DNA, LSD, M-O-U-S-E
January 30, 2007 10:49 AM Subscribe
Francis Crick was high as a kite on LSD when he figured out the double helix structure of DNA. Later, his role in the drug legalization movement inspired biochemist Richard Kemp to supply Britain with massive amounts of cheap LSD, until he was stopped in one of the largest drug busts in history. When asked about his drug use, Crick replied, "Print a word of it and I'll sue."
Deoxyribonucleic acid! Duuude!
posted by hal9k at 11:14 AM on January 30, 2007 [2 favorites]
posted by hal9k at 11:14 AM on January 30, 2007 [2 favorites]
Bah...using LSD causes revolutionary discoveries ? I suspect that it wouldn't have been of much use without the years of studywork by Crick.
posted by elpapacito at 11:14 AM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
posted by elpapacito at 11:14 AM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
You too can be a genius on LSD. If you're already a genius before you drop your tab.
posted by jfuller at 11:15 AM on January 30, 2007
posted by jfuller at 11:15 AM on January 30, 2007
I guess drugs are good, then. I had no idea.
posted by QuietDesperation at 11:18 AM on January 30, 2007
posted by QuietDesperation at 11:18 AM on January 30, 2007
I suspect that it wouldn't have been of much use without the years of studywork by Crick.
You're right ... but then again, would the years of study work have been much good without the flash of insight that brought it all together? There's the similar story of Friedrich August Kekulé's discovery of benzene after dreaming of an ouroboros. Humans have both rational and intuitive faculties, and we're at our best when we use both of them. Study and reason provide grist for the intuitive mill, but more often than not, the moment of discovery itself has very little to do with reason, and everything to do with intuition. Of course, then comes the long, hard work of proving or disproving that moment of insight with reason and study again. But disparaging one or the other doesn't help; we have both, and we're at our best when we use both.
posted by jefgodesky at 11:24 AM on January 30, 2007 [4 favorites]
You're right ... but then again, would the years of study work have been much good without the flash of insight that brought it all together? There's the similar story of Friedrich August Kekulé's discovery of benzene after dreaming of an ouroboros. Humans have both rational and intuitive faculties, and we're at our best when we use both of them. Study and reason provide grist for the intuitive mill, but more often than not, the moment of discovery itself has very little to do with reason, and everything to do with intuition. Of course, then comes the long, hard work of proving or disproving that moment of insight with reason and study again. But disparaging one or the other doesn't help; we have both, and we're at our best when we use both.
posted by jefgodesky at 11:24 AM on January 30, 2007 [4 favorites]
Conceptualize DNA, pitch a no hitter, invent PCR, inspire blistering guitar solos, my list of what it can't do is getting shorter?
posted by Mr_Zero at 11:24 AM on January 30, 2007 [2 favorites]
posted by Mr_Zero at 11:24 AM on January 30, 2007 [2 favorites]
Too bad you ain't been able to get decent real LSD in over 20 years.
And yes, drugs are good. Aspirin's a frigging wonder drug for arthritic old folks, especially considering the Vioxx experience.
posted by davy at 11:25 AM on January 30, 2007
And yes, drugs are good. Aspirin's a frigging wonder drug for arthritic old folks, especially considering the Vioxx experience.
posted by davy at 11:25 AM on January 30, 2007
Everybody in Derek & The Dominos was smacked out of their skulls when they made Layla & Other Assorted Love Songs. Does this mean if I shoot heroin, I'll become a great musician?
posted by jonmc at 11:26 AM on January 30, 2007
posted by jonmc at 11:26 AM on January 30, 2007
When I did LSD I realized I preferred alcohol.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:28 AM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:28 AM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
Does this mean if I shoot heroin, I'll become a great musician?
No, but if you were already a great musician your best album will be on the one right before you OD.
posted by Mr_Zero at 11:29 AM on January 30, 2007
No, but if you were already a great musician your best album will be on the one right before you OD.
posted by Mr_Zero at 11:29 AM on January 30, 2007
Seems like subsequent commenters don't know what reformedjerk is referring to in that first (perfect) comment. In a nutshell, Franklin's succeeded at making xray images of the double helix that went a long way towards revealing the shape, and Watson saw those unpublished results, (without Franklin's consent I believe) well before his paper with Crick. There's a good nova episode on the history, if somewhat dramatic and uncharitable to Watson. That said, there's a strong argument that Watson and Crick were gaping aholes to a female colleague who at the very least, contributed significantly to their paper's findings.
posted by Dr. Boom at 11:37 AM on January 30, 2007
posted by Dr. Boom at 11:37 AM on January 30, 2007
(that stray apostrophe is going to bug me all day)
posted by Dr. Boom at 11:38 AM on January 30, 2007
posted by Dr. Boom at 11:38 AM on January 30, 2007
Too bad you ain't been able to get decent real LSD in over 20 years.
It seems like it's been about 6 years.
Free Pickard site.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:56 AM on January 30, 2007
It seems like it's been about 6 years.
Free Pickard site.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:56 AM on January 30, 2007
Davy: nonsense. Dirty acid and "acid aint as good as it used to be" are both Urban myths. Set and setting, boy, set and setting.
Recently, at Hoffmans 100th birthday in CH, people tried some Argon-ampouled original sandoz LSD that had been stored in the dark. A few, errr, experienced people tried it. They said it was just as good and clean as most modern street acid. It assayed pure by HPLC.
In '98 I used to live next door to 19 portugal place, where crick dropped his acid. Couldn't find any spare tabs around there though.
Also, a report from the 2004 Mail on Sunday? From mayanmatrix.com? WTF? Ahh it's the first link on Google, when you type "crick lsd". Well done!
posted by lalochezia at 12:01 PM on January 30, 2007
Recently, at Hoffmans 100th birthday in CH, people tried some Argon-ampouled original sandoz LSD that had been stored in the dark. A few, errr, experienced people tried it. They said it was just as good and clean as most modern street acid. It assayed pure by HPLC.
In '98 I used to live next door to 19 portugal place, where crick dropped his acid. Couldn't find any spare tabs around there though.
Also, a report from the 2004 Mail on Sunday? From mayanmatrix.com? WTF? Ahh it's the first link on Google, when you type "crick lsd". Well done!
posted by lalochezia at 12:01 PM on January 30, 2007
I suspect he was as high as an acrobatic kite in a tornado.
posted by srboisvert at 12:02 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by srboisvert at 12:02 PM on January 30, 2007
Seemed like a dream too good to be true
Stash it in the bank while the tablets grow high
In the millions, and everybody's high
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:13 PM on January 30, 2007
Stash it in the bank while the tablets grow high
In the millions, and everybody's high
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:13 PM on January 30, 2007
I wouldn't look sideways at a good buzz, but Narcotic Evangelism bugs me.
Whether it's Guns, God or Ganja, moderation is just not enough for some people.
posted by CynicalKnight at 12:18 PM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
Whether it's Guns, God or Ganja, moderation is just not enough for some people.
posted by CynicalKnight at 12:18 PM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
Was anyone else confused by the inconsistent use of punctuation in that first article? It confused me. That's all.
posted by echo0720 at 12:25 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by echo0720 at 12:25 PM on January 30, 2007
I agree with lolochezia. I've had some great stuff recently (though I suppose if everything from the past 20 years has been fake, I don't really know what I'm talking about, since my first time was only almost that long ago).
IANAE, but while it does seem harder to get now, it's always relative. If you really try, it's not impossible. I mean, there's always the Dead/Phish market, no?
I know we've already had countless of these discussions, but what resonates for me about LSD is that it's the only drug I can think of where someone can take it once, have an extremely positive experience, and never want (or need) to take it again. And where's the crime in that?
on preview: I see a difference between a "buzz" and using psychedelics for personal exploration/growth, though I agree that moderation is certainly a good thing.
posted by mrgrimm at 12:25 PM on January 30, 2007
IANAE, but while it does seem harder to get now, it's always relative. If you really try, it's not impossible. I mean, there's always the Dead/Phish market, no?
I know we've already had countless of these discussions, but what resonates for me about LSD is that it's the only drug I can think of where someone can take it once, have an extremely positive experience, and never want (or need) to take it again. And where's the crime in that?
on preview: I see a difference between a "buzz" and using psychedelics for personal exploration/growth, though I agree that moderation is certainly a good thing.
posted by mrgrimm at 12:25 PM on January 30, 2007
Crick replied, "Print a word of it and I'll sue."
Sue for what? His only basis for suing would be if he never used drugs. Huh?
posted by Pastabagel at 12:39 PM on January 30, 2007
Sue for what? His only basis for suing would be if he never used drugs. Huh?
posted by Pastabagel at 12:39 PM on January 30, 2007
Rosalind Franklin had no idea what her x-rays meant. In those days it took exactly the kind of intuitive visualization mentioned in the linked article to interpret them. Whether the LSD helped or not is subject to counterfactual speculation, but it was brilliant.
On preview: ditto to what Dr. Boom said; she was badly used by her male colleagues.
posted by Mental Wimp at 12:52 PM on January 30, 2007
On preview: ditto to what Dr. Boom said; she was badly used by her male colleagues.
posted by Mental Wimp at 12:52 PM on January 30, 2007
Mr_Zero
In college I was a medium-good pool player. Snooker was my game, but once when quite well into a trip I ran three straight tables in standard pocket billiards. My (unstoned) companions just stood back and scowled, thinking that they had been hustled.
The thing of it was, I wasn't interested in the outcome of the game; I just was entranced by watching the balls sink into the pocket along with the ghostly repittions following each time. I wanted that to happen over and over again, and it did. I've never even come close to that feat since.
posted by Mental Wimp at 12:56 PM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
In college I was a medium-good pool player. Snooker was my game, but once when quite well into a trip I ran three straight tables in standard pocket billiards. My (unstoned) companions just stood back and scowled, thinking that they had been hustled.
The thing of it was, I wasn't interested in the outcome of the game; I just was entranced by watching the balls sink into the pocket along with the ghostly repittions following each time. I wanted that to happen over and over again, and it did. I've never even come close to that feat since.
posted by Mental Wimp at 12:56 PM on January 30, 2007 [1 favorite]
I wonder where the streets full of junkies hang up their self-produced masterpieces. Maybe they drive to their underwater geodesic dome galleries in their water-powered boat-car equipped with a cloaking device. Thats why us norms never seen them.
Or maybe this is confirmation bias of the half-assed assumption that LSD is magical. Unfortunately drug use cant even teach the difference between cause and corrolation!
posted by damn dirty ape at 12:57 PM on January 30, 2007
Or maybe this is confirmation bias of the half-assed assumption that LSD is magical. Unfortunately drug use cant even teach the difference between cause and corrolation!
posted by damn dirty ape at 12:57 PM on January 30, 2007
Or how to spell correlation.
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:04 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:04 PM on January 30, 2007
I was surprised to hear that Coltrane was on acid during some of his later recordings. (I know some of you who've heard those wild albums will say "No shit." But I could not play music when I was on LSD any more than I could drive or pretend to be normal when someone rang the doorbell.)
posted by kozad at 1:09 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by kozad at 1:09 PM on January 30, 2007
To say Franklin had no idea what her Crystalography data meant is not exactly true - she had other conflicting results that implied a different structure.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 1:14 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 1:14 PM on January 30, 2007
Kid Charlemagne
Didn't know about the conflicting results. Can you steer me to a citation for that?
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:23 PM on January 30, 2007
Didn't know about the conflicting results. Can you steer me to a citation for that?
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:23 PM on January 30, 2007
I love this! : >
(related-ish: they're talking about making E a legal anti-anxiety drug now)
posted by amberglow at 1:27 PM on January 30, 2007
(related-ish: they're talking about making E a legal anti-anxiety drug now)
posted by amberglow at 1:27 PM on January 30, 2007
What seems to me to be the most difficult single insight in understanding the structure of DNA-- the idea of turning the base pairs inward to the center of the molecule and seeing that they fit together like jigsaw puzzle pieces-- is claimed by Watson in The Double Helix, as I recall, but the Wikipedia article on Crick says that Franklin told Watson and Crick that the backbone of DNA had to be on the outside of the molecule.
posted by jamjam at 1:31 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by jamjam at 1:31 PM on January 30, 2007
amberglow:
Ecstasy already was legal. It was developed in 1912 by Merck, but never sold. It was made illegal in the US until many decades later.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:34 PM on January 30, 2007
Ecstasy already was legal. It was developed in 1912 by Merck, but never sold. It was made illegal in the US until many decades later.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:34 PM on January 30, 2007
NOVA episode about Franklin and how the photographs she took provided Crick and others with the necessary information for them to correctly identify the structure. Without her photo, they might have come up with it eventually, but the photo allowed them to limit the models to only those that fit specific qualities.
posted by pwb503 at 1:39 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by pwb503 at 1:39 PM on January 30, 2007
Pastabagel: It was made illegal in the US until many decades later.
wasn't
Well, not until it gained wider popularity and rat studies involving a cousin chemical MDA showed proxy signs of serotonergic toxicity (recently specified as axotomy).
Here's details of that fiasco and what happened afterwards.
Of course, if this whole WoD ethos weren't going on, maybe the compounds in this study would have been evaluated for human safety.
posted by daksya at 1:54 PM on January 30, 2007
wasn't
Well, not until it gained wider popularity and rat studies involving a cousin chemical MDA showed proxy signs of serotonergic toxicity (recently specified as axotomy).
Here's details of that fiasco and what happened afterwards.
Of course, if this whole WoD ethos weren't going on, maybe the compounds in this study would have been evaluated for human safety.
posted by daksya at 1:54 PM on January 30, 2007
"That said, there's a strong argument that Watson and Crick were gaping aholes to a female colleague who at the very least, contributed significantly to their paper's findings."
posted by Dr. Boom
The Nova program theatrics tend to make people forget Franklin's work was properly credited on the original DNA structure paper in Nature.
Also Brenda Maddox's detailed and sympathetic biography of Franklin, The Dark Lady of DNA, pretty much scuppers the "she was robbed by gaping a-holes" theory - although it's true that this brilliant woman came up hard against male cronyism in science.
By all accounts, Crick would have found this 'LSD assisted brainstorm' stuff pretty funny one way or the other! A lovely guy!
posted by Jody Tresidder at 2:06 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by Dr. Boom
The Nova program theatrics tend to make people forget Franklin's work was properly credited on the original DNA structure paper in Nature.
Also Brenda Maddox's detailed and sympathetic biography of Franklin, The Dark Lady of DNA, pretty much scuppers the "she was robbed by gaping a-holes" theory - although it's true that this brilliant woman came up hard against male cronyism in science.
By all accounts, Crick would have found this 'LSD assisted brainstorm' stuff pretty funny one way or the other! A lovely guy!
posted by Jody Tresidder at 2:06 PM on January 30, 2007
Deoxyribonucleic acid! Duuude!
Anyone seen Demetri Martin: "I wonder what the most intelligent sentence anyone has said, starting with 'dude', is?"
I think we've found the answer.
posted by cardamine at 2:14 PM on January 30, 2007
Anyone seen Demetri Martin: "I wonder what the most intelligent sentence anyone has said, starting with 'dude', is?"
I think we've found the answer.
posted by cardamine at 2:14 PM on January 30, 2007
Mr. Watson, come here! I want 'shrooms.
posted by staggernation at 2:27 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by staggernation at 2:27 PM on January 30, 2007
From a NYRB article about Cary Grant (Geoffrey O'Brien, "The Man in the Smoking Jacket," Dec. 16, 2004) that I kept around for some reason or other:
In 1957 he began to take LSD under medical supervision, and ultimately became an enthusiastic spokesman for the drug, telling the reporter Joe Hyams (in an interview he came to regret):
"I have been born again. I have been through a psychiatric experience which has completely changed me.... Now I know that I hurt every woman I ever loved. I was an utter fake, a self-opinionated bore, a know-all who knew very little.... The moment when your conscious meets your subconscious is a hell of a wrench."
Grant wrote extensively about his LSD experiences, speaking of passing "through changing seas of horrifying and happy sights, through a montage of intense hate and love, a mosaic of past impressions assembling and reassembling." It is startling to realize that Grant was undergoing these visionary revelations just around the time he was starring as the self-centered, martini-drinking, decidedly unenlightened adman Roger Thornhill in North by Northwest: another instance of the ultimate inscrutability of Cary Grant.
posted by breezeway at 2:30 PM on January 30, 2007
In 1957 he began to take LSD under medical supervision, and ultimately became an enthusiastic spokesman for the drug, telling the reporter Joe Hyams (in an interview he came to regret):
"I have been born again. I have been through a psychiatric experience which has completely changed me.... Now I know that I hurt every woman I ever loved. I was an utter fake, a self-opinionated bore, a know-all who knew very little.... The moment when your conscious meets your subconscious is a hell of a wrench."
Grant wrote extensively about his LSD experiences, speaking of passing "through changing seas of horrifying and happy sights, through a montage of intense hate and love, a mosaic of past impressions assembling and reassembling." It is startling to realize that Grant was undergoing these visionary revelations just around the time he was starring as the self-centered, martini-drinking, decidedly unenlightened adman Roger Thornhill in North by Northwest: another instance of the ultimate inscrutability of Cary Grant.
posted by breezeway at 2:30 PM on January 30, 2007
Jody Tresidder writes "The Nova program theatrics tend to make people forget Franklin's work was properly credited on the original DNA structure paper in Nature."
The issue of Nature in which the double-helix result is reported contains not only the Watson and Crick paper, but also papers by Maurice Wilkins (who went on to share the DNA Nobel Prize with Watson and Crick) and Franklin. This suggests that at the time of publication, at least, there was significant acknowledgment of Franklin's contribution. Unfortunately, she died (at age 37!) only five years after these papers were published, and posthumous Nobel Prizes are not awarded, so there's no way to know how the Nobel Committee would have addressed her contribution. Also, Watson wrote some very unfortunate and unprofessional things about her in his big ol' book.
posted by mr_roboto at 2:55 PM on January 30, 2007
The issue of Nature in which the double-helix result is reported contains not only the Watson and Crick paper, but also papers by Maurice Wilkins (who went on to share the DNA Nobel Prize with Watson and Crick) and Franklin. This suggests that at the time of publication, at least, there was significant acknowledgment of Franklin's contribution. Unfortunately, she died (at age 37!) only five years after these papers were published, and posthumous Nobel Prizes are not awarded, so there's no way to know how the Nobel Committee would have addressed her contribution. Also, Watson wrote some very unfortunate and unprofessional things about her in his big ol' book.
posted by mr_roboto at 2:55 PM on January 30, 2007
While the original links were interesting, I also found this link within the freepickard.org site, listing cautions for the the female sexual arousal/male erectile dysfunction drug Bremelanotide, to also be pretty damn interesting. To borrow from Huxley (and with a nod to Shakespeare), "Oh brave new world that has such people in it..." We certainly do live in interesting times.
posted by mosk at 3:02 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by mosk at 3:02 PM on January 30, 2007
"Also, Watson wrote some very unfortunate and unprofessional things about her in his big ol' book."posted by mr_roboto
He did, indeed mr_roboto.
Took 'em back too - with a big apology - in the afterward of the later editions of The Double Helix.
Remember, he wrote some "very unfortunate and unprofessional things" about many people in his famously gossipy, famously mega-selling book. That was Watson's MO. Crick, for example, was among many who almost had a hernia (if not an LSD flashback!) when he saw the proofs!
posted by Jody Tresidder at 3:18 PM on January 30, 2007
He did, indeed mr_roboto.
Took 'em back too - with a big apology - in the afterward of the later editions of The Double Helix.
Remember, he wrote some "very unfortunate and unprofessional things" about many people in his famously gossipy, famously mega-selling book. That was Watson's MO. Crick, for example, was among many who almost had a hernia (if not an LSD flashback!) when he saw the proofs!
posted by Jody Tresidder at 3:18 PM on January 30, 2007
...cautions for the the female sexual arousal/male erectile dysfunction drug Bremelanotide...
I want me some of that.
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:27 PM on January 30, 2007
I want me some of that.
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:27 PM on January 30, 2007
damn dirty ape:
I wonder where the streets full of junkies hang up their self-produced masterpieces. Maybe they drive to their underwater geodesic dome galleries in their water-powered boat-car equipped with a cloaking device. Thats why us norms never seen them.
Or maybe this is confirmation bias of the half-assed assumption that LSD is magical. Unfortunately drug use cant even teach the difference between cause and corrolation!
Ah yes, the "streets full of junkies" on acid. Where is that again? I hate to break it to you, but even the closest thing one could reasonably call "streets full of junkies" and be referring to acid-"junkies," the Haight or La Honda around 40 years ago, doesn't really fit the bill. Acid-users don't loiter on the streets and turn into "junkies," per se, like crack addicts or smackheads, they generally sit around and giggle and stare at shit and paint and write and talk nonsense.
And one more thing, my good friend; there is no "assumption" that LSD is magical. And if you'd give it a shot, you'd know exactly what I mean.
posted by jckll at 3:58 PM on January 30, 2007 [3 favorites]
I wonder where the streets full of junkies hang up their self-produced masterpieces. Maybe they drive to their underwater geodesic dome galleries in their water-powered boat-car equipped with a cloaking device. Thats why us norms never seen them.
Or maybe this is confirmation bias of the half-assed assumption that LSD is magical. Unfortunately drug use cant even teach the difference between cause and corrolation!
Ah yes, the "streets full of junkies" on acid. Where is that again? I hate to break it to you, but even the closest thing one could reasonably call "streets full of junkies" and be referring to acid-"junkies," the Haight or La Honda around 40 years ago, doesn't really fit the bill. Acid-users don't loiter on the streets and turn into "junkies," per se, like crack addicts or smackheads, they generally sit around and giggle and stare at shit and paint and write and talk nonsense.
And one more thing, my good friend; there is no "assumption" that LSD is magical. And if you'd give it a shot, you'd know exactly what I mean.
posted by jckll at 3:58 PM on January 30, 2007 [3 favorites]
My friend Slater said George Washington totally smoked pot, man. His ol' lady Martha totally had a fat bowl waiting for him when he'd walk in the door.
Also, did you know the Constitution and shit is written on hemp?
posted by keswick at 4:13 PM on January 30, 2007
Also, did you know the Constitution and shit is written on hemp?
posted by keswick at 4:13 PM on January 30, 2007
Drugs: Magic Elixir or Doorway to Hell?
This is a strange thread.
posted by kozad at 4:29 PM on January 30, 2007
This is a strange thread.
posted by kozad at 4:29 PM on January 30, 2007
False dichotomy: Magic Elixir AND Doorway to Hell.
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:34 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:34 PM on January 30, 2007
I was going to post an excerpt from a journal entry describing my experience of temporary, LSD-induced synesthesia, but decided that it was too large and probably of limited interest. So here's a (self) link, if you want the story.
Temporary Synesthete - Excerpt
posted by BoatMeme at 4:35 PM on January 30, 2007
Temporary Synesthete - Excerpt
posted by BoatMeme at 4:35 PM on January 30, 2007
Hey Mental Wimp, this is both my favorite LSD story and my favorite baseball story. You might identify with it.
posted by isopraxis at 4:40 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by isopraxis at 4:40 PM on January 30, 2007
And of course, Crick wasn't the only person to win a Nobel Prize as a consequence of an acid-inspired vision. Kary Mullis also claims that his invention of the Polymer Chain Reaction also occurred to him in a vision he had on an acid trip.
Like Crick, Mullis also claims that the drug gave him the ability to visualize molecular structures.
Personally, the drug did very little for me apart from dissolving my ego and making me recognize that I was at one with the universe.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:56 PM on January 30, 2007
Like Crick, Mullis also claims that the drug gave him the ability to visualize molecular structures.
Personally, the drug did very little for me apart from dissolving my ego and making me recognize that I was at one with the universe.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:56 PM on January 30, 2007
Does this mean if I shoot heroin, I'll become a great musician?
It worked wonders for Billy Holliday's phrasing.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:59 PM on January 30, 2007
It worked wonders for Billy Holliday's phrasing.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 4:59 PM on January 30, 2007
BoatMeme:
I was going to post an excerpt from a journal entry describing my experience of temporary, LSD-induced synesthesia, but decided that it was too large and probably of limited interest. So here's a (self) link, if you want the story.
Temporary Synesthete - Excerpt
Nice story, out of curiosity, how big of a dose were you on? I wouldn't call myself an acid junkie but I've had my share and never experienced synesthesia. Totally unfortunate, I would like to so badly...
posted by jckll at 5:10 PM on January 30, 2007
I was going to post an excerpt from a journal entry describing my experience of temporary, LSD-induced synesthesia, but decided that it was too large and probably of limited interest. So here's a (self) link, if you want the story.
Temporary Synesthete - Excerpt
Nice story, out of curiosity, how big of a dose were you on? I wouldn't call myself an acid junkie but I've had my share and never experienced synesthesia. Totally unfortunate, I would like to so badly...
posted by jckll at 5:10 PM on January 30, 2007
I think "high as a kite on acid" is not quite accurate. Most articles say he "took LSD in tiny doses as a thinking tool" One can barely arrange a trip to the lavatory, let alone invent DNA when you're tripping your brains out. But, a tiny dose (25 mics) is somewhat akin to drinking two cups of coffee and turning up the color knob in your brain half a notch. I wouldn't be surprised if numerous inventions and discoveries were made on these kinds of drugs. Novelists and artists are far more frank about this subject than scientests and engineers because of the culture they work in.
posted by Blingo at 5:15 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by Blingo at 5:15 PM on January 30, 2007
Nice story, out of curiosity, how big of a dose were you on?
1 tab of blotter acid, which I understand can differ greatly in dosage sizes. I don't remember the particular variety or source, but the trip as a whole ranked on the low-middle end of the scale in intensity. It was not my first trip, probably 4th or 5th. After that, I experienced many unfulfilling if not downright unpleasant trips trying to recapture the synesthesia experience.
posted by BoatMeme at 5:31 PM on January 30, 2007
1 tab of blotter acid, which I understand can differ greatly in dosage sizes. I don't remember the particular variety or source, but the trip as a whole ranked on the low-middle end of the scale in intensity. It was not my first trip, probably 4th or 5th. After that, I experienced many unfulfilling if not downright unpleasant trips trying to recapture the synesthesia experience.
posted by BoatMeme at 5:31 PM on January 30, 2007
Nice post subject, too. Unfortunately now I have that damn tune in my head again, but its cleverness is worth it.
posted by LanTao at 7:01 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by LanTao at 7:01 PM on January 30, 2007
In other trippy DNA news: Does evolution select for faster evolvers?
posted by homunculus at 7:18 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by homunculus at 7:18 PM on January 30, 2007
Is there anywhere else on the net where the overlap of geek culture and drug culture is so prevalent as mefi? Those are not two audiences I would necessarily put together.
After all this time, this is still an interesting place.
posted by Ynoxas at 8:00 PM on January 30, 2007
After all this time, this is still an interesting place.
posted by Ynoxas at 8:00 PM on January 30, 2007
Magic Elixir AND Doorway to Hell
I am forced to recall (with great pleasure) the recurring SCTV 'Doorway to Hell' Lin Ye Tang character played by Dave Thomas. It was an injoke with my group of friends and codrinkers all through university and thereafter. Which dates me pretty horribly, I guess.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:26 PM on January 30, 2007
I am forced to recall (with great pleasure) the recurring SCTV 'Doorway to Hell' Lin Ye Tang character played by Dave Thomas. It was an injoke with my group of friends and codrinkers all through university and thereafter. Which dates me pretty horribly, I guess.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:26 PM on January 30, 2007
Those are not two audiences I would necessarily put together.
Really?
huh.
posted by flaterik at 9:41 PM on January 30, 2007
Really?
huh.
posted by flaterik at 9:41 PM on January 30, 2007
Is there anywhere else on the net where the overlap of geek culture and drug culture is so prevalent as mefi? Those are not two audiences I would necessarily put together.
The "personal" computer revolution is very nearly a direct outgrowth of the drug-informed California counter-culture of the late 60s and early 70s.
The ideas of decentralization that inspired personal computing aren't new, but some of the people involved in the just-born hobbyist computer scene were also moderately to heavily involved with various movements like The Diggers and People's Park.
Much of the motivation for "Personal" computing came from the fear that if the government owned all the computers that they would be our masters and enslave us. Because of the (visible) use of computers in the Draft during the Vietnam War and their (visible) effects on the population there was a very real impetus for this.
There were community-centered computing and networking initiatives such as the Community Memory project which involved leaving terminals for free public use in headshops, record stores and bars and whatnot.
Combine this with the inspiration (as well as possible paranoia), the visualization and imaginative properties of certain powerful psychedelics, mix in the plentiful and cheap surplus electronics in the Bay Area, combined with the raw, working talent of the area and what you have is a nearly perfect formula for innovation and invention.
A hotbed of innovation we're still experiencing today.
Psychedelic drugs are, indeed, not the only factor in this formula, but they are a very, very important factor that had a lot to do with "softening the ground" to make way for really wild and crazy ideas about how to use and apply computing technology.
The era even inspired a well known poem titled "Watched over by Machines of Loving Grace."
So, basically every time you turn on your small desktop computer and use it to access some kind community networking services, you have a number of drug-using dirt hippies to thank. No, seriously. Techno-hippies. There's probably more of them hiding out of sight than all of the anti-tech, barefoot, Rainbow-Family-Touring dirt hippies you can see.
Anecdotally, every single hard core professional programmer I've ever met is a huge (and usually active) fan of psychedelics. They say it allows them to hold more data-points at once in their mind, to visualize more complex models or concepts, and allows them to make associations and leaps of logic they would have otherwise not had, or would have waited much longer for.
And lastly, conjecture: There's probably more than one line or even dozens or hundreds of lines of code running on your computer or devices right now that was either written or concieved while the programmer was under the direct influence of psychedelics.
And if you're running OS X (Aka, a variant of unix called BSD), linux, or any number of other *nix/GPL machine I can guarantee this is true.
This is one of the "dirty" secrets of the computing industry that they don't want you to know. There was a GQ article about it back in the late 80s or early 90s in which a fair number of people were fired for going on the record about it.
The "industry" has refused further interviews about it ever since, as far as I can tell. They don't want the public to know that it is rather commonplace, because the public doesn't understand and automatically equates states of mental confusion or irreality to the use of psychedelics - and frankly, this just isn't true.
Finally, even Timothy Leary was quoted as saying something like "Computers will be the LSD of the 90s.", and in retrospect, he's right.
The world and humanity and how we interact with each other has been drastically changed. The information is flowing. Many, many millions of us are learning in leaps and bounds, and not just learning but doing -- and we're just now barely beginning to tap into the potentials available to us.
The power is very decidedly flowing towards the people - finally, perhaps for the very first time. People are being heard - and while the din of everyone trying to shout at once is a bit loud, the toy is still shiny and much needs to be said, and yet many important voices are still being heard.
So, yeah. Drugs and personal computers go hand in hand, and have been that way since birth.
If the concept of that makes you (you, the general reader) uncomfortable, perhaps you should reconsider your prejudices and assumptions about psychedelics, who uses them and for what reasons. Because there's really nothing to fear there.
posted by loquacious at 10:58 PM on January 30, 2007 [10 favorites]
The "personal" computer revolution is very nearly a direct outgrowth of the drug-informed California counter-culture of the late 60s and early 70s.
The ideas of decentralization that inspired personal computing aren't new, but some of the people involved in the just-born hobbyist computer scene were also moderately to heavily involved with various movements like The Diggers and People's Park.
Much of the motivation for "Personal" computing came from the fear that if the government owned all the computers that they would be our masters and enslave us. Because of the (visible) use of computers in the Draft during the Vietnam War and their (visible) effects on the population there was a very real impetus for this.
There were community-centered computing and networking initiatives such as the Community Memory project which involved leaving terminals for free public use in headshops, record stores and bars and whatnot.
Combine this with the inspiration (as well as possible paranoia), the visualization and imaginative properties of certain powerful psychedelics, mix in the plentiful and cheap surplus electronics in the Bay Area, combined with the raw, working talent of the area and what you have is a nearly perfect formula for innovation and invention.
A hotbed of innovation we're still experiencing today.
Psychedelic drugs are, indeed, not the only factor in this formula, but they are a very, very important factor that had a lot to do with "softening the ground" to make way for really wild and crazy ideas about how to use and apply computing technology.
The era even inspired a well known poem titled "Watched over by Machines of Loving Grace."
So, basically every time you turn on your small desktop computer and use it to access some kind community networking services, you have a number of drug-using dirt hippies to thank. No, seriously. Techno-hippies. There's probably more of them hiding out of sight than all of the anti-tech, barefoot, Rainbow-Family-Touring dirt hippies you can see.
Anecdotally, every single hard core professional programmer I've ever met is a huge (and usually active) fan of psychedelics. They say it allows them to hold more data-points at once in their mind, to visualize more complex models or concepts, and allows them to make associations and leaps of logic they would have otherwise not had, or would have waited much longer for.
And lastly, conjecture: There's probably more than one line or even dozens or hundreds of lines of code running on your computer or devices right now that was either written or concieved while the programmer was under the direct influence of psychedelics.
And if you're running OS X (Aka, a variant of unix called BSD), linux, or any number of other *nix/GPL machine I can guarantee this is true.
This is one of the "dirty" secrets of the computing industry that they don't want you to know. There was a GQ article about it back in the late 80s or early 90s in which a fair number of people were fired for going on the record about it.
The "industry" has refused further interviews about it ever since, as far as I can tell. They don't want the public to know that it is rather commonplace, because the public doesn't understand and automatically equates states of mental confusion or irreality to the use of psychedelics - and frankly, this just isn't true.
Finally, even Timothy Leary was quoted as saying something like "Computers will be the LSD of the 90s.", and in retrospect, he's right.
The world and humanity and how we interact with each other has been drastically changed. The information is flowing. Many, many millions of us are learning in leaps and bounds, and not just learning but doing -- and we're just now barely beginning to tap into the potentials available to us.
The power is very decidedly flowing towards the people - finally, perhaps for the very first time. People are being heard - and while the din of everyone trying to shout at once is a bit loud, the toy is still shiny and much needs to be said, and yet many important voices are still being heard.
So, yeah. Drugs and personal computers go hand in hand, and have been that way since birth.
If the concept of that makes you (you, the general reader) uncomfortable, perhaps you should reconsider your prejudices and assumptions about psychedelics, who uses them and for what reasons. Because there's really nothing to fear there.
posted by loquacious at 10:58 PM on January 30, 2007 [10 favorites]
Explaining LSD, and what it's like to be on a trip, to some one who has never done it, and never plans to do it, is time wasted.
posted by rougy at 11:28 PM on January 30, 2007
posted by rougy at 11:28 PM on January 30, 2007
"Is there anywhere else on the net where the overlap of geek culture and drug culture is so prevalent as mefi?"
What you don't realize - and may never understand - is that hightened intelligence and drug use have had a lot in common with one another since the dawn of man.
posted by rougy at 11:30 PM on January 30, 2007
What you don't realize - and may never understand - is that hightened intelligence and drug use have had a lot in common with one another since the dawn of man.
posted by rougy at 11:30 PM on January 30, 2007
The PC and the Internet sprang from pot-smoking, acid-dropping California dreamers
posted by homunculus at 12:35 AM on January 31, 2007
posted by homunculus at 12:35 AM on January 31, 2007
Having done shrooms, but not acid, and until now thinking that the effects were much the same, I have to conclude that I was greatly mistaken. Were I on mushrooms and trying to figure out anything more profound than how to tie my shoe, I wouldn't get past step one: find the shoe.
posted by dreamsign at 12:55 AM on January 31, 2007
posted by dreamsign at 12:55 AM on January 31, 2007
The thing about psychedelics that even experienced experimenters forget is that there isn't really any sort of one-to-one causality with psychedelics.
The same dose in the same setting may produce drastically different results.
Which is to say that it isn't just set and setting, but also mindset, and the uncountable, endless variations of various natural states of mind from profound thought to zen emptiness to outright emotional disturbance are not just a part of the psychedelic experience but the primary part, itself.
Ones knowledge of the intricacies of their own mind is directly essential in influencing and directing a given experience. And for some people, the more they experience the more they learn and know, and the finer and more adept they are about self-directing their experiences and interacting with them.
Further, raw intelligence plays a very large factor in the effectiveness of certain psychedelic experiences. Someone with a limber brain capable of easily manipulating many more datapoints or capable of internally manipulating more complicated puzzles or spatial constructs is likely to have a much more satisfying, rewarding and/or constructive time with a psychedelic experience - if only by virtue of complexity of imagination and creativity, as psychedelic experiences are generally inherently self-directed and activated experiences.
Combine all of this with someone who already has the foundations of an ongoing thought problem laid out and being worked upon from many angles, and the formal training in that particular field to document it and do good science regardless - which isn't that hard because good science is often procedural.
Combine that with some judicious moderation and it leads to some people being able to find their shoes, tie them, and even walk down to the lab to do a little science while their head and eyes might be a little on the sparkly side.
posted by loquacious at 1:38 AM on January 31, 2007
The same dose in the same setting may produce drastically different results.
Which is to say that it isn't just set and setting, but also mindset, and the uncountable, endless variations of various natural states of mind from profound thought to zen emptiness to outright emotional disturbance are not just a part of the psychedelic experience but the primary part, itself.
Ones knowledge of the intricacies of their own mind is directly essential in influencing and directing a given experience. And for some people, the more they experience the more they learn and know, and the finer and more adept they are about self-directing their experiences and interacting with them.
Further, raw intelligence plays a very large factor in the effectiveness of certain psychedelic experiences. Someone with a limber brain capable of easily manipulating many more datapoints or capable of internally manipulating more complicated puzzles or spatial constructs is likely to have a much more satisfying, rewarding and/or constructive time with a psychedelic experience - if only by virtue of complexity of imagination and creativity, as psychedelic experiences are generally inherently self-directed and activated experiences.
Combine all of this with someone who already has the foundations of an ongoing thought problem laid out and being worked upon from many angles, and the formal training in that particular field to document it and do good science regardless - which isn't that hard because good science is often procedural.
Combine that with some judicious moderation and it leads to some people being able to find their shoes, tie them, and even walk down to the lab to do a little science while their head and eyes might be a little on the sparkly side.
posted by loquacious at 1:38 AM on January 31, 2007
Which is to say that it isn't just set and setting, but also mindset, and the uncountable, endless variations of various natural states of mind from profound thought to zen emptiness to outright emotional disturbance are not just a part of the psychedelic experience but the primary part, itself.
That mindset is actually what's typically meant by the "set" of "set and setting."
posted by juv3nal at 1:44 AM on January 31, 2007
That mindset is actually what's typically meant by the "set" of "set and setting."
Interesting. I think at some point I began differentiating between internal mindset, external emotional interaction with any participants and any purely environmental stimulus as three distinct phases. Or perhaps as an integration of the "Third World / World of Thought / Noosphere" concept or something.
Regardless for some reason I don't feel that set and setting is enough of a descriptor. I think that there's a difference between one's own internal mindset, the emotional/interactive response to interacting with people - the community mindset - and the purely inanimate environmental aspects of the setting itself.
posted by loquacious at 2:52 AM on January 31, 2007
Interesting. I think at some point I began differentiating between internal mindset, external emotional interaction with any participants and any purely environmental stimulus as three distinct phases. Or perhaps as an integration of the "Third World / World of Thought / Noosphere" concept or something.
Regardless for some reason I don't feel that set and setting is enough of a descriptor. I think that there's a difference between one's own internal mindset, the emotional/interactive response to interacting with people - the community mindset - and the purely inanimate environmental aspects of the setting itself.
posted by loquacious at 2:52 AM on January 31, 2007
Anyone come across this before? It's an article about how lsd provides an insight into brain architecture.
If anyone has come across any futher developments on this I'd love to hear about it.
If that link hasn't worked, here it is again...
http://physical-sciences.uchicago.edu/research/2002/articles/brain.html
posted by leibniz at 4:46 AM on January 31, 2007
If anyone has come across any futher developments on this I'd love to hear about it.
If that link hasn't worked, here it is again...
http://physical-sciences.uchicago.edu/research/2002/articles/brain.html
posted by leibniz at 4:46 AM on January 31, 2007
Decentralized labs in the northeast US (of all places) are building up their distribution networks. Locally, supplies and prices have reached early 90s levels...the drought is over.
posted by solipse at 9:32 AM on January 31, 2007
posted by solipse at 9:32 AM on January 31, 2007
"...there isn't really any sort of one-to-one causality with psychedelics."
That's absolutely true.
There are too many variables. I think that a person can narrow down the direction a trip is going to take, but that's about it. You might be zooming right along, and then a knock at the door, or the phone ringing, or seeing something on television can totally derail your trip.
And then again, sometimes you get in a situation where the anxiety is going to be high - being out in public or with people you don't really know - and for some reason you see something and you laugh and all the fears melt away.
Somebody up there mentioned how he realized that we are one with humanity after he tripped - I'd have to second that.
Every little bit of good we do makes a difference.
posted by rougy at 12:19 PM on January 31, 2007
That's absolutely true.
There are too many variables. I think that a person can narrow down the direction a trip is going to take, but that's about it. You might be zooming right along, and then a knock at the door, or the phone ringing, or seeing something on television can totally derail your trip.
And then again, sometimes you get in a situation where the anxiety is going to be high - being out in public or with people you don't really know - and for some reason you see something and you laugh and all the fears melt away.
Somebody up there mentioned how he realized that we are one with humanity after he tripped - I'd have to second that.
Every little bit of good we do makes a difference.
posted by rougy at 12:19 PM on January 31, 2007
The key phrase is "tiny amounts of LSD." It never occurred to me or any of my pals forty years ago to use a tiny amount. A novel idea. The difference between using the drug as a tool for thought, and using it for the sheer fun of it, I suppose.
posted by David Williams at 2:10 PM on January 31, 2007
posted by David Williams at 2:10 PM on January 31, 2007
I wonder if you really can be honestly be consciously strategic about it, like you can with non-psychedelic drugs (stimulants or depressants, etc)?
posted by amberglow at 4:01 PM on January 31, 2007
posted by amberglow at 4:01 PM on January 31, 2007
Geek culture and Drug culture overlapping?
But of course!
The PC is the LSD of the '90s.
--Timothy Leary
posted by archae at 11:46 PM on January 31, 2007
But of course!
The PC is the LSD of the '90s.
--Timothy Leary
posted by archae at 11:46 PM on January 31, 2007
Ones knowledge of the intricacies of their own mind is directly essential in influencing and directing a given experience.
I'm not disagreeing with anything in your comment, except perhaps the notion that the experience is ultimately variable. Hell, even strains of shrooms offer widely different but particular experiences though within each is a wide ambit influenced by a lot of things, including as you say, state of mind, experience, and situational factors.
My experience is that there can be an extremely lucid period while on mushrooms, but that it inevitably devolves into circular thinking - a kind of dreamlike memory loss involving a comlete inability to solve anything. As David Williams suggests, it may be a dosage thing, or related to that, it may be where you simply are on the arc of the dose (if it isn't just me, and numerous conversations on the topic seem to indicate otherwise).
I don't doubt that psychedelics can have a profound impact on a person's ability to visualize -- it certainly has for me (a lasting impact, interestingly). But ability to do more than visualize -- to computate -- would necessitate some pretty fine attention to dose, I think, and I haven't yet met a person who has been able to do more than visualize while on psychedelics. "Labwork" I doubt very much. More like wake the next morning (feeling fantastic) with an exciting new idea.
posted by dreamsign at 1:15 AM on February 1, 2007
I'm not disagreeing with anything in your comment, except perhaps the notion that the experience is ultimately variable. Hell, even strains of shrooms offer widely different but particular experiences though within each is a wide ambit influenced by a lot of things, including as you say, state of mind, experience, and situational factors.
My experience is that there can be an extremely lucid period while on mushrooms, but that it inevitably devolves into circular thinking - a kind of dreamlike memory loss involving a comlete inability to solve anything. As David Williams suggests, it may be a dosage thing, or related to that, it may be where you simply are on the arc of the dose (if it isn't just me, and numerous conversations on the topic seem to indicate otherwise).
I don't doubt that psychedelics can have a profound impact on a person's ability to visualize -- it certainly has for me (a lasting impact, interestingly). But ability to do more than visualize -- to computate -- would necessitate some pretty fine attention to dose, I think, and I haven't yet met a person who has been able to do more than visualize while on psychedelics. "Labwork" I doubt very much. More like wake the next morning (feeling fantastic) with an exciting new idea.
posted by dreamsign at 1:15 AM on February 1, 2007
"Labwork" I doubt very much. More like wake the next morning (feeling fantastic) with an exciting new idea.
posted by dreamsign
Agreed.
Though even "exciting new idea" might be pushing it, since WITHOUT umpteen hours of first-rate thinking, discussion etc - what would the "exciting" part of the new idea be worth?
All those metaphors about unlocking/refiguring/opening doors/nudging glimpses into reality are SO seductive with respect to drugs - and often so empty. (Wish they weren't.)
posted by Jody Tresidder at 6:38 AM on February 1, 2007
posted by dreamsign
Agreed.
Though even "exciting new idea" might be pushing it, since WITHOUT umpteen hours of first-rate thinking, discussion etc - what would the "exciting" part of the new idea be worth?
All those metaphors about unlocking/refiguring/opening doors/nudging glimpses into reality are SO seductive with respect to drugs - and often so empty. (Wish they weren't.)
posted by Jody Tresidder at 6:38 AM on February 1, 2007
« Older Sweden opens up embassy in Second Life | I tried to buy an Xbox 360 and God doesn't want it... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by reformedjerk at 11:04 AM on January 30, 2007 [3 favorites]