Yes – this is what this thread is all about.

“Reality” is not something that exists as some solid, concrete “place”. It is an abstraction – a collection of human-defined axioms or “tendencies”. Conscious experiences that satisfy the axioms are “real” by definition. Change the definition, and you change what is real.

How would one go about proving that one is experiencing “real” reality? There can be no such proof. Not here, not in “hyperspace”, not in “heaven” or anywhere else.

hyperspace is real because i experience it.

gods real to every christian.

I experience it also and I also think its real. In fact, allot of folks I know experience it regularly and they also think its real.

In a universe of infinite possibilities the probability of hyperspace is 100%, right?

I too have had a number of experiences that lead me to believe that there is something very real to the experience. I am, however, an eternal skeptic and I agree with gibran in that I can no more prove hyperspace to be real than I can prove existence to be real.

The question that arises (repeatedly and in multiple threads) is, "what bearing does existence being 'real' have on anything?" My answer is...none...it changes nothing. With regards to this existence, whether it's "just this life" or all a dream or something far stranger does not change the rules of this thing we call existence...

The phrase uttered by the entity gibran encountered, "you were never actually alive in the first place" comes to mind.

Applied to a DMT experience...it feels real...hell, sometimes more real than 'reality'...but eventually the experience ends and it is back to this reality, to chopping wood and carrying water and pondering what the hell just happened

Imo, the reality of a DMT experience seems of less consequence than what we do with that experience in so-called "waking life." If it's 'real', then there is an infinite realm of exploration that lies before us...if it's not 'real' then we are each experiencing some of the most beautiful neurochemical art we could ever hope to encounter.

Either way, it is nothing short of pure spiritual exhilaration and breathtaking beauty.

I have been to hyperspace.

I have been on spaceships and held dialogue with alien beings from other parts of the galazy.

I have met with beings from other dimensions and even peered through into the future and back to the past..

I have experienced multiple lifetimes.

I think it is real in a sense, and that is real enough. Enough said.

Yes, what people are trying to point out here is that a subjective experience is always "real" to the subject, because if something isn't "real" then you couldn't have just experienced it. Even if it's just a fireworks of neurochemistry it's still real, as an experience.

But what the skeptics are trying to do is point out that something that has the definition of "real" must exist in a measurable space somewhere, either in this dimension or another one. Meaning that 2 separate observers can inhabit the same space and make the same observations.

But that definition of "real" makes sense only because we humans have gotten so used to living in this seemingly measurable and concrete 3-dimensional reality. But even quantum physics is starting to point out that anything you measure is affected exactly because you're measuring it (Heisenberg uncertainty principle). So measuring things and therefore getting "evidence" just seems like a completely meaningless human concept. Sure these evidences are meaningful and useful in our everyday 3D lives, but were talking about the frontiers of the unknown here.

The thing I'm trying to get at here is that it doesn't matter if an experience exist in a measurable space or not, it still exists because it is being observed by an awareness, which is you. Reminds me of something that McKenna said: "You're witnessing something that no-one has ever seen, AND what no-one will ever see again!". So sorry there's no passengers to be taken for these trips. And no measuring to be done.

Then again never say never. If the visual reconstruction stuff ever becomes a proper science, then we may find out that atleast the visual aspects of hyperspace can be recorded and measured. But I have a strong feeling that when we enter hyperspace, that thing would just show static.

Didn't read whole thread, but first page had me wanting to post this is massive letters...
"If nothing lasts, then the conclusion is that the felt presence of immediate experience must be what life is for."
- Terence McKenna


Your truth is your truth, the way your experience has guided you to perceive it. Just don't let that perception turn into belief and i don't think you will ever preclude yourself from having the best life you can.

Reality or not, if you are never made aware, you can never experience it.

We exist to bear witness.
We had to be.
The infinite needs us to see it.
Without the perceiver,
the perceived does not exist.
That gives us leverage.
Don't look until you get what you want.

nice example.

I think it just boils down to what peoples understanding of real is. If hyperspace fits their conception of real, then its real to them. If not, no harm in being critical...

It's all gravy either way really. Real or not, the point is we get to experience it, right?

I love this thread.

2019 - had to read this thread again.
funny how one grows older and finds himself with new perspectives.

Together with Improbability of Hyperspace part II, and What is "real" and when is it useful to ask this? , this thread is one of my all time favorites.

Hyperspace is just one of a million terms used to describe the plane of things which are filtered out by our consciousness ordinarily yet are perceptible to us in a heightened state.

Hyperspace is right in front of us all the time but its just being blocked out from our ordinary perception of things.

If it wasnt real it would not have the sense of continuity or natural principals to it that it does, just as the physical plane does.

Delirium is much much different than what people often call hyperspace, they should not be conflated as sadly they often are.

lol yea this was a fun one

Often the most unbelievable moments are quiet, sober, alone. The waves of realisation that I, at least according to one theory, inhabit an object created through progression of ever increasing complexity that is assumed to have started as unstable quarks and is now conscious. Not only of it's immediate environment but also of the vastness of what it is a part of and how terrifyingly unknowable everything else out there is.

If altered states are real or not hardly seems much of a concern compared to how monumentally bizarre those moments of realisation are. It builds up from inside and bursts out through every gap between atoms in my body. The mind bending concequences of the base reality we experience every day hurts more than any trip.

Until you get back into the trip. Then that hurts the brain more for a while.
In any case, I have no evidence that either altered states or this base reality are real.


I think maybe the point of it all is to find something you truly believe and commit without the need for conclusive evidence.