Can you actually share dreams?

[Paulius]

@Blucid

1. I’m still waiting for the answer for my question about the scientists have proved that we don’t have the mechanism to receive b-waves.

Scientists do not prove negatives. YOU are STATING that it is POSSIBLE. Therefore, you must give us proof. We do NOT state that it is IMPOSSIBLE, because there is no point. We merely reject your hypothesis because it has no supportive proof.

@Blucid

2. Science existed since mankind was created. It’s a term. Do you even know when the human kind discovered the size of earth? The distance to the moon? The sun? Do you have a clue? I can give you a small hint - saying galile just proves me that you have no idea what science is.
   Not to offend but don’t sarcastically answer sofisticated answers that you have no grounds to base them on.
   Thanks

Science didin’t exist since the mankind “was created”. Science, as we know it, is just a few hundred years old. If you are talking about the “science” that was a few millenia earlier, you must realise, that they were the times when people didin’t know anything and based their views on religious philosophy. They may have called it “science”, however, we don’t do it now.

And, again, I must say, do not ask us to prove that something doesn’t exist (in this case telepathy or shared dreaming). It is you, the ones that are making the statement, who must come with the proof. Science moves on, and we do not waste energy and time in proving (or disproving) nonsense. To get our interest, you must come up with a plausible argument.

And yes, as someone stated, this is taking the shape of a “Atheists vs Believers” discussion. I guess we should close this (noone here changes their beliefs anyway as far I see, no matter how much we discuss), or create a new thread with the appropriate title.

EDIT:
And, dagto, calm down!

[dagto]

Yessss masterrrr i will follow your path niaaaaa !

[The_Nameless_One]

Let me know if it’s just my complete lack of passion towards anything talking, but since discussions about these things usually go nowhere (other than, inexplicably, towards the bashing of science and/or religion, politics, or someone calling someone else a nazi) and are of relative use since we aren’t making research or papers on the subject, does anyone have any stories of possibly shared dreams?

I’ll post them if I remember any.

[dB_FTS]

@Paulius

@dB_FTS

Compare the shared dreaming with lucid dreaming. What the difference? They are both very abstract and you may say that lucid dreaming is not because it’s proved that exists…

You don’t realise the difference? Shared dreaming requires telephatic abilities (the supposed ability of two different human minds to connect and succesfully share and perceive information using brain waves). Lucid dreaming, fortunately, doesn’t require telephacy. It is merely a dream, where your conscious brain section is active. Everything in a LD is biologically possible. Not everything in a shared dream is biologically possible.

And please, all shared dreaming supporters - don’t post out-of-date arguments like this:

Well, ya know, 2000 years ago they didin’t believe that earth was round. Now we do. So this means, that shared dreaming can be proven in the future.

Simply realise, that science didin’t exist at that time. Now, since the times of Galileo, Newton, Einstein etc. we have made huge progress. We know, with a well defined borders what we should test, what we should belive in, and what we should reject. We know what is absurd, and shared dreaming, in this case, is. There have been efforts to prove the existence of telephacy, no one succeeded. You may of course say - “Well, noone believed S. LaBerge either about LD’ing.”. But please, it was damn 30 years earlier. Noone had a clue about how huge the science of neurology is. Noone had a clue what dreams are. In this 21st century, we know a lot. We have modelled our brain using computers, we know what each part of the brain is responsible for. We have sliced through the brain and found everything what was needed. Now scientist are actually thinking of “creating” a brain, using reverse engineering - that is awesome. And you’re talking about shared dreams, which is a topic, outdated by at least 10 years. Since we know lots about the brain, enough to actually fantasize about reverse engineering it, we also know, what is absurd. Time has changed, science has changed, neuroscience has flourished. Things that were arguably impossible 20 years earlier, are now just impossible.

I’m not comparing lucid dreaming with shared dreaming on the basis what they are but on the significance of proving shared dreaming as once was lucid dreaming.

@Paulius

And please, all shared dreaming supporters - don’t post out-of-date arguments like this.

Why not? it’s very important discovery and in that time there were people like you that they were saying that’s just not possible… Like shared dreaming today and lucid dreaming “yesterday”.

And why would shared dreaming require telepathy? Have you heard about unified field theory? Have you heard about projects/tests where were thousands of experienced meditators meditating and focusing on lowering criminal rate on world wide scale? And they were actually successful in significant rate, and they repeated the tests many times just to be sure. So you can’t say that’s not possible because there’s your scientific prove that link between 2 human beings exist on that specific scale…

You may of course say - “Well, noone believed S. LaBerge either about LD’ing.”. But please, it was damn 30 years earlier.

So what? 30 years later from now for any significant discovery you just gonna say: it was damn 30 years earlier? Discovery is discovery specific for the time we live in, otherwise it wouldn’t be called discovery… We learn every day and we develop new technology as we develop ourselves and we change the views on things…

[Paulius]

@The Nameless One

Let me know if it’s just my complete lack of passion towards anything talking

No, not exactly. I like discussions, however, a simple thing must be realised. I’ll tell you:

Imagine, that a group of scientists are having a party. Naturally, a party needs a cake, otherwise it wouldn’t be a party. So the scientists get a cake. Scientists like to analyse stuff, so they start analysing the cake. They note it’s shape, size, colour, other features. Then they go on slicing the cake into pieces, horizontally, vertically, diagonally. In short, they analyze the whole cake, thoroughly. The scientists know so much about the cake and it’s ingredients, that they actually think about reverse engineering one. This would result in many cakes, which would be really nice for the party. The scientists continue the party with analysing an apple.
Meanwhile, a group of random people come into the party. They proudly state, that there is an alien hidden in the cake. The scientists, of course, are stunned by such a statement. They, understandably, argue that it isn’t true, since they have thoroughly searched the cake and they have understood it’s principle and mechanisms. The random people, who have now ruined the party, demand for proof that a such alien doesn’t exist inside the cake, otherwise, they will remain within the idea, that a such alien exists. Scientists, who have thoroughly analysed the cake, and didin’t find any aliens, are shocked by the absurdity of these random people. They have no choice, but to end the party.

So here are the most important reasons, why the discussion isn’t going anywhere and results in both parties being angry:

1. The party was ruined.
2. The cake was humiliated.
3. The random people didin’t bring any cookies into the party.

I hope you do understand, that the cake resembles the human brain, and the alien - supposed telephatic abilities of a human being.

[Limitles]

I personally believe that shared dreaming is possible. From experience? no. And who was saying that science has only been around for a couple hundred years? Science is just the art of answering questions with testing, reasearch, and reasoning. There may be no “reasoning” to support that shared dreaming could exist. But is seems there has been little research and testing. They may have analyzed the brain and found nothing the could potentially have telepathic abilities but testing from within dreams hasn’t really been tested. Maybe it just hasnt been proved yet because you would need to have several variables right such as

• Being in REM sleep at the same time (in a dream)
• You both need to be lucid- (not necesarrily but to test it best, that would be smart)
• some possible meeting spot, possibly just a blank white nothingness area- so each subject could easily think of and imagine, and recreate this place from within the dream.
  Its a little bit difficult to get all these things correct with people we’ve probably never seen before and in different time zones. You would also have to coordinate a time when to fall asleep, or possibly both WBTB and then sleep at the same time after that.
  But i believe when everything matches up, it could be possible to meet in a dream.
  Again over the internet some may still doubt because of possible cheating but you have to start somewhere…

[Nicklebrick]

I truly wish shared dreaming is possible, i believe that it is, but have no proof nor experience with this topic.

[Paulius]

@Limitles

I personally believe that shared dreaming is possible. From experience? no.

So if it’s neither from experience, nor from any scientifical proof, what is your reason in believing it at all?

@Limitles

And who was saying that science has only been around for a couple hundred years? Science is just the art of answering questions with testing, reasearch, and reasoning.

Science, as we know it, has been only around for a couple hundred of years. It started with Copernicus, Galileo etc. Before that time, “science” was philosophy and religious teaching, based on religious scripture. It is not science by today’s definition. If we moved some of our modern scientists a thousand years back in time, they would be charged with witchcraft and burnt on fire. And science is not an “art” as you call it. It is simply reasoned thinking, rational perception of the world, based on proven theories and laws of physics etc., which has the task of explaining how the Universe works. It is not an art.

@Limitles

There may be no “reasoning” to support that shared dreaming could exist. But is seems there has been little research and testing.

Correct me on this if I’m wrong, but there have been testing attempts on this. There were created a couple of websites for this purpose, to connect people together for the purpose of proving the existence of this kind of dreams. None of them have succeeded as of yet, despite pursuing this goal for 10 years or more.

@Limitles

They may have analyzed the brain and found nothing the could potentially have telepathic abilities but testing from within dreams hasn’t really been tested.

Testing “within dreams”? What do you actually mean by that? If, what you have in mind, is proof from personal experience, you should understand, that it is not a sufficient proof. Shared dreaming won’t be proven if a pair of dreamers wake up and declare that they’ve just had a shared dream. It needs to be confirmed by using external devices. In my opinion, a simple method can be used, in fact, the same one that was used to prove the existence of LD’s. The subjects can communicate “in a shared dream” by using eye movements, where one of them moves his/her eyes, and the other one repeats the movement he just saw. Eye movements are recorded by external devices, and, if the pattern matches, we have a practical proof of the existence of shared dreams. Despite the simplicity of this method, we have not yet received any evidence on this.

@Limitles

Maybe it just hasnt been proved yet because you would need to have several variables right such as

• Being in REM sleep at the same time (in a dream)
• You both need to be lucid- (not necesarrily but to test it best, that would be smart)
• some possible meeting spot, possibly just a blank white nothingness area- so each subject could easily think of and imagine, and recreate this place from within the dream.

The first variable is easy to accomplish, since the longest REM phase may last for an hour. It gives a lot of room for a simultaneus REM phase.
Regarding the second variable, if the subjects are natural LD’ers, or LD’ers, who have mastered their techniques, it will be easy. As far as I’m aware, many people on this forum can induce LD’s at will. This isn’t the problem.
The third one isn’t even a variable. I wouldn’t find it hard to think of a “meeting spot”, provided I’m lucid. S. LaBerge faced nearly the same variables. He also had to make sure that his patients were able to LD. It wasn’t a problem for him.

@Limitles

Its a little bit difficult to get all these things correct with people we’ve probably never seen before and in different time zones. You would also have to coordinate a time when to fall asleep, or possibly both WBTB and then sleep at the same time after that.

That’s why it should be done in a laboratory, not at two different parts of the world. Trying to organise such tests with the help of a website just complicates the matter further. Especially, as you mentioned, it allows cheating. Therefore, the evidence may be falsified and should not be taken seriously.

@Limitles

But i believe when everything matches up, it could be possible to meet in a dream.

If you ever acquire proof for this, it would be great. However, since we have analysed the human brain thoroughly, the chance that we might have missed something as important as a telephatic device is simply too small.

[dB_FTS]

Well, dagto this forum is about lucidity in dreams and some people should become more lucid in waking life as you stated, but also some should be a little less limited…

[Limitles]

@Paulius
Yes there has been attempts on this but my idea of being testing would be some sort of lottery type thing that chooses LD’ers at random and cameras would be on them at all time to further prevent cheating. Once they have several people they all go into a lab and what not and really test it.

By testing within dreams i mean just that. Being lucid in a dream, and attempting to meet up with another Dreamer. Your idea of how to prove a SD is good… another possible way was posted recently on here.— Its an brain image reconstruction… here is the url on youtube- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nsjDnYxJ0bo
and if this advances and gets alot better and dreams could really be ‘seen’ in this device then that would be complete proof that it could be possible. You would see two different Point of Views on the same dream.

@Paulius

@Limitles

But i believe when everything matches up, it could be possible to meet in a dream.

If you ever acquire proof for this, it would be great. However, since we have analysed the human brain thoroughly, the chance that we might have missed something as important as a telephatic device is simply too small.

Looks can be deceiving.

[SuperAlex]

Whether we will be able to prove or disprove the phenomena of sharing dreams, I think everyone should see the difference between something being hard to believe and something being outright stupid.

[Blucid]

Just so you all people know…

The human kind estimated and measured and studied even in the BC.

Also, the answer to my question “size of earth”:

In Egypt, a Greek scholar and philosopher, Eratosthenes (276 BC– 195 BC), is said to have made more explicit measurements. He had heard that on the longest day of the summer solstice, the midday sun shone to the bottom of a well in the town of Syene (Aswan). At the same time, he observed the sun was not directly overhead at Alexandria; instead, it cast a shadow with the vertical equal to 1/50th of a circle (7° 12’). To these observations, Eratosthenes applied certain “known” facts (1) that on the day of the summer solstice, the midday sun was directly over the Tropic of Cancer; (2) Syene was on this tropic; (3) Alexandria and Syene lay on a direct north-south line; (4) The sun was a relatively long way away (Astronomical unit). Legend has it that he had someone walk from Alexandria to Syene to measure the distance: that came out to be equal to 5000 stadia or (at the usual Hellenic 185 meters per stadion) about 925 kilometres.

Eratosthenes’ method for determining the size of the Earth
From these observations, measurements, and/or “known” facts, Eratosthenes concluded that, since the angular deviation of the sun from the vertical direction at Alexandria was also the angle of the subtended arc (see illustration), the linear distance between Alexandria and Syene was 1/50 of the circumference of the Earth which thus must be 50×5000 = 250,000 stadia or probably 25,000 geographical miles. The circumference of the Earth is 24,902 miles (40,075.16 km). Over the poles it is more precisely 40,008 km or 24,860 statute miles. The actual unit of measure used by Eratosthenes was the stadion. No one knows for sure what his stadion equals in modern units, but some say that it was the Hellenic 185-meter stadion.
Had the experiment been carried out as described, it would not be remarkable if it agreed with actuality. What is remarkable is that the result was probably about one sixth too high. His measurements were subject to several inaccuracies: (1) though at the summer solstice the noon sun is overhead at the Tropic of Cancer, Syene was not exactly on the tropic (which was at 23° 43’ latitude in that day) but about 22 geographical miles to the north; (2) the difference of latitude between Alexandria (31.2 degrees north latitude) and Syene (24.1 degrees) is really 7.1 degrees rather than the perhaps rounded (1/50 of a circle) value of 7° 12’ that Eratosthenes used; (4) the actual solstice zenith distance of the noon sun at Alexandria was 31° 12’ − 23° 43’ = 7° 29’ or about 1/48 of a circle not 1/50 = 7° 12’, an error closely consistent with use of a vertical gnomon which fixes not the sun’s center but the solar upper limb 16’ higher; (5) the most importantly flawed element, whether he measured or adopted it, was the latitudinal distance from Alexandria to Syene (or the true Tropic somewhat further south) which he appears to have overestimated by a factor that relates to most of the error in his resulting circumference of the earth.
A parallel later ancient measurement of the size of the earth was made by another Greek scholar, Posidonius. He is said to have noted that the star Canopus was hidden from view in most parts of Greece but that it just grazed the horizon at Rhodes. Posidonius is supposed to have measured the elevation of Canopus at Alexandria and determined that the angle was 1/48th of circle. He assumed the distance from Alexandria to Rhodes to be 5000 stadia, and so he computed the Earth’s circumference in stadia as 48 times 5000 = 240,000.[1] Some scholars see these results as luckily semi-accurate due to cancellation of errors. But since the Canopus observations are both mistaken by over a degree, the “experiment” may be not much more than a recycling of Eratosthenes’s numbers, while altering 1/50 to the correct 1/48 of a circle. Later either he or a follower appears to have altered the base distance to agree with Eratosthenes’s Alexandria-to-Rhodes figure of 3750 stadia since Posidonius’s final circumference was 180,000 stadia, which equals 48×3750 stadia.[2] The 180,000 stadia circumference of Posidonius is suspiciously close to that which results from another method of measuring the earth, by timing ocean sun-sets from different heights, a method which produces a size of the earth too low by a factor of 5/6, due to horizontal refraction.
The abovementioned larger and smaller sizes of the earth were those used by Claudius Ptolemy at different times, 252,000 stadia in the Almagest and 180,000 stadia in the later Geographical Directory. His midcareer conversion resulted in the latter work’s systematic exaggeration of degree longitudes in the Mediterranean by a factor close to the ratio of the two seriously differing sizes discussed here, which indicates [3] that the conventional size of the earth was what changed, not the stadion.

[dagto]

blucid, google and wikipedia is a good friend. Also I didn’t even read the comment because it’s not the point here. We are a few members in this topic trying to open your eyes but you don’t dare listen so why should we ?

[dB_FTS]

@dagto

lol… dB_FTS why did you think that I was talking to you ? It’s a “you” plural. I was talking to the admins who don’t want us to talk freely, that never hurts.

Well, it was right bellow my post and I assumed…

@dagto

blucid, google and wikipedia is a good friend. Also I didn’t even read the comment because it’s not the point here. We are a few members in this topic trying to open your eyes but you don’t dare listen so why should we ?

dagto, if any scientist had your kind of attitude that you have for shared dreaming then they wouldn’t be scientist and they wouldn’t discover or prove anything, because they would simply say that’s not possible and stay at this believe and they would live in ignorance and wait for someone to prove them wrong…

EDIT:

Also I’m out of this discussion because it really makes no sense anymore… like I said before good luck proving me wrong or more importantly proving yourself right…

[Blucid]

thank you FTS…

The new generation here thinks it knows what science is. So frustrating…

You know, people, a HUGE part of science is making an assumption and doing everything you can to prove it and then deny it. If your total deviation ratio from the success area is less then Alpha (5% in non-accurate science) then you got it!
But there will be no testing, no measuring, nothing without an assumption

[dagto]

dB_FTS, I would make more progress in my life and progress to the science than any of the believer in strange super power, I searched for it I didn’t attack the topic with no basement…
I’m happy you left the topic because you are right this topic has no sense because everyone is shouting their own beliefs and so do I…

And my generation as you said as for parents a precedent generation if you know what I mean.

You have at least all a critical sense, and that’s why you can still be “logical” or with some sense in the society.

The human HAVE TO ask “why” not just “what” you can NOT evolve if you keep asking “what” without “why”. But here in this topic NO one in your side said why did it exist or how does it work but in my side everyone keeps repeating you how the world is ruled, we don’t just say the universe exists…

So that’s why I am here like an old man keeping repeating the same things since the beginning. I asked the question in many posts but no ones answered me: WHY does SD exists?
How does it works (hypothetically) I know what you are thinking, you presume that i don’t want to hear about SD but it’s false I am as interested as a Star wars fan can be. it’s not because it’s false that it’s not interesting in any ways, it can even help the “science”.

Since the beginning you are just debating on the fact of his existence. We are all wrong the question is WHY ! I just want to know why please, if you believe in humanity just tell me why and how.

[Blucid]

dagto,

I did not say, in any post or in any line or ever in my life that I truly believe that SD is true.
All I did is say that some people here talk about science with no basis as to what science is and that SD is p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e and not actually exists.
Why? well as I typed earlier - our brain radiates brainwave in a crazed manner (that is how we can actually measure the brain activity) so the question is (AND STILL IS for some that wrote that it isn’t) can our brain actually collect that data and analyse it.
Since this question, in science, is STILL on the table, SD is possible.
Cheers! 2-0 Spain for now

[Lord_Antares]

@dagto- I am no mod, but please be more polite from now on. If people cannot see your point or accept that shared dreaming hasn’t been scientifically proven but believe for their own reasons (if it were provable, it wouldn’t be a belief, would it?), doesn’t mean they are not listening or that they are lower life forms.

Again, you said that science hasn’t been able to prove but that it doesn’t even bother doing that and you chose to ignore that post just because you have no argument on that.

So just keep it down a bit, I too share your opinion but I cannot change anyone’s mind because, as I said, they will always believe.

[dagto]

If you can’t prove that it is possible then you can’t say it’s possible by default.

"I did not say, in any post or in any line or ever in my life that I truly believe that SD is true. " Good for you.

[Lord_Antares]

Do you then go bashing religous peoples’ opinions too?
You are missing a huge point. No one is saying or proving it is possible, they BELIEVE it and they know it might not be the case.

Nevertheless, there are frendlier ways to state your opinion.