BERKELEY, Calif. – You may idly wish you could hear what others are thinking yet write off telepathy as science fiction. But one day, the ability to read people’s minds may not be a talent reserved for psychics and the X-Men.

A group of neuroscientists at the University of California, Berkeley, reported they may have come up with a scientific way to read people’s minds.

Led by post-doctoral researcher Brian Pasley, the scientists have developed a method for deciphering the electrical signals in a person’s brain as they listen to words or conversation. Upon figuring out these signals, they were then able to use them to recreate the imagined speech of the same person.

The secret to their method lies in the temporal lobe of the brain, which is used in auditory perception. When a person hears a word or phrase being spoken, the activity that occurs in the temporal lobe also occurs when the person imagines that same word or phrase.

“This is a fundamental principle of the brain,” Robert Knight, a senior author for the study and a neuroscientist at UC Berkley, told FoxNews.com.

“The area that performs a cognitive or behavioral function is also activated when you imagine that function. For example, let’s say you raise your right arm. Then if you imagine raising your right arm, the same areas that were active when you move your arm are working when you imagine it.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/02/01/mind-reading-breakthrough-hailed-by-us-scientists/#ixzz1ltfPDLCL

This is cool. I heard people speculating whether this could one day lead to thought-controlled devices, at least for the disabled.

I believe there are some of us that find a group of people and there's an immediate connection. There's something recognizable. How it happens I don't know. I used to have a delightful activity with my Mom; related to telepathy!

Nowadays, there are two people with whom there's an extraordinary "connection". I say that persons name outloud and several occassions...there's a text. Or a call.
We laugh a lot!
Just saying: lets get rid of phones. Ha ha ha ha

There's special bonding and love how I met these two people.

Life is wonderful!

That is a lovely crop circle there sophi LoL (zepellin fans)

It appears that it is going to lead to a lot more ... like actual communication.

It's all good. Love science!

I'm a synesthete but for many years I didn't know what I was going through but I started developing my perception with meditation which I learned from martial arts. I naturally see shapes and graphs and use these to derive the sums of large equations.

I have a way to imagine answers to dialogue be it real or memorex. The brain doesn't distinguish actual conversation from recorded TV or media, it just follows along and creates a platform to host an event. By event, I mean timing, or time from what we know of it.

Reading minds to me is hosting a number of questions and accepting there is an answer and alternative answer to any one question. So any actual chit chat session is merely an opportunity to use one's imagination. Our humanistic tendencies lead us to choose one answer but an imaginary one is just as good. Thing is, I use spatial metrics as opposed to coordinate based systems as with remote viewing.

Nobody really wants to bother with reading any one in particular's mind when we need to achieve solutions for the present-past. We have no clue what the future means in terms of true solutions. That said, the future would be ideal, if imagined as our pasts and recollections would also be imagined satisfactory.

Let me put it this way: Sitting in front of your PC you can be thinking a number of things. If I'm a hacker I don't want to know what you're thinking at any given moment because I would have directed you to your pages and constructed your events. Events are sessions and sessions are logged as data. I control the amount to time your session lasts and it's acceptable to know you have choices to make while sitting there and those willful, independent choices are available even if not made, there are answers to questions you have not yet asked.

So, what role does accountability have to play with this mind reading science? We can't really be held responsible for our participation in the space time continuum.

We have electrical impulses that carry information from all over our body to the brain and the brain sends them back,it really wouldn't surprise me if science could make a device that can intercept some of the information from these electrical impulses,kind of like radio waves or sound waves.

I don't know, there's an episode of Gilligan's Island where they all were able to read each others minds...it didn't go well.

Heres a good trick on the subject of mind reading, finish the questions below, before moving on, you will be surprised.

What is 6+3?
What is 9+9?
What is 18+4?
what is 22+2?

Now what is the first vedgetable that comes into your head?

Mail me or IM me, and I will tell you the vedgetable :)
Actually just kidding, you were thinking of something that Bugs always eats, a carrot. The reason, think of the numbers to the answers, what do they have in common? The association and conditioning is already there with the numbers, I am just playing on it.

Try it on your friends, although write down the answer before you do the trick and make sure they do not see it, at the end, show them your prediction. They will be impressed. I been using this trick on and off in my act for about 10 years, it always amazes.
Sometimes though for some bizarre reason some people will pick a potato, so it might be worth having this written down in another pocket for a truly amazing surprise.
:)

I do not see how any of this grounds the claim that a mind can be read. The fact that certain areas of the brain are being used cannot determine the content of the thought. Besides that, humans have the propensity to use areas of the brain in order to do things that other people do not usually use those areas for. This all looks like wishful thinking to me...

Minds can be read with language and language alone, not by which areas of the brain are active and/or have an increase in bloodflow.

No, what they are saying is that the temporal lobe produces the same electrical signal whether the word is spoken or thought. The electrical signal can be read from outside the brain.

What would be required is that there would need to be a specific and definable signal for each possible thought/word or set thereof. I would suspect that a general idea could be had using these techniques, but "mind reading" in a meaningful sense?

Nah, I don't see it even being possible.

Each word had a definable signal that was the same whether spoken or thought. What make it a dramatic discovery was that to was localized to a specific part of the brain making the reading much more practical.

Creative,

I agree with your first point. Not all brains will work the same and there are multiple levels of thought going on. Not to mention the person will have to hooked up to something to receive the signals.

I don't know about you, but I could be reciting poetry and thinking about how I am going to slit your throat at the same time. I don't think they will be able to read that.

*As for your second point about minds only being read by language alone, I disagree with this strongly.

Emotions can be picked up from people as you come close to them long before you sense any language through telepathy.

And for you skeptics that don't believe in telepathy... oh well. I've experienced it and I know it is real.

That is amazing! I was thinking of a carrot. But I don't understand how it works. Would you mind explaining?

Eventually they will be, though they may need to combine different mind reading technologies to do it. We have determined that we can map out a person's visual centers and then infer what it is that they are visualizing. Eventually we will be able to produce images of what they are imagining. This is contrary to much of what I learned about neurology 20 years ago... such is the progress of science.

Over 90% of the content of that post is irrelevant.

If you go up to anyone, at anytime, and say: "Quick! Think of a vegetable! Was it a carrot?" You will get a majority of 'yes'.

Most of the other vegetables that we eat in our culture, on a regular basis, are not referenced using only the singular of the vegetable name. Carrot and potato are two that are, and 'potato' is another answer people give to that question.

To refer to celery, broccoli, corn in the singular, we use "a stalk of..." or "and ear of..." I'll say "I want a carrot" but not "I want a celery", I say "I want a celery stalk" or "I want some celery".

To refer to beans, peas, and the like, we almost always refer to them in the plural, not the singular.

So grammatically there are not many answers to that question which fit our normal use of language.

And how many people just eat a potato? They have baked potatoes with toppins, or mashed potatoes, or french fries, or potato casserole... I think the fact that people actually snack on individual carrots makes 'carrot' a far more common answer than 'potato'.

I'm sure there are other veggies that meet the criteria of being referenced i the singular, but i can't think of any right now... and thats the whole point.

English speaking people with very different cultural backgrounds might be inclined to think of something other than carrot or potato at first.

Edit: Since I posted, I thought of a few more veggies that meet the grammatical constraints - but we don't really just snack on them, whole, as a culture. I think its the combination of the grammar, and the common snacking of individual carrots, that leads to this effect.

I mostly eat broccoli!

But do you say: "I want a snack. I think I'll have a broccoli!" ?

Or do you say "I think I'll have some broccoli" ?

I thought of a potato.

--

Well metal, I would be amazed if they were to figure out a way to map out thought as is being suggested. I'm just a bit skeptical.