I beg to differ"According to the Increase" That the Mind and Brain cannot and do not direct what we say and do in life.It is spoken of about what the brain can do,but not explain concerning how it is done. Neurons,cells,atoms and elements of the body is to regulate matter and flesh....our Terrestrial Existence. There is an outside source from which Electric activity is generated....it is call Spirituality.Our spirits generate this power. The brain can die,...but not the spiritual things such as intelligence,personality and knowledge. The Brain unveil reveal the Spiritual side of our Celestial Spirits.The physical body was not design By God to speak nor communicate with Him.It is a Spiritual matter beyond scientific and technical equations.
The mind and brain, do directly make up what we say and do in life. To suggest otherwise is foolishness. This statement makes no sense. You mean, our physical nature. Untrue. This is untrue also. Conjecture, based on nothing by speculation. Conjecture based on nothing but speculation. No god had anything to do with existence of humans to begin with. Therefore, no god to communicate with. Conjecture, based on nothing but speculation.
This is knowledge about the brain,what do you know about it.What part told you that I was wrong? Which cells got together and directed you?Since you don't believe in spirituality,what part of a material substance call the brain are you referring to?
Sweet mercy, Cagsil! You gotta find a better format for replying specifically to different points in preceding posts. Maybe a quote of the particular part to which you are referring might make your counterpoints easier to match up to the originally proposed assertions. Just a friendly suggestion.
Interesting theory, that a source outside the body generates the electricity that flows in our neurons. Lets take a look at it.
Electricity is the flow of electrons down a conductor. It may be electrons moving in a metallic wire that goes from a generator (hoover dam) to a light bulb and back. It may be flowing from a battery through the body and chassis of a car to the starter motor and back on a wire. It might even be flowing through the air from a cloud to the earth in the static display called lightning (yes, air is a conductor when the voltage is high enough). In all cases, though, it is the movement of electrons.
You are proposing that some outside, immaterial source creates these electrons (with their negative charge) and inserts them into our neurons. Just where is the point of input? We have no wires protruding from our skull... If electrons are indiscriminately added to an object that object takes on a negative charge that must and will be discharged. Where is the point of return to this unreal generator? We don't run around sparking all the time...Just how are these electrons created? Are anti-electrons created at the same time as a balance (with their own associated problems), or are there atoms floating around our heads with a positive charge after electrons are stripped from them?
No, it would seem that there is too much evidence against an immaterial, unreal electrical generator for each and every person to consider the theory viable, let alone factual. Sorry.
You're welcome. I might suggest to Jack that he present speculation as just that - speculation - and politely inquire if anyone has any knowledge that would disprove it rather than present it is factual information.
You left out the explanation of spirituality,so therefore your findings are not complete.Electrons did not create themselves, and they don't exist by themselves.I know it is hard to admit and that it is a hard pill to take,but it is as it is. Where did your electricity come from?What elements are there that can perform that task.
You don't seem to understand. It takes exactly one contrary fact to disprove a theory but it takes many, many facts all in agreement to make a theory viable. It also takes such things as peer review and experimentation before any theory can be accepted as factual. Your presentation of your conjecture as factual and real does not and cannot make it so.
Whether I explain spirituality to your satisfaction is immaterial. Whether I teach you where electricity comes from is immaterial. Whether I show you what elements might perform electrical generation is immaterial.
The only thing that does matter is that I have shown you not one, but several factual reasons why you conjecture cannot be real.
Your claims of my ignorance of other unrelated questions does not change that you have been given factual reasons why the theory cannot be true. Until YOU can rebut those reasons the theory will remain in the trash can as worthless.
Should you wish to continue the dissection of your theory I would expect a rebuttal of the facts I have proffered, beginning with the location and makeup of the electrical conductor passing the bony skull into the soft brain tissue inside.
As a side issue I might ask how the electric eel generates the massive electrical charge it uses to kill its prey. Does it, too, have an invisible eternal spirit generator working for it or does it make the electricity organically with it's own tissue? Just a thought for consideration....
You haven't provided any rebuttal to the problems yet...
Ignoring the problems and holes in your theory won't make them go away - you must patch the holes with explanation before trying to float the boat again.
When you have done so we can address your other questions. With several decades of training and practical experience in the electrical field I humbly submit that I have a little more knowledge than you do in that area and am happy to share what I have.
This is the point I'd have made had I got in here sooner. It does seem to me like ApostleJack is arguing that the synaptic activity in the brain is literally directly caused by a person's soul. BUT - I do have one thing to add. You may have noted that one of the assertions in ApostleJack's thesis is that the electricity in the brain has no known source, and therefore must be from an unknown spiritual source (ie, the soul). However, the electricity in the brain is not so mysterious as he supposes. Like other cells in the body, brain cells have a bit called mitochondria. These sub-cellular pieces are responsible for converting most of the body's ATP, a chemical which reacts in the body to create energy. This reaction results in what is called an electrochemical gradient along the cell membrane (Peter Mitchell won the Nobel for Chemistry for his work regarding the production of electrical energy by ATP), which in turn becomes your source of energy.
So, if you want to call the mitochondria your "soul", then there is absolutely nothing wrong with ApostleJack's theory.
Take a container. Stick in a few lead plates, connected together and with a wire leading out of the container. Fill the remaining container space with sulphuric acid. Stick a wire into the acid, again leading out of the container. Voila! Electricity from nothing but a container and two chemicals. It's called a battery in laymans terms.
There are a thousand replacement materials for the lead, and another thousand for the sulphuric acid.
Every animal on earth is composed of chemicals and every animal with muscles and/or nervous tissue has the ability to make batteries in its body. Electric eels have the ability to make a BIG battery.
Rats! I wasn't going to tell you how organic tissue can produce electricity until you solved the other electrical problems with your out-of-body-spirit-generator. Oh well.
I know, I read it, did not know or have anything to comment about it, except that I thought it was a bio-chem kinda thing the impulse's in a human brain, not an invisible spirit??? I am no expert though.
Cags, I realize I'm hijacking the thread here but..
I agree that the storage, or more precisely the contents of that storage - the memories stored - are part of what I conceive of as mind.
Would you also consider the energy/electrical density pattern, the interconnections of neurons, the activity of the brain to be part of the mind? I lack the words for what I'm trying to describe, and it borders (or is entirely) metaphysical but is the best I can do.
Storage seems incomplete for what I consider the mind to be.
It's not a problem. You're not hijacking anything, because you're still on topic. Capacity is the only word I should have used. Not storage. The mind(capacity) expands. The activity you refer to is consciousness(on all levels).
OK, I'm with you then. A different use of terminology is all.
I would have very nearly equated consciousness and mind while leaving capacity as part of the physical brain. The number of neurons and interconnections between them. The neuron count apparently decreases as they die and don't regenerate but the interconnections are what really seem to count and they change all the time.
It is to show God's ingenuity and power above that of humankind.He takes the smallest thing and make it the greatest.Education from God is different from world knowledge.I am His example of such education.
Humans are funny animals. We think we are the smartest mammals because we have opposable thumbs and because no other animal has come right out and told us that we aren't. Perhaps we are. When I was younger, pondering and researching such things, I came up with many answers; these, in turn, only created more questions.
Science or spirit? Spirit or science? Which is right? Another human trait is the default inclination to believe there can only be one solution to every question. This is ironic when one considers the intricate balance of opposable qualities within us that allow us to exist -- never mind opposable thumbs! Our bodies are made of over 50% liquid and our brains have 'electricity' in them.
Alter that intricate balance and one's heart could literally stop. What can start it again? Electricity. Yet, no one appreciates an electrical appliance dropped into their bath water; well, one that's on, that is.
Personally, coming from a very unscientific background, I think it's a little science and a little spirit. By the way, about the thumbs? We may not be as superior as we think. Just the other day God told me that they were a mistake. He put them on backwards. He had to leave the Garden of Eden for a few days to deal with a couple of faulty volcanoes. By the time He returned, Adam and Eve had already learned how to use their thumbs just as they were, and He hadn't the heart to change them around. At least, that's what He told me...
You having conversations with a god? Please seek help. Secondly, your statement proves your god that you believe in isn't perfect. Third and final strike, isn't your god supposedly omnipresent? If so, then he wouldn't had to leave the Garden of Eden to attend anything.
On a side thought- Your statement also insinuates that your god is not too bright and shows the ignorance it apparently has.
Yes, a very few, dear Cagsil. Not being perfect myself, why would I expect perfection from God, or anyone for that matter? Perfection; now there's a relative and subjective myth. That's alright, though. It's a big planet. There's room for all of us! I enjoyed reading some of your other hubs last night, too. Thanks.
Interesting statement. Everything is subjective, until it's viewed from all sides, at which time the view changes to objective. Yes it is. Actually, soon to be running out of room. My hubs or comments in the forums? There happens to be a difference. If you read my comments in the forums, that would not be a surprise. If you managed to read my hubs, then I'm honored and humbled, you would take the time to do so. However, if you did read my hubs(any of them), why didn't you feel like leaving a comment? Just curious.
Your hubs. It was well beyond my bedtime but I couldn't wind down enough for sleep. During the day I transcribe audio files and sometimes my brain isn't tired but my fingers are! That's why the mouse was invented, right? I will be returning to comment very soon
How to correlate science and spirituality? I think both are very relative though they both look very distinctive, like when we think about science it's more real, based on facts and more experimental a theory which is...
I just heard this on TV...but can't remember it all.The partial definition of String Theory is something like: quantum mechanics is all about the smallest, and theory of relativity is the other end of the spectrum,...