I'm no NT (and damn glad not to be too :lol: ), but my daydreams are partly related to my special interests (chemistry, biochemistry, other nerdly stuff like that hehe), at the moment, the woman I fell in love with (yea, you can probably guess who it is Amy, just damn shame I gotta move out of the country :smile: )
And partly just abstract stuff, the workings of the universe in general, music, when/how I'm next going to trip/nod out and all sorts of fantasy odds and ends, and the odd combination of all of the above (picture beautiful woman in a labcoat, shooting up H :razz: )
I do have completely random ones as well, that, well, theyre just day to day things where my mind removes itself from my body and just thinks about what it chooses to
I daydream quiet often. Mostly when I'm in a maths lesson. I think that we day dream just the same as NT'S. Most of my daydreams are not about computers and science (wow I find that boring). My daydreaming is just...well random. Although I do have the odd daydream with Josh Hartnett in it :grin:. Just because our brain is "wired differently" doesnt mean that we cant all have the same thoughts and views.
Mel, xxxxxx
I believe that the research in question should take a page from computer programming in that there are an infinite number of methods, many radically different from each other, to reach the same result.
and in that case, they shouldn't assume that just because all of the classic signs of an something aren't there, doesn't mean that it's not happening.
In science, when you want to test something, the first thing to do is to get a concrete definition of what you're looking for. In this case, when they say "daydreaming", they mean they meant "neurotypical daydreaming" or "activation of a certain brain center".
Well! Don't know if I am on the spectrum, but for what it's worth, I am CONSTANTLY daydreaming, even when I am very absorbed in productive work at my routine job. This is odd: I read somewhere, years ago, that for most people the most frustrating type of job would be one that engaged them physically but not mentally. Dude, for me that's the best type of job, simply because while I would love to use my perfectly good mind to do something ambitious, my teeming, shimmering, dramatic inner life has always been, and will always be, too much for any "real world" pursuits to compete with. I have just recognized that new people & situations are foreign objects in my airspace, irritants to be absorbed as quickly as possible so I can return my attention to my own thoughts...not to sound hostile, because I have ended up very fond of many of these new people, very comfortable in these new situations, but the trouble is that adapting to them takes attention that I cannot easily give. Once the new person has been assimilated into the crew at work, or the new skill has been mastered, or the new whatever-it-is has become second nature so that I can competently deal with him/her/it on a kind of automatic pilot, then I am perfectly happy. But I am beginning to see that a life of nonstop challenges requiring constant, 100% commitment & mental "presence" would burn me out very quickly. My brain insists upon being itself. Interesting thought: Years ago, watching some crime drama on TV with my brother, I remarked that I would find it so boring to be a cop. He thought I was crazy: "You'd be out there on the street getting shot at!" At the time I didn't know what I meant either. Now I do. So many ambitious undertakings in life require FULL ATTENTION, and my brain is so busy all the time with dialogues, monologues, make-believe interviews, philosophizing, psychoanalyzing, working on problems, dreaming about my crushes (I look! I dream! I just don't touch), and just plain self-entertainment, that I know I can't just shut all that off & go full-out into the so-called real world. So I have to have relationships & work that accomodate my lifelong state of having one foot in this world & one foot in MY world. P.S.--some of my best daydreaming happens while listening to loud music on the headphones & rocking in the wing chair. I often invent fantastic videos or super-athletic ice-skating routines to go with the song, matching dramatic high points in the action to the beat of whatever song it is. I also do this at work if the song is in my head. If I had a brain scan, I'll bet there would be very HIGH activity in the daydreaming center, not low. Whether this makes me more or less likely to be an autistic-spectrum person, who can say? Seriously, can anyone say? Does anyone know what I mean?
My non-situational daydreaming (daydreaming that's not specifically about my working through how I'd face a situation, or solve a problem, or whatever) is somewhat repetitive and formulaic in its scenarios, and it's definitely tied strongly to my interests. But my mother has always said there's something peculiar about the way I appear to do it as compared to the way my neurotypical siblings do, so maybe there is something to the idea that we daydream in very different ways, using different parts of the brain to different degrees, and that it impedes on our conscious interaction in different ways.
Seriously, I want to wear a portable brain-wave monitor for a week (not sure such a thing exists yet, but somebody here can invent it! :smile: ) and let the scientists see what goes on in which lobes. If there is not an atypically HIGH level of daydream activity going on in my brain, I will eat my hat AND my coat!
And it's a really BIG coat by the way. :shock:
The thing is that apparently the only type of daydreaming that they know how to detect through brain scanning is the neurotypical variety(which makes sesnse, as it's present in the vast majority of the population).
BTW, a portable brainwave meter would be extremely hard to make, as it would require a LOT of shielding in order to prevent it from picking up electrical noise from various other objects.
The thing is that apparently the only type of daydreaming that they know how to detect through brain scanning is the neurotypical variety(which makes sesnse, as it's present in the vast majority of the population).
So strange...so maybe other kinds of daydreaming are happening right in front of them, in huge amounts, & they can't detect it? :?
BTW, a portable brainwave meter would be extremely hard to make, as it would require a LOT of shielding in order to prevent it from picking up electrical noise from various other objects.
Probably just as well for me...I mean, it's a REALLY big coat! :razz:
Seriously, though, if I could be successfully scanned, I just KNOW there would be atypical stuff going on & a lot of it would be dreaming!
One area, the medial-frontal cortex, "actually grows too big and too fast" in people with autism, Kennedy said.
Autistic people also tend to have trouble with behaviors specifically linked to areas that make up the resting network -- social interactions, face processing and emotions.
However, it is true that detailed imaging is suppressed during saccades. This phenomenon, known as saccadic masking or saccadic suppression, is known to occur in the time preceding a saccadic eye movement, suggesting that there are neurological functions at work rather than simple mechanical or optical functions, such as retinal blur
autism is given no room compared to saccades,
regardless of what areas between high level Neuroscience,
should overlap with Autism.
very few scientific communities seem to conduct Autism research without a fearful or doubting touch, fail to accept that Autistic persons are not overpowered very easily. it is like as a species we have been sprouting streamlined individuals, sleek, developed, and these have been discounted because no one seems to process it as an upgrade of species' firmware. it is my firm belief that autism is a reaction from beneath the Genome wishing to come outwards, again, like a systemic upgrade upstairs. it is probably a suggestion of what 'system percievance' our Species of animal is capable of processing at this time in its slow crawl over earth's globe.
I daydream meglomania.
I've conquer the world in so many ways. . .
And I notice that 21 seconds are given.
In such short periods, I usually blank out rather than daydream. Hardly surprising then. . .