Check out our updated Community
Strength of thoughts.

Do you believe that thoughts can be materialized? Is it sort of undescribed physical phenomenon or process? What is the energy of thoughts? Is it real energy like typical energies described in learning books by physics but not having a scientific description for now and could be describe in terms math in the future? Or maybe it is just strong psychological setting on achievement the goal? What do you thing about this question?
Sep 17, 2016 9:09 PM
Comments · 4
Thanks, Michail. Your English is clear, but the subject is abstract; this means that differences in understanding seem bigger in writing than they really are.  I think I grasp your point: since we agree that thought must have a physical expression in the brain somewhere (even if it can't yet be identified), then it follows that it must have physical energy.  Everything material or physical automatically has energy. I had initially understood your usage of the word "energy" in a more general sense, but I can see that that's not what you meant.
September 18, 2016

As I have heard also that nobody have been able to find correlation between particular thought and a corresponding synapse. It is one of the main causes which have been limiting capability to create AI for now. Yes, I don't know what is in real science and probably it has already happened in laboratories as you said. But I don't agree that energy of thought it is just figurative way of speaking and don't understand you, when you in start said that "thought has a physical dimension" and than said that it is a  "figurative way of speaking". When we say that some physical phenomena could be measured we mean that we could measure some energy which released or consumed in this process. If think in a formal way that process of thinking consumes the energy and we could say that thoughts have a energy but it have a much problem with clear formulating what is the thoughts what is the thinking ane etc.

When you have listed several stages and have associated their in a logical way, you ,being based by premise that expression some thought in a language which is physical process, have come to conclusion that thoughts have led to energy consumption or as you said to "uses energy". But when I asked the question I meant the process of thinking without expression on language level, just thoughts. 

I probably explaine my thoughts on english not clear enough.

September 18, 2016

I've not heard any news to suggest that neuroscientists have been able to associate a particular thought with a corresponding synaptic pattern.  But perhaps it has already happened in laboratories.  However, even if that hasn't happened yet, thought is a product of a physical organ (the brain) and so logically I would say that thought has a physical dimension.  

As for the idea that thoughts have energy, I think that this is just a poetic or figurative way of speaking. For me the reality seems to be: 

1. A thought can be expressed in language which is physical.  

2. Others process words heard and their meanings intellectually (and this would include at the neurological level).  

3. This processing may activate some energy which was till then latent.  

4. Then the other makes a decision to do something in response to the meaning of the words, and so uses energy. 

Interesting question.  What do you think?

September 17, 2016

Thank you for your reply, I would like ask you next question.

What do you think about more easier fulfillment of desires when we use process visualization? Is it just a self-deception when we try to associate some events in our life with our thoughts? What do you think about telekinesis or something like that? Is it a fiction for you? 

September 18, 2016
Language Skills
English, German, Russian
Learning Language
English, German