RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science

RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (5/31/2011 10:36:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Well, there is an intangible sort of property to conciousness, but it has a physical property as well. ...like the color green (which is same, intangible-tangible thing) Let's unpack this a bit? The color "green" is an experience. Yes, it corresponds to a particular range of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. But the color "green" is an internal experience, intangible, not something actually "out there" somewhere. So there isn't really a single "intangible-tangible" thing. There is light of a particular visible wavelength, which is tangible, and our experience of color ("green" in this example), which is intangible. Similarly, there is our experience of consciousness, and then there is the brain. Yes, our experiences (normally) correspond to patterns of neural activity in that organ. But as with the color green, one is an experience, internal and intangible, while the other is physical, objective and tangible. Correspondence does not establish equivalence. Electromagnetic radiation isn't "green," and the brain isn't "conscious." I think the really interesting question to ask would be, "What is it that's conscious?" K.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 9:15:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Well, there is an intangible sort of property to conciousness, but it has a physical property as well. ...like the color green (which is same, intangible-tangible thing) Let's unpack this a bit? The color "green" is an experience. Yes, it corresponds to a particular range of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. But the color "green" is an internal experience, intangible, not something actually "out there" somewhere. So there isn't really a single "intangible-tangible" thing. There is light of a particular visible wavelength, which is tangible, and our experience of color ("green" in this example), which is intangible. Similarly, there is our experience of consciousness, and then there is the brain. Yes, our experiences (normally) correspond to patterns of neural activity in that organ. But as with the color green, one is an experience, internal and intangible, while the other is physical, objective and tangible. Correspondence does not establish equivalence. Electromagnetic radiation isn't "green," and the brain isn't "conscious." I think the really interesting question to ask would be, "What is it that's conscious?" K. And its been asked many times and there are as many answers as there are answerers. "Conversations on Consciousness" is the best book Ive read on the topic, but it predates a lot of advancements in neurology.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 2:56:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve 1.)Didn't make up any definitions, I cited my source, you don't like it, take it up with Lasch - so no, I don't "lie", you did. You didn't cite Lasch until your after-the-fact "BTW" comment in the post I responded to. You're "mis-remembering" again. [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: xssve 2.) if it's real, it has a physical presence, it leave physical traces, it interacts in some way with physical reality, it is physical - if it doesn't it isn't real, to insist otherwise is really making shit up. That is not the only definition of "real". Get yourself a dictionary and learn how to read it. quote: ORIGINAL: xssve 3.) ergo, if consciouness is real, it has physical properties... See above for this and subsequent. K.

xssve -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 4:27:13 PM)
1.) But you have it now, so I think we can put that one to bed. 2.) Sorry, I think the burden of proof is on you here, fictions are not considered real, unless it's, "real fictions", and it's fiction until you do furnish empirical evidence, a hypothesis is a fiction, a theory has supporting evidence: physical evidence, even if its just mathematical - i.e., happens all the time in physics, somebody predicts a particle should be there, an experiment is designed, and most of the time, it's there, though it soften detected only through an interaction with known particle or particles. Thus, theory is considered real, a hypothesis is a special type of fiction - "non-physical reality" is like saying,"unreal reality", so unless you want to qualify that further, which is what I asked you to do to begin with, I'm gonna hafta say, neh, wrong answer. 3.) I'm quite willing to bet money that if consciousness exists, there is some sort of physical evidence for it, other than the obvious, cogito ergo, etc., a field effect, a quantum matrix, something. It right up there with "Life" - that's a "thing" too, it's existence is undeniable, it's very much real, but it can only be described in terms of metabolic processes, even if that seems to fall short of an adequate description, "consciousness" is simply an extension of those metabolic processes, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, synergy is one word used to describe that, and it's very much in keeping with common biological algorithms, adaptive multitasking - it's the issue that fueled the whole "irreducible complexity", ID debate that seems to have mercifully abated. NDE's are probably similar to very short coma's: during coma a patients nervous system continues to process data, more less automatically, and that is registering and being recorded somewhere in the brain, where it's possibly turned into holographic imagery, via extrapolation, based on previous referential experience - it's one of the things the human brain does. The Doctors and Nurses, etc., may be convinced the patient is dead, but clearly, as I say, if the patient lives tell about it, they must have been wrong - unless you want to throw in some sort of resurrection hypothesis. Knock yourself out.

mnottertail -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 4:44:57 PM)
But we know it exists, even a cretin can judge between the quick and the dead quite readily, with only a little practice. I expect the physical aspect of the actual conciousness has been explained, necessarily and sufficiently, but everybody is looking for the big plan from IAM, and the larger meaning. Well, my guess, there ain't one. You got some synapses firing, you got some structures in the brain, some chemicals, some electricals, some electro-chemicals. TADA. Then you got dead guys. Very inert these lads.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 4:52:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy its been asked many times and there are as many answers as there are answerers. That's the nature of interesting questions. You'd prefer what? quote: Which planet is the third one from the sun? Discuss K.

mnottertail -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 4:53:13 PM)
Point of order, this side of the sun, or the other side, third planet? Discuss. Which parallel universe? Discuss.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 5:07:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve The Doctors and Nurses, etc., may be convinced the patient is dead, but clearly, as I say, if the patient lives tell about it, they must have been wrong - unless you want to throw in some sort of resurrection hypothesis. Changing words to alter the meaning in order to create a straw man to shoot down is not a practice that will earn you respect or a reputation for intellectual honesty. The patients were in cardiac arrest, not breathing, and flatlined. In other words, "clinically dead," not dead and buried. They were resuscitated, not "resurrected". Can't you find a hobby that doesn't require skills you lack? K.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 5:09:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: xssve The Doctors and Nurses, etc., may be convinced the patient is dead, but clearly, as I say, if the patient lives tell about it, they must have been wrong - unless you want to throw in some sort of resurrection hypothesis. Changing words to alter the meaning in order to create a straw man to shoot down is not a practice that will earn you respect or a reputation for intellectual honesty. The patients were in cardiac arrest, not breathing, and flatlined. In other words, "clinically dead," not dead and buried. They were resuscitated, not "resurrected". Can't you find a hobby that doesn't require skills you lack? K. And "flatlined" still doesnt mean that there is no way their senses might be working.

mnottertail -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 5:14:37 PM)
They could be flatlined and consious. Nothing would prohibit that. Howz about comas? Concious? Unconcious? Where does life begin arguements are hammered together. Soon, we have a roomful of physicists and astronomers and mathmeticians.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 5:21:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail They could be flatlined and consious. Nothing would prohibit that... Except the proposition that consciousness is a product of brain activity. [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Howz about comas? Coma is defined as a state of deep unconsciousness. K.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 5:25:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy And "flatlined" still doesnt mean that there is no way their senses might be working. You want to argue that our sensory capabilities are independent of brain function, but not consciousness? K.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 5:31:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy And "flatlined" still doesnt mean that there is no way their senses might be working. You want to argue that our sensory capabilities are independent of brain function, but not consciousness? K. no...there is a difference between no brain activity and no MEASURABLE brain activity given our technology.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 6:00:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy no...there is a difference between no brain activity and no MEASURABLE brain activity given our technology. In an EEG, each electrode is connected to one of the inputs of a differential amplifier, and a common reference electrode is connected to the other input. Because the electrodes are placed on the scalp, currents occuring deep inside the brain contribute far less to the summed signal than those closer to the surface. Accordingly, the gain setting on an EEG allows the voltage differential to be amplified as much as 100,000 times in order to avoid missing signals that would identify deep brain activity in an otherwise superficially inactive brain. If you want to assert that a functionally lucid consciousness with perception and memory is (a) dependent upon brain activity but (b) doesn't require a measurable EEG, you'll have to do more than just pontificate about it unless you want to slip into that chasuble. K.

Edwynn -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/1/2011 6:11:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Point of order, this side of the sun, or the other side, third planet? Discuss. Some would tell us that what is being spoken of would be the planet that describes the third orbit among eight such orbits as exist at a distance from the sun. But it's true that if speaking of some combination of radial planetary alignment that there are in fact 6 possibilities of one of the outer six being able to claim title of 'third planet from the sun,' for the duration of that alignment. The inner two planets seem to have trouble with this situation, left out of any consideration at all for such possibility, Venus being quite steamed about it, and Mercury running away from the problem as fast as it can. But planetary psychoconsciousness would perhaps be better left to another thread. quote: Which parallel universe? Discuss. I sometimes think that the perpendicular universe has long been the 'red headed step child' in these discussions. But in any case, the question of "which one?" implies that decision or something volitional would be involved in a response. Let me check with my neurotransponders and see what they tell my consciousness it's supposed to decide, then I'll get back to you on that.

xssve -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/2/2011 6:46:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: xssve The Doctors and Nurses, etc., may be convinced the patient is dead, but clearly, as I say, if the patient lives tell about it, they must have been wrong - unless you want to throw in some sort of resurrection hypothesis. Changing words to alter the meaning in order to create a straw man to shoot down is not a practice that will earn you respect or a reputation for intellectual honesty. The patients were in cardiac arrest, not breathing, and flatlined. In other words, "clinically dead," not dead and buried. They were resuscitated, not "resurrected". Can't you find a hobby that doesn't require skills you lack? K. So they weren't dead, that's what I said, heart activity had ceased, not brain activity. "Independent consciousness" would presumably be able to function without being embedded in an organic substrate, but it would require some kind of substrate to exist, it can only be energy, and energy has substance - a neutrino has no resting mass for example, that's why it can travel faster than a photon, but it does have relativistic mass. I think what you're talking about is more commonly referred to as a "soul" - another very difficult to prove hypothesis. I never say never, but at present moment, it will have to remain pure speculation.

xssve -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/2/2011 7:05:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy And "flatlined" still doesnt mean that there is no way their senses might be working. You want to argue that our sensory capabilities are independent of brain function, but not consciousness? K. You have three brains, the Limbic system, or reptilian complex, the paleomammalian cortex and the cerebral cortex - the last processes symbolic information, the middle one is where most of our basic mammalian social behaviors are encoded, the first is largley autonomic systems, breathing, etc. - Terry Schiavo's brain function for example was largley confined to the limbic system - all more complex functions had ceased activity, she could breathe and digest food, but she couldn't chew or feed herself - but presumably, any stimulus she was receiving was still being recorded and processed in her memory, assuming there were healthy brain cells for it to be recorded and processed, and had she magically become conscious, self aware, again, i.e., if more complex levels of the brain could have been somehow reactivated, she would have theoretically been able to recall whatever had been recorded. Similar to the way a dead body sometimes still displays reflexive action, less complex mammals particularly, will often continue to writhe, try running away, etc., even after their heads have been removed - see Mike the Headless Chicken, or #20 here. That's the Limbic system, which carries more of the load in less complex organisms, and doesn't appear to have a conscious component. In cardiac arrest, the brain is still largely intact, in fact don't quote me on this, but I thought I recently heard somewhere that electrical impulses in the brain could still be detected long after brain death, and all externally detectable activity had ceased. A better experiment would be to use an MRI instead of an EEG, but it really isn't practical as it would hinder the surgeons and other medical personnel in attempting resuscitation.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/2/2011 9:12:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata The patients were in cardiac arrest, not breathing, *and flatlined. that's what I said, heart activity had ceased, not brain activity. What is your problem with English comprehension?? quote:* ORIGINAL: xssve "Independent consciousness" would presumably be able to function without being embedded in an organic substrate, but it would require some kind of substrate to exist, it can only be energy, and energy has substance - a neutrino has no resting mass for example, that's why it can travel faster than a photon, but it does have relativistic mass. I have no idea whether or not consciousness would necessarily require a "substrate," and even less of an idea how you would know. For your information, however, "relativistic mass" combines a magnitude component with a time component that does not relate (if you'll forgive the pun) to a property of the object but to the geometric properties of space-time. And for your further information, neutrinos do not travel faster than photons. Photons have no rest mass. A neutrino does have a very small but non-zero rest mass, and cannot travel at the speed of light. Google is your friend. [:D] K.

Kirata -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/2/2011 9:52:23 PM)
I take your point that lower level functions may persist in the absence of consciousness. But perceptual processing is a function of the neo-cortex. And in any case, how does memory explain... people observed under medical conditions who report having been conscious during periods of extended cardiac arrest while their brain function was flatlined, and who are able to describe things they observed during that time which they would not have been able to see even if they had been wide awake with their eyes open K.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Before the Big Bang: looking back in time - Parallel Universes - BBC science (6/3/2011 12:31:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata I take your point that lower level functions may persist in the absence of consciousness. But perceptual processing is a function of the neo-cortex. And in any case, how does memory explain... people observed under medical conditions who report having been conscious during periods of extended cardiac arrest while their brain function was flatlined, and who are able to describe things they observed during that time which they would not have been able to see even if they had been wide awake with their eyes open K. A link to your own post doesnt give anyone a clue about what youre talking about.

Page: << < prev 8 9 10 [11] 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.199646E-02