Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from how Stuff
Speaker 1: Works dot com. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind.
Speaker 1: My name is Robert Lamb, and I'm Julie Douglass. Julie,
Speaker 1: are you a fan of continuity in life? Oh? Sure?
Speaker 1: I love in the most logical way, so that when
Speaker 1: a string of words it is understood or put together.
Speaker 1: I too makes sense when words prefer it in a
Speaker 1: way that complete center, least informed string together, it's much
Speaker 1: easier to understand. Yes, You're only a lot easier to understand. Well,
Speaker 1: was there? Was there just some sort of asynchronicity going
Speaker 1: on there? I don't know. It felt a little weird,
Speaker 1: didn't it. Yeah, a little skipping about kind of felt
Speaker 1: like David Lynch just edited us. Yes, noel or editor.
Speaker 1: All right, well let's shake that off, alright, and uh
Speaker 1: and and move forward, Because indeed, continuity is is an
Speaker 1: important part of the way that we perceived the world
Speaker 1: and and and how we make sense of the world.
Speaker 1: But to what extent isn't an illusion? How much of
Speaker 1: the perceived continuity uh in life is just a sort
Speaker 1: of an accident of the brain. You know, I was
Speaker 1: thinking about this lately because I'm watching the Olympics and
Speaker 1: Winter Olympics and searching, and I don't have cable or
Speaker 1: satellite TV, and um super lazy, and I didn't go
Speaker 1: get some rabbity or antennas. Instead, I'm streaming it to
Speaker 1: my Roku player through an app called us TV now.
Speaker 1: Are us TV now And anyway, the point is is
Speaker 1: that there are so many weird time lapses in the
Speaker 1: streaming that it really does feel like David Lynch is
Speaker 1: presenting the Olympics, and there's all sorts of odd conversation
Speaker 1: loop back that happened three four times, and it starts
Speaker 1: to feel like it's just even those little tweaks are
Speaker 1: putting me into a different universe, into an alternate universe.
Speaker 1: And I thought about that, just that that little tweak
Speaker 1: can really be unsettling and fe centering. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's just the way that our our brain is seeing
Speaker 1: and hearing things. We get these chunks that even though
Speaker 1: they're they're out of sequence due to the realities of
Speaker 1: our time system here on Earth, but we can't help
Speaker 1: to try and piece them together and make sense of it,
Speaker 1: because that's what our brains do all the time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and we really take for granted this idea of perceptual
Speaker 1: constancy and how we see the world, because if you
Speaker 1: see an image in front of you, think, oh, that's
Speaker 1: that's just something that's that is exactly as it is
Speaker 1: that I'm perceiving it, um, just as it is in reality,
Speaker 1: and nothing could be further from the truth. It is
Speaker 1: a constructed reality by your brain, by your visual system UM,
Speaker 1: which analyzes let's slow down that moment and you're watching
Speaker 1: the socio Olympics, right. It analyzes the interactions between visible
Speaker 1: electromagnetic waves and the objects in our environment. So not
Speaker 1: just the you know, when I'm watching on the TV screen,
Speaker 1: but the light in the room, the dimensions of that room.
Speaker 1: All of that is being penciled in by little artists
Speaker 1: in my brain essentially trying to tell me what I'm seeing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we often experience reality with this idea that hey, it's
Speaker 1: it's me experiencing reality, and ultimately that's the truth. You
Speaker 1: are your body, so anything your body does, it's all
Speaker 1: working together as a single unit. But when you start
Speaker 1: breaking it down, you realize that you or your conscious mind,
Speaker 1: and your conscious mind is just kind of the froth
Speaker 1: on the beer that is the brain, and then it's
Speaker 1: it's then that beer is just setting in a dark
Speaker 1: room and it's only getting information um passed onto it
Speaker 1: from these from these these eyes that are outside of
Speaker 1: the room, uh, outside of the brain itself. So you're
Speaker 1: getting this information passed to the brain and then to
Speaker 1: the mind, and uh, it's not a accurate version of
Speaker 1: what is actually going on outside the room. Yeah. We
Speaker 1: talked about this a little bit with Liliputian hallucinations and
Speaker 1: how that our brains have to create this perceptual constancy.
Speaker 1: And if you think about it, it's doing this by
Speaker 1: reconstructing a three dimensional dimensional world with two dimensional images
Speaker 1: on your rentness, and so when you look at an object,
Speaker 1: each of your eyes sees a slightly different picture. So
Speaker 1: think about a fork and a plate on the table.
Speaker 1: Now you're okay. So your brain has to move between
Speaker 1: these two objects and create scale in shape, and there
Speaker 1: has to be a perceptual constancy in there in place,
Speaker 1: and it's doing that behind the scenes with a lot
Speaker 1: of different processes. We're talking about minocular vision providing the
Speaker 1: image perceived by each separately, and then you have binocular
Speaker 1: vision that's getting in on on the play here. And
Speaker 1: if you're looking at something in the distance, then you
Speaker 1: have to keep in mind that there's something like atmospheric perspective,
Speaker 1: which is created by the dust particles and water vapor
Speaker 1: in the air, which then color the way that you
Speaker 1: see an object. Something farther away from you is gonna
Speaker 1: look a little hazy, a little blurry. Yeah. And we
Speaker 1: know that damage to the brain can sometimes create gaps
Speaker 1: in that visual data that comes into play. And we
Speaker 1: also know that our brain and when it doesn't have
Speaker 1: that data, will hallucinate an image for you. So again,
Speaker 1: this hold on reality, this this illusion of continuity is
Speaker 1: just a very tenuous thing here. Yeah, and it's and
Speaker 1: again it's also worth remembering that your brain is not
Speaker 1: passing on all the information to you. Uh, it's a
Speaker 1: there's a lot of computation that's going on beneath the surface.
Speaker 1: One example of this came from a study from the
Speaker 1: University of Arizona from doctoral degree candidate Jay Sanganetti, publishing
Speaker 1: the journal Psychological Science. And they took a various subjects
Speaker 1: and they had them look at these images where you
Speaker 1: had an abstract dark center of an image and then
Speaker 1: white on the sides and on some of these that
Speaker 1: there was just abstraction they did. There was no actual picture.
Speaker 1: It's just white and dark. But in there's you had
Speaker 1: these white seahorse shapes on the sides. So they flash
Speaker 1: these at everyone's at everyone in the study, and some
Speaker 1: people got the sea horse, some people got the abstract nonsense. Uh.
Speaker 1: But they found that that that in the brain when
Speaker 1: they looked at the brain activity, there was identification of
Speaker 1: the sea horse going on even when people didn't consciously
Speaker 1: see the sea horse. It's like the brain was identifying
Speaker 1: it and saying sea horse. But then it doesn't pass
Speaker 1: the information onto your your conscious understanding. It's it's happening
Speaker 1: into some conscious level, so saying seahorse but not seahorse. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so it's sometimes you were seeing things but you're not
Speaker 1: consciously seeing them because it's not important to your to
Speaker 1: your immediate understanding of the world around you. But you know,
Speaker 1: how does that subconsciously color the things that do rise
Speaker 1: to the top of that froth on the bier right right,
Speaker 1: which is the whole other thing that we could get into.
Speaker 1: But we're we're interested in looking at this illusion of
Speaker 1: continuity and sing how it games us in certain ways
Speaker 1: and certainly. One of the ways that we have mentioned
Speaker 1: before is something that is exploited by magicians, and it's
Speaker 1: called the retention vanish that very iconic trick in which
Speaker 1: you see the coin go from one hand to the other.
Speaker 1: And it happens when there's a lag in the brain's
Speaker 1: perception of motion, and this is called persistence of vision,
Speaker 1: and the audience will actually see the coin, say, transfer
Speaker 1: from the right to the left palm for a split
Speaker 1: second after the hands separate, and that is because visual
Speaker 1: neurons don't stop firing once a given stimulus. Here the
Speaker 1: coin is no longer present. So even though that coin
Speaker 1: wasn't necessarily deposited into the left hand, the last image
Speaker 1: that your brain saw looked like it, and it's not
Speaker 1: going to stop that process and say, oh wait, hold on,
Speaker 1: you know, split one of a second here we think
Speaker 1: that it actually didn't get transferred. It's going to continue
Speaker 1: to fire and you're gonna have this this false perception
Speaker 1: of continuity into the other hand. Yeah, it's crazy. Again.
Speaker 1: Your brain is filling in the gaps for you in
Speaker 1: order to give you the complete picture. It's like a
Speaker 1: reporter has been sent out into the city to get
Speaker 1: a story finds out certain bits of information, and it's
Speaker 1: just filling in, uh, the gaps in what happened, and
Speaker 1: the way they fill in the gaps, it's it's the
Speaker 1: way it likely happened, all right. Somebody was seeing a
Speaker 1: point A and then they were seeing at point B.
Speaker 1: It stands to reason they walk down the street from
Speaker 1: point A to point B. But maybe not well, And
Speaker 1: I was just thinking about this too. Aren't we even
Speaker 1: getting to the point with metic keywords in the way
Speaker 1: that we use the internet. Aren't we sort of filling
Speaker 1: that in? Can't you look at a like a pool
Speaker 1: of meta keywords for an article and immediately start to
Speaker 1: fill in those gaps yourself. Yeah, So if you see
Speaker 1: something like you know, illusion of continuity, visual visual perception,
Speaker 1: persistence of vision, you begin to understand the story that's
Speaker 1: developing there. Yeah. Or look at any movie trailer, especially
Speaker 1: movie trailers for films that are not that inventive and
Speaker 1: and that stick, uh, stick rather closely to the accepted tropes.
Speaker 1: Oftentimes you'll look at at the extended trailer for the
Speaker 1: film and you say, hey, well, I just saw the film.
Speaker 1: There's absolutely no reason to see it because you were
Speaker 1: given the little points, the little the little important moments
Speaker 1: along the way, and then your brain just fills in
Speaker 1: the rest, and based on previous knowledge, you know exactly
Speaker 1: what's going to happen. Yeah, and movies are the ultimate
Speaker 1: illusion of continuity. Yes, it turns out that twenty seven
Speaker 1: point five hurts. This is a sequence of still photograph
Speaker 1: slides that are displayed at or about this rate of
Speaker 1: presentation gives us the illusion of motion. So, like the
Speaker 1: basic flip book, like a horse running, you flip the
Speaker 1: page is fast enough, and it looks like a little
Speaker 1: horses is running around there, though obviously it is not. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so motion pictures or those horses that you see are
Speaker 1: really just a sequence of those still images at twenty
Speaker 1: four prame, excuse me, twenty four frames per second, and
Speaker 1: that exceeds something called the temporal resolving properties the human
Speaker 1: visual system, so it's outside of the zone of detection.
Speaker 1: So if you're looking at thirty five millimeter film projection,
Speaker 1: each still is presented for one of a second, alternating
Speaker 1: with a black frame for roughly the same duration, and
Speaker 1: the eye perceives the images as just one fluid scene.
Speaker 1: But old timey films, we we perceive that gap, right,
Speaker 1: and then we kind of herky jerky motion that you
Speaker 1: get this this sort of this unreal uh idea of movement,
Speaker 1: the kind of unreal movement that is generally retained and
Speaker 1: stop motion animation. Yeah, and that's because the frame rate
Speaker 1: is clocking in at seventeen to eighteen frame rates per second.
Speaker 1: It's too low. So the brain says, I see something here.
Speaker 1: There is a discontinuity, and in this respect, this twenty
Speaker 1: seven point five hurts. It also translates to sound and
Speaker 1: how sound begins to form a sort of continuity. And
Speaker 1: this is this is the idea that I'm going Dad.
Speaker 1: Hear each individual beat, but if we were to speed
Speaker 1: that up enough, it would just be one constant exactly,
Speaker 1: because the molecules are vibrating at that speed and they're
Speaker 1: creating that sort of booz that continuity. And Daniel J. Levitton,
Speaker 1: who wrote the book This Is Your Brain on Music,
Speaker 1: talks about that and he used this example of putting
Speaker 1: a playing card in the spokes of a wheel. He
Speaker 1: says that slow speeds, you hear the click click, click
Speaker 1: click click of the car, but at higher speeds the
Speaker 1: clicks were together and they cease to be perceived as
Speaker 1: individual noises, but now as a continuous buzz and he
Speaker 1: says a tone you can actually hum along to a pitch,
Speaker 1: and that's sort of the magic of this continuity of
Speaker 1: sound and motion. Alright, So on that note, let's take
Speaker 1: a quick break and when we get back, we're going
Speaker 1: to talk about why Spider Man, you know that gift,
Speaker 1: why he is such a good groover. Alright, we're back
Speaker 1: dancing Spider Man. Yes, uh, this is just one of
Speaker 1: those gifts that's been around forever where the this this
Speaker 1: little kind of pixelated the Spider Man. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe it was a real person dancing in the original footage,
Speaker 1: but it's just kind of it's kind of a little
Speaker 1: artifact on the web that just won't go away. And
Speaker 1: you see him sort of sashang, I guess is the
Speaker 1: correct descriptive term, back and forth and kind of this
Speaker 1: kind of is he snapping his fingers or am I
Speaker 1: just I don't know. He seems to be doing the
Speaker 1: Charleston sometimes and then he kind of goes into the
Speaker 1: disco moves. Um. He's on a white background, and it's
Speaker 1: just it's a very simple animated gift. But the great
Speaker 1: thing about it is that you can play nearly any
Speaker 1: piece of music to it, and Spider Man seems to
Speaker 1: keep time. Yes, you can. You can throw classical music
Speaker 1: on it, and he seems to be uh sash back
Speaker 1: and forth to Mozart. You can throw there on some
Speaker 1: dub step and he seems to be really jamming out
Speaker 1: to that as well, and everything in between. No matter
Speaker 1: what the genre, what the track, what the what the speed,
Speaker 1: you know what? What? What are the beats permitted happen
Speaker 1: to be? He still seems to be dancing to that
Speaker 1: particular song. And it's a real insight into the human
Speaker 1: proclivity for synchronicity, right, because there's nothing magic about the
Speaker 1: Spider Man gift. It's just this gift of this dude
Speaker 1: dancing and the Spider Man the costume. But when we
Speaker 1: look at it, we can't help but find the ways
Speaker 1: that it matches up. We can't help it but look
Speaker 1: at it and say, hey, this fit's perfectly with the music. Yeah. Now,
Speaker 1: before we get into how this actually happens, or this
Speaker 1: illusion of synchronozy synchronicity happens, I wanted to mention that
Speaker 1: when it comes to the visual cortex, it is mapping
Speaker 1: a visual of how the pitch and tone in a
Speaker 1: in a song are changing, and in turn, music moves
Speaker 1: us because we envision movement in it. So we can't
Speaker 1: help but look at something like this animated gift and
Speaker 1: start to really synchronize our own um interpretations of the
Speaker 1: music and the movements. Yea, with what we're seeing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we talked about before when we talked about the way
Speaker 1: music and art moves this, Uh, that the music that
Speaker 1: tends to really resonate the most with us, you know,
Speaker 1: think about the songs that really give you chills or
Speaker 1: or just you know, really you captures your imagination. Generally,
Speaker 1: you're talking about places where whether there's definite movement going
Speaker 1: on in the song, there's some sort of rising action,
Speaker 1: or it's descending, or it's there's this sudden drop, you
Speaker 1: name it, but there's there's something coming together or pulling apart,
Speaker 1: and and that's what we lack onto. Yeah, and it's
Speaker 1: no coincidence that music is really effective um and therapeutic
Speaker 1: with Parkinson's patients and stroke patients and coordinating their movements
Speaker 1: again because of the visual cortex in this idea that
Speaker 1: we're trying to sync up to the thing that we're
Speaker 1: listening to and we're seeing. So I wanted to mention
Speaker 1: that Radio Labs Jody Avrigon has a great explanation of
Speaker 1: why Spider Man is such a good dancer, and she
Speaker 1: talked to someone by the name of Devin mcaulay who
Speaker 1: works in the Timing, Attention and Perception Lab at Michigan
Speaker 1: State University, and he says that humans are really flexible timekeepers.
Speaker 1: He says, we have a tennessee to pay much more
Speaker 1: attention to events that are synchronous than asynchronous, and so
Speaker 1: this would bias our attention to time points that provide
Speaker 1: evidence for Spider Man dancing synchronously with the music. We're
Speaker 1: ignoring the times that he's out of time with music,
Speaker 1: you know. And this this ties in really closely with
Speaker 1: the episode we just did on Reincarnation. We talked about
Speaker 1: families looking at like what a child is saying about
Speaker 1: an imaginary friend or about some phobia that they seem
Speaker 1: to have, and then how they end up matching that
Speaker 1: up with someone who was recently deceased and their story.
Speaker 1: You end up ignoring all the different places where it
Speaker 1: doesn't come together, and you focus on the one or
Speaker 1: two places, even then it does come together. Another example
Speaker 1: of this that that instantly came to mind where you're
Speaker 1: doing the research. I give you two rather distinct things
Speaker 1: on one hand, the Wizard of Oz and then the
Speaker 1: other hand, Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon. Yes,
Speaker 1: because here we have a great example of these two
Speaker 1: independent artistic works. Right. Yeah, Wizard of Oz did not
Speaker 1: inspire Dark Side of the Moon. But as your college
Speaker 1: roommate will will happily tell you, they sync up really
Speaker 1: well with each other. You if you mute Wizard of
Speaker 1: Oz and you play Dark Side of the Moon, they're
Speaker 1: gonna be all these moments where the lyrics or the
Speaker 1: or the rise and follow up the music, where all
Speaker 1: it just comes together perfectly and it seems as if
Speaker 1: it were meant to be. You also see this with
Speaker 1: Blade Runner and Dark Side of the Moon. So again
Speaker 1: to you, completely independent works, but the brain thinks that
Speaker 1: there's a collaboration going on. Yeah. I was actually looking
Speaker 1: at a website called sink movies dot com and they
Speaker 1: have a number of examples, some of them some of
Speaker 1: them kind of interesting, Like there's one uh that they
Speaker 1: call city Kid, which is a kid a the radiohead
Speaker 1: album the Fabulous Album over the movie Dark City, which
Speaker 1: is a movie I love. And so those are two
Speaker 1: things I can see mixing rather well with each other.
Speaker 1: I'm less into the idea of, say, Toy Story in
Speaker 1: the Attic, where they take Aerosmith's Toys in the Attic
Speaker 1: and sync it with Pixar's Toy Story. But again, they
Speaker 1: have something like twenty one different examples of an album
Speaker 1: and a movie. When sync together, they seem to make
Speaker 1: sense magically, all of a sudden, they are synchronous. Now.
Speaker 1: In the case of Spider Man, Abergann says that there's
Speaker 1: something called periodosities. These are movements of various different but
Speaker 1: related rhythms nestled inside the rhythms of Spider Man's gyrations.
Speaker 1: And there are also these nested rhythmic patterns within any
Speaker 1: given song. So she says that when we are watching
Speaker 1: Spider Man, we were listening to a song, our brains
Speaker 1: pick out two items to match, one from the column
Speaker 1: of Spider Man's rhythms and one from the column of
Speaker 1: the song rhythms, and then matches those up together. Huh yeah,
Speaker 1: Because definitely it is a very fluid movement that of
Speaker 1: this dancing Spider Man. There are no um, you know,
Speaker 1: sharp points. It's not just him like bonking his pelvis
Speaker 1: back and forth. Like that's the kind of thing which
Speaker 1: would match up with many songs, but not but certainly
Speaker 1: not have this universal um uh connectedness to music. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he doesn't do the sprinkler or anything, so there's no
Speaker 1: jerky movements. Um. But yeah, they're smooth, they're continuous, and
Speaker 1: their short and duration, which help our brains again to
Speaker 1: sync up those two different columns. If they were a
Speaker 1: little bit longer, if his movements went on for a while,
Speaker 1: then we would have too many beats that might have
Speaker 1: been skipped, and that would put some red flags up
Speaker 1: there in our brains. Interesting, you know, I wonder if
Speaker 1: anyone has really applied this thinking to the sinking of
Speaker 1: movies and music, because certainly I'm thinking of Flapstick and
Speaker 1: Wizard of Oz, you know, and just you know, the
Speaker 1: Cowardly Lion and then all this, and there's not a
Speaker 1: lot of this kind of fluid movement that would match
Speaker 1: with any kind of music. So I wonder if anyone
Speaker 1: out there has, like has has looked at something that
Speaker 1: is very fluid, some sort of like performance piece with
Speaker 1: a lot of dance in it um or or or
Speaker 1: something kind of avant gare. Like, I'm thinking maybe of
Speaker 1: the what's the the gentleman that you're yeah, Philip Glass,
Speaker 1: but also on the film side of things, the gentleman
Speaker 1: that your husband's rather fond of makes the really strange
Speaker 1: art films Matthew Barney, Matthew Barney, and what is that
Speaker 1: series call though it's Master Ye, Yeah, Like I wonder
Speaker 1: if that's the sort of property that would that would
Speaker 1: pair well with just about any kind of movement music,
Speaker 1: because there's kind of a performance, uh, dance quality to
Speaker 1: it well. And Philip Glass does have a lot of
Speaker 1: um pieces that he has done with dance before, and
Speaker 1: it's very interesting. But there's his Generally, his music does
Speaker 1: not lend itself to sort of any sort of smooth,
Speaker 1: continuous or short burst there. It's usually pretty long and
Speaker 1: drawn out um and then you know the sort of
Speaker 1: jarring changes in the pitch and the tempo. And next
Speaker 1: one wonder about the sort of media they consume and
Speaker 1: the pacing of it all and the ways that our
Speaker 1: brain likes to say, ah, yes, I like this idea
Speaker 1: of continuity. Please let me try to create it wherever
Speaker 1: and whenever I can around me, and indeed we we
Speaker 1: do look for it all around us. And we see
Speaker 1: this time and time again in our attempts to understand
Speaker 1: not only how the world works, but the meaning behind
Speaker 1: why it works. Right when we start trying to to
Speaker 1: answer those big questions in life, why is this happening
Speaker 1: to me? Why did this happen to the world, and
Speaker 1: we start looking for these different different patterns. Uh, in
Speaker 1: the world around us. You could all you could even
Speaker 1: say that it's a synchro destiny here. That's a word
Speaker 1: that Depoxia Chopra has termed has coined. And uh, he's
Speaker 1: suggesting that synchronicity can quote accelerate you towards your destiny. Oh,
Speaker 1: I mean you're going to be excelled towards your destiny
Speaker 1: no matter what. Yeah, that's that's generally gonna happen. You
Speaker 1: can just sett in your your house doing nothing and uh,
Speaker 1: it's like the old proverb by doing nothing, all all
Speaker 1: problems are solved right there you go. Um, but but
Speaker 1: that does not sell books, my friend. No. One final
Speaker 1: thought on on a synchro destiny. I found this is
Speaker 1: not a depox writings, but someone had written about it
Speaker 1: on a blog and they said, Uh, when you live
Speaker 1: your life with an appreciation of coincidences and their meaning,
Speaker 1: coincidences and their meaning, that's that's kind of that that
Speaker 1: that has all the answers in it right there, because
Speaker 1: a coincidence, by its very nature, it's just a coincidence.
Speaker 1: There is no meaning behind the coincidence. If you're finding
Speaker 1: meaning and your coincidences, then uh, then that's the problem,
Speaker 1: potentially the problem. You might find some beauty in those
Speaker 1: coincidences by aspiring reason to them, but if there's reason
Speaker 1: behind the coincidence, it's not a coincidence, right Or am
Speaker 1: I crazy? Um? Well, no, I mean I think that
Speaker 1: if you take that line of reasoning, you might find
Speaker 1: yourself in front of the new paper trying to pick
Speaker 1: out secret codes and articles and covering the walls around
Speaker 1: you and as well as the tinfoiled windows. It can
Speaker 1: be problematic, right if you take that logic too far. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's And that's ultimately the point. You know, use a
Speaker 1: little balance in your pattern recognition. Don't let your software
Speaker 1: get two out of whack, because finding finding beauty in
Speaker 1: the world is one thing. Uh, covering your your walls
Speaker 1: of your house with newspaper clippings is quite another. For example,
Speaker 1: my daughter has the Frozen Castle set. The other day,
Speaker 1: I was looking at it and the throne looked like
Speaker 1: a lion's face to me. It was mean, it was
Speaker 1: very cool. It's just pattern recognition, uh, And I did
Speaker 1: not run from it. I just saw it for for
Speaker 1: what it was a plastic chair, all right. So there
Speaker 1: you have it a little insight into continuity and how
Speaker 1: we observe it and to what extended it is an
Speaker 1: illusion and uh, you know, there's a whole deep end
Speaker 1: of the pool out there in terms of union, uh
Speaker 1: synchronicity that either we'll come back and talk about later
Speaker 1: or you can explore on your own time. But it's uh,
Speaker 1: it's one of those areas that gets really deep, really fast,
Speaker 1: and it's just a little bit, uh, a little bit
Speaker 1: more than we're looking to, uh to cover in this
Speaker 1: particular episode. In the meantime, though, we'd love to hear
Speaker 1: your take on this episode. What kind of music have
Speaker 1: you tried to pair with Spider Man. We'll make sure
Speaker 1: that we put that Spider Man up on the blogs
Speaker 1: when this episode publishes, and we'll have a link in
Speaker 1: the description for the podcast it so you can find it. Uh,
Speaker 1: let us know how your your pairings went there. Also,
Speaker 1: is there a particular movie and album pairing that you
Speaker 1: think is rather magical, that you think comes together perfectly?
Speaker 1: I myself have in the past when when I did
Speaker 1: entertaining that was for somebody other than a toddler. I
Speaker 1: would love to take like really bad be movies and
Speaker 1: put him on mute and then play funk music over it.
Speaker 1: And I found that there were often those magical points
Speaker 1: where it's like the dude in the in the rubber
Speaker 1: monster suit looks like he's dancing to the funk music
Speaker 1: and it's perfect, and it's it's like it was meant
Speaker 1: to be. But I see now that that was just
Speaker 1: an illusion of my brain. Yeah, but I mean artistic
Speaker 1: synchronicity is something entirely into itself. Yeah, So give us
Speaker 1: your examples of artistic synchronicity, and you can do so
Speaker 1: by findings that steppable your mind dot com. That's the
Speaker 1: mother ship. That's where all the podcasts live, that's where
Speaker 1: all the blog posts live, That's where the videos hang out.
Speaker 1: You can also find links to our various social media accounts. Facebook, Tumbler, Twitter,
Speaker 1: Google Plus, uh, SoundCloud, who knows what else? The links
Speaker 1: are there? Find us, follow us at the at the
Speaker 1: page of your choice. And hey, if you listen to
Speaker 1: us on iTunes, Uh, if you haven't already, go in
Speaker 1: and give us a really nice positive review. It helps
Speaker 1: the algorithm out, that's right. And uh, if you would
Speaker 1: like to send us an email, you may do so
Speaker 1: at below the mind at discovery dot com for more
Speaker 1: on this and thousands of other topics. Does it how
Speaker 1: stuff works? Dot com? You could? Could you gad you
Speaker 1: plier