I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.
Posts: 29 Joined: 09-Nov-2011 Last visit: 07-Feb-2023 Location: Solipsistic Virtual Machine
|
So, one of the things that has bothered me in the past was seeing a friend take these huge inhalations of dmt, barely hold it in, and blow out a huge cloud of vapor, only to then do it again. I kept telling him to hold it in, or to take smaller hits, so as to not waste it. Thinking on this subject, I was led to recall a time from my youth when I witnessed someone 'hyperventilating' nitrous into a balloon until he passed out (didn't look that fun to me). So, I got to thinking, what if my buddy were to take this huge inhalation, and then, when he was ready to blow it out, blew it into a balloon, and then, once he was ready to take that next hit, drew from the previous hit which now resided in the balloon, such that it would get a second chance for absorption. Anyone tried something like this or have thoughts, comments, etc.? This molecule is so precious that to blow large clouds of it out into the air just seems... sacrilegious.  Quote:...if you see that it is inconceivable that anything should exist, it is evident that at least one inconceivable fact is there. That is to say, that which exists is not limited to the conceivable. Since the inconceivable is there, it is impossible to set any limit to the quantity of inconceivableness which may be present in the situation. Now were the existence of anything consistently to remind you of the fact of inconceivability...it would be impossible for you to feel in the same way about the conceivable. ...if anyone were reminded about the inconceivable by the fact of existence at all constantly, he would sooner or later have the perception that there may be inconceivable considerations which are inconceivably more important than any conceivable consideration could be. ...if you do have a perception that any conceivable consideration may be utterly invalidated by some other consideration which you do not know, and if you are reminded of this perception constantly by the fact that things exist, certain modifications take place in the way you feel about things. These modifications have not taken place in the psychology of most people.
- Celia Green
|
|
|
|
|
☂
Posts: 5257 Joined: 29-Jul-2009 Last visit: 24-Aug-2024 Location: 🌊
|
if you hold it in for like 20 seconds it seems that nearly all of it is absorbed by the lungs though there are some members here like hyperspace fool who speak highly of that method, so it would be fun to try it out https://www.dmt-nexus.me...aspx?g=posts&t=25477
<Ringworm>hehehe, it's all fun and games till someone loses an "I"
|
|
|
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.
Posts: 29 Joined: 09-Nov-2011 Last visit: 07-Feb-2023 Location: Solipsistic Virtual Machine
|
universecannon wrote:if you hold it in for like 20 seconds it seems that nearly all of it is absorbed by the lungs Yeah, I'm not really asking for me (seriously, I don't do the 'SWIM' thing - I think it's kinda lame), as I tend to hold things in long enough to not suffer this particular problem. Although I do wonder about something: just because you can't see the vapor doesn't mean it's not there. I wish I had the necessary tools to measure this idea with more than merely anecdotal evidence. Thank you! I didn't even think to search the forums because I thought the idea was so odd that no one would've thought of it. I've learned my lesson! Unfortunately, that thread really devolved into things that were totally off-topic, and it's unfortunate that so many people derided the technique without trying it first. As I mentioned, after reading that thread I'm curious as to whether or not the apparent lack of 'visible' vapor, especially for those that know how to hold it in for 20-30 seconds, can be assumed to imply there's no dmt contained therein. I'm going to strongly recommend that my friend give this technique a go and report back so that I can post feedback. At some point, I hope to attain the status that will allow me to post to that thread above, and I'll provide the feedback there as well. Quote:...if you see that it is inconceivable that anything should exist, it is evident that at least one inconceivable fact is there. That is to say, that which exists is not limited to the conceivable. Since the inconceivable is there, it is impossible to set any limit to the quantity of inconceivableness which may be present in the situation. Now were the existence of anything consistently to remind you of the fact of inconceivability...it would be impossible for you to feel in the same way about the conceivable. ...if anyone were reminded about the inconceivable by the fact of existence at all constantly, he would sooner or later have the perception that there may be inconceivable considerations which are inconceivably more important than any conceivable consideration could be. ...if you do have a perception that any conceivable consideration may be utterly invalidated by some other consideration which you do not know, and if you are reminded of this perception constantly by the fact that things exist, certain modifications take place in the way you feel about things. These modifications have not taken place in the psychology of most people.
- Celia Green
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 3207 Joined: 19-Jul-2011 Last visit: 02-Jan-2023
|
PupilOfPerception wrote:As I mentioned, after reading that thread I'm curious as to whether or not the apparent lack of 'visible' vapor, especially for those that know how to hold it in for 20-30 seconds, can be assumed to imply there's no dmt contained therein. there are many electric vaporizers that can be set to specific temperatures, and the lower ones definitely vaporize, but there is absolutely no visible vapor. you can taste it though... and if you can smell dmt in the vapor, that means there are enough particles in it for you to smell (granted your nose can detect particles in the parts-per-billion, but still). My wind instrument is the bong
CHANGA IN THE BONGA!
樹
|
|
|
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.
Posts: 29 Joined: 09-Nov-2011 Last visit: 07-Feb-2023 Location: Solipsistic Virtual Machine
|
So, it was tried and determined, for my friend, that it wasn't worth the extra hassle, if worth anything at all. Quote:...if you see that it is inconceivable that anything should exist, it is evident that at least one inconceivable fact is there. That is to say, that which exists is not limited to the conceivable. Since the inconceivable is there, it is impossible to set any limit to the quantity of inconceivableness which may be present in the situation. Now were the existence of anything consistently to remind you of the fact of inconceivability...it would be impossible for you to feel in the same way about the conceivable. ...if anyone were reminded about the inconceivable by the fact of existence at all constantly, he would sooner or later have the perception that there may be inconceivable considerations which are inconceivably more important than any conceivable consideration could be. ...if you do have a perception that any conceivable consideration may be utterly invalidated by some other consideration which you do not know, and if you are reminded of this perception constantly by the fact that things exist, certain modifications take place in the way you feel about things. These modifications have not taken place in the psychology of most people.
- Celia Green
|
|
|
DMT-Nexus member
Posts: 3135 Joined: 27-Mar-2012 Last visit: 10-Apr-2023
|
why doesnt your friend simply "attempt" to hold it in longer? Why go through the hassle of using another device to accomplish something so easy? "Energy flows where attention goes" [Please review the forum Wiki and FAQ before posting questions]
|