Wednesday, April 30, 2025
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > News > Metaphysics & Psychology > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Metaphysics & Psychology

Burst of brain activity after death could be 'soul' leaving the body

By T.K. Randall
February 22, 2025 · Comment icon 137 comments
Higher dimension
Do we have a soul ? Image Credit: Pixabay / FalcoZen
A leading psychologist has identified an unusual burst of brain activity that occurs after a patient has died.
Do we each possess a 'soul' that persists after we die or is consciousness produced entirely within the physical brain ? It's a question that scientists, psychologists and philosophers have been attempting to definitively answer for centuries and a conundrum that we seem to be no closer to solving.

That said, Dr Stuart Hameroff - a professor of anesthesiology and psychology at the University of Arizona - believes that he may be closer than most to finding an answer.

Back in 2009, researchers at George Washington University placed small sensors in the brains of patients deemed to be clinically dead just before their life-support machines were turned off.

Surprisingly, they recorded unexpected brain activity - sometimes lasting up to 90 seconds - occurring after the patient had died.

Dr Hameroff now believes that this could be evidence of a 'soul' leaving the body upon death.
The research also suggests that consciousness may be the last thing that goes when we die.

"As the brain reaches a critical level of hypoxia, the [action potential, an electrical signal that shoots down a neuron] is lost by large numbers of neurons, and this loss of electrical potential causes a cascade of electrical act," the study researchers wrote.

"We offer this as a potential explanation for the clarity in which many patients have 'out-of-body experiences' when successfully revived from a near-death event.".

But is this really evidence of a 'soul' leaving the body or simply the activity of a dying brain ?

We may never know for sure.

Source: Metro.co.uk | Comments (137)




Other news and articles
Our latest videos Visit us on YouTube
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #128 Posted by papageorge1 2 months ago
If they were all false, then there would be no reason to revisit and update. But the key word there become is 'if'. So, let's say the chance of a paramormal suggestive story being not explainable by known knowledge is 50%, the odds of two being both false is 25%, three is at 12.5%. My best estimate is the chance of every story colloquially called paranormal being false papameter's out at 49.7 trillion to one. It's a done deal for me and the only interesting thing for me is finding explanatory models. Time to 'revisit and update'. It's a fine argument and very applicable here. An argument from ... [More]
Comment icon #129 Posted by Liquid Gardens 2 months ago
You don't understand.  "I believe in the supernatural because I'm convinced by the preponderance of the evidence" isn't an argument, it's a statement of belief.  "Here is why the preponderance of the evidence shows strong support for the supernatural: First if we look at this evidence...." followed by the actual case, would be an argument.  Your discussions of the evidence are a miniscule number of your posts compared to how many times you simply state you believe in the supernatural.  Which is a strong indication your case is weak. So far the chance of a paranormal story being explainabl... [More]
Comment icon #130 Posted by papageorge1 2 months ago
It's a statement of belief plus the reasoning process that led to the belief. What's the issue? 100%? But how do you know they always misinterpret and believe incorrect things in every suggestive case? Please explain that reasoning. If so, you'll be the first person in history to prove the paranormal nonexistent.
Comment icon #131 Posted by openozy 2 months ago
One reason I think this is true is because nature isn't kind and this euphoria before death would serve no purpose to the living. Other than that I've witnessed energy leaving the body on death on three occasions and ascending to wherever, so I have no doubts at all.
Comment icon #132 Posted by Liquid Gardens 2 months ago
How is that 'an argument'?  "I believe crystal healing is real because of science" - is that an argument?  Looks like mostly a claim, 'crystal healing is real because of science'.  The reasons why science supports crystal healing (it doesn't...) would be the argument.   You are using a different but valid meaning of 'explainable'.  The abilities of magicians may be because they are doing tricks or instead because they are using real magic.  I don't 'know' that every single magic trick that was ever done was a trick, but if I were to recruit the expertise of professional magicians, they ... [More]
Comment icon #133 Posted by papageorge1 2 months ago
Fine, and for an argument from preponderance for the paranormal would require how many hundreds/thousands of cases? I was only stating the reasoning method I used from decades of interest in the subject.  I think you are trying to say that every single case suggesting the paranormal can be explained by known things. For the sake of the argument, I'll even grant you that point. But how reasonable/likely is that in reality? That becomes the judgment for each of us and I am giving my judgment.
Comment icon #134 Posted by Liquid Gardens 2 months ago
Well to be fair you've added more than that, there's the usual accusation that a significant number of experts are emotionally driven to not believe in the paranormal although I don't think you've ever adequately addressed why someone wouldn't want the paranormal to be real.  Regardless since you like to offer up facts and viewpoints you find on ChatGPT, here's what it has to say about your favorite 'evidence' type: Anecdotes are considered weak evidence because they are based on personal experiences or individual stories, which are highly subjective and not necessarily representative of broa... [More]
Comment icon #135 Posted by papageorge1 2 months ago
The reasons vary. A typical one would be a dislike of those silly religious and psychic types for possibly some good reasons. And they like the idea of 'science' ruling the roost over religion/spiritual/psychic/woo nonsense and showing people what is really going on. But then when someone of intelligence comes along with evidence that there seems to be something to this religion/spiritual/psychic/woo stuff that is completely beyond known science they become rankled to an irrational extent.  And there are other reasons. Now on to anecdotal data. What ChatGPT said about the weaknesses of anecdo... [More]
Comment icon #136 Posted by XenoFish 2 months ago
Thus the problem of quantity, quality and consistency of stories. Without actual evidence or repeatable phenomena that can be tested, it's just a tale.  Which is why I have an issue with anecdotes being used as proof. 


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles