The Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT Experiences (@Harvard Science of Psychedelics Club)
Why Hacker News recommends it
HN commenters point to it as an interesting lecture related to psychedelics, brain geometry and hyperbolic space, with a good intro to hyperbolic geometry.
What it is
Andres Gomez Emilsson of the Qualia Research Institute presents a model of DMT experiences using hyperbolic geometry and dynamical systems theory. He describes how different intoxication levels correspond to changing curvature and information content of experience.
Recommended by 3 HN commenters across 3 different months, 2021 to 2023.
What Hacker News said
Recommends nabla9 · 2021-06 · on “LSD and psilocybin increase the fractal dimension of brain activity”
Here is interesting study lecture and article, maybe somewhat related. The Geometry and objects of things you see in typical to DMT experiences are hyperbolic. Lecture [this video] The Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT Experiences: Symmetries, Sheets, and Saddled Scenes [LINK]
Recommends jlokier · 2022-07 · on “Strange new phase of matter acts like it has two time dimensions”
You might enjoy "The Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT Experiences (@Harvard Science of Psychedelics Club)", [this video]
Recommends travisjungroth · 2023-06 · on “How to create a game using hyperbolic geometry?”
You’re adding another dimension. Sort of a “half” dimension. If you want a distance function in a space that’s non-Euclidean, you’re likely (always?) going to have something you can represent as hyperbolic geometry. Check out metric spaces and measures on Wikipedia. For a “vibes” intro, The Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT experiences has a good intro in the beginning. [this video] I’m no expert on hyperbolic geometry. These things just helped me “get it” in the sense of “I get why that’s a thing”. Also, seeing it for yourself doesn’t hurt.
Cites andresgemilsson · 2021-12 · on “The Hyperbolic Geometry of DMT Experiences (2016)”
Hello! I'm the author of this article. I stand by it and I think comments are failing to engaging with the actual models, phenomenological observations, and synthesis provided. I suspect people here have not actually payed attention to these experiences and may have epistemological assumptions that make them think it's impossible to bring useful information back. In particular, I'll say that the article's analysis assumes indirect realism about perception (it's all "in your head"), it focuses on structural features of the experience (phenomenal character rather than intentional content - I'm not interested in what the machine elves told you, I'm interested in what were the wallpaper symmetry