Introduction video for Puzzlebox Orbit, an educational toy that combines a brain-controlled helicopter with open hardware, software, and teaching material.
Operated via an EEG headset from NeuroSky plus either your mobile device or the dedicated Pyramid remote, you can fly the Orbit through focused concentration or by achieving mental relaxation. What makes the Puzzlebox Orbit truly unique however is the open release of all source code, hardware schematics, 3D models, and step-by-step building instructions which are published freely online.
Puzzlebox Jigsaw - Racing - PGR3 - New York City - Overhead
Uploaded by puzzleboxlimited on Jan 24, 2011
Realtime visual display of levels of Attention (in red) and Meditation (blue) as recorded during gameplay using Puzzlebox Jigsaw and a NeuroSky MindSet EEG headset. A rolling 30-second history is visible in the top-right corner as are instantaneous meters visible along the right-hand side. The replay view was set to the original overhead perspective for a more clear understanding of what the original player saw.
The game is Project Gotham Racing 3, driving a Corvette ZR-1 through New York City.
Vegetative patient Scott Routley says 'I'm not in pain'
Video [embedded] The moment when Prof Owen asked patient Scott whether he was in pain
By Fergus Walsh Medical correspondent 12 November 2012 Last updated at 19:47 ET
A Canadian man who was believed to have been in a vegetative state for more than a decade, has been able to tell scientists that he is not in any pain.
It's the first time an uncommunicative, severely brain-injured patient has been able to give answers clinically relevant to their care.
Scott Routley, 39, was asked questions while having his brain activity scanned in an fMRI machine.
His doctor says the discovery means medical textbooks will need rewriting.
Vegetative patients emerge from a coma into a condition where they have periods awake, with their eyes open, but have no perception of themselves or the outside world.
Mr Routley suffered a severe brain injury in a car accident 12 years ago.
None of his physical assessments since then have shown any sign of awareness, or ability to communicate.
But the British neuroscientist Prof Adrian Owen - who led the team at the Brain and Mind Institute, University of Western Ontario - said Mr Routley was clearly not vegetative.
"Scott has been able to show he has a conscious, thinking mind. We have scanned him several times and his pattern of brain activity shows he is clearly choosing to answer our questions. We believe he knows who and where he is."
Prof Owen said it was a groundbreaking moment.
"Asking a patient something important to them has been our aim for many years. In future we could ask what we could do to improve their quality of life. It could be simple things like the entertainment we provide or the times of day they are washed and fed."
Scott Routley's parents say they always thought he was conscious and could communicate by lifting a thumb or moving his eyes. But this has never been accepted by medical staff.
Prof Bryan Young at University Hospital, London - Mr Routley's neurologist for a decade - said the scan results overturned all the behavioural assessments that had been made over the years.
"I was impressed and amazed that he was able to show these cognitive responses. He had the clinical picture of a typical vegetative patient and showed no spontaneous movements that looked meaningful."
Observational assessments of Mr Routley since he responded in the scanner have continued to suggest he is vegetative. Prof Young said medical textbooks would need to be updated to include Prof Owen's techniques.
The BBC's Panorama programme followed several vegetative and minimally-conscious patients in Britain and Canada for more than a year.
Another Canadian patient, Steven Graham, was able to demonstrate that he had laid down new memories since his brain injury. Mr Graham answers yes when asked whether his sister has a daughter. His niece was born after his car accident five years ago.
The Panorama team also followed three patients at the Royal Hospital for Neuro-disability (RHN) in Putney, which specialises in the rehabilitation of brain-injured patients.
It collaborates with a team of Cambridge University neuroscientists at the Wolfson Brain Imaging Centre at Addenbrooke's hospital, Cambridge.
Video [embedded] Panorama's Fergus Walsh meets Professor Adrian Owen to learn what the brain is like when in a vegetative state
One of the patients is diagnosed as vegetative by the RHN, and he is also unable to show awareness in an fMRI machine.
A second patient, who was not able to be fully assessed by the RHN because of repeated sickness, is later shown to have some limited awareness in brain scans.
*
FMRI SCANNING
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging measures the real-time activity of the brain by tracking the flow of oxygen-rich blood The patients were repeatedly asked to imagine playing tennis or walking around their home
In healthy volunteers each produces a distinct pattern of activity, in the premotor cortex for the first task and the parahippocampal gyrus for the second
It allowed the researchers to put a series of yes or no questions to severely brain-injured patients. A minority were able to answer by using the power of thought
The Death of “Near Death”: Even If Heaven Is Real, You Aren’t Seeing It
By Kyle Hill | December 3, 2012
You careen headlong into a blinding light. Around you, phantasms of people and pets lost. Clouds billow and sway, giving way to a gilded and golden entrance. You feel the air, thrusted downward by delicate wings. Everything is soothing, comforting, familiar. Heaven.
It’s a paradise that some experience during an apparent demise. The surprising consistency of heavenly visions during a “near death experience” (or NDE) indicates for many that an afterlife awaits us. Religious believers interpret these similar yet varying accounts like blind men exploring an elephant—they each feel something different (the tail is a snake and the legs are tree trunks, for example); yet all touch the same underlying reality. Skeptics point to the curious tendency for Heaven to conform to human desires, or for Heaven’s fleeting visage to be so dependent on culture or time period.
Heaven, in a theological view, has some kind of entrance. When you die, this entrance is supposed to appear—a Platform 9-3/4 [ http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/King%27s_Cross_Station ] for those running towards the grave. Of course, the purported way to see Heaven without having to take the final run at the platform wall is the NDE. Thrust back into popular consciousness by a surgeon claiming that “Heaven is Real,” the NDE has come under both theological and scientific scrutiny for its supposed ability to preview the great gig in the sky.
But getting to see Heaven is hell—you have to die. Or do you?
Crossing Over with Alexander Eben
Newsweek’s October Cover on The Daily Beast.
This past October, neurosurgeon Dr. Eben Alexander claimed that “Heaven is Real [ http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/10/07/proof-of-heaven-a-doctor-s-experience-with-the-afterlife.html ]”, making the cover of the now defunct Newsweek magazine. His account of Heaven was based on a series of visions he had while in a coma, suffering the ravages of a particularly vicious case of bacterial meningitis. Alexander claimed that because his neocortex was “inactivated” by this malady, his near death visions indicated an intellect apart from the grey matter, and therefore a part of us survives brain-death.
Alexander’s resplendent descriptions of the afterlife were intriguing and beautiful, but were also promoted as scientific proof. Because Alexander was a brain “scientist” (more accurately, a brain surgeon), his account carried apparent weight.
Scientifically, Alexander’s claims have been roundly criticized and, in my view, successfully refuted. Academic clinical neurologist Steve Novella removes the foundation of Alexander’s whole claim by noting that his assumption of cortex “inactivation” is flawed [ http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/proof-of-heaven/ ]:
Alexander claims there is no scientific explanation for his experiences, but I just gave one. They occurred while his brain function was either on the way down or on the way back up, or both, not while there was little to no brain activity.
In another takedown of the popular article, neuroscientist Sam Harris (with characteristic sharpness) also points out this faulty premise, and notes that Alexander’s evidence for such inactivation is lacking [ http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/this-must-be-heaven ]:
The problem, however, is that “CT scans and neurological examinations” can’t determine neuronal inactivity—in the cortex or anywhere else. And Alexander makes no reference to functional data that might have been acquired by fMRI, PET, or EEG—nor does he seem to realize that only this sort of evidence could support his case.
Without a scientific foundation for Alexander’s claims, skeptics suggest he had a NDE later fleshed out by confirmation bias and colored by culture. Harris concludes in a follow-up post on his blog [ http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/science-on-the-brink-of-death ], “I am quite sure that I’ve never seen a scientist speak in a manner more suggestive of wishful thinking. If self-deception were an Olympic sport, this is how our most gifted athletes would appear when they were in peak condition.”
And these takedowns have company. Paul Raeburn in the Huffington Post [ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-raeburn/newsweek-heaven-cover-story_b_1958795.html ], speaking of Alexander’s deathbed vision being promoted as a scientific account, wrote, “We are all demeaned, and our national conversation is demeaned, by people who promote this kind of thing as science. This is religious belief; nothing else.” We might expect this tone from skeptics, but even the faithful chime in. Greg Stier writes in the Christian post [ http://www.christianpost.com/news/heaven-is-for-real-but-are-near-death-experiences-83578/ ] that while he fully believes in the existence of Heaven, we should not take NDE accounts like Alexander’s as proof of it.
These criticisms of Alexander point out that what he saw was a classic NDE—the white light, the tunnel, the feelings of connectedness, etc. This is effective in dismantling his account of an “immaterial intellect” because, so far, most symptoms of a NDE are in fact scientifically explainable. [I won’t go into depth here, as another article on this site [ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=peace-of-mind-near-death ] provides a thorough description of the evidence, as does this study [ http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661311001550 ].]
One might argue that the scientific description of NDE symptoms is merely the physical account of what happens as you cross over. A brain without oxygen may experience “tunnel vision,” but a brain without oxygen is also near death and approaching the afterlife, for example. This argument rests on the fact that you are indeed dying. But without the theological gymnastics, I think there is an overlooked yet critical aspect to the near death phenomenon, one that can render Platform 9-3/4 wholly solid. Studies have shown that you don’t have to be near death to have a near death experience.
“Dying”
In 1990, a study was published in the Lancet [ http://www.scribd.com/doc/7874216/Features-of-neardeath-experience-in-relation-to-whether-or-not-patients-were-near-death ] that looked at the medical records of people who experienced NDE-like symptoms as a result of some injury or illness. It showed that out of 58 patients who reported “unusual” experiences associated with NDEs (tunnels, light, being outside one’s own body, etc.), 30 of them were not actually in any danger of dying, although they believed they were [1]. The authors of the study concluded that this finding offered support to the physical basis of NDEs, as well as the “transcendental” basis.
Why would the brain react to death (or even imagined death) in such a way? Well, death is a scary thing. Scientific accounts of the NDE characterize it as the body’s psychological and physiological response mechanism to such fear, producing chemicals in the brain that calm the individual while inducing euphoric sensations to reduce trauma.
Imagine an alpine climber whose pick fails to catch the next icy outcropping as he or she plummets towards a craggy mountainside. If one truly believes the next experience he or she will have is an intimate acquainting with a boulder, similar NDE-like sensations may arise (i.e., “My life flashed before my eyes…”). We know this because these men and women have come back to us [ http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/AroundTheWorld/story?id=7243806 ], emerging from a cushion of snow after their fall rather than becoming a mountain’s Jackson Pollock installation.
You do not have to be, in reality, dying to have a near-death experience. Even if you are dying (but survive), you probably won’t have one [ http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-10/fyi-what-causes-near-death-experiences ]. What does this make of Heaven? It follows that if you aren’t even on your way to the afterlife, the scientifically explicable NDE symptoms point to neurology, not paradise.
This Must Be the Place
Explaining the near death experience in a purely physical way is not to say that people cannot have a transformative vision or intense mental journey. The experience is real and tells us quite a bit about the brain (while raising even more fascinating questions about consciousness). But emotional and experiential gravitas says nothing of Heaven, or the afterlife in general. A healthy imbibing of ketamine [ http://gawker.com/5949892/newsweek-cover-story-or-internet-posting-about-dugs-a-quiz ] can induce the same feelings, but rarely do we consider this euphoric haze a glance of God’s paradise.
How can I dismiss the theological importance of NDEs so easily? As I said, I fully understand how real and valuable they can be. But in this case, as in science, a theory can be shot through with experimentation. As Richard Feynman said, “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.
The experiment is exploring an NDE under different conditions. Can the same sensations be produced when you are in fact not dying? If so, your rapping on the Pearly Gates is an illusion, even if Heaven were real. St. Peter surely can tell the difference between a dying man and a hallucinating one.
The near death experience as a foreshadowing of Heaven is a beautiful theory perhaps, but wrong.
Barring a capricious conception of “God’s plan,” one can experience a beautiful white light at the end of a tunnel while still having a firm grasp of their mortal coil. This is the death of near death. Combine explainable symptoms with a plausible, physical theory as to why we have them and you get a description of what it is like to die, not what it is like to glimpse God.
Sitting atop clouds fluffy and white, Heaven may be waiting. We can’t prove that it is not. But rather than helping to clarify, the near death experience, not dependent on death, only points to an ever interesting and complex human brain, nothing more.
We wish that paradise is waiting for us after we die. It is hard to accept the shade creeping into our time in the sun. We see a vision of what must be the place, so we grasp it and believe it. I think David Byrne of the Talking Heads captured this hopefulness about Heaven, this want of respite, best when he sang, “Home is where I want to be, but I guess I’m already there. I come home; she lifted up her wings. I guess that this must be the place.”
*
References:
1. Owens, J., Cook, E., & Stevenson, I. (1990). Features of “near-death experience” in relation to whether or not patients were near death. Lancet, 1175-1177.
Kyle Hill is currently working as a research assistant at Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where he graduated magna cum laude with a bachelor's degree in Environmental Engineering and is now pursuing a master's degree in Communication with a focus on science, health, environment, and sustainability. His research is focused on how personal motivations and website characteristics affect the depth of information processing. Hill is also a research fellow with the James Randi Educational Foundation [ http://randi.org/ ] and a blogger for Nature Education Student Voices [ http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/student-voices ]. He writes daily at the Science-Based Life blog [ http://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/ ].
The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
