It's nothing to do with the walking, or the street: that's the same. When seems to be something external to the what, how, and where of the situation. But this creates a problem for neuroscientists.We think we know how the fact that the brain could store the concept of "walking down the street" (or "walking" and "street"). Very roughly, simple sensory impressions are thought to get built up into more and more complex combinations, and this happens as you move away from the brain's primary visual cortex (V1) and down the so-called ventral visual stream.
In area V1, cells respond mostly to nothing more complex than position and the orientations of straight lines: / or \ or _ , etc. Whereas once you get to the temporal lobe, far down the stream, you have cells that respond to Jennifer Aniston. In between are progressively more complex collections of features.
Even if the details are wrong, the fact that complex objects are composed of simpler parts and ultimately raw sensations, means that our ability to process complex scenes doesn't seem too mysterious, given that we have senses.
But the fact that we can take any given scene, and effortlessly think of it as either "past", "present", or "future", is puzzling under this view because, as I said, the scene itself is the same in all cases. And it's not as if we have a sense devoted to time: the only time we're ever directly aware of, is "right now".
Swedish neuroscientists Nyberg et al used fMRI to measure brain activity associated with "mental time travel": Consciousness of subjective time in the brain. They scanned volunteers and asked them imagine walking between two points, in 4 different situations: past, present, future, or remembered (as opposed to imagined in the past). This short walk was one which they'd really done, many times.
What happened?
The crucial contrast was between remembering, past imagining and future imagining, vs. imagining in the present. This revealed a rather cute little blob:
So what? This is a nice study, but like most fMRI it doesn't tell us what this area is actually doing. To know that, we'd need to know what would happen to someone if that area were damaged. Would they be unable to imagine any time except the present? Would they think their memories were happening right now? Maybe you could use rTMS could temporarily inactivate it - if you could find volunteers willing to lose their sense of time for a while...
6 comments:
Quote: "Maybe you could use rTMS [could]to temporarily inactivate it - if you could find volunteers willing to lose their sense of time for a while..."
This is a very interesting and highly relevant idea for testing the attainment of a "Non-Dualist" state (Achievement of Oneness with a collapse of an individuating "self"). The Non-dualists (Advaitins in Sanskrit) who realized the Oneness are called "Jivanmuktas." The fundamental realization achieved by them is that "everything is happening NOW only - all their sensory perception being permanently abiding in the "Now."
Literally there are hundreds of such people spread in all the continents. ("Sailor" Bob Adamson, Mike Graham for example are well known in Australia).
I have been arguing for the development of Neuronal Correlates of Jivanmuktas (see ten Posts with that title at my Blog: http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/).
The proposed rTMS test can be an additional marker as a correlate for Jivanmuktas.
I have even proposed to the Advaita Academy of UK to initiate a research proposal on this aspect.
We have many internet web sites that provide links to the web sites of Non-dualist teachers who apparently reached the state of Oneness (living always in the "Now"). If only we could persuade the Advaita Academy and a few of the young Non-dualists (Jeff Foster, David Brockman in the UK) or continue with the set of people whom Jeffery Martin interviewed (see article: "RESEARCH ON NON-DUALISM, "self" AND CONSCIOUSNESS" at my Blog).
Recent methods developed for extracting inter-regional brain connectivity, using fMRI data, specifically the causal effects that brain areas exert on each other during a cognitive task, can be very beneficial in understanding how the concept of time emerges as a consequence of observed pattern of brain activity. In other words, it seems that damaging the normal function of a region is not the only method for understanding the role of detected activated region in consciousness of subjective time in the brain.
Experiments done in the sixties on live brains have shown the lag between event and awareness. On the whole your brain takes care of your daily interaction and gives you afterwards a redacted version of what you have done. Your storyteller then fits this in its storyline and you become aware of it.
Evidently this is a very involved process, which to my mind is impossible to pinpoint since it takes too many modules interpreting too much data.
We are just the monkey on the back going along for the ride. The timeline is a wholly virtual construct.
Being unaware of a timeline happens frequently. Unconsciousness it's called.
The interesting question to me is how does this impact the results from other fMRI studies out there? You can envision situations in otherwise-carefully controlled experiments where a stimulus (let's say a visual one) triggers a 'memory' response in the left parietal cortex that is independent from the one it is directly intended to measure in a number of subjects - enough so that it would interpreted as a statistically-significant signal.
Where else has this area of the brain turned up in other fMRI studies, and could it now have to re-evaluated as a consequence?
That part of the brain should be known as Proust's Area, since lesions would obviously send one on a Search for Lost Time.
A related question is whether the color of time is the same for everyone. For Marcel it was a pinkish lavender.
More seriously, would this area be part of the "default network"?
people under the influence of psychedelics such as LSD and psilocin tend to experience a state of 'timelessness' during the peak period of subjective effects. it would be interesting to compare activation patterns between subjects on drug and control when imagining/remembering events. I would hypothesize, however, that there is not an exact neurophysiological locus responsible for 'time processing;' subjective time concepts could rather result from circadian (perhaps hypothamalmic) management of neurotransmitter release from various diffuse projection systems, such as the raphe nuclei
Post a Comment