@mdariotic Possibly. But it's much more complicated than that. Mirror neurons operate on a much more basic level. The major problems found in the brain of psychopaths are defecits in structures associated with physiological/emotional excitation and regulation. There are also often problems with learning (ie: rewards and punishments) and memory.
Aside from the facts, I think some of his speculation & interpretations is BS; even animals can immitate, so its not something that has emerged in human population. Immitating a movement is something, but understanding the significance & the purpose of the movement is something else, without recognizing & interpreting other people's action, we wouldn't be self-awared. This neurons only function in immitating a movement, it is not the reason for the ability to learn, although it makes it easier.
i wonder if this results in one feeling higher empathy towards someone they resemble. or who they feel they resemble. up to clothing, way of dress and even social identity. physical and subconscious empathy could be controlled by some mathematics of bodily ego.
Finally a video that explains the Trolls and Flamers on YouTube. NO empathy ! They are sub human! Now we can all feel sorry for their social retardation.
Doesn't the skin receptors send a positive signal when touched, though? Hence, you don't actually feel the full magnitude of the neurons when you watch somebody being touched if you have an incapacitated arm; the arm will fire "no" signal, i.e. the absence of a negative signal but it will not fire a *positive one*. And a positive signal is greater than the absence of a negative signal, right?
I wish he would have given more basis for the whatever evolutionary jump. Don't animals have the same mirror processes? Monkey see Monkey do......now there's some philosophy.
So the mirroring effect of commercials following a Sponsored TED talk is the same Money/Tax 'advancement' to curb traffic flow as seen in the IBM commercial??
Mirroring actions relates to judgment/anticipation. If an action might affect me I prepare by emulating it in my brain. What he refers to as a mirror neuron is actually an information neuron, preserved for the life of the people who have been influenced by the event either through direct observation or communication via complex language. The phantom limb stuff also relates to judgment and anticipation - not skin receptors telling the brain not to worry. Google Complex Evolution Consciousness.
its why for those that believe in the bible, pornography is wrong, because your brain is firing as if your having sex, that is why porn is stimulating. That is why it is adultery to God, for those that believe in God, is classified as adultery, because your watching others have sex.
@wacked0ne any enlightened person would know exactly how their body works. actually in the context of this video, an understanding of mirror neurons is the basis of any revelation. so probably someone or other involved in writing the bible knew about mirror neurons.
its why for those that believe in the bible, pornography is wrong, because your brain is firing as if your having sex, that is why porn is stimulating. That is why it is adultery to God, for those that believe in God, is classified as adultery.
I think he's Indian, but I had a question, if that's true then do people who lose a limb or a body organ in an accident experience what they watch happen to other people's limbs and organs ?
if the amputee has a mirror to his left side, then his right arm looks like his left arm in the reflection...and then maybe if the patient watches his right arm being squeezed in the mirror, he might feel relief in his phantom left arm. there's another vid on youtube where dr ramachandran explains this...he's treated patients using this phantom box (with a mirror).
@jimmayl1 that would be weird because the brain would likely tell you that what u feel is in your right arm. but as he explains it, if you numb your left shoulder downwards, and see others touch their left arm you can feel the touch with the phantom arm..
@jimmayl1 that would be weird because the brain would likely tell you that what u feel is in your right arm. but as he explains it, if you numb your left shoulder downwards, and see others touch their left arm you can feel the touch with the phantom arm..
Say someone has an amputated left arm and the remaining right arm is squeezed. Will the left phantom arm feel anything or will there be a feedback signal from the right arm that will halt the phantom left from feeling anything?
@jimmayl1 i can't remember correctly but i think there's a certain part of an amputee's face when touched stimulates their phantom arm, or at least produces a feeling in an arm that isn't there. im not positive, but i think it's something like that
@jimmayl1 that would be weird because the brain would likely tell you that what u feel is in your right arm. but as he explains it, if you numb your left shoulder downwards, and see others touch their left arm you can feel the touch with the phantom arm..
There are ten times as many glial cells in the brain as there are neurons. The billion glial cells were long thought to be packing or padding for the neurons, since they surround each neuron, but have no electrical activity themselves. Recently it has been discovered that glial cells do communicate with each other, with a method called 'calcium surges'. Neurons comprise only one-tenth of our brain, what are the glial cells talking to each other about? The future will tell.
@040wATTcLUb I agree! What an enchanting speaker. Amazing man. The implications of this for so many fields of science, anthropology, linguistics and psychology, is vast.
While I am a HUGE fan of Ramachandran, it should be noted that there are some VERY good criticisms against the idea of mirror neurons.
For example, Greg Hickok has argued in the literature (and his blog, haha) that "there is little or no evidence to support the mirror neuron=action understanding hypothesis and instead there is substantial evidence against it."
Google "talking brains Eight problems for the mirror neuron theory of action understanding in monkeys and humans."
if u cannot comprehend it and then reject this idea then its your view but trying to make people believe that this idea is totally absurd without relevant evidence and authority in your part compared to V.S Rama while hiding in this cyber space does not hold ur views as valid...period!!!!
Doesn't it seem logical that psychopaths, lacking empathy, must have mal-functioning Gandhi neurons? On the other hand, humans like Gandhi must have over-active Gandhi neurons.
@geezzerboy Interesting question. As far as I'm aware, psychopaths are aware of the emotions of other people and are/can be very manipulative because of it. So maybe they do have functioning Gandhi neurons but, for whatever other reason, are unable to translate that emotion into their own. On the other hand, maybe it is the case that their Gandhi neurons don't work and the brain tries instead to translate what it's perceiving using the other, non-Gandhi mirror neurons. Who knows.
@geezzerboy Or they use them for a different purpose. They are also used for imprinting and certain predatory skills. A predator may imagine chasing his prey before he actually does and take note of what animals lift their heads and look around. They have his number. The one not aware is "sleeping".
I don't see how people can not make such observation of connection simply by observing humans socializing and communicating. It's not mind reading as reading is objective. But still helpful.
I feel like I'm in a censured classroom! But all I was tryn to note (harmlessly) was that these findings do pull together a great deal of the myths, spiritual traditions, and ancient sciences we have to date found no strong science for ok, Big Bro?
Which words (G rated, unquestionably) won't they allow? I've tried repeatedly to post my concepts and they repeatedly say YouTube not availble...but these defanged statements post! Wow...
I notice now that YouTube will not permit certain points to be released as comments, this is very disheartening. Wat happend to freedom of sharing ideas? I submit generic points that post but others that carry cognitive weight say YouTube not available... What gives?
I am not at all shocked that we have found populations of neurons in the motor cortex that fire when we see similar actions being performed by others.
Motor cortex feedback loops from the visual system are the only way for us to learn how to move our limbs in space. Try doing anything without the hand-eye feedback system - its magnitudes harder.
Sensory "empathy" is more interesting but still I don't think is out of the blue given the abstraction abilities of our brains. Good talk though!
I think the neuroscience is unremarkable on its own, as are the philosophical theories of collective conciousness. What I like about this is the attempt to unite the two and using science to answer traditionally philosphoical questions.
The real neuroscience breakthrough, which many philosophers will argue is impossible (particularly dualists thinkers), will come at the discovery of the neural substrate of conciousness and knowing exactly how it works.
Interesting stuff. The more often neurons fire the more likely they are to fire again (ie have a particular thought). So if this is how our brains work - by mimicking other's actions in our own thought processes, what does that mean for kids watching media generated images of violence etc? Do they have the mimic neurons firing whilst doing so & then are therefore more likely to carry out those action in real life? I wonder...
The neurology's irrelevant to the media violence debate. Imagine a study where a set of kids are 1st denied, then allowed violent media and their violence rated before and after. That might suggest whether violent media causes real violence but doesn't refer to neural mechanisms at all. Conversely, mirror neurons might make kids copy violent behaviour they see in media or might make them more empathetic and so less violent. The mechanism doesn't predict either way.
omg prof VS Ramachandran is a pimp...if any of you guys know any better, he is the author of Phantoms in the brain. he basically (by himself) found a way to cure pains for people with amputated limbs. this guys is one of the worlds leading neuroscientist....the jock of the science world...so unless you guys have at least a college degree, i would reframe from making stupid comments...
Actually, that's a reason why castration isn't an effective way to prevent child molesters from reoffending. That would explain why it's still possible for someone who's been castrated to get strong sexual/other excitement from whatever they're doing.
You nail it... its funny but true. Sex is mostly impersonal and work on visual basis. So no need for partner if you have nice 'Tits and Asses V' on shelf. Joke aside... you right! :P
@theshermany haha, yeah. That was an immediate thought. It becomes a replacement for relationship, but it's problem is that porn omits many other crucial benefits of being in a relationship. Could an advanced porn sufficiently replace a human in all areas?
There is no you or me, the thing separating you from the chair is thought! So ppl long time ago asked the question to the source itself, what is thought, who am i?
This just in from CommonRaven: in order to know the likelihood of anything, you have to be omniscientist. Scientists everywhere are fired after this revelation meets their employers.
The rebuttal to this is a known point as well: atheists are the same as athorists and aclaustics; it's impossible to know with 100% that God, Thor, or Santa Claus don't exist, but it is beyond all reasonable doubt. Most people don't feel compelled to say "it's overwhelmingly likely that Santa doesn't exist", they just flat out say it. We'd waste so much time if we always spoke with strict logical precision and it's seldom necessary.
Yes, I went with Yahweh as a concrete example of a specific definition that can be disproved. Others exist.
The book that claims he has those characteristic also claims he says certain things are moral/immoral. In that same book, he violates some of those moral precepts. If God claims murdering innocents is evil, and God murders innocents, then he is evil by his own definition. Such is in his book, as well as many other actions he himself defines as evil.
The problem is, there's no real definition of God. But there are certainly some descriptions of God that can be shown to be logical contradictions. And as you know from that freshman logic class, a contradiction refutes a logical argument.
God is omniscient, omnipotent, and moral.
Evil exists.
This is a contradiction, just as "a 4-sided triangle" is.
You do not fully grasp te black swan. That and your weird ideas on statistics are your primary arguments ? That is not the real world.
We fully understand where error margins and discrepancies come from. With calibrated methods we can predict events so precisely, the margins are well beyond 2 decimal points.
Arrogance is to insist raising that 0.008% and elevating it to a note worthy and fact shattering chance. When you could know that this is rubbish.
Stop kidding yourself, you have no clue what you are on about, and it is getting a bit silly.
What would you think we should use to predict anything ?.
The black swan analogy, we have gone over all ready. I think you do not fully understand the black swan theory. ( which differs from the black swam problem ).
It would be horribly tedious if I had to go in to every tiny bit of uncertainty and apoligize of 2% or less of a "statistical" margin of error.
With 98% odds, I'd not bet my life on the other 2%, and therefore I is as good as fact.
Basically It is just expression,semantics and language we are talking about, because we pretty much mean the same thing,but by your definition, a "fact" is a impossibility.
I hope not that you are implying that we know WHAT gravity is ?
In fact the ironic thing is that applied physics is a major part of the sector I am active in. Especially radiometric analysis, which, as you might like to wiki, is entirely based on statistical analysis.
Look it up, o2 isotope, c14, uranium-thorium, fission track dating.
All of which produce statistic results. Are you saying that the methods are flawed because not every particle is measured?
Wow, cool tangential conversations being spawned from this talk.
I enjoyed the speaker's conjectures. These kind of talks are what originally made me dig TED so much.
It's a rad time to be alive. For thousands of years our species has inhabited this Earth, and only now are we really capable of destroying it/understanding it/physically leaving it.
It's like I've got front row seats to the best show in the galaxy. I wonder if every generation feels this way?
Even though Ramachandran is one of the top scientists in the world right now, in this video he messes up a bit, and going a bit too far. I dont blame him, he's on the wave.
BUT, thats why worshipping is not good. Everyone has their favourite persons(and i know there are loads of Ramachandran's fans out there), and each time they do a mistake, you should acknowledge it, and realise it, and dont take everything to be true just because the MOST of the things he said were true...
Reality is falsifiable? That means you can prove reality wrong? I think you don't know the definition of the word. Unfalsifiable means that it is a claim that is impossible, even in principle, to falsify - i.e. prove wrong.
Sure you can't "calculate" the likelihood of something falsifiable, I would never imply you can, but the question is do you treat is as likely i.e. accept it, or do you treat as unlikely, i.e. reject it. The only rational choice is to reject unfalsifiable claims.
Statistics mislead only if not understood or used out of context, something that the media is fairly good at.
Statistical analysis is a crucial part of every scientific field.
Your analogy is also flawed. We do make odds on the weather and economics and generally they work.
We also can not know the position, speed, and direction of a single water molecule, but still we can make really accurate predictions on behaviour of a body of water.
We can't predict accurate weather ( which is to say, that weather prediction are done extremely locally, and are usually scarily precise ) that accurately because we indeed, do not have all the data.
The results are predictable and good though, and not calculating the possibility of a killer asteroid is quite logical because of the ODDS of such a thing upsetting our current climate and throwing a nuclear winter at our asses !.
Weather prediction do not NEED to take into account a meteor !.
Ehhh. Statistical data is interpreted analysis of empirical data. You clearly have no clue here. Lets move on.
In research, an anomalous reading is often the case, this is called an "outller. A array of points rarely make a straight line.
In you deck of 52 cards, I will never get an outlier of course. But with any deck, after 8 trillion times you come along and insist that I have to seriously consider the queen of poofs is also in the deck, Why would I even consider that as semi-probable?
The reason why it is logically impossible to prove or disprove is that it is an unfalsifiable claim. That's the important concept- unfalsifiability. I care whether my beliefs are likely or not, and the question is: should I treat unfalsifiable claims as likely or unlikely? There is only one rational choice that doesn't leave you also believing Vishnu, Santa and all other unfalsifiable claims.
"Missing the point" is something we both excel at seemingly. And, again, you are right that 100% exclusion on anything is not feasible.
You are wrong about using odds though. The very existence of using odds are based on the fact that not having all the data is a reoccurring theme in knowledge gathering. Perhaps I should have called it statistics, but I assumed you understand that both are essentally the same.
Beyond reasonable doubt is based on probability. The same is used in research.
Deck of cards :. Correct, Assume I know nothing of the amount of cards or what is on them. Lets imagine, I do not know why somebody would but it is!, that this information is prohibited from me. I would simply draw 1 card 5200 times and then If could, after the analysis, tell you with a reasonable measure of certainty the nature of the deck. Would I be able to proof or disproof the existence of the "Ace of gogo'dancers"?, no, but why would I? Nothing requires this.
When I talk about a supernatural thing that is false, I naturally mean that, in light of science and it's track-record, the explanation for a detailed phenomenon will more likely be the scientific one then the supernatural one.
When A supernatural concept disagrees with a scientific concept, it is even more clear that the empirical and statistical data are better equipped to describe the natural world for us.
Things that are currently unknown and not required for explanation, are just that.
that commercial at the end was awesome. nothing like that would ever get passed here in America because everyone would say their rights are being stripped away and that it's socialism. lol
Prof. Ramachandran teaches at my old alma mater U.C.S.D. and he is a brilliant in his field of behavioral neurology. However, he is out of his depth on the Anthropological front. This is where he makes a lot of critical mistakes.
He shows a slide about "Culture and Civilization" he calls the Great Leap Forward, and talks about 5 things that came about and rapidly spread 75,000 to 100,000 years ago:
1. Tool Use
2. Fire
3. Shelter
4. Language
5. Theory of Mind
The problem is not one of these emerged/spread to the whole population during this time period:
1. Tool use goes back 2,000,000 years ago with the first tools, with slow ongoing evolution of tool kit complexity since. We know that all human ancestors used tools from that time forward without exception.
3. Shelter sites for humans have occurred as early as 500,000 years ago altough they became much more widespread with the rise of Homo Sapiens. There is lots of debate about what constitutes shelters, so some definitions push shelter/nesting site creation back a million or more years.
4. Language, in terms of what we understand like modern languages, is not known when it arose, but many think these came into being less than 100,000 years ago.
His biggest conjecture is that this explosive change happened due to the rise of this mirror neural system in humans at this time. The problem is that he doesn't provide any paleontological evidence for this changed at this time (setting aside all of the timeline issues above). If he had endocasts of humans 100,000 years ago and 125,000 years ago showing these changes, that would be strong evidence for at least the rise of mirror neurons at that time.
Another mistake is making the claim that it is this mirror neural system that explains the sudden rise in an invention being transmitted across and down generations and that this is a uniquely human adaptation that explains modern humans. The problem is that this kind of cultural transmission pattern has been seen in numerous primate species and in elephants.
He then makes a complete mess when he takes about Darwinian/Lamackian evolutionary paradigm differences and how he thinks it applies here. When he illustrates his point with a discussion of the evolutionary adaptation of protective coats in polar bears and the killing of said polar bear by a human ancestor, the confusion on his part is complete. Uugh! The polar bear didn't learn to wear a thick, protective coat over hundreds of thousands of years.
The rest of the lecture on empathy neurons is interesting but subject to a variety of interpretations. His insistence that we are literally connected to each other via our neurons is an argument that completely escapes me. I don't see how his argument leads to that conclusion. Similarly when he says there is no distinction between the consciousness of two people, it is belied by the obviously observable fact that this isn't the case. This has been demonstrated empirically again and again.
Very brilliant people can get themselves into trouble when they stray outside their areas of core competence. Such is the case here when Prof. Ramachandran starts to discuss man's evolutionary past and what may have constituted fundamental changes in the recent past. He is wrong about the date for the use of fire or that cultural transmission is lateral and then downward only in humans. His statements do not reflect the consensus held by physical anthropologists and evolutionary ones. Oops!
Yeh that was interesting since wasn't Homo habilis 2.3 million to 1.4 million years ago at the beginning of the Pleistocene period attributed with the beginning of tool, fire use, and culture?
However, I still think the path he discusses science is considering is fascinating.
Wouldn't it be nicer to focus on the correlation he's established. I'm no scientist, humble computer programmer I am, a poor mans philosopher... if the action resulted in an observable correlated neural impulse in two individuals, one feeling & observing while the other only observing, it's possible that correlation is no more than what it seems, localizing some action / reaction pair. No need to get excited for the wrong reasons.
@thebytegrill ... what I mean is one felt it, the other saw it, yet both observed/empathized an action probably stored in a similar part of the brain. Long way to go no doubt before we call it.
Oh I agree, I'm not trying undermine his research.
Personally I don't think he went nearly far enough with the implications.
Research that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated by independent studies show human conscious awareness and observation has visible physical effects on mechanical and electronic objects and devices.
There is definitely a level of reality science and humans are not currently able to comprehend.
The way he rolls his 'r's drives me insane! lol
IMbirdieful 1 day ago
damn what happened to his awesome jacke from last time
cerebralcereal 1 week ago
This video is popular on Baku
rturozamora37a 1 week ago
I wonder if psychopaths have some sort of problem in their mirror neurons and therefore they are not capable of feeling empathy for others :)
mdariotic 2 weeks ago
@mdariotic Possibly. But it's much more complicated than that. Mirror neurons operate on a much more basic level. The major problems found in the brain of psychopaths are defecits in structures associated with physiological/emotional excitation and regulation. There are also often problems with learning (ie: rewards and punishments) and memory.
MrAtheism33 2 weeks ago
Gandhi neurons, so profound. No independent arising of phenomena. The correlation between neuro and contemplative traditions is so fascinating.
tfed1219 1 month ago
@Yakko12345 He was your lecturer?!! I'm so envious. My psychology lecturers were so uninspiring.
tfed1219 1 month ago
Aside from the facts, I think some of his speculation & interpretations is BS; even animals can immitate, so its not something that has emerged in human population. Immitating a movement is something, but understanding the significance & the purpose of the movement is something else, without recognizing & interpreting other people's action, we wouldn't be self-awared. This neurons only function in immitating a movement, it is not the reason for the ability to learn, although it makes it easier.
IMAHMS 1 month ago
Our teacher used this in interpretation class =D It was impossible to take notes! But it is very interesting.
Merryyy203 2 months ago
Rollin those R's so hard
shoemama 2 months ago 2
i wonder if this results in one feeling higher empathy towards someone they resemble. or who they feel they resemble. up to clothing, way of dress and even social identity. physical and subconscious empathy could be controlled by some mathematics of bodily ego.
Zaknrfamaa 2 months ago
29 People's Brain hurt after watching this video.
nanotechpowerware 2 months ago
Regarding the Stockholm plan, where does the money go?
dleddy14 3 months ago
nice ibm advertisement.
wolfsandwich 3 months ago
Finally a video that explains the Trolls and Flamers on YouTube. NO empathy ! They are sub human! Now we can all feel sorry for their social retardation.
3877michael 5 months ago 8
Huh.
So I guess the neurological "Great Leap Forward" he's talking about lead not long after to a veritable "Cultural Revolution"?
Nice.
malus40 5 months ago
@malus40 Title of his next presentation? "Primatism with Human Characteristics"
(or just "Deng Xiaoping", for short)
malus40 5 months ago
iz the neuroscientist saying my thoughts, determined by my environment, helped that wacko in norway do what he did?
eysheinsof 6 months ago
Doesn't the skin receptors send a positive signal when touched, though? Hence, you don't actually feel the full magnitude of the neurons when you watch somebody being touched if you have an incapacitated arm; the arm will fire "no" signal, i.e. the absence of a negative signal but it will not fire a *positive one*. And a positive signal is greater than the absence of a negative signal, right?
LuminaFlux 6 months ago
I wish he would have given more basis for the whatever evolutionary jump. Don't animals have the same mirror processes? Monkey see Monkey do......now there's some philosophy.
guitarunner 8 months ago
So the mirroring effect of commercials following a Sponsored TED talk is the same Money/Tax 'advancement' to curb traffic flow as seen in the IBM commercial??
b4skin 8 months ago
Why the fuck is there a solid 3 minutes of ads at the end of the vid? lol
Petrify666 9 months ago
Mirroring actions relates to judgment/anticipation. If an action might affect me I prepare by emulating it in my brain. What he refers to as a mirror neuron is actually an information neuron, preserved for the life of the people who have been influenced by the event either through direct observation or communication via complex language. The phantom limb stuff also relates to judgment and anticipation - not skin receptors telling the brain not to worry. Google Complex Evolution Consciousness.
TheAccurate1 9 months ago
@TheAccurate1 Yeah, let's believe something clearly in the format of pseudoscience (CEC) and disregard the actual scientist. Mmhmm.
callmemrtorture 8 months ago
its why for those that believe in the bible, pornography is wrong, because your brain is firing as if your having sex, that is why porn is stimulating. That is why it is adultery to God, for those that believe in God, is classified as adultery, because your watching others have sex.
andydrew105 9 months ago
@andydrew105
Yep, 'cause they knew about mirror neurons when they wrote the bible.
wacked0ne 8 months ago
@wacked0ne any enlightened person would know exactly how their body works. actually in the context of this video, an understanding of mirror neurons is the basis of any revelation. so probably someone or other involved in writing the bible knew about mirror neurons.
Zaknrfamaa 2 months ago
its why for those that believe in the bible, pornography is wrong, because your brain is firing as if your having sex, that is why porn is stimulating. That is why it is adultery to God, for those that believe in God, is classified as adultery.
andydrew105 9 months ago
I think he's Indian, but I had a question, if that's true then do people who lose a limb or a body organ in an accident experience what they watch happen to other people's limbs and organs ?
subzeroicefrost 10 months ago
@subzeroicefrost yes
noey543 8 months ago
Fuck IBM
dirtydonki 11 months ago
What accent be that?
Dropnuggets 11 months ago
@Dropnuggets Indian
samann95014 9 months ago
he switches from pronouncing R and rolling his tongue and it throws me off
Dropnuggets 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
he switches from pronouncing R and rolling his tongue and it throws me off
Dropnuggets 11 months ago
he switches from pronouncing R and rolling his tongue and it throws me off
Dropnuggets 11 months ago
This guy was my prof at UCSD. Always an entertaining lecturer.
Yakko12345 11 months ago 26
@Yakko12345 o, you lucky bastard to have had this guy as a professor. Ramachandran is one of the great geniuses of our time.
jibbberjabbber666 7 months ago
@Yakko12345 oh wow, I'm so jealous!
enroserie 4 months ago
@Yakko12345 u lucky bastard :D
Limeni69 2 months ago 2
Wtf was that commerical at the end... big brother much?!
MochizMuM 11 months ago
Love that brogue.
xNickTheBrickx 1 year ago
@jimmayl1
if the amputee has a mirror to his left side, then his right arm looks like his left arm in the reflection...and then maybe if the patient watches his right arm being squeezed in the mirror, he might feel relief in his phantom left arm. there's another vid on youtube where dr ramachandran explains this...he's treated patients using this phantom box (with a mirror).
AnjaliDoney 1 year ago
Duh.
Seaileanu 1 year ago
@GrudgyDiablo
Yes it is Grudgy - It explains so much more than it asks.
8))) <3
MilitantPeaceist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jimmayl1 that would be weird because the brain would likely tell you that what u feel is in your right arm. but as he explains it, if you numb your left shoulder downwards, and see others touch their left arm you can feel the touch with the phantom arm..
ceejay011485 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jimmayl1 that would be weird because the brain would likely tell you that what u feel is in your right arm. but as he explains it, if you numb your left shoulder downwards, and see others touch their left arm you can feel the touch with the phantom arm..
ceejay011485 1 year ago
The way we are wired, amazing, but how does God fit into this? Check us out for a video on Neurons give us some feedback!
newhopecalgary 1 year ago
Say someone has an amputated left arm and the remaining right arm is squeezed. Will the left phantom arm feel anything or will there be a feedback signal from the right arm that will halt the phantom left from feeling anything?
jimmayl1 1 year ago
@jimmayl1 i can't remember correctly but i think there's a certain part of an amputee's face when touched stimulates their phantom arm, or at least produces a feeling in an arm that isn't there. im not positive, but i think it's something like that
pscoggs 1 year ago
@jimmayl1 that would be weird because the brain would likely tell you that what u feel is in your right arm. but as he explains it, if you numb your left shoulder downwards, and see others touch their left arm you can feel the touch with the phantom arm..
ceejay011485 1 year ago
words cannot...
what's the word?
someone type it out for me, I might be able to pick it up.
leewolfgang 1 year ago
Could this mean that human beings are a super organism like ants or bees?
ANDR3W1848 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@ANDR3W1848
"Could this mean that human beings are a super organism like ants or bees?"
Yes! We are a community or hive! We exist by symboitic relationships. We fail when we become antobiotic.
Apathy >>> Death of consciousness
Empathy >>> Life of consciousness
MilitantPeaceist 1 year ago
@ANDR3W1848
Yes!
MilitantPeaceist 1 year ago
Love this Guy !!!
I am watching the mirror box being used in the stroke unit where my mother is .
Vancouver Island , Canada .
nicoledcarroll 1 year ago
Stunning information in this talk!
098anne 1 year ago
Correction: Sorry, we have 100 billion neurons, thus ten times more glial cells equals one trillion glial cells.
geezzerboy 1 year ago
There are ten times as many glial cells in the brain as there are neurons. The billion glial cells were long thought to be packing or padding for the neurons, since they surround each neuron, but have no electrical activity themselves. Recently it has been discovered that glial cells do communicate with each other, with a method called 'calcium surges'. Neurons comprise only one-tenth of our brain, what are the glial cells talking to each other about? The future will tell.
geezzerboy 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
slugdub101 1 year ago
Comment removed
slugdub101 1 year ago
Comment removed
slugdub101 1 year ago
@slugdub101 The mirror neurons were first found in macaque monkeys, in the early 1990's.Later verified in humans.
geezzerboy 1 year ago
Comment removed
slugdub101 1 year ago
Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
crocz 1 year ago
Ramachandran is amazing. He should have the same status and fame as Einstein, Freud, and Darwin.
040wATTcLUb 1 year ago
@040wATTcLUb I agree! What an enchanting speaker. Amazing man. The implications of this for so many fields of science, anthropology, linguistics and psychology, is vast.
fairiebee 1 year ago 2
He probably emphasizes on the RRRRRR in his name... Rrrramachndrrran..
lowpro88 1 year ago
Incapacitate your body from the neck and down and then watch porn?
fasantupp 1 year ago 50
@fasantupp LOL, I'd so try that!
tomaz2007 1 year ago
@fasantupp
you win.
Therealskyass 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fasantupp
FUCK YOU WIN!!!
Therealskyass 9 months ago
@fasantupp That is the immediate obvious first thought lol! Scary!!
dleddy14 3 months ago
Interesting. If it's true I wonder what would happen when you just imagine someone scratching his hand. Would be these neurons reacting too? ;)
rt4013 1 year ago
While I am a HUGE fan of Ramachandran, it should be noted that there are some VERY good criticisms against the idea of mirror neurons.
For example, Greg Hickok has argued in the literature (and his blog, haha) that "there is little or no evidence to support the mirror neuron=action understanding hypothesis and instead there is substantial evidence against it."
Google "talking brains Eight problems for the mirror neuron theory of action understanding in monkeys and humans."
zakiechan 1 year ago
if u cannot comprehend it and then reject this idea then its your view but trying to make people believe that this idea is totally absurd without relevant evidence and authority in your part compared to V.S Rama while hiding in this cyber space does not hold ur views as valid...period!!!!
amarylisbaby 1 year ago
Doesn't it seem logical that psychopaths, lacking empathy, must have mal-functioning Gandhi neurons? On the other hand, humans like Gandhi must have over-active Gandhi neurons.
geezzerboy 1 year ago 4
@geezzerboy Interesting question. As far as I'm aware, psychopaths are aware of the emotions of other people and are/can be very manipulative because of it. So maybe they do have functioning Gandhi neurons but, for whatever other reason, are unable to translate that emotion into their own. On the other hand, maybe it is the case that their Gandhi neurons don't work and the brain tries instead to translate what it's perceiving using the other, non-Gandhi mirror neurons. Who knows.
HecticRat 11 months ago
@geezzerboy Or they use them for a different purpose. They are also used for imprinting and certain predatory skills. A predator may imagine chasing his prey before he actually does and take note of what animals lift their heads and look around. They have his number. The one not aware is "sleeping".
I don't see how people can not make such observation of connection simply by observing humans socializing and communicating. It's not mind reading as reading is objective. But still helpful.
abram730 6 months ago
I feel like I'm in a censured classroom! But all I was tryn to note (harmlessly) was that these findings do pull together a great deal of the myths, spiritual traditions, and ancient sciences we have to date found no strong science for ok, Big Bro?
JIIHD 1 year ago
Which words (G rated, unquestionably) won't they allow? I've tried repeatedly to post my concepts and they repeatedly say YouTube not availble...but these defanged statements post! Wow...
JIIHD 1 year ago
I notice now that YouTube will not permit certain points to be released as comments, this is very disheartening. Wat happend to freedom of sharing ideas? I submit generic points that post but others that carry cognitive weight say YouTube not available... What gives?
JIIHD 1 year ago
How intriguing! I had to pause this and resume at another time because of the implications herein.
JIIHD 1 year ago
So many people will take this video the wrong way.
Ramshobraja 1 year ago
Don't you see what this is??? It's the Third eye and science finally found it! Eureka moment!
vbr666 1 year ago
I am not at all shocked that we have found populations of neurons in the motor cortex that fire when we see similar actions being performed by others.
Motor cortex feedback loops from the visual system are the only way for us to learn how to move our limbs in space. Try doing anything without the hand-eye feedback system - its magnitudes harder.
Sensory "empathy" is more interesting but still I don't think is out of the blue given the abstraction abilities of our brains. Good talk though!
Ikaath 1 year ago
I think the neuroscience is unremarkable on its own, as are the philosophical theories of collective conciousness. What I like about this is the attempt to unite the two and using science to answer traditionally philosphoical questions.
The real neuroscience breakthrough, which many philosophers will argue is impossible (particularly dualists thinkers), will come at the discovery of the neural substrate of conciousness and knowing exactly how it works.
TomMackio 1 year ago
Interesting stuff. The more often neurons fire the more likely they are to fire again (ie have a particular thought). So if this is how our brains work - by mimicking other's actions in our own thought processes, what does that mean for kids watching media generated images of violence etc? Do they have the mimic neurons firing whilst doing so & then are therefore more likely to carry out those action in real life? I wonder...
Binjons 1 year ago
The neurology's irrelevant to the media violence debate. Imagine a study where a set of kids are 1st denied, then allowed violent media and their violence rated before and after. That might suggest whether violent media causes real violence but doesn't refer to neural mechanisms at all. Conversely, mirror neurons might make kids copy violent behaviour they see in media or might make them more empathetic and so less violent. The mechanism doesn't predict either way.
museumoftechno 1 year ago
omg prof VS Ramachandran is a pimp...if any of you guys know any better, he is the author of Phantoms in the brain. he basically (by himself) found a way to cure pains for people with amputated limbs. this guys is one of the worlds leading neuroscientist....the jock of the science world...so unless you guys have at least a college degree, i would reframe from making stupid comments...
thaialism 1 year ago 2
4:32
Hehe. Porn.
YawnGod 1 year ago
@YawnGod
fagot!
LogicalFlawDetector 1 year ago
LFD
"Derogatory Term Principle"
in it's purest form - so you feel that the term faggot represents an entity you have no idea about?
or
Represents your personal bias and bigotry?
"When Dogma goes full circle, you wind up with your head reappearing through your neck, from your arse, but you will be permanently twisted"
MilitantPeaceist 1 year ago
@MilitantPeaceist
Fagot!
LogicalFlawDetector 1 year ago
@LFlawedD
;)
MilitantPeaceist 1 year ago
For all the males out there just imagine seeing someone kicked in the balls.
If you cringed then you felt his pain in a way lol
jiraiya2006 2 years ago
The way you feel it is empathic, which is what VS is saying. If you really felt it the way you're implying you'd be on the floor writhing.
sgmarshall 1 year ago
it all depends on the person
jiraiya2006 1 year ago
Is this new or just reinterpretation ? Whats with the advert at the end "TED"
perioendo 2 years ago
So if someone has their dick cut off and they watch a porno they gonna feel like they're having sex?
DrInfidel 2 years ago
@DrInfidel HAHAHA thats cool
francaisfreak 2 years ago
Actually, that's a reason why castration isn't an effective way to prevent child molesters from reoffending. That would explain why it's still possible for someone who's been castrated to get strong sexual/other excitement from whatever they're doing.
david0aloha 1 year ago
i've been trying to watch this video for three days now and i cant get it to work.. it this happening to anyone else?
iosuVakerizzo 2 years ago
The brain is so fucking crazed.
321lawc 2 years ago
Thank god a Neuroscientist finally says we are all connected, now how do we let the world know?
soulsurferjeweet 2 years ago
This also describes why so many people watch porn.
theshermany 2 years ago 44
You nail it... its funny but true. Sex is mostly impersonal and work on visual basis. So no need for partner if you have nice 'Tits and Asses V' on shelf. Joke aside... you right! :P
VooDooMadMan 2 years ago
@theshermany yeah, just get your body numbed and ENJOY ! :D
CZKing 2 years ago
Comment removed
alokbagga 1 year ago
@alokbagga
I think I should. It may be a few weeks before I get or locate a copy though.
theshermany 1 year ago
@theshermany. I thought the same thing, scrolled down, and saw that it was the first comment. I love the internet.
MrExplosionFace 1 year ago
@theshermany ...why so many armless people watch porn.
michaelgoldstrom 1 year ago
@michaelgoldstrom They're masochists?
loggeronline 1 year ago
@theshermany i will never beat off the same again
blueshiftX 1 year ago
@theshermany genius comment
santoshiom 1 year ago
@theshermany haha, yeah. That was an immediate thought. It becomes a replacement for relationship, but it's problem is that porn omits many other crucial benefits of being in a relationship. Could an advanced porn sufficiently replace a human in all areas?
kenziegunn 1 year ago
@theshermany Hmm.... porn, a mirror, a phantom penis... hmm....
Still chary about that.
hymnofashes 1 year ago
There is no you or me, the thing separating you from the chair is thought! So ppl long time ago asked the question to the source itself, what is thought, who am i?
KarthikSoun 2 years ago
Even with a popped collar VS is cool.
MrFrankBullitt 2 years ago 2
I'm wondering if it just concerns humans. What if you watch a dogs ear being touched, for instance?
Bornatnight1 2 years ago
But if you see one dog bait other dog ear you almost fell the pain, you start to empathizing with it right?
VooDooMadMan 2 years ago
VS ramachandran... wat a ledgend
leshark 2 years ago 20
6:10
"[if you] remove [your] skin...you've dissolved the barrier between you and other human beings"
k166a 2 years ago
we are all connected
koutak1s 2 years ago
Anyone else having problems playing this particular video?
soupisgoodfood42 2 years ago
Comment removed
AdenoidHynkelThe2nd 2 years ago
Humans are a lot smarter than animals and have richer culture, language, behaviour, and society.
trenteady 2 years ago
This just in from CommonRaven: in order to know the likelihood of anything, you have to be omniscientist. Scientists everywhere are fired after this revelation meets their employers.
trenteady 2 years ago
The rebuttal to this is a known point as well: atheists are the same as athorists and aclaustics; it's impossible to know with 100% that God, Thor, or Santa Claus don't exist, but it is beyond all reasonable doubt. Most people don't feel compelled to say "it's overwhelmingly likely that Santa doesn't exist", they just flat out say it. We'd waste so much time if we always spoke with strict logical precision and it's seldom necessary.
trenteady 2 years ago 2
Yes, I went with Yahweh as a concrete example of a specific definition that can be disproved. Others exist.
The book that claims he has those characteristic also claims he says certain things are moral/immoral. In that same book, he violates some of those moral precepts. If God claims murdering innocents is evil, and God murders innocents, then he is evil by his own definition. Such is in his book, as well as many other actions he himself defines as evil.
jursamaj 2 years ago
jajajajja seguia si
rominalarrondo 2 years ago
che q copado , me encanto!
santiagoscaine 2 years ago
The problem is, there's no real definition of God. But there are certainly some descriptions of God that can be shown to be logical contradictions. And as you know from that freshman logic class, a contradiction refutes a logical argument.
God is omniscient, omnipotent, and moral.
Evil exists.
This is a contradiction, just as "a 4-sided triangle" is.
jursamaj 2 years ago
Great video. Very interesting, including the ending.
gl2findme 2 years ago
You do not fully grasp te black swan. That and your weird ideas on statistics are your primary arguments ? That is not the real world.
We fully understand where error margins and discrepancies come from. With calibrated methods we can predict events so precisely, the margins are well beyond 2 decimal points.
Arrogance is to insist raising that 0.008% and elevating it to a note worthy and fact shattering chance. When you could know that this is rubbish.
0.008% perhaps is unproven. So what ?
retepvosnul 2 years ago
Stop kidding yourself, you have no clue what you are on about, and it is getting a bit silly.
What would you think we should use to predict anything ?.
The black swan analogy, we have gone over all ready. I think you do not fully understand the black swan theory. ( which differs from the black swam problem ).
retepvosnul 2 years ago
It would be horribly tedious if I had to go in to every tiny bit of uncertainty and apoligize of 2% or less of a "statistical" margin of error.
With 98% odds, I'd not bet my life on the other 2%, and therefore I is as good as fact.
Basically It is just expression,semantics and language we are talking about, because we pretty much mean the same thing,but by your definition, a "fact" is a impossibility.
I'd say a 98% chance of snow is pretty factual.
The 2% off-chance is negligible.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
You are indeed only guessing.
I hope not that you are implying that we know WHAT gravity is ?
In fact the ironic thing is that applied physics is a major part of the sector I am active in. Especially radiometric analysis, which, as you might like to wiki, is entirely based on statistical analysis.
Look it up, o2 isotope, c14, uranium-thorium, fission track dating.
All of which produce statistic results. Are you saying that the methods are flawed because not every particle is measured?
retepvosnul 2 years ago
Wow, cool tangential conversations being spawned from this talk.
I enjoyed the speaker's conjectures. These kind of talks are what originally made me dig TED so much.
It's a rad time to be alive. For thousands of years our species has inhabited this Earth, and only now are we really capable of destroying it/understanding it/physically leaving it.
It's like I've got front row seats to the best show in the galaxy. I wonder if every generation feels this way?
OregonCoastGhost 2 years ago 2
Even though Ramachandran is one of the top scientists in the world right now, in this video he messes up a bit, and going a bit too far. I dont blame him, he's on the wave.
BUT, thats why worshipping is not good. Everyone has their favourite persons(and i know there are loads of Ramachandran's fans out there), and each time they do a mistake, you should acknowledge it, and realise it, and dont take everything to be true just because the MOST of the things he said were true...
tudoralexe 2 years ago 2
@tudoralexe
Mistakes?
What did he error?
natholomew 2 years ago
Reality is falsifiable? That means you can prove reality wrong? I think you don't know the definition of the word. Unfalsifiable means that it is a claim that is impossible, even in principle, to falsify - i.e. prove wrong.
Sure you can't "calculate" the likelihood of something falsifiable, I would never imply you can, but the question is do you treat is as likely i.e. accept it, or do you treat as unlikely, i.e. reject it. The only rational choice is to reject unfalsifiable claims.
coolman9999uk 2 years ago
Statistics mislead only if not understood or used out of context, something that the media is fairly good at.
Statistical analysis is a crucial part of every scientific field.
Your analogy is also flawed. We do make odds on the weather and economics and generally they work.
We also can not know the position, speed, and direction of a single water molecule, but still we can make really accurate predictions on behaviour of a body of water.
Your "not knowing the factors" concept is flawed.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
We can't predict accurate weather ( which is to say, that weather prediction are done extremely locally, and are usually scarily precise ) that accurately because we indeed, do not have all the data.
The results are predictable and good though, and not calculating the possibility of a killer asteroid is quite logical because of the ODDS of such a thing upsetting our current climate and throwing a nuclear winter at our asses !.
Weather prediction do not NEED to take into account a meteor !.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
Finally : We stand on the moon, together, and I hold aloft a stone. "What will happen when I let go of this moonrock ?" I ask.
Could you, having been aloud to investigate all realms of possibility, come up with a satisfactory answer and estimate ?
Or would you be hampered by the little irritating fact that we have no inkling on what gravity is AT ALL ?
retepvosnul 2 years ago
Ehhh. Statistical data is interpreted analysis of empirical data. You clearly have no clue here. Lets move on.
In research, an anomalous reading is often the case, this is called an "outller. A array of points rarely make a straight line.
In you deck of 52 cards, I will never get an outlier of course. But with any deck, after 8 trillion times you come along and insist that I have to seriously consider the queen of poofs is also in the deck, Why would I even consider that as semi-probable?
retepvosnul 2 years ago
The reason why it is logically impossible to prove or disprove is that it is an unfalsifiable claim. That's the important concept- unfalsifiability. I care whether my beliefs are likely or not, and the question is: should I treat unfalsifiable claims as likely or unlikely? There is only one rational choice that doesn't leave you also believing Vishnu, Santa and all other unfalsifiable claims.
coolman9999uk 2 years ago
"Missing the point" is something we both excel at seemingly. And, again, you are right that 100% exclusion on anything is not feasible.
You are wrong about using odds though. The very existence of using odds are based on the fact that not having all the data is a reoccurring theme in knowledge gathering. Perhaps I should have called it statistics, but I assumed you understand that both are essentally the same.
Beyond reasonable doubt is based on probability. The same is used in research.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
Deck of cards :. Correct, Assume I know nothing of the amount of cards or what is on them. Lets imagine, I do not know why somebody would but it is!, that this information is prohibited from me. I would simply draw 1 card 5200 times and then If could, after the analysis, tell you with a reasonable measure of certainty the nature of the deck. Would I be able to proof or disproof the existence of the "Ace of gogo'dancers"?, no, but why would I? Nothing requires this.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
When I talk about a supernatural thing that is false, I naturally mean that, in light of science and it's track-record, the explanation for a detailed phenomenon will more likely be the scientific one then the supernatural one.
When A supernatural concept disagrees with a scientific concept, it is even more clear that the empirical and statistical data are better equipped to describe the natural world for us.
Things that are currently unknown and not required for explanation, are just that.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
What if I anaesthetise my penis and then watch porn?
coolman9999uk 2 years ago
that commercial at the end was awesome. nothing like that would ever get passed here in America because everyone would say their rights are being stripped away and that it's socialism. lol
thebutler89 2 years ago
Awesome! 5 stars! I love neuroscience.
kennegun 2 years ago
You fail.
retepvosnul 2 years ago
I love how he rolls his "R's" rRRrrrRrrR
Myopic08 2 years ago 3
Prof. Ramachandran teaches at my old alma mater U.C.S.D. and he is a brilliant in his field of behavioral neurology. However, he is out of his depth on the Anthropological front. This is where he makes a lot of critical mistakes.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago
He shows a slide about "Culture and Civilization" he calls the Great Leap Forward, and talks about 5 things that came about and rapidly spread 75,000 to 100,000 years ago:
1. Tool Use
2. Fire
3. Shelter
4. Language
5. Theory of Mind
The problem is not one of these emerged/spread to the whole population during this time period:
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 2
1. Tool use goes back 2,000,000 years ago with the first tools, with slow ongoing evolution of tool kit complexity since. We know that all human ancestors used tools from that time forward without exception.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 2
2. Fire was first domesitcated 1,000,000 years ago by Homo Erectus and has been used by all homind decents since then.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 2
3. Shelter sites for humans have occurred as early as 500,000 years ago altough they became much more widespread with the rise of Homo Sapiens. There is lots of debate about what constitutes shelters, so some definitions push shelter/nesting site creation back a million or more years.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 2
4. Language, in terms of what we understand like modern languages, is not known when it arose, but many think these came into being less than 100,000 years ago.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago
5. This is very young, and certainly less than 25,000 years. This is the age of the oldest sites that indicate abstract thinking among our ancestors.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago
In a similar vein, his slide includes 'Civilization' in the title, and the first true civilizations didn't arise until 6,000-8,000 years ago.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago
His biggest conjecture is that this explosive change happened due to the rise of this mirror neural system in humans at this time. The problem is that he doesn't provide any paleontological evidence for this changed at this time (setting aside all of the timeline issues above). If he had endocasts of humans 100,000 years ago and 125,000 years ago showing these changes, that would be strong evidence for at least the rise of mirror neurons at that time.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago
Another mistake is making the claim that it is this mirror neural system that explains the sudden rise in an invention being transmitted across and down generations and that this is a uniquely human adaptation that explains modern humans. The problem is that this kind of cultural transmission pattern has been seen in numerous primate species and in elephants.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago
How do you know those species don't have a primitive form of our mirror neurons that allows them to transmit behavior?
sexyloser 2 years ago 2
He then makes a complete mess when he takes about Darwinian/Lamackian evolutionary paradigm differences and how he thinks it applies here. When he illustrates his point with a discussion of the evolutionary adaptation of protective coats in polar bears and the killing of said polar bear by a human ancestor, the confusion on his part is complete. Uugh! The polar bear didn't learn to wear a thick, protective coat over hundreds of thousands of years.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 2
You're taking the word "learn" too literally.
trenteady 2 years ago
The rest of the lecture on empathy neurons is interesting but subject to a variety of interpretations. His insistence that we are literally connected to each other via our neurons is an argument that completely escapes me. I don't see how his argument leads to that conclusion. Similarly when he says there is no distinction between the consciousness of two people, it is belied by the obviously observable fact that this isn't the case. This has been demonstrated empirically again and again.
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 2
Very brilliant people can get themselves into trouble when they stray outside their areas of core competence. Such is the case here when Prof. Ramachandran starts to discuss man's evolutionary past and what may have constituted fundamental changes in the recent past. He is wrong about the date for the use of fire or that cultural transmission is lateral and then downward only in humans. His statements do not reflect the consensus held by physical anthropologists and evolutionary ones. Oops!
chrisdmoller 2 years ago 5
Yeh that was interesting since wasn't Homo habilis 2.3 million to 1.4 million years ago at the beginning of the Pleistocene period attributed with the beginning of tool, fire use, and culture?
However, I still think the path he discusses science is considering is fascinating.
mattghtpa 2 years ago
Wouldn't it be nicer to focus on the correlation he's established. I'm no scientist, humble computer programmer I am, a poor mans philosopher... if the action resulted in an observable correlated neural impulse in two individuals, one feeling & observing while the other only observing, it's possible that correlation is no more than what it seems, localizing some action / reaction pair. No need to get excited for the wrong reasons.
thebytegrill 1 year ago
@thebytegrill ... what I mean is one felt it, the other saw it, yet both observed/empathized an action probably stored in a similar part of the brain. Long way to go no doubt before we call it.
thebytegrill 1 year ago
@thebytegrill
Oh I agree, I'm not trying undermine his research.
Personally I don't think he went nearly far enough with the implications.
Research that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated by independent studies show human conscious awareness and observation has visible physical effects on mechanical and electronic objects and devices.
There is definitely a level of reality science and humans are not currently able to comprehend.
mattghtpa 1 year ago
@mattghtpa
Rubbish. Give me some peer reviewed articles that show evidence for any:
"human conscious awareness and observation has visible physical effects on mechanical and electronic objects and devices"
You are not serious right?
Ikaath 1 year ago