• Enrique
    848
    Since some of you at this site have shown interest in current theories regarding physics of the brain such as Orch-Or, I thought it could be fun to post an excerpt from a paper I'm publishing on the application of my coherence field theory to neuroscience for your entertainment. I look forward to comments and I hope a lively discussion!

    I'll make the OP multiple posts so it fits. The first section mirrors an earlier OP of mine, but since that part is necessary to understand the rest, I thought I would include it all in one place to induce no bewilderment.

    The Role of Quantum Coherence in Neuron Signal Transmission and the Brain’s Macroscopic Organization

    A primer on neuron anatomy and function will be given by way of introduction (Figure 1). The main structures of a neuron are the axon, dendrites and soma. The soma is a cell body housing the nucleus and additional organelles, which looks like a typical cell. At least several dendrites plus their branches sprout from the soma, long and thin protrusions that are also microscopic. The axon projects from the opposite side of the soma and is responsible for longer distance transmission of an electrical signal. Each neuron has only one axon. It is larger in diameter than dendrites but also relatively narrow and can range from microscopic to meters in length. The axon is insulated by a layer of fat called the myelin sheath to increase conductance speed, the source of white matter’s color as opposed to the grey matter of dendrites, soma and the interior of axons. Production and positioning of myelin is regulated by glia, either Schwann cells or oligodendrocytes, located around the axons. The synaptic cleft is on the far side of the axon from the soma, where axon and dendrites make connections for transmitting a signal between neurons. Most Na+ ions are located outside the cell, K+ ions inside the cell, and Ca2+ ions at the synaptic cleft, maintaining concentration gradients for selective diffusion when ion channels open. Cl- channels are located at the junction between dendrites and soma to block signal transmission while the neuron is at rest. Ions are transported perpendicularly through channels in the neuron’s outer membrane as a chain reaction that proceeds from dendrites, through the soma, and ultimately to the axons which integrate more distant regions of the body and brain to form a nervous system. The brain makes roughly a hundred trillion connections between eighty billion neurons.

    Neuron firing begins with communication transmitted from an axon to dendrites at the synaptic cleft. Na+, K+ and Ca2+ ions as well as a host of more complex molecules such as neurotransmitters are secreted by the axon, flowing around and through the synaptic cleft to stimulate dendrites at the proper moment. This process is called a synapse, and it triggers downstream ion channels to open in sequence, temporarily depolarizing the cell in a voltage change that travels like a blip along the length of a dendrite. This is called an EPSP (excitatory postsynaptic potential). An IPSP (inhibitory postsynaptic potential) from Cl- influx through its channels at the base of dendrites can block signal transmission, but if cumulative EPSPs from dendrites are strong enough to overcome Cl- blockage and traverse the soma, a signal reaches the axon hillock at the junction of axon and soma. With enough signal strength, ion channels around the axon hillock start letting ions flow through the outer membrane, instigating a longer chain reaction called an action potential. This voltage signal travels along the axon’s length to the axon terminal where a synapse is again prompted at the synaptic cleft.

    In an axon, numerous Na+ channels are clustered at the nodes of Ranvier, relatively small interruptions in the myelin sheath that are evenly spaced along the axon’s length. Na+ channels are voltage-gated for sensitivity to the neuron’s electrical signal, which triggers them to open and let Na+ flow in. Each node of Ranvier is flanked by paranodes, where the myelin sheath attaches to the cell membrane. The paranodes are flanked by juxtaparanodes, where voltage-gated K+ channels allow K+ to rush out of the axon when open. The majority of an axon is internodal space, with K+ leakage channels that let this ion back into the cell (Figure 2). Because a neuron is more porous to K+ than Na+, sodium-potassium pumps are located throughout the cell membrane, helping to restore ion concentrations of the resting potential by a constant ferrying of two K+ ions into the cell accompanied by three Na+ ions out of the cell. Dendrites propagate EPSPs by a similar mechanism, with Na+ channel nodes and strategically located K+ channels throughout. After depolarization occurs and the electrical blip travels past a given region, the neuron quickly begins to repolarize, resetting ion concentrations to presynaptic levels. Vigor of signal transmission between neurons is determined by the frequency of depolarizations rather than voltage intensity, with more rapid rates of pulse stimulating stouter responses downstream. The adage is “neurons that wire together fire together”, interweaving to form intricate networks and feedback loops.

    Many aspects of neuronal function have been well-understood for decades but mysteries remain, for the transport and diffusion of ions alone cannot account for some observations about signal transmission and neuron anatomy. In theory, ions encounter less axial (lengthwise) resistance in axons of larger diameter, which should result in greater degrees of freedom for diffusion and more rapid diffusion rates. Nodes of Ranvier would then be spaced farther apart to keep the signal’s voltage change constant upon reaching nodes, but they are actually spaced closer together in larger diameter neurons. Computer simulations have demonstrated that widening nodes of Ranvier slightly to substantially increase the quantity of Na+ channels does not change the rate of signal transmission with larger amounts of diffusion. Neither can diffusion plausibly explain why voltage-gated K+ channels are concentrated at the juxtaparanodes. And an action potential travels meters in milliseconds, far exceeding rates of diffusion. Signal transmission in neurons is not the product of collisions between ions, but quantum coherence in solution seems to explicate it.

    Most of the solution internal to a neuron is made up of positive ions and water molecules. H2O is of course a polar molecule, its oxygen atom being the negative pole and hydrogen atoms the positive poles, bent somewhat at the fulcrum. A solvation shell forms around each positive ion, with negative poles of water aligned on the shell’s inner surface and positive poles facing outward. Thus, the solution contains a complex contour of positive and negative charge, or more precisely less and more electron waveform concentration. Nanoscale electromagnetic pressure to evenly distribute electron density within and between atoms, a process quantified in terms of momentum and strength of charge, drives a dynamic equilibrium which keeps water molecules and ions in perpetual motion. Trillions upon trillions of haphazard asymmetries are generated as the solution’s baseline, decoherent condition.

    When Na+ rushes into the cell at a node of Ranvier, electron density lessens in that region, drawing nearby electron energy into the vicinity. This electric current moves towards Na+ increase, but initialization of the current begins adjacent to the node and propagates outward into successively distant regions. Symmetry of the nodal region means that simultaneous propagation in the reverse direction will halt signal transmission’s forward trajectory so the node can more quickly reset upstream. If charge is on average constant the signal slows as it travels because of electron mass’ inertia, so I have named this mechanism the “ebb effect”.

    Since electromagnetism essentially consists in a diffuse, high velocity field containing relatively small loci of dense wavicle matter that perturb it while shifting around, the initialization of flow from greater to lesser electron density as a current of electrical coherence, drawing electron energy out of increasingly distant regions of solution, includes a companion EM field fluctuation called an LFP (local field potential) that acts remotely and with effective instantaneity. (As a side note, the nuclear field is similarly instantaneous, for the nucleus possesses at least 99.9% of an atom’s mass while binding atomic orbitals that have 100,000 times the volume into a synchronous unit.) Ion channels are apparently adapted for sensitivity to this EM field perturbation that accompanies the lengthwise voltage effect, a phenomenon observed by in vitro experiments with neural networks. Because the EM field’s domain as linked with electron density at a specific region extends to multiple cells, perturbations via coherence currents which alter electron density overlap and form a sort of synchronous grid, integrating the neurons of neural networks via a mechanism of phase-locking between ion channels and the EM field. Quantum spins of atoms in neuronal solution are not aligned as in an iron bar magnet for instance, and this creates slight asymmetries accumulating to largely cancel magnetic effects even at the cellular scale, making the field primarily electric at very basic levels of emergence, though the structure of electrical coherence currents may be momentarily synchronous enough that a spike in nanoscale magnetism is the trigger for ion channels, propagating at the speed of light. Macroscopic waves of the electric field as induced by phase-locking within tightly coupled feedback loops are what EEG (electroencephalogram) measures, and can range in length from millimeters to more than a dozen centimeters.

    The greater a discrepancy between ion concentrations in abutting regions of the neuron, the stronger the electrical coherence current will be drawn towards more positive concentration, causing initializations to accelerate in the opposite direction and traverse longer distances. Thus, when voltage-gated Na+ channels at a node of Ranvier open, the electrical signal along with a companion EM field fluctuation accelerate enough to traverse paranodal space. When the electrical signal reaches a juxtaparanode, EM field fluctuation perturbs voltage-gated K+ channels to open and let the ion rush out of an axon. This rapidly increases the discrepancy in electron density between a node of Ranvier and the juxtaparanode, accelerating an electrical signal with enough force to propel through internodal space and reach the next nodal region. The next node has usually not been completely repolarized, so once the signal attains this node’s sphere of influence, acceleration is resumed and EM field perturbation reopens voltage-gated Na+ channels, a chain reaction that continues down the length of the axon. This mechanism of electrical signal transmission via currents of quantum coherence and the ebb effect, initiated and boosted by voltage-gated ion channels in the neuron’s outer membrane, blows through rate barriers of lengthwise diffusion in millisecond communication between neurons.

    Microscopic platinum sensors inserted into individual neurons have revealed a crystalline structure extending lengthwise just below the axon’s membrane, wrapped around a core support framework of microtubules. This crystalline structure probably restricts diffusion into the center of an axon so the ebb effect is not diminished by dilution and ion concentrations remain at efficient levels. Larger diameter axons have more volume surrounding this structure, perhaps necessitating that nodes be closer together so as to compensate for dilution.

    Similar structure in dendrites indicates that they transmit an electrical signal from synapse to soma by the same mechanism. Cl- channels block these EPSPs by increasing electron density at the junction between dendrites and soma, which causes a coherence current to propagate upstream within dendrites as an IPSP. If EPSPs are strong and coordinated enough to breach the soma, this buildup of electron density accelerates rapidly afterwards across the soma’s relatively vast expanse due to the biggest charge gradient in a neuron between the base of dendrites and the largest quantity of voltage-gated Na+ channels at the axon hillock.

    The ebb effect has not been verified by experiment, but in theory it would be observable within any solution containing ion concentrations disequilibrated enough to produce charge differentials that cause electrical currents to flow. A combination of quantum coherence, the ebb effect, phase-locking and neural networking could be sufficient to model the brain’s electrical properties from the intracellular to organwide scale. Macroscopic, ultrasynchronous oscillations within the brain’s electric field would correlate with consciousness because magnetic properties of atoms are hypersensitive to this supervenient field, just as electricity from a wall socket drives magnets to run many appliances. If diverse neurons and neural networks engage in a range of breadth and saturation in phase-locked synchrony depending on the chemistry of their ion channels, membranes and circuitry, this might explain the spectrum of low to high arousal, from unconscious to subconscious to maximally attentive mental states as Johnjoe McFadden’s CEMI (conscious electromagnetic information) theory suggests. Intentional will insofar as it arises from the brain may simply be neural structure phase-locked to the electric field in feedback loops. Further research along these lines seems likely to resolve the combination problem, accounting for holistic qualities of volition, but what about the substance of consciousness, what are percepts such as colors, shapes, textures, feelings etc. as physical phenomena? It turns out that the modeling of quantum coherence holds promise for progress on this issue as well.
  • Enrique
    848
    The Role of Light/Molecular Interactions in Producing a Perceptual Coherence Field Within the Brain

    A mechanism responsible for percepts insofar as they arise from the brain must include a couple closely related features. First, it must be near-instantaneous over time so that the properties of perception are as synchronous and fluid as we experience our own minds to be. Second, it must be near-instantaneous across spatial distances so that perception is an integrated unit, as we also more or less observe. Essentially, the substance of consciousness must be holistic, and unless the miscellaneous manifestations of color, shape, texture, sound, taste, smell, feel etc. are all entirely generated by an underlying, nonelectromagnetic substance akin to aether, which is doubtful in the extreme though a nonlocal substrate transcending atomic structure does seem to exist, this combinatorial binding must be to some degree electromagnetic.

    Atoms and molecules alone, while seemingly capable of being perturbed under many conditions via entanglement as induced by the nonlocal substrate, a dynamic that has to this point gone largely unmodeled, do not in themselves interact with anything like action at a distance. This means that even when massive particles or more precisely “wavicles” as defined electromagnetically correlate faster than light, thus far requiring painstakingly calibrated conditions in order to be witnessed in the lab, they are demarcated by localization boundaries which quickly become prohibitive to integration at macromolecular scales, and by the time emergence reaches the scale where mechanical forces among bodies are usually observed to take effect, atomic structure can be modeled as in the classical domain. From an atomic perspective, the consistent presence of spatial disjunction even at microscales, attributed to a quantum/classical divide, defies holistic qualities of consciousness. But electromagnetic radiation does not have nearly the same constraints. Light fills nonvacuum spaces populated by atomic structure as a wave. Photons are bosons and as such prove much more prone to additive behavior, forming ultrahybrid superpositions of diverse wavelengths. Light waves more extensively entangle via the underlying nonlocal substrate, with phase states of photons correlating across kilometers. And light itself travels at millions of meters per second through permittive and permeable environments such as Earth’s atmosphere or the aqueous solution of cells, effectively instantaneous at volume scales of a brain. So can dynamics of light waves provide an electromagnetic binding mechanism for perception’s substance?

    As was mentioned, it has been known for years that photosynthetic reaction centers achieve 100% energy yield from the light-harvesting chlorophyll complex surrounding them. This is ascribed to translation of UV light into a chemical energy that takes multiple routes or “flows” through numerous molecules as a quantum wave via entangled coherence, roughly analogous to a body of water. Thus, a mechanism by which light and molecules blend into highly distributed energy arrays has been verified. The question then is how common this is.

    Early research into light/matter interactions within neurons exposed specimens to UV and visible radiation. It was found that this light could effect neural function, but primarily due to the degradation of ion channels and additional membrane mechanisms, reducing synaptic efficiency. More recent experiments have focused on microtubules because a long-standing, discourse-enriched hypothesis, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff’s Orch-Or (orchestrated-objective reduction) theory, proposes that the compact structure of these cytoskeletal filaments, which pervade all cells, may be conducive to cycling between a global superposition state and wave function collapse in a sort of quantum pulse, perhaps especially instantiated within the brain. Various criticisms of the model have been proffered, for instance that the organ is too hot and wet for superpositions sustained enough to correlate with consciousness, but the idea that light may be involved opens up further possibilities.

    A recent experiment aimed to assess the interaction of UV light with microtubules, which can range to 50 micrometers long. It was hypothesized that tryptophan in microtubule filaments, by virtue of being an aromatic amino acid, might have theoretically significant sensitivity to UV light. Analysis showed that a solution of microtubule fragments exposed to UV light was provisional of remote energy transfer between component tryptophan molecules. Anesthetics inhibited this phenomenon, hinting at correlation with consciousness. Combining the data with a model of tryptophan positioning inside intact microtubules suggested this amino acid can mediate the production of a coherent energy field in the presence of UV radiation, extending through the entire length of a microtubule. The only significant source of UV radiation in a typical cell was hypothesized as perhaps the oxidation reactions of mitochondria, so it is doubtful that UV light plays much of a functional role in the brain, but it becomes more and more apparent that atoms blend with light of complementary wavelength to produce coherent states of superposition which can span at least micrometers. That endogenous light within neurons could result in a similar field of quantum coherence among molecular arrays is plausible, but a viable source of EM radiation must exist.

    To begin solving this problem, we can simply recognize that all electromagnetic matter is saturated by radiation with various properties depending on this radiation’s wavelength. According to James Clerk Maxwell’s theory, electromagnetic matter which we in the 21st century conceive as wavicle structure can be described both qualitatively and quantitatively as a field with centers of maximum density roughly approximated in concept by the largest line of force concentrations of a macroscopic magnet, all situated within a pervading, “nonlocally” active substrate that perturbs on average at a much more rapid rate, exceeding the speed of light. This is the still loosely determined speed of entanglement. The denser that electromagnetic matter is at a particular location, the greater mass it has and the slower it moves relative to the total EM field, with atomic structure as determined by the nuclei which are orders of magnitude more massive than electrons being the heterogeneous locus of electromagnetic density. When electrons which as a baseline correspond to atomic orbital structure move, they perturb spaces between them at an on average characteristic rate. This perturbation energy closely correlated with electrons or more precisely density maximums within an electrical portion of the coherence field travels through a vacuum like outer space as particulate photons, at the speed of magnetism and the speed of light. Perturbation of photon streams by atoms reduces the speed in a way dependent on electromagnetic properties of those atoms, while causing photons to assume a variety of forms based on conditions of contact, ranging from particulate scattering as in the Compton effect to superpositioned waves of extremely hybrid and variable wavelength which participate in making atoms vibrate or “heat”.

    Most if not all atomic bonds absorb and emit infrared radiation due to vibration and rotation, and many also do the same with visible light. Terrestrial vision tends to be based on a range from 400–700 nm because unlike ultraviolet and infrared light this portion of the spectrum is transparent to water. This allows us to detect the surface features of objects in great detail despite the fact that 25% of our atmosphere is comprised of water vapor, along with discerning the purity and contents of liquid water by visual inspection. Infrared light is emitted by molecules, but is absorbed into vibrating and rotating atomic bonds just as readily, the main contributing factor in production of thermal energy or “temperature”, so does not radiate far before translation into chemical energy. Some animals such as the pit viper have organs for sensing infrared radiation so as to hone in on prey at close range, particularly helpful at night, but visible light is more practical for distance vision as it transmits through the air at long range and is more plentiful than ultraviolet. Despite the fact that optics regards the visible spectrum as its core reference point, infrared is much more active at local scales. Electromagnetic matter on Earth can be thought of as most essentially an infrared field punctuated by particularly concentrated electrical density contours, the atomic centers of mass induced by nuclei.

    Like all Earth’s matter the brain is full of infrared light, but the capacity of this radiation to transmit macroscopic distances is constrained from local absorption by all kinds of atomic bonds, especially those of aqueous solvent which limit its range to millimeters. However, a wealth of evidence suggests that brain tissue’s thermal energy, the signature of infrared radiation, strongly correlates with function. Brain tissue temperatures have been measured to exceed those of the blood by 0.5–0.6 degrees Celsius in various mammals. In rats, temperature of the hippocampus increases 1.5–38 degrees Celsius when actively exploring. In male finches, temperature of brain tissue increases during variance in song tempo. Feeding and social interaction produce rapid, unique, and relatively long-lasting brain temperature elevations, occurring faster and with greater magnitude than those of the arterial blood supply. In humans, somatosensory cortex temperature increases during nerve stimulation, and likewise for motor cortex and bodily movement. Many brain regions such as the substantia nigra alter their activity when temperature is varied. Rise in temperature of neuronal pathways is generally associated with sensory stimuli, and correlations between temperature and data obtained on resting potential, action potential, nerve conduction velocity and synaptic transmission are well-established. Anesthesia lowers brain temperature, a sign that infrared radiation may be linked to conscious awareness. The total brain varies in temperature by 1–3 degrees Celsius in some animal models. Though much more research is necessary, a clear relationship between function and brain hyperthermia, essentially greater amounts of infrared radiation and resultant molecular vibration, seems to exist.

    Mechanisms of function for infrared radiation have not been proven, but we do have clues. A rapid spike and fall in temperature of two degrees microCelsius occurs during action potentials, hinting at connection between the infrared spectrum and nerve firing. Do the properties of signal transmission in a neuron provide us with a viable hypothesis which if corroborated would explain linkage between the infrared field and consciousness?

    As we have seen, the most comprehensive and probable model for signal transmission in a neuron regards these signals as directional currents of quantum coherence regulated by changes in ion concentration at strategic locations such as the nodes of Ranvier, juxtaparanodes, dendrite/soma junctions, etc. If this is accurate, neural signals are propagated lengthwise as electricity, not primarily by diffusion, and thus achieve what can somewhat liberally be regarded as relativistic speeds that slightly increase electron mass, most likely much greater than 10% the speed of light and probably closer to 50% or higher. We know from many technological applications that electrical currents which accelerate at relativistic speeds emit EM radiation of longer wavelength, and decelerating electric current shorter wavelengths. For example, as the high energy beam of electrons in an x-ray machine, traveling at half the speed of light, collides with a metal plate, high frequency braking radiation in the x-ray portion of the spectrum is emitted, while the acceleration of alternating current in a radio antenna emits low frequency radio waves. This effect is probably caused by compression responsible for emission of higher frequency EM radiation from a denser, decelerating mass and lower frequency EM radiation from a less dense, accelerating mass, a physical process underlying the relativistic interpretation. Direct current, by contrast, does not involve sizable shifts in velocity and produces a relatively uniform magnetic field rather than broadened, “thicker” spectrums of radiation. If the binding effect of EM radiation in the brain is to be richer in structure and function than the inorganic environment and perhaps the rest of the body such that some kind of distinctive perceptual field is possible, the most likely mechanism is by way of acceleration or deceleration of coherence currents, expanding the spectrum of radiative energies as well as types of interaction between the radiative field and molecules from baseline to biologically functional levels.

    Acceleration of a coherence current occurs between the node of Ranvier and adjacent juxtaparanodal regions, while a relatively gradual deceleration takes place within internodal space. However, reverse propagation around each node after activation largely halts lengthwise motion, returning cellular solution to the baseline infrared spectrum of its most localized decoherence, so extra emission of EM radiation is sporadic, insufficient to enhance the total field in a sustained way. Dendrites encounter a similar dynamic of current interference that halts transmission of electrical potential and radiation emittance. Both dendrite and axon nodes are small compared to the entire neuron so any field that is generated seems unlikely to functionally interact with macromolecules.

    Acceleration also takes place around the synaptic space on both the dendrite and axon terminal sides due to a gradient of relatively high to low electron density between single positive charge ion concentration (Na+, K+) and Ca2+ near the synaptic junction. Ca2+ channels would have to engage in a very fast cycle, pumping this ion and its electron energy out of and into the cell fast enough that lengthwise voltage remains stable and a coherence flow’s signal velocity can be sustained. Research indicates that ions travel through channels as a tunneling wavicle, and since the rate of this quantum process is near-instantaneous, steady lengthwise voltage and extra EM radiation sustained enough to augment the overall field is possible, though relevant analysis by experiment needs to be performed. In this model, additional radiation from a steadily accelerating coherence current saturates molecules and membranes of the synapse from both sides. A complete understanding of this mechanism, assuming it exists, requires more detailed analysis of neuron anatomy near the synaptic junction.

    At this point, it seems more possible to model coherence current behavior within the soma, between the base of dendrites and the axon hillock. An axon hillock has the largest quantity of Na+ channels and Na+ ions in a neuron, and dendrite/soma junctions are where Cl- channels and Cl- ions are concentrated. Reuptake of Na+ within the soma, upstream of the axon hillock, remains somewhat less than in the rest of the neuron due to greater volume, which is also the case with K+, so a fairly steady gradient of positive ions ranging from highest concentration at the axon hillock to gradually lower concentrations while approaching the dendrites is maintained. Cl- reuptake must be efficient enough that most of this ion’s concentration cycles near the dendrite/soma junctions as a result of diffusion.

    During the initialization of a resting potential, Cl- concentrations are at their highest following an influx that halts dendritic potentials with reverse propagation of a coherence current. Cl- concentrations then begin to diminish due to reuptake and the back propagating coherence current ceases, though electron density persists at relatively high levels. When dendritic potentials again reach the soma junction and reverse propagation is minimal, this draws higher electron density out of successively more remote regions of the soma via the ebb effect. Combined with some continuation of Cl- influx, an increase in size and breadth of electron density occurs until this replenishing mass comes under the influence of the positive ion gradient imposed by the axon hillock. This mass then accelerates away from the dendrites with enough force to reach the axon hillock, prompting its voltage-gated ion channels to open as a consequence of the accompanying local field potential. Large amounts of Na+ rush in, stimulating an action potential and restoring the positive ion gradient within the soma. This large influx of Na+ to its maximum concentration sustains acceleration of the coherence current even while electron density from Cl- influx attenuates and reaches a minimum due mostly to the dendritic potential’s distributing effect. As Na+ concentrations again attenuate at the axon hillock and within the soma, Cl- concentration increases and regains a maximum at the dendrite/soma junctions to block EPSPs, sustaining acceleration from the opposite side, recycling the process. Thus, even in the absence of an electrical potential and EM field sufficient to trigger action potentials, acceleration is sustained by charge differentials on either side of the soma.

    To summarize:

    At the dendrite/soma junctions:
    1. Cl- influx, concentration and electron density maximum
    2. Cl- concentration and electron density attenuation
    3. The ebb effect force of dendritic potentials combined with some Cl- influx
    4. Electron density from Cl- concentration at a minimum, with continued influx

    Instigated by the axon hillock:
    1. Na+ concentration attenuation
    2. Greater Na+ concentration attenuation
    3. Na+ concentration minimum
    4. Na+ influx and concentration maximum

    The resultant acceleration of a coherence current through most if not all of the soma’s volume is held at roughly constant levels. This model of course needs verification by experiment, but it seems probable that a steady source of extra EM radiation can be maintained in the soma also.

    If sustained EM radiation is emitted at relatively large scales around the synapse and within the soma, we must then discern its properties. Coherence currents do not have any electrical grounding to keep their velocity the same as they travel, so these flows probably begin at roughly the same speed as agitation from decoherence except channeled in a lengthwise direction, gradually decelerating with distance due to inertia if charge is constant. This means that initialization would produce EM radiation complementary to decoherence in aqueous solution, centered on wavelengths slightly longer than those of the boundary between visible and near-infrared portions of the spectrum. If charge differential and thus voltage suffices to accelerate the coherence current, its electrical density decreases and lower frequency light will be released. Thus, acceleration around the synapse and within the soma probably adds somewhat longer wavelengths to the spectrum. Altogether, it seems reasonable as a hypothesis that coherence currents thicken the infrared core of a neuron’s spectrum to at least 1–10 micrometers in wavelength, maybe beyond. This spectral range of EM radiation is capable of traveling through aqueous solution at distances from 100 millimeters — 10 micrometers, with distance shrinking as wavelength increases (Figure 3). The soma is about 12 cubic micrometers and the synaptic space 1 cubic micrometer, with the space occupied by coherence currents themselves roughly equivalent in volume, so it seems credible to assert that this 10+ micrometer wavelength spectrum can saturate both. Whether very low intensities of visible light that more readily travel through aqueous solution could be present via coherence current deceleration or interaction with molecules is uncertain. Together with maximized reflection of this radiation from white matter, the brain’s grey matter may be saturated with a substantive light spectrum capable of influencing properties of molecules. The extent to which similar mechanisms occur in conjunction with the ion channels of non-neuronal cells is also an interesting inquiry, barely broached.

    Electric current accelerates from greater, “negative” electron density towards lesser, “positive” electron density in settings that are presently more amenable to measurement than neuronlike solution. Proportional counters work by injecting alpha, beta and gamma energy from radioactive substances into mixtures primarily made up of a noble gas. Atoms of gas ionize, and free electrons thus produced are attracted to an anode within the device. As a free electron approaches the anode it accelerates, gaining enough energy to cause further ionization of from 10–10,000 additional electrons in a process called a Townsend avalanche. The combination of many such avalanches generates an electrical pulse proportional to the emitted radiation, allowing its quantity to be detected.

    As was postulated in the case of positive ion influx at the nodes of Ranvier and elsewhere, electric current strengthens as it approaches the proportional counter’s anode. And similar to positive ions in a neuron, the ionized gas is for all intents and purposes stationary in relationship to the electron cascade. Atoms of noble gas in a proportional counter emit photons within the visible and UV range, but the level of this emission is relatively small. Electric currents necessary to operate proportional counters raise temperature considerably, so for various reasons the infrared spectrum is robust in likeness to a brain. The only difference between a proportional counter and a brain in terms of general infrared dynamics may be the intricacy, emergent organization and scale of how this radiation interacts with constituent molecules.

    It is significant that electric current acceleration within an ionic mixture of uneven charge, which was proposed to occur in solution by using a gedanken experiment based on neuron anatomy, is the working principle behind proportional counters. Though it remains uncertain exactly how the phenomenon is to be modeled, for instance where these electron currents reside on the coherence spectrum, how the theory of relativity might be applicable, and what the structure and shape of a coherence flow is to quantitative precision, the physical process undoubtedly exists and is substantially associated with infrared radiation.

    After this further proof of concept, the convincing but still very approximate picture which emerges in relationship to the nervous system and brain is of an infrared field centered at about 1–10 micrometers in wavelength, additively superpositioning to various degrees at different distance scales and locations, interacting with complex molecular arrangements in multiple ways simultaneously as dependent on chemical sensitivities. Percepts might be the internal structure of this infrared field as hybridized with biochemistry. If the hypotheses are accurate, vibrations of the infrared spectrum as thermally combined with those of molecules may not merely correlate with feel percepts but actually be the feeling itself. Elaborate biochemical differentiations of the thermal coherence field might refine the basic matter of feel percepts into a full gamut of sensations: sound, touch, taste, smell, interoception, etc. Likewise, at least a fraction of the superpositioned, additive wavelength structure of this radiative/molecular field would actually be imagery of the mind’s eye and internal aspects of vision. The possible range of functional combinations is almost as diverse as biochemistry itself, and the potential for experimentation nearly untapped. Proving this coherence field theory could pave the way for a new paradigm in physics and the neuroscientific study of consciousness.
  • Enrique
    848
    A Coherence Field Theory of Physics and Consciousness

    In the domain of physiology, basic atomic structure is heterogeneously dense enough that decoherent states predominate even microscopically, with matter’s motions differentiated by trillions upon trillions of wavicle asymmetries, giving rise to what can approximately be termed interference. Because of the asynchrony produced by variability in density contours, coherence tends to endogenously occur within an organic body only at quantum scales, a situation in which the physics of matter fields is equivalent to the physics of quantum fields. As biological evolution proceeded, organisms developed mechanisms for harnessing quantum coherence, in enzyme catalysis, photosynthesis, and as we have seen, electrical properties of the neuron. Technologies have also utilized quantum coherence in electronics, lasers, computers and more. But these systems, both organic and artificial, are deeply connected to principles modelable with the Newtonian physics of macroscopic objects, a maximally intuitive interpretation regarding matter as in a state of decoherence even while it moves. This assumption that decoherence exists as the default state allows humans to supplement the interface of proprioception with environment in efficient ways, and is core to human toolmaking, object fabrication, and the species’ survival.

    Proprioception’s material basis, as was indirectly theorized by James Clerk Maxwell and scientists of a similar bent, seems to be the probable fact that, within density contours of electromagnetic matter’s approximately wavelike structure, loci of maximum energy exist, which in the present day we know are generated by interaction of nuclei with the surrounding field. Effects of nuclei on the total field are thus the source of electromagnetism, inducing loci of energy concentration within the density contour that we know as atoms. If both the position and motion of distinct instances of electromagnetic matter are hypothetically identical, greater density or “mass” implies more constituent energy and more inertial resistance against transitioning from a standing to traveling wave, whether this energy is a beam of electrons or a basketball.

    Within an atom, still more finely differentiated loci of energy concentration we model as electron orbitals absorb and emit energy as photons. This is deceptive because even though absorption and emission of light by “orbitals” is rather straightforwardly quantized in the textbook case, the total electromagnetic field radiates predominantly as a wave while amongst atomic wavicles, undergoing subtle and complex energy transitions when perturbed by atoms. As per conservation laws, the energy transition at contact affects atomic wavicles as well, increasing or decreasing chemical vibrations as heat and modulating atomic wavelengths, though knowledge of how exactly this interchange works remains rudimentary. Entire atoms and molecules as defined by nuclear fields do not ordinarily move at speeds that relativistically increase mass to a degree having measurement significance, but the electrons and photons that interact within the scope of nuclear fields do. As electrons attain these speeds, their energy density as mass increases slightly. Light which electrons emit reaches lower frequencies the more these electrons are accelerating and thus subsisting in a less dense (though relativistic) state within the bounds of their coherence upon energy release, and reaches higher frequencies the more that electrons are decelerating upon energy release, a more dense state. Thus, an x-ray machine emits braking radiation as high energy x-rays, and accelerating current within a radio antenna emits low energy radio waves. Matter somewhat hotter than temperatures typically reached at Earth’s surface emits greater amounts of ultraviolet and visible light due to more rapid vibration, corresponding with larger electron energy density — relativistic mass — as the source of higher energy radiating. This effect might be explained by the electromagnetic density contour within an atom becoming more pronounced so the proportion of diffuse, highest velocity space increases while loci of greatest density become much more compactly massive, similar in concept to a complex combination of centripetal and centrifugal forces. All matter at temperatures typically found on Earth’s surface or within physiological systems radiates most heavily in the infrared portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, a phenomenon intrinsic to its baseline, relatively decoherent state of coherence. In neurons, accelerating coherence currents might be sustained in the soma and around the synapse, expanding the infrared spectrum to include longer wavelengths which altogether can saturate cells at a range of 10 micrometers to 100 millimeters. The superpositioned array of electromagnetic wavelengths would bind with and be modified by complex molecular components to produce a plethora of vibrations such as perceptual sound, touch, taste, smell etc., in essence feel, and in many cases perceptual images as additive structure also.

    Physiological matter is dense and asymmetric, interference-laden and decoherent, so endogenous structure and motions of the underlying nonlocal substrate, which in different conditions can perturb at faster rates than the speed of light, align closely with a model that assumes the quantum/classical divide. Except for pockets of nanoscale machinery where quantum states have adapted to function with high degrees of coherence, these systems can be viewed mostly as decoherent and pervasively classical. But coherence as the underlying, more nonlocally active substrate of matter is not essentially electromagnetic or even quantum. We should not be surprised then if further research leads to proof that standing and traveling waves of coherence within the nonlocal substrate can perturb electromagnetic matter near-instantaneously at quite remote and macroscopic scales from the perspective of current physics, especially if this matter is much more diffuse and homogeneous than an organic body. Beginning to model perturbations of the total coherence field, relying partly on more determined analysis of this field’s correlations and interactions with coherence of electromagnetic matter at the quantum scale, in organic bodies and undoubtedly elsewhere, may initiate the next scientific revolution, surpassing current models to create a liaison between quantum theory and coherence field theory.
  • jgill
    2.6k
    I thought it could be fun to post an excerpt from a paper I'm publishingEnrique

    In a journal?
  • Enrique
    848
    In a journal?jgill

    Yes!
  • jgill
    2.6k
    Which one? When?
  • Enrique
    848


    A quantum physics journal in September.
  • Enrique
    848
    Anyone know of any experiments that have been performed to prove or disprove my hypotheses? How does my theory match the introspective intuitions you guys have? Many of you seem to think of the mind as nonphysical, but I'm not sure what that would even mean beyond "we don't know how matter works to some degree". Alternate ways to model or define the mind exist, sure, but why wouldn't every phenomenon be describable in terms of a tangible substance?
  • Deleted User
    0
    This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.
  • Enrique
    848
    A higher level cannot be described from a lower level.ArielAssante

    A higher and lower level can't typically be considered identical enough that one is absolutely dispensable, but they can be made translatable such that more efficient objectivity of the lower level (such as matter in neuroscience) can at least partially replace not uncommonly divisive vagaries of the higher level (such as metaphysical, psychological and stereotypal concepts) which are usually historical relics in the context of enlightened culture's technological and humanist leanings. But the issue is not simple. How symbolic we should be is the conundrum. If symbolism is no more than an intersubjectively private language meant to facilitate segregation from the uninitiated this can be problematic I think, and the marginal clout of academia in political life despite absolute centrality of its methods to the economy is an instance that makes this apparent. Much of our recent social turmoil probably comes from rejecting the ideal of universal objectivity as the impetus for intersubjectivity in favor of a culture that excessively embraces exclusionary and divisive language. A controversial topic I admit.
  • magritte
    495

    Do you also have a short abstract of the article?
  • Enrique
    848
    Do you also have a short abstract of the article?magritte

    Sure, I've got an abstract for ya! Not all of this is covered in the excerpt I posted.

    A general definition of quantum coherence is developed from analysis of superposition, entanglement, chemical bonding behavior, and basic phenomena of classical mechanics. Various properties of atoms can be better explained if these particles are matter waves that embody a spectrum ranging from relatively coherent to decoherent states. It is demonstrated that quantum coherence so defined can comprehensively explain signal transmission in neurons and dynamics of the brain’s emergent electric field, including potential support for the claim that conscious volition is to some degree real rather than an illusion. Recent research in a physiological context suggests that electromagnetic radiation interacts with molecular structure to comprise integrated energy fields. A mechanism is proposed by which quantum coherence as accelerating electric currents in neurons may result in a broadened spectrum of electromagnetic radiation capable of interacting with molecular complexes in the brain and perhaps elsewhere in an organism to influence vibrational and structural properties. Research should investigate whether a consequent energy field is the basic perceptual substrate, with at least some additive electromagnetic wavelengths of this field involved in generating image percepts insofar as they arise from the body, and electromagnetic vibrations the signature of a more diverse phenomenon by which somewhat nondimensional features of perception such as sound, touch, taste, smell, interoceptive sensations, etc. partially arise. If examination of the brain reveals this organ to be composed of a coherence field, structured at least in part by broadened spectrums of EM radiation interacting with molecular components, this has major implications for furthering our model of the matter/mind interface and possibly physical reality in total.
  • Deleted User
    0
    This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    my coherence field theory to neuroscience for your entertainmentEnrique
    Unfortunately, your articles are way over my head. So, I'm not able to evaluate their validity. But I have seen a variety of attempts by physicists to show neuroscientists how Physics can explain Consciousness. For example, British physicist Johnjoe McFadden "posits that consciousness is in fact the brain's energy field". His theory seems to be a physicist's version of Tononi's Integrated Information theory. Could your "Coherence Field" be related to those other theories, in that the key feature is Holistic unification or integration (cooperation ; working together) of independent elements, such as neurons? :smile:

    New Theory of Consciousness :
    I argue here that nearly all examples of so-called ‘integrated information’, including neuronal information processing and conventional computing, are only temporally integrated in the sense that outputs are correlated with multiple inputs: the information integration is implemented in time, rather than space, and thereby cannot correspond to physically integrated information. I point out that only energy fields are capable of integrating information in space. ____McFadden
    https://neurosciencenews.com/electromagnetic-consciousness-17191/

    Integrated information theory attempts to provide a framework capable of explaining why some physical systems are conscious, why they feel the particular way they do in particular states, and what it would take for other physical systems to be conscious. ___Wikipedia

    "e pluribus unum" : one out of many
    Coherence
    Integration
    Organization
    Unification
    Cooperation
    Holism
    Enformation : to cause unrelated things to function as one interrelated system
  • Enrique
    848
    Yes, all professions create languages to attain “heights” or as you say create ‘segregation from the uninitiated’. Language, however, is not pertinent because ‘what is’ on the “higher” “level” is not translatable into language.ArielAssante

    Then the inquiry becomes: what is the appropriate attitude and approach of those at a higher level to those at a lower level, and of those at a lower level to those at a higher level?

    For example, British physicist Johnjoe McFadden "posits that consciousness is in fact the brain's energy field". His theory seems to be a physicist's version of Tononi's Integrated Information theory. Could your "Coherence Field" be related to those other theories, in that the key feature is Holistic unification or integration (cooperation ; working together) of independent elements, such as neurons?Gnomon

    Johnjoe McFadden's CEMI (conscious electromagnetic information) theory is the starting point for my coherence field theory. The main differences are that a coherence field is not exclusively electromagnetic and not necessarily confined to the brain. I also emphasize the hypothesis that EM radiation participates in binding matter into the substance of percepts, which has not been discussed in his CEMI papers with much specificity. But my ideas about how coherence contributes to volition are inspired by CEMI. I think the main aspect distinguishing coherence field theory is that specific, concrete mechanisms are proposed which begin to model consciousness at a very basic level of emergence, the subatomic scale.

    I have way more certainty about how coherence emerges within a brain, as various "quantum" processes, than in relation to the environment generally, but I think EM radiation and entanglement mechanisms will be key in expanding physics to account for the so-called "nonlocality" of consciousness. So I go beyond the rather vague concept of an energy field to hypothesize the way this energy is functionally modulated by structures such as neurons, ion channels, coherence flows, coherence fields, etc. to form a unified physical system. I think the next stage is to identify precisely which molecules and portions of the electromagnetic spectrum form particular percepts insofar as these percepts arise from the brain, nervous system and body. This would be a partial model of the mind's eye, the visual field etc. as a perceptual substance, blending subjective awareness with objective matter in a synthetic approach.

    I'm not an adherent of the "existence is fundamentally information" framework, but I think it might become possible to scientifically test your hypothesis that the universe is an integrated consciousness once we comprehend the physics of consciousness' basic building blocks.
  • Deleted User
    0
    This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.
  • Enrique
    848
    The people had never stopped talking.ArielAssante

    Some are good at getting the people to talk but not so good at making sure they can leave discreetly lol Human life is just crazy.
  • Enrique
    848
    Genes that made the entire 400-700 nm spectrum visible evolved in primates about 30 million years ago. As I described in the OP, this portion of the spectrum is maximally transparent to water, enabling an efficient form of distance vision.

    According to coherence field theory, very low intensities of visible light might be generated at the soma/axon and soma/dendrite junctions (perhaps elsewhere?) by decelerating electric currents in aqueous solution and certain kinds of infrared/molecular interactions, possibly inducing integrated and more or less sustained visible light fields.

    Could color vision and this internal visible light have coevolved via large-scale mechanisms of image recall so that visualization capacity in connection with tangible objects became much greater, more vivid, refined and accurate in our lineage than most vertebrates, selecting for spatial imagination to increase along with expanding facility in logical thinking? Perhaps color vision is partly the essence which made evolution of technologically able thinking possible for vertebrate brains, by way of optimizing object-imagination's fidelity.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    I'm not an adherent of the "existence is fundamentally information" framework, but I think it might become possible to scientifically test your hypothesis that the universe is an integrated consciousness once we comprehend the physics of consciousness' basic building blocks.Enrique
    In my thesis, EnFormAction (generic information) is simply the causal-power-to-enform : to cause isolated unrelated things to cohere into a functional unity : a recognizable purposeful Form. One kind of "functional unity" is Consciousness, which is the functional (purposeful output) of integrated (coherent) neurons. Neurons themselves are merely channels (conduits) for energy*1. But, by working together as a goal-directed system, those neurons, and other supporting structures, become Sentient.

    That transformation is not magic though, it happens everywhere everyday. It's more like a physical Phase Transition, in which the functional properties of H2O are transformed. So, I would assume that the same kind of scientific testing, that parses Phase Change into a logical operation, might serve to test the hypothesis that the whole universe is a Cosmic Information Processor (CIP), converting raw material into things & meanings. :nerd:

    PS__One metaphorical method to make sense of the abstruse account above is to imagine that Information is the Essence of Energy. Just as Einstein showed that Matter is "fundamentally" Energy, Quantum physics is beginning to indicate that physical Energy is essentially one aspect of the universal power to Enform (to cause change of form). And the causal power is in the relationships, the ratios, such as Hot vs Cold, Positive vs Negative. In Einstein's formula, the constant "C" is basically the ratio of lightspeed to zero velocity (changelessness).


    *1. In my thesis, Energy is one form of Generic Information (EnFormAction). The other forms are Matter & Mind. Matter is a physical (massive) form of invisible intangible Energy (E=MC^2). And Mind is a metaphysical (immaterial) form of coherent Information. Mind is simply the ability to cognize, to know, to become aware of the other forms of EnFormAction. The act of Enforming (causation) produces Form-Change in both Physics (Matter) and Metaphysics (Mind).

    *2. A Phase Transition is a change of state (mode of being). Functionally water is different from ice & steam. But each phase or mode has a practical role in physics. Likewise, a phase transition from tangled masses of neurons to logical cognition has a meaningful purpose in the operation & evolution of the information-based universe.
  • Sherlock Holmes
    1
    I find the idea of a "physics of consciousness" specious. The presumption is that we can analyze and perhaps explain consciousness scientifically and I must question that.

    Every scientific explanation is an exercise in reductionism, are we to assume that consciousness can be reduced? what if it cannot be?

    Can we claim to understand something that cannot be reduced? This is really a comment about the interplay of science and epistemology. But if consciousness cannot be reduced then it cannot be explained (in the scientific sense) and so perhaps we should consider this.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    Every scientific explanation is an exercise in reductionism, are we to assume that consciousness can be reduced? what if it cannot be?Sherlock Holmes
    I can't speak for Enrique. but his Coherence Theory seems to be more Holistic than Reductive. Admittedly, that is more of a philosophical approach than scientific, but he proposes to explain his thesis in terms of physical processes, rather than spiritual. The problem with Holistic concepts is that you have to swallow it whole. But if you list the particular ingredients of the red pill, at least you can know that you are getting some nutrients, and not just a sugar pill. :joke:
  • Enrique
    848
    Can we claim to understand something that cannot be reduced? This is really a comment about the interplay of science and epistemology. But if consciousness cannot be reduced then it cannot be explained (in the scientific sense) and so perhaps we should consider this.Sherlock Holmes

    I think it's apparent that consciousness can be profoundly reduced to physical processes, but what these processes are at base, presuming a foundation even exists, is not known. I think a comprehensive physical system obviously obtains, but what this consists in is also not known. These are opposite poles of the uncertainty spectrum, and human perspectives are currently constrained somewhere in the middle, but this uncertainty is not incapable of being resolved simply on principle. The discourse between philosophical speculating, theoretical modeling and empirical verification must continue to work on the problem and perhaps someday we will grasp our boundaries.

    While the act of reduction is intrinsic to human thought regardless of nature's structure, being no more than simplification for the purpose of integrating concepts, this is not the same as replacement. Even if we arrive at a model of the brain that explains its workings entirely in terms of electrons, EM fields, EM radiation etc., enabling a synthesis of physics with neuroscience, this won't make it any less necessary for many to gossip about everyone else's business lol Though I think reduction can on occasion run into issues when reification happens.

    But if you list the particular ingredients of the red pill, at least you can know that you are getting some nutrients, and not just a sugar pill.Gnomon

    I want the spice pill a la Dune, and maybe coherence field theory can deliver.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    A Coherence Field Theory of Physics and Consciousness . . . .
    I think it's apparent that consciousness can be profoundly reduced to physical processes, but what these processes are at base, presuming a foundation even exists, is not known.
    Enrique
    Some have expressed concern about using Reductive methods to study a Holistic phenomenon like Consciousness. But I notice that you refer to your CFT as a "coherent field" theory. Which indicates that you recognize that examining individual particles as Things will not reveal much about the Systems and Processes they contribute to. For example, an electron is sometimes treated as-if it's an isolated particle of solid Matter, when it is actually more like an integrated drop in the ocean of an electromagnetic field. Consequently, studying a drop of salty water will not tell you much about the ocean as a whole. That's why the original Reductive methods of empirical Science have lately made room for the Holistic methods of Systems Theory.

    Likewise, the reductive search for the seat of consciousness (e.g. Pineal gland?)*1 in the brain has not been very fruitful. That's because Consciousness is not that simple. Instead, it emerges from a complex, multi-organ integrated unified process. Each of those organs, and sub-processes, contributes to the immaterial Function we call "Knowing", but no particle alone is sentient. That's why a reductive microscopic view will not yield the secret to Sentient Matter. Hence, Consciousness must be studied in vivo, not in vitro. Neuroscientists have "profoundly reduced" Consciousness to physical neural processes (physiology, not psychology), but have not yet reached the foundation of a knowing Mind. Now it's time to put all those processes back together, to see what the jig-saw puzzle will look like as meaningful image.

    Ironically, Systems Theory is more of a philosophical approach (using innate Reason & Logic) than a scientific method of extending the reach of sensory organs with mechanical tools. For example, the only tool that can be used to dissect an invisible intangible Quantum Field is Mathematics, which is simply formalized Reason & Logic. I suppose that's why they call it a hypothetical "theory" instead of a physical "measurement". Therefore, calling your CFT a "field theory" seems to indicate that it is basically a Systems Theory. Is that correct? :smile:


    *1. The Pineal gland is sometimes referred to as the "third eye" because it secretes Melatonin, which is sensitive to light, but not for vision. Instead, it controls the Circadian Rhythm, which is a continuous cyclic process, not a single isolated thing.

    Systems Theory :
    A holistic view of a system encompasses the complete, entire view of that system. Holism emphasizes that the state of a system must be assessed in its entirety and cannot be assessed through its independent member parts.
    https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Systems_Theory/Holism
  • Enrique
    848
    a reductive microscopic view will not yield the secret to Sentient Matter. Hence, Consciousness must be studied in vivo, not in vitro. Neuroscientists have "profoundly reduced" Consciousness to physical neural processes (physiology, not psychology), but have not yet reached the foundation of a knowing Mind.Gnomon

    Conceptually, CFT is both holistic and reductionistic. Reducing brains to subatomic constituents allows us to comprehend how the interaction between body and environment transcends physiological structure with its classical and thermodynamic constraints, dissolving the boundary between physics and biology in a more inclusive, comprehensive view. Reducing matter to basic electromagnetic properties enables us to contextualize electromagnetism such that we will eventually be able to distiguish light and atoms from related forms of energy with more instantaneous momentums.

    I think the heterogeneity of organic structure acts as a sort of rate bottleneck for coherence. The nonelectromagnetic, relatively "nonlocal" flow which permeates the environment is more or less agitated and broken up by momentum differentiations in the body. This localizes organic motion to quantum scales, causing physiological matter to involve more "decoherence" - a phenomenon comparable to pilot wave interferences - than holistic flow. But internal structure of the atmosphere for instance is relatively simple and homogeneous by comparison, so coherence currents can travel at entanglement rates that span macroscopic distances rather than being confined to the quantum scale.

    In my opinion, standard atomic theory is an illusion because it defines everything in terms of nuclear and electromagnetic forces, as if all matter revolves around particles with properties determined in relationship to a form of momentum which has localizing effects analogous to organic structure. It is perhaps more accurate to consider light and atoms as part of a larger energy field that is fundamentally nonelectromagnetic, through which coherent energy can in many cases flow without being restricted to electromagnetism's speed limits and characteristic shieldings of force. Phenomena of consciousness seem to necessitate that this is the case, but macroscopic coherence among electromagnetically homogeneous systems has not been effectively modeled to this point.

    So to model consciousness we will need an entirely new model of matter, but it's still a physical process, only its composition is significantly nonelectromagnetic. We have to scientifically observe matter in a different way, conceptually "reducing" it to a more comprehensive form with greater explanatory power. Understanding the system in a more unified sense by synthesizing or "reducing" its properties to the form of an individual model. A mechanistic account effective enough to make mind objectively comprehensible in vivo.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    It is perhaps more accurate to consider light and atoms as part of a larger energy field that is fundamentally nonelectromagnetic, through which coherent energy can in many cases flow without being restricted to electromagnetism's speed limits and characteristic shieldings of force. Phenomena of consciousness seem to necessitate that this is the case, but macroscopic coherence among electromagnetically homogeneous systems has not been effectively modeled to this point.Enrique
    I don't have the technical qualifications to follow your argument for a "Coherence Field". But in my own layman's musings, I have developed a philosophical worldview that seems to be amenable to your more scientific theory. My own thesis is coming from a different direction, but arrived at a similar conclusion.

    My personal notion of a "non-electromagnetic" field is Information-centric instead of Matter/Energy based. I won't go into the details here, but some avant-garde scientists have concluded that Matter & Energy are actually special forms of the Universal Power to Enform -- that I call "EnFormAction". EFA includes the ability to animate material bodies (Life), and to produce (inform) abstract ideas in a neural network (Mind). Similar ideas are especially associated with physicist & cosmologist Paul Davies*1, and with neuroscientists Giulio Tononi and Christof Koch*2. Perhaps an even bolder proposal is the new information-based paradigm by physicist/complexity-theorist James Glattfelder*3.

    So, maybe your "model" of (logical??) Coherence can dovetail into these other non-reductive, non-traditional theories of how some physical systems came to be conscious. Imagined as a bonding or integrating force, Coherence may explain how novel holistic properties emerge from collections of non-sentient matter I don't want to deflect you from your own path, but maybe some of these other approaches could inform your thesis. :smile:



    *1. From Matter to Life : Information and Causality,
    ___Davies, et al

    *2. Integrated information theory attempts to provide a framework capable of explaining why some physical systems are conscious, . ___Tononi

    *3. Information -- Consciousness -- Reality : an information-theoretic ontology
    The primacy of consciousness
    ___James Glattfelder

    Information Field :
    My guess, as expressed in the Enformationism theory, is that Life & Mind are phase changes of energy as it transforms over time and in space. Here’s a Cliff Notes synopsis : Energy begins as a continuous field of potential, then emerges as discrete particles of matter. Later, from the complex interplay of energy & matter, stars & stuff, animated Life emerges. Then, as Life interacts with other life – as social groups or predator/prey interactions – Mind arises to control external behavior. Finally, Consciousness emerges to moderate the flow of internal thoughts. So, the Brain/Mind Paradox is a problem only because they are intimately connected at the root, while displaying different qualities at the crown.
    http://bothandblog2.enformationism.info/page70.html
  • Enrique
    848
    Perhaps an even bolder proposal is the new information-based paradigm by physicist/complexity-theorist James GlattfelderGnomon

    Coherence field theory isn't holistic or reductionistic so much as staunchly realist. I think it should be possible to integrate with information theory as an emergent level of conceptualization, but at this stage that would deviate from an essential facet of my realist approach, which is to be firmly rooted in the "atomic facts" of material processes. CFT's primary support so far comes simply from bare empirical facts of neural anatomy that can only be comprehensively explained by coherence operative at the quantum scale, with some preliminary reasoning about the way quantum theory is realist, specifically the concept of density contours within an EM field. Organisms are physical machines consisting in a rare blend of classical, quantum and so-called "nonlocal" coherence phenomena that makes them extraordinarily functional. The internal differentiation of coherence into such a richness of form is responsible for life's distinctiveness compared to matter as such. Maybe when the empirical facets are fully grasped and proven in a physiological context, I can read some much different stuff and think about how to make it work with information theory. I'm looking forward to scientific experiments that will prove or disprove my hypotheses, that's the next step.

    So, the Brain/Mind Paradox is a problem only because they are intimately connected at the root, while displaying different qualities at the crown.Gnomon

    The way I look at it, substance of perception, even to the extent that we might regard it as subjective, arises from material building blocks such as atoms, EM radiation and further palpabilities, the outcome of interactions finely grained as the subatomic scale. So it is nearly the essence of physical matter to be a protoperceptual substrate or "coherence field". Philosophically this is panprotopsychism. The kinds of minds characteristic of organic life as we know it on Earth are emergent orchestrations of these material building blocks, an extremely functional (perceptive) coherence field. But physical/perceptual matter is diverse, vastly transcending biochemical form and even electromagnetism. Coherence fields can become conscious in a huge host of ways, many of which are mostly invisible to current scientific instruments. So it's possible to have cosmic, terrestrial, simple, complex, spiritual etc. consciousness, all as different forms of coherence field. Consciousness is almost common as substance itself, and coherence field theory is as much an account of perception as mechanism.

    I can't think of a reason why information theory wouldn't be compatible with this besides the caveat that an abstract concept of complexity doesn't tell you very much about nature without reference to the idiosyncrasies of empirical observation.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    Coherence field theory isn't holistic or reductionistic so much as staunchly realist. I think it should be possible to integrate with information theory as an emergent level of conceptualization, but at this stage that would deviate from an essential facet of my realist approach, which is to be firmly rooted in the "atomic facts" of material processes.Enrique
    Perhaps a "staunchly realistic" perspective would include both General (holistic) and Particular (reductive) facts. Shannon reduced Information theory to atoms of data called "bits" & "bytes". But other information theorists have broadened their scope to include "ideas" & "meanings". Reality consists of both Isolated Parts (holons) and Integrated Systems (wholes). One kind of undivided system is a Quantum Field of Superposition. Only when you pop the bubble with a measurement, does a detached particle appear, as-if from nowhere.

    A quantum theorist once said something like : "the quantum atom is a field"; implying that the fundamental substance is not a particle, but a whole integrated system of (virtual ; potential) bits & bytes. If so, then "material processes" are ultimately processing Information. Admittedly, such a complex holistic view is more philosophical (generalization) than scientific (simplification). So it may not suit your "firmly rooted" approach. Holistic facts are not isolated cells, but entangled snarls of roots. Glattfelder calls it "the rhizome of reality". :joke:

    Information - Consciousness - Reality :
    He then offers two ways of understanding this dynamic world : in Aristotelian terms as “the entelechy of existence”, and the metaphor of “the rhizome of reality”. Later, he mentions a more technological way to think of reality, as a mathematical structure forming “the software that connects us, that enables all distributed systems, including life itself”. However, he seems to think of this evolving complexifying mechanism as more like a living cosmic organism. Hence, the notion that it is becoming self-reflective, as some of its creatures have become capable of forming mental models of the whole cosmic system.
    ___James Glattfelder
    http://bothandblog7.enformationism.info/page18.html

    Entelechy :
    Philosophy
    1. the realization of potential.
    2. the supposed vital principle that guides the development and functioning of an organism or other system or organization.


    Are quantum fields real or merely a mathematical tool used to describe elementary particles? :
    https://www.quora.com/Are-quantum-fields-real-or-merely-a-mathematical-tool-used-to-describe-elementary-particles

    AN ENTANGLED RHIZOME OF ROOTS
    wp2cf34605_05_06.jpg
  • Enrique
    848
    I can't think of any argument to pose against what you wrote. Unless the human mind evolves away from the need to translate experience into informational forms of the Shannon kind, computational models will be crucial for understanding nature.

    One kind of undivided system is a Quantum Field of Superposition. Only when you pop the bubble with a measurement, does a detached particle appear, as-if from nowhere.

    Are quantum fields real or merely a mathematical tool used to describe elementary particles?
    Gnomon

    As for the way measurement collapses superpositions into a particulate state, I think this must involve some kind of physical process roughly analogous to how a water droplet adheres to the tip of a pipette when it is dipped into a beaker and essentially separates from the solution. The universe is like the total water content of the beaker, indiscernibly disturbed, but locally a mathematically significant event has happened. I'm not sure that QFT really models the physical process at this point, and because intermediate steps are not observed, physicist's "collapse of the the wave function" math is more wild idealization than reality. But theorists are working to develop models of localization, and perhaps an experiment will soon be designed to adjudicate between various QFT collapse models.

    I wish I understood the math in more depth, but until I do I'm sticking to the "quantification as useful fiction" doctrine! This is the view that most physicists seem to promote. We have not yet bridged the gap between the Copenhagen interpretation and reality. But I think neuronal structure is solid proof of the coherence/decoherence spectrum and how intrinsic charge disequilibrations within a coherence field imbue electromagnetic matter with an essentially dynamic, perpetual motion mechanism.

    "Rhizome of reality" seems like apt imagery. How can humans explain all of this with pictures a grade schooler can comprehend and yet the world is such a s***show?
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    As for the way measurement collapses superpositions into a particulate state, I think this must involve some kind of physical processEnrique
    Oh, it definitely involves a physical process, but it also seems to require a mental action, such as Intention*1 (goal-setting ; aiming ; direction ; purpose). In Beyond Weird, Philip Ball discusses the still unresolved "measurement problem". And he notes that "everything that seems strange about quantum mechanics comes down to measurement". Moreover, the non-physical aspect of an experimental setup*2 is the intention of the Experimenter/Observer. That's why I mentioned that the Latin root of "to measure" is mensura, and the root of mensura is mens-, meaning "mind" or "intention". That may be why physicists, such as John A. Wheeler, concluded that the Mind of the Observer "participates" in the experiment. So, a quantum measurement involves both physical apparatus, and a psychological act of intention.

    Consequently, I interpret the act-of-measurement as the extraction of binding-integrating Information from the superposed wave into the mind of the experimenter. Thus, metaphorically, popping the non-local whole balloon into a particular entity, with both position & velocity in space. Over the last century, physicists & philosophers have argued back & forth about the role of the observer. But, from the perspective of Information theory, I have concluded that it's the non-physical Mind that makes the difference between a continuous wave of potential, and a localized particle of energy. It's not magic, but it is a sort of mind-over-matter causation. The wave is omni-directional & omni-potential, but the arbitrary choice of physical setup*2 forces it to reveal some otherwise hidden information (e.g. interference patterns ; like a herd of horses squeezing single-file through a gate in the corral )

    That holistic non-scientific analogy also helps to explain why some information theorists go back to a time before Shannon inadvertently changed the meaning of the word "information" from "knowledge in a mind" to "digits in a computer". Hence, they emphasize the meaningful mental form of Information, instead of the abstract mathematical form. At the same time, a few physicists were beginning to use the term "Information" to describe something more fundamental than even Energy. Recently, physicist Melvin Vopson resurrected Landauer's speculation that abstract & meaningful Information can also become Physical, and has proposed experiments to test the theory.

    I apologize, if I'm going off on a tangent from your OP. But I immediately saw the potential for combining your key notion of Cohesion (unity ; bonding ; continuity ; integration ; wholeness) with my notion of the essential inter-relating role of Information*3 (both physical & mental) in the universe. Those invisible, but logical, relationships are what makes Quantum theory seem spooky, when viewed as simply a mindless machine. The potential for Mind was in the material world from the beginning. It just needed to be cohered (squeezed ; channeled ; condensed) into a sentient form of Energy : e.g. Technology. :nerd:

    PS__With Einstein's formula "E=MC^2" in mind, I have proposed that the cosmic constant "C" linking Energy & Mass is not just a meaningless abstract ratio, but defines*4 the relationship between Energy & Matter with specific information; like a setting on a dial.


    *1. Intention : In billiards, the intention of the pool-shooter is what makes the difference between random scattering of the opening shot, and the subsequent non-random placing of balls in pre-specified pockets.

    *2. Setup : like corralling horses, the wide-open terrain transforms into a fenced-in enclosure, as intended by horse-riding humans

    *3. Information : (noun) data ; (verb) to transform ; to create meaning in a mind.
    Note -- in its active form (to enform) I spell it with an "E" to indicate its relationship to causal Energy.

    *4. To Define : to delimit ; to identify essential qualities (definition is a form of information)

    The mass-energy-information equivalence principle :
    Landauer’s principle formulated in 1961 states that logical irreversibility implies physical irreversibility and demonstrated that information is physical. Here we formulate a new principle of mass-energy-information equivalence proposing that a bit of information is not just physical, as already demonstrated, but it has a finite and quantifiable mass while it stores information.
    https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.5123794

    Information :
    * Knowledge and the ability to know.
    * Technically, it's the ratio of order to disorder, of positive to negative, of knowledge to ignorance.
    * It's measured in degrees of uncertainty. Those ratios are also called "differences". So Gregory Bateson* defined Information as "the difference that makes a difference". The latter distinction refers to "value" or "meaning". Babbage called his prototype computer a "difference engine".
    * Difference is the cause or agent of Change. In Physics it’s called "Thermodynamics" or "Energy". In Sociology it’s called "Conflict" or "Cooperation".

    http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page11.html

    Cosmic Constant : This ratio is usually denoted by ΩΛ and is estimated to be 0.6889±0.0056, according to results published by the Planck Collaboration in 2018.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant
    Note -- "Hawking proposed that the cosmological constant is probably zero in quantum cosmology". Its closeness to Zero may explain why the expansion of the universe is so finely balanced between Eternal Inflation & Eventual Collapse.
  • Enrique
    848
    it definitely involves a physical process, but it also seems to require a mental action, such as Intention (goal-setting ; aiming ; direction ; purpose).Gnomon

    If as a thought experiment I view intention as core or fundamental from my panprotopsychist perspective, what does that entail? Subatomic particles, especially photons and electrons, would be like bits of information, fragments of libido. These are organized by the emergent structure of matter into kilobytes of quantum machinery that probably start to play a role in awareness at the level of biomolecular interactions with light. Light/biomolecular arrays coordinate to form percepts, megabytes in the field of awareness insofar as it arises from the body and brain, which are synchronized magnetically via phase-locking with an electric field in feedback loops. This quantum/electrical coherence field characteristic of physiological structure is then differentiated into gigabyte regions and terabyte systems with complementary functions that integrate to produce a conceptualizing mind.

    So it is possible to define mind as bits of information in a computerlike structure. But as I've described, more than just quantum/electrical properties are involved in the dynamics of awareness, for a nonelectromagnetic nonlocality participates, which we do not yet effectively model and which appears not to obey the principles of even quantum mechanics. Experiments that determine the principles of this nonelectromagnetic realm will probably subvert current physics, causing my hypothetical computation-based model to become obsolete. In order for the information paradigm to work, we will have to redefine what a bit is on multiple occasions. Maybe I'm not grasping an important aspect of the paradigm at this point, but information theory almost seems to me like materialism reified, with empirical content abstracted away from the episteme's foundation - experimental results - such that new developments will seem extremely unintuitive upon further discovery. For information theory to work as a lasting epistemic paradigm, we need to transition between models of what computation fundamentally is.

    This is not prohibitive to information theory, but I think the paradigm needs a conceptual mechanism filling the primordial and somewhat ineffectual role literary deconstruction attempted to achieve, an explicit critical method built in to assure that revision is possible so our image of the cosmos does not rigidify into a framework that can only be rationally modified (as opposed to radically dismantled) by a computer scientist. If a revisionary method is not included in the philosophy of information theory, it will go the way of psychologism, behaviorism etc., mostly rejected by a new generation that is set adrift philosophically. At some point the pace of intellectual advancement is going to become so rapid and seismic that we can't have a philosophical revolution every generation. Information theory or whatever philosophical movement comes to prominence needs a critical, revisionary facet to parallel and mitigate the tendency to reify. I think science is beginning to realize this with the increasing emphasis on historicity in its literature for a mainstream audience. Maybe the new movement can be a permanent one, as a sort of deconstructive empiricism that incorporates information theory as one of its dimensions.
  • Gnomon
    2.7k
    panprotopsychist perspective,Enrique
    In order for the information paradigm to work, we will have to redefine what a bit is on multiple occasions. Maybe I'm not grasping an important aspect of the paradigm at this point, but information theory almost seems to me like materialism reified, with empirical content abstracted away from the episteme's foundationEnrique

    I parse "panprotopsychist" as : all + before + mind. But "proto" could also mean "earliest or most primitive form". If so, are you proposing some element of reality that is even more fundamental than Energy & Natural Laws? In the Enformationism thesis that primordial factor is EnFormAction (EFA ; the causal power to enform, to create novelty; to change ; to evolve ; the prototype of Energy). And the kind of Information we associate with minds (& computers) is just one form of the omni-potent EFA. As theoretical physicists have proposed, Matter & Energy are also forms of Generic Information (EFA). A religious term would be "the Will of G*D". But a philosophical term is Plato's "LOGOS" (the logical laws of reality). A scientific label might be something like "Energy + Coded Laws" (causation & direction).

    In the Enformationism paradigm, a "bit" could be defined as an instance of EFA : an act of Creation or a bit of Being. Just like Shannon's "bit", those instances are uncountable. So, it is defined statistically as anything from Zero to 100% of all possibilities. Rather than defining Enformationism as "materialism reified" I would call it "materialism idealized" or "abstracted". That's because Shannon's "data" is purely abstract, and defined only in terms of numbers (math). Although the Information in your mind is abstract, in the sense of leaving behind the material flesh, it is metaphorically concrete, in that your mental images are skeletal representations of physical objects, as perceived by the physical senses. The abstract image in your mind is like the logical bones of a physical object. They can only be "seen" by Reason, not by the eyes.

    So, the "important aspect" of Information that you are not grasping is the Meta-Physical element. I use the term "metaphysical" in the Aristotelian sense of "non-physical" : meaning "mental", "imaginary", "psychological", "philosophical". These aspects of our world are not subject to cyclotron splitting by physicists, or laboratory dissection by biologists. They must be experienced as conscious feelings or impressions. Yet, they can be communicated between Minds in the form of Words (abstract meanings ; ideas ; Logos). Hence, they will not be found in a search for the Physics of Consciousness. :nerd:

    Matter, Energy and Information :
    In the realm of physics, everything is matter-energy, a single element that takes two basic forms as explained in special relativity. Then Cybernetic systems came along, which described systems in terms of matter-energy interactions, but added the element of information, which creates a feedback loop for the system.
    http://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/Matter-Energy-and-Information.pdf
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.