News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Garage12

09/25/15 6:32 PM

#66079 RE: Dank02 #66078

Thank you for your honesty. It's obvious you do know what your talking about and not willing to go along with the rediculous BCI breakthrough talk that goes on here. It's a toy and quite possibly not even a toy that has function to speak of. I appreciate the time your taking to defend your results and the time to post the YouTube video showing your results.
icon url

yjohn80

09/25/15 11:18 PM

#66082 RE: Dank02 #66078

I watched your interesting video twice. Thank you!

It was a nice try I should say. However, I also should say that the bio-electric signal,claimed to be detected by the device, is everywhere in your body. It can be generated in the brain, heart beating and muscle constructions because it is the way how a living thing works, that is, every movement is controlled by bio-electric signals.

When you use your fingers to pitch the sensor, the muscles in fingers construct and these muscles generate electric signals and that might be detected by the device. This might be a good thing since it means the device is sensitive.

It is interesting to watch that you use a wire to connect the sensor. I ask you to do the following test and answer me the results if you don't mind. After the wire connection is made, you just leave the device there without any touch with your fingers to see if the screen showing any signal. Then, you use finger to touch the wire to see if any signal shown in the screen. If no for the first situation but yes when the finger touches. The result is good because that means all signals are from your fingers that bring bio-electric signals derived from the muscle movements and firing of neuron fibers in your fingers.

Good luck!
icon url

sharkfox

09/26/15 12:15 AM

#66084 RE: Dank02 #66078

no videos, no proof, and no credibility... what you're proving is that the device picks up electric impulses.

eeg disadvantages: Low spatial resolution on the scalp. fMRI, for example, can directly display areas of the brain that are active, while EEG requires intense interpretation just to hypothesize what areas are activated by a particular response.[18]
EEG poorly measures neural activity that occurs below the upper layers of the brain (the cortex).
Unlike PET and MRS, cannot identify specific locations in the brain at which various neurotransmitters, drugs, etc. can be found.[12]
Often takes a long time to connect a subject to EEG, as it requires precise placement of dozens of electrodes around the head and the use of various gels, saline solutions, and/or pastes to keep them in place. While the length of time differs dependent on the specific EEG device used, as a general rule it takes considerably less time to prepare a subject for MEG, fMRI, MRS, and SPECT.
Signal-to-noise ratio is poor, so sophisticated data analysis and relatively large numbers of subjects are needed to extract useful information


so this states that the eeg picks up noise??? heres the source:

http://www.dept.cs.ucl.ac.uk/research/equator/papers/Documents2002/Mel_presence_2002.pdf

but hey, at least you gave it a shot