4 ms·

Specifically from paper: The live/dead mice (and container) were all held at 37C, which google tells me is a normal mouse body temp. And, the observed light doe

Specifically from paper: The live/dead mice (and container) were all held at 37C, which google tells me is a normal mouse body temp. And, the observed light does not match the spectrum of black body radiation expected for the temps at which images were taken or subjects were held. Also strange: The effect changed w/ injury or anesthetic treatment according to the abstract.

api 1y ago
If we had good enough sensors could we use this for screening or diagnostics? “Aura scanners” has an appropriately cyberpunk feel.
- XorNot 1y ago
  From the abstract the answer basically seems to be yes, and that's how they're pitching it. They note increased emissions due to injury, which would be consistent with repair activities increasing the general intensity of chemistry happening to facilitate repair at wound sites.
Fanofilm 1y ago
Research is finding MicroTubules in the brain likely are the LINK (quantum entanglement) to where Consciousness "lives" (is located). Note that the Microtubules link STOPs while under Anesthesia. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=microtubules+consciousness https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=microtubules+co...
- Y_Y 1y ago
  Your idiosyncratic use of capital letters only adds to my skepticism.
  - noir_lord 1y ago
    First video when I hit that YouTube link was Joe Rogan. Skeptic meter caught fire before I could get a reading.
    - codr7 1y ago
      This is such a weird way to navigate life. Joe Rogan has interviewed plenty of people, different people that have very little in common, just because some of them have controversial views that make you nervous that doesn't mean all the information is useless.
      - afthonos 1y ago
        We are constantly bombarded by links to information. It is reasonable to make snap judgments about the quality of the information based on who is providing it. If I’m looking for accurate, factual information on a topic that is clearly prone to magical thinking, a provider whose reputation is to listen to anyone, including people who very much engage in magical thinking, is actually a very bad source. Because they will not filter on anything beyond “is this neat to listen to.”
      - Starman_Jones 1y ago
        You are correct. However, Joe Rogan should not be the first stop for assessing the scientific plausibility of a new idea. If that is where someone is sending you, that can- and should- be a red flag.
      - freejazz 1y ago
        I don't think it's the controversy of his guests so much as many of their unqualified ramblings that get treated as expertise. It's really obnoxious that it all gets put into political controversy when it's just often facially stupid BS.
        codr7 1y ago
        And you're enough of an expert on all subjects to judge? Or are you rather shielding from whatever makes you think?
        freejazz 1y ago
        The odd defensiveness of it wherever any criticism is labeled as some sort of philosophy against thinking. >And you're enough of an expert on all subjects to judge? Never claimed to be
  - runlaszlorun 1y ago
    I havent even RTFA to be fair but I like how often Bayesian heuristics like this turn out to be... Useful... If even not provably "true".
  - jamal-kumar 1y ago
    Yeah he types weird and linked some generic YouTube search result that pops Joe Rogan up for some people, but there's some pretty interesting research along these lines that's becoming harder to dismiss as just Roger Penrose stepping way outta his field (I don't see people personally attacking Hameroff or Tuszynski for their roles in this research which always struck me as telling). I think it's more trying to zero in on how consciousness works from the perspective of trying to figure out how xenon administration in anesthesiology works to induce its effects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXElfzVgg6M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXElfzVgg6M https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064522000197 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S157106452...
- etrautmann 1y ago
  Why does consciousness have to live somewhere? I currently prefer to think of it as an emergent phenomenon that arises (somehow, we have no clue) from the complex and distributed computations in the brain. Many different systems contribute, and saying that a single level of abstraction is where it lives seems meaningless. Kind of like saying that your video game “lives” in a transistor. It’s not wrong, but it’s not useful.
  - codr7 1y ago
    We don't seem to be able to find it inside the physical brain, and not for a lack of trying. Just throwing emergent behaviour out there changes nothing, just like it doesn't for AI.
    - griffzhowl 1y ago
      There are observed differences in brain function between conscious and unconscious patients. What's wrong with that as an initial characterization of "consciousness in the brain"? The investigation of these "neural correlates of consciousness" is quite a rich research field in its own right
      - codr7 1y ago
        Obviously, but that doesn't tell us shit where consciousness comes from.
        griffzhowl 1y ago
        why not?
    - etrautmann 1y ago
      What would "finding it" mean, whether inside the brain or out? It's quite easy to perturb consciousness by messing with the pieces of the brain, via pharmacology, injury, electrical stimulation, etc. I'm not sure why we need to assign responsibility to a single specific component like microtubules. That seems like saying the axle is responsible for a car moving. Sure, not wrong, but not right or explanatory either.
- Terr_ 1y ago
  It sounds like it's time for The Talk [0]. The whole thing is good, but the final punchline in the last three panels are particularly relevant. [0] https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3
griffzhowl 1y ago
Specific electrochemical processes have their own characteristic photon emissions. Since there are some processes that occur distinctively in living organisms (e.g. to do with metabolism), it was previously thought that these would have characteristic photon emissions, but as far as I know these are the first observations of this kind of thing. The effect changing with injury or anaesthetic I guess reflects the fact that there are different electrochemical processes occurring in these cases that have detectable differences in the photon emissions
- roughly 1y ago
  I seem to recall the mechanism for anesthetics being something like temporarily depolarizing the mitochondrial walls to shut down ATP synthesis, so that might point towards where the effect is originating.
  - pfdietz 1y ago
    That would be lethal. Instead, they affect cell membranes of nerve cells.
    - roughly 1y ago
      Ah, thank you, I was misremembering. That sounds more feasible.

api 1y ago

If we had good enough sensors could we use this for screening or diagnostics? “Aura scanners” has an appropriately cyberpunk feel.

XorNot 1y ago
From the abstract the answer basically seems to be yes, and that's how they're pitching it. They note increased emissions due to injury, which would be consistent with repair activities increasing the general intensity of chemistry happening to facilitate repair at wound sites.

Fanofilm 1y ago

Research is finding MicroTubules in the brain likely are the LINK (quantum entanglement) to where Consciousness "lives" (is located). Note that the Microtubules link STOPs while under Anesthesia. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=microtubules+consciousness https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=microtubules+co...

Y_Y 1y ago
Your idiosyncratic use of capital letters only adds to my skepticism.
- noir_lord 1y ago
  First video when I hit that YouTube link was Joe Rogan. Skeptic meter caught fire before I could get a reading.
  - codr7 1y ago
    This is such a weird way to navigate life. Joe Rogan has interviewed plenty of people, different people that have very little in common, just because some of them have controversial views that make you nervous that doesn't mean all the information is useless.
    - afthonos 1y ago
      We are constantly bombarded by links to information. It is reasonable to make snap judgments about the quality of the information based on who is providing it. If I’m looking for accurate, factual information on a topic that is clearly prone to magical thinking, a provider whose reputation is to listen to anyone, including people who very much engage in magical thinking, is actually a very bad source. Because they will not filter on anything beyond “is this neat to listen to.”
    - Starman_Jones 1y ago
      You are correct. However, Joe Rogan should not be the first stop for assessing the scientific plausibility of a new idea. If that is where someone is sending you, that can- and should- be a red flag.
    - freejazz 1y ago
      I don't think it's the controversy of his guests so much as many of their unqualified ramblings that get treated as expertise. It's really obnoxious that it all gets put into political controversy when it's just often facially stupid BS.
      - codr7 1y ago
        And you're enough of an expert on all subjects to judge? Or are you rather shielding from whatever makes you think?
        freejazz 1y ago
        The odd defensiveness of it wherever any criticism is labeled as some sort of philosophy against thinking. >And you're enough of an expert on all subjects to judge? Never claimed to be
- runlaszlorun 1y ago
  I havent even RTFA to be fair but I like how often Bayesian heuristics like this turn out to be... Useful... If even not provably "true".
- jamal-kumar 1y ago
  Yeah he types weird and linked some generic YouTube search result that pops Joe Rogan up for some people, but there's some pretty interesting research along these lines that's becoming harder to dismiss as just Roger Penrose stepping way outta his field (I don't see people personally attacking Hameroff or Tuszynski for their roles in this research which always struck me as telling). I think it's more trying to zero in on how consciousness works from the perspective of trying to figure out how xenon administration in anesthesiology works to induce its effects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXElfzVgg6M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXElfzVgg6M https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064522000197 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S157106452...
etrautmann 1y ago
Why does consciousness have to live somewhere? I currently prefer to think of it as an emergent phenomenon that arises (somehow, we have no clue) from the complex and distributed computations in the brain. Many different systems contribute, and saying that a single level of abstraction is where it lives seems meaningless. Kind of like saying that your video game “lives” in a transistor. It’s not wrong, but it’s not useful.
- codr7 1y ago
  We don't seem to be able to find it inside the physical brain, and not for a lack of trying. Just throwing emergent behaviour out there changes nothing, just like it doesn't for AI.
  - griffzhowl 1y ago
    There are observed differences in brain function between conscious and unconscious patients. What's wrong with that as an initial characterization of "consciousness in the brain"? The investigation of these "neural correlates of consciousness" is quite a rich research field in its own right
    - codr7 1y ago
      Obviously, but that doesn't tell us shit where consciousness comes from.
      - griffzhowl 1y ago
        why not?
  - etrautmann 1y ago
    What would "finding it" mean, whether inside the brain or out? It's quite easy to perturb consciousness by messing with the pieces of the brain, via pharmacology, injury, electrical stimulation, etc. I'm not sure why we need to assign responsibility to a single specific component like microtubules. That seems like saying the axle is responsible for a car moving. Sure, not wrong, but not right or explanatory either.
Terr_ 1y ago
It sounds like it's time for The Talk [0]. The whole thing is good, but the final punchline in the last three panels are particularly relevant. [0] https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3

griffzhowl 1y ago

Specific electrochemical processes have their own characteristic photon emissions. Since there are some processes that occur distinctively in living organisms (e.g. to do with metabolism), it was previously thought that these would have characteristic photon emissions, but as far as I know these are the first observations of this kind of thing. The effect changing with injury or anaesthetic I guess reflects the fact that there are different electrochemical processes occurring in these cases that have detectable differences in the photon emissions

roughly 1y ago
I seem to recall the mechanism for anesthetics being something like temporarily depolarizing the mitochondrial walls to shut down ATP synthesis, so that might point towards where the effect is originating.
- pfdietz 1y ago
  That would be lethal. Instead, they affect cell membranes of nerve cells.
  - roughly 1y ago
    Ah, thank you, I was misremembering. That sounds more feasible.