Default mode network Before & Now

[Voidmatrix]

From gemini:

"
Both high and low temperatures can negatively impact cognitive functions such as attention, memory, and decision-making, though heat generally has a greater and more immediate detrimental effect than cold. Prolonged exposure to extreme heat can trigger a stress response, impairing executive function and leading to decreased cognitive scores, while even brief cold exposure can reduce processing speed and attention. The impact of temperature on cognition is complex, with specific effects varying by individual, duration of exposure, and environmental context.

Effects of Heat

• Impaired Function:
  High temperatures can impair attention, processing speed, memory, and decision-making abilities.
  
  
• Stress Response:
  Heat can trigger a stress response, releasing hormones like cortisol, which further contributes to cognitive impairment.
  
  
• Educational Impact:
  Studies have shown that abnormally hot days are associated with reduced performance on math tests, particularly for teenagers and adolescents.
  
  
• Regional & Demographic Differences:
  The impact of heat on cognition can vary by region and is often more pronounced in individuals with lower education levels.
  

Effects of Cold

• Impaired Function:
  Quick exposure to cold temperatures can impair attention, memory, and executive function, similar to heat.
  
  
• Context-Specific Effects:
  The effect of cold can be more nuanced; for example, in some regions, cold exposure may be linked to reduced performance, while in others, it may have no significant effect.
  
  
• Individual Response:
  The severity of cold's impact depends on the individual's physiological response to the cold and the duration of exposure.
  

Key Considerations

• Extremes vs. Gradual Changes:
  Extreme temperatures, both hot and cold, are detrimental, but research suggests high temperatures may be more problematic for cognitive function.
  
  
• Duration and Context:
  Short-term exposure to cold can impair functions, while prolonged exposure to high heat can trigger stress responses and longer-term cognitive effects.
  
  
• Individual Factors:
  Age, education, and individual physiological responses play a significant role in how temperature affects cognitive abilities.
  
  
• Environmental Context:
  The regional and seasonal context can influence the relationship between temperature and cognition, meaning effects are not universal. "
  
  
  
• One love

 

[northape]

I have mixed sauna and cold immersion a few times, so I know this data firsthand
Although, going from one extreme to the other creates a nice, clear-headed space and sobers one up quite efficiently.
I've wanted my own sauna for years now. Sadly, locals unlike Finns don't have it in their culture. Sauna in Finland is everywhere.

 

[CosmicRiver]

What about all the origins of civilization? Places like Egypt, India, Iran, Peru, and so on were cradles of different highly advanced cultures. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something?

i think they were/are among the most fertile areas on Earth

 

[Transform]

From gemini:

"
Both high and low temperatures can negatively impact cognitive functions such as attention, memory, and decision-making, though heat generally has a greater and more immediate detrimental effect than cold. Prolonged exposure to extreme heat can trigger a stress response, impairing executive function and leading to decreased cognitive scores, while even brief cold exposure can reduce processing speed and attention. The impact of temperature on cognition is complex, with specific effects varying by individual, duration of exposure, and environmental context.

Effects of Heat

• Impaired Function:
  High temperatures can impair attention, processing speed, memory, and decision-making abilities.
  
  
• Stress Response:
  Heat can trigger a stress response, releasing hormones like cortisol, which further contributes to cognitive impairment.
  
  
• Educational Impact:
  Studies have shown that abnormally hot days are associated with reduced performance on math tests, particularly for teenagers and adolescents.
  
  
• Regional & Demographic Differences:
  The impact of heat on cognition can vary by region and is often more pronounced in individuals with lower education levels.

Effects of Cold

• Impaired Function:
  Quick exposure to cold temperatures can impair attention, memory, and executive function, similar to heat.
  
  
• Context-Specific Effects:
  The effect of cold can be more nuanced; for example, in some regions, cold exposure may be linked to reduced performance, while in others, it may have no significant effect.
  
  
• Individual Response:
  The severity of cold's impact depends on the individual's physiological response to the cold and the duration of exposure.

Key Considerations

• Extremes vs. Gradual Changes:
  Extreme temperatures, both hot and cold, are detrimental, but research suggests high temperatures may be more problematic for cognitive function.
  
  
• Duration and Context:
  Short-term exposure to cold can impair functions, while prolonged exposure to high heat can trigger stress responses and longer-term cognitive effects.
  
  
• Individual Factors:
  Age, education, and individual physiological responses play a significant role in how temperature affects cognitive abilities.
  
  
• Environmental Context:
  The regional and seasonal context can influence the relationship between temperature and cognition, meaning effects are not universal. "
  
  
  
• One love

Cold exposure (cold showers, ice baths, cold lake swimming, ...)

Probably you've heard of people doing this- taking cold showers or taking ice baths etc. The hype around this is actually justified. Huge mood boost (lasting for sometimes multiple days) and has various significant health benefits. Recommended! Pics below are my current set-up; taking advantage...

forum.dmt-nexus.me

 

[Voidmatrix]

I have a little bit of time to break my thoughts down further.

I will say that I think this observation is best noticed looking at two continents in particular, Africa and Europe. There doesn't seem to be enough information on the America's and it's hard to notice this in Asia because the landscape and environments can be quite dynamic and there's also so much movement across the continent. There wasn't quite as much movement for a long time between Europe and Africa, especially Subsaharan Africa (hence the Scramble for Africa and what preceded it in the few centuries prior).

I'd like to also add a little saying to keep in mind for this discussion: necessity is the mother of invention.

Let's look at written language. Africa as a continent, especially Subsaharan Africa, was one of the last to develop writing systems that weren't simple symbols and codes. This isn't necessarily because they are more intellectually bereft than anyone else in the world (though people who liked ideas like phrenology would say otherwise). No, written systems often come about when a large group of people are able to settle down somewhere. Swaths of Subsaharan Africa were very vibrant and verdant for a very long time. Run out of food or water in an area? All good, there's another area not too far away. You just move. That's why there are still pastorilist groups in Africa, meandering around the land throughout the year. You don't settle down and then build huge castles or develop writing systems. There's no need.

Also this verdancy lends itself to there being smaller groups that bind together over time. That wasn't really an option in Europe. Fewer people can survive together in tropical climate than in a cold one. The environment supports it.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Also, Africa wasn't nearly as densely populated as other places in the world, like in Europe, and as such information between groups often moved slower.

While there are connections to northern Africa, Subsaharan Africa is almost it's own continent. But the environments are very different as well.

Back to temperature and cognition. Heat causes things to expand and increases excitation. Cold contracts and lowers excitation. If we think of this with regards to varying populations, and think about the impacts of the brain, we can see why such dynamic differences occur.

Don't feel like I explained myself very well, but oh well.

One love

 

[northape]

Don't feel like I explained myself very well, but oh well.

It was a good, clear explanation, and I got what you meant in your earlier posts. This all just shows that we are Nature, and our very biology is interwoven with the environments we live in. "Necessity is the mother of invention" is right on point. I feel that this process is like a natural law. It's not like we decide to invent, but are driven to it by circumstances.

Heat causes things to expand and increases excitation. Cold contracts and lowers excitation. If we think of this with regards to varying populations, and think about the impacts of the brain, we can see why such dynamic differences occur.

Sorry, I noticed that I'm quite biased when it comes to heat and sunlight, so I tend to promote them

People in Europe seem to be more heady, and the farther north you go, the need for invention and order increases. It would be difficult to survive otherwise. Mountains are another environment that forces increased cooperation, but it's difficult to build a civilization there. Norway is an oddball for sure - it has both. One needs to see the amount of infrastructure there to understand it. Still, countries like France and Germany are better for fostering development. You need the right balance of cold and warm weather for us monkeys.

 

[Voidmatrix]

Sorry, I noticed that I'm quite biased when it comes to heat and sunlight, so I tend to promote them

I'm not saying either is better or worse, so I support your endorsement for vitamin D. I'm simply making an observation on likely causes on distinctions of developments of peoples around the world. You added even more layers.

You need the right balance of cold and warm weather for us monkeys.

This can be applied to many of the "first great civilizations" you mentioned earlier. In all of those areas, during the periods that led to them flourishing and during the periods in which they flourished, look carefully at the amenability of the environment on several layers; access to water, food, etc, travel routes, etc etc. If I'm not mistaken.

One love

 

[northape]

This can be applied to many of the "first great civilizations" you mentioned earlier. In all of those areas, during the periods that led to them flourishing and during the periods in which they flourished, look carefully at the amenability of the environment on several layers; access to water, food, etc, travel routes, etc etc. If I'm not mistaken.

For sure, the climate was different back then, and they settled on the most fertile lands. If you're a believer in the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis, it all makes even more sense.

I guess we can never know how they felt or saw the world. Even if we got a good simulation going, it still would be objective knowledge. It would be interesting to do a study today to see if the DMN differs in groups around the world. I'd love to see scans of New York City dwellers compared to those of some uncontacted tribes in the Amazon. It's just pure curiosity at this point.

 

[blig-blug]

I understand your point @Voidmatrix, and agree, but I'm too pedantic to not comment on some details that are irrelevant to the argument

Africa as a continent, especially Subsaharan Africa, was one of the last to develop writing systems that weren't simple symbols and codes

I don't think so! Hieroglyphics were among the first writing systems, and aren't "simple symbols" at all. They are "simple symbols" in the way Chinese characters are.
As for sub-saharian Africa, there is the Meroitic script, an alphabetic system descending from Egyptian hieroglyphics developed in the 3rd century BC. The Kingdom of Kush in general was one of the earliest civilizations, and it's sub-saharian Africa.

That wasn't really an option in Europe. Fewer people can survive together in tropical climate than in a cold one.

However, the actually cold parts of Europe were extremely uncivilized as well, full of peoples without a writing system. Civilization in Europe developed in the Mediterranean, a region that is not cold at all. And talking about "European civilization" in that context is not accurate at all: it was Mediterranean civilization, as it included northern Africa as well.
Writing wasn't developed indigenously in Europe (with some exceptions that left no persisting mark in history), but was introduced by Phoenicians.
Most of central and northern Europe only had some kind of civilization either after being conquered by the Romans. The many areas that weren't conquered by them acquired civilization even later, and still through Roman influences. That's why in European history there has been a persistent obsession by many rulers to call themselves Roman emperors: kaiser, tsar, emperor (including "Holy Roman Emperor")...

More than about temperature, it's about the environment. Civilization has appeared in places where taxable crops such as wheat and corn were present and viable. Those are crops that have a very narrow harvest window, which makes them difficult to hide for tax purposes. It doesn't have to do as much with cognition as to the viability of early forms of State.

Run out of food or water in an area? All good, there's another area not too far away. You just move

Yes, it's more about this. Most civilizations appeared in places where there is a point of balance between the environment being too harsh and too abundant. Central and Northern Europe were in the "too harsh" bucket, no civilization emerged there. They just were relatively close to areas where civilization did appear, while sub-saharian Africa had the Sahara and very dense forests in between them and "cradles of civilization". The areas that didn't, like Nubia, civilized earlier than most of Europe.

Also, Africa wasn't nearly as densely populated as other places in the world, like in Europe

Yes, but that reverses cause and effect: population density increased with urbanism, State, and civilization.

 

[Pumpy]

Jerusalem artichokes/topinambur are a noted source of this fructose-based polysaccharide. Their qualities in combination with enteric bacterial action could go a long way towards explaining your choice of moniker

haha yes velocity is important to me that is true though i was originally thinking of the Na + K + pump that is the electrogenic transmembrane ATPase allowing for the disturbance of membrane resting potential in neurons <edit---> (i wanted an excuse to explain that)

 

[Voidmatrix]

I don't think so! Hieroglyphics were among the first writing systems, and aren't "simple symbols" at all. They are "simple symbols" in the way Chinese characters are.
As for sub-saharian Africa, there is the Meroitic script, an alphabetic system descending from Egyptian hieroglyphics developed in the 3rd century BC. The Kingdom of Kush in general was one of the earliest civilizations, and it's sub-saharian Africa.

That's why I put special emphasis on subsaharan Africa. That's really where this lies. Areas north of the Sahara align more with what I said to northape about the environment of " first great civilizations."

However, the actually cold parts of Europe were extremely uncivilized as well, full of peoples without a writing system. Civilization in Europe developed in the Mediterranean, a region that is not cold at all. And talking about "European civilization" in that context is not accurate at all: it was Mediterranean civilization, as it included northern Africa as well.
Writing wasn't developed indigenously in Europe (with some exceptions that left no persisting mark in history), but was introduced by Phoenicians.
Most of central and northern Europe only had some kind of civilization either after being conquered by the Romans. The many areas that weren't conquered by them acquired civilization even later, and still through Roman influences. That's why in European history there has been a persistent obsession by many rulers to call themselves Roman emperors: kaiser, tsar, emperor (including "Holy Roman Emperor")...

More than about temperature, it's about the environment. Civilization has appeared in places where taxable crops such as wheat and corn were present and viable. Those are crops that have a very narrow harvest window, which makes them difficult to hide for tax purposes. It doesn't have to do as much with cognition as to the viability of early forms of State.

Temp is part of the environment so I was zooming in on potential effects of a specific variable. As I stated early on, this shit is complex.

But yes, from that same latitudinal region, information moved up into northern Europe. With regard to the contrast I'm making though, look at the development of western Europe vs subsaharan Africa, and we can see the divergence of thought being tied to environment, including temperature.

Yes, it's more about this. Most civilizations appeared in places where there is a point of balance between the environment being too harsh and too abundant. Central and Northern Europe were in the "too harsh" bucket, no civilization emerged there. They just were relatively close to areas where civilization did appear, while sub-saharian Africa had the Sahara and very dense forests in between them and "cradles of civilization". The areas that didn't, like Nubia, civilized earlier than most of Europe.

Galimore makes an observation similar to this in Alien Information Theory in that too much chaos life cannot form and too much order and it cannot thrive. Balance. Places that flourished had more of this balance.

Yes, but that reverses cause and effect: population density increased with urbanism, State, and civilization.

Sorry I'm not following you here. I feel like the but is out of place because you seem to be feeling rhe original point. Europe was forced yo settle more, thus increased urbanism, state, and "civilization." Again, a lot of African groups were roaming or moving often that this didn't happen nearly as much.

It seems as though subsaharan Africa didn't find the balance in that so much of it was too easy to live in, so huge societies never need to form.

One love

 

[Transform]

longitudinal region

Latitudinal, surely?

 

[Voidmatrix]

Latitudinal, surely?

Thanks, I literally woke up stressed and flustered 20 minutes ago, responding on the porcelain throne.

One love

 

[northape]

Long live the King

 

[Transform]

Central and Northern Europe were in the "too harsh" bucket, no civilization emerged there.

There were some levels of organised society many thousands of years before the Romans arrived in Great Britain. Numerous Roman roads (but not all of them, obviously) were built on pre-existing trackways. Megalithic earthworks also tell a tale of organised human society, if not civilisation, on a considerable scale. (I'd highly recommend a visit to Silbury Hill and Avebury to ponder this point.)

There are also unknowns in the possible traces of human settlements lost to the oceans after the Younger Dryas event, but some of the extant European megalithic remains appear to point at highly organised human groups of mindboggling antiquity. If there was dry land, these people will have been there too.

On a final note, I can't help myself from repeating once more the quote attributed to Mahatma Gandhi - when asked what he thought of western civilisation, he is reported to have replied, "I think it would be a good idea."

 

[Transform]

Thanks, I literally woke up stressed and flustered 20 minutes ago, responding on the porcelain throne.

One love

Hope you're feeling a bit more levelled out now after your ablutions, and that you too will find balance among the chaos.

 

[Voidmatrix]

Thanks, I literally woke up stressed and flustered 20 minutes ago, responding on the porcelain throne.

One love

I guess it also reflects my cognitive issues as well, since you've edited and handful of my posts. You have my gratitude.

@northape I'm contemplating restoring that post. Shit was funny.

At the end of the day, we're dancing with some serious supposition because there will be details that we'll never have that are necessary for grasping the full scope of what the DMNs were for ancient peoples.

That's not to say we shouldn't continue.

One love

 

[Transform]

@northape I'm contemplating restoring that post. Shit was funny

+1

 

[northape]

@northape I'm contemplating restoring that post. Shit was funny.

My sense of humor is sketchy
You can restore it if you like...

 

[blig-blug]

As I stated early on, this shit is complex.

Basically, this.

from that same latitudinal region, information moved up into northern Europe

Because there were less geographical obstacles. The way it moved north was for the most part through violent invasion and murder. Later through the spread of religion in ways that could involve the latter if it was rejected.

look at the development of western Europe vs subsaharan Africa, and we can see the divergence of thought being tied to environment, including temperature

Yes, I'm not disagreeing. Compare the (old) African jungles with the Amazonian region, and the savannah with the American plains and steppes elsewhere. I'm just saying that I don't think it's related to temperature in the way you originally presented it (that cold promoted civilization).

Sorry I'm not following you here. I feel like the but is out of place because you seem to be feeling rhe original point. Europe was forced yo settle more, thus increased urbanism, state, and "civilization." Again, a lot of African groups were roaming or moving often that this didn't happen nearly as much.

What I mean is that first they settled and then populations increased. And they weren't really forced: the places were settlement started were the places where it was easier to do so. Normally alluvial plains with mild climates. In the dense forests of central Europe settlements were much more similar to African villages than to Greek or Roman (or Sumerian) cities, and further to the north, there has been nomadism until very recent times (see Finland). So both settlement and population increase come downstream from an environment that allowed for it, not one that forced it.
There are examples that show that urbanism was a possibility but not a necessity. For example, in the Iberian peninsula the first cities were coastal Greek colonies in the Mediterranean coast, and only those peoples in close contact with the Greek colonists built cities. Cities only became widespread after the Roman conquest. The climate allowed for it as well as in Italy or Greece, and yet it didn't happen until it was forced by a conqueror.

There were some levels of organised society many thousands of years before the Romans arrived in Great Britain. Numerous Roman roads (but not all of them, obviously) were built on pre-existing trackways. Megalithic earthworks also tell a tale of organised human society, if not civilisation, on a considerable scale. (I'd highly recommend a visit to Silbury Hill and Avebury to ponder this point.)

Yes, it wasn't meant as a way to demean cultures that didn't develop into urban civilizations. It's just that an equivalent degree of social and cultural development were widespread in Africa and the Americas too, and the focus of the conversation is in those elements that weren't. By the way, I personally don't think that urbanism and civilization were positive for humanity in the long term, so I don't hold the peoples that didn't develop cities by themselves as somehow "backwards".