Enlightenment: Just tell what it is.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

Can you breathe up there?

Since I am alive enough to respond in a thread, my educated guess would be "yes."

That is just an assumption though, further testing will be needed.

reply to post by Serdgiam


Because the cardiac muscle is myogenic, meaning it has the property of being able to contract rhythmically independent of any nerve supply. So the autonomic nervous system modifies the speed of the heart beat but the heart can actually be removed from an animal and continue beating. Isotonic solution/saline is basically sodium chloride that is isotonic to body fluids, and is therefore able to maintain living tissue temporarily. It contains the same concentration of ios as blood and the cells of the body.
Source(s):
Cardiac Nurse

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

Because the cardiac muscle is myogenic, meaning it has the property of being able to contract rhythmically independent of any nerve supply. So the autonomic nervous system modifies the speed of the heart beat but the heart can actually be removed from an animal and continue beating. Isotonic solution/saline is basically sodium chloride that is isotonic to body fluids, and is therefore able to maintain living tissue temporarily. It contains the same concentration of ios as blood and the cells of the body.
Source(s):
Cardiac Nurse

Do you have an actual source? I would love to see a test where the heart was able to beat an infinite amount of time outside of the source of its oscillations!

I have never denied the heart will continue beating. In fact, that is expected according to capacitance

Just to clarify, your "cardiac nurse" and myself are saying the same thing. Just like a capacitor in a stereo system will continue to hold a charge when the power source is cut. At least, for a time.

reply to post by Serdgiam


Go to google and type 'does the heart beat independently?'

See what comes up.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


I did when you suggested it before. Pretty much everything is stating exactly what I am. I am guessing you do not understand what I am talking about here, nor do you appear to care to learn about it. Thats generally the moment that I move on to greener pastures, so to speak.

If you have access to a test where the heart is able to continuously beat for years on end with no external stimuli, then you may have a point. Equally convincing would be a test where it shows a heart able to start beating on its own after being stopped for years (again, with zero external stimuli). I am willing to accept it is possible, but I will need to see the data. All data suggests to the contrary of what you are saying. Everything is essentially accounted for in capacitance, and it receives the initial electrical charge from the containing system.

reply to post by Serdgiam


The Body's Electrical System
Have you ever wondered what makes your heart beat? How does it do it automatically, every second of every minute of every hour of every day?

The answer lies in a special group of cells that have the ability to generate electrical activity on their own. These cells separate charged particles. Then they spontaneously leak certain charged particles into the cells. This produces electrical impuses in the pacemaker cells which spread over the heart, causing it to contract. These cells do this more than once per second to produce a normal heart beat of 72 beats per minute.

The natural pacemaker of the heart is called the sinoatrial node (SA node). It is located in the right atrium. The heart also contains specialized fibers that conduct the electrical impulse from the pacemaker (SA node) to the rest of the heart.

science.howstuffworks.com...

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

The answer lies in a special group of cells that have the ability to generate electrical activity on their own. These cells separate charged particles. Then they spontaneously leak certain charged particles into the cells. This produces electrical impuses in the pacemaker cells which spread over the heart, causing it to contract. These cells do this more than once per second to produce a normal heart beat of 72 beats per minute.

This still isnt disagreeing with what I am saying. For it to support your point, those "special group of cells" would be able to function without fail or entropy for the duration of the life of the muscle, with no input from any systems such as the CNS, etc. When it is taken outside of the containing system (the source) it ceases to beat after a period of time.

Again, I would love to see a test that confirms that these group of cells are able to generate this activity outside of the containing body without decay that is in accordance to capacitance and entropy. Perhaps we are having some miscommunication here... To me, it seems you are claiming that you can take a heart out of a body and it will beat indefinitely with no external stimuli or source (i.e. "independent). It is the same as claiming that you can use your MP3 player without ever plugging it in or putting batteries in it. While it may be able to store a usable charge, it will decay, and is strictly dependent on outside sources for this.

For a heart to do this as you claim it does, how does the heart convert the energy it needs to perform this process without the body? How, in your view, is the heart capable of giving itself the initial charge?

The natural pacemaker of the heart is called the sinoatrial node (SA node). It is located in the right atrium. The heart also contains specialized fibers that conduct the electrical impulse from the pacemaker (SA node) to the rest of the heart.

Pretty cool stuff isnt it? That SA node is akin to a capacitor. Though, the entire heart itself can essentially hold a charge.

Just like in any electrical device, it converts the source energy into a usable form depending on the system. If there is no source energy, then it will simply decay over time, in accordance to capacitance/entropy/etc. It will still be able to function, for a very brief time, in its original capacity.

This is getting extraordinarily off topic though, and that isnt really fair to the OP. I welcome you to start a thread about it!

Originally posted by Serdgiam

It should also be noted that the heart does not beat independently! In the situation you pose, its oscillations are based on the electrical signals received from the brain.

The heart muscle cells produce their own electric and pulse/beat.
The brain regulates.

reply to post by Serdgiam


I have only provided what is online - i originally stated that no one can say what beats the heart and you stated that it was not true and that the brain does it.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

I have only provided what is online - i originally stated that no one can say what beats the heart and you stated that it was not true and that the brain does it.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
The heart muscle cells produce their own electric and pulse/beat.
The brain regulates.

You are really starting to lose me here... Either way, this isnt fair to the OP. If you wish to start a thread about it, I have no doubt it will be interesting.

reply to post by Serdgiam



The heart muscle cells produce their own electric and pulse/beat.

You seem to be missing this bit.

Originally posted by Serdgiam
You are really starting to lose me here... Either way, this isnt fair to the OP. If you wish to start a thread about it, I have no doubt it will be interesting.

edit on 11-2-2013 by Serdgiam because: took something too far out of context for relevancy

Sorry OP. I was led astray.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

The heart muscle cells produce their own electric and pulse/beat.

You seem to be missing this bit.

Not at all, in fact, I have brought that up repeatedly and even went into more depth on that very specific point in one of my latest posts. You just arent quite understanding what I am saying. I edited the post while you were editing yours too, fun stuff.

Start a thread! Ill reply in that, but not again here (unless its on topic).

edit:

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Sorry OP. I was led astray.

You are not a victim, we are responsible for our own choices. Now thats on topic!

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

The heart muscle cells produce their own electric and pulse/beat.

You seem to be missing this bit.

Not at all, in fact, I have brought that up repeatedly and even went into more depth on that very specific point in one of my latest posts. You just arent quite understanding what I am saying. I edited the post while you were editing yours too, fun stuff.

Start a thread! Ill reply in that, but not again here (unless its on topic).

Where did you say the heart cells themselves produce their own charge and in turn causes the beat?

Enlightenment is the realization that 'it is just happening'.
What and why are for those who don't know.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Where did you say the heart cells themselves produce their own charge and in turn causes the beat?

Many here have offered their opinions on exactly "what" enlightenment is.

Who do you feel is right, and who do you feel is wrong?

Do you think it is possible to be both and neither at the same time?

to add: nice edit there

reply to post by Serdgiam


Syncronicity. I didn't know if you would have seen it and was about to repost.

reply to post by Angle


Balance. Harmony. Equilibrium.

When doing wrong as you see it is not wrong but right, it is then necessary. When doing what is "necessary " is wrong then being correct is irrelevant towards balance.

Sin originally was breaking the harmony with "God". It was believed that WE expelled God from the garden. In this respect it is not that learning is wrong and so we were punished. It is that we learned to separate ourselves from union. We made ourselves one instead of as one. The end result was discord, a divide, a fall from grace in confusion.

Our tower of Babel is our effort to separate ourselves from all things.

The good then would be to destroy our tower. Good would return us to balance even though it may be necessary to destroy that which has made us separate.

Death is then a return to unity. For some and because of their isolated state they do not return. They simply end. Like a drop of water spilled in a desert. Others who are closer to all things are like a drop falling into the sea.

Those that are close to all are overflowing then like an ocean that renews itself though their cup is small.

Others who have made of themselves a large cup in their isolation are as worthless to thirst as an empty golden cup.

It is not the vessel that matters to thirst but the content.

Like water with no cycle of renewal, no matter how large the ocean, it will eventually dry. Like a ship will sink no matter its size.

A vessel that does not grow will spill when more than its emptiness is poured in. A vessel took large will always be empty if its emptiness is not filled.

Then man is a vessel that must grow so as to not spill like a broken cup. He must fill himself so as to not be as empty as a broken cup.

Balance would keep us filled. Unbalance is the same as being broken, spilling or never filling.

If you by your actions waste in goods name, you then waste your good. If by your actions and in goods name fail to do good, then you are the same as evil.

Balance is more important than "good". Harmony is the womb of good and unity is the seed of all that is blessed.

reply to post by Serdgiam


It seems we define our own self and label it enlightened. This is also true. Like what is one about?

I have a nice thought on it, do people meditate to stimulate becoming enlightened, if not, can one become enlightened just because of aging, I mean, without intentialy 'going for it' and without knowing what enlightenment is. What if you don't know what it is and if it could ever happen to you. How/why? What would one say it is?

Where does the term enlightened come from/what does it mean?


WHAT DOES IT MEEEAAAAAAN? ?

Originally posted by Angle
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

It seems we define our own self and label it enlightened. This is also true. Like what is one about?

I have a nice thought on it, do people meditate to stimulate becoming enlightened, if not, can one become enlightened just because of aging, I mean, without intentialy 'going for it' and without knowing what enlightenment is. What if you don't know what it is and if it could ever happen to you. How/why? What would one say it is?

Where does the term enlightened come from/what does it mean?


WHAT DOES IT MEEEAAAAAAN?

?

To put my thoughts in a different way, every one and every thing is already enlightened, they just havent figured it out yet. I think that this sort of.. paradox is somehow introduced with the variable of free will.

Inherently, when we seek something out, we put ourselves into a position where we do not have what we are looking for. Why else would we look for it?

I am unsure if free will applies to any of the actions we take, but I remain firmly convinced it DOES apply to our perspective about what is happening. I believe there is even the possibility that it can have physical manifestations, perhaps in something like an effect on magnetic fields, and is perhaps not "just" a state of denial.

reply to post by Angle

enlightened
adjective
Definition of ENLIGHTENED
1
: freed from ignorance and misinformation
2
: based on full comprehension of the problems involved

Wow. That was so difficult. I'm telling ya, Google really takes it out of me. Whew. Anyway, now that you have the Merriam-Webster definition in front of you, has your understanding of enlightenment grown any more profound?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


AI:

You should really enlighten up!

HA!

*ahem*

Sorry.. I can be prone to outburst.