The "I measured my own susceptibility using an app I vibe-coded with GPT-5.6 Sol: I dragged a slider until the two circles appeared equal in size." is available on IA:
I can also eliminate the illusion by covering up the blue circles and only looking at the orange circles.
Maybe that's what the DMT is doing? ... perhaps it gives you tunnel vision (or tunnels your attention) such that you only "see" (or are paying attention to) the orange and blocking out the blue from your mind.
i find this whole blog very dubious, with apologies to the author.
a bunch of people did psychedelics and then found that reality seemed more inclined to listen to their volition and respond to their intention or attention.
this was an n of some small number, and the original person who reported it could not reproduce it.
i don't believe this is good science.
the test is self made by the subject while under the affect of the drug.
the subject has a bias as well.
> But then I notice that when I move my attention to the centre of the picture — to the space between the two groups of circles — their apparent sizes begin to rebalance[...]
Same. When I read that line my first thought was "ok, but have you tried that sober?" It seems like a rather intuitive way to counter the illusion without the need for DMT.
It's pretty easy for me to replicate the balanced circles by gazing at the center point. However, I can't say whether that would've held true had I not been predisposed to the possibility via the article.
It does require me to slightly "space out", for lack of a better way of putting. Not defocus, more like downshifting my visual cortex a notch.
For whatever it's worth, I was a college kid in the 90s, and I can induce a wavy effect on patterned walls and floors via a similar spacing out.
Author of the article here! Yes, of course, I've tried this sober — merely shifting attention does not work.
Thanks for the report. Some people do report being able to cancel it while sober. For most of them, defocusing their vision is required, which is not particularly surprising - you are removing the surrounding context.
Could you please tell me more about downshifting the visual cortex? I am planning to publish an update on this illusion, with various sober attention techniques to establish a baseline for future research.
It also won't work on DMT. Because when you take DMT, whatever variety, you will not be able to look at a monitor, a picture or anything really. The whole concept of "looking at something" is inapplicable then.
Some family recently visited from out of state and we went to Venice Beach, where there is now tons of stores selling “magic mushrooms” along the boardwalk.
To my knowledge shrooms haven’t been legalized in California so I was curious what they sold (but not enough to try it). Turns out California state regulators have been surreptitiously testing the product from time to time and most of it is 5-MeO-DMT… and they don’t do anything about it despite being schedule I.
Venice Beach, leading the way in “medical” research!
I'd be astonished if any of what you wrote above is true.
State regulators do not "surreptitiously test" Schedule I drugs on the public via retail sale. That's just inane.
There is no legal classification for "magic mushrooms", but I am willing to bet that the products for sale are legal, and do not contain psilocybin or psilocin.
They're just some unregulated compound that might have come from mushrooms, but is more likely made in a lab, and may or may not be mildly psychoactive.
And they'll probably add some caffeine and theobromine, which boardwalk denizens will feel the effects of and not know precisely how to categorize.
I get how you could misread it, given his use of the word surreptitiously, but OP is not suggesting that the state is testing the products on consumers, but instead that they occasionally test the products to identify what they contain and what is being sold.
You're right, I definitely misread that part. Apologies!
FWIW, OP's framing is still misleading though. Regulators do not test retail product as part of some kind of surreptitious sting operation, which they then do not bother to follow through on.
The Department of Public Health responds to complaints, and patterns of medical reporting to find a cause and determine whether there are legal or health code violations. The sale of 5-MeO-DMT (or psilocybin or psilocin) would be shut down, and charges filed.
The sale of 4-Aco-DMT would be legal, so instead they issue warnings that amount to "That thing you bought that was sold with claims of similarity to an illegal drug does actually have physiological effects even though it's legal, so be careful.". Which is fair enough!
I’m glad they are testing them and it demystifies a lot.
Of note the legal status in that state regulator’s article is misleading
4-Acetoxy-DET And 4-Acetoxy-DMT are not on any schedule, but could be subjected to the Analog Act, which itself has unresolved legal status per substance
Yup, it’s a prodrug. Some people prefer it to the real thing because it has fewer GI side effects, although one study has said it has more adverse events (particularly cardiovascular stress) associated with it as well
> QRI is a non-profit building a new science of consciousness. Its central bet is that: Consciousness is a relatively simple property of our universe — simple enough for evolution to discover it. Consciousness has useful computational properties — otherwise evolution would not have come to rely on it.
My brother, that is philosophical position, not a "bet".
It's really hard to take stuff like this seriously. 5-MeO-DMT helped you see something you knew was true? (the red circles are the same size) Shocking.
I'm really confused by the idea that we're at some kind of evolutionary local minimum and psychidelics are going to push us out.
I'm not up on the biology, but don't our bodies produce DMT (I realize that's not the compund from the article) and/or analogues? If psychdelics allow us to see the truth, why isn't my brain upping the dose?
> 5-MeO-DMT helped you see something you knew was true? (the red circles are the same size)
You may be an exception here?
Most humans, myself included, see the right circle as larger than the left one, regardless of how strongly you know they are the same size. Perception quirks like these are the basis for a lot of graphic design theory.
If the drug cancels this effect, it is doing something significant to the brain.
As someone who has done plenty of 5-meo-dmt and bufo I find this silly. Yes, something significant is happening...how could anyone really care about an optical illusion on your laptop when you're dissolving into God?
Anyways my guess is that his pupils were the size of dinner plates and I'd wonder if having your eyes dilated by other means would have a similar effect
Hah, yes and no. What we see sober is an illusion, and etheogens just show us other illusions, so that with some effort we can cross-correlate them and hopefully arrive at The Truth. It being that there is no such thing.
Most one can do is accept that one is limited by one's perception and then keep that in mind.
https://web.archive.org/web/20261008201251/https://heart.qri...
Maybe that's what the DMT is doing? ... perhaps it gives you tunnel vision (or tunnels your attention) such that you only "see" (or are paying attention to) the orange and blocking out the blue from your mind.
a bunch of people did psychedelics and then found that reality seemed more inclined to listen to their volition and respond to their intention or attention.
this was an n of some small number, and the original person who reported it could not reproduce it.
i don't believe this is good science. the test is self made by the subject while under the affect of the drug. the subject has a bias as well.
this is a trip report.
This works for me without DMT.
It's pretty easy for me to replicate the balanced circles by gazing at the center point. However, I can't say whether that would've held true had I not been predisposed to the possibility via the article.
It does require me to slightly "space out", for lack of a better way of putting. Not defocus, more like downshifting my visual cortex a notch.
For whatever it's worth, I was a college kid in the 90s, and I can induce a wavy effect on patterned walls and floors via a similar spacing out.
Thanks for the report. Some people do report being able to cancel it while sober. For most of them, defocusing their vision is required, which is not particularly surprising - you are removing the surrounding context.
Could you please tell me more about downshifting the visual cortex? I am planning to publish an update on this illusion, with various sober attention techniques to establish a baseline for future research.
On that hypothesis, it doesnt really surprise me that illusions based on context clues are interpreted differently.
To my knowledge shrooms haven’t been legalized in California so I was curious what they sold (but not enough to try it). Turns out California state regulators have been surreptitiously testing the product from time to time and most of it is 5-MeO-DMT… and they don’t do anything about it despite being schedule I.
Venice Beach, leading the way in “medical” research!
State regulators do not "surreptitiously test" Schedule I drugs on the public via retail sale. That's just inane.
There is no legal classification for "magic mushrooms", but I am willing to bet that the products for sale are legal, and do not contain psilocybin or psilocin.
They're just some unregulated compound that might have come from mushrooms, but is more likely made in a lab, and may or may not be mildly psychoactive.
And they'll probably add some caffeine and theobromine, which boardwalk denizens will feel the effects of and not know precisely how to categorize.
FWIW, OP's framing is still misleading though. Regulators do not test retail product as part of some kind of surreptitious sting operation, which they then do not bother to follow through on.
The Department of Public Health responds to complaints, and patterns of medical reporting to find a cause and determine whether there are legal or health code violations. The sale of 5-MeO-DMT (or psilocybin or psilocin) would be shut down, and charges filed.
The sale of 4-Aco-DMT would be legal, so instead they issue warnings that amount to "That thing you bought that was sold with claims of similarity to an illegal drug does actually have physiological effects even though it's legal, so be careful.". Which is fair enough!
Legal, unregulated, and synthetic. But close enough for the moderately-savvy customer.
Also, it is an extremely powerful psychedelic with effects nothing like psilocybin. It’s most likely 4-Aco-DMT
This article also says that 5-MeO-DMT has no psychoactive effects taken orally
[1] https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OPA/Pages/NR25-024.aspx
Of note the legal status in that state regulator’s article is misleading
4-Acetoxy-DET And 4-Acetoxy-DMT are not on any schedule, but could be subjected to the Analog Act, which itself has unresolved legal status per substance
Apparently it feeds your biases though. Check your filters, perhaps?
My brother, that is philosophical position, not a "bet".
So I vibe code one:
https://ebbinghaus-effect.greulen.workers.dev
(a one shot in DeepSeek, with only manual adjustments for the sizes)
I'm really confused by the idea that we're at some kind of evolutionary local minimum and psychidelics are going to push us out.
I'm not up on the biology, but don't our bodies produce DMT (I realize that's not the compund from the article) and/or analogues? If psychdelics allow us to see the truth, why isn't my brain upping the dose?
You may be an exception here?
Most humans, myself included, see the right circle as larger than the left one, regardless of how strongly you know they are the same size. Perception quirks like these are the basis for a lot of graphic design theory.
If the drug cancels this effect, it is doing something significant to the brain.
Anyways my guess is that his pupils were the size of dinner plates and I'd wonder if having your eyes dilated by other means would have a similar effect
because you are not stressing it in the right way.
PS. idk where you got the idea of 'we're at some kind of evolutionary local minimum'. it was never about that.
Most one can do is accept that one is limited by one's perception and then keep that in mind.
We're all blind, and that might be an elephant.