Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
As per my completely unfounded pet theory
DrEvil » 12 Oct 2014 13:07 wrote:3 grams? Not quite following.
And yeah, a clone probably wouldn't work. Either it gets a mind of its own (developed or beamed in from elsewhere), or if it's kept in a coma to avoid developing a mind of its own (assuming the mind doesn't come from somewhere else), it won't be a match to your brain, unless making a carbon copy of a brain also duplicates the mind running on it. That of course assumes we could make a copy of a grown brain in the first place.
DrEvil » Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:39 pm wrote:^^As per my completely unfounded pet theory, electromagnetic fields can do some crazy stuff with your head.
Stick an electrode in the right part of someone's brain and they see god.
If a desperate mind is reaching out (by means of expanding/amplifying the electromagnetic field made by our brains), it could potentially also induce visions in others close by, like nurses for instance.
Off topic: This is also my pet theory on the classic alien abduction tale. Driving down a dark country road, strange light in the sky, all your electronics are knocked out and you either blank out or see strange stuff.
All of these things can be achieved by a powerful electromagnetic field, caused by some unknown atmospheric phenomenon like ball lightning, or something like the 'Hessdalen lights'.
People Have Near-Death Experiences While Brain Dead
For practical purposes outside the world of academic debate, three clinical tests commonly determine brain death. First, a standard electroencephalogram, or EEG, measures brain-wave activity. A "flat" EEG denotes non-function of the cerebral cortex - the outer shell of the cerebrum. Second, auditory evoked potentials, similar to those [clicks] elicited by the ear speakers in Pam's surgery, measure brain-stem viability. Absence of these potentials indicates non-function of the brain stem. And third, documentation of no blood flow to the brain is a marker for a generalized absence of brain function.
But during "standstill", Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem response was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" NDE of all Atlanta Study participants
Ben D » Sun Oct 12, 2014 4:57 pm wrote:...wait...there are no brain generated electromagnetic fields during an nde...some of these nde experiences have happened while the brain was being monitored in a hospital environment...People Have Near-Death Experiences While Brain Dead
For practical purposes outside the world of academic debate, three clinical tests commonly determine brain death. First, a standard electroencephalogram, or EEG, measures brain-wave activity. A "flat" EEG denotes non-function of the cerebral cortex - the outer shell of the cerebrum. Second, auditory evoked potentials, similar to those [clicks] elicited by the ear speakers in Pam's surgery, measure brain-stem viability. Absence of these potentials indicates non-function of the brain stem. And third, documentation of no blood flow to the brain is a marker for a generalized absence of brain function.
But during "standstill", Pam's brain was found "dead" by all three clinical tests - her electroencephalogram was silent, her brain-stem response was absent, and no blood flowed through her brain. Interestingly, while in this state, she encountered the "deepest" NDE of all Atlanta Study participants[
The omnipresent quantum vacuum awareness 'touches' all that is, within and without. Death only means the regaining of non-dual awareness that was temporarily 'lost' because of incarnation and subsequent deriving of awareness using the brain.
When the genie is let out of the bottle again...it's like magic!
Elvis » Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:13 am wrote:DrEvil » Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:39 pm wrote:^^As per my completely unfounded pet theory, electromagnetic fields can do some crazy stuff with your head.
Stick an electrode in the right part of someone's brain and they see god.
If a desperate mind is reaching out (by means of expanding/amplifying the electromagnetic field made by our brains), it could potentially also induce visions in others close by, like nurses for instance.
Off topic: This is also my pet theory on the classic alien abduction tale. Driving down a dark country road, strange light in the sky, all your electronics are knocked out and you either blank out or see strange stuff.
All of these things can be achieved by a powerful electromagnetic field, caused by some unknown atmospheric phenomenon like ball lightning, or something like the 'Hessdalen lights'.
I think it's good to tease out these things from the 'mechanistic' standpoint, and I have great respect for your intelligence and approach to these questions, Dr. Evil. Brain-generated electromagnetic fields are definitely a relevant consideration, and, for me, they offer a sensible (if partial) explanation of ESP phenomena.
But to me, given all the experiential indications that a continuity of consciousness exists independently of a physical body -- e.g. NDEs, children describing 'past lives' in historically accurate detail, 'unexplainable' haunting events, the posthumous communications of Frederic Myers etc. -- a much simpler explanation is that consciousness exists, and persists, in and out of physical incarnations.
I'd say a lot of this comes down to the question of intentionality; I'm persuaded that there is intention behind all existence. The techno-industrial-scientific view, of course, says that's ridiculous -- that human consciousness is the result of random physical events -- and ignores it. I think ignoring it might (by definition?) constitute an ignorance that discourages scientists from looking in areas that should be more open-mindedly explored. Intention might never be objectively proven with instruments, but perhaps only through subjective experience; would that mean it cannot exist as a creating force?
Believe it or not, in elementary school I was the 'science geek'; my biggest childhood hero was Galileo, I repeated many of his experiments and observations for myself, recording results as he did with notes and drawings. I checked out every astronomy, chemistry and biology book in the local library, had a huge chemistry set, telescopes, micropscopes, and a scientifically-trained father to consult. So my appreciation of scientific method, and mode of thinking, is pretty well set. But I think the presently accepted boundaries of what constitutes a legitimate scope of inquiry, and the boundaries of what constitutes a legitimate interpretation of data, are too limiting.
All that said, a greater study of brain-induced electromagnetic fields is one good place to start.
And Dr. Evil, I will really appreciate any back & forth with you on this subject. I have similar conversations with a close friend/neighbor who's a scientist, and for all his brilliance and open-mindedness, it's proved very frustrating for me to get through past the wall of his demand for 'hard data' proving things like "ghosts," "past lives" and "intention." But it's good for me: I'm struggling to express all of this in a rational way.
DrEvil wrote:All that said - I should qualify my materialistic view of things: By materialistic I mean that making a distinction between science and the unknown is wrong. They're part of the same thing. Just because we can't explain something today doesn't automatically put it beyond the purview of science. It just means we don't know how it works. Of course, the science we have today might need some heavy revision to accommodate the.. "expanded view", if you will.
DrEvil wrote:Tl;dr: All I know is I don't know shit.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Nature."
(Hat tip to Peter Watts).
3753. Wendy G NDE 9/7/14 I continued to float up and a tunnel appeared. A beautiful tunnel with a bright light at the end of it (the light was brighter than the sun but did not hurt your eyes and it was pure white light). I knew that I had died and would be leaving behind a 5-6 month old infant and my husband but I did not care. I wanted to go into the light. I wanted to go home. When I came through the light I knew everyone there and they were so happy to see me welcoming me home. They were all dead relatives - none had I met before but I knew everyone. They also appeared in human form to be recognized but somehow that was not their true form now (something I had sensed). I had a connection with everyone and almost a collective consciousness (I do not know how to describe it).
Detailed NDE due to cardiac arrest during surgery.
547. Barbara S NDE. English expanded version 1/16/05 & 1/30/2011 & 9/7/14 The next thing I remember was coming into a clear white light. I lost all fear of drowning. I knew that my body was perfectly safe. I felt this total love and acceptance from this light. I realized that the white light had a voice in it and was separate from me. I also realized that I was still me but was part of this white light also. I belonged to it and it belonged to me. I was told that you are here to gain knowledge and to learn how to love. When I was told this I realized that when the entity say "You" it didn't mean just me, it meant the human race. I understood all the ramifications of love and knowledge when it said this to me. It didn't mean physical love as much as learning to accept all races and knowing that no soul is better than another.
NDE due to drowning at age 10. Shared 49 years later.
3752. Bob M NDE 9/7/14 I stepped into deep water way over my head and after a few bounces from the bottom to catch a breath of air I ingested to much water so I died. While in the act of dying I was terrified, but only for a few seconds. Then a calm and peace came over me that I still remember vividly. Warm light and peace that passes understanding (literally) surrounded me and I was going to the light. Next thing I knew I was laying on the bank being pounded on and hurting in my chest.
NDE due to drowning at age 9. Shared 69 years later.
3751. Marta E NDE 9/7/14 From Portugal. A car came across the one I was driving and I lost consciousness by traumatic cranium encephalic attack… I remember I believe I was out of my body, looking down and asking me I was everybody so anxious about the situation… It was so peaceful, that I can't remember in my all life to have had a such equal experience .
NDE due to car accident from physician.
Ben D » Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:01 am wrote:Schroeder’s explanation is a re-phrasing of Arthur C. Clarke’s famous Third Law that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Schroeder’s declares:
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Nature. Basically, either advanced alien civilizations don’t exist, or we can’t see them because they are indistinguishable from natural systems. I vote for the latter.
Schroeder explains about the Fermi Paradox....basically, we can’t detect really advanced civilizations because their technology is so advanced that it operates in harmony with a planet, and it uses some kind of communication that looks like natural radiation, etc., to such an extant that it appears to not be there.
It amounts to saying that the universe provides us with a picture of the ultimate end-point of technological development. In the Great Silence, we see the future of technology, and it lies in achieving greater and greater efficiencies, until our machines approach the thermodynamic equilibria of their environment, and our economics is replaced by an ecology where nothing is wasted.
Belligerent Savant » Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:43 pm wrote:.
...
You raise sound points Re: religion/spirituality, DrEvil [as did the other contributors on this page]. I happen to believe there are phenomenon that can't currently be explained by 'chemical reactions' alone. The nature of consciousness -- and the nature of 'outer space' -- remain relatively unknown territory; it's premature to render a confident declaration on what may actually be going on out/in there.
...
Side-note, Re: nature of consciousness:
https://www.wired.com/2013/04/conscious ... ter-death/
Excerpt:
Wired: One of the first after-death accounts in your book involves Joe Tiralosi, who was resuscitated 40 minutes after his heart stopped. Can you tell me more about him?
Sam Parnia: [...]
When Tiralosi woke up, he told nurses that he had a profound experience and wanted to talk about it. That’s how we met. He told me that he felt incredibly peaceful, and saw this perfect being, full of love and compassion. This is not uncommon.
People tend to interpret what they see based on their background: A Hindu describes a Hindu god, an atheist doesn’t see a Hindu god or a Christian god, but some being. Different cultures see the same thing, but their interpretation depends on what they believe.
Wired: What can we learn from the fact that people report seeing the same thing?
Parnia: At the very least, it tells us that there’s this unique experience that humans have when they go through death. It’s universal. It’s described by children as young as three. And it tells us that we should not be afraid of death.
Wired: Couldn’t the experiences just reflect some extremely subtle type of brain activity?
Parnia: When you die, there’s no blood flow going into your brain. If it goes below a certain level, you can’t have electrical activity. It takes a lot of imagination to think there’s somehow a hidden area of your brain that comes into action when everything else isn’t working.
These observations raise a question about our current concept of how brain and mind interact. The historical idea is that electrochemical processes in the brain lead to consciousness. That may no longer be correct, because we can demonstrate that those processes don’t go on after death.
There may be something in the brain we haven’t discovered that accounts for consciousness, or it may be that consciousness is a separate entity from the brain.
Wired: This seems to verge on supernatural explanations of consciousness.
Parnia: Throughout history, we try to explain things the best we can with the tools of science. But most open-minded and objective scientists recognize that we have limitations. Just because something is inexplicable with our current science doesn’t make it superstitious or wrong. When people discovered electromagnetism, forces that couldn’t then be seen or measured, a lot of scientists made fun of it.
Scientists have come to believe that the self is brain cell processes, but there’s never been an experiment to show how cells in the brain could possibly lead to human thought. If you look at a brain cell under a microscope, and I tell you, “this brain cell thinks I’m hungry,” that’s impossible.
It could be that, like electromagnetism, the human psyche and consciousness are a very subtle type of force that interacts with the brain, but are not necessarily produced by the brain. The jury is still out.
Wired: But what about all the fMRI brain imaging studies of thoughts and feelings? Or experiments in which scientists can tell what someone is seeing, or what they’re dreaming, by looking at brain activity?
Parnia: All the evidence we have shows an association between certain parts of the brain and certain mental processes. But it’s a chicken and egg question: Does cellular activity produce the mind, or does the mind produce cellular activity?
Some people have tried to conclude that what we observe indicates that cells produce thought: here’s a picture of depression, here’s a picture of happiness. But this is simply an association, not a causation. If you accept that theory, there should be no reports of people hearing or seeing things after activity in their brain has stopped. If people can have consciousness, maybe that raises the possibility that our theories are premature.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests