INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Is this true?

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Message
Author
Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Is this true?

#1 Post by Nirvanam » September 27th, 2009, 11:27 am

I came across the following statements on the web: "The next exciting discovery is that the thoughts in our head do not stay in our heads. Scientists have discovered that "thought" is actually pure energy and it is sent out or broadcast from our bodies into the universe. Thoughts are actually transmitted from our bodies like a radio transmitter and then this energy travels outward."

People who have more knowledge on this subject please help me understand whether the above is a fact and if so what could be its implications.

User avatar
grammar king
Posts: 869
Joined: March 14th, 2008, 2:42 am

Re: Is this true?

#2 Post by grammar king » September 27th, 2009, 12:02 pm

I believe it's codswaddle. I'm sure one day they'll be able to invent a device to transmit our thoughts as radiowaves or something, but the brain has no need of a transmitter, AFAICT.

User avatar
getreal
Posts: 4354
Joined: November 20th, 2008, 5:40 pm

Re: Is this true?

#3 Post by getreal » September 27th, 2009, 1:10 pm

sounds like a load of camel poo to me!

Surely thoughts are composed millions of electrochemical reactions in our brains*.

*I am no scientist. This is purely my (limited) understanding.

Wouldn't we all need to develop pointy heads to act as antennae first, anyway?
"It's hard to put a leash on a dog once you've put a crown on his head"-Tyrion Lannister.

User avatar
sisyphushappy
Posts: 27
Joined: October 24th, 2008, 9:42 pm

Re: Is this true?

#4 Post by sisyphushappy » September 27th, 2009, 2:11 pm

It's a question of evaluating the evidence put forward to support the claim. I seriously doubt that there was any evidence being put forward.
Examine the religious principles which have, in fact, prevailed in the world, and you will scarcely be persuaded that they are anything but sick men's dreams.
-- David Hume

http://www.herhg.org.uk
http://timstephenson.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24065
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Is this true?

#5 Post by Alan H » September 27th, 2009, 2:14 pm

Grammar King is correct: it's utter woo nonsense. What is 'pure energy'? Is there such a thing as 'impure energy'? It's another case of a little knowledge being dangerous.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: Is this true?

#6 Post by jaywhat » September 27th, 2009, 2:28 pm

Nirvanam wrote:I came across the following statements on the web: "The next exciting discovery is that the thoughts in our head do not stay in our heads. ..... People who have more knowledge on this subject please help me understand whether the above is a fact and if so what could be its implications.

Yes it is clearly a fact and explains why I cannot remember a fucking thing.

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: Is this true?

#7 Post by Nirvanam » September 27th, 2009, 2:37 pm

A closer look at that paragraph tells me that there are 2 assertions made:
1. Thought is a form of energy
2. Like other forms of energy (sound, light, etc), this "thought" thing also flows into space from its source i.e. the body of the thinker

So, first can someone confirm whether thought is a form of energy? If yes, then does this thought energy share the characteristic of flowing out from its source like sound and light do?

Hundovir
Posts: 806
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 3:23 pm

Re: Is this true?

#8 Post by Hundovir » September 27th, 2009, 2:49 pm

Nirvanam wrote:I came across the following statements on the web: "The next exciting discovery is that the thoughts in our head do not stay in our heads. Scientists have discovered that "thought" is actually pure energy and it is sent out or broadcast from our bodies into the universe. Thoughts are actually transmitted from our bodies like a radio transmitter and then this energy travels outward."

People who have more knowledge on this subject please help me understand whether the above is a fact and if so what could be its implications.
From: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictio ... +broadcast
thought broadcasting /thought broad·cast·ing/ (thawt brawd´kas-ting) the feeling that one's thoughts are being broadcast to the environment.
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers. © 2007 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.
thought broadcasting
[thôt]
Etymology: AS, thot
a symptom of psychosis in which the patient believes that his or her thoughts are "broadcast" beyond the head so that other people can hear them.

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: Is this true?

#9 Post by Nirvanam » September 27th, 2009, 3:32 pm

Hundovir wrote:
Nirvanam wrote:I came across the following statements on the web: "The next exciting discovery is that the thoughts in our head do not stay in our heads. Scientists have discovered that "thought" is actually pure energy and it is sent out or broadcast from our bodies into the universe. Thoughts are actually transmitted from our bodies like a radio transmitter and then this energy travels outward."

People who have more knowledge on this subject please help me understand whether the above is a fact and if so what could be its implications.
From: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictio ... +broadcast
thought broadcasting /thought broad·cast·ing/ (thawt brawd´kas-ting) the feeling that one's thoughts are being broadcast to the environment.
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers. © 2007 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.
thought broadcasting
[thôt]
Etymology: AS, thot
a symptom of psychosis in which the patient believes that his or her thoughts are "broadcast" beyond the head so that other people can hear them.
I don't understand the message you are conveying. Are you suggesting that if a person tries to find out whether thought is a form of energy then he is psychotic? Or, are you saying that all persons suffering from psychosis demonstrate a symptom where they believe that their thoughts can be heard? Or are you suggesting that some psychosis patients demonstrate the above symptom? Or was it something else? Please do clarify. Anyway, I don't see how your post is helping answer or add any value to the thought-energy thing we are discussing.

Hundovir
Posts: 806
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 3:23 pm

Re: Is this true?

#10 Post by Hundovir » September 27th, 2009, 3:43 pm

I am suggesting that the original quotation is not true and that such views have more in common with the views of psychotics than they do with mainstream science.

Edit: Also the location of my tongue during some of my posts may be in the vicinity of my cheek. That doesn't mean there's no underlying serious point being made.

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: Is this true?

#11 Post by Lifelinking » September 27th, 2009, 3:47 pm

I cannot remember a fucking thing.
this is technically known as a c.r.a.f.t. moment.

I have em all the time
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

User avatar
Alan C.
Posts: 10356
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 3:35 pm

Re: Is this true?

#12 Post by Alan C. » September 27th, 2009, 4:44 pm

this is technically known as a c.r.a.f.t. moment.

I have em all the time
:pointlaugh:
It's known where I come from as a "senior" moment and yes I have them all the time :smile:
Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers.

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: Is this true?

#13 Post by Nirvanam » September 27th, 2009, 5:15 pm

Hundovir wrote:I am suggesting that the original quotation is not true and that such views have more in common with the views of psychotics than they do with mainstream science.

Edit: Also the location of my tongue during some of my posts may be in the vicinity of my cheek. That doesn't mean there's no underlying serious point being made.
It is almost as a rule that radically new and different discoveries/understanding tend not to come from mainstream science. It takes one or just a few nutters to be bold enough in their thinking and open new avenues of knowledge for humanity that their contemporary mainstream scientists/theorists seemed incapable of.

User avatar
Ken H
Posts: 4021
Joined: February 22nd, 2009, 12:09 am

Re: Is this true?

#14 Post by Ken H » September 27th, 2009, 5:19 pm

Alan, have you tried a tin foil hat to prevent your thoughts from escaping?
This is one of the great social functions of science - to free people of superstition. - Steven Weinberg

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: Is this true?

#15 Post by Lifelinking » September 27th, 2009, 5:19 pm

It is almost as a rule that radically new and different discoveries/understanding tend not to come from mainstream science.

Er, evidence?

I can think of many great discoveries made by 'mainstream' scientists.

Could you cite some examples please?
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

Hundovir
Posts: 806
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 3:23 pm

Re: Is this true?

#16 Post by Hundovir » September 27th, 2009, 5:31 pm

Yes, come on Nirvanam. Lifelinking got in before me, but I agree. That point of view - "It is almost as a rule that radically new and different discoveries/understanding tend not to come from mainstream science" seems to be held by acupuncturists, reiki healers, homeopaths, chiropracters, "pyramid energy" advocates, believers in Atlantis... need I go on?

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: Is this true?

#17 Post by Nirvanam » September 27th, 2009, 6:00 pm

:idea: Alright alright *blocking face with arms in embarrassment* I stretched (a little too far) a research finding from TRIZ body of knowledge that generally radically new inventions that remove the need for an existing system, come from an industry that is different from the one that the system belongs to. For example consider the system, wrist watch, the main useful function of which is to inform you of the time. Now this system has become redundant because its function is being performed by other systems (cell phone, PDA) developed in some other industry/walk of life, without any increase in cost i.e. cost of owning a system for the function of informing you of the time. Its a bad habit I have of relating seemingly unrelated concepts...you can see the harmful effects of this ability :wink:

Peace! Peace! Peace! Peace!

Gottard
Posts: 1306
Joined: October 3rd, 2008, 3:11 pm

Re: Is this true?

#18 Post by Gottard » September 27th, 2009, 6:05 pm

From Wiki:
Telepathy (Greek τηλε, tele meaning "distant" and πάθεια, patheia meaning "to be affected by",[2]) refers to the transfer of information on thoughts or feelings between individuals by means other than the five senses (See Psi).[1][3] The term was coined in 1882 by the classical scholar Fredric W. H. Myers, a founder of the Society for Psychical Research,[1] specifically to replace the earlier expression thought-transference.[1][3] A person who is able to make use of telepathy is said to be able to read the thoughts and stored information in the brain of others. Telepathy, along with psychokinesis forms the main branches of parapsychological research, and many studies seeking to detect, understand, utilize telepathy have been done within the field.

There is no accepted mechanism by which telepathy can work, and there is no definition which unambiguously distinguishes it from a number of other related concepts such as clairvoyance, so the concept is not accepted by the scientific community.[4]

Telepathy is a common theme in modern fiction and science fiction, with many superheroes and supervillains having telepathic abilities. Such abilities include sensing the thoughts of others.
==============================================
The only thing I agree on is that when you are in front of an individual with whom you are well acquainted you may/might feel what his/her thoughts are. But this I would call "perceptivity".
The only thing I fear of death is regret if I couldn’t complete my learning experience

Hundovir
Posts: 806
Joined: June 21st, 2009, 3:23 pm

Re: Is this true?

#19 Post by Hundovir » September 27th, 2009, 6:13 pm

@Nirvanam :kiss:

Better? :smile:

Actually, what your OP reminds me of is the oft stated fact (I think) that electromagnetic emissions from Earth will continue to propagate outwards and will be detectable elsewhere until they become too attenuated. Somewhere out there, maybe aliens are watching the first episode of Monty Python. Or hearing Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany or...

I shouldn't think that EM emissions from the human body would get very far before becoming too weak to be picked up.

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: Is this true?

#20 Post by Nirvanam » September 27th, 2009, 6:59 pm

Hundovir wrote:@Nirvanam :kiss:

Better? :smile:

Actually, what your OP reminds me of is the oft stated fact (I think) that electromagnetic emissions from Earth will continue to propagate outwards and will be detectable elsewhere until they become too attenuated. Somewhere out there, maybe aliens are watching the first episode of Monty Python. Or hearing Chamberlain's declaration of war against Germany or...

I shouldn't think that EM emissions from the human body would get very far before becoming too weak to be picked up.
Thanks Hundovir!!!! Feeling much better :D

Like you say it may be possible that some EM get emitted from the body but their intensity would not be strong enough to carry them too far. But, and here's the 'woo' part, if EM can be emitted from the body and if thoughts are also EM then the main reason that is stopping the thought from going far enough, its intensity, can possibly be controlled. By increasing its intensity in whichever way possible (technological devices, repetitive focused thinking, whatever) the thought EM may travel farther. If conceptually it is actually possible to do so, then finding the mechanism (the system) to carry out the function would be a matter of time.

Post Reply