The Universe Solved

 


Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Synthetic Telepathy Options
Tracy
Posted: Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:41:08 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Tracy
Posted: Friday, July 16, 2010 6:36:44 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Tracy
Posted: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 2:44:00 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Odd, I cannot find the link, or the file (which I know I had 'archived').
But I've been thinking for some time now, "when will they develop a recording device that can record my dreams?"
A couple of days ago I read an article about a team in Kyoto, Japan who were working on technology to "create images from dreams."
I know I saved the article, but can no longer find on the net, or anywhere else.
This happens more and more these days.
Tracy
Posted: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 2:49:57 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Also odd is the fact that a couple of days ago I was going to post the link.
I knew I wouldn't.
I new then that I would later ask here, "Has anyone else read this article?" or "Anyone else hear about this?"

I'll have to look all this up all over again. :(
Tracy
Posted: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 3:15:26 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Found it!
Michio Kaku was talking about it on C2C.
jim
Posted: Thursday, September 30, 2010 7:47:28 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 897
Points: 2,697
This kind of research has been going on for years...

http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19025501.500-tapping-into-vision-thoughts-and-dreams.html


Here is a study from 2005 where MIT researchers were able to identify objects that a monkey was looking at by reading neuron activity...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/310/5749/863

It is only a matter of time before resolutions improve, techniques improve, and we will be watching our visualizations on a screen. :)
Tracy
Posted: Thursday, September 30, 2010 3:12:12 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
The first I remeber reading about this stuff was way back in the day, in the 90's. An article I read about the Navy and DOD experimenting with developing systems where pilots could fly fighter jets, manipulating control surfaces, with thoughts.
The idea of connecting the technology with the mind, crazy.
We'll create a virtual record of all human thought, we'll call it 'The Akashic Records", or something.
Well, I guess if it were The Akashic Records it would have to include not just all human thought, but all information. Is there a difference? I don't know, I'm wandering off topic and not making much sense now.

Now if we could combine this 'synthetic telepathy' with the nanotechnology.
Tracy
Posted: Friday, October 01, 2010 3:08:03 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Maybe we'll actually get video of this man:
http://www.thisman.org/
Tracy
Posted: Friday, October 29, 2010 2:51:50 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
RedDog
Posted: Friday, October 29, 2010 5:46:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/1/2009
Posts: 52
Points: 156
Location: Washington
jim wrote:
This kind of research has been going on for years...

http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19025501.500-tapping-into-vision-thoughts-and-dreams.html


Here is a study from 2005 where MIT researchers were able to identify objects that a monkey was looking at by reading neuron activity...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/310/5749/863

It is only a matter of time before resolutions improve, techniques improve, and we will be watching our visualizations on a screen. :)

I don't think we will ever be watching the real visualizations of ones dreams any more than you can tell what I mean
when I say "God Bless America", in this venue. It will just be data devoid of meaning. The tonal and emotion sideband carrier will
always be missing from these tools we are creating. They may get images, but out of context.
jim
Posted: Friday, October 29, 2010 9:17:35 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 897
Points: 2,697
Maybe true. However, I would argue that if the dream experience is COMPLETELY within our brain, then theoretically it is possible to completely read every single neuron and, with sufficient interpretive knowledge, we could decipher the dream, and then recreate it.

On the other hand, if the dream experience is not entirely within our brain (e.g. tapping into the hologram), I would agree that there is no way to recreate a dream. Lucid dream experiments seem to demonstrate that this is at least something the case.


RedDog
Posted: Sunday, October 31, 2010 1:18:08 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/1/2009
Posts: 52
Points: 156
Location: Washington
jim wrote:
Maybe true. However, I would argue that if the dream experience is COMPLETELY within our brain, then theoretically it is possible to completely read every single neuron and, with sufficient interpretive knowledge, we could decipher the dream, and then recreate it.

On the other hand, if the dream experience is not entirely within our brain (e.g. tapping into the hologram), I would agree that there is no way to recreate a dream. Lucid dream experiments seem to demonstrate that this is at least something the case.




For the sake of arguement, let us say that the dream is totally withing the brain/body system, just as we believe conscious thinking is.
My point is that the tools we create are based upon a flawed technological premise; That data = knowledge and knowledge = understanding.
My point has always been that even within this physical system, that data is without emotional context. Even if we could record my emotional
firings around the phrase "God bless America". Your data may eventually be able to indicate a strong sideband reaction that could be assigned
a positive alogorythm, but you could not tell from that data what I'm really feeling when I think that phrase. Whereas, if I utter the phrase
the sound carries with it a sideband you could hear, combined that with my facial expression which you could see, and the sound would carry
even more meaning.

I don't think that will ever be possible technologically to record and interpret.
jim
Posted: Monday, November 01, 2010 6:33:16 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 897
Points: 2,697
Hmmm.

To quote neurologist Antonio R. Damasio (see http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=feeling-our-emotions), "...Emotions are more or less the complex reactions the body has to certain stimuli. When we are afraid of something, our hearts begin to race, our mouths become dry, our skin turns pale and our muscles contract. This emotional reaction occurs automatically and unconsciously. Feelings occur after we become aware in our brain of such physical changes; only then do we experience the feeling of fear." From his point of view, feelings are simply the conscious reflection upon emotions.

With that in mind, let's say that we apply your logic to a robot. Defining a robotic dream as the visual experience that the robot was having, I'm sure you agree that we could recreate that from its constituents, and knowing how the robot was programmed. However, could we know what feelings and emotions accompanied the robot's dream? I would argue yes if we define feelings as Dr. Damasio did. However, I would argue no if we define feelings as something outside of brain chemistry, something attributable to a soul. In the robot's case, we assume no soul; hence we could probably recreate both the dream and the feelings that accompany it. Of course, for someone else to perceive the feelings, they would have to experience more than just the visual aspect of the dream - their entire brain would have to be temporarily hijacked, right? In the case of a human, if we assume the reductionist philosophy of Dr. Damasio and most other scientists, we would have to arrive at the same conclusion.

I guess what I am saying (although probably not very well) is that I agree that the simple viewing of the dream can be created, but doesn't replicate the experience without the emotional context. But, I still think that that emotional context could even be experienced with sufficiently advanced technology. And only if the soul is external, would it be impossible for anyone else to fully experience a dream the way the subject would.

What do you think?
RedDog
Posted: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:22:22 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/1/2009
Posts: 52
Points: 156
Location: Washington
It is a fun thought experiement and consciousness puzzle to question, literally, what makes you, you.
Are we more than just our recorded memories and experiences. I think so. Could we eventually create
something to house US, or transfer our consciousness? I think not.

Let's see if I can explain my rationale briefly.
First, I don't want to separate the natual unconscious state from the conscious waking state. Each
state carries with it a unique set of experiences which we record, say in our bodies someplace, that
defines the experience as personal to us. And the recording (not a great term) is more than data.

I feel that there are more components to this recording which go beyond mere data recording, like
what a robot or AI would have, no matter how sophisticated.

Let me make a cooking anology. My Grandmothers favorite biscit recipe. It exists, in memory as
several components. There is the data of the recipe listing all the various ingredients, Then there
are the actual ingredients, then there is the order in which the ingredients must be assembled
to recreate what she did. I won't even mention the element of consciousness which is part of
her creating and watching her creation, but to get the final product (a valid memory) you need
all those parts, in the right order, with the right elements. If anyone is missing, all you have is
data.

The ability to record all three of those in real time, may somehow be achieved technologically
and we may even see evidence of this occuring natually on this planet, in the form of EVP's or
typical ghost type paranormal activities. But a ghost is not truely you, only a dim recording of
you at a point in time.

If death releases energy ( and with it a bit of mass is lost) then that energy could indeed be
accurately recorded by this planet or something in it, but is that living forever? Is that even
living? Or is it nothing more than a trail you left upon exiting the program.
leekien
Posted: Monday, November 22, 2010 3:28:22 AM
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member

Joined: 11/22/2010
Posts: 1
Points: 3
Location: hà nội
jim wrote:
This kind of research has been going on for years...

http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19025501.500-tapping-into-vision-thoughts-and-dreams.html


Here is a study from 2005 where MIT researchers were able to identify objects that a monkey was looking at by reading neuron activity...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/310/5749/863

It is only a matter of time before resolutions improve, techniques improve, and we will be watching our visualizations on a screen. :)


thank all

vietnam cambodia tours
Tracy
Posted: Thursday, January 13, 2011 4:22:20 PM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
The iPhone app:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1346900/The-app-read-mind-iPhone-brainwave-detector-matter-time.html

'The human brain is the most powerful, complex thing in the universe, and for the first time, we're able to harness its amazing power and connect it to everyday technology.'
Tracy
Posted: Sunday, March 06, 2011 11:46:24 AM
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2009
Posts: 448
Points: 1,347
Location: N.Lewisburg,OH,US
Right after I see something on tv about cars that allow the blind to drive I read this:
http://www.livescience.com/13085-hands-steering-car-mind-control.html
JF
Posted: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 8:04:19 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 9/7/2010
Posts: 56
Points: 71
Location: BC, Canada
jim wrote:
This kind of research has been going on for years...

http://technology.newscientist.com/channel/tech/mg19025501.500-tapping-into-vision-thoughts-and-dreams.html


Here is a study from 2005 where MIT researchers were able to identify objects that a monkey was looking at by reading neuron activity...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/310/5749/863

It is only a matter of time before resolutions improve, techniques improve, and we will be watching our visualizations on a screen. :)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainstorm_(1983_film)#Plot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Days_(film)#Plot
http://www.enterthesourcecode.com/#/story/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_Code_(film)#Plot_summary
Once computers get super fast & enter into the quantum phase, consciousness & simulated personalities & events could become a blur.
As research into this reality continues, eventually several overlapping or parallel simulations might cause confusion. We like to think
that we are currently near reality version 1.1, but how many updates & modifications have already occurred over the past several
thousands of years?
http://thedigitallabyrinth.blogspot.com/2010/07/christopher-nolan-method.html
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Universe Solved Theme Created by Jim Elvidge (Universe Solved)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.2 (NET v2.0) - 9/27/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
This page was generated in 0.181 seconds.