So, the question is: Is our brain truly an 'electromagnetic' brain?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether the brain can be accurately described as an "electromagnetic" brain, focusing on the nature of the electromagnetic fields emitted by the brain, their intensity, and frequency. Participants explore the implications of these emissions, referencing various measurement techniques such as EEG and magnetoencephalography (MEG).

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the brain emits a weak electromagnetic field, questioning its precise intensity and frequency.
  • Others challenge the notion of organized emissions from the brain, suggesting that what is emitted is more akin to disorganized waste heat, contributing to entropy.
  • There is a contention regarding the practicality of measuring these emissions in real-world settings, with some arguing that technologies like MEG are not feasible outside of controlled environments.
  • Several participants emphasize the need for specific peer-reviewed references to support claims about the brain's electromagnetic emissions.
  • Some express frustration over vague references and demand more explicit arguments or evidence in support of claims made.
  • There are discussions about the advancements in MEG technology and its decreasing need for shielding, contrasting with earlier beliefs about its practicality.
  • Participants mention the existence of numerous peer-reviewed studies analyzing signals related to brain activity, with calls for specific examples to substantiate claims.
  • Some participants highlight the importance of coherent field effects in physical systems, suggesting that the brain may produce similar effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the brain's electromagnetic emissions are organized or merely disorganized waste. There are competing views on the practicality of measuring these emissions and the interpretation of existing literature.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of "emission," the variability in measurement techniques, and the unresolved nature of the claims regarding the organization of electromagnetic fields emitted by the brain.

  • #31


Proton Soup said:
"field" doesn't imply self-propagating to me, but then, i was never a radio guy. "wave" implies self-propagating to me. "changing electromagnetic field" i would interpret as something like a rotating magnetic field in a motor. thus, a changing magnetic field in a conductor could generate cross-talk in other conductors if they run parallel. but I'm not sure what effect this would have in a biological system. i think to set another nerve off and generate an action potential, you've got to trigger a voltage-gated channel. but cells work pretty hard to maintain a voltage gradient and the fluid between them is a conductor. won't the interstitial fluid act as a kind of faraday cage?

so what is the reason we don't emit radio? I'm guessing it's that our antenna is too short for all the low-frequency electrical activity we generate.

Even more than that, our body as a whole isn't usually the antenna, just individual organs and and organ systems, even cells. IR is our big emission.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #32


Pythagorean said:
hrm... I guess this seems like a geometry trick to me: because you're still moving charge around the circuit (even if not through the capacitor). So the wires conducting the shuffling charges is where the magnetic field would be expected.

Yes, sorry, I didn't address that point. And yes, you can definitely get EM radiation propagating away from the wires/traces that are connected to the capacitor. That's actually a very big concern in PCB and product design -- if you allow too much RF energy to propagate away from your product, you can fail the "Radiated Electromagnetic Interference" (EMI) tests that you have to pass before you can certify and ship your product.

So you keep the traces short with respect to the wavelengths involved, and you use shielding, etc. There are lots and lots of things you have to do right in order to keep the parasitic "unintentional radiation" that propagates away from your product from being a problem.
 
  • #33


berkeman said:
Yes, sorry, I didn't address that point. And yes, you can definitely get EM radiation propagating away from the wires/traces that are connected to the capacitor. That's actually a very big concern in PCB and product design -- if you allow too much RF energy to propagate away from your product, you can fail the "Radiated Electromagnetic Interference" (EMI) tests that you have to pass before you can certify and ship your product.

So you keep the traces short with respect to the wavelengths involved, and you use shielding, etc. There are lots and lots of things you have to do right in order to keep the parasitic "unintentional radiation" that propagates away from your product from being a problem.

I have a trimeter that I used to take around with me. I'd get hits from microwaves and cellphones (no surprise there) but once when I was in a Sam's Club, I picked up a good peak from one of the freezers in a row of four. No idea what it could have been.

maybe transformer malfunction?
 
Last edited:
  • #34


Pythagorean said:
I have a trimeter that I used to take around with me. I'd get hits from microwaves and cellphones (no surprise there) but once when I was in a Sam's Club, I picked up a good peak from one of the freezers in a row of four. No idea what it could have been.

maybe transformer malfunction?

Yes, or something else that might have been causing arcing or similar.

I read a great article one time by a HAM radio operator who used to get called by the FCC to hunt down interfering transmitters. Depending on the location, strength, and frequencies, interference can be a pretty severe problem (like when it steps on EMS dispactch or police dispatch frequencies). Because of his skills at transmitter hunting, this guy got called regularly, and was usually able to find the interfering source, whether it was intentional or unintentional.

The best story of the bunch was an interfering source that seemed to be coming from a residential neighborhood, but only at certain times of the day and night. The intermittant nature of the signal made it hard to track down, but he finally knocked on a door of a home in the neighborhood, introduced himself and showed his credentials, and asked if he could look inside the home for the source. It turned out to be an electric analog wall clock which had a problem in its motor. When the second hand would start to climb up from the 30 minute mark each hour, there would be some arcing in the motor from the extra torque needed. That arcing was the source of the interfering signal (I forget what service it was interfering with, but it was a pretty important service). :-p
 
  • #35


LFP (local field potentials) can be anywhere from <1 to 40 Hz. There is currently a lot of research going into what exactly these fields are (that is, are they action potential spiking, or are they subthreshold membrane fluctuations, or are they representative of synaptic input at the dendrites), and what functional role, if any, they might have at feeding back into the neurons.
 

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K