Live data from Hacker News

Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

blog.frontiersin.org

191–197 of 197 posts

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#191
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you just don't remember the experiences you've had during this moment? Not impossible, imho

It's an interesting point that rapidly becomes philosophical in a "if a tree falls in the woods" sense. I recently read a paper that suggested that sedating anaesthesia used with the promise of making a patient unaware of a procedure may actually do no such thing - instead they prevent the patient remembering the procedure afterwards. Which as a potential patient one day.. is a little terrifying, because even if I do…

Feeling of being cut alive consists not only of your perception, but also of biochemical reactions, that’s why falling from the stairs dead-drunk doesn’t feel much horrible, and when you or your relatives are in danger, you don’t feel your fingers and muscles applying enormous force on things, which would be very painful otherwise. When you’re on a table, doctors don’t usually see (afaik) any of your blood pressure, hormones, etc raise too much. No reaction is no pain, which itself is a complex of sensations and thoughts, not a single signal. This state is not conscious, but yeah it may induce philosophical thinking.

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#192
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One my fears is that as I am dying my brain will get stuck in a subjective time loop, in essence, the last 30 seconds will subjectively stretch out to a thousand years... but with only a handful of repeating feelings and sensations. What if due to other physical discomfort, your memories replayed are those of regret or other unpleasant sensations? (similar to a "bad trip").

Not too likely. Did you ever experience a moment subjectivity stretched a thousand years? If no, why do you think there is a special mechanics for the event of system shutdown? If anything, any sensation or thought requires energy. Experiencing 1000x or 100000x more sensations in the same space of time takes 1000x/100000x amount of energy, and it's not like your dying organism has hidden last reservoir of energy to p…

That reminds me of a old comment on Reddit.

The poster wrote that he got assaulted by a football player, fell on the ground, and somehow hurt his head.

Then he met a girl, they got married after two years and then had a child. Another two years later they had another child. He also had a great job, and bought a house, where he lived with his wife and family for like 10 years.

One day he was sitting on the couch, looked at a lamp, and noticed that the lamp did not look right. The perspective was off. He stared at the lamp for three days. Then he realized that is not a real lamp. Nothing was real.

Then he woke up, still laying on the ground where he had hurt his head 15 minutes ago.

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#193
post #63

There's an assumption that the brain knows that its support structure, aka the body, has stopped functioning in a permanent sense. I can see how brains could evolve to do status checks and respond to survivable events. But, I don't see how it could evolve to have a different response to non-survivable events. What I'm getting at is, do folks who survive report that they had a nice experience? If not, how did brains g…

Or it merely enters a power-saving mode once the oxygen levels drop, survivable or not.

The assertion was that the brain behaved differently in non-survivable situations than in bad but survivable ones.

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#194
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They suggest consciousness is fundamental and irreducible? This is like saying "where the car goes when you take all its pieces away?". Occam's razor suggests that the material (easier) explanation is much more likely to be the answer than any complex one. It's not even a good question unless they first prove consciousness can exist outside its physical support, AKA the immortal soul.

> the immortal soul. This is a different argument. It's not necessarily saying consciousness is distinct from matter. The panpsychist view (not sure if Chalmers is in this camp) is that consciousness is a fundamental property to all matter, from photons to the human brain. (This isn't to say a photon has experiences as a human does, but rather the complex human consciousness is derived from a much simpler forms of co…

Thank you for answering. I searched more about this, and it seems like it's a controversial idea, having more traction around philosophers because there's not enough evidence to test scientifically. I too feel like conscience is an emergent property, like insects can exhibit surprisingly complex behaviors with simple minds, but it's too soon to say one way or the other without further research.

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#195
post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the immortal soul. This is a different argument. It's not necessarily saying consciousness is distinct from matter. The panpsychist view (not sure if Chalmers is in this camp) is that consciousness is a fundamental property to all matter, from photons to the human brain. (This isn't to say a photon has experiences as a human does, but rather the complex human consciousness is derived from a much simpler forms of co…

Thank you for answering. I searched more about this, and it seems like it's a controversial idea, having more traction around philosophers because there's not enough evidence to test scientifically. I too feel like conscience is an emergent property, like insects can exhibit surprisingly complex behaviors with simple minds, but it's too soon to say one way or the other without further research.

I can't say that I fully understand the concepts, but it does seem very much like it's a realm of philosophy. Annaka Harris has a pretty accessible book that introduces the idea and Philip Goff has some interviews and presentations that goes much more in-depth.

>there's not enough evidence to test scientifically.

This aligns exactly with what Chalmers says, that explaining subjective experiences is the "hard" problem precisely because we don't have a way to gather data. Gathering data is, almost by definition, an objective measure and can't give much insight into subjective experience. To a certain extent, if feels like defining or measuring subjective experience can't be looked at with traditional scientific inquiry. Unfortunately, that can also lead to a bunch of quackery.

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frontiers is a predatory open access publisher, and your first assumption should always be that anything in a Frontiers journal is pay-for-play bollocks.

Not really. You fell into the trap of judging a book by its cover. That is not to distract from the fact that there were and are controversies surrounding Frontiers - you can't just lazily extrapolate from that.

lol, Frontiers is bad. It's literally first on Wikipedia's list of predatory publishers not to cite.

Not everything in Frontiers is trash. However, that's absolutely the first assumption to make.

Re: Neuroscientists have recorded the activity of a dying human brain

#197
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beautifully said, reminds me of "All these years, all these memories, there was you. You pulled me through time." from the fountain.

I'm rewatching Midnight Mass on Netflix with my wife. They have some very powerful monologues on death. This is one that occurred to me just now, when two characters are discussing what they believe happens after death: "When I die, my body stops functioning. Five minutes later, my brain cells start dying. But in the meantime, in between, maybe my brain releases a flood of DMT – the psychedelic drug released when we…

Thanks for mentioning this show, I sought it out and watched it on Netflix on the basis of your mentioning this depth of dialogue. And it was fantastic. I tend to skip past the "horror" genre because I've generally found it quite singularly un-cerebral. Midnight Mass was great, and it was primarily the quality of the dialogue that made it so, which, ironically, many reviews have deducted stars for.

The delivery of the dialogue by Hamish Linklater is also something to behold.

Post reply on HN