|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19338647 - 12/28/13 08:14 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
not much really did tho except for the cat vision thing.
I will be honest, except for some nmr & cat scan stuff, nothing is more radical in neuroscience from my point of view over the last 40 years than this cat vision thing.
and it is really simple stuff; i.e. neuroscientists are mostly not on the ball
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
It does sound like you stay up to date on it, I thought the left/right brain thing having evidence against it was pretty big.
Also some of the works going on with QM and the brain and various bio-feedback research.
Actually, I don't know if I agree that not much has changed at all.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19338733 - 12/28/13 08:28 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
So what should I ask him RGV?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19339412 - 12/28/13 10:51 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
well, at this point since his career depends on acceptance of the theory proposed you may as well ask if he likes green jello. anything else and he will be pretty defensive.
Did you see his right eye? that guy is a fighter!
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
You can take him Red, I know you can.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
DP.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: well, at this point since his career depends on acceptance of the theory proposed you may as well ask if he likes green jello. anything else and he will be pretty defensive.
Did you see his right eye? that guy is a fighter!
Haha, you may be right.
Funny icelander...
|
Hobozen

Registered: 11/03/11
Posts: 10,634
Loc:
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19339715 - 12/29/13 12:20 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I sent an email to Vilayanur's .edu address, and also gave him a link to this thread; let's hope he takes the bait.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: Hobozen]
#19339729 - 12/29/13 12:26 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What did you say to him?
|
Hobozen

Registered: 11/03/11
Posts: 10,634
Loc:
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19339751 - 12/29/13 12:33 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I told him that a debate on a forum has started concerning his claims of mirror neurons. I quoted RVG's post and asked if he could clear up any possible misconceptions.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: Hobozen]
#19339838 - 12/29/13 01:05 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I guess we has to await his response. You could have posed as a student or tried some other social engineering to increase your odds of an answer though :P
|
cez

Registered: 08/04/09
Posts: 5,854
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19339925 - 12/29/13 01:32 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I'm posting simply to subscribe to the possibility of a response from Vilayanur.. Thanks for sharing too Teknix
|
KingKnowledge
Around



Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 2,876
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: cez]
#19343591 - 12/29/13 09:09 PM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I haven't watched this video yet, but mirror neurons are one of my favorite subjects. Just goes to show that the brain can't necessarily differentiate outward experiences from those derived from within.
All is one and one is all.
|
Kickle
Wanderer


Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,852
Last seen: 13 hours, 50 minutes
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: AND if your arm is anaethetized you will not be able to tell the difference between the real or memory event.
Why? Your memory is not impaired. Particularly not your memory of being anaesthetized. Why would touching of another suddenly be associated as touching of yourself? There is no reason I can see for that associative miscue to occur unless the associative process is dependent on those sensory clues. And in that case the argument put forth that the only thing dividing one from another is sensory experience holds true. Take that away and we don't know whether an association is our own or not. I thought that was precisely what Ramachandran was saying. Mirror neurons aside that is.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
Middleman

Registered: 07/11/99
Posts: 8,399
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: teknix]
#19344331 - 12/30/13 12:12 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
We look like cats to cats? 
B. Alan Wallace has some great talks on the neurological correlates of consciousness.
|
cez

Registered: 08/04/09
Posts: 5,854
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: Middleman]
#19344473 - 12/30/13 01:18 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
That was a great lecture by Wallace
|
birdland

Registered: 07/24/11
Posts: 2,202
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: Middleman]
#19345423 - 12/30/13 08:12 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Great stuff Rev! 
Very thought provoking and inspiring.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: Kickle]
#19345451 - 12/30/13 08:32 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said: Take that away and we don't know whether an association is our own or not.
without a mirror neuron subsystem, the idea of the touch on the arm is an idea not limited to the following classes of associations: 1. personal sensation of finger on arm 2. visual sensation of finger on arm 3. language describing the act 4. language describing the sensation ... 1a. memory of personal sensation of finger on arm 2b. memory of visual sensation of finger on arm 3c. memory of language describing the act 4d. memory of language describing the sensation
for the idea to exist in the mind one or all of the sensations or memories will be connected to it.
The neurons that sense the touch are the same neurons that can be activated by the memory of the touch. to be more accurate, those neurons that are activated by sensation are a superset of those neurons that are activated by the memory of that sensation... i.e. during the memory of the sensation fewer neurons of that sensation will become 'reactivated' as a consequence of the associative memory system being 'lossy'; so you could say that simple memories of experience are generally slightly QUIETER than fresh sensations.
what we call the idea includes, the various engrams or neural excitation patterns that are associated with it.
so when we see another person touch their arm, we perceive the idea, and in that perception our associated engrams are activated.
that is standard associative recall.
even if our arm is anesthetized, we will perceive the act by watching the other person, and so the sensory memory (1a) will be activated by association.
the memory activation of the (quieter) subset of the same sensory monitor cells of the arm being touched will be strong enough that the sleeping arm (producing no signals) will strongly seem to have been touched. Some of the same being touched neurons will have been activated, enough to make it seem local IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY LIVE SIGNAL which would be current and referentially baseline.
the proposal of a extra mirror neurons AND extra signal suppression circuitry adds two levels of complication over top of what is simple and obvious
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
Kickle
Wanderer


Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,852
Last seen: 13 hours, 50 minutes
|
|
Do you have any evidence for the mechanism by which memory activates this subset of neurons referred to as mirror neurons? If not then its a speculative sell. Not that such speculation is invalid, but it could be. As far as I know mirror neurons took their name when no causal link was found to explain this secondary activation. So this reflection of others activation became ascribed as a property of the neuron just as the reflective quality of a mirror is ascribed to the mirror.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Evidence of Oneness (Ted Talk) [Re: Kickle]
#19350329 - 12/31/13 09:04 AM (10 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
there is a large body of evidence for:
- a simple model of memory engram pattern:
*where neurons that are activated at the same time become interlinked *where repetition of activation strenghtens the linkage
- a simple mechanism of memory activation:
where if part of the pattern is supplied either by
* sensation or * ideation - memory -thought - language - perception
when this large body of evidence is reviewed to any extent, the need for mirror neurons vanishes,
Besides that, no method for mirror neurons to function has been proposed that gets ay where near to being consistent with any model of memory formation and activation; except for people wishing that magical mirror neurons might exist.
An understanding of the brain working as a unit to experience blended sensory input in the ongoing process of making memories is not trivial, but it is doable, and much of the necessary research has already been done, however a unified model has not yet been properly ratified by a consensus of neurologists.
If one were ratified (such as the one I proposed about 30 years back (sketched out here) - which no existing science disproves and much of the record supports) then the theory of motor neurons would have absolutely no traction whatsoever.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
|