PDA

View Full Version : Alternate dimensions?? Planes of Reality??



Messenger
2005-Feb-28, 12:35 AM
Little help here, for the science-challenged??

Went to see Constantine last night. Really enjoyed it -- but, alot of mention of adjoining planes of reality & whatnot.

Okay, what's the low-down on parallel planes of dimensions? The way they throw around references to these things around in the movies, I should be able to find one in my closet...on the other hand, that would explain the socks....

Do these things exist, or are they Bad Science??

novaderrik
2005-Feb-28, 02:58 AM
there has got to be other dimensions with goateed versions of the good guys- that fits right into the human (or at least the Hollywood) desire to tie everything into the duality of man and a bunch of other pseudo mythological psychological mumbo jumbo to make the people that just spent $8 to sit thru 2 hours of stuff blowing up really loud feel like they learned something about themselves.
so, if there are other dimensions, i must be the bad Derrik, since i have the goattee. the "good" me must live areally boring life..

Jpax2003
2005-Feb-28, 04:41 AM
there has got to be other dimensions with goateed versions of the good guys- that fits right into the human (or at least the Hollywood) desire to tie everything into the duality of man and a bunch of other pseudo mythological psychological mumbo jumbo to make the people that just spent $8 to sit thru 2 hours of stuff blowing up really loud feel like they learned something about themselves.
so, if there are other dimensions, i must be the bad Derrik, since i have the goattee. the "good" me must live areally boring life..Wasn't that a South Park episode?

Messenger
2005-Feb-28, 05:16 AM
Actually, the theology in Constantine wasn't bad, and kind of weird for me, because I'd just posted very similar sentiments on this site a couple of days before. But where, exactly, are these alternate dimensions? They keep being mentioned in all kinds of tv shows and movies, but I don't really understand the concept. I'm interested because of the frequency of the references, and also because periodically God gets posted out to one of these alternate dimensions. Enquiring minds need to know.

The Supreme Canuck
2005-Feb-28, 05:22 AM
Well, by definition, these dimensions are simply... not here.

*Cough*

You just can't get there from here.

Messenger
2005-Feb-28, 05:53 AM
Sooo helpful... #-o In other words, they don't exist at all?

The Supreme Canuck
2005-Feb-28, 05:54 AM
They may. Or not. We can't know since information would be just as unable to travel as us.

Wow. Helpful. :-?

Messenger
2005-Feb-28, 06:37 AM
No matter. I'm assuming that someone has postulated their existence, sometime. I'll go wade through some of my books and see what I can find.

papageno
2005-Feb-28, 12:25 PM
there has got to be other dimensions with goateed versions of the good guys- that fits right into the human (or at least the Hollywood) desire to tie everything into the duality of man and a bunch of other pseudo mythological psychological mumbo jumbo to make the people that just spent $8 to sit thru 2 hours of stuff blowing up really loud feel like they learned something about themselves.
so, if there are other dimensions, i must be the bad Derrik, since i have the goattee. the "good" me must live areally boring life..Wasn't that a South Park episode?
More like Star Trek "Mirror Universe" episodes (and imitations).

SkepticJ
2005-Feb-28, 05:04 PM
Well if Brane Hypothesis or something like it is true then our universe is stuck on a "brane" and their are others. But we're not talking mysticism here though. No hell brane or whatever. But some of the brane universes could have weird physics compared to our's. Another universe could be only a millimeter away on another brane. Time will tell.

Jpax2003
2005-Mar-01, 06:15 AM
One of my favorite comments about traveling from one dimension to another was in Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy series: "firing rockets at right angles to reality".

I don't think the dimensions as depicted in movies is like what we would realistically experience. They say we live in the 3rd dimension. However, I wonder if we might actually exist in the fourth dimension but witness events in the 3rd dimension. The idea that a hypersphere moving across 3D would look like a small dot expand to a large sphere then recede back to a dot and disappear might be extrapolated to explain physical reality while also explaining a "spiritual" reality not detected directly by science. It's just an idea I have.

Messenger
2005-Mar-01, 03:16 PM
The idea that a hypersphere moving across 3D would look like a small dot expand to a large sphere then recede back to a dot and disappear might be extrapolated to explain physical reality while also explaining a "spiritual" reality not detected directly by science. It's just an idea I have.

I like it! My head just exploded, but I like it. :D

Edymnion
2005-Mar-01, 04:37 PM
Okay, the idea of alternate planes of existance are actually valid in science.
As humans, we are capable of percieving only three and a half dimenions. The 3 "physical" dimensions, and limited perception of the 4th dimension, time. But, there are actually dozens if not hundreds of dimensions. Only problem is, we can't percieve them.

For a simple example of this, imagine one of those egyptian mural drawings where the person is always shown in profile. They can look left, or right. Lets say thats the only two directions they can look in, those are the dimensions they can percieve. They can't look up, so they can't see what is above them, and they can't look out, to see you looking at them. Its sort of the same thing with us and the other dimensions. They're there, we just aren't able to turn our heads in the right directions to see them.

It is theoretically possible to have creatures that exist in those higher dimensions, but are incapable of perceiving or interacting with the lower dimensions, in the same way the egyptian drawing can't grab the pencil out of the artist's hand. It would be a case of one world with multiple layers, and one layer is totally seperate from the other. After all, if we can't see or affect their dimensions, and they can't see or affect ours, there would be no way to even know they were there.

Which, using the previous example, gives a rather unsettling possibility. Just like the artist can move in 3 dimensions while the drawing cannot, what would happen if some creature or being existed in a dimension(s) that we can't perceive, but where it could see and manipulate ours? Like the artist that can draw things in the 2D world of an animation?

Now, do these higher dimensions actually exist? Well, a great deal of our higher level sciences rely on their existance to do calculations with, and those calculations seem to work, so those dimensions do appear to exist, with mathematical proofs for their existance. Could there be life forms of some kind in those higher dimensions that we cannot possibly see? We don't know, and at the moment, there is no way to know. We cannot test this in any way, meaning that part of the discussion is pseudo-science at best. Really, it boarders more on the realm of religion than it does science. What lies beyond the reality that we can see, if our 3.5 dimensional body is the only one there is, or if there are higher planes of existance that we move on to or not.

One of the few realms where hard science meets philosophy and religion on even ground.

eburacum45
2005-Mar-02, 08:28 AM
A very good overview of the current multiple universe therories can be found on Max Tegmark's pages:
http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/multiverse1.html

One concept which is less popular these days is the many-worlds scenario, which has inspired countless parallel universe science fiction scenarios (including Sliders on TV).

Although the Many-Worlds interpretation is real theory to explain various quantum effects, there is no understood mechanism which could lead to the creation of so many potential universes. As Toseek calculated on a different thread, the number of possible parallel worlds is vast beyond imagining.

Messenger
2005-Mar-04, 03:23 PM
Thank you so much for your replies. I'm relatively well-educated in a few areas, but my ability to do math is so lacking, I was steered out of sciences very early on. My concentration was almost totally in the arts, and so, alot of basic concepts just aren't there when I try to understand sciences. However, that said, I did see that Simpsons episode where Homer "falls" into the three dimensional universe. So I have a slight head start on the concepts here. :D


Which, using the previous example, gives a rather unsettling possibility. Just like the artist can move in 3 dimensions while the drawing cannot, what would happen if some creature or being existed in a dimension(s) that we can't perceive, but where it could see and manipulate ours? Like the artist that can draw things in the 2D world of an animation?

Which is where God & Hell come in in the movies. Would a timeless dimension (if I can attempt to describe it) qualify as a dimension beyond ours? Religious tradition actually offers very little in terms of a description of where we go when we die; it's either going to be very, very good, or very, very bad, and that's pretty much all we know. Religion just concentrates on getting us there. If something is completely interactive with our dimension, to the point where it exists simultaneously with us, and in it's own dimension, would that qualify as an alternate dimension? Sorry if these are dumb questions.


Now, do these higher dimensions actually exist? Well, a great deal of our higher level sciences rely on their existance to do calculations with, and those calculations seem to work, so those dimensions do appear to exist, with mathematical proofs for their existance

Math is amazing. I can't do it, but it's really amazing. :D What sciences rely on alternate dimensions? Quantum physics? The dimensions being there, mathematically speaking, what do we do with them? Anything at all?

Rick Sobie
2005-Mar-19, 07:57 AM
Little help here, for the science-challenged??

Went to see Constantine last night. Really enjoyed it -- but, alot of mention of adjoining planes of reality & whatnot.

Okay, what's the low-down on parallel planes of dimensions? The way they throw around references to these things around in the movies, I should be able to find one in my closet...on the other hand, that would explain the socks....

Do these things exist, or are they Bad Science??

From my investigations/experiences etc, in meditation and dreamlike states and all the experiences of lucid dreaming, astral travel, and what not, I came to the conclusion that this reality is a manufactered space.

That is to say, it is like a stage and we are but players on it as Shakespeare stated.

I have an analogy...

Picture a room, two or more thrones, you and your party sit in the thrones and someone flips the switch you are born on earth into a play of sorts with some parameters set for your experience, and a path of likelihood which you will follow, that being what has been reffered to as the straight and narrow path.

Now with your conscience as your guide, you attempt to stay on the path.
Or venture off for a more exciting experience etc.

Along the way are markers of a sort and dreams as well allow you to reflect on your progress. A higher level of dream is a shared experience with others, who may be also within this space, and with others who are back where the machine is.

At times you may find yourself having a lucid dream in another manufactured space, which is designed to maybe answer questions or further your understanding of the interplay within this play.

If you are fortunate enough, you may be beamed out of the machine and find yourself in a different world again in a dream-like state but so real it is indistinguishable from this one.

A bit further and you may be partially awake, then go into slight sleep paralysis, but still be conscious, still able to move, but aware that your body is within a field of some kind that has got you captured in a way. That is to say this beam or energy has you and you can feel it and it is making you sluggish but you can get up, and move about with a little effort, and you are drowsy because of the control the beam has on you and then suddenly you are beamed elsewhere, and find yourself in a different place, and then partial sleep paralysis again, then awake in that location.

Then after you have visited, the reverse occurs, and you go through the process and are back home, then to finsih off the experience, a short dream of your venture there, to cloud the reality of the experience all to protect your consciousness from any shock of the adventure and then awake.

That is how the normal beam me up Scotty experience occurs.

Now reality itself, is in accordance with the laws of physics.

The elements have a De Broglie wave characteristic and on a specific frequency. Each element being on a distinct frequency. But the scale of frequency is not continuous, that is to say that between those frequencies, are other frequencies which are never used in this reality.

As you can imagine there are an infinite number of possible frequency combinations, and providing they have the same set, but are offset from this it can constitute a separate plane of existence.

Now if the relationship between those frequencies, is the same, the reality will look the same.

If it is much higher or lower by offset, your experience will be more or less intense.

So a normal dream, with a lower offset of frequencies, seems less real, and going higher it becomes more real and passes this level of reality into the super real. Where reality attacks the senses somewhat and it takes a bit to adjust to the intensity of it.

Now some people have all sorts of abilities which they have developed or have been born with which allow them to interact with this setup and even to react further on more than one plane of existence at the same time.

Some people can even use their own consciousness, their minds eye, to create mental imagery. In this way they are imitating the process using their own minds.

Beyond that they can create strong mental imagery and project it, and even observe things through the collective unconscious.

Beyond that they can feel their phantiom self, their spirit body, as those do who lose a limb, still feel that phantom limb. If you are aware of your phantom body or your spirit body, it resides in a type of non linear speace of no space and no time. And although people are not quick to discuss it, very many people can even interact with it between themselves, and even feel with it to a degree.

And they sing about it too, as in Ray Charles, who was blind and so developed his other sensory perceptions.

He sang "I love you in a place, where there's no space or time"
from the song "A song for you" (http://ray-charles.lyrics-songs.com/lyrics/7420/)

But keep in mind that only by experiencing these things for yourself will you come to accept it as real, because even with the Lorentz transformations, you realize that the apartus which might be used to study reality, is itself made of the same stuff and it cannot observe the thing in and of itself objectively.

So life is a subjective experience, but you may get an objective view if you have the good fortune to be beamed elsewhere or even lucid dream to the extent that it appears as real as this realty.

I wrote a bit of a story based on this and am planning on turning it into a romantic comedy and you can read it here (http://www.members.shaw.ca/rsobie/) if you like.

WaxRubiks
2005-Mar-26, 03:44 AM
would you even know if you had entered an alternative universe?
when you go to the shop for all you know you maybe leaving the universe that your house was in and entering a very similar one, how would you know?
and when you go home again, you go back to the same house and the same dimention(or universe).

collegeguy
2005-Mar-28, 01:09 AM
Well if Brane Hypothesis or something like it is true then our universe is stuck on a "brane" and their are others. But we're not talking mysticism here though. No hell brane or whatever. But some of the brane universes could have weird physics compared to our's. Another universe could be only a millimeter away on another brane. Time will tell.

What do you mean time will tell? Just a question, I don't mean to offend. Or you think we will be able to travel to other dimensions one day?

eburacum45
2005-Mar-28, 06:52 AM
This may be possible; if it is I would suggest that these other planes, or other branes, or whatever are actually difficult-to-reach parts of our own universe, rather than other universes.
Similarly the galaxies outside our observable universe may seem to be forever beyond our reach; but if we wver find a wormhole or some other kind of space-time flaw which allows us to go there, these newly accessible worlds would be part of our universe, not part of another.

If (for instance) gravity waves or some other form of radiation can cross the boundaries between branes we may be able to detect objects and events in adjacent branes; it may be possible to transmit information to these locations as well, eventually perhaps even ourselves or our avatars.

That would be an interesting development...

farmerjumperdon
2005-Mar-29, 09:09 PM
I think the multi-verse stuff is just a play on words. Universe means all that there is - period. If what we know as the current Universe were found to include things that had not been experienced or observed before; then those things are simply included in my new inventory of the Universe.

Even if we were to uncover new dimensions (a real stretch but for the sake of thought experiment, OK), why does observing or experiencing them make them any less a part of our Universe (which means everything in and about our existence) than the things we already know about. One Universe, and by definition, it includes EVERYTHING, whether we are aware of it's existence or not.

Why is time counted as 1/2 of a dimension? Just curious, since it was not elaborated on at all. IMO, we exist in 3 dimensions - with time not sharing all the properties of the 3 dimensions.

The artist/painting analogy is thin (pun). Seriously, if the painting only existed in 2 dimnensions, the artist would not experience it at all. If it had zero thickness, the artist would have no way of measuring it's existence, much less seeing it.

We can not experience anything that does not have 3 dimensions. This is a general and mostly intuitive statement; I am open to being proven wrong.

Lastly, the time travel thing bugs me, mostly because of the way it is worded. It should be called time dilation. The only reason "travel" is even involved is because moving at high speed (traveling) is required for time dilation to occur. The stories or thought experiments seem to always use traveling far away, which I think leads to the misconception. How about a thought experiment where you moved at the speed of light, around and around on an 8' circle of track. Skip the details about accelerating, and decellerating, and vomiting. If you did it for 10 years, measured by the people that strapped you on the train, when you stopped they will have aged 10 years and you some amount less. You did not go anywhere but round and round a little track.

Think about it. In the typical thought experiment like this they have the "traveler" always making a round trip - which is the only reason anybody would even notice time dilation occurred. If you made a one-way trip fast enough and far enough away for time dilation to occur, neither you nor the folks at your arrival point would have any frame of reference to notice that time dilation had occurred. It is only when you return to the place you began that anybody would notice that time had passed differently.

Calling it time travel makes it sound, especially to laymen, that you could step into a machine and zoom around the Universe, back and forth through time as if you were on a really fast city bus. At least on the scale in which we exist, the arrow of time is one-directional.

Vilim
2005-Mar-30, 04:40 AM
Why is time counted as 1/2 of a dimension? Just curious, since it was not elaborated on at all. IMO, we exist in 3 dimensions - with time not sharing all the properties of the 3 dimensions.


Probably because we can move forward in it but really have little control over it. Through time dialation we can move through it at different rates, so it is a half dimension



The artist/painting analogy is thin (pun). Seriously, if the painting only existed in 2 dimnensions, the artist would not experience it at all. If it had zero thickness, the artist would have no way of measuring it's existence, much less seeing it.


We can approxamate that a painting is in two dimensions. Technically the atoms which make up the paint are in 3 dimensions, but those are really the medium, you can scan it into a comptuer and represent it conceptually as a two dimensional pixel array.

By definition, a painting and a photograph is the projection of our three dimensions onto a two dimensional plane, it isn't the fact that technically it exists in 3 dimensions, it is the information that is important.



We can not experience anything that does not have 3 dimensions. This is a general and mostly intuitive statement; I am open to being proven wrong.


Sure we can, again, it is an approxamation, however the text on a piece of paper exists at our scale in two dimensions, if I look at it on an angle I can't percieve any third dimension to it. If you zoom in the third dimension of the ink becomes evident however from my point of view text on a piece of paper exists in two dimensions.


How about a thought experiment where you moved at the speed of light, around and around on an 8' circle of track. Skip the details about accelerating, and decellerating, and vomiting. If you did it for 10 years, measured by the people that strapped you on the train, when you stopped they will have aged 10 years and you some amount less. You did not go anywhere but round and round a little track.

I think people use the travelling to a distant star analogy because it is simple and linear, with a circle track you are constantly accelerating, I am not sure what woulr happen with respect to time dilation when you were on a track.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Mar-30, 01:35 PM
Approximations are not relevant if the approximation significantly changes the outcome and does not hold true to the idea. Paintings, pictures, screen displays, etc; sort of work as an analogy, but fail as a practical experiment. You definitely are not going to percieve them if they only exist in 2 dimensions. I'll give you that viewing a painting is an approximation, but it is strictly an illusion because of the scale you mention. Just being able to see it guarantees it exists in at least 3 dimensions - not 2. You might only be seeing 2 of it's dimensions, but given your knowledge, you know that it must have a 3rd dimension, or there would be nothing to see.

By what definition is a painting a projection onto a 2-dimensional plane? The surface being painted has 3 dimensions, the paint has 3 dimensions - strictly speaking, there is nothing 2 dimensional about it other than the fact that you are choosing to ignore, or are not aware of the 3rd dimension. Doing so does not remove the 3rd dimension.

I'm not sure why the information being conveyed is relevant, other than the fact that the information is only available to you because it does exist in 3 dimensions.

I think it is more accurate to say we experience time differently than to say we move through it. Could you move over it, under it, sit on top of it? Saying you move through it again sounds like it is some physical entity that you could get to by getting on a bus.

NoXion
2005-Mar-30, 03:09 PM
I find the idea of a creature that exists in more than 3.5 dimensions to be fascinating; think about it, you would never be able to catch or cage such a creature, as it could simply move outside of your grasp in a similar manner that you or I could step outside a circle drawn in the ground.

A fully 4-dimensional creature would be able to move about time similar to a 3.5D creature on a conveyor belt; the creature could 'move backwards' slowly so that it percieves time slower, or could actually 'travel' backwards in time at the same rate it goes forward, effectively stopping time for itself (Naturally evolved bullet-time anyone?) Or it might even be able 'go backwards' faster than the rate of time in order to go back to the time before you captured it. It naturally follows that such a creature would be able to accelerate time for itself as well. If it 'stands still' then time flows for it as normal.
(The conveyor belt was the best analogy I could think of. If anyone has a better one, please share)

A creature that can move in extra spatial dimensions wouldn't need to tick around with time, and could simply waltz out of the 3.5D cell you tried to put it in.

Just the musings of a layman, I've probably made some grevious errors somewhere. But it would make brilliant sci-fi.

farmerjumperdon
2005-Mar-30, 04:38 PM
This is why I do not cosider time as a dimension as I do the other 3. You can move up/down, sideways, etc within the framework of the other dimensions; but you can not do so with time. You can experience it differently, but not move around freely along the coordinates of time.

I think of time not as a dimension in itself, but as a description of the phenomena we experience as a result of existing for more than a singular presence. Time is our way of giving order to events, and is relative based on the frame of reference for the observer. I think talking about it as a corporeal thing is very misleading and ends up leading to analogies with things like conveyor belts and the like. Time does not lend itself to any analogy that requires it to take a physical form.

Is there any evidence that more than 3 dimensions exist? (Other than time?). I ask this because it seems to me that these extra dimensions only exist as part of supporting tenuous theories that require their existence. String theory for example (which because of the energies required for experimentation appears to only to be able to ever exist as a thought experiment), calls for 10 dimensions. Never mind that there is no other reason to believe they exist. The dimensions are needed for the theory, and some people like the theory, and so they like the number of dimensions at 10.

If there are dimensions that operate on a scale that is small beyond our ability to ever observe them - are they relevant to our existence? Is it the Planck limit that draws a line on our ability to observe prior to a certain time or experience anything smaller than a certain size? If so, does their existence (the other 7 dimensions) have any consequence for us at all? Might they exist and have been relevant in the energies of the Big Bang, but now have no relevance at all in a cooled-down Universe? Can they even be said to exist if the energies needed to create them will never be conjured up again?

Must stop rambling.

WaxRubiks
2005-Mar-31, 09:56 AM
Isn't time just the changing of entropy?

Jpax2003
2005-Mar-31, 10:51 AM
I think a painting is a three dimensional construct depicting a two dimensional image representing data abstracted from any number of dimensions.

I used to think we existed in a 3D world. Then I thought it was 4D with the incusion of time (although 3.5D makes more sense upon reflection). Now I have a hypothesis that includes at least 4D (4.5D with time included) with the possibility of 7D (3.5-3.5)and I have an inkling of a 10D (3.5-3-3.5) universe.

At the risk of exploding Messenger's head again (see my post above) I have a hypothesis that suggests we are not 3D entities but at least 4D beings that are experiencing the 3.5 world due to the construction of the universe. Our bodies could be similar to a hyper-cube, a 3d representation of a 4d being. This could go a long ways toward explaining some paranormal or psychic phenomena. (I say some because I think most reports are bunk.) The explanation is that like a hypercube, that can move in and out of existence in the 3d world apparently appearing and disappearing out of nowhere, so may information be exchanged out of a normal channel through distance (clairvoyance) or through time (precognition).

That sounds fanciful, but the nuts and bolts may be that a "soul" not only has a higher intelligence and emotional center but also a "sub-conscious" analog that runs the 3.5D body via direct interaction with biochemistry on the quantum level. The hypothesis is that this hyper-body-sub-conscious actively collapses quantum uncertainties via direct observation. I think of it as a corollary of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Edymnion
2005-Mar-31, 03:38 PM
The artist/painting analogy is thin (pun). Seriously, if the painting only existed in 2 dimnensions, the artist would not experience it at all. If it had zero thickness, the artist would have no way of measuring it's existence, much less seeing it.

We can not experience anything that does not have 3 dimensions. This is a general and mostly intuitive statement; I am open to being proven wrong.He said he wasn't a scientist, and wanted a non-technical explination.

So, I used an analogy. It was not ment to be a 100% accurate, just generally correct enough to get the point across.
This is why I do not cosider time as a dimension as I do the other 3. You can move up/down, sideways, etc within the framework of the other dimensions; but you can not do so with time. You can experience it differently, but not move around freely along the coordinates of time.Which is why I count it as a half-dimension as far as we are concerned. We can percieve it, but we cannot affect it directly in any way.

Messenger
2005-Apr-01, 06:03 AM
(I'm a woman, by the way). I'm still reading, please don't mind if I don't jump in and participate...it's like poetry, really; I sense there is a deeper, coherent meaning, but it eludes me... I feel that way about math, too. :D

I'm sure there are explanations for things that are currently beyond our understanding. I've read too many stories of premonitions, including one particularily poignant one in the newspaper about a guy who had a dream about a disaster that actually took place the next day, killing several people, who asked "what was the point of me seeing it, if I couldn't do anything to stop it?"

There's alot of stuff that happens to us that we not only don't know how to explain, we don't even know what to do with it. Maybe if we knew more about it, we would know how to use it. Maybe precognition does have something to do with different dimensions, and with time. When you think about it, what an enormous survival skill precognition would be to any species. If it is possible, evolution would select for it with a vengeance. I hope that eventually science will explain all of it.

I read The Stars My Destination the other day; it's a classic of sci-fi, and I highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it already. It proposed that the ability to manipulate time was going to be the next step in human evolution.

Jpax2003
2005-Apr-01, 09:49 PM
The hypothesis I am working on is not anywhere near completion or a comprehensive theory, but I have a couple ideas for possible experiments. Many of these experiments are already suggested for other forms of paranormal investigation so nothing new there, but I twist some of them a little differently. I'll need to dig into my records to recall what I actually described as I've been working on this off and on for over 4 years.

I agree that if paranormal abilities were true then nature might select for them, but it's hard to quanitify. An apocolyptic vision could allow an organism to avoid disaster or it could induce paroxysm. I suspect it might have to do with brain size. Part of the hypothesis is that the cellular design and biochemistry of the biological computer dictate how much of the "hyper-mind" can be processed/accessed with it (kinda like how older hardware can't run newer software). Dreaming is like an access algorhythm that uploads the day's events and experiences to the hypermind (fast broadband upload stream vs. slow but widespread transactional interchange during wakefullness), but more importantly it clears the local memory for the next day. Studies have suggested that lack of sleep causes mental problems, and a computer analog might be like having a full and fragmented hard drive.

Another vague idea I had was that the quantum level engineering of biochemistry might result in improper collapses of uncertainty upon death resulting in a slight decrease in mass throughout the organism or possibly just in the brain and CNS. There is at least one study that claims that bodies lose a very small amount of weight upon death. I think they said it was maybe a quarter ounce. However, this is all just an incomplete hypothesis.