Mind-brain (split from I ask recognition from physicalists of at least 1 non-physical dimension where concepts, the inner voice, inner imagery and dreams 'reside'

[Luc Turpin]

12 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Your being confused by the language of science, we do not know, doesn't = we don't understand anything about it.

What we don't understand is the fundamentals of why it work's, but that's not an invitation to just speculate; it's an invitation to put in the hard work and gather all the information needed to contradict the 'we (I don't include myself)' who do understand, beyond the basics you can find on the tinternet.

I can see that you are determined to believe what you post, which is fine; fill your boot's, just remember Nietzches word's and come back to us with some trusted evidence. 

Ok, well then we don't understand much about it.

True, we don't understand the fundamental of why it works; speculation is part of science too; trying to pull new evidence into the picture and then see where it goes.

Trusted evidence is most of the time in the eye of the beholder; or what is in line with your beliefs is good evidence and what is not in line with your beliefs is not good evidence.

I will continue posting my friend and see if something intrigue's you in believing that it might not be as we think it is.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

Trusted evidence is most of the time in the eye of the beholder; or what is in line with your beliefs is good evidence and what is not in line with your beliefs is not good evidence.

Trusted evidence is the antipode of that, it's when I nudge a mate and say "did you see that..." and the mate says "yep, wish I hadn't"... 😉

[Luc Turpin]

Finaly, I have been res

2 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Trusted evidence is the antipode of that, it's when I nudge a mate and say "did you see that..." and the mate says "yep, wish I hadn't"... 😉

Good one!😊

Will try and give you more than that!

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Luc Turpin said:

Finaly, I have been res

Good one!😊

Will try and give you more than that!

Take your time and give it a really good think, before you do.

[Luc Turpin]

 

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Take your time and give it a really good think, before you do.

Will try and do that too!

Thanks for the advice.

Feel like a low-lying bottom feeder, but will notheless try and find sustenance.

[DrmDoc]

8 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

We do not know what consciousness is, let alone how it works.

We do not know how the brain really thinks beyond synapses and chemicals.

Also, the body does more than we think it does and nature thinks more than we think it does.

That is what I think!

I have presented arguments, information and evidence to that effect in past posts and will continue to do so in future ones.

correction: We do not know how the brain really thinks beyond synapses and molecules.

Knowing what consciousness is and how it works depends on one's definition of consciousness.  Excluding various faiths and philosophies, the science suggest to me that consciousness is merely a basic awareness suggested by an organism's observed behavioral responses to stimuli and nothing more than that.  In my view, every living organism potentially has some level of consciousness, which is simply some level of sensory awareness of its environment.  In my view, consciousness and mind are not synonymous--consciousness is a precursor to or prerequisite for mind.

Although some ascribe consciousness with some salient or spirital quality, for me it is merely a term that identifies an organism as having a sensory system.  Having a sensory system, for me, does not suggest that an organism has a mind; however, having a sensory system is essential for building the response systems essential to the construct of mind--mind is a product of our brain's response systems.  For example, during dream sleep, your identity of self relative to your life and sleep environment is lost to that dreaming state.  It is only when you awake from the dream state that you become fully aware of who you are relative to physical reality.  This happens because our brain does not have full access to the body's sensory system amid the dream state.  We regain our full sense of self when we arouse from dream sleep as our brain reconnects to the body's sensory because that connection stimulates those neural pathways our brain uses to navigate our physical/material reality--it is our connection to our body the reminds us of who we are relative to our reality when we awake.

Mind and consciousness are not the same because, in my view, having mind is reserved for organisms whose behaviors suggest a thought process.  Before ascribing mind to an organism that organism's should demonstrate it's ability to engage behaviors contrary to its instinctive behaviors.  For example, if you heard a sudden loud bang from behind, your instinct might be to distance yourself from that noise.  If instead the noise came from a person in front of you who popped a balloon, you might not react from fear because you could visually assess the balloon pop threat level--your ability to engage thoughtful behaviors contrary to your fears suggests you have a mind.

[Luc Turpin]

The general-conventional consensus was that neurons stored memories:

“Memory is the reactivation of a specific group of neurons, formed from persistent changes in the strength of connections between neurons.”

“The brain stores memories by changing how neurons talk to each other. When one neuron fires an actional potential, another neuron activates. Over time, this connection gets stronger.”

But newer evidence appears to show that brain waves are also involved in memory storage.

“Hippocampal ripples were observed to play a crucial role in coordinating these nerve cells, suggesting their importance in memory formation and retrieval.”

https://neurosciencenews.com/memory-brain-waves-25630/

“Traveling waves influencing the storage and retrieval of memory”

"Broadly, we found that waves tended to move from the back of the brain to the front while patients were putting something into their memory,"

"When patients were later searching to recall the same information, those waves moved in the opposite direction, from the front towards the back of the brain,"

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-03-brain-memories-recalled.html

There are many other recent findings that indicate a combination of cell activation and brain wave in the formation and storage of memories.

So, what’s the big deal? This opens the possibility that memories are stored like in a hologram.  Speculating here, but with evidence and possible theoretical model -  Hologramic Theory of Mind.

3 hours ago, DrmDoc said:

Knowing what consciousness is and how it works depends on one's definition of consciousness.  Excluding various faiths and philosophies, the science suggest to me that consciousness is merely a basic awareness suggested by an organism's observed behavioral responses to stimuli and nothing more than that.  In my view, every living organism potentially has some level of consciousness, which is simply some level of sensory awareness of its environment.  In my view, consciousness and mind are not synonymous--consciousness is a precursor to or prerequisite for mind.

Although some ascribe consciousness with some salient or spirital quality, for me it is merely a term that identifies an organism as having a sensory system.  Having a sensory system, for me, does not suggest that an organism has a mind; however, having a sensory system is essential for building the response systems essential to the construct of mind--mind is a product of our brain's response systems.  For example, during dream sleep, your identity of self relative to your life and sleep environment is lost to that dreaming state.  It is only when you awake from the dream state that you become fully aware of who you are relative to physical reality.  This happens because our brain does not have full access to the body's sensory system amid the dream state.  We regain our full sense of self when we arouse from dream sleep as our brain reconnects to the body's sensory because that connection stimulates those neural pathways our brain uses to navigate our physical/material reality--it is our connection to our body the reminds us of who we are relative to our reality when we awake.

Mind and consciousness are not the same because, in my view, having mind is reserved for organisms whose behaviors suggest a thought process.  Before ascribing mind to an organism that organism's should demonstrate it's ability to engage behaviors contrary to its instinctive behaviors.  For example, if you heard a sudden loud bang from behind, your instinct might be to distance yourself from that noise.  If instead the noise came from a person in front of you who popped a balloon, you might not react from fear because you could visually assess the balloon pop threat level--your ability to engage thoughtful behaviors contrary to your fears suggests you have a mind.

Excellent +1

I was using consciousness and mind interchangeably. Moving onward in our discussion, I will adopt your definitions of both terms. Consciousness is merely having a sensory system; a precondition for a response system, which is essential to the construct of min. And having a mind is reserved to organisms whose behaviors suggest a thought process.

As a result of the preceding, do these behaviors indicated below suggest a thought process?

“Matabele ants recognize infected wounds and treat them with antibiotics”

“If the wounds become infected, there is a significant survival risk. However, Matabele ants have developed a sophisticated health care system: They can distinguish between non-infected and infected wounds and treat the latter efficiently with antibiotics they produce themselves”.

Targeted treatment of injured nestmates with antimicrobial compounds in an ant society | Nature Communications

 

Bee-2-Bee influencing: Bees master complex tasks through social interaction

“Bumblebees successfully learned a two-step puzzle box task through social observation. This task was too complex for individual bees to learn on their own. Observing trained demonstrator bees performing the first unrewarded step was crucial for successful social learning. Individual bees failed to solve the puzzle without previous demonstration, despite extensive exposure.

Bumblebees socially learn behaviour too complex to innovate alone | Nature

 

Clown anemonefish seem to be counting bars and laying down the law

“We often think of fish as carefree swimmers in the ocean, reacting to the world around them without much forethought. However, new research suggests that our marine cousins may be more cognizant than we credit them for. Fish may be counting vertical bars on intruders to determine their threat level, and to inform the social hierarchy governing their sea anemone colonies”.

Counting Nemo: anemonefish Amphiprion ocellaris identify species by number of white bars | Journal of Experimental Biology | The Company of Biologists

 

Octopus

“They can complete puzzles, untie knots, open jars and toddler proof cases, and are expert escape artists from aquariums. Even more fascinating—their intelligence stems from a completely unrelated path to human intelligence, and about two-thirds of their neurons are in their arms, not their head.” 

https://ocean.si.edu/ocean-life/invertebrates/why-octopus-brain-so-extraordinary#:~:text=They%20can%20complete%20puzzles%2C%20untie,their%20arms%2C%20not%20their%20head.

[Luc Turpin]

15 hours ago, DrmDoc said:

 

Two more if I may!

Chimpanzees recognize their own delayed self-image

“Unlike mirror self-recognition, recognizing one's own image in delayed video footage may indicate the presence of a concept of self that extends across time and space. While humans typically show this ability around 4 years of age, it is unknown whether this capacity is found in non-human animals. In this study, chimpanzees performed a modified version of the mark test to investigate whether chimpanzees could remove stickers placed on the face and head while watching live and delayed video images. The results showed that three of five chimpanzees consistently removed the mark in delayed-viewing conditions, while they removed the stickers much less frequently in control video conditions which lacked a link to their current state. These findings suggest that chimpanzees, like human children at the age of 4 years and more, can comprehend temporal dissociation in their concept of self.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5579101/

Multimodal perception links cellular state to decision-making in single cells

“Individual cells make decisions that are adapted to their internal state and surroundings, but how cells can reliably do this remains unclear. To study the information processing capacity of human cells, we conducted multiplexed quantification of signaling responses and markers of the cellular state. Signaling nodes in a network displayed adaptive information processing, which led to heterogeneous growth factor responses and enabled nodes to capture partially nonredundant information about the cellular state. Collectively, as a multimodal percept this gives individual cells a large information processing capacity to accurately place growth factor concentration within the context of their cellular state and make cellular state–dependent decisions. Heterogeneity and complexity in signaling networks may have coevolved to enable specific and context-aware cellular decision-making in a multicellular setting.”

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abf4062

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

Chimpanzees recognize their own delayed self-image

“Unlike mirror self-recognition, recognizing one's own image in delayed video footage may indicate the presence of a concept of self that extends across time and space. While humans typically show this ability around 4 years of age, it is unknown whether this capacity is found in non-human animals. In this study, chimpanzees performed a modified version of the mark test to investigate whether chimpanzees could remove stickers placed on the face and head while watching live and delayed video images. The results showed that three of five chimpanzees consistently removed the mark in delayed-viewing conditions, while they removed the stickers much less frequently in control video conditions which lacked a link to their current state. These findings suggest that chimpanzees, like human children at the age of 4 years and more, can comprehend temporal dissociation in their concept of self.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5579101/

How does this support your position? 

Besides, it's got a bit of a "no shit Sherlock" vibe, If a chimp can recognize itself as an image, then what's time got to do with it?

10 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

Multimodal perception links cellular state to decision-making in single cells

“Individual cells make decisions that are adapted to their internal state and surroundings, but how cells can reliably do this remains unclear. To study the information processing capacity of human cells, we conducted multiplexed quantification of signaling responses and markers of the cellular state. Signaling nodes in a network displayed adaptive information processing, which led to heterogeneous growth factor responses and enabled nodes to capture partially nonredundant information about the cellular state. Collectively, as a multimodal percept this gives individual cells a large information processing capacity to accurately place growth factor concentration within the context of their cellular state and make cellular state–dependent decisions. Heterogeneity and complexity in signaling networks may have coevolved to enable specific and context-aware cellular decision-making in a multicellular setting.”

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abf4062

(bolded mine) And we're back to the wiring over the neuron.

 

[Luc Turpin]

11 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

How does this support your position? 

Besides, it's got a bit of a "no shit Sherlock" vibe, If a chimp can recognize itself as an image, then what's time got to do with it?

"and nature thinks more than we think it does" -mine. If a chimp can recognize itself as an image, then there is a thought process and the chimp has then a mind. 

15 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

(bolded mine) And we're back to the wiring over the neuron.

The point is individual cells have the inate capacity for decision making based on information processing  ("decisions that are adapted to their internal state and surroundings"), a prerequisite to sensory systems; I guess (wanted to ask DrmDoc about this one). Then comes the response systems, thought process and then ultimately mind. Is the game setup for mind to happen? No neurons and wiring required.

[DrmDoc]

15 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

The general-conventional consensus was that neurons stored memories:

“Memory is the reactivation of a specific group of neurons, formed from persistent changes in the strength of connections between neurons.”

“The brain stores memories by changing how neurons talk to each other. When one neuron fires an actional potential, another neuron activates. Over time, this connection gets stronger.”

But newer evidence appears to show that brain waves are also involved in memory storage.

“Hippocampal ripples were observed to play a crucial role in coordinating these nerve cells, suggesting their importance in memory formation and retrieval.”

https://neurosciencenews.com/memory-brain-waves-25630/

“Traveling waves influencing the storage and retrieval of memory”

"Broadly, we found that waves tended to move from the back of the brain to the front while patients were putting something into their memory,"

"When patients were later searching to recall the same information, those waves moved in the opposite direction, from the front towards the back of the brain,"

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-03-brain-memories-recalled.html

There are many other recent findings that indicate a combination of cell activation and brain wave in the formation and storage of memories.

So, what’s the big deal? This opens the possibility that memories are stored like in a hologram.  Speculating here, but with evidence and possible theoretical model -  Hologramic Theory of Mind.

With memory, there's this generally accepted idea that the brain produces two types:  Short-term working memory and long-term memory.  Relative to the dreaming brain, the accepted idea is that dreaming is one way in which our brain consolidates short-term memories into long-term memory.  To support this idea, copious research has revealed enhanced acuity in brain function only after it has received sufficient dreaming-level (REM) sleep--however, as I have so often discovered, the researchers conclusions are flawed, which brings us back to the neuronal nature of memory.

In brief, the conclusions sleep/memory researchers have reached suggest that memory is like food stock in a refrigerator (short-term memory) that dreaming consolidates or move into freezer storage (long-term memory).  This conclusion is flawed because it doesn't account for the effects of our brain's glymphatic system. Briefly, brain activity creates cell waste and the glymphatic process is how the brain cleans itself. Researchers of sleep and dreaming have not accounted for the effects of that process in their research.

Sleep/memory researchers gauge the acuity effects of waking and testing sleep study participant amid the various stages of sleep. Their sleep interruption study approach impedes the brain's ability to clean itself, which occurs more efficiently during sleep.  These interruptions impede the brain ability to remove obstructions between cell communication--allow our brain to complete its sleep cycles enhances the connectivity between its neurons, which enhances functional acuity.

In my view, which appears to be alligned with your neuroscience citations, memory isn't analogous to moving food stock from refrigerator to freezer; memory is a well worn path between destinations that gets lost or forgotten if not traveled often and cleared of debris.

 

15 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

I was using consciousness and mind interchangeably. Moving onward in our discussion, I will adopt your definitions of both terms. Consciousness is merely having a sensory system; a precondition for a response system, which is essential to the construct of min. And having a mind is reserved to organisms whose behaviors suggest a thought process.

As a result of the preceding, do these behaviors indicated below suggest a thought process?

“Matabele ants recognize infected wounds and treat them with antibiotics”

“If the wounds become infected, there is a significant survival risk. However, Matabele ants have developed a sophisticated health care system: They can distinguish between non-infected and infected wounds and treat the latter efficiently with antibiotics they produce themselves”.

Targeted treatment of injured nestmates with antimicrobial compounds in an ant society | Nature Communications

 

Bee-2-Bee influencing: Bees master complex tasks through social interaction

“Bumblebees successfully learned a two-step puzzle box task through social observation. This task was too complex for individual bees to learn on their own. Observing trained demonstrator bees performing the first unrewarded step was crucial for successful social learning. Individual bees failed to solve the puzzle without previous demonstration, despite extensive exposure.

Bumblebees socially learn behaviour too complex to innovate alone | Nature

 

Clown anemonefish seem to be counting bars and laying down the law

“We often think of fish as carefree swimmers in the ocean, reacting to the world around them without much forethought. However, new research suggests that our marine cousins may be more cognizant than we credit them for. Fish may be counting vertical bars on intruders to determine their threat level, and to inform the social hierarchy governing their sea anemone colonies”.

Counting Nemo: anemonefish Amphiprion ocellaris identify species by number of white bars | Journal of Experimental Biology | The Company of Biologists

 

Octopus

“They can complete puzzles, untie knots, open jars and toddler proof cases, and are expert escape artists from aquariums. Even more fascinating—their intelligence stems from a completely unrelated path to human intelligence, and about two-thirds of their neurons are in their arms, not their head.” 

https://ocean.si.edu/ocean-life/invertebrates/why-octopus-brain-so-extraordinary#:~:text=They%20can%20complete%20puzzles%2C%20untie,their%20arms%2C%20not%20their%20head.

How I determine whether an organism's behavior suggest it has a mind is by asking myself if that organism is behaving in way that is independent of its instinctive nature.  If an organism is engaging in a behavior that does not align with what we know of its instinctive behaviors, then we may infer from the behaviors we observe that the organism has engaged a choice not to follow its instinct, which to me suggest a thought process.  Indeed, behaviors that suggest a thought process infers evidence of a mind and, by my definition, a mind is quantified by a brain's capacity to merge dichotomous sensory data with its memory stores in a process that produces behaviors independent of instinct.

Edited March 31 by DrmDoc

[Luc Turpin]

Asian elephants mourn, bury their dead calves

“They found in each case that a herd carried the deceased calf by the trunk and legs before burying it in the earth with its legs facing upward.”

https://threatenedtaxa.org/index.php/JoTT/article/view/8826

 

Magpies ‘feel grief and hold funerals’

Magpies feel grief and even hold funeral-type gatherings for their fallen friends and lay grass “wreaths” beside their bodies, an animal behaviour expert has claimed.

https://www.againstcorvidtraps.co.uk/reports/magpies-feel-grief-hold-funerals/#:~:text=expert%20has%20claimed.-,Magpies%20feel%20grief%20and%20even%20hold%20funeral%2Dtype%20gatherings%20for,also%20have%20a%20compassionate%20side.

 

A few more still!

The determinants of mind are: sensory system, response system, thought process and independent of instinct.

All examples meet the first two determinants, while most the third (thought process) and a few the last one (independent of instinct).

Any disagreements?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Do we really know how the brain works?

 

"The mammalian brain is a web of densely interconnected neurons, yet one of the mysteries in neuroscience is how tools that capture relatively few components of brain activity have allowed scientists to predict behavior in mice. It is hard to believe that much of the brain’s complexity is irrelevant background noise."

 

"We wondered why such a redundant and metabolically costly scheme would have evolved,” 

 

"Previous assumptions about the true dimensionality of the brain dynamics might have been due to the lack of ability to record from a sufficiently large number of neurons,”

 

"More than 90 percent of the dimensions observed in neural activity (independent components that one needs in order to describe the observed neuronal dynamics that contain signals that are different from noise) were not connected to any spontaneous movements or sensory inputs in the mice studied. Thousands of these dimensions, containing more than half of the cumulative neural activity of the mice, were spread across the brain in space and time, without forming distinct clusters in any one region and ranging in time from minutes to less than seconds."

 

"Neural activity linked to animal movements was known to be streamlined into a low-dimensional subspace, allowing previous techniques, which could record fewer neurons, to identify these connections. However, more than 90 percent of the remaining dimensions contained reliable signals that were distinct from noise, not required for behavior, and not explained by environmental stimuli,”

 

https://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273(24)00121-1?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0896627324001211%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

 

[Luc Turpin]

 

https://scitechdaily.com/unprecedented-simultaneous-recording-of-the-activity-of-one-million-neurons-answers-fundamental-question-of-neuroscience/

 

[dimreepr]

On 3/31/2024 at 2:01 PM, Luc Turpin said:

"and nature thinks more than we think it does" -mine.

Nature doesn't think at all, unless you think Gaia is actually a god...

[Luc Turpin]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Nature doesn't think at all, unless you think Gaia is actually a god...

Some parts of nature might think more than we think they do; no Gaia required.

There were some interesting ideas on the Gaia theory proposed by James Lovelock (e.g. the planet earth is a living system), but there was not a lot of traction and the theory soon faded away scientificaly speaking; I guess there were too many issues with it.

[Luc Turpin]

On 3/31/2024 at 11:23 AM, DrmDoc said:

With memory, there's this generally accepted idea that the brain produces two types:  Short-term working memory and long-term memory.  Relative to the dreaming brain, the accepted idea is that dreaming is one way in which our brain consolidates short-term memories into long-term memory.  To support this idea, copious research has revealed enhanced acuity in brain function only after it has received sufficient dreaming-level (REM) sleep--however, as I have so often discovered, the researchers conclusions are flawed, which brings us back to the neuronal nature of memory.

I am entirely in agreement with the above indicated statement. There is indeed copious research on enhanced acuity in brain function after sleep. And I agree as well that sleep disruptions during studies must have an impact on the data set.

Furthermore, I would like to know your opinion on the statement that newer evidence appears to show that brain waves are also involved in memory storage.

Do you agreee or have an explanation for why this may not be the case?

On 3/31/2024 at 11:23 AM, DrmDoc said:

How I determine whether an organism's behavior suggest it has a mind is by asking myself if that organism is behaving in way that is independent of its instinctive nature.  If an organism is engaging in a behavior that does not align with what we know of its instinctive behaviors, then we may infer from the behaviors we observe that the organism has engaged a choice not to follow its instinct, which to me suggest a thought process.  Indeed, behaviors that suggest a thought process infers evidence of a mind and, by my definition, a mind is quantified by a brain's capacity to merge dichotomous sensory data with its memory stores in a process that produces behaviors independent of instinct.

If I apply your determinants of mind (sensory system, response system, thought process and independent of instinct) to the probable mind in nature examples, I come up with the following results:  all meet the first two determinants (sensory-response systems), most the third (though process) and a few the fourth and last determinant (independent of instinct). Are you in agreement with this assessment?

 

 

[Luc Turpin]

On 3/30/2024 at 9:01 AM, dimreepr said:

Trusted evidence is the antipode of that, it's when I nudge a mate and say "did you see that..." and the mate says "yep, wish I hadn't"... 😉

With some of my references, am-I not nudging the mate in seing what he wished he hadn't?😊

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Another study on the involvement of brain waves in memory recall

“Contrary to Previous Belief – New Study Links Brain Waves Directly to Memory”

“Neurons create rhythmic electrical activity patterns within the brain. A pressing question in neuroscience is the primary driver of these rhythmic signals, known as oscillations. Researchers from the University of Arizona discovered that merely recalling events could set off these oscillations, even more than experiencing the events themselves”.

 

https://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273(23)00474-9?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0896627323004749%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

[DanMP]

On 3/29/2024 at 11:36 PM, Luc Turpin said:

I understand what you are implying; only the study authors could answer your question.

No, any researcher in the field can (and should) replicate the study and make a more thorough investigation, as I suggested, in order to determine if the body does really remember.

On 3/29/2024 at 11:36 PM, Luc Turpin said:

I doubt that going through the “rough-terrain” would be sufficient to grow tougher skin, but it remains a possibility.

Try to walk, repeatedly, without shoes, on rough surfaces and you'll have the answer.

 

On 3/29/2024 at 11:36 PM, Luc Turpin said:

Did not understand the link that you wish to make between waves generated in the brain and the “domino effect”!

The "waves" are generated in the brain by neurons "touching"/triggering their neighbors in patterns previously "prepared" (through thinking and memorizing). In the "domino effect" you also prepare patterns, and the waves are produced by individual pieces touching/knocking down the next. The "waves" are a byproduct, not a trigger, in both cases.

 

On 3/29/2024 at 11:36 PM, Luc Turpin said:

“Gut microbiota regulates mouse behaviors through glucocorticoid receptor pathway genes in the hippocampus”

So, as I said, chemicals are "sent" to the brain, and the brain does the "job".

 

On 3/29/2024 at 11:36 PM, Luc Turpin said:

As for virus, you would be surprised at what they can do!

The same is valid for computers. Are the computers thinking?

 

You posted a lot about other animals being aware/conscient and thinking. Yes they are. They evolved very similar to us, so why not? What are you trying to prove by that?

[Luc Turpin]

3 hours ago, DanMP said:

The "waves" are generated in the brain by neurons "touching"/triggering their neighbors in patterns previously "prepared" (through thinking and memorizing). In the "domino effect" you also prepare patterns, and the waves are produced by individual pieces touching/knocking down the next. The "waves" are a byproduct, not a trigger, in both cases.

Neurons creating waves and waves affecting neurons?

Again, maybe not a one-way street.

Understood that examples given are "outside" influences, but nonetheless they remain essentially waves.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-12-gamma-brain-combat-alzheimer-disease.html#google_vignette

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-03-noninvasive-treatment-patients-memory-impairment.html

 

3 hours ago, DanMP said:

So, as I said, chemicals are "sent" to the brain, and the brain does the "job".

It's not a one way street!

Communication is sent from the gut to the brain and then back down to the gut. 

3 hours ago, DanMP said:

The same is valid for computers. Are the computers thinking?

Not saying that viruses think, but they do a lot more than what was originally expected of them.

For example, viruses communicate between one another; this was unexpected.   

3 hours ago, DanMP said:

You posted a lot about other animals being aware/conscient and thinking. Yes they are. They evolved very similar to us, so why not? What are you trying to prove by that?

To put the point accross that nature thinks much more than we think it does.

[DrmDoc]

On 4/1/2024 at 2:49 PM, Luc Turpin said:

I am entirely in agreement with the above indicated statement. There is indeed copious research on enhanced acuity in brain function after sleep. And I agree as well that sleep disruptions during studies must have an impact on the data set.

Furthermore, I would like to know your opinion on the statement that newer evidence appears to show that brain waves are also involved in memory storage.

Do you agreee or have an explanation for why this may not be the case?

Memory regards our ability to recall a prior or learned experience.  My take on memory storage and brain waves goes back to my analogy of the well traveled path between destinations in that the path of or to a memory must be frequently traveled or stimulated to be fully recalled.  Reverberant stimulation along a set neural pathway (brain waves) stengthens that path of recall to a prior or learned experience. Memory isn't the experience itself, it's the path of conscious recall within the brain to that experience.

On 4/1/2024 at 2:49 PM, Luc Turpin said:

If I apply your determinants of mind (sensory system, response system, thought process and independent of instinct) to the probable mind in nature examples, I come up with the following results:  all meet the first two determinants (sensory-response systems), most the third (though process) and a few the fourth and last determinant (independent of instinct). Are you in agreement with this assessment?

Assessing whether mind is suggested by any organism we identify regards our ability to assess whether it behaves in a way that is independent of what we have identified as its instinctive behavior.  Behavior is a response to stimuli; therefore, the organism must have a both an observable or testable sensory and response system.  Evidence of a mind would be produced by the organism's response systems, which we would observe as its behaviors.  If any of the animal examples you've consider for the presence of mind displayed behaviors identified as non-instinctive, that animal likely has a mind--of course consideration must be given for whether the animal's non-instinctive behavior was caused by an abnormality or disease affecting its brain function.

[Luc Turpin]

13 hours ago, DrmDoc said:

Memory regards our ability to recall a prior or learned experience.  My take on memory storage and brain waves goes back to my analogy of the well traveled path between destinations in that the path of or to a memory must be frequently traveled or stimulated to be fully recalled.  Reverberant stimulation along a set neural pathway (brain waves) stengthens that path of recall to a prior or learned experience. Memory isn't the experience itself, it's the path of conscious recall within the brain to that experience.

Agreed that memory must be frequently traveled or stimulated to be fully recalled. Where lies our differences is in the role that waves play in memory. For DanMP, waves are a byproduct of synaptic firing with apparently no role to play in memory. For you, it is eloquently worded as a reverberant stimulation along a set neural pathway (brain waves) that strengthens that path of recall to a prior or learned experience. Both views espouse that waves have either no or some sort of limited role in memory. As for myself, I believe that waves play a more prominent role that what is currently ascribed to them. Given that brain waves arise from a network activity of brain cells. However, what still remains unsettled “is whether brain waves drive activity or simply occur as a byproduct of neural activity that was already happening”. Traveling waves that spread across the cortex or hippocampal ripples that appear “to play a crucial role in coordinating these nerve cells” may be indications of the former and not the latter. As for how memories are created and stored in the brain, I make a clear break from convention and stipulate that the brain stores memory as codes of wave phase; the same principle as the one required for holograms to do what they do. More on this later as our discussion unfolds.

13 hours ago, DrmDoc said:

Assessing whether mind is suggested by any organism we identify regards our ability to assess whether it behaves in a way that is independent of what we have identified as its instinctive behavior.  Behavior is a response to stimuli; therefore, the organism must have a both an observable or testable sensory and response system.  Evidence of a mind would be produced by the organism's response systems, which we would observe as its behaviors.  If any of the animal examples you've consider for the presence of mind displayed behaviors identified as non-instinctive, that animal likely has a mind--of course consideration must be given for whether the animal's non-instinctive behavior was caused by an abnormality or disease affecting its brain function.

Agreement in principle that some given examples might have a mind of their own. I will push this discussion further by considering the fundamental constituent of all life forms, which is the cell and apply our determinants of mind to it. There is general consensus, I believe, that cells have the capacity to sense and respond to their environment. Take for example the cell membrane and its role as modulator of what goes in and out of the cell. Where it gets more controversial though is whether cells can think. Some believe, as I do, “that cells can cognitively read their environment, analyse the received information and then execute the necessary action. This coordinate cell action is known as cell signaling, which substantiates the possibility that the cell too has a mind”. As for the fouth determinant, it get's even murkier as my search for non-instinctive behaviors has resulted in not even the slightest hint of observation that this could be the case. So, I am left in the lurch, having to say that cells meet basic, but not all requirements of mind. That stated, through cells sensory and response systems, the game appears nonetheless set up to have mind express itself through nature.

[DanMP]

20 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

... and waves affecting neurons?

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-12-gamma-brain-combat-alzheimer-disease.html#google_vignette

Interesting, thank you, but: 1, there are not only waves:

Quote

These employ gamma frequency sensory stimulation (e.g. exposure to light, sound, tactile vibration, or a combination), trans cranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), in which a brain region is stimulated via scalp electrodes, or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), in which electric currents are induced in a brain region using magnetic fields.

and 2, the influence may be not directly on neurons:

Quote

A hypothesis of Tsai's lab right now is that sensory gamma stimulation might promote the clearance of amyloid and tau via increased circulatory activity of brain fluids.

Also, the study is in agreement to what I said:

Quote

About "our current picture of how mind works in the brain", I don't agree that it is wrong, but I do think that there are many things to investigate and elucidate.

You said:

Quote

there is something wrong with our current picture of how mind works in the brain

but didn't provide any real evidence.

 

20 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

It's not a one way street!

Communication is sent from the gut to the brain and then back down to the gut. 

Yes, so?  You said that the body

Quote

• ... also actively participates in memory, emotion, cognition etc. 

They might even create their own memories, emotions, cognition which are amalgameted with those produced by the brain to form the whole.

This is a very bold personal(?) statement and you didn't provide any real evidence for it.

Edited April 3 by DanMP

[Luc Turpin]

2 hours ago, DanMP said:

Interesting, thank you, but: 1, there are not only waves:

The point that I am trying to make is that waves produced by neurons or waves applied to the brain have an effect on the brain. More specifically, that waves produced by neurons are implicated in memory. In the case given, that waves work in conjunction with other things is not an issue, because the point remains that waves appear to have an effect on the brain.

2 hours ago, DanMP said:

and 2, the influence may be not directly on neurons:

This study, already provided, gives a more nuanced view on how cells might be affected:

"Before MIT's original studies in 2016 and 2019 researchers had not attributed molecular changes in brain cells to changes in brain rhythms, but those and other studies have now shown that they affect not only the molecular state of neurons, but also the brain's microglia immune cells, astrocyte cells that play key roles in regulating circulation and indeed the brain's vasculature system". 

"A hotly debated aspect of gamma stimulation is how it affects the electrical activity of neurons and how pervasively".

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-12-gamma-brain-combat-alzheimer-disease.html#google_vignette

2 hours ago, DanMP said:

Also, the study is in agreement to what I said:

Cannot find the highlighted text, but the effect appear to not only be on the ciculatory activity of brain fluids. Nonetheless, if it was only an effect on the circulatory activity, it would still be an effect on the brain. Waves affect brains.

2 hours ago, DanMP said:

You said: there is something wrong with our current picture of how mind works in the brain

2 hours ago, DanMP said:

but didn't provide any real evidence.

Almost all of the examples and references provided in this thread run counter to the conventional picture of how mind works in the brain

2 hours ago, DanMP said:

This is a very bold personal(?) statement and you didn't provide any real evidence for it.

I gave you all of these references to back up my claim that the body actively participates in memory, emotion, cognition (see below).

You only speculated on one of these references that "tough skin" was the apparent reason for memory preservation in headless flatworms that re-grew heads. (possible speculation, but highly improbable).

There is no mention from you on any of the other references provided.

Therefore, I think that the onus is still on you to prove me wrong.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brains-are-not-required-when-it-comes-to-thinking-and-solving-problems-simple-cells-can-do-it/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/the-leading-edge/202402/do-organ-transplants-cause-personality-change-in-recipients#:~:text=In%20some%20cases%2C%20organ%20recipients,from%20organ%20donors%20to%20recipients.

https://www.mdpi.com/2673-3943/5/1/2#:~:text=Among%20heart%20transplant%20recipients%20who,four%20or%20more%20personality%20changes

file:///C:/Users/Dad/Downloads/preprints202309.1894.v1%202.pdf

http://individual.utoronto.ca/mfkolarcik/HeartorBrain2_Pearsall-Journal%20of%20Near-Death%20Studies_2002-20-191-206.pdf

https://www.medicaldaily.com/can-organ-transplant-change-recipients-personality-cell-memory-theory-affirms-yes-247498

https://namimi.org/mental-illness/dissociative-disorder/didfactsheet#:~:text=The%20different%20identities%2C%20referred%20to,the%20need%20for%20eyeglass%20prescriptions.

https://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/28/science/probing-the-enigma-of-multiple-personality.html

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/36679938.pdf

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8888853/#:~:text=Results%3A%20Physiologic%20differences%20across%20alter,and%20regional%20cerebral%20blood%20flow.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2766827/#:~:text=Individuals%20with%20dissociative%20identity%20disorder,languages%20during%20their%20dissociative%20states.

 

[Luc Turpin]

Statement that may clarify the situation on neuronal connections versus brain waves.

"The two major theories of how the brain generates the mind are the neuronal connections where electrical signals travel along axons triggering a chemical connection at another neuron's dendrite and electrical brain waves, which oscillate together at specific frequencies. Both of these mechanisms occur simultaneously, so, perhaps they are complementary and perform different functions. Another theory of mind is that it consists of information, possibly in the form of electromagnetic energy, which would encompass all forms of electricity in the brain".

[Luc Turpin]

I have many times mentioned that I would follow the evidence where it goes.

Here it is moving away from my contention that we don't know how the brain works. One example given by me for this was that in an NDE the brain was "offline" and still able to produce a stream of thought; thereby indicating that there was a gap in our understanding of how the brain works

Well according to this article, there is apparently a lot going on in a dead brain.

"For about two minutes after her oxygen was cut off, there was an intense synchronisation of her brain waves, a state associated with many cognitive functions, including heightened attention and memory. The synchronisation dampened for about 18 seconds, then intensified again for more than four minutes. It faded for a minute, then came back for a third time".

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/02/new-science-of-death-brain-activity-consciousness-near-death-experience?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email