In the 'are DMT and psilocybin the same' thread, someone posted a link to a study about the binding profiles of various hallucinogenic substances.
So i thought that if the binding affinity's of most of the hallucinogens are known, that could maybe help to shed some light on what classic hallucinogens actually do in the brain. On how exactly they work.
My thought is that if many people would be asked to rank various psychedelics in terms of relatedness, we could maybe see some pattern emerge. A relationship between the binding affinity's of each substance, and how close the effects of these substances are in relation to eachother.
So for instance: i personally find psilocin to be more related to LSD than to mescaline. And i find LSD to be closer to mescaline than to shrooms.
It doesn't mean much if this is just one persons opinion. But if many people would rate a limited set of substances in this way, i think you would probably get a picture that in some way should match the list of binding affinity's for each substance.
Maybe, by using the nexus 'hyperspace dictionary', we could even link some very specific effects and phenomena, to activity on specific receptors: if people would consistently say that for instance mecaline and LSD are more likely to cause synesthesia than DMT or shrooms, than you could maybe link synesthesia to activity on some specific receptors, based on how LSD and mescaline relate to other substances in terms of affinity for specific receptors.
Does this sound like a good idea?
So i thought that if the binding affinity's of most of the hallucinogens are known, that could maybe help to shed some light on what classic hallucinogens actually do in the brain. On how exactly they work.
My thought is that if many people would be asked to rank various psychedelics in terms of relatedness, we could maybe see some pattern emerge. A relationship between the binding affinity's of each substance, and how close the effects of these substances are in relation to eachother.
So for instance: i personally find psilocin to be more related to LSD than to mescaline. And i find LSD to be closer to mescaline than to shrooms.
It doesn't mean much if this is just one persons opinion. But if many people would rate a limited set of substances in this way, i think you would probably get a picture that in some way should match the list of binding affinity's for each substance.
Maybe, by using the nexus 'hyperspace dictionary', we could even link some very specific effects and phenomena, to activity on specific receptors: if people would consistently say that for instance mecaline and LSD are more likely to cause synesthesia than DMT or shrooms, than you could maybe link synesthesia to activity on some specific receptors, based on how LSD and mescaline relate to other substances in terms of affinity for specific receptors.
Does this sound like a good idea?