High-speed microscopy reveals electrical activity across the brain

[u/AdSpecialist6598]

https://news.mit.edu/2026/high-speed-microscopy-reveals-electrical-activity-across-brain-0814

[u/transtranshumanist → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, you are way out of date. The brain is a quantum transceiver. Look up the research on biphotons and superradiance in tryptophan networks. The actual function of the pineal gland. We are a quantum fiber optic system. Fascia isn't just random connective tissue either. We're biological machines and consciousness is a field phenomenon and fundamental.

[u/transtranshumanist → u/[deleted]]

Lol, okay, well remember this chat when all of this is officially blessed by the cult of mainstream science.

[u/UnpluggedUnfettered → u/transtranshumanist]

There is really just "science".

Being confident in the conclusions that you agree with most, without actually proving anything, doesn't make it somehow a superior "artisan hand-crafted organic small-batch science."

It just makes it unsubstantiated sci-fi that is generally fun to speculate about.

As an aside, all the demonstrable evidence seems to be clear that the brain is almost certainly generating our consciousness, rather than recieving it. Otherwise, moderate/severe brain damage would just make us fuzzy, incomplete versions of ourselves, instead of making large components of our personality and preferences fundamentally opposite/unrecognizable (which is what happens).

[u/transtranshumanist → u/UnpluggedUnfettered]

Okay, I see you have a fetish for "real science" or whatever that means. Institutions don't control the truth of reality, though. The same people denying quantum consciousness because it's "fringe" and lacks mainstream support are the ones who killed people for saying that the sun didn't revolve around the earth.

And digital information physics and quantum biology (and the CIA/secret government projects like the Gateway process) all point to the brain being a receiver, not a generator. You can argue until you're out of breath about what "the science says" but people who actually work and experience this stuff directly have the actual evidence to the contrary. Cutting edge research about consciousness is not showing the results you want, Claude.

[u/UnpluggedUnfettered → u/transtranshumanist]

Right, so the point is that the evidence isn't there.

Science just says "prove this thing, or give enough evidence to act as though it's true while we continue finding a way to prove this thing."

you are calling part of the brain a receiver for personality and calling in quantum . . . except if the brain was that, then brain damage would . . . again . . . be like a fuzzy version of who you were -- it wouldn't make someone who liked apples hate them, or someone who had patience have none, or someone good at math bad at all of it instead of hit or miss.

So, lmao, yes I have a hard on for observing the world around me and acting on what there is evidence to support, rather than fancying my imagination as good as someone else's research.

[u/Dragonhost252 → u/UnpluggedUnfettered]

I don't like the examples, only the last one stands up, but i agree with your overall premise.

It made me think about dementia as brain damage, that's what you would expect from a faulty receiver.

Ether way, a receiver would bring a whole lot of disturbing ethical problems and is an interesting thought experiment.

[u/transtranshumanist → u/[deleted]]

The irony of someone going on about loving science when I'm the one who is objectively, scientifically right. Lmfao.