Archive for dezembro 18th, 2015

Como os neurônios nos guiam versus como nossa mente guia nossos neurônios ( Ted Talk)

sexta-feira, dezembro 18th, 2015

Neurologista faz uma apresentação em video no Ted talk sobre  ” Como seu cérebro te diz onde você esta‘”. Excelentes informações, tecnologia, etc. Porem existe um conflito entre o moderno paradigma acadêmico e o paradigma da Matrix/DNA, o que motivou meus comentários postados no debate. A seguir, copia dos comentarios e link: https://www.ted.com/talks/neil_burgess_how_your_brain_tells_you_where_you_are#t-471036 xxxx Meu comentario de introducao:

Louis Morelli

Posted Dec – 18 – 2015
Is there any scientific fact as proof that this materialistic paradigma anthropomorphizing a bunch of atoms called cells in the way that they could tell anything to the intelligence ( or mind, or consciousness), of a human being? Because if we consider the opposite, the other way around, it works same way and makes lots of sense. But, for understanding it is necessary a knowledge and a research method that are not being taught at our modern universities: it is about the identity of all natural systems. It has been a force that has controlled the thermodynamic equilibrium of systems, from atoms to galaxies. This paradigma has Dawkins at the head, who already gave personality and purpose to a less complex bunch of atoms called genes! They believe that consciousness was invented by first time in this world by the human brain, who by magics and from nothing created the information for, since that they had not showed where these information for consciousness came from. Again, since nobody watched how it happened it is not a scientific fact, yet. Let’s look what have to say a different paradigma called “Matrix/DNA Theory”: ” Nervous systems and their evolutionary product, the brains, are a natural system that was developed since primordial cells’ body. It was a necessity of biological bodies for better working the identity of systems. As we can see at the formula for natural systems, a complete and perfect closed system is composed by seven pieces. Each piece has a specific function determined by the force we call “life’s cycle”, which was encrypted at any natural light wave as its seven different frequency/vibrations. The sum of information of all pieces, plus the fuzzy information that emerges from the interaction of those pieces, creates the control force, the systemic personality, which is its command of instructions, its identity. ( to be cont. below – sorry, when talking about a new world view, we need explain the basics, if not, nobody understand one word).

So, as natural system, the atoms, estelar, galactic, cells systems have their own identity. But as these systems are merely new shapes of a unique system that began at the Big Bang, and they are coming under evolution, becoming more and more complex, so, the identity also began at the Big bang and is under evolution. As said the philosopher: the mind, or consciousness, was sleeping at atoms, dreaming at galaxies, began waking up at the biological shape of that system, and is lifting up at human beings. But, it is still an embryo, the human head is the egg, the brain is the placenta and amnion. In this Universe is occurring a process of genetic reproduction. Reproduction of an unknown natural system that triggered the Big Bang and inoculated its code in shape of light waves. Since that here emerged consciousness, it is due that system has it, of course. When we are under embryogenesis, we get consciousness about the six or seven month. But, no one of us invented our consciousness. It was existing beyond our egg, or embrionary sac, our little universe, in a specie called human beings. Ok: six human months are 13,7 billions universe years from human perspective. Universes’ embryogenesis takes 20 billion years. What’s the problem with that? Are you not seeing that the embryo is still expanding? About space orientation, it is the identity that make the calculations, then send instructions to specific neurons that have specific memories and are linked to specific muscles as legs, arms, etc. An not the other way around. There is an evidence for it. As discovered Tor N. in his ” The User Illusion” our mind is slow than our brain when getting signals/stimulus that touches our body. It is 16% slower. Then, when you go to a parking lot picking up your car first time, you think or stop before for to make those calculations, since that space does not touch our body. ( cont. next post)

Louis Morelli

Posted a few seconds ago
I know that with this reduced explanation nobody will understand a new world view that never had rad/imagined before. It could be helpful, if you see the formula for natural systems, at my website. You will feel the necessity and the presence of the systems’ identities. Mental disorders are ancient diseases that still has not been eliminated by Science. We still does not know how to touch the brain for fixing it. It means that something is wrong, and after matrix/DNA, I am suspecting that it is the paradigma. By the way, considering the importance that is human health, I think that all solid alternatives must be researched..

XXXXX

Andor Bodnar

Posted 4 years ago
the brain tells you nothing… a neuron doesn’t know anything, and it don’t tell anything to the brain. It is the human being, like Jim and Sarah, that figures our where he or she is, not their brains. However they wouldn’t have the mental capacity to figure out where they are in space, so their brains are a necessity. But the notion that your brain tells you things is misconceived. xxxx
Louis Morelli

Posted Dec. 18 – 2015
I am with you, Andor. See Matrix/DNA Theory explanation above

xxxx

Dave Hoggan

Posted 4 years ago
In reply to: Andor Bodnar
So the conscious human came first and then the brain out of necessity? What are you on about. Read a book son. xxxx
Louis Morelli

Posted Dec – 18 – 2015
In reply to: Dave Hoggan
Is there any book that watched who came first and how they came to be?! That’s impossible because there were no human being as witness, that time. Any book about must be a philosophy’s theory, no scientific one. Do you really believe that the human brain created such complex thing like consciousness? Do you believe that consciousness never existed before in this world, so, the human brain invented it first time? Or got it from nothing, by magic? If didn’t have information for consciousnesses in this Universe, the human brain created those information?! There is other alternatives about how they came to be. Read the post above from Matrix/DNA Theory, it is one plausible explanation. xxxxxx Interessante o seguinte post de um leitor:
Marc Applebaum

Posted 4 years ago
Interesting information about the neurology of location–at the same time neuron’s don’t “know” where we are, only a consciousness can “know.” I’d argue that when we start anthropomorphizing cells, we simultaneously lose the meaningful sense of consciousness as a whole. So while the cells are the substrate within which consciousness of place arises, and understanding their individual functions is obviously important for neurological science, psychology can’t afford to forget abouts its primary subject–the psyche as a whole.

Nicotina ajuda a memoria?! Veja estes dois comentarios:

Tom Callahan

Posted 4 years ago
Very interesting, especially the brief mention of visual imagery. This may be related to an interesting observation I made when I recently quite smoking. On Sept 3rd, 2011 I quit smoking. For the next 3-4 weeks, there must have been a significant chemical imbalance in my brain, from the deprivation of nicotine. Normally when asked if you want to do something or go somewhere or have something to eat, your mind conjures up images or associated feeling with whatever was suggested. For example, normally when asked if you wanted to go again to a particular restaurant, that you have been to before, you conjure up your memories of the last visit, which determines whether you feel positive or negative about the experiences and therefore about the possibility of doing that experience again. However, for those 3-4 weeks, because of the imbalance there was no visual imagery presented, and decision making was almost impossible. It was as if I had never been to the restaurant before and had no recall of any feelings about the experience. When no “feeling” came through, I became very much aware of the loss of cognizance. It was not as if I received those visual images and chose to ignore them, it was startling to notice that they were not there. This occurred on many different occasions related to questions like, “What do you want for dinner?”, “did you see that movie?”, “have you ever eaten there before?”. After a month or so, the cognizance began to return, but after 5 months, has yet to feel the same. Decision making and going with the “gut” feeling, feel almost lackadaisical. Makes me almost want to start smoking again, or at least taking nicotine. And then related to your talk, why are some people able to remember where the car is and others are not. Why do some people get lost driving around the block and others never need to look at a map. And how does the brain chemistry play a role.
Mitch SMith

Posted 4 years ago
@Tom, Thank you for that insight! I can connect it with one of my own insights from long ago that never got connection till now. When I first began smoking cigarettes, I noticed that it affected my visual perception: When smoking in the dark, I noticed that if I moved the glowing end of the cigarette in a circular motion, I could discern a ghost-image of the ember trailing the primary image.. it was fun to make air-drawings with it (a bit like making circles with a sparkler firework). But the key thing was that – if I puffed the cigarette, the trailing “ghost” image lagged further. The nicotein was delaying the “reset” of my retinal sensors. If nicotein is doing that reset lag over the entire brain, then the synaptic wiring will have learned it all in the context of the neuron firing duration. Without that context .. I can see that all learning in the context of nicotein will become displaced to some extent. In effect, you will have to re-learn everything. This might help with devising quit-smoking drugs The ghost image was distinct. It appeared at the end of the fade-trail. From that – the visual system “watches” as a stimulus comes in from the sensor. It waits for the sensor to stop firing, then repeats it .. somewhere .. perhaps in the sensory layer .. but perhaps in the cognitive layer (the echo has no trail of its own – somehow, that gets filtered out as non-information[noise]). SO there are 2 things: 1. “see it”. 2. “got it”. INteresting.

Mais Informação sobre Cérebro e Consciencia

sexta-feira, dezembro 18th, 2015

xxxxx

Dúvidas Sobre Efeitos Eletromagnéticos no Cérebro, Consciência e Livre-Arbítrio

http://www.universoracionalista.org/duvidas-sobre-efeitos-eletromagneticos-no-cerebro-consciencia-e-livre-arbitrio/#close

Meu comentário enviado e aguardando moderação: Louis Morelli – Dec – 20 – 2015

O autor Douglas padece de seus “transtornos psiquiátricos” , como todos os humanos, e explica o porque:” Um delay de 0,5-1 segundo faz com que os processos de decisão acontecem de forma inconsciente e que a consciência de uma decisão é na verdade posterior ao processo de decisão” Esta demora da consciência em aprovar a decisão baseada na sua experiencia de vida e’ confrontada com sua fé, sua visão de mundo, e se não existir contradição, a decisão é aprovada. Por nunca ter experimentado estados alterados do cérebro e educado dentro da moderna cosmovisão materialista dominante nas suas escolas, ele decidiu que todos os relatos são alucinações sem respaldo na sua realidade, depois disto se encaixar em sua fé. Então existe o livre-arbítrio, pois se esta não fosse sua fé, sua consciência poderia ter desaprovado a escolha empírica do inconsciente.

Eu queria saber quais são suas bases cientificas para afirmar que o relato da cientista e neurologista Jill Taylor ( veja video My Stroke Insight do TED Talk) foi uma alucinação e a realidade que ela disse ter visto e sentido, não existem.

Nenhuma doutrina deveria ser aceita pela mente aberta e racional se considerar apenas dois fatos e uma teoria razoável:

1) A Teoria das Cordas sugere que existem ao menos 11 dimensões. Nos percebemos apenas 3 ou 4. Com isso, louco sera qualquer individuo que pensa que conhece o mundo ou a logica deste mundo. Em nosso cérebro faltam ainda os sensores para percepções da conjuntura maior, e por faltar estes sensores, nem ideia temos de como desenvolve-los tecnologicamente para fazer os tais testes psicológicos que seriam realmente sérios.

2) Nos perdemos a antena dos insetos, ela se atrofiou e tornou-se a pequena pineal, apagada no fundo do cérebro ( e sendo o elemento mais importante no cérebro em relação a efeitos eletromagnéticos, não vi nenhuma menção dela no artigo) . Não captando o magnetismo dos corpos, nem o nosso mesmo, e apenas confiando em instrumentos mecânicos que são meras extensões de nossos sensores cerebrais para dizer que sabemos sobre magnetismo, seus efeitos, é muita precipitação;

3) Vemos apenas duas ou três das sete faixas das ondas de luz visível. E falta ainda captar as cinco ou seis especies de ondas que emanam das radiações, como o gamma, o ultra-violeta, etc. Assim, todos os objetos muito distantes, sejam macro ou microcósmicos apresentam apenas uma pequena percentagem de suas formas e realidades.

E’ extremamente util e louvável que se divulgue a Ciência, pois ela é hoje o segredo da riqueza e poder militar/tecnológico das nações. O maior pecado brasileiro esta justamente na falta de pratica, de investimento, de interesse do publico pela Ciência.. Mas temos que desenvolver a Ciência para o bem-estar dos humanos e não do capital ou da fé e ideologia de uma minoria de predadores que estão no poder. Os relatos da Dra. Jill sugerem que tanto a consciência humana, como o ego, o “eu” e a própria especie humana são fatores temporários de menor importância. O importante dentro do humano ‘e o “não-eu”, a não-consciência, que se tornam mesquinharias perto do que esta dentro do humano mas é maior que o Universo.Quero ver qual o fato comprovado cientifico que anula este relato, ou o depoimento de alguém que teve derrame no mesmo local e circunstancias. E eu não acredito nisso, mas mantenho sob pesquisas. A Ciência se limita a fatos reais, ela faz a campanha dos fatos, que e’ sua campanha e não campanha sobre fatos ou não-fatos aos quais ela não teve ainda acesso, como os conceitos humanos, tais como fé e seus produtos.