sigma6
27th February 2013, 05:44
This is a materialist type interpretation, which we can't deny still operates as a critical factor, regardless how ephemeral physical reality may be, it is, as Einstein said, [perniciously] "persistent" So much so, we can create an entire Newtonian physics to explain it. So let's not 'poo poo' Newtonian physics altogether (lol)
Sometimes I am so focused on things transcendent I actually have to remind myself to still deal with the physicality or 'machinery' of what we are made of... and there are many subtle intricate interactions... Dr Sacks speaks of differences between psychotic hallucinations which are "interactive" and to the physical 'machinery of mind' parts of the brain, which can sometimes simply not function with rather unique results.
For example under some circumstances, when it comes to the brain's ability to process visual information, it can create visual experiences as a "non-interactive movie" operating 'independently' of the observer. (how scary would that be...) His research is very profound, and he speaks from a very personal and passionate insight.
Had a flash: I couldn't help but think of Michael Talbot when he talked about how the eyes/mind has been found to process data according to "Fourier Equations" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_diffraction_(mathematics)) used to mathematically express holographs (3D imagery) ... Now I thought about why this would be and came to the conclusion that it would be 'necessary' that the mind would process data in such a manner because that would be a requirement of what the mind is trying to achieve. That is, when we "visualize" what we see, it "appears" to be outside the head in a 3 dimensional space around us... now why is that? Well Michael hit it didn't he, because the mind realizes it is processing data, that pertains to what IS outside of us and around us and MUST NOW RECREATE THAT as accurately as possible with what it has, which is ultimately an upside down image of light photons impinging onto the back of the retina. This is, by definition, only 2 dimensional data in the strictest sense. It is the brain that recreates this pure raw data into an "external" 3D imagery. A kind of holographic effect in a sense. This is actually a more parsimonious interpretation of what Michael Talbot is saying but I think it is applicable here. And I think he would agree given the context of what Dr Sacks has researched.
This makes perfect sense when you think about it. The mind has unlimited processing capacity. The eyes gather 2 dimensional data, ALL other sense faculties are COMBINED with that data. We can physically walk over and "touch" the object, we can hit it and "hear" it make a noise. So we are aware there is a separate physical object out there. The mind doesn't ignore this data, but incorporates it with the physical 2 dimensional data. Of course the mind knows how to incorporate all available information to re-present this information as accurately as possible. So although the 'experience' is happening inside our brain just like feeling, taste and smell. It knows the the "final result" has to appear "outside" the body, otherwise it wouldn't be an accurate representation, consistent with all the available 5 sense data it is also processing. Thus why it is a holograph, a complex representation of external reality, but none the less, an illusion or "recreation" by definition. A necessary "illusion" since the brain exists in the pitch black encasement of the skull, never to directly see light. The eyes don't "think" they only collect data, their function is to immediately re-organized and pass that data to the brain as quickly as photons impinge on the retina... this could probably even be measured in fps (frames per second)
In any event, we know that the raw data of the eye is highly, highly processed by the brain before we actually "see" it, and things like "perspective" are "learned" or "interpreted" which is why we can be easily fooled with optical illusions that exemplify this interpretation (especially when there aren't other sensory inputs to provide more context to help us differentiate!). And thus it makes perfect sense that part of that processing would involve mathematics similar to holographs in order to create a "3D visual experience". As much as we take it for granted, it is created and optical experiments show how easily this "effect" can be 'disrupted'. Thus what the brain is creating is inside the body, somewhere between where the eyes pick up the visual light stimulus and the electrical activity in the back of the visual cortex.
We manage to "create" an image that "appears" OUTSIDE of our head... think about that... it appears as outside of our head but we know that the actual sensory datum, like our sense of touch, smell and taste experience has to be somewhere INSIDE our body, it only appears as 3 dimensional space outside of our head. (lol)
Thus our mind creates a holographic image as the most accurate representation of reality. But it is a creation of mind, an accurate recreation of external reality. The same with hearing. It is 'projected' into a 'perception' of external reality, electrical impulses accurately recreating actual physical energy, much like a TV and Speaker does (think 'surround sound' and '3D' effects)
The reason this all came to mind was because the idea of seeing 'independent movie type' hallucinations has a very valid explanation, which is what his research is based on. Just as when we take hallucinogenic drugs and it appears the drug is taking over the "machinery" of our mind and body and creating incredible optical experiences (among other things) So physical 'breakdown' of core components of brain function related to the visual cortex and other parts of the brain that create our "visual experience" could create illusions which appear as "projections" very similar to the classic "Princess Leia" scene (Help me Obi Wan...) because of how the mind works. The image would appear as equivalent to a 3D projection and appear OUTSIDE us. And the experience of people who suffer from this (they are aware what they are seeing is not real.) Is the evidence and proof. These are the most fascinating studies, when something like this dysfunctions in the brain, and reveal it's inner workings...
Dr Oliver Sacks: What Hallucination Reveals About How Our Minds Work
SgOTaXhbqPQ
Sometimes I am so focused on things transcendent I actually have to remind myself to still deal with the physicality or 'machinery' of what we are made of... and there are many subtle intricate interactions... Dr Sacks speaks of differences between psychotic hallucinations which are "interactive" and to the physical 'machinery of mind' parts of the brain, which can sometimes simply not function with rather unique results.
For example under some circumstances, when it comes to the brain's ability to process visual information, it can create visual experiences as a "non-interactive movie" operating 'independently' of the observer. (how scary would that be...) His research is very profound, and he speaks from a very personal and passionate insight.
Had a flash: I couldn't help but think of Michael Talbot when he talked about how the eyes/mind has been found to process data according to "Fourier Equations" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_diffraction_(mathematics)) used to mathematically express holographs (3D imagery) ... Now I thought about why this would be and came to the conclusion that it would be 'necessary' that the mind would process data in such a manner because that would be a requirement of what the mind is trying to achieve. That is, when we "visualize" what we see, it "appears" to be outside the head in a 3 dimensional space around us... now why is that? Well Michael hit it didn't he, because the mind realizes it is processing data, that pertains to what IS outside of us and around us and MUST NOW RECREATE THAT as accurately as possible with what it has, which is ultimately an upside down image of light photons impinging onto the back of the retina. This is, by definition, only 2 dimensional data in the strictest sense. It is the brain that recreates this pure raw data into an "external" 3D imagery. A kind of holographic effect in a sense. This is actually a more parsimonious interpretation of what Michael Talbot is saying but I think it is applicable here. And I think he would agree given the context of what Dr Sacks has researched.
This makes perfect sense when you think about it. The mind has unlimited processing capacity. The eyes gather 2 dimensional data, ALL other sense faculties are COMBINED with that data. We can physically walk over and "touch" the object, we can hit it and "hear" it make a noise. So we are aware there is a separate physical object out there. The mind doesn't ignore this data, but incorporates it with the physical 2 dimensional data. Of course the mind knows how to incorporate all available information to re-present this information as accurately as possible. So although the 'experience' is happening inside our brain just like feeling, taste and smell. It knows the the "final result" has to appear "outside" the body, otherwise it wouldn't be an accurate representation, consistent with all the available 5 sense data it is also processing. Thus why it is a holograph, a complex representation of external reality, but none the less, an illusion or "recreation" by definition. A necessary "illusion" since the brain exists in the pitch black encasement of the skull, never to directly see light. The eyes don't "think" they only collect data, their function is to immediately re-organized and pass that data to the brain as quickly as photons impinge on the retina... this could probably even be measured in fps (frames per second)
In any event, we know that the raw data of the eye is highly, highly processed by the brain before we actually "see" it, and things like "perspective" are "learned" or "interpreted" which is why we can be easily fooled with optical illusions that exemplify this interpretation (especially when there aren't other sensory inputs to provide more context to help us differentiate!). And thus it makes perfect sense that part of that processing would involve mathematics similar to holographs in order to create a "3D visual experience". As much as we take it for granted, it is created and optical experiments show how easily this "effect" can be 'disrupted'. Thus what the brain is creating is inside the body, somewhere between where the eyes pick up the visual light stimulus and the electrical activity in the back of the visual cortex.
We manage to "create" an image that "appears" OUTSIDE of our head... think about that... it appears as outside of our head but we know that the actual sensory datum, like our sense of touch, smell and taste experience has to be somewhere INSIDE our body, it only appears as 3 dimensional space outside of our head. (lol)
Thus our mind creates a holographic image as the most accurate representation of reality. But it is a creation of mind, an accurate recreation of external reality. The same with hearing. It is 'projected' into a 'perception' of external reality, electrical impulses accurately recreating actual physical energy, much like a TV and Speaker does (think 'surround sound' and '3D' effects)
The reason this all came to mind was because the idea of seeing 'independent movie type' hallucinations has a very valid explanation, which is what his research is based on. Just as when we take hallucinogenic drugs and it appears the drug is taking over the "machinery" of our mind and body and creating incredible optical experiences (among other things) So physical 'breakdown' of core components of brain function related to the visual cortex and other parts of the brain that create our "visual experience" could create illusions which appear as "projections" very similar to the classic "Princess Leia" scene (Help me Obi Wan...) because of how the mind works. The image would appear as equivalent to a 3D projection and appear OUTSIDE us. And the experience of people who suffer from this (they are aware what they are seeing is not real.) Is the evidence and proof. These are the most fascinating studies, when something like this dysfunctions in the brain, and reveal it's inner workings...
Dr Oliver Sacks: What Hallucination Reveals About How Our Minds Work
SgOTaXhbqPQ