Science

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5291
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:59 am

PostWed May 09, 2012 3:09 am » by Constabul


Perronick wrote:How can this futuristic manifesto explain a feeling? Pile on, folks. We know nothing :lol:


Well poets have been explaining this for a vary long time, no futuristic manifesto needed, now if you want to discuss the experiments dealing with the synapses that fire in the brain as some of these "emotions" are monitored, certianly we can, but many of these Feelings are "conceptualized" as chemical reactions happen in response to stimuli.

Are there possibilities for other influences to affect the brain during these processes. Indeed.

A better phrased "phrase".. We do not know it all.

Cause we obviously know something... :alien51:
Image
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5291
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:59 am

PostWed May 09, 2012 3:19 am » by Constabul


Shaggietrip wrote:
@ Shaggietrip, going to look over the info, Will reply as i can. I did recently provide an article talking about similar, but different subject http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 194223.htm
:cheers:

Read more: science-t71017-60.html#ixzz1uKTBdhjf




Thank you for the response. I had seen the article you posted.



There is much that I read into such subjects. Curves, waves,fields and magnetics. Sound comes with it. Those that think there is no sound in space just have not researched.

Bells like the Nazi ufo. Waves like sound or water. One can ride a wave. Magnetics which from the age of 14 really believe is the key to transportation.

Waves like the earth in its wave ~~~~~~~
Image


Sorry to post my seemingly simple thoughts but I think we are getting closer to understanding and discovering many new things.



Love the thread stay well. :cheers:


Actually am trying to organize a "good enough" response. You and IAM are making me work for this thread.. :mrgreen:

By all means post away. I have been fairly busy lately, but will try to be more expounding on this subject in the next couple days, have practicals to get through this wknd, so am busy preparing for such.
:cheers:
I found the discussion vary intriguing, tho honestly took be a bit to conceptualize what they were talking about. Being on a slow connection, and having flash player issues have been playing hell on me.
Image
Image

Conspirator
Posts: 1453
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 6:05 am

PostWed May 09, 2012 3:20 am » by Perronick


Constabul wrote:
Perronick wrote:How can this futuristic manifesto explain a feeling? Pile on, folks. We know nothing :lol:


Well poets have been explaining this for a vary long time, no futuristic manifesto needed, now if you want to discuss the experiments dealing with the synapses that fire in the brain as some of these "emotions" are monitored, certianly we can, but many of these Feelings are "conceptualized" as chemical reactions happen in response to stimuli.

Are there possibilities for other influences to affect the brain during these processes. Indeed.

A better phrased "phrase".. We do not know it all.

Cause we obviously know something... :alien51:


We know shit and we see ourselves as demi gods because of our petty knowledge. We can't explain a fucking feeling yet we play with our own DNA.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5291
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:59 am

PostWed May 09, 2012 3:25 am » by Constabul


Perronick wrote:
Constabul wrote:
Perronick wrote:How can this futuristic manifesto explain a feeling? Pile on, folks. We know nothing :lol:


Well poets have been explaining this for a vary long time, no futuristic manifesto needed, now if you want to discuss the experiments dealing with the synapses that fire in the brain as some of these "emotions" are monitored, certianly we can, but many of these Feelings are "conceptualized" as chemical reactions happen in response to stimuli.

Are there possibilities for other influences to affect the brain during these processes. Indeed.

A better phrased "phrase".. We do not know it all.

Cause we obviously know something... :alien51:


We know shit and we see ourselves as demi gods because of our petty knowledge. We can't explain a fucking feeling yet we play with our own DNA.


Ok.. :headscratch:
Image
Image

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:01 am

PostWed May 09, 2012 3:27 am » by Cthulhu


they can grow 2-headed goats.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5291
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:59 am

PostWed May 09, 2012 4:00 am » by Constabul


New Questions About Animal Empathy

ScienceDaily (Dec. 8, 2011) — The emotions of rats and mice and the mental infrastructure behind them promise to illuminate the nature of human emotions, including empathy and nurturance, a Washington State University neuroscientist writes in a recent issue of the journal Science.

Jaak Panksepp, Baily endowed chair of animal well-being science and professor of veterinary and comparative anatomy, pharmacy and physiology, makes his case in a Perspectives column responding to research in which rats helped other rats with no explicit rewards at stake. The research, Panksepp writes, "raises questions about the affective experiences of animals other than humans."

Panksepp, who has pioneered work in how core emotions stem from deep, ancient parts of the brain, said there remains a good deal of resistance in the scientific community towards the notion that "nonhuman animals have affective experiences, and that these can and should be studied in empirical ways."

But he argues that recent advances in neuroscience are letting researchers look at how animal affect, or emotions, control learning, memory and behavior.

"Simplified models of empathy, as in mice and rats, offer new inroads for understanding our own social-emotional nature and nurture," he writes. "Such knowledge may eventually help us promote nurturant behaviors in humans."

Panksepp elaborated on his essay in a recent correspondence with the Washington State University News Center:

Q: Humans are under the impression that they are the animal with the greatest feelings and certainly have the greatest capacity to empathize with other creatures. Is this a mistaken assumption? Why?

Panksepp: There is no question that all other animals have emotional feelings. The science is strong for that. And all our strongest basic emotional feelings come from brain networks all mammals share. Unfortunately, we can't scientifically compare the intensity or greatness of feelings across species.

However, because we have a greater capacity to think than most, we can do more with our emotions than other animals. We can write music, create poetry. And because of our higher mental abilities, we also have greater capacities for both empathy among strangers and cruelty. There are hints that across modern history empathy has been winning out over cruelty. But then one looks at the 20th century and wonders.

Still, the only way that empathy will continue to grow is if our higher mind gets in touch with the better angels of our lower minds -- with maternal care and social joy being among the most important.

Q: If I read you correctly, the logic of attributing empathy to other, lower order animals grows out of the way our brain reflects our evolution, with higher order thinking and feeling on the more recently evolved outer layers but key, core emotions lying deep in the center. So while an animal may have a more rudimentary brain, its brain still has core functions that can include empathy. Right?

Panksepp:
Indeed, we mammals share the basic tools for feeling and learning and perhaps even thinking. And empathy is reflected at all these levels. But our capacity for empathy would probably collapse without the basic emotions we share with other mammals.

Emotional contagion, a primitive form of empathic feelings, seems universal among mammals. Thinking about what others are thinking about and feeling seems much more developed in us than any other creature, except perhaps those with brains as big and complex as ours, like dolphins. Indeed, dolphins have certain brain areas that are more enlarged than ours -- higher emotional regions of the brain that probably are needed for higher forms of empathy and positive fellow feelings.

Q: Why are people resisting the notion that nonhumans can have affective experiences?

Panksepp: I don't think animal lovers have much doubt about the fact that animals have emotional feelings. Many scientists have little more than doubts. Thus, science has not yet reached agreement on how to study the many kinds of basic feelings we have and that many other animals surely have.

It is clear that when we finally understand their emotions, we will begin to have lasting scientific knowledge about our own. Only modern brain science can give us answers to questions such as, "What are emotions?" and "What are affective feelings?" It is clear that we can have many types of affective experiences -- feeling good (positive) and bad (negative) in various ways.

Certain positive and negative feelings are aroused by our sensory channels, like various forms of pain and taste. Others arise from inside our bodies, like hunger and thirst signals to the brain. And then there are emotional feelings that arise largely from complex networks that reside completely within our brains, but which move our bodies intensely in various ways.

These last kinds of feelings are most important for understanding our moods and psychiatric disorders. We now have a great deal of knowledge about which brain systems generate various basic emotional feelings -- experiences like desire, anger, fear, lust, motherly love, grief and playfulness. Once we understand the brain chemistries that control these kinds of emotional feelings in animals, we will better understand ourselves, as well as develop much better medicines for human emotional problems.

Q: You have a zinger of an ending. If we better understand the affective processes of mouse and rat brains, we might be better able to help humans be more nurturing. I read it this way: Humans may have the greatest capacity for compassion and empathy on earth, owing in part to our consciousness, but at times we behave worse than rats. If we understand the core, instinctual capacity for empathy among all animals, we might be better humans in the humanistic sense.

Panksepp: Yes, I think the more we know about the emotions of other animals, the more we will understand our own emotions. Without the ancient emotional systems that all mammals share, our ability to be conscious is drastically impaired. The more we know about our animal emotions, which support the rest of our mental apparatus, the more ideas we will have about how to be better people. As we follow the old philosophical advice to "know thyself," the more options we will have for being good to others and the world.

But until quite recently, an enormous gap in our knowledge has been any solid scientific knowledge about our emotional nature. Neuroscience is changing that. And when we really know ourselves, we will be able to think about ourselves more clearly as creatures of the world.

What we do with this knowledge will vary from one mind to another. My hope is that our desire to care about others will grow. To do that well is one of the best ways to take care of yourself. . .and the world.


The above article ties into another subject I am looking at, but fits here too. Additionally here is a PDF link, that is vary informative, The science of "feelings" is neuroscience and it has effectively treated a number of "feeling" based disorders.
http://www.neuroanatomy.wisc.edu/course ... 282%29.pdf
And another
http://www.bus.umich.edu/neuroacrp/Yoon/Bechara.pdf

:ugeek:


Upload to Disclose.tv


http://mahinth.blogspot.com/2010/09/neu ... tions.html
Image
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7400
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 9:09 pm

PostWed May 09, 2012 10:03 pm » by Mozi!!a


Blindness’ May Rapidly Enhance Other Senses



Can blindness or other forms of visual deprivation really enhance our other senses such as hearing or touch? While this theory is widely regarded as being true, there are still many questions about the science behind it.

New findings from a Canadian research team investigating this link suggest that not only is there a real connection between vision and other senses, but that connection is important to better understand the underlying mechanisms that can quickly trigger sensory changes. This may demystify the true potential of human adaptation and, ultimately, help develop innovative and effective methods for rehabilitation following sensory loss or injury.

François Champoux, director of the University of Montreal's Laboratory of Auditory Neuroscience Research, will present his team's research and findings at the Acoustics 2012 meeting in Hong Kong, May 13-18, a joint meeting of the Acoustical Society of America (ASA), Acoustical Society of China, Western Pacific Acoustics Conference, and the Hong Kong Institute of Acoustics.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 152002.htm

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5477
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 5:03 pm
Location: བདེ་འབྱུང

PostWed May 09, 2012 11:34 pm » by Iamthatiam


Const.! Woah...Wait there, mister, I don't write in Eng as fast as you do :D

No, nothing against the term..Science is just a term, after all...Like you said...Like Politics, for instance, I bet that this word raises certain negative feelings inside even the most advanced thinkers, because there is no way to easily dissociate it from it's practical applicabilities that had been carried out. One can easily sustain the idea of Man being a Political Animal, at the most Philosophical understanding of the subject. However, it gets very hard to separate it from greed and vanity, even if you go back to the days of Greek/Roman Politicians (Whose we could perfectly attribute the creation of the word "Mobster")!

Yes, I agree with you that science is a tool, with which has been misused for too long, and you will understand when I say that Humans were suposed to be far advanced, by now, and I tell you this as someone who understands well the undergoes regarding scientific discoveries coming out of warfare developments...Would humans have the rocket science if it wasn't by warfare? The old ballistics, that has been perfected throughout time, for purely bellic reasons?! [ :mrgreen: Enters the fokkin words]: 'WHAT IF'? The world would be useing cars moved by hydrogen for a long time, IF the Oil sheiks didn't have prevented this research, through lobbying, traffic of influence, assassinations....What happened to the science to be so compromised by Humans' affairs? I told you before, and will reafirm here, Science was held almost sacredly by myself, once! Then, you could say: "Well, it is only a word, only a tool"...it is, indeed...

Forgive me if it sounds pessimistic, rather than realistic, but all I can see is greed and vanity permeating 'academicisms'...All the scientific discoveries being prostituted, sooner or later, deprived from them optimal unfoldings, and outcomes!!! There is no Idealisms of a Mythological nature pushing me towards these takings, only what I'v been seeing through a not so short life, my friend! My bitterness is solemnly restricted to that, which surely makes me wondering, "would Humans be better understanding the so called 'Spiritual World' by now, if wasn't by what Im telling you"???

I know the nature of your excitement, trust me...I do...Remember, tho, you have a limited range of time to be here, watching these developments, and if something isn't done to depart science from corruption, you will see a new generation of weapons produced by the CERN's discoveries, instead of means to travel astronomical distances, useing Dimensional rules, yet to be discovered by you!

Please, get me right here, my friend...What I meant, from heart! And keep your mind open, and your heart bold...Your knowledge is not limited, only "Forgotten"!!! :wink:

Thanks for your attention & Time, I know how valuable it is when we are studying..wish you the best, bro!! :flop:

To nobody say Im derailing this thread....


The zombie-ant fungus is under attack, research reveals

A parasite that fights the zombie-ant fungus has yielded some of its secrets to an international research team led by Penn State's David Hughes. The research reveals, for the first time, how an entire ant colony is able to survive infestations by the zombie-ant fungus, which invades an ant's brain and causes it to march to its death at a mass grave near the ant colony, where the fungus spores erupt out of the ant's head. "In a case where biology is stranger than fiction, the parasite of the zombie-ant fungus is itself a fungus -- a hyperparasitic fungus that specializes in attacking the parasite that turns the ants into zombies," Hughes said. The research will be published in the journal PLoS ONE.

Image

Image

"The hyperparasitic fungus effectively castrates the zombie-ant fungus so it cannot spread its spores," said Hughes, who is an assistant professor of entomology and biology, and a member of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Penn State. "Because the hyperparasitic fungi prevents the infected zombie-ant fungus from spreading spores, fewer of the ants will become zombies."

As part of their research, the scientists created a detailed model that revealed previously unknown details of the interactions between the fungus-infected ants and the parasite-infected zombie-ant fungus. Scientists previously had known that ants defend their colonies against microscopic enemies such as fungal spores by efficiently grooming each other. In this study, the researchers also modeled the effect of ant behavior on limiting infection. "Interestingly, beyond the well known effect of defensive ant behavior, our new research reveals the added effect of the castrating actions of the hyperparasite fungi, which may result in significantly limiting the spread of the zombie-ant fungus" Hughes said.

The scientists report that only about 6.5 percent of the spore-producing organs of the zombie-ant fungus were viable. "Even though there are a lot of dead and infected zombie ants in the neighborhood, only a few of the spores of the zombie-ant fungus will become mature and able to infect healthy ants," Hughes said. "Our research indicates that the danger to the ant colony is much smaller than the high density of zombie-ant cadavers in the graveyard might suggest. This complex interaction between ant colonies, their brain-manipulating parasites, and other fungi capable of lending assistance to the colony underscores the need to study social insects under natural conditions." Hughes said his team is expanding its efforts and "remains focused on following the exciting theatre played out on the rainforest floor."


:hugging:

:cheers:
Image

"The Heaven's Lights are fed by the energy generated inside the furnaces of Hell; I AM One Conductive Wire! "

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:46 pm

PostThu May 10, 2012 1:23 am » by Haansolo


"Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy!

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 5291
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:59 am

PostSat May 12, 2012 11:36 pm » by Constabul


Shaggietrip wrote:I do hope this post fits the criteria. As most know I am not a scientist. Nor do I have great knowledge on science. But I enjoy reading on it and learning new things via research. Yes I may be a little one tracked minded, On space science that is. Now I am going to curtail the copy pastes at this time in fear that the op may not feel this appropriate for thread.


Now that out of the way. I was looking into Red Shift and came across what I am posting and found it interesting. I hope others do also.




Poster point:

I belive that once a photon has been liberated from an atom it no longer has any velocity in the time dimension. All matter is traveling through spacetime at c, in the case of matter most of the velocity is in the time dimension. When a photon is emitted from an atom it is mearly dropped off in 3D space, standing still in time (as it does) while the rest of the "solid" universe speeds away at c, giving the observer the impression that it is the photon that is moving away at the speed of light.

The photon, being an oscilating electromagnetic wave, appears to any observer wizzing by to be a sine wave, but that is only the view of the observer (similar to the light clock analogy). When the photon is observed close up the sine wave is no longer apparent and the photon now appears as a mass-less point (or particle) Same can be said for all kinds of "raw" energy, this energy cannot travel through time.

____________________

Anothers response:

@ most of the velocity is in the time dimension :

i am toying with a notion that spacetime is made of: time and space, in which space is discrete and in between theese discrete 'points' of space time is building up.http://www.sciencefo...ns/#entry675842

@ standing still in time (as it does) while the rest of the "solid" universe speeds away :

the dilaltion as measured by cosmological redshift is in my oppinion an effect of the buildup of time in a discretely spatial space-time. Again both notion seem similar. But when you say "stands still in time" you are actualy reffering to my "travells ony thru space-dimension of space-time".


______________________


A hypothetical de-synthetisation of spacetime as a synthesys of space and time.

Question: is there space for time? Answer: Only if space is discrete.

The hypothesis:

In spacetime space is discrete, time is a quantity that is building up between points of discretely distributed space. Gravity holds things in place localy, but on the scale beyond gravitational effect, time has an effect of "stretching the spacetime" noticed by cosmological redshift. The universe is getting "bigger", but only in the sense of buildup of time. This gives us infinite time in both directions. The galaxies in this stretching space-time are drifting apart from each other faster than the speed of light, but are not increasing in size themselves, as isnt nothing that is under effect of curvature (gravity) - at the same time as space-time is stretching as measured by cosmological redshift. This is because the building up of time in a spacetime with a discretely distributative space.


Effects listed:

time is infinite in both directions from any point of refference,
space is discrete, travel is discrete
posiibility of no Big Bang at all, or at least no t=0 at all
not necesserely a cyclical neither infinite universe, but certainly infinite time without t=0
or if there is t=0 there is also a posiible one or more t < 0.
time is infinite (limitless) in both future and past
in singularity there is no time, but only localy, there is time (endless) outside of singularities
gravity seems to have the exact opposite effect of time in the discrete-spaced spacetime.
possible cyclical inflation epochs
cosmological redshift beyond Z=1.4 not braking C limit, dillation beyond Z=1.4 effect of adding up of quantity of time
@ has been liberated from an atom it no longer has any velocity in the time dimension
in my hypothesis it seems that curvature (gravity) in its ultimate form is devoid or absent of time, so when the photon is released it becomes a light-particle outside the curvature. Infact it has no more velocity in time dimension. But solemnly travells thru discrete spatial dimention, while time itself keeps on building up between theeese points of space it travells thru.

@the rest of the "solid" universe speeds away at c,
it is "speeding away at greater than c, as measured by cosmological redshift", the space-time is growing faster than C (observed from and by an system within curvature - with gravity). And again, similar, what you call "solid" universe i call "has curvature or has gravity"

@this energy cannot travel through time.

perhapse noting could travel thru time (infact i think C prohibits that), but if it wanted to it must be a part of a curvature system (must have gravity), since if anything was to travel thru time, it shoud itself be outside time. I think gravity or curvature is absent of time, if not so, objects within curvature would stretch with the space-time dillation. If we allow a discrete distribution of "space-points" and define travel as traveling thru space, we can reconcile the problem of greater than c dillation as measured by cosmological redshift and confirm that at the same nothing can travel faster than buildup of time in our hypothesysed space-time. time is enddlesly being built up, hence stretching spacetime indefinately, while space travel is only possible at max C and only outside curvature the limit itself can be achieved.

it would at first appear paradoxical to say: a particel traverses spacetime thru discrete points of space A,B,C,... while time is "stretching" the space-time as a whole. It would appear to present us with two times. The time of spacetime (with discrete spatial dimension) and time measured in travel thru discrete-space. But it is not so. In the presence of curvature, the whole body traverses space-time, spatialy discrete and continuously thru time. Comparing motion and activity on scales beyond the reach of gravity, we get the effect of forementioned faster than c dillation, because space-time is stretching faster than "C", since time is infinately being added as a quantity and C is a constant.

So, when your particle had bene 'liberated' from the atom, we could say it exited a body within curvature and is emmiting (travelling) thru spacetime (literally appearing in point A, dissapearing in point A, appering in point B etc.). The atom keeps on traveling thru space time as part of a curvature system (has gravity), and is not effected by the stretching of spacetime, that is what is observed with cosmological red-shift does not "stretch" the atom itself, since in curvature time does not exist. The photon, as a masseless entity however must travel at a constant speed of c. But in between forementioned discrete space-points (A,B,Etc), time itself is increasing. So to look at this photon from an distant galaxy which is drifting avay from our it would seem it is not infact catching up with the dillation. And that infact is a observed fact.


Source: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/66200-a-space-time-with-discrete-space-and-infinite-time-in-both-directions/




How Can Galaxies Travel Faster Than Light?


Upload to Disclose.tv


tdarnell




:cheers:


Vary Puzzling observations,
There is a lacking in knowledge base hear aswell, but love to here the concepts that are put forth and ponder them.

One of those ponderous ideas is the Light, Matter, Energy manifestation.
We know of matter, we know of light, we see in particular a certain spectrum. Observing only a fraction of "reality". Light is emitting heat, hotter the brighter and the shorter the wavelengths.
So, in regard to the video, and somewhat the discussions direction, will try to tie in.. Well, My questions that i'm not qualified to answer.


Image

Light, in the visible (EM)spectrum is white, even tho other non visible waves are present too(microwaves, infrared, ultraviolet, X-rays, and gamma rays).
So in "viewing", Like the picture above, light cascades into the visible spectrum. in wave form. we observe a "acceleration" taking place because red light travels at 66.2% of c,
blue light travels at 65.4% of c, one will naturally seem to be speeding away, while others seem to be speeding closer.
But in the White light spectrum(unified), in a vacuum the speed is constant. Least that seems to be the general impression.

In Observing all these things, the acceleration might be due to an attraction affect. Being drawn towards something. Think of the Blackhole and how its gravity drags matter into it.
The same could be at work in the universe where, it is not so much the big bang that supplies the expansion of the universe, as much as it is being "pulled" in all directions by some mechanism(Gravity is the initial culprit that comes to mind.)
As things from the center is being drawn out, the outter edges "accelerates" as the proximal gravitational forces are experienced closer to the source.

Being drawn to what? your guess is as good as mine.

But to me, this expression of what we consider light, in wave form, in observation exhibits differing "speeds" of light, when infact it is all the same.

That being said, the earth is orbiting the sun, which is in an orbit too, in the milky way, which too is thought to either be in an orbit too, or just hurtling through the universe. If an object dropped out of the force exertion "grid" of the gravitational pulls of all things considered. My first thoughts go to, items in motion stay in motion, until other forces are exerted to stop them(e.g Newton..
It would not really stop, but continue at a reduced speed of observation. Traveling on inertia.

But honestly i can not say, I could have gotten a bit wrong. I hope that in someway, furthers your thoughts on the subject.
Image
Image


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook