Messages that can only be understood under the influence of psychedelics

All the people in this thread who decoded it used long exposure or faster playback. Using the latter, for me, it starts to become readable at 2.5x and is essentially a clear static image at 4x. (I had to download the video and play it back using VLC.)

Which for me, makes this claim a bit absurd:

> At a theoretical level, this confirmation is significant because it is the first clear demonstration of a real perceptual computational advantage of psychedelic states of consciousness.

LSD fans might hate this conclusion, but there's no "computational advantage" to having a 2.5x to 4x slower processing speed, which his the only thing actually being shown here.

This is consistent with the idea that the geometric patterns of hallucinogenic drugs are just feedback artifacts in an analog system of your senses, and by imparing its 'clock' signal chemically, you get periodic noise whose geometry is proportional to the signalling frequency and its failures. No higher dimensions, just maybe a lower, impaired, fractal dimension.

There are still theraputic uses for this impairment, and definitely a lot of recreational ones that allow you to discover things about yourself like any other testing or resistance, but hallucinogens are at best biohacking via chemical glitching, not spiritual gateways.

You admit that there is plenty of recreational and therapeutical use for them and then that leads you to the conclusion that they’re not spiritual gateways. I find this surprising as those are one in the same to me.

Spiritual experiences have been about recreation, understanding others, the self, personal growth, coming of age, etc…

I feel like your post in general is full of acknowledgment of these drugs capabilities followed by attempts to downplay it with pejoratives like “chemical glitching” or “lower dimension”. It’s quiet confusing that you seem to think positively of the drugs but then dunk on them in the same breath.

I don’t think being able to explain, categorize and describe phenomena needs to make them less significant or impact. The mechanism of action being non mystical doesn’t need to change the significance of the experience.

This reminds me of a quote from Margaret Boden about her work on understanding creativity in a academic context.

> A scientific understanding of creativity does not destroy our wonder at it, nor does it make creative ideas predictable. Demystification does not imply dehumanization.