It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
you realy only posted an insult and how much you enjoy being able to insult these particular opinions.
not even any intelligent discusion on the question at hand, just a simple siding with the source of the article, how shamefull.
What does this guy think about quantum mechanics in neuroplasticity?
You can call it consciousness if you want - or you can call it the phenomenon of self-directed neuroplasticity.
Obviously QM has - if correct - influenced the evolution of our brain...
To believe that states of matter can be intentionally altered merely by thinking is to believe wishes can come true by magic.
Neuroplasticity (also known as cortical re-mapping) refers to the ability of the human brain to change as a result of one's experience, that the brain is 'plastic' and 'malleable'.
It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that there is at least one type of information
processing and manipulation that does not readily lend itself to explanations that assume
that all final causes are subsumed within brain, or more generally, CNS mechanisms. The
cases in question are those in which the conscious act of willfully altering the mode by
which experiential information is processed itself changes, in systematic ways, the
cerebral mechanisms utilized. There is a growing recognition of the theoretical
importance of applying experimental paradigms that employ directed mental effort in
order to produce systematic and predictable changes in brain function (e.g., Beauregard et
al. 2001; Ochsner et al. 2002). These wilfully induced brain changes are generally
accomplished through training in the cognitive reattribution and attentional
recontextualization of conscious experience.
Further, an accelerating number of studies in the neuroimaging literature significantly support the thesis that, again, with appropriate training and effort, people can systematically alter neural circuitry associated with a variety of mental and physical states that are frankly pathological (Schwartz et al. 1996; Schwartz 1998; Musso et al. 1999; Paquette et al. 2003). A recent review of this and the related neurological literature has coined the term “self-directed neuroplasticity” to serve as a general description of the principle that focused training and effort can systematically alter cerebral function in a predictable and potentially therapeutic manner
(Schwartz & Begley 2002).
Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by Astyanax
To believe that states of matter can be intentionally altered merely by thinking is to believe wishes can come true by magic.
What is your meaning of 'states of matter'? Because if it is what science says... then it is not 'matter' in the outdated classical sense - but probability wave functions (or something of the like, however you wish to term it... I prefer cymatic geometry from ZP vibration).
And even if I take at face value your statement of 'matter', then I offer this as a verified example of how 'states of matter' can indeed be intentionally altered 'merely by thinking':
Neuroplasticity (also known as cortical re-mapping) refers to the ability of the human brain to change as a result of one's experience, that the brain is 'plastic' and 'malleable'.
More specifically:
It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that there is at least one type of information
processing and manipulation that does not readily lend itself to explanations that assume
that all final causes are subsumed within brain, or more generally, CNS mechanisms. The
cases in question are those in which the conscious act of willfully altering the mode by
which experiential information is processed itself changes, in systematic ways, the
cerebral mechanisms utilized. There is a growing recognition of the theoretical
importance of applying experimental paradigms that employ directed mental effort in
order to produce systematic and predictable changes in brain function (e.g., Beauregard et
al. 2001; Ochsner et al. 2002). These wilfully induced brain changes are generally
accomplished through training in the cognitive reattribution and attentional
recontextualization of conscious experience.
Further, an accelerating number of studies in the neuroimaging literature significantly support the thesis that, again, with appropriate training and effort, people can systematically alter neural circuitry associated with a variety of mental and physical states that are frankly pathological (Schwartz et al. 1996; Schwartz 1998; Musso et al. 1999; Paquette et al. 2003). A recent review of this and the related neurological literature has coined the term “self-directed neuroplasticity” to serve as a general description of the principle that focused training and effort can systematically alter cerebral function in a predictable and potentially therapeutic manner
(Schwartz & Begley 2002).
Quantum Physics in Neuroscience and Psychology: A
New Model with Respect to Mind/Brain Interaction
Neuroplasticity Wiki
----
@ Korg -
Indeed, and thanks.
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye
you realy only posted an insult and how much you enjoy being able to insult these particular opinions.
That is correct.
not even any intelligent discusion on the question at hand, just a simple siding with the source of the article, how shamefull.
I have participated in dozens of 'intelligent discussions on the question at hand', in dozens of threads on this subject that already exist on ATS. I am tired of repeating myself.
To believe that states of matter can be intentionally altered merely by thinking is to believe wishes can come true by magic. It is tragic nonsense, and only the ubiquity of human desire and desperation that gives it currency at all.
Originally posted by Pauligirl
Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
are you trying to look for the least appealing and most unfounded? it sure seems that way,
Yes I was, because to me, that was pretty much the point of the original article. Quantum quackery. Why do you find it least appealing and most unfounded?
i got one better for you
vids.myspace.com...
your OP's source is of the opinion that Michio Kaku is also a crackpot,
Interesting. I hadn't seen that one before, but I don't think Lawrence Krauss is calling Kaku a crackpot. Or maybe he is, I don't know. Granted, Krauss doesn't agree with the whole multiverse idea, but it seems that what he's going after is expressed in the article's original question: "Can the weirdness of quantum mechanics make you well, or make you wealthy?" and the promoters of such as Deepak Chopra, and the book "The Secret." No real quantum mechanics there, just junk science.
Changing the brain's functional directives through altering the way that the brain functions (which is basically what your references are suggesting) is a far cry from altering a disconnected and physically isolated whole by way of that brain activity. One is like affecting the gas/air mixture in a carburetor by tweaking the adjustments, whereas the other is like inflating the tires by tweaking the carburetor. The statements you've chosen don't suggest that the human brain can affect anything external. Only the way it - itself - operates and functions. That's not quantum mechanics. That's learning.
Several features of human consciousness persistently elude scientific explanation. The emergence of a consciously observed world from a neuronal substrate entails a serious topological paradox: neuronal elements can be spatially separated whereas the space in which conscious perception takes place is experienced as an inseparable unity [1]. Any operation mapping the world experienced in consciousness onto a neuronal substrate will inevitably destroy the integrity of the self as inner observer by spatial distribution resulting in separated and reduced sub-selves. More intuitively than rigorously explainable by scientific reasoning, a solution of this paradox has been approached by consciousness models based on a configuration space arising from non-local quantum effects in the brain [2,3]. In particular, effects based on quantum coherence or non-locality, e.g., EPR (Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen) phenomena or entanglement have been suggested to provide mechanisms by which the self stays holistic and irreducible despite of being spatially distributed.
Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by Pauligirl
Tnak you. Seriously. It's as if magical thinking has invaded the sciences lately and no one has - until this article - had the nuts to call these people out on this crap.
.....This assertion that whenever I let a loaf drop in the bowl, that an infinite number of loafs drop into an infinite number of bowls, with all of them initiating fully legitimate trajectories that will then branch from instant to instant into limitless numbers of realities that will then branch from instant to instant and into.....I don't know what that ends up amounting to, or why the need exists for such a complete mess of meaningless creation.
Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
reply to post by Toadmund
a perfect example of how none of you know wth your talking about, you posted all this is nothing but a theory based upon a theory and nothing more, you clearly think they draw the theories out of thin air for no reason at all,
Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by NorEaster
Changing the brain's functional directives through altering the way that the brain functions (which is basically what your references are suggesting) is a far cry from altering a disconnected and physically isolated whole by way of that brain activity. One is like affecting the gas/air mixture in a carburetor by tweaking the adjustments, whereas the other is like inflating the tires by tweaking the carburetor. The statements you've chosen don't suggest that the human brain can affect anything external. Only the way it - itself - operates and functions. That's not quantum mechanics. That's learning.
Well, did you read the entire paper?
Changing the brain's functional directives through altering the way that the brain functions (which is basically what your references are suggesting) is a far cry from altering a disconnected and physically isolated whole by way of that brain activity.
Originally posted by Toadmund
Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by Pauligirl
Tnak you. Seriously. It's as if magical thinking has invaded the sciences lately and no one has - until this article - had the nuts to call these people out on this crap.
.....This assertion that whenever I let a loaf drop in the bowl, that an infinite number of loafs drop into an infinite number of bowls, with all of them initiating fully legitimate trajectories that will then branch from instant to instant into limitless numbers of realities that will then branch from instant to instant and into.....I don't know what that ends up amounting to, or why the need exists for such a complete mess of meaningless creation.
I would say you were full of Quantum Qrap.
I agree, it seems like all lot of the theories that science churns out nowadays.
It seems like they develop a theory, then they build another theory on top of that theory, then, Whoa-Ho! look out, have we got a doozy for you folks, now lets just suppose.....
It's like the federal reserve creating money from thin air, and loaning it out at interest, a whole system develops on this scheme, like theories, created from an idea, then it turns into a real belief. Then it's accepted as the way it is.
Hmmm, bad example, but that's how I look at it, physicists, taking a theory and creating theories from theories.
Like building an addition to a large house that sits on a sandy riverbank.
The foundation from which it is built is suspect.
Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
so your point here is that you made this thread for the sole purpose of discrediting quantum mechanics and the observer/observed relationship? why? isnt that biased and closed minded? or was your only intent to agree with your source for the OP
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Actually its the "quacks" (Metaphysicists) that have been talking about and predicted all the Behaviours of the quantum world hundreds and even thousands of years before Physicists "discovered" these things. Science moves forward in snail pace. In another 1000 years they will have caught up with Metaphysics.
I apologize for the dissent.
edit on 21-9-2010 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by NewlyAwakened
It's babies and bathwater again. We don't agree on how to interpret quantum mechanics, and we don't know anything about this phenomenon called consciousness. Why so quick to dismiss the notion that maybe they're related?
*
Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
for you to say that thought itself does not change the state of matter shows how uninformed you are on this subject, or else your in disagreement with many physicists who im sure have more professional experience regarding the subject then you do.
Well, did you read the entire paper?
I am young now
I looked at both the papers you posted. They are both theoretical and speculative, not based on any experiments in either quantum mechanics or neuroscience. Just model-making. The PDF was complete rubbish. And neuroplasticity has nothing at all to do with what you're talking about.
Yes, that's pretty clear. Young and hopeful. I think you know very little about quantum mechanics, too little to even understand how little you know. If you still hold the opinions you currently do after you have been educated--which I seriously doubt--then we'll talk again.
Matter which we perceive is merely nothing but a great concentration of energy in very small regions. We may therefore regard matter as being constituted by the regions of space in which the field is extremely intense. . . . There is no place in this new kind of physics both for the field and matter for the field is the only reality. -Einstein
As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.
-Max Planck
I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.
-Max Planck