Could Visual Reorientation Illusions be 4d Related?

[wendy]

Astronauts in space are not under the effects of gravity, and this in itself creates an imbalance.

The thing is that if you are seeing something that you recognise as living in the same chorix as you normally deal with, you are not invoking extra dimensions. It;s all in the same space.

The reason i bring the medical issue up, is because i had it once, and that was the cure.

W

[Hugh]

Astronauts in space are not under the effects of gravity, and this in itself creates an imbalance.

A chemical imbalance, that causes VRIs to occur?

What of someone, who is capable of inducing the flip, but chooses not to, goes about their life keeping their "normal" view orientations intact? The more one gets to control this, the more one realizes that it is a matter of choosing which direction one wants to look in. Astronauts learn this.

The thing is that if you are seeing something that you recognise as living in the same chorix as you normally deal with, you are not invoking extra dimensions. It;s all in the same space.

If we are actually in higher dimensional space, then it is all in the same space that we're in.

What would we see of a 4d hypersphere if we were 4d ourselves but with limited extending 2d plane vision? A 3d sphere. If we rotated that sphere around 360 degrees, we would have it back to its original position. If we did a 360 degree turn within that space, we'd come back to our original position. We'd think it was all 3d around us, but it wouldn't be.

The question is, what would be the indication that we were actually 4d? What would we be able to see differently?

[wendy]

We should realise that 4d is not 3d. If you are seeing the same setup from a different angle, you are still in 3d. It's not four dimensions edge on. It's just bog simple 3d.

The position that one is seeing something that is not what the eyes are seeing suggests that the mind and eye become disconnected. The image is evidently comming through, but is being processed differently. This is an indication that something has interrupted due process, the most likely candidate is something like a chemical imbalance.

We do not see four dimensions. There's nothing that riki tiki can run out and see: we have to do the calculations in our mind. Very little is to be gained by thinking of orthogonals, because we don't see the three dimensions in this way.

On the other hand, there are useful guides around, such as the HYPER thread at my polygloss, which do deal with how to visualise 4d, what it is and what it is not.

[Hugh]

I'm sorry I couldn't find the hyper thread at your polygloss, could you give the direct link please? Thanks.

Perhaps I should ask your direct answer to this question:

How would a theoretical 4d being see 4d objects in 4d space with only 2d extending plane vision?

[Hugh]

Sorry for the double post, but I've found a couple of pages from Alkaline's introduction that might illustrate the concept of a VRI. On the Rotation page, at the bottom, there is a diagram of a 3d cube turning through the fourth dimension, through the plane, and becoming a mirror image of itself. Now picture if you are in that 3d cube viewpoint, and you are rotated along with the cube. You would end up facing a 180 degree opposite direction. What was on your left and right, would still be on your left and right. What was in front and behind you, would still be in front and behind you. But, relatively speaking, if you were originally facing north, north would have become south, and east would have become west. Your 3d viewpoint would have been flipped into its mirror image, and you along with it. You can see here how one can see the same 2d plane of vision from a different direction.

If we do actually have higher spatial dimensions, the matter that makes up our bodies, and eyes, would extend in all those dimensions, so we could see our 3d boundary viewpoint from different orthogonal directions within that space.

On the Flatness and Levitation page, at the bottom, there is a diagram of Emily rotating Bob's world in circles. Something like the VRI, only a VRI happens in an instant.

[wendy]

The url http://www.geocities.com/os2fan2/gloss/pghyper.html points to the first of several pages on hyperspace, that is, over-space.

it sounds me that VRI is more to do with crossed wires than any sort of 4d. We in effect process signals, and if there is a reversal, it could be inside the brain, not because of 4d.

i can write backwards, and i know that this is simply a single switch i set.

W

[Hugh]

Hi Wendy,

I agree that it is possible that this just has to do with how our brain processes our visual signals. What has me thinking otherwise though, is the deep down feeling that this is more real than imagined. Every time the flip happens, I know and feel that I'm looking in a different direction. It's not just me, but a lot of other people that experience this too.

I've tried to explain the actual geometry of how it's possible (see Alkaline's diagram mentioned in the previous post), but it might take more detailed explanations from someone like Pat or Quickfur to make it more understandable how it might be possible. Because this is a theoretical higher dimensional forum, I would think that this is the place to throw around any ideas about how space there might actually be viewed. Alkaline's been brave enough to start the forum in the first place, and come up with all those diagrams and pictures trying to explain things in higher dimensions.

I checked into the Hyperspace thread you mentioned, but the question of how one would see 4d objects in 4d space with 2d extending plane vision is still to be answered.

[wendy]

been there, done that.

No, it's still the same dreary 3d thing you're seeing, so you really don't need to go four-dimensional for that. i suggest something like astral travel might be the go.

W

[Hugh]

Let's try this.

Temporarily, forget what I'm saying about the VRI.

Think of four dimensional space.

Geometrically, how would 2d extending plane vision be able to view this 4d space? What would that extending plane of vision encounter in that 4d space?

[PWrong]

Now picture if you are in that 3d cube viewpoint, and you are rotated along with the cube. You would end up facing a 180 degree opposite direction. What was on your left and right, would still be on your left and right. What was in front and behind you, would still be in front and behind you. But, relatively speaking, if you were originally facing north, north would have become south, and east would have become west. Your 3d viewpoint would have been flipped into its mirror image, and you along with it. You can see here how one can see the same 2d plane of vision from a different direction.

It's not just your viewpoint. If you were actually flipped out into the 4th dimension, you'd be laterally inverted. If you were right-handed, you'd become left handed. Any writing you had on you would be backwards. All your organs would be on the wrong side, which wouldn't be a problem, but it might feel weird.

Unfortunately, you wouldn't experience it for long. A lot of molecules have completely different properties from their mirror image, including DNA. So I assume you'd die pretty soon after being flipped over in 4D.

[pat]

Hmmm... I'm coming late to this thread and trying to understand what you mean by 2d extending plane of vision. So, I'm trying to parse this:

8. Here's where I think that the VRI fits in. It would be possible, in that higher dimensional space (and if we're higher dimensional too), to look in two different perpendicular directions, in two glances, and see the same 2d plane of vision from each eye, but from different orthogonal directions.

When you say 'each eye' above, do you mean 'each eye during each of the two glances' or do you mean 'the same eye gets the same plane of vision during each of the two glances'?

Take, for example, a first glance where +/- x is right/left, +/- y is up/down, +/- z is forward/backward. Make the second glance +/- x is right/left, +/- y is up/down, +/- w is forward/backward. In most instances, nothing in your scene will be in both the first and second glance.

Or, did you have something else in mind?

Take an example stepped down a notch. Cut a slit in a piece of paper. Orient the slit vertically in front of you. Look through it for your first glance. For your second glance, turn you and the piece of paper 90-degrees to your right, and look again. Probably the floor and ceiling are the only two objects that are in both of your glances.

[houserichichi]

...and possibly me pointing and laughing.

(sorry, couldn't resist)

[Hugh]

Let me just say that I appreciate any time that anyone spends on this topic. I realize that it sounds a little crazy. Please bear with me though, as I really do think it might have some value, even if only to learn more about higher dimensional space.

Hi PWrong,

It's not just your viewpoint. If you were actually flipped out into the 4th dimension, you'd be laterally inverted. If you were right-handed, you'd become left handed. Any writing you had on you would be backwards. All your organs would be on the wrong side, which wouldn't be a problem, but it might feel weird.

Unfortunately, you wouldn't experience it for long. A lot of molecules have completely different properties from their mirror image, including DNA. So I assume you'd die pretty soon after being flipped over in 4D.

You may be misunderstanding what I'm suggesting. I'm saying that we might actually be 4d ourselves, just with a limited viewpoint, that can only see a 3d "slice" of what's around us at any time. Our 4d bodies don't get painfully reversed, just our view of them and our 4d surroundings. Nothing physically moves in 4d space with the VRI, just the viewing direction; we're already in 4d space.

Hi Pat,

Hmmm... I'm coming late to this thread and trying to understand what you mean by 2d extending plane of vision.

What I'm thinking, is that a simple 2d plane of vision would only see a 2d flat slice of what's in front, but if that plane extends forward, it sees all of what's in front of it. If you put out 5 blocks in front of you, spaced at various distances away, there is no single flat 2d plane that could show all of them, but a 2d extending plane would. So, even with one eye, we can see with a 3d viewpoint, of what's around us.

When you say 'each eye' above, do you mean 'each eye during each of the two glances' or do you mean 'the same eye gets the same plane of vision during each of the two glances'?

I mean the same individual eye, gets the same 2d extending plane of vision, before and after the VRI flip, just from a different orthogonal direction.

Take, for example, a first glance where +/- x is right/left, +/- y is up/down, +/- z is forward/backward. Make the second glance +/- x is right/left, +/- y is up/down, +/- w is forward/backward. In most instances, nothing in your scene will be in both the first and second glance.

For this example, one can see the same x and y axis 2d plane of vision from at first, along the z axis, then, along the w axis. This would be a 90 degree VRI flip. It's the same plane of vision, from another orthogonal direction.

Take an example stepped down a notch. Cut a slit in a piece of paper. Orient the slit vertically in front of you. Look through it for your first glance. For your second glance, turn you and the piece of paper 90-degrees to your right, and look again. Probably the floor and ceiling are the only two objects that are in both of your glances.

With the VRI flip, you don't physically move, you just look at the same thing from another direction, which I think might be possible in 4d space. Like Aale said "Tetronians will not be able to see within a trionian body, they see the lightrays reflecting of a body just in a direction more then we trionians do!"

[pat]

Take an example stepped down a notch. Cut a slit in a piece of paper. Orient the slit vertically in front of you. Look through it for your first glance. For your second glance, turn you and the piece of paper 90-degrees to your right, and look again. Probably the floor and ceiling are the only two objects that are in both of your glances.

With the VRI flip, you don't physically move, you just look at the same thing from another direction, which I think might be possible in 4d space. Like Aale said "Tetronians will not be able to see within a trionian body, they see the lightrays reflecting of a body just in a direction more then we trionians do!"

The point that I was trying to make is that unless you move, changing the viewing direction will change what you're looking at.

[Hugh]

Hi Pat,

The point that I was trying to make is that unless you move, changing the viewing direction will change what you're looking at.

Would you agree that our viewing plane consists of an x and y axis (right/left, up/down)?

Is it true that both w and z are orthogonal to the same x and y plane in 4d space?

Are w and z both orthogonal to each other as well?

Can one look along either w or z, and see the same x and y plane in 4d space?

Wouldn't those two viewing directions be orthogonal to each other?

[wendy]

The trouble is that we don't see a plane. We see a solid anglum, the "theta" bit in "R, theta". It crosses a plane of course, at "r, theta". It is interesting that the guaging of R is a learnt thing, and even translating r to R (ie a picture to something solid), is a learnt art.

However, a constant r does not imply a constant R. That's what the notion of depth is. This is why when we move position, the view changes, because R,theta does not always map onto R", theta.

There is no "plane of view", that can be equally viewed from the x or z direction. It's like viewing the rooms of a house from standing on the floor, against viewing it from above.

The thing is, that if you are seeing a hedrix (2d angulum) of identical objects, you are in the same chorix (3d space). Invoking a fourth dimension is clearly wrong here.

W

[Hugh]

Hi Wendy,

The trouble is that we don't see a plane.

Even though our plane of vision extends forward, one can still draw what we see from each eye on a 2d flat x and y plane.

There is no "plane of view", that can be equally viewed from the x or z direction.

Can the x and y plane of view be equally viewed from the w and z direction? Aren't there shared 2d planes in a 4d hypercube?

It's like viewing the rooms of a house from standing on the floor, against viewing it from above.

In 4d, isn't there the extra space allowed in order to view the exact same 2d plane view from a different orthogonal direction?

The thing is, that if you are seeing a hedrix (2d angulum) of identical objects, you are in the same chorix (3d space).

If we're in 4d, with limited vision, we'd see everything around us, but only in a 3d slice boundary. The ability to see that boundary from different directions, may be an indication, that it exists in higher dimensional space.

[pat]

Is it true that both w and z are orthogonal to the same x and y plane in 4d space?

Are w and z both orthogonal to each other as well?

Can one look along either w or z, and see the same x and y plane in 4d space?

Wouldn't those two viewing directions be orthogonal to each other?

As far as I can tell: Yes, yes, no, yes.

Sit at the point <x,y,z,w> = <0,0,0,0>. Look in the direction z-direction (<0,0,1,0>). Put an object in front of you at <0,0,10,0>. Now, look in the w-direction (<0,0,0,1>). You won't see that object unless you've got a 180-degree field of view.

Put several objects in the same plane in front of you:
<0,0,10,0>
<3,0,10,0>
<0,3,10,0>
<3,3,10,0>

You have the same problem when you try to look in the w-direction. You won't see any of those objects unless you have a 180-degree field of view. And, if you've got a 180-degree field of view, all of those objects will be along the edge of your sight. They won't be in front of you.

[pat]

If you put the objects at:

<0,0,10,10>
<3,0,10,10>
<0,3,10,10>
<3,3,10,10>

Then, you could have all of the objects in your view-"cone" whether you're looking in the z-direction or in the w-direction. But, it requires a view-"cone" that's fully 4-d. I thought your "2-d extending plane" was only 3-d.

[wendy]

The thing is that we don't see a plane. What we see is the ends of lines that extend from our eye to objects.

So in essence we're looking down a whole mob of pipes and seeing just the circular ends of them.

These lines intersect a plane, but this does not mean that objects lie in the plane.

For example, suppose we are at (-1, 0, 0) An object at (5,1,0) will cross the plane x=0 at (0,1/6,0). This does not mean that the object is at this point, but that's where we would draw it if use the plane x=0 as the canvas.

The thing is, that if one were to suddenly move into the w plane, all one would see is, eg w,y,z at x=0. This measn that the object at (5,1,0) would not be seen.

Even if it were true that there was a visual plane at x=0, it would look the same regardless of where one looks at it from the perpendicular. There is nothing special about 4d.

It would be rather like a maypole. It looks the same from the north as it does from the east.

[Hugh]

Hi Pat,

Then, you could have all of the objects in your view-"cone" whether you're looking in the z-direction or in the w-direction. But, it requires a view-"cone" that's fully 4-d. I thought your "2-d extending plane" was only 3-d.

Our "at a glance" understanding of the space around us is 3d, based on the fact that we only can look in one direction at a time with a 2d extending plane. It's a limited viewpoint. But, if we're actually 4d, then we would have 4d space available to us. Our eyes and retinas would actually extend in those other directions too. So our view-cone could access both the z or w axis, but only in one direction at a time. We'd have to flip between the views to see them both.

Hi Wendy,

These lines intersect a plane, but this does not mean that objects lie in the plane.

All you need is the lines to intersect at the plane.

The thing is, that if one were to suddenly move into the w plane, all one would see is, eg w,y,z at x=0. This measn that the object at (5,1,0) would not be seen.

With the VRI, there is no movement, it's an instant rotation of viewpoint, along the plane.

Even if it were true that there was a visual plane at x=0, it would look the same regardless of where one looks at it from the perpendicular.

Agreed, the visual plane would look the same, from any perpendicular direction.

It would be rather like a maypole. It looks the same from the north as it does from the east.

Similarly, our view, with the VRI.

[lordofduct]

Something I feel is being left out here is not just sight... but what sight really is and why we may not perceive other dimensions may be because we don't have the organs to collect the information.

All sight is is the collection of information of light as it reflects off a surface and back to us.

How does light reflect in 4D? Does light exist in 4D? Is the information about the light traveling down a 4th axis collected the same way as the light traveling down the 3 lower axes? What does each rotation of ourselves look like in the 4th realm?

and most importantly, does the brain even use this information?

------------------------
How does light reflect in 4D?
- Well this is hard to tell... but for a single ray of light in 3D as it approaches a surface it will reflect in directions at the normal angled down to the tangent plane at that point of the surface. Creating a sort of dome or half sphere outwards... for one single ray of light. So in 4D a single ray of light with direction vector in the 4th dimension <x,y,z,w> it would reflect of a single point of a 4D object from the normal angled down to the tangent 3D realmish (what the hell would this be called?). creating a half 4nth sphere. that is a whole lot of information right there!

Does light exist in the 4th realm?
- most likely, it exists here so it is pretty much assumed it would there. But you never know...

Is the information about the light traveling down a 4th axis collected the same way as the light traveling down the 3 lower axes?
- this is retorical... like we could even phathom this if we can't even pathom what a 4D object even looks like!

does the brain even use this information?
- We may be bombarded with this information... but that is a lot of info. Does the brain even use it? Why would it if we didn't need it? The human brain can only interpret sound from frequencies 20hz to 20khz. It doesn't interpret sounds below or above that... sounds that get extremely higher then that can't even effect the ear as it would shatter.

You can consider the brain like a computer. It can only process so much information at once before being overloaded. So it limits certain information to allow others to go through or shifts the jobs of different organs to quiet the load. For instance taste in humans is done mostly through the oil factory as opposed to the tongue. This is a big reason our taste is so dull in comparison to dogs. A dog can distinguish the taste of every different part of its food just with its tongue. Our tongue only distinguishes 4 tastes! This allows the information to be processed more easily.
---------------------------------------------------

And this about rotation. Rotating through 4space. Well when we move we move in 3directions. we don't ever move that direction. Possibly there are reasons for this. Certain physical restrictions to our 4dimensional body that keeps it from moving in any 4th direction.

For instance take a sphere in 3space effected by gravity. It sits on the surface of the object creating the gravity. It can now only move on 2 axes on it's own. It takes an outside source to lift it up off the surface. We have muscles to move us in that third direction.
How about a cylinder in 3space effected by gravity... it can only move on 1 axis without the assistance of an outside force.

Now if all objects in our 3space realm were restricted as such in the 4th realm then we would never need to be concerned about the fourth realm as it poses no threat to us or very very little threat. The brain will not use this information.

Also what do those projections in the 4th axis look like? Say as we are rotated it is as if the surface of every particle in our body is rotated inward to the center and center to the surface and once completing rotation the surface returns back to it's original self (one way of imagining the rotation of such an object... not the only). Each phase of rotation is similar but not the same... the similarity though is enough for the brain to ignore, or even confuse it with the another phase in rotation. Kind of like those images that are two things at once (the painting of the old lady and young woman!) It only sees one of the many just because of confusion.

--------------------------
Now back to the VRI topic! heh...

well those restrictions I spoke off on that sphere and cylinder were gravity. Lets just hypothesis that it is also the restriction in our 4th realm (such as if the universe was standing on the surface of a large 4D object. That object would have immense gravity!) As our 4D selves walk all over the surface of this 4D object and don't have the ability to leap out of it's gravity we would need another 4D object to push us up off of it. We would be restricted to 3 axes then and would show why we can't rotate about the 4th axis.

Now say you leave some of the forces of gravity behind. This gives us just a little bit more freedom in movement in the 4th realm. Maybe minor, but what if this small change allowed us to shake just a little tiny bit in the 4th dimension. This could possibly (REALLY hypothetical on such a large level) cause the VRI... possibly causing a distortion of the 3D image in front of us altering the images just enough that it confuses the brain and it interprets images it never was confronted with before disorienting you.

possiby!

[Hugh]

Hi lordofduct,

well those restrictions I spoke off on that sphere and cylinder were gravity. Lets just hypothesis that it is also the restriction in our 4th realm (such as if the universe was standing on the surface of a large 4D object. That object would have immense gravity!) As our 4D selves walk all over the surface of this 4D object and don't have the ability to leap out of it's gravity we would need another 4D object to push us up off of it. We would be restricted to 3 axes then and would show why we can't rotate about the 4th axis.

Now say you leave some of the forces of gravity behind. This gives us just a little bit more freedom in movement in the 4th realm. Maybe minor, but what if this small change allowed us to shake just a little tiny bit in the 4th dimension. This could possibly (REALLY hypothetical on such a large level) cause the VRI... possibly causing a distortion of the 3D image in front of us altering the images just enough that it confuses the brain and it interprets images it never was confronted with before disorienting you.

So you're thinking that we might be 4d, but restricted to 3d because we're being held down by 4d gravity on a 3d surface. When the gravity is temporarily taken away, that allows us movement in 4d allowing us to see the same 3d surface from another direction with the VRI.

This is similar in some aspects to brane theory, in which we are restricted to a 3d mem'brane', in a 4d (or higher) universe.

What would cause the gravity to be temporarily taken away? When I experience the VRI, it is more of a controlled choice than a changing of existing physical laws.

I'm wondering if you've ever experienced the flip yourself? The image you see before and after are the exact same, just from another direction.

A similar possibility I've wondered about involves manifolds. From what I understand, a 1d line curved in the 2nd dimension (eg. a circle) is a 1d manifold. A 2d plane curved in the 3rd dimension (eg. a sphere) is a 2d manifold. 2d Fred restricted to the surface of the sphere would think he's only 2d moving in 2d space but it would actually be 3d space he's moving in.

Trying to imagine a 3d manifold - a 3d realm curved in the 4th dimension is hard but what would it be like to actually live in it? How would we experience that space? We'd think it was only 3d but we would actually move around in 4d space within the whole of it. Could the VRI be related to seeing space within a 3d manifold?

You've brought up a lot of other interesting questions. How would we see 4d space, how would our brain process 4d?

From what I've read, we would see a 3d slice of a 4d object in front of us. Say there is a 4d light source in front of us the 3d slice size of a basketball. We'd definitely see it, but how would we know it was 4d? Also, if we were actually 4d ourselves, but only able to see a 3d slice of what is around us at any instant, how would we know we were actually 4d?

[lordofduct]

well the physical force doesn't have to be something else pushing on us. As we have legs with muscles to push off the ground in 3D (unlike the sphere or cylinder with no mechanical parts to push itself).

If we do not perceive the 4th dimension, we may not know how to move in the forth dimension... but when freed of certain restrictions such as gravity that allow a slight wabble we may learn to wabble ourselves a little bit.

when this occurs it could cause VRI. Just like most visualizations of 4 spacial dimensions show a 3D object inverting on itself it... this would be seen as flipped directions.

I couldn't really tell though exactly because I don't fully understand VRI.


I have to concede that the LONG ass post I made yesterday was made at like 6 in the morning on very little sleep. I mostly used the post to talk about stuff besides VRI that the idea made me think of.

---------------------------

[Hugh]

when this occurs it could cause VRI. Just like most visualizations of 4 spacial dimensions show a 3D object inverting on itself it... this would be seen as flipped directions.

This is where I think it's related to higher dimensions.

I couldn't really tell though exactly because I don't fully understand VRI.

I feel sad for anyone who has never experienced the flip. They're a lot of fun actually, especially when you learn to control them.
So you've never had your directions flipped around or got lost, then upon seeing something familiar, but from another direction, had it all flip back to your 'normal' view?

[lordofduct]

No i've had it occur a few times... it's just my understanding of them are limited. And never thought about it enough to want it to happen.

[Hugh]

No i've had it occur a few times... it's just my understanding of them are limited. And never thought about it enough to want it to happen.

I think that most people experience them at some time or another. It's something that just happens to you at the start, it's more of a nuisance.

If you want to be able to control it, the best time to try is when it just happened to you. You see things from one direction, then the flip happens, then you try to flip it back to where it just was while the memory of the spatial awareness is still fresh. That's how I did it the first time. You end up being able to flip around your directional view four different ways eventually, here on earth that is. It's like being in a whole new space each time.

[bo198214]

I first need to clarify a bit the phenomenon. There was said that it is as if looking from a different angle. But the eyes still see the same image. So I would assume, that the angle is still the same. But the feeling of moving ahead has turned into the feeling of moving to the left. The feeling is as if you would move to the left with your head turned to the left (in case of 90 degree flip). Is this correct? (Otherwise you would see - though your eyes are directed ahead - the left side, this then would be a kind of out of body experience. And you could impress people by seeing things to the left (or even behind) though your eyes are directed to the front.)

As child I had often the impression when lying in bed (with closed eyes) that the room would be rotated about 180° and only by opening the eyes I could readjust my imagination with the reality (dont know whether this has something to do with the VRI.) And I also know by meditating friends that there could emerge the feeling of being upside down, though sitting in meditation position.

[thigle]

i thought all the time that Hugh was talking about actually seeing things flipped, while knowing that they are not. a case of paraconsistent logic, allowing working with paradox, but he has to clarify.

also, Hugh, you state:

You end up being able to flip around your directional view four different ways eventually, here on earth that is. It's like being in a whole new space each time.

you sure 4 exactly and no more ? what's the sight that offers itself from the centre that's in the middle of these 4 ? can you try this ? can you centre yourself at that point ? if so, you end up with what Aale de Winkel called tetronian perspective.

[Hugh]

Hi bo198214,

I first need to clarify a bit the phenomenon. There was said that it is as if looking from a different angle. But the eyes still see the same image. So I would assume, that the angle is still the same. But the feeling of moving ahead has turned into the feeling of moving to the left. The feeling is as if you would move to the left with your head turned to the left (in case of 90 degree flip). Is this correct?

Yes, everything stays the same relative to you with the flip. It's the exact same image from another direction. You don't see something to your left without turning to the left to look. You see the same thing. It's just that the direction of "left" has changed relative to where it used to be by 90 or 180 degrees.

As child I had often the impression when lying in bed (with closed eyes) that the room would be rotated about 180° and only by opening the eyes I could readjust my imagination with the reality (dont know whether this has something to do with the VRI.)

This feeling of rotation from the "normal" view is the VRI. I often find too that the flip can occur on its own during times when my eyes are closed. It's interesting to hear you refer to your "normal" view as "reality" and your flipped view as "imagination". In actuality all views are equally real, there are some (or one) of them that is just your normal view of your usual surroundings. When you happen to see it flipped around, your brain automatically flips it back to normal so that you have your orientational bearings back again. But what if one then consciously flips it back to the other view, then begins to live within that view? It's really fun to do because everything isn't how it normally is, but it's just as real.

And I also know by meditating friends that there could emerge the feeling of being upside down, though sitting in meditation position.

I know that a 180 degree vertical VRI is possible - astronauts do it all the time. Here on earth though, one must overcome the directional sense of the orientation of gravity, and see it as moving in the opposite direction. You would still be sitting down, but it would be "upside down" relative to where you just were. I believe there are those that can do this, especially in a meditative state.

A question I have is, if people can see the world from other directions, could this be an indication that there are higher dimensions of space and ourselves in order to allow for this?

Also, if one can sense gravity from different relative directions with the flip, and we actually are in 4d or higher space, then does that mean that the "direction" of gravity is more only a function of our limited "3d slice" view of the universe, and not of its possible reality as a field of some sort?

Hi thigle,
The paper you refer to called "consciousness: a hyperspace view" in the topic "non-dimensional being & consciousness" thread contains some interesting descriptions of reflection spaces that remind me very much of the VRI experience. I've described earlier in this thread about how one can do a VRI flip "into" the space seen reflected by two mirrors held at a 90 or 45 degree angle to each other. I wonder if this could be shown to be conscious evidence of the existence of reflection spaces, possible in higher dimensional space.

i thought all the time that Hugh was talking about actually seeing things flipped, while knowing that they are not. a case of paraconsistent logic, allowing working with paradox, but he has to clarify.

Well, I see things flipped, and I know that they are. There is nothing wrong with it, its still the same world, it's still me, just from another direction. Everything is the same except it's from another orthogonal direction.

you sure 4 exactly and no more ?

I've only ever seen four here on earth. There may be people who have been able to also do not only vertical flips but also all 24 possible flips (4 rotations times 6 sides in a cube). I'm sure that astronauts can do all 24 flips in space if they can focus well. The whole thing reminds me of a 3d necker cube.

what's the sight that offers itself from the centre that's in the middle of these 4 ? can you try this ? can you centre yourself at that point ? if so, you end up with what Aale de Winkel called tetronian perspective.

Ah, that's the big question, can one see all different possible perspectives at the same time thus seeing the whole of reality and not just a "3d slice" of it? Although I have not been able to do this visually, I have been able to approach it on a spiritual level and I find there is a sense of a "realization of oneness" with all. If one can look in opposite directions and see the same thing, then it exists in the middle, and all is one.