Talk:Isolation tank
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Brain in a vat
Isolation tanks have nothing whatsoever to do with the "brain in a vat" thought experiment. This thought experiment is about a literal brain being fed electrical signals that a body would normally be providing it, thereby simulating reality to the brain despite its really being in a vat. This is meant to highligh that there is no way to be certain that what the brain "thinks" it is experiencing are necessarily actually happening to an associated body. The only tenuous connection between these two topics I can come up with is that perhaps whoever put that in regarding the comments about humans needing constant stimuli, and...the brain in a vat experiment being used as an example of that? It makes no sense. Anyone object to the removal of this reference? Mswer 20:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Torture References?
There are no longer any references to the tank being used for torture, yet it's in the torture category. It used to have references to it, and they should probably be put back -- if no one has any objections after a few days I may either add it back in myself or remove the article from the torture category. StopTheFiling 16:07, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
I do not beleive float tanks have never been used for torture - I defy anyone to prove me wrong! I've been running a floatation tank centre since 1993 and average around 1300 customers a month. I've yet to see any customer leave a float tank in any state other than relaxed. I certainly don't subscribe to the notion that there's a deep human need for an almost constant input of stimuli. User:bloobuoy
- I don't think that they've had very long stays in a very good tank. In The Cardinal of the Kremlin, one is used as a torture device, but the sensory deprivation is complete. The victim is completely submerged, covered head to toe with a substance that cannot be felt when wet and has her voice muted using destructive interference with the sound waves. BioTube 02:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Cardinal of the Kremlin - is a work of FICTION!
- Sorry, very sloppy comment I made before. I meant to say "remove the category." There is indeed very few on isolation tanks and torture or MKULTRA. Ben T/C 19:33, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] External link section
Do we need all those links? At least some of them are link spam or, as Glabrata put it, "biased research" (cf. (Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming). Please remove everything you don't see fit. Ben T/C 19:42, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
- As Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, I've removed 2 unnecessary subsections of links. I've also removed a few other links - 1 was essentially a duplicate, another a personal account, and another a purely commercial link. --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I think it's a shame that there aren't some links to commerical centres, I think the best carry lots of information and also prove that it's a viable therapy.
- If the information is verifiable you can add it to the article, bearing copyrigh rules in mind. Doctormatt 02:40, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Obviously Wikipedia isn't a link farm - but I believe a link to at least one center would allow for additional information and of course pictures - I propose http://www.floatworks.com as I know they're the worlds largest centre - and a great website too
- I disagree. I think the floatworks site adds little besides commercial interests, and opens the door to every floating center adding their website to the page, and then we end up where we were a year/six months ago. I think it is best to have no links to commercial floating sites, and only link to encyclopedic, informational sites, if any. If people have pictures, they can add them directly. Doctormatt 17:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Floatation Tank Facility Directory - A list of commercial U.S. sites were you can use a floatation tank.(floatforhealth is a pay for list site). I came back to this page trying to find the one I was looking for (for a birthday present), but couldn't as it had been removed (and didn't know where in the edits it may have been).I agree the floatforhealth/floatdirectory only list half of the floatation centers out there.Try Floatfinder.com or just use google search. The original article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Isolation_tank&oldid=79671756 69.243.168.118 19:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Formerly the IP-Address 24.22.227.53
I have added the floatation tank association (not a commercial site) - which is a governing body and has a great research, theories and f.a.q pages. It has certainly helped me in my research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.34.48.22 (talk • contribs)
- I removed it. The site your added is a commerical site: its goal is to promote services. The offering of "vouchers" makes that clear. Also, it has very limited usefulness for research: there are six papers there, which appear to have been copy-and-pasted from proper journals (I wonder about the copyright law on this). At least one makes reference to figures which weren't included by the "cut-and-paste"-er, making the site look shoddy and suspect. Doctormatt 23:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Think the picture should be removed - it clearly shows the manufacturers name - this goes against the commercial advertising - I am sure we can find a tank picture that doesn't show the manufacturer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.90.117 (talk) 11:01, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Components and Materials
It seems relevant to include a section on how isolation tanks are constructed. I do not have this information myself, but I plan to explore this topic soon and will be glad to create a new section for it. Of course if anyone else happens to have info, please feel free to start it yourself. --FJ, 00:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
The part about Joe Rogan commenting on this was definitely on a Loveline episode. Does anyone know if he spoke about it both on Loveline and Opie and Anthony, or is the Opie and Anthony comment incorrect?
[edit] Use of scientific terms
"The parasympathetic response is the mechanism by which the body naturally regenerates itself and maintains chemical and metabolic balance". This line is misinterpreting what the parasympathetic nervous system is; both the sympathetic and parasympathetic systems work together to maintain homeostasis (although it is true the parasympathetic in a lot of cases is associated with "rest and digest" but this is different from regeneration). The whole paragraph needs cleaning up as it contains inapropriate use of scientific terms (eg. elimination of gravity is rubbish) and has no references for these claims. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 40.0.96.2 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] floateria merge
I think the info at floateria should be moved here (though I wasn't the one who added the tag...). The floateria page is terrible: in fact it only contains the word "floateria" in a header and title, so I cannot tell what the heck "floateria" is. Any other opinions? Doctormatt 04:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tank temperature
The first paragraph states that the water in the tank is that of skin temperature. Were this true, the human body would overheat inside such tank. The basic temperature in the tank should be somewhere around 20-25 degrees Celsius (I cannot recall the exact temperature).
I do not know what "skin temperature" is, but I disagree about the temperature you mention. I have had a tank in my home for 7 years. I keep it set at 94.3 degrees F (35 Celsius). If it goes down a degree or so that is okay, but anything less than 93.0 degrees makes it too cold to stay in the tank. 138.88.218.95 03:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Keith L
Lower temparature then 34.6 C the floater will feel cold. The variation between 34.8-35.4 C seems to be the best since over 35.5 C the body starts to sweat. This is my conclusion and I have had a tank for 5,5 years. People with a fever can even at 34.8 get a feeling that the water is cold. I like to see someone in a floatingtank at 20-25 C, They will run up from the tank within a few minutes.
[edit] link question
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cmFMwKoBcS8 - video of floatation experience - should it be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.128.112 (talk) 19:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- No. This video is not helpful to the reader of this article. Thanks for asking instead of just adding it. Cheers, Doctormatt 19:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] potential dangers, hallucinations?
I'm surprised there is no mentioning of the potential dangers of using a flotation tank, especially in a badly or poorly supervised setting. People in early experiments were excessively cautioned, which often caused them to panic or have bizarre reactions to the tanks. There also isn't a single mention of hallucinatory responses in the entry, with the exception of one that mentions taking hallucinagenics in combination with using a tank. Even without the use of drugs, hallucinatory reactions are reported quite commonly. The article seems to read like a brochure. I'm not terribly familiar with editing, so I don't want to just jump in. I thought I'd leave my thoughts here, along with a couple of linked sources to support my comments. Sorry if there's any sloppiness here, this is my first time using the editor.
There are no potential dangers - I have been running 9 tanks for 15 years - no one has had a bad experience or freaked out - have you used a floatation tank yourself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.90.117 (talk) 11:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach by Bernard Spilka
The Man Who Tasted Shapes by Richard E. Cytowic Motemeal (talk) 11:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sink-in, dry, waterbed-like isolation tank?
I seem to recall hearing about a special type of waterbed for burn victims that uses a waterproof loose/elastic cover over the water, that functions very differently from what is commonly called a waterbed. The cover over the water is so loose and flexible that the user sinks deep into the pool of water to the normal buoyant floating height without pressure sores forming on the burn victim's body. Meanwhile they stay completely dry due to the cover isolating them from the water.
Has this found any application as a form of lower-maintenance isolation tank? Just think, no need to filter and change the water, just need to change the bedding which may be little more than a super-stretchy lycra sheeting. I am not involved in the float tank industry so I don't know if this has been explored as a float tank technology.
DMahalko (talk) 07:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Salt recovery?
Is there any economic and ecological value in recovering and extracting the epsom salt from the water? An often quoted number is "800 pounds of epsom salt" for a typical float tank.
This site shows a 50 pound bag costs $42.99, which is therefore $687 for 800 pounds: http://www.saltworks.us/shop/product.asp?idProduct=255
If the water is to be changed every two months for a moderately-used pool, that is some $4127 per year. At what financial cost does salt recovery become viable? And is it even possible?
Mere drying through evaporation would not be sufficient to purify the salt, since oils and sediments would remain in the dried salt. The article for Magnesium sulfate says the melting point is 1124°C, so perhaps the dried, evaporated salt could be fired in a kiln to burn off organic pollutants without damaging the salt?
