I’ve heard people say that the answer is instantaneous, but that doesn’t quite cut it.
I guess I’m asking how fast do things move from synapse to synapse and neuron to neuron in your brain/nervous system.
It takes about 500ms for the brain to become consciously aware of a stimulus. It’s possible to react faster than that through anticipation or reflex actions (which bypass higher cognitive functions), but it still takes half a second before you actually comprehend what happened.
From memory - pause - about 100 m/s.
The only person I have heard asserting that the speed of thought is instantaneous(or at least faster than c) would be ‘Dr’ Kent Hovind, who has not exactly proven himself reliable on matters of science.
Nerve impulses, in the words of the inimitable Isaac Asimov, travel “about as fast as a dog cart.” Thoughts, however, don’t have to travel very far, so they take very little time, even though there may be huge cascades of nerve activity going on.
Tripler’s Second Law:
The speed of thought is directly converse of the blood alcohol content of the thinker. The inspiration of the ideas, however, is directly proportional to the same.
I’ve heard Joe Random’s figure before, but I also remember reading as a kid that “signals travel up your nervous system at 300 miles per hour”. Don’t ask me for a cite: it was in a book, and that book by sure is now long out of print.
It was a Charlie Brown/Peanuts book on the human body. Back in the 80s.
Tripler
Like, Hall & Oates 80s.
How do you determine the origin of a thought and then time its arrival to your consciousness?
Dear PS:
I think I’m reading your question a little differently. Essentially the human thought impulse is believed to be governed by laws of physics. The impulse can’t move faster than the speed of light, or even approach c, because we’d start mucking with time and all sorts of messy stuff.
BUT
Theoretically, the impulse may be able to move faster than c, thereby explaining precognition and Fakirisms and all sorts of other altered states. Depends on which camp you’re in: the old guard with Einstein, or the Young Turks like Mr. Sagan, who, outside of colonizing the Oort Cloud, made it clear humans may only conquer other galaxies via the Mind.
Think about how long a dream can seem to last… maybe when one dies, the mind makes up and Eternity. <shrug> Hope I’m on the right track for you.
I have a feeling that I read somewhere that perception is known to play tricks on us over the ordering of events, (perhaps like the way that you think you snapped awake just before the alarm clock started to ring) - so maybe subjectively, it can actually move backwards in time.
Correct me if I am mistaken, but I thought that neural activity was electrochemical in nature. The electrical component is a field effect which theoretically could transmit impulses at c, but the chemical component is a reaction which is rate limited according to chemical concentrations, temperature, etc. Standard high-school chemistry and physics stuff.
If it were all electrical, wouldn’t our thoughts be perturbed in the presence of strong magnetic fields? Having toured an operating cyclotron, I’m quite sure this is not the case.
As an upper limit, I would look at the transmission time for a reflex action (touch a hot pan). My understanding is that such actions occur entirely within the CNS, not involving any higher thought processes.
-FK
Our thoughts can be perturbed by strong magnetic fields… back in a moment with a cite.
In my case, all to often it is much, much slower than my speed of mouth. 
Fuji, you’re too much of a pragmatist <grin>;yes, the time involved in the synaptic leap is a function of chemistry and physics all boiling down to action potential, but I was referring to the “open gate” theorum, somewhat recently and cryptically illustrated in John L. Casti’s The Cambridge Quintet.
This isn’t new stuff, but what it says is (rather obviously) our minds can be set, outside of the CNS, on one task such that we can hold onto that hot pan while our flesh is falling away. But the interesting part of the theory links concentration/meditation to nothing more than keeping the synapses bridged and those pathways connected so that thoughts are, somewhat yogically, kept on track.
Hence the reference to exceeding c.
The action potential of a neuron travels at 10 to 100 meters per second. A typical value is ~30 m/sec, but different neurons propagate signals at different speeds.
Reaction to a visual stimulus occurs in <100 msec.
It’s not all that fast, really. Only double your normal movement rate. Speed Beyond Thought is only 10 times normal.
Your words seem to suggest that this perception is merely an illusion. I’ve heard this phenomenon described with a much more concrete example:
Suppose you are in a room with many people enaged in various conversations. All those conversations blend into an easily ignored white noise, and you can easily focus on the conversation that you are in, tuning out all other sounds.
For example, someone calls out “John Smith!” and you ignore it, because your name is John Jones. Then someone calls out “John Jones!” and you are aware of the whole thing. Not just the “Jones”, but even the “John”. And in fact, you even heard the words before it: “Hey, you’re John Jones!”
(Should this be in a new thread?)
I think the speed varies according to political affiliation.
That’s called “echoic memory”. You retain roughly 2 seconds of auditory stimulus even when you’re not paying attention. If something draws you attention to the stimulus (such as hearing your own name), then you can recall the contents of the echoic memory before it fades away.
There is also a visual version of sensory memory called “iconic memory”. It’s much shorter, though. Roughly 500ms.
Much appreciated! I figured that there was research into this, but I didn’t realize there was a term for it.
Is iconic memory responsible for the odd perceptual effect of a lengthened second when first looking at the moving second-hand (or digits) of a clock? - sort of like the buffer filling up or something?