Rouleau writes: Throughout this
essay I have presented significant evidence in support of a hypothesis that
reconciles the continuity of experience and death. Before offering some
important corollaries, implications, and final thoughts, I think that for the
purposes of clarity it is necessary that we briefly return to the question at
the core of this essay by restating its challenge: What is the best
available evidence for the survival of human consciousness after permanent
bodily death? On the bases of what has been presented thus far, I offer the
following answer:
The best
available evidence for survival is the significant observational and
experimental data that indicate the brain is an organ that receives and emits
electromagnetic radiation in ways that are consistent with a transmissive model
of brain function that positions consciousness as independent and at least
partially separate from the brain itself.
Admittedly,
there are several conceptual steps that must be followed to fully appreciate
the argument and I suspect its conclusion can only be compelling if all of the
evidence can be considered simultaneously. Therefore, it may be necessary to
compress the argument down to its most essential postulates, even at the risk
of losing information. Here, I will provide an explicit and succinct summary of
the evidence I have laid out in previous sections, formalize my proposed theory
of survival, suggest a general mechanism, and provide some historical
background for models of consciousness that support survival.
Recall that,
initially, I approached the question by focusing on how brains function because
the survival of consciousness is only threatened by death if brains produce
consciousness by force of internal mechanisms alone. I then invoked William
James’ transmissive model of brain function, which posits that consciousness is
a signal or the product of a signal that may interact with the brain but
originates in the external environment. Therefore, if consciousness is
generated in part or whole by forces outside the head, brain death is not
synonymous with the end of consciousness.
I argued that
the transmissive model is consistent with the electromagnetic nature of the
brain and is supported by an established literature of EMF-brain interactions.
I demonstrated that cognition, behaviour, and even free will can be manipulated
by external EMFs. Next, I summarized the results of my own experiments with
fixed, post-mortem human brains. Together, they suggested that a transmissive
model could be mediated by the material-like properties of brain tissues that
filter induced voltage fluctuations caused by natural and artificial EMF
exposures. The right parahippocampal cortex was particularly capable of
passively amplifying and filtering electromagnetic signals. Other EMF-brain
mechanisms are possible including interactions with biogenic magnetite.
Finally, I discussed human magnetoreception, environmental sources of EMFs,
real-time Schumann-brain resonances, and the reasons why brain-EMF interactions
can account for the continuity of consciousness and the storage of memories
outside the brain.
The argument
put forward here is that brain death cannot eliminate consciousness because
consciousness is not a product of the brain. Rather, consciousness and other
brain functions are explained by EMF-brain interactions, and these are not
wholly dependent on the activities of living cells. To formalize my theory of
survival:
Consciousness
survives permanent bodily death because the electromagnetic forces that give
rise to experience and thought are not created by brain tissues – they are only
received, interpreted, filtered, or transmuted by them.
The idea that
an electromagnetic field emitted by the body may permit the continuation of
consciousness after permanent bodily death has been previously articulated. In
the 1987 paper entitled “Electromagnetic Radiation and the Afterlife”, Janusz
Slawinski cited the pioneering biophoton research of Fritz-Albert Popp and
others to propose a scientific theory of the afterlife. Slawinski theorized
that sharp increases of biophoton emissions from dying organisms – the “death
flash” – may represent the separation of an electromagnetic consciousness or
life force from the body that carries information about the individual. The
following excerpt from his seminal paper337 echoes several key themes in this
essay:
An important
finding is that all dying cell populations and organisms emit a radiation ten
to 1,000 times stronger than their stationary emission during homeostasis. That
phenomenon of “degradation" or “necrotic" radiation, picturesquely
called “light shout", “light S.O.S", or “death flash", is
universal and independent of the cause of death. Its intensity and time course
reflect the rate of dying. Of particular significance are reports on
electromagnetic radiation from the human brain during the agony (and/or
ecstasy) of contemporary near-death experiences, which center on ineffable
light. Measurements of the number of photons emitted and the number of dying
cells, Ndc, give the ratio Nhv/Ndc = 1. That suggests the involvement of one
center critical both for the life of the cell and for light emission. The
phenomenon of the “death flash" constitutes a cornerstone of this
hypothesis.”
Persinger and
St-Pierre later calculated that the energy of the death flash (5 x 10-17
Joules) would be within the range of visible detection for dark-adapted eyes,
meaning it should be perceivable under very low light conditions. They argued
that the existence of the death flash phenomenon accounts for historical
reports of perceived blue and white light emissions observed hovering over or
emanating from the bodies of dying people and blue-shifted wavelengths of light
associated with cellular stress. Therefore, the proposed theory of survival
outlined in this essay builds on an existing scientific literature concerning
the biophysics of death and dying that should be pursued with vigor.
The proposed
theory of survival is dependent upon the validity of transmissive brain
function, which is not incompatible with models of productive brain function.
The action potential really is generated by local, electrochemical events – and
those that run along the corticospinal tract really do generate voluntary motor
activations. However, the complexities of higher order functions appear to be
reliant on the synchronizing and cohering effects of endogenous and exogenous
EMFs. And because many of these effects are mediated by inorganic,
sub-cellular, or material-like properties, it is reasonable to treat
transmissive and productive modalities as compatible, parallel processes.
Therefore, the
proposed theory does not require a complete revision of our understanding of
the brain but rather, an amendment and consideration of some important
implications. Still, there are some possible limitations that will need to be
addressed by future research efforts. Most notably, the dependence of
consciousness on external EMFs, how qualia are derived from EMF-brain
interactions, whether the surviving consciousness is personal or shared, and
the degree to which productive mechanisms participate in transmissive function
are important issues that will require dedicated investigation.
Electricity
seems to bridge the gap between the lifeless world and living matter. . . .
[it] is one of the fundamental factors in all living systems just as it is in
the non-living world.
Burr’s
influence on the field of biology can be found in the works of later scientists
like Robert O. Becker, who significantly popularized the view that
electrodynamics were consequential features of biological organisms rather than
incidental biproducts and even suggested they may underlie psi phenomena. Over
time, electrical contributions to living systems became increasingly clear and
electromagnetic theories of consciousness began to emerge in the literature,
where they continue to develop and gain popularity.
One review of
the literature suggested that many prominent thinkers including Köhler and
Libet have touched on elements of EMF-based theories of mind but have been
historically misclassified. Among the more explicit theorists is the
neuroscientist E. Roy John, who developed his own field theory of consciousness
and claimed that spatiotemporal coherence of electromagnetic and quantum-like
processes could resonate with brain structures to give rise to binding,
synchronous firing and other important features of consciousness including
cortico-thalamic reverberations. Related is the conscious electromagnetic
information (CEMI) field theory proposed by Johnjoe McFadden.
Arguably, the
famous orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) model of consciousness
offered by Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff is fundamentally an
electromagnetic theory of consciousness since it relies upon the quantum
effects of electrons and their interactions with the material properties of
microtubules, which are well-known to align and interact with EMFs. Indeed,
microtubules represent an obvious candidate for the mediation of EMF-brain
interactions since they generate dipoles within cells, respond to electric
fields, and interact with biophotons. Incidentally, microtubules also display
electric circuit properties of memristors that give rise to hysteresis-like
phenomena that can encode information sub-cellularly – providing a mechanism
for EMF-based memory within cells. Therefore, it is unsurprising that some have
explicitly placed microtubules at the center of electromagnetic field theories
of consciousness.
A good theory
should provide new ways of interpreting existing empirical data and the
supposedly established concepts on which they are based. In addition to
explaining survival, a working model of transmissive consciousness may provide
new insights that challenge existing assumptions about life, death, and
everything in between. When a baby babbles as part of normal language
acquisition, we currently assume it is essentially practicing behaviour that is
selectively reinforced by caregivers as part of normal development. In other
words, babies learn language from trial and error.
Viewed through
the lens of transmissive function, babbling may represent something subtly different.
Suppose babbling is the behavioural correlate of downloading linguistic
information from a local or distant “source file”. This may involve a wireless
brain-to-brain connection with caregivers or access to historical linguistic
information in the electromagnetic equivalent of the Akashic record. This would
be consistent with the disproportionate representation of EMF-sensitive REM
cycles in infant sleep. Even if language is learned by conventional means, it
may be reinforced and crystalized by EMF-sleep interactions.
Similarly, the
insidious cognitive decline associated with neurodegenerative disorders and
dementia may represent an uncoupling of the brain’s structure from the
transmitted signal rather than a failure of endogenous neurophysiology. As
brains degenerate, they become increasingly “out-of-tune”, space and time
become increasingly irrelevant, the life-death boundary may become blurred, and
individuals may incorrectly identify people in their environments as long
deceased spouses or friends. With both babbling and dementia, the neurobiology
would be exactly as it is currently understood; however, the causal mechanisms
and ultimate explanations would be fundamentally different.
A good theory
should also explain more phenomena than its predecessor or its contemporary
alternatives. Indeed, a theory of survival that relies on transmissive brain
function will necessarily implicate psi phenomena because they too are reliant
upon the independence of mind from brain. Consider that popular models of brain
function that are based upon the assumption of productive functional dependence
do not provide a mechanistic framework for psi and paranormal events.
Consequently, psi research has either been ignored or marginalized by modern
scientists despite significant interest among people all over the world and
throughout history. In the following section, I will describe how the
apparently unique abilities of some individuals classically termed telepathy,
remote viewing, and psychokinesis are consistent with the survival of
consciousness and easily accommodated by a model of transmissive brain
function. It will also become evident that these phenomena can be inhibited or
modulated by natural and artificial electromagnetic fields, which supports the
general arguments that have been put forward in previous sections.
Nicolas
Rouleau, PhD, a neuroscientist and bioengineer, is an assistant professor at
Algoma University in Canada. He received an award from the Bigelow Institute
for Consciousness Studies "An Immortal Stream of Consciousness" in
response to its search for "scientific evidence for the survival of
consciousness after permanent bodily death." Footnotes and bibliography
are omitted from these excerpts from his essay, but the full essay is available
online at https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/index.php/contest-runners-up/.
