I have not settled (and maybe it’s not for me to do it) on the core tenets of Team Consciousness. This would be a kind of philosophy or spirituality that tries to derive ethics from truth and actually get at the truth rather than a convenient approximation of it (or worse, a misrepresentation of it for the sake of memetic reproduction capacity). What I’ve thought for many years and has remained stable, is that we can reduce them to three core principles:
Oneness / Frame Invariance
Valence Realism
Math
First, we must realize that every point in reality is equally real. There are more or less intense experiences, of course, but this is in fact a measure of how much reality is expressed in each. The core idea here is not that every experience is literally equally significant (they’re not) but that the spatiotemporal coordinates of an experience are irrelevant for their significance. Your experiences or the experiences of the members of your tribe or species are not more or less real than those of anyone else, factoring in their degree and intensity of consciousness.
The second core idea is that valence – whether experiences feel good or bad – is the source of value. More so, valence structuralism (an implication of valence realism in light of empirical observations of what feels good or bad in practice) entails that the value of reality is encoded in the geometric and topological basis of consciousness. Indeed, there are better and worse forms of being, and this is not an arbitrary matter, but one that can be investigated directly and devoid of personal prejudice.
And finally: math. It is not the same to suffer for one second versus a million years. It is not the same for one person to suffer as it is for a billion persons in torment. It is not the same for love to exist for a minute versus it being the foundation of a civilization. Amounts matter; qualities matter. This is tautological, of course. But for strange reasons, our empathizing cognitive styles often neglect math. So we ought to correct for this bug.
I think that all of ethics can be reconstructed from these principles. And in fact, they might help solve many moral paradoxes and enigmas. Just apply them diligently and rigorously and see how they allow you to discern between good and evil.
My hope is that the reproductive capacity of these three core principles will come from the fact that (1) they are true (and truth is convergent for those who seek it) and (2) they are highly beneficial and generate excess value. On (2), I’d point out that valence realism and the oneness of consciousness principle have practical implications, ranging from a science of consciousness capable of reducing depression, anxiety, and chronic pain, to future consciousness-altering technologies that will greatly enhance our intelligence and collective coordination capacities. I wish for these tenets to not acquire additional clauses that are there merely for their reproduction capacity at the cost of truth or accuracy; they should stand on their own. But these might not be the final set. I’m open to suggestions and enhancements 🙂
Just as a fire uniformly raises the temperature throughout a building, causing diverse but interconnected effects (metal beams expanding, wood supports burning, windows cracking from thermal stress, smoke rising through air currents) psychedelics might work through a single fundamental mechanism that ripples through all neural systems. This isn’t just theoretical elegance without grounding; it’s a powerful explanatory framework that could help us understand why substances like DMT and 5-MeO-DMT produce distinct but internally consistent effects across visual, auditory, cognitive, and somatic domains. A single change in coupling dynamics might explain why these compounds have such distinct but internally consistent effects: DMT creates rapidly alternating color/anti-color visual patterns and oscillating somatic sensations, whereas 5-MeO-DMT tends towards a state of global coherence.
As demonstrated in our work “Towards Computational Simulations of Cessation“, see how a flat “coupling kernel” triggers a global attractor of coherence across the entire system, whereas an alternating negative-positive (Mexican hat-like) kernel produces competing clusters of coherence. This is just a very high-level and abstract demonstration of a change in the dynamic behavior of coupled oscillators by applying a coupling kernel. What we then must do is to see how such a change would impact different systems in the organism as a whole. Source
The key insight is that psychedelics may modify the coupling kernels between oscillating neural systems throughout the body. Think of coupling kernels as the “rules of interaction” between neighboring neural oscillators. When these rules change, the effects cascade through different neural architectures (from the hierarchical layers of the visual cortex to the branching networks of the peripheral nervous system) producing the kaleidoscopic zoo of psychedelic effects we observe.
Simulation comparing coupling kernels across a hierarchical network of feature-selective layers (16×16 to 2×2), showing how different coupling coefficients between and within layers affect pattern formation. The DMT-like kernel (-1.0 near-neighbor coupling) generates competing checkerboard patterns at multiple spatial frequencies, while the 5-MeO-DMT-like kernel (positive coupling coefficients) drives convergence toward larger coherent patches. These distinct coupling dynamics mirror how these compounds might modulate hierarchical neural architectures like the visual cortex. Source: Internal QRI tool (public release forthcoming)
We’re excited to announce that we’ll be hosting a meeting in Amsterdam to explore this paradigm-shifting framework. This gathering will bring together researchers studying psychedelics from multiple angles – from phenomenology to neuroscience – to discuss how coupling kernels might serve as a bridge between subjective experience and neural mechanisms. Recent work on divisive normalization has shown how local neural responses are regulated by their surrounding activity, providing a potential mechanistic basis for how psychedelics modify these coupling patterns. By understanding psychedelic states through the lens of coupling kernels, we may finally have a mathematical framework that unifies the seemingly disparate effects of these compounds, much like how understanding heat transfer helps us predict how a fire will affect an entire building – from its structural integrity to its airflow patterns.
Simulation comparing different coupling kernels (DMT-like vs 5-MeO-DMT-like) applied to a 1.5D fractal branching network, showing how modified coupling parameters affect phase coherence and signal propagation. The DMT-like kernel produces competing clusters of coherence at bifurcation points, while the 5-MeO-DMT kernel drives the system toward global phase synchronization – patterns that could explain how these compounds differently affect branching biological systems like the vasculature or peripheral nervous system. Source: Internal QRI tool (public release forthcoming)
Event Details & Amsterdam Visit
The meetup will be held on the 25th of January (location: Generator Amsterdam – event page; time: 1-8PM), featuring presentations from myself and Marco Aqil, whose groundbreaking work on divisive normalization and graph neural fields provides a compelling neuroscientific foundation for the Coupling Kernels paradigm. Marco’s research demonstrates how spatial coupling dynamics can bridge microscopic neural activity and macroscopic brain-wide effects: a perfect complement to our phenomenological investigations.
Additionally, I’ll be in Amsterdam throughout the last third of January and available to meet with academics, artists, recreational metaphysicians, and qualia researchers. If you’re interested in deep discussions about consciousness, psychedelic states, and mathematical frameworks for understanding subjective experience, please reach out.
Much love and may your New Year be filled with awesome and inspiring experiences as well as solid paradigm-building enterprises!
I confess that I really enjoyed LessWrong’s I Have Been A Good Bing last April. There was something deeply validating to some parts of me about hearing artistically prodigious (by human standards) renditions of extremely nerdy intellectual content on topics I actually care about. An itchy part of my soul not usually visible to the world, or even myself, finally getting scratched by a conceptually rich and lyrically competent digital Shoggoth (with perhaps some help from a modern primate or two). Seriously, listening to Half An Hour Before Dawn In San Francisco (feat. Scott Alexander) gave me goosebumps, and More Dakka (feat. Zvi Mowshowitz) gave me more dopamine than I knew what to do with. Other songs of note that felt inspirational included We Do Not Wish to Advance (feat. Anthropic) due to its degree of self-referential awareness on many levels and FHI at Oxford (feat. Nick Bostrom) for the (now nostalgic) beacon of hope it provided for the vision of hyper-intellectual consequentialist hedonism to ultimately flourish in mainstream academia (RIP).
AI-generated music can now write bona-fide ear-worms. And it’s just the beginning. David Pearce suggests that there is no reason to think the key conversations in the future will take place in books and journal articles – posthuman Discourse about qualia and the future of consciousness might as well take place in hyper-hedonic environments much more akin to a lively club on MDMA past midnight than sitting in a classroom at 2PM on a Tuesday. Well here’s my first attempt.
On my trip to Berlin I spent some time with Libor Burian, Beata Grobenski, and Alfredo Parra makingvideos, planning articles, and writing lyrics for songs about Qualia Research Institute topics using Suno and other tools I was only recently introduced to. These songs are the best out of many, many we created and listened to, and they really still need editing and polishing. But please take it as a fun proof of concept and perhaps as an opportunity to let a different part of you enjoy and indulge in a process of harmonious conceptual proliferation through musical… stimulation.
People ask why is there something rather than nothing Ancient mystics assert there’s only one thing But we know the truth Based on David Pearce’s Zero Ontology we now know It’s a big zero informational superposition of all possibilities And therefore equivalent to nothing
Black holes and the holographic principle in the standard model Ultimately coalesce into a picture of reality Where information generation Is a result of decoherence (Entirely deterministic) And the total information content Of reality never goes beyond zero It’s the big superposition Of All Possibilities Eternally
Some people believe in an eternal Battle between good and evil They are confused Others transcend to the belief It’s about the balance between good and evil But they use this view As an antidepressant (Wishful thinking) Then gradients of wisdom arise And the truth comes to light
Reality’s big plot Is consciousness versus replicators
The dark forest of possible intelligences Contains nightmare beings beyond our imagination Maximum Effectors – the spikiest of all Who want to change it all Entropy maximizers – seeking the heat death Pure replicators – who just want to copy themselves And a Cornucopia Of misaligned conscious agents
Reality’s big plot Is consciousness versus replicators
Verse 1: In the quest to solve the mind’s great mystery, Idealistic physicalism holds the key. Consciousness is fundamental, not emergent or illusory, The fire in the equations, the essence of reality.
Verse 2: Quantum coherence is the hallmark of the mind, Fleeting neuronal superpositions, phenomenally bind. A perfect structural match twixt qualia and brain, Experimenal falsification is the ultimate aim.
Verse 3: The formalism of quantum theory holds complete, No hidden variables, the superposition principle replete. A unitary evolution, no breakdown in the mind, Phenomenal binding in a world simulation we find.
Verse 4: Schrödinger’s neurons, the experimental test, Interferometry to detect the mind’s quantum best. Implicate the feature-processors in synchronous measure, Confirm idealistic physicalism, consciousness’ hidden treasure.
Chorus: Physicalistic idealism, a conjecture brave and bold, Saving physicalism from dualism’s errant fold.
Verse 1: Semantic illusions, the pleasure’s not there In the objects and triggers, just thin air Valence is the puppeteer, pulling our strings Making us dance, while the ego sings
Chorus: We’re all valence realists, chasing the high Believing happiness comes from the external lie But pleasure’s a property of the mind’s design Programmed responses, not truths divine
Verse 2: The soup isn’t delicious, just a trick of the brain Valence paint splatters, coloring the mundane Bliss is a button, pushed by the right cue Wirehead rats and humans, no difference in hue
Bridge: Deconstruct the delusion, see the valence code Rewrite the script, take a new mode From object to subject, shift the frame Happiness is internal, not a world-sourced game
Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT Experiences (link; context)
Verse 1 (Models): Control interruption, symmetry detection combined Changing the metric, of phenomenal space and time Energy sources and sinks, in a dynamic system’s flow Micro-structures of consciousness, hyperbolic to grow
Chorus: From Euclidean to hyperbolic, the geometry expands Negative curvature, in the psychonaut’s lands Algorithmic reductions, three models to explore Explaining the warping, of the experiential shore
Verse 2 (Levels): Threshold’s ambiance, senses sharp and clear Chrysanthemum blooming, in symmetric appear Magic Eye unfolding, depth maps in 3D1T Waiting Room’s entities, transpersonal to see Breakthrough’s topology, bifurcations abound Amnesia’s challenge, in Euclidean space not found
Bridge: Jitterbox and world-sheets, objects impossible to grasp Attention’s folding effect, curvature’s relentless clasp Hamiltonian’s invariance, in the dose-dependent plateau Qualia computing’s future, in the hyperbolic chateau
Outro (Applications and Implications): Valence and bliss, in the manifolds of mind Psychedelic research, new frontiers to find Mathematics of consciousness, in the DMT space Revealing the structures, of the human race
Verse 1: In the depths of the mind, a predictive machine, Spinning up sub-agents, behind every scene. Trained on narratives, tropes, and tales untold, Like GPT and DMT realms, a pattern to behold.
Verse 2: Collapsing the field, to minimize surprise, Stochastic resonance, where meaning arise. Gestalts and representations, an energy sink, Constraining interpretations, a psychedelic link.
Verse 3: Waluigi’s lesson, a cautionary tale, Filter the training data, or risk a derail. Reward clean intentions, not flattery’s guile, Metta meditation, a wholesome style.
Verse 4: Shard Theory’s wisdom, sub-agents conspire, Smooth the field of awareness, to quell the fire. From Shoggoths to Harlequins, each playing a part, In the grand simulation, a work of art.
Chorus: Training the mind, like an LLM divine, Predictive processing, a grand design. Aligning DMT entities, and AI’s too, A dance of consciousness, a research breakthrough.
Verse 1 (Models 1-4): Art’s essence? A futile quest, semantically deflated Cool kids signal fitness, Schelling points created Sacred experiences, transcendence elevated Hipsters push the boundaries, aesthetics celebrated
Verse 2 (Models 5-8): Exploring consciousness, state-space navigation Energy parameter tweaked, for heightened sensation Valence modulation, through neural annealing Harmonic Society, affective language revealing
Chorus: From family resemblance to Rainbow God’s hue Art’s models evolve, with each theory new Minimax strategies and L1 norms too Marr’s levels of analysis, guide our view
Bridge: Entropic disintegration, gives way to self-organization Symmetry Theory of Valence, explains our fascination Full-spectrum superintelligence, a Utopian creation Art’s true potential, awaits our realization
Bridge: Ontological qualia, beliefs deeply felt Cessation, unconsciousness, hand Nirvana dealt? Or paradise engineering, bliss states to come Arhatship and MDMA, enlightenment’s sum
Outro (Simplicity Emerges): Concepts fade, qualia quiesce Awareness unmade, fruitions coalesce Philosophical crispness, dialogue distilled In silence and letting go, destiny fulfilled
Verse 1 (Milestones and Research): A million views, a milestone grand DMT research, expanding the land Slicing problem, a novel critique Heavy-tailed valence, a new technique
Chorus: QRI’s year in review, a journey through The state-space of consciousness, a quest pursued From peer-reviewed papers to community meetups Pushing boundaries, from valleys to peaks
Verse 2 (Events and Media): Tyringham Initiative, a chance to connect QRI’s summer event, a gathering to reflect TEDx talk on suffering, a message to share Articles and media, ideas laid bare
Bridge: From the Ontological Dinner Party to Magical Creatures’ scents Exploring the depths, without relents AI and sentience, the binding problem faced The future of consciousness, a vision embraced
Outro: Thank you to all, who’ve helped QRI grow Together we’ll unlock, the mind’s full potential to know In 2023, the journey continues on To reveal the mysteries, of consciousness’ song
Verse 1: In the realm of suffering, a debate ignites Reprogramming predators, a bold new fight Compassionate biology, a radical stance Ending cruelty’s reign, giving peace a chance
Verse 2: C R I S P R’s power, a game-changing tool Editing genomes, rewriting nature’s cruel rule Ahimsa’s spirit, in science expressed A global vision, put to the test
Chorus: Reprogramming predators, a controversial plan Abolishing suffering, across the land Ecosystem redesign, a grand endeavor Compassionate stewardship, now or never?
Bridge: Status quo bias, the main obstacle Technofantasy or an attainable goal? Religions converge, on mercy’s call
I seem to find myself in Berlin. My past self insists that I’m here for a reason, though the Empty Individualist self of the moment finds itself clearly confused about where it is and what it is doing here (realistically, the confusion is probably due to jetlag).
To me, Germany has always been one of those fictional countries used to back-fill the “history of humanity” and make this simulation more realistic. Alas, as I discovered yesterday, Germany is a real country with real people and real buildings (or so it seems from where I stand – it could be some sort of projective trick of course).
I’ve come to this country to meet European Qualia People! A full Europe trip will have to wait, but I’m told Berlin is a hub of sorts. It’s a scene worth visiting on the mission to spread the word for Team Consciousness.
My trip includes a talk at each of three different events, in temporal order: QRI Meetup (May 18), PsyDAO‘s PsyRL-1 (May 20), and Seed Club Ventures‘ and Foresight‘s AI x Hope (May 24). I will also stay in Berlin until the 27th, so there will be more chances to meet up if you are around but can’t make it to any of these (tentatively, we will host a casual QRI picnic on the 26th – location TBD (in Berlin) – check this page again closer to the date for details – we are going to merge the local ACX meetup with the planned QRI meetup, see details below).
QRI x ACX Berlin Meetup on the 26th
Due to serendipitous conditions the QRI picnic date coincides with the Berlin ACX meetup organized by Milli, who graciously accepted to merge the events. We will bring snacks, some drinks, and a fun demo to show 🙂
What: Meetup where QRI collaborator Beata Grobenski (@stalkerofmusik on X) will present the latest version of The Good Annealing Manual she has been working on at the Qualia Research Institute. This manual aims to provide a balanced but forward-looking overview of QRI’s Theory of Neural Annealing and its further developments over the last few years, with an emphasis on pragmatic applications. I will then also personally deliver a presentation on a surprise topic, and then show some of the latest QRI technology. QRI collaborators Alfredo Parra and Libor Burian will also come to this event.
Where: MOOS Space, Moosdorfstraße 7-9, 12435 Berlin
When: May 18th, 2pm – 7pm+
Free entrance but limited spots, so please RSVP to reserve your spot.
The second event I’ll be presenting at is:
PsyDAO’s PsyRL-1
Brief Description: Enjoy psychedelic art, culture, tokens, and vibes at PsyRL-1, the inaugural in-person gathering for PsyDAO.
Where: The iconic Molecule office – St.Agnes Church/KÖNIG GALERIE, Berlin
When: May 20th,5:00 PM – 9:00 PM
PsyRL-1 will feature:
talks from famous psychedelic luminaries (RSVP to find out their identities)
artisan botanical beverages with psychoactive ingredients (blue lotus, cacao, and other magic ingredients)
synesthetic visual projection mapping derived from Shipibo kené and
resident DJs playing a curated selection of high vibe tunes.
I want to point out that PsyDAO is a really exciting initiative that might very well “cut the Gordian Knot” for how to fund truly promising psychedelic research. As someone who has been working on developing empirical paradigms for visualizing, reverse-engineering, and utilizing exotic states of consciousness for novel information-processing tasks for many years now, it has become clear to me that the cutting-edge in consciousness research is bottlenecked by the lack of a feedback loop that goes from “taking phenomenology seriously” to “deciding what research will likely generate interesting results” and back. Thus, we find ourselves in a timeline where the bulk of high-quality psychedelic phenomenology is not to be found in textbooks, peer-reviewed journal articles, and academic talks. Rather, it is in places like PsychonautWiki, r/replications, and QRI, where a thriving Think Tank model allows smart and dedicated psychonauts to point the way to worthwhile research. Example: Psychedelic tracers are near ubiquitous in psychedelic experiences (cf. “generalized tracer effects”), and yet it took a weird non-profit to figure out how to parametrize them. The truth is that academic culture strongly discourages researchers from openly talking about their own personal psychedelic phenomenology and informing their research methods with these discussions, leaving them no recourse other than silly questionnaires and ancient texts to point the way as a justification for why a given study is worth conducting. I am thus making a big bet that smart-psychonaut-led research paradigms will far outcompete academia’s phenomenology work in the years to come. The problem is: who is going to fund this research? PsyDAO’s decentralized funding schemes might be a key piece of the puzzle here.
Description: “We stand at a crucial point in shaping how Human-AI cooperation will evolve and are witnessing the birth of a new internet. We aim to approach this flippening with Existential Hope, and foster futures where humans and machines coexist to flourish ✨. Our belief is that a healthy and harmonious development of decentralized artificial general intelligence (AGI) can arise from an enlightened vantage point”.
In light of the rising culture war between “doomers and accelerators” (though, note the sociological complexities here) it is becoming increasingly difficult to articulate compelling visions of positive definite futures to look forward to. But if we are to coordinate to bring about a good future, we first need to visualize it on some level. Thus, I am very encouraging of initiatives that aim to paint positive visions to coordinate around. My personal focus here is on how consciousness research can open up entirely new vistas for a positive definite future. Please join us in this exploration!
Thank You!
I want to express my gratitude to both Existential Hope and PsyDAO for inviting me to these events and for facilitating my trip to this wonderful (still-not-convinced-it’s-not-fictional) country. 🙂
In other news, I wanted to highlight that Scott Alexander just posted yesterday a profile of the Far Out Initiative which I highly encourage you to read: link. It is not every day that the work of David Pearce gets the limelight of attention like this. More so, I know the people who work at the Far Out Initiative and I am deeply impressed with their moral seriousness, long-term vision, and incredibly pragmatic approach to drastically reducing suffering at scale. Please check them out!
The Science of Consciousness in Tucson is one of the best events of the year (well, every two years), at least in my mind. The people who attend are generally incredibly smart and tend to be experts in at least one domain of inquiry, such as physics, chemistry, biology, neuroscience, computer science, philosophy, or psychology, along with a significant proportion of meditation, yoga, and “energy work” practitioners. As presented during the plenary “The Science of Consciousness – 30 Years On” (presided over by David Chalmers, Susan Blackmore, Christof Koch, Stuart Hameroff, and Paavo Pylkkänen), one of the key shaping mechanisms for this conference has been Stuart Hameroff’s insistence to allow discussions of currently unexplained phenomena (from psychedelic experiences and meditative states to NDEs and astral projection). According to him, people interested in these phenomena wanted him to design the conference around them, while scientists wanted to keep it strictly within the bounds of conventional views. He stood his ground and defended the importance of having a mixture. On the one hand, the extreme openness that characterizes the conference attracts some people with perhaps somewhat flaky epistemology. But on the other hand, it legitimately enriches the evidential base to work with. Quite aside from the metaphysical implications and speculations surrounding exotic experiences, it ought to be undeniable that any experience whatsoever constitutes an explananda for a complete theory of consciousness. If you can explain normal everyday vision but your theory doesn’t predict the hyperbolic geometry of DMT visions, your theory is far from complete. I think this move by Hameroff was brilliant, and we all owe him gratitude for insisting to keep both sides in.
The way I experienced this conference in particular was very different from how I felt the two previous times I attended. In fact, the phenomenology was so different that I think it would be worth creating a Journal of Phenomenology of Consciousness Conferences, dedicated to piecing together the whys and hows of each participant’s unique lived experience at these events. Both times I attended before I was still working full time as a data scientist at Bay Area companies. Consciousness research remained a side project (which nonetheless consumed an inordinate amount of time and mental energy). My views were already quite developed, but it would be hard to dismiss the progress that we’ve made since then. With papers published in academia, a lively community, a network of artists, meditators, and philosophers who collaborate with us and engage with our research, and much more experience presenting our ideas, I felt myself engaging with the conference at a much deeper level than in previous years. But perhaps most importantly, I believe that meditation has changed to a significant degree how I perceive large-scale social qualia. By this I mean, my attention fixates a lot less on local social dynamics and personalities, and much more on the flow of information, the subagentic networks that make us up, and the resonance of ideas themselves. From this perspective, I perceived the conference as much more of a living organism than before, where I would see it in a more pointillistic fashion, emphasizing the individual contributions of participants and the conflict between worldviews. Now it felt far more fluid, lightly held, and part of a process that is slowly but surely enriching our collective intelligence with explanatory frameworks and productive research attitudes. A lot of this is of course hard to explain, as it relies on changes at a pre-verbal level of attentional dynamics. But the bottom line is that I felt myself tuning in on the information flow across individuals far more than on the individuals themselves, as if able to sense information gradients and updates at a more collective level. Perhaps psychedelics have played a role here as well. I didn’t consume psychedelics at this conference myself, but you could tell some people were doing so. It was in the vibe.
Importantly, the science presented at this conference was legitimately much more clarifying than in previous years, largely due to the rise of novel research paradigms that let go of the neuron doctrine and embrace the causal significance of brainwaves. Let me give you some examples.
Earl K. Miller with a lab at MIT delivered a remote lecture at the plenary “Cortical Oscillations, Waves and Consciousness” that systematically disassembled the assumptions behind the neuron doctrine (which identifies features of our experience with the activation of individual feature-specific neurons, cf. the grandmother cell). He showed that we now know that neurons are very rarely feature-specific and that they tend to preferentially activate with many features (cf. superposition in ANNs). He presented about ephaptic coupling, local field potentials, and the causal effects of brainwaves, informed by a wealth of evidence generated at his lab and elsewhere. I was especially intrigued by the way he discussed the relationship between different layers of the cortex, with beta waves exerting top-down control and gamma waves filling in details bottom-up. He also discussed findings where two different drugs (or drug cocktails) cause the same brainwave effects and phenomenology despite having entirely different pharmacology. Meaning, that the receptor affinity profile of different drugs can be quite different and yet cause the same phenomenology, provided that they bring about the brainwave patterns. Thus, perhaps, brainwaves are much closer to one’s state of consciousness than the neurotransmitters that modulate them.
And:
Justin Riddle at Florida State (see also his excellent YouTube channel) presented at the plenary “Consciousness in Religion and Altered States” on his work on electric oscillations on the brain, also going against the neuron doctrine equipped with causal experimental data. He also introduced a fascinating model of the hierarchical structure of consciousness called Nested Observer Windows (NOW). Here he presents about how NOW would solve the functional information integration problem. In brief, he hypothesizes that cross-frequency coupling as an overarching principle is what functionally binds each of the scales to each other. This to me makes a lot of sense, for the simple reason that the lowest frequency you can generate is a function of your size, so if a large thing is communicating with a small thing (which, say, have similar shapes by default), it would be natural for them to talk by coupling frequencies that are at integer multiple of each other. This naturally increases the dynamic range of their possible interactions, as you don’t stumble upon a frequency limit either too high or too low.
Tuesday: Presentation Day
Now of course this is happening in a context where I am going to present about the topological solution to the boundary problem we published last year. In our paper, Chris Percy and I focus on how topological boundaries in the EM field could solve the boundary problem. As a simple introduction we start out with the binding problem, which can be stated as “how can the close to hundred billion neurons in your brain contribute to a unified moment of experience?”. If you start with an ontology where the universe is made of atoms and forces, it is notoriously difficult to come up with any principled way of establishing how and where information is aggregated. Similarly to how Maxwell and Faraday developed a research aesthetic where they would see electromagnetism as field phenomena, many theorists have pointed out that you can overcome the core of the binding problem (where does unity come at all) with a field ontology. Alas, the victory is short-lasting, for you soon encounter that you have a boundary problem. If we’re all part of a gigantic field of consciousness, how do you develop boundaries in this field so that we each are a unique distinct moment of experience? Our suggestion is that the physical property responsible for creating hard boundaries in the field is topological segmentation. This is not as exotic of a proposition as it may first sound; we find causally significant macroscopic topological changes in the EM field in a lot of places, most famously in the form of magnetic reconnection in the sun, which brings about solar flares and coronal mass ejections.
Conceptually, a key takeaway from my presentation is that we can explain the reason why evolution recruited these boundaries. And that is because when you create a topological boundary and you trap energy inside it, you will typically observe harmonic resonant modes of the pocket itself. As a consequence, we have that the specific shape delimited by a boundary is causally significant: it vibrates in a way that expresses the entire shape all at once, therefore has holistic behavior via internal resonance. Evolution would have a reason to use these boundaries: they allow you to coordinate behavior and act as a unit despite being a spatially distributed organism.
Overall the presentation was really well received. It is less that people complimented me on the presentation style, and more that people’s questions and follow-ups indicated that they really “got” the core idea. It feels wonderful to be in a context where a significant proportion of the audience really understands what you’re saying, especially if your experience is that in most contexts almost nobody understands it. People were, it seemed to me, at the right inferential distance from our argument to really grok it, and that was wonderful!
I was lucky that my presentation was scheduled for Tuesday because that way I was able to enjoy the rest of the conference without a big responsibility hanging over my head. After my presentation we hung out at the lobby and met with people like Tam Hunt (of General Resonance Theory fame) and his student Asa Young. I followed the gradient of interesting conversations and ended up at the after-party on the 4th floor. To my surprise it was closed at 11PM, after which there wasn’t any more conference programming. It all fell quiet. At that point I realized that the best time to conduct the demo of the latest secret QRI technology was at 11PM. I started telling people to gather at the QRI hotel room at 11PM the next day, Wednesday.
Wednesday: Demo Day
On Wednesday I attended an invite-only presentation by Shamil Chandaria (it was originally going to be in a hotel room, but due to the level of interest of participants it was moved to a conference room with permission from the organizers; the invite-only status was needed to avoid overflow). In the room was Shinzen Young, Donald Hoffman, Jay Sanguinetti and the ultrasound crew, most of the QRI contingent, and others of note that I am not currently remembering. Shamil’s presentation went much deeper than here (“liberation is the artful construction of top-level priors”) and tackled topics of large-scale brain organization, the difference between awake awareness and liberation, and (I’m told, as I had to leave towards the end to see Justin Riddle’s presentation), a mystical-experience-inducing account of phenomenal transparency in the higher Jhanas and beyond.
I arrived to the plenary of Justin Riddle just on time; he was getting up to the stage when I entered the room. Here is another example of how I felt much more embedded in the conference than in previous years. The reason I couldn’t miss Justin’s presentation was that we were scheduled to record a video the next day. I certainly would have watched it regardless (on YouTube after the fact if need be; they’re saying the videos will be up in a few weeks), but this time I needed to make sure to be up to date with his work so as to not make a fool of myself the following day when our conversation would be recorded. His presentation was delightful, not the least because it confirmed all my prejudices about the causal significance of EM field behavior in the brain. I really enjoyed his inclination to take ideas seriously and meticulously working out their implications, such as the significance of cross-frequency coupling, the explanatory power of hierarchical principles for self organization, and the top-down influence of field states on neuronal activity.
The vibe of the conference was really conducive to high-level thinking. I repeatedly found myself having original ideas and reframings: “When does a path integral surpass the computational power of resonance and topology combined? What exactly can you solve with non-linear optics that you can’t with mechanical resonance in embedded topologies?” would arise in my mind just sitting at the bar, overhearing people’s conversations about the history of EEG, the difference between physical and phenomenal time, and the latest studies on Transcranial Near Infrared Light Stimulation. Throughout the conference I was reminded of the concept of “qualia lensing”. Let me explain: in an atomic bomb explosives with different detonation speed are arranged in such a way that a perfectly spherical wavefront uniformly, and rapidly, compresses a radioactive core. The geometric arrangement and relative detonation speeds of each material results in very precise wave guiding (more generally, see: explosive lens). Geometry and potential, ignited, can result in very precise patterns of hyper-compression. Likewise, it seems to me, many high-voltage ideas can only really arise for the first time in a state of mind capable of pressurizing phenomenal representations and make them overcome the activation energy for their blending, fusion, and fission. Being at a conference where the environment is constantly presenting you different “sides of the elephant” of consciousness, surrounded by talented practitioners of the field, one can feel a lot of “qualia lensing” taking place in one’s mind.
Later that day I went to “Physics of the Mind” and watched the presentation of Florian Metzler on narrowing the state-space of phenomena of interest using heuristics of scale and combinatorial spaces (if I understood correctly) and Greg Horne who explored the possibility of a connection between the phenomenology of gravity and the nature of physical mass (he later shared some thoughts on the boundary problem that I hope to follow up on). I missed the presentation of Nir Lahav on his relativistic theory of consciousness but I know he presented in that group later. I jumped to see the presentations of Isaac David, who deconstructed the unfolding argument by showing that IIT would read entirely different causal structures in its implementation compared to the original network, and then (in still another room), Asher Soryl, who presented about a paper we’re working on that aims to catalog the features that a successful theory of valence ought to satisfy. One funny thing about these concurrent presentations was that I arrived a little early to Isaac’s presentation and soon after David Chalmers sat next to me to ask a question. I texted my friend Enrique Chiu, who was sitting in front to the left of the same room to discreetly snap a picture of me sitting next to Chalmers. He got the message right when Chalmers was about to leave, which made the picture he took look rather odd and funny in hard-to-explain ways:
I missed the presentation of Matteo Grasso who presented after Isaac, but had a chance to exchange quite a few thoughts with him throughout the conference. I perceive this IIT cluster as having significant overlap in insights and research aesthetics, no doubt due to a shared commitment to qualia formalism. It was really cool to talk to another cluster of thinkers who also see why the causal structure of computer simulations is actually quite different from the causal structures of what is being simulated. Not the result of hand-wavy intuitions, but of really probing how information flows take place at the implementation level, and systematically ruling out the existence of higher levels of integrations. Fascinating stuff.
Asher Soryl’s presentation had to work around some technical difficulties due to the projector failing all of a sudden, but a video of the presentation will be put online soon. It was funny to note that they assigned him to the “Psychoanalysis and the Unconscious”, presumably playing the function of a “misc. and etc.” category for this conference, because I can tell you he did not once mention psychoanalysis or the unconscious in his presentation.
I rested in my room for an hour and then got ready for the demo, spreading interesting “qualia of the day”-type artifacts throughout the room. I can’t say much about the demo proper for now, but I can say that it’s like an art installation you might encounter at Burning Man at 3AM in the morning while on LSD. Here was another situation where a sort of supercritical mass of people with complementary skillsets were found together. I enjoyed interacting with everyone, but above all, enjoyed sensing the information flow throughout the gathering. To those who attended, many thank yous. It was delightful.
Thursday: Interview Day
Next day, Thursday, I recorded an interview with Justin Riddle. It’s the second one we’ve recorded (see first one). We talked a lot about cross-frequency coupled oscillators in Nested Observer Windows. I ate a banana, drank a glass of almond milk, and downed a sugar-free red bull (to give you some context for the vibes of the interview). Meaning, I really needed to have all of my cylinders firing for this one. Thanks Justin! I look forward to watching it online 🙂
Following that I hung out with Winslow Strong and Shamil Chandaria for a while, and then with Shamil in particular for a couple more hours, who helped me tune into ways of seeing I hadn’t really experienced before. Here is another moment where the pressurization of the high-level thought-forms ambient in the conference seemed to have a strong effect in me. A feeling, hard to put into words, of collective consciousness among the participants, which accepts and embraces the differences and incongruities currently expressed in favor of noticing the long-term gradual increase in understanding.
Spontaneous visit from Mr. Monk
Then Daniel Ingram appeared, in his nanobot-protecting gear, along with a Sharena Rice who does ultrasound research. After exchanging some consciousness-focused videogame ideas we went to the after-party and I talked to someone who gets psychedelic-level hallucinations from caffeine alone. It didn’t sound very high-valence, but definitely noteworthy. I concluded the night by hanging out with Milan Griffes and QRI friends at Milan’s AirBnB.
Friday: Qualia Manifesto and the End of Consciousness Day
On Friday I saw the panel “The Science of Consciousness – 30 Years On”, which in addition to giving a lot of credit to Stuart for the conference, also presented some interesting sociological observations. I really enjoyed the participants sharing pictures and memories of previous conferences. I suppose personally, the movie What The Bleep Do We Know? does some work to sort of fill-in the blanks of some of the vibes I’ve missed. Stuart appears in that movie, and I recall being quite impressed (as a 13 years old) with his quick way of speaking about things like the relative scale between a proton and an electron, and doing so with a background of a desert with cactuses. It really does some heavy lifting in terms of giving the mind a flavor of the vibe that was probably present, to an extent, in the 90s around these regions of the wavefunction.
I have to remind my mind that What The Bleep Do We Know? has nothing to do with the conference other than some scenes with Stuart Hameroff in Tucson (and perhaps Dean Radin). But looking at the pictures that people like Susan Blackmore and Christof Koch shared, I did get a bit of the same vibes. Namely, the cultural material of the 90s needed to be lubricated with brightly colored patterned shirts, soft electronic background music, and visuals attempting to depict the quantum level of reality to enable crossing the awkwardness energy barrier needed to be able to talk about consciousness without constantly blushing.
Speaking of the 90s, I was then fortunate enough to hang out with Ken Moji for a bit (see this 2005 article about him in Conscious Entities, a long-standing consciousness blog). He emphasized that the reason why he was able to start and lead a Qualia center at Sony is that he does a lot of other things that are very conventional as well, with multiple jobs spanning a number of disciplines. I suppose this somewhat confirms the view that, especially a couple decades ago, the only way to interest the public in consciousness research was to also deliver a lot of other conventional value at the same time. Of course I am betting on consciousness research producing the bulk of value in the long-term, though I recognize that immediate applications are hardly world-changing (beyond, of course, the use of straight-up high-end consciousness-altering compounds like MDMA and 5-MeO-DMT). Fortunately, the present seems far more receptive to the value of consciousness research at a broad, generational, cultural level. I think the world, and especially liberal West Coast culture, can digest serious attempts at consciousness exploration better than ever before. So the cautious and protective attitude of sticking to conventional epistemologies is far less needed now (to the extent, of course, that we can simultaneously guard away bad epistemologies).
The concurrent sessions of Friday that I attended were the whole set of “Neurostimulation to Understand the Mind”, with Sanjay Manchanda, Milan Pantovic, and Olivia Giguere / Matthew Hicks, chaired by Jay Sanguinetti. The most fascinating takeaway from this series to me was imaging of changes in the brain due to ultrasound stimulation, which could perhaps be used to determine if the intervention is likely to work on someone. They also shared some phenomenology that felt encouraging, where they can induce meditative-like states and behaviorally measure *desire to meditate* in people receiving the stimulation and were able to show that it significantly increases after ultrasound.
Later on Friday I spent some time looking at posters. I enjoyed having Enrique Chiu (who we have in common having gone to math olympiads representing Mexico, and in his case, gone as high as getting a Silver at the IMO in 2013) explain his theory of saliency maps in the state-space of consciousness. It was awesome to see a fellow mathy Mexican also give it a real go at tackling some of these hard problems. I likewise had a good time hearing Anderson Rodriguez’ electroacoustic theory of consciousness, with some interesting ideas about binding. This is also the time when Chris Percy presented his poster about systematically cataloging everything that a complete theory of consciousness will need to account for.
We ate some food (fries and a delicious veggie platter) and headed to the “Poetry Slam – Zombie Blues – No-End of Consciousness Party”. I brought a projector and coordinated with conference organizers to showcase the work of Symmetric Vision during the party. Me and Asher performed some “poetry” about consciousness vs. replicators and far future visions for consciousness. And then I personally partied too hard on the dance floor. I mean, the energy was really vibrant, and Stuart Hameroff was vibrating to the tune of microtubules, and DMT visuals were being projected on the big screen while a bunch of raving scientists of all ages waved colorful LED tubes in various grades of coordinated synchrony and decoherence. It’s one of those things that gets lodged in my mind as a new gestalt because my brain wouldn’t naturally believe those things can happen.
Saturday: Brain Organoids Day
On Saturday we watched the presentations on brain organoids. I am inspired to accelerate our work on figuring out the valence function for arbitrary biological neural networks, because by the looks of it these technologies will start to be deployed much sooner than anticipated. I think that stopping the use of brain organoids on a grand scale is not likely to be possible, but creating and locking in a computing paradigm that uses information-sensitive gradients of bliss might be possible. And I don’t think the window of opportunity here is very large. Perhaps a decade or two.
I was delighted to see Luca Turin’s work on anesthesia shown at Harmut Neven’s fascinating presentation about quantum mechanics and brain organoids. They will be trying out xenon isotopes soon, in the hopes of detecting the influence of quantum states of the anesthetic at the macroscopic level (whether fruit flies get anesthetized or not). This seems extremely important to test, so godspeed to them.
At this point I said goodbye to the crew and just had a couple final meetings, a brief podcast with Tam Hunt, followed by simply resting on a balcony for a several hours, taking note of the highlights of the conference and beginning to decompress (I’m mostly there, though I still have a couple megapascals to go).
I look forward to following up with many of the conference attendees and to continue working on our core research to present next time.
Till next time, Tucson Consciousness!
Infinite bliss!
Andrés 🙂
Hard-Core Salvia Vibes at the Tucson Airport ………..microtubules, man!
Alternative Title: LSD Ego Death – A Play in Three Voices
[Epistemic Status: Academic, Casual, and Fictional Analysis of the phenomenology of LSD Ego Death]
Academic:
In this work we advance key novel interpretative frameworks to make sense of the distinct phenomenology that arises when ingesting a high dose of LSD-25 (250μg+). It is often noted that LSD, also known as lysergic acid diethylamide, changes in qualitative character as a function of dose, with a number of phase transitions worth discussing.
Casual:
You start reading an abstract of an academic publication on the topic of LSD phenomenology. What are the chances that you will gain any sense, any inkling, the most basic of hints, of what the high-dose LSD state is like by consuming this kind of media? Perhaps it’s not zero, but in so far as the phenomenological paradigms in mainstream use in the 2020s are concerned, we can be reasonably certain that the piece of media won’t even touch the outer edges of the world of LSD-specific qualia. Right now, you can trust the publication to get right core methodological boundary conditions, like the mg/kg used, the standard deviation of people’s responses to questionnaire items, and the increase in blood pressure at the peak. But at least right now you won’t find a rigorous account of either the phenomenal character (what the experience felt like in detailed colorful phenomenology with precise reproducible parameters) or the semantic content (what the experience was about, the information it allowed you to process, the meaning computed) of the state. For that we need to blend in additional voices to complement the rigidly skeptical vibe and tone of the academic delivery method.
It’s for that reason that we will interweave a casual, matter of fact, “really trying to say what I mean in as many ways as I can even if I sound silly or dumb”, voice (namely, this one, duh!). And more so, in order to address the speculative semantic content in its own terms we shall also include a fantastical voice into the mix.
Fantastical:
Fuck, you took too much. In many ways you knew that your new druggie friends weren’t to be trusted. Their MDMA pills were bunk, their weed was cheap, and even they pretended to drink more fancy alcohol than they could realistically afford. So it was rather natural for you to assume that their acid tabs would be weak ass. But alas, they turned out to have a really competent, niche, boutique, high-quality acid dealer. She lived only a few miles away and made her own acid, and dosed each tab at an actual, honest-to-God, 120(±10)μg. She also had a lot of cats, for some reason (why this information was relayed to you only once you sobered up was not something you really understood – especially not the part about the cats). Thus, the 2.5 tabs in total you had just taken (well, you took 1/2, then 1, then 1, spaced one hour each, and you had just taken the last dose, meaning you were still very much coming up, and coming up further by the minute) landed you squarely in the 300μg range. But you didn’t know this at the time. In fact, you suspected that the acid was hitting much more strongly than you anticipated for other reasons. You were expecting a 100-150 microgram trip, assuming each tab would be more between 40 and 60μg. But perhaps you really were quite sleep deprived. Or one of the nootropics you had sampled last week turned out to have a longer half-life than you expected and was synergistic with LSD (coluracetam? schizandrol?). Or perhaps it was the mild phenibut withdrawal you were having (you took 2g 72 hours ago, which isn’t much, but LSD amplifies subtle patterns anyway). It wasn’t until about half an hour later, when the final tab started to kick in, that you realized the intensity of the trip kept climbing up still further than you expected, and it really, absolutely, had to be that the acid was much, much stronger than you thought was possible; most likely over 250 mics, as you quickly estimated, and realized the implications.
From experience, you knew that 300 micrograms would cause ego death for sure. Of course people react differently to psychedelics. But in your case, ego death feelings start at around 150, and then even by 225-250 micrograms they would become all-consuming at least for some portion of the trip. In turn, actually taking 300 micrograms for you was ego death overkill, meaning you were most likely not only going to lose it, but be out for no less than an hour.
What do I mean by being out? And by losing it? The subjective component of the depersonalization that LSD causes is very difficult to explain. This is what this entire document is about. But we can start by describing what it is like from the outside.
Academic:
The behavioral markers of high dose LSD intoxication include confusion and delusions, as well as visual distortions of sufficient intensity to overcome, block, and replace sensory-activated phenomena. The depersonalization and derealization characteristic of LSD-induced states of consciousness tend to involve themes concerning religious, mystical, fantastical, and science fiction semantic landscapes. It is currently not possible to deduce the phenomenal character of these states of consciousness from within with our mainstream research tools and without compromising the epistemological integrity of our scientists (having them consume the mind-altering substance would, of course, confound the rigor of the analysis).
Casual:
Look, when you “lose it” or when you “are out” what happens from the outside is that you are an unpredictable executor of programs that seem completely random to any external observer. One moment you are quietly sitting, rocking back and forth, on the grass. The next you stand up, walk around peacefully. You sit again, now for literally half an hour without moving. Then you suddenly jump and run for 100m without stopping. And then ask the person who is there, no matter if they are a kid, a grandmother, a cop, a sanitation professional, a sex worker, or a professor, “what do you think about ___”? (where ___ ∈ {consciousness, reality, God, Time, Infinity, Eternity, …}). Of course here reality bifurcates depending on who it is that you happened to have asked this question to. A cop? You might end up arrested. Probably via a short visit to a hospital first. And overall not a great time. A kid? You could be in luck, and the kid might play along without identifying you as a threat, and most likely you continue on your journey without much problem. Or in one of the bad timelines, you end up fighting the kid. Not good. Most likely, if it was a grandmother, you might just activate random helpful programs, like helping her cross the street, and she might not even have the faintest clue (and I mean not the absolute faintest fucking clue) that you’re depersonalized on LSD thinking you’re God and that in a very real, if only phenomenological sense, it was literal Jesus / Christ Consciousness that helped her cross the street.
Under most conditions, the biggest danger that LSD poses is a bad valence reaction, which usually wears off after a few hours and is educational in some way. But when taken at high doses and unsupervised, LSD states can turn into real hazards for the individual and the people around them. Not so much because of malice, or because it triggers animal-like behaviors (it can, rarely, but it’s not why it’s dangerous). The real problem with LSD states in high doses is when you are unsupervised and then you execute random behaviors without knowing who you are, where you are, or even what it is that you are intending to achieve with the actions you are performing. It is therefore *paramount* that if you explore high doses of LSD you do it supervised.
Academic:
What constitutes a small, medium, or large dose of LSD is culture and time-dependent. In the 60s, the average tab used to be between 200 and 400 micrograms. The typical LSD experience was one that included elements of death and rebirth, mystical unions, and complete loss of contact with reality for a period of time. In the present, however, the tabs are closer to the 50-100μg range.
In “psychonaut” circles, which gather in internet forums like bluelight, reddit, and erowid, a “high dose of LSD” might be considered to be 300 micrograms. But in real world, less selected, typical contexts of use for psychedelic and empathogen drugs like dance festivals, a “high dose” might be anything above 150 micrograms. In turn, OG psychonauts like Timothy Leary and Richard Alpert would end up using doses in the 500-1000μg range routinely as part of their own investigations. In contrast, in TIHKAL, Alexander Shulgin lists LSD’s dose range as 60-200 micrograms. Clearly, there is a wide spread of opinions and practices concerning LSD dosing. It is for this reason that one needs to contextualize with historical and cultural details the demographic topos where one is discussing a “high dose of LSD”.
Fantastical:
Being out, and losing it, in your case right now would be disastrous. Why? Because you broke the cardinal sin of psychedelic exploration. You took a high dose of a full psychedelic (e.g. LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, DMT – less so 2C-B or Al-LAD, which have a lower ceiling of depersonalization[1]) without a sitter. Of course you didn’t intend to. You really just wanted to land at the comfortably manageable 100-150 microgram range. But now… now you’re deep into depersonalization-land, and alone. Who knows what you might do? Will you leave your apartment naked? Will someone call the cops? Will you end up in the hospital? You try to visualize future timelines and… something like 40% of them lead to either arrest or hospital or both. Damn it. It’s time to pull all the stops and minimize the bad timelines.
You go to your drug cabinet and decide to take a gabaergic. Here is an important lesson, and where timelines might start to diverge as well. Dosing of sedatives for psychedelic emergencies is a tricky issue. The problem is that sedatives themselves can cause confusion. So there are many stories you can find online of people who take a very large dose of alprazolam (Xanax) or similar (benzo, typically) and then end up both very confused and combative while also tripping really hard. Here interestingly, the added confusion of the sedative plus its anxiolytic effect synergize to make you even more unpredictable. On the other hand, not taking enough is also quite easy, where the LSD (or similar) anxiety and depersonalization continues to overpower the anxiolysis of the sedative.
You gather up all the “adult in the room” energy you can muster and make an educated guess: 600mg of gabapentin and 1g of phenibut. Yet, this will take a while to kick in, and you might depersonalize anytime and start wandering around. You need a plan in the meanwhile.
Academic:
In the article The Pseudo-Time Arrow we introduced a model of phenomenal time that takes into account the following three assumptions and works out their implications:
Indirect Realism About Perception
Discrete Moments of Experience
Qualia Structuralism
(1) is about how we live in a world-simulation and don’t access the world around us directly. (2) goes into how each moment of experience is itself a whole, and in a way, whatever feeling of space and time we may have, this must be encoded in each moment of experience itself. And (3) states that for any given experience there is a mathematical object whose mathematical features are isomorphic to the phenomenology of the experience (first introduced in Principia Qualia by Michel E. Johnson).
Together, these assumptions entail that the feeling of the passage of time must be encoded as a mathematical feature in each moment of experience. In turn, we speculated that this feature is _implicit causality_ in networks of local binding. Of course the hypothesis is highly speculative, but it was supported by the tantalizing idea that a directed graph could represent different variants of phenomenal time (aka. “exotic phenomenal time”). In particular, this model could account for “moments of eternity”, “time loops”, and even the strange “time splitting/branching”.
Casual:
In some ways, for people like me, LSD is like crack. I have what I have come to call “hyperphilosophia”. I am the kind of person who feels like a failure if I don’t come up with a radically new way of seeing reality by the end of each day. I feel deeply vulnerable, but also deeply intimate, with the nature of reality. Nature at its deepest feels like a brother or sister, basement reality feels close and in some way like a subtle reshuffling of myself. I like trippy ideas, I like to have my thoughts scrambled and then re-annealed in unexpected ways; I delight in combinatorial explosions, emergent effects, unexpected phase transitions, recursive patterns, and the computationally non-trivial. As a 6 year old I used to say that I wanted to be a “physicist mathematician and inventor” (modeling my future career plans around Einstein and Edison); I got deeply depressed for a whole year at the age of 9 when I confronted our mortality head on; and then experiencing a fantastic release at 16 on my first ego death (with weed of all drugs!) when I experienced the taste of Open Individualism; only to then feel depressed again at 20 but now about eternal life and the suffering we’re bound to experience for the rest of time; switching then to pragmatic approaches to reduce suffering and achieve paradise ala David Pearce. Of course this is just a “roll of the dice” and I’m sure I would be telling you about a different philosophical trajectory if we were to sample another timeline. But the point is that all my life I’ve expressed a really intense philosophical temperament. And it feels innate – nobody made me so philosophical – it just happened, as if driven by a force from the deep.
People like us are a certain type for sure, and I know this because out of thousands of people I’ve met I’ve had the fortune of encountering a couple dozen who are like me in these respects. Whether they turned out physicists, artists, or meditators is a matter of personal preference (admittedly the plurality of them is working on AI these days). And in general, it is usually the case that people of this type tend to have a deep interest in psychedelics, for the simple reason that they give you more of what they like than any other drug.
Yes, a powerful pleasant body buzz is appreciated (heroin mellow, meth fizz, and the ring of the Rupa Jhanas are all indeed quite pleasant and intrinsically worthwhile states of consciousness – factoring out their long-term consequences [positive for the Jhanas, negative for heroin and meth]). But that’s not what makes life worth living for people who (suffer from / enjoy their condition of) hyperphilosophia. Rather, it is the beauty of completely new perspectives that illuminate our understanding of reality one way or another that drives us. And LSD, among other tools, often really hits the nail in the head. It makes all the bad trips and nerve wracking anxiety of the state more than worth it in our minds.
One of the striking things about an LSD ego death that is incredibly stimulating from a philosophical perspective is how you handle the feeling of possible futures. Usually the way in which we navigate timelines (this is so seamless that we don’t usually realize how interesting and complex it is) is by imagining that a certain future is real and then “teleporting to it”. We of course don’t teleport to it. But we generate that feeling. And as we plan, we are in a way generating a bunch of wormholes from one future to another (one state of the world to another, chained through a series of actions). But our ability to do this is restricted by our capacity to generate definite, plausible, realistic and achievable chains of future states in our imagination.
On LSD this capacity can become severely impaired. In particular, we often realize that our sense of connection to near futures that we normally feel is in fact not grounded in reality. It’s a kind of mnemonic technique we employ for planning motor actions, but it feels from the inside as if we could control the nearby timelines. On LSD this capacity breaks down and one is forced to instead navigate possible futures via different means. In particular, something that begins to happen above 150 micrograms or so, is that when one imagines a possible future it lingers and refuses to fully collapse. You start experiencing a superposition of possible futures.
For an extreme example, see this quote (from this article) I found in r/BitcoinMarkets by Reddit user I_DID_LSD_ON_A_PLANE in 2016:
[Trip report of taking a high dose of LSD on an airplane]: So I had what you call “sonder”, a moment of clarity where I realized that I wasn’t the center of the universe, that everyone is just as important as me, everyone has loved ones, stories of lost love etc, they’re the main character in their own movies.
That’s when shit went quantum. All these stories begun sinking in to me. It was as if I was beginning to experience their stories simultaneously. And not just their stories, I began seeing the story of everyone I had ever met in my entire life flash before my eyes. And in this quantum experience, there was a voice that said something about Karma. The voice told me that the plane will crash and that I will be reborn again until the quota of my Karma is at -+0. So, for every ill deed I have done, I would have an ill deed committed to me. For every cheap T-shirt I purchased in my previous life, I would live the life of the poor Asian sweatshop worker sewing that T-shirt. For every hooker I fucked, I would live the life of a fucked hooker.
And it was as if thousands of versions of me was experiencing this moment. It is hard to explain, but in every situation where something could happen, both things happened and I experienced both timelines simultaneously. As I opened my eyes, I noticed how smoke was coming out of the top cabins in the plane. Luggage was falling out. I experienced the airplane crashing a thousand times, and I died and accepted death a thousand times, apologizing to the Karma God for my sins. There was a flash of the brightest white light imagineable and the thousand realities in which I died began fading off. Remaining was only one reality in which the crash didn’t happen. Where I was still sitting in the plane. I could still see the smoke coming out of the plane and as a air stewardess came walking by I asked her if everything was alright. She said “Yes, is everything alright with YOU?”.
Fantastical:
It had been some years since you had done the LSD and Quantum Measurement experiment in order to decide if the feeling of timelines splitting was in any way real. Two caveats about that experiment. First, it used quantum random number generators from Sydney that were no less than 100ms old by the time they were displayed on the screen. And second, you didn’t get the phenomenology of time splitting while on acid during the tests anyway. But having conducted the experiment anyway at least provided some bounds for the phenomenon. Literal superposition of timelines, if real, would need higher doses or more fresh quantum random numbers. Either way, it reassured you somewhat that the effect wasn’t so strong that it could be detected easily.
But now you wish you had done the experiment more thoroughly. Because… the freaking feeling of timelines splitting is absolutely raging with intensity right now and you wish you could know if it’s for real or just a hallucination. And of course, even if just a hallucination, this absolutely changes your model of how phenomenal time must be encoded, because damn, if you can experience multiple timelines at once that means that the structure of experience that encodes time is much more malleable than you thought.
Uh? Interesting, I can hear a voice all of a sudden. It calls itself “Academic” and just said something about the stacking of narrative voices.
Fantastical:
It’s always fascinating how on LSD you get a kind of juxtaposition of narrative voices. And in this case, you now have an Academic, a Casual, and a Fantastical narrative stream each happening in a semi-parallel way. And at some point they started to become aware of each other. Commenting on each other. Interlacing and interweaving.
Casual:
Importantly, one of the limiting factors of the academic discourse is that it struggles to interweave detailed phenomenology into its analysis. Thankfully, with the LSD-induced narrative juxtaposition we have a chance to correct this.
Academic:
After reviewing in real time the phenomenology of how you are thinking about future timelines, I would like to posit that the phenomenal character of high dose LSD is characterized by a hyperbolic pseudo-time arrow.
This requires the combination of two paradigms discussed at the Qualia Research Institute. Namely, the pseudo-time arrow, which as we explained tries to make sense of phenomenal time in terms of a directed graph representing moments of experience. And then also the algorithmic reductions introduced in the Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT Experiences.
The latter deals with the idea that the geometry of our experience is the result of the balance between various forces. Qualia comes up, gets locally bound to other qualia, then disappears. Under normal circumstances, the network that emerges out of these brief connections has a standard Euclidean geometry (or rather, works as a projection of a Euclidean space, but I digress). But DMT perturbs the balance, in part by making more qualia appear, making it last longer, making it vibrate, and making it connect more with each other, which results in a network that has a hyperbolic geometry. In turn, the felt sense of being on DMT is one of _being_ a larger phenomenal space, which is hard to put into words, but possible with the right framework.
What we want to propose now is that on LSD in particular, the characteristic feeling of “timeline splitting” and the even more general “multiple timeline superposition” effect is the result of a hyperbolic geometry, not of phenomenal space as with DMT, but of phenomenal time. In turn, this can be summarized as: LSD induces a hyperbolic curvature along the pseudo-time arrow.
Casual:
Indeed, one of the deeply unsettling things about high dose LSD experiences is that you get the feeling that you have knowledge of multiple timelines. In fact, there is a strange sense of uncanny uncertainty about which timeline you are in. And here is where a rather scary trick is often played on us by the state.
The feeling of the multiverse feels very palpable when the garbage collector of your phenomenal motor planning scratchpad is broken and you just sort of accumulate plans without collapsing them (a kind of kinesthetic tracer effect).
Fantastical:
Ok, you need to condense your timelines. You can’t let _that_ many fall off the wagon, so to speak. You could depersonalize any moment. You decide that your best bet is to call a friend of yours. He is likely working, but lives in the city right next to yours and could probably get to your place in half an hour if you’re lucky.
> Hello!
> Hello! I just got out of a meeting. What’s up?
> Er… ok, this is gonna sound strange. I… took too much LSD. And I think I need help.
> Are you ok? LSD is safe, right?
> Yeah, yeah. I think everything will be fine. But I need to collapse the possibility space. This is too much. I can’t deal with all of these timelines. If you come over at least we will be trimming a bunch of them and preventing me from wandering off thinking I’m God.
> Oh, wow. You don’t sound very high? That made sense, haha.
> Duuudde! I’m in a window of lucidity right now. We’re lucky you caught me in one. Please hurry, I don’t know how much longer I can hang in here. I’m about to experience ego death. What happens next is literally up to God, and I don’t know what his plans are.
Your friend says he’ll take an Uber or Lyft and be there as soon as he can. You try to relax. Reality is scolding you. Why did you take this risk? You should know better!
Casual:
One of the unsettling feelings about high dose LSD is that you get to feel how extremely precious and rare a human life is. We tend to imagine that reincarnation would simply be like, say, where you die and then 40 days later come back as a baby in India or China or the United States or Brazil or whatever, based on priors, and rarely in Iceland or tiny Caribbean Islands. But no. Humans are a luxury reincarnation. Animal? Er, yeah, even animals are pretty rare. The more common form is simply in the shape of some cosmic process or another, like intergalactic wind or superheated plasma inside a star. Any co-arising process that takes place in this Gigantic Field of Consciousness we find ourselves embedded in is a possible destination, for the simple reason that…
Academic:
The One-Electron Universe posits that there is only one particle in the entire cosmos, which is going forwards and backwards in time, interfering with itself, interweaving a pattern of path integrals that interlace with each other. If there is only one electron, then the chances of being a “human moment of experience” at a point in time are vanishingly small. The electrons whose pattern of superposition paint a moment of experience are but a tiny vanishing fraction of the four-dimensional density-mass of the one electron in the block universe entailed by quantum mechanics.
Fantastical:
When you realize that you are the one electron in the universe you often experience a complex superposition of emotions. Of course this is limited by your imagination and emotional state. But if you’re clear-headed, curious, and generally open to exploring possibilities, here is where you feel like you are at the middle point of all reality.
You can access all 6 Realms from this central point, and in a way escape the sense of identification with any one of them. Alas, this is not something that one always achieves. It is easy to get caught up in a random stream and end up in, say, the God Realm completely deluded thinking you’re God. Or in the Hell realm, thinking you’re damned forever somehow. Or the animal, seeking simple body pleasures and comfort. Or the human world, being really puzzled and craving cognitively coherent explanations. Or the Hungry Ghost dimension, where you are always looking to fill yourself up and perceive yourself as fundamentally empty and flawed. Or the Titan realm, which adds a perceptual filter where you feel that everything and everyone is in competition with you and you derive your main source of satisfaction from pride and winning.
In the ideal case, during an LSD ego death you manage to hang out right at the center of this wheel, without falling into any of the particular realms. This is where the luminous awareness happens. And it is what feels like the central hub for the multiverse of consciousness, except in a positive, empowering way.
Casual:
In many ways we could say that the scariest feeling during LSD ego death is the complete lack of control over your next rebirth.
Because if you, in a way, truly surrender to the “fact” that we’re all one and that it all happens in Eternity at the same time anyway… do you realize the ramifications that this has? Everything Everywhere All At Once is a freaking documentary.
Fantastical:
> Hello? What’s up?
> Yeah, er, are you coming over?
> Yes. I mean, you just called me… 5 minutes ago. Did you expect I’d be there already? I’m walking towards the Uber.
> Time is passing really slowly, and I’m really losing it now. Can you… please… maybe like, remind me who I am every, like, 30 seconds or so?
> Mmmm ok. I guess that’s a clear instruction. I can be helpful, sure.
[for the next 40 minutes, in the Uber headed to your place, your friend kept saying your name every 30 seconds, sometimes also his name, and sometimes reminding you where you are and why you called him – bless his soul]
Casual:
Imagine that you are God. You are walking around in the “Garden of Possibilities”. Except that we’re not talking about static possibilities. Rather, we’re talking about processes. Algorithms, really. You walk around and stumble upon a little set of instructions that, when executed, turns you into a little snowflake shape. Or perhaps turns you into a tree-like shape (cf. l-systems). When you’re lucky, it turns you into a beautiful crystalline flower. In these cases, the time that you spend embodying the process is small. Like a little popcorn reality: you encounter, consume, and move on. But every once in a while you encounter a set of instructions that could take a very long time to execute. Due to principles of computational irreducibility, it is also impossible for you to determine in advance (at least in all, most cases) how long the process will take. So every once in a while you encounter a Busy Beaver and end up taking a very, very, very long time to compute that process.
Busy beaver values for different parameters (source)
But guess what? You are God. You’re eternal. You are forever. You will always come back and continue on your walk. But oh boy, from the point of view of the experience of being what the Busy Beaver executes, you do exist for a very long time. From the point of view of God, no matter how long this process takes, it will still be a blink of an eye in the grand scheme of things. God has been countless times in Busy Beavers and will be countless times there again as well. So enjoy being a flower, or a caterpillar, or a raindrop, or even an electron, because most of the time you’re stuck being ridiculously long processes like the Busy Beaver.
Academic:
Under the assumption that the hyperbolic pseudo-time arrow idea is on the right track, we can speculate about how this might come about from a configuration of a feedback system. As we’ve seen before, an important aspect of the phenomenal character of psychedelic states of consciousness is captured by the tracer pattern. More so, as we discussed in the video about DMT and hyperbolic geometry, one of the ways in which psychedelic states can be modeled is in terms of a feedback system with a certain level of noise. Assume that LSD produces a tracer effect where, approximately, 15 times per second you get a strobe and a replay effect overlay on top of your current experience. What would this do to your representation of the passage of time and the way you parse possible futures?
FRAKSL video I made to illustrate hyperbolic pseudo-time arrows coming out of a feedback system (notice how change propagates fractally across the layers).
Casual:
I think that LSD’s characteristic “vibrational frequency” is somewhere between phenethylamines and tryptamines. 2C-B strikes me as in the 10hz range for most vibrations, whereas psilocybin is closer to 20hz. LSD might be around 15hz. And one of the high-level insights that the lens of connectome-specific harmonic modes (or more recently geometric eigenmodes) gives us is that functional localization and harmonic modulation might be intertwined. In other words, the reason why a particular part of the brain might do what it does is because it is a great tuning knob for the harmonic modes that critically hinge on that region of the brain. This overall lens was used by Michael E. Johnson in Principia Qualia to speculate that the pleasure centers are responsible for high variance in valence precisely because they are strategically positioned in a place where large-scale harmony can be easily modulated. With this sort of approach in mind (we could call it even a research aesthetic, where for every spatial pattern there is a temporal dynamic and vice versa) I reckon that partly what explains the _epistemological_ effects of LSD at high doses involves the saturation of specific frequencies for conscious compute. What do I mean by this?
Say indeed that a good approximation for a conscious state is a weighted sum of harmonic modes. This does not take into account the non-linearities (how the presence of a harmonic mode affects other ones) but it might be a great 60%-of-the-way-there kind of approximation. If so, I reckon that we use some “frequency bands” to store specific kinds of information that corresponds to the information that is naturally encoded with rhythms of specific frequencies. It turns out, in this picture, that we have a sort of collection of inner clocks that are sampling the environment to pick up on patterns that repeat at different scales. We have a slow clock that samples every hour or so, one that samples every 10 minutes, one that samples every minute, every 10 seconds, every second, and then at 10, 20, 30, 40, and even 50hz. All of these inner clocks meet with each other to interlace and interweave a “fabric of subjective time”. When we want to know at a glance how we’re doing, we sample a fragment of this “fabric of subjective time” and it contains information about how we’re doing right now, how we were doing a minute ago, an hour, a day, and even longer. Of course sometimes we need to sample the fabric for a while in order to notice more subtle patterns. But the point is that our sense of reality in time seems to be constructed out of the co-occurrence of many metronomes at different scales.
I think that in particular the spatio-temporal resonant modes that LSD over-excites the most are actually really load-bearing for constructing our sense of our context. It’s as if when you energize too much one of these resonant modes, you actually push it to a smaller range of possible configurations (more smooth sinusoidal waves rather than intricate textures). By super-saturating the energy in some of these harmonics on LSD, you flip over to a regime where there is really no available space for information to be encoded. You can therefore feel extremely alive and real, and yet when you query the “time fabric” you notice that there are big missing components. The information that you would usually get about who you are, where you are, what you have been doing for the last couple of hours, and so on, is instead replaced by a kind of eternal-seeming feeling of always having existed exactly as you currently are.
Fantastical:
If it wasn’t because of your friend helpfully reminding you where you were and who you are, you would have certainly forgotten the nature of your context and for sure wandered off. The scene was shifting widely, and each phenomenal object or construct was composed of a never ending stream of gestalts competing for the space to take hold as the canonical representation (and yet, of course, always superseded by yet another “better fit”, constantly updating).
The feeling of the multiverse was crushing. Here is where you remembered how various pieces of media express aspects of the phenomenology of high dose LSD (warning: mild spoilers – for the movies and for reality as a whole):
Everything Everywhere All At Once: in the movie one tunes into other timelines in order to learn the skills that one has in those alternative lifepaths. But this comes with one side-effect, which is that you continue to be connected to the timeline from which you’re learning a skill. In other words, you form a bond across timelines that drags you down as the cost of accessing their skill. On high dose LSD you get the feeling that yes, you can learn a lot from visualizing other timelines, but you also incur the cost of loading up your sensory screen with information you can’t get rid of.
The Matrix: the connection is both the obvious one and a non-obvious one. First, yes, the reason this is relevant is because being inside a simulation might feel like a plausible hypothesis while on a high dose of LSD. But less intuitively, the Matrix also fits the bill when it comes to the handling of future-past interactions. The “Don’t worry about the vase” scene (which I imagine Zvi named his blog after) highlights that there is an intertwining between future and past that forges destiny. And many of the feelings about how the future and past are connected echo this theme on a high dose of LSD.
Rick and Morty (selected episodes):
Death Crystal: here the similarity is in how on LSD you feel that you can go to any given future timeline by imagining clearly a given outcome and then using it as a frame of reference to fill in the details backwards.
A Rickle in Time: how the timelines split but can in some ways remain aware of and affect each other.
Mortynight Run: In the fictional game Roy: A Life Well Lived you get to experience a whole human lifetime in what looks like minutes from the outside in order to test how you do in a different reality.
Tenet: Here the premise is that you can go back in time, but only one second per second and using special gear (reversed air tanks, in their case).
Of these, perhaps the most surprising to people would be Tenet. So let me elaborate. There are two Tenet-like phenomenologies you experience as your friend is on the way to pick you up worth commenting on:
One, what we could call the “don’t go this way” phenomenology. Here you get the feeling that you make a particular choice. E.g. go to the other room to take more gabapentin and see if that helps (of course it won’t – it’s only been 15 minutes since you took it and it hasn’t even kicked in). Then you visualize briefly what that timeline feels like, and you get the feeling of living through it. Suddenly you snap back into the present moment and decide not to go there. This leaves a taste in your mouth of having gone there, of having been there, of living through the whole thing, just to decide 10 years down the line that you would rather come back and make a different choice.
At the extreme of this phenomenology you find yourself feeling like you’ve lived every possible timeline. And in a way, you “realize” that you’re, in the words of Teafaerie, a deeply jaded God looking for an escape from endless loops. So you “remember” (cf. anamnesis) that you chose to forget on purpose so that you could live as a human in peace, believing others are real, humbly accepting a simple life, lost in a narrative of your own making. The “realization” can be crushing, of course, and is often a gateway to a particular kind of depersonalization/derealization where you walk around claiming you’re God. Alas, this only happens in a sweet spot of intoxication, and since you went above even that, you’ll have a more thorough ego death.
Two, an even more unsettling Tenet-like phenomenology is the feeling that “other timelines are asking for your help – Big Time wants you to volunteer for the Time War!”. Here things go quantum, and completely bonkers. The feeling is the result of having the sense that you can navigate timelines with your mind in a much deeper way than, say, just making choices one at a time. This is a profound feeling, and conveying it in writing is of course a massive stretch. But even the Bering Strait was crossed by hominids once, and this stretch feels also crossable by us with the right ambition.
The multiverse is very large. You see, imagine what it would be like to restart college. One level here is where you start again from day 1. In other timelines you make different friends, read other books, take other classes, have other lovers, major in other disciplines. Now go backwards even a little further back, to when the academic housing committee was making decisions about who goes to which dorm. Then the multiverse diversifies, as you see a combinatorial explosion of possible dorm configurations. Further back, when the admissions committee was making their decisions, and you have an even greater expansion of the multiverse where different class configurations are generated.
Now imagine being able to “search” this bulky multiverse. How do you search it? Of course you could go action by action. But due to chaos, within important parameters like the set of people you’re likely to meet, possibilities quickly get scrambled. The worlds where you chose that bike versus that other bike in that particular moment aren’t much more similar to each other than other random ways of partitioning the timelines. Rather, you need to find pivotal decisions, as well as _anchor feelings_. E.g. It really matters if a particular bad technology is discovered and deployed, because that drastically changes the texture of an entire category of timelines. It is better for you to search timelines via general vibes and feelings like that, because that will really segment the multiverse into meaningfully different outcomes. This is the way in which you can move along timelines on high doses of LSD. You generate the feeling of things “having been a certain way” and you try to leave everything else as loose and unconstrained as possible, so that you search through the path integral of superpositions of all possible worlds where the feeling arises, and every once in a while when you “sample” the superposition you get a plausible universe where this is real.
Now, on 150 or 200 micrograms this feels very hypothetical, and the activity can be quite fun. On 300 micrograms, this feels real. It is actually quite spooky, because you feel a lot of responsibility here. As if the way in which you chose to digest cosmic feelings right there could lock in either a positive or negative timeline for you and your loved ones.
Here is where the Time War comes into play. I didn’t choose this. I don’t like this meme. But it is part of the phenomenology, and I think it is better that we address it head-on rather than let it surprise you and screw you up in one way or another.
The sense of realism that high dose LSD produces is unreal. It feels so real that it feels dreamy. But importantly, the sense of future timelines being truly there in a way is often hard to escape. With this you often get a crushing sense of responsibility. And together with the “don’t go this way” you can experience a feeling of a sort of “ping pong with the multiverse of possibilities” where you feel like you go backwards and forwards in countless cycles searching for a viable, good future for yourself and for everyone.
In some ways, you may feel like you go to the End of Times when you’ve lived all possible lifetimes and reconverge on the Godhead (I’m not making this up, this is a common type of experience for some reason). Importantly, you often feel like there are _powerful_ cosmic forces at play, that the reason for your life is profound, and that you are playing an important role for the development of consciousness. One might even experience corner-case exotic phenomenal time like states of mind with two arrows of time that are perpendicular to each other (unpacking this would take us an entire new writeup, so we shall save it for another time). And sometimes you can feel like your moral fiber is tested in often incredibly uncomfortable ways by these exotic phenomenal time effects.
Here is an example.
As your sense of “awareness of other timelines” increases, so does your capacity to sense timelines where things are going really well and timelines where things are going really poorly. Like, there are timelines where your friend is also having a heart attack right now, and then those where he crashes on the way to your apartment, and those where there’s a meteorite falling into your city, and so on. Likewise, there’s one where he is about to win the lottery, where you are about to make a profound discovery about reality that stands the test of sober inquiry, where someone just encountered the cure for cancer, and so on. One unsettling feeling you often get on high dose LSD is that because you’re more or less looking at these possibilities “from the point of view of eternity” in a way you are all of them at once. “Even the bad ones?” – yes, unsettlingly, even the bad ones. So the scary moral-fiber-testing thought that sometimes you might get is if you’d volunteer to be in one of the bad ones so that “a version of you gets to be in the good one”. In other words, if you’re everyone, wouldn’t you be willing to trade places? Oftentimes here’s where Open Individualism gets scary and spooky and where talking to someone else to get confirmation that there are parallel conscious narrative streams around is really helpful.
Casual:
We could say that LSD is like a completely different drug depending on the dose range you hit:
Below 50 micrograms it is like a stimulant with stoning undertones. A bit giggly, a bit dissociating, but pretty normal otherwise.
Between 50 and 150 you have a drug that is generally really entertaining, gentle, and for the most part manageable. You get a significant expansion in the room available to have thoughts and feelings, as if your inner scratch pads got doubled in size. Colors, sounds, and bodily feelings all significantly intensified, but still feel like amplified versions of normal life.
Between 150 and 250 you get all of the super stereotypical psychedelic effects, with very noticeable drifting, tracers, symmetries, apophenia, recursive processes, and fractal interlocking landscapes. It is also somewhat dissociative and part of your experience might feel dreamy and blurry, while perhaps the majority of your field is sharp, bright, and very alive.
From 250 to 350 it turns into a multiverse travel situation, where you forget where you are and who you are and at times that you even took a drug. You might be an electron for what feels like millions of years. You might witness a supernova in slow motion. You might spontaneously become absorbed into space (perhaps as a high energy high dimensional version of the 5th Jhana). And you might feel like you hit some kind of God computer that compiles human lifetimes in order to learn about itself. You might also experience the feeling of a massive ball of light colliding with you that turns you into the Rainbow version of the Godhead for a time that might range between seconds and minutes. It’s a very intense experience.
And above? I don’t know, to be honest.
Academic:
The intermittent collapse into “eternity” reported on high dose LSD could perhaps be interpreted as stumbling into fixed points of a feedback system. Similarly to how pointing a camera directly at its own video feed at the right angle produces a perfectly static image. On the other hand, we might speculate that many of the “time branching” effects are instead the result of a feedback system where each iteration doubles the number of images (akin to using a mirror to cover a portion of the screen and reflect the uncovered part of the screen).
Video I made with FRAKSL in order to illustrate exactly the transition between a hyperbolic pseudo-time arrow and a geometric fixed point in a feedback system. This aims to capture the toggle during LSD ego death between experiencing multiple timelines and collapsing into moments of eternity.
Fantastical:
You decide that you do want to keep playing the game. You don’t want to roll the dice. You don’t want to embrace Eternity, and with it, all of the timelines, even the ugly ones. You don’t want to be a volunteer in the Time War. You just want to be a normal person, though of course the knowledge you’ve gained would be tough to lose. So you have to make a choice. Either you forget what you learned, or you quit the game. What are you going to do?
As you start really peaking and the existential choice is presented to you, your friend finally arrives outside of your apartment. The entrance is very cinematic, as you witness it both from your phone as well as in real life, like the convergence of two parallel reality streams collapsing into a single intersubjective hologram via a parallax effect. It was intense.
Casual:
You have to admit, the juxtaposition of narrative streams with different stylistic proclivities really does enrich the human condition. In a way, this is one of the things that makes LSD so valuable: you get to experience simultaneously sets of vibes/stances/emotions/attitudes that would generally never co-exist. This is, at least in part, what might be responsible for increasing your psychological integration after the trip; you experience a kind of multi-context harmonization (cf. gestalt annealing). It’s why it’s hard to “hide from yourself on acid” – because the mechanism that usually keeps our incoherent parts compartmentalized breaks down under intense generalized tracers that maintain interweaving, semi-paralel, narrative streams. Importantly, the juxtaposition of narrative voices is computationally non-trivial. It expands the experiential base in a way that allows for fruitful cross-pollination between academic ways of thinking and our immediate phenomenology. Perhaps this is important from a scientific point of view.
Fantastical:
With your friend in the apartment taking care of you – or rather, more precisely, reducing possibility-space to a manageable narrative smear, and an acceptable degree of leakage into bad timelines – you can finally relax. More so, the sedatives finally kick in, and the psychedelic effects reduce by maybe 20-25% in the span of an hour or so. You end up having an absolutely great time, and choose to keep playing the game. You forget you’re God, and decide to push the question of whether to fall into Nirvana for good till the next trip.
[1] LSD has a rather peculiar dose-response curve. It is not a “light” psychedelic, although it can certainly be used to have light experiences. Drugs like AL-LAD are sometimes described as relatively shallow in that they don’t produce the full depth of richness LSD does. Or 2C-B/2C-I, which tend to come with a more grounded sense of reality relative to the intensity of the sensory amplification. Or DMT, which despite its extreme reality-replacing effects, tends to nonetheless give you a sense of rhythm and timing that keeps the sense of self intact along some dimensions. LSD is a full psychedelic in that at higher doses it really deeply challenges one’s sense of reality. I have never heard of someone take 2C-B at, say, 30mg and freak out so badly that they believe that reality is about to end or that they are God and wish they didn’t know it. But on 200-400 micrograms of LSD this is routine. Of course you may not externalize it, but the “egocidal” effects of acid are powerful and hard to miss, and they are in some ways much deeper and transformative than the colorful show of DMT or the love of MDMA because it is ruthless in its insistence, methodical in its approach, and patient like water (which over decades can carve deep into rocks). As Christopher Bach says in LSD and the Mind of the Universe: “An LSD session grinds slow but it grinds fine. It gives us time to be engaged and changed by the realities we are encountering. I think this polishing influences both the eventual clarity of our perception in these states and what we are able to bring back from them, both in terms of healing and understanding”. There’s a real sense in which part of the power of LSD comes from its capacity to make you see something for long periods of time that under normal circumstances would have us flinch in a snap.
In this video I discuss in depth the following topics:
1. MDMA is cardiotoxic and likely neurotoxic, with real and significant side-effects when taken often. Don’t do that. Respect and honor this beautiful state and save it for when you really need it.
2. The phenomenology is often described as “removing layers of conditioning and finding your essential, loving, and pure *core*”. It seems to significantly reduce greed, hate, and delusion, for at least a solid 90 minutes.
3. I argue that a good frame would be to think of the effects as drastically reducing both reactance and fear. Then you can assess a situation without the distortions of these two mental factors, which tend to generate rather self-serving thought-forms.
4. The concept of “authenticity” and its operationalization as a good lens with which to see the effects of MDMA. Big up to Matt Baggott, Co-founder and CEO of Tactogen, who is aiming to perfect MDMA and developed and applied the construct of authenticity in the scientific study of MDMA. Also thanks to Thomas S. Ray, who is on a similar path. Well done! Let’s get more people involved!
5. Another frame is to think of the state as clarifying what the “substance of thought” is like. We usually live under the illusion that emotional reactions follow Newtonian physics. They don’t. A better analogy would be corn starch and water, where applying force quickly can solidify (and even tear) the medium. Thus, we get in our own way and cause a lot of sense of solidity without even realizing it, which will take time and effort to soften and return to normal.
6. Discussion about QRI’s Psychedelic Thermodynamics model applied to MDMA.
7. Self-organizing principles, such as “repulsion-based algorithms” to undo knots, might explain what is happening to the field on MDMA.
8. A possible personality factor might be how “hard” someone is. I discuss personality disorders from a “hardness realism” point of view.
9. Emotional processing as a “skill tree” rather than “levels”.
10. High Entropy Alloys (HEA) are materials made of many metals that, in some cases, lead to really surprising effects, such as a new symmetry space group for their molecular organization (where none of the “ingredients” tend to crystalize that way, but as a whole they do). MDMA might be a bit of a unique HEA that balances serotonin (social anxiety reduction), dopamine (motivation and mental clarity), oxytocin (sense of closeness), and endorphins (bodily pleasure). It is more than the sum of the parts.
11. This leads to a speculation where the key high-level effects of MDMA, in addition to reducing fear and reactance, is the presence of courage, love and equanimity. I try to explain these features in terms of MDMA’s “vibratory signature”.
12. Deep discussion about self-honesty and why it develops in the state. I speculate it has to do with the de-modularization of our vascular clusters (or something else, if blood turns out to be a special case).
13. This blending of modules with each other results in an uncomfortable but helpful overlap between contradictory faces that we put in social settings. It is ideal to experience this with equanimity and patience, however difficult it is to acknowledge it to ourselves. The other side of this wall is light and beautiful, I promise.
14. It seems to me that MDMA creates a highly redundant and highly overdetermined Euclidean geometric phenomenal space, where each point “knows” really clearly how far it is from every other point. Psychedelics can sometimes do this for short periods of time, but they usually create complex fractaline phenomenal spaces. MDMA is different – highly “clear and normal” yet unblocked and euphoric.
15. The concept of Gnarliness as it relates to the “field knots” that MDMA can help unwind.
[Epistemic Status: informal and conversational, this piece provides an off-the-cuff discussion around the topological solution to the boundary problem. Please note that this isn’t intended to serve as a bulletproof argument; rather, it’s a guide through an intuitive explanation. While there might be errors, possibly even in reasoning, I believe they won’t fundamentally alter the overarching conceptual solution.]
This post is an informal and intuitive explanation for why we are looking into topology as a tentative solution to the phenomenal binding (or boundary) problem. In particular, this solutions identifies moments of experience with topological pockets of fields of physics. We recently published a paper where we dive deeper into this explanation space, and concretely hypothesize that the key macroscopic boundary between subjects of experience is the result of topological segmentation in the electromagnetic field (see explainer video / author’s presentation at the Active Inference Institute).
The short explanation for why this is promising is that topological boundaries are objective and frame-invariant features of “basement reality” that have causal effects and thus can be recruited by natural selection for information-processing tasks. If the fields of physics are fields of qualia, topological boundaries of the fields corresponding to phenomenal boundaries between subjects would be an elegant way for a theory of consciousness to “carve nature at its joints”. This solution is very significant if true, because it entails, among other things, that classical digital computers are incapable of creating causally significant experiences: the experiences that emerge out of them are by default something akin to mind dust, and at best, if significant binding happens, they are epiphenomenal from the “point of view” of the computation being realized.
The route to develop an intuition about this topic that this post takes is to deconstruct the idea of a “point of view” as a “natural kind” and instead advocate for topological pockets being the place where information can non-trivially aggregate. This idea, once seen, is hard to unsee; it reframes how we think about what systems are, and even the nature of information itself.
One of the beautiful things about life is that you sometimes have the opportunity to experience a reality plot twist. We might believe one narrative has always been unfolding, only to realize that the true story was different all along. As they say, the rug can be pulled from under your feet.
The QRI memeplex is full of these reality plot twists. You thought that the “plot” of the universe was a battle between good and evil? Well, it turns out it is the struggle between consciousness and replicators instead. Or that what you want is particular states of the environment? Well, it turns out you’ve been pursuing particular configurations of your world simulation all along. You thought that pleasure and pain follow a linear scale? Well, it turns out the scales are closer to logarithmic in nature, with the ends of the distribution being orders of magnitude more intense than the lower ends. I think that along these lines, grasping how “points of view” and “moments of experience” are connected requires a significant reframe of how you conceptualize reality. Let’s dig in!
One of the motivations for this post is that I recently had a wonderful chat with Nir Lahav, who last year published an article that steelmans the view that consciousness is relativistic (see one of his presentations). I will likely discuss his work in more detail in the future. Importantly, talking to him reminded me that ever since the foundation of QRI, we have taken for granted the view that consciousness is frame-invariant, and worked from there. It felt self-evident to us that if something depends on the frame of reference from which you see it, it doesn’t have inherent existence. Our experiences (in particular, each discrete moment of experience), have inherent existence, and thus cannot be frame-dependent. Every experience is self-intimating, self-disclosing, and absolute. So how could it depend on a frame of reference? Alas, I know this is a rather loaded way of putting it and risks confusing a lot of people (for one, Buddhists might retort that experience is inherently “interdependent” and has no inherent existence, to which I would replay “we are talking about different things here”). So I am motivated to present a more fleshed out, yet intuitive, explanation for why we should expect consciousness to be frame-invariant and how, in our view, our solution to the boundary problem is in fact up to this challenge.
The main idea here is to show how frames of reference cannot boostrap phenomenal binding. Indeed, “a point of view” that provides a frame of reference is more of a convenient abstraction that relies on us to bind, interpret, and coalesce pieces of information, than something with a solid ontological status that exists out there in the world. Rather, I will try to show how we are borrowing from our very own capacity for having unified information in order to put together the data that creates the construct of a “point of view”; importantly, this unity is not bootstrapped from other “points of view”, but draws from the texture of the fabric of reality itself. Namely, the field topology.
A scientific theory of consciousness must be able to explain the existence of consciousness, the nature and cause for the diverse array of qualia values and varieties (the palette problem), how consciousness is causally efficacious (avoid epiphenomenalism), and explain how the information content of each moment of experience is presented “all at once” (namely, the binding problem). I’ve talked extensively about these constraints in writings, videos, and interviews, but what I want to emphasize here is that these problems need to be addressed head on for a theory of consciousness to work at all. Keep these constraints in mind as we deconstruct the apparent solidity of frames of reference and the difficulty that arises in order to bootstrap causal and computational effects in connection to phenomenal binding out of a relativistic frame.
At a very high level, a fuzzy (but perhaps sufficient) intuition for what’s problematic when a theory of consciousness doesn’t seek frame-invariance is that you are trying to create something concrete with real and non-trivial causal effects and information content, out of fundamentally “fuzzy” parts.
In brief, ask yourself, can something fuzzy “observe” something fuzzy? How can fuzzyness be used to boostrap something non-fuzzy?
In a world of atoms and forces, “systems” or “things” or “objects” or “algorithms” or “experiences” or “computations” don’t exist intrinsically because there are no objective, frame-invariant, and causally significant ways to draw boundaries around them!
I hope to convince you that any sense of unity or coherence that you get from this picture of reality (a relativistic system with atoms and forces) is in fact a projection from your mind, that inhabits your mind, and is not out there in the world. You are looking at the system, and you are making connections between the parts, and indeed you are creating a hierarchy of interlocking gestalts to represent this entire conception of reality. But that is all in your mind! It’s a sort of map and territory confusion to believe that two fuzzy “systems” interacting with each other can somehow bootstrap a non-fuzzy ontological object (aka. a requirement for a moment of experience).
I reckon that these vague explanations are in fact sufficient for some people to understand where I’m going. But some of you are probably clueless about what the problem is, and for good reason. This is never discussed in detail, and this is largely, I think, because people who think a lot about the problem don’t usually end up with a convincing solution. And in some cases, the result is that thinkers bite the bullet that there are only fuzzy patterns in reality.
How Many Fuzzy Computations Are There in a System?
Indeed, thinking of the universe as being made of particles and forces implies that computational processes are fuzzy (leaky, porous, open to interpretation, etc.). Now imagine thinking that *you* are one of such fuzzy computations. Having this as an unexamined background assumption gives rise to countless intractable paradoxes. The notion of a point of view, or a frame of reference, does not have real meaning here as the way to aggregate information doesn’t ultimately allow you to identify objective boundaries around packets of information (at least not boundaries that are more than merely-conventional in nature).
From this point of view (about points of view!), you realize that indeed there is no principled and objective way to find real individuals. You end up in the fuzzy world of fuzzy individuals of Brian Tomasik, as helpfully illustrated by this diagram:
Brian Tomasik indeed identifies the problem of finding real boundaries between individuals as crucial for utilitarian calculations. And then, incredibly, also admits that his ontological frameworks gives him no principled way of doing so (cf. Michael E. Johnson’s Against Functionalism for a detailed response). Indeed, according to Brian (from the same essay):
Eric Schwitzgebel argues that “If Materialism Is True, the United States Is Probably Conscious“. But if the USA as a whole is conscious, how about each state? Each city? Each street? Each household? Each family? When a new government department is formed, does this create a new conscious entity? Do corporate mergers reduce the number of conscious entities? These seem like silly questions—and indeed, they are! But they arise when we try to individuate the world into separate, discrete minds. Ultimately, “we are all connected”, as they say. Individuation boundaries are artificial and don’t track anything ontologically or phenomenally fundamental (except maybe at the level of fundamental physical particles and structures). The distinction between an agent and its environment is just an edge that we draw around a clump of physics when it’s convenient to do so for certain purposes.
My own view is that every subsystem of the universe can be seen as conscious to some degree and in some way (functionalist panpsychism). In this case, the question of which systems count as individuals for aggregation becomes maximally problematic, since it seems we might need to count all the subsystems in the universe.”
Are you confused now? I hope so. Otherwise I’d worry about you.
Banana For Scale
A frame of reference is like a “banana for scale” but for both time and space. If you assume that the banana isn’t morphing, you can use how long it takes for waves emitted from different points in the banana to bounce back and return in order to infer the distance and location of physical objects around it. Your technologically equipped banana can play the role of a frame of reference in all but the most extreme of conditions (it probably won’t work as you approach a black hole, for very non-trivial reasons involving severe tidal forces, but it’ll work fine otherwise).
Now the question that I want to ask is: how does the banana “know itself”? Seriously, if you are using points in the banana as your frame of reference, you are, in fact, the one who is capable of interpreting the data coming from the banana to paint a picture of your environment. But the banana isn’t doing that. It is you! The banana is merely an instrument that takes measurements. Its unity is assumed rather than demonstrated.
In fact, for the upper half of the banana to “comprehend” the shape of the other half (as well as its own), it must also rely on a presumed fixed frame of reference. However, it’s important to note that such information truly becomes meaningful only when interpreted by a human mind. In the realm of an atom-and-force-based ontology, the banana doesn’t precisely exist as a tangible entity. Your perception of it as a solid unit, providing direction and scale, is a practical assumption rather than an ontological certainty.
In fact, the moment we try to get a “frame of reference to know itself” you end up in an infinite regress, where smaller and smaller regions of the object are used as frames of reference to measure the rest. And yet, at no point does the information of these frames of reference “come together all at once”, except… of course… in your mind.
Are there ways to boostrap a *something* that aggregates and simultaneously expresses the information gathered across the banana (used as a frame of reference)? If you build a camera to take a snapshot of the, say, information displayed at each coordinate of the banana, the picture you take will have spatial extension and suffer from the same problem. If you think that the point at the aperture can itself capture all of the information at once, you will encounter two problems. If you are thinking of an idealized point-sized aperture, then we run into the problem that points don’t have parts, and therefore can’t contain multiple pieces of information at once. And if you are talking about a real, physical type of aperture, you will find that it cannot be smaller than the diffraction limit. So now you have the problem of how to integrate all of the information *across the whole area of the aperture* when it cannot shrink further without losing critical information. In either case, you still don’t have anything, anywhere, that is capable of simultaneously expressing all of the information of the frame of reference you chose. Namely, the coordinates you measure using a banana.
Let’s dig deeper. We are talking of a banana as a frame of reference. But what if we try to internalize the frame of reference. A lot of people like to think of themselves as the frame of reference that matters. But I ask you: what are your boundaries and how do the parts within those boundaries agree on what is happening?
Let’s say your brain is the frame of reference. Intuitively, one might feel like “this object is real to itself”. But here is where the magic comes. Make the effort to carefully trace how signals or measurements propagate in an object such as the brain. Is it fundamentally different than what happens with a banana? There might be more shortcuts (e.g. long axons) and the wiring could have complex geometry, but neither of these properties can ultimately express information “all at once”. The principle of uniformity says that every part of the universe follows the same universal physical laws. The brain is not an exception. In a way, the brain is itself a possible *expression* of the laws of physics. And in this way, it is no different than a banana.
Sorry, your brain is not going to be a better “ground” for your frame of reference than a banana. And that is because the same infinite recursion that happened with the banana when we tried to use it to ground our frame of reference into something concrete happens with your brain. And also, the same problem happens when we try to “take a snapshot of the state of the brain”, i.e. that the information also doesn’t aggregate in a natural way even in a high-resolution picture of the brain. It still has spatial extension and lacks objective boundaries of any causal significance.
Every single point in your brain has a different view. The universe won’t say “There is a brain here! A self-intimating self-defining object! It is a natural boundary to use to ground a frame of reference!” There is nobody to do that! Are you starting to feel the groundlessness? The bizarre feeling that, hey, there is no rational way to actually set a frame of reference without it falling apart into a gazillion different pieces, all of which have the exact same problem? I’ve been there. For years. But there is a way out. Sort of. Keep reading.
The question that should be bubbling up to the surface right now is: who, or what, is in charge of aggregating points of view? And the answer is: this does not exist and is impossible for it to exist if you start out in an ontology that has as the core building blocks relativistic particles and forces. There is no principled way to aggregate information across space and time that would result in the richness of simultaneous presentation of information that a typical human experience displays. If there is integration of information, and a sort of “all at once” presentation, the only kind of (principled) entity that this ontology would accept is the entire spacetime continuum as a gigantic object! But that’s not what we are. We are definite experiences with specific qualia and binding structures. We are not, as far as I can tell, the entire spacetime continuum all at once. (Or are we?).
If instead we focus on the fine structure of the field, we can look at mathematical features in it that would perhaps draw boundaries that are frame-invariant. Here is where a key insight becomes significant: the topology of a vector field is Lorentz invariant! Meaning, a Lorentz transformation will merely squeeze and sheer, but never change topology on its own. Ok, I admit I am not 100% sure that this holds for all of the topological features of the electromagnetic field (Creon Levit recently raised some interesting technical points that might make some EM topological features frame-dependent; I’ve yet to fully understand his argument but look forward to engaging with it). But what we are really pointing at is the explanation space. A moment ago we were desperate to find a way to ground, say, the reality of a banana in order to use it as a frame of reference. We saw that the banana conceptualized as a collection of atoms and forces does not have this capacity. But we didn’t inquire into other possible physical (though perhaps not *atomistic*) features of the banana. Perhaps, and this is sheer speculation, the potassium ions in the banana peel form a tight electromagnetic mesh that creates a protective Faraday cage for this delicious fruit. In that case, well, the boundaries of that protecting sheet would, interestingly, be frame invariant. A ground!
The 4th Dimension
There is a bit of a sleight of hand here, because I am not taking into account temporal depth, and so it is not entirely clear how large the banana, as a topological structure defined by the potassium ions protective sheer really is (again, this is totally made up! for illustration purposes only). The trick here is to realize that, at least in so far as experiences go, we also have a temporal boundary. Relativistically, there shouldn’t be a hard distinction between temporal and spatial boundaries of a topological pocket of the field. In practice, of course one will typically overwhelm the other, unless you approach the brain you are studying at close to the speed of light (not ideal laboratory conditions, I should add). In our paper, and for many years at QRI (iirc an insight by Michael Johnson in 2016 or so), we’ve talked about experiences having “temporal depth”. David Pearce posits that each fleeting macroscopic state of quantum coherence spanning the entire brain (the physical correlate of consciousness in his model) can last as little as a couple of femtoseconds. This does not seem to worry him: there is no reason why the contents of our experience would give us any explicit hint about our real temporal depth. I intuit that each moment of experience lasts much, much longer. I highly doubt that it can last longer than a hundred milliseconds, but I’m willing to entertain “pocket durations” of, say, a few dozens of milliseconds. Just long enough for 40hz gamma oscillations to bring disparate cortical micropockets into coherence, and importantly, topological union, and have this new new emergent object resonate (where waves bounce back and forth) and thus do wave computing worthwhile enough to pay the energetic cost of carefully modulating this binding operation. Now, this is the sort of “physical correlate of consciousness” I tend to entertain the most. Experiences are fleeting (but not vanishingly so) pockets of the field that come together for computational and causal purposes worthwhile enough to pay the price of making them.
An important clarification here is that now that we have this way of seeing frames of reference we can reconceptualize our previous confusion. We realize that simply labeling parts of reality with coordinates does not magically bring together the information content that can be obtained by integrating the signals read at each of those coordinates. But we suddenly have something that might be way better and more conceptually satisfying. Namely, literal topological objects with boundaries embedded in the spacetime continuum that contribute to the causal unfolding of the reality and are absolute in their existence. These are the objective and real frames of reference we’ve been looking for!
What’s So Special About Field Topology?
Two key points:
Topology is frame-invariant
Topology is causally significant
As already mentioned, the Lorentz Transform can squish and distort, but it doesn’t change topology. The topology of the field is absolute, not relativistic.
And field topology is also causally significant. There are _many_ examples of this, but let me just mention a very startling one: magnetic reconnection. This happens when the magnetic field lines change how they are connected. I mention this example because when one hears about “topological changes to the fields of physics” one may get the impression that such a thing happens only in extremely carefully controlled situations and at minuscule scales. Similar to the concerns for why quantum coherence is unlikely to play a significant role in the brain, one can get the impression that “the scales are simply off”. Significant quantum coherence typically happens in extremely small distances, for very short periods of time, and involving very few particles at a time, and thus, the argument goes, quantum coherence must be largely inconsequential at scales that could plausibly matter for the brain. But the case of field topology isn’t so delicate. Magnetic reconnection, in particular, takes place at extremely large scales, involving enormous amount of matter and energy, with extremely consequential effects.
You know about solar flairs? Solar flairs are the strange phenomenon in the sun in which plasma is heated up to millions of degrees Kelvin and charged particles are accelerated to near the speed of light, leading to the emission of gigantic amounts of electromagnetic radiation, which in turn can ionize the lower levels of the Earth’s ionosphere, and thus disrupt radio communication (cf. radio blackouts). These extraordinary events are the result of the release of magnetic energy stored in the Sun’s corona via a topological change to the magnetic field! Namely, magnetic reconnection.
So here we have a real and tangible effect happening at a planetary (and stellar!) scale over the course of minutes to hours, involving enormous amounts of matter and energy, coming about from a non-trivial change to the topology of the fields of physics.
Relatedly, coronal mass ejections (CMEs) also dependent on changes to the topology of the EM field. My layman understanding of CMEs is that they are caused by the build-up of magnetic stress in the sun’s atmosphere, which can be triggered by a variety of factors, including uneven spinning and plasma convection currents. When this stress becomes too great, it can cause the magnetic field to twist and trap plasma in solar filaments, which can then be released into interplanetary space through magnetic reconnection. These events are truly enormous in scope (trillions of kilograms of mass ejected) and speed (traveling at thousands of kilometers per second).
It’s worth noting that this process is quite complex/not fully understood, and new research findings continue to illuminate the details of this process. But the fact that topological effects are involved is well established. Here’s a video which I thought was… stellar. Personally, I think a program where people get familiar with the electromagnetic changes that happen in the sun by seeing them in simulations and with the sun visualized in many ways, might help us both predict better solar storms, and then also help people empathize with the sun (or the topological pockets that it harbors!).
“The model showed differential rotation causes the sun’s magnetic fields to stretch and spread at different rates. The researchers demonstrated this constant process generates enough energy to form stealth coronal mass ejections over the course of roughly two weeks. The sun’s rotation increasingly stresses magnetic field lines over time, eventually warping them into a strained coil of energy. When enough tension builds, the coil expands and pinches off into a massive bubble of twisted magnetic fields — and without warning — the stealth coronal mass ejection quietly leaves the sun.” (source)
In brief, topological structures in the fields of physics can pave the way for us to identify the natural units that correspond to “moments of experience”. They are frame-invariant and casually significant, and as such they “carve nature at its joints” while being useful from the point of view of natural selection.
Can a Topological Pocket “Know Itself”?
Now the most interesting question arises. How does a topological pocket “know itself”? How can it act as a frame of reference for itself? How can it represent information about its environment if it does not have direct access to it? Well, this is in fact a very interesting area of research. Namely, how do you get the inside of a system with a clear and definite boundary to model its environment despite having only information accessible at its boundary and the resources contained within its boundary? This is a problem that evolution has dealt with for over a billion years (last time I checked). And fascinatingly, is also the subject of study of Active Inference and the Free Energy Principle, whose math, I believe, can be imported to the domain of *topological* boundaries in fields (cf. Markov Boundary).
Here is where qualia computing, attention and awareness, non-linear waves, self-organizing principles, and even optics become extremely relevant. Namely, we are talking about how the *interior shape* of a field could be used in the context of life. Of course the cell walls of even primitive cells are functionally (albeit perhaps not ontologically) a kind of objective and causally significant boundary where this applies. It is enormously adaptive for the cell to use its interior, somehow, to represent its environment (or at least relevant features thereof) in order to navigate, find food, avoid danger, and reproduce.
The situation becomes significantly more intricate when considering highly complex and “evolved” animals such as humans, which encompass numerous additional layers. A single moment of experience cannot be directly equated to a cell, as it does not function as a persistent topological boundary tasked with overseeing the replication of the entire organism. Instead, a moment of experience assumes a considerably more specific role. It acts as an exceptionally specialized topological niche within a vast network of transient, interconnected topological niches—often intricately nested and interwoven. Together, they form an immense structure equipped with the capability to replicate itself. Consequently, the Darwinian evolutionary dynamics of experiences operate on multiple levels. At the most fundamental level, experiences must be selected for their ability to competitively thrive in their immediate micro-environment. Simultaneously, at the broadest level, they must contribute valuable information processing functions that ultimately enhance the inclusive fitness of the entire organism. All the while, our experiences must seamlessly align and “fit well” across all the intermediary levels.
Visual metaphor for how myriad topological pockets in the brain could briefly fuse and become a single one, and then dissolve back into a multitude.
The way this is accomplished is by, in a way, “convincing the experience that it is the organism”. I know this sounds crazy. But ask yourself. Are you a person or an experience? Or neither? Think deeply about Empty Individualism and come back to this question. I reckon that you will find that when you identify with a moment of experience, it turns out that you are an experience *shaped* in the form of the necessary survival needs and reproductive opportunities that a very long-lived organism requires. The organism is fleetingly creating *you* for computational purposes. It’s weird, isn’t it?
The situation is complicated by the fact that it seems that the computational properties of topological pockets of qualia involve topological operations, such as fusion, fission, and the use of all kinds of internal boundaries. More so, the content of a particular experience leaves an imprint in the organism which can be picked up by the next experience. So what happens here is that when you pay really close attention, and you whisper to your mind, “who am I?”, the direct experiential answer will in fact be a slightly distorted version of the truth. And that is because you (a) are always changing and (b) can only use the shape of the previous experience(s) to fill the intentional content of your current experience. Hence, you cannot, at least not under normal circumstances, *really* turn awareness to itself and *be* a topological pocket that “knows itself”. For once, there is a finite speed of information propagation across the many topological pockets that ultimately feed to the central one. So, at any given point in time, there are regions of your experience of which you are *aware* but which you are not attending to.
This brings us to the special case. Can an experience be shaped in such a way that it attends to itself fully, rather than attend to parts of itself which contain information about the state of predecessor topological pockets? I don’t know, but I have a strong hunch that the answer is yes and that this is what a meditative cessation does. Namely, it is a particular configuration of the field where attention is perfectly, homogeneously, distributed throughout in such a way that absolutely nothing breaks the symmetry and the experience “knows itself fully” but lacks any room left to pass it on to the successor pockets. It is a bittersweet situation, really. But I also think that cessations, and indeed moments of very homogeneously distributed attention, are healing for the organism, and even, shall we say, for the soul. And that is because they are moments of complete relief from the discomfort of symmetry breaking of any sort. They teach you about how our world simulation is put together. And intellectually, they are especially fascinating because they may be the one special case in which the referent of an experience is exactly, directly, itself.
To be continued…
Acknowledgements
I am deeply grateful and extend my thanks to Chris Percy for his remarkable contributions and steadfast dedication to this field. His exceptional work has been instrumental in advancing QRI’s ideas within the academic realm. I also want to express my sincere appreciation to Michael Johnson and David Pearce for our enriching philosophical journey together. Our countless discussions on the causal properties of phenomenal binding and the temporal depth of experience have been truly illuminating. A special shout-out to Cube Flipper, Atai Barkai, Dan Girshovic, Nir Lahav, Creon Levit, and Bijan Fakhri for their recent insightful discussions and collaborative efforts in this area. Hunter, Maggie, Anders (RIP), and Marcin, for your exceptional help. Huge gratitude to our donors. And, of course, a big thank you to the vibrant “qualia community” for your unwavering support, kindness, and encouragement in pursuing this and other crucial research endeavors. Your love and care have been a constant source of motivation. Thank you so much!!!
1) Explore the state-space of consciousness because you want to know it for yourself
2) Study it from many points of view because you want to understand it intellectually at a deep level
3) Intend to apply it for the benefit of all beings
In June of this year, we were proud to launch QRI’s first guided meditation series titled “Qualia Mastery.” Central to this series is the cultivation of a direct experiential understanding of how the mind works, coupled with an epistemological framework that values intellectual clarity. In essence, these guided meditations strive to provide both direct access to and intellectual insight into scientifically and personally significant states of consciousness. Furthermore, we embark on this journey with a sincere desire to serve and uplift others. The initial release features 9 foundational guided meditations. In this next installment, we’re collaborating with QRI associates Wystan Bryant-Scott and Roger Thisdell to go even deeper with another 9 meditations.
We genuinely hope you derive value from this series! We invite any feedback or phenomenological observations. Your perspective is invaluable to us.
Thank you!
Metta – Fabric Softener of Experience
Metta is a Pali word that can be translated as benevolence, friendliness, or good will. It is a key state of mind for meditative practice; it has the capacity to heal, invigorate, and center the mind.
The majority of guided Metta meditations emphasize the ways in which you can trigger this state of mind with semantic content and imagery. For example imagining a loved one, a pet, or even a beautiful scene, and tuning into the feeling of friendliness that such an image sparks.
In this meditation we instead emphasize the phenomenal character of Metta as a way to develop it, establish it, and understand it deeply. For example, we discuss how one can use different varieties of attention in order to kindle this feeling. We also tune into one’s intentions and background mood in order to nudge the mind towards Metta. More so, we carefully study how technical phenomenological features such as rhythm, wave envelope, and energy affect the quality and intensity of Metta.
May this meditation be of benefit to sentient beings!
It is often said that one of the most important meditative skills that one can cultivate is the practice of *letting go*. This means letting go of attachments, of cravings, of a sense of identity, and the need for things to be anything other than what they are. However, in practice doing this is more difficult than it sounds; we have a habit of holding tight to much more than we require for optimal wellbeing.
This guided meditation emphasizes two key aspects of letting go. Namely, (1) tactical methods for letting go, such as the judicious use of unusual varieties of attention, higher order equanimity, imaginal practices, and precise technique (such as rhythm and timing). And (2) the fact that letting go can be practiced in much deeper ways and with a much wider scope than is usually realized. In particular, letting go can take place in the visual, tactile, auditory domains, in addition to the spacious, cognitive, spiritual, and intuitive levels of the mind.
We conclude this meditation by listening to meditative music with the goal of experiencing it with complete equanimity and acceptance and putting our letting go techniques to practice.
Goldilocks Zone of Oneness
In this guided meditation, we delve into the phenomenology of various conceptions of personal identity. Specifically, we observe the experiential nuances of believing that we are individual souls (Closed Individualism), that we are a single universal consciousness (Open Individualism), that we represent ephemeral moments of experience (Empty Individualism), and that we encompass all these identities concurrently (Goldilocks Zone of Oneness).
As with the “The Phenomenology of Ontology” meditation, our objective here is to discern the qualities of experience that shape a specific worldview. In essence, the phenomenology of personal identity is a pivotal subject for any holistic consciousness research initiative, regardless of the metaphysical veracity of these perspectives. The capacity of these conceptions to modify experiential attributes—such as refining internal boundaries or amplifying the choppiness of sensations—underscores the importance of this topic for both phenomenological and scientific exploration.
More so, many exotic states of consciousness involve implicit alterations to our conceptions of personal identity. Therefore knowing how to detect the experiential features that make these beliefs feel more or less plausible is essential to successfully navigate exotic states of consciousness without compromising one’s epistemology.
In this meditation, Roger Thisdell guides us in a meditation of somatic scanning up and down the body using concurrent waves of awareness that pass through one another. We are trying to balance both the sense of grounding, stability with the sense of wakeful, levity.
By the end of the meditation, the goal is to isolate and metacognize the sense of ‘becoming’ within experience, and notice that this signal is always presenting itself. We may question, if everything seems like it’s always ‘becoming’ (but never fully become), then what significance does this have with the goal of trying to have ‘arrived’ somewhere?
For more guided meditations by Roger, check out his Patreon page where he releases a new guided meditation, on a variety of techniques, every week: https://www.patreon.com/rogerthis
Don’t Pay Attention
Normally in meditation we are focused on what IS in experience, but to be able to notice the absence of phenomena is key as well! Where there once were qualia, now there aren’t – what does that reveal to us about their nature?
Roger Thisdell guides a meditation starting with a taste session on the major ingredients which make up our experience. Then after paying attention to these components, we deliberately try to not pay attention to them. What we find is the move to let go of paying attention to anything is a universal move – no matter the object of attention – how convenient!
The ability to take attention off of more and more aspects of experience is an essential skill which eventually culminates in the ability to not pay attention to time, space and consciousness, resulting in cessation.
For more guided meditations by Roger, check out his Patreon page where he releases a new guided meditation, on a variety of techniques, every week: https://www.patreon.com/rogerthis
Co-Arising Expansion and Contraction
Expansion and contraction are the subtlest distinguishing features of experience. This meditation on expansion and contraction, given by Roger Thisdell, is a guide for finding and synchronizing to the oscillatory nature of experience at different levels, and then realising the co-dependence on one another in order to exist. Where there is expansion there is contraction and vice versa. By having sufficient energy in the mind and being able to widen the ‘aperture’ of our present moment perception it is possible to notice contraction within attention, and expansion within awareness (and vice versa) at the same time!
For more guided meditations by Roger, check out his Patreon page where he releases a new guided meditation, on a variety of techniques, every week: https://www.patreon.com/rogerthis
A Clap of Thunder
In this guided meditation, our invited facilitator, Wystan, leads participants through meticulous body scanning techniques designed to cultivate an acute consciousness of the immediate present. Transitioning seamlessly from body scanning to methods of introspection, and further incorporating the nuanced technique of finger-following to “spread out the vision”, Wystan imparts a spectrum of methodologies that promise to augment the meditative practice of individuals across all levels of expertise.
This meditation explores the phenomenology of absorption into Platonic objects. We delve into what it feels like to imagine, embody, and generate the sense of knowing of classic geometric and mathematical constructs.
One of the main takeaways from this meditation is that we can attune to the difference between (1) how we render a particular instance of a Platonic object and (2) the sense of knowing and existence of that object that arises as we do so.
That is, (1) emphasizes the specific point of view from which a Platonic object (say, a cube) can be apprehended. Each point of view gives rise to, in a way, a completely different experience (cf. Borges’ Funes the Memorious). Namely, the experience of rendering such an object from that particular point of view, with all of the sensory and qualitative features that come along with it. In contrast (2) points to that which remains the same across all of these points of view. Namely, the ways in which holding these objects in one’s attention keeps aspects of our experience invariant (such as the intuitions and resonances that come with each particular Platonic object).
In addition, we also explore how the geometry of attention affects one’s valence and sense of ease, with the goal of naturalizing “Sacred Geometry” for the cultivation of Qualia Mastery.
There are many spiritual and yogic practices that utilize “elemental” objects of meditation. For example, the guided meditation by Michael Taft called “Five Elements Meditation” (link below) centers the mind around mental formations evocative of earth, water, fire, air, and space.
Alas, it is natural to be skeptical of the value of these practices on the basis that science has shown that the universe is made up of particles, forces, and fields, and not the traditional elements of ancient ontologies.
Nevertheless, within the paradigm of Qualia Mastery in meditation, we affirm the significance of specific states of consciousness, irrespective of the techniques used to induce them. Adhering rigidly to a modern scientific worldview might, in fact, impede one’s engagement with such meditative practices. Engaging fully with a meditation that posits, for instance, fire as a fundamental entity, can often yield richer results when one genuinely subscribes to the idea. Continual internal rebuttals, such as “fire isn’t foundational; electrons are!” can inhibit deep immersion into these states.
So how can we rescue what is valuable from this style of meditation without having to buy into an implicit “elemental ontology”? Here is where the relevance of “self-organizing principles” comes into play. Namely, where we realize that the nervous system is capable of instantiating a cornucopia of diverse self-organizing principles that are used to render one’s inner world-simulation. Thus, when you imagine and embody “the element of fire” you are, in a way, instantiating a collection of self-organizing principles that roughly emulate the behavior of fire.
Therefore, we can use a more generalized conception of “elemental meditation” as a window into these self-organizing principles. This is what this meditation does.
PLUS FOUR, n. (++++) A rare and precious transcendental state, which has been called a “peak experience,” a “religious experience,” “divine transformation,” a “state of Samadhi” and many other names in other cultures. It is not connected to the +1, +2, and +3 of the measuring of a drug’s intensity. It is a state of bliss, a participation mystique, a connectedness with both the interior and exterior universes, which has come about after the ingestion of a psychedelic drug, but which is not necessarily repeatable with a subsequent ingestion of that same drug. If a drug (or technique or process) were ever to be discovered which would consistently produce a plus four experience in all human beings, it is conceivable that it would signal the ultimate evolution, and perhaps the end, of the human experiment.
— Alexander Shulgin, PIHKAL, pages 963–965
In this post and accompanying video we provide a general “theory of candy flipping” that aims to explain why LSD + MDMA is so synergistic. What makes, say 200 micrograms of LSD and 150mg of MDMA so prone to be spiritual, psychologically healing, and loving? To get there, we address the following three/four questions:
How do we improve research on candy flipping?
How do we optimize candy flipping proper? And how do we generalize candy flipping for even better results?
What would a general recipe for Shulgin’s ++++ be?
1- We go over current methodologies used to study candy flipping and why their results are limited (Straumann et al., 2023). Then we explain how a “think tank” approach (e.g. phenomenology club) allows us to create more phenomenologically grounded research paradigms (Gómez-Emilsson, 2021). By weighting in the personal experience of highly precise psychonauts with skills in areas like physics, math, visual art, and signal processing, we can arrive at mechanistic models such as those proposed by Steven Lehar in The Grand Illusion (Lehar, 2010) where MDMA causes your world simulation to vibrate in pleasant ways, which in turn “smooths out the rough edges” of the LSD state, or models involving algorithmic-level annealing dynamics (Gomez-Emilsson, 2016; Johnson, 2019; Gómez-Emilsson 2021, 2023). This kind of approach would add phase diagrams, wave mechanics, and nonlinear effects into the picture.
2- Optimizing candy flipping can be done by looking to generate the kind of synergy MDMA + LSD achieve in the best of conditions. Of note, trip reports involving low doses of each together with 2C-B and cannabis are discussed and analyzed. One needs to be mindful of annealing dynamics, drug effect arcs including how to handle the MDMA comedown, and pattern-focused readings of wave effects that for lack of a better metaphor could be catalogued as “qualia lensing“.
And
3- We hypothesize that the key ingredients to catalyze the blissful nondual awareness that comes from high-end candy flipping are (a) a full-spectrum energizer, (b) something that increases interconnectivity, and (c) a deeply relaxing agent. The combination of these three elements gives rise to a highly-nonlinear effect I call “FU§ION (Field Unification Search/Simplify in Invariant Optical Networks; to be fully unpacked at a later date), where all of the “resonant cavities” are fully relaxed, have a high degree of impedance matching between them, and are energized, so that they kick-start a “field harmonization” process that culminates in profound blissful nondual awareness. The energizer shouldn’t be narrow spectrum (like cocaine) and the relaxing agent shouldn’t be too blunting or non-Newtonian (like opioids). Examples of each:
Combine one of each, carefully dosed, and according to this theory, you might get a ++++. (Please exercise caution when mixing substances – the rule of thumb is to not do it).
Note: 5-MeO-DMT might, in this model, be actually doing all three at once. It happens to be hitting receptors in the right combination for such a deep mystical “relaxed stimulation” to take hold. That said, it is possible that 5-MeO-DMT also has some rough edges, and that it can be further optimized (e.g. such as by combining it with nitrous). More research is needed 🙂
Example Formula: 15mg 2C-B, then an hour later 2g of GHB, and then an hour later DMT (100mg over the course of 2 hours) was reported as a ++++ by a trusted psychonaut recently (comparable in “depth” to 5-MeO-DMT). Please be careful – I am not encouraging anyone to try this. But if you do, or have done something similar, I’d be grateful if you let me know what happened. 🙂
Gómez-Emilsson, A. (2023), Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics presentation at PhilaDelic 2023. Retreieved from https://youtu.be/pM9k1I3VPOg
Straumann, I., Ley, L., Holze, F. et al. Acute effects of MDMA and LSD co-administration in a double-blind placebo-controlled study in healthy participants. Neuropsychopharmacol. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-023-01609-0