Yes.

The human brain is an amazing organ and strangest thing in the universe.

Dear @Marcel, Yes sure I think that the human brain with the feeling, personality, and wishes are the 'strangest thing' in the universe. Besides, see the following report about the10 strangest things in universe at the following page:

http://www.sciencechannel.com/aliens-space/10-strangest-things-in-universe.htm

Dear Marcel, Yes without doubt. All the scientific creations are the product of human brain as brains of a collective or the brain of an individual. Without that ,all that we see today all around as scientific creation or discovery would not have been possible. This acknowledgement does not undermine the Planet Earth or Nature or GOD. I think, the superpower, if exists, or nature has given this power to the human brain!

Yes, the world is full of strange things, but the human brain is the most complicated and strange. 

At the moment, yes we could say — humanly speaking — that Yes, the human brain is at the center of everything we know. For the trivial reason that nobody else has still came to say the contrary [i.e. — and it would be enough — any enquiry came from outside to visit/discuss our center].

Out of my last ridiculous logical speaking: No, I do not think at all that our brain could be the only, the last, the privileged, the eldest and the youngest born of the Universe, despite it is a fantastic example of super complex singular machine.  But for this rejection I don't find any funded reason, but my human brain.

—g 

Dear @Marcel, while I was doing some research about your thread, I have found a thread with not so many responses, here at ResearchGate, but interesting since there are some relevant literature mentioned.

"According to a study published in Nature's Scientific Reports, the universe may be growing in the same way as a giant brain -- with the electrical firing between brain cells 'mirrored' by the shape of expanding galaxies. The results of a computer simulation suggest that "natural growth dynamics" -- the way that systems evolve -- are the same for different kinds of networks -- whether its the internet, the human brain or the universe as a whole." Watch the second attached link!

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_does_there_exist_similarity_between_brain_cells_and_the_Universe_Is_it_just_a_coincidence_or_Pareidolia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ASj0969dLw

Dear Marcel, I have the idea that the author want to say that the brains are the most peculiar thing in the universe.

Moreover the brains are just a proliferation of the spinal marrow. It is peculiar because these ectodermis cells llow the organism to produce self-reflexion

Dear Marcel and friends, that is indeed what Kaku sats in your quote. However, I tend to think that is not the case. It all depends in the scale. To me the most complex, passionating and enthrilling phenomenon is the biosphere. The brain is just one particular although important component.

Dear All,

YES. Only a little less stranger compared to the human mind, which is little less stranger than the cosmic mind, which in its turn is much much less stranger than the Holy Spirit or God, which is the ultimate source substratum and support for all that is.

Regards,

Rajat

I disagree. I say, human being itself is the 'strangest thing' in the universe.

Dear Marcel,

Dear All,

I am so ignorant on the richness of nature that I am not able to answer this question. One can but guess but this guessing is as uncertain as the meal of a stray dog.

Dear @Marcel. I am with you whether you call the human brain is the strangest thing in the universe or the center of the universe. The fact is it has intelligence. Human brain contains 1011 neurons. Although there are many different types of nerve cells they share common features. It is been said that we only use a mere 10% of our brain capacity! The remaining hidden 90% of your mental strength lies buried… discover, release and use it to gain new success, personal happiness—a fuller, richer life.

Dear Marcel, Thank you for introducing the very interesting book of Michio Kaku.

The following quote is also from the book:

“The brain weighs only three pounds, yet it is the most complex object in the solar system Michio Kaku,

I tend to disagree, Brain is a very strange but I  think that humans and human mind are stranger than brain itself.

The human brain is certainly one the most complex and amazing objects in the universe There are as many neurons in the brain as there are stars in the Milky Way galaxy. So it is no surprise that, despite recent advances in the science of the brain and mind, scientists still find ourselves squinting in the dark somewhat

The followers of this thread may find the following links useful.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/brainiac-says-well-all-be-part-brain-net-someday-n70236

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/18800.Michio_Kaku

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/aug/unsolved-brain-mysteries

Dear Marcel,

Have you meant:

'Ik hoop dat mijn perspectief van natuurkundige zal helpen onze kennis te verrijken en een verhelderend inzicht te geven in het meest vertrouwde en tegelijkertijd vreemste ding in het heelal: ons brein'.

Agree with Andras: the emphasis lies in future tense: "zal helpen", and with caution: "ok hoop".

let's not forget that his a physicalist perspective.

However, the human case of a live being not having competitors, is detrimental [eco-detrimental, self-detrimental, etero-detrimental].

—g 

I think that the human brain is the most perfect thing in the Universe ever!

Dear Giuseppe,

Homo sapiens = Homo destructivus suits perfectly to be the strangest!

Dear Asmat,

Human being = human brain!

Dear All,

Ancient Greeks knew this before the Dutchmen:

"Numberless are the world's wonders, but none more wonderful than man."

Sophocles: Antigone

Dear All,

To be more precise:

“Numberless are the world's wonders, but none

More wonderful than man; the storm gray sea

Yields to his prows, the huge crests bear him high;

Earth, holy and inexhaustible, is graven

With shining furrows where his plows have gone

Year after year, the timeless labor of stallions.

The light-boned birds and beasts that cling to cover,

The lithe fish lighting their reaches of dim water,

All are taken, tamed in the net of his mind;

The lion on the hill, the wild horse windy-maned,

Resign to him; and his blunt yoke has broken

The sultry shoulders of the mountain bull.

Words also, and thought as rapid as air,

He fashions to his good use; statecraft is his

And his the skill that deflects the arrows of snow,

The spears of winter rain: from every wind

He has made himself secure--from all but one:

In the late wind of death he cannot stand.

O clear intelligence, force beyond all measure!

O fate of man, working both good and evil!

When the laws are kept, how proudly his city stands!

When the laws are broken, what of his city then?

Never may the anarchic man find rest at my hearth,

Never be it said that my thoughts are his thoughts.”

― Sophocles, Antigone

Dear All,

The story started so and now earth, water and air are heavily polluted and the nature suffers...

“Numberless are the world's wonders, but none

More wonderful than man?” Than man? than man? than man?

"O fate of man, working both good and evil!"

This is kind of all discussion. Some of us are - openly or tacitly - clearly encephalocentrists. The dream of the upmost importance of the brain has, I believe, already be dreamt. Kaku's quote is one of the most recent votes on that side.

I shall be honest. Encepahlocentrism is by and large predominant in the scientific community.

On the other side, however - the fewer! - are the ones (like me) that think that the brain is only an important part of a much more complex system: the biosphere.

Encephalocentrism, as it has been clearly said is but one variant of an anthropocentric worldview. Man as the center and upmost place of the universe… Well, let's look at the very complexity of the biosphere! 

The universe exists only in my perception. The universe exists only in your perception. The universe exists only in Michio Katu's perception. ... None of these universes is like any other.  Nevertheless, we share commonalities of perception  As far as I can tell from my perception, the human brain is marvelous. I cannot tell if it is the most marvelous, but it is far up in my perception.

So you make statements about our position in the universe ignoring the fact that we as biological humans never traveled further than the moon?

Dear All,

Michio Kaku wrote on black holes:

“There are monsters out in the cosmos that can swallow entire stars. That can destroy space itself completely invisible. Anything that strays too close will be pulled in millions and millions of black holes zipping around our galaxy, nothing there to light them up. Millions and millions of black holes zipping around our galaxy, nothing there to light them up.”

There are monsters on the Earth: they are called men!

Millions and millions of merchants with black soul destroy earth, water, air and plants and animals even other men to get more money.

Based on all the exposure that I have got all through the life about the variety of human responses (often under comparable conditions) , I do feel that human brain is the 'strangest of all things I have witnessed in the universe.

As far as my experience goes, I have not come across any other object stranger than the human brain some instances of which are narrated in the following link:

http://listverse.com/2014/04/03/10-strange-stories-about-the-human-brain/

Hi everybody; More connections between neurones in a normal human brain (not mine :) ) than known stars in known universe... So what ? more than not a lot is facing infinity with humble lack of importance. Peace to everyone (wisful thinking ?)

wisHful.

One can judge the value of something in a better way when it is missing (such as the value of "unavailable"  water when you are thirsty). Imagine the life on this earth is void of the human brain, what it will be like? Each one of us can provide an answer.

Even when the human brain is not used well or used in a wrong manner, variety of problems & troubles will emerge & spread "as we see in many parts of the world". The brain, in my humble opinion, is not strange...What is strange is not utilizing the  full capacity of this "golden tool" .

Maybe rather: human brain is the most impressing thing within the known universe? Brain complexity influences not only medicine and psychology, but also computational sciences and many more brain-derived technologies (or simply affected by our cognition).

Dear friends, just for the sake of conversation, please allow me to go back to a discussion some of us know a little bit about.

Usually it has been said that the brain is an organ. However, the arguments have also been raised about the brain being a gland. An big and complex gland that, well, also encompasses some others. What would you think about it? This can probably send some lights about.. you know… Thank you.

Is it the structure of the brain that is the strangest thing we've ever seen or what? i assume, everyone that suggests -the brain is the most complex thing- is considering the functionalities of brain as complex or strange(things i presume that are related to brain like thought; consciousness; language; emotions) and also thinks what all we see from our brains are based on physical matter(no duality or so). so i think(if you accept all those assumptions!?!) it is something that we don't know well yet(how all those emerge from a piece of meat) then the answer would be yes but still we are our brains + bodies(organs,etc), i mean we are more than just that of our brains; we are more strange than and more complex;

Oh God, is it possible to introduce the concept of QUOTE in this brainstorming cascade of writings?! I'ld like to echo the words of XY at pag. nth, and I've still to click and reclick and reclick. The Universe! —g

It is really an interesting question. I am strongly agreed with the answers of Prof. András Bozsik, Prof. Carlos Eduardo Maldonado, Prof. Abedallah M Rababah, and Prof. Ljubomir Jacić.

This is a good question, well-worth considering.

One of my Philosophy teachers gave lectures on Edmund Husserl and phenomenology.   During one of those lectures, he suggested an analogy between thoughts emanating from many brains and turning on light bulbs after sunset.   Our brains are analogous to light bulbs turning on, each time we have an idea.

Light (visible wavelength) passes through eyes (optic nerves) converted into electrochemical impulses,

Dear Dr Krishnan,

Are these features unique to human brain?

Dear Shanker,

I don't know because I did not explore the universe in detail.

Is the brain a self-organising structure and mind a naturally developing phenomenon? I think the onset of light is potentially very important but possibly beyond (but including) the remit identified above by Krishnan. Vision-Space: Our self-organizing mind, 1/f noise and a possible role for ipRGC receptor functions
 http://youtu.be/4xpk9f8M9vo   

In my view, the strangest thing are super organisms that we (humans) support, as if we were their cells - and like our own cells, we have no idea about the whole organism. I refer to things like the "super-entity" in the network of transnational companies found by James B. Glattfelder (PhD Thesis):

"The ‘‘emerging picture’’ reveals the role of a ‘‘super-entity’’ in the global network of TNC, a finding that goes beyond our current knowledge about globalization. The insights obtained in this work even challenge established economic theories, because they are hardly predicted or explained by these." (Frank Schweitzer, his supervisor)

In Decoding Complexity Uncovering Patterns in Economic Networks - Springer Theses, Recognizing Outstanding Ph.D. Research.

In this view, the flow of information of the human network support "another level of a kind of a brain" (it's my interpretation). So, in some sense I agree with Michio Kaku, but only about the brain, not the human brain. 

He has a Ted Talk too. I strongly recommend: http://www.ted.com/talks/james_b_glattfelder_who_controls_the_world

PS: The cover page of Science (this week) shows a "brain-chip" (2nd strange thing...): http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6197.toc 

Perception of 'light' without the use of the biological eyes: dream states 

I perceive during ('lucid') dream states at night a lot of 'light' and visions and movies and pictures and people and cities and villages and landscapes and etc.... To me, this phenomenon is not a strange thing because it happens frequently.

Is the brain during dream states self-organised or is there interconnectivity with the external world (e.g. external 'radio-waves' arrive and are captured by the brain system to translate the waves into images/sounds expressed during dream states, cf. television systems)? Based on own empirical observations, I think there is clear interconnectivity with the external world based on how 'dream pictures' arrive (e.g. sudden flashes, sometimes replicated with intervals of a couple of weeks). How to 'proof' it scientifically? 

Well the way I see it, as a result of studying the actual phenomenon of vision (experiential - intuitive) is that vision a closer to a control hallucination than it is the 'projection of optics'. So dreams are simply less controlled hallucinations! i.e. not 'driven' by input from the eyes. The structure of the phenomenon of vision is not optical - vision is non-photographically rendered etc. So…it would appear that we generate the phenomenon through a 'perceptual structure' that's populated with cues from light input ( sound  etc) mediated by past experience, our intent in the world etc. The perceptual structure is operational when we are asleep?

How to prove it? Well we have developed a Vision-Space software tool that restructures picture media (optical media) into Vision-Space media (perceptually structured media). This media is inherently 3D, no need for binocular fusion technology. We are looking to get that programming architecture to real-time speeds in order that evaluation tasks can begin in simulator conditions. Will we get the funding - that's the question!!!!

The other way to approach an understanding of perceptual structure this is, I think, to encourage those working within visual science, ( especially the retina) to start to test the visual system with perceptually structured media and not pictures and artificially structured light sources? These do not 'stand in' for a real setting. They will produce atypical firing in the retina a deep brain structures. 

Hello John,

you describe dreams as a kind of 'hallucinations'. In the translated book of Michio Kaku I read on page 45 'Toch is veel van wat we zien eigenlijk een illusie' ('Much of what we see is an illusion'). In this case, MK refers to vision via the biological eyes of what is perceived via the receptors then translated by the 'brain' into something else. What is touching the eye does not truly reflect what is mentally seen.

I have therefore following remarks for more discussion to make:

1) Empirical research is done with a tool (the human brain) that we currently do not really understand.

2) In an evolutionary framework, creating illusions might have value from a natural selection point of view (e.g. linked to survival/reproduction), not from an empirical research point of view. in other words, the biological tool we use for empirical research has not been build in the 'evolutionary past' for empirical research.

I copy from my recent work:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264537258

Let us make a virtual trip to what Humanity has been accepted throughout the centuries and was later found to be totally false:

• Earth is not the Centre of Cosmos (CoC) (and we will not ‘drop down’ when we will travel at the ‘end of the horizon’)

• Sun is not the CoC (and even more it is not in the centre of our Galaxy)

• Galaxy is not the CoC (and even more it is not the centre of our Local Cluster)

• ...

So, let us perform the next big inductive jump and postulate that:

• Our universe is not Cosmos but is just one more Local Universe

In the virtue of the above thoughts the answer to the above question is very simple:

No.

Article A new cosmological paradigm: universal locality

Following up Leonardo's conribution, let's not forget that ll in all, we are clearly holobiontic. Including, of course, our won brain.

Respected András Bozsik

Which comes first i.e. human being or human brain?

The human being comes first

One thing is sure. By now we know much more about the structure of the brain (and the mind), much more about the origin of the universe and the structure of matter...

…than about the origin of life and the complexity of the biosphere.

I strongly support what Leonardo Luiz Portes wrote at pag 5 (1) about superentities. It's rare to hear and read about it, so thank you. However, the question posed by Marcel uses to cite Michio Kaku, thus we are forced to consider the "dimension" of the entity he refers to (they refer to, both Michio Kaku and Marcel Lambrechts, if I'm not mistaken). From this reason, we could deduce that |(the) HB| needs to count as a singularity. In dimensional terms of singularity, something becomes more intricate if we just change |(a) superentity| with |(the) biomass|. Singularity, supersingularity, plurality and complexity are not synonyms.

—g

(1) Quote missing, quote missing, unique pointer to post URI missing.

Dear Dr Marcel,

An absolute answer to your question (the 'strangest thing'), necessitates an exhaustive knowledge of the nature of every thing in the Universe . Only then it can be said conclusively that the human human brain is the 'strangest thing' in the universe. Else the answer, based on an incomplete information, will only be relative, depending on the proportion of all the 'things' existing in the Universe that the respondent has encountered/considered,

You have very honestly admitted that you did not explore the universe in detail.

This is exactly where lies the answer to your question!

Whether one admits or not, your plain admittance, in fact, is applicable to every individual as it would just not be possible for any individual, or for that matter even a group of individuals (however large), to explore (or even to know) the entire Universe, comprising infinite objects, in detail.

If this can be agreed upon, it is not possible to answer the question in its present form. The views expressed by all the respondents here are based on the objects they have come across/considered and not those existing in the entire Universe and therefore all the answers are founded on different bases.

The question, therefore, needs to be amended to that extent. Or else the answer to the question, at least the one I can come out with, would be: "The information available is insufficient to answer this question". [Caution: This should not imply that the respondent is incompetent to answer the question].

Dear Shanker,

What I summarized in a brief sentence has been very well argued by you. Empirical approaches in science require verification/exploration and statements must be adjusted to the scale of analysis. It must be mentally very exhausting to have this always in mind when you write an accessible book for people with distinct education backgrounds. Another risk might be to attract only a limited readership.

The same question could of course be interpreted in different ways begging for discussions how strange the brain or its connections can be as illustrated with so many fascinating examples mentioned above.

Human brain is the strangest thing in the universe that creates, controls, regulate and directs thoughts and action either consciously or subconsciously. There may be few things more fundamental to human identity than the belief that people are rational individuals whose behaviour is determined by conscious choices. However recent studies have shown that our decisions and behaviour are deeply influenced by unconscious thought, and how greatly those thoughts are swayed by stimuli beyond our immediate comprehension. People often act in order to realize desired outcomes, and they assume that consciousness drives that behaviour. But the studies now challenge the idea that there is only a conscious will. Our actions are very often initiated even though we are unaware of what we are seeking or why.

Please See the Picture, gives the answer.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder

Dear @Roland,

In the book of Michio Kaku it is indicated on page 45 that human brains use ca. 20 Watts of energy. He claims its the highest value allowed before the body may start to dysfunction.

Dear @Yogesh,

Michio Kaku compares the level of consciousness across living beings and relates it to brain complexity. He also provides a definition of consciousness (p. 53) where he assumes that living beings take environmental factors (time, space, social interactions, abiotic factors) into account to form a (conscious) model of the perceived world.

Humans are considered to be the most conscious of all because they have more complex brains involving ca. 100 billion neurons and even more neuron connections.

Based on what I read, I would not exclude that there is a positive relationship between the level of conscious and unconscious brain actions across living beings. For instance, bigger brains probably also involve more unconscious processes because of the higher number of neuron connections and interactions....

Some people claim that humans only use 10% of their brain (except the actrice Scarlett J.). Do you believe that, if you also take the unconscious processes into account?

This unconscious processing can be understood though or in terms of, the 'implicit' processes involved in spatial awareness occurring in peripheral vision? This holistic spatial awareness operates 'prior-to' attention in central vision. It promotes interest to central vision triggering saccadic eye movement etc. This is where I have issues with the 'unconscious' label and with 'consciousness' as it is often used. We are aware through this 'implicit' processing! Its not 'unconscious'. I think we need to start to use the word 'awareness' encompassing 'implicit and explicit' awareness, their respective processing pathways and their mediation to achieve experiential reality.

@ Marcel -  The 10% use of brain as claimed may probably stands for conscious part. I don't think  the unconscious functions and use of brain can be quantified.  

Dear Yogesh,

Are people that are in coma or that sleep 'unconscious' or 'conscious'? Brain activity can be measured in people varying in mental states or not?

'Being aware' involves behavioral action in response to environmental change. Perhaps bigger/more complex brains (humans, mammals) handle better/respond more rapidly to rapid environmental change than plants or reptiles?

I think that is an interesting consideration. As far as I can make out spatial awareness in peripheral vision occurs in 'time now'. This suggests that the data about the environment is embedded within the light array. (Primary spatial awareness direct from the light array? http://youtu.be/8wUT0HGNSww) The alternative route to spatial awareness through central vision involves conceptual evaluations of occlusion and perspective related cues. i.e. there is no time synchrony between spatial awareness in peripheral vision and central vision (Zeki papers). However, if we look at the evolution of the eye with the lens being the last element on the scene, we might deduce that the system of environmental spatial awareness comes 1st as its rather significant when it comes to 'who's on the menu tonight'? 

When people dream, they claim they see light, movies, photos, pictures, landscapes and cocktails of stimuli not perceived when they are active during the day... People that are in (lucid) sleep states also can perceive sound, taste, touch, etc.....,

How is awareness related to time or space defined in this framework?

hmmm, I am having bandwidth issues here at present but the thing is trying to load.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wUT0HGNSww&feature=youtu.be

Marcel: Vision is actually entirely non-photographically rendered. There is no projection going on, no depth-of-field, no information structure blur, no motion blur, picture, frames per second or binocular fusion as there aren't any 'pictures' to fuse! Vision would appear to be a matter of 'presentation'. So closer to a controlled hallucination? When we are awake the processes are driven mainly by light input. When asleep, by past experiences, sound (we appear to keep that semi operational?), and to some extent our subconscious intent. All this suggests that there is a 'perceptual structure' that we generate and that it's multi-sensory. We know that when the sound 'signal' is segmented prior to posting to awareness through audition it's in the same form as visual input despite being a different ecology. I attach a raft of 'self-conscious' presentations!!

Dear John,

you work at the proximate/mechanistic multi-disciplinary level, not the ultimate/evolutionary one. Thanks!

Dear @John,

what you and others imply is that vision is often an illusion/hallucination (see above). In the book of Michio Kaku, the perception of 'yellow', 'brown' or 'orange' are considered as illusions (controlled hallucinations as you would say) because humans without unusual mutations only have receptors for red, green and blue. What are the consequences for empirical research based on vision awareness. Results based on illusions or controlled hallucinations shared by scientists are apparently accepted in a science framework. 

Example:

There must be a lot of published scientific work on 'orange' (e.g. carotenes), here described as a controlled hallucination. 

The evolutionary framework again:

- How can the strangest or most fantastic thing in the universe be selected by local selection pressures on Earth? Does this imply that Earth itself is the strangest thing in the universe?

- A feature unique to the human brain is to be able to simulate the future, even thousands of years in advance (see book MK). What have been the benefits in Darwinian natural selection to select a brain that is able to make predictions about events that may happen in more than 1000 human generations?

Millions of years of evolution of receptors must have created evolutionary adaptive receptors that can cope with perturbations related to dark matter, or not?

Hi Marcel,

Without wanting to appear flippant, because I think this is a very serious question, I think the answer is 'obvious'! We generate a true field structure within the phenomenon of vision (phenomenal field). This is populated with disordered information (not blur) that provides us with spatial awareness in peripheral vision through proximity cues (distance from fixation). This data distributed in this spatial field can only be 'directly' unfolded from the light array. This intern suggests that our receptors are taking some form of three dimensional data from the light array this being dealt with through the dorsal stream (where pathway). Light coming from an object in the environment is passing through dark matter (as a medium) and we know that it effects the path of photons (contributes to gravitational lensing).

Take a look at the presentation list attached. The point being that we are modelling visual awareness in new technology (Vision-Space) and I can't see how this could be operational without something acting as a medium and that the retina is 'decohering' light at the retina and setting the requirement for the 'what' and 'where' pathways. We need to look carefully at ipRGC and their mediation of cone output at photopic levels?

If this is the case then there is nothing more fundamental? There are publication on my page.

Dear John,

you spent much more time on this topic then I, so I cannot disagree.

Vision is crucial for empirical research, so think it is also important to define/identify perception constraints related to vision or underlying mechanisms influencing vision and its mental expressions 

Could not agree more. I place these under the heading 'perceptual structure'. We generate it. The way to 'realise this' is via intuitive record and psychophysical means. Vision-Space does just this. What's needed now is multidisciplinary effort to 'infill' to chance our programming architecture from being 'illustrative' to being cross disciplinary (academic). With this in place we should be able to work out exactly what it is that our receptors are doing and the order of information required from the light array to activate that activity. Then how did the input potentials get there! I don't think that 'optical projection' as we understand it will get much of a look in! 

Human brain is very much unique - it can think, plan, dream, give commands to whole body, in a day many thoughts are executed, works, emotions, sentiments, love, fight, different moods, sleep, perspective planning, understanding, knowledge gaining,  analysis, solutions, discoveries, inventions, livelihoods,  etc... all can be done by a single brain 

Dear Kuldeep,

Perhaps the individual human brain is also unique because it can think, plan, dream, and give (mental) commands to the whole (biological) body of someone else (mental brain networks)..

The first so-called experimental scientific demonstration of telepahy has been published in the scientific journal PLoS ONE a couple of days ago. Is it the first evidence?  

Dear Marcel, Telepathy like phenomenon I have heard from many in my country, in our ancient books and beliefs it is well documented, many times what we think the other is also simultaneously doing same (may be coincidence or by chance), I could experience in books that even a person (say saints or holy gentlemen) could reach another place and guide others to work in good senses, scientifically if could be proved would be wonderful. During  hypnosis also one can command other to do like this. It is brain only through which can command many through many ways and means.

In dream states you also have a social network

Dear Marcel, Hope to see social network after death too, it may be there, why can't such mysteries be solved! 

Dear Kuldeep,

There are still much things to be discovered! How would life be if everybody would know everything?

Which would imply that one of the meanings of life is to learn/to discover from others, and to support others to learn/to discover....

Yes, dear Marcel. I wish this were an answer to my question on the meaning of life!

Cheers Marwan,

Different questions can provoke the same answer and one question can provoke different answers. Interesting, or not?

Very much so, dear Marcel. Without doubt!

Sorry, I didn´t really be present in this thread. But without repeating all the wonderful arguments, I´ve a very simple problem: Does anyone of all the discussers know the universe with all details and particularities? I´m totally overchallenged with a question like this here. Pardon!

Exactly, Hanno. We cannot go beyond what we know and perceive.

Dear Marcel,

I´m thinking about the reasons for this kind of questions. Interesting fields the cited sciences "Astrophysics, Cosmology, Science of the Universe, Exobiology, etc....", but no reason to apply anthropocentric view of the universe.

I agree with the remarks of you and Joseph.

'We cannot go beyond what we know and perceive' can either be applied at

(i) the individual level each having own (limited) experiences, or

(ii) the population level where someone tells/writes something about own  experiences and others can either believe or reject.

Dear Marcel, It can never happen that everybody would know everything at any time or in future, hence this hypothetical question/answer cannot be explained, since different brains vary and all cannot accommodate the all know outs / knowledge. 

How many letters/words have been written during the last 5000 years, and how many of these written letters/words have been read by each living human being on Earth? Just to illustrate how biased each reader is, even for aspects that are potentially accessible to scientists?

And why are there so many (spiritual) people that talk about (personal) experiences not accessible to (controlled/standardized) science practice? 

Here are 10 weird and highly specific brain conditions, and what they each show us about the human brain.

http://io9.com/5874229/10-incredibly-strange-brain-disorders

And what is your favorite brain condition others can't see? 

Any system, as long as it functions good, its safe... brain is a very complex and crucial. Unlike Physical disturbances, Psychological disturbance which affect emotions have more repercussions on life an livelihood.

To define a so-called psychological disturbance, people use behavior in relation to a given environment or a context.

Example:

If a priest claims he observed/experienced a (paranormal/spiritual) appearance, people might call this 'normal' versus if a citizen claims he observed/experienced a (paranormal/spiritual) appearance, people might call it a 'psychological disturbance'.   

Do you think that the brain prevents the expression of a free will?

Kaku seems to delight in making sensational-sounding, unsupported statements. The footprints are likely already eroded from temperature changes and micrometeorites. One large meteorite could get all the footprints at once.

Perhaps he had a psychological disturbance. Is a dream a psychological disturbance? A dream can have a spiritual effect.

Yes, a dream can have a spiritual, and why not, physical effect.

Perhaps brains can imagine situations that might occur in the future, like simulating future conditions. Can dreams be defined as a proactive strategy to anticipate possible future conditions, or not?

Example:

Do dreams help to learn understanding feelings that other people might experience, e.g. to learn empathy to anticipate future environments requiring empathy?