Our Hearts and Brains Emit Energy Fields

]reply to post by sirnex

It doesn't mean reality doesn't exist either. It just means that physics as we understand it in our macroscopic world doesn't behave exactly the same way was physics at the subatomic level. Matter still exists, reality still exists, atoms still exist, planets still exist, etc. Everything still exists regardless of you or I being around to observe it existing.

I don't know if this has been mentioned already, but quantum decoherence accounts for matter appearing as though it has objective material existence, even though quantum coherence is maintained at the macroscopic level.

Quantum Decoherence

reply to post by Realtruth


Replying to the OP's original post, this is the first time I have heard that the heart supposedly emits more energy than does our brain, or at least as it is proposed in this fashion.

Interestingly, it falls in line with a number of eastern mystical traditions which teach that our normal focus of consciousness is located at the heart centre. The purpose of the meditation practices is to raise this focus from the heart centre to the centre above the eyes in the mind, partly in order to stem the constant flow of energy through the heart centre (and other centres) and utilize this energy for internal spiritual uplift.

While our attention or consciousness is centered at the heart, we are subject to the ups and downs of emotions, and therefore scatter and squander much of the energy which is available to the mind and body. There are schools of thought who consider this expended energy as food or "loosh" for entities in the astral realms. These entities are strongly attracted to anyone who undergoes powerful emotions, and a tragedy such as 911 is a veritable feast for them.

reply to post by bsbray11

Here are the sources I asked for, and never received:

Because they're moronic questions with nothing more than intent to deflect and flame bait.

The mind is a product of the brain and all information it receives must first pass through the five sensory organs. If these sensory organs fail, or brain functions fail and/or are altered due to injury or psychotropic drugs then the mind is unable to perceive reality. The EM field generated by the human body is weaker than a fridge magnet, can not affect a compass and being as this is so, obviously can't affect a magnetic field generated by a planet. The source for the independent analysis was already mentioned, you decided to deflect away from that aspect of the discussion. The connection thing was taken from a dictionary, no need to post a source, look it up yourself instead of being lazy. If you don't own a dictionary, there are tons of dictionary websites published in numerous languages, pick one. I've meditated before and studies have been done on the beneficial effects of meditation, pick a study and learn from it. Changing reality and making changes to things in reality are different concepts when discussing metaphysical and material aspects of reality. You can be as sarcastic and make as many meaningless ill thought out remarks all you want, that's all you've been doing because you haven't a damn argument of your own. The reason I insulted you was due to your trolling comments, flame baiting, deflections, straw man arguments and your wonderful hands and arms argument that had nothing at all to do with my criticism of the OP's video. You sir/ma'am are the troll.

Considering humans are recent additions to the universe, I am pretty confident that the universe did not give a damn that we were not around to observe it's existence. Science is not a new age metaphysical dogma, what I said did not contradict that notion. Science does indeed study these aspects and all studies I have personally read about show these metaphysical notions either false or inconclusive. This is possibly why physics rather than mystical religious magic bull crap still provides new sources of useful information. The hormone argument was not akin to arguing from antiquity, hormones in themselves are not very magnetic by nature.

This part is a real gem though...

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by sirnex
...it is also true that the electromagnetic field that barely penetrates outside the human body has no physical affect upon anything nor is controllable to any degree



"no physical affect upon anything"

Wrong, because it controls the function of my muscles.

"nor is controllable to any degree"

Wrong, because I can control it, to control the function of my muscles.

And that doesn't necessarily mean its usefulness stops there, and of course the human EM field is responsible for more than that. So any claims that that's all it can do, would need scientific validation.

OUTSIDE. Learn to read. Every single one of your utterly pointless trolling arguments revolves around nothing more than taking thing's out of context, reformulating it into a new statement and them arguing from absolutely nothing. You have had no real argument nor sources to the contrary of what I've posted. You're simply a troll, and that's all.

reply to post by soficrow

Speaking of electromagnetism, the sun and all - have I mentioned the established link between strokes and heart attacks and the sun's low frequency emissions before and after solar storms? ...It's real - and it wouldn't happen if our cells and systems weren't all about frequency.



[Just tryin' to get this thread back on a better track. ]

Yes, that's called the sun's magnetic fields affecting the human body. That is far different than the human bodies EM fields affecting the Earths magnetic field.

reply to post by Jezus

Measurement does not collapse the wave function, the availability of information to a conscious observer does.

That's not what the results say. I've asked you before to quote it, what's wrong with simply quoting it and ending this debate? Right... Because it doesn't EXIST and you're getting this garbage from what the bleep do we know instead of from the science itself.

reply to post by mysticnoon


Quantum decoherence has nothing to do with human consciousness affecting reality. Quote a scientific article and prove me wrong.

Originally posted by sirnex

Measurement does not collapse the wave function, the availability of information to a conscious observer does.

That's not what the results say. I've asked you before to quote it, what's wrong with simply quoting it and ending this debate? Right...

You have analyze the experimental results and think about the observations.

You have to think.

The the results say that deleting the measurement after the experiment is complete has the same effect as not measuring at all.

Measurement does not collapse the wave function. Information does.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by sirnex

Measurement does not collapse the wave function, the availability of information to a conscious observer does.

That's not what the results say. I've asked you before to quote it, what's wrong with simply quoting it and ending this debate? Right...

You have analyze the experimental results and think about the observations.

You have to think.

The the results say that deleting the measurement after the experiment is complete has the same effect as not measuring at all.

Measurement does not collapse the wave function. Information does.

Dude, just quote it and source it. There's no harm in it. If there is a scientific article publishing the results saying that the experiment conclusively proves consciousness collapses reality, then by all mean link me to it. I've tried searching myself, but I can not find such a scientific article publishing those results.

What is so hard with quoting since you claim this is what it's saying? JUST QUOTE IT ALREADY!

Originally posted by sirnex
If there is a scientific article publishing the results saying that the experiment conclusively proves consciousness collapses reality, then by all mean link me to it.

Collapses reality? You need to study the topic more. This is specifically about the wave function not "reality".

And I have quoted the experimental results multiple times.

You are still going to have to use your mind to comprehend the significance of the results.

Originally posted by Jezus
This is the experiment the proves measuring is not what collapses the wave function.

The availability of information to a conscious observer collapse the wave function.

A Double-Slit Quantum Eraser Experiment
grad.physics.sunysb.edu...

"This experiment uses the phenomena of interference, produced by light incident on a double slit, to investigate the quantum mechanical principle of complementarity between the wave and particle characteristics of light. Using a special state of light, Walborn and his coworkers created an interference pattern, made a "which-way" measurement which destroyed the interference, and then erased the "which-way" marker, bringing the interference back. This experiment clearly displays the way in which nature is counterintuitive on the quantum scale and makes it clear that our ways of thinking based on our everyday experiences in the classical world are often completely inadequate to understand the quantum world."


Delayed Erasure

"Next the erasure measurement is performed. Before photon p can encounter the polarizer, s will be detected. Yet it is found that the interference pattern is still restored. It seems photon s knows the "which-way" marker has been erased and that the interference behavior should be present again, without a secret signal from photon p. "

reply to post by Jezus

And I have quoted the experimental results multiple times.

It does not specify nor mention a human conscious observer having any effect upon the physical processes setup to occur within the experimental apparatus itself. Again, we see the conclusion, the end results printed out on paper or on the computer screens after every single iteration of the experiment. No where is the human conscious mind mentioned as being the causation or having a direct effect upon any physical process occurring. If you have a scientific article that states this as the results of that experiment or as the intention behind the experiment to prove such a notion, then AGAIN BY ALL MEANS QUOTE IT!

Originally posted by sirnex
It does not specify nor mention a human conscious observer having any effect upon the physical processes setup to occur within the experimental apparatus itself.

Originally posted by Jezus
You are still going to have to use your mind to comprehend the significance of the results.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by sirnex
It does not specify nor mention a human conscious observer having any effect upon the physical processes setup to occur within the experimental apparatus itself.

Originally posted by Jezus
You are still going to have to use your mind to comprehend the significance of the results.

Why can't you simply post the scientific results stating the mind has a direct physical role upon the process involved in the experiment? Why!? Is it really that hard? You're the one who claimed that's what the results are saying, so just post it already. Can't be that difficult can it? I mean, you did read it right?

Oh no wait... Your making this all up! Ah, I get ya now. Just yanking my chain, right?

Originally posted by sirnex
Why can't you simply post the scientific results stating the mind has a direct physical role upon the process involved in the experiment?

I have posted the experimental results multiple times.

You still have to use your own mind to comprehend the significance.

Originally posted by Jezus
This is the experiment the proves measuring is not what collapses the wave function.

The availability of information to a conscious observer collapse the wave function.

A Double-Slit Quantum Eraser Experiment
grad.physics.sunysb.edu...

"This experiment uses the phenomena of interference, produced by light incident on a double slit, to investigate the quantum mechanical principle of complementarity between the wave and particle characteristics of light. Using a special state of light, Walborn and his coworkers created an interference pattern, made a "which-way" measurement which destroyed the interference, and then erased the "which-way" marker, bringing the interference back. This experiment clearly displays the way in which nature is counterintuitive on the quantum scale and makes it clear that our ways of thinking based on our everyday experiences in the classical world are often completely inadequate to understand the quantum world."


Delayed Erasure

"Next the erasure measurement is performed. Before photon p can encounter the polarizer, s will be detected. Yet it is found that the interference pattern is still restored. It seems photon s knows the "which-way" marker has been erased and that the interference behavior should be present again, without a secret signal from photon p. "

Originally posted by sirnex
Can't be that difficult can it? I mean, you did read it right?

Apparently it is difficult for some people to understand the implications of the experiment.

I'll try again to help you.

Deleting information changed the experimental results (seen above in the experiment)

Since information is not physically connected to what it describes.

Consciousness must be a factor.

Science deals with experimental results. You are going to have to think for yourself to comprehend the significance.

reply to post by Jezus

I have posted the experimental results multiple times.

I understand that, what I am asking for is the specific remarks that the mind or experimenter is facilitating the deletion itself. That the MIND ITSELF HAS A DIRECT PHYSICAL ROLE IN THE PROCESS. You have yet to post this.

Apparently it is difficult for some people to understand the implications of the experiment.

Apparently it is difficult for some people to do basic basic basic basic research in order to understand the experiment. How about you stop watching sensationalized movies like what the bleep do we know and do a really quick basic search on this experiment to understand HOW THE "ERASURE" PROCESS TAKES PLACE.

Here, I'll do it for you since your blatantly to lazy yourself and would rather keep spouting false sensationalized garbage about this experiment.

Quantum Erasure

Increasing the strangeness of this scenario, the next step is to bring back the interference without doing anything to the s beam. A polarizer is placed in the p beam, oriented so that it will pass light that is a combination of x and y. It is no longer possible to determine with certainty the polarization of s before the quarter wave plates and therefore we cannot know which slit an s photon has passed through. The s photons are no longer marked. The potential to gain which-way information has been erased.

The coincidence measurements were repeated with the polarizer in place. It can be seen from the data that the interference pattern is back.

How does photon s know that we put the polarizer there?

Photon s and photon p are entangled. Photon p must be able to communicate to s through some means that is unknown to us. It must be telling s whether it should be producing a pattern or not. But as we will see, this does not seem to be the case. In the next section, things get stranger still.

Delayed Erasure

The experiment up to this point has been performed by detecting photon p before photon s. The erasure of the which-way information was performed by modifying the path of p and then measuring s. One could regain a bit of reassurance in commonsense by believing that there must be some form of communication taking place between photon p and s so that s knows whether to interfere or not. Perhaps photon p encounters the polarizer and sends s an immediate message telling it that it can again go the interference route. This is not the case, however, as the next and final portion of the experiment shows.

The path of beam p is lengthened (the polarizer and detector moved farther away from the BBO crystal), so that photon s can be detected first. The interference fringes are obtained as before. Then the quarter wave plates are added to provide the which-way marker. The interference pattern and lack of interference pattern from these runs are shown here.

Next the erasure measurement is performed. Before photon p can encounter the polarizer, s will be detected. Yet it is found that the interference pattern is still restored. It seems photon s knows the "which-way" marker has been erased and that the interference behavior should be present again, without a secret signal from photon p.

How this happening? It wouldn't make sense that photon p could know about the polarizer before it got there. It can't "sense" the polarizer's presence far away from it, and send photon s a secret signal to let s know about it. Or can it? And if photon p is sensing things from far away, we shouldn't assume that photon s isn't.

Perhaps the funny business of entanglement plays a more important role than we thought. The two photons are entangled. They are connected together in a special way that doesn't break no matter how far apart they are. It seems that these entangled photons also have some sort of entangled connection with the quarter wave plates and the polarizer.

Making Sense of the Nonsensical

From this experiment it is apparent that interference is destroyed by a "which-way" marker and that it can be restored through erasure of the marker, accomplished by making the appropriate measurement on the entangled partner photon p.

In this set up, the "which-way" measurement does not alter the momentum or position of the photons to cause destruction of the interference pattern. We can think of the loss of interference as being due only to the fact that the photons are entangled and that the presence of the quarter wave plates changes this entanglement. The interference pattern can be brought back through the erasure measurement because of the entanglement of the photons, and the way that the presence of the quarter wave plates and polarizer changes the entanglement.

Entanglement is not something we encounter in our everyday world. The concept of locality does not hold for the entangled state like it does for everything in our experience. We encounter things that have a particular location, we can say that a particular thing is here and not there. We certainly do not encounter things that are in two places at once. However, this is possible on the quantum level. Two photons that are in an entangled state can be separated across the universe, but they are still connected together. In this experiment, with each measurement that was performed, the way the photons were entangled changed. This caused the very strange results that were observed. We like to think about photon p as being in one place and photon s as being in another apart from p. But this is not really the case.. We have to start thinking in ways that aren't consistent with what we experience in our larger scale world. Entanglement seems to play a very important role on the quantum scale of the world, so we need to think about it in new ways.

This quantum erasure experiment is one of many experiments being done that provides a way for us to better understand the strange nature of quantum mechanics. We have encountered strange concepts like entanglement and non-locality. Perhaps this is just the beginning of a journey to a deeper understanding of the universe and new discoveries.

grad.physics.sunysb.edu...

Do you understand yet? Do you understand that the experimenter is not purposefully directly deleting anything? Do you even understand after reading all of that that this experiment has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HUMAN MIND?????????

Jesus! LEARN SOMETHING FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

Originally posted by sirnex

Here are the sources I asked for, and never received:

Because they're moronic questions with nothing more than intent to deflect and flame bait.

Oh, alright, sure.

For the record, like anyone who can go back to my previous post and see for themselves, all I was doing was asking sources for claims that YOU made!!

Asking you for sources is, according to you, "moronic," of course. You're only proving my point that when you're called on your garbage, you just throw a temper tantrum instead.


The epic rant you just posted was just as full of fallacious reasoning and statements with no credible sources whatsoever as your whole presence on this thread, and your whole presence on ATS in general. You're apparently so arrogant that you think we have to take everything you say at face value and just take your word for it, because you say so. Well sorry man, but the world has evolved since the dark ages, and the scientific revolution marked the time when people started demanding proof for claims. You've made lots of claims, like I showed in my last post, that you never offered to source.


What the hell, here they are again:

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by sirnex
Nor does the mind have a DIRECT PHYSICAL influence upon the experiments involved.

Source?

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by sirnex
The EM fields generated by the human body have no appreciable affect upon the planets magnetic field as asserted by the OP

Do you have evidence for this, too?

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by sirnex
The EM fields generated by the human body in no way have any affect upon the Earth's magnetic field.

Again you make a statement with no proof. This is argument from ignorance. Do you have scientific papers to validate this claim?

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by sirnex
The fact remains that independent analysis did not observe any statistical anomalies at all. Again, argument from authority in conjunction with confirmation bias.

What "independent analysis" are you talking about? Why do you never give sources when you make claims? Do you think you're the only source that you or anyone else needs?

Originally posted by sirnex
The common definition of connected implies two things being joined together.

Again, source? Post a dictionary definition and do yourself in. You make a lousy dictionary.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by sirnex
You don't reach some amazing enlightenment and knowledge or any of the other new age concept associated with higher consciousness.

Spoken by a true authority on hard limitations of consciousness and knowledge.

How many months did you spend meditating in the mountains before you came to that final conclusion? Let me guess, you have a link to a scientific study to back that up, too?

Originally posted by sirnex
And yes, our senses can be deceived, but this is more of a how information gets processed issue than it is one of ZOMG I CHANGED REALITY!!!1oneone!1

Should I take this as another unsupported claim of yours, that humans can't change reality now either?

All of these claims YOU made and still haven't provided sources for. Because you are just making stuff up and expecting everyone to believe you out of sheer arrogance. Obviously you have no sources for all the garbage you post. The closest thing you have to a source for any of it is argument from ignorance, which is a logical fallacy.

Why should anyone even take you seriously?

You shouldn't be allowed to use the word "science" in any of your arguments, because you don't know what it means.

Originally posted by sirnex
I understand that, what I am asking for is the specific remarks that the mind or experimenter is facilitating the deletion itself. That the MIND ITSELF HAS A DIRECT PHYSICAL ROLE IN THE PROCESS. You have yet to post this.

A human mind designed the experiment, and decides to delete the information.

Duh.

Originally posted by sirnex
Do you understand yet? Do you understand that the experimenter is not purposefully directly deleting anything? Do you even understand after reading all of that that this experiment has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HUMAN MIND?????????

As I have said already.

The actual delete process is not that part that proves consciousness is a factor.

The result of the deletion (whether done by a robot or monkey) is what proves consciousness is a factor.

It is sometimes done weeks after the experiment by randomly burning an envelope.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by sirnex
I understand that, what I am asking for is the specific remarks that the mind or experimenter is facilitating the deletion itself. That the MIND ITSELF HAS A DIRECT PHYSICAL ROLE IN THE PROCESS. You have yet to post this.

A human mind designed the experiment, and decides to delete the information.

Duh.

Originally posted by sirnex
Do you understand yet? Do you understand that the experimenter is not purposefully directly deleting anything? Do you even understand after reading all of that that this experiment has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HUMAN MIND?????????

As I have said already.

The actual delete process is not that part that proves consciousness is a factor.

The result of the deletion (whether done by a robot or monkey) is what proves consciousness is a factor.

It is sometimes done weeks after the experiment by randomly burning an envelope.

The experiment was not about the human mind nor does it even factor in the human mind. The human mind does not do the "erasure" as is clearly defined in the quoted text given. Regardless of the experimental apparatus being designed by man does not detract from the physical processes that naturally occur as the experiment is showing us. What your attempting to say is akin to saying we create gravity by observing it, which is blatantly false.

Originally posted by sirnex
You sir/ma'am are a blatant idiot.

en.wikipedia.org...

Look the rest of for yourself you lazy twit.

Sorry, which one of your various unsupported claims was this supposed to be a source for?

Originally posted by sirnex
The experiment was not about the human mind nor does it even factor in the human mind.

So you are still denying the obvious fact that the human mind designed and conducted all of these experiments, and thus factors in?

Originally posted by sirnex
The experiment was not about the human mind nor does it even factor in the human mind. The human mind does not do the "erasure" as is clearly defined in the quoted text given. Regardless of the experimental apparatus being designed by man does not detract from the physical processes that naturally occur as the experiment is showing us. What your attempting to say is akin to saying we create gravity by observing it, which is blatantly false.

You keep ranting on about the human mind after I have clearly explained that the result of the experiment (deleting the information and having it change the experimental results) is what proves that consciousness is a factor, not the function of the human mind in an experiment.

Anyway the human mind does do the erasure....because a human mind created and conducted the entire experiment.

Duh.

---

I honestly can't tell if you really can't understand why information is related to the human mind...I thought you already got past this part with your "squiggly lines" analogy.

reply to post by bsbray11

Sorry, which one of your various unsupported claims was this supposed to be a source for?

Read the link, it's pretty clear.

So you are still denying the obvious fact that the human mind designed and conducted all of these experiments, and thus factors in?

Nope, never denied that humans created the experiment. Back to the usual straw man arguments I see.

reply to post by Jezus

Anyway the human mind does do the erasure

Nope, it does not directly erase anything as is clearly detailed in the quoted text provided earlier.

If I throw a rock into a lack, does the human mind make a splash in the water? Come one now... Are you that effin retarded?

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by bsbray11

 

Sorry, which one of your various unsupported claims was this supposed to be a source for?

Read the link, it's pretty clear.

Yeah, it's about EM fields. Maybe you don't realize you're talking to an electronics major too. I have known since the start of our discussion what an EM field is. I also happen to know that your link validates none of the garbage claims you made. So it's cute and all that you refuse to say which claim it's supposed to be a source for, but it's easy enough to see you're just trolling, as usual.

So you are still denying the obvious fact that the human mind designed and conducted all of these experiments, and thus factors in?

Nope, never denied that humans created the experiment. Back to the usual straw man arguments I see.

So then you admit the obvious way in which the human mind factors into and interfaces with the experiments. They would not happen at all without the human mind. It is an enormously integral part of every experimental set-up.