san4o
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 4
|
Post by san4o on Mar 15, 2019 19:24:25 GMT
Have you ever wondered how your thoughts control your body? How are your thought even created? What is the physical universe that we interact with made of?
I wanted to share my thoughts on this subject and hear all of your thoughts as well!
I will not talk about spiritual things and philosophy so much and be concentrating more on practical and rational perspective.
If we delve in to physical universe, then we can find out that everything is built of the same small particles of energy that are just vibrating a bit differently. Molecules-atoms-electrons-pions-quarks the further we go, the more we can see that actually there is no “hard” matter and everything, as stated before, is made of tiny particles of energy that vibrate at a certain frequency. Your body and our planet and everything is “made” of the same stuff, that just acts a bit differently. This is one of the first big mysteries- How is everything separated in such a genius manner and all of these individual entities, parts and particles stay bound to the bigger physical world representation. How does these energy particles know to be bound together to make atoms that make our skin cells and adapt to the ever-changing everything?..
Ok, let’s leave this thought for a while and look in to the consciousness aspect. Our thoughts and reactions are electrical impulses that innervate our nerve cells. Through this neural network we manipulate our body, over time we learn to manipulate with our body better and better and some individuals achieve things that regular people can only dream about. Interesting phenomena is observed in this practice. Human abilities are limited, at least very educated people tell us that our muscles are capable of that and that and nothing more, and same goes for all the rest of our functions, BUT once in a while there comes someone who overcomes these limits and what is fascinating is that after one person has done it, more and more people appear who are able to do it. Like some sort of collective power-up or unlocking of potential. Where lays our true limit? This is exactly the question that I want to find out! Let’s go back a bit. Where does our mind live? There is no part of the brain that can produce a mind, there are many things that help our mind understand itself and the world around it, but our mind is not in our brain. Our mind can be influenced by our brain, but our brain is only the medium that connects our mind with this physical reality. So where is our mind? What is our mind? Who knows! And I think we are too primitive to try to understand it at the moment, but what we can try to understand is- How exactly our mind interacts with the physical reality? My thoughts are that our mind can create small specific energy impulses that create the reaction in our brain, so that means that our mind is capable of creating these impulses from nothing in this physical reality or it transfers some impulse from non-physical reality, where our mind exists, and delivers it to this one. This is the way how our mind has learned to interact with physical dimension effectively, through controlling our brains, that control our body. But can we create these impulses outside our brain? How strong of an impulse can we create? Can we create impulse strong enough to influence the structure of things around us? Maybe, maybe not! But I am quite sure that we are capable of much more.
Norms that have been accepted by public for our abilities, shape the way that we look at ourselves. There are a lot of stories about people with so called supernatural abilities, but I think they are not supernatural, we are all capable of them. The only issue is that we (our mind) needs to learn how to manipulate these impulses to achieve what we want. As a newborn baby learns everything he needs to know to take part in our society, trough falling and trying and not giving up, seeing examples all around him, so can we learn to do much more. Physical reality is actually just little particles of energy, and our mind can create energy impulses, so theoretically we can learn to influence reality itself. Of course it would take us a long time to get there through these small little breakthroughs that some special individuals achieve, but all of us need to embrace it and try to move in that direction if we want to get there. Energy likes to resonate and amplify when it is in contact with the same frequency. Our minds attract physical things that resonate with our thoughts. At least that is what I believe, so let’s think about what we think and what can we do to achieve greater and greater hights as individuals and as a human specie collectively. (sorry for the last sentence, I hope it does not sound like "cat herding", I am just passionate about this idea)
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Mar 15, 2019 20:18:21 GMT
Yes, thoughts do lead into controlling your body. Can you explain what you meant by, "Your body and our planet and everything is “made” of the same stuff, that just acts a bit differently." I wasn't too sure on what that meant.
|
|
Nicholas
Junior Member
Posts: 66
Likes: 23
Politics: only when needed
Religion: Buddhist
Relationship Status: Widower
Age: 70 +
|
Post by Nicholas on Mar 15, 2019 20:52:26 GMT
Here is a small example of our greater human potential:
The winters in eastern Tibet were so cold that the water from the snow melting under the sun's rays would freeze in its flow, creating broad barriers of icicles, some up to three stories high. These would sometimes block the steep mountain trails, making travel impossible. Yet no matter how cold it was or how much snow had fallen, there was never any snow on Lama Ngaktrin's roof: it would melt from his tummo, the yogic practice of inner heat. One day, Ngaktrin received news that one of his major sponsors had passed away on the other side of the mountain pass. On the way there, a river had flooded and then frozen, so that huge ice curtains rose to a height of two or three stories. There was no way to get through. A request arrived via a much longer trail for Lama Ngaktrin to come and do phowa, the ejection of consciousness, for the dead patron. Ngaktrin, without a moment's hesitation, replied, "I'm coming!" His attendants tried to dissuade him, protesting, "How can you go? Do you want to die in the icy water? And if you have to travel around the ice curtains, it will take you two or three days. How can you, an old lama, go there? There's no way-just forget about it."
But Ngaktrin said: "No, it would be very improper not to go. He has been a kind patron to me. If I fail to reach him, it would be a serious breach of samaya [vows]. I'm going tomorrow morning, no matter what!"
The servants could do nothing but obey, although unhappy that they would have to take the long treacherous way around. Ngaktrin however assured them that that wouldn't be necessary.
Bright and early the next morning, he told his attendants, "Last night I cleared the way."
Sure enough, all the ice on the whole mountain pass had melted. There was not a flake of snow anywhere; they could travel freely. When asked, "How can this be possible?" Ngaktrin simply responded, "Last night I practiced a little tummo and melted it."
|
|
san4o
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 4
|
Post by san4o on Mar 15, 2019 21:27:58 GMT
Well I am basing this on this assumption 'If you can get enough energy into one place (generally light or kinetic energy), then you’ll get a (mostly random) variety of particles popping out. The conversion between mass and energy is so ubiquitous in physics, that most physicists only know the mass of particles in the context of their equivalent energy' so I assume that in a deeper level all matter is just condensed energy. This is still a debatable question, but that is why I am sharing this perspective in philosophy and not physics topic, although these 2 fields are overlaping quite a bit in this post!
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Mar 15, 2019 21:48:04 GMT
Well I am basing this on this assumption 'If you can get enough energy into one place (generally light or kinetic energy), then you’ll get a (mostly random) variety of particles popping out. The conversion between mass and energy is so ubiquitous in physics, that most physicists only know the mass of particles in the context of their equivalent energy' so I assume that in a deeper level all matter is just condensed energy. This is still a debatable question, but that is why I am sharing this perspective in philosophy and not physics topic, although these 2 fields are overlaping quite a bit in this post! Ok, then since they're similar but act differently, would you say both have thoughts or use like a brain to control everything which can direct things or change things?
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 15, 2019 23:49:37 GMT
Have you ever wondered how your thoughts control your body? How are your thought even created? What is the physical universe that we interact with made of? I wanted to share my thoughts on this subject and hear all of your thoughts as well! I will not talk about spiritual things and philosophy so much and be concentrating more on practical and rational perspective. If we delve in to physical universe, then we can find out that everything is built of the same small particles of energy that are just vibrating a bit differently. Molecules-atoms-electrons-pions-quarks the further we go, the more we can see that actually there is no “hard” matter and everything, as stated before, is made of tiny particles of energy that vibrate at a certain frequency. Your body and our planet and everything is “made” of the same stuff, that just acts a bit differently. This is one of the first big mysteries- How is everything separated in such a genius manner and all of these individual entities, parts and particles stay bound to the bigger physical world representation. How does these energy particles know to be bound together to make atoms that make our skin cells and adapt to the ever-changing everything?.. Ok, let’s leave this thought for a while and look in to the consciousness aspect. Our thoughts and reactions are electrical impulses that innervate our nerve cells. Through this neural network we manipulate our body, over time we learn to manipulate with our body better and better and some individuals achieve things that regular people can only dream about. Interesting phenomena is observed in this practice. Human abilities are limited, at least very educated people tell us that our muscles are capable of that and that and nothing more, and same goes for all the rest of our functions, BUT once in a while there comes someone who overcomes these limits and what is fascinating is that after one person has done it, more and more people appear who are able to do it. Like some sort of collective power-up or unlocking of potential. Where lays our true limit? This is exactly the question that I want to find out! Let’s go back a bit. Where does our mind live? There is no part of the brain that can produce a mind, there are many things that help our mind understand itself and the world around it, but our mind is not in our brain. Our mind can be influenced by our brain, but our brain is only the medium that connects our mind with this physical reality. So where is our mind? What is our mind? Who knows! And I think we are too primitive to try to understand it at the moment, but what we can try to understand is- How exactly our mind interacts with the physical reality? My thoughts are that our mind can create small specific energy impulses that create the reaction in our brain, so that means that our mind is capable of creating these impulses from nothing in this physical reality or it transfers some impulse from non-physical reality, where our mind exists, and delivers it to this one. This is the way how our mind has learned to interact with physical dimension effectively, through controlling our brains, that control our body. But can we create these impulses outside our brain? How strong of an impulse can we create? Can we create impulse strong enough to influence the structure of things around us? Maybe, maybe not! But I am quite sure that we are capable of much more. Norms that have been accepted by public for our abilities, shape the way that we look at ourselves. There are a lot of stories about people with so called supernatural abilities, but I think they are not supernatural, we are all capable of them. The only issue is that we (our mind) needs to learn how to manipulate these impulses to achieve what we want. As a newborn baby learns everything he needs to know to take part in our society, trough falling and trying and not giving up, seeing examples all around him, so can we learn to do much more. Physical reality is actually just little particles of energy, and our mind can create energy impulses, so theoretically we can learn to influence reality itself. Of course it would take us a long time to get there through these small little breakthroughs that some special individuals achieve, but all of us need to embrace it and try to move in that direction if we want to get there. Energy likes to resonate and amplify when it is in contact with the same frequency. Our minds attract physical things that resonate with our thoughts. At least that is what I believe, so let’s think about what we think and what can we do to achieve greater and greater hights as individuals and as a human specie collectively. (sorry for the last sentence, I hope it does not sound like "cat herding", I am just passionate about this idea)
These are the premises I'd wish to start with, and if you happen to disagree with either of them, let me know.
1. Every thought and emotion you have is linked to some physical process. 2. Every physical process can be described mathematically, one way or another. 3. No entity without free will may have consciousness, as consciousness is our experience of free will.
If those premises are true, then the big question is; What is the mathematics underpinning consciousness? Simply put, there are three different approaches for mathematically describing reality:
1. Probability math, which is used in quantum mechanics. 2. Finding general solutions to equations, like when one describe accurately how balls move on a billiard ball table. 3. Approximation, which is the method needed for problems, such as the 3 body problem, where there is no general solution. A computer simulation of a galaxy would be a good example for that.
Before I start to address your points directly, I'd like to know if you have a problem with any of the above.
|
|
san4o
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 4
|
Post by san4o on Mar 16, 2019 10:53:15 GMT
Well I am basing this on this assumption 'If you can get enough energy into one place (generally light or kinetic energy), then you’ll get a (mostly random) variety of particles popping out. The conversion between mass and energy is so ubiquitous in physics, that most physicists only know the mass of particles in the context of their equivalent energy' so I assume that in a deeper level all matter is just condensed energy. This is still a debatable question, but that is why I am sharing this perspective in philosophy and not physics topic, although these 2 fields are overlaping quite a bit in this post! Ok, then since they're similar but act differently, would you say both have thoughts or use like a brain to control everything which can direct things or change things? I don't know if I wold call it brain, but I am leaning towards intelligent design theory, because, frankly, I don't think there is a better, more logical explanation about everything..
|
|
san4o
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 4
|
Post by san4o on Mar 16, 2019 11:06:09 GMT
1. Every thought and emotion you have is linked to some physical process. 2. Every physical process can be described mathematically, one way or another. 3. No entity without free will may have consciousness, as consciousness is our experience of free will.
About the first point- if you consider resonance in energetical level and non material plane also a physical process (because yes, resonance is a physical proces, but question is does this statement includes this state where there is no mesurable change in energy in material plane, but some processes get affected anyway), then yes, otherways I think this point needs aditional level. And yes, I agree on second and third point.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Mar 16, 2019 18:15:09 GMT
Here is a small example of our greater human potential: The winters in eastern Tibet were so cold that the water from the snow melting under the sun's rays would freeze in its flow, creating broad barriers of icicles, some up to three stories high. These would sometimes block the steep mountain trails, making travel impossible. Yet no matter how cold it was or how much snow had fallen, there was never any snow on Lama Ngaktrin's roof: it would melt from his tummo, the yogic practice of inner heat. One day, Ngaktrin received news that one of his major sponsors had passed away on the other side of the mountain pass. On the way there, a river had flooded and then frozen, so that huge ice curtains rose to a height of two or three stories. There was no way to get through. A request arrived via a much longer trail for Lama Ngaktrin to come and do phowa, the ejection of consciousness, for the dead patron. Ngaktrin, without a moment's hesitation, replied, "I'm coming!" His attendants tried to dissuade him, protesting, "How can you go? Do you want to die in the icy water? And if you have to travel around the ice curtains, it will take you two or three days. How can you, an old lama, go there? There's no way-just forget about it." But Ngaktrin said: "No, it would be very improper not to go. He has been a kind patron to me. If I fail to reach him, it would be a serious breach of samaya [vows]. I'm going tomorrow morning, no matter what!" The servants could do nothing but obey, although unhappy that they would have to take the long treacherous way around. Ngaktrin however assured them that that wouldn't be necessary. Bright and early the next morning, he told his attendants, "Last night I cleared the way." Sure enough, all the ice on the whole mountain pass had melted. There was not a flake of snow anywhere; they could travel freely. When asked, "How can this be possible?" Ngaktrin simply responded, "Last night I practiced a little tummo and melted it." You don't have to convince me of the power of the mind.
I was able to keep my heart rate at 190 for 45 minutes by simply emptying my mind and redirected what thoughts I had left to the object being lifted.
Watch my aunt's stage 4 liver cancer stop progressing, while maintaining normal liver function, simply through keeping her spirits up (until hospice overdosed her on drugs and killed her).
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 16, 2019 23:38:59 GMT
1. Every thought and emotion you have is linked to some physical process. 2. Every physical process can be described mathematically, one way or another. 3. No entity without free will may have consciousness, as consciousness is our experience of free will.
About the first point- if you consider resonance in energetical level and non material plane also a physical process (because yes, resonance is a physical proces, but question is does this statement includes this state where there is no mesurable change in energy in material plane, but some processes get affected anyway), then yes, otherways I think this point needs aditional level. And yes, I agree on second and third point.
Ok. Well, we agree upon that there may be a process despite no measurable change in energy. This is something I will return to later.
So, referring to the three forms of mathematics used to describe reality, I would simply make the claim that the two first leave no opening for free will. If someone could scan all the information in someone's brain and its surrounding environment, and then use this information to simulate exactly what that person, from that point on, will think and feel, then our consciousness is a mere, passive mirror of the physical processes in the brain. If, however, we may premise that we do have free will, the only option left is that quantum uncertainty must play a role in the brain. In which case, any simulation must apply probability math, making its predictions uncertain.
Even if one can demonstate that quantum uncertainty does play a role in the brain, that doesn't, by itself, explain free will, since all we got, so far, is to describe free will as that of rolling a dice. If my choices are merely probabilistic, then I also don't have free will. But the story doesn't end here.
Before I continue, I need to know whether you have any objections, or something you wish to add.
|
|
san4o
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 4
|
Post by san4o on Mar 17, 2019 7:17:09 GMT
Ok. Well, we agree upon that there may be a process despite no measurable change in energy. This is something I will return to later.
So, referring to the three forms of mathematics used to describe reality, I would simply make the claim that the two first leave no opening for free will. If someone could scan all the information in someone's brain and its surrounding environment, and then use this information to simulate exactly what that person, from that point on, will think and feel, then our consciousness is a mere, passive mirror of the physical processes in the brain. If, however, we may premise that we do have free will, the only option left is that quantum uncertainty must play a role in the brain. In which case, any simulation must apply probability math, making its predictions uncertain.
Even if one can demonstate that quantum uncertainty does play a role in the brain, that doesn't, by itself, explain free will, since all we got, so far, is to describe free will as that of rolling a dice. If my choices are merely probabilistic, then I also don't have free will. But the story doesn't end here.
Before I continue, I need to know whether you have any objections, or something you wish to add.
I agree, please continue!
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 17, 2019 8:19:36 GMT
Ok. Well, we agree upon that there may be a process despite no measurable change in energy. This is something I will return to later.
So, referring to the three forms of mathematics used to describe reality, I would simply make the claim that the two first leave no opening for free will. If someone could scan all the information in someone's brain and its surrounding environment, and then use this information to simulate exactly what that person, from that point on, will think and feel, then our consciousness is a mere, passive mirror of the physical processes in the brain. If, however, we may premise that we do have free will, the only option left is that quantum uncertainty must play a role in the brain. In which case, any simulation must apply probability math, making its predictions uncertain.
Even if one can demonstate that quantum uncertainty does play a role in the brain, that doesn't, by itself, explain free will, since all we got, so far, is to describe free will as that of rolling a dice. If my choices are merely probabilistic, then I also don't have free will. But the story doesn't end here.
Before I continue, I need to know whether you have any objections, or something you wish to add.
I agree, please continue!
So if we were to study the quantum processes in the brain, the only way by which we know how to describe them is through probability math. For that reason, we conclude that they are random. Meaning, that the sequence of quantum events simply happen when they happen, and could not, for example, be described mathematically as being determined by a mathematically defined sequence of numbers.
The reason for this is that one's conception of a mathematically defined sequence of numbers must represent some underlying patter. Mathematically, that would mean expressed by euqations, and in computer language, which I prefer to use, it could be written as an algorithm. Since, when one studies quantum processes one consistently sees no discernible pattern beyond probabilities, there is seemingly no room for the possibility that they may follow a defined mathematical sequence.
But this is based on the assumption that all defined mathematical sequences represent patterns, and may hence be computed by algorithms. This is not correct. There is a concept that was discovered with Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem, described as an "unenumerable subset of natural numbers". This is a set of natural numbers that is mathematically clearly defined, and yet couldn't be computed by any algorith, or produced by any mathematical formula. The simple explanation for this, is that the subset itself represents infinite complexity, and hence, the algorithm would have needed to be infinitely long, which is, obviously, not possible.
If, underneath the apparent randomness of quantum processes are defined by unenumerable subsets of natural numbers, then that also allow for a swithc from one such set to another. And when such a switch happen, because both sequences follow no discernible pattern, it wouldn't be possible to detect by an external observer. So if your experience of free will is a matter of swithcing between such number sets, then you making such a choice wouldn't, in any way, break the apparent randomness of the quantum processes in your brain, to someone observing them. So it would be mind over matter, without actually challenging the laws for physics. -Which is exactly how I think consicousness works.
|
|
san4o
New Member
Posts: 9
Likes: 4
|
Post by san4o on Mar 17, 2019 18:50:40 GMT
So if we were to study the quantum processes in the brain, the only way by which we know how to describe them is through probability math. For that reason, we conclude that they are random. Meaning, that the sequence of quantum events simply happen when they happen, and could not, for example, be described mathematically as being determined by a mathematically defined sequence of numbers.
The reason for this is that one's conception of a mathematically defined sequence of numbers must represent some underlying patter. Mathematically, that would mean expressed by euqations, and in computer language, which I prefer to use, it could be written as an algorithm. Since, when one studies quantum processes one consistently sees no discernible pattern beyond probabilities, there is seemingly no room for the possibility that they may follow a defined mathematical sequence.
But this is based on the assumption that all defined mathematical sequences represent patterns, and may hence be computed by algorithms. This is not correct. There is a concept that was discovered with Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem, described as an "unenumerable subset of natural numbers". This is a set of natural numbers that is mathematically clearly defined, and yet couldn't be computed by any algorith, or produced by any mathematical formula. The simple explanation for this, is that the subset itself represents infinite complexity, and hence, the algorithm would have needed to be infinitely long, which is, obviously, not possible.
If, underneath the apparent randomness of quantum processes are defined by unenumerable subsets of natural numbers, then that also allow for a swithc from one such set to another. And when such a switch happen, because both sequences follow no discernible pattern, it wouldn't be possible to detect by an external observer. So if your experience of free will is a matter of swithcing between such number sets, then you making such a choice wouldn't, in any way, break the apparent randomness of the quantum processes in your brain, to someone observing them. So it would be mind over matter, without actually challenging the laws for physics. -Which is exactly how I think consicousness works.
This also could be a way to look at this. But I am a practical person and usually try to understand things for the purpose of understanding how to take the next step and how to evolve it to something better, more efficient or usefull. Is there a way to use this view to unlock bigger potential? If yes then how? (I am not looking down at this explanation, I just don't see how to use this understanding practicaly)
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 17, 2019 22:08:09 GMT
So if we were to study the quantum processes in the brain, the only way by which we know how to describe them is through probability math. For that reason, we conclude that they are random. Meaning, that the sequence of quantum events simply happen when they happen, and could not, for example, be described mathematically as being determined by a mathematically defined sequence of numbers.
The reason for this is that one's conception of a mathematically defined sequence of numbers must represent some underlying patter. Mathematically, that would mean expressed by euqations, and in computer language, which I prefer to use, it could be written as an algorithm. Since, when one studies quantum processes one consistently sees no discernible pattern beyond probabilities, there is seemingly no room for the possibility that they may follow a defined mathematical sequence.
But this is based on the assumption that all defined mathematical sequences represent patterns, and may hence be computed by algorithms. This is not correct. There is a concept that was discovered with Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem, described as an "unenumerable subset of natural numbers". This is a set of natural numbers that is mathematically clearly defined, and yet couldn't be computed by any algorith, or produced by any mathematical formula. The simple explanation for this, is that the subset itself represents infinite complexity, and hence, the algorithm would have needed to be infinitely long, which is, obviously, not possible.
If, underneath the apparent randomness of quantum processes are defined by unenumerable subsets of natural numbers, then that also allow for a swithc from one such set to another. And when such a switch happen, because both sequences follow no discernible pattern, it wouldn't be possible to detect by an external observer. So if your experience of free will is a matter of swithcing between such number sets, then you making such a choice wouldn't, in any way, break the apparent randomness of the quantum processes in your brain, to someone observing them. So it would be mind over matter, without actually challenging the laws for physics. -Which is exactly how I think consicousness works.
This also could be a way to look at this. But I am a practical person and usually try to understand things for the purpose of understanding how to take the next step and how to evolve it to something better, more efficient or usefull. Is there a way to use this view to unlock bigger potential? If yes then how? (I am not looking down at this explanation, I just don't see how to use this understanding practicaly)
It also links to conscious understanding, to imply that algorithms are insufficient for developing general intelligence. (This is a claim that needs to be justified, but I can elaborate on that at some later point.) There is currently a misconception that teh development of artificial intelligence is approaching what's referred to as the singularity, when AI becomes more intelligent than humans and may start improving on itself. This is a dead end. I'm sure one can accomplish a lot with algorithms, and already has, but in order to capture the essence of general intelligence, one needs to first understand and copy the biological processes that create the bridge between quantum uncertainty and consciousness. Before that is realised, one will continue to put all the resources into improving algorithms, rather than trying to isolate the mechanisms in the brain that allow for conscious understanding.
The mathematician Roger Penrose believes a part of the brain called microtubules has a structure that would allow for a quantum wave function to develop before collapsing. After he made this suggestion, some research on this has been done to investigate it. Here's the abstract from a scientific paper:
"The mechanism by which anesthetic gases selectively prevent consciousness and memory (sparing non-conscious brain functions) remains unknown. At the turn of the 20(th) century Meyer and Overton showed that potency of structurally dissimilar anesthetic gas molecules correlated precisely over many orders of magnitude with one factor, solubility in a non-polar, 'hydrophobic' medium akin to olive oil. In the 1980s Franks and Lieb showed anesthetics acted in such a medium within proteins, suggesting post-synaptic membrane receptors. But anesthetic studies on such proteins yielded only confusing results. In recent years Eckenhoff and colleagues have found anesthetic action in microtubules, cytoskeletal polymers of the protein tubulin inside brain neurons. 'Quantum mobility' in microtubules has been proposed to mediate consciousness. Through molecular modeling we have previously shown: (1) olive oil-like non-polar, hydrophobic quantum mobility pathways ('quantum channels') of tryptophan rings in tubulin, (2) binding of anesthetic gas molecules in these channels, and (3) capabilities for π-electron resonant energy transfer, or exciton hopping, among tryptophan aromatic rings in quantum channels, similar to photosynthesis protein quantum coherence. Here, we show anesthetic molecules can impair π-resonance energy transfer and exciton hopping in tubulin quantum channels, and thus account for selective action of anesthetics on consciousness and memory."
But I'm personally not very interested in the practical use, partly because of the ethical considerations. Given how humans behave, there's not way I'd actually want them to unlock the mystery of how to create consciousness in a lab. The reason why I'm interested in it, is because it goes against the modern view of man, as some kind of biological computer iwth flawed software. Realising that we're something substantially beyond that, allows for the individual to believe in itself.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Mar 18, 2019 2:44:14 GMT
Ok, then since they're similar but act differently, would you say both have thoughts or use like a brain to control everything which can direct things or change things? I don't know if I wold call it brain, but I am leaning towards intelligent design theory, because, frankly, I don't think there is a better, more logical explanation about everything.. You mean like a creator/God?
|
|