Can science explain near-death experiences?

[Saru]

Scientists are finding more and more ways to explain the various aspects of near-death experiences.

Approximately 3 percent of the U. S. population says they have had a near-death experience, according to a Gallup poll. Near-death experiences are reported across cultures, with written records of them dating back to ancient Greece.

Read more...

[White Crane Feather]

Everything can be explained with a creative enough mind. Everything we experience in this world must be experienced through the brain. I'm not sure what else anyone was expecting. OBEs are experiences all experiences must have nural component in a biologic being. The question is where does the experience come from and why. Under this logic if I eat a banana, then the chemicals in the banana excite my taste buds, hormones are released, endorphins, nurons fire etc etc etc. I guess the banana is not real because it's only in my head.

The only way we would be able to tell if NDEs are spiritual in nature or not is if they HAPPEN WHEN PEOPLE ARE BRAIN DEAD as well.

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html

Being creative.

Let me explaine non locality. It's all very simple you see.

In quantum mechanics particles behave as both waves and particles. Scientists can create a scenerio where there are two beams of particles but in reality they are the same beam in two different places. ( this is true) this is known as entanglment. What ever happens to one automatically happens to the other. This seems to violate speed of light and information transfer laws.... Non locality. ( still true) in reality it does not.... Here is why. being waves, what we see as particles are simply the peaks of the waves. Our current technology gives us the ability to stretch the wave and follow each peak. This gives the illusion that there are two different beams when in actuality there is only one. So what apears to be faster than light information exchange is not, because we are only acting on one entity. ( this is bull.... I made the whole thing up)

My point being. It's easy to "explaine" anything. Without any real data or a real reason...... Bias speculation is meaningless.

The real question with NDEs (and this comes up time and time again).... Is why nature and Human experience has created an experience that mimics exactly what we would expect if there were a spiritual realm. Why not flying spagetti monsters or purple unicorns.

I'm sure someone has materialistic biased explanation explanation..... But So far non if it adds up to anything more than creative writing.

[Alienated Being]

I thought there was already a logical, scientific explanation presented to explain such a phenomenon? Such as chemical releases in the brain as a result of dying brain cells?

[White Crane Feather]

I thought there was already a logical, scientific explanation presented to explain such a phenomenon? Such as chemical releases in the brain as a result of dying brain cells?

Yup it's chlorine. You see chlorine binds with nural transmitters to disrupt electrical signals. This makes sort of a white noise in the visual cortex. Thats why people experience a bright light. Also tunnel vision. Hence a tunnel with a bright light at the end.......

( oh dear am I being creative again)

Edited September 14, 2011 by Seeker79

[Rolci]

can science explain that according to the second law of thermodynamics, enthropy cannot dicrease, meaning complexity should decrease in the universe, still you have the emergence of life from lifenessness, consciousness from "I don't know what", and then things like unconditional love, like when one chooses to respond with forgiveness and acceptance to a hostile act. Can't see how the laws of the universe as scientist interpret them can result in all of the above. Especially with the funny explanation that it was all a big accident, including "nothing" exploding into all these galaxies. Just too funny...

[Dirty Bubble]

can science explain that according to the second law of thermodynamics, enthropy cannot dicrease, meaning complexity should decrease in the universe, still you have the emergence of life from lifenessness, consciousness from "I don't know what", and then things like unconditional love, like when one chooses to respond with forgiveness and acceptance to a hostile act. Can't see how the laws of the universe as scientist interpret them can result in all of the above. Especially with the funny explanation that it was all a big accident, including "nothing" exploding into all these galaxies. Just too funny...

Please do read a little more about thermodynamics and science in general before making blind posts.

[Dirty Bubble]

- post removed -

A straw man argument is attacking a position that the other party does not hold. The post was an excellent example of one.

[undertheflow]

I thought there was already a logical, scientific explanation presented to explain such a phenomenon? Such as chemical releases in the brain as a result of dying brain cells?

Well, here's the problem. The part of the text I bolded should be replaced with the word "materialistic." Basically science is the use of the scientific method to study things, materialism is the belief that ONLY what science finds is real.

For example, a scientist would say that "ghosts" can be explained by leaky pipes and overactive imaginations, but would also acknowledge that there is the possibility that "ghosts" exist. A materialist would say that ghosts don't exist and can only be explained by leaky pipes.

Within the context of this phenomenon, you have the problem of NDE's occuring while a person is brain dead, as seeker just pointed out. You also have the problem of people who learn to initiate verifiable out of body experiences at will. But the biggest problem here is that we don't know if the experience is caused by chemical releases, or if chemical releases are caused by the experience.

I personally could care less if one chooses to assign purely materialistic explanations to NDEs. At the end of the day it's just more work for Retrievers. I just find it amusing that scientists don't realize how religious they are.

[Annabis]

- post removed -

I'm not sure why you two are getting so hot headed and argumentative over something so insignificant. In my opinion near death experiences are nothing more than a chemical reaction caused by your brain. My example would be when I took a large dose of DMT. Within seconds I was decending down a geometrical hole of vivid color and then launched into the depths of space. From there God, or some Greater Being held me in her arms while the universe sang to me. I heard the most beautiful sounds, saw unexplainable images and felt as if my aura was glowing beyond all physical capability. When I returned to reality I had an overall greater appreciation and love for life and the universe as a whole. I am sure a lot of you will say okay, well, that was under the influence of drugs but the truth of the matter is that DMT is the same chemical your brain releases while dreaming and during NDE's. This is why I believe a NDE is nothing more than your brains reaction to a specific chemical release.

[sutemi]

It has been taught for 1000s of years that a state of contentment exists within (heaven is within), or an experience of being at/in peace. What stops this experience in our everyday lives? distractions from the world around us and thoughts (brain activity) of all kinds, constant info and it is said that meditation can release us so we can interface with this inner experience. NDEs are similar in as much as any slowing of the brain and removal of external stimuli will often lead to this awareness of an inner experience of peace. Here is a short film about the brain and what happens when it starts to shut down. This film is brilliant although she doea get imotional toward the end. See what you think.

I have been practicing meditation for over thirty years and have experienced this state quite a few times. I can verify for what its worth that the doctor in this short film was experiencing a real state that is available to all and points to most NDE experience as being real.

[undertheflow]

I'm not sure why you two are getting so hot headed and argumentative over something so insignificant. In my opinion near death experiences are nothing more than a chemical reaction caused by your brain. My example would be when I took a large dose of DMT. Within seconds I was decending down a geometrical hole of vivid color and then launched into the depths of space. From there God, or some Greater Being held me in her arms while the universe sang to me. I heard the most beautiful sounds, saw unexplainable images and felt as if my aura was glowing beyond all physical capability. When I returned to reality I had an overall greater appreciation and love for life and the universe as a whole. I am sure a lot of you will say okay, well, that was under the influence of drugs but the truth of the matter is that DMT is the same chemical your brain releases while dreaming and during NDE's. This is why I believe a NDE is nothing more than your brains reaction to a specific chemical release.

That's a good point. But the issue becomes more complex when a patient has an NDE while completely brain dead, or when the patient reports hearing and seeing things while floating around the ceiling that they could not possibly know due to their lack of consciousness. Most scientists discount these aspects of NDE's because of their personal beliefs.

It's a complex issue, I personally don't trust science as far as I can throw it, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. We'll all know the truth one day, won't we?

[_Only]

I was wondering if any research has been done into why many people have an NDE with a strong feeling of euphoria attached, but a small percentage of cases have a feeling of dread and fear. Has there been any thoughts about that?

I only ask because I knew someone who nearly died drowning in a pool when he was young, and went to a very, very scary place, instead of the usual euphoric experience.

If it is chemicals released to the brain, maybe he was having a "bad trip"?

[_Only]

This is why I believe a NDE is nothing more than your brains reaction to a specific chemical release.

Or a release of a chemical that allows you to return to the "real world".

I know; silly idea, but romantic. Everyone would like to think this world of ups and downs is just an illusion, and there's some other purely euphoric world out there with some loving creator (see heaven).

- posts removed -

*edt* - Filled in a few missing letters. And man, sounds like you two need to start your own meaning of straw man thread, or maybe take it to PM?

[White Crane Feather]

Or a release of a chemical that allows you to return to the "real world".

I know; silly idea, but romantic. Everyone would like to think this world of ups and downs is just an illusion, and there's some other purely euphoric world out there with some loving creator (see heaven).

*edt* - Filled in a few missing letters. And man, sounds like you two need to start your own meaning of straw man thread, or maybe take it to PM?

Yeah no kidding, I do apologies for my part in all that.

Of course the problem with thinking it's just all brain chemistry is that everything, every perception, feeling, and experience is just Brain chemistry. The experience is real.... It's the nature of the experience that is debatable.

What makes you think your food is real if it's just all chemistry?

[_Only]

Yeah no kidding, I do apologies for my part in all that.

Of course the problem with thinking it's just all brain chemistry is that everything, every perception, feeling, and experience is just Brain chemistry. The experience is real.... It's the nature of the experience that is debatable.

What makes you think your food is real if it's just all chemistry?

The Channel 7 news told me it's real!

[sutemi]

I agree with seeker 79 its all brain chemistry, so its difficult to grasp every ones experience during an NDE but as I posted in my previous post I have had experiences during meditation comparable with most of the reports of NDEs I have read, peace and the light etc. There is a link to a short 15 min lecture in that post which addresses the brains workings, sorry both of our brains! And the experience that I have found during meditation is the same as the good doctor explains. It is the best explanation I have seen.

[White Crane Feather]

The Channel 7 news told me it's real!

Honestly. If one thing Is all brain chemistry and it's real, what separates that from another?

[Taut]

Well, there is the "religion" of science, then there is "religion", and then spirituality. Thinking inside a box doesn't work for me in terms of explanations. The spiritual approach at least allows for a broader perspective, but so also does quantum physics. It's all subjective at this point anyway and open to endless debate. We are a long way technologically from "proof", but the marriage of science and spirituality is making progress.

Once you meditate for 30 years, you'll just know. For some, it's a lot shorter. You won't need a scientist, or anyone else's opinion. I know that the physical body is an expression of the All in the world of form and that there is much more to us than just a collection of cells and chemistry. That's the "cliff notes" version.

After all, didn't you see Star Wars? :P:P:P:P

[_Only]

Once you meditate for 30 years, you'll just know. For some, it's a lot shorter. You won't need a scientist, or anyone else's opinion.

I can't seem to for more than a few seconds!

[Taut]

I can't seem to for more than a few seconds!

Most of us start that way JO - it's takes practice to quiet the mind - it truly is a "monkey". There are lots of good guides out there, just pick the one that suits you and keep practicing. Don't get frustrated and quit trying.

The simplest one is to concentrate on the in and out breath and when thoughts intrude and you wander away, just keep coming back to your focus on the breath, gently, over and over if necessary.....don't fight to do it. The more you do it, the less your thoughts intrude. One day you'll just find the "sacred silence". Don't worry, you'll know.

Best wishes

Edited September 16, 2011 by Taut

[Rolci]

Please do read a little more about thermodynamics and science in general before making blind posts.

Oh I have, believe me. It's all guesswork, theories and dogma. Sometimes worse than religion. And every one of their "solutions" give rise to more questions. Rather than reduce the number of questions. Like inventing dark matter to explain some missing mass, and then add "oh, by the way, we can't really see dark matter, we just guess it's there." They also guess natural laws are the same everywhere in the universe. Like when they imagined newton's equations apply in all cases. A bit of humility and less arrogance.

[Dougal]

Oh I have, believe me. It's all guesswork, theories and dogma. Sometimes worse than religion. And every one of their "solutions" give rise to more questions. Rather than reduce the number of questions. Like inventing dark matter to explain some missing mass, and then add "oh, by the way, we can't really see dark matter, we just guess it's there." They also guess natural laws are the same everywhere in the universe. Like when they imagined newton's equations apply in all cases. A bit of humility and less arrogance.

I think the same could be said of armchair physicists proposing that they've discovered the fault with all the modern professional physicist's theories.

[Rolci]

I think the same could be said of armchair physicists proposing that they've discovered the fault with all the modern professional physicist's theories.

I most certainly didn't. they have just discovered it themselves: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14948730 I simply observe and state the obvious: they don't have a clue what they're doing. they invent stuff from thin air and then realize they were wrong. they don't even understand gravity, which is the one force humans on earth have been experiencing the LONGEST! let alone answering questions like why do these laws of the universe exist in the first place, where they came from, what is their nature, etc. just to mention the most simplistic questions, not touching stuff like why are they constant, and if they do change, why do they change in a way that makes it possible for the universe to exist in a stable state, why can't we observe the universe starting to fall apart because of some laws not being spot on. Or how, based on the laws given at the moment of the big bang, did matter form stably, why did this result in planets, how all of a sudden stuff started "moving", turning into what we call life, and how that stuff can ask itself now: "who am I?" And better yet, based on these laws, what's the next step? Where is this going? Based on this trend towards complexity, what is the next logical step in the evolution of matter, life, and consciousness? Come on science, it can't be that hard! It all came from a singularity! I mean, what can be simpler than a point with no dimensions??

[encouraged]

I was excited when I saw the article!

People who have not had an NDE, or people who have had one that did not contain events that prove to them that it was spiritual for fact, would have the normal thought of, "I wonder what they have found out about NDEs." Then, if interested, they would go to the link and read about it.

On the other hand a person whose NDE contained events that proved it to be a spiritual (mind-body) experience, to him, would respond differently. Knowing their NDE was a spiritual experience, they would naturally respond with the notion that the article is about science finally proving that NDEs are indeed spiritual experiences. My interpretation of the headline was as stated above.

I rushed to the link and read, only to be disappointed once again! It is like nothing has progressed beyond Carl Sagan saying it is due to a person's memories of being born. Where he goes through the birth canal, seeing the examining room lights "unfolding." (I was a C-section baby.) Thereby, Sagan being under the illusion that he has explained the NDE tunnel vision experience.

• I wish they would explain:
  
• What was the mechanism, as a blinded person, by which I saw and knew the conversation of Mom and the doctor? Since in seeing them I was seeing through a clay block wall. Proven additionally by adding to the conversation they had had, when Mom returned to my emergency room examining room. As well, how did I know I would continue to live after the effects of the injuries I got.
  
• What was the mechanism by which I saw the flowers delivered to the room. Proven by my reciting them to Mom with 100% accuracy, clockwise, by relating the color of flower and the vase. After which she told me I was correct and then related the name of the flower, the person who sent it, and the note that accompanied it.
  
• When they finally tested my eyes, how was I able to know they long stem red roses were not delivered for that occasion, but had been there before and selected as the object for me to see. How did I know where they had been prior to putting them on the meal tray stand and moving it to the end of the bed. How did I know that what I saw with my eyes during that test, were not all the long stem roses there had been in that vase.
  
• How could one be at an astonishingly creative moment while his brain is said to be in the process of dying. I have noted some nine new, never before to me, creative thoughts and/or experiences I had never before heard of or thought of or experienced before. E.G. communication that opens up (probably mind reading communication) or becomes available when people's eyes meet, thereby giving the impression of communicating through the eye-meeting-eye connection.
  
• I could go on and on... in fact I already have...
  

The article was a terrible disappointment. I have waited a lifetime for science to progress on this topic and little has been done because of the anti-spiritualism and the anti-science trends that have evolved and caused polarization between the science and spiritual communities.

A final thought about gathering like events into only one explanation as this article does:

You don't see a sunset and classify it as a sunrise on the basis that they both have common factors.

[White Crane Feather]

I was excited when I saw the article!

People who have not had an NDE, or people who have had one that did not contain events that prove to them that it was spiritual for fact, would have the normal thought of, "I wonder what they have found out about NDEs." Then, if interested, they would go to the link and read about it.

On the other hand a person whose NDE contained events that proved it to be a spiritual (mind-body) experience, to him, would respond differently. Knowing their NDE was a spiritual experience, they would naturally respond with the notion that the article is about science finally proving that NDEs are indeed spiritual experiences. My interpretation of the headline was as stated above.

I rushed to the link and read, only to be disappointed once again! It is like nothing has progressed beyond Carl Sagan saying it is due to a person's memories of being born. Where he goes through the birth canal, seeing the examining room lights "unfolding." (I was a C-section baby.) Thereby, Sagan being under the illusion that he has explained the NDE tunnel vision experience.

• I wish they would explain:
  
• What was the mechanism, as a blinded person, by which I saw and knew the conversation of Mom and the doctor? Since in seeing them I was seeing through a clay block wall. Proven additionally by adding to the conversation they had had, when Mom returned to my emergency room examining room. As well, how did I know I would continue to live after the effects of the injuries I got.
  
• What was the mechanism by which I saw the flowers delivered to the room. Proven by my reciting them to Mom with 100% accuracy, clockwise, by relating the color of flower and the vase. After which she told me I was correct and then related the name of the flower, the person who sent it, and the note that accompanied it.
  
• When they finally tested my eyes, how was I able to know they long stem red roses were not delivered for that occasion, but had been there before and selected as the object for me to see. How did I know where they had been prior to putting them on the meal tray stand and moving it to the end of the bed. How did I know that what I saw with my eyes during that test, were not all the long stem roses there had been in that vase.
  
• How could one be at an astonishingly creative moment while his brain is said to be in the process of dying. I have noted some nine new, never before to me, creative thoughts and/or experiences I had never before heard of or thought of or experienced before. E.G. communication that opens up (probably mind reading communication) or becomes available when people's eyes meet, thereby giving the impression of communicating through the eye-meeting-eye connection.
  
• I could go on and on... in fact I already have...
  

The article was a terrible disappointment. I have waited a lifetime for science to progress on this topic and little has been done because of the anti-spiritualism and the anti-science trends that have evolved and caused polarization between the science and spiritual communities.

A final thought about gathering like events into only one explanation as this article does:

You don't see a sunset and classify it as a sunrise on the basis that they both have common factors.

I am Disappointed as well. Science is supposed to give us unbiased investigations. But in these cases we are left with imaginative searching. What amounts to ----we can't explain it so we will try really hard to fit it into our current world view-- it's much easier to

Get creative trying to explain something then to change ones paradimes.