The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Major Bombshell : Manifesto For A Post-Materialistic Science :  (Read 186437 times)

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile


That's no conclusive evidence for the materialistic claim that memory can be stored or encoded in the brain , not even remotely close thus : that's just like implanting or replacing a missing component , or damaged tissue or damaged area of the brain by implants ,be it a device , a recording or whatever , no evidence for storage of memory in the brain : that's the deceptive simplistic naive realism  at work  : what you see is not what you get .



No, that's  exactly the point Don. They didn't just interfere or block a process, anesthetize or damage part of brain, or even elicit certain behavior by tweaking a structure.  They coded the information in rat's memory and fed it back. "When fed scrambled versions of the code, the rats could no longer perform the task."
 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
I can't believe the way you bandy about the expression 'Occam's razor', because you will go to any length to shoe horn the immaterial into biological processes, even those without gaps in need of a God.
And his methodology has scant chance of changing anytime soon. A dedicated scientist will weigh the results of the experiment and form his opinions based upon the resultant observations and change his opinion if a different interpretation is required. Don only chooses to believe those things which conform to his predisposed mystical persuasions and has proven to us all that he is not willing to budge from that platform.

A total waste of bandwidth..................................
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
That's no conclusive evidence for the materialistic claim that memory can be stored or encoded in the brain , not even remotely close thus
Recent evidence is consistent with, and strongly supportive of, that claim, if not conclusive. That, taken together with similarly supportive research results, including the rat memory experiments, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary and any plausible alternative hypothesis, means that the only reasonable position to take is the that memory is stored or encoded in the brain.

Of course, that position is provisional - if contrary evidence, and/or a plausible alternative hypothesis is forthcoming, the position can be reconsidered. That's how science operates - follow the evidence.

Oh, please , materialists following the evidence ? lol : you gotta be kidding me : materialists follow empirical evidence only whenever it would fit into their a-priori held materialist beliefs they have been taking for granted as "scientific " , come on , otherwise ,they would ignore it , deny it as such , or try to come up with theories , models or interpretations of the anomalous data , to get around the problem : see all those consciousness -related anomalies that are not only incompatible with the materialist production theory , but they have been also breaking its materialist dry neck lol

If materialists would really try to follow the evidence ,with scientific integrity and rigor ,  they will cease to be materialists , in the first place to begin with , since materialism has been proven to be false , thanks mainly to all those consciousness -related anomalies for which materialism can never account , let alone explain .

Those experiments have been providing no evidence whatsoever for the alleged memory storage in the brain : they just delivered interesting data that was materialistically mis-interpreted .


You , Mr. dlorde , and all those materialist scientists , including those who have conducted those experiments , are guilty lol  of simplistic naive unscientific realism in relation to the interpretation of the results or data of those above mentioned and other similar experiments , not to mention that they are guilty  lol of confirmation bias and more ,by intentionally and deliberately designing experiments as to confirm the materialist a-priori held belief assumptions on the subject : that's evidence enough for the fact that consciousness of the observer does shape the  interpretation or representation of the related  physical reality , through expectations, , confirmation and other bias : the observer and the observed are inseparable = there is no such a thing as the independent observer : our "reality " is just the product of the mutual interactions between consciousness and its environment ,and since the consciousnesses of materialist scientists are  shaped by materialism , consciously or unconsciouslty, no wonder that they try to design experiments in ways that would confirm their a-priori held materialist beliefs on the subject .

Have materialist scientists ever tried to falsify their production theory ? to see whether or not it can pass the tests , no , never : all those experiments of theirs were /are and will be designed as to try to corroborate or confirm their a-priori held materialist assumptions or beliefs on the subject .


Those experiments have delivered no conclusive evidence for memory storage in the brain , not even remotely close thus , once again :

You have to try to bridge the huge gap ( You cannot but fall through it lol ,poor lad ,  because there is no bridge in there , in the first place to begin with lol, just one in your imagination . ) between neurophysiological processes and mental states or subjective experiences , memory experiences ... untill you can do that = you will never be able to do that through materialism , ever thus , untill then , there can be no conclusive evidence for those scientists' claims regarding the alleged memory storage in the brain .

In other words : they should try to prove to us how quantitative neurophysiological processes can ever account for , let alone "produce ", qualitative mental states , subjective experiences , memory ....

Or as philosophers say : how can they jump from "is " to "ought " lol : the one does not lead to the other = They are incompatible .


Yeah, right : the only "reasonable position" to take is that memory is stored in the brain of course , since materialism a-priori assumes that consciousness ,the mind and their related memory are incoded in or computed by the brain = materialist confirmation bias ,in accordance with the materialist expectations on the subject .No wonder ...

If you would try to interpret that same data or the above mentioned experiments from a non-materialist perspective , the reasonable position to take regarding that is totally different :
The mind and consciousness + their related memories are neither in the brain, neither encoded in the brain nor computed by it , and hence ,there is no conclusive evidence regarding the materialist claim that memory can be or is  stored in the brain, since results of those experiments are no evidence for memory storage in the brain : the one does not lead to the other .

« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 17:56:00 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Cheryl :

Who said i am not interested in the physical reality then ?'......

........ that does not mean that i reject all what materialist science has been revealing so far regarding the physical reality  , needless to add : that's a nuance or a difference you're still not able to see , ironically enough , despite all those threads and posts i have been displaying on the subject , including those of this thread .

That's a completely disingenuous response. You've shown repeatedly no matter what the topic is, that you prefer the unproved mystical, immaterial explanation over a  physical one, even if that physical one is pretty obvious and straight forward, and has years and years of replicated evidence and models that make consistently make accurate predictions. I can't believe the way you bandy about the expression 'Occam's razor', because you will go to any length to shoe horn the immaterial into biological processes, even those without gaps in need of a God.

( See the definition of naturalistic science or naturalistic methodology which are no exclusive synonymous of the materialist ones .Naturalistic science and methodology that can be non-materialistic also , and can even be theistic .Science that's all about methodology  and not about any particular world view or philosophy such as materialism .That's why PEAR , for example , developed an extended scientific naturalistic non-materialistic methodology and epistemology , not to mention vocabulary , that includes both the subjective and the empirical rational objectve in science .
I have been saying all the above and posting links and more about it , on many occasions , but , you behave as if i did not do that , by continuing to think and behave as if science cannot but be exclusively materialistic , and hence the whole universe cannot but be explained through material physical or biological processes only .)

You've got it all backward or upside down , Cheryl :

Post-materialistic science is all about embracing both the material and the immaterial in nature , since all those consciousness -related anomalies , to mention just those thus , have been proving materialism to be false , so, all materialist extensions of the materialist version of the nature of reality have been proven to be approximately correct and fundamentally false , including the materialist production theory and the rest, which means that the nature of reality is thus not exclusively material physical or biological , and hence material, biological  or physical processes alone cannot account for the nature of reality , let alone for  that of consciousness , memory , the mind ....

The rest of your post is irrelevant thus .

It's only through stumbling upon anomalies that science can progress by challenging the prevailing scientific wisdom of the moment , remember : see the history of science then , or just that major one regarding the birth of QM that has proven the classical determinist mechanical Newtonian world view upon which materialism was built , to be approximately correct and fundamentally false ,and hence even QM has been proving materialism to be fundamentally false thus , despite all materialistic denials and gymnastics on the subject .

P.S.: I am looking ,as we speak, so to speak, for a certain link to a certain PDF whose  scientific content might turn out to be the dethroning of the materialist standard model of quantum field theory through reviving the old -new aether theory empirically : I will post that to our friend dlorde here below .

« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 18:25:50 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
You , Mr. dlorde , and all those materialist scientists , including those who have conducted those experiments , are guilty lol  of simplistic naive unscientific realism in relation to the interpretation of the results or data of those above mentioned and other similar experiments...<blah>
As usual, no attempt to address the evidence presented or make a coherent argument; just unsupported assertion and bluster. It's a bit sad really.
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
So the hypothesis is that consciousness is essential to the conduct of the physical universe. Therefore everything that has ever happened, anywhere, was driven by consciousness.

Now a lot of what goes on in the universe is inimical to life: black holes, stellar infernos, collapsing stars.... but it goes on. So either (a) consciousness is not a property of living things, or (b) living things can somehow make changes in distant galaxies, billions of years before living things existed.

If (a) then PEAR, Conan Doyle, and every other investigator of the paranormal, have been wasting their time playing with human subjects which can only introduce noise and bias into the system: they should be studying consciousness that is not embedded in the material, or the consciousness of rocks. If (b), their entire concept of causality is flawed because a conscious being may have affected the experiment some time before you even conceived of it.

Ironically enough ,of all the very few people here who have been so generously, interestingly and gracefully ,  participating to this thread , by sharing  some of their time , energy , knowledge and more , you , alancalverd , are the one who should know about the active and proactive central role of consciousness in shaping the physical reality , as a quantum physicist , aren't you ? ,was it not for materialism that has been  blinding you and clouding your scientific capacity of judgment and analysis , integrity , rigor .

As a materialist scientist , you are yet another  living proof of the fact that consciousness that gets shaped by world views such as materialism , consciously or unconsciously , is the one that shapes the physical reality,and that what we call the physical reality is just the product of the mutual interactions between consciousness and its environment where the former plays a central role in shaping the latter ,consciousness as an active and proactive agent  .

I hope that you can realise that fact by now . Thanks . Nice weekend .
« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 18:44:13 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
You , Mr. dlorde , and all those materialist scientists , including those who have conducted those experiments , are guilty lol  of simplistic naive unscientific realism in relation to the interpretation of the results or data of those above mentioned and other similar experiments...<blah>
As usual, no attempt to address the evidence presented or make a coherent argument; just unsupported assertion and bluster. It's a bit sad really.

What evidence ? Those are interesting experiments , but , they offer no conclusive evidence for the alleged storage of memory in the brain ...: that data is a matter of interpretation thus .

Only when you assume that consciousness and the mind +their related memories ...are encoded in or computed by the brain that you can make that unbridgeable leap or jump .

 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
dlorde :

The old-new revived aether theory in physics is on its way to dethrone the materialist standard model of quantum field theory : see this on the subject : New emprical experiments have proved the existence of aether : there is thus no empty space : aether is like a light-conductor fluid :

Physicists have been working on that , and it might take some generations to finish that work :

Secrets of the Aether by David W. Thomson.

This book sells on amazon.com .
Google search gives away a link to a free ebook version. I'd say grab it while you can.


Structures of the Aether:

The books' cover  is the Aether Unit. The "surface of distributed frequency” represents by the double sphere, and relates to electrostatic charge. Forward, linear time is but one aspect of quantum frequency. Forward time and space come together when dark matter enters the rotating magnetic field of the Aether, and produces the subatomic particles of visible matter. Subatomic "particles" exist at various levels of geometry. Mass has circular geometry. The electrostatic charge is spherical in geometry. The strong charge (or electromagnetic charge) has toroidal geometry. All physical existence comes together in the Aether, which has double loxodrome geometry.

Source: "Secrets of the Aether" by David W. Thomson.

eBook found online here: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FDavid_Thomson%2Fpublication%2F233814697_Secrets_of_the_Aether%2Flinks%2F09e4150bd19786c5fb000000&ei=HAxSVNbzMeH6ygOG04DYDg&usg=AFQjCNFi1c46DgLbgsNiJPJs42L94pytTA&sig2=BUNocND3VBXEFS_9iNdA8g
« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 19:02:22 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile


That's no conclusive evidence for the materialistic claim that memory can be stored or encoded in the brain , not even remotely close thus : that's just like implanting or replacing a missing component , or damaged tissue or damaged area of the brain by implants ,be it a device , a recording or whatever , no evidence for storage of memory in the brain : that's the deceptive simplistic naive realism  at work  : what you see is not what you get .



No, that's  exactly the point Don. They didn't just interfere or block a process, anesthetize or damage part of brain, or even elicit certain behavior by tweaking a structure.  They coded the information in rat's memory and fed it back. "When fed scrambled versions of the code, the rats could no longer perform the task."

So what ? That's no conclusive evidence for the alleged memory storage in the brain : the one does not necessarily lead to the other : those recordings are not memory itself , just its translated brain activity : see the difference ?

It's the same as when you damage a tv set or a radio device ,so they cease to broadcast sounds and/or images ,and then when you replace the damaged components in them by new or similar ones , they work again properly : does that mean that those devices used to produce those sounds and/or images ? = just an analogy = a material one at that , that is .

Life memory at least is a qualitative subjective non-physical process : how can the quantitative neurophysiology produce or store the subjective qualitative memory in the brain then ? How can you make that extraordinary jump ,leap or gymnastics from the quantitative to the subjective qualitative then ? , unless you are a materialist magician of course lol  who assumes a -priori that the human "machine ", or life in general,  is just like a computer or a machine : the latter materialist metaphors regarding the nature of life are false , so ... since machines or computers do lack many unique features and properties , capacities and more of ...life .
« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 19:17:22 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile




Those experiments have been providing no evidence whatsoever for the alleged memory storage in the brain : they just delivered interesting data that was materialistically mis-interpreted .

So what's the correct interpretation of what happened in that experiment? How do you explain what occurred with your non-material, non-local model of consciousness? How did they manage to code memories from the rat's brain, if memories were not encoded in the rat's brain? That doesn't really sound like a matter of interpretation. They either did it or they didn't.

Quote


Have materialist scientists ever tried to falsify their production theory ? to see whether or not it can pass the tests , no , never : all those experiments of theirs were /are and will be designed as to try to corroborate or confirm their a-priori held materialist assumptions or beliefs on the subject .
It wasn't because of any a-priori belief. If they had gotten a different result - if the scrambled code had the same result, for example, the experiment would have had an entirely different conclusion.
Quote
If you would try to interpret that same data or the above mentioned experiments from a non-materialist perspective , the reasonable position to take regarding that is totally different :


Be my guest.



 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Try to record the memories , or rather their translated brain activity , of some species , including those of humans , and let us hear and watch them then on some sort of a screen . lol

Recordings of neuronal patterns, or neuronal chemical and electrical brain activity ,  of memory are not memory itself ,just its neurophysiological translations , so to speak, just their chemical and electrical brain activity  .
« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 19:25:27 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile


That's no conclusive evidence for the materialistic claim that memory can be stored or encoded in the brain , not even remotely close thus : that's just like implanting or replacing a missing component , or damaged tissue or damaged area of the brain by implants ,be it a device , a recording or whatever , no evidence for storage of memory in the brain : that's the deceptive simplistic naive realism  at work  : what you see is not what you get .



No, that's  exactly the point Don. They didn't just interfere or block a process, anesthetize or damage part of brain, or even elicit certain behavior by tweaking a structure.  They coded the information in rat's memory and fed it back. "When fed scrambled versions of the code, the rats could no longer perform the task."

So what ? That's no conclusive evidence for the alleged memory storage in the brain : the one does not necessarily lead to the other : those recordings are not memory itself , just its translated brain activity : see the difference ?


No, you're wrong Don. It wasn't just "brain activity" or some instinctive behavioral response. As the article says, it was the ability to operate the levers in the correct sequence - something they learned, something they couldn't do before. And they did it with the code, and not without.

 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
... That's what PEAR and non-materialist scientists have been doing to pave the way for the birth of the post-materialistic science where consciousness plays a central and key active and proactive role , where consciousness is inseparable from its physical reality with which it interacts , and which it shapes ...

Let PEAR go, Don, it's an interesting dud that failed replication. Like its namesake, it started unpromisingly, took a long time to ripen, then turned to mush when people tried to get serious with it.

That's a matter of vision or lack of it , a matter of either accepting the evidence or not , a matter of interpretation or perspective in relation to  the consciousness -related anomalies that have been challenging the current materialist science : PEAR's work can be compared to that of Planck, metaphorically speaking (just a metaphorical analogy thus )   =  will be paving the way for the birth of a new non-materialist science,as Planck paved the way for the birth for the revolutionary QM that superseded the approximately correct and fundamentally false Newtonian physics upon which materialism was built , ironically enough  :

You still do not get the core essence of PEAR's work ,dlorde, that challenges the materialist mainstream 'scientific world view " (That's mainly why it is rejected by mainstream science .No wonder .No surprises there . That's no reason for me to reject it , on the contrary thus )  : the subjective and objective information are inseparable = the subjective and the objective are inseparable = the observer and the observed are inseparable = what we call the physical reality is just the product of the inseparable mutual interactions of consciousness with its environment where consciousness does play a central key active and proactive role in shaping its environment  = the universe is not impersonal , as materialist science wanna make people believe it is = the universe is personal = interconnected = there is no such a thing as the independent observer = the observer and the observed are inseparable = scientific naturalistic rational analytical empiricism must be extened as to include the subjective information that's inseparable from the rational objective one= scientific naturalistic methodology and epistemology must be extended in accordance with the above , not to mention its vocabulary  .


PEAR itself acknowledged the fact that it is extremely difficult to replicate some specific experiments of theirs , because of their almost impossible to quantify subjective information part ,since the subjective and the objective are inseparable .

Try to quantify your conscious subjective inner life and experiences then in their inseparable and mutual interactions with your environment then .

 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile


That's no conclusive evidence for the materialistic claim that memory can be stored or encoded in the brain , not even remotely close thus : that's just like implanting or replacing a missing component , or damaged tissue or damaged area of the brain by implants ,be it a device , a recording or whatever , no evidence for storage of memory in the brain : that's the deceptive simplistic naive realism  at work  : what you see is not what you get .



No, that's  exactly the point Don. They didn't just interfere or block a process, anesthetize or damage part of brain, or even elicit certain behavior by tweaking a structure.  They coded the information in rat's memory and fed it back. "When fed scrambled versions of the code, the rats could no longer perform the task."

So what ? That's no conclusive evidence for the alleged memory storage in the brain : the one does not necessarily lead to the other : those recordings are not memory itself , just its translated brain activity : see the difference ?


No, you're wrong Don. It wasn't just "brain activity" or some instinctive behavioral response. As the article says, it was the ability to operate the levers in the correct sequence - something they learned, something they couldn't do before. And they did it with the code, and not without.

I know : new learned memorized skills : the recordings of their related brain activity or of their related neurophysiological chemical and electrical activity are not that new acquired memory itself , just its electrical chemical neurophysiological translations : see the difference ? .

So, one cannot jump from that to the conclusion that memory is stored in the brain : the one does not lead to the other : logical fallacy , to say the least .

Otherwise , try to record some of my memories lol , and show them to me on a screen in real life as i have experienced them , to the last detail, , including their sounds smells , colors , images , tastes , joy ,sadness and the rest lol

Some of my memories are not pretty to watch ,smell, hear , taste , feel , pciture , see , imagine , ......though lol
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
dlorde :

See a serious challenge to the standard model of quantum field theory here above , and do , please , tell me about it , since i am not that into or at least not versed in QM .

Maybe ,our quantum physicist here alancalverd can do that instead .Thanks .Nice weekend to you all .

Here below  is that particular  link ,once again :

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FDavid_Thomson%2Fpublication%2F233814697_Secrets_of_the_Aether%2Flinks%2F09e4150bd19786c5fb000000&ei=HAxSVNbzMeH6ygOG04DYDg&usg=AFQjCNFi1c46DgLbgsNiJPJs42L94pytTA&sig2=BUNocND3VBXEFS_9iNdA8g
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
The old-new revived aether theory in physics is on its way to dethrone the materialist standard model of quantum field theory : see this on the subject : New emprical experiments have proved the existence of aether : there is thus no empty space : aether is like a light-conductor fluid : ... Secrets of the Aether by David W. Thomson.
If this theory is consistent with the available evidence, explains everything that the existing theories explain, and has more explanatory and/or predictive power, or is simpler, it is likely to eventually be adopted.

The fact that it is at least 10 years old and hasn't been taken up or even aroused significant interest suggests that it doesn't meet those criteria. There are thousands of people proposing ideas outside the mainstream - they can't all be right, but maybe he'll turn out to be the one in thousands that is. I wish him luck - new ideas that work are always welcome.

However, I fail to see what it has to do with your ham-fisted appeals to mysticism.
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
PEAR itself acknowledged the fact that it is extremely difficult to replicate some specific experiments of theirs , because of their almost impossible to quantify subjective information part ,since the subjective and the objective are inseparable .
Wow, that's classic Special Pleading - last recourse of the desperate. One wonders how you can be so sure it wasn't the other experiments that showed no effects that were the valid ones. If you accept every experiment that show anomalous results, even if replications fail to show those results, you'll end up with a cupboard full of contradictory results that you're obliged to accept. Oh wait - you can just ignore the ones that don't agree with your pre-existing belief system. Right on.

OK, whatever; you carry on believing in the PEAR fantasy while the rest of us continue in the real world.  Good luck with that.
« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 20:46:31 by dlorde »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
dlorde :

Sorry , almost no time left but for the following ,very quickly then :

I - There was no mysticism involved in what i was saying : our reality is psycho-physical where consciousness is inseparable from its environment and physical brain and body ,and where it does play a central key active and proactive role in shaping it .

II - That aether theory seems to involve the role of consciousness in the physical reality ....I have to try to read that related PDF ,so .

Maybe, our mate alancalverd   here can help in telling us about the relevance or lack of it of that eather theory .

P.S.: PEAR is  a fantasy only according to materialists , since it challenges the materialist mainstream "scientific world view " .

Thanks, guys  .Nice weekend .Cheers.
« Last Edit: 01/11/2014 21:53:43 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Gee, for something that can't be done or doesn't exist, scientists seem to be making rather good progress with it.

This looks interesting:
Real-time neural coding of memory.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17925242
Abstract

Recent identification of network-level functional coding units, termed neural cliques, in the hippocampus has allowed real-time patterns of memory traces to be mathematically described, intuitively visualized, and dynamically deciphered. Any given episodic event is represented and encoded by the activation of a set of neural clique assemblies that are organized in a categorical and hierarchical manner. This hierarchical feature-encoding pyramid is invariantly composed of the general feature-encoding clique at the bottom, sub-general feature-encoding cliques in the middle, and highly specific feature-encoding cliques at the top. This hierarchical and categorical organization of neural clique assemblies provides the network-level mechanism the capability of not only achieving vast storage capacity, but also generating commonalities from the individual behavioral episodes and converting them to the abstract concepts and generalized knowledge that are essential for intelligence and adaptive behaviors. Furthermore, activation patterns of the neural clique assemblies can be mathematically converted to strings of binary codes that would permit universal categorizations of the brain's internal representations across individuals and species. Such universal brain codes can also potentially facilitate the unprecedented brain-machine interface communications.


or

Organizing principles of real-time memory encoding: neural clique assemblies and universal neural codes
http://www2.gsu.edu/~rosan/Lin_Osan_Tsien_Trends_Neurosciences_2006.pdf

Or this

Neural coding for the retrieval of multiple memory patterns
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0303264706000712
Abstract


We investigate the retrieval dynamics in a feature-based semantic memory model, in which the features are coded by neurons of the Hindmarsh–Rose type in the chaotic regime. We consider the retrieval process as consisting of the synchronized firing activity of the neurons coding for the same memory pattern. The retrieval dynamics is investigated for multiple patterns, with particular attention to the case of overlapping memories. In this case, we hypothesize a dynamical nontransitive mechanism based on synchronization, that allows for a shared feature to participate in multiple memory representations. The problem of the choice of a cognitive plausible time-scale for the retrieval analysis is investigated by analyzing the information that can be inferred from finite-time analyses. Different types of indicators are proposed in order to evaluate the temporal dynamics of the neurons engaged in the retrieval process. We interpret the simulation results as suggestive of a role for chaotic dynamics in allowing for flexible composition of elementary meaningful units in memory representations.


Sparse coding
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Sparse_coding
Mammalian brains consist of billions of neurons, each capable of independent electrical activity. Information in the brain is represented by the pattern of activation of this large neural population, forming a neural code. The neural code defines what pattern of neural activity corresponds to each represented information item. In the sensory system, such items may indicate the presence of a stimulus object or the value of some stimulus parameter, assuming that each time this item is represented the neural activity pattern will be the same or at least similar.....

Abstract
The hippocampus and declarative memory: cognitive mechanisms and neural codes
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432801003655

It is widely accepted that the hippocampus and related brain areas mediate declarative (or explicit) memory in humans. However, little is known about the fundamental cognitive mechanisms of hippocampal dependent memory or about the nature of hippocampal neural representations that underlie properties of declarative memory. Here, it is proposed that the hippocampus plays a critical role, when distinct personal experiences must be encoded in relation to one another and linked within an organization that supports flexible, inferential memory expression. This set of fundamental cognitive mechanisms is consistent with key properties of declarative memory as observed in humans. Furthermore, emerging evidence from recordings of hippocampal neural activity shows that hippocampal networks encode episodic memories as sequences of events and the places, where they occur. In addition, hippocampal neuronal networks encode events and places that are common across related episodes. This combination of coding properties suggests that the hippocampus contributes to declarative memory by mediating the construction of a ‘memory space’ composed of a network of linked episodic representations.

Exploring the neural coding in behaving animals by novel optogenetic, high-density microrecordings and computational approaches: Towards cognitive Brain-Computer Interfaces
http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/102559_en.html


Information theory and neural coding
http://www.cnd.mcgill.ca/~ivan/neuro%20information%20theory/BorstTheunissen99.pdf
« Last Edit: 02/11/2014 02:26:10 by cheryl j »
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Gee, for something that can't be done or doesn't exist, scientists seem to be making rather good progress with it.

Thanks for those links Cheryl, some interesting stuff there I hadn't seen.

Although I'm not as confident as the authors about this aspiration: "...In addition, activation patterns of the neural clique assemblies can be converted to strings of binary codes that would permit universal categorizations of internal brain representations across individuals and species". I can see the possibility of broad categorizations, but limited specificity.
« Last Edit: 02/11/2014 13:35:41 by dlorde »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
If consciousness has a role in shaping events, we need to explain why the double-slit experiment gives the same result regardless of who makes the observation or how they do it. The only explanation can be that every observer's consciousness is the same, so either every person, strip of film, photomultiplier, and electron cascade amplifier shares the same consciousness, or consciousness is invariant between material objects and all-pervasive, which rather suggests that it is of material origin and by no means an emergent property of anything. Frankly, I prefer the suggestion that "self-interference" happens, whether anyone observes it or not.
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
If consciousness has a role in shaping events, we need to explain why the double-slit experiment gives the same result regardless of who makes the observation or how they do it. The only explanation can be that every observer's consciousness is the same, so either every person, strip of film, photomultiplier, and electron cascade amplifier shares the same consciousness, or consciousness is invariant between material objects and all-pervasive, which rather suggests that it is of material origin and by no means an emergent property of anything.
Yes. I find ideas of panpsychism eliminate functionalist descriptions and explanations of consciousness by redefining it as something independent of particular physical properties, moving it out of the physical into the solely metaphysical.

It leaves unanswered questions about the nature of what we used to call consciousness - what we see in the more complex living things and not in inanimate things and less complex living things, that seems to vary according to complexity & sophistication; and it doesn't explain why there is such a close relationship between this and the organisation and complexity of the brain, and why its various observable attributes seem to be so specifically localised in the brain. 

 
Quote
Frankly, I prefer the suggestion that "self-interference" happens, whether anyone observes it or not.
You and me both.
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
alancalverd, dlorde :

I- What do you think about that PDF regarding the eather theory in physics ? : Is it based on solid physics and maths or not ? You can get that PDF for free through the above displayed links .Normally it costs about $ 75 on amazon.com,so .

It asserts that there is an underlying non-material  5th and more fundamental than the rest force in nature that's behind keeping the universe together and that permeates everything from elementary particles all the way up to the macro -universe . A force that's huge : if that non-physical underlying force does exist : how can that it's not been accounted for by the standard model of quantum field theory ? How could it not be detected ? since it seems to be the most significant force of them all in nature by far .

II - See how Robert Lanza has developed his biocentrism theory that's based on the central role of consciousness and life in the universe :

http://www.robertlanzabiocentrism.com/biocentrism/

III- Many physicists think otherwise in relation to the double slit experiment and its related collapse of the wave function ,including PEAR , including the manifesto of this thread , and including many quantum physicists such as Amit Goswami and others .

IV- How can you quantify the subjective information of memory , consciousness ...? since materialism assumes that they are encoded in or computed by the brain .

Cheryl :

Consciousness , the mind and their related memories are non-physical processes+ non-local , and hence they are neither in the brain nor are they the product of brain activity : so , searching for consciousness , the mind , memories ... in the brain is a dead -end street : neuroscience will never be able to explain consciousness , the mind , memories ...thus : it can only try to study how the brain works , how the mind ,consciousness, memories ...work through it , but can never tell us much , if anything at all, about either the nature of consciousness, that of the the mind , or that of memories ...

Otherwise , tell me how the subjective information of our inner lives , subjective experiences , subjective memories can be encoded in or computed by the brain ?

Thanks for those above displayed links of yours by the way .

They can calculate the brain activity all they want,that will not tell us much , if anything at all , about the nature of consciousness, the mind , memories , imagination, intelligence , inner life , creativity ... ( I have  read a scientific article about supercomputers that take 20 mns to calculate just 1 sec of brain activity ,and even if the capacity of those computers gets improved  exponentially through quantum supercomputers,that would tell us only about how the brain relatively works .)

« Last Edit: 02/11/2014 18:41:17 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline DonQuichotte

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1763
    • View Profile
Cheryl, dlorde : You're gonna like the following , but , don't jump to premature conclusions yet :

" Mind-Reading Device Invented By Scientists To Eave-drop On ...Inner voice lol :


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/11199031/Mind-reading-device-invented-by-scientists-to-eavesdrop-on-inner-voice.html



« Last Edit: 02/11/2014 19:53:14 by DonQuichotte »
 

Offline cheryl j

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1460
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile



IV- How can you quantify the subjective information of memory , consciousness ...? since materialism assumes that they are encoded in or computed by the brain .


You use the word subjective like it's some trump card, a barrier you are 100% certain we will never be able to cross. You are more than willing to accept any "indirect" evidence of psi - that doesn't bother you in the least - but indirect and replicable evidence of subjective experience is outlandish to you. This is despite the fact that we've already made considerable progress. A mere 50-60 years ago, Behaviorists said most of mental activity couldn't be studied, because it couldn't be observed or measured - only behavior was suitable subject matter for science. That has changed with neuro-imaging and ingenious study designs, like those of Ramachandran's, who proved that subjective experiences like synesthesia were real sensory phenomena. We are starting to decode the language of neurons. We can reconstruct the visual images of things a person is looking at with surprising accuracy. All of this was once considered an impossibility because it was "subjective" internal human experience. And the technology just keeps getting better and better.

Quote

Consciousness , the mind and their related memories are non-physical processes+ non-local , and hence they are neither in the brain nor are they the product of brain activity :

Well, that's your theory, but not most scientist's. Tell me how this non local, immaterial consciousness interfaces with matter. Tell me what field or particle carries the information in your consciousness or immortal soul from place to place. If you are proposing something like this, as Carroll pointed out in his lecture, you are not simply "adding" something extra to what is already known about physics - the standard model would  actually have to be wrong, almost all of it, and there's just too much evidence that it's not. Which is not to say that someone is not free to chuck science completely out the window and believe whatever he likes. But you can't hedge your bets anymore, and say okay, physics is right about certain things but there's still room for souls, and telekinesis -I can make machines generate certain numbers with my thoughts,and see into the future, and read minds, etc. No, you can't, and dark matter and aether will not help you do it.

« Last Edit: 02/11/2014 22:28:20 by cheryl j »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums