Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are thoughts transcendant?
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5907 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 46 of 142 (428055)
10-14-2007 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Kitsune
09-26-2007 9:06 AM


LindaLou
I feel that to apply it across the board in one's life, however, means that you stand to miss out on some otherwise unobtainable truths.
That is the point though LL. How can we determine if the "unobtainable " is indeed truth or not if we do not apply scepticism in order to eliminate the chaff from the wheat?
In other words how do we determine what is actual and what is merely that which we would like it to be in spite of evidence to the contrary?
It is not as though a sceptic is inhuman and cold but there is no point in deluding oneself if that is indeed what we are doing by accepting things uncritically is it? It may be that the universe is itself inhuman and cold {though that seems to me to be a human assessment and not an actual one}. The universe may just be incapable of any human attachment at all.
I, for one, would love to believe that my parents are in a place seperate from our own where one day they will meet me once again and we can catch up on what has been missed. That said ,I am quite aware of how that desire could cloud my thinking when examining the claims of those who profess to KNOW that such things do indeed occur and that THEY have the answer.
To the contrary , it seems to me that the harder one investigates an actual... REAL.. phenomena the greater the evidence would side with it. When it fails to do so am I being unreasonable to eventually assume that phenomena is not likely at all?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Kitsune, posted 09-26-2007 9:06 AM Kitsune has not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 142 (428099)
10-14-2007 4:59 PM


On thought and telepathy
Thought I’d give a general reply to this topic
LindaLou: Telepathy may be some good evidence of this.
LindaLou: I see what you're saying here I think -- that I'm ascribing something supernatural to a process that we simply do not understand now, but may understand in the future.
NJ; We've never witnessed anyone's thoughts.
molbiogirl: Telepathy is bunk.
The topic here is “is thought transcendent?”, and although it has been asked “What the hell does that mean?” I’ll take the route of does thought continue to exist after you have thought something.
The answer to this is, I believe, Yes. It does relate to telepathy.
When a person is thinking the electrical activity in their brain is changing, it is also changing in response to the various experiences they are having right now, or when they remember past experiences. This is a change in current flow.
From basic physics we know that ANY change in current flow will produce an electromagnetic wave. Turn on a light and you have sent out an electromagnetic wave. Lightning creates EM waves, in fact since there are thousands and thousands of lightning storms happening right now worldwide this naturally occurring EM radiation is used to do AFMAG surveys usually looking for metallic mineral deposits. Radio waves, microwaves, visible light, UV are all the same thing, EM radiation, the only difference is the frequency.
So if you are thinking as you read this you are also broadcasting. You can’t help it, it’s just physics.
Can humans detect EM radiation. Of course, we can see. So can lots of other creatures, and sharks can detect fish in their area that are in distress by sensing electrical impulses. Detecting EM radiation is not unusual and it happened quite early in evolutionary history.
Can you read other people’s thoughts? Let’s think about this for a moment. They are broadcasting, but so are you. I’ve been an amateur radio operator since I was 13 in 1962, and financed my undergraduate degree in geology by working as an electronics technician. You can not broadcast and receive on the same frequency at the same time. Your broadcasting will be billions of times larger than any signal you can receive.
What follows does not apply to the average person in the same way having an IQ of 180 doesn’t apply to the average person either. Can a person “silence” their mind, shut down their mental activity? Everything conscious and unconscious except life support systems. Most people can not and most have all kinds of stuff running up there they don’t know about. An example, close one eye, does the world still look 3D? For most people it does, but it is physically impossible to see 3D with one eye. So you must have some mechanism or circuit running upstairs. Turn it off. Bet you can’t. A mind out of control of its owner.
You can turn it off by getting in a car, and deciding to drive across America without ever sleeping. Sooner or later you will get so tired you will lose “depth perception” and crash. Or you could “find” it and figure out how to turn it on and off at will. I can do this. It took me a long time and I have no idea if you can learn how to do it or not.
Most people can not play music by ear, most are not intelligent enough to be a research scientist, most can not learn a second language later in life and have no accent, most do not have a photographic memory, most do not have an IQ of 180, but there are people who exist today in all those categories. Just because the average person can’t do it doesn’t mean it can not be done. It may mean it is just very rare.
From my viewpoint if someone actually wanted to do research on telepathy they would look for people who could innately silence their mind or had learned to do so, instead of just collecting any idiot off the street.
So far in my 58 years I know well only two people who can “see/perceive” what other people are thinking. A fellow named Frank I had worked with at one time back in NY and me. I’ve come across a few others in Lily Dale a spiritualist community where mediums “contact” the dead. Actually what they do is perceive what someone is thinking about their deceased loved ones and describe what they “see”. Most mediums there aren’t very good and some are fakes.
None contact the dead.
BTW even though I can perceive other people’s thoughts I have no psychic/spiritual ability. I only detect EM radiation people are naturally putting out. I don’t do it very often since most of the time like everyone else I’m occupied thinking and if a person is primarily thinking in words and symbols I don’t perceive that very well. They have to be thinking of an actual event in their lives. Let me give you an example. When my older son was 9 he mentioned that nobody could read people’s thoughts. I told him that some people could and asked him to close his eyes and recall sometime in his life when he was having a good time and keep thinking about it, but to say absolutely nothing. I then shut everything off and became a “total observer paying attention”. What happened was I felt something across the upper part of my chest and when I “looked” at “paid close attention” to it, I realized and saw in my mind that I was in a swimming pool (could feel that water lapping against my chest) and saw my older brother standing at the side of the pool on his deck( this was a “picture” from my son’s viewpoint as it would have had to have been, he was doing the recalling). So I said to my son it was the summer before last, you are in Uncle Joe’s pool looking up at him on the deck. His mouth dropped open, yes that was exactly what he was recalling.
No big deal.
Is thought transcendent? Do radio waves and light waves last forever? Thought results in the same thing. Ask a physicist, I think they might, but I’m not sure.
Edited by petrophysics, : No reason given.
Edited by petrophysics, : No reason given.
Edited by petrophysics, : two for typos, one to fix quote boxes

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by anglagard, posted 10-14-2007 8:42 PM petrophysics1 has replied
 Message 52 by Taz, posted 10-14-2007 11:14 PM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 55 by nator, posted 10-15-2007 6:41 PM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 56 by crashfrog, posted 10-15-2007 8:26 PM petrophysics1 has not replied
 Message 59 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-15-2007 9:53 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 48 of 142 (428127)
10-14-2007 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 4:59 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
That's quite a story.
Have you considered providing evidence of your abilities by being tested under controlled conditions? After all it is worth a cool million:
JREF - Home

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 4:59 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 8:50 PM anglagard has replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 142 (428128)
10-14-2007 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by anglagard
10-14-2007 8:42 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
From a con man? I'd be in court for years and can make more money finding oil and gas and have.
Besides it is not a psychic ability, unless you consider seeing as being psychic as well.
P.S. I'd consider doing it for a university, but they need to pay my consulting fee since this would cut into geology work($1250/day plus expenses).
Edited by petrophysics, : P.S.added

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by anglagard, posted 10-14-2007 8:42 PM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by anglagard, posted 10-14-2007 9:19 PM petrophysics1 has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 50 of 142 (428132)
10-14-2007 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 8:50 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
petrophysics writes:
From a con man? I'd be in court for years and can make more money finding oil and gas and have.
Besides it is not a psychic ability, unless you consider seeing as being psychic as well.
P.S. I'd consider doing it for a university, but they need to pay my consulting fee since this would cut into geology work($1250/day plus expenses).
I was wondering how my rather neutrally-worded inquiry would be perceived.
First, I am unfamiliar the the term con man being applied to James Randi himself, usually he is referred to as a magician who exposes con men.
Second, I am unfamiliar with the term 'seeing' used in the context of telepathy except in the works of Carlos Castaneda. Unfortunately, it appears Carlos was quite the con man as the evident purpose behind his work was to get a short and supposedly unattractive guy laid.
The dark legacy of Carlos Castaneda | Salon.com
Third, i find your reason to forgo any testing, namely that you are already rich, quite unconvincing. For one thing, you would change the entire understanding of paranormal phenomena and for another you could always donate the money to the Salvation Army. Besides, one can always choose to not sue Randi, maybe even write a book or article about how the challenge is bogus. I don't see how Randi would have any grounds to sue you for accepting the challenge. Why are you being so selfish concerning your gifts?
You said it, care to back it up?

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 8:50 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 10:40 PM anglagard has not replied

  
petrophysics1
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 142 (428141)
10-14-2007 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by anglagard
10-14-2007 9:19 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
I used the term con man because a year or so ago I looked at the fine print on that offer and basically if Randi doesn't want to pay up he won't. So the offer looks like a PR pitch not a real offer.
Second, I am unfamiliar with the term 'seeing' used in the context of telepathy except in the works of Carlos Castaneda.
If you are talking about the word "seeing" I used in the last post I was just refering to normal sight which is detecting electromagnet radiation.
As far as seeing with regards to telepathy when I do this I see in my mind what the other person is recalling seeing, I usually feel their recalled physical sensations as well and often hear the recalled sounds or speach. Very very rarely I have the sense of smell also. Just like in a dream, only I'm awake.
People who can recall things well(see it etc. in their mind)are much easier to receive/perceive. Kids are great they have less trash going on in their minds than most adults. The worst are druggies or people who have used lots of drugs in the past. Their pictures are often chaotic and not in any proper time sequence. Looks like something has happened to their ability to recall things compared to people who have never used drugs. This can be spotted in normal conversation if you know what to look for.
I have heard of Carlos Castenada, but don't know anything about him. I think my Ex of many years ago read some of his books for some anthropology class she was taking.
I am not interested in being a publically known person or changing the entire understanding of paranormal phenomena. I also do not enjoy writing, which is why I have only 60 posts but have read thousands here.
I do exactly what I like doing which is solving geologic and borehole geophysical problems and making and drilling my own gas and oil prospects.
Why are you being so selfish concerning your gifts?
I don't consider telling people that if they can silence their mind they too maybe able to do this and then proposing a natural mechanism by which it works to be selfish. Plus some psychology student might read it and get an idea for masters or PhD research. Hardly selfish of me.
Do you think there's something I can do with this "gift"? Do you want to know what everyone is thinking? Why?
The real gold here is in finding everything in your mind so it can be still. The perceiving of other people's thoughts is just something that showed up and I had to find a rational explanation for it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by anglagard, posted 10-14-2007 9:19 PM anglagard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 10-15-2007 8:36 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 52 of 142 (428145)
10-14-2007 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 4:59 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
I can somewhat see what you are saying in regard to your "telepathy". I am one of the few who could play music by ear and actually repeat what I've just heard on my piano. Most people don't believe me when I tell them this, and since I'm not a professional musician, I stopped telling people this long time ago unless they ask me.
With regard to how a person could "telepathically" read other people's thoughts, I propose the following experiment to confirm what you have told us.
We could put someone in such a deep state of unconsciousness that he wouldn't even dream. We then have at least another person standing close to him thinking about a specific event.
In your opinion, would this simulate what you referred to as the silencing of the mind?
I'm just trying to understand how this works and see if we could possibly devise any experiment that could be repeated.

Disclaimer:
Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.
He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 4:59 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-15-2007 10:00 PM Taz has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 53 of 142 (428266)
10-15-2007 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Larni
09-26-2007 5:31 AM


quote:
Nator I have been replying to posts in sequence and found that I seem to be echoing you quite accurately. From this I conclude that we must have some psychic connection. Shall we go to Mr Randi and claim our prize?
LOL!
Yes! I could use half a million dollars.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Larni, posted 09-26-2007 5:31 AM Larni has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 54 of 142 (428267)
10-15-2007 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Kitsune
09-26-2007 9:06 AM


quote:
"The need to believe" applies, in my case, to spirituality. I would be perpetually depressed if I thought that all there is to the world, is what we perceive. I love learning new things about physical reality, but I need the spiritual as well. But even there I do try to apply some skepticism. I stopped being a Catholic when I learned about other religions, and that the Bible is a historical work by a past culture and not the holy book of God that I'd been taught. I now consider myself an agnostic.
Skepticism is needed in a court of law. It is needed in any scientific or logical discipline. I feel that to apply it across the board in one's life, however, means that you stand to miss out on some otherwise unobtainable truths.
Again, I provide one of my favorite Feynman quotes:
Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars” mere globs of gas atoms. Nothing is 'mere'. I too can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Kitsune, posted 09-26-2007 9:06 AM Kitsune has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 55 of 142 (428269)
10-15-2007 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 4:59 PM


some problems with your testing protocol
An obvious problem with your test is that you are intimately aware of just about everything that has happened to your own child. It isn't a surprise that you would be able to be so specific, since the high points in a 9 year old's life are likely to be connected to his family, and his father is likely to know about them.
Another obvious flaw in your test was that you didn't write down your "reading" before asking him to tell you what he was thinking about. He could have changed his thought to conform to what you said yours was because he wanted his dad to be a real mind reader, or to please you.
Have you ever tested your ability on total strangers, where careful protocols are followed, like not speaking with the person at all beforehand and you both writing down your "results" before revealing them?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 4:59 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 56 of 142 (428287)
10-15-2007 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 4:59 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
None contact the dead.
Right, because that would be ridiculous and the people that do it are obviously frauds.
Telepathy, though, that's completely fucking reasonable.
Seriously. I can understand the people who don't believe in any woo (because I'm one of them), and the people that will believe literally any woo that you put in front of them (because they don't have any idea how to be skeptical of anything.) What I don't understand is the people who reject one woo at the same time they defend another. "Aliens? Oh, that's BS; but Bigfoot is totally real." "There's no such things as mediums, but telepathy is totally possible."
There's an equal amount of evidence for all woo, by definition - none. It's impossible for me to understand the people who think that a total lack of evidence proves their own personal woo at the exact same time that the exact same lack of evidence disproves everybody else's.
I only detect EM radiation people are naturally putting out.
Please contact the James Randi Foundation and win the 1 million dollars. Even if you don't need the money it's beyond selfish of you to keep these otherworldly gifts to yourself. Just think how many lives/time could be saved at the airport if you could be employed, probing minds to find the suicide bombers. Every minute you're not doing this, people are dying as a result. How selfish can you be, Petro?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 4:59 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Kitsune, posted 10-16-2007 2:25 AM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 57 of 142 (428289)
10-15-2007 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 10:40 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
I used the term con man because a year or so ago I looked at the fine print on that offer and basically if Randi doesn't want to pay up he won't.
I don't know what you thought you were looking at, but James Randi doesn't proctor the test, and the payout isn't according to whether or not you convince him. He doesn't own the money; it's set aside in an independently-run trust. It's really not even up to Randi whether or not it gets paid.
So you're completely wrong, and not only that, you're libeling a world-class humanitarian and educator because you're too chicken-shit to put your money where your mind-powers are. Bad form, bad form indeed.
Do you think there's something I can do with this "gift"? Do you want to know what everyone is thinking? Why?
In an age of murder and world terrorism? Jesus, Petro, what the hell is wrong with you? People are being killed because their killer's minds aren't being read. What about the serial-murderer-rapist who has a little girl locked away somewhere, but he refuses to tell the police where, to play his sick little games?
Why aren't you down there at the precinct reading his mind? Saving a life?
Because you're either a chicken-shit or a liar, and it's a hell of a lot easier to claim magic powers and slander decent people on the internet than to face the fact that telepathy is impossible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 10:40 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Damouse, posted 10-15-2007 9:16 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 67 by nator, posted 10-16-2007 8:36 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 58 of 142 (428293)
10-15-2007 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
10-15-2007 8:36 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
Hot-damn, frog, that was quite a pin-down.
On the topic of telepathy...
LindaLou writes:
Have you ever done anything to work with or raise your chi? I suspect not, as you don't seem to think it exists. Why don't you give it a try sometime. I do tai chi. I can feel my hands tingling when I am done. When I am in a natural place like a park or a forest, I swear to you that I can feel the chi. Trees have a lot of chi. Maybe this sounds like religious nonsense to you. Chi is central to many Eastern philosophies and to Chinese medicine;
What is reality to anyone but input from your senses? That is our connection to the world, without our senses the only way we knew we existed is a la Descartes. What gives you the ability to judge outside of your senses?
many people accept its existence just as they accept that the sun shines and the tides come and go
... and many people believe in assorted varieties of deities as well, even though you mentioned in an earlier post you didnt ascribe to that. What is the differance between the two? Both are assumptions not founded in reality, that is to say, input from your 5 senses.
Hmm, (on an unrelated topic) now that i think of it, shouldnt your inner-ear/cochlea system count as a 6th sense?

This statement is false.
Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 10-15-2007 8:36 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 142 (428302)
10-15-2007 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by petrophysics1
10-14-2007 4:59 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
The answer to this is, I believe, Yes. It does relate to telepathy.
That's not exactly what I had in mind, but I would agree that telepathy will qualify a form of transcendent thought.
Can humans detect EM radiation. Of course, we can see. So can lots of other creatures, and sharks can detect fish in their area that are in distress by sensing electrical impulses.
Do you think that animals sense this EM radiation when they, say, become distressed about an incoming storm? If that's true, then what of earthquakes, since various animals from fish to dogs to birds have exhibited strange behavior just before a quake hits?
Do you think there is a sensefield, of sorts, being emitted in the form of raw energy? If so, would you classify this phenomena also as EM radiation?
Can you read other people’s thoughts?
Well, as bizarre as it might be, I have read quite a bit about MK Ultra that, quite honestly, I found astonishing. I wouldn't say that I'm a true believer in it or a total skeptic. I'm somewhere in the middle.
You can turn it off by getting in a car, and deciding to drive across America without ever sleeping. Sooner or later you will get so tired you will lose “depth perception” and crash. Or you could “find” it and figure out how to turn it on and off at will. I can do this. It took me a long time and I have no idea if you can learn how to do it or not.
Turn what off? Your depth perception? If so, how is it done for you?
So far in my 58 years I know well only two people who can “see/perceive” what other people are thinking. A fellow named Frank I had worked with at one time back in NY and me. I’ve come across a few others in Lily Dale a spiritualist community where mediums “contact” the dead. Actually what they do is perceive what someone is thinking about their deceased loved ones and describe what they “see”. Most mediums there aren’t very good and some are fakes.
None contact the dead.
Interesting.
BTW even though I can perceive other people’s thoughts I have no psychic/spiritual ability. I only detect EM radiation people are naturally putting out. I don’t do it very often since most of the time like everyone else I’m occupied thinking and if a person is primarily thinking in words and symbols I don’t perceive that very well. They have to be thinking of an actual event in their lives. Let me give you an example. When my older son was 9 he mentioned that nobody could read people’s thoughts. I told him that some people could and asked him to close his eyes and recall sometime in his life when he was having a good time and keep thinking about it, but to say absolutely nothing. I then shut everything off and became a “total observer paying attention”. What happened was I felt something across the upper part of my chest and when I “looked” at “paid close attention” to it, I realized and saw in my mind that I was in a swimming pool (could feel that water lapping against my chest) and saw my older brother standing at the side of the pool on his deck( this was a “picture” from my son’s viewpoint as it would have had to have been, he was doing the recalling). So I said to my son it was the summer before last, you are in Uncle Joe’s pool looking up at him on the deck. His mouth dropped open, yes that was exactly what he was recalling.
Very interesting.
Is thought transcendent? Do radio waves and light waves last forever? Thought results in the same thing. Ask a physicist, I think they might, but I’m not sure.
Which brings me to my next question. What are thoughts, actually? Are they merely just temporal signals? If so, what is the mechanism that accounts for memories? Is there not something grander than that?
I also wanted to get your input on a very strange phenomenon that might be along the same lines as what we've been discussing. When I played in band, my bassist and one of my guitarists used to ask me strange questions, like, "What color do see to that song?"
As you might imagine, my answer was, "What color do I see? I'm sorry, but I'm not following you what you're saying. Explain it to me."
The description they gave me was that morphing color schemes appear in their mind whenever they hear music. Dependent upon the tone or mood of the music, variations of colors could be seen in their mind.
Being that they are both really eccentric kind of people, I sort of dismissed it. But then I started reading about a phenomenon called, Synesthesia. Immediately I thought of my band mates.
And what seemed fanciful began making more sense in a very real way. Based on their descriptions, I have imagined that screen saver that plays on audio files, with undulating patterns of color, morphing in to different shapes and shades of color.
A couple months back, I was watching a television program about an English idiot-savant, who, for all intense and purposes, is a mathematical genius. In describing his talent, he takes his synesthesia a step further. He claims that each number, no matter how many characters, illicit in his mind very distinct shapes and colors.
Some oblong, some very angular, some intricately geometric, along with varying colors. The number, say, 71, is completely unique to just 7 or 1.
Now, a lot of good neurological theories have been proposed that seem plausible, but I'm curious to get your take on it, given your alleged talent.
Edited by Nemesis Juggernaut, : Edit to add

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-14-2007 4:59 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Damouse, posted 10-15-2007 10:16 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 63 by crashfrog, posted 10-16-2007 12:13 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 142 (428305)
10-15-2007 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Taz
10-14-2007 11:14 PM


Re: On thought and telepathy
In your opinion, would this simulate what you referred to as the silencing of the mind?
And isn't this the goal of deep meditation? I have tried to meditate so deeply that, literally, no thoughts come in. I find this virtually impossible, as if I'm consciously thinking about not thinking. Seems circular to me. But then again, there is that possibility that I have not been bestowed with such a gift.
As for playing music by ear, I too can do this with ease. A lot of people have been bewildered by it. But for me its like that scene in Good Will Hunting where his girlfriend was trying to understand how and why mathematics was so simple for him. Bereft of any good answer, all he could really say was that he just understood it with ease.
Perhaps we all have these talents, but that we all channel them differently.

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Taz, posted 10-14-2007 11:14 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Taz, posted 10-15-2007 11:45 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 65 by Kitsune, posted 10-16-2007 2:16 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024