How fast is the speed of thought?

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
This is an interesting question. What is "thought"? I think that is important, right?

There are sublime communications that can cause one to react quicker than they could think. Consider the deer that "jumps the bullet". There is no way it has time to react to the sound consciously. The body just kind of takes over and acts.

I am a former college football player, and all state lineman for the Lone Star State. One of the things my coaches have always yelled at me is "don't think, react". Once you have taken the time to think, you have wasted your advantage.

Does this mean the body acts without the mind? If so, that creates some interesting propositions.

In the brain, signals are sent via electrical pulse. That would mean that the brain operates at the speed of light, and the speed of "brain thought" would depend on the synaptic response combined with the calculation of light speed travel across them.

But is this where thought actually happens? Or is the brain akin to a modem, sending and recieving information from the mind, which is in a higher place? If this is so, then we have no way to measuring the limits of the mind, as it surely must be capable of acting instantaneously.

And there are legitimate scientific experiments (performed at SRI) that indicate this to be true. Instantaneous, regardless of time and space.

I would take 'thought' to mean consciouness. "Don't think, react" refers to letting your sub-conscious decide what to do instead of thinking about it.

Consciousness is much slower than the SC. I compare them to electronic systems; hard wired logic can operate much faster than logic (a computer) with an operating system and software. The penalty for the flexibity of the computer is speed as with the consiousness and sub-consciouness.

Many that have had serious life threatening situations may have experienced the slow motion effect when the SC takes over and it feels like you can make a cup of tee while your car crashes for example. Science has yet to replicate this effect.

The brain is an electro-chemical system but this doesn't mean anything happens at the speed of light. It is a common misconception but electricity doesn't travel anywhere near C, even in straight copper wire. Nerves are very slow at transmitting information electrically, usually from 1 to 100m/s depending on the degree of myelination. Many animals such as cats have highly myelinated nerves giving faster reaction times. Myelination is analagous to the quality of the insulation on a wire.

Humans have some photo-receptors in the periphery of the eyes that respond to movement and connect mainly to the SC whilst the majority are normally handed by the consciousness. This is what makes you sometimes think you have seen something move in your peripheral vision or makes you jump or flinch when you see something approaching quickly from outside the centre of your vision.

Anyway, to answer the OP, vision processing in the conscious takes around 85ms, analysing the scene takes about 50ms, making a decision takes about 30ms and commanding a muscle about 50ms. Memory accesses take around 30ms and making something up, such as lying takes aorund 80ms.

Because of the time difference taken to make something up it should be possible to detect if people are lying by analysing their brain. I don't think this tech is anywhere near reliable at the moment though.

All the figures above are from memory but shouldn't be too far out.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I think a better question, actually, is how fast does the universe run? Like, if it were a movie, how many frames per second would it run at?

Based on the Planck time the Universe's frame rate would be 10^43 frames per second.

Originally posted by LightFantastic

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I think a better question, actually, is how fast does the universe run? Like, if it were a movie, how many frames per second would it run at?

Based on the Planck time the Universe's frame rate would be 10^43 frames per second.

I have read this before. I have also read that the interpretation of time from this is erroneous. But it is an interesting starting point for consideration.

How do you see this with time dilation?

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I have read this before. I have also read that the interpretation of time from this is erroneous. But it is an interesting starting point for consideration.

How do you see this with time dilation?

I was hoping you werent gong to ask that. It will take a bit of thought I think!

EDIT

The Planck time will be the same from all reference frames. The Planck time itself is based on the speed of light.


[edit on 25/5/2010 by LightFantastic]

The nervous system operates on multiple levels and perhaps the slowest is when receiving information via senses, processing the data and taking appropriate action on it. Adrenaline accelerates the response producing the 'time dilation' feeling EG the slow motion effect in highly stressful or traumatic circumstances like being involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. There are 'hardwired' or reflex responses that don't involve any conscious thought so they're about the fastest, a good example is the puff of air into your eye that the optometrist uses to check your blink response - this is a self-defense reflex and something you can't control.

Originally posted by LightFantastic

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I have read this before. I have also read that the interpretation of time from this is erroneous. But it is an interesting starting point for consideration.

How do you see this with time dilation?

I was hoping you werent gong to ask that. It will take a bit of thought I think!

EDIT

The Planck time will be the same from all reference frames. The Planck time itself is based on the speed of light.


[edit on 25/5/2010 by LightFantastic]

Here is the problem I have with that...

...it seems to me that information enters the universe. Now, perhaps it is already in the universe, whatever. But consider it from the perspective of "spookiness at a distance".

If you have two bound photons in different parts of the universe, would the change of state rely on relativistic principles? Or is this change of state "transrelativistic"?

The concept of "instantaneous" (as used by Ingo Swann in his SRI research) implies that there is a standard, non-relative progression of events. To state differently, the 10^43 is a nice number, but it only works within the relative universe. What happens when we consider that, beneath it all, there is likely another scale of time that is not impacted by things like time dilation.

For example, the mind. Where is the mind? We know it isn't in the brain, as we have seen people with radical hemispherectomies that were able to graduate college. The brain is more like a "physical control unit" mixed with a "modem", and it communicates with the mind.

So, where is the mind? Is it outside of the physical universe? If so, then that implies that information is entering into our universe. That is a whole nuther topic, to be honest....but for the purposes of this discussion, what time scale does our mind live within? Is it still the same 10^43 frame rate? And, if so, is it bound by the same time dilation principles? If not, then how does it reconcile with the universe?

Time dilation really screws things up. It implies that events we see and age are likely not the age we infer.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
If you have two bound photons in different parts of the universe, would the change of state rely on relativistic principles? Or is this change of state "transrelativistic"?

For example, the mind. Where is the mind? We know it isn't in the brain, as we have seen people with radical hemispherectomies that were able to graduate college. The brain is more like a "physical control unit" mixed with a "modem", and it communicates with the mind.

So, where is the mind? Is it outside of the physical universe? If so, then that implies that information is entering into our universe. That is a whole nuther topic, to be honest....but for the purposes of this discussion, what time scale does our mind live within? Is it still the same 10^43 frame rate? And, if so, is it bound by the same time dilation principles? If not, then how does it reconcile with the universe?

Time dilation really screws things up. It implies that events we see and age are likely not the age we infer.

Wow BFFT you are really making my head hurt now! Can you give me a link on the people with the hemispherectomies so I can assess?

The speed of quantum entanglement has been measured at > 50C so it does not obey relativity in the normal sense. There are more than one way to kill this chicken though:

1. The entanglement 'link' goes back in time. QM doesn't usually require a direction for time.
2. No real 'information' is transmitted so it doesn't have to obey relativity anyway
3. The whole universe is a single point in another dimension and the entagled particles 'communicate' through this dimension.
4. There is an underlying deterministic order to QM and the results of measurements were preset but still appeared random.

Time dilation shouldn't be a factor if the mind is external because all there would be is the initial offset time when the connection is first made, after that everything would be sequential.

I'm having trouble at the moment reconciling the 'mind not in the brain' thing at the moment and how this would work down the tree of life to all the other entities with information processing capabilites. Thinking about it all life processes information and this should be one of the defining features of life.

If the mind is truly outside of the brain, I struggle to come up with a reason why nature should expend such a great amount of energy creating and powering such a complex device. Any ideas?

PS Let me know if I am not understanding you correctly.


[edit on 25/5/2010 by LightFantastic]

reply to post by LightFantastic


You understand me correctly. I have a thread here on ATS, i think...but rather than direct there i will just kind of rehash what i remember the OP to be.

Linkage

On Jun 2, 2005, NBC Philadelphia had an interesting report. Christina Santhouse had caught a virus that caused a rare brain disorder known as Rasmussen's Syndrome at an age of 8. And her doctor had to perform hemispherectomy, removal of half of the brain, on her. After 10 years, Christina was about to graduate from high school with honors. After the surgery, she had a slight limp and her left hand didn't work at all. She had also lost her peripheral vision, but otherwise, she was an ordinary teen. A similar case was reported on Telegraph (UK) on May 29, 2002, a girl named Bursa had the same disorder and her left brain was removed when she was 3, she became fluent in Dutch and Turkish when she was 7. In 1987, A. Smith reported that one patient with hemispherectomy had completed college, attended graduate school and scored above average on intelligence tests. Studies have found no significant long-term effects on memory, personality, or humor after the procedure, and minimal changes in cognitive function overall.


The outcome of hemispherectomy is surprising. Neuroscience tends to suggest memory is stored in the neurons in the brain. If that premise stands true, removing half of the brain would destroy one's memory if memory is stored in the network structure of neurons as one school of cognitive physiology suggests, or at least destroy half of the memory if bits of memory information are stored in individual neurons in the brain as suggested by another school of cognitive neuroscience. But it is apparent that the results disagree with either of the explanations. Removing part of the brain has been one of the standard surgical operations for severe epilepsy and has been performed thousands of times. Many of the results are quite similar to those of hemispherectomy. The orthodox explanation for the observation is that information stored in the infected brain areas is duplicated in the health part of the brain prior to the surgery. This rationalization is still inadequate when you take into account how a brain surgery is performed. Surgeon has to remove the infected area and some surrounding health tissue, sometimes a much larger tissue than the infected area, to make sure infection does not spread. If the information stored in the infected areas is reproduced somewhere in the brain before surgical procedure, some information is still lost when surrounding health brain tissue is removed, consequently the memory would suffer. This is not observed after the surgery. So it is necessary to assume that the memory stored in the neighboring health tissue is also replicated in other parts of the brain. This raises a question: how does the brain know how much health tissue is going to be taken out? If the brain does not know, surgeries will inevitable destruct part of the memory. The belief that memory is stored in the brain (in neurons or in the network of neurons) apparently contradicts with findings in brain surgeries.

So, we must differentiate between "memory" and "mind". But that is hard, as they are so intertwined. Often, in eastern Mystical thought, self cannot be without other. This is often explained in the concept of "We are the sum of our experiences", and those experiences are intertwined with "other".

But perhaps this is incorrect. Perhaps "self" cannot exist without "other", because "self" and "other" are but facets of the same stone, metaphorically speaking. Perhaps you and I are simply separate iterations of the same mind.

Now, this can become limited in the way the brain is able to access the "mind". Something else I have posted relating to the above article:

The article goes on to show that the same can be said in animals like rats, but that is for a whole 'nuther subject.

What this shows is that not only is MEMORY stored in a higher place, but so is the ability to reason and logic. Logic supersedes man. Man merely taps into logic for his own use. His ability to tap into this logic must then dictate his perceived "intellect".

So what/who is the logical force that man is able to utilize? It is a force that also contains the elements of memory (which harkens to concepts such as an Akashic Record).

When i am challenged by someone who claims that there is no God, no creative force, this is my evidence. My shield. It is proof that there is a higher mind than me, than all of us. We are all connected into it. Our brains are merely the "modem".

Another snippet from the referenced article, that relates to the brain/mind functioning of "lower" life forms:

In the 1920s Karl Lashley conducted a series of experiments trying to identify which part of the brain memories are stored. He trained rats to find their way through a maze, and then made lesions in different parts of the cerebral cortex in an attempt to erase its original memory trace. His experimental animals were still able to find their way through the maze no matter where he put lesions on their brains. He therefore concluded that memories are not stored in any single area of the brain, but are instead distributed throughout it. Distributing the memory of every single event over the whole brain is energetically inefficient and mathematically impossible. If his reasoning is not confined to the brain, the logical conclusion should be that memory is not stored in the brain.

The question we must ask ourselves is, "Are animals and humans actually using the same Logos (logic matrix, as referenced in the OP) for memory? Is is the same "CPU" (to use a computer analogy) that controls all lifeforms? Is their only limitation written into the hardware of their brains, and its ability to access the Logos?

If this is true, then it would mean that we are related to the animals intrinsically. They are us, and we are them. This sounds very new agey, but also very Native American.

I am sure that many are uncomfortable with this concept, and i invite any challenges to my reasoning. But without much in the way of challenge, it must becomes perceived as fact: All is One.

reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman


Speed is incomparable to the origins of thought.

Look at my Pandora Pyxis thread for a mind bender.

It's distributed.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by LightFantastic

 

If this is true, then it would mean that we are related to the animals intrinsically. They are us, and we are them. This sounds very new agey, but also very Native American.

I am sure that many are uncomfortable with this concept, and i invite any challenges to my reasoning. But without much in the way of challenge, it must becomes perceived as fact: All is One.

Very interesting info thanks.

You may be interested in this as well Man With Tiny Brains Shocks Doctors

Due to time constraints I haven't yet researched the effects of hemispherectomies on adults because with children and the link I gave there are reasonable enough 'normal' explanations.

I have created some rather large software neural network systems in the past and I found that once trained you could knock out 90% of neurons at random and the network would still perform its job.

We already know the area where short term memory is stored and damaging this area affects this. I don't think we know how or where long term memories are stored though.

I have often wondered myself where instinctual behaviour is stored although it could be classed as simple information compared to the complexity of the design of the creature itself.

The idea that we all tap into a collective consciousness is very interesting and something I will look into further.

reply to post by LightFantastic



Touching on your point about instincts...the concept of "100 monkeys" has always fascinated me. Where you can have identical groups of monkeys on separate islands, and the skills that one group learns the other group automatically picks up.

Or the concept of memetics, whereby thoughts can occur to multiple people separated by great distance

Or some of the simple experiments performed by Ingo Swann and Hal Puthoff at SRI.

I understand that there are "normal" explanations for how brains can regain functionality. But they don't account for other phenomena.

But i do not doubt that people can have parts of the brain altered and impact functioning. Like a modem or a .dll file, if you don't have the right tools to access the information, then it won't work properly.

reply to post by Pilgrum


Optometrists uses the air puff test to test eye pressure. Because high eye pressure = glaucoma.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


If memory is not stored in the brain then why do people with traumatic brain injures cannot form new memories, or lost their long term ones?



"Memory loss, the most common cognitive impairment among head-injured people, occurs in 20–79% of people with closed head trauma, depending on severity."

"Why doesn't my short-term memory work? Well, let's quickly review how the brain works. We know the information flows in through the middle of our brain and branches out like a tree. Before that information goes to different areas, it goes through a channeling/filtering system. It's almost like a mail room--this information goes into this box, and that letter goes into that box. When the brain is injured, these middle areas get pressed upon because of swelling (pressure pushes down on the brain). The middle sections of the brain are also resting on the bone of the skull. Because of forward and backward movement of the brain in an accident, they get sheered or torn. A problem develops when there is a large flow of information coming in which the brain can't process, or when information is not being sent to the right place. So the mail room of the brain is not doing its job. "

www.tbiguide.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

I can direct you to one Takakki Musha who wrote a publication called, Possibility of High Performance Quantum Computation by using Evanescent Photons in Living Systems where he discusses mathematically no less how the human brain can preform "Faster than light" calculations using quantum tunneling.

A great read for those who subscribe to Orch OR and Hameroff/Penrose.

[edit on 26-5-2010 by YouAreDreaming]

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

If memory is not stored in the brain then why do people with traumatic brain injures cannot form new memories, or lost their long term ones?



"Memory loss, the most common cognitive impairment among head-injured people, occurs in 20–79% of people with closed head trauma, depending on severity."

"Why doesn't my short-term memory work? Well, let's quickly review how the brain works. We know the information flows in through the middle of our brain and branches out like a tree. Before that information goes to different areas, it goes through a channeling/filtering system. It's almost like a mail room--this information goes into this box, and that letter goes into that box. When the brain is injured, these middle areas get pressed upon because of swelling (pressure pushes down on the brain). The middle sections of the brain are also resting on the bone of the skull. Because of forward and backward movement of the brain in an accident, they get sheered or torn. A problem develops when there is a large flow of information coming in which the brain can't process, or when information is not being sent to the right place. So the mail room of the brain is not doing its job. "

www.tbiguide.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

To use an analogy, if a .dll file is corrupt Windows can have a very hard time writing to the hard drive.

If i were to remove 1 or 2 wires from my modem, would my connection be as strong? Or would i make the entire game room mad when i was the host and lagged out due to connectivity?

The brain is a connection device. It is the modem, not the hard drive, and i would doubt it is the CPU.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
The brain is a connection device. It is the modem, not the hard drive, and i would doubt it is the CPU.

There is almost enough evidence that the brain in the head could be completely removed and the subject would still survive. The real brain appears to be in each and every cell.

The brain in the head is more like a optional graphics card plugged into a mother board. Remove the graphics card and you lose a few fancy features, yet the main functions still work.

The motor portion of the brain probably essential for the overall nervous system, as it seems to help balance involuntary motion. Without it, you would have to constantly think how to move your body and be more aware of its functions.

Originally posted by dzonatas

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
The brain is a connection device. It is the modem, not the hard drive, and i would doubt it is the CPU.

There is almost enough evidence that the brain in the head could be completely removed and the subject would still survive. The real brain appears to be in each and every cell.

The brain in the head is more like a optional graphics card plugged into a mother board. Remove the graphics card and you lose a few fancy features, yet the main functions still work.

The motor portion of the brain probably essential for the overall nervous system, as it seems to help balance involuntary motion. Without it, you would have to constantly think how to move your body and be more aware of its functions.

I think that is a pretty good analysis.

At the SRI experiments, it was shown that plants responded to their environment in a novel manner. There would be measurable electrical impulses that indicate stress when a person made movements to harm them. They seemed to actually pick up more on intent that body language or voice.

reply to post by dzonatas


Could you please post some credible scientific links to back this up?

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
reply to post by dzonatas

 

Could you please post some credible scientific links to back this up?

I'll have to agree. Although a case exists where a baby was born with Anencephaly blog.taragana.com...

And we have other cases of people with nearly no brain at all having almost normal lives.

forums.canadiancontent.net...

I think if we took at 40 year old man and started to hack slowly away at the brain until it was removed they would die due to the fact by that age the body and brain had grown so interdependent on each other. Hence why a stroke simply messes a person up, the brain body connection has become hard-wired.

These miracle cases however do suggest that alternative cells are picking up where the lack of brain left off. Clearly something neurological in nature, it is a miracle and amazing that they survive at all. Can't refute that.

Originally posted by YouAreDreaming
I think if we took at 40 year old man and started to hack slowly away at the brain until it was removed they would die due to the fact by that age the body and brain had grown so interdependent on each other. Hence why a stroke simply messes a person up, the brain body connection has become hard-wired.

yes, i definitely think you're on to something with that.
when a person has a stroke, there is a 6 month window, immediately following the event, in which there is potential to regain full pre-CVA functioning, no matter how severe the damage done.

not many know this and it is a hard thing, indeed, all things considered, but i think it supports what you've written here.

------

now, to answer the OP:

thought travels faster than anything - the (variable) speed of light included.
but i have no proof of this outside what goes on inside my own mind, so i'll just have to declare it an opinion and nothing more.
:shk:

but i will say this:
when GOD answers, the answer comes before the question is even fully formed, as thought. this happens with all sentient life that is not incarnate. even if one half of the two mental conversation participants is still in body, the barriers that slow down the transmission of thought - neurons and synapses and such - are overcome and have no affect because the other participant is not bound by any restrictions of a material nature, whatsoever.

kind of like the difference between having a land-line telephone modem or wifi....even though the computer is still the same hardware physically, the speed of transmission is variable depending on the other end of the network link.