Brahma's holodeck

Yoga Discussion General Yoga
#1

Hi everyone, I am new on this forum. I am both yoga-based meditation practitioner and scientist. I have started a blog with reflections on how the brain interacts with the Soul so as to experience.
I’d like to hear from the rishis and munis among you, whether you think or even know whether my hypotheses make sense or not.
As I cannot yet post URLs as a starting member here’s the whole lot of it:

The way the brain processes sensorial input to let us experience sight, sound, taste, touch has always amazed me and neuroscience has not given me the answers I have been looking for. Neuroscience is descriptive, can analyse patterns, and can even attribute activities in certain parts of the brain with certain action, emotion or thought patters. What neuroscience fails to tell us is how the images, sounds and other sensorial input that enters our brain give us the experience we are aware of. Rodolpho Llinas describes on oscillatory timing and binding principle, that may indeed be a prerequisite for having the experience of awareness we have, but this does still not explain why a ball is experienced as a spherical object and a dice as a cube. Here comes my hypothesis of how brain activity is transformed into something which can be observed by the soul that dwells in us. Neurons are like electricity transporting wires. When electricity is transported through a wire, an electromagnetic field is induced. Electromagnetic waves are broadcasted. Could it be that the neuronal activity patterns create an interference pattern which is congruent or isomorphous to the object observed? So that in fact the Brahmarandhra (the cavity between the two hemispheres) is a kind of spherical projection screen, on which a 3D image sound, scent, taste and touch show is performed, with as a spectator the soul, the Bhoktr, the enjoyer? A kind of Brahma?s holodeck?

#2

Interesting theory. How could you test it? And what properties you could derive/predict? For example should there be an interference of this hologram by external sources of electromagnetic waves? But still it leaves this problem of “ghost in machine”. Who/what is watching this hologram?

I don’t know if you are familiar with Axel and Buck research. They got Nobel prize (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2004/) for research on olfactory system. I was totally amazed by it (you can watch award lecture at this site). They show how smell is translated into neuronal activity. So each smell corresponds with a specific pattern of neural activation. Its like coding smells by geometric patterns. You could guess it but its fascinating to actually see how it works.

#3

Hi Pawel, I have thought of a way to test it: by surgically inserting a nanoscale light beam generating device (or other electromagnetic radiation generating device) in the brahmarandhra you can generate interference, which will make the hologram collapse. At that point the volunteer will not experience any event anymore. It will be difficult to find a volunteer! Application: new way of anesthesia! properties to be predicted: more difficult. Another device as sensor in the brahmarhandra can perhaps capture the electromagnetic waye interference patterns including those deriving from the olfactory system you referred to: this would yield a vast source of information on the working of the brain. Who is watching? the Soul (jivatma) of course, which I believe is a thread of concentrated energy, rooted in the absolute Soul (paratma) ie. God, the Bhoktr and ultimate enjoyer of our experiences… So the Ghost in the machine is the ultimate essence of being.

#4

Hi Awwware,
I was thinking about it, and I thought that maybe there is no need to introduce this intermediate element for our soul to see. I think like that: you see a object. This is just your linguistic construction to simplify what is happening. What is really happening: there are billions of photons/electromagnetic waves of varying frequencies and amplitudes flooding into your eye. They are absorbed by molecules in retina creating quasi-two dimensional structure of molecules excited by incoming photons. This structure is then translated into modulation of electrochemical activity of neurons connecting retina cells with brain. Then, this modulation of neurons activity is transmitted into spatial patterns of activity in brain (like in case of an olfactory system) and further processed and translated into different patterns in short term memory and other areas in brain.

What I want to say: through all path of phenomena of perception there is nothing “simple” or basic property (like roundness of object). At some level of processing some patterns are amplified and we recognize them as familiar (e.g. roundness of a ball). But concept of being round/square etc. is artificial concept created by interaction of our brain with environment. If we would suddenly be transported to different universe with different laws of physics and forms of nature we wouldn’t see anything. Everything would be just mass of confusing images around us. So I think things like “roundness” are just learned concepts and are not elements that have to be reproduced for our “soul” to see. Maybe our “soul” can just read and understand electrical activity of the brain without need of simplification?

#5

I agree the recognition of objects (apperception) needs no soul to see it. This is a fixed action pattern released by the basal ganglia. But the perception itself must somehow be perceived by something; the soul must somehow feel these electromagnetic patterns whirl through its own electromagnetic field. Also 90 % of our so-called perception is in fact a virtual reality projected by our brainwaves, 10 % makes up for the actualisation with the “real surroundings”(if there is sth such as objective reality). Nevertheless, beit fixed action patterns or a projected virtual reality, these patterns are still perceived before the apperception of manas and Buddhi comes in (and therefore where the Ego starts to interfere with the pure observation by the untouched soul). It is the very perception by the soul that I think is like a show in a 3D theatre…

#6

[QUOTE=Pawel;43017]Hi Awwware,
I was thinking about it, and I thought that maybe there is no need to introduce this intermediate element for our soul to see. I think like that: you see a object. This is just your linguistic construction to simplify what is happening. What is really happening: there are billions of photons/electromagnetic waves of varying frequencies and amplitudes flooding into your eye. They are absorbed by molecules in retina creating quasi-two dimensional structure of molecules excited by incoming photons. This structure is then translated into modulation of electrochemical activity of neurons connecting retina cells with brain. Then, this modulation of neurons activity is transmitted into spatial patterns of activity in brain (like in case of an olfactory system) and further processed and translated into different patterns in short term memory and other areas in brain.

What I want to say: through all path of phenomena of perception there is nothing “simple” or basic property (like roundness of object). At some level of processing some patterns are amplified and we recognize them as familiar (e.g. roundness of a ball). But concept of being round/square etc. is artificial concept created by interaction of our brain with environment. If we would suddenly be transported to different universe with different laws of physics and forms of nature we wouldn’t see anything. Everything would be just mass of confusing images around us. So I think things like “roundness” are just learned concepts and are not elements that have to be reproduced for our “soul” to see. Maybe our “soul” can just read and understand electrical activity of the brain without need of simplification?[/QUOTE]

Please allow me to incorporate some of your questions (i’ll quote) in a further blog I am writing on this issue

#7

I think this idea of nanoscale anesthesia is not a bad one. As described in Kurzweil’s “the singularity is near”, full immersion in virtual realities is suggested by having nanorobots in our blood vessels or at the end of each synapse. I think this is cumbersome and unnecessary. I hypothesize, that one single nanorobot located in the Brahmarandhra, with both brain wave pattern monitoring and interference wave generators can be sufficient. By having the inner brain waves collapsed and by replacing them with a nanorobot generated pattern, the Soul can be forced to watch whatever virtual reality is broadcasted by the nanorobot. This would be a significant development towards the realisation of the “Matrix”.

#8

[QUOTE=Awwware;43023]Please allow me to incorporate some of your questions (i’ll quote) in a further blog I am writing on this issue[/QUOTE]

Sure, no probs. No need to quote, I’m sure I read those things somewhere and just think that I’m stating original questions :wink:

[QUOTE=Awwware;43022]I agree the recognition of objects (apperception) needs no soul to see it. This is a fixed action pattern released by the basal ganglia. But the perception itself must somehow be perceived by something; the soul must somehow feel these electromagnetic patterns whirl through its own electromagnetic field. Also 90 % of our so-called perception is in fact a virtual reality projected by our brainwaves, 10 % makes up for the actualisation with the “real surroundings”(if there is sth such as objective reality). Nevertheless, beit fixed action patterns or a projected virtual reality, these patterns are still perceived before the apperception of manas and Buddhi comes in (and therefore where the Ego starts to interfere with the pure observation by the untouched soul). It is the very perception by the soul that I think is like a show in a 3D theatre…[/QUOTE]

Ok, I get your idea better.
But still I think there may be a bit of anthropomorphism in this theory. For example when you say “perceiving object” you already introduce your concepts into description of reality - concept of object. From physical point of view there is no such category. Its our construct build on experience that some subsets of matter around us are more “coherent” than others. And our brain learns to recognize those coherent subsets and calls them “objects”. But if “soul” would see reality without ego interference (which would include knowledge of those “objects”), there would be just one blur of visual sensations. Unless “soul” would have its own brain with ability to recognize patterns and knowledge of some of them (so that it could see the same patterns as brain sees).

#9

[QUOTE=Pawel;43073]Sure, no probs. No need to quote, I’m sure I read those things somewhere and just think that I’m stating original questions :wink:

Ok, I get your idea better.
But still I think there may be a bit of anthropomorphism in this theory. For example when you say “perceiving object” you already introduce your concepts into description of reality - concept of object. From physical point of view there is no such category. Its our construct build on experience that some subsets of matter around us are more “coherent” than others. And our brain learns to recognize those coherent subsets and calls them “objects”. But if “soul” would see reality without ego interference (which would include knowledge of those “objects”), there would be just one blur of visual sensations. Unless “soul” would have its own brain with ability to recognize patterns and knowledge of some of them (so that it could see the same patterns as brain sees).[/QUOTE]
Yes, I agree the classification as objects is brain computational activity. That the Soul does not perceive just a visual blur, but also has the right context of understanding what it perceives, comes from the fact, that the Soul is allegedly rooted in the Absolute (paramatma) where all knowledge and understanding is present in its purest form. It is my understanding, that the physical world and for that matter also the body and the brain is the densest aggregation level of existence; there are higher shells of existential levels around us (the koshas), the highest one of which (Adi or the Monad) is rooted in the Godhead. For a more explicit explanation of these things read I.K Taimni’s Man, God and the Universe. So the blur of visual and other sensory sensations is fed to Isvara (God), who is the Bhoktr (the enjoyer) thereof. Not that I have experienced allthese things; just a glimpse thereof. But what I am looking for is to find a plausible scientific parallel for the more untangible mystical aspects of Vedanta. Note that the ultimate computer as described in “The singularity is Near” of Ray Kurzweil, which is a very technological futuristic book and has nothing to do with mysticism, could be a star or a black hole… I see a similarity here with Taimni’s explanations. According to Taimni, the local Isvara of this solar system, is the star we call the Sun. That’s where our soul is supposed to be rooted, and that could be the place where the being and knowing merge.
The weakness of this reply is that the ghost in the machine problem is deferred to yet another aggregation level i.e. the Sun. The advantage is that there the “concept space” is directly embedded in an concentrated energy matrix without the cumbersome structures of the physical world.

#10

More pseudoscientific theories on the border of science and mysticism on http://tuynmix.blogspot.com/ and http://awwware.wordpress.com/