I was at a conference called `mind and its potential' a few weeks ago
and the term `Peak Gamma synchronicity' was mentioned there. One of
the speakers (Professor Lea Williams), from the `Brain Dynamics
Institute' at Westmeed Hospital in Sydney, had a little to say about
it. It was only in passing and I am going from memory here.
When used by her this term appeared to refer to a level of activity
where the associative cortex was firing in synchrony at around 40 Hz.
This apparently is the type of activity that they have seen in
meditative states when examining Buddhist monks and others.

According to Professor Williams it ordinarily takes about 1000
repetitions to replace one behavioral pattern with another in terms of
cortical activity. Thus most people give up on behavior change before
they reach the required number of repetitions. However it seems that
this is not the case when (what she is referring to as) `Peak Gamma
Synchronicity' is present. Apparently when the cortex is firing in
this way behavior change can happen much more rapidly with much fewer
repetitions and it seemed that she was referring to almost immediate
change. She did also mention that they suspected that rituals used in
tribal cultures (such as dance) for rites of passage and initiation
may induce this state of PGS

Conceptually this makes sense to me although I do wonder what the
significance of this is. Does it mean that in these states there is a
coherence emerging that enables maximized integrative processing
allowing further emergent states and that the rapid behavior changes
seen are transformative bifurcations? And/or is it possible that in
these states that localized associative dynamics (attractors) are not
present allowing for an otherwise unattainable flexibility and
establishment of new localized dynamics around organizational
principles already inherent within the system.

I find that when training with NeuroCARE (clients and myself) that
there is an eventual state that experientially seems similar to this.
During this time apparently random and unrelated thoughts, images,
feelings drift in and out of consciousness. This is consistent with
meditational experience of effortless mindfulness whilst unconscious
processing and healing is occurring within the human condition. A
feature of this state (for both NC and Mindfulness Meditation) is that
there is very little absorption into these events and one does not
therefore follow them. This lack of involvement or grasping enables
the inherent and natural processes (healing, developmental, and
transformative) within the human condition to do their thing. So this
leaves me wondering if this might not be the same state they were
talking about with PGS and why we see some of the results we do. This
is consistent with training via a global emergent dynamical EEG as NC
does. I think that it is also likely that PGS is an emergent
phenomena and therefore possible to come about via training within the
frequency band that NC does and in the way that NC does.

So I am interested in weather others are familiar with this use of the
term PGS and these phenomena and what they think the implications may
be.


--- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com, "Val Brown" <val@...> wrote:
>
> Yes, it's Global Synchrony although Synchronicity does actually also
> capture a central aspect of the phenomenon: viz, that it appears to
> have without sequenced linkages to provoke the observed synchrony.
> but, again, this phenomenon points to one of the core problems in the
> field and that is that there isn't a shared language -- nor a set of
> shraed "tools" -- to use to understand the events of interest within
> neurofeedback.
>
> For instance, a large proportion of the field remains quite tied to
> what I would call "hyperlocalization". This is the belief that
> location really does matter and it matters in very big ways. So that
> would mean that precise locations of sensors -- and precise frequency
> bands done in "isolation" -- are also critically important. This
> orientation reflects a number of other beliefs and biases, notably the
> idea that a SINGLE variable is the best way to investigate phenomena.
> But it also reflects the idea that, if a problem "appears" in one
> location, that is ALSO the likeliest point of entry to ameliorate
> the "problem".
>
> Now no one literally ONLY believes in that version of
> hyperlocalization -- there is simply too much evidence now that
> contralateral sites or "opposite" or "complementary" frequencies, etc
> are relevant or even better than a direct "frontal assault" on the
> site or frequency band (or "coherence" level, or, or, or) of
> interest. Despite that accumulated interest, however, many continue
> to hunt for specific linkages, between specific "generators" within
> the CNS, etc. And, from that kind of perspective, the phenomenon of
> Global Synchrony is a real mystery.
>
> It occurs without discernible temporal precedence: ie,
> it "spontaneously" emerges. It that sense it is very like a
> "quantum" phenomenon -- there is a certain floor level of such
> activity which emerges without specific precursor and which then
> vacililates on its own -- ie not in direct, linear response to any
> particular, discernible stimulus trail. And therein lies the mystery
> for the "hyperlocalization" biased approaches.
>
> From those perspectives there much be SOMETHING (and it probably is an
> actual THING) that is causing or facilitating or supporting the
> synchrony that is observed. The situation is very similar to what
> happened when Marconi unveiled his "wireless" communication device we
> now know as radio. Traditionalists simply couldn't believe that there
> wasn't a THING that was being transfered directly, point-to-point a la
> what happens with a telegraph. But the truth was that, now,
> with "wireless" transmission of information, the SAME MESSAGE
> went "instantly" to any number of receivers. Not only did the message
> get "there" quickly -- without specifically orienting it to go TO a
> particular site -- it now went as multiple copies of itself to any
> number of available receiving sites.
>
> Now we have the World Wide Web as a reality -- and as a metaphor for
> the CNS. Location is really irrelevant for the World Wide Web. What
> you need to reach me is NOT where I'm located PHYSICALLY in the
> world. Rather, you need my LOGICAL address -- the basis in
> INFORMATION that allows the system AS A WHOLE to route messages to
> LOGICAL addresses from which I can retrieve them. It's a profound
> difference that will only slowly seep into more general awareness and
> use.
>
> Now this is NOT to say that location doesn't "count" at all. I'm sure
> that it does in a number of ways. But it is to underline my
> experience that robust, profoundly transformative neurofeedback
> training can be done using the same two central sites for the two
> channels of EEG that are used. This is what we do in NeuroCARE and
> I've yet to see ANY data that shows a consistently different, better
> set of sites, either in general or even in specific.
>
> But that's a different issue for a different post.
>
> val
>
>
>
> --- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com, "tim_clearmind"
> <clearmind@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com, "John Thompson" <nhtc@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I recently came across the term `Peak Gamma Synchronicity'. If some
> > > one could explain what this is and its relevance to the function of
> > > the CNS I would appreciate it.
> > > John
> > >
> > sounds dead dodgy to me - probably mean "peak gammar
> > synchrony"(nonlinear) or "peak gamma coherence" (linear)
> >
> > I don't think this use of the term (which is already jungs) is
> > justified in nf
> >
>