Near Death and Out of Body Experiences

Some people may not remember an NDE, ....


This is an important point ;). We need to be careful not to generate explanations for null effects (i.e., the absence of experience), but yes this makes a good deal of sense. Indeed, overly excessive neural disinhibition will result in memory loss, as it is basically a stroke at those levels.

The evidence from Syncopy suggests the experiences are happening during recovery, not before arrest and certainly not during arrest!
 
When my elderly Mom had a operation a few years ago she had hallucinations that were awful, and not just for her. She started accusing me of trying to kill her.

As for an afterlife (shrug) I believe in it because I find it comforting to believe in one. It's not something I expect to ever see evidence proving. And I don;t believe the stories that go around various religious communities that make it to the mass culture. I just like the idea that one day I'll see my favorite grandmother, my Dad, and my old dogs again. If there is one, I'll know one day, and if there's not, well, I won't know but won't be around to be bothered by not knowing.
 
Last edited:
The 2010 memoir, "The Boy Who Came Back From Heaven," was written by Alex Malarkey and his father, Kevin Malarkey, a Christian therapist in Ohio.

"I said I went to heaven because I thought it would get me attention. When I made the claims that I did, I had never read the Bible. People have profited from lies, and continue to. They should read the Bible, which is enough. The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."
Turns out it was all just a bunch of Malarkey.

Couldn't resist.:D
 
The 2010 memoir, "The Boy Who Came Back From Heaven," was written by Alex Malarkey and his father, Kevin Malarkey, a Christian therapist in Ohio.

Quote:
"I said I went to heaven because I thought it would get me attention. When I made the claims that I did, I had never read the Bible. People have profited from lies, and continue to. They should read the Bible, which is enough. The Bible is the only source of truth. Anything written by man cannot be infallible."
Turns out it was all just a bunch of Malarkey.

Couldn't resist.:D

Yeah, I saw that on the news this morning. I can't go along with "[t]he Bible is the only source of truth"; but I have to give the kid credit for saying it's not right to prop up faith with (or profit from) a lie.
 
My point in quoting Belz was to stress that the explanation of anoxia is too simplistic. Not everyone experiencing hypoxia and anoxia, that is revived, will have an NDE therefore it can't be the only explanation.

I was thinking of the research for developing AI and what is involved with human perception in mind when I responded to Belz.I might be reading too much into AI research but I think it reflects how our organic brains work to some extent. Organic AI, or biological computers, are too new to really compare them to the human brain but that might change in the future. I hope I get to download into Six if it happens in my lifetime.

With the Multi-net-logic, the description of qbits as morphogrammatic pattern on the level of possibilities in pre-conscious quantum spacetime, is a new theory of quantum computing given, in an entirely different sense compared with theories of classical physics and computing science. All linearity and value restrictions are annulled. There is no algorithm but furthermore parallel processing of reflections operators and transjunctional gaps for transformation of quantum information in and between neurons that produces a series of conscious events.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/225303548_Quantum_computing_-_An_attempt_to_unify_HameroffPenrose_orchOT_with_GuentherKaehr_kenomic_computation

Can you define the hilited term?
 
Please don't tell me that you think that, between the scientific explanations (such as the nuanced ones offered by Dr B) and "it's the afterlife!" it's the science which is the "pat explanation."

Looks like we are working towards a "life works in mysterious ways" argument.
 
Originally Posted by turingtest View Post
Please don't tell me that you think that, between the scientific explanations (such as the nuanced ones offered by Dr B) and "it's the afterlife!" it's the science which is the "pat explanation."
Looks like we are working towards a "life works in mysterious ways" argument.

The ultimate pat explanation, because it's really no explanation at all while trying really hard to sound like one.
 
Other broader evidence is also interesting. For example, Children report meeting cartoon characters in 'the light' or characters from Sesame street, etc in a world full of sweets and treats......oddly, this is absent from adult NDEs.

Food for thought - but my hunch is there is not a real heaven full of puppets with arms up their arses, and inanimate 2D cartoon characters...quantum or not......just saying. ;)
 
and why do people only travel "towards the light" and not really away from it? Two reasons.

1) Visual neurons are represented in central vision more than peripheral vision and under conditions of disinhibition, phosphenes that are activated will condense centrally (giving the perception of a light in the distance) due to this bias. As disinhibition increases, more and more peripheral cells get excited, so 'the light' is seen to expand - giving the illusion of moving towards it (Sue Blackmore has a computational model on this).

2) This is also easily explained by neural biases that exist due to our experience of moving through a 3D world that are also present.

We move forward most of the time and the visual information out there in the world moves across the retina and visual cortex in an expanding (from centre) manner. Just look at a computer driving game to see how this is used to imply the illusion of movement.

When information goes from central to peripheral field, it is known as foveofugal drift (expanding). When you move backwards, and information moves from peripheral to central visual field its foveopatel (contracting).

In NDEs, the neural disinhibition excites brain regions and activates systems which represent this fovofugal bias and thus induce the illusion, you're moving forward towards the light, as when the phosphenes become activated, the central then peripheral biases induces the foveofugal illusions.

Again - no need for anything quantum here.........
 
Last edited:
Again - no need for anything quantum here.........

In general, if you say the word "quantum" and you are not Stephen Hawking, you expose yourself as a fool of the highest order.

"Quantum" is not a magic wand that can be waved to miraculously explain supernatural phenomena.
 
In general, if you say the word "quantum" and you are not Stephen Hawking, you expose yourself as a fool of the highest order.

"Quantum" is not a magic wand that can be waved to miraculously explain supernatural phenomena.

Quantum is like a firewall for woo debate.

It presents the woo's argument with flashing lights and colors, to attracte interest. Yet it blocks unwanted packets, such as those concerned with logic; "It's quantum, logic doesn't apply."
 
Did you see where the " Heaven " kid is now saying he lied..

Who would believe a kid would make stuff like that up...:rolleyes:

Let the spin begin...

If he lied once, maybe he lied twice and really went to Heaven. Maybe he is lying now to discourage everyone from wanting to get into Heaven and therefore prevent Heaven from getting too crowded... But of course, if he lied, he is not getting into heaven... Oh, it is so complicated!

I do like the idea that the complicated science is a "pat" answer, whereas "God did it" is the more sophisticated explanation.
 
Please don't tell me that you think that, between the scientific explanations (such as the nuanced ones offered by Dr B) and "it's the afterlife!" it's the science which is the "pat explanation."

No, what I have a problem with is accepting the research, thus far, as the complete explanation for NDE's when there are still questions about how the human brain functions.
 
Can you define the hilited term?

Yes, in the context of what I read about AI research, I took it to mean the amount of information shared between the neurons.

You mean "highlighted" don't you? Not "hilited", I'm assuming it's a typo.
 
In general, if you say the word "quantum" and you are not Stephen Hawking, you expose yourself as a fool of the highest order.

"Quantum" is not a magic wand that can be waved to miraculously explain supernatural phenomena.

Research into AI is a peripheral way of understanding how the brain might fully function during this kind of event when the natural occurring event within an organic brain is unpredictable.

If the researchers involved in AI describe the transmission of information between neurons as a type of quantum exchange are you saying they are fools too? I think those kinds of statements demonstrate a higher order of ignorance IMO.
 
Research into AI is a peripheral way of understanding how the brain might fully function during this kind of event when the natural occurring event within an organic brain is unpredictable.


Why in the world would that be? Human neuron interaction is electro-chemical, with the exact type and amount of chemical being very important to the way the next neuron perceives the input. In all, scientists have discovered 30 to 100 types of neurotransmitters.

Computers, on the other hand, are electrical. There is no chemical connection needed, let alone dozens of different chemicals.

How on earth could one be compared to the other?
 

Back
Top Bottom