced the 'unaware of dream yet can control as if lucid' state, and that happens when the dreamer is so used to dream control that it's almost 'natural' for him to control it.

This control would fall under the category of 'conscious control' (Again, I'm not claiming to be highly knowledgeable, just sharing my thoughts.) The dreamer here is merely using his skill at dream control. What I mean to say is, he is, in a way, still in control, whether he is aware of it or not is a different question. The other type of control would be in the case where he died in a plane crash, possible due to a fear of flying. Yet again, this is based on the 'day residue' idea, which you (or the whole dream research group, for that matter) seems to be highly critical of.

You're right. I totally and completely believe in all sufficiently popular religious dogma.

Oh, as an aside, have you met my pals Sam and Dean Winchester? They're pretty cool and the world they live in exactly reflects my dreaming world.

Baa.

Sorry. XP

Strawmen aside, my real argument will just take us back to your first point...

The sufficiently popular idea was a metaphor. You don't have to hold me for every bad example (I kid.)

Let me put it this way. Let's say my claim WAS backed up by sufficient research and papers were published and blah, would you believe it then? What if, that claim was totally wrong? (as we see sometimes in physics, poor CERN) Would you still dream of a Dream Demon? If you ask me, I'd say yes, based on expectation. But as you said, that does take us to my first point.

Alright, putting aside that your "experiment" (as you've presented it) is atrociously unethical, and not even an experiment (by the widely accepted definition), all of those concerns could be rationalized with the day residue effect, which you yourself touched on in your first point.

Think about it this way:

Throughout the day, you're worried lucid dreaming is going to be negative and scary.
You go to sleep, with that worry at the back of your mind.
You have an experience that reflects those negative thoughts.

That's just a basic example of day residue. All you've done here is try to provide evidence for something that's already been extensively studied, while simultaneously fucking up a ton of people's chances to enjoy and master lucidity.

Not cool.

Well, it wasn't ME who created the idea of lucid dreaming being scary, but I did help it along. If it makes any difference, I was sure to clarify stuff later on and explain them how it wasn't really dangerous and totally cool. While it was unethical, it helped me convince myself that what I was claiming had some merit. And to be honest, they intended community wasn't really the type who'd get serious about lucid dreaming (9gag, anyone?).

Your logic here is flawed, but I'm not going to argue about an idea that was conceived by popular fiction.

Also, please do some real research into how the brain and body functions (and computers, too, for that matter).

The computer metaphor is just an idea to help people understand certain aspects of how the brain functions (you see it used commonly with certain memory models). The big picture is way more complicated than most people can grasp, as evidenced by our limited progress in creating procedures to treat brain abnormalities, or even creating a fully realized simulation.

I don't claim to be an expert, but I can tell you right now that all those "lesser" bodily functions are handled by very specialized regions. Try searching for info on the the pons and medulla, and working from there to see what I'm getting.

Not that I'm offended, but you seem to think that I have no scientific knowledge at all. I was merely making it easier for general public to understand, you can't expect 12th graders to understand recent findings in Quantum Physics. The 'layers' idea was not conceived by popular fiction, it existed a long, long time before that. A good chunk of experienced LD'ers used to believe in the idea of dream layers (myself included). However, upon trying to do it myself again and again, I really couldn't recreate what I once experienced. Being the introspection skeptic you are, I'd rather not bother detailing what my experiences were.

However, I urge you to keep in mind that, while not having researched into dream sciences, I'm not supporting my claims on a whim. I have a few LD's under my belt, as well, and I'd appreciate it if you take into account my considerable experience in LD'ing.

This is wrong:

I can cite a few examples of people who begin every dream lucid and have complete control in each one. However, most of the don't frequent DV, and providing you with the necessary information to seek them out is against the rules.

People like this do not exist within the set you've defined.

Therefore by counterexample, your categories are flawed.

Funny, all my time in DV I haven't met one person who claimed started every dream as a lucid and have perfect control in each one. You claim you can cite examples, yet you don't.
If any of these people have a running internet website with any material I can read, I'd be happy to look into it.

Also, the set I've defined wasn't really intended for these people. They might make up less than 0.1% of the whole LD'ing community. Can you list a sizable group of people who DON'T fall into the category?
Newtonian mechanics do not apply to all mass bodies, but that doesn't mean they are not useful to define common everyday events.

Apply for a grant.

If you are as knowledgeable as you claim, it shouldn't take much to write a proposal, find a researcher who'd be willing to work with you (an maybe co-author the paper detailing your results), and start the process of making your idea a reality.

Age isn't an issue. I know a few people 18 and under who are involved in real research (both under and post-grad).

Ah, somehow I've difficulty in believing people would be interested in investing money on the claims of a 16 year old high school graduate student which are based on introspection. xD

You took my gaming time, but I'm glad you did. Maybe I should try to re-plan my whole pseudo-experiments, but I really can't think of more ways then doing it myself, i.e., introspection.

Oh wait, forgot this.

Again, this is simply drawing conclusions based on the day residue effect. You can't make wide-sweeping statements like this without broadening your scope and collecting real evidence.

No, the expectation theory wasn't based on day residue. It was based on my experience that with enough experience/skill, you can change every element in a dream.
You seem rather touchy with the whole 'day residue' thing. xP

Originally Posted by Naiya

Hi Max,

Your conclusions are based in flawed logic and your understanding of the science of dreams is almost nonexistent. Mzz already pointed out what I would have to say about each conclusion.

Google IASD. You can join their forum for free, and you can become an official member at a discounted price as a student. They also fund research. Maybe you should send them your proposal. If what you have to say has any basis whatsoever in the existing science, I'm sure I'll see your name published in their journal soon. Good luck.

Hi Naiya, thanks for the reference, I'll look into it.

Mzzkc, since answering right here is rather difficult, why don't we online chat? You can ask me questions you have in real time and prove how stupid I am. xD

Facebook would be great.

By the way, I hope you don't think that I am skeptical towards Dream Guides. xD I have one of my own haha.

I'll PM ya with details. =P

Any other forum,
Any other people,

This thread would have been a MASSIVE shitstorm of "I'm right because I have made conclusions" and "You're wrong because I don't agree"

I love DV.
>mfw I have nothing to add

Originally Posted by Avalanche

Any other forum,
Any other people,

This thread would have been a MASSIVE shitstorm of "I'm right because I have made conclusions" and "You're wrong because I don't agree"

I love DV.
>mfw I have nothing to add

Ay, we are an internet love machine ^.^

Too soon?

No, I don't care how much of a love machine DV is, but I'm still not having sex with you.

Wait were you the one who who posted on 9gag that lucid dreaming post. If you do then I don't know if I should thank you are be mad at you. Because of you one friend of mine saw his brother murdering his whole family and another one saw aliens that creeped him out. The first one gave up on lucid dreaming before he started because of that and the other one would have done the same if I would not tell him I am lucid dreaming. On the other hand I saw that post too and became interested in lucid dreaming so if we are talking on the same post then thanks to you I even know what lucid dreaming is. Anyways nice conclusion you got there , it was very interesting to read them.

Pretty thread, just this part:

However, for what it's worth, I'd say that people aren't really trying hard enough, aren't really skilled at it, or haven't done it enough times to succeed frequently.

My main skill is teleportation, have done it... well way too many for me to count, maybe billions is a small number at this point.
Anyway, I have failed at it sometimes while fully expecting it to work, simply because of a rule I was not aware of; given that here attention also failed but whatever, thats another thing for another thread.

Originally Posted by Beefer

Wait were you the one who who posted on 9gag that lucid dreaming post. If you do then I don't know if I should thank you are be mad at you. Because of you one friend of mine saw his brother murdering his whole family and another one saw aliens that creeped him out. The first one gave up on lucid dreaming before he started because of that and the other one would have done the same if I would not tell him I am lucid dreaming. On the other hand I saw that post too and became interested in lucid dreaming so if we are talking on the same post then thanks to you I even know what lucid dreaming is. Anyways nice conclusion you got there , it was very interesting to read them.

Thanks.
The original post wasn't mine, mine was the one that mocked the 'shadow people stealing souls' idea. xD

Originally Posted by Hukif

My main skill is teleportation, have done it... well way too many for me to count, maybe billions is a small number at this point.
Anyway, I have failed at it sometimes while fully expecting it to work, simply because of a rule I was not aware of; given that here attention also failed but whatever, thats another thing for another thread.

My main skill is combat, but I've failed many times too. F lord is the best League of Legends players, and he loses games too.
But you're right. Whether or not human flaw becomes a barrier in enhancing our LD'ing skills is another question.

Also, this:

Frankly, in my experience, expectation alone never fails to bring about desired results. I have ALWAYS been able to do what I wanted using expectation alone, sometimes on the first try, sometimes on the hundredth.

Success rate wasn't really the point, rather success/failure using expectation alone was what I had in mind.