Altered states of consciousness induced by breathwork accompanied by music

This is a really strange comment section. The average person sharing their experiences seems very unlike the average HN user.

I feel like I can barely relate to those people, and understanding what they're saying is nigh impossible. The definitions of most things are really vague - even the article of this thread only defines breathwork as "cyclic breathing without pausing, accompanied by progressively evocative music". So... faster breathing while intensifying music is playing?

One issue for me is how anything connected to these topics seems to attract a healthy mix of rational observation, psychedelic users and religious people (old and new). Deciphering which is which is really difficult without already having a foot in the door on this topic.

I was just going to post that the comment section is gone full bozo today.

The alarming thing is that--if you look at their other comments--they are otherwise like the average HN user.

Which is to say, hacking one's wifi router is a legitimate and worthwhile pursuit, but hacking one's mind is not?

I love the line between topics where HN groupthink will insist on the most rigorous studies and completely right off anything not 100% compared to things like this where the more off-the-wall anecdotes and beliefs are the most rewarded.

Compare this thread to anywhere that pornography might be considered harmful for instance.

I think they point more towards the dichotomy of rigorous engineering versus woo.

Formulate hypothesis, test hypothesis, record results, compare results against previous experiments, adjust hypothesis, share the data. Again, I think the problem you have is with the subject matter.

I have no problem with the subject matter and routinely hack my own firmware, I'm just clarifying the point that you seemed to miss. This thread is full of the kind of anecdotal evidence that would be laughed out of the room on any other day. That's not a judgement it's just a fact.

And actually, if I do have a problem it's quite the opposite of what you're suggesting: I'd like us to give more weight to the lived experience of others even in other contexts and regarding other subject matters.

People very easily get confused between the vibes and reality of "rigor". It's a good exercise to consider whether particular views you hold appeal to you because of actual evidence-based analysis or just because they feel science-like to you.

To pick a random example in two directions:

1. "The thoughts, ideas and feelings experienced by a human mind consist of patterns of neurons firing": you'll read this often on HN from people who think of themselves as rational, and it is usually stated in relation to the idea that those thoughts, ideas and feelings can also be experienced by a suitable computer program. This isn't remotely rigorous, though. There are certainly arguments that can be made in favour of it, but there are also arguments against and the whole debate properly belongs to philosophy at this stage, not science, as the questions involved aren't even properly formulated let alone experimentally validated. What science actually tells us is that neurons fire, that there are observable relationships between neuron firing and external stimuli and motor action and that the firing of particular neurons affects the firing of other neurons. Science gives us detailed mechanisms for some of these relationships, and ways of influencing them. This is a vast body of knowledge, but nowhere does it contain the conclusion that "the thoughts, ideas and feelings experienced by a human mind consist of patterns of neurons firing". Perhaps some day it will, once the question of "neural coding" is solved (along with many other such questions) and we've experimentally verified that reproducing a firing pattern alone is sufficient to replicate a subjective experience. Until then the statement isn't science, to the extent that it isn't even formulated in a way that can be supported or opposed by science. It just feels sciencey to some people and that's enough for them.

2. "Meditation can alter the subjective perception of time": This might sound more "woo" than the above, but it's a lot less so. It can quite easily be stated in way that can be quantified and experimentally validated/falsified, and there are studies that have explored it (I have no views on the quality of them). The outcome is not even surprising - time seems to pass more slowly when you sit still and breathe deeply, what a shock!

The word "ineffable" is a common one in the literature that documents altered states of consciousness for good reasons. You must be an initiate. Once you've dabbled in spiritual contemplation, breathwork, or psychedelic journeys, you know what the figurative language points to and it's no longer puzzling why the seemingly separate groups you mentioned come together.

On HN it's very common to see a blog post along the lines of "I found this old piece of equipment with no brand name, I used some network traffic inspection to figure out what it does, I hacked around a bit, I got it working and turned it into a self-ringing doorbell with wifi" (or whatever). All of that is anecdotal, N=1, "I did what worked for me, I hope it's interesting to you". And those posts are highly prized and rightly so.

That's great yes, and I'd like us to give even more weight to the lived experience of others even in other contexts and regarding other subject matters.

I certainly wouldn't argue with that point but I think if you ignore your made up examples and actually look elsewhere in the thread you'll agree as well that the criticism above was not misplaced.

I'm not saying the comments on this post are rigorous. I'm saying the ones elsewhere on HN are not. I therefore see rather less of a disparity between these comments and "the average HN user" than the commenter at the top of this thread. It's just more obvious to them because they don't agree with what's being said.

(Edit: That said, my example 2 seems pretty relevant to at least some of the comments here, no? Eg. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45048410. And my example 1 isn't at all made up: it's a claim made very frequently on HN, and usually implied to be self-evident.)

Oh, the horror, outside world exists. And even scarier, people there are not only hacking a wi-fi routers, but their minds as well.

No, that's a strawman. Honest people don't put words in other people's mouths.

The one other comment here that I responded to was

"I put saliva on my scalp to clean the testosterone from the hair. That one was inspired by cats. The male scalp excretes lots of testosterone which cannot be removed with just shampoo. This also fixes androgenetic alopecia (it does not get reversed, but stops happening)."

That's not hacking one's mind ... rather, it's a series of false claims. I looked at their other comments and found them reasonable and competent ... thus my statement above.

I'm not about to get drawn further into this tangle ... this is my last comment on this subject.

In contrast I like the fact that there is often an indication of what is not substantiated by strong/provable/scientific evidence and what is not. In fact I quite love both these subjective experience reporting and the more sceptical perspectives. A lot depends on the specific subject and whether evidence exists or is feasible to gather. I would hate to not hear about cool sounding ideas that MIGHT work, but is just not endorsed by rigorous chains of evidence. As long as the discussions are honest and in good spirit. People can point out risks and likihoods and alternative explanations. I really like those too.

Let’s talk about the willingness of so many to hijack an unconscious process (breathing), This forces you to reflect on control, and then plunges you into a recursive semantic loop: Did I do this? Or did this happen to me? This is the basis of consciousness hacking through sign activation. It only gets stranger.

It's like you're doing meditation, and thinking "I shouldn't be thinking". But you can't be conscious about being unconscious. Or something like that.

I suspect that's because these topics aren't discussed nearly as frequently as others here.

My input as a non-religious, non-psychedelic user who has done some breathwork: it is simply changing something about the normal functioning of the body (such as oxygen levels) and does induce a mildy altered (but pleasant) state of consciousness for me.

Yes, thank you for your attention on this matter.

And yet, not unusual; some years ago there were posts about nutrition fairly frequently, when Soylent was being developed and SF was high on investor money being thrown around left right and center. People came out and shared their personal experiences with regards to health, diet and nutrition, with the Soylent developer leading the effort in min/maxing food and eating down to a convenient shake, and its proponents sharing their experiences in weight loss, time min/maxing, how food is boring and a distraction, etc. A lot of people had a Steve Jobs-like mentality, believing that eating, thinking about what to eat, etc is a distraction from what they think is Actually Important. Famously Steve Jobs wore the same outfit all the time so he didn't have to think about what to wear.

Some time later it was about microdosing LSD and nootropics.

Of note is that meditation isn't about not thinking per se, more about allowing your thoughts to flow freely.

Which is a weird thing that happened to me or that I became aware of a few years ago, late at night or when I lie down for a nap I can get into that state, it's like dreaming while being awake. Of course, as soon as I'm aware of that I snap out of it, it's like "hey I want to keep following that train of thought" but it doesn't work when it's active.

Of course, if I don't snap out of it like that I will invariably fall asleep, lol.

I read that comment as an obvious - but very well composed - parody.

The next steps in this sort of pretentiousness might be, "multi-threaded breathstreams unmitigated by interstitial cessation, conjoined with progressionist effervescent and aurally delivered syncopathic acoustic tunework" and people will act like that is perfectly normal.

Can you explain how exactly that process happens? The article is still really vague about it, as are most people here. Is it about forcing yourself to hyperventilate? Or forcing your breathing to be at a certain rhythm, regardless of what the rest of your body demands naturally? And how does the music come into play here?

Also, is it dangerous? I know the human body is very sensitive to abnormal blood saturation, so I'm curious what it can do to you.

I'm not asking why these different groups come together, it's not very difficult to understand. The confusing part for me is deciphering which comments and arguments come from which school of thought. That seems to be nearly impossible unless you have personal experience with this topic, and I don't due to it being such an impenetrable topic.

Sorry, but due to having never experienced this, I don't get the importance of asking these questions. The base meaning of your comment is clear to me, but not the part about how this is hacking or indicative of a paradigm shift in your thinking. I just don't have anything to compare that to.

There are 2500+ years of prior art on "breath work", but group think here is to dismiss it as woo.

The abstract does clearly mention HVB as being similar to hyperventilation, so presumably it is similar to "bellows breathing" from yoga / pranayama. They also name-check Holotropic breath work, which I have not studied, but has been a hot topic for several years now.

As best as I can interpret, "cyclic breathing without pausing" means no pausing after full inhale or exhale.

By contrast, "box breathing" would have typically equal durations of in-breath and out-breath, with equal duration of pauses. This style of breathing would be done typically to calm the mind, with slow, long breaths.

Breath can also be asymmetrical (typically exhales longer than inhales, said to be calming). I find this style to be awkward, I guess the inhale has to be more forceful to move the same amount of air as will be exhaled.

To be sure, when a topic is posted that people have some interest and experience with, then we will tell you about our experiences. Sorry if that harshes your mellow...

I don't know why you're interpreting my post like it's written in an accusatory or aggressive way. Seriously, multiple people have done this in response to me and I don't know why. I never speculated on the validity of any of this, or said that it was all woo or fake. Please, kindly leave your "groupthink" and "harshes your mellow" at the door.

All I said is that understanding this topic for someone with no personal experience of what's being described is difficult, especially since there are multiple groups (yes, some of them more focused on unprovable 'woo' than others) who take an interest in this. In those descriptions, telling apart reality from magic is hard when speaking to someone new - but that's not saying that the underlying topic is magical at all.

This compounds the fact that I have no frame of reference to understand what most people here are describing. I wish I had a better reference, but this is genuinely the best I can do as someone with no experiences like these.

Thanks for the extended description of what "breathwork" entails, the disambiguation was very helpful.

Yup. It’s a lovely state of mind. Feels like the executive function has switched off so the usual judgment/self-censoring can’t interfere. It’s like a pure state of creativity/openness.

Between the states of wake and asleep I sometimes (more than once) can see my self floating above a forest, as if I was a drone flying above trees. I realize what is happening, that I'm not asleep and can keep on flying. I can snap out of it, or maybe I fall asleep.

I don't believe it's dangerous at all.

I followed a guided meditation audio initially. It focuses on deep relaxation, lying down and staying very still while you focus on awareness of your body and breath.

I think folks who haven't tried to really relax and connect with their body might be surprised how much awareness and control you can have.

I have a fitbit and I can drop my heart rate quite a bit with practice, I've gotten down to 39 before with breathing and relaxation techniques.