Posted:
Interesting. Will transforming the brain also result into my consciousness to go into someone else's body too? Umm...
On a serious note, the brain interprets what is sensed by the receptors (the 5 senses) and its attendant limitations. We are surrounded by raw data. Our perception of the world is limited by our sense organs and our nervous system.
For eg lets take perception of color-
White light is a mixture of waves of varying wavelengths. The retina on the back of each eye contains neurons (photoreceptors) that respond (via electrical signals) to light. Among the types of photoreceptors are rods and cones. Cone cells are the first step in the nervous system that gives rise to the experience of color. There are three types of cone cells in the eye, each of which is tuned to respond most strongly to a particular wavelength: short-, medium-, and long-wavelength cones (S-cones, M-cones, L-cones, respectively).
Absorption range of each type overlaps with the others. A single cone does not tell you anything about color. That interpretation is by the nervous system. So we can say that color is not the property of the material world but of the brain and people can and do differ in their perception of these senses. The same can be applied to other senses like taste, touch, sound, taste. "Supertasters" have more sensitive taste buds and taste things differently than the majority.
Synesthesia is "the mixing of the senses" and occurs when a stimulus (light, for example) involuntarily elicits a sensation in another sensory modality (sound, for example). A synesthete might see the color purple when in pain. All perception and experience is a function of the brain and the rest of the nervous system. Since nervous systems differ among people, people perceive and experience things in different ways. My "reality" could be different than your "reality", whether in subtle or extreme ways.There isn't any way we could get outside our own brain and view the world, is there? Could there be some way to know what "reality" is really like ? I feel that there is more to the physical world than we experience it as human beings. The wavelengths that a bat, dog, bird, or a snake can sense differs widely. They must see a totally different "reality" than we do.So how do we proove whose reality is more real ?
Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum
now here's the point we might have missed while we were spending time on various wikipedia sites- that math does not have a physical interpretation. We still dont know what gravity is even after all that math. Take Newton's law on gravitation. We know the math equation. But we still dont know what causes it. Coming to GR, it has multiple alternative solutions and physical interpretations based on those solutions. Once we start making interpretations based on GR, thats when we start getting into fantasy land, because some of them do lead you there. Take retrocausality for example. Is it proved? No. Does it stop "physicists" from trying to think up all kinds of tricks such as CTL to get us there? No. So we keep putting out science fiction for 50 years and then someone comes along and says that our universe has to rule out CTL. Boss, there is as much speculation with this stuff as with others. GR is only the tip of the iceberg. That math seems to be verified. But a lot of other theories built around it is your kind "blind speculation", not that it has stopped anyone from concocting those.
Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum
i dont think a material's property can be all perception. We might perceive a property differently but it is what it is. For example, the material's color does not change just because we might be color blind. That means there likely is some objective absolute reality that we might perceive differently.
Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum
i dont think a material's property can be all perception. We might perceive a property differently but it is what it is. For example, the material's color does not change just because we might be color blind. That means there likely is some objective absolute reality that we might perceive differently.A material does not have a color. The color is a property of the brain (aided by the receptors) White light (sunlight) which is a mixture of waves of various wavelengths, falls on an object . some wavelengths get absorbed while other get reflected and fall on the eye. If it's a human eye ( has more cones than rods) a more vivid color is perceived, more suited to day vision . If the reflected light falls on a snakes eye ( has more rods than cones in its retina) the perception will differ. It sees moving objects better and has better night vision . Infact, snakes are said to have the ability to sense infrared thermal radiation that allows these animals to "see radiant heat. This helps them to target a live prey.
also, i dont think just putting someone's brain in another body would result in same thoughts. To the extent mind has an impact on body, and body has an impact on mind, we need to replicate the body that houses the brain/ nervous system to perhaps even come close to replicating one's thought process.😊I concur.that last bit would then suggest our consciousness would likely change even if we could take it out of our body.😊 Just a theory now- perhaps that out-of-body consciousness is the one obtained by reverting to some mean consciousness reflecting experiences over past lifetimes and this one.😊We would have to first ascertain if the data is indeed stored in the brain or does it merely access and process it..
Word Count: 0
Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum
OK, that definition of physical is a little disorienting. You managed to combine Physics and Math and arrive at a new discipline!
Yes and yes to the questions on space.
Not only it curves, it bends, it twists and it even rips (as in black holes). Why is that stupefying?
In fact, space "adjusts" itself on the fly to accommodate the speed of light. Let's discuss that if you would like :)
Originally posted by: K.Universe.
color has an objective reality?!
Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum
yes, in the sense of leaving footprints in terms of frequencies. Now let's have your next question.😆
Originally posted by: BirdieNumNum
yes, in the sense of leaving footprints in terms of frequencies. Now let's have your next question.😆
comment:
p_commentcount