/sci/ - Science & Math

lol

this looks.../x/-tastic.

i only read part of OPs post

it sounds interesting, until you realize that such delusions are called schizophrenia and there are literally millions of people in the world that think they experience such things. and most of them are unaware that there is anything wrong with them.

>>1644733
can you prove that schizos aren't genuinely experiencing parallel universes?

Is /x/ the most stupid board on 4chan?

>>1644755
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Now get back to /x/.

>>1644756
/b/ is stupider, but it knows it.
/x/ doesn't realise its herpaderp is herpaderp.

>>1644758
pledes εφ

I think schizophrenia brought about man being self aware. The people with schizophrenia today are just that more self aware.

>>1644755

if you want you can induce schizophrenia on yourself. just get a quarter ounce of cocaine or a gram or two of meth and stay up for 3 or 4 days until you get cocaine/amphetamine psychosis, and then decide if the things you start seeing and hearing are alternate universes or just your brain fucking up due to dopamine and seratonin everywhere.

>>1644758
Sounds like the dogmatic religion of whoever gets to declare what is and isn't extraordinary.

>>1644789
I heard voices once due to prescription drug withdrawal. Doesn't mean the voices were manufactured by my brain. It could mean the brain changes let me hear something that actually existed.

>>1644800
You're an idiot. A crazy idiot.

>>1644755
The miswiring of neuron signals whenever we scan their brains proves that they aren't.

>>1644785
No it did not sir, and no they are not. Fuck off back to /x/.

We CAN test this with Repeatable Scientific Experiments

Have more than one person do the exact same thing.
Do both people hear the exact same voices or witness the exact same phenomenon?

THIS is how we determine what is reality and what is not the best that we possibly can.

>>1644819
how so?

>>1644824
If two people could independently repeatedly hear the same thing it would prove the sound originated outside either brain. If two people hear different things, it doesn't prove anything. Unless a way is found to actually control the contents of the speech they're hearing, it won't be possible to demonstrate it isn't coming from the brain.

>>1644830
Neurocognitive deficits, abrasive and almost lupine blood flow in said brain, also the atypical receptors and abnormal flow of seratonin and dopamine that is coequal with hallucinogenics. As well as schizophrenia often affects parts of the brain that are responsible for us being able to hear sound, think our own thoughts, imagination, vision, and tangible senses. Not to mention that whenever schizophrenia acts on the brain, it can only be produced within the brain, and only happens in it. If the person was experiencing himself transcending realities, his brain would at least require the ability to produce non-native frequencies and neuron charges, as well they would represent as evidence of outer dimensions and realities. That, however, does not happen, and while their neuron signals and abnormal blood flow works work differently enough to produce it's mental disorder, they are still the same as ours, just damaged to a degree.

>>1644876
>non-native frequencies and neuron charges
what do you mean by that?

You can't expect people to run around doing your homework for you at your whim.

SCIENCE!

1. A man claims to experience an unknown phenomenon.

2. Can he form a testable hypothesis explaining it based upon his observations?

3. Can he devise a falsifiable experiment that meaningfully tests the hypothesis?

4. Did the results of the experiment hold up to the hypothesis?

5. Are the results repeatable and can we now make accurate predictions based upon this hypothesis?

You are currently stuck on step two. Once you make it past step five you will have an acceptable theory that may stand until a more accurate hypothesis undergoes this process and strikes down the old one.

You can propose anything you like but no matter how certain you feel about it, it's a useless gesture until you are able to produce evidence.

>>1644885
Frequencies and neurons that aren't native to the brain, the human body, and/or this planet on it's own.

>>1644876
I don't see why different frequencies are needed. It's not like the brain is a radio receiver. I can accept that whatever is going on in the brains of schizophrenics can be similar to what goes on in the cases of some hallucinogens, but some hallucinogens have long been used with the idea that they can lead to seeing and hearing real things in other dimensions. That the sensing parts of the brain are affected wouldn't be surprising whether it is actual hallucination or actually reflective of some objective reality. Either way, the brain has been modified so as to be able to see or hear it.

>>1644900
>frequencies
>It's not like the brain is a radio receiver

You're going to need to learn more about biology and electricity before you're able to meaningfully continue this discussion. Also, a dictionary.

>>1644900
If string theory is correct, different universes are made up of different frequencies, thus any evidence of different realities can be searched by finding frequencies or vibrations that aren't of our own (which theories like the simple harmonic oscillator or a Lorentzian function could back up). If the claims schizophrenics are able to transcend reality, different frequencies and neural transmissions would be evident on their brains to back up their claims.

>>1644906
In other words you can't defend your asinine theory about the brain wave frequency having to change.

>>1644910
lol the frequencies at which strings vibrate in string theory are orders of magnitudes of orders of magnitude above the frequencies at which the brain operates. This should have nothing to do with string theory.

>>1644913

No, I mean you don't seem to know enough about neural function, brain waves or that the word frequency does not always refer to electromagnetic radiation.

I'd love to educate you, but this is wholly beyond the scope of an image board and the time available. I suggest consulting with a college.

But if you're going to get defensive and resort to schoolyard arguments when someone points out gaps in your understanding, then you're on your own entirely.

Fuckers been watching too much Fringe.

>>1644925
You would be wrong. I actually did binaural beat brainwave entraining research while in college. I think you're just an idiot who can't understand or formulate an argument.

>>1644915
Anything that's apart of this universe are apart of it's frequency or at least within it's own range in order for anything to exist in it. If a person can shift universes, his strings' frequencies would have to adjust to that other universe and back in order to transcend them. And if a schizophrenic person is capable of transcending the other -verses, it would at least be evident on his brain.

>>1644959
This thread has nothing to do with string theory.

>>1644899
why would experiencing parallel universes (not fundamentally different to our) would prerequire that?

>>1644967
Not directly, but if it's correct, the brain would have to shift different frequencies than whatever dimension it's in, thus any changes would be evident on the person's brain. Thus this provides two possible ways to prove/debunk their claims that they've been to other realities: the evidence of frequency and neuron changes that aren't native our own universe, and the credibility of string theory itself.

>>1644974
Because (again this goes back to whether ST is correct or not) different universes/parallel-universes are of different frequencies, thus the mind would have to shift it's own to theirs in order to present itself in other -verses, which would dilute it's own brainwaves and neurons would leave traces of such on the person's brain. It would at least require traces and evidence of frequency changes to valid the claim that schizophrenics can transcend our reality.

>>1644975
yeah but in the /x/ thread it was discussed about parallel universes (like "having taken" different paths of possibilities within a branching maternal multiverse) not alternative dimensions or alien realities

>>1644986
Parallel universes are alternative dimensions and alien realities I'm afraid.

>different frequencies
>would dilute it's own brainwaves and neurons would leave traces of such on the person's brain
assuming that this is true, since the brain recieves similar stimuli from parallel realities would our current equipment be sufficient to detect it? sorry if I make you repeat yourself, but if the schizos have an abnormal scan how exactly do we rule out that it is not due to the hypothetical frequency anomaly you mentioned

btw skepticfag here, not trying to defend the /x/tards, just honest questions

>>1644975
Well this would be at odds with the millennia-old hypothesis that both normal and abnormal brains are capable at times of seeing and hearing SPIRITUAL things. The "spiritual dimension" is not consistent with the other worlds of string theory, so approaching the subject from that viewpoint doesn't deal with the spiritual theory.

>>1644984
But these frequencies have nothing to do with the brain frequencies that were discussed, which are brainwave frequencies under 30 hz.

>>1645004
Despite how different their brainwave scans are, they're still native and produced by the brain itself. The ones from different realities would be of a different strength and speed and would stand out because they would the ones that aren't native to the persons brain nor anyones, and would also non-native to own reality.

>>1644989
why is that nessecary

assuming the universe isn't fully deterministic and sister universes are born every time a di-tri-polychotomy of possible outcomes appears in a chain of events then the sister universes are only slightly different at least for the near future after their "split"...

>>1645011
The frequencies are still within the universes' frequency range, depending on which verse/dimension itself, it's still within and apart of it's range.

i.e.: The brain's frequency would change to another one if it were in a different reality.

>>1645016
Because it would serve as data/evidence that they exist outside this one, and that the person has been there briefly.

>>1645019
No, you're not getting it. The frequency of brain waves, 1hz-30hz, has nothing whatsoever to do with the frequency of the strings in our universe (assuming they exist), which is much much much higher.

>>1645007
I'd prefer if we are going to make "supernatural" claims to keep that in a semi-naturalistic level instead of fortifying ourselves in faith of the gaps and childisly defend arbitrary beliefs because "you can't prove invisible pink unicorns, that make me fool good and important, don't real".

Of course that discussion is surely a wild goose chase but since we took an unexcusably open minded approach let's not reduce it to "I want to habeeb" batshitnuttery...

>>1645012
Your brainwave frequencies don't look different depending on whether you are imagining a cow or seeing a cow that is external to you.

>>1645040
wut? I'm saying that the natural mechanism provided by string theory doesn't fit for the idea that schizos or people who eat cactuses are seeing something from the spiritual world. Dismissing the whole idea just because you don't like it isn't "scientific".

>>1645034
that... I guess

they still are brainwaves dude

>>1645034
That range is still within range of the universes' frequency, that's how we're able to be present within it. If the brain could change to another universe, the 1-30hz would shift to a different one in order to be present in that other universe, or another and another.

>>1645042
You produce recollection waves whenever you see something you recognize. That's just an example however.

>>1645050
>I'm saying that the natural mechanism provided by string theory doesn't fit for the idea that schizos or people who eat cactuses are seeing something from the spiritual world
agreed
>>1645050
>Dismissing the whole idea just because you don't like it isn't "scientific".
though I honestly don't like it the reason I dismissed it was because I saw it as the overused trolling technique in /sci/ - atheism vs religion. You know like "you can't disprove that schizos are contacting an unfalsifiable fairy land so it must be true"...

Hello dear /sci/, I'm a neuroscientist. I see there's a lot of talk going on about brain waves and unfortunately I think you haven't a clue what you are talking about (don't take that as an accusation because it's not meant that way).

I'm a bit too lazy to read through the entire thread, so could someone give me the gist of the discussion and than perhaps I could offer some knowledge about brain function to sort out some issues.

>>1645107
>>1645107
>so could someone give me the gist of the discussion

How do scientists know that what people see/hear while having Schizophrenia is real or not?

>>1645113
If in a controlled environment those schizophrenic people report perceiving things that cannot be verified by others, e.g., an extra person on the room that's cannot be seen or heard by the doctors also present in the room, that's a good indication that the schizophrenic person is hallucinating.

Functional measurements have indicated that these hallucinations aren't the result of direct sensory input, but are generated instead by hyper-active sensory cortices, which means they are generated in the part of the brain responsible for perception. They don't have some super extra sense that we can't measure.

>>1645107
Basically there's a claim by /x/ that a schizophrenics brain allows him to transcend reality, and that what he's experiencing is instead that different reality itself and not just his brain making it up. And then someone in this thread applied this to string theory, saying that if it's correct, his brainwaves should be able to change frequencies when entering the other realities, and thus such frequency changes (of course the frequency change would one that's not native to the brain or this reality should be evident on his brain in order to back up the claim he's been in another universe briefly.

>>1645126
...which is false because brainwaves don't even remotely correspond to the frequencies of strings in any dimension.

>>1645123
and how do we know that hyper-active sensory cortices don't allow for perception of a reality than normal sensory cortices cannot detect?

>>1645126
>his brainwaves should be able to change frequencies when entering the other realities
That to me seems like that person doesn't understand what brain waves are. When a neuron fires it temporarily lifts the concentration gradient between the inside and outside of the cell, so that positive ions flow into the cell which means the outside becomes slightly more negative compared to baseline. When lots of neurons synchronize their activity this can be measured as periodic fluctuations in extracellular negativity, and that's what brain waves are. They have functional relevance because some cellular mechanisms are regulated by oscillations at certain frequencies.

All frequencies (from 0.1 to 100+hz) are present at some point in healthy brains and some are more pronounced during sleep than others for instance. That has nothing to do with alternate realities, but with the cellular prostheses at work at those times.

>>1645144
exactamundo

>>1645138
Well the argument in string theory is that everything (literally) is made up of tiny little strings vibrating within a large frequency range depending on the universe/dimension the object is, and in order to be present in a universe is to have your frequency within the range of the specific universe. So the argument the previous bloke was hypothesizing was such frequency change should be evident (like leave traces) on the person himself, especially his brain. Now the question is, if ST true, whether or not that's accurate or applicable.

>>1645142
Because we can't empirically verify that those realities are there, and there is nothing that would suggest they are actually there.

>>1645146
No because we have no measurable indication that strings even exist, much less what frequency they vibrate at.

>>1645142
ignorant of the subject but I guess that happens because there is no intermediate activity to other parts of the brain/nervous system that would indicate external stimuli, hust indications of localised brain activity, rait?

>>1645144
>but with the cellular processes* at work at those times.

>>1645148
But that becomes a circular argument. If you need hyperactive sensory cortices in order to empirically verify the reality, then the absence of of that empirical verification with the lack of the hyperactive sensory cortices doesn't indicate anything.

>>1645146
Uhhh.... No, I think the question is (assuming string theory is true): would any frequency shifts leave evidence on the person's brain that would stand out and can be studied.

>>1645156
The thing is, other than the actual optic nerves from your eyes to your visual cortex, there's not a thing in your brain that can differentiate from an image you're seeing through your eyes and seeing in a dream. Same with a visual hallucination or "vision". There's really no way to distinguish, except to determine that the vision isn't coming by way of photons going into the eyes.

>>1645159
You can measure reality by other means than your brain.

The point is that activity in the sensory cortices in schizophrenics is not the result of any input, but spontaneous because of hypo-suppression by other brain regions. Most neurons have an intrinsic baseline firing rate, which means they generate activity even though they aren't stimulated. This is kept in check by inhibiting input from other neurons. If that inhibition falls away the neurons become hyper-active. That's just the way they work.

when /x/ comes to /sci/ its just being crazy.
when /sci/ goes to /x/ its just being desperate.

Seriously, what the fuck are you doing asking /x/ for citations? That should qualify you as cognitively deficient if you can't be made aware that you have no fighting chance of proving anything there. Get some mother fucking situational awareness or be troll up something more interesting cause as it stands shit is childish and makes ICP look dignified.

>>1645167
yeah well unfortunately photons (figurative light balls) don't exist. I'll agree that there is an absolute smallest 'package' of light but as for a 'particle' - no. Particle is the wrong word even if there is a mass.

>>1645390

>>1645390
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality

>>1645390
They have momentum.

>>1645419
and velocity has mass..

>>1645390
It's both, idiot.

>>1645413
I am very well aware of that but I would still insist that all matter is composed of waves which the 'particle' is only a vehicle to help us arrive at this conclusion.

>>1645390
My inner string theorist claims they're vibration quanta on branes.

>>1645442
I should also clarify that its the Planck length which causes the illusion of particles.

>>1645442
>>1645445
But you claimed that photon's don't exist. If they're a wave phenomenon (which they aren't entirely) how than don't they exist?

>>1645433
velocity does not have mass. when did public understanding of relativity get this fucked up. it was not always thus.

>>1645445
Well, now you've truly gone full retard. Plank length has no know physical significance. Stop watching science "documentaries" and do yourself a favor and pick up a tetxbook.

>>1645148
there is a way but you need 4 people
2 yous and 2 of the same friend.

Sharing the results from there might get tricky since someone has to be 'primed' in order to view the results. It's no different from reading a math proof or white-paper filled with technical jargon though - a certain mental preparation must be achieved before you can interpret the papers or the results and participate in the cutting edge understanding.

>>1645455
I haven't taken part in the discussion, but upon seeing this I have to second it.

>>1645456
... you're from /x/, aren't you?

particle acolytes listen and listen well as we visit Cantor's grave.

If you have a small circle with infinite lines of symmetry filling the inner circle completely and cutting into it's circumference and then into the circumference of a larger concentric circle stationed on the same center as the inner - how do you explain the gaps between the lines of symmetry on the larger circle's circumference?

It is the same for a light source and you supposed photons on a liner path outwards - where then are the gaps in the sphere surrounding your light source as you stand a distance away looking at it lest you suppose infinite particles shooting in infinite directions around some pinpoint filament?

>>1645493
photons describe the interactions. waves describe the movement.

>>1645455
fine, planck's constant you stubborn asshole. With your rigid and 'unforgiving' rebuttal it's obvious you are looking to win a debate rather than discover a truth. So goes science today.

>>1645507
I dig your neutrality but this is WAR!

comeon you covert niggers lets keep this particle rolling huh?

>>1644755
The energy needed would exceed normal body structure.

It looks like I'm going to have to come here everyday and whoop some residual atavic determinism ass.

>>1644506

I facepalmed so hard the entire thread through. They're fucking nuts, goddamn.

I for one believe OP

>>1645528
elaborate

CAPTCHA: wank impairs

I have heard real loud voices like if it were gods. What do I have?

>>1646854
might have you stolen the lightning?

Empirical evidence is nothing.
This physical realm is nothing.
Prepare yourself, petty humans, for the day in which all sciences and mathematics shall be ripped asunder and a new age of thought shall spread across all of consciousness.

>>1647830
That's nice aether, broke out of the asylum?

So many sciences are built upon lies. Just as this universe is a lie, so are our perceptions of it. You may gather evidence and insist that, without a doubt, this is true and this is false, but you are still ignorant to the entirety of truth.

Scientists, of all people, should know that nearly everyone is ignorant to the truth. Ponder, for but a moment, that your truths are, in fact, nothing but misinformation and that you actually have a terribly incomplete view of reality.

>>1647855
This is why women should never leave the kitchen.

>>1647867
I'm an eighteen year old male. *doesn't like to refer to himself as either a "man" or a "boy"*

Here's is a post I made on /x/ in the same thread you fellows are discussing. Enjoy:

"UGHm PEOPLE ARE SO STUPID.
Hrmm, I wonder why sciences insist upon people being crazy when "Crazy" people insist that they're actually doing extraordinary things, such as reality jumping.

OH! IS IT MAYBE BECAUSE:
Science
Doesn't
Know
Everything?

HRRRM, WELL, LET'S THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A SECOND BEFORE WE JUST SHRUG IT OFF AND WAVE IT AWAY

Man is ignorant. Man is lied to everyday by almost everything. Man created science, I suppose. So would it not make sense that science is just as ass backwards as man? Sure, they can use "tools" and "Devices" to measure and implement clever calculations, BUT THESE TOOLS AND THOUGHT FORMS ARE JUST AS ASS BACKWARDS AS THE REST OF IT!

Fuck
Science,
Nigga."

>>1644758
Ugh, you would be so stupid as to think that.

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EVIDENCE ONLY TO CONVINCE YOUR DULLARD ASS.

THE EVIDENCE DOESN'T EVEN NEED TO BE REAL, SO LONG AS IT "FITS" YOU'LL LAP IT UP LIKE A DOG AND HAPPILY DIGEST THE GARBAGE.

Now would be a good time to start totally alienating myself from whomever might be reading, so here goes:

I've done magic before. I've made things happen according to my will. I've influenced people with BUT THOUGHTS. I've interacted with other-worldy entities. I've had telepathic experiences.

It is through these happenings that I have formed my belief system.

Am I delusional? Or are you (gentle reader, if any) just ignorant as fuck?