View Full Version : 'Dream Catcher' Can dreams solve other people's problems?

20th April 2014, 02:18
Remarkable new evidence of the power of 'dream telepathy.'

It appears possible that people can intentionally dream details about the personal problems of an unknown individual, simply by examining a picture of the target and then “incubating” or planning to dream about that individual’s problems.

Distinguished cognitive scientist Carlyle Smith, a very careful and rigorist experimentalist who is a Lifetime Professor Emeritus in the Department of Psychology at Trent University in Canada, presented the data in a recent paper (Smith, 2013; "Can healthy, young adults uncover personal details of unknown target individuals in their dreams?"). Smith was and is a driving force in the revolutionary transformation in our understanding of how sleep can facilitate memory consolidation. The design of his experiments on dream “telepathy” were similarly well designed, and so need to be taken seriously.

Experiment 1 was a pilot study focused on the development of experimental materials, procedures and dream coding techniques. I will focus here on experiment 2, in which 66 students were asked to dream about the life problems of a target individual whom none knew. (Neither did Smith himself.) Participants simply viewed the photo and then attempted to dream about the problems of that individual. They were told that the person's problems could be health-related, emotional, financial, or any number of other concerns. (Another 56 students followed the same procedure, but the photo that they examined was of a fictitious face generated by a computer.)

Smith obtained the photo of the target individual from a friend who verified her actual problem before the experiment began. The individual was a middle-aged woman with multiple problems: She had multiple sclerosis, especially in her hands, requiring frequent medication to reduce the pain. She was also the primary caregiver for her mother, who was in the final stages of lung cancer. She had recently lost her husband to an industrial mishap—he was accidentally crushed by a front-end loader, and in the process, a limb was severed. The woman was also involved in a very serious car accident.

To discover whether his subjects could dream about any of this woman’s problems simply by examining a photo of her, Smith coded several types of elements in the dreams of participants both before they attempted to dream about the woman (pre-incubation), and after (post-incubation). The dream categories that were scored included:

1. Any mention of torso or torso problems;
2. Any mention of head parts or head problem;
3. Any mention of a limb or limb problems;
4. Any mention of breathing or breathing problems;
5. Other health problems;
6. Financial problems;
7. Problems related to social or marital relationships;
8. Car/driving problems.

The study found that the proportions of dream elements referring to all these categories combined was significantly larger for subjects post-incubation than at the baseline pre-incubation level. The most-mentioned categories in post-incubation dreams were limb problems, breathing problems, and car/driving problems.

Why Did It Work?

Were these striking results due to chance—a sort of indiscriminate elevation of all kinds of “problems” in the post-incubation dreams? Probably not. In the control group, there was no such elevation in post-incubation dreams. Nor did unrelated high-profile problems like cancer, heart disease, or mental illness appear in any substantial way in the subjects' dreams.

Here's one striking example of a post-incubation dream from a subject in the experimental group:

"[W]oman has crippled hands and can’t open the pill bottle. The right arm does not work and there is a lot of pain. Her hands are all crippled and rolled almost into fists.”

While these results are indeed striking and intriguing, the crucial comparison is between the frequency of “hits” in subjects' post-incubation dreams and the baseline frequency of the generic versions of these “hits" in dreams? In other words, how often do limbs, car crashes and breathing problems occur in dreams at all? Do these post-incubation “hits” rise above those baseline frequencies? Smith tracked baseline frequencies for these topics in his subject's pre-incubation dreams but still found a significant rise in the proportion of hits in post-incubation dreams.

It is reasonable to conclude that Smith has identified something more here than just a statistical artifact.

Lets say that some sort of dream telepathy is real—and that dreams are more sensitive signal detection devices than our daytime mental states. What could account for this sensitivity? Smith mentions a few possibilities: He notes that correlated brain signals between two isolated individuals has been documented using functional magnetic imaging. Striking instances of apparent dream telepathy and similar brain activity patterns has been noted between twins in particular.

Whatever the mechanism, tests of the reality of dream telepathy should continue apace. Use of huge dream communities, like those at dreamboard.com and dreamscloud.com, should be enlisted. If hits continue to rise to above chance levels, as in Smith’s studies, imagine if one had 200,000 dreamers attempting to dream the details of a pictured individual's problems? Thousands to millions of dreamers might be enlisted to dream about possible practical solutions to the target's problems.

Then we might then really begin to understand the power of dreams!

Source: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dream-catcher/201404/can-our-dreams-solve-problems-while-we-sleep


20th April 2014, 02:58
Skywizard I love your threads so much!!!!!!!! You find THE COOLEST stuff -- wtf -- but before you posted,
I was reading (weird huh?) about Quantum Entanglement and the God Concept...

Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently – instead, a quantum state may be given for the system as a whole.

During dreams, like your article says, people can achieve "quantum entanglement" with others -- it's been documented by Carl Jung and many others -- but people just don't seem to be willing to accept the power of the unconscious.

Not to mention, people who dream of death or loss before it occurs.
People who dream about insanity or evil.
And those who experience a Visitation from the deceased in dreams, are often most shocked when the predictions/visions given by the departed turn out to be accurate.


there is a state of existence and awareness just below the MET.
the level where information travels freely, as if we exist at some mystical zero point,
but the body itself remains at rest and within a set physical parameter...

Dreams DO tell the future, or are the arena where the future is fixed...
by Observing we Make Real.

:( yikes!


From http://www.crystalinks.com/holographic.html:

"In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.
Aspect's experiment is related to the EPR Experiment, a consicousness experiment which had been devised by Albert Einstein, and his colleagues, Poldlsky and Rosen, in order to disprove Quantum Mechanics on the basis of the Pauli Exclusion Principle contradicting Special Relativity.
Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.
Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.
University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram."