Artificial Human Companions

In The Devil's Notebook, Anton LaVey discusses Artificial Human Companions, their construction and the effect they will have on human society. The Japanese are already pioneering the way toward creating servitors which will be useful for labor, while here in America the Realdoll manufacturers are creating objects for sexual fulfillment. The benefits to society would be many, but with the benefits also come pitfalls. I of course do not mean terminator style kill bots run amok, but something more subtle. Consider this article:

Runaway Consumerism Explains the Fermi Paradox

In the light of this article, how might "fitness faking" technology undermine civilization, if at all? Or will this new technology clear the way for the elite among the human race to separate themselves from the masses, while simultaneously weeding out the weak who are easily distracted by artificial things?

I read about this not too long ago. I am not concerned with them running amok, but perhaps this is the way the weak will be forced to be on the sidelines and weeded out by the ones who can afford to do this. Technology can be used for better reasons I think, but I guess time will tell. This is one subject many should think about in the days to come. Thank You for sharing.

Very very intresting artical. I think there is some truth to this and I would agree that "fittness faking" tecxhnology is underminding the population.

Thanks for sharing I will try to post some more on this when I have though it through.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stelionis Ignigenae

Or will this new technology clear the way for the elite among the human race to separate themselves from the masses, while simultaneously weeding out the weak who are easily distracted by artificial things?

---

Son, if you can't parse that one you never understood that thing about Social Stratification.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stelionis Ignigenae

In The Devil's Notebook, Anton LaVey discusses Artificial Human Companions, their construction and the effect they will have on human society. The Japanese are already pioneering the way toward creating servitors which will be useful for labor, while here in America the Realdoll manufacturers are creating objects for sexual fulfillment. The benefits to society would be many, but with the benefits also come pitfalls. I of course do not mean terminator style kill bots run amok, but something more subtle. Consider this article:

Runaway Consumerism Explains the Fermi Paradox

In the light of this article, how might "fitness faking" technology undermine civilization, if at all? Or will this new technology clear the way for the elite among the human race to separate themselves from the masses, while simultaneously weeding out the weak who are easily distracted by artificial things?

---

Fitness faking tech is a branding of inner instincts being manipulated. In classical conditioning, the conditioned response is derived from natural response. I.E.

Hot = ouch

hot + red (over time) = ouch

red = ouch

The color red is associated with pain.

This being said, the article in reference to "fitness faking tech" is a metaphor for conditioned neural responses that are similar to base instincts.

Tasty food = good for you

KFC = tasty food

KFC = Good for you

The instinct to infer that good tasting food is good for you, has been passed down by our ancestors, the monkeys. When agriculture first started out, the Sumerian farmers took the biggest and tastiest grains and planted them in stead of the smaller, bitter grains. This produced more crops, and better tasting food. When the article references that fast food is a "Fitness faking Tech", it is referring to the tasty food = good food instinct. Hence why we (humans) tend to eat KFC more often than broccoli.

Those who "eat broccoli" per sey, will inherit the earth, because they contain more self control.

What the author is basicly saying, is that:

people who don't succumb to the temptations of pornography, Xbox and KFC will inherit the earth. Entertainment is the scourge of mankind, pay attention to space, send out more space messages. Work more on spaceships and NASA, than entertainment. Eat right, have family values, and take care of the earth, and maybe we will contact aliens.

in short, Consumerism should be put below contacting aliens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeptismo118

Son, if you can't parse that one you never understood that thing about Social Stratification.

---

blunt, but correct. The article wasn't about servitors, or technology being used to create servitors. Demonic guides/aids and occult "helpers" as it were, have nothing to do with this article.

It is an interesting opinion, but ill suited towards your argument. The part about "weeding out the weak" was all about patiences. When we all die from a cardiac arrest because we were jerking off to porn and eating another chicken basket, the veggie/family values/scientists will inherit the earth, due to the rest of humanity's short sightedness.

I would read that article again if I were you, just to grasp the concept. I had to read it twice, just to get past the authors gross hate, spite, and viciousness towards the rest of the western world.

SWM you may have got the point of this artical more than most and I take my hat off to you, after your reply I think I see this artical in new light.

*Takes hat of to SWM*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWM

blunt, but correct. The article wasn't about servitors, or technology being used to create servitors. Demonic guides/aids and occult "helpers" as it were, have nothing to do with this article.

---

Neither do they have anything to do with the LaVeyian notion of Artificial Companions save in the most tenuous of metaphoric ways.

Satanism 101 for the basics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skeptismo118

Son, if you can't parse that one you never understood that thing about Social Stratification.

---

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j...e/facepalm.jpg

You know just once I would like to try and start a conversation using the Socratic Method without getting primate dominance as a reply.

Protip: I am not your son, do not use diminutives with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWM

Fitness faking tech is a branding of inner instincts being manipulated. In classical conditioning, the conditioned response is derived from natural response. I.E.

Hot = ouch

hot + red (over time) = ouch

red = ouch

The color red is associated with pain.

This being said, the article in reference to "fitness faking tech" is a metaphor for conditioned neural responses that are similar to base instincts.

Tasty food = good for you

KFC = tasty food

KFC = Good for you

The instinct to infer that good tasting food is good for you, has been passed down by our ancestors, the monkeys. When agriculture first started out, the Sumerian farmers took the biggest and tastiest grains and planted them in stead of the smaller, bitter grains. This produced more crops, and better tasting food. When the article references that fast food is a "Fitness faking Tech", it is referring to the tasty food = good food instinct. Hence why we (humans) tend to eat KFC more often than broccoli.

Those who "eat broccoli" per sey, will inherit the earth, because they contain more self control.

What the author is basicly saying, is that:

people who don't succumb to the temptations of pornography, Xbox and KFC will inherit the earth. Entertainment is the scourge of mankind, pay attention to space, send out more space messages. Work more on spaceships and NASA, than entertainment. Eat right, have family values, and take care of the earth, and maybe we will contact aliens.

in short, Consumerism should be put below contacting aliens.



blunt, but correct. The article wasn't about servitors, or technology being used to create servitors. Demonic guides/aids and occult "helpers" as it were, have nothing to do with this article.

It is an interesting opinion, but ill suited towards your argument. The part about "weeding out the weak" was all about patiences. When we all die from a cardiac arrest because we were jerking off to porn and eating another chicken basket, the veggie/family values/scientists will inherit the earth, due to the rest of humanity's short sightedness.

I would read that article again if I were you, just to grasp the concept. I had to read it twice, just to get past the authors gross hate, spite, and viciousness towards the rest of the western world.

---

Sigh. Robots can't be used for porn? Robots can't be used to substitute for social skills? Robots can't be used to fulfill instincts that would normally be fulfilled by having children? About the only thing robots can't do is serve as food. It's a good argument, I just expected other people to be able to synthesize ideas. My mistake.

Light has just dawned. I had no idea someone would think robots would be used for porn. I did not even entertain this. I have a question, do you think Robots will be programmed with emotions. I realize I sound off base a bit, but it seems we are fulfilling what our world was depicted in the moves of the fifties. We are getting into so many possibilities of letting technology rule our world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stelionis Ignigenae

Sigh. Robots can't be used for porn? Robots can't be used to substitute for social skills? Robots can't be used to fulfill instincts that would normally be fulfilled by having children? About the only thing robots can't do is serve as food. It's a good argument, I just expected other people to be able to synthesize ideas. My mistake.

---

To be honest, no they can not. Where are your robot hookers? Methinks you have been watching too much A.I.

And thanks everybody else :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stelionis Ignigenae

In The Devil's Notebook, Anton LaVey discusses Artificial Human Companions, their construction and the effect they will have on human society. The Japanese are already pioneering the way toward creating servitors which will be useful for labor, while here in America the Realdoll manufacturers are creating objects for sexual fulfillment. The benefits to society would be many, but with the benefits also come pitfalls. I of course do not mean terminator style kill bots run amok, but something more subtle. Consider this article:

Runaway Consumerism Explains the Fermi Paradox

In the light of this article, how might "fitness faking" technology undermine civilization, if at all? Or will this new technology clear the way for the elite among the human race to separate themselves from the masses, while simultaneously weeding out the weak who are easily distracted by artificial things?

---

Stelionis would the weak be the ones who will fall for this and succumb to what the scientist are doing. Is the elitist the ones who know what these new toys will actually do to the people who grab them up like candy. Yes they will buy them as it is something new a new fad and because Scientist say so to own one would be only for ones who can afford them and would this mean the one's that do not fall for this be in the elitist group?

Lets just Look at the basic demographics of the worlds population, and the percentage that the article is actually applicable to...maybe 5%? Its just a guess, but I doubt I'm off by much...hell, double my estimation if you want.

By far the bulk of the worlds population is still poor, relatively uneducated and very simple...living with conservative mindsets that haven't changed in decades. Whether we like it or not, it is this demographic that is breeding the fastest and will be a major cause to any collapse in civilization that might happen. The guy that makes the tea in the office here has 3 wives, 11 children and 5 grandchildren...he's 42. His youngest wife is 19.

Now it could be argued that the "elite" minority isn't doing enough about this situation because we are to busy staring at our belly buttons drooling..but I suspect that a lot of the poorer demographic are actually quite happy with their lot or it would take generations to change their way of looking at life even if the more affluent elite were to start trying to influence them.

I don't think apathy due to technical advancement is a major issue...its more like stopping the teaboy from getting wife number 4 that bothers me.

Three wives? Where are you?

I live in the East...3 wives is considered quite normal hereabouts. I personally think he, (and most men with more than 1 wife), are certifiably insane...but I'm an outsider looking in.

PS...I think he has a girlfriend to...

Oh my. I thought it was hard with one husband.

To add, you have to take perspective into account. If the human race is happy being served to, and busy being content on food and artificial sex, the want and need to further intelligent evolution is unwarranted.

Quote:

---

Lets just Look at the basic demographics of the worlds population, and the percentage that the article is actually applicable to...maybe 5%? Its just a guess, but I doubt I'm off by much...hell, double my estimation if you want.

---

http://www.gizmag.com/pictures/6571_7120623001.jpg

Its more like 2%. However, once we figure out how to make whatever you're talking about, there will be a way to mass produce it cheaply. Look at the One Laptop Per Child program. Basically its a non-profit organization that gives cheep, easy to assemble, heavy duty, easy to learn laptops across the world to children who would never have an opportunity otherwise. Its the same principle as the "servitor" aspect". If we can mass produce it cheaply and efficiently, we can afford to GIVE THEM AWAY.

Rapid consumerism is a catalyst to the eventual tech boom that will enable everyone in the world to live in their own personal utopia. This however is offset by natural resources. Land, water, food, and fuel; all are factors that are required to fulfill said utopia. Unless we discover a sustainable source of fuel that can be siphoned off of war and famine, there is going to be a distinct lack of any utopia at all, servitor or otherwise. Think to Idiocracy (2006). The future is so dumbed down, that even the average man of today is considered a genius. This could be the case of our future. We have become so dependent on technology already, that we have bred new social disorders, diseases, weapons and malice, all with technology.

Have you ever heard of an obsessive compulsive hand washer from the Renaissance? What about a weapon that can destroy an entire city from the stone age? Such things were either God's wrath or a curse from some wandering Roma. By the time that we develop the technology to mass produce prostitutes cheaply, we will be out of the information age, and into the age of pleasure. Its an example of ends justifying the means.

In Vir's example of consumerism benefiting humanity, I can only hope. Grand schemes such as Stelionis Ignigenae mentioned, can't be considered influential yet. Why? Because they don't exist. Robot hookers aren't prowling the streets, and whatever notion you have that they're just around the corner, is wrong.

Prostitutes in general is a Taboo subject.

Thats having sex with Humans. Having sex with robots would cause a media stir like no other. When it does happen, I'll consider if they can be used for porn, companionship, or whatever. So far, the most advanced robot in the world still can't recognize faces correctly. Its a LONG time off until we get to have sex with it. If you have any direct links or evidence besides blowup sex dolls, or low tech examples of robot prostitutes, I will gladly view those sources.

As for synthesizing ideas, all I can say to that is Ideas can be wrong. So can opinions. However it all comes back to perspective.

I'm going to use two people, myself and you ( in general, you is nonspecific in these examples)

In example: If my moral code is different from your moral code, unless you can convince me otherwise, you are wrong under my morals. If my perspective changes, then maybe your morals will have more sympathy.

In example: If I view a rock as a rock, and you view a rock as a rock, we both share the same view of a rock. If we take a step further; I view a rock of any size as just a rock, you view a rock of smaller size to be a pebble, and a rock of bigger size to be a boulder. They are both rocks, but under your perspective, merely claiming a boulder is a rock deems insufficiency.

Understanding ideas and getting others to believe them are two different things. The same could be said about servitors. 2% of the entire world can afford a mechanical prostitute. The African child can understand the idea of mechanical prostitutes. When he is older, he may even want one. He understands that he may never get one. Claiming that this man can afford it doesn't make that statement true. Being elite justifies importance to the rest of the world simply because its a habit. Once technology evolves, and we can mass produce this prostitute, the elite are no longer elite for having a mechanical prostitute. Any man can have a prostitute, the United Nations may even start shipping them out to poor countries in order to control STDs and world population.

HOWEVER:

This hasn't happened yet. Its a strict case of having to see to believe.

Percentages or not if the human race is content to have this happen there will be no human race. Technology is at the point where they are playing God again, like they did with the ancient races and they destroyed themselves. We will destroy our selves from within if it is allowed to continue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lady Dunsany

Percentages or not if the human race is content to have this happen there will be no human race. Technology is at the point where they are playing God again, like they did with the ancient races and they destroyed themselves. We will destroy our selves from within if it is allowed to continue.

---

The invincible force meets the immovable object. Its a beast that can't be stopped.

You can preach the advancements of robotics until you're blue in the face. I realize that the advancements in nano tech as well as robotics are immensely impressive. However, this doesn't change the fact that its hard to believe any future tech like that would be available to the common man. At least in a long while.

It seems to me a lot like the flying car. I know they exist, I can appreciate the technology. I can't own one though. Too damn expensive. Too insificiant. Too much of a waste.

By the time that the technology is at the selling point, or breaching point, we either run out of resources to mass produce said tech, or we simply don't have enough money to make it worth while.

I doubt that a robo-hooker will ever be popular, even if its at a mass producing point. The 15 year old girl down the street is a whole lot cheaper compared to a hi tech expensive bundle. AI is still in the dark ages, and as far as producing any robot that doesn't put togeather cars or washing machines is too far off to mention.

It doesn't even matter that companies try to bring advanced tech from 2050. We don't have the money to buy it. And whatever anyone can ever do with ANYTHING, its about money.

money makes the world go round.

Its too far into the future to be entirely accurate. I looked up Moore's law, but I still have to see it to believe it. In order for it to be worth it (to me, the consumer) it has to be at Target. Computer terms aren't my thing, so that goop about processors is a little foreign to me. I'm using myself as the common man in this retrospect. I will hold firm on my stance that robo-hookers will not be on the streets or in the beds of the wealthy for 50 years. Thats my time line, take it or leave it.

I'm not going to spend the time debating the future of technology, because you beat me at the advancement game. I can proudly say I have learned something however. Nice volley Vir.

All very cool and shiny...but I might point out that your major computational and robotic advancements are driven by rather different motives.

Your 16 Petaflop computer is going to be used to run vast societal systems, archives, finance and scientific analysis. Big and complicated yes, but still basic input/output. No matter how many linear or parallel computations it may be capable of, we still have no idea of what the code for abstract thought may look like. The failing isn't in our ability to create kickass fast computers, its our inability to understand ourselves and what makes us humans fundamentally different from the rest of the animal kingdom...and then we would have to translate these concepts into binary, (or trinary for that matter), code. Only once we've done that, can we start talking of artificial intelligence. To do that we would have to understand our own neural cortex...and we are generations away from that, let alone in the developing the software to replicate. Modern software is having difficulty coping with parallel computing as it is...we have no clue what the next evolutionary step in coding even looks like.

And besides...who says that our neural cortex is the best model to base artificial intelligence on. The reason we try is because its the most advanced thing we've got to work with, but as anyone with a girlfriend or wife will quickly point out..it may have some stability issues..(that was a complete joke and I've already been chewed out by my sister, thank you. :o)

As for the robotic hooker..."Robots" tend to be purpose built and specifically designed. Their purpose has a direct impact on what they look like and their level of interactive ability...you really don't want an overly intelligent robotic hooker...you'r not going to sit and discuss the relative merits of chemically aged versus traditionally stored Red Wines now then are you? Its more cost effective to build a robot that does one thing really well as opposed to a general human replicant that can sort of do a bit of everything. You would build just smart enough to do whats its meant to. Come to think of it...off the top of my head I can't think of any other function a robot could fulfill apart from being a supplicant bed partner that would necessitate a robot to look even vaguely humanoid.

I've never understood why we have in our minds that robots should look, act and think like us. There are 6 billion of us on the planet as it is...hows that working out for you so far?

Quote:

---

Actually the only barrier to a functioning AI is the processor speed. Even our base integrated circuit 16 petaflop processor could be used to create a rather realistic AI. I don't even want to know how many If Then statements it would be made up of but that would more or less be all it takes to give the appearance of life

---

This is true, but now you aren't talking about true AI...just a mechanical mirror aping its creator. As you said, giving the appearance of life. Its not quite the same thing. It wouldn't be self aware, wouldn't worry about its own existence unless you programmed it to. Its just a fast computer.

Quote:

---

Cause and effect. We're not that complicated.

---

While I appreciate that sentiment, and wish it were true...I disagree. I don't believe all our actions are knee jerk on either a conscious or unconscious level. I agree that a lot of what we do is, (much more than we would like to admit), but to reduce the human experience to stimulus and response is a lazy way of going about it.

Quote:

---

Although a quantum processor would solve this problem neatly because a quantum would be able to process trinary code. Instead of 1 and 0 yes and no a quantum processor would utilize the unique ability of quantum particles to be in multiple states at once alal Schroedinger's Cat and it would process instead -1 0 and 1 where -1 is no 1 is yes and 0 is a maybe. That single simple advancement would open up a whole new world of flexible reactive systems.

---

yes, I'm sure it would...just as soon as we figure out how arrange all the little -1, 0 and 1's into the correct order. Although here I am confused...if you'r view of humanity is based on a "cause and effect" outlook...all you need 1's and -1's surly...what would precipitate the uncertainty that would necessitate a 0?

I fully agree with the concept that the main horsepower for any AI will probably be housed away from the functioning unit itself. bulk, cooling, power and so on would make it much easier to manage. Of course the fatal flaw in that is vulnerability...take out heart and you kill the beast. All of them.

Quote:

---

As for why a human looking robot the answer to that is simple. We've already built our entire world around ourselves. Our world is made for bipedal creatures with stereoscopic vision. It's more practical to build a robot that can walk and negotiate the obstacles in a home than to build some big clumsy thing with wheels that has to make a three point turn just to go down a hallway. Now I'll give you the idea of a robo-hooker is extreme and we will be far more likely to have them picking up our clothes, working in dangerous environments like nuclear power plants and mining operations before we have them in our beds but the technology is catching up to our science fiction.

---

This is true to a point...but a rather narrow definition. Dogs do just fine around the house, as do cats and cockroaches. I would argue that bi-pedalism is more difficult to emulate because of the inherently unstable nature of the design. Walking is often described as controlled falling and is a bastard to compute. 4 or even 6 legs is much more stable and maneuverable.
We gained no evolutionary advantage by walking on 2 legs, (I don't think we did at any rate)...there must be better ways of doing it.

vey interesting i am going to look this one for more info. but it is all good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stelionis Ignigenae

The Japanese are already pioneering the way toward creating servitors which will be useful for labor, while here in America the Realdoll manufacturers are creating objects for sexual fulfillment.

---

Reminds me of an episode from Ghost in the Shell series
(or maybe it was one of the movies).

Reminds me of one of the episodes in the twilight zone.

well, there's nothing new about that. Watching porn is basically that same "virtual" sex thing.

Stepford wives ring a bell?

The article is actually motivating to close this laptop and go dig in the garden. I have to admit that I am thankful for the 'victims' of the Matrix in a way. More for me to conquer,-so to speak. However, I doubt that any of us fall in to that category...:p

I learned a lot from this post, even if much of the discussion occurred in January. I read the article and after an informative debate with my girlfriend, I reached the conclusion that, while the article does include one interesting answer to the Fermi Paradox, it is only one answer and nothing more than that. There are too many variables. Perhaps some alien species fell victim to technological enslavement, but many more probably did not. The article is extremely speciocentric, assuming that all beings evolve and create their subsequent technology in the same manner. It is akin to scientists thinking that just because life on Earth depends on water and oxygen, for example, that all beings need water for cellular fiction and must somehow filter air into their lungs. So, I think there are many solutions to the Paradox, but I do personally think that aliens have at least been to Earth. Beyond that, I have nothing much more to say about what they've done, if anything but purely observational research.

As for the impact of technology on society, I can say that there are also too many variables. Yes, for the most part, humans are responsible for continuing their evolution. Mother Nature is a bit obsolete now, but saying that will always be the cases rules out mass extinctions, whether they be freak accidents (a meteor large enough to annihilate some but not all life) or human created (nuclear war or a rebellion against technology), that would drive humans into a primitive state. As I said, too many variables.

I will say that technology will impact humanity the same way religions did and do: those who are cowed into group think will fall into a stagnant trap and degenerate while individuals will use the technology to their benefit and prosper.

Artificial human companions.

If we're talking beings like the cylons in the recent reimagining of Battlestar Galactica then probably none of us alive right now will be around for that. Currently the stage we're at when it comes to such AI is actually far from impressive when you consider that the said machines extant are like retarded cockroaches.

Earth is a Type 0 civilization. If you look at Star Trek, in the Type II civilization of the Federation there is the AI named Data. Can a Type 0 civilization produce a Data? Unlikely.

We're a century or so from reaching just Type I status.

Don't hold your breath when it comes to truly spectacular artificial human companions.

Moore's law may reach its limit in about twenty years but even if not it would be about fifty years from now before we would have artificial human companions that could reach genuine human parody but at that point they would be dangerous and we would have to voluntarily restrict their advancement in order to control them that way we can be safe from them so they wouldn't get to achieve human parody at such a time because we wouldn't allow it.

My theory is that about fifty years after such an event once we have successfully transitioned from a Type 0 to Type I civilization then such restrictions will be lifted and such artificial human companions would become pretty much more and more human on all levels including legally.

Furthermore, my conviction is that a Type 0 civilization entails certain political and religious/philosophical obstacles and therefore other obstacles that would make what I consider to be a true artificial human companion an impossibility.

I just don't personally consider anything less than human to be a artificial human companion. To me a true artificial human companion is truly human except is made human through artificial means.

Others would differ of course. I don't deny that anything less than my ideal conception of a artificial human companion would be a artificial human companion to anyone else but for me personally such wouldn't be at all.

If Anton LaVey considered the inventions in his Den of Iniquity to be artificial human companions then that was what worked for him. For me that wouldn't work.

I agree with the artificial companions, I would hope things would be like the film IRobot, however, oddities and technological anomalies happen, just like all the the spectrum of sciences. War has always been a part of human society and if we make technology increasingly human we will see the same Lex Talionis principle transfer to our robotic friends. I doubt that we will see a Terminator style future as we have not, and probably never will, harness and master the ability of actual time travel (my assumptions on that is that we will wire high resolution; superiorly high definition memories within our minds into a virtual matrix and visit our past artificially.) That fact aside if we play our cards right we can have all or manufacture friends fight all of our wars for us.

I love the rhetoric behind:

Mcdonalds = Good food

Good food = Healthy food

Mcdonalds = Healthy food

This typed of rotten rhetoric is taught and learned to be defaced in logic 101. Most well trained medical doctors have often stated, that in line with today's concept of food if it taste's really good 9 times out of 10 it's not good for you.

-Nevermore

:eek:Yes the technology we have now is "stupifieing". Everyone out there is addicted and numb and it only stands to get worse the way we are heading. The good taste in all the processed food is from chemicals like MSG that makes our brain think the food tastes good and creates an addiction. Never cared for most fast food. I tend to go for the finer foods.LOL Artificial human companions sound like a nice idea, but can they ever advance to the point where they really have any advantage over the real ones. they would have to feel real and seem real. Virtual is good for some, but doesn't replace the realness for me. There are advantages to both. A virtual experience is better than nothing if I am home sick and can view far off travel spots, but it's not as good as the real thing. It might be more effective to come up w/ a technology where the user puts on a helmet and actually has the experience in his brain. Saw that in an old 80's movie. It might be more real and have the same positive effects on the body that the actual experience would have-a thought, but that is a long ways away also.