Our Hearts and Brains Emit Energy Fields

reply to post by sirnex

Consciousness is NOT a factor.

I wonder if observation would be included in consciousness? Because observation makes a difference in the particle/wave phenomenon. I'm not trying to argue, just trying to learn here, and find some credence in the cosmic/quantum/living organism connections, aka oneness, which is energy related, imo.

spec

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist
reply to post by sirnex

 

Consciousness is NOT a factor.

I wonder if observation would be included in consciousness?

So far science has not been able to make a conclusion about that. Mostly this is because science has yet to quantify consciousness itself in any way, or find any way to measure its existence. But consciousness obviously exists.

Sirnex will no doubt use the argument from ignorance fallacy and tell you that no, consciousness is not a factor, even though science does not actually say this. He thinks that if something isn't proven yet, then it's automatically wrong, and then he'll privilege you with a bunch of insults on top of that.


All you have to do is ask him for sources for his claims and you'll immediately see that he is arguing from ignorance.

Originally posted by sirnex
I get it. An apple is an apple because we associate an abstract grouping of symbols that inherently have no purpose or meaning in and of themselves other than that we understand those abstract squiggles as signifying what type of fruit we're eating.

So if deleting the squiggles can influence the physical realty of the apple.

What does that mean?

reply to post by Jezus

So if deleting the squiggles can influence the physical realty of the apple.

What does that mean?

It means your reaching and grasping for an argument to hang on to. Regardless of what we define that object, regardless of us even being around to define it, it still exists. The universe doesn't give a rats bottom what we call it, how we measure it, how we define it, how we objectify it, or if we even exist period. It still keeps on plugging away just as it has been for billions upon billions of years before we even came to be. Before our star was even a star. Before our planet had yet to even form.

This thread demonstrates the dogmatic narcissism of humanity. The need and desire to be special, something more important than reality itself. It's just sad really.

We didn't exist for the last 13 billion plus years. We've only been around for tops two million. What's that tell you? Does that still tell you human consciousness has an affect upon how reality works?

Originally posted by sirnex
The universe doesn't give a rats bottom what we call it, how we measure it, how we define it, how we objectify it, or if we even exist period.

Considering that humans themselves are inherently part of the universe already, this statement is demonstrably false.

I suppose Sirnex had consulting a rock in mind, or some equally competent argument. Maybe a rock or space debris is part of the universe to him, but intelligent beings are somehow completely separate from it, as if we came from something else besides this universe.

Humans concern themselves with all of those things, and are part of the universe. Therefore the universe does show concern for all of those things, via humans and human consciousness itself.

reply to post by sirnex


Maybe because anything metaphysical turns you off, you have missed some pertinent evidence/studies on the subject. Check these threads and resources to include in your determinations.
Consciousness creates reality

New Video: Russian Scientists beginning to prove that consciousness effects reality?

Reality Check

"Reality" is founded on Thought and Consciousness, not Matter

consciousness is non-orientable. reality is a knot. (Quantum Theoretic Machines)

ETA: Some fascinating science work in this book too by Ervin Laszlo: Science And The Akashic Field

Excerpts and comments on this work

In quantum physics the issues revolve around the phenomena of non-locality; superpositions of states; the collapse of the superposition where “it appears to choose its real states on its own”; EPR pairs where “once they are in the same state, they remain linked no matter how far they travel from each other” and also the effect of simply having an available observation channel, even if it is not used, it can still collapse the wavefunction of an experiment. These phenomena have been described exhaustively in countless places so I wont reiterate them here.

In regards to biology he states that “Instant, multidimensional correlations are coming to light between the parts of a living organism, and even between organisms and environments... [these] are nearly as 'entangled' as microparticles that originate in the same quantum state [such as EPR pairs]... What happens to one cell or organ also happens in some way to all other cells and organs... [also] what happens in the external milieu of the organism is reflected in some way in its internal milieu. Thanks to this coherence, the organism can evolve in tune with its environment... [Darwinian evolution and random mutation is not enough]... That our world is not populated solely by the simplest of organisms, such as bacteria ... is due in the last analysis to the kind of 'entanglement' that exists among genes, organisms, organism species, and their niches within the biosphere.” Furthermore, “the organism's coherence goes beyond the coherence of a biochemical system; in some respects it attains the coherence of a quantum system... Simple collisions among neighbouring molecules... must be complemented by a network of instant communication that correlates all parts of the living system, even those that are distant from one another. Rare molecules, for example, are seldom contiguous, yet they find each other throughout the organism. There would not be sufficient time for this to occur by a random process of jiggling and mixing; the molecules need to locate and respond to each other specifically, even if they are distant.”

In regards to consciousness Laszlo states that “in the conservative view human communication and interaction is limited to our sensory channels ... [but] we are linked by more subtle and encompassing connections as well.” Also “The connections that bind 'my' consciousness to the consciousness of others... are rediscovered today in controlled experiments with thought and image transference, and the effect of the mind of one individual on the body of another.” Furthermore, “Native tribes seem able to communicate beyond the range of eye and ear... In the laboratory also, modern people display a capacity for spontaneous transference of impressions and images, especially when they are emotionally close to each other... transpersonal contact includes the ability to transmit thoughts and images, and ... it is given to many if not all people... this is the finding of recent experiments... Reliable evidence is becoming available that the conscious mind of one person can produce repeatable and measurable effects on the body of another... [also] Intercessory prayer and spiritual healing, together with other mind- and intention-based experiments and practices, yield impressive evidence regarding the effectiveness of telepathic and telesomatic information- and energy-transmission. The pertinent practices produce real and measurable effects on people, and they are more and more widespread. But mainstream science has no explanation for them. Could it be that our consciousness is linked with other consciousnesses through an interconnecting Akashic Field, much as galaxies are linked in the cosmos, quanta in the microworld, and organisms in the world of the living?”

In regards to the origin of the universe and its metaphysical foundation Laszlo states that “the universe we observe and inhabit is a secondary product of the energy sea that was there before there was anything there at all. Hindu and Chinese cosmologies have always maintained that the things and beings that exist in the world are a concretization or distillation of the basic energy of the cosmos, descending from its original source. The physical world is a reflection of energy vibrations from more subtle energy fields. Creation and all subsequent existence, is a progression downward and outward from the primordial source.
In Indian philosophy the ultimate end of the physical world is a return to Akasha, its original subtle-energy womb. At the end of time as we know it, the almost infinitely varied things and forms of the manifest world dissolve into formlessness... In Akasha, all attributes of the manifest world merge into a state that is beyond attributes: the state of Brahman.
Although it is undifferentiated, Brahman is dynamic and creative. From its ultimate 'being' comes the temporary 'becoming' of the manifest world, with its attributes, functions and relationships. The cycles of samsara [individual lifetimes] ... are the lila of Brahman: its play of ceaseless creation and dissolution. In Indian philosophy, absolute reality is the reality of Brahman. The manifest world enjoys but a derived, secondary reality and mistaking it for the real is the illusion of maya...
The traditional Eastern conception differs from the view held by most people in the West... [that] reality is material. The things that truly exist are bits or particles of matter... Matter moves about in space, acted on by energy. Energy also enjoys reality (since it acts on matter), but space does not: space is merely the backdrop or the container... and is passive in itself... space is not experienced... it is only the precondition of experience... [this last comment exposes the Western reliance on sensory experience and therefore its entrapment within the illusion of the empirical world or Maya]
The view that space is empty and passive, and not even real to boot, is in complete opposition to the view we get from contemporary physics... it is clear that what they describe as the unified vacuum – the seat of all the fields and forces of the physical world – is in fact the primary reality of the universe... What we think of as matter is but the quantised semi-stable bundling of the energies that spring from the vacuum. In the last count matter is but a waveform disturbance in the nearly infinite energy-sea that is the fundamental medium – and hence the primary reality – of this universe, and of all universes that ever existed and will ever exist.”

Here are his credentials:

Laszlo is generally recognized as the founder of systems philosophy and general evolution theory, serving as founder-director of the General Evolution Research Group and as past president of the International Society for the Systems Sciences. He is the recipient of the highest degree in philosophy and human sciences from the Sorbonne, the University of Paris, as well as of the coveted Artist Diploma of the Franz Liszt Academy of Budapest. His numerous prizes and awards include four honorary doctorates.

www.enlightennext.org...

spec

reply to post by speculativeoptimist

Maybe because anything metaphysical turns you off, you have missed some pertinent evidence/studies on the subject. Check these threads and resources to include in your determinations.

Doesn't turn me off at all. I see no evidence for the metaphysical at all, that's all. There's no evidence of mind being separate from body, there's no evidence of spirit, there's no evidence of ESP or magic super powers, there's no evidence of heaven or hell, and no evidence of supernatural deities.

The first link you posted was a gross misrepresentation of the double slit experiment where the OP lacks proper understanding of the physics, took information he most likely heard from a sensationalized website that stated that human consciousness creates reality. Unfortunately, that is not what the science tells us at all. It would be cool if it were true, but it's not. If your first source is a gross misunderstanding, I can only imagine that the rest of them are as well.

Science is not a new age thing mind you, and never should we look towards new age sources as sources of scientific information.

Originally posted by sirnex
Science is not a new age thing mind you, and never should we look towards new age sources as sources of scientific information.

This is a dogmatic belief that contradicts science itself.

It's not a scientific opinion to say we should avoid studying all of these subjects just because you've formed a pre-conceived idea that there is nothing to it.

Also no one else here is saying that the mind is separate from the body, either. If anything they are pointing out something completely different, that the mind and body both are intricately linked to our environment, from which we came.

reply to post by speculativeoptimist

ETA: Some fascinating science work in this book too by Ervin Laszlo: Science And The Akashic Field

I did a search on this guy and well... He seems to believe in intelligent design along with evolutionary processes. I personally can't take someone seriously when they believe in intelligent design, or that something must have been created at some point by purpose of some creator. There is simply no evidence for it and god of the gaps arguments are hardly evidence at all. These people do nothing more than attack lack of current understanding and triumphantly exclaim "See, I was right all along because you can't explain it!". They never offer up any evidence or experimental proof for their hypothesis, all they can do is attack lack of knowledge. It's simply a form of cognitive laziness in my eyes.

reply to post by sirnex

I personally can't take someone seriously when they believe in intelligent design,

That's fair enough, but why condemn others for thinking differently? If this were the science forum, I could appreciate the sternness of your position, and not try and disagree with cold hard facts, but this is the P/MetaPh forum, and by definition that includes some of the realms mentioned in this thread, and the associated material and perspectives. There is more headroom here to build on, and blend theoretical with practical. There are also those here that have experienced some type of 'spiritual' oneness or other energy anomalies. There are experiences that reach ineffable proportions, and it is my opinion that these realms will become part of science, as an old adage says,"science is catching up to what the shamans of old times already knew," and part of that is oneness, and another is the aether fields.aether studies

Also, what do you think of Einstein's perspective of Intelligent Design? Einsteins - Intelligent Design

These people do nothing more than attack lack of current understanding and triumphantly exclaim "See, I was right all along because you can't explain it!". They never offer up any evidence or experimental proof for their hypothesis, all they can do is attack lack of knowledge.

That could be considered a broad stroke, no? There are/have been a number of credible scientists that would disagree with you. I don't think they 'attack lack of knowledge,' but they explore it and theorize/hypothesize on it, which are the first steps of the scientific process. I mean some scientists, not all of the charletonesque exclaimers like you mentioned, which there are plenty.

It's simply a form of cognitive laziness in my eyes.

Could not the same be said for your perspective? I don't mean that coyly, I mean I would inquire about someone's life experiences in all of this too, as well as how much research they have done on the subjects.
I understand where you are coming from, but I feel this forum is more inclusive of these type of subjects.

To the OP, pardon the digressions into the multifaceted metaphysical meanderings

Peace,
spec

reply to post by speculativeoptimist

That's fair enough, but why condemn others for thinking differently? If this were the science forum, I could appreciate the sternness of your position, and not try and disagree with cold hard facts, but this is the P/MetaPh forum, and by definition that includes some of the realms mentioned in this thread, and the associated material and perspectives. There is more headroom here to build on, and blend theoretical with practical. There are also those here that have experienced some type of 'spiritual' oneness or other energy anomalies. There are experiences that reach ineffable proportions, and it is my opinion that these realms will become part of science, as an old adage says,"science is catching up to what the shamans of old times already knew," and part of that is oneness, and another is the aether fields.aether studies

I don't condemn them for thinking differently, I condemn them for exclaiming to be 100% right in their beliefs without providing any tangible evidence for them. Attacking gaps in human knowledge is far from being evidence for something else which lacks evidence for in itself.

Every religion practiced from Judaic-Christianity to Hinduism holds adherents who all claim personal experiences that validate their doctrines and beliefs. Are they all correct when they all profess that all others are wrong? The human being is a fallible being, we're not always correct in what we think or what we assume from experience alone, which is why we have science.

Also, what do you think of Einstein's perspective of Intelligent Design? Einsteins - Intelligent Design

He did not believe in a creator god and I've already quoted his statement against people, such as the site you linked to who misrepresent his statements as one being that he was a religious god fearing man.

That could be considered a broad stroke, no? There are/have been a number of credible scientists that would disagree with you. I don't think they 'attack lack of knowledge,' but they explore it and theorize/hypothesize on it, which are the first steps of the scientific process. I mean some scientists, not all of the charletonesque exclaimers like you mentioned, which there are plenty.

No, people like Behe do nothing more than attack gaps of human understanding. Behe and his ilk have done nothing to further progress the idea of intelligent design. They have been offered numerous chances and finances to conduct experiments to challenge them and last I've heard they failed to take up any offers. They have one goal and one goal in mind alone, to get God into our school systems in place of evolution.

Could not the same be said for your perspective? I don't mean that coyly, I mean I would inquire about someone's life experiences in all of this too, as well as how much research they have done on the subjects.
I understand where you are coming from, but I feel this forum is more inclusive of these type of subjects.

I fail to see how trying to understand how something came to be rather than chalking it up to some man made deity is comparable to cognitive laziness. You're going to have to explain that one to me.

reply to post by sirnex

I fail to see how trying to understand how something came to be rather than chalking it up to some man made deity is comparable to cognitive laziness

It's the "rather than" that could be considered lazy I guess, as opposed to an including of some intelligent design in understanding how we came to be. Let me clarify what i mean by intelligent design, I feel similar to Einstein's views, which I thought his actual quotes were included in my link, but I did not interpret that as 'god, but just intelligence as a supreme organization. I think he was speaking of the marriage of science and spirit. What then is intelligent design if not a deity? Forces of nature, collective cosmic consciousness, the tao, extra-terrestrials, or something in the universal unfolding that has intention, and is not just pure reactionary.
The broad stroke comment was for the assumption that any/all scientist involved with exploring these gaps wants to comes out gain recognition or mock the sciences. Even though there are a lot of disingenuous and downright fraudulent professionals in this end of the spectrum, some like Laszlo and Einstein, are bridging the gap.
I guess it comes down to personal philosophy too sirnex. I recently became made aware of the "tyranny of the or," which is how people think. Some people think either this or that, and others, including myself think, this and that.

spec

reply to post by speculativeoptimist

It's the "rather than" that could be considered lazy I guess, as opposed to an including of some intelligent design in understanding how we came to be.

The problem with intelligent design is that it offers up no evidence or proof for it. The entire theory solely rests upon current lack of human knowledge of how various biological systems work and came to be. That is what's lazy. How can an entire theory rest upon lack of knowledge and be taken seriously? Why not say it was all the flying spaghetti monster instead? Maybe it was a cosmic pink unicorn? At this point we can now make up anything we want and demand people take us seriously while never offering up any evidence for our ideas.

Let me clarify what i mean by intelligent design, I feel similar to Einstein's views, which I thought his actual quotes were included in my link, but I did not interpret that as 'god, but just intelligence as a supreme organization. I think he was speaking of the marriage of science and spirit.

He wasn't.

What then is intelligent design if not a deity? Forces of nature, collective cosmic consciousness, the tao, extra-terrestrials, or something in the universal unfolding that has intention, and is not just pure reactionary.

Forces of nature are not intelligent. There is no evidence of cosmic consciousness. The tao is just another human invented religious belief structure. ET involvement would have left evidence behind. There is no evidence the universe is intelligent and intended to create itself or our species within it.

The broad stroke comment was for the assumption that any/all scientist involved with exploring these gaps wants to comes out gain recognition or mock the sciences. Even though there are a lot of disingenuous and downright fraudulent professionals in this end of the spectrum, some like Laszlo and Einstein, are bridging the gap.

Attacking gaps of current knowledge and saying see this is a sign that we were created is not scientific and certainly not something ever employed by Einstein.

I guess it comes down to personal philosophy too sirnex. I recently became made aware of the "tyranny of the or," which is how people think. Some people think either this or that, and others, including myself think, this and that.

I call it the tyranny of the blind. People tend to believe blindly in things without evidence for those things. They often cite personal experiences and confirmation bias arguments as that proof. Never ever do they have tangible proof in which would lead them to know with any certainty that can be proven that what they believe is true. I like science even though it's often wrong and ever changing because science offers something tangible. We advance through science, not through made up things.

Reminder folks

I posted this under the heading of Mysterious, Forum Psychology, Philosophy and Metaphysics.

Otherwise it would have been under Science and Technology forum, but it isn't.

Originally posted by Realtruth
Reminder folks

I posted this under the heading of Mysterious, Forum Psychology, Philosophy and Metaphysics.

Otherwise it would have been under Science and Technology forum, but it isn't.

That's nice and all and if the material posted remained on that topic alone, I wouldn't even have replied. Instead it brought in some issues that should they be true can be scientifically proved to be true. No such evidence is provided for those truths, arguments involve gaps of knowledge, and still others discuss hands and arms for the hell of it.

Point is, if human hormones could affect planetary magnetic fields, we'd know about it by now. As it stands, there's no evidence that a cascade of biochemical responses can generate the required EM fields in order to have any such effect, such as changing planetary magnetic fields. As it further stands, independent studies show no such changes at all. And to top all of that off, the best one can do is bitch about hands and arms. Quiet ridiculous and pointless to your topic, but some people can't be bothered to stay on topic.

Originally posted by sirnex

Point is, if human hormones could affect planetary magnetic fields, we'd know about it by now. As it stands, there's no evidence that a cascade of biochemical responses can generate the required EM fields in order to have any such effect, such as changing planetary magnetic fields. As it further stands, independent studies show no such changes at all. And to top all of that off, the best one can do is bitch about hands and arms. Quiet ridiculous and pointless to your topic, but some people can't be bothered to stay on topic.

Actually the point was in the OP and the title Heart and Brains emit energy fields and the question again posed in text, not hormones.

Do you know what a SQUID is ? Superconducting Quantum Interference Device

searchcio-midmarket.techtarget.com...

One of the device's most promising uses is in magnetoencephalography (MEG), the process of measuring magnetic fields to enable brain imaging. Physical processes, such as muscular or neural activity, in humans (and other animals) create magnetic fields as small as a thousand billionth of a tesla (as a comparison, a fridge magnet generates about a tenth of a tesla). DC SQUIDs, contained in a helmet-like device, measure the currents created by neural activity. The possible SQUID neuroscience applications are myriad. A recent study used SQUID-enabled magnetoencephalography to measure the surprisingly large level of activity in consumer's brains that is evoked by choosing between (for example) brands of ketchup.

SQUID

Scientists are using SQUID instruments to map the ways diseases alter biomagnetic fields around the body. Others are applying pulsating magnetic fields to stimulate healing.

Science Measures Human Energy

The Human Energy Field

It has long been known that activities of cells and tissues generate electrical fields that can be detected on the skin surface. But the laws of physics demand that any electrical current generates a corresponding magnetic field in the surrounding space. Since these fields were too tiny to detect, biologists assumed they could have no physiological significance.

This picture began to change in 1963. Gerhard Baule and Richard McFee of the Department of Electrical Engineering, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY detected the biomagnetic field projected from the human heart. They used two coils, each with 2 million turns of wire, connected to a sensitive amplifier.2

In 1970, David Cohen of MIT, using a SQUID magnetometer, confirmed the heart measurements. By 1972, Cohen had improved the sensitivity of his instrument, enabling him to measure magnetic fields around the head produced by brain activities.3

More interesting findings.

In the early 1980’s, Dr. John Zimmerman began a series of important studies on therapeutic touch, using a SQUID magnetometer at the University of Colorado School of Medicine in Denver. Zimmerman discovered that a huge pulsating biomagnetic field emanated from the hands of a TT practitioner. The frequency of the pulsations is not steady, but "sweeps" up and down, from 0.3 to 30 Hz (cycles per second), with most of the activity in the range of 7-8 Hz

reply to post by Realtruth

Actually the point was in the OP and the title Heart and Brains emit energy fields and the question again posed in text, not hormones.

That part is fine. I'm well aware that the human organism generates small electromagnetic fields. What I replied to and had an issue with was within the video provided in the OP where it stated that human emotions had an affect upon the planets magnetic field. That's what I was replying to as it was wrong. Our bodies simply do not generate, even collectively the massive massive massive amount of EM fields required to do something like that and certainly not through emotions cause by hormones.

Do you know what a SQUID is ? Superconducting Quantum Interference Device

Like I told the hands and arms argument person, I have no issue with the electrochemical reactions that take place within the human body. Again, I will repeat myself for you, I have an issue with the video you provided which stated that human emotions during 9/11 affected the planets magnetic field. Emotions are a hormonal response towards both internal and external stimuli. Any electrical current generated by the human body through induced higher activity from hormones still does not create the significant energy to affect planetary magnetic fields.

Originally posted by sirnex
Point is, if human hormones could affect planetary magnetic fields, we'd know about it by now.

That's funny because the same argument was made against Copernicus in his day.

It's also a fallacy akin to appeal to antiquity, and has nothing to do with logical reasoning. For all you cry about people posting stuff without proof, you must be the king of doing exactly that.

Slayer just posted this video in another thread but I thought it was equally relevant here:




It's video clips of Carl Sagan, Richard Feynman, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Bill Nye, talking about how everything is connected.

But it's auto-tuned into a pretty cool song.


Check it out.



Here's the "chorus" as auto-tuned by Neil deGrasse:

We are all connected
To each other, biologically
To the Earth, chemically
To the rest of the Universe, atomically

Kinda catchy. Great stuff.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Jezus

 

So if deleting the squiggles can influence the physical realty of the apple.

What does that mean?

It means your reaching and grasping for an argument to hang on to. Regardless of what we define that object, regardless of us even being around to define it, it still exists. The universe doesn't give a rats bottom what we call it, how we measure it, how we define it, how we objectify it, or if we even exist period.

This experiment proves you wrong.

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. "