• Enrique
    584
    CEMI (Conscious Electromagnetic Information) theory claims that synchronous neuron firing creates an electromagnetic field which suffuses across relatively large regions of the brain to stimulate even further neuron activity, which upon reaching a sufficiently robust level comprises the substance of fully conscious awareness. The originator of this theory seems to imply that the brain's electromagnetic field differs considerably in composition depending on the quantity and kind of neurons which are firing in synchrony, giving rise to a large variety in the mental states observed.

    The following is my own "coherence field" theory: the brain's global electromagnetic field is a basic substrate that most varies in relationship to the amount of synchronous electrical potential involved in generating it, less with respect to the particular structure of neurons which produce it. This global electromagnetic field essentially amounts to a single substance extending throughout the mass of the brain as induced by an effectively uniform type of stimulating electrochemical transmission. The brain's diversity of action stems from the way molecular superpositions in biochemical pathways integrate into this single field while they operate, the entire cognitive apparatus welded together by electric charge. A hypothesis is that the many nodes of superposed fields are capable of responding to further types of field phenomena, more or less nonlocal in causation, which have not yet been substantially characterized by science.

    I think both of these theories might have an aspect of the truth. Perhaps consciousness consists in gradations of more or less CEMI-type fields depending on brain region, with high-level CEMI awareness concentrated in particular (though perhaps roving) places within the brain, so that for instance the ability of the brain to project hyperconscious mental images is a separate process from inducement of the fully attentive optical field, while each having distinctive CEMI-like properties, yet the action potential-induced electromagnetic field of the brain viewed in its entirety tends to operate by way of a single, simple mechanism responsible for its general stability in the presence of fluctuating stimuli, uniting biomolecular percepts as a mind.

    So the electromagnetic field is somewhat particularized in line with CEMI theory, though not enough for even human agents to introspect awareness with a huge amount of resolution, but this of course can vary between individuals. The electromagnetic field binds diverse percepts (specially adapted arrays of biochemical pathway entanglements and their superpositions, as has been discussed already in some of my threads) within a single matrix of mind, the integrated "what it is like" to experience existence, because this field is rather functionally homogeneous. I would claim that due to fundamental similarities between the tissues and cells of species, there is probably a "what it is like" to be an insect, maybe even a bacterium, especially in the presence of relatively strong and dispersed fields from even external origins. Lower introspective resolution does not imply a machinelike lack of perception and feeling, and higher introspective resolution can readily cooccur with some perceptual deficits. I suppose this is contra the perspective of materialistic determinism or "objectification" commonly directed towards animals or the disabled.

    Maybe neuron function specifically can be differentiated into more, less, and majority non-CEMI processes, yet all nonetheless bound together by a relatively stable electromagnetic matrix. Are CEMI mechanisms the subconstituent of an unconscious but nonetheless global underlying electromagnetic field? This would explain the serial (nonparallel) processing characteristic of full awareness, as a relatively localized and disjuncted interruption of the global field by sufficiently strong, "CEMI" fields. An interesting inquiry would be as to where unmistakably CEMI-level fields are located within the brain. Could the CEMI centers be wherever fMRI indicates blood flow is particularly concentrated, or even more localized than that? Do EM fields, including CEMI fields, bypass neurons somewhat and interact directly, maybe as a sort of nested, morphing pattern?

    The issue of how quantum mechanisms such as superpositions avoid thermodynamic decoherence is a pertinent matter in this context. Maybe some combination of cytoskeletal fibers, membranes, and specially adapted biochemical pathways that perhaps resemble photosynthetic reaction center complexes in their quantum flexibility might explain it. Is superposition much more pervasive than conventional atomic theory suggests, perhaps even a property consonant in some measure with the fundamental structure of solutions despite heat entropy, with the postulated biochemical pathways I speak of being distinguished more by degree than kind?

    Provided superposition is common in the brain and elsewhere, the quantity of possible mechanisms available to perception is staggering. This could probably be a new scientific "field". What do you think?
  • Enrique
    584
    In case that wasn't entirely clear:

    a. the EM field of the brain is the global substrate responsible for the experience of integrated cognition
    b. superpositions in biochemical pathways blended into this EM field are the percepts
    c. electric charge is the binding agent between the EM field and biochemical percepts
    d. the CEMI fields are responsible for full conscious awareness as distinctively causal portions of the EM field that rove around somewhat within the brain depending on which regions are active, basically the seat of concentrated attention and also what we call "will", whether visual, verbal etc.
  • Aleksander
    4
    1) If that theory was true, shouldn't the omnipresent nowadays devices generating EMs be able to visibly alter our feeling of consciousness?
    2) Can we on the basis of that theory make any new statements regarding free will?
  • Enrique
    584
    1) If that theory was true, shouldn't the omnipresent nowadays devices generating EMs be able to visibly alter our feeling of consciousness?
    2) Can we on the basis of that theory make any new statements regarding free will?
    Aleksander

    1) The electromagnetic frequencies of electronic devices are too high to affect low frequency brain waves. Transcranial magnetic stimulation has been proven to alter or disrupt thought patterns, memories etc.

    2) Free will exists to the extent that CEMI fields as our intentional cognitions are active agents in brain function and behavior, generated by synchronous nerve firing to then more widely affect regions of the brain via a cellular sensitivity mediated by quantum biochemistry as they oscillate and radiate.
  • Enrique
    584
    To clarify my point about free will, humans are not free in the sense of "I'm floating in a vacuum, liberated from all causation except my own!", but in this theory volition is physically instantiated as EM field consciousness within the brain, in particular as the CEMI fields, such that events proceed in a different manner without it. I would claim that human freeness is our volition as a real cause, a determining factor, and is not pure independence.
  • T Clark
    6.3k


    I'll just provide my usual commentary on your theories about consciousness and then leave you alone. CEMI is an unsupported, far-fetched theory of the origins of consciousness. As far as I can tell "coherence field theory" is just another name for your attempts to use the so-called "weirdness" of quantum mechanics to explain consciousness with no scientific basis. This is not science, it's pseudo-science.
  • Enrique
    584
    I'll just provide my usual commentary on your theories about consciousness and then leave you alone. CEMI is an unsupported, far-fetched theory of the origins of consciousness. As far as I can tell "coherence field theory" is just another name for your attempts to use the so-called "weirdness" of quantum mechanics to explain consciousness with no scientific basis. This is not science, it's pseudo-science.T Clark

    From my reading, it seems that CEMI theory is supported by lots of evidence, and a model based on action potentials and synapses alone is obviously incapable of solving the binding problem, whereas CEMI theory easily does. "Far-fetched" isn't even pseudoscientific.

    I didn't say that "weirdness" proves quantum mechanics is involved with consciousness. I said that superpositions amongst entangled molecules, particularly between their electrons, producing quantum fields in specially adapted, emergent biochemical pathways, are responsible for the appearance of percepts, and constitute a mind if blended into an EM field in suitable ways. That's not pseudoscience: trillions of atoms have been simultaneously entangled in experiments, and the de Broglie wavelengths of electrons are compatible with the idea that various degrees of superposition between atoms undoubtedly occur (assuming conventional atomic theory).
  • Enrique
    584
    Neurons evince dendritic potentials in addition to axon potentials, and each soma (cell body) is attached to numerous dendrites. Could amplification of the electromagnetic field to CEMI levels be the result of large exponential increase in the quantity of activated dendrite potentials as wired-together neurons synapse synchronously?

    Does a feeling of "straining" the conscious brain result from a CEMI field maxing out its capacity to activate primarily dendritic potentials as it roves within and courses through brain regions, a sort of smoothly wavelike swelling that strives to bring more of the unconscious into the sphere of full conscious awareness, rather than a crisply particularate phenomenon?
  • Enrique
    584
    Some evidence that CEMI fields are located in the limbic system:

    If dendrite to dendrite linkages between cell bodies are the neuronal structures that participate in CEMI field propagation, this explains why dendrites of the cerebellum are concentrated along its upper surface, in maximal proximity to the limbic system.

    The two millimeter thickness of the cerebral cortex would give CEMI fields in the limbic system full access to its neurons.

    The limbic system is the oldest portion of the brain distinctive to more highly developed vertebrates, suggesting that this is where fundamental stream of consciousness (qualitatively robust images, sounds etc.) must be located.

    Structures of the limbic system are densely packed together in the core of the brain, making massive amounts of synesthesia possible as mediated by neuronal connections, probably in consort with CEMI-type fields, so that rats smelling in stereo, dogs generating mental images in association with smells, humans visualizing sounds etc. are not difficult to account for.

    If the limbic system is the seat of stream of consciousness, it is core to qualitative perception in addition to its role in processing and routing sensory or motor signals, and its location at the center of the brain would maximally protect this essential role in subjectivity from damage.

    If we introspect internally generated visual and auditory qualia for instance, it certainly seems as if they activate and radiate roughly from various locations in and around the core of the brain (certainly not its surface), whatever the substance of this subjectivity substrate turns out to be, perhaps as CEMI/molecular interactions.


    The inquiry might then be into what regions within the limbic system produce stream of consciousness, and if CEMI fields or something like them are involved (which it seems they must be so as to solve the binding problem), how these fields interact with the cerebrum and cerebellum (more computational portions of the brain) to integrate inferential and spatial thought/memory with the limbic system as suspected locus of phenomenal perception.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment