Mr Newton's Classroom

[Tigger]

harleyborgais wrote:

...God is by nature composed of Magnetic Dipoles...

Unitarians, of course, would argue for the mystical Monopole...



If there was an Olympics for producing turgid, meaningless gibberish you would be in with a chance...

Special Olympics, come to think of it...

Oh, oh, (sorry, Oh), Monoploy: can I be the tin hat?? or The God Dog?

[LucidFlight]

Correct if I am wrong, but Doesn't a single Neuron store a single Bioelectric field, and doesn't the brain store memories using several neurons in the way holographs do, with interference patterns?

In that way the brain stores memories across several neurons, but each neuron holds a bit (however that 'Bit' is more complicated than a simple 1 or 0). Also in this way, when up to 3/4 of the brain of a salamander was removed, the remaining 1/4 was able to restore its function (just like a piece of holographic film still contains the entire image).

See, I always thought human brains were different from computers in that "memory" is not stored as identifiable "bits" of data; instead, information is maintained across and by neural pathways (involving neurons, of course) and firing patterns (in different configurations and strengths). With regards to neuroscience, I'm not aware of the term "Bioelectric field". I am, however, aware of terms such as action potential, ion channel, synapse, dendrite, axon, myelin, electrochemical, propagation, etc. But then, I'm a bit of a n00b. Perhaps you guys are talking at much higher levels of comprehension on the subject.

(Or maybe you're not talking neuroscience at all? Alternative neuroscience, perhaps? Brain/consciousness science?)

[JimC]

Correct if I am wrong, but Doesn't a single Neuron store a single Bioelectric field, and doesn't the brain store memories using several neurons in the way holographs do, with interference patterns?

In that way the brain stores memories across several neurons, but each neuron holds a bit (however that 'Bit' is more complicated than a simple 1 or 0). Also in this way, when up to 3/4 of the brain of a salamander was removed, the remaining 1/4 was able to restore its function (just like a piece of holographic film still contains the entire image).

See, I always thought human brains were different from computers in that "memory" is not stored as identifiable "bits" of data; instead, information is maintained across and by neural pathways (involving neurons, of course) and firing patterns (in different configurations and strengths). With regards to neuroscience, I'm not aware of the term "Bioelectric field". I am, however, aware of terms such as action potential, ion channel, synapse, dendrite, axon, myelin, electrochemical, propagation, etc. But then, I'm a bit of a n00b. Perhaps you guys are talking at much higher levels of comprehension on the subject.

(Or maybe you're not talking neuroscience at all? Alternative neuroscience, perhaps? Brain/consciousness science?)

Kudos! You are so much more subtle than I am; the stiletto, rather than the club studded with rusting nails...

[LucidFlight]

Emotion then requires an additional dimension, and Creative thought requires yet another dimension (of freedom of movement of waves of energy).

I take it you're not quite into conventional neuroscientific models for emotion. Is there a reason for this?

By the way, there are even useful models for creative thought and intelligence; for example, Confabulation theory (computational intelligence). Have you looked into this sort of stuff?

Part 1: Baroness Greenfield- The Neuroscience of Creativity

[JimC]

Emotion then requires an additional dimension, and Creative thought requires yet another dimension (of freedom of movement of waves of energy).

I take it you're not quite into conventional neuroscientific models for emotion. Is there a reason for this?

I was disappointed; dimension deserves a capital, surely?

(and probably energy too...)

[LucidFlight]

Emotion then requires an additional dimension, and Creative thought requires yet another dimension (of freedom of movement of waves of energy).

I take it you're not quite into conventional neuroscientific models for emotion. Is there a reason for this?

I was disappointed; dimension deserves a capital, surely?

(and probably energy too...)

Yes, definitely Dimension and Energy. They are very Important.

[LucidFlight]

Kudos! You are so much more subtle than I am; the stiletto, rather than the club studded with rusting nails...

People tend to be more open to honey than stilettos, I find. People who are more open are more interesting.

(OK, some people are open to stilettos, but that's a different story.)

[LucidFlight]

Oh, and if you liked part one of that video, be sure to check out the other parts:
Baroness Greenfield- The Neuroscience of Creativity

[harleyborgais]

Here are some excerpts I liked from BrainMans reference: http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/freewill.html...


bacteria do have 'protein-based circuits'

Finally, Spier and Thomas ask what it is in Orch OR that 'does the work of the mind' As in other theories, the answer is mainly glucose and oxygen.

We discard nothing from conventional theories except the assumption that consciousness emerges completely from membrane-level computational complexity.

Proteins are dynamic–their state a delicate balance between various countervailing forces. However, strong forces cancel out so that dynamic protein conformation and function are determined by weak quantum-level dipole interactions called London (van der Waals) forces9.

the Orch OR model predicts a lower limit for consciousness at the level of about 300 neurons (e.g. small worms and urchins). A single-celled paramecium, while clever, seems unlikely to sustain sufficient quantum coherence to reach threshold for OR reduction (up to one minute would be required), and is thus unlikely to attain conscious experience11. One may question even rudimentary consciousness in small worms ("What is it like to be a worm?") but, unlike any other theory, Orch OR is at least able to make such a prediction.


Reply to Hameroff from Emmet Spier and Adrian Thomas

We thank Stuart Hameroff for detailing the intellectual history of the Orch OR model. However, re-rooting its foundations in a form of monism begs more questions than it answers. Even ignoring the problematic conclusion that ' then 'all forms of matter (rocks, air, grass, protozoa, etc.) have minds, we still find it hard to understand how his mind-component of matter influences the substance component of matter.

machinery must exist for these bits to be fetched, processed and re-stored. This is the job of the central processing unit (CPU) and is wholly ignored in models of the brain as a computer.

Hameroff agrees with Bray’s conclusions that protein molecules are the basic operational elements in living cells,

chemistry is sufficient to explain the complex behaviour of single-celled organisms such as E. coli. Furthermore, mutations that alter the chemistry of E. coli’s proteins change its behaviour in ways that are predictable from the effect of the mutations on protein chemistry. Conventional chemical mechanisms can explain how single cells process such information

(http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/freewill.html)

I especially like how well we have learned to predict the effect of chemistry on the behavior of bacteria. This is really useful for a discussion of the most basic form of consciousness.

I think the CPU is not a separate thing in the Human mind because all neurons use overlapping energy fields to communicate with all other neurons simultaneously.

I think that is how we have a subconscious and Intuition, because all of our memories act together, but our conscious mind can only consider memories one at a time. The conscious mind is like the CPU, but it is not required for most of our brains automatic functions.

They said it was hard to understand how the mind component influences matter, well, that is easy when you consider Energy as a general term which can refer to Momentum of a Pressure wave of Matter (sound), or to a Pressure wave of Electrical Charge, or to the Kinetic Energy of a mass resting on a surface.

Thoughts are just waves of energy, and so are particles which make atoms. That is proven by matter/anti-matter annihilation.

[harleyborgais]

I will respond to anything I have missed when I can.

[JimC]

harley borgais wrote:

They said it was hard to understand how the mind component influences matter, well, that is easy when you consider Energy as a general term which can refer to Momentum of a Pressure wave of Matter (sound), or to a Pressure wave of Electrical Charge, or to the Kinetic Energy of a mass resting on a surface.

As a physics teacher who actually knows what he is talking about, may I inform you that this waffling garbage is wrong in many many ways?

The dumbest of my students would dissect those definitions into shreds in a very short space of time...

* energy and momentum are very different qualities; one is a vector, and one is a scalar, amongst other equally vital differences (rather important terms, but not actually requiring a captital...)

* the combination of pressure wave and electrical charge is a meaningless combination of disparate phenomena

* kinetic energy is a property of something moving, NOT SOMETHING SITTING ON A FUCKING BENCH!

(I might issue a gently reproving tut-tut for bad language to my student for the last bit...)

Do you actually realise that you are talking unadulterated crap, or do the voices in your head still insist that you're on the right track?

[LucidFlight]

I myself have pondered the wave potential of a spinning neuron as it radiates its trans-dimensional dipoles across an unbounded singularity upon a Calabi–Yau 5-sphere.

[JimC]

I myself have pondered the wave potential of a spinning neuron as it radiates its trans-dimensional dipoles across an unbounded singularity upon a Calabi–Yau 5-sphere.

And just how many mushrooms did that require?

[AshtonBlack]

I myself have pondered the wave potential of a spinning neuron as it radiates its trans-dimensional dipoles across an unbounded singularity upon a Calabi–Yau 5-sphere.

And just how many mushrooms did that require?

6

[Brain Man]

Here are some excerpts I liked from BrainMans reference: http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/freewill.html...


bacteria do have 'protein-based circuits'

Finally, Spier and Thomas ask what it is in Orch OR that 'does the work of the mind' As in other theories, the answer is mainly glucose and oxygen.

We discard nothing from conventional theories except the assumption that consciousness emerges completely from membrane-level computational complexity.

Proteins are dynamic–their state a delicate balance between various countervailing forces. However, strong forces cancel out so that dynamic protein conformation and function are determined by weak quantum-level dipole interactions called London (van der Waals) forces9.

the Orch OR model predicts a lower limit for consciousness at the level of about 300 neurons (e.g. small worms and urchins). A single-celled paramecium, while clever, seems unlikely to sustain sufficient quantum coherence to reach threshold for OR reduction (up to one minute would be required), and is thus unlikely to attain conscious experience11. One may question even rudimentary consciousness in small worms ("What is it like to be a worm?") but, unlike any other theory, Orch OR is at least able to make such a prediction.


Reply to Hameroff from Emmet Spier and Adrian Thomas

We thank Stuart Hameroff for detailing the intellectual history of the Orch OR model. However, re-rooting its foundations in a form of monism begs more questions than it answers. Even ignoring the problematic conclusion that ' then 'all forms of matter (rocks, air, grass, protozoa, etc.) have minds, we still find it hard to understand how his mind-component of matter influences the substance component of matter.

machinery must exist for these bits to be fetched, processed and re-stored. This is the job of the central processing unit (CPU) and is wholly ignored in models of the brain as a computer.

Hameroff agrees with Bray’s conclusions that protein molecules are the basic operational elements in living cells,

chemistry is sufficient to explain the complex behaviour of single-celled organisms such as E. coli. Furthermore, mutations that alter the chemistry of E. coli’s proteins change its behaviour in ways that are predictable from the effect of the mutations on protein chemistry. Conventional chemical mechanisms can explain how single cells process such information

(http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/views/freewill.html)

I especially like how well we have learned to predict the effect of chemistry on the behavior of bacteria. This is really useful for a discussion of the most basic form of consciousness.

I think the CPU is not a separate thing in the Human mind because all neurons use overlapping energy fields to communicate with all other neurons simultaneously.

I think that is how we have a subconscious and Intuition, because all of our memories act together, but our conscious mind can only consider memories one at a time. The conscious mind is like the CPU, but it is not required for most of our brains automatic functions.

They said it was hard to understand how the mind component influences matter, well, that is easy when you consider Energy as a general term which can refer to Momentum of a Pressure wave of Matter (sound), or to a Pressure wave of Electrical Charge, or to the Kinetic Energy of a mass resting on a surface.

Thoughts are just waves of energy, and so are particles which make atoms. That is proven by matter/anti-matter annihilation.

You are going way to far here harley. Basically what you intend to do is try and force reality into a large model of mutual harmonic interconnection. You could do that in astrophysics as there isnt much evidence to contradict you. You cant do this in the brain because its been taken apart and studied in every level and angle thousands of times over. Bear in mind hameroff has been proven wrong on his idea for whole brain quantum level induction. Only the limbic system falls in line with his model conceptually.

In the brain you can split it up roughly into cortex and limbic system. Yes the limbic system seems to used harmonic induction as our hippocampus (gateway to memory) relies on in phasing of alpha (thalamus) and theta waves (hippocampus). The cortex is the reverse. Induction operates to increase local activation of columns for feature extraction based on whatever spotlight consciousness is focusing on at that time (focused attention). This occurs at the expense of other column activity. The cortex is a battlefield for local emergence. Synchronization is sporadic. Mostly its a lot of noise and clattering. The cortex is never mutually inductive all at once, unless you blast yourself with LSD...perhaps the entire visual system at the rear of the brain might all light up.

Cortex is dis-connective, even in its structure only 33% connectivity. The fabric of reality is also highly disconnected as well as connected. The brain for example is only 50% connected up. So reality might only have 50% interconnectedness if you view the brain as a reflection of reality. Hard stance to take currently though. Every time there is a supernova there is massive disconnection occurring in the universe structure. Its an error to try and force your model of interconnected harmony onto all of it. Nice principle from a spiritual view. I doubt interconnection can be a model of what all reality is but more like a proportion (say half) of reality. Its more likely you are projecting your own mind which may be more connective than the average mind onto reality. Thats not exactly a valid way to find out whats real, but it is for sure a means to feel at ease whats out there is in accordance with the processes of your own mind.