Our brains are wired so we can better hear ourselves speak, new study shows. Like the mute button on the TV remote control, our brains filter out unwanted noise so we can focus on what we’re listening to. But when it comes to following our own speech, a new brain study from the University of California, Berkeley, shows that instead of one homogenous mute button, we have a network of volume settings that can selectively silence and amplify the sounds we make and hear.
Activity in the auditory cortex when we speak and listen is amplified in some regions of the brain and muted in others. In this image, the black line represents muting activity when we speak. (Courtesy of Adeen Flinker) Neuroscientists from UC Berkeley, UCSF and Johns Hopkins University tracked the electrical signals emitted from the brains of hospitalized epilepsy patients. They discovered that neurons in one part of the patients’ hearing mechanism were dimmed when they talked, while neurons in other parts lit up. The auditory cortex is a region of the brain’s temporal lobe that deals with sound. Neuroscientists plant false memories in the brain. The phenomenon of false memory has been well-documented: In many court cases, defendants have been found guilty based on testimony from witnesses and victims who were sure of their recollections, but DNA evidence later overturned the conviction.
In a step toward understanding how these faulty memories arise, MIT neuroscientists have shown that they can plant false memories in the brains of mice. They also found that many of the neurological traces of these memories are identical in nature to those of authentic memories. “Whether it’s a false or genuine memory, the brain’s neural mechanism underlying the recall of the memory is the same,” says Susumu Tonegawa, the Picower Professor of Biology and Neuroscience and senior author of a paper describing the findings in the July 25 edition of Science. Neuroscientists have long sought the location of these memory traces, also called engrams. Lead authors of the paper are graduate student Steve Ramirez and research scientist Xu Liu. Evidence for psychic activity found.
It took eight years and nine experiments with more 1,000 participants, but the results offer evidence that humans have some ability to anticipate the future. "Of the various forms of ESP or psi, as we call it, precognition has always most intrigued me because it's the most magical," said Daryl Bem, professor of psychology emeritus, whose study will be published in the American Psychological Association's Journal of Personality and Social Psychology sometime next year. "It most violates our notion of how the physical world works. The phenomena of modern quantum physics are just as mind-boggling, but they are so technical that most non-physicists don't know about them," said Bem, who studied physics before becoming a psychologist.
Publishing on this topic has gladdened the hearts of psi researchers but stumped doubting social psychologists, who cannot fault Bem's mainstream and widely accepted methodology. All but one of the nine experiments confirmed the hypothesis that psi exists. Electromagnetic theories of consciousness. The electromagnetic theories of consciousness propose that consciousness can be understood as an electromagnetic phenomenon. Overview[edit] Theorists differ in how they relate consciousness to electromagnetism.
Electromagnetic field theories (or "EM field theories") of consciousness propose that consciousness results when a brain produces an electromagnetic field with specific characteristics. Susan Pockett[1] [2]and Johnjoe McFadden[3][4][5] have proposed EM field theories; William Uttal[6] has criticized McFadden's and other field theories. Some electromagnetic theories are also quantum mind theories of consciousness; examples include quantum brain dynamics (QBD) approaches of Mari Jibu and Kunio Yasue[7] and of Giuseppe Vitiello.[8] In general, however, quantum mind theories other than these QBD approaches do not treat consciousness as an electromagnetic phenomenon.
Also related are E. Cemi theory[edit] McFadden thinks that the EM field could influence the brain in a number of ways. MSNBC - How to Think About the Mind. How to Think About the MindNeuroscience shows that the 'soul' is the activity of the brain Sept. 27 issue - Every evening our eyes tell us that the sun sets, while we know that, in fact, the Earth is turning us away from it.
Astronomy taught us centuries ago that common sense is not a reliable guide to reality. Today it is neuroscience that is forcing us to readjust our intuitions. People naturally believe in the Ghost in the Machine: that we have bodies made of matter and spirits made of an ethereal something. Yes, people acknowledge that the brain is involved in mental life.
But they still think of it as a pocket PC for the soul, managing information at the behest of a ghostly user. Modern neuroscience has shown that there is no user. This resistance is not surprising. The disconnect between our common sense and our best science is not an academic curiosity. Prozac shouldn't be dispensed like mints, of course, but the reason is not that it undermines the will. . © 2004 Newsweek, Inc. How to Think About the Mind. Neuroscience of free will. On several different levels, from neurotransmitters through neuron firing rates to overall activity, the brain seems to "ramp up" before movements. This image depicts the readiness potential (RP), a ramping-up activity measured using EEG. The onset of the RP begins before the onset of a conscious intention or urge to act.
Some have argued that this indicates the brain unconsciously commits to a decision before consciousness awareness. Others have argued that this activity is due to random fluctuations in brain activity, which drive arbitrary, purposeless movements.[1] Philosophers like Daniel Dennett or Alfred Mele consider the language used by researchers. They explain that "free will" means many different things to different people (e.g. some notions of free will believe that free will is compatible with determinism,[10] some not). Overview[edit] Patrick Haggard discussing[15] an in-depth experiment by Itzhak Fried[16] Free will as illusion[edit] Relevance of scientific research[edit]