Author Topic: Freespace - Conclusions  (Read 4340 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
Freespace - Conclusions
I need some...

1.  Is it logical to have pilots like in freespace than it is in something like hugewarships battles...
( I personally feel that this is the right way to go... and this would mean that pilots would need a way to have control like they were in air enviroment.)

2.  How would they simulate that effect...

3.  Subspace, a way to penetrate the laws of physics...  We are constantly finding things that do. Discuss please...

If you think of anything else, post them...
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

 

Offline Ford Prefect

  • 8D
  • 26
  • Intelligent Dasein
Freespace - Conclusions
Where space travel is concerned, I don't have a problem with taking liberties for the simple reason that we don't yet fully understand the way spacetime behaves. What I don't like is something that reduces space travel to a matter of hours or minutes. I like it better when deciding to take a trip across the stars means you'd better pack a toothbrush and a translation dictionary.
"Mais est-ce qu'il ne vient jamais à l'idée de ces gens-là que je peux être 'artificiel' par nature?"  --Maurice Ravel

 

Offline ShadowWolf_IH

  • A Real POF Guy
  • 211
    • CoW
Freespace - Conclusions
see i disagree with that.   We know that we will go to our closest star in 4 years and 4 months if we are going lightspeed.  but in subspace?  do we even know the limits of compression?  and what about jumping?  in other words using the folded space theory to literally rip a hole in time space and jump through it...this is of course much simplified....but take the freespace way of doing it, and the battletech way of doing it.  instantaneous travel...but a week to recharge.  then a couple weeks in transit to the planet........the fact is...we don't know how it will work....we have ideas....but we don't know.  so i actually enjoy some of the things that get brought up....not the improbability drive mind you   ;)
You can't take the sky from me.  Can't take that from me.

Casualties of War

 

Offline Ford Prefect

  • 8D
  • 26
  • Intelligent Dasein
Freespace - Conclusions
Well yes, with our current level of knowledge, many things are equally plausible. I was speaking more in terms of what makes the universe exciting for me. I like the long trip part of it. I like the idea of having a civilization so huge that it can't even fully keep track of itself, (like the Systems Commonwealth in Andromeda), and that seems less possible when you can jump to any star in a short time.
"Mais est-ce qu'il ne vient jamais à l'idée de ces gens-là que je peux être 'artificiel' par nature?"  --Maurice Ravel

 

Offline ShadowWolf_IH

  • A Real POF Guy
  • 211
    • CoW
Freespace - Conclusions
yeah, but if it still takes weeks, or even months to get to the planet......
You can't take the sky from me.  Can't take that from me.

Casualties of War

 

Offline mrfun

  • 25
Re: Freespace - Conclusions
Quote
Originally posted by jdjtcagle

1.  Is it logical to have pilots like in freespace than it is in something like hugewarships battles...
 


What's that mean? :wtf:

Anyway about the subspace business, it's a required dramatic device to tell a story.  Using physics as we know it as a basis for a galactic adventure will result in one BORING galactic adventure.  Travel, wars, trade, everyhting would take hundreds of years to get from one planet to another.  So we need some device to make it all appear somewhat plausible otherwise we have no story to tell.

Along these lines I like the Battletech solution the best.  It maintains relativistic physics and realism in all areas but one, the jump drive itself.  Which of course is a mystery since most of the technology used to create it has been destroyed or forgotten, so it takes on a sort of magic quality because it can't truly be explained.  Battletech has the feel of a real universe to it, and part of this is because they don't stretch the technology to such a level of importance thet it eclpises the characters or the politics of the story, which is what any fictional universe survives on.

 

Offline Col. Fishguts

  • voodoo doll
  • 211
Freespace - Conclusions
Quote
Originally posted by ShadowWolf_IH
......  so i actually enjoy some of the things that get brought up....not the improbability drive mind you   ;)


Why...that thing is awesome, it has so twisted logic it even makes some sense (in a sick, twisted way). Man, I love the Hitchhiker books....
"I don't think that people accept the fact that life doesn't make sense. I think it makes people terribly uncomfortable. It seems like religion and myth were invented against that, trying to make sense out of it." - D. Lynch

Visit The Babylon Project, now also with HTL flavour  ¦ GTB Rhea

 

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
Re: Re: Freespace - Conclusions
Quote
Originally posted by mrfun


What's that mean? :wtf:

Anyway about the subspace business, it's a required dramatic device to tell a story.  Using physics as we know it as a basis for a galactic adventure will result in one BORING galactic adventure.  Travel, wars, trade, everyhting would take hundreds of years to get from one planet to another.  So we need some device to make it all appear somewhat plausible otherwise we have no story to tell.

Along these lines I like the Battletech solution the best.  It maintains relativistic physics and realism in all areas but one, the jump drive itself.  Which of course is a mystery since most of the technology used to create it has been destroyed or forgotten, so it takes on a sort of magic quality because it can't truly be explained.  Battletech has the feel of a real universe to it, and part of this is because they don't stretch the technology to such a level of importance thet it eclpises the characters or the politics of the story, which is what any fictional universe survives on.


Sorry, Ok...
Huge capital ships cost UNBELIEVABLE abmount of money, while fighters and bombers are buch cheaper...
That's why I think technology would be based around freespace to find out ways for the fighter to have more control in an airless enviroment.  Kind of like we want to find ways "right now" to like safely and possibly with gravity on a space enviroment
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

 

Offline Ford Prefect

  • 8D
  • 26
  • Intelligent Dasein
Freespace - Conclusions
Well, people have theorized about accelerationless drives for a while now. The concept would use some kind of control over gravity to allow a ship to continually shift its mass, allowing it to move. I don't know much about it, but I think it's safe to say that this technology is beyond the level of the Freespace universe. (Although they do apparently have artificial gravity on their ships.)

Quote
Travel, wars, trade, everyhting would take hundreds of years to get from one planet to another. So we need some device to make it all appear somewhat plausible otherwise we have no story to tell.

I didn't suggest using physics as we know it, only making it so it takes longer than minutes or hours to get from one place to another.
"Mais est-ce qu'il ne vient jamais à l'idée de ces gens-là que je peux être 'artificiel' par nature?"  --Maurice Ravel

 

Offline Lightspeed

  • Light Years Ahead
  • 212
Freespace - Conclusions
Quote
Originally posted by ShadowWolf_IH
see i disagree with that.   We know that we will go to our closest star in 4 years and 4 months if we are going lightspeed.  


This, unfortunately, is wrong. The main problem, also a reason why realistic physics are un-feasible for space sims, is that time is not an absolute value.

As soon as you would reach lightspeed with your ship (lets just assume it would be possible) you would explode and die, as the time compression would be infinite (i.e. ANY PERIOD OF TIME shrinks to absolutely zero) and thus you would immediately experience the end of the universe (and never get out of your 'travel' again).

Also, your ship would have an infinite mass, which would then again cause serious problems with any matter surrounding it.

Another way at observing the problem would be that for you (i.e. the crew) any given distance would shrink to exactly zero. So you would be everywhere at once. Another thing that would indeed complicate your flight.

With real physics it is perfectly possible to reach the closest star in around one minute (or less!). No need for a toothbrush or anything. All you have to do is approximate light speed to a ridiculously amount, and you'll have so much time compression the whole trip will take almost no time for you. However, if you would take the trip back after you've arrived, you'd land back on earth eight years after your start.

Now, here, you see the problem with using this in any space sims or anything. There's no room for a good game if you start messing around with time - for example: Command sends you into some nebula to kill off some shivans. You arrive exactly one minute of your time later, though for Command around 60 years will have passed. Unlikely for a good plot to make it here.

So, if you want space travel AND a good game, you'll have to screw being realistic, and apply things like subspace. It might even be more realistic than we all think.
Modern man is the missing link between ape and human being.

 

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

 

Offline Ford Prefect

  • 8D
  • 26
  • Intelligent Dasein
Relativistic time dialation only applies if you're using Newtonian propulsion. If you're travelling by simply flying from point A to point B using any form of rocket propulsion, then you're always limited by the value C, (which can't actually be reached as far as we know.) But when we open the whole "folding space" idea to speculation, we really have no idea how long travelling light years would take. We're free to make it take seconds, days, or years, or whatever. So my point is, I personally believe the optimum value is the weeks-months range.
"Mais est-ce qu'il ne vient jamais à l'idée de ces gens-là que je peux être 'artificiel' par nature?"  --Maurice Ravel

 

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
Quote
Originally posted by ShadowWolf_IH
see i disagree with that.   We know that we will go to our closest star in 4 years and 4 months if we are going lightspeed.  


It takes 4 years to travel to the nearest star at lightspeed, not four months...
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

  

Offline Gloriano

  • silver dracon
  • 210
  • Oh
Quote
Originally posted by jdjtcagle


It takes 4 years to travel to the nearest star at lightspeed, not four months...



52 months actually as Shadow already said 4 years and 4 month
You must have chaos within you to give birth to a dancing star.- Nietzsche

When in despair I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won; there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall.- Mahatma Gandhi

 

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
Misinterpreted...
sorry ShadowWolf_IH
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

 

Offline Lightspeed

  • Light Years Ahead
  • 212
Quote
Originally posted by Ford Prefect
Relativistic time dialation only applies if you're using Newtonian propulsion. If you're travelling by simply flying from point A to point B using any form of rocket propulsion, then you're always limited by the value C, (which can't actually be reached as far as we know.) But when we open the whole "folding space" idea to speculation, we really have no idea how long travelling light years would take. We're free to make it take seconds, days, or years, or whatever. So my point is, I personally believe the optimum value is the weeks-months range.


uh.... time compression ALWAYS works, no matter how/in which way you're moving. You will always be limited by the value c; however, the other factors are NOT constant. The distance you have to travel will shrink, the time will be compressed.

If you travel with light speed, it will take exactly the same time to travel 50 or 600 light years. You'd need exactly zero seconds,and you wouldn't be 'traveling' as any distance will shrink to zero.

Of course, light speed can never be reached. The problem is, if you accelerate an object, energy is not converted in a 100% way.

The faster your object is going, the larger its mass will be. Of course, on 'low speeds' as we use, this is negligible. However, when youre going for the big c, this will be your main problem. The mass will get bigger and bigger and would have to be infinite at light speed. Now, to accelerate an object, you need to apply a force.

It's pretty easy to calculate with Newton's formula F = m * a. Now, if m is infinite, you'd have to apply an infinite amount of force to your object to reach light speed.

So, in fact, accelerating will eventually become harder and harder and you will NEVER reach light speed. You can (presuming you can put out more and more energy with future technologies) get indefinitely close to light speed. Thus, you could indeed fly ANY time you wish to your target, ranging from (almost) zero seconds, over two minutes, to weeks, months or years. You'd just have to hit the precise speed ;)

There's another err... slight problem with this, however. If you apply a force to an object, the same force will work to the opposite direction (When calculating with impulses: m1v1 = -m2v2). You see the problem... Accelerating (as is a well known effect in real life(TM) also) will in turn push you back into your seat/whatever. Now, you will be limited to a certain maximum acceleration, as your body can only endure a limited amount of force. With this ridiculously limited value of acceleration you will need centuries to reach light speed (or anything near it) --> It would take ages to 'get going', and even longer to reach your desired speed near the magical c.

Now if we continue that line of thought, as we need to apply an infinite amount of force to reach light speed, we will be pushed back with a... bingo! infinite amount of force. NOTHING consisting of matter can take this, so you will NEVER be able to accelerate objects to light speed.

:)
Modern man is the missing link between ape and human being.

 

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
Uhhh... Rictor
What was that thing you posted that porves matter can interact with each other no matter how far away they are?
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

 

Offline jdjtcagle

  • 211
  • Already told you people too much!
The whole universe is a hologram is not my point, but it suggest how much do we really know about our universe and about faster than light travel...

http://www.twm.co.nz/hologram.html

In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.

University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram.

To understand why Bohm makes this startling assertion, one must first understand a little about holograms. A hologram is a three- dimensional photograph made with the aid of a laser.

To make a hologram, the object to be photographed is first bathed in the light of a laser beam. Then a second laser beam is bounced off the reflected light of the first and the resulting interference pattern (the area where the two laser beams commingle) is captured on film.

When the film is developed, it looks like a meaningless swirl of light and dark lines. But as soon as the developed film is illuminated by another laser beam, a three-dimensional image of the original object appears.

The three-dimensionality of such images is not the only remarkable characteristic of holograms. If a hologram of a rose is cut in half and then illuminated by a laser, each half will still be found to contain the entire image of the rose.

Indeed, even if the halves are divided again, each snippet of film will always be found to contain a smaller but intact version of the original image. Unlike normal photographs, every part of a hologram contains all the information possessed by the whole.

The "whole in every part" nature of a hologram provides us with an entirely new way of understanding organization and order. For most of its history, Western science has labored under the bias that the best way to understand a physical phenomenon, whether a frog or an atom, is to dissect it and study its respective parts.

A hologram teaches us that some things in the universe may not lend themselves to this approach. If we try to take apart something constructed holographically, we will not get the pieces of which it is made, we will only get smaller wholes.

This insight suggested to Bohm another way of understanding Aspect's discovery. Bohm believes the reason subatomic particles are able to remain in contact with one another regardless of the distance separating them is not because they are sending some sort of mysterious signal back and forth, but because their separateness is an illusion. He argues that at some deeper level of reality such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something.

To enable people to better visualize what he means, Bohm offers the following illustration.

Imagine an aquarium containing a fish. Imagine also that you are unable to see the aquarium directly and your knowledge about it and what it contains comes from two television cameras, one directed at the aquarium's front and the other directed at its side.

As you stare at the two television monitors, you might assume that the fish on each of the screens are separate entities. After all, because the cameras are set at different angles, each of the images will be slightly different. But as you continue to watch the two fish, you will eventually become aware that there is a certain relationship between them.

When one turns, the other also makes a slightly different but corresponding turn; when one faces the front, the other always faces toward the side. If you remain unaware of the full scope of the situation, you might even conclude that the fish must be instantaneously communicating with one another, but this is clearly not the case.

This, says Bohm, is precisely what is going on between the subatomic particles in Aspect's experiment.

According to Bohm, the apparent faster-than-light connection between subatomic particles is really telling us that there is a deeper level of reality we are not privy to, a more complex dimension beyond our own that is analogous to the aquarium. And, he adds, we view objects such as subatomic particles as separate from one another because we are seeing only a portion of their reality.

Such particles are not separate "parts", but facets of a deeper and more underlying unity that is ultimately as holographic and indivisible as the previously mentioned rose. And since everything in physical reality is comprised of these "eidolons", the universe is itself a projection, a hologram.

In addition to its phantomlike nature, such a universe would possess other rather startling features. If the apparent separateness of subatomic particles is illusory, it means that at a deeper level of reality all things in the universe are infinitely interconnected.

The electrons in a carbon atom in the human brain are connected to the subatomic particles that comprise every salmon that swims, every heart that beats, and every star that shimmers in the sky.

Everything interpenetrates everything, and although human nature may seek to categorize and pigeonhole and subdivide, the various phenomena of the universe, all apportionments are of necessity artificial and all of nature is ultimately a seamless web.

In a holographic universe, even time and space could no longer be viewed as fundamentals. Because concepts such as location break down in a universe in which nothing is truly separate from anything else, time and three-dimensional space, like the images of the fish on the TV monitors, would also have to be viewed as projections of this deeper order.

At its deeper level reality is a sort of superhologram in which the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. This suggests that given the proper tools it might even be possible to someday reach into the superholographic level of reality and pluck out scenes from the long-forgotten past.

What else the superhologram contains is an open-ended question. Allowing, for the sake of argument, that the superhologram is the matrix that has given birth to everything in our universe, at the very least it contains every subatomic particle that has been or will be -- every configuration of matter and energy that is possible, from snowflakes to quasars, from bluY whales to gamma rays. It must be seen as a sort of cosmic storehouse of "All That Is."

Although Bohm concedes that we have no way of knowing what else might lie hidden in the superhologram, he does venture to say that we have no reason to assume it does not contain more. Or as he puts it, perhaps the superholographic level of reality is a "mere stage" beyond which lies "an infinity of further development".

Bohm is not the only researcher who has found evidence that the universe is a hologram. Working independently in the field of brain research, Standford neurophysiologist Karl Pribram has also become persuaded of the holographic nature of reality.

Pribram was drawn to the holographic model by the puzzle of how and where memories are stored in the brain. For decades numerous studies have shown that rather than being confined to a specific location, memories are dispersed throughout the brain.

In a series of landmark experiments in the 1920s, brain scientist Karl Lashley found that no matter what portion of a rat's brain he removed he was unable to eradicate its memory of how to perform complex tasks it had learned prior to surgery. The only problem was that no one was able to come up with a mechanism that might explain this curious "whole in every part" nature of memory storage.

Then in the 1960s Pribram encountered the concept of holography and realized he had found the explanation brain scientists had been looking for. Pribram believes memories are encoded not in neurons, or small groupings of neurons, but in patterns of nerve impulses that crisscross the entire brain in the same way that patterns of laser light interference crisscross the entire area of a piece of film containing a holographic image. In other words, Pribram believes the brain is itself a hologram.

Pribram's theory also explains how the human brain can store so many memories in so little space. It has been estimated that the human brain has the capacity to memorize something on the order of 10 billion bits of information during the average human lifetime (or roughly the same amount of information contained in five sets of the Encyclopaedia Britannica).

Similarly, it has been discovered that in addition to their other capabilities, holograms possess an astounding capacity for information storage--simply by changing the angle at which the two lasers strike a piece of photographic film, it is possible to record many different images on the same surface. It has been demonstrated that one cubic centimeter of film can hold as many as 10 billion bits of information.

Our uncanny ability to quickly retrieve whatever information we need from the enormous store of our memories becomes more understandable if the brain functions according to holographic principles. If a friend asks you to tell him what comes to mind when he says the word "zebra", you do not have to clumsily sort back through ome gigantic and cerebral alphabetic file to arrive at an answer. Instead, associations like "striped", "horselike", and "animal native to Africa" all pop into your head instantly.

Indeed, one of the most amazing things about the human thinking process is that every piece of information seems instantly cross- correlated with every other piece of information--another feature intrinsic to the hologram. Because every portion of a hologram is infinitely interconnected with ever other portion, it is perhaps nature's supreme example of a cross-correlated system.

The storage of memory is not the only neurophysiological puzzle that becomes more tractable in light of Pribram's holographic model of the brain. Another is how the brain is able to translate the avalanche of frequencies it receives via the senses (light frequencies, sound frequencies, and so on) into the concrete world of our perceptions. Encoding and decoding frequencies is precisely what a hologram does best. Just as a hologram functions as a sort of lens, a translating device able to convert an apparently meaningless blur of frequencies into a coherent image, Pribram believes the brain also comprises a lens and uses holographic principles to mathematically convert the frequencies it receives through he senses into the inner world of our perceptions.

An impressive body of evidence suggests that the brain uses holographic principles to perform its operations. Pribram's theory, in fact, has gained increasing support among neurophysiologists.

Argentinian-Italian researcher Hugo Zucarelli recently extended the holographic model into the world of acoustic phenomena. Puzzled by the fact that humans can locate the source of sounds without moving their heads, even if they only possess hearing in one ear, Zucarelli discovered that holographic principles can explain this ability.

Zucarelli has also developed the technology of holophonic sound, a recording technique able to reproduce acoustic situations with an almost uncanny realism.

Pribram's belief that our brains mathematically construct "hard" reality by relying on input from a frequency domain has also received a good deal of experimental support.

It has been found that each of our senses is sensitive to a much broader range of frequencies than was previously suspected.

Researchers have discovered, for instance, that our visual systems are sensitive to sound frequencies, that our sense of smell is in part dependent on what are now called "osmic frequencies", and that even the cells in our bodies are sensitive to a broad range of frequencies. Such findings suggest that it is only in the holographic domain of consciousness that such frequencies are sorted out and divided up into conventional perceptions.

But the most mind-boggling aspect of Pribram's holographic model of the brain is what happens when it is put together with Bohm's theory. For if the concreteness of the world is but a secondary reality and what is "there" is actually a holographic blur of frequencies, and if the brain is also a hologram and only selects some of the frequencies out of this blur and mathematically transforms them into sensory perceptions, what becomes of objective reality?

Put quite simply, it ceases to exist. As the religions of the East have long upheld, the material world is Maya, an illusion, and although we may think we are physical beings moving through a physical world, this too is an illusion.

We are really "receivers" floating through a kaleidoscopic sea of frequency, and what we extract from this sea and transmogrify into physical reality is but one channel from many extracted out of the superhologram.

This striking new picture of reality, the synthesis of Bohm and Pribram's views, has come to be called the holographic paradigm, and although many scientists have greeted it with skepticism, it has galvanized others. A small but growing group of researchers believe it may be the most accurate model of reality science has arrived at thus far. More than that, some believe it may solve some mysteries that have never before been explainable by science and even establish the paranormal as a part of nature.

Numerous researchers, including Bohm and Pribram, have noted that many para-psychological phenomena become much more understandable in terms of the holographic paradigm.

In a universe in which individual brains are actually indivisible portions of the greater hologram and everything is infinitely interconnected, telepathy may merely be the accessing of the holographic level.

It is obviously much easier to understand how information can travel from the mind of individual 'A' to that of individual 'B' at a far distance point and helps to understand a number of unsolved puzzles in psychology. In particular, Grof feels the holographic paradigm offers a model for understanding many of the baffling phenomena experienced by individuals during altered states of consciousness.

In the 1950s, while conducting research into the beliefs of LSD as a psychotherapeutic blue öyster cult, Grof had one female patient who suddenly became convinced she had assumed the identity of a female of a species of prehistoric reptile. During the course of her hallucination, she not only gave a richly detailed description of what it felt like to be encapsuled in such a form, but noted that the portion of the male of the species's anatomy was a patch of colored scales on the side of its head.

What was startling to Grof was that although the woman had no prior knowledge about such things, a conversation with a zoologist later confirmed that in certain species of reptiles colored areas on the head do indeed play an important role as triggers of sexual arousal.

The woman's experience was not unique. During the course of his research, Grof encountered examples of patients regressing and identifying with virtually every species on the evolutionary tree (research findings which helped influence the man-into-ape scene in the movie Altered States). Moreover, he found that such experiences frequently contained obscure zoological details which turned out to be accurate.

Regressions into the animal kingdom were not the only puzzling psychological phenomena Grof encountered. He also had patients who appeared to tap into some sort of collective or racial unconscious. Individuals with little or no education suddenly gave detailed descriptions of Zoroastrian funerary practices and scenes from Hindu mythology. In other categories of experience, individuals gave persuasive accounts of out-of-body journeys, of precognitive glimpses of the future, of regressions into apparent past-life incarnations.

In later research, Grof found the same range of phenomena manifested in therapy sessions which did not involve the use of drugs. Because the common element in such experiences appeared to be the transcending of an individual's consciousness beyond the usual boundaries of ego and/or limitations of space and time, Grof called such manifestations "transpersonal experiences", and in the late '60s he helped found a branch of psychology called "transpersonal psychology" devoted entirely to their study.

Although Grof's newly founded Association of Transpersonal Psychology garnered a rapidly growing group of like-minded professionals and has become a respected branch of psychology, for years neither Grof or any of his colleagues were able to offer a mechanism for explaining the bizarre psychological phenomena they were witnessing. But that has changed with the advent of the holographic paradigm.

As Grof recently noted, if the mind is actually part of a continuum, a labyrinth that is connected not only to every other mind that exists or has existed, but to every atom, organism, and region in the vastness of space and time itself, the fact that it is able to occasionally make forays into the labyrinth and have transpersonal experiences no longer seems so strange.



The holographic prardigm also has implications for so-called hard sciences like biology. Keith Floyd, a psychologist at Virginia Intermont College, has pointed out that if the concreteness of reality is but a holographic illusion, it would no longer be true to say the brain produces consciousness. Rather, it is consciousness that creates the appearance of the brain -- as well as the body and everything else around us we interpret as physical.

Such a turnabout in the way we view biological structures has caused researchers to point out that medicine and our understanding of the healing process could also be transformed by the holographic paradigm. If the apparent physical structure of the body is but a holographic projection of consciousness, it becomes clear that each of us is much more responsible for our health than current medical wisdom allows. What we now view as miraculous remissions of disease may actually be due to changes in consciousness which in turn effect changes in the hologram of the body.

Similarly, controversial new healing techniques such as visualization may work so well because in the holographic domain of thought images are ultimately as real as "reality".

Even visions and experiences involving "non-ordinary" reality become explainable under the holographic paradigm. In his book "Gifts of Unknown Things," biologist Lyall Watson discribes his encounter with an Indonesian shaman woman who, by performing a ritual dance, was able to make an entire grove of trees instantly vanish into thin air. Watson relates that as he and another astonished onlooker continued to watch the woman, she caused the trees to reappear, then "click" off again and on again several times in succession.

Although current scientific understanding is incapable of explaining such events, experiences like this become more tenable if "hard" reality is only a holographic projection.

Perhaps we agree on what is "there" or "not there" because what we call consensus reality is formulated and ratified at the level of the human unconscious at which all minds are infinitely interconnected.

If this is true, it is the most profound implication of the holographic paradigm of all, for it means that experiences such as Watson's are not commonplace only because we have not programmed our minds with the beliefs that would make them so. In a holographic universe there are no limits to the extent to which we can alter the fabric of reality.

What we perceive as reality is only a canvas waiting for us to draw upon it any picture we want. Anything is possible, from bending spoons with the power of the mind to the phantasmagoric events experienced by Castaneda during his encounters with the Yaqui brujo don Juan, for magic is our birthright, no more or less miraculous than our ability to compute the reality we want when we are in our dreams.

Indeed, even our most fundamental notions about reality become suspect, for in a holographic universe, as Pribram has pointed out, even random events would have to be seen as based on holographic principles and therefore determined. Synchronicities or meaningful coincidences suddenly makes sense, and everything in reality would have to be seen as a metaphor, for even the most haphazard events would express some underlying symmetry.

Whether Bohm and Pribram's holographic paradigm becomes accepted in science or dies an ignoble death remains to be seen, but it is safe to say that it has already had an influence on the thinking of many scientists. And even if it is found that the holographic model does not provide the best explanation for the instantaneous communications that seem to be passing back and forth between subatomic particles, at the very least, as noted by Basil Hiley, a physicist at Birbeck College in London, Aspect's findings "indicate that we must be prepared to consider radically new views of reality".
« Last Edit: July 27, 2004, 07:09:18 pm by 1472 »
"Brings a tear of nostalgia to my eye" -Flipside
------------------------------------------
I'm an Apostolic Christian (Acts: 2:38)
------------------------------------------
Official Interplay Freespace Stories
Predator
Hammer Of Light - Omen of Darkness
Freefall in Darkness
A Thousand Years

 

Offline Ford Prefect

  • 8D
  • 26
  • Intelligent Dasein
Quote
uh.... time compression ALWAYS works, no matter how/in which way you're moving. You will always be limited by the value c; however, the other factors are NOT constant. The distance you have to travel will shrink, the time will be compressed.

The only type of travel we've known in all of our history has been Newtonian. From horses to rockets, it all operates on the principle of moving through space in a linear manner from one point to another. This is where relativity applies, and it is by this mode of travel that we predict how long it would take to get from star to star, because right now it's the only way we know how. But I'm not talking about anything within the boundaries of established science, I'm talking about theoretical modes of travel like subspace. What I'm trying to say is that because we don't know whether such a mode of transportation is even physically possible, we're free to theorize all we want as to how long such travel would take, and whether or not relativity applies in the same way.
"Mais est-ce qu'il ne vient jamais à l'idée de ces gens-là que je peux être 'artificiel' par nature?"  --Maurice Ravel

 
In other words, let's imagine up something that doesn't follow the laws of physics.

Not a bad thought, but not useful unless you actually find evidence of such (for which you'd probably win a nobel prize).

In any case, games make up stuff like subspace as a plot element.  Makes it simpler and more fun than to work it out so it's "realistic".


@jdjtcagle

Looks like it's talking about quantum entanglement (and then some squalid speculation that really doesn't have anything to do with it).

Sure it lets us tranfer the state of a particle instantaneously (people keep confusing it with teleportation btw, you hear it in the news all the time). but it doesn't allow any information to be transferred if the observers of the respective particles aren't allowed to communicate.