http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127002.800-body-illusions-leave-your-body-behind.html seems to be the first link - there is a video and some further articles and referencing. I once did a poll on what proportion of the population believes David Copperfield can really do such tricks as flying over the Grand Canyon. I have kept the results secret as I would be too embarrassed to admit genetic similarity to the minority that responded 'yes'. One gets to relativity by jumping off a cliff and thus seeing a cannon ball travel in a flat trajectory. Given survival rates of cliff jumpers, one assumes this is a thought experiment. There are a number of centres around the world which specialise in disorientation chambers and the like - just imagine if, in reality, these are called 'schools'.
On 23 Mar, 12:52, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > Was one of the volunteers David Copperfield? > > On Mar 23, 7:46 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 23 Mar, 07:10, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > New Scientist has a special report on out of body and other > > > illusions. Under normal circumstances, your sense of self is firmly > > > anchored inside your body. Sometimes, though, something goes awry, the > > > connection between body and self breaks down and you have an out-of- > > > body experience. Such moments occur when brain function is disturbed, > > > such as after a stroke or epileptic seizure, or while on drugs (no > > > doubt we have our own drugged-up, epileptic stroke experimenters in > > > here). In 2007, however, two research teams independently reported > > > ways of inducing an out-of-body experience in the lab in normal > > > healthy people. The techniques differ slightly, but both involve > > > feeding volunteers video images of themselves from an unusual > > > perspective while applying tactile stimulation, somewhat like the > > > rubber hand illusion. Get volunteers to stand about 2 metres in front > > > of a video camera while wearing goggles displaying video images, > > > converted into a holographic-like 3D projection - the volunteers see a > > > version of their own backs. When they stoked the volunteers' backs, > > > many reported a weird feeling that they were somehow inside the > > > virtual body in front of them (Science, vol 317, p 1096). > > > > The volunteers also experienced "proprioceptive drift" towards the > > > virtual body: they felt as if they were standing in the position of > > > their virtual self. When the researchers turned off the display, moved > > > their volunteers backwards and asked them to return to their original > > > position, many overshot towards where they felt their virtual body had > > > stood. A feeling of out-of-body levitation by repeating the > > > experiment with volunteers who were lying down (Consciousness and > > > Cognition, DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2008.11.003) has not yet recreated > > > the entire out-of-body experience: It remains an 'as-if' feeling, but > > > they are trying to refine it to the full Flying Harrington. > > > The trick, though, is to come back with information you couldn't > > have got otherwise. When they can do THAT, I'll take notice. Until > > then, it's Houdini stuff; entertaining but not particularly useful. > > > > Ehrsson's team have done something similar, with seated volunteers > > > filmed from behind while a researcher stands to the side of them > > > stroking the volunteer's chest and a space just in front of the camera > > > (see illustration). The volunteers see their own backs, feel the > > > stroking but also see somebody stroking a position just behind them. > > > This strongly creates the illusion that they are outside their own > > > bodies, says Ehrsson (Science, vol 317, p 1048). > > > What's more, when Ehrsson tried swinging a hammer at the previously > > > stroked airspace, it elicited a strong stress response in the > > > volunteer. > > > > I don't know how many realise this, but the relativity experiments > > > were substantially connected to far cruder versions of these recent > > > ones. Who knows what we might be able to 'see for real' if we > > > experienced more illusions? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
