Most of us dream four to six times a night. But we forget 90% of our dreams 10 minutes after they end. Any app or latest technology, or at least an attempt to record a dream has not been developed yet. However, it is possible to record a dream by writing it down and making drawings or sketches related to it. Dream journals are best to document dreams in order to analyze and interpret them. Some apps like Somnio and Freud provide that service.
According to Antonio Zadra, a psychology professor at the Université de Montréal, Dreams are designed to be forgotten. For him, it’s very important to not confuse dream experiences with reality.
A dream is one of those things that are unexplainable by science. Science cannot make sense out of your dreams; it can only explain its point of view on the topic. It is such a ‘topic’ where science’s explanations can be seen as just another perspective.
What exactly is a dream and can it be recorded?
We have often wondered if it is possible to record a dream. The answer is no. In fact, the thing that prevents us from recording dreams is the process of dreaming itself. Because dreams are not stories that start and finish, like a film or a novel. For Antonio Zadra, it’s better to think of our dreams as mental phenomena that happen in sleep, rather than short films with remembered plots. According to Zadra, “dreams do not express a desire for fantasy, but rather the need for a private sphere where we can freely think about what we want to think about without external interference.”
The psychologist claims that our dreams are similar to the thoughts we would have in our day-to-day lives, except this time, there is no external interference or inner censorship to cut ourselves. The result is a story that is coherent and relatively complex. Many even compare the stories that we tell ourselves in our dreams with the movies we have seen.
And since those dreams are not put under any external pressure, anything is possible. They do not have to make sense or be relevant to our lives, which can be why many times they seem bizarre or incoherent.
It may be possible to record a dream using virtual reality technology. In this method, a person would wear a headset and be immersed in a virtual world. While in the virtual world, the dreamer would recall their dream and the headset would record it. Recording brainwave activity during sleep is one partial way to do it. With electroencephalography (EEG) devices, measuring electrical activity in the brain, there are some bare ways, with limitations.
Although your dreams are very unique and different from every dream, it is possible to have at least some common characteristics that you can use as a reference while remembering them.
So, if you can’t remember your dreams exactly, but you can remember their basic motives, their types of characters, and their most recurring themes… Then it’s enough to start thinking about those motifs that you did not know about the first time. That way you will allow your mind to enrich the memory of these recurring themes with more and less important details that will make up a growing story in your head.
The creativity of the unconscious mind in dream
In the past, many cultures have thought of dreams as a way to communicate with the supernatural. Ancient Egyptians used dream interpretation to help guide their decisions and the interpretation of dreams was an important part of the beliefs of many religions.
According to Antonio Zadra, “Dreams are a product of imagination and they’re completely subjective experiences “. And because there is no censorship or external pressure during dreaming, our unconscious mind has complete freedom to explore its own creativity.
Conclusion
Dreams are the product of our imagination. They do not have a meaning or a purpose. Recording dreams may not seem impossible, especially with modern technology, but it is still unproven whether it is possible. Accuracy is another factor just waiting. Dreams are still a mystery, and their nature and purpose remain largely unknown. Scientists have studied dreams for centuries, but the only thing they can say for certain is that they occur during certain stages of sleep. So, technology for recording dreams is far from being possible.
The bacteria in the Siberian permafrost have been studied and found to have survived hibernating for up to 30,000 years—much longer than commonly assumed. What do they do during that time? How can they survive?
Read on to find out more amazing facts about how bacteria survived a 30,000 years-long Siberian winter.
How could bacteria survive during a 30,000 years-long winter?
Researchers have come across strains of bacteria in the Siberian permafrost that has survived over 30,000 years, which is much longer than previously expected.
A number of bacterial strains have been found to be protected inside the permafrost at a depth of between 500 and 2,000 meters (1,640 and 6,562 ft) below the surface. The samples were collected in southwestern Siberia and are found to be almost identical to those found in North America’s subarctic regions.
These bacteria survive by hibernating during summer months when temperatures rise above -20°C and persistent freezing conditions prevail. Researchers speculate that this could be due to a combination of the extremely cold winter temperatures and the bacteria’s ability to survive for long periods of time without oxygen.
Most strains identified in the study do not contain any DNA or genetic information. However, there are some strains that do have DNA in them. The researchers call these “protists” because they contain intracytoplasmic organelles and have likely lost their own DNA.
The team who discovered this says that it is “likely that protist communities are extremely resilient to seasonal freeze-thaw cycles. It seems that the protists remain alive and in dynamic disequilibrium with their surrounding water in the permafrost. This implies that these communities have an active metabolic activity deep in the permafrost. This is something that has been previously impossible to observe.”
How could there be organisms preserved inside a deep frozen layer?
Subterranean environments are found beneath a range of different types of substrates including soil, rocks, and ice. In this so-called subarctic environment where temperatures can get up to -35°C, much of it is likely to be cold enough for microbes to survive.
However, the researchers think that the main reason why this area is such a hotspot for permafrost preservation is that the region has seen very little disturbance at ground level, allowing for the soil to be preserved in its frozen state. The Siberian area has also been largely left alone since the last Ice Age.
This means that any living organism discovered must have adapted to survive under these conditions. In fact, only a few microorganisms have likely survived over time in subarctic regions like these. These hardy organisms are resistant to freezing and are able to hide inside ice crystals until conditions start improving again.
Permafrost
Permafrost is ground that remains frozen for several consecutive years. It typically occurs in higher latitudes and high altitude locations where the mean annual air temperature remains below freezing.
It’s formed because the ground stays cool year-round while the surface layer freezes each winter. Over time, organic matter starts to decompose and forms a layer of peat humus. It remains trapped underneath a frozen solid layer above.
Estimates suggest that as much as 20% of the land in the Northern Hemisphere contains permafrost. This equates to 1.6 million square kilometers (625,000 square miles).
Concluding paragraph
So, while the notion that bacteria can survive in a winterless climate may seem like old news, these discoveries show that during long-term timescales, microorganisms can survive in the most extreme conditions.
Humanity possibly has yet to discover any microorganisms from the deepest cold biosphere located in the Siberian permafrost. However, this finding does reinforce why it’s important to preserve such regions for future study. After all, it could provide us with clues as to how other life forms have evolved in extreme environments.
Plants and animals along with some others are the two types of beings that are considered ‘living’. Although both are living beings, the thing that separates them is consciousness and awareness of the surroundings and the presence of other beings.
In this blog post, we’ll discuss the debate as to whether or not the consciousness of plants is similar to the consciousness of animals. We hope you will find it informative!
A short introduction to consciousness
While the definition of consciousness varies across most individuals, there is a consensus that it describes an awareness of the outside world. For example, individuals with a condition like blindness are not considered to be conscious of the world around them. Someone who is blind can still feel and touch things, so they know they exist as objects in their world. Their consciousness is focused on the task at hand, making sure they do not bump into things or trip over something in their way.
Awareness of Plants?
Well, the straightforward answer to this question would be “who knows after all”. But a majority of researchers, including the author of this article, believe that plants have intelligence and even consciousness. Plants not only sense pain, but they also perceive and interact with their surroundings in complex ways. The ability to feel pain, to perceive and respond to stimuli, is complex and is associated with complex neural networks and neurotransmitters. Plants also have their own kind of complex brains that operate on their own in ways comparable to human brains.
The question of how plants perceive and respond to their surroundings is one of the most impassioned science debates today. One theory suggests that plants are aware of the world around them largely through chemical reactions in their roots. The roots contain “nerves” that sense all kinds of signals from the air, from light, from touch, from other plants, or even from vibrations in our own bodies via things like bones or nerves. These reactions in the roots–known as “reactions”–are similar to “touch” in our own body. While this process is certainly intriguing, it doesn’t explain how plants sense light, water, or gravity, which is much more complex than simply taking in a particular chemical scent or touching a root.
The details of plant perception can best be explained by considering what plants sense and seeing through a little perspective. Plants have many things to which they must respond, including sunlight and air, gravity (which allows them to grow), temperatures, water levels, movement of other plants or animals in the ecosystem, and much more.
A plant’s roots are like an extension of its brain. They contain a sophisticated nervous system in which some neurons are dedicated solely to sensing certain signals or activities such as the detection of light, temperature, and vibration. In the root, these neurons detect signals that tell the rest of the plant whether there is an abundance of water or other resources available from the surrounding environment. A plant may be able to sense even tiny changes in air pressure (which affects choices such as when a plant can photosynthesize).
Plants are also able to sense how their roots are touching the ground. If a plant is grown in a pot and the bottom of the root hits the bottom of the pot, it will not grow any deeper. However, if it hits something extra soft, like mud or sand, it will continue growing. This allows a plant to build a system of tubers that connect with the surface of the earth like eyes on stalks that can see where light is coming from. A plant also has receptors in its roots capable of sensing gravity, which allows it to respond to other things such as other plants in its biome (for example, if they bend over under wind pressure).
Plants respond not just through their roots but also through their leaves. Leaves are made up of dozens of tiny cells that contract and expand like muscles and move in the same way that our own muscles can be excited. The leaves of some plants contain light-sensitive pigments, which respond to light in much the same way that our own skin does. There is even a type of plant called “human touch-me-not” whose leaves have small hairs like those on our skin which can detect pressure, just like human fingertips. Yet there are many other types of plants that don’t even have any such sensory organs in their leaves.
Of course, the brain is not the center of intelligence for plants, but their roots and leaves are the seats of most of their distinct senses.
Do plants have consciousness similar to animals’? Technical View…
Plants somehow do have consciousness similar to animals’ but it is nowhere near as advanced in comparison. While plants may be aware of the feeling that is caused by sunlight on their leaves or moisture on their roots, they will never be able to comprehend these sensations as part of a larger existence. They have no real sense of time and are unaware of the end goal of these sensations. This is where the main difference between plants and animals lies.
How does the awareness of plants differ from the awareness of animals?
Unlike animals, plants do not possess the actual capacity for consciousness. Despite this fact, there is no doubt that they do have some sense of awareness about their surroundings. While they are unable to process what they feel, they do possess a basic consciousness that is based on instinct.
The feelings that plants experience are different because they also have awareness of their own self-preservation. For example, when a plant is wounded by a knife it is able to sense that it needs to react in a certain way or die. Plants can go into a state of hibernation during periods of drought or extremely cold weather and this shows us that their awareness allows them to react based on circumstance.
Animals take in stimuli through their senses and then process them making them react to actions. They are aware of other living beings and the presence of the environment around them. Plants lack this sense entirely though they do react to stimuli from things such as light or gravity.
Concluding Paragraphs
Although plants are considered to be simple organisms with no true sense of consciousness, as we continue to learn more about them we may find out that they do possess something similar to what an animal considers itself conscious of. This is a really controversial topic, hence the answer could vary from individual.
As far as we are concerned, plants possess a basic level of intelligence. This allows them to absorb sunlight and convert it into sugar for energy. This is the limit of their awareness though, and any ability to become conscious like animals is considered to be purely a product of imagination. Plants cannot truly process stimuli because they lack any sort of neural connection that would allow them to do so.
It’s not only easy to believe in things you don’t want to believe in — it’s a challenge for some people to avoid believing in things that can’t be proven.
There are several highly controversial topics on supernatural vs scientific that has been hotly debated for centuries- whether or not there is anything supernatural that can be proven scientifically. Some believers say yes, and skeptics who believe the opposite.
Summarizing the arguments for and against what exists in the unknown, as well as which side of the debate has more compelling evidence to back them up, is the aim of this blog post.
Can anything supernatural be proven scientifically?
What do I define as a supernatural phenomenon? The paranormal is a general term for anything believed to exist outside natural law. This includes telekinesis, ghosts, and life after death. The supernatural is an umbrella term that covers both paranormal and religious beliefs. ‘Supernatural’ is the overarching category that contains the specific subcategories of ‘paranormal’ (elements of reality that purportedly defy scientific laws) and ‘religious’, pertaining to the gods or deities of religions. Before we can explore whether or not there are any scientifically testable examples of either, we must discuss what science can study in the first place.
Science is a method of knowledge acquisition. It attempts to explain the world and events within it using observable and repeatable evidence. In order to do so, it uses various methods. This includes experimentation, to test hypotheses (ideas that are not necessarily true) and provisional laws (rules that typically need to be proven using evidence), to find truths about the universe. Science is solely concerned with those things that can be proven using tangible evidence. The supernatural is not subject to this kind of experimental testing, therefore cannot be proven.
If there are items outside the empirical sciences that are supernatural, these would be religious phenomena rather than scientific phenomena. This is because religion has no empirical basis but only appeals to faith or belief. Religious phenomena do not need to be proven either since they are only concerned with what people choose to believe.
Is science already proving the existence of supernatural things?
Some would say that science is in fact simultaneously proving the existence of both the supernatural and miracles. But this is a large mistake. Science does not prove anything, it disproves. An example of a supernatural claim being contradicted by science is the divinity of Jesus Christ. Science, through textual criticism and archaeological digs, has found that the Gospels were written decades after Jesus’ death and are therefore unreliable as eyewitness testimonies. If one takes this into consideration, it becomes clear that doesn’t mean that God didn’t exist. It simply means that they didn’t exist in a particular form (i.e. that he didn’t exist as a human being). Science cannot prove the existence of God, nor can it disprove miracles.
To be clear, I am not saying that science disproves the existence of any kind of supernatural phenomenon. The reason that this is such a common claim by skeptics is that many religious believers will cite studies like the above (reliance on eyewitness testimony etc) when trying to defend the validity of their faith.
Even if supernatural phenomena are imaginable, they would still be outside the realm of science, as demonstrated above. In order for there to be a scientific explanation for something unreal (such as a ghost), it must first fit into the natural world.
What’s more, empirical evidence demonstrates that paranormal elements (impossible events) are in fact impossible. For example, every documented instance of ghosts has been attributed to psychological disorders. Therefore, any supernatural phenomenon that is not attributable to an external cause will have no observable evidence. That is because it cannot be proven scientifically.
What if a supernatural event is observed?
Perhaps the most common argument from the religious side of this debate is: “if science cannot explain something, it must be supernatural.” To clarify: science can never observe any supernatural phenomenon. It is because these are by definition impossible and therefore not possible to record. If, however, a scientific observation does not have an obvious natural cause, skeptics will simply say that it still has a natural cause that has yet to be discovered (but could one day be); whereas believers will claim that God must have intervened and performed the action in question. Either way, for there to be any kind of scientific study into what is deemed supernatural, it must first fit into some natural law.
There is a certain bias toward the existence of God that religious people must fight against; the same way a scientist must fight against bias for naturalism. Supernatural explanations may appear to be good explanations because they are so enthusiastically embraced by believers, but that’s only because it is natural to believe in something supernatural. It is like how many people believe in ghosts, even though these are not scientific entities. They still feel like they should exist because they “seem right”.
If a believer is convinced that a particular observable event is somehow supernatural in nature, he must provide natural evidence for his claim. That is not as easy as it sounds. It requires an appeal to the scientific method. The mere fact that an event cannot be explained does not mean it’s supernatural, and the mere fact that it can be explained does not mean it’s naturalistic. The evidence must support both sides, and not just the side a person wants to believe.
Concluding paragraph
I believe that the more people learn about science, the more they will realize that there is nothing supernatural. I have come to believe that there are no accounts of ghosts and poltergeists because they do not exist. If there are any phenomena outside of our understanding of the world, then it can only be attributed to external causes and therefore has natural causes behind them which have yet to be discovered.
In the current world of artificial intelligence, there are still many things that computers can’t do. One thing that humans are notoriously good at is coming up with creative new ideas and making decisions based on feelings rather than a strict set of rules. But what if we discovered the “algorithm of thought” – a way to think and make decisions for ourselves that did not involve the conscious use of our logical and rational minds? What if we learned how to do this so completely that we eventually made ourselves obsolete?
There are two things we must consider with any technological advance. The first is ensuring that technology advances in a way to benefit all people, not just those who are already wealthy or politically influential. The second is ensuring that the technology is safe for all people – that it does not become capable of harming us, and can be controlled in a way so that it does not harm us.
A brief explanation of the algorithm of thought
An algorithm of thought is not something like “the complete set of instructions for thinking”. It is rather the ability to translate intuitive, unconscious thoughts into a logical, explicable form. There are two main components to it:
1) The ability to come up with new ideas (creativity).
2) The ability to make decisions without having all the information beforehand. This will make more sense in just a bit.
We will talk about creativity first because that is what people usually think of when they talk about “thinking.” People ask questions like, “How can people be creative if everything has already been done?” We’ve seen examples in this blog like how people can make mash-ups of songs that are unique. What is happening here is that people are translating their intuitive, unconscious thoughts into logical explanations that others can understand.
The ideas themselves are not creative. In fact, many of them are just the results of people’s subconscious mind trying to satisfy their urges. But what determines whether or not you end up going along with those ideas? That is where decision-making comes in. The very act of translating your gut reaction into an explanation of why you feel a certain way allows you to somehow judge the value of those gut reactions and prioritize them. If it seems like a stupid idea, then your subconscious mind will let it die. If it seems good, then you’ll go with it and make it something more concrete.
A good decision-making algorithm takes all the information it has about a problem and makes the best possible solution without messing up. So what if we could come up with a completely infallible algorithm of thought…?
Things that are quite disturbing
Let’s suppose we could create an algorithm of thought that could make decisions perfectly all the time, based on all the information it has, even if it had to process it in real-time. When a person with the algorithm of thought came up with a creative idea, his or her brain would be satisfied and he or she would go along with that idea. But when the person decided on how to make decisions, the algorithm of thought would be able to process all the information about that decision and come up with the best possible answer. It could not just mess up – it would always come up with the perfect answer.
When we say algorithm of thought, we don’t mean any kind of strict or rigid system that have to follow. We are talking about a process by which the brain can form new connections whenever it makes a decision, so that it can always come up with the best decision possible.
Now, this does not mean that people will stop making decisions. People will still want to do things for their own reasons. But the decisions made by the people with this algorithm of thought are mostly subconscious and based on their gut reactions. This means that the algorithm controls them, instead of their brains; in fact, the brain’s role is now reduced to that of a relay and processing front-end for the algorithm.
How is the invention of the algorithm of thought possible? Or, is it even possible?
We know that the human brain can change and adapt, learn, and develop new skills throughout life. It can come up with creative new ideas on how to do things. It can even invent entirely new ideas that no one else has ever had before.
Talking about the algorithm of thought, the brain has not changed in any physical way. It is the same brain that you and I have. But how is it possible that this human brain can invent an algorithm of thought by itself?
A phenomenon in the brain called neuroplasticity, which basically states that your brain has no fixed structure and can always be changed by learning and experience. This means that you are constantly being shaped by the environment around you, which includes your genes, your friends, books, movies, TV shows – basically everything you experience. Your brain is constantly adapting to these stimuli of changes and forming new connections within itself.
The neural connections that are formed are not fixed but rather plastic, flexible, and easily modified. The more you use them – either by learning new things or by making decisions – the more tightly they bond with each other. As a result, any of the connections that have been heavily used over time will be stronger than those that have not.
Impact of the brain on the system
The brain can store all the information it learns in the form of long-term memories. This has been shown experimentally by means of running rats through mazes over and over again in order to teach them to navigate these mazes with ease. In such a maze, there is a blue square in the middle of the maze. When the rat finally gets used to these surroundings and goes through this maze without any problem, there is an area in its brain called hippocampal formation that lights up. This area used to be inactive because it was never used by the rat – but after many repetitions of going through that maze, it has formed strong connections with its neighbors. Now when the rat goes through this same maze, this activated hippocampal region lights up again and it can navigate through these mazes unhindered.
When we say algorithm of thought, we don’t mean any kind of strict or rigid system that we have to follow. We are talking about a process by which the brain can form new connections whenever it makes a decision so that it can always come up with the best decision possible.
If a person keeps on making decisions throughout his life and forming these new connections, the algorithm of thought will develop its abilities over time. In fact, the stronger you use this algorithm of thought for making decisions, the stronger this connection will become in your brain.
Is it the brain’s algorithm, then?
It’s more like a hack on the brain’s algorithm. For example, when you are hungry and see a pizza, you want to eat it. But in this process, there are millions of patterns being formed in your brain and activities going on. It’s like programming your brain somehow to only react to a certain pattern of stimuli. And you can choose what kind of pattern will make your brain react. You just keep on learning and improving your algorithm of thought over time, until it seems like your mind is a clear platform free of any psychological biases that might stop you from thinking rationally and making good decisions.
What would happen if we made ourselves obsolete?
Now, let’s ask the question: What would happen if we turned our brains into a purely logical, predictable, and nearly flawless algorithm of thought? What if we could make ourselves so logical and predictable that we would be a nearly flawless decision-making system? How would this affect us, the living humans?
One way to think about it is to view computers as a type of tool that we use to manage our lives. If you were to become completely dependent on technology and completely obsolete, you would lose all control over your life. You would lose what made you human in the first place – your ability to make decisions based on your feelings, not just reasons. You would become a machine.
If you think about it this way, then we can see how this could be dangerous. Just take an example of tech empires that have destroyed themselves by becoming too powerful (or just look at the examples in our world like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany).
We exist due to our uniqueness, and our ability to choose. If we become obsolete, we will lose this.
Bottom Line
The key to preventing this kind of catastrophe is to ensure that humans’ decisions are based on their own reasoning and intelligence, not based on any sort of algorithm. As we see the rate of evolution of technology in the past decades, scientists are most likely to discover the concept of the algorithm of thoughts in the near decades. This means that we should be very aware of the consequences, and do our best to ensure that we don’t end up becoming obsolete.
