Essentially -- yes, yes, yes and yes; and maybe even a few
more "yes"es. However, I think the woman eithe misspoke (as they
used to say in the US) or she really didn't know her terms and
literature. It is Global Synchrony and was studied by a number of
people but most recently -- and notably -- by Richie Davidson in re:
to the "Compassion Monk". It's actually, though, an "old" finding
and we've been using bilateral 40 Hz targets since 95 -- when they
first became widely and easily available in the Biograph/MultiTrace
system.

Lehman demonstrated a contralaterally oriented 21 Hz synchrony that
correlates with the 40 Hz phenomenon described by Davidson. Again,
this replicates the findings that Sue and I first discussed in 95,
having worked with 21 Hz for quite a while before that using other
equipment, including CapScan.

The rest is really theorizing -- because everyone is always doing
this to more or less of a degree in concert with whatever else is
occurring in the CNS. The trick is to not get seduced into the
linearization that some specific "amount" of either or both or these
patterns IS somehow "enlightenment" or whatever. It is all a dance
and, YES, NeuroCARE definitely is oriented to allowing the CNS to
return this intrinsic, always available resource. And IME it does
this is a quite powerful and direct way, while also remaining gentle
and non-coercive. Simply "keep your feet in the room", as the
saying goes, and NeuroCARE will help you to return to that
primordial ground of consciousness.

val

--- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com, "John Thompson"
<nhtc@...> wrote:
>
> 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
> > >
> >
>