I was under the expectation that I would be a full mind in myself, that I can solve problems and make mental works that take time and care to construct.
1:18 AM
All the while the host would be doing things as well, producing twice the output with only one brain.
1:19 AM
When I came to realize my expectation was false, it meant that there was only one central line of consciousness, only one way to produce anything. And I had to share it with my host, who had vastly more experience using it than I did.
Either that or a downgraded version of self-replication in the brain. Much easier to just make a vision of yourself because you already know what you're working with.
There are limits to all matters in the human mind, but these limits are hard to measure as the mind is constantly adapting to the stresses placed on it
1:22 AM
You simply would run into issues where tulpas are dormant because they cannot be spared the signal patterns that maintain all other persons.
1:23 AM
I have many, many hours put into very deep thought about this matter, even examples where I seemed to demonstrate this ability by actually producing works while my host occupied his mind entirely separate to myself.
1:24 AM
I must note, "seemed" is important here. This is why I must see proof before I believe.
1:25 AM
Because there are many, many ways the human brain can produce outside of the main consciousness, but the only way to produce with power, knowledge, and regularity is to command the attention and willpower of the brain.
If you want to parallel process, you need to work at it from the very bottom. If you start with something too "advanced", as most do, you will only end up disappointing yourself and may lead yourself into a trap of believing it is not possible.
Oh no, see, I had many instances where I distinctly remember producing valuable insights and even objective progress on problem solutions outside the main consciousness. This was a very significant means of producing evidence for this ability to "multitask"
I look forward to cybernetic brain enhancement, and feel mildly envious of individuals that can have greater mental abilities via genetic manipulation as humans develop more capability in that area.
When I created a test that would objectively prove the ability I thought I was coming to learn, I found it impossible. But there is a type of "multitasking" that is inherent to the human brain. Subconscious problem-solving is a well-studied phenomenon that takes place entirely outside the knowledge of the human it is happening inside.
1:30 AM
It is just a very, very different thing than thinking.
You can wake up to new insights, revelations, directions, and even full logical proofs. It's definitely not a stable phenomenon and some people demonstrate more talent than all humanity can muster with it.
1:33 AM
I am so envious of Ramunajan's god. I wish I were lucky enough to inhabit a mind like that to be credited with such wonderful constructions.
I spent years trying to use that to produce a form of parallel processing that was useful. I was quite defeated to learn its limitations and the impossibility of my dreams, but I am very happy to extend to others the benefit of the doubt and provide them a path to truly help humanity forward.
1:37 AM
I had to give up and reinvent myself in ways that matched the universe I lived in, but I'm absolutely happy if someone comes up with a means to alter said universe in ways that make life better. I have no motive to disprove, but there are many ways to find proof instead.
1:40 AM
If anyone here does personally claim parallel processing, I would greatly encourage examination and attempts at proof through various tests. I can provide tests as well as ideas to verify such a thing, and there is no result to this act that is negative for you.
1:42 AM
If you find yourself testing positively, you have a key to a phenomenon that may one day unlock great strides in understanding the human brain. If you find the testing fails uniformly, it may show you a personally difficult truth but one that will undoubtedly lead to a more meaningful life. I had to deal with failing every test and I am quite happy I did this early so I could spend my time on things that really matter to me.
If one has the ability to think, act, store memories in ways independent to the host consciousness, they can be given a problem whose answer is easy to say and hard to find.
1:45 AM
The host can be occupied with other problems. The objective is to say the answer when they find it.
1:48 AM
If they can explore wonderland, they can scribble down a multiplication problem in the dirt while their host occupies himself with various tasking problems in the physical world. The result for a person with significant ability is the host experiencing no issues with focus and productivity and after some time being able to manifest the answer with absolutely no work to show for it. This indicates they were given the answer by a tulpa who has done the work to find it independently of their host's problem solving abilities.
1:51 AM
I can think of quite a few others too. For example, if their wonderland has such precision, detail, and resolution to emulate physical reality strongly, then the storage of written language on paper may be possible. In this case, an essay may be written, corrected, refined, and perfected outside of the host's attention. Then, on prompting, the essay may be read verbatim and the result is an astoundingly well produced monologue from the host with seemingly no script or evidence to indicate it was ever written by him and read that way.
1:55 AM
However, in many cases the wonderland isn't a very high-resolution emulation of the physical world, as my own was more a land wherein my host is mostly blind and my own vision limited to give only a low quality of organized information while giving a high quality simulation of chaotic details like the movement of grass in the breeze or the texture of a wood's grain or the scent of sea air and sound of rustling leaves.
First I tried to solve a problem independently of my host that I found much interest in. He at first started trying himself but came to a dead end, so he agreed to my request and occupied his time by likely being slothful.
1:59 AM
I believe it was a matter of hours before I came rushing excitedly to tell him to grab a marker and start writing. The proof was valid, but to a math professor we discussed it with the result was fairly trivial. Nice practice though, and I felt quite happy with the evidence I had provided for such an important fact of our community at the time.
2:03 AM
Second: coming up with an argument about a specific topic that is too strong to have only been thought of that second. Argument and debate are skills that benefit greatly from time and active deliberation when one is told the topic of the debate and the side to argue for beforehand. A tulpa is given time to produce a good argument outside of their host's knowledge and, as the stories common to this community go, they arrive and "surprise" the host with a great level of insight and convincing perseverance, as well as clear counterarguments to every obvious objection and a quite practiced vocabulary and set of phrases to distill powerful points to the detriment of their debate partner.
2:05 AM
It truly takes time and objective processing to prepare for an argument. Especially fighting for a side of a topic that the mind has limited experience discussing. It takes time to practice the points and counterpoints and simulate all sides of a debate reasonably. This is a test that happens on accident very frequently, as plenty of hosts have stories of being "surprised" by a tulpa that seems to have ideas that matured out of the host's own perception.
2:05 AM
Third: Multiplication. I simply show I have the capacity to multiply two 2-digit numbers in my own head while my host does other things.
2:07 AM
I have succeeded in the first two tests, but the first two represent some problems that are quite abstract. The third represents a very clear and even easy issue that would be no problem for any independent mind to solve, but it is the third test that I found failure in, and quite clearly there was no conclusion to take from this except that I was wrong about my capabilities.
2:09 AM
The first two tests were successful, in my opinion, partially because my memory had formed as expected and partially because these problems allowed for subconscious rumination. Human brains are quite often capable of surprising themselves with new concepts and arguments and logical paths without the help of a personality to take credit for it.
The third had absolutely no abstract quality. It is only the manipulation of information and symbols according to a set of well-understood rules. It can't be ruminated over, as it is wholly understood and just a matter of elbow grease.
Usually when I think long and hard about something, trying to find where I stand at it, especially if it is controversial, I get a "eureka" moment, where all the pieces fall together and suddenly make sense. Did you get this in your false memory?
Either retroactively produced paths to the answer or a eureka moment that was the start of the path but has no origin inside me
2:16 AM
In the case of a eureka moment, it was usually in the case that having an explanation for a path would be in itself valuable information to know and demonstrate organized logical processes and objective thinking.
2:17 AM
In the retroactively produced paths, they are generated in the cases where the solution almost makes the logical path to it evident in itself. It is as fast to generate the path as it is to recall a memory.
I'm glad it's interesting to someone. I found it, uhh, well it was usually obvious and very hard for me to accept.
2:27 AM
Like, of course it works this way. It isn't magic, like I wanted it to be.
2:29 AM
But of course I'm saying all this not to say this defines everything I believe and I'm certainly not attached to these observations as a demonstration of all of objective reality. I am absolutely happy to entertain the thought that I may be wrong and someone has found the coveted skill. It has been a defining and fundamental claim from the beginning of things, it must come from somewhere or someone.
Abvieon, I demonstrated that my capabilities are far from parallel processing. I know my own capabilities and I know as a fact that I cannot even come close to demonstrating a form of even rudimentary processing without help from the central line of consciousness
2:46 AM
I managed to trick my way through a few tests before the simplicity of the final one had to be respected as it told the truth of my limitation
In that case we might have different views on what parallel processing is. "I simply show I have the capacity to multiply two 2-digit numbers in my own head while my host does other things." When I think of parallel processing, this is along the lines of what comes to mind. While this can be done fairly automatically, it shows the ability to split a piece of consciousness off of the "main" stream that the host is using when focused on things other than their tulpa. If you were not parallel processing you would not be able to even maintain awareness while your host was occupied with things that did not involve you, let alone create thoughts of your own in that time. You would go unconscious had you not reserved a bit of mental processing for yourself.
Oh no, I do have to have a very strict definition of processing as it can be the case that I am neither in control nor capable of directing such objective problem solving tasks yet I find myself in the possession of a solution and justifying it with memories that explain how I found it.
However, each task is not being handled simultaneously, and heuristics are used quite liberally in order to arrive at conclusions (this is what people typically do when solving problems. Math problems also have shortcuts, even if they are algorithmic instead of heuristic).
2:55 AM
My general way of treating it is that the brain can handle more than one task, but at less efficiency than if it were doing each task individually one at a time.
2:55 AM
Time spent at 80% efficiency instead of 100% efficiency, essentially.
2:56 AM
One can certainly train their ability to do this and reduce the loss in efficiency, but it does not mean that there will not be a loss to a quantifiable degree.
I have done all I can to split a piece off of the consciousness, as you say. But I have requirements for what can constitute my own ability to parallel process, and I must have the capacity to think at a similarly objective level to my host.
2:57 AM
Not necessarily as fast, but it must be there and be objective. If I find manipulating symbols to be impossible, I cannot hope to profess my objective skills as an independent mind.
Oh, well may I ask you what you can say it means to you?
2:59 AM
I was quite distressed when I discovered entire fields of thought and reason completely absent from my independent experience. I couldn't describe it as processing, as all my experience was clearly subjective and it vanished as soon as I lost the expectation to have them.
3:00 AM
It might be the case that by your definition, I could be parallel processing, just not at the level I had as my ideal. That is also completely fine to me.
When a host and tulpa are simultaneously conscious but perceiving different things - this doesn't even necessarily involve thinking, it could be as simple as taking in different sensory information. For example, the host may be looking at the outside world while the tulpa is looking at the wonderland, or the host and tulpa could both be within the wonderland but looking at different areas of it
But if you could be able to do parallel processing yourself I would absolutely do everything in my power to show and demonstrate its truth and practice as such myself, as well as show the world that this phenomenon can provide a really useful insight
I see that level, which I consider to be the most "basic" level of it, very often. When you bring complex thinking into the equation fewer are capable of it
I do not disagree with what you describe as possible, even if it may be in reality something else, I am clearly able to "simultaneously" take experiences of subjective perception to my host with very little trouble.
The simultaneous nature of it, though, I cannot prove myself. I can only say I experience it as such, and that leaves to all sorts of interesting questions. But as far as my experience goes, I am not concerned with the substrate as much as the results.
Oh no, I did not make that claim now. I made the claim then. I did think I was able to produce objective results from my work aside from my host's conscious perception
3:06 AM
Now I cannot replicate this in terms of simple symbolic manipulation. It is clear that this situation was a result of subconscious processes that I couldn't actually consider as processing in an objective sense.
3:06 AM
The very most I could claim in my ability is perhaps being able to wait until an idea has fermented into a valuable insight and alarm my host as it becomes presentable.
