The neurological roots of thought?

Interesting new research into the apparent neurological roots of thinking: Architecture of the Mouse Brain Synaptome, in the journal Cell, at https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S08...18)30581-6 . Article here :

"In a technical tour-de-force, a team from the University of Edinburgh in the UK constructed the first detailed map of every single synapse in the mouse brain.
.....
Using genetically modified mice, the team literally made each synapse light up under fluorescent light throughout the brain like the starry night. And similar to the way stars differ, the team found that synapses vastly varied, but in striking patterns that may support memory and thinking.
.....
In other words: synapses come in types. And each type may control a thought, a decision, or a memory.
.....
The detailed maps revealed a fundamental law of brain activity. With the help of machine learning, the team categorized roughly one billion synapses across the mouse brain into 37 sub-types. Here’s the kicker: when sets of neurons receive electrical information, such as trying to decide between different solutions for a problem, unique sub-types of synapses spread out among different neurons unanimously spark with activity.
......
The essence of you—memories, thought patterns—seems to be etched into how diverse synapses activate in response to input. Like a fingerprint for memories and decisions, synaptomes can then be “read” to decipher that thought.

But as the authors acknowledge, the study’s only the beginning. Along with the paper, the team launched a Synaptome Explorer tool to help neuroscientists further parse the intricate connections between synapses and you."

Many neural correlates of consciousness have been known for years, and are assumed by materialist neuroscientists to point to how consciousness must be one and the same as the brain's vast arrays of neurons and synapses, and especially their activities. This new study shows the neural correlates of an example of (primitive) consciousness to an unprecedented level of resolution and complexity. Naturally, a lot of materialists will think that this research is somehow getting closer to the true material nature of consciousness. I don't think so. There is still the mystery of the Hard Problem. And there is still the great volumes of empirical evidence of the ultimate independence of human consciousness and the physical brain, in phenomena such as veridical NDEs. I don't think the neuroscientists are ever going to find what they are looking for with any of the ingenious tools they can develop, because it's a category error on their part.

Interesting new research into the apparent neurological roots of thinking: Architecture of the Mouse Brain Synaptome, in the journal Cell, at https://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S08...18)30581-6 . Article here :




Many neural correlates of consciousness have been known for years, and are assumed by materialist neuroscientists to point to how consciousness must be one and the same as the brain's vast arrays of neurons and synapses, and especially their activities. This new study shows the neural correlates of an example of (primitive) consciousness to an unprecedented level of resolution and complexity. Naturally, a lot of materialists will think that this research is somehow getting closer to the true material nature of consciousness. I don't think so. There is still the mystery of the Hard Problem. And there is still the great volumes of empirical evidence of the ultimate independence of human consciousness and the physical brain, in phenomena such as veridical NDEs. I don't think the neuroscientists are ever going to find what they are looking for with any of the ingenious tools they can develop, because it's a category error on their part.

Well that’s just what your synapses are telling you.

I'm pretty confident that the independant consciousness thing will turn out to be a software/hardware style interface. Where the "soul" is just some kind of entangled energy that is compatible with the neural structure of the human brain. And this structure would've originated in the brain itself before gaining independance later which it could then allow for reincarnation and/or independant survival. I think it's going to turn out to be something really mundane like that which proves the materialists right more than the spiritualists.

The Rose Rune demonstrated that such structures are energetically possible and I see no reason why a naturally occuring, stable version of that couldn't exist. Created by and thus mapped to the general neural structure and behaviour of the human brain.

I'm pretty confident that the independant consciousness thing will turn out to be a software/hardware style interface. Where the "soul" is just some kind of entangled energy that is compatible with the neural structure of the human brain.  And this structure would've originated in the brain itself before gaining independance later which it could then allow for reincarnation and/or independant survival. I think it's going to turn out to be something really mundane like that which proves the materialists right more than the spiritualists.

The Rose Rune demonstrated that such structures are energetically possible and I see no reason why a naturally occuring, stable version of that couldn't exist. Created by and thus mapped to the general neural structure and behaviour of the human brain.

An intriguing conjecture. It could explain a number of things that have been otherwise inexplicable, such as the apparent evolution of consciousness. 

The problem is, as I posted elsewhere, the Standard Model of all particles and fields that have been discovered to date seems to be internally consistent and complete at this point in time in terms of accounting for everything detectable with physical instrumentation. There doesn't seem to be any room in physics for the postulated consciousness particle and field. So it doesn't look like consciousness is any kind of physical field/particle phenomenon that can be fitted into the Standard Model.  

And the evidence is that consciousness survives physical death regardless of the violence of the passing, regardless of it even being an extremely energetic explosion vaporizing the physical body, for instance. This could be at very high temperatures (maybe even millions of degrees in an atomic explosion) where the fields and forces constituting the matter of the physical body are totally disrupted. Anything physical in any way would presumably be disrupted. But the mind and consciousness presumably still survive.

An intriguing conjecture. It could explain a number of things that have been otherwise inexplicable, such as the apparent evolution of consciousness. 

The problem is, as I posted elsewhere, the Standard Model of all particles and fields that have been discovered to date seems to be internally consistent and complete at this point in time in terms of accounting for everything detectable with physical instrumentation. There doesn't seem to be any room in physics for the postulated consciousness particle and field. So it doesn't look like consciousness is any kind of physical field/particle phenomenon that can be fitted into the Standard Model.  

And the evidence is that consciousness survives physical death regardless of the violence of the passing, regardless of it even being an extremely energetic explosion vaporizing the physical body, for instance. This could be at very high temperatures (maybe even millions of degrees in an atomic explosion) where the fields and forces constituting the matter of the physical body are totally disrupted. Anything physical in any way would presumably be disrupted. But the mind and consciousness presumably still survive.

Based on my poltergeisting experiments and other experience I'm not so sure about that. I suspect that the standard model is not complete. Rather right now the standard model only consists of a single completed module that likely interfaces witjh other independant modules that at best loosely interface with each other at their respective fringes.

It's part of an idea I call the "theory of inertial density" which states that the reason why all physics is internally consistent is because everything bound by it shares the same intertial density or phase state. Thus making them all compatible. Once you go too far out of phase normal interactions for that phase state start to break down. One way to think of it is like a communication protocal. You can have millions of computers all networked together if and only if they all use the same network protocol that they all understand. If you split half of them off and give them a different but equivalent protocol, the two sides can no longer interact. Even if they are technically capable of interaction. They are bound to whatever else speaks their language.

Now let's say you have 100 computers all using a unique communication protocol individually numbered 1-100. Each protocol is only fully compatible with it's own protocol but can transfer some data between the protocol that is one number above or below it. If you daisy chained all of these computers together you could get all of them sort of talkingto each other, but only if they were chained in order.

Now imagine that but infinite, across infinite axis, and using continuouis rather than discreet math, that's what I think these things look like based on, well, every paranormal story and experience I've ever had or heard of. Spirits seemingly existing on their own plane, things seemingly not bound by time, ghosts and poltergeists that can only kinda sorta interact with the world here, Consciousness surviving death even in scenarios that should destroy it if it were made of normal, known physical things, mind effecting matter, the Kruger Effect, precognition, etc.

Hell I think this could explain normal physics too. "Duplicate" objects like electrons explained by being slightly different phases states of the same basic pattern, expressed by occupying different points in space and time. Things that are most compatible would naturally be closest to each other thus creating the appareance of "space" between things. etc etc.

It's a model that simultaneously allows for interaction and isolation, which is exactly what we see. How correct the theory is I don't know, but I know it's not completely wrong.