Physiological Instrumentation: EEG, ECG and MRI protocol
Compound: N,N-DMT
Status: research
What instrumented work has actually been announced, what has not, and what this site will accept as evidence. Open call.
Safety
Monitoring: Any instrumented arm involving a substance requires clinical oversight appropriate to that substance and that modality, arranged by the party running the study, under their own ethics approval. This site publishes records. It does not run, sponsor, supervise or advise on such studies, and a page appearing here is not an endorsement of any study listed on it.
Side effects
- Not applicable. This page describes acceptance criteria and a register, not a session
Abort criteria
- Not applicable. See the study's own approved protocol
Contraindications
- Informal instrumented studies involving a controlled substance, without ethics approval and clinical oversight
- MRI without specialist screening
- Every contraindication listed on the 650 nm laser protocol page applies to any arm involving N,N-DMT
Related
Why: DMT + 650nm Laser Protocol is the protocol any instrumented arm would be measuring.
Slug: dmt-laser
Title: DMT + 650nm Laser Protocol
Why: Wavelength Comparison Test is a pre-registration already published on this site, as a worked example of what is asked for here.
Slug: wavelength-comparison
Title: Wavelength Comparison Test
Why: Apple Vision Pro Passthrough Protocol is where the announced timestamping tool is recorded, with its status.
Slug: avp-passthrough
Title: Apple Vision Pro Passthrough Protocol
Overview
Mechanism: Physiological instrumentation cannot show what an observer sees. It can do something narrower and more useful: timestamp. If an observer marks the moment a form appears, and an independent instrument recorded a signal at that same moment, the report gains a timestamp that did not come from the observer's memory. That is what makes an instrumented arm worth the cost. It converts a retrospective account into a time-locked one, and time-locked accounts from independent observers can be compared in a way that stories cannot.
Indications
- Open call for collaborators
- Register of announced instrumented work
- Acceptance criteria for physiological data
- Separating capability from commitment
Evidence level: The record as of 21 August 2026, including what is absent. The pilot study (Goler 2025, IPI Letters, CC BY 4.0) lists future work that includes investigating potential neural correlates using reliable brain imaging techniques, and designing formal controlled experiments to measure statistical recurrence. Those are stated intentions in a published paper. They name no modality, no institution, no collaborator, no funding and no date. Beyond that: a search of the public record on 21 August 2026 found no announced or registered study using ECG, functional MRI, eye tracking or heart rate variability in connection with this protocol, by any party. DreamMind Labs describes EEG brain mapping among its capabilities, but ties it to extended state DMT work rather than to this protocol, on an undated page. There is no OSF registration, no ClinicalTrials.gov entry, no AsPredicted record and no published ethics approval for this phenomenon by anyone. Separately, and unrelated to this protocol, instrumented DMT research does exist and is peer reviewed: multivariate EEG work on the DMT state is catalogued in this site's bibliography. That work is real, it is citable, and it is not about the laser claim. Keeping those two apart is the point of this page.
Contraindications
- Any instrumented arm involving a controlled substance requires ethics approval and clinical oversight. This site does not run such studies and does not advise anyone to run one informally
- MRI safety screening is a specialist procedure and is not addressed here
- This page is a record and an open call. It is not an instruction to obtain or use a controlled substance
Citations
Doi: 10.59973/ipil.158
Year: 2025
Title: Detailing a Pilot Study: The Code of Reality Protocol (source of the stated intention to investigate neural correlates)
Doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-51974-4
Year: 2019
Title: Neural Correlates of the DMT Experience Assessed with Multivariate EEG (peer reviewed, not about the laser protocol)
Year: 2026
Title: Shawn Ryan Show #320, description of a tool in development, podcast assertion
Integration
Prompts
- What modality, what sampling rate, and how is the instrument clock synchronised to the observer's marker?
- Where is the pre-registration lodged and what is its identifier?
- What result would count against the claim?
- Is there a sober arm, and is there a naive observer arm?
- Under what licence will the raw data be deposited?
- Who approved the ethics, and what is the reference number?
Homework
- Lodge the pre-registration before collecting anything
- State the falsifying result in writing before the first session
Framework: This page is maintained as a register. Each entry states the claim, who made it, where, on what date, and its status: published study, pre-registration, stated intention, or podcast assertion. Entries are not promoted between those categories without a document. Where the record contains nothing, the page says the record contains nothing and gives the date the search was run, so that a reader can tell a genuine absence from a stale page.
Follow up structure
- Researchers with ethics approval or instrument access: submit through the registry and the pre-registration will be published before collection
- Anyone with a documented announcement not listed above: submit the source and it will be added to the register with its date and status
- Completed instrumented work: submit the identifier, the raw data location and the licence
- Null results are hosted on identical terms to positive results
Preparation
Screening
- Ethics approval from a recognised body, with the approving institution and reference number stated
- A pre-registration lodged before data collection, at OSF, ClinicalTrials.gov, AsPredicted or an equivalent public register, with its identifier stated
- A stated null hypothesis and a stated result that would count against the claim
- Instrument specification: modality, sampling rate, electrode montage or sequence, and synchronisation method between the instrument clock and the observer's event marker
- A sober arm and a naive observer arm within the same design
- A commitment to publish the result whichever way it falls, and to deposit the raw data under an open licence
- Clinical oversight appropriate to the modality and to any substance involved
Set setting: This page does not describe a session you can run at home. Its purpose is to state what this site will accept from a party who is equipped to run one, and to hold the record of what has been announced by anyone so that intentions are not read later as completed work.
Consent template: The open call. If you hold ethics approval, instrument access or a relevant dataset, this site will publish your pre-registration before you collect data, host your null result on the same terms as a positive one, and record your work in the chronology under its own evidence class with your name on it. Submissions arrive through the registry. Nothing here requires agreement with any interpretation of the phenomenon, and a submission that argues against it is as welcome as one that supports it.
Legal status: N,N-DMT is Schedule I in the United States and controlled in most countries. Nothing on this page is an instruction to obtain or use a controlled substance, and nothing here is medical advice. This site does not run or sponsor the studies described and lists no study as approved or completed without its identifier.
Controls and rigor
Why: Instrumented work carries more authority than a self report, which is exactly why an unregistered instrumented study would do more damage here than no study at all. These are the conditions under which this site will treat physiological data as evidence rather than as illustration.
Practices
- Pre-registration before collection, publicly lodged, or the result is catalogued as a report rather than as a test
- Time synchronisation stated explicitly. An event marker that depends on the observer speaking afterwards is not time locked
- A sober arm on the same apparatus and the same observer
- Blinded analysis. Whoever scores the physiological data does not know which epochs the observer marked
- Raw data deposited under an open licence, not summary statistics alone
- Announced intentions are recorded on this page as intentions, and are never rendered as findings. If an announced study is completed, this page is updated with its identifier and its result
- Absence is recorded too. Where a search of the public record finds no study, this page says so and dates the search
Reference material only. Nothing on this page is medical advice or a personal recommendation.
Adults 18 and older only.
First reported by Danny Goler in August 2020; the written protocol grew out of that observation. He has no part in Meridian Optics Lab, this store, or this site, is not a founder and holds no editorial role, and has not reviewed or endorsed any kit, page, or claim published here.