Where are memories stored in the brain ?

[onlookerofmayhem]

On 1/14/2022 at 3:11 PM, papageorge1 said:

OK, sorry Mayhem, apparently you responded to my post before I was finished editing it. My bad. Please see the final version of that post.

While I appreciate your apology, I don't appreciate your complete and total evasion to my responses to your initial post.

Posting links about quantum mechanics does nothing to show that it is just an assumption that memories are stored in the brain. (Your initial statement that I disagree with.)

Just because somebody believes there may be a different mechanism behind memory storage does not negate what we know. Nor does it create a "controversy".

Is there a controversy about the shape of the Earth? 

Any proponent of what you are proposing is adding an unjustified step in the process.

Is it possible that the Universe is conscious and memories are not necessarily stored in the brain? Sure it is.

Is there any decent evidence that is the case? No there's not.

[papageorge1]

45 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

While I appreciate your apology, I don't appreciate your complete and total evasion to my responses to your initial post.

Posting links about quantum mechanics does nothing to show that it is just an assumption that memories are stored in the brain. (Your initial statement that I disagree with.)

Just because somebody believes there may be a different mechanism behind memory storage does not negate what we know. Nor does it create a "controversy".

 

Just to clarify, you did see my edited post that included:

Are Memories Really Stored In The Brain

Excerpt:

The possibility of a radically new mechanism to explain the functioning of human long-term memory is considered. After reviewing orthodox nodal and connectionist (internal) memory models, an alternative model is proposed. This model assumes at the outset that memories are not stored in the brain at all. Rather it is proposed that the brain operates more like an aerial rather than an internal memory storage device.

45 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

 

Is there a controversy about the shape of the Earth? 

 

Not in my opinion. It is spheroidal.

 

Here's more on the memory controversy:

Memory And Brain.

Excerpt:

Memories are non-local frequency patterns in consciousness. Our brains are the physical instruments that allow us to receive those patterns. Injuring those parts of the brain associated with memory can affect our access to memories the same way as damage to a radio receiver may affect what stations it can pick up.

Edited January 16, 2022 by papageorge1

[onlookerofmayhem]

10 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Just to clarify, you did see my edited post that included:

Yes.

10 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

This model assumes at the outset that memories are not stored in the brain at all.

That's a pretty damning statement. 

That is starting with a conclusion and trying to cherry pick data that best fits it.

12 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Here's more on the memory controversy:

Deepak? Really?

I couldn't care less about his assertions. His statement is pure conjecture and he cannot back it up with any evidence. 

He is a useless sorce of information.

15 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Not in my opinion. It is spheroidal.

Good. So do you understand that even though some people think it is flat, that there is no controversy to the matter.

It wouldn't be controversial to say the Earth is a spheroid?

Only a flat-Earther would consider it a controversial statement. 

Same thing with memories being stored in the brain.

It doesn't matter if some people think it might not be.

All the actual evidence and data that we currently have points to memories being stored in the brain.

Until it is shown to be otherwise, that is the conclusion at the moment. 

Now, are you going to explain how non-locality or any other facet of quantum mechanics is a valid explanation as to how memory or conscience is stored outside of the brain?

 

[papageorge1]

8 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

 

Good. So do you understand that even though some people think it is flat, that there is no controversy to the matter.

It wouldn't be controversial to say the Earth is a spheroid?

Only a flat-Earther would consider it a controversial statement. 

Same thing with memories being stored in the brain.

It doesn't matter if some people think it might not be.

All the actual evidence and data that we currently have points to memories being stored in the brain.

Until it is shown to be otherwise, that is the conclusion at the moment. 

 

 

You missed my intention with my spheroidal earth controversy. My point was that I do not consider every belief worthy of controversy. The spheroidal earth is not controversial in my opinion, but the memory storage issue is. That means I form judgment on the quality of the opinions.

8 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

 

Now, are you going to explain how non-locality or any other facet of quantum mechanics is a valid explanation as to how memory or conscience is stored outside of the brain?

 

Here is one concept I included in my initial post in this thread:

Akashic records

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the religion of theosophy and the philosophical school called anthroposophy, the Akashic records are a compendium of all universal events, thoughts, words, emotions and intent ever to have occurred in the past, present, or future in terms of all entities and life forms, not just human. They are believed by theosophists to be encoded in a non-physical plane of existence known as the mental plane. 

[onlookerofmayhem]

31 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

You missed my intention with my spheroidal earth controversy.

No. You apparently are missing my point.

It's the same exact concept.

If I posted a bunch of links to pages where somebody claims the Earth is flat and said,

"See! There's a controversy about whether the Earth is a spheroid or not. 

The people who think it's a spheroid are just starting with the assumption that it is."

That doesn't mean there is actually a controversy over the conclusion.

Literally the same thing is true when you state it's a controversy about where memories are stored because somebody says that maybe, perhaps it could be that they are not.

32 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Here is one concept I included in my initial post in this thread:

I asked you to explain it. Not wikipedia.

I'm well aware of the claims.

35 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

In the religion of theosophy and the philosophical school called anthroposophy, the Akashic records are a compendium of all universal events, thoughts, words, emotions and intent ever to have occurred in the past, present, or future in terms of all entities and life forms, not just human. They are believed by theosophists to be encoded in a non-physical plane of existence known as the mental plane. 

That has absolutely nothing to do with what I asked you.

It's a completely useless assertion that doesn't mention anything related to your earlier links about non-locality.

And again, I couldn't care less about what Theosophy has to say about anything. I know what they claim and none of it holds any value.

You may as well try to convince me Jesus was ressurected because it says so in the bible.

[psyche101]

On 1/14/2022 at 5:25 PM, papageorge1 said:

Then let's see the demonstration and end the controversy once and for all.

Controversy ended 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.iflscience.com/brain/watch-chemicals-turn-memories-first-time-has-ever-been-recorded/

 

[psyche101]

On 1/16/2022 at 1:08 PM, papageorge1 said:

Just to clarify, you did see my edited post that included:

Are Memories Really Stored In The Brain

Excerpt:

The possibility of a radically new mechanism to explain the functioning of human long-term memory is considered. After reviewing orthodox nodal and connectionist (internal) memory models, an alternative model is proposed. This model assumes at the outset that memories are not stored in the brain at all. Rather it is proposed that the brain operates more like an aerial rather than an internal memory storage device.

Not in my opinion. It is spheroidal.

 

Here's more on the memory controversy:

Memory And Brain.

Excerpt:

Memories are non-local frequency patterns in consciousness. Our brains are the physical instruments that allow us to receive those patterns. Injuring those parts of the brain associated with memory can affect our access to memories the same way as damage to a radio receiver may affect what stations it can pick up.

Deepak Chopra is a joke.

Complete and utter con man. Looks like a complete fool whenever he speaks to any real scientist. 

Your dismissed.

[psyche101]

On 1/15/2022 at 6:48 AM, papageorge1 said:

I don't understand the problem. What is wrong with developing new theories to help understand what we currently can't explain? Seems like natural human scientific curiosity to me.

Making crap up isn't scientific or a theory.

It's just made up crap.

[papageorge1]

10 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Controversy ended 

 

I would hope you meant that humorously, but I suspect you're serious.

[psyche101]

6 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

I would hope you meant that humorously, but I suspect you're serious.

It's proof that the brain is local. Memories actually being stored chemically in the brain. It's been filmed. 

That information is solid and refutes your imagination. You can refuse to believe it, which would be like refusing to believe that New Zealand exists. 

But that much wouldn't be beyond you either. 

[papageorge1]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

It's proof that the brain is local. Memories actually being stored chemically in the brain. It's been filmed. 

That information is solid and refutes your imagination. You can refuse to believe it, which would be like refusing to believe that New Zealand exists. 

But that much wouldn't be beyond you either. 

Now show how that activity is actual physical memory storage as opposed to the creation of access connections for non-local storage and Psyche will go Nobel.

Edited January 18, 2022 by papageorge1

[psyche101]

2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Now show how that activity is actual physical memory storage as opposed to the creation of access connections for non-local storage and Psyche will go Nobel.

I don't think one gets a Nobel for copy and paste.

The researchers then stimulated the hippocampus, which is a small region of the brain that has most of the ability to form and store memories. Following stimulation, the researchers were actually able to witness the synthesis of the β-actin-encoding mRNA in the nucleus of the neuron. The molecules were then tracked out to the dendrites, where communication between neurons takes place. 

 

Singer noted that an increase in stimulation correlated with increase in synaptic activity in the predicted location. The outcome of this research was very much predicted by many previous studies dealing with memory, and it is an astounding step forward to be supported with actual real time video showing the process.

 

For your efforts, you win a wizard hat 

 

Welched on any bets lately?

[papageorge1]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

I don't think one gets a Nobel for copy and paste.

The researchers then stimulated the hippocampus, which is a small region of the brain that has most of the ability to form and store memories. Following stimulation, the researchers were actually able to witness the synthesis of the β-actin-encoding mRNA in the nucleus of the neuron. The molecules were then tracked out to the dendrites, where communication between neurons takes place. 

 

Singer noted that an increase in stimulation correlated with increase in synaptic activity in the predicted location. The outcome of this research was very much predicted by many previous studies dealing with memory, and it is an astounding step forward to be supported with actual real time video showing the process.

 

For your efforts, you win a wizard hat 

 

Welched on any bets lately?

Here's just one real world example arguing for non-local memory storage. During a Near Death Experience people have full memories of who they are and who others are even though they often have no detectable activity in the area of the brain that you are claiming holds the memory storage. Hmmm...to that.

[psyche101]

14 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Here's just one real world example arguing for non-local memory storage. During a Near Death Experience people have full memories of who they are and who others are even though they often have no detectable activity in the area of the brain that you are claiming holds the memory storage. Hmmm...to that.

No detectable higher functions. 

Brain activity can last hours after actual death. It's a slow shutdown process. All you have illustrated is basically a brain reboot. That's local. 

[papageorge1]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

No detectable higher functions. 

Brain activity can last hours after actual death. It's a slow shutdown process. All you have illustrated is basically a brain reboot. That's local. 

We are talking in Near Death Experiences of the highest level of mental functioning without detectable activity in the memory area of the brain. I'm just saying that looks bad for the local memory storage theory.

Not to mention I am convinced of medium communication with the long dead too and they have recall of their lives and certainly no working memory area of a physical brain.

And I believe people have verifiable past life memories that occurred with a brain long gone.

The local storage only model seems doomed to me.

[psyche101]

13 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

We are talking in Near Death Experiences of the highest level of mental functioning without detectable activity in the memory area of the brain. I'm just saying that looks bad for the local memory storage theory.

After the amount of times I've corrected you on this imaginative idea of yours based on old information, you either cannot retain information or refuse to.

Again. The brain takes hours to die. Near death is not death. 

Human brain may stay active for hours after death

Study leader Dr. Sam Parnia said that the patients could describe in details what happened around them. He explained that the time death is declared is the one when the heart stops beating. As the heart stops beating, it stops pumping blood to the brain and slowly the brain begins to shut down, he explains. He added that this process of the brain shutting down slowly may take hours and the person may be dead during this time but aware of their surroundings.

Your information is old, outdated and superseded.

13 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Not to mention I am convinced of medium communication with the long dead too and they have recall of their lives and certainly no working memory area of a physical brain.

And I believe people have verifiable past life memories that occurred with a brain long gone.

I don't care about your beliefs. They are childish and very silly. Why do you think I care about this?

 

Beliefs are why you stagnate and wallow in nonsense and myth. They don't do you any favours.

13 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

The local storage only model seems doomed to me.

Because you start with a conclusion and refuse to learn. As such once again, who cares what you think? You Welch on bets and support those who desecrate human remains for personal gain. Your credibility is non existent. And your understanding of consciousness is as as well. 

[papageorge1]

1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

After the amount of times I've corrected you on this imaginative idea of yours based on old information, you either cannot retain information or refuse to.

Again. The brain takes hours to die. Near death is not death. 

Human brain may stay active for hours after death

Study leader Dr. Sam Parnia said that the patients could describe in details what happened around them. He explained that the time death is declared is the one when the heart stops beating. As the heart stops beating, it stops pumping blood to the brain and slowly the brain begins to shut down, he explains. He added that this process of the brain shutting down slowly may take hours and the person may be dead during this time but aware of their surroundings.

Your information is old, outdated and superseded.

I don't care about your beliefs. They are childish and very silly. Why do you think I care about this?

 

Beliefs are why you stagnate and wallow in nonsense and myth. They don't do you any favours.

Because you start with a conclusion and refuse to learn. As such once again, who cares what you think? You Welch on bets and support those who desecrate human remains for personal gain. Your credibility is non existent. And your understanding of consciousness is as as well. 

I have heard dozens of cases that make no sense in your memory storage theory.

Here would be how I'd humorously and seriously appraise your argument style for your theory (oh, excuse me, your non-controversial certain fact ):

If you ignore all data that doesn't fit, the data fits nicely

[psyche101]

21 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I have heard dozens of cases that make no sense in your memory storage theory.

I don't care. I've offered actual data. Old wives tales aren't data. They are fairytales. All you did was illustrate your belief again, so I repeat, who cares what you believe? Everything you have illustrated as your belief is rather silly. 

21 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Here would be how I'd humorously and seriously appraise your argument style for your theory (oh, excuse me, your non-controversial certain fact ):

If you ignore all data that doesn't fit, the data fits nicely

What data? I'm the only one who has provided any and it doesn't support your fantasy. It supports the real world information that I have posted. You have referred to useless anecdotes.

[Golden Duck]

On 1/15/2022 at 4:06 AM, papageorge1 said:

Well, here's a controversy starter to start some mayhem:

Are Memories Really Stored In The Brain

Excerpt:

The possibility of a radically new mechanism to explain the functioning of human long-term memory is considered. After reviewing orthodox nodal and connectionist (internal) memory models, an alternative model is proposed. This model assumes at the outset that memories are not stored in the brain at all. Rather it is proposed that the brain operates more like an aerial rather than an internal memory storage device.

Do you like Assasins Creed?

[papageorge1]

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Do you like Assasins Creed?

Sorry don’t know of it.

[Golden Duck]

3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Sorry don’t know of it.

Just remember it then.

[onlookerofmayhem]

11 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Now show how that activity is actual physical memory storage as opposed to the creation of access connections for non-local storage and Psyche will go Nobel.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Eric-Kandel

"Kandel’s award-winning research centred on the sea slug Apylsia, which has relatively few nerve cells, many of them very large and easy to study. The sea slug also has a protective reflex to guard its gills, which Kandel used to study the basic learning mechanisms. These experiments, combined with his later research on mice, established that memory is centred on the synapses, as changes in synaptic function form different types of memory. Kandel showed that weak stimuli give rise to certain chemical changes in synapses; these changes are the basis for short-term memory, which lasts minutes to hours. Stronger stimuli cause different synaptic changes, which result in a form of long-term memory that can remain for weeks."

 

[onlookerofmayhem]

9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

If you ignore all data that doesn't fit, the data fits nicely

That is one of the most inane, ironic, hypocritical and ridiculous things you have ever said on here.

99.999999999999999999% of the data says that memories are created by and stored in the brain.

And you come in, with absolutely no actual data, to say that Deepak Chopra says it's not. And posting links about non-locality and refusing to explain what it has to do with anything. 

You are the one dismissing pretty much all of the data and science to contend otherwise.

Where is all if this scientific data and studies relating to people knowing things they couldn't have possibly known?

Where are the studies of NDEs that prove it was impossible for people to have been aware of their surroundings on some level?

Where are all the Nobel prizes for Deepak or any others from your side in regards to the brain and the functions it performs?

I'll give you a hint. The answer is none.

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/nobel.html

 

[moonman]

Remember kids, the only one who loses an argument against stupid is you.

[onlookerofmayhem]

5 minutes ago, moonman said:

Remember kids, the only one who loses an argument against stupid is you.

Guilty as charged.