Why is there anything at all? My solution

[joc 17,317]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

 

But studies show that the dead person’s mind and consciousness continue to work, at least for a shoirt time – meaning the deceased can recognise their own death.

I have large doubts concerning this. I don't think there is any conscious activity happening. Memory cells still contain memory...that I am sure.  Like a digital controller will hold memory until the circuits all cool down.

[lightly 7,782]

On November 8, 2018 at 4:47 AM, joc said:

• 3d. Trolling: We have zero tolerance for trolling on the forums. We define 'trolling' as the act of posting intentionally false, controversial or offensive comments designed to start arguments or to provoke, bait or annoy other members.
• 3e. Flamebaiting: Do not taunt or bait another member in to an argument.
• 3f. Abusive behaviour: Do not be rude, insulting, offensive, snide, obnoxious or abusive towards other members.

Just a friendly heads up joc....Quoting the rules is also a no-no ...see under   5. ETIQUETTE 

[joc 17,317]

3 minutes ago, lightly said:

Just a friendly heads up joc....Quoting the rules is also a no-no ...see under   5. ETIQUETTE 

Banning myself now!  

That's like what?  Jumping out of the frying pan into the fire? 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

On 11/10/2018 at 4:16 AM, psyche101 said:

I'm sure I have mentioned this study before. Whilst the brain shows no activity, it appears to still be gathering information. One might even hear thier own death announcement from a death state whilst consciousness ebbs away. 

LIFE AFTER DEATH: When you die you KNOW you’re dead as consciousness persists - study

When the heart stops the blood supply to the brain is quickly cut off – and in operating theatres this moment would be recorded as the official time of death.

But studies show that the dead person’s mind and consciousness continue to work, at least for a shoirt time – meaning the deceased can recognise their own death.

Indeed there is some evidence to suggest the ‘dead person’ may even hear their own death being announced as they lie on the operating theatre table.

Dr Parnia and his team continue to investigate the pervasiveness of consciousness after death with twin studies in Europe and the United States who have suffered cardiac arrest, in the largest study of its kind.

He said: "In the same way that a group of researchers might be studying the qualitative nature of the human experience of 'love,' for instance, we're trying to understand the exact features that people experience when they go through death, because we understand that this is going to reflect the universal experience we're all going to have when we die.”

He added: "We also study the human mind and consciousness in the context of death, to understand whether consciousness becomes annihilated or whether it continues after you've died for some period of time — and how that relates to what's happening inside the brain in real time.

"And the evidence reveals that people whose heart stopped and then restarted – usually on the operating table – could describe exactly what had been happening around them.

"The new research is an extension of these findings."

 

As he states, we all die, we all have the same reflexes, we are going to have a commonality at death. 

The main advantage of this research is transplant organs. When you die about 1,000 genes kick in and go into overdrive trying to repair a dead body, which they will inevitably fail at. In this activity, cancer genes also kick in, which is not a good thing. There appears to be a strong connection to the statistics that show people who receive organ transplants from dead donors are much more likely to develop cancer than those who receive them from live donors. 

Thing is, all sorts of things fire up at death, and even without brain activity conciousness persists, ebbing away at a far slower rate than brain activity would indicate. 

All this enlightens more aspects about the death process, which is opening doors into understanding the natural processes that have offered popularity to afterlife myths. 

Wow. That is a striking amount of cognitive  dissonance there. Essentially they are finding out that consciousness even awareness does continue after death, at least, for a short while that is known WITHOUT BRAIN ACTIVITY, yet the assumption still is that life after death is a myth. That is an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance and assuming ones own bias assumptions. I’m glad you posted that psyche. It’s a clear demonstration of how even respected researchers can put colored goggles over their eyes. 

You would think that somone with an open mind to the results would actually give more credit to afterlife “myths” once it’s discovered that coordinated conscious experiences can indeed exist without brain activity or blood pressure. That is an amazing scientific discovery.

Wow. 

 

 

 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

On 11/9/2018 at 5:33 PM, MERRY DMAS said:

You live in a world where what you want to believe is true is true.

You're not alone.

I live in the same world you do surrounded by realities. Throwing things out because they don’t fit in a particular box is not a way to gleam truth. It’s just another bias attitude. 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

On 11/10/2018 at 5:51 AM, joc said:

I have large doubts concerning this. I don't think there is any conscious activity happening. Memory cells still contain memory...that I am sure.  Like a digital controller will hold memory until the circuits all cool down.

Interesting. 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

On 11/9/2018 at 4:44 PM, Liquid Gardens said:

Depends on whether they are 'near death' or 'dead'.  I agree there'd be something to account for if someone can remember what went on while beyond the point of the brain being able to accept input. The problem is there are a lot of variables and unknowns and difficulties involved in measuring all that.

I don't disagree with that, it is an interesting phenomenon, but I'm not seeing anything that unusual going on that suggest anything other than a physical explanation.  Plus it doesn't seem that there is ever anything that works in the negative with NDEs in the evaluation.  For example, I read what I think was an excerpt from the AWARE study and it was from NDE-er who had seen God who told him it wasn't his time, etc, but he also saw a crystal city with crystal clear waters flowing through it.  Now I think encountering God is fairly common in an NDE but if this is indicative of something real, why isn't everyone seeing this crystal city?  Shouldn't the fact that others didn't see the crystal city cause us to doubt some of these testimonies then?

Actually a lot of people have seen a city like that. Here is where we have to do some thought experiments. For a moment we have to assume that life after death is indeed a reality before we can write in certain things that are strikes against the possibility of that reality. 

We know form NDE annecdotes that some people see Jesus, some Mohammad, some a loving light... etc etc. These are obvious inconsistencies. In a physical world this poses a problem, but not in an interpretive one. 

Our thought experiment 

If a spirit world is real and our consciousness goes there after we die, then ......

-We will not be taking our physical eyes with us, so visual experiences are actually interpretations that are going to be clouded by our cultural and personal experiences. The same can be said for audio and tactile experiences. This would be necessary for it to have any meaning for us at all as it has to fit within how we interact with other things and store it to memory.

One might see a crystal city, or a white city, or a shining city, or a golden city. ( I have seen the city by the way. I have blogged about it here on UM before)

Its clear we are dealing with themes that must be interpreted through a person’s experience. Context is more important to a mind without a body than content.

back to the experiment. If NDEs are real, logically it dosnt seem like it could be any other way unless some unearthly intelligence demanded consitancy. In that case we’d all be seeing the same god. 

I hope you see what I’m getting at.

I also can’t understnd why you would think the NDE phenomenon dosnt have some unusual characteristics about it. It’s easy to write things off, but even psyche has produced some interesting material. There is obviously something happening that , at the moment, is beyond our understanding. I’m not even saying it has to be spiritual, but assuming a materialist conclusion is just another fallacy. If there were a spirit world and this is our avenue of inquiry, it would be never discovered if evidence of its existance were assumed to be just some unknown material interaction. That is a level of bias that does not belong in any inquiry especially a scientific one. 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2018 by White Crane Feather

[psyche101 37,275]

7 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

Wow. That is a striking amount of cognitive  dissonance there. Essentially they are finding out that consciousness even awareness does continue after death, at least, for a short while that is known WITHOUT BRAIN ACTIVITY, yet the assumption still is that life after death is a myth. That is an incredible amount of cognitive dissonance and assuming ones own bias assumptions. I’m glad you posted that psyche. It’s a clear demonstration of how even respected researchers can put colored goggles over their eyes. 

You would think that somone with an open mind to the results would actually give more credit to afterlife “myths” once it’s discovered that coordinated conscious experiences can indeed exist without brain activity or blood pressure. That is an amazing scientific discovery.

Wow. 

LOL I find your post somewhat amusing where you accuse the experts in the field of cognitive dissonance whilst you display it by the truckload

Dr Sam Parnia is no slouch in this area, he is possibly the most informed person but is often taken out of context by afterlife proponents. 

I don't see how it supports afterlife myths at all myself, quite clearly what we are seeing is a gradual shutdown of systems. It well illustrates that our body is more complex than we previously recognised, but not totally unexpected. Dr Parnia hopes the information can give us insights to better resuscitation techniques extending the critical period where this is possible. 

I honestly find your approach to this information nothing short of astounding. 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

LOL I find your post somewhat amusing where you accuse the experts in the field of cognitive dissonance whilst you display it by the truckload

Dr Sam Parnia is no slouch in this area, he is possibly the most informed person but is often taken out of context by afterlife proponents. 

I don't see how it supports afterlife myths at all myself, quite clearly what we are seeing is a gradual shutdown of systems. It well illustrates that our body is more complex than we previously recognised, but not totally unexpected. Dr Parnia hopes the information can give us insights to better resuscitation techniques extending the critical period where this is possible. 

I honestly find your approach to this information nothing short of astounding. 

You shouldn’t find it astounding. I have a completely open mind about it, nor is does the information, assuming is good information, ( even joc notices the implications and doubts it) conflict with my position. It actually supports it. Is finding evidence of conciousness without brain activity not what we should expect if indeed there is some sort of afterlife? 

Your authority made a clearly bias statement (“afterlife myths”) that disqualifies him as an unbiased researcher in reguards to if there is an afterlife or not. Not that his work isn’t good , but he is obviously interested in the dieing process and not any metaphysical implications which there seems to actually be. Look I’m not even saying that’s what it is, but it is exactly what an afterlife positive theory would predict.  

Edited November 21, 2018 by White Crane Feather

[Davros of Skaro 8,482]

9 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

I live in the same world you do surrounded by realities. Throwing things out because they don’t fit in a particular box is not a way to gleam truth. It’s just another bias attitude. 

How about I put a common object in a public place which I give you directions on where to look, and within 24 hrs you tell me what it is.

Make me eat crow feather man.

[psyche101 37,275]

1 hour ago, White Crane Feather said:

You shouldn’t find it astounding.

I do though, clearly what we are seeing is the shutdown process. It makes so much more sense that such disorientated input into a failing system would result in what we term NDEs. That you would still champion afterlife ideas with all that information is truly a great leap. 

Quote

I have a completely open mind about it,

I honestly feel that your support of the afterlife idea strongly indicates otherwise. There is less reason to consider it viable with each discovery, yet you somehow see this information as supportive. With all due respect, that's a talent in itself. 

Quote

nor is does the information, assuming is good information, ( even joc notices the implications and doubts it) conflict with my position. It actually supports it.

As already noted  Sam Parnia is a leader in this field of research. This is pretty cutting edge stuff. 

I don't think Joc supports an afterlife notion, and I'd be more than surprised if he found any doubt in Parnias work. 

As far as I can tell, it I no way supports your position. I feel your abusing poetic license something shocking there. 

But thats pretty much what I mentioned previously. Due to the success Parnia has in breaking new ground, NDE proponents often misrepresent his work as supporting an afterlife idea, which I honestly find deplorable. 

Quote

Is finding evidence of conciousness without brain activity not what we should expect if indeed there is some sort of afterlife? 

An ebbing shutdown process? I really don't think so. 

Quote

Your authority made a clearly bias statement (“afterlife myths”) that disqualifies him as an unbiased researcher in reguards to if there is an afterlife or not.

I don't think it is a biased statement. Physics does not support the afterlife idea, there's no good reason to consider it as viable at all. It's just another cultural story handed down through the generations, like God or the Easter Bunny. 

Quote

Not that his work isn’t good , but he is obviously interested in the dieing process and not any metaphysical implications which there seems to actually be.

Indeed, that's the entire point of the AWARE project. To understand the death process as well as we possibly can. If the afterlife idea was at all possible, suggestive evidence would indicate that. It's not a project to chase metaphysical claims. It's main objective is to see how far into death we can revive a person. Studying death to understand life if anything. 

Quote

Look I’m not even saying that’s what it is, but it is exactly what an afterlife positive theory would predict.  

I just can't see that. We are seeing how consciousness shuts down and what parts are the last to go. We used to think hearing was the last sense to die, but it seems to more a tool of consciousness allowing our recording to continue until degredation destroys all organics. An afterlife suggest a transfer of energy, nut a shut down process. I see it as more strong proof against the afterlife. But I feel physics has already answered that question. 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

53 minutes ago, MERRY DMAS said:

How about I put a common object in a public place which I give you directions on where to look, and within 24 hrs you tell me what it is.

Make me eat crow feather man.

I thought we were talking about NDEs? Very original by the way. 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

I do though, clearly what we are seeing is the shutdown process. It makes so much more sense that such disorientated input into a failing system would result in what we term NDEs. That you would still champion afterlife ideas with all that information is truly a great leap. 

I honestly feel that your support of the afterlife idea strongly indicates otherwise. There is less reason to consider it viable with each discovery, yet you somehow see this information as supportive. With all due respect, that's a talent in itself. 

As already noted  Sam Parnia is a leader in this field of research. This is pretty cutting edge stuff. 

I don't think Joc supports an afterlife notion, and I'd be more than surprised if he found any doubt in Parnias work. 

As far as I can tell, it I no way supports your position. I feel your abusing poetic license something shocking there. 

But thats pretty much what I mentioned previously. Due to the success Parnia has in breaking new ground, NDE proponents often misrepresent his work as supporting an afterlife idea, which I honestly find deplorable. 

An ebbing shutdown process? I really don't think so. 

I don't think it is a biased statement. Physics does not support the afterlife idea, there's no good reason to consider it as viable at all. It's just another cultural story handed down through the generations, like God or the Easter Bunny. 

Indeed, that's the entire point of the AWARE project. To understand the death process as well as we possibly can. If the afterlife idea was at all possible, suggestive evidence would indicate that. It's not a project to chase metaphysical claims. It's main objective is to see how far into death we can revive a person. Studying death to understand life if anything. 

I just can't see that. We are seeing how consciousness shuts down and what parts are the last to go. We used to think hearing was the last sense to die, but it seems to more a tool of consciousness allowing our recording to continue until degredation destroys all organics. An afterlife suggest a transfer of energy, nut a shut down process. I see it as more strong proof against the afterlife. But I feel physics has already answered that question. 

I’m not sure you understand science then. Physics says nothing about an afterlife. It can’t. Physics dosnt tell us what gravity is either, or the cogs behind the uncertainty principal. Physics merely described effects of those unknown principals. 

You still seem to be missing the point. If consciousness is purely a result of brain function, then without brain function consciousness should not be possible. Again, as I have mentioned many times the ability to recognize, decipher, and then store information in a way that creates cognition requires complicated brain functions. 

I understand that the dying process is being studied.

There many good reasons to look into it as a worthy inquiry. Just because fundamentalists have problem with the ramifications is besides the point. 

Joc said he had doubts about the study you posted. I can see why. The implications are indeed counter to his bias. 

Of course it’s a bias statement. It’s even fallacious. When discussing the evidence for or not for something, and calling it a myth clearly demonstrates an assumption of a conclusion. 

An ebbing shut down is fine. We are talking about the seat of consciousness. If it’s still there when it is biologically impossible, then we have to consider where and how it is existing and other options. 

We are going to have agree to disagree. If your mind is already made up, and no amount of evidence can be interpreted outside of a materialist philosophy, which has been proven false by the way, then we are at a standstill. It’s like trying to talk to a religious fundamentalist that uses the Bible for evidence. Obviously another form of petito principi. 

I would totally concede this line of argument if your authority has proven higher brain function is happening during NDEs, but it seems ( by your sources) that the opposite is emerging. I have already conceded to LG that it’s entirely possible NDEs may actually happen in the moments after brain function is restored even though I think it’s unlikely. 

How you can’t see that this is at least lending a little support to an afterlife positive interpretation is alarming. By all means my friend keep thumping that bible, but the earth is not flat.

 

Edited November 21, 2018 by White Crane Feather

[psyche101 37,275]

3 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

I’m not sure you understand science then.

I feel comfortable discussing most subjects. With all due respect, your championing a superstition indicates the same of you to me. There's possibilities and then there's outright fantasy. The afterlife idea clearly comes under that latter description. 

Quote

Physics says nothing about an afterlife. It can’t.

See, this is what I mean. How can you state that and say you understand science? 

Put simply, the mind is the brain, the brain is made atoms, and we know how atoms work. When you die, entropy takes over and thermodynamics kicks in. If the afterlife was to prove valid, we have to revise all that, and I just cannot see that happening. 

Quote

Physics dosnt tell us what gravity is either, or the cogs behind the uncertainty principal. Physics merely described effects of those unknown principals. 

It does tell us what atoms are made of  how they disperse and how entropy works. We also know how incredibly complex the brain is, and what forces would be required to maintain that complexity. All of that says there is no afterlife. As stated above, the process is elegantly simple. It does not support afterlife concepts at all. It says that can't happen according to what we know. 

Quote

You still seem to be missing the point. If consciousness is purely a result of brain function, then without brain function consciousness should not be possible.

No I'm not you are, the point is that there is a slower shutdown process than we realised. Parnia is working on a lazaerus effect that may allow people to return from the dead long after we thought it was possible. 

The big news here is that it is possible, our earlier estimates of death are crude by comparison and as anyone can see wrong. We are understanding the brain better, not supporting myths. The brain seems to shut down in stages. From the most complex to the most rudimentary functions. Some genes stay alive for days in the body after death, this is the consciousness version of that process. It seems it may take several hours for consciousness to entirely shut down. It does not happen with brain death as we have suspected. That's big news. 

Quote

Again, as I have mentioned many times the ability to recognize, decipher, and then store information in a way that creates cognition requires complicated brain functions. 

This doesn't seem to be that complex. There is no processing going on, just information gathering, like a working capacitor on a dead circuit board. If there is energy present  the capacitor will store it when the functionality of the circuit board is gone. 

Quote

I understand that the dying process is being studied.

The AWARE project is the most intensive and in depth study that I know of. 

Quote

There many good reasons to look into it as a worthy inquiry. Just because fundamentalists have problem with the ramifications is besides the point. 

The only real fundamentalism I can see is ensuring a superstition is considered valid against all information logic and reason. There are no negative ramifications if we were to have found an afterlife concept was valid  there are only ramifications for those who have invested a lifetime or more in that superstition. 

There are no good reasons. There is simply no good reason to believe the afterlife is a valid concept. Its not supported at all, and the only evidence of existance is man made tales. Nothing on nature supports the notion of life after death and as I noted before  physics actually refutes the idea. Its not viable according to what we know. It's just an old superstition. 

Quote

Joc said he had doubts about the study you posted. I can see why. The implications are indeed counter to his bias. 

I didn't answer his post yet. When he sees the studies and what they have already recorded as hard evidence I will be interested to see his response when the big picture is properly presented. 

Quote

Of course it’s a bias statement. It’s even fallacious. When discussing the evidence for or not for something, and calling it a myth clearly demonstrates an assumption of a conclusion. 

Not at all. Because physics deems is impossible, its in the realm of the Toothfairy, or God. The odds are so small that dismissing such without further evidence is valid, otherwise we would be changing pretty much everything we know, and I don't know anyone that would call such a feasable proposal based on no evidence. 

Quote

An ebbing shut down is fine. We are talking about the seat of consciousness. If it’s still there when it is biologically impossible, then we have to consider where and how it is existing and other options. 

That's exactly what the AWARE project is doing. It cannot yet explain the slow shutdown but its been recorded so it happens no matter what. There's nothing to indicate a continued existance, just parts of the body doing what they have always done when damage occurs. Some systems seem to be autonomous and take longer to shut down after the brain has stopped sending signals. 

Quote

We are going to have agree to disagree.

Its all in the evidence gathered by Parnia. You can think what you like, but facts make the call at the end of the day. 

Quote

If your mind is already made up, and no amount of evidence can be interpreted outside of a materialist philosophy, which has been proven false by the way, then we are at a standstill. It’s like trying to talk to a religious fundamentalist that uses the Bible for evidence. Obviously another form of petito principi. 

You've got that backwards, the evidence is supporting the conclusion, not the other way around. Petito principi applies to afterlife ideogies as your stating with a conclusion. 

What you are supporting is akin to Bible thumping. The evidence does not support an afterlife yet you still champion the superstition. You have twisted Parnias results to support your conclusions. The slow shutdown theory is still very much a shutdown theory, your hanging onto the idea that the shutdown never happens, but it does. Parnia has stated that it might take hours for all aspects of consciousness to shut down. Some aspects take days to shut down. It all supports eventual death, just not as quickly across the entire body as once thought. Cardiac arrest and death are not synonymous.

Quote

I would totally concede this line of argument if your authority has proven higher brain function is happening during NDEs, but it seems ( by your sources) that the opposite is emerging.

It is. 

Another researcher (Jimo Borjigin) came to the same conclusions testing rats. 

In Dying Brains, Signs of Heightened Consciousness

WE OFTEN TALK about death as a point in time. One moment you’re alive and the next, when your heart stops beating and your lungs stop breathing, you are clinically dead. This definition tempts us to view death as a clear-cut event, like the flip of a switch.

That’s not how Jimo Borjigin, a neuroscientist at the University of Michigan, sees it. “Doctors assume that after clinical death, the brain is dead and inactive,” she says. “They use the term ‘unconscious’ again and again. But death is a process. It’s not a black-or-white line.”

In a new study, Borjigin discovered that rats show an unexpected pattern of brain activity immediately after cardiac arrest. With neither breath nor heartbeats, these rodents were clinically dead but for at least 30 seconds, their brains showed several signals of conscious thought, and strong signals to boot. This suggests that our final journey into permanent unconsciousness may actually involve a brief state of heightened consciousness.

In Dying Brains, Signs of Heightened Consciousness

Quote

I have already conceded to LG that it’s entirely possible NDEs may actually happen in the moments after brain function is restored even though I think it’s unlikely. 

Again, Parnias work strongly suggests this is indeed the case. And that the senses that continue to record after death hold that memory if revived. 

Quote

How you can’t see that this is at least lending a little support to an afterlife positive interpretation is alarming. By all means my friend keep thumping that bible, but the earth is not flat.

And this is what I find astounding. There's clearly no support for an after life notion, yet you grasp the evidence as if supporting by hinging it on brain activity. Parnia has clearly broken new ground that redefines the death process, not an afterlife process. Ironic that I see you as the Bible thumping flat earthers pushing superstitions based on a cherry pick of old evidence concerning time of death with new evidence that does not support independent consciousness, but a gradual shutdown process. You seem to be deliberately ignoring the shutdown part here to support your personal preferences. You can keep supporting superstition all you like, but historically, that option hasn't come out on top. 

[Davros of Skaro 8,482]

7 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

I thought we were talking about NDEs? Very original by the way. 

You claim to astral project. What better way to further your NDE hypothesis?

I used to do ap myself. I found it to be nonsense. The vibrational state I later found out is just a vestigial remnant from when our ancestors slept in trees that needed to lock their muscles so not to fall. Your outlook on the vibrational state is no better than someone having a vestigial tail, and going around wiggling it thinking it works magical spells.

Instead of making assertions that go against evidence, and reason? Show me it's true by doing the experiment. 

[psyche101 37,275]

On 11/10/2018 at 11:51 PM, joc said:

I have large doubts concerning this. I don't think there is any conscious activity happening. Memory cells still contain memory...that I am sure.  Like a digital controller will hold memory until the circuits all cool down.

WCF turned my attention here  sorry bro, missed this one. 

Thing is we have proof of this. Its more than theory now that we have observed it. 

Brain Activity Has Been Recorded as Much as 10 Minutes After Death

From what I gather, its not normal or 'higher' activity. As the brain dies it is said that hearing is the last sense to go. The whole body knows you are dead, and in a futile effort, tries to fix it from what I gather. This means certain automatic processes at genetic levels continue to not only do their job, but work extra hard at it. From what I understand, input is still recorded, its just not processed. Of one was brought back to life after experiencing this state, those memories would need to be sorted, and you would only have that sensory input in reserve. It strikes me that it's quite possible that in that state, it could seem like you are everywhere in the room at once, as sight is a sense your not able to use. 

That's my understanding of where its going anyway. 

The Human Connectome Project has a simulated map of consciousness, one of them looks like rhis:

There's as many connections as there are stars in the milky way. It honestly doesn't surprise me that in a natural shutdown those pathways degrade over several hours. 

But obviously not in decapitation cases or such, I imagine that would be more immediate. 

[joc 17,317]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Quote

Joc said he had doubts about the study you posted. I can see why. The implications are indeed counter to his bias. 

I didn't answer his post yet. When he sees the studies and what they have already recorded as hard evidence I will be interested to see his response when the big picture is properly presented. 

In answer to WCF....   The implications are not counter to afterlife at all...and psyche has fully explained why.

As to my post...  

On 11/10/2018 at 7:51 AM, joc said:

I have large doubts concerning this. I don't think there is any conscious activity happening. Memory cells still contain memory...that I am sure.  Like a digital controller will hold memory until the circuits all cool down.

The 'doubts' I have is that there is any conscious activity happening...meaning...that the deceased is  'consciously aware' that they are dead.  In other words, I have doubts that Bob is laying there with no heartbeat or pulse thinking, OMG...I'm freaking dead!  lol

However....Borjigin's studies with rats is very interesting!  

 Borjigin discovered that rats show an unexpected pattern of brain activity immediately after cardiac arrest. With neither breath nor heartbeats, these rodents were clinically dead but for at least 30 seconds, their brains showed several signals of conscious thought, and strong signals to boot. This suggests that our final journey into permanent unconsciousness may actually involve a brief state of heightened consciousness

As far as afterlife goes....brain activity after death has nothing to do with Consciousness surviving after the brain dies.  And I think you fully illustrated that in technicolor in your responses to WFC.  

I mentioned the digital controller because, at times certain devices that have a memory backup will hold memory such as times, programs, etc.  When the electricity goes off...the backup battery powers the memory chip.  So, in order to clear the memory from the chip, with no electricity powering the controller, the battery is removed and the 'memory' of the chip dissipates.  However; Some devices take longer to dissipate that electronic memory and it can take literally a couple of minutes for that to happen because the memory chip is still warm and can hold residual memory that could effect the device once electricity is restored.

But the brain is more than a 'memory chip' powered by a battery...it is incredibly complex...it is electro-chemical...it is alive...and that aliveness...that consciousness has many factors attached to it...and that there is an increase in heightened consciousness, is pretty much a definite factor in death.  So....if....functionality is restored to the brain...the 'memory' of that heightened consciousness would become conscious memory in real time.  Makes perfect sense to me.  Just as the memory of a dream is only conscious memory when awakened during REM.  

I find the whole subject fascinating.  For instance Dan had a NDE...but he doesn't remember any of it.  We all had dreams last night...but most of them we don't remember so one might say, I didn't dream at all last night.

I think that everyone who experiences clinical death has the same kind of NDE...some remember it and some don't.  And those that do and claim it was ultra real are...in real time...remembering what happened in that brief period of heightened consciousness.  That is pretty much supported by Borjigin's research with rats... “We weren’t surprised that we found brain activity but we were surprised by the high degree of it,” says Borjigin.

Thanks for getting back with me on that! 

 

 

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

3 hours ago, MERRY DMAS said:

You claim to astral project. What better way to further your NDE hypothesis?

I used to do ap myself. I found it to be nonsense. The vibrational state I later found out is just a vestigial remnant from when our ancestors slept in trees that needed to lock their muscles so not to fall. Your outlook on the vibrational state is no better than someone having a vestigial tail, and going around wiggling it thinking it works magical spells.

Instead of making assertions that go against evidence, and reason? Show me it's true by doing the experiment. 

Hahah I have heard that before, and it’s nonsense. The vibrational state is not a physical vibration while a Hypnic Jerk is a very physical reaction. You might want to hit the books a little harder. The closest physical symptom that might be relate to the vibrational stage is a change in skin conductivity. This suggests it’s  more of an electrical issue with the skin and the nerves in those alter states of consciousness, but that’s just a guess too. Lots of people like to get creative to try and explain something away. At least you are past disbelieving the vibrational state exists simply because it’s forign to most people’s experiences. 

Maybe I did, but I don’t remember talking much about myself in this thread other than identifying with some people’s experiences. I’m happy to engage in a discussion even a debate about the merits of arguments with you, but making this about me is simply an immature round about way of creating adhoms. 

I don’t remember making any claims to be experimented with in this thread. I thought we were discussion NDEs.  

I have made precisely zero assertions that go against evidence or reason. In fact, you seem to be trying to lead the discussion down a path full of fallacy. You might want to check yourself a bit.  

Edited November 21, 2018 by White Crane Feather

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I feel comfortable discussing most subjects. With all due respect, your championing a superstition indicates the same of you to me. There's possibilities and then there's outright fantasy. The afterlife idea clearly comes under that latter description. 

See, this is what I mean. How can you state that and say you understand science? 

Put simply, the mind is the brain, the brain is made atoms, and we know how atoms work. When you die, entropy takes over and thermodynamics kicks in. If the afterlife was to prove valid, we have to revise all that, and I just cannot see that happening. 

It does tell us what atoms are made of  how they disperse and how entropy works. We also know how incredibly complex the brain is, and what forces would be required to maintain that complexity. All of that says there is no afterlife. As stated above, the process is elegantly simple. It does not support afterlife concepts at all. It says that can't happen according to what we know. 

No I'm not you are, the point is that there is a slower shutdown process than we realised. Parnia is working on a lazaerus effect that may allow people to return from the dead long after we thought it was possible. 

The big news here is that it is possible, our earlier estimates of death are crude by comparison and as anyone can see wrong. We are understanding the brain better, not supporting myths. The brain seems to shut down in stages. From the most complex to the most rudimentary functions. Some genes stay alive for days in the body after death, this is the consciousness version of that process. It seems it may take several hours for consciousness to entirely shut down. It does not happen with brain death as we have suspected. That's big news. 

This doesn't seem to be that complex. There is no processing going on, just information gathering, like a working capacitor on a dead circuit board. If there is energy present  the capacitor will store it when the functionality of the circuit board is gone. 

The AWARE project is the most intensive and in depth study that I know of. 

The only real fundamentalism I can see is ensuring a superstition is considered valid against all information logic and reason. There are no negative ramifications if we were to have found an afterlife concept was valid  there are only ramifications for those who have invested a lifetime or more in that superstition. 

There are no good reasons. There is simply no good reason to believe the afterlife is a valid concept. Its not supported at all, and the only evidence of existance is man made tales. Nothing on nature supports the notion of life after death and as I noted before  physics actually refutes the idea. Its not viable according to what we know. It's just an old superstition. 

I didn't answer his post yet. When he sees the studies and what they have already recorded as hard evidence I will be interested to see his response when the big picture is properly presented. 

Not at all. Because physics deems is impossible, its in the realm of the Toothfairy, or God. The odds are so small that dismissing such without further evidence is valid, otherwise we would be changing pretty much everything we know, and I don't know anyone that would call such a feasable proposal based on no evidence. 

That's exactly what the AWARE project is doing. It cannot yet explain the slow shutdown but its been recorded so it happens no matter what. There's nothing to indicate a continued existance, just parts of the body doing what they have always done when damage occurs. Some systems seem to be autonomous and take longer to shut down after the brain has stopped sending signals. 

Its all in the evidence gathered by Parnia. You can think what you like, but facts make the call at the end of the day. 

You've got that backwards, the evidence is supporting the conclusion, not the other way around. Petito principi applies to afterlife ideogies as your stating with a conclusion. 

What you are supporting is akin to Bible thumping. The evidence does not support an afterlife yet you still champion the superstition. You have twisted Parnias results to support your conclusions. The slow shutdown theory is still very much a shutdown theory, your hanging onto the idea that the shutdown never happens, but it does. Parnia has stated that it might take hours for all aspects of consciousness to shut down. Some aspects take days to shut down. It all supports eventual death, just not as quickly across the entire body as once thought. Cardiac arrest and death are not synonymous.

It is. 

Another researcher (Jimo Borjigin) came to the same conclusions testing rats. 

In Dying Brains, Signs of Heightened Consciousness

WE OFTEN TALK about death as a point in time. One moment you’re alive and the next, when your heart stops beating and your lungs stop breathing, you are clinically dead. This definition tempts us to view death as a clear-cut event, like the flip of a switch.

That’s not how Jimo Borjigin, a neuroscientist at the University of Michigan, sees it. “Doctors assume that after clinical death, the brain is dead and inactive,” she says. “They use the term ‘unconscious’ again and again. But death is a process. It’s not a black-or-white line.”

In a new study, Borjigin discovered that rats show an unexpected pattern of brain activity immediately after cardiac arrest. With neither breath nor heartbeats, these rodents were clinically dead but for at least 30 seconds, their brains showed several signals of conscious thought, and strong signals to boot. This suggests that our final journey into permanent unconsciousness may actually involve a brief state of heightened consciousness.

In Dying Brains, Signs of Heightened Consciousness

Again, Parnias work strongly suggests this is indeed the case. And that the senses that continue to record after death hold that memory if revived. 

And this is what I find astounding. There's clearly no support for an after life notion, yet you grasp the evidence as if supporting by hinging it on brain activity. Parnia has clearly broken new ground that redefines the death process, not an afterlife process. Ironic that I see you as the Bible thumping flat earthers pushing superstitions based on a cherry pick of old evidence concerning time of death with new evidence that does not support independent consciousness, but a gradual shutdown process. You seem to be deliberately ignoring the shutdown part here to support your personal preferences. You can keep supporting superstition all you like, but historically, that option hasn't come out on top. 

Sigh... psyche. I’m not going to get into with you anymore than this. Not because I can’t but because its as pointless as talking to a bible thumper ether it’s you or me, but I’ll say this one last thing. Memories cannot be stored biologically without electrical activity in the brain, nor can conciousness exist without it. It’s a simple matter of knowing that nural pathways require energetic reactions to be formed. This is actually what creates the energy signatures we can measure. Brainwave patterns are created by these processes in our neurons. This is all known biology. When you can demonstrate that nural pathways can still be formed and information still be taken in under cardiac arrest and no Brian waves but with some other energetic activity. I will have to concede, as I have with the possibility that it all happens after revival ( which has other huge implications), that it happens in the brain during those time periods. If no energetic reactions can be found that form nural pathways, then we are still stuck on this point. I’ll read into your source to see what precisely the work that is being done. Happy thanksgiving from the US my friend. 

[Liquid Gardens 11,164]

22 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

Actually a lot of people have seen a city like that. Here is where we have to do some thought experiments. For a moment we have to assume that life after death is indeed a reality before we can write in certain things that are strikes against the possibility of that reality. 

The only reason we need to take this approach is because we can't do what we normally do, which is provide the positive evidence that supports that life after death is a reality, because that evidence is very shaky.  Assume wizards are real; good luck finding anything that is a strike against the possibility of that reality.

22 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

We know form NDE annecdotes that some people see Jesus, some Mohammad, some a loving light... etc etc. These are obvious inconsistencies. In a physical world this poses a problem, but not in an interpretive one. 

Where is this interpretive 'world' you speak of?  I'd argue that the inconsistencies are not problems for the narrow 'physical world', I'd argue they are problems for anything that is real.

22 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

If a spirit world is real and our consciousness goes there after we die, then ......

-We will not be taking our physical eyes with us, so visual experiences are actually interpretations that are going to be clouded by our cultural and personal experiences. The same can be said for audio and tactile experiences. This would be necessary for it to have any meaning for us at all as it has to fit within how we interact with other things and store it to memory.

One might see a crystal city, or a white city, or a shining city, or a golden city. ( I have seen the city by the way. I have blogged about it here on UM before)

Its clear we are dealing with themes that must be interpreted through a person’s experience. Context is more important to a mind without a body than content.

back to the experiment. If NDEs are real, logically it dosnt seem like it could be any other way unless some unearthly intelligence demanded consitancy. In that case we’d all be seeing the same god. 

All of the above bolded statements are just plain assumptions on your part, you seem to be trying to impose these 'rules' on something we know nothing about, we have no information on the capabilities of a soul/spirit/disembodied consciousness, you have not shown that those don't have some kind of senses that allow them to see real things in a spirit world.  And this 'interpretive' approach essentially armors NDEs against any criticism, while simultaneously undercutting it.  If the crystal city that only some see in NDEs is just an interpretation of something else spiritually 'real', then why not apply that same logic to the whole experience itself, that the whole experience is just an interpretation created solely in the physical brain.

Again, I think my previous point is that (despite your tendency to accuse others of 'bias!' way too prematurely) that your evaluation method here also seems biased.  According to you, that some people see Jesus and some Mohammed, etc, isn't an issue, it's what we supposedly should expect in this 'interpretive' world.  However the main reason we are even mentioning NDEs as a thing is there is some commonality for some of them, which means if instead when people had NDEs they all saw Thor and Asgard, you'd be touting this as evidence for NDE.  If the experiences are different, you win because it's interpretive; if the experiences are common, you win because it's unusual and unlikely.  What can ever be a strike against NDEs then even in theory?

22 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

I also can’t understnd why you would think the NDE phenomenon dosnt have some unusual characteristics about it. It’s easy to write things off, but even psyche has produced some interesting material. There is obviously something happening that , at the moment, is beyond our understanding.

NDEs do have unusual characteristics, so do spiderwebs, so do dreams, so does dropping acid, etc.  I don't think this is any more 'beyond our understanding' than dreams or sleep paralysis is, even though we don't have totally complete understandings of how those work either.  Brains do weird things when deprived of oxygen, that is not beyond our understanding, and we have stories, no evidence to examine, that memories are occurring at a time when there is no possibility of memories being created due to lack of brain function; that evidence requires a synchronization and careful scientific monitoring of events that can't and shouldn't occur in an emergency life-saving situation.

22 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

I’m not even saying it has to be spiritual, but assuming a materialist conclusion is just another fallacy.

Depends on whether it's an assumption or a conclusion based on argument and evidence.  Is it okay if I assume a materialist conclusion for dreams?  Because most of what you wrote about the interpretative afterlife experience makes the case for visits to an external dreamworld, and a zillion other things, just as well.

[joc 17,317]

3 hours ago, White Crane Feather said:

Memories cannot be stored biologically without electrical activity in the brain, nor can conciousness exist without it. It’s a simple matter of knowing that nural pathways require energetic reactions to be formed.

Once stored...the memories are still there...long after the actual body and brain are dead.  This is a medical fact.  What Borjigin's research showed was that after rats had been clinically dead for at least 30 seconds there were signals of conscious thought brought about from a brief heightened state of activity in the brain.

Now, my research is anecdotal...totally...and it wasn't even research...I was attempting to revive a dying Electric Blue Acara (fish).  It was just floating in the tank...so I put in a cup of aquarium water.  I slowly moved it around with a pencil attempting to get oxygen through it's gills.  After a few minutes it started swimming very slowly.  After a few minutes of that...it suddenly began swimming very fast and extremely erratic...and I mean extremely fast...like suddenly shot up with steroids fast...and then, after about 2 0r 3 seconds of that...it's fins all shot out like it had been electrocuted.  Of course I had no way of knowing whether or not the fish was clinically dead...but I had paid $25 for this fish and had been jacking with it for almost half an hour...so I just kept on....

I continued moving the fish even after it totally spazzed out...and after about ten minutes...it started moving again...very, ever so slowly...after a few minutes of that...bam...again...totally skizoid erratic, extremely fast swimming...and then...again...suddenly...shlock...it looked like it had been electrocuted.

All that to say...and we are talking about a small fish...not a rat....but...I concluded that something had triggered a state of heightened consciousness if only for a few seconds. So from my experience with that fish, I find Borjigin's research very interesting.

As to your above quote...I think all Borjigin was really saying is that electrical activity doesn't all dissipate as quickly as we think it does.  Do you think it inconceivable for chemical reactions to happen in the brain that might cause electrical activity to spike in some way?

Edited November 21, 2018 by joc

[joc 17,317]

11 minutes ago, joc said:

Once stored...the memories are still there...long after the actual body and brain are dead.  This is a medical fact.

Let me qualify that statement.   I read once a long time ago in a medical magazine about a surgery done where all of the blood was removed from a patients body.  

This is one of the most amazing videos I have ever seen...and it was this that I was actually referring to in the above quote.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2fp7d5ldppZgr7JnQWdNdL4/surgery-in-which-a-patients-blood-is-completely-drained-from-their-body

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

2 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

The only reason we need to take this approach is because we can't do what we normally do, which is provide the positive evidence that supports that life after death is a reality, because that evidence is very shaky.  Assume wizards are real; good luck finding anything that is a strike against the possibility of that reality.

Where is this interpretive 'world' you speak of?  I'd argue that the inconsistencies are not problems for the narrow 'physical world', I'd argue they are problems for anything that is real.

All of the above bolded statements are just plain assumptions on your part, you seem to be trying to impose these 'rules' on something we know nothing about, we have no information on the capabilities of a soul/spirit/disembodied consciousness, you have not shown that those don't have some kind of senses that allow them to see real things in a spirit world.  And this 'interpretive' approach essentially armors NDEs against any criticism, while simultaneously undercutting it.  If the crystal city that only some see in NDEs is just an interpretation of something else spiritually 'real', then why not apply that same logic to the whole experience itself, that the whole experience is just an interpretation created solely in the physical brain.

Again, I think my previous point is that (despite your tendency to accuse others of 'bias!' way too prematurely) that your evaluation method here also seems biased.  According to you, that some people see Jesus and some Mohammed, etc, isn't an issue, it's what we supposedly should expect in this 'interpretive' world.  However the main reason we are even mentioning NDEs as a thing is there is some commonality for some of them, which means if instead when people had NDEs they all saw Thor and Asgard, you'd be touting this as evidence for NDE.  If the experiences are different, you win because it's interpretive; if the experiences are common, you win because it's unusual and unlikely.  What can ever be a strike against NDEs then even in theory?

NDEs do have unusual characteristics, so do spiderwebs, so do dreams, so does dropping acid, etc.  I don't think this is any more 'beyond our understanding' than dreams or sleep paralysis is, even though we don't have totally complete understandings of how those work either.  Brains do weird things when deprived of oxygen, that is not beyond our understanding, and we have stories, no evidence to examine, that memories are occurring at a time when there is no possibility of memories being created due to lack of brain function; that evidence requires a synchronization and careful scientific monitoring of events that can't and shouldn't occur in an emergency life-saving situation.

Depends on whether it's an assumption or a conclusion based on argument and evidence.  Is it okay if I assume a materialist conclusion for dreams?  Because most of what you wrote about the interpretative afterlife experience makes the case for visits to an external dreamworld, and a zillion other things, just as well.

Have you ever been in a car accident or other crisis? Events  are always described from a conscious observers perspective and interpretation. Police officers know this and seperate people on purpose. Two people sitting right next to each other can and often do recall events in totally different and sometimes very contradictory ways. This dosnt disqualify the event as imagined or not real. Certainly people with different interests or attitudes can recall things totally different. With reguards to inconsistencies and argunent  that It nullified the validity of annaecdotes. It dosnt. The “city”. The tunnel, the life review, the benevolent presence, floating above your yourself and others, etc etc etc. are all themes shared by many many many people. Some who seem to have never been exposed to them culturally. Even if we assume an afterlife negative assumption, the themes, are strikingly and statistically consistent throughout humanity and are recorded early on from cultures with no contact with each other since prior to the last ice age. Strangely enough it’s exactly consistent with what we would expect from an after life positive reality. That’s fine, but we are assuming no afterlife, so now we are left with genetic memory ( like a dog that knows to bury bones or a cat burying its scat even though never raised around other dogs or cats), or we are left with cultural themes that maintained their presence for at least 20-50 thousand years of human migration.  The later can be demonstrated that it is most likely  not true. We can’t rule out themes built into our genes though. Psycological archetypes steming from evolutionary pressures is an interesting subject. 

We have quite a bit of observations from doctors themselves that people are forming memories when the “can’t” enough to start to measure and make statistical predictions actually. We have enough data points to predict how many doctors will have these conversations where the doctor recognizes the patient was righ about things they shouldn’t. Let’s not even mention  that it’s on their mind when they wake up because of what they experienced. These are normal people not usually the typical woo lovers. These are all worthy issues that demonstrate the effects of some unknown phenomon, that could very well be as elusive as gravity. As mentioned, gravity still remains an unknown entity as well, however it’s existance is unmistakable through observations of its effects. 

And you are right brains do weird things. The problem is that none of this is weird. It’s common enough and thematically consistent enough to warrant more respect than psi balls and magic powers. 

Indeed if we don’t know the nature of something, then assuming it’s nature seems kind of premature. 

I’m in agreement with you. Even if somone thought they saw Asgard which actually fits some of the themes, it couldn’t be considered a strike against NDEs. That is my whole point it can’t be. All things are interprtations. It’s through logic that we weed out what is likely or not likely true. This defeats the argument that inconsistencies in content are evidence of that NDEs are purely imaginative. That’s all I was getting at. 

Which brings us to the other issues. I’m not discounting the possibility that the experiences are created in a physical brain. When and if the research shows that the physical brain is capable of doing this under the circumstances of no brain waves and blood pressure, then the argument is over.

The rest... they are not assumptions. They simply logical progressions. This is done in science all the time. Have you ever read through great discoveries in physics and how they happened from the scientists themselves? Though experiments and the logical consequences of various conditions are essential to the process of beginning a viable theory. Math is the ultimate expression of logical thought. So many discoveries, Black holes being one of them, are discoveries that fall out of logical progression ( maths), and the  turn out be real. Einstein was so disturbed by the consequences of his mathematical discovery of singularities that he disregarded it at first because his own bias that nature shouldn’t go to such extreme wouldn’t let him trust his calculations. So none of what I said are assumptions. Let’s not forget that that  world and the environment have been explored for many thousands of years by shaman and people like myself. I realize that many think it’s purely imaginative, but if you are going to give me any credit at all, I can tell you I am very experienced in that environment. Even if by your standards it’s purely a virtual one. The thought experiment is both logical and built on a solid education of how the environment works. It’s much more than an assumption. Even when we asssume an after life negative reality, one has to admit that these states and archetypes between NDEs and shamanic experience are closely related. Hell some Native American rituals closely mimic the dying process. 

I think you are totally wrong on this LG. A position on any side that is going to be explored must go through a process of finding the logical consequences if —-it’s real— before any hypothesis can be formed. That standard construction of a hypothesis that even grade schoolers learn is the “If , then” statement. Without the “if” there is no start to finding out what needs to be tested. There is no logical progression. I’ll make some hypothesis right now that  must assume.

—-If there is a soul that leaves the body , then that soul must have a way to reintegrate with the body and download information to the brain and form new nural pathways.—

now we can look for consequences to see if logically something like that might be happening, and we can deduce some of the physical signs of such an ocurance. A good scientist might look for the sudden creation of afterlife memories in an instant which would manifest as the creation of a ton of new neural pathways in avery short time . Surges of electrical activity, or even expansion of the areas of the brain used for certain areas related to certain kinds of experiences. We could swim in evidence or nullifiy these possibilities and truely flesh out the nature of NDEs. But not without investigative assumptions. 

anyway. You can see where I’m going. To avoid the full process because it’s been written off as woo is not science nor logical. It’s closer to ideological oppression. 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2018 by White Crane Feather

[White Crane Feather 5,621]

54 minutes ago, joc said:

Once stored...the memories are still there...long after the actual body and brain are dead.  This is a medical fact.  What Borjigin's research showed was that after rats had been clinically dead for at least 30 seconds there were signals of conscious thought brought about from a brief heightened state of activity in the brain.

Now, my research is anecdotal...totally...and it wasn't even research...I was attempting to revive a dying Electric Blue Acara (fish).  It was just floating in the tank...so I put in a cup of aquarium water.  I slowly moved it around with a pencil attempting to get oxygen through it's gills.  After a few minutes it started swimming very slowly.  After a few minutes of that...it suddenly began swimming very fast and extremely erratic...and I mean extremely fast...like suddenly shot up with steroids fast...and then, after about 2 0r 3 seconds of that...it's fins all shot out like it had been electrocuted.  Of course I had no way of knowing whether or not the fish was clinically dead...but I had paid $25 for this fish and had been jacking with it for almost half an hour...so I just kept on....

I continued moving the fish even after it totally spazzed out...and after about ten minutes...it started moving again...very, ever so slowly...after a few minutes of that...bam...again...totally skizoid erratic, extremely fast swimming...and then...again...suddenly...shlock...it looked like it had been electrocuted.

All that to say...and we are talking about a small fish...not a rat....but...I concluded that something had triggered a state of heightened consciousness if only for a few seconds. So from my experience with that fish, I find Borjigin's research very interesting.

As to your above quote...I think all Borjigin was really saying is that electrical activity doesn't all dissipate as quickly as we think it does.  Do you think it inconceivable for chemical reactions to happen in the brain that might cause electrical activity to spike in some way?

I think It would definitely have to be measurable. What has to shown to account for an NDE though is that the brain being coordinated enough to form complicated scenarios that include speech recognition, visual memories, etc etc etc. these are all highly developed and sensitive abilities.

If memories are being formed with no brain activity, we are going to have to rethink where these memories are coming from. Random dosnt cut it when we have enough evidence that the content has certain themes. 

We have to be careful too. As per the conversation I have been having with LG. If this happens in humans, it actually fits what could happen if indeed memories from an  outside entity ( a soul perhaps) are being downloaded to a physical brain. This is obviously something that has to happen if an afterlife positive reality is real. I would expect a brief surge of brain activity if this happens. Biologically Memories are stored in nural pathways and those pathways have to be created somehow, and it must be an energetic process. This makes this line inquiry a dead end because an energetic reaction will happen both in creative creation of memories or reintegration from a source outside the body. I’m not going to dig it up, so people can look for it or take my word for it, but I made this prediction years ago in discussions similar to this prior to the discovery in rats. 

[XenoFish 101,465]

1 hour ago, White Crane Feather said:

Biologically Memories are stored in nural pathways and those pathways have to be created somehow, and it must be an energetic process. This makes this line inquiry a dead end because an energetic reaction will happen both in creative creation of memories or reintegration from a source outside the body. I’m not going to dig it up, so people can look for it or take my word for it, but I made this prediction years ago in discussions similar to this prior to the discovery in rats. 

http://www.human-memory.net/processes_recall.html