[Robert]

I would very much like to explore thought. There is some background discourse on the “Religion can be discussed calmly” thread but it drifted, as threads often do and I take responsibility for part of that drift.

Basically I am asking:

1. Is it possible to measure thought quantitatively?

2. Is it possible for thought to exist apart from the self?

3. Is it possible for that thought to exist after the physical body is dead?

1. The fact that thought takes time to go from point ‘a’ to point ’b’ which we know is true, means that it has mass so it can be measured.
F=MA Newton’s second law (force = mass x acceleration)

Since we now know that thought has mass we also know that it resonates at a specific frequency or range of frequencies just like every other mass in the universe.

My hypothesis is that thought is independent of the body and is unique to itself. Religion may be calling this mass the ‘soul’ or ‘essence’ but we have not established that correlation nor have we established the existence of ‘god’ with respect to this ‘essence’. That is, we don’t know if this mass is directed by anything other then itself.

If ‘essence’ ( I will call it ‘E’ from here forward for simplicity and to reduce confusion) resonates then the next question is at what frequency or frequencies?
We know that the mind emits a frequency of between 1 and about 15 Hz ( Alpha, Beta, Theta and Delta) and that E, being recognized by the self, also must resonate somewhere in that range for us to sense it. Very much the same as a radio is tuned to a specific frequency and it is that unique reception from E to the individual that he or she carries throughout their life.

That is to say, that it is entirely possible for E to carry from one physical body to the next and carry with it a pattern (akashic record) of events throughout time.

If E has mass then it is capable of frequency change just as a gas or liquid changes frequency when heated.
It then becomes possible for E, due to this frequency shift, to be to be in resonance with other E’s or E’s on different levels of reality if they do indeed exist.

One more thought. When two frequencies with different resonance are present together they produce third and forth frequencies. ( Additive and subtractive) This is called heterodyning.
Example 10 Hz and 15 Hz = 25 Hz and 5 Hz. This is in fact how your table radio works.

When two same frequencies combine they amplify. 10 Hz and 10 Hz = 2 times the initial power.

I don’t want to dissuade those of you without a technical background so please don’t be threatened by some of the physics.

Well, I’m getting ahead of my self. You thoughts please. (No pun intended!)

[Plaid-Man Individual]

Hi Robert,

In order to entertain your hypothesis, we may need to know how you define "Thought", and how you define the relationship between thought and essence.

Do you consider thought to be any response by an organism to an environmental stimuli, or is your definition of thought only an attribute of (so called) higher order animals/mammals, or possibly exclusive to humans, and if the later where does the functional line of distinction occur (and in what organisms) between ordinary stimuli-->response and thought as "essence"?

PMI

[Flint]

I'll play this game one time. After that, it pales too much

Basically I am asking:

1. Is it possible to measure thought quantitatively?

If it is, nobody has the vaguest idea how. Not that we haven't made efforts to do so, but the numbers we come up don't seem to describe anything useful. I've measured your thoughts at about a 42, give or take a million. How's that?

2. Is it possible for thought to exist apart from the self?

Depends on what you mean by "self". The way I define it, your thoughts ARE your self, these are synonyms.

3. Is it possible for that thought to exist after the physical body is dead?

Sure, in everyone else. Thoughts are a program running on the brain. Stop the brain and the program no longer runs. Introduce changes to the brain (through probes or injury or drugs) and the program changes, almost always for the worse.

1. The fact that thought takes time to go from point ‘a’ to point ’b’ which we know is true, means that it has mass so it can be measured.
F=MA Newton’s second law (force = mass x acceleration)

This continues to be one of the dumbest things I have ever encountered. You might as well "weigh" the imagination depending on how long it takes you to dream up a good excuse why you were out so late. Thoughts are a side-effect of a physical process. The brain has mass. The process running on the brain isn't a physical thing. It takes time to go from Detroit to Clevelend, should we therefore decide that distance has mass, or that the process of traveling has mass? Yeah, we speak of "heavy thinking" and "weighty ideas" but these are figures of speech.

Since we now know that thought has mass we also know that it resonates at a specific frequency or range of frequencies just like every other mass in the universe.

Since your original claim was an egregious conceptual blunder of the first magnitude, you'd better stop babbling and return to square one. Next time, apply some more massive thoughts, OK?

(The remainder of the post was pure noise, devoid of the slightest signal.)

[Chills]

Robert
As I suggested earlier I am definitely challenged when it comes to some things.
So if my questions seem perhaps over simplisitic, it is only my attempt to understand and to grasp the concepts etc.
I stopped short of replying to your entire post because I realized there was a continuum to the development that without understanding step one I would never truly grasp any thing beyond that.


Basically I am asking:

1. Is it possible to measure thought quantitatively?

2. Is it possible for thought to exist apart from the self?

3. Is it possible for that thought to exist after the physical body is dead?

1. The fact that thought takes time to go from point ‘a’ to point ’b’ which we know is true, means that it has mass so it can be measured.
F=MA Newton’s second law (force = mass x acceleration)

Since we now know that thought has mass we also know that it resonates at a specific frequency or range of frequencies just like every other mass in the universe.

Dum question perhaps.. but how do we know that thought moves from point a-to point b

My hypothesis is that thought is independent of the body and is unique to itself. Religion may be calling this mass the ‘soul’ or ‘essence’ but we have not established that correlation nor have we established the existence of ‘god’ with respect to this ‘essence’. That is, we don’t know if this mass is directed by anything other then itself.

Another dum question perhaps: What is the difference if any between a thought and any other neural transmission.
Example: Thinking about a sunny day compared to scratching an itching chin.

[Roger Thornhill]

Newtonian physics may be the wrong tool for trying to understand thought.

Pure research mathematics, and cutting-edge physics theory, are starting to profoundly reshape our awareness. For instance, there are robust theories which now suggest the existence of entities which have velocity, but no mass at all. There are also cases where a unique entity can exist simultaneously in multiple physical locations.

Just as Galileo's writings on celestial mechanics caused a philosophical and religious revolution, these new discoveries are going to reshape our current thinking.

I only wish I had the education to be able to examine current explorations in depth, instead of reading a generalized layman's overview. I have a basic understanding of things like chaos theory, dark matter, recursive space-time and the like, but it'd sure be a joy to be able to actually set up the experiments and then run the numbers.

[Robert]

I'll play this game one time. After that, it pales too much

Don’t play it at all, go back to your baseball cards. I’m happy with that.

Basically I am asking:

1. Is it possible to measure thought quantitatively?

If it is, nobody has the vaguest idea how. Not that we haven't made efforts to do so, but the numbers we come up don't seem to describe anything useful.,

We know that the brain resonates at different frequencies directly related to thinking. The question is what causes those electronic waves to change frequency? Regardless of the source we know it is thought creating that change. We also know that thought must jump from interneuron to interneuron. We know that takes time and if it takes time there must be inertia which indicates mass.
The question is not that we can’t measure, haven’t found a system to measure it or the mass when we do measure it is infinitely small.

I've measured your thoughts at about a 42, give or take a million. How's that?

About what I’ve come to expect from you.

2. Is it possible for thought to exist apart from the self?

Depends on what you mean by "self". The way I define it, your thoughts ARE your self, these are synonyms.

Apart from the physical body and we still don’t know whether they “are your self” or not. Is ther a hypothesis to go with your opinion?

3. Is it possible for that thought to exist after the physical body is dead?

Sure, in everyone else. Thoughts are a program running on the brain. Stop the brain and the program no longer runs. Introduce changes to the brain (through probes or injury or drugs) and the program changes, almost always for the worse.

A program? We don’t know the source of that “program”. Where it comes from. Do you? We don’t know that the ‘program’ stops only the individual. So we still haven’t answered the question.

1. The fact that thought takes time to go from point ‘a’ to point ’b’ which we know is true, means that it has mass so it can be measured.
F=MA Newton’s second law (force = mass x acceleration)

This continues to be one of the dumbest things I have ever encountered.


Subjective opinion with now counter arguement or data.

You might as well "weigh" the imagination depending on how long it takes you to dream up a good excuse why you were out so late. Thoughts are a side-effect of a physical process.

We don’t know that, again, we still haven’t determined the source of thought.

The brain has mass. The process running on the brain isn't a physical thing.

What is it? Where does it come from? You’re making my point for me.

It takes time to go from Detroit to Clevelend, should we therefore decide that distance has mass, or that the process of traveling has mass? Yeah, we speak of "heavy thinking" and "weighty ideas" but these are figures of speech.

No but the thing that travels has mass. A thought travel from one neuron to the next across a space. Does it take time? If there is a frequency involved it does. F= 1/T

Since we now know that thought has mass we also know that it resonates at a specific frequency or range of frequencies just like every other mass in the universe.

Since your original claim was an egregious conceptual blunder of the first magnitude, you'd better stop babbling and return to square one. Next time, apply some more massive thoughts, OK?

You haven’t proven my hypothesis wrong. In fact you haven’t said anything technically that contradicts it.

(The remainder of the post was pure noise, devoid of the slightest signal.)

No, the remainder of the post related to frequency and know characteristics of frequency. Again, your making statements that you are not supporting with scientific proof.

I have observed you for awhile now and I find that you are, not in my opinion intelligent, you are well informed and there is a big difference between the two.
I find everything you know I can get off my hard drive, the only difference is that you can talk and I’m sure that if you paint it is by the numbers.
Quite frankly, I’m weary of your childishness, take out your hostility elsewhere.

You said this is your only post on my thread. Let’s make it that.


.

[Robert]

Robert
As I suggested earlier I am definitely challenged when it comes to some things.
So if my questions seem perhaps over simplisitic, it is only my attempt to understand and to grasp the concepts etc.
I stopped short of replying to your entire post because I realized there was a continuum to the development that without understanding step one I would never truly grasp any thing beyond that.

how do we know that thought moves from point a-to point b

We don’t know the origin but we know the effect of thought. We know that it travels to different parts of the brain and from interneuron to interneuron. We know that when our thinking changes the emitted frequency from our brain changes. When we are calm or working out a mathematical problem our resonant frequencies are different.

[i]nother dum question perhaps: What is the difference if any between a thought and any other neural transmission.
Example: Thinking about a sunny day compared to scratching an itching chin.[I]

I would say that they both originate from the same place. If we think about it what happens when we have an itch? Is a thought generating the action to scratch? Yes if we look at a tree are thoughts generating our smile.

[Flint]

Rob:

You asked for my opinion, and I gave it. And just as you did with SmartAZ, you rejected it as stupid. After some observation, I've come to recognize why you are so fascinated with trying to figure out what thought is. Those who can, think. Those who can't, try to figure out what the hell thought is anyway.

If you'd like, I can hook you up with someone who believes he has proof that thought is supernatural, and therefore solid evidence of the existence and purpose of his Christian God. He's absolutely convinced, and will regard you as being just as hostile and empty as you consider those who disagree with you. Unless, of course, he converts you to his faith, in which case he will discover that you weren't as stupid as he thought all along.

(And as a footnote, there is no such thing as scientific proof. Saying there is reflects a truly profound lack of understanding of what you're talking about. But that has never slowed you down before...)

Are you interested?

[Robert]

Newtonian physics may be the wrong tool for trying to understand thought.

Pure research mathematics, and cutting-edge physics theory, are starting to profoundly reshape our awareness. For instance, there are robust theories which now suggest the existence of entities which have velocity, but no mass at all.

Yes, of course this is possible and quantum physics has surpassed Newton. So let’s say that thought can be an ‘entity’ but we still have to get past it taking time to move through the brain. Can we prove it doesn’t?

There are also cases where a unique entity can exist simultaneously in multiple physical locations.

This is interesting but what are we saying, that it is unchanged in each location? Is it possible for thought to be in two places at the same time? Why do we need all the wires then?
Perhaps we're looking at it wrong? Perhaps thought is external to the body and once it enters the body it starts things happening. Just like the simple radio it gets signals in and converts them to sound waves.

Just as Galileo's writings on celestial mechanics caused a philosophical and religious revolution, these new discoveries are going to reshape our current thinking.

Maybe so but we still haven’t stopped warring and I think when we do that we have really changed.

I only wish I had the education to be able to examine current explorations in depth, instead of reading a generalized layman's overview. I have a basic understanding of things like chaos theory, dark matter, recursive space-time and the like, but it'd sure be a joy to be able to actually set up the experiments and then run the numbers.

I still think there can be experiments done and I have some instrument designs in mind that might shed some light on things.
Are brain waves frequency modualted or amplitude modulated. We'll have to see.

[Chills]

Robert

I can not see the difference between a pain signal and contemplating a sunset. Both seem to me to be transmissions of sorts.
It would seem to me that thought is the conscious processing of incoming sensory data combined at times perhaps archival data stored in the brain etc...etc.etc.

If as you suggest thought exists separate from the body then we should be able to pick it up randomly simply by turning on the same devices that measure it in a living body... I would think.

I go back to looking at the function of awareness and beginning there..to follow the whole process.

I am not sure if thought and awareness..are not one and the same.

just some thoughts .....interesting.

[Robert]

Rob:
You asked for my opinion, and I gave it. And just as you did with SmartAZ, you rejected it as stupid.

No, what you gave me were your insults without an alternate theory.

I've measured your thoughts at about a 42, give or take a million. How's that?

This continues to be one of the dumbest things I have ever encountered.

Since your original claim was an egregious conceptual blunder of the first magnitude, you'd better stop babbling and return to square one. Next time, apply some more massive thoughts, OK?

And SmartAZ gave me this which was none of your business to interject in.

God gave us a bible to explain these things. Have you read it, or do you only quote what someone has told you it says? The bible says over and over that when you are dead you are dead, and you stay dead until the resurrection.

It sounds to me like you just need to study the bible until you have learned a few things about what you claim to believe. HERE is a free book to get you started.

In short you’re lost go read the true story.

So neither of you added anything constructive to the debate like others did. Did I respond to the others like I responded to you?

After some observation, I've come to recognize why you are so fascinated with trying to figure out what thought is. Those who can, think. Those who can't, try to figure out what the hell thought is anyway.

More childish insults without substantive value

(And as a footnote, there is no such thing as scientific proof. Saying there is reflects a truly profound lack of understanding of what you're talking about. But that has never slowed you down before...)

More insults!
Please, I’m trying to relate to individuals who may not have a physics background but have valuable ideas and input in other areas.

I’ll be happy to discuss fast fourier or laplace transforms with you.
How about the Miller Effect on capacitance loading of metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistors.
How about that motorcycle you ride? I can take that engine apart re-machine it to blueprint specs. I can make a watch from scratch, build a robot down to programming the embedded microcontroller in assembler language and I would be happy to discuss finer points of film base plus fog density of photographic films.
So spare me you ‘scientific’ arrogance.

Are you interested?

At this point no and good day.

[Robert]

Robert

I can not see the difference between a pain signal and contemplating a sunset. Both seem to me to be transmissions of sorts.
It would seem to me that thought is the conscious processing of incoming sensory data combined at times perhaps archival data stored in the brain etc...etc.etc.



I go back to looking at the function of awareness and beginning there..to follow the whole process.

I am not sure if thought and awareness..are not one and the same.

just some thoughts .....interesting.
If as you suggest thought exists separate from the body then we should be able to pick it up randomly simply by turning on the same devices that measure it in a living body... I would think.

Well Roger gave me some food for thought about that and you make a good point.
The problem is that we first have to typify the signal because we may very well be able to build a receiver but we may have to do some frequency conversion to get meaningful results which in itself may give us some other clues.

[lars]

http://www.chetart.com/thought.jpg

[lars]

A few random thoughts on thoughts.

1)-It seems to me that abstract thought (consciousness) requires language; ie, we think in words. Human babies and other species have brain functions, but not abstract thoughts. Yet whales, porpoises and elephants have larger brains than humans. What for? Maybe the clicks of porpoises is a kind of language and therefore they can think thoughts and communicate them(abstract thoughts, not just emotions like anger, fear, etc). Hey, maybe whales think deep thoughts (Jack Handy?). I doubt it but we won't know until we can speak whale.

2)-The other obvious necessity for even nonabstract thought is sensory ability. Helen Keller couldn't hear or see but she could still partly sense the world. In fact, the abilty to sense may make as good a defintion of Life as bio-functions. A stone has no awareness, ergo it is not alive.

Like I said, "random" thoughts.

[Roger Thornhill]

Robert,

You bring up some interesting factors to consider. Since you're familiar with photographic materials and processes, let's consider an analogy.

Light continues to frustrate physicists. Sometimes it acts as a particle, sometimes it acts as a wave. What if "thought" displayed multiple characteristics as well, dependent on the environment and the interactions in a specific situation?

To pursue the analogy, is there a quantum level below which thought does not fully form? Mott/Gurney theory says it takes multiple hits from photons in one locus to produce a latent image on a silver halide. Perhaps it takes multiple reactions of some form to finally produce a unique thought.

I don't think this is simply an electro-chemical reaction. For instance, it's quite simple to produce acetominophen by reacting basic chemical compounds in a flask. The chemical slurry does not "think" as it becomes a more complex compound. When the brain's chemistry changes states and fires multiple synaps, this is not "thought". There's something more to it.

[Robert]

Ok here’s Newton’s falling apple. We recently had an individual go off the road into a ditch. She remained hidden there for several days . Someone came forward and told how she saw the woman, through a vision, in the ditch and where. The police found the woman and saved her life.

So this indicates to me that something happened outside individual thought. This is our apple. There is apparently some form of transmission going on beyond the physical body. I know this as I have done it and had it proven in a group setting.

I don’t know how many of you are familiar with the hundred monkey study? Basically what the study found was that after a certain number of monkeys on one island began , I believe it was washing fruit, other isolated islands of monkeys began doing the same thing.

Roger I will answer your question when I return. I’m pressed for time now.

[Chills]

Lars & Robert

1)-It seems to me that abstract thought (consciousness) requires language; ie, we think in words. Human babies and other species have brain functions, but not abstract thoughts.
I think you are correct regarding abstract thought…it is a construct of language.. i.e. a poem or a math equation…

Here is the problem in my view. Language is simply a construct it is not awareness. When we seek understanding through language we are limited by its finite nature.
It is my opinion that all those folks who seek to remove the ego etc and become one with the universe through meditation or who want to connect etc etc etc etc can achieve that simply by ceasing to think…simply be aware…That is a oversimplified version. I suspect traditional hunters in the artic for example did this all the time and could speak with the animals.


2)-The other obvious necessity for even nonabstract thought is sensory ability. Helen Keller couldn't hear or see but she could still partly sense the world. In fact, the abilty to sense may make as good a defintion of Life as bio-functions. A stone has no awareness, ergo it is not alive.
This is what I tend to believe which is why I keep going back to awareness..the function..as you describe the ability to sense.

The very variation in the ability to sense and make sense of those sensations(sensory info) is exactly the reason I believe it is very important to first look to the function of awareness itself first. Both Helen Keller and myself are aware because her sensory input is impaired (or perhaps simply different) we are not and never can be aware of exactly the same.

It is my opinion that awareness (the function-the ability to sense) is universal among humans, the only variation is actually what we are aware of.
Lars used the example of Helen Keller, I would add people who have ADD ADHD etc as having tremendous variations simply in brain/neural transmissions that make what they are aware of and how they construct language archive information and even how they learn very different at primary levels..

-------------------------------------------------

Robert

You mention your newtons apple. This is referred to as a high degree of empathy. I have this as well, I think most people do.
I think to search for this is relatively simple… as I suggested above, simply cease to think in language.. put oneself in senses on mode…
I think it will be difficult to find it through the use of language though through some languages i.e. music and math one may be able to abstract it.

I do not think it is a transmission so much as our ability to read the sensory input flooding in from the world around us.... if you know what I mean. If it is indeed transmissions of sorts then obviously most of that data is below language and below/above the technology we have to pick it up.

I know I sound a bit redundant here, but again it all goes back to awareness.
Because that is where this begins imv, with the raw data of sensation.


Just some thoughts.

[Annmarie]

I think the question asked on the other thread regarding what I am Not, is the way to look at the nature of thought. I am not this hand, foot, body, computer, desk, etc. What is left is only the awareness I AM. With that awareness comes the understanding that we are part of pure mind and that nothing is contained outside of Mind. The only thing constant, unchanging and eternal is Mind. All else is illusion, or dreams. In other words we are Mind or Thought experiencing itself as if in a dream.

Some of us have had instances of waking up - Jesus and Buddah, for example, and they tried to convey their message to us. Jesus said, be of good cheer for I have overcome the world. Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is another fascinating read. Jesus also said, The kingdom of God is within. Within what? Within Mind of course, not within the body. I don't want this to go off topic, but I wanted to say that early Christianity did indeed believe in reincarnation. The Church put only certains gospels in the Bible, there were many gospels that were not included. They make for fascinating reading.

So can you measure thought? Why would it make a difference? Just curious.

[Robert]

Chills,
This is exactly where Jiddu Krishnamurti went when he spoke of reaching the point of seeing where we become one with the object seen and we move past thought. At this point thought ceases and we are completely aware.
I have never done it completely but have had glimpses.

[Robert]

Robert,


You bring up some interesting factors to consider. Since you're familiar with photographic materials and processes, let's consider an analogy.

Light continues to frustrate physicists. Sometimes it acts as a particle, sometimes it acts as a wave. What if "thought" displayed multiple characteristics as well, dependent on the environment and the interactions in a specific situation?

To pursue the analogy, is there a quantum level below which thought does not fully form? Mott/Gurney theory says it takes multiple hits from photons in one locus to produce a latent image on a silver halide. Perhaps it takes multiple reactions of some form to finally produce a unique thought.

Ok, now we’re touching on Quantum theory here and things don’t happen, according to Plank, until the level of energy reaches one quanta. I don’t know if I would say ‘multiple reactions’ as much as a reaction of a specific energy level.

I don't think this is simply an electro-chemical reaction. For instance, it's quite simple to produce acetominophen by reacting basic chemical compounds in a flask. The chemical slurry does not "think" as it becomes a more complex compound. When the brain's chemistry changes states and fires multiple synaps, this is not "thought". There's something more to it.

Yes, and that supports the hypotesis that thought is not completely within the physical body because we must come back to the individual who saw the car in the ditch. Where did that come from? Where did the hundredth monkey get the ‘idea’ to wash the fruit?

[Robert]

I think the question asked on the other thread regarding what I am Not, is the way to look at the nature of thought. I am not this hand, foot, body, computer, desk, etc. What is left is only the awareness I AM. With that awareness comes the understanding that we are part of pure mind and that nothing is contained outside of Mind. The only thing constant, unchanging and eternal is Mind. All else is illusion, or dreams. In other words we are Mind or Thought experiencing itself as if in a dream.

Yes but where is that ‘pure mind’? Does it travel from existence to existence? Is it within the narrow framework of the physical self?

Some of us have had instances of waking up - Jesus and Buddah, for example, and they tried to convey their message to us. Jesus said, be of good cheer for I have overcome the world. Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is another fascinating read. Jesus also said, The kingdom of God is within. Within what?

I interpret this to mean that spirituality comes from within the individual, that God is within the individual and social systems are not God or avenues to God. ‘Know thyself’ fits this.

So can you measure thought? Why would it make a difference? Just curious

We don’t know where the discovery would take us. I like to think that it will open individuals to extended areas of spiritual exploration. For instance we see a plane fly by and don’t question it. It is possible to go into our akashic record, I have done it and validated it What if we didn’t question the ability to astro-project? Would our minds be more amenable to it? When I first did it in a group I was the only one not amazed. Did the inability to accept the possibility inhibit the others?
Where is the akashic record? It can't be in the physical body.
What is happening here is that I am working backwards but in a confined way. I have already traveled to interesting levels of spirituality, astro-projected and seen future events (9/1- five years before it happened I saw explosions in NY, DC and LA (I read later that the terrorists had planned on LA.). Now I’m looking for ways to answer those events with reason. We can say it can’t be done or no one has ever done it but then we would have to say that about every inquiry. We would have to stop reasoning, stop asking altogether then wouldn’t we?

[Chills]

Chills,
This is exactly where Jiddu Krishnamurti went when he spoke of reaching the point of seeing where we become one with the object seen and we move past thought. At this point thought ceases and we are completely aware.
I have never done it completely but have had glimpses.

Well Robert I have never heard of Jiddu Krishnamurti.
I have never been much into reading about these things.
It seems all very simplistic and logical to me.

I think we may be obscuring the obvious here.

I tend to think that we as an individual identity ego etc only exist in the language construct. I tend to think of life as a continuum and I(this body) as only one point on that continuum.

I tend to think that the experience of premonition is more common than we think and it has probably got to do with our innate (sub language) ability to process all kinds of information and predict outcomes based on the known critieria.
I can give you examples from my own life where I knew within minutes when someone would phone me or show up at my door.
I knew something terrible was going to happen to my son 3 days before he died. He died a little over two years ago. He lived 2000 miles away.

I do not think there is anything mystical about it all.
I use to, mind you until I started to investigate it from two points.
One logic and two what we know about brain functions.

I would like to see a spectre scan of your brain.
Out of curiosity


Anyway an interesting thread.

[lars]

Not too long ago, I decided to see if anyone from my distant past was in Google. I found several, it was an entertaining exercise. One was a frat brother, Jack Houck. We were never buds and have not kept up but I can testify to Jack's intelligence and education. He seems to believe in PK, "mind over matter." Shoot, he even gives "PK parties". Check him out. Tell him Lars (Larry) sent ya.

http://www.jackhouck.com/index.shtml

[Chills]

Just thought I should add... spectre scans show how active different parts of the brain are.
I have a hunch...probably a long shot in the dark........that there may be a correlation between some of these abilities..empathy premonition etc.. and different brain functions.

Not really sure.... but I would sure like to have a look see ..... :rolleyes:

[SmartAZ]

I think I'll have a beer.

[Robert]

Well Robert I have never heard of Jiddu Krishnamurti.
I have never been much into reading about these things.
It seems all very simplistic and logical to me.

You might like his writing. I read him about 20 or 30 years ago. ‘Freedom from the Known’ was one of his books.

I think we may be obscuring the obvious here.

I tend to think that we as an individual identity ego etc only exist in the language construct. I tend to think of life as a continuum and I(this body) as only one point on that continuum.

Ego is an aspect of fear. I’ve done extensive work in the area of fear but it is a tangent from this discourse. Here’s a thing to think about though. We walk down a path in the woods, step on a snake and jump back. Is thought involved? I don’t think so, I think it’s instinct and thought doesn’t enter into it until after we jump back. We grab a hot pot and pull back. Is there thought involved? Not until after we pull back and check for burns.

I tend to think that the experience of premonition is more common than we think and it has probably got to do with our innate (sub language) ability to process all kinds of information and predict outcomes based on the known critieria.

I think there is some credibility to that. We process a long series of possibilities that lead to an event and if everything happens the event occurs. If one thing doesn’t our prediction is wrong.
This might possibly explain slowing down in my car before I even know there is a kid who is going to run out in the street but how do we explain the individual who saw the car in the ditch. How do we explain astro-projection? My sense was that the body was left behind and my action was independent of it. My sense in the slowing down of the car was that I was being directed by a ‘force’ beyond myself, in fact, I believe thought was suspended until after the incident.

I can give you examples from my own life where I knew within minutes when someone would phone me or show up at my door.

Ok, someone phones you. What are the possibilities that you can plot the events to the call and the specific individual? Astronomical. Is it possible? Perhaps but it’s more likely that we’re sensing something on a different level, an energy, whatever.

I knew something terrible was going to happen to my son 3 days before he died. He died a little over two years ago. He lived 2000 miles away.

Sorry to hear that, I lost a boy very dear to me and it’s a rough road. As far as death, I think we know when we are going to die and I’ve seen it in several people. My father knew within a day or two. Even sudden death accidents are sensed by the individual. Could you have been sensing this through your son?

I do not think there is anything mystical about it all.
I use to, mind you until I started to investigate it from two points.
One logic and two what we know about brain functions.

Ok, let me speak a little about the mystical end of it from what I’ve observed through my own experiments and work. It is possible to travel to different planes of existence. My perception is that they are right before us and the thing that allows us to be active in those planes is resonance. That is, we can easily travel there but we must learn to resonate at the frequency of the specific plane, again, the same way we tune a radio. The inhibiting factor for most individuals is fear and the moment fear enters into our actions, regardless whether it is astro-projection or different spiritual planes, the journey ends. You can try this for yourself by watching your actions when you meditate and noticing when fear enters into the picture. That’s why there is so much emphasis by spiritual teachers on making your mind blank, thoughtless, because fear does not enter into it and all that is left is awareness. I would be happy to discuss different planes of existence as I perceive them but I think it is a tangent off of this inquiry.

I would like to see a spectre scan of your brain.
Out of curiosity

I don’t think it will be much different then anyone else’s. People have been doing this on drugs for centuries. The problem is that drugs can take you there but you don’t know how you got there or back. When you develop the ability without drugs you have a ‘memory’ of the process, much the same way you remember the roads you chose to go to work.

The astral plane is the easiest to access because it is the ‘closest’. This is the plane that the TV personality Jon Edwards, is that his name? Accesses. On the astral plane we still retain many characteristics of the physical plane such as ego (based in fear) and you will notice how people he ‘brings through’ still talk about silly things like dress colors and hairstyles. Ghosts, recent suicides and those who refuse to give up the material physical plane are usually there.

Here is another point that you might find interesting. We manifest what we believe after death until we give up the illusion and continue on. Sartre for instance, most likely experienced nothingness and a Catholic might experience Purgatory.
As far as I can see we don’t die and have the universe revealed to us. If we are angry people we take that with us too. Your whole existence is the journey, death is just a transition and not an ending.

As we travel to the higher planes the duality of love and its opposite fear meld into absolute love, because fear is an illusion, once again ‘maya’ to the Buddhists. Only once did I approach a level of love void of fear that I would say represents Christ or the Buddha. It is beyond any thought or explanation and you simply don’t want to leave, your questions are answered before they are asked and you exist in a realm of absolute bliss. You come away with a profound change in your life that never leaves, a true metamorphosis.

But we are getting off the thread.

[Anita]

is there a quantum level below which thought does not fully form?

Yes! I spend a lot of time there [without even trying]. :D

Good discussion you've got going here, Robert. Have you bent a spoon yet?

[lars]

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/12/07/computer.thought.reut/index.html

'Thinking cap' controls computer

December 7, 2004



WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Four people were able to control a computer using their thoughts and an electrode-studded "thinking cap", U.S. researchers reported Monday.

They said their set-up could someday be adapted to help disabled people operate a motorized wheelchair or artificial limb.

While experiments have allowed a monkey to control a computer with its thoughts, electrodes were implanted into the animal's brain. This experiment, reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, required no surgery and no implants.

"The results show that people can learn to use scalp-recorded electroencephalogram rhythms to control rapid and accurate movement of a cursor in two dimensions," Jonathan Wolpaw and Dennis McFarland of the New York State Department of Health and State University of New York in Albany wrote.

They tested their device on four people -- two partly paralyzed men who used wheelchairs and a healthy man and woman.

During the experiments, the four volunteers faced a video screen wearing a cap that held 64 electrodes against the scalp to record brain activity.

The key was a special computer algorithm -- a program that translated the brain signals into a meaningful directive of what the users wanted the computer to do.

It took some practice, but all four learned to move a cursor on the screen in two directions, Wolpaw and McFarland found.

"The impressive noninvasive multidimensional control achieved in the present study suggests that a noninvasive brain control interface could support clinically useful operation of a robotic arm, a motorized wheelchair, or a neuroprosthesis," the researchers wrote.

The two disabled men were better at the task, the researchers found. This could have to do with stronger motivation or perhaps a brain forced to be more adaptable to cope with the injuries that left the men disabled, the researchers said.

Many groups are working on ways to help disabled and paralyzed people use their thoughts to control machines. While some require brain implants, others use such cues as eye motion or brain waves recorded from outside.

[Annmarie]

"As we travel to the higher planes the duality of love and its opposite fear meld into absolute love, because fear is an illusion, once again ‘maya’ to the Buddhists. Only once did I approach a level of love void of fear that I would say represents Christ or the Buddha. It is beyond any thought or explanation and you simply don’t want to leave, your questions are answered before they are asked and you exist in a realm of absolute bliss. You come away with a profound change in your life that never leaves, a true metamorphosis."

This happened once to me too! This is what I referred to as revelation, that's the only word I could think of to describe it. I have left my body several times and realized I am not a body, but your above description happened only once to me. And your right, the change in your viewpoint is profound.

For me this must have only taken a moment, but in that moment I knew or understood so much that it would take some time to explain it. You are so right about fear melding into absolute love, and you realize fear is an illusion that we are choosing to experience. This is why I defined God as absolute, unconditional Love, because in Reality fear does not exist. You realize this when you experience this state. There is no where that you begin or end, or anything else begins or ends - there is just Mind, observing, and nothing else but pure unexplainable JOY!!

As far as where Mind is located, I think everything is located WITHIN Mind. There is nothing outside of mind, Mind IS everything and everywhere simultaneously. Time is an illusion, a construct of ego. There is no time unless our thinking brain considers a past and a future. The thinking brain is NOT Mind. Mind can never be contained in a body. Mind can experience itself through the brain and the body, but that is not what it is. You and I had the fortunate experience to tap into it briefly, but we both know it really cannot be explained because it goes beyond words.

Everything that ever "was" or "will be" has already happened - thus you can see those Akashic (spelling?) records. I am not real familiar with that, but I believe it is a recording of everything that happened or will happen. Is that correct? Another thing, Mind (God) can only be experienced when the brain has emptied itself of thought and has suspended notions of time (past or future). Fear gets in the way, but fear is only experienced when one is "thinking" in terms of past or future. Fear is the only thing that blocks us from reaching this state. Fear is the only "thing" that stands between us and God, or Mind.

[Anita]

I'm reminded of Alfred Aiken [amazing that his name even came to mind]. Had a co-worker who was REALLY into Aiken in maybe 1967 take me to a seminar of his, where I guess I bought a book of his...or maybe the coworker gave me the book; don't remember which. I suspect that his books can only be purchased through private parties these days, but I think you'd find them interesting, Annemarie. Google him and see if his philosophies match yours.

[lars]

I myself am deeply moved by Aiken

http://www.clayaiken.com/

[Chills]

Robert..

Interesting thread. I think at this point we have diverged from an inquiry into thought and have made assumptions that may not be well founded. For example the use of the term 'astral plane' etc.. assumes that such a thing exists. It might for you it doesnt for me, so to speak. In my own posts I added speculations...not well founded either.
Etc

I will follow with interest but I think I have very little if anything to add to this discussion.

Again very interesting.

[Robert]

It is interesting that you bring this up Lars. I have often thought of developing some device to allow, say , an individual with a missing hand to use an artificial hand throught robotics but I went in other directions. ( My patents are in the field of medical instruments by the way and my mother always wanted me to do more into the field)

[Robert]

As far as where Mind is located, I think everything is located WITHIN Mind. There is nothing outside of mind, Mind IS everything and everywhere simultaneously. Time is an illusion, a construct of ego. There is no time unless our thinking brain considers a past and a future. The thinking brain is NOT Mind. Mind can never be contained in a body. Mind can experience itself through the brain and the body, but that is not what it is. You and I had the fortunate experience to tap into it briefly, but we both know it really cannot be explained because it goes beyond words.

Sort of like Reich’s ‘ethers’. Perhaps it is everywhere. Ok, so now this ‘energy’ surrounding the brain is converted somehow and becomes the thought that runs through neurons as an electrical pulse. This is the belief of several religions that relate God to a cosmic consciousness. This explains the women in the ditch and someone ‘seeing’ that but we still have to tune in and out otherwise everyone would be jumbling the same info like a radio that gets all the stations at the same time.

Everything that ever "was" or "will be" has already happened - thus you can see those Akashic (spelling?) records.

While I agree with this we don’t have proof and it creates more questions. If it is true then the premise of prediction through several associated events may be just the ability to access a certain part of the ‘total memory bank’, the hard drive so to speak.

I am not real familiar with that, but I believe it is a recording of everything that happened or will happen. Is that correct?

Usually we consider the akashic record of the individual and it represents the lives that individual has lived.

Another thing, Mind (God) can only be experienced when the brain has emptied itself of thought and has suspended notions of time (past or future). Fear gets in the way, but fear is only experienced when one is "thinking" in terms of past or future. Fear is the only thing that blocks us from reaching this state. Fear is the only "thing" that stands between us and God, or Mind.

Yes, fear is a product of thought. My analogy of grabbing the hot pot. Until thought enters in there is no fear and thought doesn’t enter in until we are well away from the pot.
It has been my observation that fear is the wall between man and God, yes. Basically I only see two forces love and fear. We can get into it but we’re going in a different direction but this is fine too, we’re all learning in a constructive environment now without hostility and this is when real learning is at its best.

[Robert]

Good discussion you've got going here, Robert. Have you bent a spoon yet?

This is interesting. I’ll tell you two stories and the group can decide.

When I was a boy, perhaps twelve, my mother made me go to religious instructions every Wednesday after school. Just before the class, to raise money, there would be a raffle of a large chocolate bar. If I remember correctly there were about fifteen to twenty kids in class. Each one would write their name on piece of paper, fold it several times and put it into a bowl with everyone else’s name and each week someone different would get to reach in and select the winner. Just before the kid did this I would ‘create’ a vision where the kid would pick my name. I won four weeks in a row and finally was not allowed to participate any longer in the raffle. This was fine with me as I was starting to become embarrassed by my winning.

The second event happened in college when I was playing basketball with a bunch of friends. I remember throwing the ball from about twenty five feet away from the hoop. About half way to the hoop I realized the ball was off to one side and I corrected it in mid stream. I remember seeing it change abruptly and it went right through the hoop. What’s important is that I wasn’t thinking about controlling the ball at all and only after the event did I realize what had happened. I dismissed this whole event. I think I didn’t want to face it, besides I had other priorities, beer and partying.

I haven’t thought about theses stories in years but I’m sure you all have them.

This is an interesting paradox it is called ‘photographing’. Here’s what happens we have an event, perhaps something someone says to us or something we observe, in our life and we don’t totally understand it at the time. We store the event and when we are capable of understanding it we bring it back. I’ve done this twenty and thirty years after events. I’ll bet many of you have to, think about it.

[Robert]

Robert..

Interesting thread. I think at this point we have diverged from an inquiry into thought and have made assumptions that may not be well founded. For example the use of the term 'astral plane' etc.. assumes that such a thing exists. It might for you it doesnt for me, so to speak. In my own posts I added speculations...not well founded either.

Yes, I agree it doesn’t have a direct relationship but it is stimulating thought and some things are happening worth mentioning. For one, you will see posters commenting on events in their lives which they weren’t, perhaps, ready to open to a group about.
I look at is as collecting data that we can sort through and accept or dismiss at a later point.

As far as the astral plane. It is better to not accept it or more accurately not accept that which doesn’t fit our paradigm. The work of people like George Anderson has been corroborated as the selection of the next reincarnated Buddha has been. I think these are food for thought at the least. We can say this is not the astral plane but this is relative. If we have two independent people who both experience the same stimuli, like Annmarie and I did, then we have to examine that stimuli even if it doesn’t fit into the realm of accepted senses and reality.
Well after my experience several books came out where individuals claimed the same experience as I did and while it is possible that all our observations were distorted by fear, which by the way, is the only thing that can distort the absolute, I specifically remember as close to a complete absence of fear that I have experienced.
So I’m basing my belief in ‘higher planes’, not on anything I have read but on personal experience and validation.

If we don’t get back to it soon we can start a new thread but it appears several posters are interested in this line and I’m happy to continue it but please challenge my statements if you disagree, this is an open door.

[Chills]

Robert

I see from reading that some points where I failed to connect with are made clear when defined or described. I didnt quite understand the use of some terms. Your reply to Annmarie was instructive.

Anyway here is a question:

How would you account for the thoughts of those who suffer from various forms of schizophrenia. Are the voices speaking to them not the same as thought?
I do not know myself, just wondering how this would be addressed.

I have known several schizophrenics. I recall talking one fellow years ago now. It was an interesting conversation. When relating to me he was quite lucid and rational but much of the time he was talking seemed totally irrationale. I asked him who are you talking to? He replied that he was having 9 conversations including the one with me.
What seemed irrationale babble wasnt at all if one separated the conversations out.

So how do we address this sort of thing

[Anita]

If I'm going off-topic, Robert, just let me know, but when my kids were little I had them practice visualization. Test tomorrow? Lay back and visualize that you'll do well. Violin competition? Lay back and visualize that you're playing better than you ever played before. When my son needed a mole removed from his leg, I stayed with him and asked the doctor and nurses to remain quiet. He and I went "off" on a tour of the rainforest, speaking aloud to each other about where we were and what we were doing. When the doctor cut into the mole, my son said, "A spider bit me on my leg." My shoe fell off my foot while we were doing this, and I told him I had to go back to look for it. He got through the whole procedure with no pain, and the doctor asked me what that was called, because she'd never seen a patient so calm. I said, "Visualization."

Young children are quite malleable regarding visualization techniques because their imaginations are so great. One of my daughters got an ear infection once and since she slept on the top bunk, I suggested that she put her ear on the ceiling overnight. When I woke her up for school the next day, she said, "Should I get my ear off the ceiling?" I said, "only if you think it's stopped hurting."

[Robert]

Chills

How would you account for the thoughts of those who suffer from various forms of schizophrenia. Are the voices speaking to them not the same as thought?
I do not know myself, just wondering how this would be addressed.

I do not know. I have someone very close to me that is schizophrenic and I’ve listened as he was in the next rook talking to himself out loud which is quite unsettling on its own. Could it be that the ‘wiring’ is not right, that the filtering system isn’t working properly because there are chemicals that can ‘shut off’ the voices.
So how would this fit into our hypothesis that there is an ether where we all draw from that is contoured by the physical brain to what we call thought?
Now we have the religious fanatic, Paul Hill for instance who killed two people because ‘god directed him to’. Is this from the same ether? Because if it is then the ether is not ‘supreme’ or it is both higher consciousness and lower.

I have known several schizophrenics. I recall talking one fellow years ago now. It was an interesting conversation. When relating to me he was quite lucid and rational but much of the time he was talking seemed totally irrationale. I asked him who are you talking to? He replied that he was having 9 conversations including the one with me.
What seemed irrationale babble wasnt at all if one separated the conversations out.
I think this fits our hypothesis because the individual body is where differentiation takes place and chemicals rectify the schizophrenic.

So how do we address this sort of thing

I’m wondering if we couldn’t prove it by putting people, even healthy ones, into intense frequency fields where we run a series of frequencies and measure thought and even well being.
Let’s say the frequency is 10 Hz, which is in the range of Alpha. I don’t think just running an intense 10 Hz generator will do very much. Here’s why:
When you tune your radio to a frequency there is information mixed with that signal. The carrier frequency just allows the radio to isolate the information being sent. The information on the carrier wave is then interpreted by you radio to give music or whatever else is being sent from the station. So we have a wave within a wave so to speak in amplitude modualtion.

[Robert]

If I'm going off-topic, Robert, just let me know, but when my kids were little I had them practice visualization. Test tomorrow? Lay back and visualize that you'll do well. Violin competition? Lay back and visualize that you're playing better than you ever played before.

There was a study done with tennis players where they had some visualize the night before the game playing really well and the next day they did.


When my son needed a mole removed from his leg, I stayed with him and asked the doctor and nurses to remain quiet. He and I went "off" on a tour of the rainforest, speaking aloud to each other about where we were and what we were doing. When the doctor cut into the mole, my son said, "A spider bit me on my leg." My shoe fell off my foot while we were doing this, and I told him I had to go back to look for it. He got through the whole procedure with no pain, and the doctor asked me what that was called, because she'd never seen a patient so calm. I said, "Visualization."

I used to do it with my dentist and never needed novocaine. I would pick a spot on the ceiling and focus on it.
Here’s an interesting experiment. The next time you get hurt focus right on the pain. We like to run away from it. The next time you get a cut focus on stopping the bleeding. I’m not the only one who can do this stuff. If I can do it you can do it. We don’t try these things because we have been taught to rely on outside forces. And of course there was the Twilight Zone. (Only kidding!)

Young children are quite malleable regarding visualization techniques because their imaginations are so great.

Yes, this is what I was trying to relay before. That if something becomes accepted as a standard we are capable of doing it more readily. Children are a prime example, they don’t know it can’t be done. They don’t know playing the cello is hard. They don’t know the high probability of wining the chocolate bar four weeks in a row.

[SmartAZ]

Several posts here have reminded me of a fascinating book, The Girl In Melanie Klein (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0030764408/qid=1102815085/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-7935821-6998243?v=glance&s=books). It is a story about a nuthouse, and it gives a tremendous amount of insight into what goes on in a patient's head. I only remember one bit from it at the moment: A visitor to the hospital said, "That girl gives me the willies. She looks at me like I'm not even there." Another patient replied, "Wrong not!" The doctor then explained to the visitor what "wrong not" meant. He said, "She looks at you like SHE isn't there!"

[lars]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11673518%255E1702,00.html



Blind man's sixth sense revealed

December 13, 2004


A COMPLETELY blind British man had been shown to possess an apparent "sixth sense" which let him recognise emotions on people's faces, British scientists said in research released today.

The 52-year-old was able to react to pictures of human faces showing emotions such as anger, happiness or fear, the researchers said.

The man, identified only as "patient X", has suffered two strokes which damaged the brain areas that process visual signals, leaving him completely blind.

However his eyes and optic nerves are intact, and brain scans showed that he appeared to somehow use a part of the brain not usually used for sight to process visual signals linked to some emotions.

When researchers from the University of Wales showed the man images of shapes such as circles and squares, he could only guess what they were, and had a similar lack of success determining the gender of emotionless male and female faces.


But when presented with angry or happy human faces, his accuracy improved to 59 per cent, significantly better than what would be expected by random chance, with similar results for distinguishing between sad and happy or fearful and happy faces.

He was unable, however, to tell apart images of animals which appeared either threatening or non-threatening.

Brain scans showed that when the man looked at faces expressing emotion, it activated a part of his brain called the right amygdala, which is known to respond to non-verbal emotional signs.

The findings, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, suggested the man was able to process information gathered by his eyes in a different part of the brain from the visual centre.

"This discovery is... interesting for behavioural scientists as the right amygdala has been associated with subliminal processing of emotional stimuli in clinically healthy individuals," said Dr Alan Pegna, who led the study.

"What patient X has assisted us in establishing is that this area undoubtedly processes visual facial signals connected with all types of emotional facial expressions."

[Anita]

The next time you get hurt focus right on the pain. We like to run away from it.

Did you mean to suggest focusing on the pain, or the fear [expectation] of pain?

I'm thinking back to my three birthings. We hear all our lives how painful childbirth will be. SmartAZ might even suggest this is woman's punishment for Eve's sin. I chose to reproduce later than some of my peers, as I listened to their childbirth stories wondering why ANYONE would INTENTIONALLY expose herself to such pain [sometimes over and over again]. I then read a book, Childbirth Without Fear, in which it was explained how natural a function this was, and when did natural functions include pain? The author suggested that there WOULD be a slight burning sensation in the perineum when the head crowned, and lo' and behold, didn't I feel a slight burning sensation. Forgetting what the author had said for my next two birthings [more because I'm forgetful than by design], I felt NO burning sensation in the perineum. I think the expectation of pain [fear of pain] is what must be focused on, as mentioned in the Bene Gesserit Litany against Fear:
"Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear; I will permit it to pass over me and through me, and when it has gone past me I will turn to see Fears' path. Where the Fear has gone, there will be nothing. Only I will remain." - attributions to Frank Herbert.

[Annmarie]

http://www.crystalinks.com/holographic.html I don't know if this link will work, but check this out.

Anita, I haven't heard of that person, Alfred Aiken, but I will go back and do a google search, thank you for the info

This thread is very interesting and I am learning from all of you. Mind directs body, not the other way around (imo) - Anita's experience with child birth and her children's experiences have to be proof of that. I think the proof is in the result. What about some of the Buddhist Holy Men that can slow down their heartbeats to nearly nothing? There is scientific proof that Yogis can do remarkable things. How can anyone deny that?

I agree that fear is the mind killer. Mind can only be fully appreciated or experienced in the present moment, or the Now as the Eastern religions teach. Fear comes about because of past and future notions or conditioning. Fear is never felt in the present moment. If we want a different "future" or experience than we have had in the "past" - we must learn to suspend judgement. We are unhappy because we have judged, not because something has happened to us. Judgement implies that what "is" shouldn't "be" so we become unhappy. I think I am going off topic here, so I will let this go.

[Robert]

Did you mean to suggest focusing on the pain, or the fear [expectation] of pain?

Here’s what I think happens:
We cut our self accidently. The instant after we cut our self the pain travels to our brain. Fear doesn’t enter in yet. It enters in after the pain because fear is absent without thought and until we think about the accident we just don’t have fear.
Now fear comes in. We think, I may have cut a nerve, I might have to go to the hospital, I’m bleeding badly, I might die etc. Fear brings distortion, it clouds our ability to see the event. But what if we could look at the cut completely without any fear, see it bleed and focus right on the pain? I do this, I’ve trained myself to watch the fear and not allow it to control what I see. Is it possible to be hurt so badly that fear enters into it for me? Maybe but the ultimate fear is of death and I don’t have that fear. I have stood right before death and not been afraid.
The reality is that in the next instant anyone or all of us could be dead. We can use it to liberate us or live like Dylan said, “hate your life and fear your death”.
I remember when I was younger and feared death. I wanted to know why, I dug through my brain, my life until I understood it, until I faced it and the conclusion I came to is that the fear of death is our greatest fear and if we can understand it we are free.

[b]I'm thinking back to my three birthings. We hear all our lives how painful childbirth will be. SmartAZ might even suggest this is woman's punishment for Eve's sin. I chose to reproduce later than some of my peers, as I listened to their childbirth stories wondering why ANYONE would INTENTIONALLY expose herself to such pain [sometimes over and over again]. I then read a book, Childbirth Without Fear, in which it was explained how natural a function this was, and when did natural functions include pain? The author suggested that there WOULD be a slight burning sensation in the perineum when the head crowned, and lo' and behold, didn't I feel a slight burning sensation. Forgetting what the author had said for my next two birthings [more because I'm forgetful than by design], I felt NO burning sensation in the perineum. I think the expectation of pain [fear of pain] is what must be focused on, as mentioned in the Bene Gesserit Litany against Fear:
"Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear; I will permit it to pass over me and through me, and when it has gone past me I will turn to see Fears' path. Where the Fear has gone, there will be nothing. Only I will remain." - attributions to Frank Herbert.

Yes, this is it, this is what I'm trying to relate.

There is a society in the world where the woman has the baby and goes right back into the fields to work but here husband is ill for three days.

[Robert]

I know there are some of you eager to get back to the exploration of thought. I'm doing several things here and it requires energy that I have to give to those projects.
I Will return to it as soon as I can.

[Annmarie]

Anita - Yes, my thoughts are very much like his (Alfred Aiken). I never heard of him before but I am tempted to order his book "That Which Is" - just read the forward and I like it very much. Thanks!

[Chills]

I find the notion of mind over matter....questionable.

I think we can show that the brain doesnt always want to do what the mind would like.
I think depression is a good example.

Just some thoughts.

[Anita]

Here’s what I think happens:

I must cut myself with sharper instruments, because while my instincts immediately take over, I [typically] don't even notice I've cut myself until blood is pouring all over. Once the blood is seen, the fear kicks in that there will be pain. I think we ALSO forget that bleeding is the body's way of cleaning out the wound; it should be WELCOMED until we feel that the body has done the necessary work and may be going overboard.

Getting way off track here, but interesting thoughts.

Chills: Mind over matter only applies to a mind in good health.

[Chills]

Chills: Mind over matter only applies to a mind in good health.


Anita... depression is not of the mind but of the brain.

[Robert]

I find the notion of mind over matter....questionable.


I think we can show that the brain doesnt always want to do what the mind would like.

Doesn’t mean the mind can’t learn to respond in a specific way. Someone learns to swing a tennis racquet a certain way to hit a ball. It’s a learned response and automatic.
The black belt breaking a board. The Indian fakir lying on a bed of nails.

The way to do it is in stages. If you went out and sat on a bed of nails you’d most likely bleed to death but if you worked up to it you might find it no different then washing the dishes. Think about things you did the first time and how aware you were. The first time you drove a car for instance but we drive our cars everyday without a second thought.

Here’s a simple experiment that any of you can do to ‘break the ice’. Place your index and forefinger on your wrist or neck until you feel your pulse. Measure your pulse after relaxing for a few minutes. Now think about slowing it down. This may take a few days of trying it off and on but once you do it and learn the process that enabled it you will find it becomes secondary.

I think depression is a good example.

First I see two kinds of depression. Everyone gets depressed, the difference is how long the depression lasts. Can we ‘move out’ of the depression by our own devices. Some of us can sometimes.
Long term depression is a different story. I have loved ones with this and the last thing they want to be is depressed. We change it chemically but can the individual do it on their own? I would say that would take an extraordinary person because they would have to look completely past their depression while the most painful of inner emotions is consuming them.

[Chills]

Robert

With all due respect, you and I have a different understanding as to what depression actually is.

It is, as best as I can understand it, a malfunction of the nervous system, so to speak.
The messages to act simply do not get through to actualize into a behavior.

[Anita]

Like Robert, I think there are two kinds, but I think that one kind is of the mind while the other is of the brain. I guess it could be called a "nature versus nurture" difference. SOMETIMES depression is simply due to misfiring or lack of chemical balance in the brain. IMO, this type of depression needs at least a temporary "rebalancing" through drugs, therapy, etc. OTHERTIMES, however, depression is simply due to life, and perhaps choices made in life. I think that the terms we use to describe sensations and emotions play a role in avoiding depression if we don't suffer from chemical imbalances in the brain. For instance, we oftentimes describe an unpleasant sensation as pain. We oftentimes describe frustration as anger. We oftentimes describe a minor inconvenience as more than it is. In so doing, I think we exaggerate our sensations and emotions to the point where we bring on depression.

Anyone remember the cartoon Lippy the Lion and Hardy Har Har? Hardy was a laughing hyena who could only see the negative things in life. He never laughed, and laughter cures most anything that ails us, IMO.

[Chills]

Anita--

I will clarify... clinical depression is what I am referring to.
The word depression is used loosely to describe a lot of things... clinical depression is a specific condition. IMO.

Also a question.. you refer to 'mind' ..can you define that for me?

[Robert]

Robert

With all due respect, you and I have a different understanding as to what depression actually is.

It is, as best as I can understand it, a malfunction of the nervous system, so to speak.
The messages to act simply do not get through to actualize into a behavior.

I can’t speak for others depression or even the clinical definitions of it.
I am not a depressed person by nature but I have been depressed for short periods of time a day here and there which I think is much different then being depressed for a year for example.

We have to ask is the mechanism the same, is the chemical reaction the same, regardless of time? I don’t know.
I know that I have looked at my depression and asked why am I depressed? This usually changes the depression if I make changes to the environment that causes it. Let’s say I’m depressed about money or paying the bills which I’m sure, in this day and age, weighs heavily on many individuals. I can worry about them, forget them or try to make some extra cash to pay them. If I put them aside and listen to some enjoyable music or read an interesting book I find my depression goes away regardless whether the bills go away or not, however it may return or interestingly enough, may not return. If I decide to change my spending habits, live with less or if I can or find ways to save money by doing things like growing a garden to save on food costs then I find the depression also goes away because, however, valid or not my resolution to the problem is isn't as important as the fact that I’m constructively attempting to resolve the problem that caused the depression. This works for me.
The key is, that no matter how formidable the problem is, if I find a solution, regardless of how long it takes to implement it, my depression diminishes or goes away completely through an avenue of constructive action.

[Chills]

I can’t speak for others depression or even the clinical definitions of it.
I am not a depressed person by nature but I have been depressed for short periods of time a day here and there which I think is much different then being depressed for a year for example.

We have to ask is the mechanism the same, is the chemical reaction the same, regardless of time? I don’t know.
I know that I have looked at my depression and asked why am I depressed? This usually changes the depression if I make changes to the environment that causes it. Let’s say I’m depressed about money or paying the bills which I’m sure, in this day and age, weighs heavily on many individuals. I can worry about them, forget them or try to make some extra cash to pay them. If I put them aside and listen to some enjoyable music or read an interesting book I find my depression goes away regardless whether the bills go away or not, however it may return or interestingly enough, may not return. If I decide to change my spending habits, live with less or if I can or find ways to save money by doing things like growing a garden to save on food costs then I find the depression also goes away because, however, valid or not my resolution to the problem is isn't as important as the fact that I’m constructively attempting to resolve the problem that caused the depression. This works for me.
The key is, that no matter how formidable the problem is, if I find a solution, regardless of how long it takes to implement it, my depression diminishes or goes away completely through an avenue of constructive action.


Robert .....

What you are suggesting is true in theory. However the problem as I stated earlier is the thought ....doesn't get actualized.... at least not in clinically depressed persons.

Example. Depressed person may be sitting on a chair saying to him/herself, they must get up and go outside or to the shower or whatever.... the thought is there..to activate....but the action doesnt take place.

There are many possible reasons for the condition arising. For example, people who suffer from SAD (seasonal addaptive disorder) ...become depressed from lack or diminished sunlight. There is NO psychological or emotional cause at all.

I personally think that clinical depression is physically based...and the accompanying emotions...are actually the result of the condition. They are symptoms rather than cause.

Just some thoughts.

[Robert]

Please continue on depression. If we are learning from it then we should keep it going and get input from those who live with it everyday and have something to say beyond the books and clinical observations.

We can still have our debate about thought too.

---------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I’ve been thinking of a way to have a friendly low key way to experiment with thought and ESP.
What I have done is put a number from 1 to 10 on a blank sheet of white paper written with a black magic marker on the wall near my computer. Each time I come to my computer I see the number and it is in my mind, so to speak.

What I would like for those of you who would like to enter this experiment to do is see if the number ‘pops’ into your head. I don’t want any of you to sit down and concentrate on the number, just see if it shows up. It may pop into your head next Monday when you’re at the grocery store looking at prices or whatever. It doesn’t have to be when you’re at the computer but if it is this is fine too.
You can PM (private mail) me with your answers and I’ll keep the info in my book privately so your info isn’t on the net. When you email me, let me know what was going on when the number came to you also.


*Please don't put your response on the thread. It may influence others.*
Thank you

[Anita]

The brain, IMO, is an organ-like PHYSICAL entity that sends messages to the MIND, which interprets the messages.

Lucky, my mom, suffered once from clinical depression; she tried to kill herself. This wasn't due to a malfunction of her brain as much as it was due to my dad dying and her inability to cope with that thought at the time. She NEEDED antidepressants AND therapy to help her through that crisis in her life. Once she got through that crisis, she didn't need either anymore. So, an external influence fupped uck her MIND. In contrast to THAT, she was also involved in an automobile accident that fupped uck her BRAIN, leaving her with epilepsy. THIS damage is PHYSICAL [to the brain organ], and cannot be cured with therapy or a temporary drug regime. She needs [and will ALWAYS need] medication to "prevent" her brain from malfunctioning.

Those are the differences, as *I* see it. YMMV.

[Chills]

Anita

You have suggested what you think the mind does but what is it..where does exist how does it come to be etc etc..
I think I would simply describe what you call mind as the conscious process of info/sensory data..

[Robert]

Robert .....

What you are suggesting is true in theory. However the problem as I stated earlier is the thought ....doesn't get actualized.... at least not in clinically depressed persons.

Example. Depressed person may be sitting on a chair saying to him/herself, they must get up and go outside or to the shower or whatever.... the thought is there..to activate....but the action doesnt take place.

Is this depression or another anomaly? Isn’t the depressed person thinking I don’t want to get out of the chair. It’s not worth it or whatever. Am I misunderstanding?

There are many possible reasons for the condition arising. For example, people who suffer from SAD (seasonal addaptive disorder) ...become depressed from lack or diminished sunlight. There is NO psychological or emotional cause at all.

I have this and my friend sent a full spectrum light. When I first turned it on I thought, “Is this going to do any good?” But I found my self happy and whistling.
I’m not sure there is no psychological or emotional cause at all. I remember when I was a kid I would get depressed if it rained for a couple of days in a row because I love to be outside and the rain stopped that. So I began to associate rain and dark with that and I have always loved the light. My house is full of windows and no shades and when I look out I can see expanses of open fields which I like because it feels like you are outside even when you’re not. So I would say there is, at least for me an emotional aspect to SAD.

I personally think that clinical depression is physically based...and the accompanying emotions...are actually the result of the condition. They are symptoms rather than cause.

It’s not my field but I’m close to someone who has it and I’ve watched in other people close to me. Can we change the physical action that causes it if indeed it is physical? I would have to be in the depths of that depression to tell you this.
I have noticed individuals who lead relatively ‘normal’ lives and then snapped. It seems to me that there is a chemical change that takes place and for some reason takes a long time if ever, to return to ‘normal’ chemical balance.
We could get into the karmic aspect of this but that’s another whole story. Although an interesting one.

[Anita]

I think I would simply describe what you call mind as the conscious process of info/sensory data..

Yes.

Thinking about your seasonal disorder [for example], I might compare it to pre-menstrual syndrome. A temporary hormonal imbalance in the body [which is VERY real] sends messages similar to the messages sent with the seasonal disorder. I remember telling my ex-husband, "Nobody likes me." He would then say, "Aren't you about to get your period?" I could then throw my arm up and exclaim, "Yes! THAT'S why nobody likes me." So, as silly as it sounds, just RECOGNIZING that the body is malfunctioning allowed ME to use a conscious process to interpret the messages AS a malfunction. The temporary malfunction needn't be "fixed" IF the MIND deals with the fact that the interpretation of messages needs modification. I would think this would work with seasonal disorder, as well.

[Chills]

Anita & Robert

I will get back this discussion....havent the time presently to address appropriately

Laters
Chills

[Robert]

Test

[Chills]

Interesting.

[Anita]

I dunno why you deleted your experience [maybe because you thought it too personal] but it sounded TO ME like you understand my differentiation between brain and mind, and THAT was MY goal.

[Chills]

I dunno why you deleted your experience [maybe because you thought it too personal] but it sounded TO ME like you understand my differentiation between brain and mind, and THAT was MY goal.

Yes and yes.

After reading some of the conflicts happening on related boards..I thought it best to delete info about myself.