[smart (OP)]

Hello kids,

Today we're going to talk about brain-to-brain coupling. 

Precisely, I hope to provide you valuable informations on techniques for remote activation of the central nervous system through non-invasive pulsed utrasounds.

Also, I want to tell you something about current research in transcranial pulsed ultrasound technology: I have not invented ultrasonic neuromodulation in my dreams! Neither do I have hallucinated the concept of brain-to-brain coupling: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01319

In fact, my investigation demonstrates a whole ecosystems of high-profile scientists, research programs, and laboratories dedicated to understanding how to develop ultrasonic neuromodulatory systems, brain-to-brain interfaces, and advanced neuroprothestics devices...
 
So, can someone share any thoughts regarding the possibility of brain-to-brain coupling and real-time sharing of neuronal activity using pulsed ultrasonic signals in the 350 kHz range??

tk

http://www.nicolelislab.net/?p=369
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060410
https://www.tylerlab.com/ultrasonic-neuromodulation/

[guest39538]

Hello kids,

Today we're going to talk about brain-to-brain coupling. 

Precisely, I hope to provide you valuable informations on techniques for remote activation of the central nervous system through non-invasive pulsed utrasounds.

Also, I want to tell you something about current research in transcranial pulsed ultrasound technology: I have not invented ultrasonic neuromodulation in my dreams! Neither do I have hallucinated the concept of brain-to-brain coupling: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01319

In fact, my investigation demonstrates a whole ecosystems of high-profile scientists, research programs, and laboratories dedicated to understanding how to develop ultrasonic neuromodulatory systems, brain-to-brain interfaces, and advanced neuroprothestics devices...
 
So, can someone share any thoughts regarding the possibility of brain-to-brain coupling and real-time sharing of neuronal activity using pulsed ultrasonic signals in the 350 kHz range??

tk

http://www.nicolelislab.net/?p=369
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060410
https://www.tylerlab.com/ultrasonic-neuromodulation/

Interesting, I would say that maybe our brains are already coupled by the electromagnetic radiation between observers.
However, our brains just do not have the capability or have not yet evolved enough to transmit and receive thoughts.  A signal can travel from one object to a receiver and be decoded into information, so why not think signals could be transmitted and received via brain in a similar way to  transmitting and receiving signals.


added- It may be a case of because we evolved voice and can communicate that way, our brains do not need to evolve any further.

[guest39538]

In saying that, when you read this message, I have just transferred my thoughts to you via electromagnetic radiation,   your brain is seeing my thoughts via a third party .

Conclusion ,  our brains are coupled via electromagnetic radiation .


p.s cool subject dude.

[smart (OP)]

In saying that, when you read this message, I have just transferred my thoughts to you via electromagnetic radiation,   your brain is seeing my thoughts via a third party .

Conclusion ,  our brains are coupled via electromagnetic radiation .


p.s cool subject dude.

Thanks bro.

Consider a system in which a group of people could control another group of people remotely with ultrasounds...

[guest39538]

In saying that, when you read this message, I have just transferred my thoughts to you via electromagnetic radiation,   your brain is seeing my thoughts via a third party .

Conclusion ,  our brains are coupled via electromagnetic radiation .


p.s cool subject dude.

Thanks bro.

Consider a system in which a group of people could control another group of people remotely with ultrasounds...

I do not think that would be possible , I do not think a persons brain would recognise the signal, it would just be white noise to them.  I think it would have to be a signal based on an individual persons brain wave frequencies.   But there probably is a master frequency of control.  It is probably doable.

[Bored chemist]

I do not think that would be possible

HOLY SH1T!
THEBOX JUST SAID SOMETHING SENSIBLE!
Are we sure his account hasn't been hacked?

[smart (OP)]

HOLY SH1T!
THEBOX JUST SAID SOMETHING SENSIBLE!
Are we sure his account hasn't been hacked?

A$$H0LE.

Can't you be serious when it counts?

[Bored chemist]

HOLY SH1T!
THEBOX JUST SAID SOMETHING SENSIBLE!
Are we sure his account hasn't been hacked?

A$$H0LE.

Can't you be serious when it counts?

Sure.
Let me know when that happens.

[Kryptid]

Hello kids,

Today we're going to talk about brain-to-brain coupling. 

Precisely, I hope to provide you valuable informations on techniques for remote activation of the central nervous system through non-invasive pulsed utrasounds.

Also, I want to tell you something about current research in transcranial pulsed ultrasound technology: I have not invented ultrasonic neuromodulation in my dreams! Neither do I have hallucinated the concept of brain-to-brain coupling: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01319

In fact, my investigation demonstrates a whole ecosystems of high-profile scientists, research programs, and laboratories dedicated to understanding how to develop ultrasonic neuromodulatory systems, brain-to-brain interfaces, and advanced neuroprothestics devices...
 
So, can someone share any thoughts regarding the possibility of brain-to-brain coupling and real-time sharing of neuronal activity using pulsed ultrasonic signals in the 350 kHz range??

tk

http://www.nicolelislab.net/?p=369
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060410
https://www.tylerlab.com/ultrasonic-neuromodulation/

The brain-to-brain coupling mentioned requires artificial devices to be in or near the brain in order to work, so it cannot be done covertly. The ultrasound stimulation article does not say anything about being able to mind-control human beings. Even if a sufficiently advanced form of ultrasonic technology could control a human brain, there's no evidence that such technology exists currently or is being used in secret to make people commit crimes.

[evan_au]

using pulsed ultrasonic signals in the 350 kHz range??

We already use pulsed signals in the 350kHz range (and above) for ultrasound imaging.

They aren't so useful for imaging the brain, because it is encased in a bony protective box - the skull.
- Likewise, they wouldn't be very effective for modifying brain operation, because it is encased in a bony protective box - the skull.

I didn't hear anything during a recent ultrasound, and I don't recall doing anything strange afterwards.
This is because 350kHz has much higher attenuation, and is even farther outside the human range than the 50kHz ultrasonic vocalizations routinely used by mice and bats (and advocated in a recent post from tkadm30).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasound#Perception

What is brain-to-brain coupling?

It has been given many names, such as speech, prose, poetry, song, facial expressions, sign language, Braille, texting and blogging.

Ultrasound, radio waves, X-Rays and neutrinos all fail as potential media for brain to brain coupling, as they are neither produced by brains (or the body attached to them) or received by brains (or the body attached to them).

[smart (OP)]

- Likewise, they wouldn't be very effective for modifying brain operation, because it is encased in a bony protective box - the skull.

This is incorrect. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10848570

[evan_au]

See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10848570

This was not showing that ultrasound can penetrate a thick skull - it was looking at sounds that are picked up by the ears.

None of the subjects recognized the HFC as sound when it was presented alone. ... no enhancement of alpha-EEG was evident when either an HFC or an LFC was presented separately.

This states that a HFC alone made no audible sound, and made no difference to brain activity. This shows that your speculation is unfounded.

The rest of the abstract shows that:
- Audible music affects the brain
- Their process of filtering the sound to separate high and low frequencies had a detectable impact on the sound.

By the way, I have heard gamelan music before, and I think they were exaggerating a bit when they suggested that it was "extremely rich in HFCs". To me, it is mostly mid-range audible frequencies.

Watch+listen:

[smart (OP)]

This states that a HFC alone made no audible sound, and made no difference to brain activity. This shows that your speculation is unfounded.

Read this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3269540/

"The coupling between the speaker’s and listener’s brain responses during natural communication relies on speaker-listener brain coupling."

[Bored chemist]

"The coupling between the speaker’s and listener’s brain responses during natural communication relies on speaker-listener brain coupling."

That's a fancy way of saying people talk to eachother.

Is the article meant to be a joke?
The first line of the abstract says "Cognition materializes in an interpersonal space. "
well, it doesn't.
Cognition materialises between people's ears.

The second sentence says "The emergence of complex behaviors requires the coordination of actions among individuals according to a shared set of rules"
which is  paradoxical since sharing a set of rules is, itself a complex behaviour.
Which comes first the chicken or the egg?

It then says "Despite the central role of other individuals in shaping our minds, most cognitive studies focus on processes that occur within a single individual. We call for a shift from a single-brain to a multi-brain frame of reference."
Which is daft.
A single brain is beyond our current ability to model well.
They propose to make it harder by modelling multiple brains.

And so on.