We have a lot of active neurons in the digestive system, which is in fact a second brain.
Same can be said for the heart which contains an autonomous neuronal system to control the cardiac function independently if need be.
Notions of distributed systems apply : redundancy, parallelism, coordinated autonomous systems, synchronization.
So why wouldn't memory storage be distributed too ?
Why wouldn't some memories stored in organs be retained after transplantation ?
The kentucky fried thing (assuming that is a true history and not a fake new) could have a few simpler explanations like doctors talking about the donor in the pre or postoperatory phase while the patient was half-awake
Regarding inherited memories, this isn't common case, nevertheless it happened in the case of transplants [0] [1]
[0] https://blogs.unimelb.edu.au/sciencecommunication/2016/10/15...
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03069...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/07/us/dna-bone-marrow-transp...
Maybe not quite a 'long-term' memory in the context you're after, but I wonder how this would compare to something like instinct and how we would tell the difference?
Somewhat related to this is Microsoft Research's project to use DNA for data storage: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/dna-storage...
Maybe a “memory” like a neuron based thing isnt what is being transmitted, but instead nearest urges directed by unique sets of microbes found in individuals
"What are you going to do with your new heart?" "Clog it up just like the last one. duh."
https://www.namahjournal.com/doc/Actual/Memory-transference-...
This doesn't necessarily mean that the anecdotes described there are false, but I'd be inclined to take them with a grain of salt.
Here is a link: https://www.medicaldaily.com/can-organ-transplant-change-rec...
We still don't know squats about how memory are stored. And cases like that can be a valid argument for memory and consciousness being a non-local phenomenon. Kinda like how client-server model in CS. ;-) . Are our brain just a browser?
Yeah, but not in the kidneys or the liver. Get back to us when you find sources from peer-reviewed journals.
By stretching the definition of memory, you can get to the conclusion that the whole body remembers. Scientists have found that the neurons in the spine learn when practicing motor tasks. The immune system remembers pathogens. Hormonal glands remember concentrations of relevant hormones by growing / shrinking. Muscles (including the heart) remember exercise by growing. If you play the guitar your fingertips harden, they "remember" the stress and toughen up in anticipation. And every single cell will learn by epigenetic changes. Maybe you could say that diabetes type 2 happens because the cells learn to respond less to insulin.
We kind of waste our time by verifying with science for new surprises. We live for <60 years, we have to manage our time with something that is impactful. So verifying anything with science is not worth our time (thinking -> googling -> starting threads). Instead, simplify the facts and write it down on paper. Keep accumulating your findings, you will come up with your own more connected theories. Occasionally, prove your theories wrong to build a stronger base knowledge.
My message is just a reply for "Is this scientifically verifiable? Of course not, not with current means"
You are apparently long, long overdue a revision of a few history books. It should very quickly become self-evident that it is in fact worth our collective time (and probably our individual time too, as it's a real achievement that everyone benefits from) to perform scientific studies.
What country are you from?
> We live for <60 years
This is for the US, from CDC data, so probably 30-something percent depending on how many were between 60 and 64:
>Totals For 2010: 2,468,435 people of all ages died. About 11.9% aged 25 to 54. 24.5% aged 25 to 64
https://modlinlegal.com/blog/maybe-i-just-won-t-plan/90-the-...
And this https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TO65.MA.ZS
shows numbers kinda all over the place depending on country, depending on where the person is from it may very well be that the majority die before 60-65 in their country.
Angola, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, both Congo, Cote d'Ivorie, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Lesotho, Malawi, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe all appear to be under 60% chance (one or two may be at or above, I made the list quickly) of making it to 65 if I'm reading that table correctly.
So, that's about 679 million people using 2017 numbers found via Google so not even 9% of the global population but still, that's roughly a 1 in 12 chance they are from a country where death before 65 is a thing for 40-60% of the population.
Also TIL Nigeria has 191 million people!!! Wow, I would have never come close to that if told to guess.
The person responded with "Kentucky fried chicken" on a whim.
It was later explained that they don't know why they felt compelled to say KFC since they never been to one in their life. Later on, they find information about the donor and how they died (motorcycle accident -- be safe on your bikes please kids). The donor was a pretty husky guy, and loved Kentucky fried chicken.
Now could have this just been sheer coincidence or chance? Most likely. Is this scientifically verifiable? Of course not, not with current means. But for some reason I've always had a strange suspicion that there was more to memory than just storage in our brains, but that they are also somehow part of us as well.