Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dino!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!well!hlr
From: rwilliam@uncle-bens.rice.edu (William R. Russell)
Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds
Subject: Re: Sensory deprivation and cyberspace
Message-ID: <5147@brazos.Rice.edu>
Date: 21 Feb 90 17:38:26 GMT
References: <16269@well.sf.ca.us>
Sender: hlr@well.sf.ca.us
Reply-To: rwilliam@uncle-bens.rice.edu (William R. Russell)
Organization: Rice University
Lines: 31
Approved: hitl@hardy.u.washington.edu

In article <16269@well.sf.ca.us>, 70117.2546@CompuServe.COM
(Dunn-70117@cis.ohio-state.edu, 2546) writes:
> 
> 
>      What ever  happened to  Dr Lilly of  "Day of  the Dolphin"  and "
> Altered States" and  isolation chamber fame.  Instead of tapping  into
> the brain electrically  which sounds a long  way off and a  bit risky,
> why not a sensory deprivation chamber of a suitable size and  volume (
> a heck of  a lot of epsom  salts). This would  serve to open a  direct
> path to the  subconscious. All outside  stimulation would be cut  off,
> the brain would be ready for  any kind of stimulation and you feed  in
> cyberspace.


While using an isolation chamber for cyberspace would eliminate
the problem of bumping into objects and other such "real" world
intrusions, it wouldn't help provide feedback or otherwise
increase the "cyberspace" experience. It would serve to block out
background "noise" (or sensation).

Besides, do isolation chambers actually open a path a to the
subconscious? I seem to remember reading Dr. Feynman mentioning
something about isolation chambers in one of his books, and he
always thought that the concept was a bunch of New Age mumbo
jumbo. 

Anyway, it would be nice to develop a virtual worlds environment
that *didn't* require a 100 gallon tank of brine to work
effectively.

						rwilliam