TriumphantGeorge Compedium (Part 6)

POST: Is this place for real or are all you guys full of shit?

A1: "...actively trying to perceive things differently..." An interesting and insightful comment. One of the quirks of human perception is that we do not process perception to a fine level of detail; instead we pick up enough points of reference to identify a pattern, then mentally fill in the rest of the pattern. This is often called "selective perception" and accounts for a number of things, such as not being able to proofread your own writing (your brain keeps you seeing what you know is there, because you wrote it, rather than what is there), odd blind spots in perception (as in this image that people read as "Paris in the spring"), and wonderful actual mental editing of contradictory perceptions like the McGurk effect. So perhaps actively trying to perceive things differently is a lot more of an interesting empirical investigation than it would initially seem. Personally, I do believe the effect is real, that under conditions we can control our reality changes, however I do not at this point accept the idea of dimensional jumping for a number of reasons.

Yes on perception: [http://www.reddit.com/r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix/comments/2kvdfc/darkroom_vision_chef_hats_dreams/]

Had never heard (or lip read) of McGurk - excellent. What are your number of reasons?

You are just begging to be bored to tears asking me that. Perhaps it would be more useful for me to say the number one reason is that I think there are better explanations for the effect.

A1: You are just begging to be bored to tears asking me that. Perhaps it would be more useful for me to say the number one reason is that I think there are better explanations for the effect. A lot of the posts here I tend to not take as serious evidence when they are easily explained by other mechanisms. For example I think a lot of the stories about things seeming different, things being different than people remember and many other accounts with a single observer do not offer any prima facie evidence for the existence of all these multiple dimensions. But there are many that intrigue me that seem to have no other rational possible explanation, aside from just plain old being made up. However having said that, there is a long tradition in many of the mystical schools, even ones associated with the mainstream religions (Yogic traditions in Hinduism, Sufi in Islam, Hermetic/gnosticism in Christianity and others) that reality is not objective. The idea here is that everything exists as potential, and it is brought into a specific form (reality) by conciousness. There are not infinitely many dimensions in which you exist but rather infinitely many potential dimensions existing in you. Many of these traditions talk about reality being a dream and we are the dreamers, and sometimes when you are aware you are dreaming, you can change the dream. Dimensional jumping might be considered then an editing of reality through intent. Now that is a really intriguing question to me even though I personally love the idea of infinite realities, I think it is more likely that there is one reality with an infinite number of manifestations. I once spoke to someone I knew who had seen someone essentially teleport, one minute they were on the phone miles away to this person, and the next this person literally appeared in front of them. (Not sure if it was as described but that is not the point). When asked "how did you do that?" the alleged teleporter said "You see the reasons why it is impossible, I see the reasons why it is possible. That makes all the difference."

You are just begging to be bored to tears asking me that.

Not at all. This is my main area of investigation - not "jumping", but what you might call the "direct application of metaphor to create plausible routes for experiential change". Very interested in your ideas! My thoughts in response:

Single observers and dimensions

The single observer is always going to be a problem, because although that is what you would expect from the concept (if you jump alone, you'll be the only one to remember the "old ways"), it leaves nobody with evidence. Other stories (several in /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix for instance) where two or more people share the experience, are more persuasive. Assuming again, of course, that they are sincere.

There are not infinitely many dimensions in which you exist but rather infinitely many potential dimensions existing in you.

This is more the model I'm inclined to adopt (an edited-down version of this here). If we consider ourself an "awareness" within which all possible moments are dissolved or enfolded, then "jumping" or any other sort of intentional change is simply a case of unfolding a particular moment. Since there is no solid underlying, then absolutely anything is possible - however...

Your mind becomes "formatted with habits" over time, which funnels and limits subsequent experiences. As I've said elsewhere:

1. Experiences leave traces which in-form subsequent experiences.
2. Thinking is an experience, and so has the same paterning effect.

It is this second part which allows us to create "plausible routes" by which novel change might occur (and also to dissolve restrictive patterns).

[Teleport] You see the reasons why it is impossible, I see the reasons why it is possible. That makes all the difference."

There's a book by Jeffrey Mishlove called The PK Man, where he describes spending time with one Ted Owens.

Ted Owens claimed to be in touch with 'other entities' - but that aside, the main thing was that by interacting with them he could (this is documented in the book but we must make our own minds up of course!) affect the weather, various other circumstances. Mishlove seems to be a fairly balanced reporter on this (he delayed publication so as not to ruin his serious career at the time, he was pretty non-trusting of Owens but got to know him). Anyway, he finishes with some other thoughts, one of which was about the Zulus. They had said that they'd tried to teach Westerners about their ability to directly change the weather, make it rain and so on. The most important thing, they said when asked, is that you have to believe it is possible.

In short, you have to know that there is a plausible route by which the event can occur. Your intentions are always responded to, I think, but given that most of us have fairly restrictive worldviews, the routes and results are fairly limited. (For instance, we often dream of the result rather than obtain in in waking life. At least in the first wave of response.)

...

ok how about this follow the instructions but think of the biggest jump you possibly can like a dimension where your the president and than tell us if ts fake or not

He won't be here to tell us.

The version of him that is no longer President will be though. And he will be convinced.

Jump to a dimension where you are The God Of All Dimensions, and give the heads-up to everyone.

POST: Jumping and Parallel Worlds

I realize that it is our minds that jump around from one dimension to another. Not us, but our minds.

I think of it as our minds (which are just open spaces of awareness) sort of connecting to different viewports, such that the experience of that particular "person" arises within us. (A little bit like this [https://old.reddit.com/r/outside/comments/2kygk4/why_did_the_devs_implement_dreams/clqq0do/].)

Worlds are not spatially located, or in fact spatial at all. I like to think that the entire world(s) and all history are 'dissolved' into the background here, right now. Switching from one situation to another is simply a case of packing this moment away, and unfolding a moment somewhere else on The Grid Of Infinite Possibilities.

Have you read Robert Monroe's Journeys Out of the Body? In it, he speaks of different "Locales". One of which, Locale III I think, has him finding himself in an alternate world, looking through the experience of a particular person. The world is like ours, except it runs more on very clever steam engine innovations, and there are other changes. Technology is fully realised, but different. He revisits this world/person multiple times at different point of his (the target's) life).

Ah, here's an excerpt:

Locale III... proved to be a physical-matter world almost identical to our own. The natural environment is the same. There are trees, houses, cities, people, artifacts, and all the appurtenances of a reasonably civilised society. There are homes, families, businesses, and people work for a living. There are roads on which vehicles travel. There are railroads and trains... However, more careful study showed that it can be neither the present nor the past of our physical-matter world
-- Out of Body Experiences: Journey to Other Worlds, Jim Dekorne

Do you mind - broadly, vaguely speaking - saying what sort of things you are going to try and fix? Have you taken account of the fact that your friends, etc, might also change during this process? Or are you going to go "full parallel", as it were?

Q: You are one of the first individuals I have seen relate this view here, and it is a viewpoint of the nature of reality (or at least a very similar view) that I have come upon independently as well (both through personal experience, logic, and reading). To answer OP, my view is that every time you imagine, you are in essence perceiving an alternate state of events (i.e. a reality). With mine and /u/TriumphantGeorge view of the nature of existence, the idea of a primary timeline is a little illogical. To extrapolate that further, the idea of a timeline is actually worth very little except in the storytelling sense. Every possible moment you experience connects because you perceive them to be related by cause and effect, the real relationship between any given moment at any point in the universe of probable moments is probability. I also dis-prefer to use the word "mind" and prefer to use "consciousness" when I refer to the experiencing entity (i.e. me) because, in essense, I believe that we are but a tendril of a larger collective.

I usually use the term "awareness" to indicate what we are, but it needs a bit of background explaining for context, so I do skip it. ("Consciousness" can be a confusing term, since there is consciousness, consciousness-of and self-consciousness, with different people arguing about different versions, claiming they have "explained" this or that.)

Yes, there is no fundamental timeline, there is only the trajectory that you have gone through (which may or may not be all in one world), in terms of sequence of moments - and the 'personal' memory associated with that. The "world timeline" is merely inferred by a lot of participants in a world (by which I mean, the collection of moments corresponding to viewports within a particular common area) having had a similar experience, and therefore similar personal memories.

The important thing is - all possible moments are available, and there is not necessarily a restriction that says they must be continuous (e.g. in principle, you could teleport or time-jump or world-jump, without an intermediary stage). The question then is - what is it that dictates which moment is next, and our overall trajectories? We do not seem to actively choose moment by moment, so what dictates the path and how can it be modified?

*Q: Indeed, that would be the million dollar question wouldn't it :)?

My current framework supposes that the moment to moment jumps are determined mostly by internalized beliefs, intent, and desire - with the magnitude of effect decreasing in that order. For example, if one did not believe that "long range" jumps were possible, then it would be unlikely for such a jump to happen from any given moment to moment, meaning that the probabilities that determine the likelihood that any given moment follows the present moment are determined primarily by the beliefs one has about how things would likely proceed. This extends beyond beliefs in natural laws, for example, as beliefs about one's personal predilections have probabilistic effects on outcomes. This works even on a practical level as one's beliefs about oneself and the nature of the situation affect one's responses to that situation (therefore affecting outcome). Intent and desires factor in less in determining the probability of a particular moment following another. A good example would be that most people would love to win the lottery, and some even focus their intent to shift to probable worlds in which this is the case. However, given the internalized beliefs that many hold that such an occurrence is unlikely (due to a "rational" measure of the probability that any single ticket would win), the internalized belief wins out on the effect of the probability of jumping to an event where one wins. Furthermore, beliefs such as that are hard to undo as they are buttressed by a myriad of internalized beliefs regarding how the world should "work."
The only reason, members of this sub are able to jump to seemingly incongrous moments is because we are able to shed enough internalized beliefs to allow it. The question I might propose is if there is even a level of agency to all of this, even when we "jump" ...*

Not agency as such. More that we are changed, and the world flows in line with our new understanding/expectations. Working on ourselves, we change the world, because they are the same.

In fact, "world = random raw creative noise + habitual channels". In other words, the structure of mind is a filter that shapes infinity into a stable world.

...the idea that jumping entails some concept of switching places ...

I think it comes from a misunderstanding of what "we" are. People are imagining themselves to be a "person" that physically goes somewhere, and that there are other "thems".

...growing consensus here that jumping operates akin to the show Sliders...

Sliders at the moment, Parallels tomorrow. The problem is that fiction tends to imply a 3rd-person view, and people tend to imagine their own events in the 3rd person. We would be better off reading something like Replay or Philip K Dick's Flow My Tears the Policeman Said and The Electric Ant for a model, and fostering the sense of 'through-your-own-eyes' that such fiction can bring.

POST: Personal experience, long time ago.

we are unchangeable awareness...

Very nicely put. And we are not in anything (e.g. a body), rather experiences arise within us. The way in which we jump dimensions is that we jump experiences.

And got me thinking...

In an OBE we can end up temporarily 'jumping' to someone other than us, in a different world (see Robert Monroe's Journeys Out of the Body and his description of 'Locale III' - mentioned before but it's a nice illustration); a so-called 'Dimensional Jump' is really a jump to someone else who has a resemblance to our previously-inhabited perspective. Or one could say that really happens is that we disconnect from this dream and connect to (or create?) an alternative. The similarities between the two are based on expectation and habit and "holding on", perhaps?

So - in an OBE situation, we deliberately let go (almost) completely to the 'dream' we are having is free to reform completely. We don't completely jump there forever, though, because we keep a bit of "holding on" to the original world.

Aside: This holding-on is metaphorically represented in tradition by the notion of the 'silver cord', which keeps a connection between this body and displaced body. Really though, it is a visual representation of an idea, and lots of people don't actually experience this. "Cutting the cord means death", it is said. Which is true, in the sense of no longer being attached to this dream, and snapping-to whatever dream experience you've tuned into instead.

POST: I consciously jumped.. and it sucks.

Firstly, it's important to realise that so-called 'jumping' is not causal. As in, jumping doesn't make things happen, so if something is different it isn't your "fault".

You should read an old explanation I've used based on the Infinite Grid Of All Possible Moments. Highlights:

Imagine a vast grid extending in all directions... Imagine that each square in the grid is a particular experience, a particular static moment, as seen through the eyes of a particular person...
[...some details omitted...]
In this model: From a 1st person perspective 'what you are' is a consciousness that is looking through the "viewport" of a certain square on the grid. There is no solidity to the experience, it is a dream-like experience. Everyone is having the experience of looking through a certain "viewport" at a certain time. From a 3rd person perspective, everyone is essentially an "extended person", since they appear as characters the experiences of many moments.
In other words, when you make a 'jump' what you are doing is subjectively 'tuning into' a new grid position. There is no physical jump involved. You do not so much change solid reality as have a discontinuity in your experience. It is possible that only you will remember how things were previously, although at other times you may elect to bring another character through the change with you.

So your sister and baby have many aspects, they are "extended persons". Unfortunately, the path you are on involves experiencing those less pleasant aspects. But it is important to realise they are "experiences for you" and not for them.

I thought I did everything correctly and really concentrated on a BETTER version of my life, although my life was pretty good to begin with.

You have to be careful because it probably doesn't work quite as you think (literally). Now, how exactly did you approach this, both physically and mentally? (I have an idea of where things went astray, but I don't want to speak the magic word in case I influence what you're going to say.)

You can't return to the previous 'universe' because this isn't really about universes, it's about experiential paths, and discontinuities between moments (which is what 'jumping' is about) are limited somewhat by your beliefs. Your habitual inferences about people, worlds, bodies, universes are all without 'solid substrate'.

Theoretically, it is possible to have a discontinuity which appears like time-travel, for instance, but could you ever really persuade yourself that tonight you'll go to bed in 2015, and tomorrow you'll have up in 2013 - Live. Die. Repeat? It's much easier to have the world 'shift' more subtly.

EDIT: As an aside, I thoroughly recommend that everyone read and watch as much fictional virtual reality, time-travel, and other reality-is-not-what-you-think-it-is material as possible, to give you some "mind formatting" which is more open to unusual routes of change.

POST: [THEORY] According to quantum mechanics, we're jumping all the time without even trying.

[POST]

The Many Worlds Interpretation [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation] of quantum mechanics posits that for every situation in which there are multiple probable outcomes, every outcome does happen simultaneously, each within their own parallel universe.
For instance, you wake up one morning and open your sock drawer to find you have two pairs of socks -- one white pair, and one black pair.
When you decide which socks you want to put on, you are only deciding which outcome you would like to experience. But there are simultaneous versions of you putting on all the other possible combinations.
You choose to put on white socks. An alternate you puts on black socks. Another alternate decides on no socks. Another alternate decides to mix it up with a white on the left foot and a black on the right food. Another alternate puts a white on the right food and a black on the left foot. Another decides its cold out and wears white socks over top of the black socks. Another decides to put black socks over top of the white socks.
NOW: Every single day every person is confronted with countless situations in which they can have an effect on the outcome. So our universe is splitting into parallel universes far more times than you can ever count.
Within the multiverse, there exists every possible version of you, some better, some worse.
So, if it is possible to jump to an alternate universe, into an alternate version of yourself, you might run into some problems.
Suppose you grew up poor, and you jump into a version of yourself who grew up rich, you would have a serious problem. Your family will have gone on vacations that you don't recall. They would have gotten you gifts that you don't remember. Sources of stress and tension in your lives would be based entirely on other things. In essence, they will not know you and you will not know them. From their perspective, you must be suffering from a stroke or something.
And what happened to the alternate you who's place you've taken over? Did they simply jump over to your dimension? Or do all of your alternate selves all shift position? If it's the latter, you cannot jump universes without seriously screwing over all of your alternate selves.

[END OF POST]

There is no universe in which I choose the white socks. ;-)

A1: Look at the post by /u/triumphantgeorge
There is no entity to switch with. You are just switching perception.

I don't know if I agree. Each alternate you in each parallel universe has their own first-person experience of their own world. Suppose Person A from Universe A does the mirror trick and finds themselves in Universe B. Universe B existed just as long as Universe A existed, and during most of that time, an alternate you known as Person B existed within Universe B. So what happened to Person B when Person A decided to jump over to Universe B? If you're only "switching perception" as you put it, does that mean that Person A's body is lying lifeless while they mentally inhabit Person B's body, meanwhile Person B is not even aware that they're being piloted by Person A? I don't believe that there was no Person B, because if you jumped to a universe where there was no Person B, you'd have no one to switch perspectives with.

I think you are making the mistake of assuming that there are lots of time tracks actively "running" in parallel, and that there are people inside the time tracks, having experiences or piloting bodies. This is not the case: you are not a person in that sense.

The trick to realising this is that from a higher level view: there is no time, and all moments from all perspectives are present simultaneously and in parallel. You are more like an "awareness" that "tunes into" a particular experience, moment, trajectory.

I understand that from an objective standpoint, time is a block and that our linear experience of it is only a trick of perspective. But I fail to see how this negates the existence of parallel versions of people in parallel universes.

It negates it in the sense that there are no physical universes that are "running" to worry about because there is no passage of time or timeline independent of an experiencer. And there aren't any people (in the sense we think of it usually), there are only perspectives and experiences.

The benefit here is that we don't need to worry about bodies not being occupied and falling down, or a body already being occupied when we try to jump. We don't even need to worry about multiple perspectives experiencing a single moment simultaneously, if we start going to that level.

In short, multiverses are another "you can experience it as-if" situation. It's an artificial restriction applied to a setup that has no fundamental restriction. (This isn't to say that it's not a useful concept, one that can't generate ideas for desires, but it isn't "real" in the sense of limitation.)

EDIT: To emphasise: there is no such thing as a spatially-extended universe outwith experience, and all moments of body-world-type experiences are "already" available.

In short, multiverses are another "you can experience it as-if" situation.
That is completely contrary to everything about multiverse theory. All other parallel universes ARE really occurring simultaneously. There is another you having their own subjective experience in another universe that you do not have direct access to. There are many other yous currently experiencing other things in other places, concurrently. The you that is here now is not the only one who is self aware and real.

They are not "occurring", all moments have already occurred in effect, in terms of a static pattern of potential experience. This matters. It also matters what is meant by a "you currently experiencing", because you have to be clear what is meant by a "you". We also have to be clear what is meant by a "universe" and where those reside.

Because fundamentally, it's all non-temporal and non-spatial. I use the phrase "as if" because the mechanics of shifting experience don't require you invoke an actual multiverse-based process, however you can use the model as a map for your intention.. It's a descriptive scheme.

EDIT: Trimmed the rest. Not currently relevant. Replaced with:

It is better to think of you as experiencing all possible moments right now, however only one particular moment is "unpacked" into the senses. You might think of yourself as an "Extended Person" in this picture. Remember, though, that since the overall picture is atemporal it doesn't matter "when" you do this.

Remember that in physics the Many Worlds Theory is really just an interpretative, unfalsifiable dodge to avoid having to deal with a non-determinsitic, probabilistic picture of the universe given to us by the mathematics of quantum mechanics - treating possible paths as "really happening somewhere, physically" rather than as structural patterns describing (say) possible experiences that maybe could be accessed.

POST: Does "jumping" mean swapping souls? My thoughts lately on the idea of jumping. Feedback appreciated.

Your soul is trading realities (and bodies) with another you

I'm going to say... no.

It's more a case of shifting your perspective to another experience. You are simultaneously everywhere (all possible moments), it's just that you are focussed on a particular moment or trajectory across moments. This works because although we think of ourselves as 'inside a body looking out', our actual experience is one of 'being a conscious space' and having thoughts, body sensations and an environment arising within that. A bit like connecting to a particular instance of a video game or shifting your attention across a grid of all moments.

In your terms, it would be like your one 'soul' is actually spread across all possible experiences - all experiences are 'dissolved' within it - but it is 'concentrated' on one particular possibility at a time, bringing it into the senses.

Everyday Example: Focus your attention on the sensations of one hand. Now focus on the other. When you shift your attention from one hand to another - attend to one and not the other - you don't have to "swap souls" with your hands in order to do this. You are always both hands (and indeed, your whole body), it's just that you are only bringing one hand into sensory experience at a time.

Thanks for your response, but how would this explain the story of the guy who jumped to mars? His other self was put into this reality, without any memories from this reality. Meanwhile, he shifted to the mars one reality. That story especially makes it seem like you are switching bodies/realities with another you, and when you do, you carry your memories over but you don't "take in" the memories from the body you've jumped into. Does that make sense? Shit, none of this makes sense.

The guy who "went to Mars" - remember there are no bodies. There are just experiences which contain body sensations. The memories you have are those you accumulate on the path you have taken, across the sequence of moments you have experienced - from your own perspective.

Because the body-feeling is so immersive, it can be better to imagine this as people sitting watching a big TV screen really close up. So if you jump discontinuously, it's the scene on the TV show that changes.

Everyone has a similar setup. People confuse 'what they are' with the history of the TV images - and most people have been experiencing the same body-perspective ("looking through the same eyes") consistently and continuously since birth, except for dreaming. So, people mistakenly come to believe they are a body rather than simply having a VR-like body experience.

Metaphor: You are watching TV via a cable service called Life+, where everything is shown from the 1st person perspective to help you feel like you are a character in the show. Suddenly you realise you can "vote" on what's going to happen next in the script, and not just your own character's actions. Pretty exciting. Then you realise you can actually change the channel completely, switch to any scenario. Incredible!

Interesting. What makes you so sure about this?

Research and experimentation. Do remember that the descriptions are all metaphors to provide a useful way of thinking about something that is actually inconceivable/infinite potential. A framework for conceptualising intentions, you might say.

You can relatively easily experience that you are an "aware space" in which a sensory world arises, rather than a body inside a world, via investigation. (Check out Rupert Spira's Presence Vol I & II for a good take on this, or Douglas Harding and his experiments.) The trick is to directly understand that your experience is constructed from concepts and that those are filters rather than building blocks. This leads you to a view of reality that is "dreamlike but with stable habits".

The next step is to play with making changes. At root, all approaches are about softening your hold on accumulated perceptual habits, so allowing your intentions to become experiences in a more efficient way than usual. 'Dimensional Jumping' is one such way, a model which is pretty flexible. Meanwhile, /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix is stuffed with stories of accidental outcomes, where people 'let go of stability' and their experience shifts from under them.

The overall scheme might be viewed as:

Infinity, divided into moments, filtered through beliefs, expectations, knowledge & intention -> experiences

And the 'method':

Soften or detach from the filters, adopt a worldview, such that you get to a "moment" that contains your intention (desired experience) by the most direct trajectory possible. (The ultimate being a straight jump to that moment.)

EDIT: Just reading another blog and encountered this post [http://buddhaspace.blogspot.com/2015/03/shunryu-suzuki-on-zazen.html], which has a similar flavour.

POST: When you jump dimensions, other versions of you are probably doing the same...

I just realized this, in a multiverse where every possibility is a dimension, if you were to attempt to traverse to another dimension, you wouldn't be the only you to do so. There could be a myriad of other "you"s who also are trying to get to a more positive dimension after figuring out how to dimension jump. Whenever you dimension jump, its not just you switching places with one other dimension, its possibly millions of your dimensional dopplegangars simultaneously taking the same leap and being haphazardly reshuffled.

There is only one "soul" or consciousness, simultaneously being all perspectives, it's just a matter of which one you are paying attention to / unfolding into sensory awareness. It's all part of the Infinite Grid Service Agreement.

POST: Wondering whether it is feasible to travel dimensions to another biological sex

I love the name! :-)

The basic answer: Nobody knows until they've done it. And I sincerely doubt whether anyone who did would talk about it. There's also the whole issue of experiential overlap. In principle you can dream anything though. Every moment is a re-start, every morning a resurrection from nowhere - just with added memories to add to the convincing effect of continuity.

Not quite related, but thinking about this brought something to mind:

Back in the time of New Thought advocate Neville Goddard, being non-white was a serious problem for getting anywhere in life. Although he didn't advocate some form of extreme jumping, he did teach that that application of the imagination could transform a person's situation:

“You can start now from scratch and choose the being you want to be. You aren’t going to change the pigment of your skin but you will find your accent or the pigment of skin or your so-called racial background will not be a hindrance, for if a man is ever hindered it can only be the state of consciousness in which he abides that hinders him. Man is freed or constrained by reason of the state of mind in which he persists.” – Neville Goddard

In other words, shift to an experience where being black, trans, maybe even ginger* just wasn't a problem. Some might say we have already jumped to a world where that is increasingly becoming the case, with rather unlikely speed. Who knows where this trajectory is heading - and that's without doing anything too much in terms of radical intervention.

*I am Scottish-linked so I am allowed to make the ginger joke.

POST: Im confused about the whole idea of DJ.

[POST]

So, I dont completely understand the concept of this. Could you DJ and magically have 100$?
Could you magically jump and have your crush be obsessed with you?
Could you even jump to somehow learn something? (You dont know how to play a guitar, you jump, now your good at playing guitar)
I understand that most or all of those intentions are a little selfish and immature. But I was just using them as examples.

[END OF POST]

These are all valid questions. I have yet to see that dimensional jumping can result in any kind of tangible difference such as having your anchor number change, let alone anything else.

Yes, they are. The problem is... it's not objective. But neither is it subjective. It can never be scientific, because there is no outside frame of reference. Everyone has to play the game for themselves.

Exactly. Perhaps there are infinite versions of your body that you can switch your consciousness to. Perhaps there is only one reality based on shared realities between you and others, in which yours can influence everything within small steps and vice versa. Perhaps neither of these options are true, yet they may be. The point is one is not able to proof without trying it.

I think that... it's all true, whichever way. It seems to be shared and consensus, but then some changes are only remembered by you, and you have power over others, but also they are independent, and so on.

Basically, it's just not conceivable. It's not a case of higher dimensionality, it's a case of infinite dimensions and therefore no dimensions. It feels like we travel a timeline, but there is no time aside from that experience. We can attach to any number of perspectives, which means there are no perspectives.

In the end we must simply say: Whatever we adopt that works, is something that works. Something is "true" if you commit to it and the corresponding experience follows. Tomorrow you might commit to a different outlook, and then that will be true instead.

POST: could i have jumped by accident?

Think of it as you moving from moment to moment. If time is to pass at all, you must shift to a next-moment. So "jumping" is not optional! Which means your trajectory will constantly adjust according to your beliefs, expectations, knowledge and intentions.

It's about doing so knowingly and to great effect due to acceptance of discontinuities.

...

Not necessarily true, as I understood jumping unintentional shifts two realities that are very close to similar to one. Otherwise if you jump intentional you are able to jump to more different realities.

"Plausible deniability" tends to apply. What answer does OP truly want to hear? Etc.

I'm just saying that the idea of conceptionist might not work if it would've been a small jump. As well as it could've been no jump at all and his dad just changed his mind, his phone updated automatically and changed settings, etc. These changes might have been occured over a long time span and now because he read about "DimensionalJumping" his conscious is trying desperate to find changes that took place but he was never aware of.

Oh, agreed. That's what I meant: no difference between jumping and non-; he's maybe just looking for stuff. After all, every moment involves a jump to the next moment, doesn't mean the whole world has to shift for every small development.

POST: [Unknown Post Deleted by User]

*A1: there is no other you.

Lets do a thought experiment. Basic theory is that for every possible choice, there is a "dimension" that reflects the outcome of that choice. Now how do we know that this is the more likely scenario rather than a paradigm in which choices not taken do not exist. Well there are plenty of tales in which others here have been able to jump to the past. This is only possible in a paradigm where time is a consequence of experience ... i.e. it only exists as a result of requiring it as a measure of experiences experienced.

Still that requires some suspension of disbelief from the colloquial view of reality - so just except that for the moment. In this paradigm, it is essentially not-preferable for non-choices to exist, since that would require all choices to be pre-ordained. In which case, Dimensional Jumping would be impossible since the probable reality in which you inhabit is the only one. Now assume that all possible choices exist, is it reasonable to assume that at every possible moment another soul or entity or version of you is created?

Assuming that every choice, no matter how minute creates a new probable reality, it is rather silly to imagine these realities as separate universes, since their quantifiability only extends to a sliver of a moment. At every possible moment, you are making decisions which generate numerous probable moments - at that rate of probable universe generation is it still reasonable to consider them separate universes if the extent of its uniqueness extends to mere microseconds, since at every second it is splitting into an infinite array of probable outcome "universes."

Because of this, some of us propose that the paradigm is essentially this: all possible outcomes exist all at once as points in a field. The experience of time is generated by travelling across this field in a probabilistic manner. Existence is the experience of moving through the probability field. Thus, when you jump, you are essentially just jumping to a less probable moment as opposed to more probable moments. There isn't another you to switch with, you are essentially just switching your perspective to a set of probable moments from which it less probable that you jump from your most recently experienced probable moments.*

Excellent summary.

William Blake describes the "Sculptures of Los's Halls", eternal pre-made states describing human drama in its entirety - dormant possibilities assuming reality when we become them:

All things acted on Earth are seen in the bright Sculptures of
Los's Halls, & every Age renews its powers from these Works,
With every pathetic story possible to happen from Hate or
Wayward Love, & every sorrow & distress is carved here,
Every Affinity of Parents, Marriages & Friendships are here
In all their various combinations wrought with wondrous Art,
All that can happen to Man in his pilgrimage of seventy years.

So we might refer to universes in the sense of "fully-defined moments of experience", perhaps, but not in the sense of spatially-extended physical environments. Similarly, no multiple souls, because there is only one mind which takes on the shape of an experience - and that is you.

We shift our attentional focus across the Infinite Grid of All Possible Moments, in order to seem to be "here" or "there", but we are already everywhere really.

POST: Question about DJ-- How much can change?

Undirected 'jumping' is basically a leap into unharnessed change, detaching and allowing things to shift into alignment with your current state, and you'll get pretty much whatever you're feeling at the time, although it'll always be quite continuous. "No disintegrations!" So be more precise about what changes you want.

Maybe check out the the Neville Goddard link I posted the other day for a different take on how to specify things.

POST: A hypothetical question

Let's also say that I like her very much and want her to be nearby without her having to physically move.

So, you just want to wake up tomorrow to discover she's now living in the same city, without experiencing a transition? The fact you are asking the question means you don't think such disruptive 'discontinuities' are possible or really desirable, I'd say.

Do I hold up a picture of my friend and let the metaphysics do the rest?

That is a brilliant phrase and I'm going to steal it. Hope you don't mind. :-) Meanwhile, why not read the Neville Goddard books and see how you get along with those.

Q: So, you just want to wake up tomorrow to discover she's now living in the same city, without experiencing a transition? The fact you are asking the question means you don't think such disruptive 'discontinuities' are possible or really desirable, I'd say.
What do you mean by that? I expect a transition of some sort to happen when I make the "jump", so I know that I switched dimensions or whatever. And what do you mean by "disruptive discontinuities"?

If you woke up tomorrow, to discover your friend lived in your city. And had always lived there. And that you've been supposedly meeting up every week for drinks for the past months. But you don't remember any of that. And your eyes are now a different colour. Would that be good?

Or would you rather your friend called you this weekend and said: "Guess what, I'm moving to <name of your city>!!"

I like the first option alot actually! Only question I have is about the method. Do I just visualize that when I'm in front of the mirror? Do I state my intentions vocally? Or will everything just work itself out?

Just know it. And open to it. And report back. So, not really a hypothetical question then. ;-)

Yea, I guess not hypothetical. :P Thanks for all the help, really appreciate it.

No worries! :-)

But, be careful with things yeah. You're basically reformatting your mind to change what experiences you "allow through the filter". Always take a pause to think about how you will really feel if things happen, with this or any other "esoteric" approaches. Unknowingly, you've spent your whole life gradually accumulating a "reality" and being comfortable with each step along the way, and this stuff just suddenly kicks things out of kilter.

POST: is this really real?

It's not exactly big among the reddit community. It's a subreddit with only 1500 subscribers. As for the mirror ritual seeming childish, I agree 100%. I just read this out of curiosity. I like to think about parallel universes, and so far everything in this subreddit sounds like its written by someone with a very tenuous gasp on the subject.

Yeah, I think it would be a mistake to think of this as parallel universes in some pseudo-many-worlds way. It seems like you have shifted to a different "realm" though.

Anyone who has done any experimentation with perception, magickal ritual, philosophical idealism and the like can see it's more about creating change in the patterns of your mind - with corresponding effects in subsequent daily experience. It is a shift in the subjective content a person encounters, which can be quite dramatic. It certainly isn't scientific.

There actually isn't a "way that it works" other than the simple doing of it, with intention. This is why it doesn't make much sense to hold it to a scientific model. Science is "inside" personal experience. It's like coming up with a science of hypnosis, say. Good luck with that.

The mirror approach must be one of the least controllable ways to force a loosening of the mind from its habits though - not recommended. It's like "three kings" while exposing your formatting completely to whatever your current mood is.

The clue is, I think, to understand that time & space are an illusion, so when you jump somewhere, it's not like you jumping INTO the world that was already there, but you sort of CREATE this world around you. Past doesn't really exist, does it, so the only changes you observe (even if they SEEM to be past changes) are only happening right now, and require no time at all.

I think we can let ourselves have it all ways. Our experience behaves "as if" there is a persistent past and future, and a persistent world beyond our perceptual, sensory space. So long as we recognise this "universe beyond our peripheral vision" exists as a set of revisable facts rather than a real spatially-extended world, then we can keep our heads together while also living a flexible existence.

We might call this creation-by-implication. Wherever we look, a just-in-time spontaneous experience arises in our sensory space that is consistent with the facts we have accepted. We can never see "behind" this. It's almost claustrophobic in that way; suffocating in dream-stuff!

But all that matters anyway is that we can change the facts - by detaching and asserting-allowing new ones - and that this changes the sensory experience. And having some sort of stable worldview (e.g. that there is a past and future, but we can edit it, or that there are facts-of-the-world, but we can shift to a new set) gives us something to work with.

POST: [post deleted by user]

Alternative metaphor: Moments as memories.

In this view, all possible experiences are "pre-made" as if they have already happened. So what we are doing is navigating a Memory Block, and our ongoing is experience is one of recall.

How do you remember something? You usually get hold of a part of the memory, and the rest of it auto-completes into awareness. However, trying to remember doesn't work - you have to "allow" it. And attempting to remember two things at once, or hold onto one memory while requesting another, rarely succeeds either, especially if they are opposites (remembering both red and blue, or good and bad, simultaneously).

The sense of smell is particularly good for triggering memories, as is the emotion or global feel of a situation (which are sensory experiences just like any other, no different to vision or sound, just harder to describe in language). Which suggests that identifying the "feel of something being true" and bringing it to mind is a powerful way to trigger a memory into experience.

When you "jump" what you are doing is letting go of this memory, and recalling a more desirable one. The more of the partial memory you bring into awareness during the process, the more constrained the result will be as it "auto-completes" via association.

What makes the entire set of "possible" experiences?

They are not made, they are effectively already given.

It's easiest just to accept this, because it appears a little chicken and egg, but the reason is one of patterning. If moving to a moment is an act of remembering, and remembering is the activation of associated overlapping patterns, then anything you can conceive of exists but it's just not currently in the senses (although the moment you conceive of it, it is).

Is everything possible?

Potentially, yes. Anything you can conceive of, by definition. It's just a case of entering it.

Practically, your own formatting restricts this. To discontinuously "jump" to another moment, you have to completely let go of this one. If you even maintain an emotional attachment, that maintains the pattern because it is a part of the memory like anything else.

For instance, can you imagine lying down on your bed, entering a lucid dream, creating-by-implication a persistent realm, and just never waking up? Taking on the view that you don't "sleep and then enter while being asleep", rather you detach from one experience and attach to another?

So, it is still possible to jump without completely letting go right?

Right, just as you say - but the patterns you remain attached to can't shift. In approaches like the mirror technique, we are loosening our grip just a little with an intention for change, and if we are in a good mood then the slight realignment bring about a few beneficial changes - "auto-completed" from the good emotion.

To more completely let go means to let go of the world. Even when we go to sleep and dream we don't do that (mainly because we implicitly intend to return to the world next morning, unchanged). The "decision" you've made on what's going to happen is probably the most important factor, next to letting go or "allowing change".

Woah. But then what are we doing right now?

You're probably not doing much of anything. You are "attentionally gripping" the patterns of your experience, and everything's staying pretty much as it always has been, keeping us on a "trajectory" of similar moments.

We can now successfully manipulate all the 4 dimensions...

Better to view it from your own perspective. All that every changes is that you switch to a different experience, like changing path a little to a slightly different dream. The world isn't to be seen as a solid place that gets literally manipulated.

Just had a random thought, if we experience our own death... and move to that experience...then what?

Do you mean, what happens if you die? One way to look at it:

Well, in this view you never really die. Say you have a massive car crash, which means there is no obvious next-moment to experience. Perhaps there's a 'blip' and it kinda somehow didn't happen after all, and your life continues (several /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix stories like that). Perhaps you experience leaving your body and floating about and going to another place. Perhaps you experience just suddenly waking up in bed, confused. Perhaps you lose all memories and experience being born again. Your background idea of what's "meant" to happen might well influence this.

Experience of some sort will continue, because you are not a body in the world - you are "consciousness" having a being-a-body-in-a-world dream.

But that's what you might call kinda Extreme Jumping!

...

RrWell, coming up with useful ways of looking at things (what I call "active metaphors") is my thing at the moment.

My own experiences are nothing too dramatic and not really "jumping" as described here, just very very unlikely, and appropriate. :-) One of the reasons for participating is to encourage a move away from the blind, uncontrolled changes that that approach can bring.

This actually isn't something to just mess around with to "see if it works". Because it will work, in some way, and the less structured your concepts of it the more it will just align things with your mood - which might be unfortunate.

(Most people don't really want a life of non-stop /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix stories, right?)

But its surprising that you, having a plethora of knowledge in the subject, haven't really manipulated things the way you want.

Funnily enough, I suppose the knowledge (formulating the description) follows the experimentation: "Things are going well, what am I doing that's right?" When you get things running well, and "stay clean", you don't need to intervene so much. But you have to know what you were doing before, in order to know how to not-intervene :-)

I'd been using the 'Imagination Room + Infinite Grid' in daily life for a while, along with whatever fun metaphor seemed right for the upcoming day - and any metaphor will do it - but the more "meta" of how it works (memory-like auto-completion of patterns) is fairly recent.

Unless a model takes account of generalised synchronicity, it has no durability.

...that's why you are still here

Only as an appearance in your experience! ;-)

When I get a chance I'll do some proper posting with a ground-up description and examples for here and /r/Oneirosophy. Reddit-wise, everything is scattered across multiple comments and discussions...

someone told me that they were just like me and wanted to jump far, but they ended up in the ER.

Yeah - they didn't realise that "jumping" doesn't mean physical jumping. ;-)

POST: What happens to the other-dimensional you you switch places with?

AND you don't need to get into the details for it to work.

This is a very good point. As a fan of metaphor myself, it's great to have a picture in your mind of a supposed mechanism or structure to back up our efforts. But the truth is:

However you imagine that it works,
That's how it works. - TG

There is no inherent background to reality; whatever you want will unfold in some way if you let it. The basic formulation is that you completely and absolutely let go of the world and yourself and concepts you are holding onto, and then "just decide" what you want. However, most people need some sort of metaphor to hang onto as a "permission belief". In that case, it's about coming up with the most flexible one that you can accept.

Yes, but accepting this is much easier said than done.

Oh, I wasn't disagreeing. I was agreeing with your point that the details don't matter and it's best to just go with it. I was adding that, as we know, there's a good reason why it's okay to ignore the mechanical details. It's all about finding a story that you're happy to go with.

Which is why when people post and say they're uncomfortable with mirrors/candles, or that they're afraid they're going to be thrown into a literal parallel universe, it's good to go "yes, look at it this way instead - now have a try". The important thing is that they get an experience of power.

People in the world find it hard to believe that just thinking about it will make it happen.

Well, they are kinda right about that. "The world is imagination", basically, but thinking about things doesn't do a great deal except create lots of experiences about your desire. This is an area where - if you're trying to specify things rather than just leap - a bit of detail is helpful.

Again its just my opinion that bombarding newbies with too much knowledge won't be beneficial 50% of the time...

It's a dilemma. So, we can respond by saying "don't ask too many questions, it'll be okay". After that, you have to give some sort of answer, which inevitably involves describing the larger perspective, or there's no way to discount the fears.

I guess a more general questions are: Is this subreddit for newbies forever? Should it establish a larger "story" about dimensional jumping, beyond the basic one (which has little explanatory power, so can make people uneasy, since it is basically uncontrolled reformatting)? Should there be a revised FAQ or wiki for proper orientation?

They came here to get away from something.

This might be the issue. If you just want "change, any change" then that's fine. In reality-tweaking endeavours, though, it's almost always better to be going towards something. Lots of the questions here are about wanting a change but wanting to hold onto something at the same time.

The authors of the Multidimensional Magick materials (a variant of this) said that (uncontrolled) "jumping" was a sort of world-suicide, and should be considered in those terms. That's about right.

So even if the method doesn't matter too much ("let go, however you can persuade yourself to"), knowing how to specify a change is probably useful. And I personally think a coherent metaphor is a pretty valuable way to support that.

These are some really good points that need to be worked upon.

Yeah, I'm not sure on the best way forward. As I see it, there are four related subreddits (ignoring /r/Occult, is all over the place):

• /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix where people are reporting unplanned changes they don't understand, discussing interpretations and the nature reality without a specific worldview.
• /r/LawOfAttraction where people are trying to make directed changes but without a real metaphor or view of reality, although there is knowledge scattered across its subscribers.
• /r/Oneirosophy which is exploring subjective reality and control in all respects, but it's a project of "practical philosophy", developing a worldview or metaphysics in addition to techniques, so not for the casual.
• /r/DimensionalJumping where people really just want a method rather without too much philosophy, but less vague that LOA. Results with a defined approach and a no-nonsense plausible idea.

My inclination is to say that this subreddit should keep it to basics. A simplified metaphor, but one with enough detail to make internal sense. A recommended way to formulate your intention. Some recommended ways to "jump".

And btw I didn't mean to say thinking. Bascially imagining it and putting your will to it?Deciding on it,kindof..Damn,we need some shorter term to explain it lol.Can't type it again and again.

I was having a chat with a friend at lunch today, trying to avoid the word "imagining" because its common use suggests either daydream fantasy or 3rd-person thinking. Difficult! Need to settle on some new vocabulary...

What I was getting at is, the way to formulate a specific intention is to directly or implicitly bring about a 1st-person perspective, expanded 3D sensory image. Summoning a shadow experience as if you were in the target "dimension" already. Even just a feeling from that point of view is sufficient (you don't actually have to "see" visuals or whatever). The stronger the emotional feeling you generate while doing this, or the longer you maintain the feeling, the more impact it'll have.

Most people don't notice they are thinking-from the 3rd-person or 1st-person, but that's the difference between failure and success I think. You always get results. But results which mean you see something happen to someone else aren't so much fun!

When you get good, just having the idea of something that you want to happen brings this about. (You "decide" you want to meet a friend, the feeling-image that constitutes the decision, even subtly, is of you experiencing it rather than an idea about it.)

That or, y'know, something like... it. :-)

POST: Jumping back in time...

Reminds me of the film Somewhere in Time, based on the Richard Matheson novel. Christopher Reeve uses "hypnosis" to go back in time to be with the woman he loves:

SPOILERS
Visiting [Professor] Finney, Richard learns that the professor believes that he very briefly time traveled once to 1571 through the power of self-suggestion. To accomplish this feat of self-hypnosis, Finney tells Richard, one must remove from sight all things that are related to the current time and trick the mind into believing that one is in the past. . .
Richard again hypnotizes himself, this time with the tape recorder [playing recorded suggestions] hidden under the bed. He allows his absolute faith in his eventual success to become the trigger for the journey back through time. He drifts off to sleep and awakens on June 27, 1912 to the sound of whinnying horses.

What would time travel be? To the time traveler, it would just be a very discontinuous experience, a jump across the Infinite Grid. One evening experiencing "2015" then suddenly experiencing "2005". How would you account for the presence of different versions other people and the fact that you would be in a different world to the present, one that would unfold separately? Perhaps by considering the notion of extended persons and personal universes. If these things are possible, then you could equally just switch to a moment where your "someone" was with you now, or about to be. But that would have its own drawbacks in terms of shifting your apparent world.

Either way, it's worth bearing in mind that attempting this sort of thing is effectively to let go of this world as it is completely. Would you not rather efficiently summon a new love, one perfectly aligned to who you are today?

All things to think about.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the infinite grid.

The Infinite Grid is really just a way of saying that all possible experiences are always available in the background - everything is already created - it's just that you are "looking at" only one of them, only one "moment" is unfolded into your consciousness at a time. To change your experience is just to shift to another moment.

Another way to think about it is that daily life is like an Imagination Room. Mistakenly, we think that what appears in our senses as all there is - but actually every possible thing is there, dissolved into the background. So in fact, you can "ask" for things that have nothing to do with what you are experiencing right now, that seem incredibly unlikely, and the more you let go, the more easily the "room" switches to those patterns. (That's what this "jumping" thing is all about: asking for an experience, and letting the world shift to it.)

I can't imagine even in .. forever.. that I would not still be in love with the same person.

Well, my own thinking is that other loves do come, which seem different but they are all the same love deep down, because there is only one "love". (Perhaps the first thing you can do is stop imagining that things are one way or the other, because it will place a restriction on what you let yourself experience. I do understand the feeling though.)

Another thing to contemplate is that "love" is actually something that is inside you, but which appears to you in the outside world as a way for you to become one with life, to join with it and recognise it's all just own seamless thing. Embrace life and it embraces you back. But that's all sounding a bit mystical, so I'll stop there! :-)

...

Good questions.

It's like the theory of quantum immortality?

Quantum immortality just says: you will keep having experiences. It doesn't really say much else.

In my description, if you hit a "moment" which has no natural continuous "next-moment", you would experience a discontinuity. That might mean a jump where you suddenly missed that oncoming car after all. Or it might mean you experience "dying and leaving your body".

What happens next, would depend somewhat on your beliefs and expectations. You might even experience losing all your memories and becoming a new person. Or you might just wake up in your bed, ten years earlier.

In other words, the Infinite Grid contains all possible experiences, not just the one's where you are looking out of this body, doing your body-stuff.

I see. In the imagination room I suppose you could also change your own self? Although I guess that would require you to let go of your current reality. . . isn't it extremely difficult to change and imagine something drastically different from your current scenario?

Right. But there is a way around this. If you treat the sensory experience around you as just being a 'mirage' floating in your consciousness, then you realise it has no solidity. It's just the current unfolded moment. And the current moment has no causal power, no influence over what moment you might unfold next - unless you use it as the basis for your selection.

Behind the scenes, the whole of time and space is available! Your intentions are already patterning your future experience, specifying the trajectory of moments that you will encounter. It's just that this takes a bit of faith to believe in, because you can't experience yourself intending - you only experience the results.

...

I asked this question a few months, playing the possibility of time travel since dimension jumping is possible. I think it is...idk though

Did you try it?

Not yet. Think ill give it a go soon.

The difficulty would be: you'd have to let go of all present-world-body experience except your sense of identity and memories. This isn't candles and mirrors. Effectively, it's fully entering a memory-seeded lucid dream or OBE that you then don't come back from.

So you stay in there....forever?

Well, there's no "in" there. Entering is probably the wrong word, because it makes it sound like Russian dolls (that you are in there, but outside of the dream you are still here). Switching to is better. Like changing channels on TV. You let go of one channel totally, and that lets you commit to another channel completely.

It's like shifting from having one "dream about being dmitche on planet Earth" to having another "dream about being dmitche on planet Earth".

I mean, I'm assuming OP wants to go "back" permanently from the wording of the post. If they just want a temporary experience, that's fine.

POST: Not sure if I want or can

As mentioned elsewhere, you don't need to worry about someone replacing you and so on - it doesn't work that way. Think of it just as:

• This is a process by which you deliberately select which experiences you want to have.
• Everyone else can do the same. The "universe" is set up in such a way as to allow everyone to have the experiences they desire simultaneously, even if they might seem to conflict with each other theoretically.
• Just definitely deciding you want all your loved ones to be the same while becoming back in touch with this person, is sufficient.

You might want to take a more controlled approach than the "mirrors & candle" approach though, to minimised side effects.

Thank you for your reply! Hearing that makes me... I don't know. I really need to at least to try this. It would be amazing to be able to change your life like this. What would be a more controlled approach, if I can ask?

I quite like Neville Goddard's description of what to do (see book recommendations in the post here).
The summary is:

• Get very relaxed, let go of all attachments, allow yourself to enter a state of "absolute allowing".
• Summon via your imagination a vivid, 3D experience of what it would be like if your desire was true right now - as if you were experiencing it, through your own eyes, around you right now. Really be there and feel it, feel it until it feels true.

It can be a silly simple scene - for instance, imagining being sat on a chair, all excited ("fuck yeah!") as you put your shoes on to go out and meet that person. So long as the scene implies that the desire has already happened and is true, it's fine. The way to view it is, by doing this you will be changing your world such that "it is true now that this will happen then". Like you've already updated the "time-landscape" of your future, and now you just have to enjoy experiencing it moment by moment until you eventually arrive at that point.

In a super-flexible world, you would imagine it so vividly that the scene would replace the scene that is around you now. You would simply have imagined yourself there directly... In a less flexible world, dimensional jumping gives you a sudden shift which occurs "out of sight". The Neville approach is more restrained, unfolds in time more, but is more controllable as a result.

Make sense?

EDIT: I'll just emphasise that the trick to this is to summon an extended, 3-dimensional experience in the space around you using your imagination, that you can feel out into like you are there. As opposed to thinking about the experience.

Thank you - I'm gonna try this. I'm just afraid that I can't do it since I'm a bit suspicious. (I know it's gonna be hard for me to imagine myself doing something.) But I'm trying my best to believe that this can be done. Many thanks!

Well, belief isn't necessarily that important, what important is not constantly second-guessing and therefore re-updating your patterns. It's a pretty automatic process.

Just do it for enjoyment - and if you get a result, great.

I state what I want and really try to believe it has already happened.

Trying implies a problem. Also, checking on progress isn't a great idea. Really, put all that aside.

Simply accept it as fact that when you imagine something as if it were here now - your "brain" effortlessly works without sophistication to replicate that image in external life. It's just a law, nothing you have to do. It's like you cut a hole that shape in your perceptual filter, which lets experiences shine through which correspond to it.

If you imagine an owl in front of you then subsequently the "owl pattern" will start to appear in your life. If you imagine other nice things, it's inevitable they will too. If you imagine feeling great, then patterns that have good feelings as part of them will be triggered.

This is a mechanical thing. It's like triggering memories by recalling a part of them, and the rest appearing by "auto-complete". (A more complicated description can be found here [The Patterning of Experience], but you don't need it.)

Check out the Goddard books. There are specific examples in there of that sort of thing.

But I would say: Don't think in terms of escaping things. Instead, commit to this idea: That the experience you are having, and the history you remember, don't dictate what happens next. They are just a sign of your current pattern. So ignore them - and instead summon 1st-person immersive imagery of how it will be when you are in the situation you desire!

You don't solve problems by thinking them over and over. That's just reasserting the "problem state". The "solution state" comes from focusing on the desired outcome, then letting it take shape. This is true in everyday life (let a problem go, later your mind says "hey, I've solved that for you, here's the solution); it's not just some esoteric thing. Think of this as goal-setting for experiences.

If you just want a change then the mirror+candle approach that started this off will give you that. Just make sure you get yourself in a good mood first.

POST: Logical question

[POST]

Forgive me if this is n00bish, but here's what I don't get:
A) I tell my friend I'm jumping
B) I successfully jump
C) Does my friend in my new dimension remember me telling them I jumped?

[END OF POST]

I also thought - if all the dimensions are not really parallel lives but probabilities, why bother 'changing dimensions' if you can change something in THIS dimension with the same effort? For example, what is the point of jumping into the dimension where you never had a disease (and mess around with the timeline), when you can (theoretically) eradicate it here?

It's just an enabling metaphor to let you have (near-)instantaneous change. It's probably better to say they are like "parallel dreams" rather than possibilities. I can be easier to conceive of detaching from one situation and attaching to another, than it is to convincingly argue how "dissolving disease" would work.

Sometimes the mystery aspect is what helps things along.

I see it as changing the settings :-) once you change them, you can see how it is reflected around you.

Ha, yes, nice metaphor. :-)

I see it as updating or inserting new facts into the world. With the understanding that the "sharing model" of the world means it's basically mine to play with, and everyone gets a similar influence. Ongoing sensory experience then spontaneously falls into line with the updated facts.

BTW, talking about settings reminded me of the Hawaiian (allegedly) ho'oponopono technique - that would actually fit better on Oneirosophy, as its premise is that reality is internal, so if you want to change anything around you, you need to find a corresponding thing INSIDE you, and change that.

Yes, I've played with it! Essentially, it's about dissolving/overwriting troublesome aspects of yourself with the feeling of love/forgiveness. A book called Busting Loose From The Business Game has a similar approach based on "reclaiming your power" from events as they arise. My own generalised version turned into this Overwriting Yourself post.

I guess it makes sense that we should all be talking about basically the same thing. In effect: digging around in the background for facts we don't like, then deleting them!

I'd go so far as to say everything is inside you - even the room and situation you are experiencing right now - because you have no outside. The sensory experience is just a perceptual mirage floating in awareness - a partial slice of the real world, which is the world of facts dissolved into the background.

There is (or used to be) a similar ideological premise in traditional psychoanalysis

Jung played with "Active Imagination" which basically does this. I think it is very much out of favour now (if it was ever really in favour). These days it's all about semi-mechanical tools such as Cognitive Behaviour Therapy - they focus on activity rather than meaning. Which is a major error really.

That is also why I commented that jumping dimensions seems (to me) as merely a functional narrative...

I think you are exactly right: you are dreaming-imagining your experience.

Which means you are 'First Cause' for everything around you. But people find that difficult to get to grips with - "okay, now what do I do with that? how do I make things happen?" - because you cannot experience the making of changes. You are the change. To make a change is to take on a new shape, meaning there's a shifting of self but no "doing". So we invent 'Second Causes' or 'enablers', whether they be technological tools to make the changes on our behalf, or active metaphors such as "dimensional jumping" or whatever.

In all cases, it is we who make the changes directly. When we use a tool or technique, the tool is a result on the same level as the outcome. We cause them both; the whole story of "using this to make that happen" is our creation.

Extra thought: This problematic thinking is everywhere. For instance, people try to fix their posture by training muscles and pushing one bit versus another, etc. But your posture is the arrangement of you. There are no "parts" to posture. The only way to have better posture, better shape, is to re-shape as a whole. To... shift.

Actually, when I think back, I believe that most profound changes in my life happened when I slept. I have a habit of going to sleep when I am stressed, as I somehow hope I will wake up and things will be different. I remember once I was supposed to have a surgery, and I was very scared and upset - I had no idea what to do, so I went to sleep praying that somehow the problem would resolve itself. I spent a couple of days in bed, trying sort of GET OUT of the situation I was in, like trying to break out from the INSIDE. After that, I came back to my normal schedule, but after I had a second health check it turned out the problem was not there anymore, and I did not need a surgery after all. Now, it's not like it magically DISSAPEARED - but there was a clear shift in the severity of the problem, to the point when it didn't require any intervention. It was really neat - not a massive change, but a change enough. Only after I started reading this forum I thought that maybe, somehow, my talents at lucid dreaming are not as useless as I previously thought.

Ah, interesting story. I think sleeping with intent works quite well (and I'd see that movie). Which makes sense in this overall scheme - sleeping and dreaming is an opening of attention, a loosening of your hold on current patterns to let them shift.

One time, I had completely screwed up at work, and took the day off sick when I had the corresponding presentation. I slept/dreamt through that day and "deleted" it. I went into work after the weekend, and the project was never mentioned ever again. Good appraisals, etc.

It is sort of like they know, but they don't at the same time.

Right.

As I like to think of it, it's like you've changed some of the facts-of-the-world. Afterwards, people's natural spontaneous actions and thoughts arise from these updated facts. If you push them, it's like there's still a memory of the old ways - however they aren't seeding the current world. But I'd say the old memory was your old memory.

My thinking is that the fact you can push them on this at all is because you know you made the change, basically. And by probing them, you are getting back your own doubt on the matter. Implicitly, by questioning them you are brining the old fact back into existence.

Meanwhile, if you had made a change but you had no idea you were responsible - e.g. a strong imagining of a change in a daydream - you'd probably experience this as some sort of Mandela Effect type deal, and just be very confused that nobody could remember what you do.

I am not sure - I sometimes think there are those twilight situations, when you stil have one leg in one world - so to speak - and another in a different one, and for a moment both are possible. Or maybe I think of soemthing else entirely, but cannot identify it correctly.

I agree with that.

Hmm. The fact that you would entertain the previous history means you have not fully committed to the new facts. If you did - they wouldn't remember. But then how would you tell? Whatever version you try to investigate, that's what you'll get back!

Yes, maybe that is the way to put this, not being fully commited. Maybe these options sometimes are probable but transient, and if you don't commit yourself to them, they become ghost-options, that almost-happened, but never did. Like they were up for grabs, but you didn't use the opportunity and they went back to the ghost world.

You (as in, everyone) should experiment with the synchronicity thing. You will directly experience that the world reflects your firm opinion - or your indecision.

The personal experience is more like a dream which operates on an "as if" basis. If your worldview is fuzzy about certain things, then the evidence you encounter appears fuzzy or contradictory also. That's why I think we need to definitely decide what's going to happen regardless of current sensory evidence, rather than start with the evidence and try to "work out what to do" or what is possible.

(Also, I think that that type of change does not really require any dramatic jumps as it still fits into the previous narrative)

How to think about that? Well, anything "out of sight" can be changed. The more out of sight, the easier it is.

The first level of "seeing" is the sensory experience that you are having. The second level of "seeing" is the narrative you are holding onto. The third level of "seeing" would be more general facts about your life. Fourth level, increasingly diffuse facts about the larger world. These fictional levels are the order in which you focus on and fix things. Background inconsequential things are shifting all the time, or rather they are "fuzzy" and never fixed anyway. Meanwhile, the sensory experience is pretty locked down ("no disintegrations!", no teleportations).

Any level can be allowed to diffuse into "fuzziness" if you step back from it, but it's not so easy to retract from the senses or the main storyline. It's always easier to have a change if you can avoid an obvious discontinuity - if you "avert your gaze" as it were, from the thing you are changing, or at the very least look only for the intended outcome.

Sleeping while the world shifts is an extremely handy way of disconnecting from one set of facts and awakening to another set. It's one way that we permit discontinuities. Probably it happens all the time, but because we never pause and check "how it was before" we don't notice. (Just like the people who if prompted know that something used to be the other way, but their actions are coming from the new facts so they don't notice.)

I was thinking of an example, but nothing comes to mind ... it would be a situation which is weighing, with different outcomes open, and suddenly everyone goes blind to one of these options, somehow as it is not supported ... I am not sure how to phrase this.
The only example I can think of (which is not perfect, but maybe you will understand what I mean) is when I broke my toe and suddenly everyone got blind to this. I was mentioning it (and whinging), but it was like noone could hear it, or noone remembered it. I was quite upset when I had to remind my parents that I had a broked toe, but it was like it was going over their head. It did heal quickly and with no problems, but I discovered that sometimes when this is happening it is not good to push this, and just let it flow. EDIT: it is like the broken toe didn't belong to the timeline, or something (?). Silly example, I know.
I am not sure if I made myself clear (and I apologise for my English, which is not my first language)

Reminds me a little of this story:

Changing the Past, Cindy - Cooperstown, New York
Several years ago I was walking through the woods and I fell. As I tumbled downhill, I heard awful sounds coming from my knee and ankle. I remember thinking that my knee was shattering. When I stopped rolling, I immediately put my hands up towards my leg to start a healing process, saying over and over in my mind frantically, "back in time, back in time."
It was getting dark, so after five minutes or so, I pulled myself up to the main path so I could be found. If I had stayed where I was maybe my ankle would have healed completely right away. When I got to the top, I started the healing again. Perhaps at that point it was for my sanity. I had just finished my second chemo treatment, and I was determined to stay focused on not taking on anything else. Since then, a guide of mine has helped me see the big picture, and I've learned that it's very interesting what we can and will do to get a merit badge, or should I say Spirit Badge! ~@:)
The paramedics told me that it was probably just a sprain. I know they didn't think that I was in pain, because I was calm and quiet, but on the inside I was screaming with pain... yet focused on reversing what had happened.
In the Emergency Room, I was told that I would probably have to have surgery on my ankle, because of the type of break it appeared to be. A few days later when I went to see the orthopedic doctor, he was looking at the x-rays and turned and looked at me with a puzzled look on his face. He said, "your ankle is broken in three places. It looks as though I had already set it ... they are aligned perfectly." I've often wondered if I had reversed a knee injury and had started on my ankle.

(I've had some experiences which you could, I guess, classify as 'jumping dimensions' - it felt, however, as if I was in a bad dream and desperately tried to divert my attention elsewhere, to the point where the situation changed.
I will give you an example.
I have very long hair, and sometimes I dream it is cut short. I am usually very upset by this, but I know it is a dream, and I concentrate for a while, and suddenly I have my long hair back on again (it's almost as 'log out, and log back in again). If I don't manage to do it in a dream, at some point I actually wake up for real, and my hair is still with me :-)
In 'reality' I had some situations that had the same feel - they were going in the very wrong direction, and some things seemed unavoidable, and suddenly everything 'magically' resolved itself, and sort of ... I don't know ... dissipated, and I felt as if I woke up from a bad dream. I suppose 'changing dimensions' is like this.

Ah, missed this - yes. That's a great example and description.

Found this article: [http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2012/03/how-to-switch-dimensions/]

Pavlina. We was always a bit of a dick, but was thought-provoking at least. Actually, I remember him experimenting with subjective reality stuff a long time ago. Think he killed his forums, but there was some interesting stuff there from people who had played with it a little.

IMHO, he had some really inspiring stuff going on before he started his sexual experiments and lost the focus.

Yes, that's where it went wrong, I remember. I think that was where he shifted from being "interesting and provocative" to "defensive and slimy". Shame he deleted the forums. A few good stories in there that would have made for good /r/DimensionalJumping or /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix fodder.

POST: Are you really jumping to different universes...?

You need to view it completely from your own perspective. You are not a person walking about a world; you are a conscious perspective having a 1st-person experience. It's more like you are switching from "looking memories about being in Situation 1" to "looking at memories about being in Situation 2".

There are loads of ways to think about it (recent example), but all rely on you accepting that the "sharing model" of the world isn't simple - i.e. it's not like we are all in a room, choosing the consensus decor together. We are each in our own rooms, with different versions of the same people.

POST: Should I really try this?

This is a theory, but basically, when you jump, you're actually switching places with another version of you who is aware of jumping. They may or may not be a lot more different than you. This you may seem a little off to your family at first, but they may get used to it. As an example.. If the you you switch with becomes employed and starts making great grades and what not. Your family would just think of it as you making your life better, etc.

No, you are not switching places as such. You are shifting your attention to a different possible experience, more like.

Haha. Sure, try it. Sit in front of a mirror with a candle and concentrate as much as possible. Everything that will happen is that you waste some time of your day. Sorry that you'll hear it from me but you will never change your dimension. You'll be stuck with your current state, your bad grades and nothing will ever change this. Only you can change it yourself by getting off your ass and do something against it on your own, like learning more to get better grades and try/work hard to find a decent job. Supernatural stuff doesn't exist on earth. I don't know if any of the Religions out there are true or false and if an afterlife in heaven or something like that exists but right here, right now, you and any human on earth including all the people here in Reddit will never experience supernatural stuff. You can't jump dimensions, you can't bend a spoon with your mind and you shouldn't believe stupid stuff other people tell you.

Have you tried it? Now, some people get carried away, for sure, but if you commit to it you are pretty much guaranteed to encounter some subsequent effects.

People get hung up on the "dimensions" imagery, but it's really part of a much older idea: consciousness as primary, the apparent world experience as illusory. Or in philosophy, that the world-as-it-is is an "infinite gloop", which is formatted into meaning by the mind which perceives it.

Shift your own patterning/filtering, shift your experience. Your milage may vary...

Well I got the first part of what you said and I know that a lot of people on earth believe in something like this but that's just because of their inexperience. Your last sentence on the other hand doesn't make any sense at all. Just a couple of fancy words mixed together to sound amazing while there's no meaning behind them whatsoever. Back on the first part. I'll tell you a nice story: There's a scientific theory which is called "Last Thursdayism" which was a response to the "Omphalos Hypothesis". I'll explain you the meaning behind these scientific theories and the solution to them. Technically you could invent any fictional stuff you want and nobody could prove you wrong. For example the "Last Thursdayism" is the logic, that the world might have been created last thursday. Technically, you couldn't prove someone wrong who said that. You couldn't travel back in time before the thursday to prove it wrong. How could you ever prove, that the world wasn't created last thursday? You could say that 2 years ago you married your wife or stuff like that. I could reply that this thought was just implemented in your mind when you were created last thursday. You could say "But I got photos of the marriage." and I would answer you that God also created these photos to make you believe that you already existed 2 years ago. The thing is that scientists and any human on earth is allowed to disprove these theses or theories by declaring them as unreliable. It works by measurring how much you have to invent to keep the theory alive. In the end in our actual universe everything makes sense, everything that exists supports other existing things and supports the logic behind them. In the "Last Thursdayism" you would need to support everything by inventing more and more stuff and so you can say that the Last Thursdayism, even though you could never prove it wrong, is surely not real and people shouldn't believe it. Now back what I want to make you understand by this: Your "much older idea: consciousness as primary, the apparent world experience as illusory" is nonsense. It's Idiocy. It's simply not real and you are stupid to believe it is. If you would still reply with "No, I believe in it, why shouldn't it be real, for me it very well is real." I would answer you, that I got a real dinosaur pet that is invisible and only I can see it and that my story is by far more likely to be actually true/real than yours and the fun thing is, that the last statement is a fact. It would really be more likely to be true than your nonesense even though it's complete bullshit itself.

I think you misunderstand this whole thing.

First, I would never suggest someone believe something without putting it to the test. This is easy done in this case. If it's just a bit of a laugh, that's fine too.

On "consciousness is primary", you probably haven't done enough reading to understand the way in which that is meant. It's got nothing to do with imagination and belief as you describe. In philosophy, you might check out panpsychism and idealism; in older traditions, Hinduism and Buddhism and even early Christianity. For a modern take, cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman's interface theory is worth a look.

I get your point put you have to differentiate between religion and superstition.

Well, religions now are largely a bastardisation of their original form. There's a lot we could go in here, but the Western religions are really a mutated, cut-down version of a more mystical approach to living. They have taken literally what was intended as metaphorical, and have lots the original message and replaced it with something far more dubious - I would say.

I don't want you or anyone else in this subreddit to change anything of their way of thinking.

That is absolutely not what this subreddit is about. It's very much about: "here's an experience, check it out".

They just need a single comment that tells them that the stuff here is not true to understand that there are two sides.

But that's not how to do it (in my opinion). They shouldn't be believing anyone who says "this is true" or "this is not true". I think you are working against your aim by doing this.

What you really mean to say is: people should think for themselves, right?

If there isn't a single comment anywhere about all this being a joke...

Well, it's not a joke. You do make a good point, and I'm going to take on this suggestion. That good point is: we might better emphasise in the sidebar that people should make up their own minds.

By the way, i'm not a native english speaker so sorry for any bad wording, inappropriate words or sentences that are difficult to understand.

No problem. I appreciate that you are coming from a "good place" on this. But I also think you have maybe come to this subreddit with preconceptions - perhaps due to that /r/nosleep post (which I think is quite unfortunate).

Religions really changed a lot and are a bastardization of their original form.

The original ideas were about empowerment of the people. It's really sad to see how it has been flipped around. Certainly in religions where there is an "entity god" to be feared and who passed down moral laws and punishments! "Non-religion" religions like Zen Buddhism seem to have retained more of the original concept - giving people ways to have a better life - but even they get mangled when they are translated into western ideas, often.

Neville Goddard (who I mention in a post here) interpreted the Christian Bible as describing different metaphors for approaching living. In effect, he is talking about using the mind to set goals, and so on. Quite a lot of the stories in the Bible are about the relationship between mind and body, imagination and perception, and between action and results (including moral action). There's a lot of metaphysics in the Bible. Unfortunately, those stories are now taken literally, as if the people were actual people, rather than symbols for certain relationships.

All that knowledge gets lost and becomes about being obedient rather than thinking for ourselves. Shame.

Yes, but I need to explain this a little closer again so that you exactly understand what I mean: I read in a thread about a confused person...

Your basic idea is absolutely right - in that as more subscribers appear, they don't maybe understand the context of this. That's why I've added a note to emphasise how one should approach this sort of thing. I would much rather just assume that people would think critically, make their own judgements, perform their own experiments - but it does no harm (and much good) to emphasise the position taken in this subreddit.

(In other subreddits, such as /r/Oneirosophy which is about studying perception from a subjective idealist point of view, there are explicit warnings and that is a valid idea.)

Well yeah, everyone has his personal preconceptions, I'm sure of this. I usually lean my preconceptions on experiences and facts and not on what a random person said.

The way I think of this: I never take my own thoughts too seriously. I never "believe" my own thinking. That way, I'm happy to change and see things differently according to new experiences I might have, or new information I might come across.

...nosleep is about horror stories, so I can assume that the story didn't have a nice ending.

The "new" story has the guy "jumping" into a dimension where he discovers he has just murdered his parents (bummer). The original story for the subreddit is actually about an experience someone had with mirrors (follow the sidebar link) which was kicked from /r/nosleep for not being believable (ironically).

Personally, I think having /r/nosleep stories now using the concept and linking to this subreddit is not a good thing. Not much we can do about it though.

But some things depend on the religion.

Very true. I think the 'insights' are about the same thing, however they are of course filtered through the culture of the time, and then filtered through history, idea, and power-struggles. Maybe that's why the information needs 'refreshed' periodically - insights are re-discovered and re-presented, to make them understandable again.

In general, most people think for themselves and make their own judgements but...

Yes, I do agree wholeheartedly with this, as a moderator for both subreddits. This one only recently kicked off; at first it was a pretty focused set of people and it wasn't very likely that anyone would happen across it uneducated. It's important to be informed in things where real effects are produced but explanations are lacking. Often people joke around with such things - and then they get a result, and it's not such a laugh anymore.

I thought nosleep is about fictional stories because the first post I ever saw was the Dimensional Jump one.

Yeah, /r/nosleep is indeed mostly fictional; don't read it myself. As with all those subreddits, there is some confusion, but that one is intended to be "fictional but play along" whereas /r/thetruthishere is about "true unexplained mysterious events" and /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix is intended to be fairly dry reports about unusual experiences.

I don't deny that mysterious events can occur. But they are only mysterious events as long as we don't yet have a plausible scientific explanation for it.

Well, not all explanations are "scientific" because that only deals with a certain methodology - but I certainly agree. There is no such thing as supernatural, there are only experiences for which we do not have an account. For some experiences, perhaps we never will. But that doesn't mean they are "beyond reality".

Unusual experiences are great but if they really occured, then there just be an explanation for them.

We are not so far apart really.

If someone experiences something, they experienced it. Whatever the nature of that experience is, that's for discussion. In many cases we may never know - in others, we might gather enough anecdotes to come up with a theory.

Nothing can occur that is impossible with our laws of nature (aka what science has discovered so far).

Of course, the "laws" of nature don't say what is possible or impossible. They are not laws in that sense (they don't say "what is legal"). Rather, they are the simplest regularities we have observed, with the broadest applicability. They are "conclusions from the evidence so far".

If an observation is made which is contrary to one of these regularities, then we try to rework the theory to fit the observation. That's what science is all about.

Actually, Wikipedia for a change has a pretty good definition of a physical law [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law#Laws_of_physics].

(One of my pet hates is that people confuse the notion of a fixed or "given" law with the idea of a "physical law". If we'd taken that viewpoint in previous centuries, we wouldn't have got anywhere.)

POST: I feel like there are fakes

[POST]

By that i mean i feel like there are a lot of people lying about jumping on here. I say this because if you jump dimensions, how could you come back on reddit in this dimension and share about it. You know, since there is no known way to return back to your original dimension

[END OF POST]

Guess what, 100% of the people here are fake. Jumping Dimensions is a joke. It's not real. It doesn't exist. I could make a fake account and share my experience of a fictional Jump and people would believe me. I could talk about all the coincidences and stuff that happened and ask questions if this or that happening is normal and people would answer me how that's completely normal and stuff like this can happen, even though I was lying the whole time and these fakers would perfectly play into my hands. =)

Hmm, so what exactly is the point of you participating here? You don't seem to understand the underlying concept vs the metaphor, and seem... opposed and defensive about the whole idea of (I guess) occult type projects or glitch type reports. Why bother posting?

Because there was a /r/nosleep reference to this subreddit and several thousands of poeple are currently checking this subreddit out for fun and are new here. Out of these thousands of people there are a few that are too young or not educated enough or haven't realized yet, that a lot on the internet is troll and fake. I don't want these very few young and/or uneducated people that came here to believe that the nonsense on this subreddit is real. I think I help them a lot by making them understand early that this subreddit is just a stupid joke so that they don't bother with it for too long and don't get sad afterwards when they sooner or later find out, that it's not real.

Admirable public service announcement. But warnings from ignorance or fearful discomfort don't help anyone. Are you really so worried that a few folk might look in a mirror?

I think we need to trust people to make up their own minds - take responsibility for informing themselves first. Which, ironically, you haven't!

There is no ignorance or fearful discomfort behind that. I wouldn't be here talking freely to you if I had a fearful discomfort about these things and it would only be ignorance if these things about dimensional jumping EVER had a piece of truth behind them to support them, which they don't have. It is as wrong and as much of a lie as an old woman looking into a crystal ball telling you your future. It's as wrong as some TV series where someone tells you your personality or future based on your asterisk or some cards he/she randomly pulled out of a deck to earn money through exploiting your human weakness of being concerned and worried about things and your future. You/the subreddit are not pushing anyone and not taking money from anybody so what you're doing here is not illegal and might be a nice hobby for some people. The "public announcement" how you like to call it is just there to not make people believe in these lies and fantasies other people tell them. Like I said, I dont want people to get sad after they realize that something, which sounds as nice as dimension jumping, is actually just fiction. They could put their hopes into this theory, hoping that it changes their lives which are currently in a bad state and in the end all their hopes get crushed. Or they drown from reality by never stopping to believe in such mystical bullshit aka superstition, which for obvious reasons has a bad reputation in reality and normal life.

I don't mean fearful quite like that. And perhaps I am misjudging you. I meant it more in the sense of someone fearful that the world isn't quite like they assume, and resistant to other people even looking at it for themselves.

I think you are showing little confidence in people to make judgements, from their own evidence!

Your comparisons don't work because this subreddit literally arose from people's "hey check this out" story. Much as /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix did. A phenomenon was noted, there are several ways to try and replicate it for yourself. If you don't manage to replicate it, nothing lost.

We might compare this situation to lucid dreaming: its existence was denied for many years, older traditional accounts were dismissed as nonsense, many people were quite aggressive about opposing the possibility of it due to its implications for theories on dreaming/waking, eventually the sheer number of reports led to a study which led to greater acceptance. The same thing happened with hypnosis (still not understood).

EDIT: In both cases (even now) it's up to people to try it for themselves. It really doesn't matter whether anyone believes in these things or not, just as some philosophers believe theoretically that "consciousness is an illusion" but I'm still pretty much convinced I am conscious from personal experience...

Don't worry, I completely understood what you meant by fearful and since I know the world is like it is and not like people in this subreddit say and dimensional jumps dont exist, I'm very condifent and there's nothing that bothers me. I might show little confidence in other people's judements but that's based on facts and a good understanding of logic, physics, chemistry and therefore what is possible and what is not. And if someone is talking about something that you can scientifically prove to be impossible, then I show little mercy to somebody who's trying to convince me of believing it or to defend people who believe it. I want to repeat again that I dont want anyone here to stop believe in what he believes. I just want to make it clear that my point of view and the truth is, that what he/she is believing isn't true. You just have to accept that. It's based on the knowledge the humans have discovered so far. Any scientist can prove that dimensional jumps like this with a stupid mirror and a candle don't work and that everything you believe to happen is just fictional. That's why out of 7 billion people, not a single one of them would be able to do a dimensional jump because it simply doesn't exist. That's why I dont need to try and experience/replicate it myself. It's like somebody tells me I'll survive when I jump out of the 40th level of a building head first into the street. It's obviously proven to be deadly to a human body and if we take some unbelievable luck and coincidences aside, then 100% of the people doing that would die. So I don't need to try it out myself first to believe it, when I know the definite result beforehand. You can't compare Lucid Dreaming to dimensional jumps. Even if Lucid Dreaming at one point in time was considered to be nonsense, you could never completely disprove it since at that time and still today we don't know everything (but a lot) about dreams and dreaming yet. It never was something that you could disprove by facts since it was so badly explored yet. Unlike that, we have very well explored mirrors and candles and a person who's sitting on he floor trying very hard to concentrate. We can definitely prove that this won't change anything and that nothing will happen and therefore dimensional jumps are impossible and therefore you can't compare it in the slightest to Lucid Dreaming. Hypnosis is a difficult topic since, like you already said, it's not yet completely investigated. Unlike the dimensional jump thingy, you dont just have a candle and a mirror that won't do anything. The hypnosis is something that is done in different ways. I don't know enough about the topic but a person talking to you and giving you orders to concentrate on yourself, trying to focus on something specific, using special words and wordings and trying to manipulate you with what he's saying and wants you to believe or using the pulsating pattern of a pendulum, which could make you a little dizzy or whatever and many, many, many, many other things could eventually result in an effect in your brain, which is completely reasonable and physically/chemically reasonable. However, I think these effects are very minor and can't make any big change like you believing that you're a chicken. Maybe it could make you believe that you're arms feel really heavy even though they obviously aren't. Personally, I never believed in hypnosis and I am very very sure, that it doesn't work on me no matter which expert would try it on me. There's also the form of Hypnosis called "Trance", which can result in different conditions of yourself after a highly mental concentration but this minor effect (if it is even noticable) is also just completely reasonable on a chemical level and won't cause anything superhuman or supernatural.

Hey, thanks for engaging here, you've put a lot of thought into it and it's appreciated.

A few points:

• I wouldn't get hung up on the candles-and-mirror thing; that's just a method of detaching from the current sensory experience.
• Science cannot investigate subjective experience. That's not what it's for. Science is about identifying shared "observed regularities" and making connective stories about them. Science is not about "truth". It's about coming up with the best predictive model for a particular phenomenon. It describes observations, not how things are.
• The problem with lucid dreaming and hypnosis is, like 'jumping', they are about subjective experience. Only personal experimentation can reveal the facts of the matter to you, one way or the other.
• When we are dealing with these things, philosophy and metaphysics are the appropriate areas.

We should be clear and not appeal to vague hand-waving science when it comes to these things - there presently no physical-chemical descriptions which account for subjective experience. There is no explanation for consciousness, or even an idea about what form such an explanation would take. (Refer to Donald Hoffman and neuroscientist Krisoff Koch for interesting takes here.) Repeat: there are no good models which match the facts. We don't even know why we perceive objects, how perception works at all, how eyesight works. So we must conduct our own investigations. Where science ends, personal investigation and judgement must begin. Random good article: George Ellis [https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/cross-check/physicist-george-ellis-knocks-physicists-for-knocking-philosophy-falsification-free-will/].

Q: Well first off, I find it important that we differentiate between "phylosophy and metaphysics", "definite science" and "higher science"...
Definite science is the science that can definitely prove and disprove things, it's about daily life and things we have very well discovered already and facts we can definitely draw.
The higher science is the science of theories, models and other constructions that we aren't a 100% sure about, which could be the proven definite science of the future. I think definite science can very well investigate human experience. Subjective experience might be a bit tricky but we can draw general similarities between humans and statistically a human brain should work just the same way as another one.
That said, we've discovered a lot in chemistry. About messengers (biochemical prozess in your brain) and how it effects our perception and body in general.
We use electroencephylography (EEG) to measure the electric currents on your brain to understand why and how lucid dreams happen. It's definitely not the most accurate way to understand the human brain and just a little step forward but it can definitely show and prove different and particular things that happen in our brain in various occasions.
// So now where I have left over:
It's definitely not just vague hand-waving science. We can exactly tell how people perceive objects and how perception works and your eyesight. We've discovered long ago how all that stuff works and how your brain processes information. That said, through these knowledge we can determine whether something is possible to happen and what the changes could be and what a particular event could cause in your subjective perception and experience.
So science can very well prove, that for any individual, something like dimensional jumping doesn't work. You can do the process but nothing will happen at all. There's no chance, no scar that could ever disappear, nothing that wouldn't be like it was before that doesn't revert back. It's simply impossible and just superstition that makes you believe that something changed, but in fact, nothing ever changed. There's no chemical or biological or physical process, in which a dimensional jump could ever occur and in which reality could ever change.

[Hi, thanks for continuing! This has been an interesting exploration.]

Science, Definite, Indefinite

Definite science and higher science

Well, your distinction is arbitrary I'd say. A model which does not connect to observation is not a scientific model - it's just a conceptual framework. What you really mean is: proven theories vs unproven theories.

It is worth reading the George Ellis article in Nature on this very point. The article begins thus:

This year, debates in physics circles took a worrying turn. Faced with difficulties in applying fundamental theories to the observed Universe, some researchers called for a change in how theoretical physics is done. They began to argue — explicitly — that if a theory is sufficiently elegant and explanatory, it need not be tested experimentally, breaking with centuries of philosophical tradition of defining scientific knowledge as empirical. We disagree.
-- Scientific method: Defend the integrity of physics, George Ellis & Joe Silk

It's the difference between something corresponding to experiment versus it simply being self-consistent.

I think definite science can very well investigate human experience.

Science is the investigation of human experience, definitely. There is nothing else for us except human experience - and all human experience is subjective. It has a limitation though: That it can only deal with those experiences which can be shared symbolically and which can be accessed in simple, describable ways. This puts much of subjective experience out of reach.

It can definitely show and prove different and particular things that happen in our brain in various occasions.

Certainly. Observing brains even allows us to correlate certain 3rd-person imagery with certain 3rd-person reported experience. However, it does not allow us to observe and measure the experience. This cannot be done. That's not a problem really, it's just a recognition of what we are actually doing with science. It's all "inside us" and we can't get outside to measure it.

Intermission: An Exercise

Here's a worthwhile little exercise which emphasises the limitations we have:

• Point to your real hand.
• If you are pointing to any particular location - stop.
• Even by the standard explanation, the hand that you are pointing to isn't your "real" hand - it's a construction of the brain, inferred by sensory inputs.
• Try again...
• So it becomes obvious that wherever the "real" hand is (assuming there is one), it is "outside of all this". And what you are experiencing right now is effectively a "perceptual dream".
• Note: If you end up pointing to your head (where your "brain" is), then start again but this time ask: where is your "real" head?
• Bonus point: Now, think about your real hand. Where does that thought appear? Does it not appear in the same "perceptual space" as your sensory experiences? You just can't get "outside" of this!

Vision, Perception, Neuroscience

We can exactly tell how people perceive objects and how perception works and your eyesight. We've discovered long ago how all that stuff works and how your brain processes information.

Unfortunately, we really haven't. Perception remains largely mysterious and unexplained. We can observe light going into the eyes, we can observe regions of the brain "lighting up" (terrible phrasing) but we do not have an explanation for perception. Cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman's interface theory talk is definitely worth your time. It specifically talks about visual perception from the beginning. I strongly recommend watching that talk. You can also read his related paper on Conscious Realism.

Meanwhile, retired neuroscientist Raymond Tallis has a reasonable article that's worth reading for another perspective. Now, I don't entirely agree with him, but it nicely outlines the various considerations.

Proving, Disproving, Experiences

So science can very well prove, that for any individual, something like dimensional jumping doesn't work.

This statement doesn't remotely follow from what you've just said, unfortunately.

It's simply impossible and just superstition that makes you believe that something changed, but in fact, nothing ever changed.

If you experience a change, and that change persist, then something did change - right? Although in a sense you are correct: in some philosophies, a change is a shift of perspective with reference to an unchanging structure, rather than an actual change in the world.

There's no chemical or biological or physical process, in which a dimensional jump could ever occur and in which reality could ever change.

Again, I must return you to a previous statement: Lack of an explanation does not mean lack of a phenomenon. If you experience something, it happens, regardless of whether you can account for it.

It would probably help to return to a question I asked in an earlier post: Can you prove that you are conscious? Can your prove that you have thoughts? Can you explain consciousness? Can you explain thoughts?

Does your lack of proof and explanation mean you have neither?

Note: A hand-waving "explanation" that these things "happen in the brain" or "emerge somehow" is not an explanation at all. If you can't say how it works, precisely then you have categorised it rather than explained it. The more closely you examine these things (for instance: vision) the more you realise we haven't explained them at all.

Outside, Inside, Nowhere

So I'm going to jump ahead here without having developed the full path for it, however all the essentials are there if you follow your experience, so...

We might summarise much of the above by saying that you are imagining an outside world, and you are thinking-about an world, that you have no evidence for other than the imagining of it. Earlier I said that:

• Science = senses + imagination

By now you probably realise that the true situation is actually:

• Science = imagination + imagination

On Perception

When we feel something, there's an electrical impulse sending information to our brain, which then it processes and it gives you the answer whether it's cold or hard, hard or soft, rough or smooth, etc.

That... isn't an explanation. Can't you see that? What do you even mean by "gives you an answer". Where and what is the "you" for starters! Keeping basic though, there are two ways in which this isn't an explanation:

• It doesn't remotely describe how light entering the eye is transformed into a full perceived environment.
• It doesn't remotely account for subjective experiencing.

You've basically said "the brain takes light and turns it into an image". That is not an explanation, you have described no processes whatsoever. You've said "magic", to link to an oft-used illustration.

Perhaps it's good to get back to basics. Light enters the eye, hits the retina, as an inverted image (although from the eye's perspective, it's not an image, it's a series of activated rods and cones of course). That information enters the brain. From a subjective point of view, my actual experience, I see a complete and unwavering room with objects which are spatially-extended in an environment. How exactly is this produced?

We do not have an account. It's fine not to know, but to say we do know when we don't seems unwise. A full description of perception will, in my opinion, incorporate complex memory. We do not see directly, we see (loosely) the thoughts that are triggered by information that enters our brain - which is of course then also an imagining... ;-)

Proving, Disproving, Experiences

You can take a subject group and let them try the dimensional jump with whatever instruction it would be possible for them.

You are kind of missing the point here, because you are assuming we live in a "simply-shared world", which we do not. Dimensional jumping by its very nature cannot be studied scientifically (which means, "intersubjectively") because it "comes before" the basic formatting (check out our man Immanuel Kant - easy intro but slightly wrong; better into here). It is a matter of metaphysics really.

Science = imagination + imagination No. Not at all. That's complete bullshit. Any scientist who ever lived/lives on this world would scream with laughter about that equation. It's absolute nonsense.

It's exactly how it is. Our perceptual experience is an imaginary one, "inspired by" accumulated information, triggered by snippets. We then make up connective stories in our imagination. Amusingly, the stories we adopt then inform our subsequent experiences.

Your mind is a big happy fiction machine, feeding upon itself. Having been told this, you'll probably start to notice it in the coming weeks.

• Experiences leave traces which in-form subsequent experience.
• Thoughts are experiences too, which also act as in-form-ation for subsequent experience.
• Your life is a big, looping metaphor machine and you didn't know it until right now.

On Consciousness

Man, you didn't even try with the consciousness thing. I'm really disappointed! ;-)

We simply have to answer this by saying that we have to accept that the universe exists and that we are real. So our thoughts and consciousness is too.

Okay, why not try this: The only thing you know for certain is that you are experiencing, therefore you are conscious and that you exist. Although you know that you are having experiences and thoughts, it is impossible for you to say what their nature is. You can think-about their nature, but that will just be another experience.

In effect we end up saying: All we know is that we are experiencing. And what we are experiencing is a real... experience. We cannot say that it is a "real" anything-else though.

There's no reality where dimensional jumps ever exist.

All that is required for dimensional jumps to exist, is for them to be experienced.

My post doesn't underlie any faith ... It underlies science and reality. Facts.

But it seems to me that you don't even know that science, reality, and facts actually are. Except (now) you might say that they are experiences. Beyond that, though?

I think if you read again what i've just written in my post, you should realize that dimensional jumps don't exist and that we can even prove that it is impossible and just a big hoax.

Unfortunately not. If anything, what you have done is further convince me that what I might have assumed was a solid world is in fact... a transient illusion, with no solidity at all, made up only of my experiencing of it.

In fact, I think you have convinced me that dimensional jumping - being a persistent experience - is perfectly possible and is not contrary to anything other than... previous habits.

POST: Just another skeptic..

[POST]

Hey guys! I really can't believe I'm posting this , but see , can't this phenomenon all be explained?
(This is kinda my first post , so sorry about the formatting)
My theory is kinda hard to explain , but I explain it easier to explain with an example. When we all were kids , we had that constant fear of a monster under our bed (assume you did) We took whatever sounds that occurred to be that monster! Our brains were searching for some evidence to show that our strong belief in something non-existant to be true (our brain is basically trying to screw us up!) So similarly , the process of dimension shifting , that sudden blurryness , all of it , its just some kinda evidence our brain is coming up to show that dimension jumping(what we believe in) is true! Even the changes! We search for the smallest changes to be true! It can be a coincidence , like that post where a redditor did a good dimension jump into a dimension where her fiancé complimented her on her looks! That person was looking for , or noticing the compliments she got about her looks!
Let's think of it as this way , If something happens when ur not expecting something , you wouldn't even be surprised. But if something happens (or changes) when your expecting something to happen/change (after a dimension jump) you'd automatically link it to the jump , wouldn't you?
So yeah , I think you kinda got my idea , I tried explaining it every way I could! Have a good day!

[END OF POST]

There's something to be said for seeing what you are looking for, definitely. However, it really doesn't explain some if the side effects - unless you view them as "memory mangling".

Side effects? As in?

Events that happened last week didn't actually happen, that sort of thing. The argument you had never occurred. That person never got sacked after all. Lots of "but I'm sure that..." things which are unrelated to your intention.

Maybe déjà vu can also be the reason for that c: But , we can never know if the person who claims that is lying or not.

Yeah. Or some other sort of memory mangling! How could we tell the difference? One of the 'problems' with this is that it is a subjective experience (of course). So by its very nature all evidence is going to be anecdotal. But that's why this subreddit isn't about proving anything to anyone. It amounts to: Some people have had an experience, here's how you can maybe produce that for yourself, you decide.

You could see it as a targeted or practical version of /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix. People do have unusual experiences. Some of them would be useful if harnessed. Is this one way to harness these 'glitch' type effects?

In the end, all that's going to matter is that for you the world apparently changed in a useful way and didn't revert back.

POST: /u/Kazymir told me to stay off this sub...

Plot twist: Nobody was human anyway, they were just "having a human experience".

Although I won't hear a word said against The Intelligence. He's knows loads of interesting facts, always gets his round at the bar, a generally nice guy. It's best not to mention his "appendages" though...

I'm just on a mission here. There are actually people who newly came here and seriously think this stuff is real so I'll just answer them the truth about all this being a joke.

The idea here is that people can take it or leave it: do the experiments and see what happens, or not. There's no debate or opinion to be had. There's no worldview being pushed; except try stuff see if it works or not. If it's not for you, nothing is lost, except a bit of time, which was probably going to be spent in bed or in front of the TV anyway.

Think of it as a practical /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix or /r/Occult centred around a particularly powerful active metaphor built on the philosophical concept of Idealism.

If it's just a kind of metaphor that's nice. People can use it to have fun and relax their mind. But people in here are actually talking about literally jumping dimensions. So this isn't a metaphor anymore. They're lying so much nonsense that it literally hurts my brain. I dont understand how people can be so stupid to believe in this bullshit.

It's a metaphor to trigger a genuine effect. The "dimensions" imagery does get confusing; it would be better to say something like "state jumping" or "format shifting". But then you have to talk about the structuring of mind and conscious experience.

Changes are experienced. The nature of those changes, that's something else. It is easier to do just by having a go. But note that nobody's pushing it here - "there's an interesting phenomenon, you might be able to leverage it, up to you".

They aren't real the people just think they are.

Hmm, how do you tell the difference? If something was one way but is now another way, if a prior event seems now not to have happened, is that not "actually real"?

Or do you mean like "in a real way beyond our sensory experience"?

Not sure what you mean by placebo and biases. What's the mechanism behind those?

The Placebo Effect is a scientific proven effect, that you believe to actually feel a change, even though there is none.

That is not what the placebo effect is. The placebo effect is a genuine change which occurs despite there being no mechanistic cause for it. Many good studies. This one is quite interesting. To repeat, the placebo effect means an "actual" result. That's why people are interested in studying it!

Biases is very general meant.

You are reaching for something like "confirmation bias" here, I suppose? That certainly occurs. Here though, we are talking about something a little different. Hmm. I think you have mixed some things up here: hypnosis, confirmation bias, placebo effect, sensory experience, the concept of "the real".

But it comes down to something quite simple: if you experience something, and your experience remains consistent with it afterwards and doesn't revert, in what way is that not "real"?

So like you said i mean the "in a real way beyond our sensory experience" - real.

There is no "real" beyond sensory experience. Our consistent, intersubjective sensory experience is exactly what we call real. Anything else is... imagination. Imagining that there is something else beyond what you are experiencing - a world we can never reach that is "how it really is". Now that is fantasy!

What is a headache except for the sensation of an ache in the head area? If that sensation goes away, then your headache has been solved.

This is very important generally:

• Not having an explanation for something doesn't mean it isn't a real phenomenon.
• Not understanding something does not mean it doesn't happen.

If we don't accept that, then science wouldn't get anywhere, because fresh observations usually don't have models to back them up. (In fact, the story of science has often been about resisting new discoveries because they can't yet be accounted for, but that is a different conversation.)

[EDIT: Please take this in the playful spirit in which it is intended! Upon re-reading, it might sound more aggressive than it was intended to be!]

Placebo Effect

That's what i meant that nothing changed. You NEVER got a medicine that helped, your mind just tricked you and by tricking yourself it surprisingly helped.

Perhaps this is a language issue! Something did change. Your body did change. We agree on this, right?

What you are trying to say is maybe: "expecting that something is going to happen gives the same result as doing something which is supposed to make it happen". Of course, perhaps all pills are placebo-based. Perhaps they don't really do much of anything anyway. Perhaps all medicine is "pretend" to some extent - whether because the doctor believes in it, or the patient believes in it.

Maybe we should update our sentence to say: "one person expecting that something is going to happen gives the same result as another person expecting something is going to happen"... ;-)

After all, it does seem as though the truth wears off over time [https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/12/13/the-truth-wears-off].

Science and The Real

Anyone who says something changed and didn't revert afterwards is simply lying. That stuff never happened. I don't believe you because it's impossible and the possibility of it being impossible is 100% and scientists can prove that.

So you are saying:

• That even if someone has an experience of something changing, they are lying?
• And that scientists can prove something is impossible?
• And that scientists have or could design and implement a study which could examine this effect?

I suggest that all these statements are dubious or incorrect.

There is a "real" beyond sensory experience. I know a lot define their sensory experience as real BUT you can't do that always. There are many sorts of real.

You are incorrect and you completely misunderstand what science is and what it can do. To repeat:

• Science makes observations using the senses.
• Science notices regularities in those observations.
• It picks out those observations which can be easily repeated by different people.
• It gathers accounts from those different people.
• It then makes up stories - conceptual frameworks, models, metaphors - which connect the different observations, using the imagination of the scientist.
• Science = senses + imagination.

And that's why it works so well. It takes the common, repeatable, simplified aspects of experience and, with imaginative stories, makes powerful tools from them.

Scientific Proof

Anyone can scientifically prove that dimensional jumping doesn't exist.
You can prove scientifically that it's impossible and definitely nonsense

Really? How... exactly?

Meanwhile, do you believe that you are conscious and that you have thoughts? Prove it. (It's a good exercise to go through.)

I suggest that what underlies your post is faith and is completely unscientific. Particularly since you are using phrases like "the mind tricked you and by tricking yourself it surprisingly helped", as if it were an explanation of some sort..

My Brain Is Lying

And the people who believe to see or feel a change that didn't revert afterwards are either lying or their brain makes them believe that it's real (with their sensory experience) even though in reality it is not.

How exactly does this work?

Are you not concerned that, right now, all the things you think are true are just "your brain tricking you and making you believe they are real"? That in fact, your experiences are just based on ideas you picked up and believed along the way, with no grounding in fact whatsoever? ;-)

Hey, will follow this up later, but we need to be clear on our definitions of the placebo effect.

The Placebo Effect

From the 2014 paper Outsmarting the Placebo Effect we have the following definition:

The placebo effect—real improvement brought on by the expectation of receiving treatment—can offer significant relief for patients.

To emphasise: The placebo effect is when actual persistent change occurs. The patient does not receive treatment but has the same outcome as if they did receive treatment. What you have described is... something else. You are describing someone "feeling better" but not really being better. The placebo effect is when people actually get better. Otherwise it wouldn't be an effect worth commenting on at all!

To emphasise again: The placebo effect is when something actually does change even though no active medicine was applied. It is not just about subjective experience. The mechanism is unknown, but a result is obtained without there being an apparent cause.

It is nothing to do with being "fooled". Unless it's the whole universe, reality itself, that is "fooled". Which would be good enough for most people, I'd say...

A1: get em george

Heheh. Well, I'm just pushing for clear-thinking all round...

The Placebo Effect - Continued - Untricking

Right, I think we're getting clearer now, and I see where we're disagreeing. Here's my broad definition:

The placebo effect is the phenomenon of someone's symptoms improving when they've only been given a dummy treatment, or even after they've just seen a doctor.
--Clinical trials and medical research, NHS UK

(Note, I don't endorse the site, just as I wouldn't endorse WebMD either, I just grabbed it because it was a good phrasing. The original article that got me exploring this was actually a New Yorker article back in 2011.)

Would you agree with this? The reason I'm pushing for this is that it's not just "feeling better". Does that make sense? In other words, if there is a mechanism it is not simply, say, pain suppression. That's why I push back against the idea that you are being "fooled by your brain". Which is no explanation at all.

If I were to offer an account of the placebo effect (the alleviation of symptoms by a non-active process) I would say it's to do with a "release" of some sort - an "allowing". I wouldn't say the brain is being tricked, so much as it is being un-tricked. Which is where a link comes in...

I'll try and dig this out, but there was a good study of back pain a while back. People would go to the doctor, complaining of pain, and they'd get scanned and there would be misshapen discs and so on. Operations would follow. However... people with the exact same apparent issues had no pain, no restriction. The deformations weren't actual causal to the pain; they were only being picked up because attention had been drawn to them.

In the same way, I suspect that many "issues" are non-issues in fact. That the "causes" detected are often unrelated to the experience of the patient, and only being discovered because of the investigation that results from the complain. In other words, "placebo" is a matter of there not being much of an illness in the first place. This is different to "healing" which is a whole other thing (it may be a matter of degree, however).

...just like I did on the whole dimensional jump-thing.

We've likely lost focus here, so let's bring it back around: how does this related to dimensional jumping, in your view?

The Placebo Effect - Continued - Double Tricking!

Let's perhaps summarise the placebo effect as you have discussed it so far (because we really want to focus this on dimensional jumping). I think I didn't properly communicate my idea on "untricking" so we'll put that aside. Let's also put aside the negative placebo effect, to help us stay focused.

Taking into account your whole comment, you are saying:

• The placebo effect is when your brain "tricks you" into feeling better, when there is no apparent physical change. In this case we have (say) been experiencing pain, and after the placebo treatment that pain is no longer experienced. (I am putting aside that symptoms more generally are often alleviated, not just pain and the like. However, that's not important for our discussion.)
• Dimensional jumping is when someone imagines that the world has changed, but in fact it has not. If they think there is a visual change, they are crazy or fuzzy-headed. (I am putting aside the possibility that people are lying about their accounts.)

In both cases you are saying that the only possible thing that can happen is that we might "feel a bit different". Anything beyond that, and we are "tricked and wrong", no matter what our experiences are. That...

No matter what seems to happen, we are tricked and wrong, or not clear-thinking enough, or mentally ill, or lying.

Is that really your position? You have offered no mechanisms for "biases" and "placebo", so really the only explanations you are offering are illness or lying.

It seems to me that you are starting from the position that all that can happen with regards to 'placebo' or to 'jumping' is that the brain can trick you into a feeling, or that you are wrong somehow. You are screaming "it can't be true! no matter what!". This is hardly an research-based approach...

If I could guarantee you an experience, an experience that was undeniably more than just "feeling" or "biases", an experience that was so obviously about the big world changing rather than just little you, the world coming at you with changes from the outside - would you take it?

Do you like owls?

Sorry man. I'm done talking to an uneducated guy who doesn't understand the basic knowledge that is taught at school and believes in Scientology and supernatual stuff that doesn't exist.

I read your other post. Not sure why you are talking about Scientology and the supernatural! Okay, quick summary response (I'm not talking about the subreddit topic here, this was all about science, perception and consciousness). Your problem is that your education in science, philosophy and metaphysics probably is stuck at high-school level. That's not a problem of course, but it does leave you in the position where you "do not know what you do not know".

Most of the problems with our discussion was because you haven't really thought about these things properly and in depth. Things that seem "obvious" to you are actually not so when you look deeper into the details. In physics we have tackled lots of things (although we still don't have a good description of quantum mechanics other than "it's maths and it works"), but when it comes to explaining the mind we are basically right at the start. We are not as far along as reading popular science articles would have you believe.

I'll leave you with one final thought to ponder: Do you genuinely feel, right now, that your experience is made up of neurons? If you don't, that means there is a gap we need to find an explanation for. (There are actually many gaps like this in our explanations.)

Oh, here's a nice article from Nature [dead link] that you might find an interesting read. It might help make my "imagination + imagination" concept a little clearer for you.

EDIT: You might want to adjust your tone a little in future, to a more respectful one. Sometimes when we think we are not understood or say that someone else is ignorant, it is actually our own lack of understanding and our own ignorance that is own show. This can later turn out to be an embarrassment for the commenter - especially on a public forum like this.

POST: I'm so confused.

If you make a change, not everything changes. One analogy is like changing a TV channel, but it's maybe more like watching a different version of the same story. Most of it is the same, some changes.

POST: [deleted by user]

You are changing aspects of your experience through intention; you are not deleting yourself!

POST: Do you keep all previous knowledge when you jump?

I you lost all of your knowledge, you'd not know about it. If you made a dramatic "jump" and had no memory of it or what came before, it would just be everyday life for you...

Generally thought, the idea is to make changes and retain the memory of the act and of the prior state.

==So you could technically lose your knowledge? But in the example I used, e.g. worse test scores, which people say has actually happened, loss of knowledge wouldn't be a problem?

Well, it really depends on the details so it's hard to tell. You end up with worse test scores - are the tests now different to that you remember (knowledge is the same), or are the tests are the same ( knowledge is correspondingly not available), or tests are the same but still can recall knowledge. All are possible really, right? You want to deliberately specify I suppose.

It's a neat thought experiment to think that we may lose our previous knowledge. We could be jumping all of the time but forgetting and we'd never know. Maybe we do jump all of the time and the key to dimensional jumping isn't to actually jump, but to take your memories with you.

We could be respawning a new world-pattern from scratch every morning, and we'd never know. Enjoy today, /u/Aeropro, because it's the only day you will have ever existed! ;-)

POST: I have a few questions

[POST]

Hello I have been a lurker of reddit for some time now and have finally decided to make an account. I will get straight to the point. I have been a sufferer of chronic halitosis for awhile now and it has affected my social life and who I've become. I want to know if it is possible for me to jump to a dimension where I don't suffer from halitosis. I have done everything possible to try and cure myself. I brush and Floss 3 days have tried countless of bad breath cure products, oil pulling and none that has worked. I don't remember the last time I have been genuinely happy.. I have ran out of ideas and feel like this could by my solution. Can I jump to a dimension where I don't suffer from this? If so how do I picture or say to myself what I want when I'm doing the mirror technique?

[END OF POST]

Hi, sorry to hear, that sounds a real pain. Stuff like that can really wear you down, I really sympathise. :-(

The answer is, yes, you can use these techniques for that sort of thing. You might want to begin by checking out a couple of things though. One problem is that if you are (understandably) focused on this and fighting it in certain ways, they can imply it and persist it. You can end up imagining the situation you are in, ever more deeply. In other words, you generally have to be careful to intend-imagine being in a good situation rather than not being in a bad situation.

Fancy doing a little experiment? Lie down on the floor, get quiet, and see if you can summon the what it would feel like to be a person with 'confident breath'? I don't mean any physical sensation of your body, but rather the "what would it feel like if this had been all sorted".

See what happens with that as a starting point.

Hello. Thanks for your kind words.. yes it is mentally painful I have psychologically scarred myself because of this.. Every time something rubs their nose or make a disgusted face.. I know they are doing that cos of me. There is nothing more in life that I want but to cure myself of this.. I have a job that I like and a wonderful family. It has affected me so much that I have thought about committing suicide. But I have long past that obstacle and learnt there is more to life. I've tried that experiment last night but I struggled to imagine what it would be like to have confident breath.. I kept getting images of me talking and people just rubbing their nose basically just negative thoughts. And what's even worse is there is this girl who likes me and I like her but I can't even take her out on a date because of my breath.. I don't know what to do.. do you have any tips?

That sounds so frustrating. I'm pleased you've realised it in context though (that's it's a nasty pin in an otherwise comfortable cushion).

First, I'm going to give you some practical advice: Get yourself some Neem toothpaste and mouthwash. It's magical stuff for keeping the mouth happy more generally, I've found, clearing up little flare-ups. Definitely worth a spin for you.

Okay, stage two of the experiment. You've got the idea now: we're going to work towards you being able to generate the feeling of what it will be like when you're sorted... This time, you're going to do the same thing, but deliberately imagine situations where people smile and respond as they will when this is all fixed.

The important thing here is that you imagine the situations as if looking through your own eyes, being there, having the experience. If the downer images you get are pretty much the same all the time, I want you to change those images into version where people are smiling, chatting, and you are responding, smiling chatting and relaxed. Again, we're looking for how it will feel when things are great. Okay?

Bonus paragraphs...

Bonus 1: When you've done that, you are going to be more specific. You are going to imagine, as if it were happening, a situation with that nice girl which meant that this had already been sorted. Totally immerse yourself in and enjoy that imagining. Right?

Bonus 2: There's something extra to be careful about here. When we have something we are unhappy or worried about, it's a fact that the world tends to confirm our fears. Not just confirmation bias, it tends to give us a little more than that. So I want you to be careful of looking out for signs that people are responding to your breath. Just decide to give up on that, and be okay with how you are now, for now - because it will change soon.

Bonus 3: Maybe once you've got "the feel", you should ask the girl out anyway? And you're gonna recall the "vibe" you've developed doing the exercise. Try some neem, load up on mints if you need a crutch, then "fuck it!" and enjoy some fun. You'll regret it later if you don't. And if its doesn't work out... oh well, next time!

I have a gut feeling that this [impacted wisdom teeth] is the culprit.

Trust that feeling. There's "something" about wisdom teeth. I had massive problems with my wisdom teeth (your whole body responds to them being there, not just your mouth). I had a very powerful "intuition" about them ("get them removed now, TG!") before they ever caused a problem...

So I think you're definitely on the right track (booking to get them removed and assigning responsibility to them).

POST: New here, with questions.

The "dimensions" are metaphorical. It's a way of saying you can shift your experience from this configuration to that configuration. You are deciding to make a change, detaching from your current experience and allowing it to shift. The whole "decisions create alternative universes" thing is a bit overblown. A better way to say it is that all possible experiences are available, but your "next-moment" is normally limited by your current situation and expectations. "Jumping" is a way of loosening those limitations, so you can jump to a farther position on the Infinite Grid of All Possible Moments. All patterns of experience are there already, it's a case of traveling to them.

(Fundamentally, the universe has no "dimensions" - that's a structure our mind imposes. It's more like an "infinite gloop" of dimensionless facts, perhaps.)

See links in sidebar for techniques and metaphors.

POST: If you think dimensional jumping isn't real...

[POST]

Go prove it then. Go prove that what this sub reddit is based on isn't true. Try jumping. Just know that the whole mirror technique is just one technique. There are other techniques. Don't forgot to be very observant. Do more research. Be a bit more open-minded.
Oh and sorry if this doesn't belong here.
Edit: Such great discussions. Well I haven't done DM yet because I am... Not quite ready. Maybe when trouble arises I will try it.

[END OF POST]

Fine words of encouragement! The challenge has been set! :-)

I was kind of worried that this wasn't suppose to be here. I do hope people notice this.

You've captured the right attitude totally. The sidebar got updated a couple of days ago with basically the same thing:

NOTE
There is no established theory of "jumping" or its mechanism, although there are numerous ways of viewing its nature.
It is for readers to decide for themselves through personal investigation and introspection whether jumping is appropriate for them or not.
An open mind combined with healthy caution is the correct mindset for all approaches targeted at the subjective experience.
Never believe something without personal evidence; never dismiss something without personal evidence.

If people aren't interested or don't care, that's totally fine. And nobody should believe something just because someone else says so (even if they like the idea). But this is a "personal experience" kinda thing so it can't be dismissed only because it sounds quirky.

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

In this case, the assertion being made is: "if a person does this thing, then the person will have this experience". Nobody can supply proof of that to the person, he must examine the matter for himself.

A3: All scientists must have a hypothesis and begin their experiments before the burden of proof can be established. That's what we're doing here; experimenting. That's fine if you don't want to try something before it's proven, but you won't be the kind of person who discovers anything new or interesting, unless its by accident.

I understand that. I read the title/first sentence, "If you think dimensional jumping isn't real...go prove that what this sub reddit is based on isn't true", as basically the same thing as someone saying that I can't prove that they don't have an invisible pet unicorn. The burden of proof lies in the person making the extraordinary claim (and I would classify jumping dimensions as extraordinary). If someone comes up with proof that dimensional jumping is real, then I will stop viewing this subreddit as simply a cool place to come to read neat stories.

A3: Being from the other side of the fence, I got a different meaning from those same words.
AFAIK there can be no proof for this phenomenon, by definition, outside your own experience. Knowing this, I read his statement not as an attempt to have you prove a negative (impossible, I know) and then present it to us all. I took it more as a challenge to suspend your disbelief and try it for yourself because at this point its all we can do.

Like /u/Aeropro, I read it the other way also. That this subreddit is based on a subjective experience, so you have to seek out the subjective experience in order to prove to yourself that there is no basis for the subreddit. It's fine to leave it open or to just not care, of course, but denying there is an effect just because we have no explanatory framework for it is meaningless.

The notion of "dimensional jumping" is the driver for and a way to explain changes. Like any other "cause and effect" type story, it's a way of joining two experiences together to make it easier to "understand" (read: to repeat and leverage an apparent connection).

Since we can't get behind the scenes, as it were, of this sort of phenomenon, you can't experience a mechanism behind the effect. (We never can, really, even in science, but at least there we are in the realm of shared observations, and so we can share a narrative fiction to go along with them.) So we make up one, subject to revision.

A1: I agree that the burden of proof is on those who claim it is real.
But I also think it is a purely subjective experience. No one can experience your jump except for you, and you can't prove you have had that experience with anyone else.
I have no interest in proving DM is real to anyone. I don't care if someone else believes or not. It doesn't affect me.
If you are curious, then explore it. If you are not, then go away.

Q: I agree that the burden of proof is on those who claim it is real.
No, it is not. You can not prove a negative assertion.
While I will attempt to say this with as much civility as possible, I have also noticed that pseudoskeptics regard their social acceptance of anyone who disagrees with them, as some sort of prize to be won, when it is not. Your acceptance of me is not required, and neither, for that matter, is your approval of my state of mental health. You are entirely welcome to consider me as being completely insane if you wish to do so; because compared with pseudoskepticism and scientism, I quite seriously consider insanity to be genuinely preferable.

I think the commenter was generally in favour though: as it's a subjective experience you can only prove it to yourself.

You are very right about social acceptance though. I think it's part of a more general problem: that subjective experience is dismissed in general. Which is ironic, since that's all we have really, and "objective" experiences are merely subjective experiences which are simple enough to communicate by language (the are words for it), and regular enough that enough people will have experienced them in order to understand the content of what is being said.

A1: I think it's part of a more general problem: that subjective experience is dismissed in general.
A big part of the problem with pseudoskeptics, is that when they say they require proof, they usually aren't even explicit in their own minds about the type of proof they want. What they really want is physical proof that has been mechanically derived, because they don't believe in anything other than physical reality, and they have also been taught by psychiatry to believe that empiricism that is not mechanically mediated is inherently untrustworthy. This again, is a logical travesty however, since as you yourself point out, ultimately our direct physical senses are all we have, even when a machine gives us a readout about something.
If a pseudoskeptic claims that something does not or can not exist, then the burden of proof is with them, for the reason that disproving a negative assertion is not possible; which in turn automatically means that their argument is invalid. If they say they require proof, then they need to be able to explicitly specify the type of proof they need. Again, I am still under no obligation to provide them with any. My only responsibility to them is entirely dependent on whether or not I want their acceptance, and in most cases I do not.
Logic is only empowering in the hands of those who actually know how to use it. The thinking of pseudoskeptics is neither logical nor empowering; it is merely a mental cage for them to sit within, and keep repeating to themselves that nothing exists. Their interpretation of science is almost exclusively about negative assertions, you will notice; what supposedly does not exist, or what can not be done. The entire reason why a negative assertion is not provable, is because the subject of such an assertion itself does not exist. In the context of logic gates, a NOT gate or inverter is defined by the absence of current.
This is medieval logic, and it is provably sound. I am a magician, not a scientist. I remain convinced that the Enlightenment was actually the direct opposite. I have been taught how to think by the likes of Paracelsus and Agrippa, and by my experience with both computer programming and magick. Paracelsus was rejected by mainstream thinkers in his own time, just as I am in mine. I like to think that he and I have a fair amount in common. The scoffers of his day accused him of unspeakable arrogance; but even if it was, it was not unfounded. When he referred to his critics as fools, he was able to demonstrate that they were.
I am also an empiricist before I am a rationalist. That means that if I attempt to perform a given dimensional jumping experiment, and my own results are consistent with the honest testimony of others, then I assume that the phenomenon in question exists; and I do so even if I do not initially understand the principles at work which generated the experiences. That is to be worked out over the course of repeated experiments. Magick is first and foremost exploratory in nature, and in fact specifically assumes and allows for initial ignorance and lack of understanding. I will leave it to the scientists to carry the ball and chain of complete certainty. It is far too heavy and restrictive for my tastes.
"You are not yet blessed, if the multitude does not laugh at you."
\ -- Seneca de Moribus.

An excellent assessment. I too am "an empiricist before I am a rationalist". Subjective experience is primary, connective fictions (explanatory frameworks) are secondary, but useful and perhaps in some sense causal.

The main-push physicists of the early-mid 20th century were not at all like most physicists and scientists today (who are effectively "engineers with beliefs"). They knew exactly the nature of what they were doing (modelling observed regularities, not uncovering truth). Some still do - e.g. George Ellis here [https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/cross-check/physicist-george-ellis-knocks-physicists-for-knocking-philosophy-falsification-free-will/] and here [https://www.nature.com/articles/516321a] and there are many others. As their points are more subtle, and less attractive to funding and to the popular "gee whiz!" media, they tend to get less coverage unfortunately.

Related, I was reading an article [https://www.sheldrake.org/reactions/the-anti-sheldrake-phenomenon] the other day, about the aggressive responses to Rupert Sheldrake's (morphic resonance) work, particularly by super-skeptic Michael Shermer. It's worth a read. (Sheldrake's morphic field ideas are very close to physicist David Bohm's implicate/explicate order, but because Sheldrake is inevitably closer to "everyday life" as a biologist, he got a kick-in.)

It then so happens that there is a moderated dialogue taking place [https://thebestschools.org/sheldrake-shermer-materialism-science-replies/] over these few months between Shermer and Sheldrake. Interesting to read reader's comments as much as it is to read the main participants contributions.

"It only works if you believe"

It's actually not about belief - or only in the sense that, you have to fully commit to it while you are doing it, because deliberate or implied intention is a requirement. The sidebar already describes the appropriate mindset.

You have cleverly chosen a phenomenon which can't be duplicated, recorded, or proven in any way.

The point isn't to prove anything to a third party, of course. And you're right: if the world-pattern moves self-consistently, there can be no trace of the previous state except in memory. How convenient! But in both senses!

The technique, being about shifting your own experience going forwards, is indeed subjective - and what else is there, after all? Conscious experience is entirely subjective: try proving that you are conscious or have thoughts, other than to yourself...

The assertion being made is:

"If a person does this thing, then the person will have this experience".
"Nobody can supply proof of that to the person, he must examine the matter for himself."

But nobody cares if you do it or not. However if you don't, you can't reasonably make a comment on whether an effect occurs, nor comment on the nature of that effect.

you should include a disclaimer in the sidebar stating that dimensional jumping is purely a thought exercise and in no way affects the 'shifting nature of reality'.

The problem is - it does do something that shifts your experience of reality, if you try it. What the nature of that change is, is up for debate. There is no mechanism, other than the experiencing.

Essentially, detaching from your senses and using a metaphor to conceptualise a change with intention results in a change in subsequent perception. But not just in the "values" of your perception; it apparently affects the "facts" also. Which is why it's an interesting area to explore, and potentially useful too.

EDIT:

Preface

I'll preface this with, nobody is telling anyone what to think here. Your response seems to be based on that idea, and the idea that other people can't be trusted to bring their own judgement to bear on things. You should always be the authority of you.

Historically, those who promote a position (politically, scientifically, historically) have always turned out to be partially incorrect at least.

Acceptance should always be provisional, in matters you have not or cannot personally verify, and all explanations should be treated as useful, not "true", since even the most apparently robust worldviews shift regularly as additional observations are incorporated - usually after a lot of in-fighting rather than an organised transition.

Response

False. By having this discussion right now I have proven my sapient self.

To yourself.

Everytime I drop the weight and observe it, it will be the same, and everytime you drop it, it will be the same and if we compare notes our numbers will match. This is not a subjective experience.

Of course it's a subjective experience. That isn't to say we can't have subjective experiences that, through communication, we subsequently agree are identical in the key respects. Of course we do!

That experiences are subjective doesn't rule out intersubjective agreement. In fact, this is exactly what science is: identifying the subset of experiences for which there is intersubjective agreement, and producing descriptions in language which can be agreed upon. However, it is probably the case that, beyond very common regularities, most experiences cannot be agreed upon in this way.

Again, your claim boils down to "You can't prove that it isn't real unless you do it. And if someone does it and experiences no change your answers will always be...

No, those won't be the answers. As I said, nobody is saying anything other than: I've done this and had this experience, try it out for fun. If someone doesn't get a result, then it didn't work as far as they are concerned. Case closed.

In that regard I can say I did it and before, everyone on earth had three eyes and now they only have two. You can't prove my claim wrong, and I can never prove it right.

Who's claiming anything or proving anything other than to themselves?

Now, if there are many accounts of an effect, then that may encourage others to give it a go - but until they do so, they shouldn't believe anything. Nor disbelieve it really, just leave it open, but that's entirely up to them. Fine to say "that doesn't make sense to me, what rubbish!" if they like, particularly since intersubjective agreement is inherently a problem with this phenomenon.

You are stating a belief as fact. Because what you claim is, by it's design' impossible to prove, you cannot state it as fact.

Nobody is promoting a general position, they are reporting their experience - describing the process; describing the subsequent experience. Actually, I usually say "apparently results in". The thing is though, there is no difference between saying "apparently results in a change in perception" and "actually results in a change in a perception". How does one distinguish between an "apparent experience" and an "actual experience"?

The reason "facts" is in quotes, is to avoid asserting a change in some external world beyond perception, about which nothing can ever be said.

Is a less harmful statement (but still deluded).

But your modified statement is incorrect, because you are responding to a position nobody is taking. In context, the statement I made isn't a "position" or a statement of fact, it's a report of an experience.

If I were to make a change to clarify things for you, it would be to preface it with "People have found that..."

We might compare this with, say, lucid dreaming. If I say that I have the experience of being conscious in my dreams, it makes no sense to make me add "I think that" or "I believe that" I have the experience. That would be like me telling you are you are not conscious, you simply think that or believe that you are conscious!

...

A2: because compared with pseudoskepticism and scientism, I quite seriously consider insanity to be genuinely preferable
lol

POST: Is there any non-anecdotal evidence for jumping success?

Well, it's important to realise that no consciousnesses are exchanged and there's aren't parallel universes in the sense of spatially-extended places. You aren't really swapping places with anyone. (Aside: MWI in physics is a pretty crappy philosophical interpretation of a mathematical theory and is not very well regarded, even though it gets a lot of coverage in "popular science".)

These descriptions are "active metaphors" - ways of conceiving of dramatic changes in your experience, and subsequently triggering them. They offer a way of changing your "world-pattern" by loosening your hold on it, and intending a shift.

You might view this as triggering shifts similar to the spontaneous experiences reported in /r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix. As with those stories, often the only evidence is the memory of those involved. Why?

Inherently, there can't be any "objective" evidence - at best, only intersubjective agreement by a few participants. If the state of the whole world changes, there is no residual evidence of how it was before. The world-pattern remains inherently self-consistent. In fact, that may be the only rule.

If there's a bit of physics to support this, it's Wheeler's "Delayed Choice Experiment" - from which you would conclude that only observations are important, and the story we describe of what happens between observations is an imaginary "explanatory fiction". (See my comment here [https://old.reddit.com/r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix/comments/37ylzn/theory_scientists_able_to_make_the_present/crqvcad/] to a post about that experiment.)

Wheeler himself was of the view that the "universe" was basically dimensionless information which accumulated and become more defined with each observation. In other words: each observation defines a "fact" which constrains what might be seen in subsequent observations.

Relevance to "Dimensional Jumping"? Well, "jumping" is a way to reset the accumulated observations to a certain level. Some of the key points:

• There is no world behind the scenes, beyond our experiences.
• All explanatory schemes are fictional.
• The pattern of your mind = the pattern of your world.
• "Dimensional Jumping" is a way to shift that world-pattern.
• The "one rule" means that after a shift all subsequent observations will be self-consistent. In other words, you will never encounter evidence of the previous world-state other than your own memories. (And you cannot guarantee those, necessarily.)

TL;DR: It's inherently an anecdotal phenomenon although it can be an apparent multi-person experience.

POST: Intended to attempt dimensional jumping and wound discovering something completely different called Mirror Tratak

At the bottom of the Darkroom Vision post there's a link to a "stranger in the mirror" article. There are loads of comments under that which are pretty interesting.

Random comment:

I never tried this with a mirror, but the effect is all to familiar. Me and my girlfriend 20 years ago would stare into each others eyes for long moments. Ah, the good old times.
On several occasions, starting at the exact same moment for the both of us, this illusion started. A rapid series of faces of young and old people would start.
While it felt uneasy and erie to me, it scared the hell out of my girlfriend, who is a believer of afterlives and reincarnation. She believed those were the faces of people we once were. To me, the strangest fact was that this effect would start and stop at the exact same moment for the both of us, and that it has never happened that she or me saw the faces while the other did not.
Also, after it happened a few times, we began to recognize the faces and their order, but this felt so bad that we looked away for a second as soon as it happened. It isn’t a pleasant feeling, so we started to avoid it.
I do not think my room was as dark as suggested above. I seem to recall this happened in the daytime too.
-- Dave, Posted September 18, 2010 at 7:47 pm, The strange-face-in-the-mirror illusion

POST: Would this be too big of a jump...

[POST]

Hi, I'm haven't "jumped" (that I was consciously aware of) before.. I've been learning meditation and reading self-help books, I am at a point where I am quite present the majority of times, I understand my existence and so finding this sub and it's contents was no surprise to me--nothing I wasn't aware of. I've been focusing on the Law of Attraction & reality shaping/creating etc, envisioning how I'd feel if I already had everything i dream of & feeling it. I have some form of IBS or Candida... Whatever, basically I currently have a messed up stomach/bowel system in which I have pretty much all the negative effects you could think of. I've spent years wrestling with medicine, diets, homeopathy, even started making my own fermented foods. I can't find anything to fix the issue, it's affected every aspect of this "life", I act as if its not there & adopt a positive mindset, but it is still always there in the background. Wondering if it'd be wise to attempt "jumping" to an experience in which I have found the correct treatment methods and skipped all the bullshit. Like, I actually found a medicine combination that cured me & I could go about life without this controlling me. Do you think this is too big a jump? Should I start small? Or should I continue practicing to manifest a reality in-which this no longer exists in my experience.. This is quite long as full of rambling about things you couldn't care less about, but I feel as if I'm close to an answer and a fix to my problem, I am yet to find the path. Cheers....

[END OF POST]

You might check whether you are directly interacting with your experience or whether you are thinking-about things, when you are working on this. Are you picturing a future situation "in your head", or are you overlaying that situation over your 3d-sensory experience right now, as if it were actually happening?

This is the difference between fantasising about something vs creating an "observation". What you want to do is create an observation which implies that the situation your desire is a fact. You might also experiment with placing your attention in your stomach/bowel area (again, not thinking this, but actually mentally sitting with that region in space) and just feel out what's actually there; sit with it. See if there's any information - "stuck thoughts" or "incomplete movements" (no pun intended!) there.

More aggressively, you could include that area in your attention and directly will a better feeling in its place. Basically, directly overwrite that area of your experience. The trick to this is to "go looking for" the desired feeling, in that location - as if it were already there, and simply needed discovered.

I thought I was doing this.. Treating it as if it was actually happening in reality. But as I said, the problem remains, lurking in the background. Maybe I'm just not doing it right :/

Try "asking" it what the problem is? Just sit quietly, rest your attention there and wait - and "let it speak".

My other thought more generally: Are you taking time out to detach and relax when doing this? Summoning things via imagination should be effortless. You can't force it, because you need it to naturally become part of your "world-pattern".

Maybe I'm just so used to this reality that it'll be a long process unlearning? If you get what I'm saying.

I do. These things are like "habits-of-the-world" really. Sometimes it's difficult to break them, because they are so intertwined with other parts of our world that they keep getting re-triggered. You have to let go and stay let-go.

That's why "technology" can be useful:

Rather than saying "I have the power to heal myself" - which can be hard to commit to if you don't really believe you are your experience - you instead "outsource" it to another part of the world. You say "this object or action has the power to heal me" and then let that play out. So don't be afraid to use other routes. And just because diet and drugs aren't "real" doesn't mean they don't and can't have an effect. They are established aspects of your dream, as it were. It can be easier to flow with them rather than de-pattern the whole of your reality. However, the intention you attach to these 'magical objects' is important.

Remember, habits are a good thing: Without habits, you'd have to manually create and maintain everything constantly. Objects would fade in and out, nothing would be stable. A bit like when you start lucid dreaming (if you've done that) and you're not very good at maintaining concentration.

Example: There is no reason why you can't survive being hit by a truck. However, "solidity" is a very strong habit of your world, and the experience of "being hit by a truck" tends to be followed by the experience of "being mangled pretty bad". On the upside though, you don't have to constantly focus on not falling through the ground due to being mildly distracted and forgetting to enforce "solidity".

When you say overlay the situation, do you mean sort of role play as if you are already what you want? Am I wrong in thinking that dimension jumping is a lot like manifestation?

Yep, I'd suggest that manifestation and jumping are both just ways of saying: "Changing this sensory experience to a sensory experience that I want". It's just that the metaphors are different. When I say overlay, I don't quite mean role play (depending on what you mean by it).

Conceive of it as literally replacing the sensory experience you are having now, by superimposing one that would mean you were in the situation you want while intending that this happen. Without the intention, it's just messing around with role play. With commitment and intention and full imagination, it's basically changing the patterning of your world. The experience you are having now is imagination, solidified. Imagery with momentum, you might say. Detaching and intending is a way of moving from this experiential imagery to that experiential imagery.

By role play I mean I act as if I have that life already. I make my decisions based off what the version of me in that life would do. This sounds a bit silly, but I even have a scrapbook of it. I collect photos of my ideal from magazines and paste them as of they were moments in my life. Then I browse these clippings from time to time. It helps "set" my mind and intentions.

Act "as if it were already true". I've never done it quite like that, but that's a great approach for getting more immersed in it - visions boards and scrapbooks. I've played with certain acting techniques to help with "embodied imagination".

POST: Dead celebrity?

"Daydreaming" is detaching and is basically the first step of this stuff. (The other part is deliberately directing it; knowingly intending a particular change.)

I think whenever we "let go", a little bit of realignment of your world takes place. It just loosens the influence of previous observations and allows things to settle a little in correspondence with how your are feeling and thinking at that time. This has a "pulling" effect on the whole "world-pattern" though, so apparently-distanct facts can drift a little, go a little fuzzy; you end up re-establishing them on your next encounter. (See recent related comment here on that. [Following post on this compedium...])

POST: Got a little question

[POST]

I'm planning to jump soon but when i read how this works. This question is related to the Schröders Cat:
The cat has 2 states: Dead and alive. Only as Long as we don't open the box/see it or saw her living
So and now when i jump but i think of something that i want to Change, i'm thinking about. So it can't actually Change because i saw that thing and know how it is and im thinking about it. Am I wrong or got i misguided?

[END OF POST]

Well, "Dimensional Jumping" is about updating the current facts of your world, by detaching enough from your experience so they can shift to a greater or lesser extent. It is the approach designed to make the change you describe. You can certainly use it to decide the state of the cat before opening the box. But more interestingly, you can potentially use it to change the state of the cat after it has been observed.

In more detail:

Everyday Life Mode

You might say that your world or "world-pattern" is the sum of all the "facts" you have observed. Every observation further narrows the set of subsequent observations which are possible. The world-pattern can adopt any form, but because it is a continuous pattern there is one rule that normally applies:

• The only rule is that the world-pattern is always self-consistent.

In other words, the world always "makes sense". We might call this process Observation Accumulation and we might call the rule The Law of Coherence.

The proper interpretation of Schrödinger's Cat is that it has no state unless it is observed. Nothing ever "happens" unless it is seen to have happened, by observing it or by observing something which implies it. But once an observation is made, that observation adds another fact to your world-pattern, and from that point on all subsequent observations will be consistent with that new fact.

Normally we just let the world-pattern unfold and evolve spontaneously, without manipulation. Each observation follows from the last, without us directing it, and we only intend actions which are consistent with what we observe. In "Everyday Life Mode", our observations appear to us, arising naturally from the current state of the world-pattern as it evolves and unfolds.

Dimensional Jumping Mode

In contrast, "Dimensional Jumping" is the process by which we deliberately add additional observations (assert new facts) into the world-pattern, using our intention and imagination - observations which do not necessarily follow from our present experience, and can even be contrary to and overwrite existing facts. We disrupt the part of the world-pattern and shift it to a new state. When we do so, The Law of Coherence means that the world-pattern will shift as one interconnected shape, so the new state will "make sense". This inevitably means that other facts are pulled out of place as a result of our change.

• If the world-pattern is shifted, all subsequent observations will be consistent with the new state.

Metaphorically speaking, if the cat had been observed to be dead and we "re-observe it" to be alive, then from that point onwards all observations, all subsequent experiences, will be based on the cat always having been alive. This may include the experience of retrieving a memory about the cat.

Note that immediately following a change, there might be a transitional period where the world-pattern is settling out, and inconsistencies or confusion may linger. The extent of this will depend on how detached you are, whether you are holding onto and resisting the movement of some aspects of the world.

TL;DR: It's all about creating new observations (sensory experiences) which imply that your desired situation is a fact - generating an experience which means to you that something is true.

POST: [META] I'd like to suggest that not all jumps are preferable, and that to the extent you believe in this phenomenon you should be respectful of its power and prayerful in its application.

This. It says right there in the Tesseract Working that this is akin to suicide. The fly by night way some approach the idea of Jumping betrayed their immaturity towards responsible magick

It shifts your world including your experience of "you", so it's good to be cautious. It's an effective suicide in that the "you" that you are experiencing will shift more discontinuously than is usual. Having said that, most people are unwittingly do a version of this quite frequently - but they are just oblivious to it because their world is remaining self-consistent.

The problem with the mirror method and the tesseract approach is that they present a ritual which is by default "undirected". Since most people don't understand what "intention" is (even if they imagine something, they'll often not will it to give it context) even directing it is a little haphazard.

That's why I think Neville Goddard style approaches or pattern-triggering are problem better, because you are more conscious of an "act" taking place, and you already have a direction in mind. A problem with all magickal dabbling is that people tend to not believe it, or believe that belief is necessary, and so mess around - and then get actual results whether they realise the connection or not.

Fortunately, basic mirror-staring is unlikely to cause problems; it's most likely simply to accelerate the path you are already hurtling along.

POST: About dimension jumping..

[POST]

So...a long time back, I lost a couple of friends. No, their not dead. We just had a big fight.
I was wondering...
Is there a way to jump into a dimension where I didn't ever get in a fight with them?

[END OF POST]

A1: It would be easier to jump to where you have all forgiven each other. Whereas it is possible to jump to where the fight never happened, it would require identifying and letting go of a larger, indeed much larger, set of beliefs.

Q: What do you mean by 'set of beilfes? And I would prefer to the fight never happened..but what about...jumping to one where I never met a certain person? If I didn't meet that person...the fight wouldn't have happened..

A1: This explanation might diverge from the consensus here, but I have evidence to make a strong case for it. Reality is inside out. What you see is what you project. What you project is formed from what is within. In order to change what you see out there you must change what is within. You are contemplating a big jump. To go to where you never met someone you would have to let go of everything that you're holding onto about that person. You'd let go of every emotion and every belief about that person. Furthermore, you'd likely have to let go of beliefs that you hold about your friends' opinions about that person. Unless you can identify one core belief that unravels all of the other thoughtforms... Maybe there is a core belief that led you to that meeting that would unravel it all. However, the connections of that core to all of the other related beliefs could disentangle other connections, which is where you run into unintended consequences that you don't want. It would be so much easier to find that place of forgiveness.

You make a good point. The problem with massive changes is that, because your "world-pattern" (by which I mean the set of all current facts) is a single continuous thing, tugging on one part of it inevitably leads to shifts elsewhere - shifts that may make no logical sense and are hard to anticipate.

A metaphor - Imagine you have a large expanse of material, formed into a hilly landscape with a different shaped object on top of each hill. The shape of the object is the current state of that region of the landscape (the current "fact"), and the hill represents the history of that that object.

• If you change the shape of the object (from pain to forgiveness) that is just an additional change in the ongoing development of the region. The region will evolve a little and will affect other parts of the landscape, but it will be a harmonious shift.
• If instead you work to change the hill (the history) then you are also tugging on the rest of the landscape - thereby changing the histories and positions of other objects discontinuously, in complex ways that cannot be predicted.

POST: [Theory] The Mirror Method Is Just Another Metaphor for the Dimension Jumping Metaphor; A More Direct Approach to Shifting Reality

[POST]

The mirror method puts the reality shifting process outside oneself. Bring the process back to the Source within yourself, and it makes the transition easier and with less chance of unintended consequences. Back in late May I decided to try the mirror method. Over a few days I jumped a few times with pretty good results, though I had very little somatic feedback to signal that I had jumped. My intentions weren't for external changes. My intentions were for internal changes.

My intention for one of the first jumps was to know that I could shift reality. I intended to be a master jumper. In the days following, I started to see a lot of synchronicity. At first it was surprising to see my thoughts reflected in reality. It was so accurate that I ruled out the possibility of confirmation bias. I chronicled some of the events at /r/Glitch_In_The_Matrix. However, the results were better with spontaneous thought than with intentional thought. I wanted to know why, so I took the red pill and went down the rabbit hole.

My search revealed many metaphors and ways of saying the exact same thing, that reality is inside out. My mission was to find the most direct approach to change what is within in order to change what is projected without. After looking at the many different layers that I found in the Library of Babbling On, I was repeatedly drawn to the Ho'oponono prison story. It reveals a very direct approach to shifting reality, cutting out all of the nonsense and mumbo jumbo that is heaped onto the process of what is very simple.

• Take responsibility for everything that you experience.
• Identify the experience that you want to change, and find it within yourself.
• Let go of the experience by/thereby letting go of that within you that projected the experience outward.

"I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you. I love you." - Ho'oponopono Prayer.

The incantation effects the following:

• Apologizing recognizes responsibility.
• Asking for forgiveness lets it go.
• Gratitude accepts the change.
• Love for oneself (since the reflection is from within) sets the right tone to accept that change.

Last night, I thought of a friend's pain, and I took the aforementioned action. It took very little time, compared to the mirror method. The somatic feedback, like a cool breeze within my chest, was immediate and very strong. This morning when I woke up, I felt a hot tingling over my entire scalp. I feel the change. We'll see what the Universe shows me next. It could also be done with one's own reflection in a mirror. Be the change that you want to see, whether you jump with a mirror or without one.

Edit: typo

[END OF POST]

Agreed.

It's all "active metaphors", as it's phrased in the sidebar. They are all different ways of indirect creation and amendment in what amounts to an imagined world.

Remember that even with the mirror method, you are dealing with something that is within you; the so-called "mirror" is inside your experience. Real mirrors are actually just very stable ideas of mirrors.

So in the mirror method you are declaring that "mirrors" have the property of allowing jumps - and so they do. Equally, you could declare that visualising a desire in detail "inserts it into the universe" and so it will come to pass. And so it does.

Or perhaps there is a bad situation, and you bring forth a thought about it. Implicitly in doing so, you are recognising that this thought is the situation. By updating the "bad feeling" into a "good feeling" you are literally changing that situation. (This is the Ho'oponono approach.)

In all cases, the implicit truth is that everything in experience is basically objects made from imagination. To imagine-that you are doing something is to actually be doing that something - subject to the other things you have imagined to date.

You can have a lot of fun experimenting with this. Random example: take two glasses, one filled with water, one empty. Declare that the empty glass is you and that the other glass is the world. The water is an experience you desire. Now, pour the water from the world-glass into the you-glass knowing that you are pouring your desire from the world into your personal experience.

To "reprint" something from before:

"However you imagine that it works,
That's how it works." -- The rule of metaphor

*Q: I like how you think. Yes, you are correct that the mirror is inside my experience.
I tried the mirror method several times, and I kept a private journal. I had a few difficulties with the method:

• very little somatic feedback -- these sessions averaged about 40 minutes long;
• difficulty with visualizing -- though I seem to imagine my world quite well;
• difficulty accessing emotion.
  The Ho'oponopono approach as I used it required no visualization but provided instant access to emotion and provided nearly instant somatic feedback that it had been accomplished.
  Of course, the access to emotion was attached to my repentance for my responsibility for projecting a hardship for my friend, so it was more emotional than intending to jump with a mirror to improve my ability to jump. However, I could have accomplished the same by taking responsibility for my friend's not having the power to resolve her loneliness because I had accepted that I was powerless to shift my own reality.
  Instead of saying this method is easier, let's simply offer it as another technique and list the pros and cons. For someone who has strong visualization skills and easy emotional access the mirror method might be more suitable. Someone like me with strong empathetic triggering of emotion and lesser visualization skills this method would be more suitable.*

Yeah, the word "visualization" is a bit of a problem I guess, because it implies an actual visual. Maybe the word "shadow-sensory imagery" is better. Anyway, the main point is that doesn't have to be visual, just summoning a sensory aspect of any sort is sufficient. Even just the feeling-idea of something. What it's important is that the experience you summon is viewed as actually being the thing your are trying to access and change.

So if I think of my (say) friend in trouble. That thought is that situation, and having accessed that thought I may allow it deepen and become clearer, and then adjust it accordingly.

The "full responsibility" part is really just a recognition that you are experiencing your own "private view" and that everything in your apparent world is you. Things are not your fault but they are literally aspects of you. So if you want them to change you must do so yourself, either indirectly via second cause ("causing" an email to your sister which apologies for the trouble you caused at the wedding) or directly via first cause (accessing the "sister relationship" directly in your mind and modifying it). Both are actually first cause, of course, because that's all there is.

[On the complexity and detail of the mirror method]. Is it not a bit too complicated for what you might do with two glasses and some water?

You might do it with two glasses of water, but how many everyday people are going to take it seriously and actually declare that the glasses and water literally are that situation?

The pomp and ceremony of the mirror method ritual and its opacity to logic are beneficial for getting people to anticipate that something valid is going on. Mirrors do have that "other dimension" vibe and setting things up to be a bit scary and detached from normal experience really helps commitment - the implicit declaration that this ritual corresponds to dramatic change. The other methods listed (subjective imagination, tesseract magick, re-patterning) are more direct but people do like to feel they are performing an action before they will commit to change. The main problem is that we can't actually experience willing or intending, we can only experience the result. So folk tend to want to "do" something that they can call "the act", even though that is a result too.

Of course, fault is a loaded word, and I don't recall using the word.

No, you didn't use the word "fault". It was me using it preemptively (for those who might read) because it's often the first thing people think of when it comes to the notion of being responsible for the world - rather than getting the "it's all you" interpretation.

EDIT: I forgot to add: thanks for the thoughtful post, it was a well-written read!

It all boils down to building and accepting a model that allows a space for your intentions to work. Different strokes for different folks. You are welcome. Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. I always enjoy reading your thoughts.

Yes. And the models you make are made from the same stuff as the experiences you are having. Really, a model is just another experience, another observation which you've "decided" means this. It really is all about ascribing meaning to things.

Responsibility=Response Ability

Cute!

I agree. I think that is where religions went wrong, when people started treating abstract and symbolic ideals too literally, and the ideas behind symbols went dead. The same with the mirror - it doesn't matter what kind of candle you use :-P you can invent your own ritual entirely, it is the spirit of the whole thing that counts.

Although those electronic candles are a poor choice, simply for elegence of design. They are the Comic Sans of the illumination world and the God Of Dimensional Jumping will surely look upon their use poorly! ;-)