18.8.12

The $1000 genome map: do you really want to know?

The $1000 genome map: do you really want to know?

 Bx8h6wqx-1334538575

A whole genome test is meaningless unless you can interpret it. Dave Faryam
It’s now possible to access genetic testing from your living room or office, without the need to visit a health professional. There are many reasons why you might like to get a genetic test. Maybe someone in your family has a genetic condition and you’ve been curious about whether you too might develop it in the future.

Now another option might be available – whole genome sequencing. The race to develop fast and affordable methods for sequencing an entire genome has been on for some time now, and the $1000 genome sequence might soon be within reach for all of us. That means it would be as affordable as your average computer.

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests have received much attention in recent years, with companies such as 23andMe and Navigenics offering online genetic tests for anyone with a few hundred dollars to spare. Sending off a DNA sample to one of these companies will get you a detailed report about your personal risk of developing more than 200 conditions including breast cancer, lupus, diabetes, alcohol dependence, obesity, schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s disease and traits, such as earwax type.

These targeted genetic tests are different from whole genome sequencing and there’s a big difference between the two types of analyses.

The complexity of the human genome

To understand the difference between targeted genetic tests and whole genome sequencing, imagine your whole genome is a telephone book with about three billion individual letters. Targeted genetic testing involves turning to specific pages within the telephone book and examining only those bits. Whole genome sequencing, on the other hand, is like printing out the entire telephone book.
If you’re contemplating paying for a whole genome sequence, there are some important facts worth noting.
Unless your whole genome sequence is accompanied by a detailed report interpreting what it contains (and possibly an experienced geneticist to answer your questions), it will be like opening up a telephone book written in a foreign language.
Even with a full report interpreting your genome sequence, current knowledge extends only to a tiny part of the human genome. So even with an accompanying report to interpret your genome, the vast majority of it will remain meaningless and be of no use to you or your doctor.

Unpacking the results

Only about 3,500 of the 23,000 genes in the genome have been connected to a particular disease or diseases anyway. And the genetic basis for common illnesses such as cancer, heart disease and diabetes remain largely unknown.
On-going genetic research could mean that the understanding of your genome could change AAP
Our knowledge of genetics is evolving so rapidly that the meaning of the report you receive will change over time as new information becomes available. In fact, the report you receive now will be very different from the one you would receive if you waited five years. Not only would there be more information in the future, there could be new ways to understand what we already know.
Most significantly, for a small proportion of people, serious genetic mutations will be found. For some genetic conditions, such as the risk of breast and ovarian cancer due to mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, there are preventative and treatment options available. But, for other conditions, such as Huntington’s disease, little can be done to prevent onset.

Handling the information

Research shows individuals react in different ways to genetic test results. For some, having information about their genetic risk is comforting, relieving uncertainty and allowing them to make reproductive decisions with increased knowledge. For others, the information can be distressing and emotionally challenging.
Direct-to-consumer genetic tests are usually without professional counselling United States National Institutes for Health, Center for Hearing and Communication Disorders
Most research, including the studies mentioned above, has measured the impact of genetic knowledge in people who have received results in a supportive environment with professional counselling. But we know little about the implications of receiving information about multiple genetic conditions at once, with minimal support, advice or counselling.
Finally, most genetic diseases and conditions being researched are influenced by multiple genetic and environmental factors. This means that a range of known and unknown genes contribute to their onset, in addition to a range of lifestyle factors. The information given to individuals is likely to be nothing more than a range of probabilities.
You might find out that you have a 20% higher chance of heart attack than the general population. What would you do with this information? Exercise more? Eat less saturated fat? Stop smoking? Do you really need your whole genome sequenced in order to follow this widely recommended advice?
Of course, faster and cheaper whole genome sequencing has some exciting repercussions as well. The implications for biomedical research are considerable, and are likely to greatly expand our understanding of the genetic basis of common diseases.
Being able to sequence, analyse and compare whole genomes in such a quick and inexpensive way is also likely to bring about important advances in our study of pharmacogenomics, where drugs are prescribed specifically to best match an individual’s genome, in order to obtain the highest possible benefit.
But if you’re not a biomedical researcher or a clinician wanting to prescribe the most effective drugs possible, whole genome sequencing may well be of limited value to you… for now.

Epigenetics - Think you can think yourself better?

Think you can think yourself better? Think again
 
4695658106_042a83f4f4_b
Try as you might, there’s no proof you can control your genetic expression. mutsmuts/Flickr
Can the way we think influence the way we feel? Most of us would say yes. But can thinking affect the way our bodies behave on a genetic level? Can we, in essence, think ourselves better? A growing band of people seem to think so.

Among these is the American “energy medicine” researcher Dawson Church, who postulates in his book The Genie in Your Genes that humans are in control of their “epigenetic modifications”. He suggests we can effect such changes with the power of thought.
So let’s examine this. What is epigenetics?

Epigenetics examines how the body manages to create all of its different cell types – such as white blood cells, muscle cells and skin cells – from the same genetic code.

Imagine our genes as letters arranged on a page from which words can be made. Without punctuation on the page these words and sentences are open to interpretation.

Epigenetic modifications are like punctuation marks. They help a cell to read the information that is contained within the DNA sequence, and enable the cell to work out when a particular gene should be used, and when it should be switched off.

In this way, these epigenetic marks provide structure and formatting to the four-letter genetic code, just as punctuation does for the 26-letter English alphabet. This means the genome can be properly interpreted.

Same DNA, different cell

Each of the different cell types within our bodies has a profoundly different function, yet each is produced from the one set of instructions, the same DNA sequence.

For example, a gene that is required for white blood cell function might be covered in exclamation marks in a white blood cell, while the same gene might be covered in full stops in a muscle cell or skin cell, where it is not required.

When things go wrong

Epigenetic punctuation marks essentially control which genes are used and which are not. So what happens when epigenetic control goes awry?

Well, genes that should be switched off are turned on, and those that should be switched on are turned off – this wreaks havoc on the cell.

While these types of changes can result in the death of a cell, they are also frequently seen in cancer, and this is currently a hot topic of research.

Unlike DNA mutations commonly seen in cancer, changes to epigenetic marks are reversible. In this way, there is hope that epigenetic mistakes can be undone.

There are already a number of drugs (such as Dacogen) being used in clinics to treat patients with various forms of leukaemia. These drugs aim to remove the epigenetic mistakes within the leukaemia cells.

The pharmaceutical industry is actively developing new epigenetic drugs, which will hopefully be useful in the treatment of a wide range of tumours.

Current research is not only focused on when epigenetic modifications go wrong, but also how they normally occur. One area of intense scrutiny involves looking at how specific environmental changes can influence epigenetic marks.

Dietary influence

Alteration in diet has a direct effect on epigenetic marks, since dietary factors can provide the molecules that are added to the DNA as epigenetic marks.

Folate is one of these dietary factors, which is especially important during early pregnancy, when epigenetic modifications are being established in the embryo.

Other environmental factors appear to have an indirect effect on epigenetic modifications. For example, stress may stimulate the body to produce the hormone cortisol, which then brings about changes in the epigenetic modification of particular genes.

So what about those claims made by Church, among others? Can we “think” our way into gene modification?

There is certainly no evidence we can control which genes are used via alteration of epigenetic modifications through the power of thought.

In fact, at this stage, neurobiologists have very little understanding of what a thought actually is, in terms of what happens in the neurons of our brains.

There is still much to discover in epigenetics. Over the coming years, work in this area will help us to understand what normally happens during human development, for example how different physical characteristics are established, but also what goes wrong in diseases such as cancer.

That’s definitely worth giving some thought to.

Disclosure Statement

Marnie Blewitt receives funding from The National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, and The Dyson Bequest.
The Conversation provides independent analysis and commentary from academics and researchers.
We are funded by CSIRO, Melbourne, Monash, RMIT, UTS, UWA, Deakin, Flinders, Griffith, La Trobe, Murdoch, QUT, Swinburne, UniSA, UTAS, UWS and VU.

Articles by This Author

About The Conversation

About The Conversation





Sections
The Conversation is an independent source of analysis, commentary and news from the university and research sector — written by acknowledged experts and delivered directly to the public. Our team of professional editors work with more than 3,500 registered academics and researchers to make this wealth of knowledge and expertise accessible to all.

We aim to be a site you can trust. All published work will carry attribution of the authors’ expertise and, where appropriate, will disclose any potential conflicts of interest, and sources of funding. Where errors or misrepresentations occur, we will correct these promptly.

Sincere thanks go to our Founding Partners who gave initial funding support: CSIRO, Monash University, University of Melbourne, University of Technology Sydney and University of Western Australia.

Our initial content partners include those institutions, Strategic Partner RMIT University and a growing list of member institutions. More than 180 institutions contribute content, including Australia’s research-intensive, Group of Eight universities.

We are based in Melbourne, Australia, and wholly owned by The Conversation Media Trust, a not-for-profit company.

Founding Partners
Strategic Partners




DNA Test for Ancestry from National Geographic | Genographic Project

DNA Test for Ancestry from National Geographic | Genographic Project

Geno 2.0 - Genographic Project Participation and DNA Ancestry Kit
Zoom    Video

Geno 2.0 - Genographic Project Participation and DNA Ancestry Kit

Introducing the next generation of our Genographic Project Participation Kit. This new DNA test uses cutting-edge technology to give you the richest ancestry information available.
Free Standard U.S. Shipping!
Price
$199.95
Quantity
I have read and accept the Geno 2.0 Terms & Conditions


Join the more than half a million people who have already taken part in National Geographic's groundbreaking Genographic Project—contribute to this real-time scientific effort and learn more about yourself than you ever thought possible.

About the test

National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence Dr. Spencer Wells and team designed Geno 2.0 based on the new technologies and insights that emerged since the launch of the Genographic Project in 2005. Using an exclusive, custom-built genotyping chip, we test nearly 150,000 DNA markers that have been specifically selected to provide unprecedented ancestry-related information.

By participating, you will:

•  Discover the migration paths your ancient ancestors followed hundreds—even thousands—of years ago, with an unprecedented view of your ancestral journey.
•  Learn what percentage of your genome is affiliated with specific regions of the world.
•  Find out if you have Neanderthal or Denisovan ancestry.
•  Have the opportunity to share your story and connect with other Genographic Project participants, helping us fill in the gaps in the human story.

What's included in the Geno 2.0 DNA Test kit:

The Geno 2.0 kit contains everything you need to begin the journey into your past, including painless cheek swabs and instructions for submitting your DNA samples (return postage required). Plus, we’ve designed the Geno 2.0 kit box to serve as a beautiful keepsake to store your results after you access them online.

How your participation helps the Genographic Project:

The Genographic Project is an ambitious attempt to help answer fundamental questions about where humankind originated and how we came to populate the Earth. Using the latest genetic and computational technologies to analyze historical patterns in DNA from participants around the world, our team of world-renowned scientists led by Dr. Spencer Wells, seeks to reveal our migratory history and to better understand the connections and differences that make up humankind.

As a Genographic Project participant, you will have the opportunity to contribute your data to our Genographic database, helping our scientists and researchers who are working to chart a comprehensive map of the early stages of human history. Participation in the Genographic Project database is your choice and is not necessary to access your individual results.
And a portion of the proceeds from the sales of Geno 2.0 kits are channeled back into the project to support additional research and to fund cultural conservation and revitalization efforts for indigenous communities around the world through the Genographic Legacy Fund.
Find more details on the Genographic Project on the About the Project page
Due to the cost of the DNA analysis, once the kit has been opened, we cannot accept returns or administer refunds. You must have Internet access to view the results—results will not be mailed. Results are available online via confidential Genographic Project ID 6-8 weeks after our lab receives your DNA samples. If you lose the ID provided with the kit, we cannot recover your information.

The Genographic Project does not test for medical information. Please read the complete terms and conditions of purchase. You must be 18 years or older to purchase a kit. Parental or guardian consent is required for participation of a child under 18.



National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence Robert Ballard, best known for his discovery of the R.M.S. Titanic, thought he knew everything about his ancestry, with a genealogy that traces back to the British Isles and Holland. While most of his DNA agrees with this story, he learned something unexpected from his Geno 2.0 results—his genome is about 2% Oceanian, connecting him to the first seafarers who settled the islands off the coast of southeast Asia around 50,000 years ago, probably via the Dutch side of his family.

HUMAN GENOME AT TEN: 5 Breakthroughs, 5 Predictions

HUMAN GENOME AT TEN: 5 Breakthroughs, 5 Predictions

Ten years after the Human Genome Project's grand achievement, experts hail the advances and share hopes for the next decade.

A person standing in front of a digital representation of the human genome.
 
A museum visitor views a digital representation of the human genome in New York City in 2001.  Photograph by Mario Tama, Getty Images Ker Than
Published March 31, 2010

In June 2000 scientists joined U.S. President Bill Clinton at the White House to unveil the Human Genome Project's "working draft" of the human genome—the full set of DNA that makes us human (quick human genetics overview).

As the tenth anniversary of that achievement approaches, scientists weigh in on the scientific discoveries the Human Genome Project enabled, as well as some hopes and predictions for future advances that could be made using the project's data.

BREAKTHROUGHS POWERED BY THE HUMAN GENOME PROJECT
1. Democratized Data
Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Human Genome Project formally lasted from 1990 to 2003. The project helped pioneer the now common practice of making scientific data freely available online.
(Related: "'Eco Hubble' to Bring Nature Data to the Public.")

This open model of research has enabled researchers to make discoveries much more quickly than in the past, said Francis Collins, NIH director and former leader of the U.S.-government effort to sequence the human genome.

"For example, the search for the cystic fibrosis gene finally succeeded in 1989 after years of effort by my lab and several others, at an estimated cost of U.S. $50 million," Collins writes in an opinion piece published in this week's issue of the journal Nature.

"Such a project could now be accomplished in a few days by a good graduate student. ... ," he writes. All the budding geneticist needs, Collins says, is the Internet, some inexpensive chemicals, a thermal cycling machine to amplify specific DNA segments, and access to a DNA sequencer, which "reads" DNA via light signals.

2. Added DNA to Human-Origins Tool Kit
The Human Genome Project has proven to be a valuable new tool for studying human origins and the history of our species' migrations, said Mark McCarthy of the University of Oxford in the U.K., who studies the genetic causes of diabetes and obesity.

"We've learned how young a species we are and how similar so many of us are, particularly those populations that came out of Africa 70,000 years ago"—such as the ancestors of modern Europeans or East Asians or South Asians—McCarthy said.

The genetic data largely back up theories derived from archeological and linguistic studies, such as the idea that ancestors of many modern human populations originated in Africa, he added. (See "Massive Genetic Study Supports 'Out of Africa' Theory.")

Furthermore—by working under the assumption that the more closely related different human populations are to one another, the more similar their genomes will be—scientists have been able to roughly chart out the path that humanity took as it spread around the world.

3. Snipped Away at Diseases' Prehistoric Origins
The Human Genome Project set a foundation for later efforts such as the International HapMap Project, which aims to uncover single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs ("snips").
SNPs are differences in the lettering of genes among members of the same species. The written language of DNA uses four "letters," or nucleotides: A, T, C, and G.

HapMap is a catalog of common SNPs that occur in human beings. SNPs that lie next to each other on a chromosome and are inherited together are called haplotypes; clusters of related haplotypes are called haplogroups.

SNPs can greatly influence our susceptibility to certain diseases, such as cancer, heart disease, and diabetes, scientists say. (Find out how an SNP-laden hairball helped reveal the face of a 4,000-year-old human.)

Geneticist Spencer Wells, who leads the National Geographic Society's Genographic Project, called HapMap "the biggest payoff of the Human Genome Project so far." (The National Geographic Society owns National Geographic News.)

HapMap "revealed the relatively high frequency of genetic diversity that exists across the entire genome. Using that data, scientists were able to start looking at disease associations at a genome-wide level," said Wells, who is also a National Geographic explorer-in-residence.

This is important because scientists are finding that many diseases have multiple gene influences.

"For the really interesting diseases, you've got a lot of genes that have relatively low effect" by themselves, Wells said.


4. Found Lack of Junk in Our Genetic Trunk
Before the Human Genome Project, some scientists had estimated the known three billion or so DNA letters combined to form a hundred thousand or more genes.

"That seemed sensible, because we're such big, complicated organisms," said Christopher Wills, a biologist at the University of California, San Diego.

"But the amazing thing is that there are much fewer genes in the human genome than expected"—only about 20,000 to 25,000—"which means that each gene has to be very sophisticated in what it does," Wills said.

Because the number of DNA letters per gene is limited, the new, lower gene count made clear that about 98.5 percent of our DNA has nothing to do with genes—junk DNA, some called it.

(See "First Decoded Marsupial Genome Reveals 'Junk DNA' Surprise.")
But even junk DNA strands—long seen as useless or as relics of vestigial genes—are proving they hold a few gems.

"The part of [DNA] that doesn't code for proteins, which is about 98.5 percent of it, turns out to be much more rich in functional characteristics than I think a lot of people had imagined," NIH's Collins told National Geographic News.
"There doesn't seem to be much reason to use the word 'junk DNA' anymore," Collins added.
5. Supercharged Genetic Research
The Human Genome Project has helped foster the creation of newer, faster, and cheaper methods of gene sequencing, said George Church, who heads the Personal Genome Project at Harvard University.

That's because the rough draft of the human genome that resulted from the Human Genome Project serves as a reference against which the data from new sequencing methods can be compared.

"It's like doing a jigsaw puzzle," Church explained. "If you've got the final picture on the cover of the box, ... you can say, This little piece goes here."

PREDICTIONS FOR THE NEXT TEN YERS

1. Science Will Pinpoint What Makes Us Homo Sapiens
In the near future, scientists will be able to compare our genome against those of our evolutionary cousins, such as chimpanzees and Neanderthals, to get a clearer sense of which genes are involved in making us Homo sapiens, the University of California's Wills said.

"The thing I'm really looking forward to is finding out how we differ from our close relatives, what has driven us toward becoming human beings, and in particular, which genes are responsible for our astonishing talents," Wills said.

NIH's Collins called the recent success at partially sequencing Neanderthal DNA "fascinating."

"I think most people ten years ago would not think it would be possible to reconstruct an accurate rendition of a sequence of Neanderthals," Collins added, "and yet we're pretty close to that."

2. Gene Therapy Will Cure Diseases
Gene therapy—curing ailments by replacing faulty copies of genes with normal ones—will finally become a reality, likely within the next decade, the University of California's Wills said.
(Related: "Color-blindness Cured by Gene Injection in Monkeys.")

"The big problem has been, How do you get the genes to the cell?" he said.
Scientists have been using viruses to "infect" animals' DNA with new genes, Wills noted, "and that's dangerous.

"But I think a breakthrough is going to be happening fairly soon. When it does, it's going to be very exciting."

(Also see: "How 'Gene Doping' Could Create Enhanced Olympians.")

3. The Very Meaning of "Gene" Will Change
The traditional definition says a gene is a region of DNA that encodes for a protein.
But in recent years, scientists have discovered stretches of so-called junk DNA that don't make proteins but are nonetheless important.

For example, some regions of DNA appear to hold instructions for producing a DNA-like, but non-proteinaceous, molecule type called double-stranded RNA.

"These double-stranded RNAs"—part of the body's RNA interface or RNAi—"turn out to be very strong regulators of the way that genes function," Wills said. (Find out why the discovery of RNAi led to a Nobel Prize.)

Some double-stranded RNA, for example, can "silence" genes by preventing their protein products from being produced. They do this by binding to and blocking a messenger molecule in the protein-creation pathway, called messenger RNA.

Wills estimates that if bits of double-stranded RNA were counted as genes, they would double the estimated number of genes in the human genome.

"As far as I'm concerned, I'm happy to call them genes without worrying about semantics," he said.

NIH's Collins agreed. "I think we're at a bit of a semantic difficulty here, in terms of deciding what to consider a gene," he said. "Genes are units of inheritance that need not be thought of in such simplistic ways anymore."

4. Personal Genomes Will Spawn Made-to-Measure Drugs
Thanks to improving technology, within the next five years a person should be able to have his or her entire genome sequenced for about a thousand U.S. dollars, many experts say.
Soon after, that figure could drop as low as a hundred dollars, the Genographic Project's Wells said. "I could imagine a time, ten years from now, where it could get down that cheap."

NIH's Collins said the pace of technological innovation has been dizzying to watch.
"I thought we would get to this point, but I didn't think we would get here so quickly," he said.
The cost of sequencing a human genome "has come down by a factor of more than 10,000. That means DNA sequencing is moving forward more quickly than that classical example of exponential growth, which is Moore's law from computers." Moore's law speculates that the processing power of computer chips doubles every two years.

Collins envisions a day soon when everyone's genome will be sequenced and included as a routine part of their medical records.

By "knowing what you're at risk for and individualizing your preventative medicine plan," doctors will be better able to treat their patients, Collins said.

The era of personal genomes will also be a boon to pharmacogenomics, the science of tailoring drugs to an individual's genetic makeup.

5. Personality Will Move From Art to Science
As scientists learn to better understand the information contained in our genomes, they will get better at predicting how genes influence the development of physical and mental traits and even behaviors.

In the distant future it may be possible to look at the genome of a human—or a close human relative—and roughly deduce not only what she looked like, but, for example, how she acted.
"Will we ever be able to do it with complete confidence? I suspect not, and I rather hope not," the University of Oxford's McCarthy said.

"But I do suspect that by the time we've finished this journey that we've started on ... we'll be able to do better than we're doing at the moment."

Dr. Amit Goswami - Speaking in Foolish Tongues: The Cult of Quantum Physics

Speaking in Foolish Tongues: The Cult of Quantum Physics

Friday, March 30, 2012


The Cult of Quantum Physics

There is a growing religious movement spawned by an unlikely source; a quantum physicist.  At its forefront is a man who calls himself a "quantum activist" by the name of Dr. Amit Goswami.

Dr. Goswami grew up in India as the son of  a brahmán priest.  He turned his back on pursuing the traditional priesthood, instead choosing the path of science.  Yet eventually that scientific path would render him to be a priest of a different kind.

I stumbled upon Dr. Goswami through a couple documentaries, "What the Bleep Do We Know!?" (which was part very quirky film/part documentary, and contained reference to a few disputed scientific studies) and "The Quantum Activist" (which was mostly compiled clips of Dr. Goswani speaking).

(I'm essentially a n00b to quantum physics, so I apologize in advance for errors in the following discussion.)

There is a curious phenomenon in quantum physics known as the observer effect, or as they sometimes put it: "consciousness causes collapse."  It works like this: unobserved matter is potentially in X number of possible states, but when there is a conscious observer, the matter gets locked into one particular state.  Such a situation is quite a paradox for materialists.  How can mere observation change matter?

Dr. Goswami, who literally wrote the textbook on Quantum Mechanics which is widely used in colleges, has come up with an interesting solution to that paradox:  "Consciousness is the ground of Being."  Or to put it another way, we live in a consciousness-based reality, not a material-based reality.  The material manifestations around us are simply "collapsed consciousness;" conscious possibilities which have been locked into a particular state by an observing consciousness.

Dr. Goswani's position is not without its skeptics, some predating the doctor himself.  One of the most famous objections (if anything within quantum physics can be considered "famous!") is Schrödinger's cat.  In 1935, Erwin Schrödinger proposed a thought experiment in which a cat in a box would live or die based off of the unobserved radioactive decay of an element, thereby implying that the requirement of an observer to lock in a state of matter (in this case, the spontaneous decay of one particular atom) is in some cases, if not all cases, illusory.

Yet Dr. Goswani sidesteps such criticisms by appealing to the cosmic consciousness, non-localized consciousness, or quantum consciousness.  This, he identifies as being one and the same with the mystic concept of God; that God is everything, although he suggests that you don't have to consider such a non-localized, quantum consciousness as God.  Certainly, this God is not a rule-giving, judgement making, and salvation-providing deity.  No, this God is the supple undercurrent of consciousness which provides the basis for all forms of collapsed consciousness, and maintains the interconnectedness of all things outside of space and time.

At least one reproducible experiment seems to support this interconnected, non-localized consciousness.  The set up is this:  Two people meditate in the same room with the intent of trying to connect with one another through their mediation.  After twenty minutes, these two people are then moved into two different rooms, each inside their own Faraday cages to shield electromagnetic communications.  The two people are rigged up to EEG processors to measure brain activity, and then told to mediate again.  Then, one of the test subjects is stimulated with light pulses, which evokes a reaction on the EEG.  The freaky thing is that the other test subject, who was not subjected to the light pulse, exhibited a very similar EEG evocation in both amplitude and phase to the one exhibited by the person who did receive the light pulse.  Control subjects who didn't meditate on each other didn't experience this sympathetic evocation.

So how is it possible that two people meditating on one another could transmit signals to each other, despite being in different locations and being shielded from one another?  Well, Faraday cages can't block out all electromagnetic influences, and there is always the chance that the EEG's themselves, combined with the electrical wiring, served as antenna, of sorts, to transmit that signal.  Yet that does not fully explain everything.  After all, why did meditation make the difference versus the control subjects?  Something connected these two people who had meditated.  Dr. Goswami posits that it is the quantum consciousness which has linked them together.

If we can influence this non-localized consciousness with our own thoughts, then it would seem that we could potentially seize the possibilities, and make manifest any reality we choose.  However, Dr. Goswami suggests that a little humility may be in order.  This quantum consciousness is larger than any of our single consciousnesses, and is subject to the influence of everyone else around.  In most of life, you will have to yield to the quantum consciousness more than it will yield to you.  Yet if groups of people begin to intently focus their consciousness from the level of meditation, as opposed to doing so at the level of ego or rational desires, it may be possible to tap into that quantum consciousness to really make the world a better place.

I have many issues with some of Dr. Goswami's quantum philosophy, including my own prejudices, but I reserve final judgement for now.  Even though the concept of quantum mechanics has been around for well over a century, it is still a burgeoning field, in my opinion.  In no small part, the difficulty lies in dealing with a scale which is only on the fringes of observability.  I compare it to trying to fully develop the Germ Theory of Disease without a microscope.  It's not that it is impossible to make meaningful discoveries or theories based on the observations, but I think that we must temper them as conjectures based on incomplete data.  Beyond that, at least at my present understanding, it seems that the doctor makes several quantum leaps of faith in connecting the dots to develop his philosophy.

Yet I can't deny that Dr. Goswami theories are enticing to ponder, and they do provide some interesting solutions to problems, such as the mind-brain interface.  Dr. Goswani's "cult" following may, in time, prove to be completely justified.  It would be fascinating to discover that science confirms the ideas which mystics have been telling us for several millenniums.  Truth is often stranger than fiction.

For additional information besides the Wikipedia link above, check out Dr. Goswami's website.


6 comments:

  1. Theists, mystics, atheist and more have jumped at quantum insights to make them their own. Everybody jumps at science to back their favorite position -- be that economics, politics, religion, consciousness, nationalism, racism or whatever.

    Yawn.
    Reply
  2. @Sabio
    Indeed! On one hand, it is encouraging that people incline towards science. But the problem is exactly that it is a "jump" at science; impulsive, without full measure of contemplation or understanding. It's so tempting to do, too. Obviously, given that such a jump solicits a yawn. ;-)
    Reply
  3. I saw those DVD titles on netflix and almost watched them. I may do so now. So, do the observations have to be conscious or can the unconscious observations of recording instruments work just as well?
    Reply
  4. @DoOrDoNot
    I watched them on NetFlix. :-) "What the Bleep Do We Know!?" is so quirky, and now that I know some of the studies they reference are disputed, I have a hard time recommending it. Of course, with your psychology background, that might make it all the more interesting! It wasn't bad. It was just weird, but kind of in a good way. "The Quantum Activist" was pretty good overall.

    Anyway, to answer your question, it turns out that unconscious observations affect reality too. In a double-slit experiment, where a single photon of light is shot at two very tiny and close-together slits, a diffraction pattern emerges on the other side of those slits (thus, light behaved wave-like). When they put a momentum measuring device on the other side of the slits, the diffraction pattern vanished (thus light behaved particle-like) if the device was turned on. It a little odd, like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Check out:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_slit
    Reply
  5. It sounds like Dr. Goswami is having a lot of fun. His site seems a little light, doesn't go into things too deep. I kind of like the idea that god can be stripped of the usual dressings, including authority and agency. It still sounds like you can make gods into whatever you feel.

    Other than being a minor, whimsical threat to standard materialism, is there anything new here for spirituality besides a rehashed justification? I do like some of his phrases.

    I tried to find out if there was any radical change in ethics or behaviour because of this and found little (I admit, it was not a rigorous search). How do Goswami's ideas change things really?
    Reply
  6. @Andrew
    I think you hit the nail on the head, that, for the most part, this is a rehashed justification; now with "scientific backing!" :-) It is a blending of old mysticism and the new age mysticism (where you make your own reality).

    The "change" is a focus shift. In watching "The Quantum Activist", he seems to promote two ideas:

    1) Take time to let the quantum consciousness speak to you. In other words, don't do, do, do, do. When you are doing, you bring a select thought into reality, but your ideas are more limited. Instead, alternate periods of doing and just simply "being," and during that time of being more options will present themselves from the quantum consciousness.

    2) As hinted at above, we do create reality in a way, but we all need to work together at it, to work for the common good, not the selfish good. (Very old-school philosophy, but with his scientific twist on the backing of influencing the quantum consciousness at a collective and sub-ego level.)
    Reply

16.8.12

Dr. Amit Goswami, Ph.D. : Theoretical Quantum Physicist

Dr. Amit Goswami, Ph.D. : Theoretical Quantum Physicist

about

 

Amit Goswami, Ph. D. is a retired professor from the theoretical physics department of the University of Oregon in Eugene, where he had served since 1968. He is a pioneer of the new paradigm of science called “science within consciousness”.

Goswami is the author of the highly successful textbook Quantum Mechanics that is used in Universities throughout the world. His two volume textbook for nonscientists, The Physicist’s View of Nature traces the decline and rediscovery of the concept of God within science.
Goswami has also written many popular books based on his research on quantum physics and consciousness. In his seminal book, The Self-Aware Universe, he solved the quantum measurement problem elucidating the famous observer effect while paving the path to a new paradigm of science based on the primacy of consciousness.

Subsequently, in The Visionary Window, Goswami demonstrated how science and spirituality could be integrated. In Physics of the Soul he developed a theory of survival after death and reincarnation. His book Quantum Creativity is a tour de force instruction about how to engage in both outer and inner creativity. The Quantum Doctor integrates conventional and alternative medicine.

In his latest book, God is Not Dead we explore what quantum physics tell us about our origins and how we should live.

In his private life, Goswami is a practitioner of spirituality and transformation. He calls himself a quantum activist. He appeared in the filmWhat the Bleep Do We Know“, “The Dalai Lama Renaissance“, and the award winning documentary “The Quantum Activist“.