メインコンテンツまでスキップ

Dr. Andrew Gallimore : DMT の静脈注射技法 : 未知の超知性体から「世界構築の機械」や「超次元の物体」を見せられた

· 約123分
gh_20250617_andrew_gallimore.jpg

前置き​

DMT の静脈注射によって体験時間を長くする技法については過去記事でも取り上げたが、その具体的な成果を Andrew Gallimore がインタビューで語っている。テキスト要約より、音声対話を聴くことを勧める。かなり面白い逸話が登場している。それに対する私の判断は末尾で述べる。

音声対話 by AI

https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/90e95d21-1437-430c-97e7-48b75bfd8277/audio

音声対話→文字起こし

[注意：音声対話を wav ファイルに export し、それを Whisper AI で文字起こしした。Google の生成した音声対話の時点で漢字の読み上げミスがあり（例：Jung の元型 → Jung の もとけい）、さらに Whisper AI が間違って文字起こししている箇所（例：深層心理 → 真相真理）がある。]

こんにちは今回はですね神経科学者のアンドリューガリモン博士の議論をもとにして

DMTジメチルトリプタミンについて深く掘り下げていきたいと思います

はいこの物質まあ一部では世界で最も奇妙な薬物なんて呼ばれているそうですけど

博士の話を聞くとなんかそれもわかる気がしますね

そうですね今回のポイントはなぜこのまあ比較的単純な分子がですね

私たちの知っている現実とは全く違う時として非常に深遠なそういう体験を引き起こすのかというところですね

ガリモン博士が問いかけているのは単なる薬理作用だけじゃなくてもっとこう意識とか現実そのものへの問いなんですよね

まずその体験がすごく変わってるっていう点ですけど博士によるとDMTを取ってほんの数秒ですよね

本当にあっという間ですそれでもう文字通り別の現実に行ってしまう感覚だと日常とは完全に切り離されてるんですね

まさにでその世界にはですね存在がいるって多くの人が報告してるんです

存在ですか

人間でもないし動物でもない言葉にするのがすごく難しいんですけどでも明らかに知性を感じる何かがいると

それで体験者が感じる驚愕の感情っていうのがあのテレンスマッケンナが言った驚愕による死っていう言葉ありますけど

あれが決して大げさじゃないって感じるほど強烈らしいんです

それは尋常じゃないですね

しかもこのDMTがいろいろな植物に含まれててもしかしたら私たちの体の中でも作られてるかもしれないと

そうなんです難易性のDMTですね

自然界に普通にあるかもしれない物質がなぜこれほど効率的に現実認識を揺るがす体験をもたらすのかここが大きな謎です

でガリモ博士が特に問題視しているのはこの体験の何ていうか圧倒的な異質さとその存在との遭遇方角の一貫性なんです

これがパンなる脳が見せる幻覚とかあるいは真相真理の現れっていう説明だけだとちょっと足りないんじゃないかと

なるほどユング的な元方とかそういう話でも説明しきれない

体験の奇妙さを完全には捉えきれないと博士は指摘してますね

ということは博士はもしかしてこれらの存在が私たちの脳に外からアクセスしているみたいな可能性を考えてるんですか

まあそういう可能性を示唆していますね

博士の推測なんですけどこれらの存在っていうのは我々が普段アクセスできないような情報空間にいて

私たちの脳が持っている世界を作る仕組みこれに介入してくると

介入

それで私たちに認識できる形例えば元方的なイメージとかを借りて姿を見せているんじゃないかって考えてるようです

なるほどだからあの理解不能な超次元的な物体とかを見せびらかすように振る舞うみたいな報告もあるんですね

そういう報告もこの仮説とつながってくるかもしれません

その異次元空間をもっと探るっていう試みもあるんですよね

DMTXプロジェクト

ああはいはいインペリアルカレッジロンドンの

DMTを持続的に注入して体験時間を伸ばすと

そうです通常はほんの数分で終わってしまう体験を約30分まで引き伸ばすことに成功したんですね

30分もですか

目的はその異次元空間の構造をもっと詳しく調べて

もし存在がいるなら安定したコミュニケーションが取れることがどうかを探ることでした

非常に野心的な研究です

その参加者の一人アントンビルトンさんでしたっけ

その方の報告すごく印象的でした

ジンジャーブレッドマンって彼が呼ぶ存在が

なんか宝石がついたパッドみたいな技術装置を見せてきたって

ええありましたね

しかも似たような装置の話しながら過去のストラスマンの研究とか

もっと昔のティモシーリアリーの体験談にもあるっていうのは

なんか単なる偶然じゃない気がしますよね

そうですねその報告の一貫性っていうのは確かに気になります

そしてこういう強烈な体験のもう一つの重要な側面として

あのエゴの死と呼ばれる現象があります

エゴの死

はい自分の名前とか体とか自分が人間だっていう感覚すら

完全に溶けてなくなってしまうと

自己同一性の感覚の妖怪ですね

それは一体何を意味するんでしょう

意識っていうのはもしかして体がなくなっても続くみたいな可能性を示してるんですかね

うーんガリモン博士は意識が存続する可能性自体は否定してないんですが

ただそれが我々が普通に考えている

私っていう個人の自我の形で続くかはまた別問題だろうと示唆しています

なるほど

博士自身はどちらかというと物質よりも意識の方が根源的で

私たちが経験しているこの物理的な世界はある意味幻想かもしれないっていう

まあ理想主義的な考え方に傾いているようです

ただ博士は注意も促してますよね

これらの体験とか存在から得られるメッセージについて

ああそうですそうです

謙虚さとかつながりへの気づきとかポジティブな面もある一方で

ええ同時にこれらの存在がトリックスター

つまりいたずら好きで時には騙すような

そういう性質を持つ可能性も指摘してるんです

トリックスター

はいだから彼らが見せるものとか情報を鵜呑みにするのは危険だと

デフォルトの姿勢としては彼らはあなたをからかってるだけかもしれないって

疑うくらいがちょうどいいというのが博士の考えですね

なるほど安易に信じ込んじゃいけないと

そういう継承ですね

いやー不快ですね

DMTっていうのは本当に現代科学じゃ捉えきれないような

深遠な意識状態と未知の存在との接触をもたらす謎の鍵みたいなものなんですね

ええ

こんな単純な分子が私たちの現実認識の根っこを揺るがす力を持ってるっていうのは

改めて考えると本当に驚異的です

こういう極限的な意識の変化の話に触れると

あなた自身の現実に対する見方とか意識の本質あるいは知性って一体何なんだろうってことについて

どんな疑問が浮かんできますか

人類って長い間宇宙みたいな外のフロンティアを探求してきましたけど

ガリモア博士が示唆するようなDMT体験っていうのは

私たち自身の内側にある広大で未知の内のフロンティアの存在を教えてくれてるのかもしれないですね

内なるフロンティアですか

ええ

この内なる探求にもっと真剣に取り組むことが

もしかしたら私たち自身とこの宇宙についての理解を根本から変える可能性を秘めている

そんな風にも思えてきます

概要

DMT体験: 現実の深淵と意識の探求

二つの音源は、Jay Andersonをホストに、神経学者であるDr. Andrew Gallimoreをゲストに迎えたYoutubeポッドキャストの転写です。

この対談では、世界で最も奇妙な薬としてDMTに焦点を当て、その独特な体験や、人間以外の超知能生命体との遭遇について深く議論しています。DMTが脳を流動的で柔軟な状態にし、これらの知的な存在が情報の流れを指示する可能性が示唆されています。また、DMTXと呼ばれる技術を用いてDMT体験を長時間化する試みについても触れ、これにより異世界をより深く探索し、知的な存在との双方向のコミュニケーションを確立できる可能性を探っています。

最終的に、両者は科学的探究と直観的な理解の融合、そして人類がDMT体験を通じて意識のより広範な領域を探索することの重要性を強調しています。

情報源 : Youtube 動画(1:31:29)​

The Bio-Chemical Portal Sending Humans to Alien Worlds

要旨

事実とされる事柄​

  • DMTは、非常に奇妙な薬物であり、経験であると考えられています。
  • テレンス・マッケンナの言葉に「DMTの唯一の危険は驚愕による死である」というものがあります。
  • DMTは数秒のうちに、通常の覚醒世界とは全く関係のない、代替現実へと瞬時に被験者を輸送します。この世界は、しばしば超知的と思われる存在によって豊かに満たされています。
  • DMTは、自然界に遍在する単純な植物アルカロイドであり、数多くの植物種に見られ、おそらく全ての植物種に見られるとされています。
  • DMTは人間の生体システムに内因性（エンドジェナス）に存在します。
  • DMTの体験は通常、非常に短時間（5～7分間）です。
  • DMTは、主観的な耐性がなく、脳への取り込みと脳からの排出が速く効率的であるという薬理学的特性を持っています。
  • DMTX（DMT Extended）技術は、アンドリュー・ギャリモール博士とリック・ストラスマンによって2015年に開発されました。
  • DMTXは、標的制御静脈内注入技術（target control intravenous infusion technology）を使用します。
  • インペリアル・カレッジ・ロンドンのチームは、数年前に初めてこのDMTXモデルをヒト被験者に適用し、約30分間DMT状態を維持することに成功しました。この実験で死傷者は出ませんでした。
  • この体験の延長により、新たな証言が得られました。
  • この研究に資金を提供し、自らも被験者となった不動産王アントン・ビルトンは、常に同じ種類の「ジンジャーブレッドマン」と呼ぶ存在を見ると報告しています。
  • ジンジャーブレッドマンたちはビルトンの首の後ろを確認し続け、ビルトンは彼らがビルトンが元の世界との繋がりをまだ持っているかを確認しているのだと解釈しました。
  • ビルトンはこれらの存在から「宝石をちりばめたパッド」という技術装置を見せられたと述べています。
  • 1960年代のティモシー・リアリーのDMTトリップの初期の報告にも、「金星の昆虫型エルフのような存在」が「宝石をちりばめたパッド」を見せたという同様の記述があります。
  • リック・ストラスマンの研究対象者の一人、ディミトリ（またはスピロス）は、彼自身の目の前に「リアリティシンセサイザー」と呼ばれるダイヤルやノブ、スライダーが付いた物体が現れたと報告しています。
  • プロフェッサー・カール・スミスは、DMTXの全てのセッションを完了した唯一の被験者で、体験中にエンティティがMRIスキャンを認識し、混乱しているように見えたと報告しました。
  • DMTは1950年代以降、血液、尿、脳脊髄液などヒトの体内で検出されていますが、その生体内での調節や機能についてはまだ何も分かっていません。 •
  • DMT（チャクルーナなどの植物由来でも合成されたものでも）は化学的には同じであり、その供給源が体験に違いをもたらすという考えに異議が唱えられています。
  • ヒキガエル（Bufo alvareus）から抽出される5-MeO DMTは、DMTとは異なる分子であり、全く異なる体験を生み出します。
  • アヤワスカは通常、脳内のDMTレベルを喫煙または注射されたDMTの約20%程度にしか上昇させません。
  • DMTは脳内の境界を溶解させ、情報が左右の脳半球間、そして脳全体にわたってより自由に流れることを可能にします。
  • 子供は概ね7、8歳頃までシータ波の状態に主におり、その後の現実理解はより具体的なものになります。
  • DMT体験中には、個人のアイデンティティ（名前、身体、これまでの自己認識）がしばしば消失します。
  • チベット仏教には多くのエンティティや存在が言及されています。
  • 宇宙は「巨大な機械」というよりも「巨大な思考」のように見え始めています。
  • 意識は根本的であるという見解（観念論）があります。
  • 全てのものは究極の現実（ブラフマン、大文字のSで表される自己、タスネス、イズネスなど）の現れであるという考え方があります。
  • 『バガヴァッド・ギーター』には「全ては神の現れである」という引用が含まれています。
  • 想像力は心の中に完全な現実を創造することができ、非物質的な空間でありながら、一見何もないところから極めて複雑な洞察を生み出すことができます。
  • DMTは、人間の存在と、全く理解不能な抽象的な領域との間の、根本的に奇妙な「閾値の障壁」として位置づけられます。
  • テレンス・マッケンナは、DMT体験をせずに死ぬことは、性体験をせずに死ぬことのようであり、根本的な経験であるべきだと述べています。

アンドリュー・ギャリモール博士の主な仮説​

  • DMTX（DMTの延長）: ギャリモール博士とリック・ストラスマンは、DMT体験を安定化・延長することで、DMT空間の探索、分析、実験、そしてそこに存在する存在との本格的な双方向コミュニケーションが可能になると仮説を立てています。DMTの作用の短さは欠点ではなく「特徴」であると考えています。
  • 知性との相互作用: DMT体験は、超知的で、人間でも動物でもない、時空を超えた「別の領域」または「別の次元」に存在するある種の知性との相互作用を含んでいるという仮説です。この知性は、体験者の脳内の「世界構築機構（world building machinery）」を操作し、理解可能な形態やイメージを生成している可能性があります。
  • 方向付けられた世界モデル (Directed World Model): 幻覚は脳によって完全に作り出されるものではなく、DMTによって脳が非常に流動的で可塑性の高い状態になり、知的なエージェントが脳にアクセスし、情報の流れを直接的に指示しているという仮説です。これは「ボトムアップのプロセス」であると考えられています。
  • 内因性DMTシステムのハッキング（EndoDMTX）: 外部からのDMT注入なしに、脳の内因性DMTレベルを自然に上昇させることで、自己生成された、より長いDMT体験を維持できる可能性があるという仮説です。これはDMT生合成の調節メカニズム、特に内因性ペプチドの理解と操作にかかっているとされています。
  • DMTをテクノロジーとして捉える: ギャリモール博士はDMTを「分子テクノロジー」と見なしており、DMTXはその「最新の反復」であり、人類がこのテクノロジーを使いこなすための進歩の道筋であると考えています。
  • DMTを「膜」または「閾値の障壁」として捉える: この体験は、現実と根本的に繋がっている「膜」や「障壁」を通過することであり、通常の知覚から根本的に逸脱することを意味するという仮説です。
  • 現実の幻想性／意識の根源性: 根本的な哲学的な観念論として、意識が根本であり、私たちが知覚する全ての形態や内容（私たちの現実を含む）は最終的には幻想、あるいはより深い究極の現実（ブラフマン、「大文字のSの自己」など）の現れであるという見解を持っています。これは身体の死後も意識が継続するという考えに繋がります。
  • エンティティへの信頼性の問題: DMT空間の雰囲気は「いたずら好きで、ずる賢い」ものであり、エンティティから受け取る情報に対しては「デフォルトで信用しない」という立場を取るべきだと考えています。
timeline と 主要関係者

タイムライン​

  • 1950年代:
    • DMTが人間で検出されるようになる。
    • Stephen ZaraによってDMTが共産主義ハンガリーで西側の科学によって発見される。
    • Timothy Learyが初期のDMT体験をする。この際、彼はヴィーナスの昆虫のような妖精的存在から宝石で飾られたパッドを見せられたと描写している。
  • 1960年代:
    • Timothy LearyがLSDの使用を理由に精神科医に送られ、その体験を語る。
  • 2015年:
    • Dr. Andrew Gallimoreと Rick Strassmanが、DMT体験を安定させ、延長するためのモデル「DMTX」を開発する。
  • 数年前（2020年代初頭頃）:
    • インペリアル・カレッジ・ロンドン・チームが、DMTXモデルを初めて人間被験者で実施する。これはAnton Biltonによって資金提供され、彼自身も被験者となる。
    • Carl SmithがDMTXの全5セッションを完了した唯一の被験者となる。彼の体験では、存在がMRIスキャンを認識し、混乱しているように見えたと語る。
  • 2022年:
    • Anton BiltonがDMTX実験中に、自身が見ている「ジンジャーブレッドマン」と呼ばれる存在が、彼が「他の世界」との繋がりが切れていないか、首の後ろを確認している様子を報告する。彼はまた、宝石で飾られたパッドと技術的な装置を見せられたと述べる。

登場人物​

  • Jay Anderson: ポッドキャストのホスト。意識とDMT体験に魅了されており、Dr. Andrew Gallimoreの著書「Death by Astonishment」のタイトルがTerence McKennaからの引用であることに言及している。
  • Dr. Andrew Gallimore: 神経学者であり、ポッドキャストのゲスト。DMTを「おそらく世界で最も奇妙な薬」と表現し、その体験が瞬時に別の現実へと誘うことを強調している。彼はDMT体験が脳によって「世界構築装置」を操作する超知性体との相互作用であるという仮説を提唱している。Rick Strassmanと共にDMTXモデルを開発した一人。
  • Terence McKenna: 故人。DMTに関する名言「DMTの唯一のリスクは驚嘆による死である」の提唱者。「意識の変革は意識を外部から供給するのではなく、意識自身が外部に存在する」という主張や、「（DMTは）境界溶解剤であり、情報が脳の左右の半球の間をより自由に流れることを可能にする」という考えを提唱した。DMTが「悟りへの近道」であるという見解も持っていたが、それには批判的な意見もある。また、高レベルの仏教徒をDMTに紹介し、「あれらはバルドのより低い光だ」と言われた逸話も語られている。
  • Dennis McKenna: 意識とDMT研究に関心のある人物。DMTが「おそらくすべての植物種に見られる」と主張している。
  • John Mack: 「存在論的ショック」という概念を提唱した人物。これはDMTが現実の存在論的基盤を瞬時に根絶する体験を指す。
  • Rick Strassman: 研究者。Dr. Gallimoreと共にDMTXモデルを開発した。彼の研究の被験者の一人、Dimitri（またはSpiros）は、現実合成装置と思われる装置を見せられたと報告している。
  • Anton Bilton: 不動産王であり、意識の探求者。インペリアル・カレッジでのDMTX研究に資金提供し、自身も被験者となった。彼はDMT体験中に「ジンジャーブレッドマン」と呼ぶ同じ存在を常に見ており、彼らが彼が「他の世界」と繋がっているかを確認していると報告している。また、宝石で飾られたパッドと技術的な装置を見せられたと語っている。
  • Dimitri / Spiros: Rick Strassmanの研究の被験者の一人。DMT体験中に「現実合成装置」と理解したダイヤルやノブ付きの装置を見せられ、その体験全体がその装置によって占められたと報告している。
  • Timothy Leary: 1960年代のサイケデリック研究者。初期のDMT体験で「ヴィーナスの昆虫のような妖精的存在」から「宝石で飾られたパッド」を見せられたと描写している。
  • Carl Smith教授: DMTXの全5セッションを完了した唯一の被験者（Subject Zero）。彼は自身を経験豊富なサイコノートと見なしている。体験中に、自身がスキャンされていることをDMTエンティティが認識し、混乱しているように見えたと報告している。
  • Dr. Stuart Hameroff: オーケストレイテッド客観的収縮理論（量子マイクロチューブル理論）の共同提唱者。量子生物物理学と意識の関係について言及されている。
  • Ram Dass: 意識の継続性について言及された人物。死は「きつい靴を脱ぐようなもの」という引用が紹介されている。
  • David Luke: チベット仏教の存在との遭遇に関する論文を執筆した人物。
  • Stephen Zara: 1950年代にDMTを西側の科学に「発見」した人物。
  • Donald Hoffman: 「意識エージェント」の概念を提唱した人物。これは現実が意識エージェント間の相互作用から生じるという考え。
  • Cormac McCarthy: 有名な作家。アイデアの源について問われた際に、自身の「潜在意識」が制御すると述べ、そのプロセスを説明できなかったという逸話が紹介されている。
  • Alan Watts: 「thusness（如是性）」や「isness（実在性）」といった概念で究極の現実を表現した人物。
  • Hermes Trismegistus: 古代の賢者。「As above, so below（上なるものは下なるもののごとく、下なるものは上なるもののごとし）」という格言が引用されている。
  • Graham Hancock: 現代のDMTに関するパネルをDr. Gallimoreと共に進行した人物。彼が「狂人」と見なされることで、その主張が軽視されがちであるという困難に言及されている。

Me:

「DMTX と呼ばれる技術」を解説して。

AI

DMTXは、神経学者のアンドリュー・ギャリモール博士とリック・ストラスマンによって2015年に開発された、DMT（ジメチルトリプタミン）体験を安定化・延長するための技術です。この技術は、DMTの薬理学的な特異性、特にその速い作用開始と脳からのクリアランス、そして主観的な耐性の欠如を最大限に活用するために考案されました。ギャリモール博士は、DMTの作用の短さが「バグではなく、むしろ特徴である」と述べています。

DMTXの主な目的は、通常数分間（5〜7分間）と非常に短いDMT体験を、持続的に維持することです。これにより、体験中にその領域を探索し、分析し、実験を行い、さらにその領域内の存在たちと本格的な双方向コミュニケーションを確立することが可能になります。

このモデルは、標的制御静脈内注入技術（target control intravenous infusion technology）を用いてDMTを被験者に注入し、望む限りその状態を維持するというものです。インペリアル・カレッジ・ロンドンのチームがこのモデルを初めてヒト被験者に適用し、約30分間DMT状態を維持することに成功しました。死傷者はおらず、実験は非常にうまくいったとされています。

DMTXによって可能になった延長された体験は、新たな証言と可能性をもたらしました。例えば、研究に資金を提供し、自らも参加したアントン・ビルトンは、延長された時間を使って「ジンジャーブレッドマン」と呼ぶ存在たちと過ごし、彼らが示す「宝石をちりばめたパッド」や「リアリティシンセサイザー」のような技術装置を理解しようと試みました。

この延長された状態では、彼のような非専門家であっても、情報を理解しようと時間を費やすことができました。ギャリモール博士は、DMTXがあれば、エンジニア、数学者、言語学者、神学者、芸術家などの専門家をこの領域に送り込み、リアルタイムで情報をチームにフィードバックしたり、質問を受けたりする可能性を秘めていると述べています。これは、深海探査の専門家が「へその緒」で繋がれて深海に潜る様子に喩えられています。

DMTXは、DMT体験が短すぎるために、口頭での報告に頼らざるを得ず、記憶が曖昧になりがちだったという課題を解決します。また、この技術は、DMTが人間自身の生体システムに内因性である（内因性DMT）という事実に基づいて、脳の内因性DMTシステムをハッキングし、外部からのDMT注入なしに脳内のDMTレベルを自然に上昇させて体験を維持する可能性を示唆しています。これは「エンドDMTX」という概念につながるかもしれません。

ギャリモール博士は、DMTXがDMT技術の「最新の反復」であり、人類の進歩に必要な、別の知性とコミュニケーションをとるための手段としての可能性を秘めていると考えています。

Me:

その

  • 「ジンジャーブレッドマン」と呼ぶ存在たちと過ごし、彼らが示す「宝石をちりばめたパッド」や「リアリティシンセサイザー」のような技術装置

を詳しく解説して。

AI

DMTXの延長されたDMT体験において、被験者から報告された特異な存在や技術装置について詳しく解説します。

「ジンジャーブレッドマン」と呼ばれる存在 「ジンジャーブレッドマン」は、DMTX研究に資金提供し、自らも被験者として参加した不動産王のアントン・ビルトンが、DMT体験中に出会ったと報告した存在です。彼は常に同じ種類のエンティティを見ると述べており、彼らが住む領域に入ると、まず地下の領域を通り抜け、その後エッシャーのような奇妙な次元の部屋へと進んだと語っています。

このジンジャーブレッドマンたちは、ビルトンのことを見下ろしているようであり、彼の首の後ろを繰り返し確認していたといいます。ビルトンはこれを、彼らが彼が完全に自分たちの世界へ渡ってしまったかどうか、あるいは元の世界（私たち人間の世界）との繋がりがまだあるかを確認しているのだと解釈しました。

「宝石をちりばめたパッド」（Jewel-encrusted pad） ジンジャーブレッドマンたちが、アントン・ビルトンに示したとされる技術装置の一つが「宝石をちりばめたパッド」です。ビルトンはこの装置がどのようなものか理解できなかったと述べていますが、DMT体験においてエンティティが技術的な装置を示すことはよくある現象だとされています。

興味深いことに、ティモシー・リアリーが1960年代に行った初期のDMTトリップでも、彼が「金星の昆虫型エルフのような存在」（Venusian insect, elfin insect type beings）と表現したエンティティが「宝石をちりばめたパッド」を見せたという報告があります。ビルトンはこのリアリーの体験について知らなかったにもかかわらず、全く同じ言葉を使って描写したため、これは注目すべき再発する特徴であると考えられています。

DMTXによって体験が延長されたことで、ビルトンはこれらのジンジャーブレッドマンたちと時間を過ごし、示された「宝石をちりばめたパッド」を理解しようと試みることができました。ギャリモール博士は、もしビルトンのような非専門家ではなく、エンジニアや数学者、言語学者などの専門家がこの領域に送られれば、彼らはリアルタイムで情報をチームにフィードバックしたり、質問を受けたりして、この種の技術装置の意味をより深く理解できる可能性があると考えています。これは、深海探査の専門家が「へその緒」で繋がれて深海に潜る様子に喩えられています。

「リアリティシンセサイザー」（Reality synthesizer） もう一つの特異な技術装置として、リック・ストラスマン博士の研究対象者の一人であるディミトリ（またはスピロス）が体験した「リアリティシンセサイザー」があります。これは彼の目の前に現れ、ダイヤルやノブ、スライダーなどが付いた物体として描写され、ディミトリはそれがリアリティシンセサイザーであると理解したものの、使いこなすことはできなかったと報告されています。彼の体験全体が、この装置が目の前にあることだけで過ぎていったほどでした。

これらの装置と存在の意義 これらの存在や装置は、DMT体験が単なる幻覚ではなく、何らかの別の知性との相互作用や、現実の根源的な側面へのアクセスを示唆していると考える研究者もいます。ギャリモール博士は、これらのエンティティが「世界構築の機械」（world building machinery）を操作して、体験者の脳に理解可能なイメージを生成している可能性があると示唆しています。彼らは、例えば「超次元の物体」を誇示したり、複雑な「エルフの機械」（elfin machinations）を披露したりするような「見せびらかし」をしているように見えるとも述べられています。

DMTX技術の導入により、これまでDMT体験の短さ（通常5〜7分）のために不可能だった、この領域の探索、分析、実験、そして存在たちとの本格的な双方向コミュニケーションの確立が可能になりました。これにより、これまで曖昧になりがちだった記憶に頼るのではなく、より詳細な報告や情報の収集が期待されています。

全体として、これらの「ジンジャーブレッドマン」や技術装置の報告は、DMT体験の深遠さと、DMTXが提供する知見収集の新たな可能性を示しています。

文字起こし

（以下は Youtube podcast の文字起こしです。ホストは Jay Anderson で、ゲストは神経学者の Dr. Andrew Gallimore です。この文字起こしから、発言者の憶測や主観を除いて、事実とされる事柄を整理して。発言者の主な仮説も要約して。）

(transcript 1of2)

The elevator pitch for DMT is that it instantaneously transports you, within a few seconds, into an alternate reality that bears no relationship whatsoever to the normal waking world, that has no, in many cases often, no referent whatsoever. And it's not only the strangest world you couldn't possibly have imagined, but an abundantly populated world, populated by apparently super-intelligent beings that are neither human nor animal, nor anything else, that you can verbalize, that you can English. And that, to me, is a great mystery. (0:00:56)

I'm so excited to get into this conversation because this is something that fascinates me and it kind of draws upon a lot of intersections of my own research and fascinations into consciousness in general. What is the world's strangest drug? Well, that's debatable, I guess. But it's a very good title. I couldn't have said, arguably, the world's strangest drug, or possibly the world's strangest drug. (0:01:32)

Well, there could be a number of contenders, but in this case I'm talking about DMT, of course, which I think makes a case for being, if not the strangest drug, certainly up there. Well, not just strangest drug, but I think strangest experience. This side of the yawning grave, as Terence McKenna used to say. Someone that you, I believe, borrowed that quote from for your title of Death by Astonishment, correct? (0:02:00)

Absolutely. It was going to be called something else. I forgot the original title. Something bad. Then it came to me, it's like, obviously, it was one of his most famous lines, the only risk with DMT is death by astonishment, which kind of sounds like ridiculous hyperbole. But, you know, if you actually use DMT, anyone who's actually experienced DMT, it doesn't feel like hyperbole. (0:02:26)

It almost feels like you might well die by astonishment. Astonishment is a very rare emotion, perhaps the rarest of emotions. Most people don't really ever experience true astonishment in their lives, I think, and DMT will deliver it on tap. A lot of people that listen to my podcast, if they haven't experienced DMT, they have certainly researched it and understand a lot of the effects and testimonies. (0:02:51)

But there will be people listening who have that idea of, well, it's just a hallucinogenic. It's just, you see things, pretty patterns, pretty images, maybe you have some voices in your head. So can you explain why this is such a difference with this particular drug? Where do I start? I mean, it's kind of a difficult question. I mean, basically, well, it's a difficult question in that there's a lot to say, right? (0:03:15)

But in the elevator pitch for DMT, is that it instantaneously transports you within a few seconds into an alternate reality that bears no relationship whatsoever to the normal waking world, that has no, in many cases, often no referent whatsoever. And it's not only the strangest world you couldn't possibly have imagined, but an abundantly populated world, populated by apparently super intelligent beings that are neither human nor animal nor anything else that you can verbalize, that you can English. And that, to me, is a great mystery. (0:04:02)

It's an enigma of how such an experience is even possible and why this simple plant alkaloid that's kind of ubiquitous throughout the natural world, found in countless plant species, Dennis McKenna maintains, probably in all plant species, if we bother to look for it, this simple plant molecule can occasion these experiences so efficiently, with kind of ferocious efficiency and reliability. (0:04:35)

That's not easy to explain. And it isn't easy. I mean, you can say, yeah, it's just, you know, you're just, it's an illusory social event, as one neuroscientist put it on Twitter, which I found absolutely fucking hilarious. I'll assume he has not taken it himself. Of course. Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Is that a lot of these people who provide, offer their explanations for DMT, have no experience with it. (0:05:02)

And so to him, when people say, oh, I saw a being, an entity, he just imagines you saw, you know, a little green man or something. And yes, an illusory social event. It's illusory, of course. You know, obviously it's not real. Come on. It's not real, an intelligent being. You're hallucinating. It's an illusion. You should really say a hallucinatory social event. But anyway, we'll let that slide. (0:05:25)

But no, I mean, that idea is just silly. But what I tried to do, I think, is try to actually deconstruct and analyze these alternative explanations and say, why do I think the hallucination explanation doesn't work or the, you know, exotic waking dream imagery and, you know, whatever else, archetypal structures bubbling up from the collective psyche, Jungian, this sort of Neo-Jungian model that's become sort of de rigueur in psychedelic circles of late. (0:05:59)

Well, quite a while, but, you know, I try to... And in the book, as you know, I take each of these apart and say, OK, do these offer satisfactory, satisfying explanations for the DMT state? And I find them to be wanting, to say the least. And so then we have to look for alternative explanations. We do. (0:06:26)

And I find it fascinating as well that you have this such a radical, like you said, such a radical change from reality in every way that could be described. And yet it is so widely distributed through nature, including being endogenous to our own biosystem, which would suggest that it is a very integral, very fundamental element of something in reality. And the fact that you have such a radical departure from your default perception would suggest to me, at least, that it's almost like a membrane. (0:06:54)

And you are passing through some form of a membrane that is in some form connected to reality in a fundamental way. I do lean towards now the position that you're interacting or interfacing with some kind of intelligence. But I don't... the kind of naive way of thinking about it, that you're kind of moving, you're peeking through into their world, I don't think is quite correct. (0:07:17)

I don't necessarily think that these entities have a form that could be faithfully represented visually. And there's no reason to think that they would. You know, if you see a... I don't know, a jaguar or an anaconda type entity or reptilian or whatever, the idea that a discarnate entity would actually possess the form of an embodied earthly creature doesn't really make any sense in my mind. (0:07:44)

We suggest that they are kind of using those forms, which, in neuroscience speak, suggests that they are manipulating this world building machinery, as I call it. (0:08:00)

Like it's an interface, but it's an interface that's filtered through archetypes that the brain is recognizing and using as a way to explain it. That could also be part of it, yes. I think the brain could be drawing upon archetypal structures. I mean, archetypes is... I mean, that's a deep question. I devote a whole chapter in the book to that. But yes, basically, your brain has to find ways of representing it or your brain has to be induced to generate certain types of imagery that make sense to you, that you can recognize as a being. (0:08:34)

You know, I know a lot of times these intelligences, there's a real sense of them kind of showing off, so to speak. They like to show you kind of what's possible if you let them take control. Not that you've got much choice in the matter, but often there's this great performance and it's often described as such. And them displaying these impossible hyper-dimensional objects and performing these incredibly dynamic, staggeringly dynamic and complex sort of elfin machinations in front of you. (0:09:13)

It's clearly, I think, they are showing off to an extent. I don't think that's really what this other place is, but I think they're just using your brain and generating that kind of imagery just to kind of show off, so to speak. I mean, Terence would tend to say that he got the inclination that they were trying to send a message or trying to push something into humanity. (0:09:39)

Like, you can do this as well. That's something he would mention a lot with his own experiences with these strange entities that, like you said, would perform almost like linguistic manifestation of higher dimensional objects and try and get you to use your own vocalizations to manifest these incredible things. And I believe Terence got the impression that there was almost a sense of urgency. (0:09:59)

Well, there's certainly a sense of urgency. I mean, often that's because the experience is temporarily very limited. And so they seem quite aware of that, which is kind of interesting. They seem so eager. And it's like I was speaking to Dennis McKenna just the other day, and the question always comes up of if they really wanted to tell us something, why didn't they just give it to us straight, so to speak? (0:10:33)

And that doesn't seem to be the game here. The message doesn't seem to be one of just giving you information in a straight way. It seems to be something more indirect. I think sometimes it is just for them to kind of show off and say, hey, you're not running the show here. You don't know shit compared to us. And they're kind of making that clear, whether we'd be capable of understanding at our current level of cognitive sophistication and development, whether we'd be capable of grokking any kind of deep message, I don't know. (0:11:16)

And so I think, yes, there is something there. (0:11:23)

I think there is, you know, on a longer timescale, it does seem as if we're being reminded of something, perhaps, reminded of our, a bit of a cliché, but, you know, kind of of our true nature and that we are part of something bigger and that we've lost the connection with that. But also it's simply a humbling message. It's a message of humility, of, you know, get over yourself, because, yes, you have perhaps the potential in the future. (0:11:58)

Maybe this is what we're being pulled towards. You know, Terence McKenna's transcendental object at the edge of time. Right. You know, there is a sense of that. And people often describe this familiarity as if they've been there before or even if they haven't been there before, this sense of like a homecoming. There's this feeling of being welcomed with this great celebratory uproar and the lights are flashing and the bells are ringing. (0:12:28)

Your name is being chanted by an elf in choir. You know, this kind of thing does go on. So so they they clearly, assuming we are dealing with some kind of intelligence, they clearly there is some connection between us and them. But we haven't quite worked out what that is, whether it's these are future humans or whether this is a place from which we came. (0:12:55)

And this is kind of a temporary state that we're in, this sort of collapsed into this lower dimensional form for a temporary period of time. And ultimately we will return to those realms maybe upon death. I don't know. It's hard to work out. But I think. (0:13:21)

The kind of the most important message that we need to kind of take to heart at first is that we're not, you know, we don't have it all worked out. And I think that's the most difficult one for humanity to get to grips with and to kind of take to heart is that we don't have it all worked out and that we're not the top of the tree when it comes to intelligence, perhaps on Earth, perhaps not, but certainly not within the the intelligence space of all reality. (0:13:44)

And I think we sometimes assume that to be the case. I think it's fascinating the parallels as well between things like near-death experiences and transcendental experiences and also even things like the paranormal and UFO experiences that are attributable in the sense of this awe-inspiring event that cannot be truly explained and in some ways almost does feel like some higher entity showing off or trying to kind of give the human being this event that completely forces a form of catalytic event, I would say, because, you know, when it comes to either, you know, a UFO experience, a paranormal experience or even a very intense psychedelically induced experience, you know, there is a certain percentage of people I think that cannot deal with that, that cannot handle that type of an overload of perception. (0:14:30)

And so it's very much something where it's a choice in the brain of whether you're going to accept this and bring it into your worldview and start to expand your worldview or if you're going to reject this and try and hide away from these larger kind of hints, you know, the mosaic of reality. (0:14:47)

And there's not many people I would say that really want to dive deep into that mosaic of reality. A lot of us would rather just ignore that and try not to think about the big picture. These things force you into the big picture. And I think that's another thing that, you know, Terence McKenna would say that it's a very democratic way of awakening people to a larger expanse of mind because once you take this, you're going on that journey. (0:15:10)

And there's no way to, you know, disregard that when you have the experience. You can listen to all the tapes and all the lectures and watch documentaries, but when you have an experience, I think that's the most powerful teacher. And like you said, this is such a profound experience. Clearly it's trying to teach us something and it's something that needs to be decoded. (0:15:28)

And I find it very interesting that is Imperial College London, right, that synthesized the DMTX where it's intravenously used to kind of elongate the process? Your first point, yeah, I think this, you know, John Mack called it ontological shock. And this way you are, you're in the entire kind of ontological foundation of your reality is kind of instantaneously extirpated. You know, it's gone and you are forced into a confrontation with the impossible, really, and forced and you can reel from that and you kind of bounce back from that. (0:16:06)

And try and explain it away or forget about it. And that's what often happens is that you will come back and you will, you will remember nothing of the experience at the time. It was, you were, your mind was, was very much blown. And you were truly astonished that this is not possible, that I could be having this experience. And then it fades away. And that's like, almost feels like a safety mechanism. (0:16:29)

So you, and then if you don't choose to do DMT again, you can let it slip. And then a few years later, you'll look back and go, well, that was a wild experience. I don't remember what happened, but I remember it was pretty crazy. But you can kind of slough it off, so to speak, and forget about it. But if you do choose to confront it and go back, then you're on a journey like no other. (0:16:57)

But yes, getting to Imperial College, yes, the problem with DMT is that it's, it's so brief. And this is mercifully brief for most people. And it's quite enough. Most people wouldn't want to spend more than five, six, seven minutes within the space. And that's what you get. You know, that's, that's the deal, so to speak. But it turns out that isn't necessarily the deal, which is where this kind of DMTX idea came from, which is myself and Rick Strassman in 2015, we developed this model for stabilizing DMT. DMT is kind of weird. It's a weird psychedelic in a few different ways. (0:17:38)

It's not merely in being short acting, but also in terms of its lack of subjective tolerance. (0:17:45)

And its lack of its, the speed and efficiency with which it enters the brain and is cleared from the brain. And it has these pharmacological peculiarities that make it a perfect candidate for this technology, target control intravenous infusion technology. I sometimes say it's almost as if DMT was designed for that purpose, where its brevity of action is not a bug, but a feature in fact. (0:18:18)

And so I thought, yeah, let's extend the experience. Let's induce people into the DMT state with an infusion and then hold them there for as long as they want. And then you can really kind of try to explore and analyze and perform experiments within the space and establish proper two way communication with the beings within the space. And so we developed this model, myself and Rick. And then, yes, the Imperial College team were the first to actually implement it in human subjects just a couple of years ago now. (0:18:50)

And it worked and it worked very well. And there weren't any casualties. They were able to keep them within the space for about 30 minutes. This has now been extended to much longer by other groups. But, yeah, they were the first ones to kind of implement our model. Is there any sort of, you know, radical encounters and testimonies from those experiments that differ because of the longevity of the experience? (0:19:17)

Like, is there anything very exciting that came from these testimonies? I think it was like 11 subjects. We did a panel, myself and Graham Hancock moderated a panel with some of them. And there was, I mean, there's lots of stories, lots of going on. There was two in particular, Anton Bilton. So he actually funded the study. He's this property tycoon turned consciousness explorer. (0:19:39)

Runs the Turing Institute. You know, he paid for it and he volunteered as well. And he found himself within... he always sees the same kind of entities. He calls them the gingerbread man. And when he enters their domain, during the infusion, he kind of first, he went through this kind of subterranean domain. Very interesting. But anyway, and kind of worked his way through that into this, he called it like an Escher type room. (0:20:14)

You know, kind of usual idea of the dimensions are strange in this place. And these gingerbread men, there's like a family of gingerbread men that were kind of looking down on him. And they said they were checking the back of his neck. They kept checking the back of his neck, which he, for some reason, understood that they were checking if there was a cord attached to see if he died or something or whether he was still connected to the other world, which is our world, I guess. (0:20:48)

And once they were satisfied that he hadn't passed permanently to their side of the veil, so to speak, they were showing him these... And it's interesting, I interviewed Anton and he said they were showing me this jewel encrusted pad and this technological device. (0:21:08)

And this is quite common, right? People go into this space and these entities show them these, you know, this device and say, look at this, use this. You know, I don't know what you're talking about. And that's an interesting feature of the experience, right? And recurring in one of Rick Strassman's subjects, who I also interviewed, and he's also in the book, Dimitri or Spiros, a Greek guy or Greek heritage anyway. (0:21:38)

And he, one of his earlier trips during Strassman's study, they held... They didn't just show him it, he couldn't get past the bloody thing. It was like in front of his face, this thing with dials and knobs and sliders and things that he understood was a reality synthesizer. And they were like, come on, look at this. I don't know. He couldn't work out, of course, what that was. (0:22:02)

The whole trip was just him, this thing in his face. But then going back to Timothy Leary in the 1960s, one of his very first trips, he was... He had these, he described them as like Venusian insect, elfin insect type beings. So he got the elf and the insect together and they showed him a jewel-encrusted pad. And I thought, oh, that's exactly the same words that Anton used, who knew nothing of this encounter. (0:22:30)

So, so, yeah. Anyway, so they showed him this jewel-encrusted pad. But of course, you know, Anton, this is in 2022 or whenever it was, and he couldn't make any sense of it. But what was cool about that is that the as we kind of hoped and predicted, the DMT state kind of stabilized. So he was within that place for an extended period of time. (0:22:54)

So he was able to at least attempt to make some sense of this and spend time with these being, these gingerbread, these little elfish gingerbread men, as he calls them, trying to make sense of it. Now, Anton is not an engineer, he's not a mathematician, he's not a linguist. But imagine sending in somebody who is, you know, a specialist in these kind of things who can look at machinery and go, ah, I know what this means. (0:23:22)

Or maybe not. But anyway, they would probably do much better than Anton could, which this is kind of where the whole DMTX kind of comes into its own. You can send people in there who do have specialist expertise within certain domains, whether it's mathematicians or topologists or linguists or theologians or artists, right? You know, whatever. And allow them to spend time and to feed information back to the team on the other side in real time, delivering information, receiving questions, you know, maybe in an earpiece or something. (0:23:59)

And, you know, look at this, look at this, ask them this or whatever. And then it's like you are the deep sea explorer connected to the boat, you know, but you're far away, but you're connected and you've got your communication device and you can look around and you can do things and you can transmit information back to the team on the other side. (0:24:22)

And that's just such a cool, the potential of that is amazing. And but only because of this extended state technology, without it, it's just too quick. You just have to rely on, you know, verbal reports as you come back. (0:24:40)

But memory is always pretty poor within these experiences for most people anyway. So I think, yeah. And then there was Carl Smith, who was the only person, subject zero. So Professor Carl Smith, he was the only person who completed all of the, I think the five sessions or something with DMTX. I mean, he's a proper experienced psychonaut, so it's kind of nothing to him. Well, it wasn't nothing. I mean, even to him, it was kind of a bit much, but he handled it. And every time he went back, he would see the same kinds of entities, but they became aware that he was coming back and he sensed that they were kind of thinking, you know, not you again. (0:25:22)

And interestingly, when he was being scanned with the MRI machine or whatever they were using, I think it was MRI, the entities were aware of this and they seemed, he said, they seemed confused because they're the ones who are normally doing the scanning. But this time it was the Imperial team doing the scanning, so they weren't quite sure what was going on or something like that. (0:25:48)

You know, it's very interesting. I get, like you said, the deep sea diver. I had this image of someone on an umbilical cord just plunging into these very strange realms and trying to recover information, almost like a UFO piercing through into their reality. And they're confused because we're scanning them, we're studying them, we're researching them. And, you know, do you think that it's possible for them to enter into our reality the way that we enter into theirs? (0:26:13)

You know, think about all of these mysterious experiences throughout history, thousands and thousands of years, you know, flaming chariots and unexplainable apparitions and visions, things that seem to almost be bleed through from this apparently not real psychedelic realm. And I just wonder if it is. I mean, I know you said you didn't really like the idea of invoking a dimensional space so much that we're piercing into. But do you think that there is a possibility that there is some form of like perceptual bleed through and they can influence our realm as much as we can enter theirs? (0:26:44)

Well, yes, it's possible. I mean, I think firstly, you know, if you see some thing out there in the world and if you see it personally and it's just you, then your brain is still this thing is still kind of part of your world model. It's still part of that model being constructed by your brain. And so there's no conflict there in that, you know, these intelligences could be manipulating your world building apparatus in order to apparently manifest within your external world, just as they might do behind your eyes. I don't think there's any difference there. (0:27:25)

But clearly, if you're dealing with an intelligence that is, you know, one of these omega minus kind of intelligences that kind of exist beyond space time or have disappeared into the fabric of space time or exist in some domain beyond, you know, it could be some other dimension. I don't dismiss that idea at all. (0:27:45)

I don't think you're going into, but I think certainly they exist in some other domain. The relationship between our reality and their reality, I think, is completely unclear. But sure, if you're dealing with an entity that can kind of get into, you know, manipulate and infiltrate and direct the construction of your world model in such a dramatic fashion and so effortlessly and with such virtuosity, then I wouldn't put anything past them. (0:28:14)

So, yeah, sure. Maybe they could manifest in a what we would call, you know, quote, unquote, physical form. I don't know. I don't have any. I don't really have any conception. I don't think it's possible to have any real conception. I do suppose some ideas in the book, but I don't claim to have any idea what kind of this intelligence is or where it's from or from whence it came or anything like that. (0:28:40)

I really don't know. I think it's I don't know if it's possible for me to know. They're the people I trust the least, the ones that proclaim on the mountaintop that they have understood every element of it and can bring it all down for the rest of us. They're the ones that I trust the least. So you have to go into this with the understanding that the more that you know, the more you realize how little you know. (0:28:58)

I think that's the true kind of journey of knowledge gathering is this fundamental realization that you're never going to understand this infinite ocean that is, you know, making up this reality that we're a part of. But I find it so fascinating, this idea of potentially a superposition of states in consciousness. You know, I was recently speaking with Dr. Stuart Hameroff, who's the co-author of the orchestrated objective reduction theory, the quantum microtubule components in the brain and how these interact with fields. (0:29:28)

And, you know, this idea of your own consciousness being able to go from a localized perception of your external environment and the sensory input that you receive to a non-local expression to an expression is almost like a field phenomena. And perhaps, you know, these entities, these intelligences, they exist within this fine field phenomena, the quantum vacuum, the Akashic record, whichever way you want to look at it, whether you're spiritual or a physicist. (0:29:53)

These things are now coming together in a way through quantum physics and through quantum biophysics that I think is making a lot of the kind of scientific fundamentalists very uncomfortable because we are getting into the spooky and the woo and the non-local. So do you think that there is, in a sense, maybe a level of quantum interaction taking place with the brain interacting with higher fields of information and perhaps these entities represent, you know, stewards of these higher information fields? (0:30:21)

What I propose in the book is, and have, you know, for a while now, is this kind of directed world model, the idea that the visions are, you know, it's not a sensing, it's not a sensed world or a dreamt world and, you know, entirely fabricated by the brain, but DMT is somehow gating access in the brain. (0:30:43)

We can probably talk about this new research a little bit later, but, you know, I kind of hypothesize that DMT pushes the brain into this very fluid and malleable state that allows this intelligent agent, call it that, access and allows it to direct the flow of information into your brain. And that raises the question of where is this, how is that working? And it makes most sense that it's coming from very, very deep down, i.e. it could be at the quantum, the quantum foam level or something, and that it is interacting with the brain. (0:31:25)

It's not interacting with the brain in the normal, obviously through the normal sense organs. So the information is coming in at some level. And it makes most sense to me, you know, if you are dealing with some kind of intelligence that exists at the foundational level of reality in some way, or at least has access to the foundational level of reality, this is how it would be done. (0:31:52)

So they would direct from the bottom up, it would be kind of a bottom up process. So yes, your brain would be effectively, your brain is always linked into the quantum world anyway, everything goes down to that level. And so I think that's the level at which they would access your brain and kind of everything emerges upwards from there, which is a great skill to have. (0:32:15)

Now, do you think that this intelligent agent, if it is an intelligent agent, do you think that it's trustworthy? Should we be trying to listen to what it has to say? I can't help but think, and even though I'm not someone who belongs to any sort of religious movement, I like to take seriously and respect the thousands of years of mysticism and theological belief frameworks, because I think that there are kernels of truth embedded within a lot of these things. (0:32:38)

And, you know, there's a cultural myths of the jinn and demons and entities that are just of a lower vibration, things that want to trick you, things that want to try and manipulate human consciousness. So do you think that there is any sort of reason not to trust this intelligent agent? Oh, I think that should be the default position. The default position should be that they're bullshitting you. Because, I mean, you know, the whole ambience of the DMT space is one of mischief and tricks. (0:33:14)

It's a tricksy kind of experience. And by far, those kind of experiences of people meeting, you know, often just quite explicitly jester, you know, with the fucking hats and stuff and like, and it's clearly, you know, something not quite jovial, but one of Rick Strassman's subjects said, you know, there's a, there's a something, you know, not quite something sinister. You know, not the kind of, we're going to get you motherfucker, but kind of like, they could turn on you if they chose to. And so to assume that everything that you, all the information you receive from them. (0:33:54)

Right. It's almost like I'm playing with you, but I don't have to play with you. (0:33:59)

Exactly. I could get a bit more serious if I wanted to. I'm just playing with you right now. And sometimes they do get really very serious. And this is why you have to be very, very careful when you form belief systems. You can, you can say, I mean, I kind of speculate that we are dealing with some kind of intelligence, but I certainly would never or haven't so far said, okay, this is what they've told me. (0:34:23)

And this is kind of what I think is actually going on because I got it from an entity. I think you have to be very careful here. You end up with, maybe we don't want to get into it, maybe we do, but you end up with seeing codes of reality and lasers and things and getting that kind of information from, from entities and reliping kind of ideological positions. (0:34:46)

Well, I mean, this is, this is a thing as well, is that if we, again, pay attention to the mystic practices and like the esoteric mystery schools, there is a level of reverence and a level of discipline that is required to traverse these realms. The shaman is someone who is completely trained and is an adept in traversing these realms. And, you know, many of the indigenous cultures, if, if a Westerner does come in and engage in these practices, they must have a shaman, they must have a guide, they have to have someone to help them go through that experience. (0:35:25)

So, I mean, I'm all for these, you know, developments through the Western lens of science and technology and, you know, DMTX, but are we prepared? Are we really prepared? Or are we being a little egotistical with our rush to jump even deeper into something that we haven't even learned to truly traverse within the 5-10 minutes? You could be right. (0:35:59)

There's certainly an argument for that. It's difficult for me to say that, being the guy that thought of the idea originally. But, yeah, I think, I mean, we have... I'm not knocking the idea. No, no. But I mean, I agree with you. And I think it's not something to be taken lightly. I will say that. I mean, we do have a long history of people taking DMT without, generally without incident. Now, does that tend to, will that begin to change as we go to a longer, longer and longer time periods? I don't know. There's no evidence so far that that's the case. (0:36:29)

Well, I suppose less so about like incident and more so, you know, how much information can you gleam from this if you're not already versed in the practices that have been done for thousands of years? I think more about, you know, the accuracy of gathering information, because obviously, from the scientific perspective, the logical brain, you need to be fusing those two together, the creative mind and the logical mind when it comes to something like this. (0:36:56)

So the shamanistic, the archaic revival, essentially, these shamanistic practices should be fused into the scientific rigor. (0:37:04)

Without going in without judgment as to the kind of entities we're getting involved with, whether they're going to be truthful, whether they're going to be beneficent, godlike beings, whether they're going to be malicious, menacing, objectionable kind of being, you know, that side, the end of the spectrum. And I think, I think it's what is missing, I think, is a lot of, a lot of scientists, I would say the majority of scientists, they're not really, there are very few who are doing these experiments, because they are truly interested in establishing communication with, you know, discarnate intelligences, most of the time, it's the interest is in what can we learn about how it affects brain activity? (0:38:12)

And, you know, how can we explain this experience or explain it away, so to speak. So there's, there's, there's no need in their mind to bring in people who are experts in navigating and who have, I mean, the shamanistic cultures of South America, you know, they've, they have developed relationships and maintain relationships with these beings as they see them, these members of their tribe, as they also see them for hundreds, thousands of years. (0:38:42)

So if you want to establish a relationship with them, then they're definitely people to ask. Right. Yeah. So there's, I think there is a, you know, anthropologists, they deal with myths and mythology and the religious worldviews of these, and then the scientists, you know, they do the real, the real, the real work, which is to explain, explain these experiences as illusory social events or, or whatever. (0:39:11)

And they need to come into contact, but first scientists need to take more seriously the possibility that you are dealing with some kind of, but that's a massive, it's a massive gulf between where we are now and the scientists putting their hands up and saying, actually, we can't explain this. And maybe that we are dealing with some kind of other intelligence here. When's that going to happen? I mean, I try my best to explain to people why we should do that, but do people listen? I don't know. Maybe not the hype people. (0:39:45)

And some of the greatest scientific minds of all time. In fact, most of the ones that we herald as the greatest, the ones that have sporadic intuitive insight that can't be truly explained, whether it comes from dream or vision. And, and I think that it's a difficult thing because the logic based scientific mind, it needs that empirical evidence. But what I've found in a lot of different areas, including actually ancient history and prehistory and some of the capabilities that were present in those periods of time that we just attribute to these Neolithic hunter gatherers. (0:40:32)

And lo and behold, we have geometric multi-ton stone building projects, celestially and equinoxally tuned and aligned and acoustically resonant. And, you know, it speaks to, in my opinion, this, this ability for humans to draw upon extremely complex information and bring it into reality in a way that can't be empirically evidenced at that time, because they don't have the actual data to quantify. (0:40:56)

They just have this insight. They just have this realization and they give us this spiritual quote, or they give us this formula and we laugh and we laugh and we laugh until science catches up. And then we look back and go, oh my gosh, that was actually what that person was saying the whole time. And I find this fascinating. And it's a massive challenge and a problem because of course, like a logical scientist isn't just going to base things on intuition from someone who's saying I'm getting an intuitive feeling. (0:41:20)

And yet it keeps proving to be pretty bloody accurate throughout time. And so there has to be some sort of a fusion between the intuitive and the logic. Yeah, I think the modern post enlightenment mind craves control over. Well, everything basically, but certainly the idea of giving into or allowing some, whether it's intuition or whether it's guidance from something else to kind of guide you. (0:41:57)

I mean, artists do that all the time. If you speak to any of the greatest writers in history, Cormac McCarthy, when he was asked about, you know, how does he come up with these ideas? And he kind of, he didn't know. And something, you know, he allows, he calls it his subconscious. And maybe that's what it is. I don't know. But he didn't, he couldn't say how he did it. He just allowed this thing to take control. (0:42:30)

And we accept that within the arts. We can, you know, the muse or whatever, you know, that's kind of, you know, getting in that state where you allow the art to flow through you or flow out of you, so to speak. That's kind of accepted as perfectly normal and natural and maybe even optimal for producing good art. But when it comes to science, it's a different matter. And I'm not saying that you should all scientists just give up this kind of the analytics, but you have to strike the balance between, you know, there is, you know, it's become something of a cliche, but it's really a truism, this separation between the left and the right brain. (0:43:14)

The right brain does see things very holistically and the left brain does tend to analyze and deconstruct things. And we are very heavily weighted towards the left side and we don't see the whole picture. We don't have that intuitive sense. And I think that's a problem. Well, surely the goal is symbiosis. It must be the goal, like, you know, the unifying of these two hemispheres, because like you said, it's actually scaled on a kind of micro to macro level in terms of all sorts of things that should be unified, including the hemispheres of our brain should be interacting in ways that we are not allowing them to interact. (0:43:53)

And it also feels like our society, I mean, it's blatantly obvious that our society is actually built against that from the get go. I mean, you're not encouraged to expand your mind, you're not encouraged to explore the unknown corridors of consciousness. And so we're actually, especially in the Western hemisphere, I would say, again, hemisphere, these things need to unify, right, even in the Western world with the Eastern world and the Eastern traditions. (0:44:15)

It feels like in our particular world, although, of course, you're currently not in the Western hemisphere. It's like an uphill battle. You're already born into a system that is fundamentally rejecting these values and fundamentally ignoring them and just laughing at them. And so like you said, how can humanity get to this point? How can we get to that kind of unification, perhaps through technology, perhaps through some sort of fusion of, you know, quantum physics and models and consciousness evolving? (0:44:41)

Who knows, maybe even AI might be able to assist us in bridging some of these gaps between our knowledge sets. (0:44:47)

(transcript 2of2)

Yeah, or psychedelic drugs, of course. Or psychedelic drugs. That's kind of what they do. You know, they dissolve, as Terence McKenna used to put it, they dissolve, they're boundary dissolvers and they allow information to flow more freely between the left and the right and, you know, through all parts of the brain, really. And so the distinction, the separateness of the components of consciousness becomes, they become less separate and you start to see, you know, if you take a psychedelic drug, you start to see the world in that way afresh. (0:45:20)

As a child does. And before it starts parcellating and piecing together and seeing purely a world of individual discrete objects rather than the unity of this entire unified process. The world is a constantly emerging process. It's not a series of objects. This is very much a left brain thing is to parcellate and name things and organize things this way, whereas the right is more about relationships and connections. (0:45:53)

And so we very much shifted towards the left hand side and ignored. And you see this throughout. I mean, we could talk about this for hours and the way that this is manifest in modern Western society. But we will probably get into territory that will get you cancelled. Well, you know, I tread that territory on a regular basis and it's always a bit of a risk, especially in the UK these days. You really do not know what you can say and get away with online. But I find it very interesting that children until roughly about the age of seven or eight are primarily in theta brainwave, right? (0:46:32)

So they're in a very different state of consciousness up until this point of it's almost like, you know, gradual indoctrination. After a while, they just start to slip into this more concretized understanding of the reality they're in. But before that, they're drifting in a dreamscape. And I think this is not too dissimilar from, you know, the DMT space. But certainly with psychedelics, there is that sense of not regressing because that's kind of a negative word, but returning to this much more naive childlike state of wonder. And we've lost that, I think. Who is it who described the disenchantment? We've become disenchanted with the world and it becomes very mundane. (0:47:18)

And when you really think about that, it's a remarkable thing to be here in this world, this incredibly beautiful and complex world. And it should be. And I guess it's you can't spend your life, you can't function if you are completely awestruck all the time, I guess. It's probably not an adaptive state to be in. But to be able to get back to that kind of state, the return to the enchanted forest once in a while, I think is a very positive thing for sure. (0:48:06)

And really puts you back in touch with how wondrous and remarkable reality, whatever it is, because I don't know, whatever reality is, you know. Yeah. Would you consider yourself a spiritual person? (0:48:09)

It's a loaded word, so I would probably avoid... I don't know. It depends how you define spiritual, I guess. But I'm not a... I sometimes come across to some people as being this hardline materialist or reductionist or whatever, but I'm not that at all. I mean, I'm very... when I was much younger, I was very, very interested in the, you know, the occults and ghosts and this kind of thing and the unseen other, you know, the unseen realms, the hidden, that which is hidden or has been hidden. I was really interested in that. (0:48:48)

Let me condense it to the survivability of consciousness. Where is your gauge on the survivability of consciousness after this bodily death? Oh, well, that's a difficult question. I mean, do I believe that... I mean, has DMT, have these research endeavours shifted your opinion at all on that kind of an idea? Well, yes. I mean, certainly, I'm certainly much more open to it. Whether we continue to exist... I think when most people think about surviving, they assume, you know, surviving after death, they assume they exist as... they want to keep themselves, right? (0:49:25)

They want to keep this person, their name and, you know, their nice clothes that they're wearing. And that's what they're talking about. They want to keep themselves as themselves, as this individual and that to cross over. Whereas if you look at more kind of ancient traditions, going back, you know, Vedanta or Buddhism, really, the idea that this is the most kind of fundamental and most important message is that all of that is an illusion, you know, that it's not real, right? (0:50:04)

That's all an illusion. This thing, your name and your occupation and this thing that we call ourselves, this is just an illusion and that your true self is something much more fundamental and deeper and was never born and will never die. So in that sense, you could say, well, I could answer, well, I don't believe it. I don't believe in death and I don't believe in birth. And that would be a perfectly valid answer. (0:50:27)

And I might that might be kind of something that I consider. But from another perspective, you know, do I do I think that I will continue as me? I don't really know what that means because my body, I'm not going to take that and all of that stuff. So what is what is actually going to be carried over? And that's an interesting question, right? What am I taking with me? Am I taking my memories and my PhD? Does that come with me? Do I have to start fresh? Is that relevant? What do people mean when they say survive after death? I don't think that's ever made clear. I don't think most people actually think about it. They just want to keep going. They just don't want to die. I think that's what it is. (0:51:12)

There's a level of ego embedded in the in the concern in of itself. But I guess if you looked at DMT, potentially as some sort of attributable flash of potential experience, like Terence said, he was one speaking or actually introduced a high level Buddhist to DMT, who then came back and said, those are the lesser lights of the Bardo. That's as far as you can go before the umbilical cord will break and you will not return back to this mortal plane. (0:51:38)

And so, you know, maybe these, these experiences are almost like a flash in the pan of what you may experience when you move over. (0:51:59)

And a lot of the time when you're in these DMT spaces, your name melts away, right? Your body melts away, your previous identity melts away, there's still something there, you're still conscious and experiencing something. But you're not you anymore. You're not Andrew, I'm not Jay. So perhaps there is a little bit of a hint within the dynamics of this strange biochemical that seems distributed across all of nature, and can be even induced endogenously. Perhaps that is almost a little Easter egg hidden within that's telling you, you know, this is what it's like when you pass over. And you better get used to it and start practicing and get prepared. Otherwise, you're gonna be very shocked when you come out of this body and arrive into the DMT space. You know what I mean? Like, maybe it's training. (0:52:25)

Yeah, I mean, you're right, though. I mean, if you get a good breakthrough hit of DMT, I mean, often your entire conception of what it meant to be human is gone. It's not just you forget who you are, but you forget what it means to be a human. And it's kind of a surprise when your brain starts piecing back together your humanity a few minutes later. (0:52:49)

It's like you get little pieces at a time. And it's like, oh, yeah. Then finally, it kind of the whole thing kind of collapses back. But yeah, I think perhaps it's it's I was what was I saying? I was that Ram Dass quote I was saying on Third Eye podcast the other day that Ram Dass quote where he says that dying is like taking off a tight shoe. (0:53:14)

This idea that actually you kind of you're you unfold into. You're kind of held tight within this space, this human life with all of its sufferings and all the tensions and the constant. It's like constant. It's never you're never quite. (0:53:34)

You know, it's always something that's part of the human condition, you know, I don't know what you would call that. But anyway, and then when you die, it's like it's like this unfolding, this natural unfolding into. So there's a continuity of consciousness, the continuity of that fundamental I of self, but not of all that stuff. So I think anyone who thinks, yeah, I'm going to go through with everything intact as I am, I think that's probably I don't see why that would be the case. (0:54:05)

But I like the idea of the continuity of consciousness and that it's impossible for consciousness to be kind of ruptured in a sense. And so it's just this continuity into this domain where you are still you still have a point of view. You still have this subjective I from which you see reality or whatever, but you're kind of unfolding into this release into this high dimensional space where you're there. Maybe you collapse down then into some other temporary existence. (0:54:40)

And this thing happens again and again. And then that's a kind of reincarnation. So you can build kind of an overarching model of what it might look like. So maybe these you see a lot in what kind of Buddhism is it like often like Tibetan Buddhism? You see a lot. There's a lot of and not so much in my Zen Buddhism. That's very austere. But in in in. Yeah, exactly. But in in like Tibetan Buddhism, there's a lot of these entities, these beings that that David Luke read a paper a few years ago or quite a few years ago now, where he he was confronted by this entity, this horrible thing with many eyes and stuff and arms. (0:55:29)

And then he found the entity within this book or whatever on on on Tibetan Buddhism. And so it feels like maybe they are accessing some domain through other means. And maybe if you sit and stare at a wall for 20 years, you might you might be able to access this realm through other means. But DMT is quicker. Yeah, well, that's the that's the thing. And again, that was that was Terence McKenna's argument that it's the democratic way that you don't need to be in the ashram for 10, 20, 30, 40 years, you know, disciplining the mind. And then there's a lot of people on the other side that would argue against that and say that it's precisely that discipline that is required to understand and appreciate the experience. (0:56:10)

So maybe there's a middle ground there. (0:56:40)

I certainly think that it's a good thing to try and increase the collective usage of these, you know, these substances that are obviously natural and endogenous. And Ram Dass's quote about, you know, unlacing the shoe is a very apt idea, I think. And your mentioning of the word collapsed, I think is important, because I look at it again, it's this weird self similarity at scale, you think about the observing of a photon or an electron and how it collapses down into a particle form, and then expands out into a waveform, when it's unobserved or unmeasured. You could almost look at this as the unobserved or unmeasured human mind, human consciousness. And when it's unobserved, and when it's unmeasured, when it's dead, from this perceptual kind of antenna that we have that grounds us into a linear experience, this human body with its sensory input is what grounds us into this linear framework. When that's no longer required, what does that consciousness do? Well, it's no longer going to be in this compressed particulate form, it's going to expand out into this waveform. (0:57:10)

So I think it's attributable. And again, it just scales up, you know, as above, so below, as the old maxim of Hermes Trismegistus, it seems to ring very true. (0:57:20)

Yeah, I think so. (0:57:50)

And I was, who is it, Don Hoffman. Donald Hoffman has this idea about interacting in intelligent, what is it called, conscious agents, and everything is just the interaction between conscious agents. And so you can imagine that when you have these, I don't know, but you know, a cluster of these interacting conscious agents that they, in the same way that you describe, when you look at an electron, it kind of collapses. And perhaps there's something to that in the way that when conscious agents interact, you get this, these very solid, not necessarily solid, very compact, compressed down forms. (0:58:06)

And then when you, you detach from, you know, interaction with the conscious, you enter some other form, or you enter this more expansive form that is neither here nor there, or is here and everywhere. And then perhaps you become, you know, interacting with, you enter into an interaction with other agents. It is. But I do find, I do find it very interesting. And some of the people I've spoken to who are kind of like in the computational sciences, and this fractal recursive self-similarity throughout reality, the spirals that go down from the quantum level all the way up to galactic, you know, spirals. (0:58:53)

And this incredible level of symmetry and geometry, and like fractal recursion, and think about these psychedelic experiences, the kind of geometries that you manage to perceive through them, same with transcendental meditation, the same things that are printed onto every religion, every temple, these cymatic geometries, there's a fundamental connection to this kind of like perfect math, perfect coding. Like you were saying, with the people who've been taking DMT and apparently seeing these laser-like matrix-style coding diagrams popping up in their experience, it would seem the reality, whatever it might be, is in some way simulated or generated, procedurally generated. (0:59:33)

And there's another very interesting quote that I can't remember who actually gave it, but the idea that the universe is beginning to look less like a giant machine and more like a giant thought. And I find that very interesting. It does feel like reality itself is in some way generative. And when you get into the coding of that, you get these geometries, you get these incredible patterns. Do you think that reality itself is illusionary? (1:00:04)

My default position for many years has been that form and content ultimately is illusory. And that I'm kind of outing myself a little bit here. Well, no, I'm not so much. But I mean, I am fundamentally, I would call myself an idealist of sorts, in that I do think consciousness is fundamental. And I think that there are patterns and structures and dynamics and forms that consciousness takes. (1:00:42)

But ultimately, these forms, they're not the truth of the matter. I mean, the truth of the matter is, I mean, I'm basically talking about this is what you will read in any book on Vedanta or on Hinduism. You know, the idea of Brahman being the fundamental reality and everything else is illusion. (1:01:18)

Everything is a manifestation of the ultimate reality. And this is from the Bhagavad Gita. I actually had a dream like 20 years ago. (1:01:41)

I was wandering through a forest and I came to an opening in the forest and there was this beautiful lake. And there was a bit some, I don't know it was a being, but something as I was gazing out over this lake, something said into my head, everything is a manifestation of God, everything is a manifestation of God. And it kind of hit me, it struck me and I shut awake. And then I, of course, I went to the computer and Googled it. And it was from the Bhagavad Gita, which I'd never read. Everything is a manifestation of God. I mean, the translation will vary depending on the book. I don't think God's necessarily the correct word. (1:02:00)

But everything is a manifestation of that, the ultimate reality, the self with a big capital S or Brahman or whatever, thusness, as Alan Watts might call it, isness or something like that. (1:02:17)

And so that's kind of my, that's the background to what I... that's my basic background of my worldview. So I don't take form too seriously. I think all forms, whatever they are, it's all the same stuff. It's all just different manifestations. But I can't write books about that. And I can't get my teeth into that, even though I think that's ultimately what we're talking about here. (1:02:43)

So I kind of focus on this, this kind of higher level, which is the brain. Ultimately, I think the brain is, it's a structure, it's a pattern of consciousness. But, you know, I have to be able to talk about it in a way that's meaningful. And that involves doing neuroscience. So that's what I do. Yes, no, absolutely. Right. You know, we're flirting with the ineffable is something that can't be languished in any sort of meaningful sense. And it's, it seems to be something that you almost get a flash picture in a higher density when you're in these psychedelic states. Like you said, when you come back, the memory drains very quickly, not too dissimilar from dreams. And I find the entire, it's kind of funny to say the entire idea of the imagination. (1:03:30)

But the imagination itself feels, to me, at least, almost like a metaphysical bridge between this anchor into the physical world, and its connection to what seems to be a higher dimensional space. I mean, the imagination, absent any sort of journey into it through psychedelia, inside your own mind, unless you're one of those individuals, you can't conjure up these things, but many people can, you can create an entire reality inside your own mind. (1:03:55)

And yet this is a non-physical space. And yet these things can arrive in extreme complexity from seemingly nothing, especially during meditation, suddenly, again, sporadic insight arrives. So it just feels like, you know, this connection between the psychedelic space, the transcendental consciousness space, even, you know, the near-death experience space, and the imagination itself all seem to just be varying expressions of the same thing, I would argue. (1:04:23)

You just have to kind of choose your perspective, if you're going to make any sense, if you want to make any sense. I mean, some people choose not to make any sense and just choose to remain quiet. And this is a perfectly valid position to take. Whereas other people, they kind of want to, like me, who've got a big mouth and want to kind of talk about these and, you know, and explicate these things in a language that people understand. (1:04:58)

And really, I think that what am I trying to do is I'm not necessarily trying to convince anyone that what I believe or what I think is kind of true. I'm just trying to plant seeds of doubt. That's really what I like to do. And that's what I've always done, is to say, hey, your idea here, your hypothesis, your model, let's actually see if it stands up to scrutiny. (1:05:27)

And once you inject doubt, then you invite further exploration. But there's always going to be this untraversable gulf between the immediacy of subjective experience. (1:05:39)

I can't explain to anyone what DMT is like. I can. You can. Doesn't matter how eloquent he might be. It's impossible to really transmit the experience as much as it is to transmit the color red with words. You can't do it. But you can, to a certain extent, look at certain features within the structure of the experience and get people to think, actually, yeah, that is kind of strange how that can happen. (1:06:08)

And once I connect it with something they do take seriously, which is the sciences, and they take the neuroscience seriously, once I can connect to that and say, hey, none of this fits into this paradigm, the paradigm fails to explain this. Then hopefully they think, OK, maybe these people who have been saying we've been interacting with intelligent beings for thousands of years, maybe they are onto something. Maybe they aren't. These aren't just the machinations of a primitive mind that haven't had the privilege of being educated in Western universities or whatever. (1:06:47)

But actually, maybe they are onto something. That's all I try to do, I think. Inject doubt. Yeah, and that's a good thing. You know, the need to challenge the status quo on these fundamental things, because there's been such a long-standing, I would say, dismissal of, you know, the woo and oh, this is just, you know, spiritual New Age nonsense. What are you talking about? You know, these ideas around consciousness. But our progression has contradicted that position through science, through the lens of science. (1:07:17)

You have to articulate, especially to the scientific mind, which is the Western world, essentially, you have to articulate through that language. And that's something that I've found as well as I've gone through my own research in very strange areas of conversation, whether it be consciousness or paranormal experiences, is that how you articulate that really can make or break whether or not someone's going to pay you any sort of attention. (1:07:38)

And a lot of the time, I think, when it comes to these subjects, especially if you've had a breakthrough psychedelic experience, my God, you're in, you know, that state of, I feel like I've had a Kundalini awakening. I've spoken to many of these kind of people. They're lovely and incredibly open-minded people, but they struggle to articulate due to the excitement, due to the overwhelming nature of what they experienced. (1:07:57)

And sometimes you need to step back from your own experiences. Sometimes you need to step back from that and figure out the best way to communicate to someone who's not even on that bandwidth to begin with. You have to build up to that. And I think that's exactly what you're attempting to do is build up to that level of a bandwidth of acceptance through using the tools and the language and the terminology that is acceptable to the status quo whilst disrupting the status quo at the same time. (1:08:22)

Yeah, I mean, it's very difficult. I tread this very precarious path between... I mean, I always say most scientists think I'm too far out and most far out people think I'm not far out enough. (1:08:38)

So I get attacked on both sides. The scientists say, oh, no, he's just nuts, you know, thinking about this kind of intelligence and stuff. Whereas the more spiritually minded or mystically minded will say that I'm just this scientist trying to explain the mechanics, you know, using the brain. And so it's very difficult to tread that path and keep friends. (1:09:13)

And also, of course, there's a lot of bullshit on that mystical side as well. And you have to know the difference between, as Terence McKenna is saying, shit and shinola. I don't know what shinola is, but... I don't know what it is either, but I love that quote. I think it's shoe polish. Sounds like a shoe polish. I'm literally going to look it up now as we're talking. (1:09:20)

It's got to be a shoe polish. You're going to Google it, right? There you go. Yeah. So that's difficult. It's very easy to get dragged into the schlock of shit because there are just piles and piles of steaming shit in that area. Because anything goes, you know, anyone can claim to be in direct communication, channeling the aliens from Zeta Reticuli or whatever. Anyone can do that. (1:09:49)

And they do. They do claim it. And they do. And they do. And some of them might be actually doing that. I don't know. But a lot of them just are crackpots. A lot of them are just charlatans and fleet frauds and just brifters. And so you don't want to be pulled too far into there and become associated with them, really, because then people don't listen to you. (1:10:12)

You know, I mean, Graham Hancock has always faced that difficulty in that it's easy to just dismiss everything he says and say, oh, he's just he's just a crap lunatic. You know, it's all woo woo and lump him together with all the other people, you know, all that stuff, the woo kind of thing. And I guess why he struggles more, I think, than me is because he doesn't have that sign. (1:10:42)

He's not a scientist and he's never claimed to be a scientist. So but yeah, there's a lot of intolerance for novel ideas. Even if you explain them carefully and say, you know, this is what I've these are these are the conclusions I've come to. And these are why I came to these inclusions and lay it all out. People will still call you nuts. People still call me nuts, but it is what it is. (1:11:06)

Yeah. And it's true. But it's true what you said. And, you know, you have to navigate in the same space as I actually I made an ex post about this a while ago, and it was quite popular. So I think it was the correct thought to have. And it's the the fact that, you know, the closed minded communities don't want to hear your idea, but the extremely open minded communities do. (1:11:24)

So you have to operate within a place where you've got an open mind, but your brain hasn't fallen out. (1:11:29)

But there's a lot of people in the same place where their brain has fallen out. They're completely open their mind, but you get lumped in with every single one of those by the skeptics. So anyone who's a skeptic of this stuff, who's in the academic world is very dry and dusty and, you know, sticks to the model. All they see is you being one of those people, exactly as you said. And that's a frustrating truth of having to navigate through these spaces. (1:11:50)

And I think that the only saving grace is, again, how you articulate yourself, how you present yourself. And the people that do stop to listen will go, oh, you know what? This guy, Andrew, is actually not crazy. He's really done a lot of work into this and I'll listen. So, you know, you just got to keep plugging away, I guess. Yeah, I was at Contact in the Desert. Have you been there? (1:12:09)

Oh, were you? Yeah, I've spoken there a couple of times. Yeah, like a couple of years ago. They didn't invite me back. But I think, I don't know why. I think I kind of know why. They didn't invite me back this year either. I don't know. I don't know if I've pissed someone off. But, you know, that was crazy. I mean, again, there you've got, you know, kind of level, a few, kind of level-headed, rational kind of people. And then there's just this, like, it's just, wow, man, these people are just far out. (1:12:37)

People in suits, like, uniforms. I think there was like a... I forgot what they were called. Oh, they dress like Navy. Yeah, they've got military uniform on, because this is serious business. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, they're Scientologists. They're part of the Sea Org. Oh, really? Well, I did know the Scientologists were far out, but... Oh, yeah, dude. Like, they're fully embedded into these conferences, drawing it back into DMT. One of the arguments, again, from like the kind of meditative cultures is that this is a fast acting way to kind of cheat your way through enlightenment. (1:13:11)

But can you actually, do you think, access the endogenous DMT at levels that would allow for a breakthrough experience? Do we require this external stimuli? I mean, clearly, the indigenous cultures of the Amazon are very wise to the internal structures and mechanisms of consciousness. I would almost imagine that if you can do this absent an external methodology, they probably would have been doing that, unless there's a separate route that they took. (1:13:37)

So, I mean, yeah, in regards to kind of external versus internal DMT, is there a power to the internalized endogenous system or do we need that activation from a higher amount externally? Well, I mean, I see it as like a progression from the forests into... you can see this thread that runs through the history of DMT with these indigenous plant-based drug preparations or plant-based technologies, in my opinion, developed by these indigenous peoples to access these realms and these intelligences. (1:14:19)

And then it comes through, you know, they kind of escape the forest and it was discovered by Western science or really it was communist Hungary, but anyway, in the 1950s by Stephen Zara and then it kind of making its way through and now we've got DMTX. And so there seems to be this progression of kind of learning to use this DMT technology, if you can, that's what I consider it to be, really, is some kind of technology, molecular technology. (1:14:53)

And DMTX, I think, is not the culmination of that. (1:14:59)

I think it's the latest iteration in the development of learning to use this technology. But then you are... the natural question is, do we need to be infusing DMT into people's brains for hours on end? Or can we hack the brain's endogenous DMT system? And that's something which I think could be possible. The problem is we know that DMT is found in humans. We know it's been detected since the 1950s in countless studies in blood and urine and cerebrospinal fluid, but we don't know anything about how it's regulated or its function. (1:15:43)

And so how might we raise DMT levels in the human brain? That's an open question. (1:16:09)

And that's kind of the next challenge is to understand regulation of DMT. Once you understand how it's regulated, and we believe, you know, I'm working on a project at the moment, or it's actually being carried out by a team at the University of Florida, but we kind of spearheaded it, which is looking at this kind of peptide, endogenous peptide, which acts as an endogenous regulator or inhibitor of DMT biosynthesis. So we're looking to isolate and characterize this peptide and see how does this regulatory system work. (1:16:28)

Once you understand how it's regulated, then you can perhaps think about manipulating it so that rather than injecting someone with DMT, you simply, you know, they lie down in a pod or something with all of their biological needs taken care of and naturally raise their DMT levels in their brain. And then they can kind of keep them within the DMT space with their own self-generated DMT for much longer. How that experience would differ? And we don't know because no one's ever done it as far as we're aware. Some people will claim that they can elevate DMT in their brains, but there's been no studies of that. Maybe it's possible with breathwork, for example. I don't know. These things, we don't know. (1:17:23)

You probably have to journey with a backpack up to the temples of Nepal or something and find the hidden one in the Himalayas where they're still levitating and tripping balls through just their own mind. Like, I'm sure that's happening somewhere. But again, like, you know, you just do not see evidence of this in a widely distributed manner. It does seem like the external process, or at least for now, is required. (1:17:45)

And another thing that's interesting about DMT, at least based on the testimonials that I've seen from a lot of people on different variations of DMT, for example, smoking it through a pipe versus drinking ayahuasca versus the 5-MeO DMT from the toad. I can't remember the specific toad, but there are a lot of different variants of extracting DMT. And there seems to actually be a difference maker between them. A lot of people will say that smoking DMT will give you this fast acting, almost technological experience. But a lot of people in ayahuasca ceremonies will claim that it's more of the Gaia, the Earth Mother and some form of goddess. And so do you think that that's more about set and setting? Or do you think that this has got something to do with the actual compound itself being made in different ways? (1:18:30)

Well, I mean, I'm, I'm of the position that, you know, DMT is DMT is DMT. And I think in that if, you know, if you took DMT that is extracted from chacruna, psychotria viridis, you know, the DMT, one of the main DMT containing plants used in ayahuasca, and you took DMT, I synthesized in a laboratory. (1:18:57)

I would challenge anyone to tell me the difference and tell me which was which. I don't think there is a difference in that regard. Have you noticed like a testimonial difference between like bull, like the bullfrog DMT and ayahuasca and smoking it? Because I'm sure I've seen quite a significant difference in how people claim it's experienced. Maybe that really is just placebo or like human psychology at play. (1:19:20)

Well, well, the, the, the, the frog you're talking about, Bufo alvareus, um, which, yeah, I mean, I think it's got another name now, but that was his original Latin name. But anyway, that that's 5-methoxy DMT. Anyway, it's not DMT. So this, this is a completely different experience. Um, but, um, again, yeah, yeah. So, but, you know, synthetic 5-MeO DMT is, in my opinion, the same as that extracted from the toad. It's just, it's, it's a molecule. (1:19:49)

And I think, I don't think it helps to, um, to invoke the idea that the molecule itself, you don't need that. You don't need to have the molecule carry a memory or whatever, or be attached to a spirit. I think that just muddies, muddies the issue. But I certainly, the set and the setting is important, but not always. Um, in, for example, a guy, a Korean guy emailed me last year. He was like terrified. He went to Peru, um, because he wanted to, as you say, to experience Mother Ayahuasca or the great spirit of the sky or whatever. (1:20:31)

Uh, and he was for three nights, he was tortured by insectoid aliens. I mean, this guy, this guy had a completely, he went in with the right set and the right, completely the right setting, um, in the Peruvian Amazon, for goodness sake, he was in the right place, but he didn't have that experience, uh, that people associate with Ayahuasca. He had something that was, as far as he was concerned, he was having experiences with aliens. It's something that, an experience that wouldn't have looked out of place in a modern DMT report, in Strassman's study, for example. Um, so I don't think it's as simple as, yeah, Ayahuasca makes you see nature, you know, nature spirits or whatever, whereas DMT is more technological. Often it's, you know, vice versa, you know, sometimes. (1:21:23)

Yeah. So I think DMT, it's certainly a very variable experience and I think it can be influenced by a certain setting, but often, more often than not, it simply transcends certain settings, certainly in the higher doses. (1:21:53)

In Ayahuasca, generally your brain levels will only reach about 20% of what you will achieve with a couple of longfalls of DMT vapor. So smoke DMT or vaporized DMT or injected DMT is really on another level, actually, than what you will achieve with even a most kind of syrupy of Ayahuasca brews. Um, so that could be the difference as well. And that you are completely transcending what you can achieve with Ayahuasca, with vaporized DMT and entering the, you know, the, these more hyper-technological, um, alien realms, for want of a better word. Um, but again, it's, it's so variable and so difficult to pin down, I think it's, yeah. (1:22:22)

Do you envision a future where we will be able to interface with greater ease with these realms? (1:22:29)

You mean in the absence of DMT? Not necessarily, but just with the development of like, you know, DMTX and, and, you know, the widespread acceptance potentially of these things as it begins to become more normalized, you think in, you know, let's say 10, 15, 20 years, could there be a more of a generalized acceptance and maybe even a desire to interact with these types of realms? (1:22:51)

Because again, like, especially in like places like England, we're still so phobic of these types of experiences. And so do you get a sense that, um, there's a actual possibility of a conversation to have on a wider scale within our lifetimes? I mean, it's interesting because if someone tells you that they are religious, right? And say they believe in the angels and Mary, the mother of God, or if they believe in Allah and the jinns and things, you, that's kind of acceptable in society, right? (1:23:28)

And no one's going to say, what the fuck? How weird is that? No, that's kind of normal. And from a young age, you know, we're, you know, at the end of the day at school, we used to say the Lord's Prayer. And we were taught about, you know, that God is watching over us. And we're going to go to heaven when we die. And these kind of things. And it's kind of perfectly normal to talk about really quite far out ideas. (1:23:51)

But if you were, on the other hand, if you then say, oh, I take this molecule, this medicine, this, this, whatever you want to call it, to communicate with these beings, which I believe in, then it's like, there's something wrong with you. And this is, you're deluding yourself. This is crazy talk. It's like, this doesn't make any sense, you know, which is more crazy, believing in something which you can't see, you will never see, that you just have to have faith in, or believing in something which you can meet and have a conversation with, and that is right there, and that cannot be denied in its presence, which is more crazy. (1:24:37)

And so we've got the whole thing completely backwards. Because I think rationality goes out the window once you start talking about psychedelics, and that's a huge problem. And people won't look at it. If I said that I meditated and contacted the spirit realm, people might think I'm a bit kooky. But most would say, oh, that's fine. You know, if he wants to believe that. But if I say I inject a drug, then it's like, oh, this is a serious problem. (1:25:09)

And his mother put him in there because he was taking LSD. And he was coming out with extremely expansive ideas that just terrified his, I believe, 1950s, 1960s parents who were extremely rigid. And so the psychiatrist is asking, you know, all sorts of questions. So what is it that, you know, amazes you so much? And he just sounds like someone who has truly had a glimpse of some more expansive reality. (1:25:49)

He's not crazy. He doesn't sound like he's babbling. And yet, when it cuts back to his mom, it's like, I just can't tell you how terrifying it is to have your son come to you and say, Mom, I've met God. I've met God. It's like, no, honey, you only meet God when you die. Don't say these things. It's like, dude, like, you know, there's like such a small mind and you feel sorry for these people. (1:26:09)

But that is still the way that we are. We have moved forward a little, but we're still very much in that knee jerk reaction. You should never be able to prove the miracle. You should only ever believe in the miracle. (1:26:18)

Right. Right. That's it. Yeah. So, yeah, we have we have moved on a little bit. You know, there's a danger to that. Yeah. You should only. And I think that that is quite frankly, I do think that's quite monotheistically enforced. You think of, you know, the religious doctrine, especially in Britain that we've been under for so many years, thousands of years. And so, you know, you come out of this shamanistic and paganistic world and that was completely eradicated by the fundamental monotheistic religions. (1:26:44)

And I think that that rigidity and that kind of suppression and boxing in of the idea of God, the idea of what a universal consciousness might be and packaging it in this way, even though for the most part, I would say in the UK, religion is essentially dying off. And not many people would consider themselves in the younger generations as Christian. In the back of the consciousness of the cultural fabric, it still seems to be present this type of kind of rejection of the absurd, even if the absurd is objectively experienceable through these methods. (1:27:17)

You know, it's still a rejection of it just on outright grounds. Right, exactly. And so how do you... that's something you need to cross that and overcome that before we can reach the stage where people are saying, you know, let's spend lengthy periods of our lives in interaction with these beings, whether it's through DMTX or through some other technology, endo DMTX or something like that. (1:27:48)

That's kind of the... that's a vision of the future, if you like, is where we do... either we're constantly in contact, you know, the indigenous peoples have been saying that to them, they describe these beings as members of their tribe and they're always in contact to some degree with them and they're always there. And then they kind of dip into direct communication by using these drugs. And so I can imagine that, but in a 21st century version of that, but it's the same idea that you take the idea that you are dealing with some kind of intelligence seriously, then you decide to enter into some kind of communicative relationship with that intelligence. (1:28:35)

And maybe that is what is necessary for our progression as a species. But I think we're too focused on sending rockets to Mars and we've got a very, we've got a very sort of a failure of imagination about what the future of humanity looks like, even though it's changing so rapidly that we don't know what the future is going to look like in five years, really. (1:28:57)

And yet we still have this very rigid idea of what technological advancement means. People talk about climbing the Kardashev scale. You hear that all the time. The idea that we're going to become spacefaring and colonizing Mars and things like that. Well, I think the technological landscape is just evolving so rapidly in our timeline. And as I briefly mentioned before, just artificial intelligence kind of bootstrapping human research capabilities in various industries, biomedicine and physics and mathematics and simulation of high level energy experiments is so much that's being streamlined through AI that I do get the sense that Terence was right about this archaic revival. (1:29:42)

It will come through the medium of quantum physics and biophysics and consciousness studies and things that are academic, things that are scientific, but it's going to inevitably dig deep enough into that structure that it's going to start discovering what we hasten to say spiritual, mystical, esoteric, the things that are ineffable and not very explainable. (1:30:04)

And DMT just seems to be this fundamentally strange threshold barrier sits right on that nexus point between human existence and this completely incomprehensible abstract realm. Exploring that realm seems like such an important endeavor, especially because it is connected to our own consciousness, even if we can't fully explain it. We journey there through our consciousness, through our perception. This is a part of us. It is a part of the human experience, albeit very novel and not very experienced by most people. (1:30:35)

And I think it's Terence that says, you know, it's terrifying the idea that, you know, you could go to the grave without having a psychedelic experience. It's like going to the grave without having a sexual experience. It should be a fundamental thing that you go through. And I would agree with that, actually. I do think that it's one of those fundamental things that you should pass through the eye of that needle at least once in your life to get that type of an idea of what are these people really talking about? (1:30:58)

Again, experience being the greatest teacher. (1:31:01)

コメント1​

以下の部分、

これらの装置と存在の意義 これらの存在や装置は、DMT体験が単なる幻覚ではなく、何らかの別の知性との相互作用や、現実の根源的な側面へのアクセスを示唆していると考える研究者もいます。ギャリモール博士は、これらのエンティティが「世界構築の機械」（world building machinery）を操作して、体験者の脳に理解可能なイメージを生成している可能性があると示唆しています。彼らは、例えば「超次元の物体」を誇示したり、複雑な「エルフの機械」（elfin machinations）を披露したりするような「見せびらかし」をしているように見えるとも述べられています。

が全体の要点。

  • DMT体験が単なる幻覚ではなく、何らかの別の知性との相互作用や、現実の根源的な側面へのアクセスを示唆している
  • 知性との相互作用: DMT体験は、超知的で、人間でも動物でもない、時空を超えた「別の領域」または「別の次元」に存在するある種の知性との相互作用を含んでいるという仮説

は 幻覚性薬物 摂取体験マニア（＝自称 Psycho-Naut）の儚い願望でしかない。

なぜなら、

  • DMT 領域の未知の知的存在＝人間とは隔絶した領域の存在＝「超次元の物体」や「世界構築装置」を操作する超知性体

が粗雑な物質界の下等な生物に過ぎない人間ごときに対して

  • 「いたずら好きで、ずる賢」く、
  • 「誇示したり」、
  • 「見せびらかし」

をするようでは、その本性は、そこいらの人間と何も変わらない。

つまり、その「DMT 領域の未知の知的存在」の正体は、人間の未熟な自我意識そのもの。それが「超知性体」の皮を被って幻覚の中で立ち顕れただけ。

コメント2​

高レベルの仏教徒をDMTに紹介し、「あれらはバルドのより低い光だ」と言われた逸話

とあるが、バルドが幻覚であることをかつて誰一人として見抜けなかった（or 見抜いていたが保身のために口を噤んでいた）のがチベット仏教の高僧のレベル。そもそも、本家のインド仏教の開祖である釈尊はもとより釈尊の高弟の誰一人として「バルドの光」がどうたらこうたら…といったタワゴトを述べていない。もっとも釈尊の解脱も意識障害による幻覚に過ぎず、仏教全体がまるごと虚構なんだけどね。

(2025-06-17)