EN | NL | FR
Current Wings Quest 130
Rainbow Connection

The mental code theory (LONG POSTS :)

Post new topic Reply to topic

Author  Message 
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
The mental code theory (LONG POSTS :)
PostPosted: Wed 03 Mar, 2004  Reply with quote

We usually say that when we dream, we get "data" of our surroundings from our mind istead of senses. It's a simplification that allows us not to think about nature of the process, as we think that we understand it. I think that the difference between RL and dreaming is not that simple.

Memory and mental code


We keep a big part of our life in memory. It's very much data. Take the sight for example. How much would take on your hard disk a 24-hour high resolution movie? Our brain has big capacity, but it can't afford storing "raw data", like computer with camera would do. Istead of that, it "encodes" the input into things like shape, color and such. I will call the format in which we store our memories a MENTAL CODE. It consist not on raw data (like movies), but on ideas, so it's a *thought description* of what we have seen. And we usually store just ASSOCIATIONS to other ideas. For example, we see something that our brain recognizes as "a red car". So we actually store associations: 1. to our idea of red color, 2. to our idea of a car. (Of course if we remember that car better, and we usually do, the description will be MUCH more deatailed).
The same applies to other senses. For example when we hear something, we don't store it on some sort of tape in the brain. If we hear words, we store words, not every sound wave we hear (as we would write them in letters). If we hear melody, we remember the tones (as we would write them using notes). There of course can go additional information, like pitch of the voice and such.

To conclude: we get info from our senses and encode it into the MENTAL CODE, which is based on what we already know.

Difference between dreams and RL


That's the main part of my theory. As I said, our process in perception is:
1. We see/hear/etc. something.
2. Our mind encodes it into a mental code.
3. Conscious mind receives the decoded info. If we want to watch something closely, we ask for more info and get more details of what we want.

I think that dreams are genereted in a mental code already (we skip step 2, and of course step 1). Of course if we want to watch something closely, we get more details.
We CAN'T see difference between dreams and RL, because we operate on mental code already.

The conclusions

1. If we have LD, we can observe the dreamworld and nearly always it seems amazingly detailed. According to my theory, it's just because our brain generates more detailed mental code when needed.
2. In dreams, we see things we would never draw, but our mind generates them all the time. It's because our mind actually doesn't create visual data, but "visual mental code" data. If we tried to draw what we remember, it would be DECODING of mental code, which is usually harder (sometimes it's even hard to explain in words what we think).
3. Doing the impossible: Take the 4D vision for example. Atheist said in "what do you want us to do" thread that we can't perceive 4d images because we simply don't have "hardware" for it. However, it can be put in mental code - not "visual mental code" that we use to describe what we see, but just code without any boundaries - "if you can think it, you can do it". That's why everything is possible in a dream.

I hope I'm not repeating someone other's post, and I hope someone will understand what I'm trying to say there...

What are your opinions/additions/reservations to my mental code theory?




Last edited by pav on Sun 05 Dec, 2004; edited 2 times in total
back to top
r3m0t
A head librarian
cookie lover
Posts: 1578
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Last Visit: 23 Apr 2008
Location: London Age: 15 LDs: about 9
 
PostPosted: Wed 03 Mar, 2004  Reply with quote

I wouldn't call it a theory... I would call it a truth! ^^



Last edited by r3m0t on Wed 03 Mar, 2004; edited 1 time in total
back to top
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
PostPosted: Wed 03 Mar, 2004  Reply with quote

It was just strange to me that people are satisfied with the simple Matrix analogy when there is much more to it.

and I'm afraid that my theore doesn't leave place for shared dreaming, as there can't be two people with identical MentalCodes, and you can't view a dream "from outside" because it's linked with rest of your memory.


back to top
Atheist
Hopelessly devoted
cookie lover
37
Posts: 2204
Joined: 25 Sep 2002
Last Visit: 29 Sep 2018
Location: California, USA
 
Re: The mental code theory (long post)
PostPosted: Thu 04 Mar, 2004  Reply with quote

pav wrote:

3. Doing the impossible: Take the 4D vision for example. Atheist said in "what do you want us to do" thread that we can't perceive 4d images because we simply don't have "hardware" for it. However, it can be put in mental code - not "visual mental code" that we use to describe what we see, but just code without any boundaries


The only point I made is that you can't display it all at once by any conventional means. Sure you can store a 4D reresentation of something in memory, but to view it you have to select a small limited portion of it to make into a 2D image, which is the only way our mind can handle visual perception. smile

Anyway, great post.


back to top
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
PostPosted: Thu 04 Mar, 2004  Reply with quote

Yes, it's not the visual conception as we are used to. I think that mental code can be associated to senses, but it doesn't need to. 4D vision wouldn't be "visual", but rather perceived as a conception. LaBerge quotes a man that had LD in 4D coordinate system - i wasn't visual, but rather conceptual. It helped him understand the idea of 4D.
And in dreams we have direct connection to mental code, so we can "perceive" what we usually store in memory, from having 6 fingers to the conception of 4D world, and it will seem real at the time.


back to top
Ego Tripping
Dream Deity
Dream Deity
Posts: 627
Joined: 29 Nov 2003
Last Visit: 16 Sep 2007
 
PostPosted: Sat 27 Nov, 2004  Reply with quote

Are you saying basically that the Brain is simply an encoder/decoder of information and not the producer of Thought/Dreams?

This Mental Code you speak of, where would it be stored? Long Term memory is still not localized to any region of the Brain. If it's not stored in the Brain, then I assume you give creedence to the Theory that the Mind and the Brain are two seperate entities and that the Mind is the true 'perception' of reality.

You say the Mental Code consists of encrypted information that we experienced which produces the Dream. What about a baby, which sleeps most of it's time? Babies are said to dream up to 80% more than Adults. What are they dreaming of if they have much less 'mental code' to deal with, and less cognitive thought to make meaning out of it?

Now keep in mind, you state that Dreams are more detailed because the brain is no longer percieving, but only percieving this 'raw code.' But Brain activity is actually reduced when Dreaming, so that is illogical. How can the Brain produce even MORE vivid imagry in a state where it's functionality is reduced? You say the Brain is producing this Mental Code in it's relaxed state, but where is it receiving it's input from?

This also relates to Near Death Experiences, which Science states are 'hallucinations' as a result of the Brain not recieving enough Oxygen. Yet when these experiences are happening, the Brain is in a state where it's functionality is reduced where it cannot produce lucid, clear images. Yet people who awake "from the dead" where the Brain was nearly inactive, come out with extremely lucid, vivid and 99% of the time, life changing experiences. How is this possible under your theory, if the Brain isn't even active to 'decode' this raw code?

I'm not criticizing at all, just curious where your Theory fits into these areas.


back to top
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
PostPosted: Sat 27 Nov, 2004  Reply with quote

aaaaaarrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhh............ it's the third time I try to answer your post, my Windows crashes everytime! smile

Ego Tripping wrote:
Are you saying basically that the Brain is simply an encoder/decoder of information and not the producer of Thought/Dreams?

No, I'm saying that brain needs to convert sensory input to the association code (Mental Code), or basically 'put it into thoughts', in order to understand it. Of course, this stage can be skipped, as it is when we're dreaming.

Quote:
This Mental Code you speak of, where would it be stored? Long Term memory is still not localized to any region of the Brain.

From what I know, that'd be what is called a semantic memory - memory which stores meanings of concepts. I don't know anything about it's physical location, thought.

Quote:
If it's not stored in the Brain, then I assume you give creedence to the Theory that the Mind and the Brain are two seperate entities and that the Mind is the true 'perception' of reality.

Sort of... actually I would compare brain to a computer, and mind to a program running on that computer... but still the mind is in brain and nothing else.

Quote:
Babies are said to dream up to 80% more than Adults. What are they dreaming of if they have much less 'mental code' to deal with, and less cognitive thought to make meaning out of it?

Well, I guess they just have much simpler dreams.

Quote:
But Brain activity is actually reduced when Dreaming, so that is illogical. How can the Brain produce even MORE vivid imagry in a state where it's functionality is reduced?

While dreaming, brain doesn't use its 'computing power' on converting everything to mental code, so it has more of that power [concentration, creativity?] to produce dreams.

Quote:
You say the Brain is producing this Mental Code in it's relaxed state, but where is it receiving it's input from?

It isn't converted from any sensory input, it's just produced in that form.

Quote:
This also relates to Near Death Experiences, which Science states are 'hallucinations' as a result of the Brain not recieving enough Oxygen. Yet when these experiences are happening, the Brain is in a state where it's functionality is reduced where it cannot produce lucid, clear images. Yet people who awake "from the dead" where the Brain was nearly inactive, come out with extremely lucid, vivid and 99% of the time, life changing experiences. How is this possible under your theory, if the Brain isn't even active to 'decode' this raw code?

I believe NDE's are very similar to dreams, so, again, there's nothing to 'decode' - everything is in association code already.

I hope that helped...


back to top
Ego Tripping
Dream Deity
Dream Deity
Posts: 627
Joined: 29 Nov 2003
Last Visit: 16 Sep 2007
 
PostPosted: Sat 27 Nov, 2004  Reply with quote

pav wrote:

Sort of... actually I would compare brain to a computer, and mind to a program running on that computer... but still the mind is in brain and nothing else.


I used a similiar analogy. The Brain is Computer that runs the Program, the Program being Physical Consciousness. The MIND however, is the User (the part you seem to leave out entirely from your theory). The user simply uses the Computer to run the Program which is designed to store and retrieve information upon the Users command. The Program is stored on the Hard Drive (eternity/God/Zero Point Field). Even if the Computer and Program is destroyed, the User does not go away, it simply uses 'a different computer.'

Quote:

Well, I guess they just have much simpler dreams.


But what's the purpose of this? There's not enough mental code to be sifting through. One part of your theory that is sad is that it leaves no room for interpretation of Dreams, basically reducing our Dreams to just random bits of raw information. But this does not coincide with the fact that many people, including myself, end up developing tremendous insight to their Selves. If Dreams were just random decoding of even more random code, they should never, EVER be coherent (since the part of the brain that normally processes this information into coherent patterns is inactive). Your theory also does not explain at all what a Lucid Dream is, which is a combination of steps 2 and 3 of your theory, yet completely skipping step 1! How is this possible if the Brain is producing this lucid image?

Quote:
While dreaming, brain doesn't use its 'computing power' on converting everything to mental code, so it has more of that power [concentration, creativity?] to produce dreams.


Wouldn't that require even MORE Brain power? To receive no physical stimuli but to still produce coherent images? The Brain would actually be working more to decode all this random and seemingly scattered info into some kind of picture. Once again, this also doesn't even take into account OBE's, NDE's, and LD's.

Quote:
It isn't converted from any sensory input, it's just produced in that form.


Produced where? Where is it being produced from? Is it just recyclying old data over and over? Once again, what about LD's?

Quote:

I believe NDE's are very similar to dreams, so, again, there's nothing to 'decode' - everything is in association code already.

I hope that helped...


Kinda...but you say NDE's are similiar to Dreams but unfortunately, NDE's completely obliterate your theory because at the time of an NDE, the brain isn't active by any measureble standard. These are people that are verified dead and show no brain activity, some people even 'dead' for up to three days (I'll be happy to pull the link). How is the brain producing these 'hallucinations' and 'dreams' in such a state of reduced functionality that it's technically not even working at it's base state? There would be no code to process.

Unless, simply, the Brain does not produce any kind of imagry whatsoever. The Brain is simple a device, a bridge, used to pass information back and forth. Once it's functions are either reduced (sleeping), bypassed (meditation/drugs) or even destroyed/shut down (NDE's/Death), it simply allows the User to have access to the rest of the information that existed outside the confines of the Program ie...the rest of the Hard Drive (existance/eternity).

Just some food for thought. Once again, sorry if I sound like I'm trying to break your ideas down, I just enjoy friendly intellectual debate.


back to top
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
PostPosted: Sat 27 Nov, 2004  Reply with quote

I didn't say that dreams are just random info. They usually don't have any external source and are produced by the brain, but that doesn't mean random. It's a creative work, sometimes very creative compared to our real life ideas. I used the term mental code to point out that they're not produced in any 'sensory' form, like a movie with sound which maybe could later be 'extracted' into some tape, they're just thoughts.

Quote:
Wouldn't that require even MORE Brain power? To receive no physical stimuli but to still produce coherent images?


It's like act of RL creativity, for example writing a book... you don't need sensory input *at the time* to write something, it's even more helpful when nothing is discrating you. A dream is an ideal situation, there is absolutely nothing discracting. Of course it requires brain power, but you are more efficient because of no distraction (by sensory input)... and in the REM stage the brain activity is near the level of waking life.

Quote:
The Brain would actually be working more to decode all this random and seemingly scattered info into some kind of picture.


Again, it's not random and scattered info, but effect of brain [subconscious] activity.

Quote:
Once again, this also doesn't even take into account OBE's, NDE's, and LD's.


LD's - why not? Sub-c is giving you 'input' (not real, just mental code), and your conscious part can discover it's not real.
OBE's - if it's a 'real' OBE, surely you'll need something more, like theory of astral projection. My theory can only explain OBE as a dream, in which you leave your body.

Quote:
Kinda...but you say NDE's are similiar to Dreams but unfortunately, NDE's completely obliterate your theory because at the time of an NDE, the brain isn't active by any measureble standard. These are people that are verified dead and show no brain activity, some people even 'dead' for up to three days (I'll be happy to pull the link). How is the brain producing these 'hallucinations' and 'dreams' in such a state of reduced functionality that it's technically not even working at it's base state? There would be no code to process.


I don't know mych about NDE's, so I can't talk about their nature... I can't explain why someone could have such vivid recall from period of lack of almost any dream activity...

Quote:
Unless, simply, the Brain does not produce any kind of imagry whatsoever. The Brain is simple a device, a bridge, used to pass information back and forth. Once it's functions are either reduced (sleeping), bypassed (meditation/drugs) or even destroyed/shut down (NDE's/Death), it simply allows the User to have access to the rest of the information that existed outside the confines of the Program ie...the rest of the Hard Drive (existance/eternity).


So the dreams would come from somewhere outside us? As a skeptic, I'm trying to find some simpler explanation that doesn't need to use any concepts we're not sure of.

Quote:
Just some food for thought. Once again, sorry if I sound like I'm trying to break your ideas down, I just enjoy friendly intellectual debate.


I'm enjoyng our discussion, too. siiw


back to top
ivi
dreamer
Somniologist
36
Posts: 100
Joined: 16 Sep 2003
Last Visit: 08 Jun 2019
 
PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec, 2004  Reply with quote

As to where the information is stored, I don't believe it's stored in our brain only. Ever since Toshiyuki Nakagaki's team proved the remarkable processes of cellular computation (or may it be - primitive intelligence) in the single-cell slime mold Physarum polycephalum (read more here) a couple of years ago, I have started to consider possibility that information in human body is stored in cellular level and not only in the brain, but throughout all of it.



Last edited by ivi on Wed 01 Dec, 2004; edited 1 time in total
back to top
Ego Tripping
Dream Deity
Dream Deity
Posts: 627
Joined: 29 Nov 2003
Last Visit: 16 Sep 2007
 
PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec, 2004  Reply with quote

^^Awesome read, thanks!

And to me, if they are stored in the cells, where are they storing it? Unless it's not held in the Cells at all, but RIGHT OUTSIDE OUR BODIES. Like, right outside. But what would most people call this? A spirit. :D


back to top
Manko
Somniologist
Somniologist
45
Posts: 246
Joined: 24 Oct 2004
Last Visit: 08 May 2019
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia
 
PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec, 2004  Reply with quote

Obviously this mental code is how things get going, but opposite to that is a theory of brain as receiver and transmitter of reality. It has just small amount of independence so while we sleep we connect to the central core and store images. Anyway shared dreams then can be easily explained, but if they even exist??
Why would we share a dream if we can meet IRL with person we need?


back to top
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
PostPosted: Wed 01 Dec, 2004  Reply with quote

Cellular memory? Reminds me of Frank Herbert's Dune... smile Maybe there's something in it, but we don't know enough so far. I think brain would be enough to store memory.
Transmitter of reality? Outside storage? Spirit?
As a skeptic, I'd use Occam's Razor.


back to top
Ego Tripping
Dream Deity
Dream Deity
Posts: 627
Joined: 29 Nov 2003
Last Visit: 16 Sep 2007
 
PostPosted: Thu 02 Dec, 2004  Reply with quote

pav wrote:
Cellular memory? Reminds me of Frank Herbert's Dune... smile Maybe there's something in it, but we don't know enough so far. I think brain would be enough to store memory.
Transmitter of reality? Outside storage? Spirit?
As a skeptic, I'd use Occam's Razor.


In that case, you accept the Brain does not produce consciousness or store memory, since the extremely random activity of the brain and slow chemical reactions that they hypothesize produce thought do not account for 1) the sheer immensity of memory 2) the mental construct called Self (how does randomness create Unity?) 3) the speed of human thought.

Think about this:

You are driving down the road drinking a Pepsi and eating some chips. You have Green Day on the CD Player and its Rush Hour (heavy traffic). Your friend calls and starts to talk to you about the party you were at last week and that lady-friend you made while you enjoy the drive and the good eats and tunes. Just then, a truck in front of you hits his brakes and your Brain catches this secondary sensory input and you slam on the breaks narrowly missing a bad accident. You hang up and put the food away, as you are a bit shaken up.

Now this is a common situation we've all most likely been in. And think about what your Brain was doing at the time.

You were able to eat and drink (taste the food), listen to the music, talk to your friend about a past experience (with visualization of the events) and still maintain enough control of the car to not veer off the road. On top of that, you were able to subliminally detect all the other sensory input coming into your Brain including the flash of the brake lights of the Truck in front of you that you INSTANTLY related to "I am going to hit him and I must hit the brakes right now before I do" all within a few milliseconds.

Simple "random firing" of the neurons does not account for how the Brain does this, the chemical processes actually run at a rate too slow to account for all the relatively instantaneous actions you perform. It also does not account for how you can technically exist "in two places at once"....one one aspect, you were on the road driving and talking, and in other, you were at the party reliving whatever the conversation was about.

Isn't it much easier to say the Brain is simply a "bridge" that simple encodes and decodes information for the Spirit to wield? Think about this, every single part of your body is designed to translate information back and forth and always onto a higher structure. Cells talk to create organs, organs talk to support the Brain, so why would it stop at the Brain? Isn't it logical, following this idea, that the Brain is simply designed to send information to a higher level? And yes, the Spirit is also designed to send information to IT'S higher level (God).

Occam's Razor states the simplest theory is usually correct. Saying the Brain, with it's slow reactions, no explanations for Memory and even less explanation for Out Of Body Experiences, Near Death Experiences, Dreams and other 'transcendental' experiences, is a lot more difficult than simply accepting the Brain does not produce Consciousness or store Memory at all.


back to top
pav
Dream Weaver
Astral Explorer
31
Posts: 348
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2010
Location: Poland
 
PostPosted: Thu 02 Dec, 2004  Reply with quote

Again - why do you assume that brain is acting 'randomly' and has slow reactions? It's an *extremely* complex neural network, and I think it's able to perform such difficult tasks on many levels (conscious, sub-c, even creating dreams). I compare brain to a computer, and layout and state of the neurons to program running on it - mind.

Memory storage - so much memory can be stored, because it doesn't take much place, as my theory explains (like 100KB description instead of 1GB movie).

Many different tasks - why not? Even our computers are capable of running many processes at once, reacting very fast. As for the fast reaction for the truck - such reactions doesn't involve consciousness (and, therefore, more complex and longer data processing), they're reflexes.

Why such complex, evolving neural network would exist, if it's only used as a data bridge? And we don't know anything about existence of any 'spirit' (that's where Occam's Razor applies, 'transcendental' experiences like dreams and NDE can be explained by psychologically as work of mind). For me, that's just escaping from a problem - by moving the location of our counsciousness away from mind.

Quote:
Cells talk to create organs, organs talk to support the Brain, so why would it stop at the Brain?

Cells, organs and brain are parts of our body, why go outside it? I'd say that brain cells talk to create a mind.


back to top
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

print  

All times are GMT + 2 Hours
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB
LD4all ~ spreading the art and knowledge of lucid dreaming online since 1996 ~