Poltergeist Activity

X

Xeno

Registered Senior Member
This is my first imput into the
discussion. I'm not going to say much
now, but i'll just input little things
here and there as I go along.

Many people believe that psychic activity
is something mystical and out of this
world. Christians say that it is the
work of the devil.

Is it really so? Not in my opinion.
Psychic activity is nothing more
than a neurological function; a
command executed by the brain using
a build up of electrical activity.

Reading people's minds? It isn't hard
if you think about it. Every mind
on the face of this earth is open
and like a radio station, the thoughts
within it are sent out like radiowaves.
People themselves act as radios,
to recieve these thoughts, they must
adjust themselves by tuning into them.
Everyone has a brain pattern that
is different from everyone else's.
To recieve another's thoughts and
communicate back and forth with that
person, you would have to adjust
your brain pattern to match that of
someone else.

That's my two cents for now
-Dan
 
And it might actually be possible had our brains radiated enough energy. In truth, the electro-magnetic potentials that arise across patches of cortex in the course of brain activity are extremely weak. For EEG, for example, the signals have to pass through some hefty amplification and complex filtering to even be detected -- and even that's possible only if the electrode is in firm contact with the skin. Put a little dielectric between the electrode and the scalp (such as hair, dead skin, air), and you'll get no measurable signal even with extreme amplification.

In actuality, a contraction of even the smallest muscle generates far more electric current and electromagnetic radiation than the brain ever could. So to suggest that brain activity can even be measured electromagnetically from a distance is to suggest that it can a) be actually perceived from a distance (not true), b) can be separated from the random activity of the muscles, c) can be separated from signals produced by circulating electrolites such as blood. And once you could somehow magically detect the brain's activity from a distance, you still have the impossible task of decoding your measurement -- because the signals you receive would undoubtedly depend on the orientation of the target's brain and body with respect to you, and even more importantly, the signals would depend on the target's neural architecture -- and no two brains are alike.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.
 
Good Show there Boris,
That was just a guess and yes, no
true mind is alike with another.
In my opinion, it's possible to
send messages to another person via
telepathic communication.
I also know that there is a scientific
way to explain these things.

So Boris, how do you think people
communicate telepathically?

-Dan
 
An interesting point. The electrical activity of the brain is so minute that it can hardly be measured. Since it can be hardly measured, telepathy cannot exist? But you are leaving out the fact that electromagnetism may not be the only possible medium. Surely you weren't implying this. Sticking to science is of course essential for finding out truths, but allowing an unknown into the equation makes it both scientific and consequently philosophical. There might be a spiritual aspect that is contained within the universe, perhaps non-interactive with physicality ...except in the form of concentrated thought or emotion. In this case trying to find this *mystery energy* would not come from using technology, but from within, where the highest of technology is...YOUR BRAIN

But then again, if telepathy does exist, it would follow that it be measurable, though the means to do so may not be available today.
Electromagnetism? No, I believe that we are dealing with something more complex than that.

[This message has been edited by JMitch (edited July 22, 1999).]
 
Although I'm a scientist and technologist by training and profession, I know telepathy is for real based on personal experience. I don't even have to rely on other people stringing me along :)

So, yes, I also am forced to assume that it's "something else" which provides the communications medium. I can't wait to see the new physics which will emerge as a result.
 
Aloysius,

Just a question. If we were to find a new energy or something EM that's causing this, how might this change physics? Im no scientist just a student :)
 
I don't see how it can be E/M. Boris' post explains this well. So it must be "something else". And that - I am almost sure - does not fit The Standard Model :)

So it seems self-evident that physics would need to change. If a causal relationship can be established which depends on a communications mechanism which has not yet been described by physics, _ergo_ new physics is called for.

Or isn't that obvious to you? Maybe I'm missing some kind of subtext to your question...I just take the simple view.
 
Ok, I see what you are saying about physics now. But what if this is a new sense, rather, one in the making. Evolution explains how life got senses, in that you have radiation that stimulates growth such as light causing eyes. An organism that is inbetween not having sight and developing it would be able to slowly sense light, however minute.

Imagine if you had a technologically advanced life form without sight, but has the basics of what will become eyes. They may sense light peripherally,or as redness through eyelids, but discount it's existence for a lack of evidence.
 
As for physics:
I don't see how a *change* could come out of this. It's obvious that we're dealing with something outside of our perception. With a drastic change in our perceptions we might be able to "see" this, and the mystery is solved. But we're talking about huge amounts of time for this adaptation, i think it's safe to say. This leads me to believe that when we have sufficiently developed this sense there will be an expansion in what we percieve, and to fill that gap will be the new knowledge of thought transfer, nothing startling at all. Nor would it necessarily change the correctness of what we already know.
 
JMitch,

It's typically been theory and experiment (i.e. real science) which has driven discoveries, rather than our five (plus? :)) senses.

There are many things which we can monitor using instruments, which our senses simply don't register. To mention a few:

- ALL radioactivity (until you get sick)
- ALL e/m waves outside the visible spectrum (unless your teeth act as rectifying diodes for AM radio)
- smells and tastes for which no receptors exist
- sound above about 15 KHz
- video flicker above about 60Hz

and I'm sure many more.
 
Good point! But I've gotta say (not to be pissy) that in most cases where we extend our senses it's because we already have a starting point. I guess I'm seeing this as BIG when it might be small.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top