And there you go... Fucking it all up by talking too much. You had me at, "I don't have time for such silly discussions."!
My theory is similar to lunas. I do believe we are a host in some
fashion. I don't believe in god but I do think humans have had some help
in our evolution. I think there is other life forms in the universe. I
believe life outside of this world is in the forum of energy. If that is
the case maybe when we do die our nerons could be some form of a life
after death in the form of energy.
You can believe that crock of shit all you like, it will not ever make t true. You suck at science.
by VirusI do find these concepts interesting... I found them more so as a younger man. I can see a little of what Who was trying to say early on, it can be pointless to spend too much time intellectualizing what can first, the chicken or the egg;you should enjoy deviled eggs with a nice chicken diner. At the end of the day it all boils down to your perception or conception of what is going on right here... right now.
Peace!
From my perception the rooster and the hen came before the egg.
This illusion still has it's laws, and no offspring whether it's a calf or cub, a puppy, a kitten, an infant, a chick and even the egg would never survive without a parent or guardian to look after them after birth.
I don't believe in Darwin's theory of evolution, as the missing links will always be missing for as long people believe it.
The brain is enclosed where it cannot be seen for starters, and even if we can see it, we wouldn't be able to know what's happening with it simply by looking at it with the naked eye.
Also, we know enough about the brain to know we've only scratch the surface of what there is to know about it.
Finally, it's us who collapses wave functions when we measure events. The only self collapsing wave function, is the mind itself.
Your question encouraged me to seek out some information on my intuition in regards to quantum events occurring in the brain. To me it just seems obvious. After looking into this some more, I'm reading articles of how the brain is being considered as a quantum computer, as it has electrons close enough to become entangled with one another which enhances it's computing power.
From what I've gathered about quantum computing. The computer perform multiple tasks in the same breath, where as conventional computers do things so fast, it provides us the illusion that it's happening at the same time. Like how a sound file is played back to us in bit rates, while the processor will run off and do other things, and pick up where it left off by accessing the current task from RAM. So basically 1 thing at a time, unlike quantum computing. That's kinda off topic, but yeah. The brain as we know it, is a computer, and a very advanced one at that. More advanced than the transistor which brings quantum mechanics into the picture making all of our favorite technological toys, possible.
by Tryptamine"The brain is enclosed where it cannot be seen for starters, and even if we can see it, we wouldn't be able to know what's happening with it simply by looking at it with the naked eye."
We have the EEG, the MEG, the MRI & fMRI, and the PET to measure activity on the macro scale. We can examine neurons using microscopes that produce high resolution images with electron beams. It is true that none of these alone gives us a perfect picture, but with all of those together we have made a lot of progress.
I'll quote myself in my first post here which reads:
"If you ask me, it's obvious that there are quantum events that take
place inside the brain. So in other words, things happen differently in
the brain when we're not examining it's behavior with scanning
equipment.
It's important to note: We already know that when a human is involved in
experiments, the wave functions of probability are then set, and an
answer, or rather, a behavior of the observed subject is then displayed."
No one understands how or why Quantum physics works the way it does. But yes, the act of observing/measuring is what sets the outcome of events. I can see how this very real concept would be a nuisance to neurological studies, which begs the question, how might a brain act when it's not being observed.
"Finally, it's us who collapses wave functions when we measure events. The only self collapsing wave function, is the mind itself."
Brain activity has been shown to precede conscious states. A great example of this would be the research published in the paper "Internally generated preactivation of single neurons in human medial frontal cortex predicts volition."
"Your question encouraged me to seek out some information on my intuition in regards to quantum events occurring in the brain. To me it just seems obvious. After looking into this some more, I'm reading articles of how the brain is being considered as a quantum computer, as it has electrons close enough to become entangled with one another which enhances it's computing power."
Are these articles based on information from scientific papers? If so, could you share them?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3470100/
Roger Penrose. That guy is one of Stephen Hawking's colleagues. Interestingly enough he's the one who pointed out how a mind is self collapsing.
Another interesting thing about that article, is how they mention reactions in the brain that are supposed to be associated with consciousness, often happens too late, or not in real time. They still don't know where consciousness comes from.
by Tryptamine"If you ask me, it's obvious that there are quantum events that take place inside the brain. So in other words, things happen differently in the brain when we're not examining it's behavior with scanning equipment."
I have to say from everything I have read to this point, it is highly improbably that quantum mechanical phenomena have any significant impact on consciousness, simply because neurons function at the macromolecule scale. What kind of meaningful quantum effects do you think there could be at sites such as these, which are absolutely gigantic if you're looking up from the quantum scale?
We're talking about orchestrated objective reduction which takes place in the brain's microtubules which are located inside the neurons.
Microtubules. Your diagram isn't consistent with what we're talking about. I'd also like to remind you that I personally suggested how they still don't know where consciousness comes from. Though in my personal belief, consciousness isn't generated by the brain, but rather the brain provides the consciousness with a temporary experience of existing as whatever we are.
I am open-minded, but perhaps you can see why I am also critical of these ideas. It sounds like new age pseudo-science to me, and it's hard for me to believe otherwise without some form of substantiation.
Unfortunately when it's time for scholars across the land to go back to school, they don't exactly through it up on the six o clock news, otherwise they won't hesitate to teach the new stuff in learning facilities, and moderate discoveries would be easier to digest for the skeptical.
New age material commonly offends those who've become comfortable with their education. In all actuality the term pseudo is a derogatory term as those labeled amateur still remain unproven.
"I can see how this very real concept would be a nuisance to neurological studies, which begs the question, how might a brain act when it's not being observed."
Could you give an example of this? I was under the impression we've learned a great deal from observing the brain. Check out this web site that has every area of the brain mapped as well as a list of the known functions that take place within those areas.
When I said we've only scratched the surface when it comes to what we know about the brain, I still mean it.
The page I provided you covers a lot, and it even covers the dual slit experiment and how their experiments with orchestrated objective reduction met that same criteria. It reads and I quote...
Quantum delayed choice experiments
In the famous “double slit experiment,†quantum entities (e.g., photons,
electrons) can behave as either waves, or particles, depending on the
method chosen to measure them. Wheeler (1978)
described a thought experiment in which the measurement choice (by a
conscious human observer) was delayed until after the electron or other
quantum entity passed though the slits, presumably as either wave or
particle. Wheeler suggested the observer's delayed choice could
retroactively influence the behavior of the electrons, e.g., as waves or
particles. The experiment was eventually performed (Kim et al., 2000)
and confirmed Wheeler's prediction; conscious choices can affect
previous events, as long as the events had not been consciously observed
in the interim.In “delayed choice entanglement swapping,†originally a thought experiment proposed by Asher Peres (2000); Ma et al. (2012)
went a step further. Entanglement is a characteristic feature of
quantum mechanics in which unified quantum particles are separated but
remain somehow connected, even over distance. Measurement or
perturbation of one separated-but-still-entangled particle
instantaneously affects the other, what Einstein referred to (mockingly)
as “spooky action at a distance.†Despite its bizarre nature,
entanglement has been demonstrated repeatedly, and is the foundation for
quantum cryptography, quantum teleportation and quantum computing
(Deutsch, 1985).
In entanglement swapping, two pairs of unified/entangled particles are
separated, and one from each pair is sent to two measurement devices,
each associated with a conscious observer (“Alice†and “Bob,†as is the
convention in such quantum experiments). The other entangled particle
from each pair is sent to a third observer, “Victor.†How Victor decides
to measure the two particles (as an entangled pair, or as separable
particles) determines whether Alice and Bob observe them as entangled
(showing quantum correlations) or separable (showing classical
correlations). This happens even if Victor decides after
Alice's and Bob's devices have measured them (but before Alice and Bob
consciously view the results). Thus, conscious choice affects behavior
of previously measured, but unobserved, events.How
can backward time effects be explained scientifically? The problem may
be related to our perception of time in classical (non-quantum) physics.
Anton Zeilinger, senior author on the Ma et al. study, said: “Within a
naïve classical worldview, quantum mechanics can even mimic an influence
of future actions on past events.â€
.
.
.
It's not that we never learned anything from observing the brain. It's more a matter of, what are we not learning from the brain since we collapse the wave function from the act of measuring it. We know particles and other tiny bits of matter and also electrons, act differently when we're not looking. The brain that actually fires electrons through a really hairy network of neurons, in most cases goes without being observed, and in that state, it isn't bound by expectations.
It's weird, but that's how quantum physics actually works.