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/.
No comments:
Post a Comment