An inconsistent position because taken to its logical conclusion no purpose exists for willing anything, total apathy. It is also fallacious because reasoning is a substantive cause, proven by the nature of civic action, organizational structure and mechanisms of progress. I think those questionable moral approaches mentioned are to be conditionally resisted to the extent that they are damaging to oneself or somebody else, for pragmatic reasons.

From the perspective of the willing subject the total material system is nondeterministic because the subject is a substantive cause. From the perspective of the total material system causality is entirely deterministic. So basically in my account the concept of determinism is for humans typically relative and has limited import. This of course hinges on the nature of the subject, but I think science objectively proves the conscious, willing agent not so illusory that it is incapable of influencing its own fate as a self with deliberative reasoning, ''reflection''. This ability is not universal, indestructible and incorruptible, however, and that is an ethical dilemma.

I didn't find CEMFI with an online search. Maybe include additional detail? Effective methods exist for correlating EEG, ECoG etc. patterns with cognitive state in subjects lucid enough to report experiences. Sizable oscillation and flow patterns segregated from the total EM field which correspond to metrics of volitional experience indicate functional autonomy, as I stated. The uncertainty is how, in the context of basic matter such as electrons, atoms, intracellular electrical currents, etc., and that is what I explained. This does not prove that causes trancending the individual brain don't constrain free will, the most nonparanormal example simply being a legal regulation, but I have shown at least how conscious decision-making is independent of the unconscious, and I did this monistically with physics, in entirely objective terms. Certainty regarding some features of the model could be increased with further experiments, but free will looks verifiable in terms of deterministic electromagnetism. The brain and environment can be made of completely deterministic matter and free will is still not an illusion.

Exactly, Libet was encroaching on our existential territory. This shows that the intuition of volition can be valid from a neuroscientific perspective. Human behavior doesn't seem to be determined entirely by unconscious processes. Our wills do apparently have real agency.

I admittedly should do more reading, but...can the wave function and its collapse be instantiated with some technology, like a REALLY fast elevator you have to be strapped into? For the sake of brainstorming, why not? Just an engineering problem as far as I can tell. If measurement collapses the wave function predictably, why can't a souped up wave function with sophisticated measurement and better known properties of physically entangled objects in principle collapse anywhere energetically feasible?

I wonder if by using an extremely powerful computer to calculate the wave function of a macroscopic space, you can generate or merely define a field of quantumlike coherence within that space, then do a targeted collapse of the wave function to create near-instantaneous convergence at a point within or on its perimeter. Perhaps you could compute a coherence field in space between your location and a destination, then collapse the wave function on a point near the destination via entanglement to travel long distances in a flash. Can the wave function and its collapse theoretically be any computable value? Wouldn't that make Schrodinger a hero!

I've got a crazy idea for you that I have not in any way corroborated or identified specific sources for, so I'm being liberal with facts, apologies. The speed of entanglement/coherence is at least 300 trillion m/s, and it occurs as a statistical correlation between bulk quantities of particles, which suggests an underlying macroscopic mechanism.

What if this macroscopic mechanism is actuated by dark matter/energy of which electromagnetic matter is a fractional component, and in some circumstances the physical principles of dark matter/energy predominate, including faster than light motion or ''nonlocality'' from the electromagnetic frame of reference, and perhaps more or less direct routes through spatial configurations that can be modeled with higher dimensions, in essence independent of the classical arrow of time. Can a spaceship conceivably use this mechanism to transport humans?

Across relatively short distances, perhaps a sixth of the mileage between Earth and Mars, this mechanism could be so rapid as to almost be instantaneous, about .1 s or less. You would arrive at your destination before you even knew what happened. This might be like pulling a tablecloth from under dishware, so rapid that the human body would not have time to react an iota before the spaceship was again at a standstill, like a mild jolt, provided the passenger was fastened in tightly enough.

If you determined and set the coordinates of your spaceship's destination with an unmanned, computerized homing beacon sent ahead by the same mechanism, you could leap frog between locations as far removed as planets of our solar system in minutes. This navigational procedure could be automated to a large extent, making the journey minimally demanding for the passengers as far as logistics. At that rate of travel, a leisurely trip could make it to Alpha Centauri in a month. Thinking less optimistically, unmanned probes might be designed that can tolerate the journey better and cover longer bursts for exploration of neighboring star systems.

Rates of entanglement within fields of coherence indicate that causality can attain these speeds, even as time travel. The issue is how to harness the essence of matter underlying electromagnetism.

But what if electromagnetic matter is just a denser portion of the aether field, not a separate substance? Electromagnetism might be like a relatively localized bulge of dense excitation in a more nonlocally active, ''aether'' substrate. In the context of classical physics, electromagnetic centers of mass (energy density) could be difficult to differentiate from aether if concentrated enough, as in an organism, or relatively stationary enough, as on Earth. But whenever atoms travel rapidly through space, aether may be associated with either resistive squishing, increasing energy density as in the case of a clock moving horizontally and a decelerating electric current, or diffusive spreading, decreasing energy density as in the case of an accelerating electric current, and this can't be easily distinguished from relativistic effects.

Atoms probably arise from the influence of much more dense nuclear fields on a singular electromagnetic field, the electron sea model, so the same principle of field relativity applies with known matter.

And maybe the Michelson-Morley experiment works with satellites in space! According to Banno some papers claim so though I haven't browsed them yet. Perhaps that was a joke.

Maybe aether has some connection to dark matter/energy and quantum coherence.

Ha, I knew it! This is my qualitative thinking. Each atom of electromagnetic matter has a density of aether infused into it, and interferences within and especially between atoms produce agitation in the aether, making its motions effectively random at largish mass, so quantum decoherence correlates to some extent with aether decoherence, one of the reasons why aether is challenging to detect on Earth.

Clocks run faster at higher Earth altitude because less density in the atmosphere corresponds to less aether density all else being equal and less compression in mass' rates of change. Clocks run ever so slightly slower at faster speed in a direction parallel to Earth's surface because a faint, macroscopic aether wind compresses density within the apparatus while flowing around and through it. Clocks run slower in space because much less particle interference allows the aether to be on average more dense and integrated. All kinds of experiments with matter can be designed to test these hypotheses if the basic principle is verified, and perhaps it has been!

Can you give a basic explanation of the technical details?

What formal qualifications do you have in this area? — Tom Storm

I have a degree in philosophy, some math with lots of chemistry, biology and neuroscience courses also. Quantum physics is more of a hobby so as you can tell my comprehension is not highly quantitative, but I've given the foundational concepts of quantum mechanics a LOT of thought for a few years and the applications for neuroscience have become very apparent to me. The field of consciousness study and its techniques are not as developed as many scientific disciplines, so you don't have to be a world-renowned superstar to help out.

Given the multitude of cause of the disease ( it is actually many loosely related diseases) , I wonder how an analysis at the molecular , much less quantum, level could impact what is essentially a behaviorally-defined syndrome.

there are even now associations of self-proclaimed ‘voice hearers’ who argue that they should not be pathologized but instead respected as merely non-typical.

I suspect that trying to find a single cause or mechanism of schizophrenia is like trying to find a cause of psychological gender. — Joshs

The reasons for noncompliance with treatment through medication amongst schizophrenics are not just about not recognising that one is unwell but often due to the negative side-effects of some medications, including movement disorders and weight gain. — Jack Cummins

I think the language-related symptoms Joshs speaks of are a matter of thought-organization and roughly belong in the category of problems with executive control, so perhaps in many cases it's not really overstimulation per se but inability to corral stimulations via reasoning. As you explained, schizophrenia has many forms and is difficult to generalize. I think traditional medications address the thought-organization symptoms fairly well, basically by modifying the way brain regions communicate. Unfortunately they can have systemic side-effects and work marginally for some patients. If my quantum hypotheses are proven accurate, the next generation of medications will modify percepts themselves, as radiative/molecular structures, which could provide noticeably better balance for many patients. I know that kind of medication would probably work well for me. It may even be possible to enhance percepts a la spice in Dune, that would be cool!

I agree many voice hearers should probably be respected as individuals who simply cannot function without support groups that let them self-identify as such. I'm very close to being in that category. My auditory stuff can be unresponsive to medication and I've tried a lot of prescriptions. I've been working with doctors to get this under control for years and if I ever find a community group that truly supports those in my position that would be amazing. A lot of patients try to avoid all the side-effect issues by minimizing dosages, but that never worked for me.

In my humble opinion, the key is to make sure you have adequate doctor's supervision as you make medication changes. I discontinued a medication once without a doctor's involvement and though I had a lot more cognitive clarity afterwards my life has never recovered. The same medication was temporarily discontinued a couple years ago due to a mixup at the pharmacy and I've been living in Mordor ever since. I doubt my experience is the norm though.

Coherence Fields in the Brain

Molecular biologist Johnjoe McFadden’s CEMI (conscious electromagnetic information) theory aptly describes EM field effects. In this model, the phenomena introspected as intentional agency arise from CEMI fields which influence neural networks on a macroscopic scale. Though the mechanism is still poorly understood, preliminary indications are that this synchronizing effect results from phase-locking mediated by the interaction of ion channels with overlapping EM fields, integrating holistically functional brain regions beyond what feedback loops alone can accomplish. Neurons that have adapted for pervasive phase-locking are involved in conscious brain processes, coordinating neural networks broadly enough to be what we experience as a motivational complex, while neurons which do not engage in phase-locking constitute unconscious processes. This accounts for some common observations about the way human minds work, notably that high arousal consciousness consists in serial processing as opposed to massive parallelism of the unconscious, explained as a disjunction of ultraintegrated CEMI fields from bordering EM fields, as well as the fact that we experience some degree of free will, in this model simply being identical to especially prominent EM field effects. It is the current author’s opinion that a construct such as CEMI theory can explicate the subconscious also, as a spectrum of low to high arousal evoked by relative breadth and saturation of phase-locking.

So EM field fluctuations ranging from the intraneuronal to macroscopic likely bind neural networks such that emergent functions of vision in the occipital lobe, analytical reasoning in the prefrontal cortex, etc. can be tightly orchestrated to evince holistic effects, manipulating the magnetic properties of atoms and molecules within large-scale flow shapes that oscillate amongst and travel through brain tissues. But the mystery of how percepts arise from chemical concentrations and electrical impulses remains. Why does consciousness look and feel like perception rather than simply being circuitry? What is this additional substance that traditional anatomy does not model?

Electric currents accelerate in many locations within a neuron, near the nodes of Ranvier, along the length of dendrites, due to the juncture of soma and axon hillock, and around the synaptic cleft as a product of steady gradient between Na+, K+ and the synapse’s Ca2+. Accelerating coherence currents of electron energy emit electromagnetic radiation that as a general rule is lower in frequency the larger the current, so radio waves range anywhere from 1mm to 100 km in wavelength, while orbitals of an atom’s valence shell emit visible light, from 400-700 nm. Microscopic electric currents in the brain emit higher frequency radiation than for instance a transmission line, but this radiation is nonetheless low enough in frequency to travel through both liquids and solids, like radio waves and more unlike visible light. If much of this EM radiation superpositions into the electron orbitals of atoms as it transits through them with a speed that is effectively instantaneous in the brain, spreading at a distance of many micrometers until its intensity diminishes to negligibility, this is almost certainly sufficient to bind hundreds if not thousands of molecular structures as individual units of extremely hybrid wavelength. In combination with entanglement effects that cause these photonic fields and atomic nodes to tightly cohere, this could produce wavelength complexes intricate enough to be what we experience as a subjective image. If the hypothesis is accurate, these entangled superposition arrays or “coherence fields” do not merely correlate with image perception but actually are the image itself.

At this stage, we do not have much direct evidence. Research into the mechanisms of
consciousness has thus far focused on microtubules. These cytoskeletal structures have a tightly
knit arrangement of molecules hypothesized as amenable to superposition. Experiments
show that the tryptophan molecules of microtubules form a complex that enters a coherent state of
energy distribution spanning micrometers in the presence of UV light. Anesthetic seems to inhibit
the process, hinting at a connection with consciousness. This mechanism is similar to that found in
photosynthetic reaction centers and may be quite common in nature. Initial data indicates that
longer wavelengths exact these effects at greater distance scales, so interaction between relatively
large molecular arrays in the brain and low frequency EM radiation as emitted by electric currents
seems within the realm of possibility. We have much more data for the influence of EM fields,
which in addition to phase-locking and numerous further functions mediate energy transduction in
transmission channels of the cytoskeleton, processes governing the entire structure of a cell along
with the movement of components such as mitochondria, vesicles, etc.

Plenty of circumstantial evidence points to light’s role in coherence fields. Within a neuron,
electric current accelerates fastest over the largest amount of space while transiting the soma, and a relatively steady electrical gradient ranging from Na+ and K+ to Ca2+ is present around the synapse. This also happens to be where complex molecular arrays that superposition with EM radiation would likely be located. The superposition of low frequency EM radiation with molecular structure is probably not obstructed by factors of heat and moisture that have seemed prohibitive to widespread coherence among molecules alone. Within a plenitude of environments, photon entanglement is especially robust while operative at large spatial ranges, which supplies a viable binding mechanism for percept units constructed of molecular parts that are distributed somewhat widely in cellular solution. And coherence fields of this kind explain why the brain is composed of grey and white matter. Grey matter of dendrites, soma and the axon’s interior is darkly shaded as it absorptively superpositions with large amounts of radiation at a range of frequencies to form percepts, while the myelin of axons is white to reflect radiation that is not absorbed so intensity minimally attenuates with distance. From the outside brain matter is greyish, but from the inside much of its atomic structure may bind with waves of EM radiation to form the substance of percepts. This can possibly make sense of mental images and hallucinatory artifacts of brain processes, perceptual phenomena which are not necessarily stimulated by environments outside the body.

If the substance of image percepts is so strongly tied to dynamics of electromagnetic matter
within the brain, why does the perceptual field appear so convincingly to be in the environment?
For instance, if visual percepts reside amongst biochemistry of the occipital lobe or elsewhere in the
brain, how is this not introspected as such? We must remember that the sharply focused optical
field is only the size of your thumb held at arm’s length in front of the face, with the majority of vision
pieced together from eye saccading and involuntary memory. The brain has adapted a distribution
of tissues and functions to discern the unity of nature effortlessly in many cases, but to a profound
degree this is indirect representation rather than direct correspondence. The issue of how percepts
can arise from a brain’s coherence fields is in essence the same as how electrical signals organize
neural networks within which these percepts are located. Just as neural units correspond to a
plethora of functions, coherence field units probably map onto brain structure as a material
equivalent of subjective imagery. Specially adapted phase-locking of neurons with EM fields could
synchronize percepts within relatively large regions of the brain.

Then why does subjective experience include somewhat nondimensional qualities of subjective feel as well? The following of course needs to be conclusively proven, but feel percepts most likely emerge from the way coherence fields as arrays of entangled superposition resonate, vibrate. This would mean that the building blocks of sensation, emotion, etc. are intrinsic to matter, as are those of image formation. In the natural environment, vibrating wavelengths do not feel or appear with much resolution, but emergent structure enhances the body’s ability to translate these building blocks into functional experience.

At first glance it seems that neural network synchronicity as mediated by feedback loops and
phase-locking is active, while the perceptual facets of coherence field modulation in the brain such as
images and feelings would be passive, so why did percepts develop what seem to be such
overabundant rather than parsimonious forms? If coherence field theory is accurate, filling this gap
in our knowledge of the physical world almost with the weight of necessity, basic fragments of feeling
and appearance are present at quantum scales. Matter would mutate as a coherence field at nearly
fundamental levels, so more complex structures of experiencing will ineluctably result in more
complex perceptual forms such as imagination, thought and emotion, though emergence can
adopt almost inexhaustible variety. This is not the entire story, for nonlocal entanglement at great
distances seems to require physical forces which include some nonelectromagnetic component, but
to the extent that these more exotic phenomena interact with brain tissue, the coherence field
concept and a quantum neuroscience seem promising as the framework upon which to construct
working models of so-called subjectivity’s substance.

Anosognosia, Mental Health and the Culture of Consciousness

It is estimated that 57-98% of those diagnosed with schizophrenia have cooccurring anosognosia, which is the name given to a patient’s absence of insight that he or she has a health condition. Inability of patients to acknowledge that lack of treatment brings on symptoms of schizophrenia leads to much noncompliance with doctors, relapses accompanied by degeneration of brain tissue, repeated hospitalizations, and a stigma that grows as available medical measures commonly remain less effective than they could be due partly to a patient’s decision-making.

Analysis of those diagnosed with schizophrenia has identified differences in the prefrontal cortex (PFC). The dorsolateral region was reduced in size, important for self-monitoring and organization. This may be responsible for inaccurate assessment of causality when the patient regards his or her symptoms. The orbitofrontal region was conversely enlarged. This portion of the brain is critical for attributing significance to events, so may cause excessive salience of perceptual symptoms, a hallmark of schizophrenia whether or not anosognosia occurs. Studying the performance of those with schizophrenia on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) revealed a seeming correlation between insight impairment and inflexibility of abstract thinking, functions linked to the PFC. Lower grey matter volume was observed in the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, a brain region which participates in working memory and decision-making, potentially reducing the capacity to entertain alternative interpretations about one’s misperceptions.

The anterior insula, involved with emotional processing, and the posterior insula with its role in processing somatosensory (bodily sensation), auditory and visceral modalities has been pinpointed as abnormal. The insula makes complex connections to additional areas implicated in schizophrenia, such as the PFC, limbic system, thalamus and sensory cortices. Post-mortem examinations have revealed especially prominent size reduction in grey matter of the insula, and measurements of regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) using positron emission tomography (PET) showed atypical activation during a task challenging the ability of subjects to attribute agency to their perceived actions. MRI has identified lower volume of both grey and white matter in the insulas of relatively stable schizophrenia patients. The prevailing model postulates the anterior insula as involved in conscious error detection, while the posterior insula integrates somatosensory input and structures concomitant with further modalities. The former might be tied to ideas of reference, and the latter hallucinatory delusions.

In 2001, studies began to single out a default mode network (DMN) active while subjects are at wakeful rest and deactivated during focused behavior, including structures such as the medial prefrontal cortex, lateral parietal cortex, anterior singulate cortex, posterior singulate cortex, and precuneus. This distribution of brain regions is deeply involved in self-reflection, social cognition and mind-wandering. Hyperconnectivity tends to be present in those at high risk for developing schizophrenia, and the DMN deactivates less in these individuals during focused tasks. In relatives without a schizophrenia diagnosis who manifest this trait, stronger connectivity was found in the DMN, hinting at a possible link between poor insight and deterioration in a specific phenotype of self-related processing.

So irrespective of how these differences develop, we can claim as a general rule that many patients with schizophrenia are more concrete thinkers, have greater difficulty in accurate attribution of causality to various perceptions such as somatosensory feelings, sounds and interoceptions on both a conceptual and aesthetic level, as well as being prone to extraordinarily spontaneous trains of thought, perhaps describable as a type of focused awareness more fused with the unconscious. When executive controls of cognition break down from gene expression and/or stressors, concepts can become palpable as perceptions, perceptions palpable as sensory input, and stream of consciousness hard-pressed to decisively and analytically integrate experiences as information. The afflicted’s capacity to cope with stimuli and navigate through illusion to reality in the motives or meanings of one’s milieu is strained. Perception of what is going on along with apprehension of the reasons why things happen grows uncertain, confused or delusional, and the psyche is susceptible to caving in under the pressure, losing touch with the world to such a degree that one cannot articulate nor in many cases even recognize the problem.

The emblematic form of schizophrenia consists in a cognitive profile that is at risk for detachment from the causal implications, abstractions and normal stimulations of sociocultural reality. But individuals who do not have schizophrenia usually go through comparable sorts of struggles at some point during their lives, with a similar taxing of the same brain regions under difficult social circumstances. Challenges to a human being’s psychical complex of executive control, affect and perception are common, so the majority of the population would report the same range of symptoms upon initial contact with a doctor or therapist. Diagnostic criteria associated with schizophrenia have thus expanded to become the equivalent of flulike symptoms in mental health, a broad category encompassing those with the standard instantiation and many that have the same social issues arising from alternate cognitive/behavioral causes and backgrounds.

Looking at schizophrenia from the most general perspective possible, our decades of experience in treating this disorder indicate that its symptoms, from full-blown psychotic breaks to chronic difficulty in ordinary situations, arise from an incapacity of the mind to deal with perceptual or affective stimulation via executive control. Though further research is needed to detail common, rare, old and new categories of schizophrenia diagnosis, it seems apparent based on initial analysis that the disorder results from excesses in psychical mechanisms of stimulation, deficiencies in psychical mechanisms of stimulation or executive control, and environmental triggers. Extreme executive control in the presence of normal perception, affect and environment does not usually appear unhealthy nor result in behavioral troubles, and this disposition is much less likely to fall under the purview of long-term counseling or medication management.

Overstimulated perception is the source of traditional schizophrenia. This is the easiest form to diagnose because it inclines to produce more obvious behaviors such as reacting to things that are not there, confused or delusional thinking, becoming agitated or catatonic for reasons which are not always clear to the general public, and of course anosognosia. Medications designed for schizophrenia were first tailored to this type of condition, and the need for treatment is not difficult to ascertain. When accompanied by severe emotional outbursts, a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder is usually the outcome and a somewhat different regimen of medications seems appropriate.

While schizophrenia as a diagnostic category evolved, it also began to encompass conditions of understimulation. These cases can evince symptoms such as flat affect, difficulty in figuring out the motives of those one interacts with due to incomparable perceptions, and relationship struggles. This is essentially the opposite of hallucinating, an anosognosia characterized by lack of intuition into the minds of typical human beings. Talk therapy and social supports are in principle capable of improving insight for these patients, but medicine has not attained the efficacy to modify this cognitive profile into more ordinary forms, which might be possible by manipulating or supplementing biochemistry in the brain and body once relevant mechanisms have been discovered.

Inability to perceive stimulations that influence one’s own behavior or one’s stimulating effects on those in his or her vicinity are also commonly diagnosed as schizophrenia. This is a kind of blindness to the impact of one’s perceptions and cognitions. The condition includes consistently encountering behavior that seems apathetic, hostile or irrational, incomprehensibility in the causation of one’s experiences, and difficulty in connecting with or expressing the motives of typical individuals. When no emotional state or approach proves workable in controlling negative feedback from the social environment, these patients are pushed to the breaking point and affective symptoms are the outcome. Severe anosognosia is a common consequence despite talk therapy, with the patient’s social support system liable to disintegration. More recent medications have started to find ways of grappling with this disorder, and improved comprehension of the underlying biochemistry and physiology should help immensely.

The similar problems that everyone has during stressful periods of life due to social environment
are not called schizophrenia, but as can be seen from this description of less well-understood forms of
the condition that are quickly becoming diagnostic conventions, a strong aspect of social triggering is
typically present. The less scientifically and medically theorized a form of schizophrenia is, the more
acute are these social triggers along with companion anosognosia, and the worse the prognosis for
even patients who can still think in relatively coherent ways. This innocent word “anosognosia” is
the tip of the iceberg for a suite of symptoms that put patients and doctors on the front lines insofar
as properties of mind prompt lack of understanding or empathy, stigma, and conflict perpetuated by
all affiliated parties.

It is obviously preferable to model the physical causes of mental health symptoms rather than
force citizens to wage a battle for the purpose of keeping relatives, friends and the public stable, safe
and informed, but neuroscience has not had much prospect of explaining in a mechanistic way how
the vast variety in percepts themselves, as opposed to the regulation of neural networks, emerges
from matter to generate the substance of consciousness. This makes culture vulnerable to a regress
towards stereotyping, alienation and strife between demographics, as those in and around mental
health treatment know quite well.

If a framework like coherence field theory can clarify the way percepts arise in conjunction with
brain, body and environment, this may manage to refine diagnostic classifications so that comprehension of consciousness becomes dramatically more explicit and less rampant with disinformation, in a way analogous to the impact had by our technical models of neurons, neurotransmitters and brain regions. This would probably be complemented by new classes of medication that modify perception while better circumventing sedative, stimulant and systemic side effects. Perhaps the fidelity of a neuroscience that utilizes quantum physics might finally bridge the gap between science and psyche which philosophers have termed the hard problem of consciousness, uniting matter with mind to rework popular ideas regarding cognition in the next phase of our centuries-long movement towards theoretical/cultural synthesis, boosting domestic accord and actualizing lives.

Re: optogenetics? — 180 Proof

I suppose this is a naturally occurring optogenetic phenomenon explored on the level of biochemical phenotype rather than genes. Researchers filled a solution with fragments of microtubules and found that energy is shared in response to light as a kind of coherence phenomenon. Apparently this process is mediated by tryptophan and more. Cool science.

I've obtained some new data and concepts that support my coherence field theory of superposition between EM radiation and molecules. When you come up with a reasonable hypothesis, the transition from pseudoscience to real science happens quickly enough. (I told you so @180 Proof lol)
Unprecedented speculation is fun and worthwhile!

At this point, we do not possess much direct evidence for coherence field theory beyond the fact that it fills a gap in our knowledge of the physical world quite seamlessly, almost with the force of necessity. Early research into light/matter interactions within biological systems has focused on microtubules. These cytoskeletal filaments contain regularized patterns of aromatic amino acids such as tryptophan. The tryptophan molecules of a single microtubule can be stimulated by UV radiation to transmit energy between them across distances of micrometers. Anesthetics seem to inhibit this activity, hinting at a correlation with consciousness. The mechanism resembles that found in photosynthetic reaction centers and may be quite common to nature. In neurons, microtubules influence receptors, ion channels and plasticity generally, so light-stimulated behavior could have a significant role for regulating cellular structure. If molecules are proven responsive to larger wavelengths of light, the data implies that activation would occur at greater distance scales, and the proposed mechanism of percept generation is well within possibility. Much more data has been discovered for the effect of EM fields, which among numerous functions mediate energy transduction in transmission channels of the cytoskeleton, processes governing the entire structure of a cell along with the movement of components such as mitochondria, vesicles, etc.

We have plenty of circumstantial evidence. The largest and most rapid region of accelerating electron coherence in a neuron is located within the soma as a flow from dendrites to axon hillock, which also happens to be where complex molecular arrays that superposition with resulting EM radiation would most likely reside. The superposition of low frequency EM radiation with molecular structure would probably not be obstructed by factors of heat and moisture that have seemed prohibitive to widespread coherence amongst molecules alone. Within a plenitude of environments, photon entanglement is especially robust while operative at large spatial ranges, which supplies a viable binding mechanism for percept units constructed of molecular parts that are distributed somewhat widely in cellular solution. And coherence fields of this kind explain why brain matter has a darkish tint while myelin is white. Grey matter of dendrites, soma and the interior of axons is darkly shaded because it absorptively superpositions with large amounts of EM radiation to form percepts, while myelinated white matter strongly reflects the light that does not penetrate atoms so radiative fields minimally attenuate across space. From the outside neurons look greyish, but from the inside contents of these cells likely synchronize via entanglement and superposition with EM radiation to form the substance of perception.

What do you guys think of this? It is interesting that experiments show nonvisible light can possibly regulate cellular functions.

That's what I'd feared since I first read your post. It's just free-floating fantasy, unmotivated, baseless, worthless, pointless. — Daemon

If you want to get into nuts and bolts of the argument, read the lead essay of my thread A Physical Explanation for Consciousness. The idea is that light and atoms share quantum properties such as superposition, entanglement and wave/particle duality which govern mutual interactions as opposed to merely the behavior of light and atoms separately, and these interactions are at least partly the source of many percepts. So electromagnetic matter essentially consists of atomic (fermionic) nodes within photonic (bosonic) fields, and additive wavelengths that result cause subjective appearance and feel. As far as the technicalities are concerned, it's based on a well-constructed argument, not free-floating fantasy at all.

To put your theory into context :
1. How does it differ from CEMI? Does it add or subtract certain features?
2. If this Mind-Field is physical, would it make mind-reading possible, via something like an EEG machine hooked-up to a computer to translate vibrations & excitations into human language?
3. What patterns of field activity would indicate Intention-to-act or to-express-thoughts-&-feelings?
4. Do you see some other practical applications of this theory in the near future? — Gnomon

1. CEMI theory explains how the brain's EM field synchronizes all the activity within that organ via feedback loops and phase locking. Coherence field theory adds the hypothetical postulate that waves of EM radiation are synchronized in addition to tissues, superpositioning into molecular arrays such that these structures are in essence percept units, of appearance as hybrid wavelengths occupying space, and feel as vibration or resonance of these wavelengths. The brain's contribution to experience would be emergent forms of these superpositions, which are even further integrated by quantum entanglement.

2. In coherence field theory, the basic constituents of perception, emotion, thought are largely a quantum facet of matter, so any mechanism or apparatus that discerns these properties can in principle mind read.

3. The boundary between fully aware intentionality and subconscious processes, high vs. low arousal, is the distinction between a CEMI field and an EM field. Many of the brain's evolutionarily streamlined EM field/phase-locking complexes are not broad or saturating enough to function as willed agency. Regions in the brain where EM fields cross the threshold to a CEMI field are the loci of intentionality.

4. Instruments that measure the brain's EM radiation in vivo have not been developed. A noninvasive EEG type device might be capable of this assuming coherence field theory is proven by experiment, which should be easy enough if valid considering how core the mechanism would be to not only brains but all matter. Medicine might be able to treat and modify percepts on the intracellular level. This research could platform progress into modeling nonlocality, parsing electromagnetic effects from the substrate of spooky action at a distance and then fashioning a comprehensive model.

You know what, I got help from some acquaintances and will be able to pay the publishing fee after all, sweet!

Do not even THINK about not paying the fee to get published if this is a real journal. What is their total cost for publication and which journal has accepted your paper? — Philosophim

I don't want to get into specifics, but it's a prominent neuroscience journal and the fee is considerable. I've already published a similar article on the same topic, so this one is somewhat superfluous, though I do tie loose ends together regarding coherence, decoherence and further physics. I'm arranging for the paper to be reviewed by a less expensive journal with the same organization and should get a response in about a month. I'll be able to pay the fee by then and will probably have additional detail to include, so it doesn't work out that badly after all. Frustrating when finances hinder me.

Why haven’t you added your “conscious excitation” as some kind of further wavefunction term and so made an actual prediction about the observables? Where are its QFT creation and annihilator operators?

A “theory” without a consequence ain’t even wrong enough to count as crackpot. — apokrisis

We don't have the technology at this point to discern exactly what a quantum wave looks like or how it moves, but perhaps my line of reasoning could motivate it to be developed. I think my ideas are beyond the scope of current QFT math, they are not an idealized model but rather a hypothesis about the actual substance of a quantum wave, mostly the result of drawing parallels between dynamics of the visible light spectrum and superposition in matter as such. I don't have technical familiarity with how advanced QFT is applied to phenomena such as superposition, I know more about the basic Schrodinger equation model. My claims regarding superposition can in principle be verified by experiment, but again the instrumentation would have to be more than what we currently have. Feel welcome to educate me on any of these topics.

That's what I'd feared since I first read your post. It's just free-floating fantasy, unmotivated, baseless, worthless, pointless. — Daemon

Truth is stranger than fiction!

Where did this idea come from? — Daemon

An Enrique original lol It's a reasonable presupposition that all this low frequency EM radiation generated by the brain is doing something, going somewhere. The coherence field model is my hypothesis, which I think is very likely to be proven but remains fodder for basic research.

But what if in fact the opposite is the general case among those who study the physics of material vibrations?

Given that this is the crucial causal claim underpinning your entire position, the case might need to be actually made for this rather than treating it as something "no-one could really doubt". — apokrisis

It is a cautious hypothesis at this stage, which I addressed with slightly more specificity in a previous paper, why the treatment is so cursory. Anyhoo, look at the OP of my thread A Physical Explanation for Consciousness if you want some more albeit equally inconclusive idea. It doesn't seem difficult to imagine ways of observing this vibration effect in vitro and in vivo, any moreso than the superpositioned wavelength structure of coherence fields.

Well, there is also the other little problem of your constant conflation of classical waves and quantum waves - ie: waves of oscillating matter and "waves" of probability amplitude, or the statistics that would narrow some observer's expectations about what happens next in the world. To be wave-like in a purely abstract mathematical sense is very different from being an actual mechanical resonance or vibration in a lump of matter. — apokrisis

My outlook could be inaccurate, but I think the probability wave function is a working reinterpretation of the real wave function - psi^2 as opposed to psi - and no consensus exists as to what the wave function itself means in physical terms. I view the quantum wave as acceleration density, a fluctuation in a fluid energy medium that varies due to both nonuniform internal motion perhaps best described as a spinor complex and external influences such as photon absorption. What that looks like structurally is still very much uncertain, but basically consists in an extremely complex waveform occupying most of atomic space.

In an academic paper I would expect to see references. Something to back this up: "Grey matter of dendrites, soma and the interior of axons is darkly shaded because it absorptively superpositions with large amounts of EM radiation to form percepts." — Daemon

That statement is hypothesis at this stage (by the way, I omitted references from the OP). But I think it amounts to plausible common sense based on known physics of EM radiation. Some low frequency radiation from accelerating electric current transmits through atoms of brain tissue while necessarily superpositioning in the process, perhaps with a minute corresponding intensity or speed fluctuation that can be pinpointed using measurements. As evidenced by the visible spectrum, matter that is white maximally deflects the proportion of EM radiation that does not transmit through atoms of tissue rather than absorbing it into orbitals as energy, minimizing intensity reduction. This also needs to be proven by experiment, but current theory supports the assertion.

This in particular seems like fanciful nonsense. — Daemon

What in particular about it seems nonsensical?

Very fascinating. This will need a lot more explanation when you do your paper no? — chiknsld

Electricity is essentially a current of quantum coherence binding electron orbitals of atoms into emergent structure, as anatomy and function of the neuron proves. Anyone who researches electricity can prove it empirically within his or her field given suitable methods.

What evidence do you have for this? How would you test the hypothesis? — Daemon

It's so early that not much empirical proof has been obtained, but this is an excerpt on the subject.

This model of perception is teeming with uncertainties at our present stage of knowledge, and the potential for experimentation almost untapped. Perhaps spectroscopic techniques can be adapted to probe the variety of ways EM radiation at a large range of frequencies superpositions into atoms as it flows, and more exotic methods will probably be necessary. Once anticipated principles of radiative/molecular binding are specified, experiments can be designed to investigate how EM radiation interacts with tissue, perhaps by parsing and identifying in greater detail the biochemistry of brain regions that are most likely to harbor coherence field effects, examining superposition properties in isolation and in vitro, then moving on to in vivo methods. This might discover novel classes of functional molecule, paving the way for a new era of medications and supplements to treat or enhance percepts on the cellular scale.

At this point, we do not possess much direct evidence for coherence field theory beyond the fact that it fills a gap in our knowledge of the physical world quite seamlessly, almost with the force of necessity. We do have circumstantial evidence, however. Coherence fields explain why brain matter has a darkish tint while myelin is white. Grey matter of dendrites, soma and the interior of axons is darkly shaded because it absorptively superpositions with large amounts of EM radiation to form percepts, while myelinated white matter strongly reflects the light that does not penetrate atoms so radiative fields minimally attenuate across space. From the outside neurons looks greyish, but from the inside contents of these cells likely synchronize via entanglement and superposition with EM radiation to form the substance of perception.

Does the model of superposition between EM radiation and molecular structure seem intuitively plausible?

Abstract

The basic physics of burgeoning quantum neuroscience is described. Anatomy of the neuron suggests that nonsynaptic mechanisms of signal transmittance occur via electric current acceleration and companion electromagnetic field fluctuation. I have named this new mechanism of solution chemistry the ebb effect. Phase-locking between neural structure and electric fields that are emergent from cellular EM field fluctuations, in addition to feedback loops within neural networks, are the probable driver of macroscopic oscillation and flow shapes in the brain. CEMI (conscious electromagnetic information) theory is a promising framework for explaining intentionality and the spectrum of arousal as EM field effects. Relatively low frequency electromagnetic radiation is emitted by the accelerating electric currents of neurons. It is hypothesized that this EM radiation superpositions with molecular structure as it spreads to comprise percepts, the hybrid wavelengths of which form subjective images while wavelength vibrations result in subjective feel. These superposition arrays are termed a coherence field, and in combination with the synchronizing influence of quantum entanglement and electromagnetic fluctuations may constitute much of awareness’ substance. If conclusively verified, coherence field theory should have significance ranging from the treatment of perceptual disorders such as anosognosia to advancing foundational constructs like atomic theory.

Turns out I may not be able to get this published after all due to expense though it was accepted by the journal. The tragic saga of not having enough money.

Can you elaborate?

I'm getting this paper published! You guys should critique and tell me if you spot any obvious errors.

I haven't read this entire thread, but as far as I saw panprotopsychism wasn't mentioned. I think Bertrand Russell coined the term, meaning that percepts arise from matter at a very basic level of emergence. The matter is not intrinsically conscious, but it is characteristic of matter to evince image (wavelength) and feel (vibration) fragments which complex minds are then built from.

So from an evolutionary perspective:

Basic properties of perception, most generally feeling and appearance, are inherent in matter. When the structure of organic matter evolves towards more complex physiology, percepts also evolve into more complicate forms as an essential facet of this matter’s structure. A more complex brain will ineluctably evolve more complex perceptual forms akin to human imagination, emotion and thought. These are probably not the only types of intellectual percept structures possible, but in this schema matter mutates as a more or less integrated perceptual field, not merely as nonconscious machinery.

So consciousness is neither an epiphenomenon nor a separate realm of substance, both of which are more dubious notions than panprotopsychism I think.

Coherence Fields as a Product of Interactions Between EM Fields, EM Radiation and Atoms

A topic that comes up while considering EM fields is why some can be so much greater in magnetization than the brain. Magnetic effects are larger the more aligned the quantum spins of an object’s atoms. Synchronization causes constructive interference concentrating the majority of this force in emergent magnetic field lines. The coordinated spins of an iron bar magnet’s atoms of course generate this sort of pattern, and molten iron surrounding the Earth’s core produces massive magnetic field lines due to a homogeneous flow induced by the planet’s rotation in addition to peculiarities of heating and cooling. Atoms of the brain are also magnetic, attracting and repelling in a comparable manner, but the haphazard orientation of quantum spins results in destructive interference so that these effects are negligible even at the cellular scale. The coherence currents of neurons punctuated by ion diffusion across membranes, which can manifest in oscillating and traveling waves as large as a dozen centimeters in length, are almost exclusively electric.

How can currents that propagate on an ultramicroscopic scale in billions of neurons disjuncted by intricate and diverse synaptic bottlenecks synchronize tightly enough to form integrated waves of macroscopic girth as recorded by EEG? Feedback loops constructed of axon to dendrite connections running both ways between bundles of nervous tissue or brain regions can explicate this to an extent, but the organ seems more cohesive than we would expect of somewhat asymmetrical signal coupling. Evidence obtained from in vitro experimentation suggests that phase-locking exists among neural networks, allowing large quantities of neurons to fire with perfect in phase synchronicity. Researchers hypothesize that this mechanism depends on interaction of the electric field with ion channels, modulating diffusion in an extremely organized way. A macroscopic electric field emergent from feedback loops and widespread phase-locking could then saturate tissue as it oscillates and flows, acting upon magnetic charge of the brain’s atoms to evoke holistic effects.

Molecular biologist Johnjoe McFadden’s CEMI (conscious electromagnetic information) theory proposes that awareness’ integration is an outcome of pervasive phase-locking of neurons with the brain’s EM field. Neurons that are adapted for sensitivity to EM fields via phase-locking participate in conscious processes, while EM field insensitive neurons are responsible for unconscious processes. This explains some features of the human mind, notably that fully attentive awareness consists in serial processing as opposed to massively parallel processing of the unconscious, depicted as a segregation of CEMI fields from bordering EM fields. Even more significant is that it demystifies the experience of free will, for in CEMI theory volition is simply identical to EM field effects. A theory akin to CEMI can also perhaps account for the subconscious, as a spectrum of low to high arousal arising from degree of breadth and saturation of phase-locking in the brain.

Coupling of neural networks in feedback loops alongside mechanisms of phase-locking with the brain’s electric field hold much promise for explaining holism of consciousness, as the outcome of macroscopic forces synchronizing and binding magnetized atoms within large swaths of tissue. But puzzles remain, for it is still not apparent how this emergent unity of electrical signals mediated by chemical concentrations looks or feels like anything. Why does experience include subjective percepts such as colors, shapes, textures, rather than only objective correlates of these phenomena? Why is experience a consciousness and not merely machinery?

Elucidation may come from modeling the superposition of light with atomic structure. Similar to the rest of Earth’s matter, the brain is filled with waves of EM radiation, ripples caused by the acceleration of electrons amongst atoms, traveling at around 300 million meters per second through permissive environments. In general, the frequency of this radiation is lower when the electrical coherence current within a given medium is larger. Acceleration of electrons in the valence shell of individual atoms tends to make perturbations that result in visible light, from 400-700 nm in wavelength, while radio waves caused by acceleration within relatively large electric currents have wavelengths of anywhere from 1 mm to 100 km. The brain is of course a massive repository of electric current, and since neurons are microscopic, the EM radiation emitted is higher in frequency than for instance a radio tower, but still low enough that it can flow through matter somewhat uninhibited, like radio waves and more unlike visible light.

The ebb effect in combination with neuron anatomy indicates that acceleration of electric current happens between a node of Ranvier and its juxtaparanodes, between dendrite nodes and the soma, and most broadly within the soma. So each neuron emits EM radiation low enough in frequency to travel through both liquids and solids. Intensity of course diminishes quickly with distance, but individual radiative fields would probably span many micrometers irrespective of cell membranes and additional molecular structures. If low frequency light superpositions in some way with atoms as it flows through them, and since the speed of this radiation is effectively instantaneous within the brain, it might be the case that at least millions of almost steady state photonic fields bind with biochemical pathways and molecular complexes as individual units, perhaps including entanglement effects knitting these superposition arrays together even more tightly. The most compelling hypothesis to this point is that the ultrahybrid wavelengths of superposition structures do not merely correlate with percepts but actually are percepts. A mechanism of superposition would be analogous to how wavelengths of light additively blend as the visible spectrum, but in this model the spectrum of subjective percepts is much more diverse, as observation of the mind obviously supports. EM field effects could then synchronize these percepts on a macroscopic scale. I term this entire apparatus of electromagnetic energy flow, feedback loop or EM field synchronization, and wave/wavicle binding a “coherence field”, and it may be possible to subsume the whole line of investigation under the heading of coherence field theory.

This model of perception is teeming with uncertainties at our present stage of knowledge, and the potential for experimentation almost untapped. Once anticipated principles of radiative/molecular binding are specified, experiments can be designed to investigate how EM radiation interacts with tissue, perhaps by parsing and identifying in greater detail the biochemistry of brain regions that are most likely to harbor coherence field effects, examining superposition properties in isolation and in vitro, then moving on to in vivo methods. This might discover novel classes of functional molecule, paving the way for a new era of medications and supplements to treat or enhance percepts on the cellular scale.

At this point, we do not possess much direct evidence for coherence field theory beyond the fact that it fills a gap in our knowledge of the physical world quite seamlessly, almost with the force of necessity. Early research into light/matter interactions within biological systems has focused on microtubules. These cytoskeletal filaments contain regularized patterns of aromatic amino acids such as tryptophan. The tryptophan molecules of a single microtubule can be stimulated by UV radiation to transmit energy between them across distances of micrometers. Anesthetics seem to inhibit this activity, hinting at a correlation with consciousness. The mechanism resembles that found in photosynthetic reaction centers and may be quite common to nature. In neurons, microtubules influence receptors, ion channels and plasticity generally, so light-stimulated behavior could have a significant role for regulating cellular structure. If molecules are proven responsive to larger wavelengths of light, the data implies that activation would occur at greater distance scales, and the proposed mechanism of percept generation is well within possibility. Much more data has been discovered for the effect of EM fields, which among numerous functions mediate energy transduction in transmission channels of the cytoskeleton, processes governing the entire structure of a cell along with the movement of components such as mitochondria, vesicles, etc.

We have plenty of circumstantial evidence. The largest and most rapid region of accelerating electron coherence in a neuron is located within the soma as a flow from dendrites to axon hillock, which also happens to be where complex molecular arrays that superposition with resulting EM radiation would most likely reside. The superposition of low frequency EM radiation with molecular structure would probably not be obstructed by factors of heat and moisture that have seemed prohibitive to widespread coherence amongst molecules alone. Within a plenitude of environments, photon entanglement is especially robust while operative at large spatial ranges, which supplies a viable binding mechanism for percept units constructed of molecular parts that are distributed somewhat widely in cellular solution. And coherence fields of this kind explain why brain matter has a darkish tint while myelin is white. Grey matter of dendrites, soma and the interior of axons is darkly shaded because it absorptively superpositions with large amounts of EM radiation to form percepts, while myelinated white matter strongly reflects the light that does not penetrate atoms so radiative fields minimally attenuate across space. From the outside neurons look greyish, but from the inside contents of these cells likely synchronize via entanglement and superposition with EM radiation to form the substance of perception.

If a superposition mechanism amongst coherence fields is proven to exist, and methods are found to observe this in detail, it seems intuitive that researchers will find it easy to model the way percepts look, perhaps including mental images and hallucinatory artifacts of brain processes, perceptual phenomena which do not necessarily arise from direct stimulation by the environment. But what about how percepts feel? Why does perception have nondimensional qualities in addition to spatial extension and temporal duration?

Percepts of feeling might simply be a consequence of the way superpositioned wavelengths oscillate collectively as resonances, vibrations. All matter from the atomic to the macroscopic scale vibrates, and it is difficult to think of a vibration that does not feel like something. Perhaps it is intrinsic of waves and wavicles to consist in fragments of feeling as they resonate. However, matter on the nanoscale does not seem to feel with much resolution. The body has apparently adapted structures which greatly increase the resolution of these resonances, resulting in a vast spectrum of emergent feelings. The seemingly intangible quality of emotion and thought insofar as it is embodied by the brain may be no more than various patterns in how complex matter feels.

One might have derivative curiosity regarding how a coherence field in the brain can produce percepts which appear to be outside of the body. For example, if percepts of vision are located in the occipital lobe or elsewhere in the brain, why is this not introspected as such? Thinking about our optical faculties, we can reflect upon how the sharply focused visual field is only as large as the size of your thumb held at arm’s length in front of the face, with the majority of human vision pieced together from eye saccading and involuntary memory. Sensory modalities consist in segregated stimuli obtained from diverse sources which are then assembled by the brain to form a perceptual world. This integrating seems almost effortless in many cases, but the process is profoundly an indirect representation rather than direct correspondence, though less so than traditional neuroscience has suggested if coherence field theory proves accurate. Just as electrochemical signaling in a neural network contributes to cognitive function, the coherence fields within those neural frameworks might actually be important aspects of consciousness’ substance itself.

At first glance it seems as if mechanisms of superposition and entanglement amongst photonic fields and atomic nodes are passive compared to EM field synchronization effects, so why did evolutionary pressures cause the percepts that comprise consciousness to develop such intricate, almost overabundant forms? The answer would simply be that basic properties of perception, most generally feeling and appearance, are inherent in matter. When the structure of organic matter evolves towards more complex physiology, percepts also evolve into more complicate forms as an essential facet of this matter’s structure. A more complex brain will ineluctably evolve more complex perceptual forms akin to the resonances of human imagination, emotion and thought. These are probably not the only types of intellectualized resonance structures possible, but in this schema matter mutates as a coherence field, not merely as nonconscious machinery from which perception emerges epiphenomenally. This is not of course the entire story, for nonlocal forces seem to be operative upon electromagnetic matter as a further mystery, but the coherence field model of perception might nonetheless start to expand our comprehension of nature tremendously.

Implications of Coherence Field Theory for Neuroscience and Beyond

After considering the import of quantum physics for neuroscience, especially the idea of quantum coherence, preliminaries of a complete explanation for the brain’s role in constituting consciousness’ substance seem accessible. In the cellular solution of neurons, wavefronts of electromagnetic energy caused by currents of electron coherence rapidly move between centers of charge, accelerated by periodic increases in charge disparity between neural regions. Electromagnetic field fluctuations tied to this energy flow trigger voltage-gated ion channels to cyclically open and close. Phase-locking between EM fields and neural chemistry along with feedback loops synchronize electromagnetic energy flows on a macroscopic scale, as oscillating and traveling waves of the kind recorded by EEG. A plausible hypothesis is that EM field dynamics are responsible for holism of fully attentive consciousness and the experience of willed agency. Accelerating electrical current in neurons induces EM radiation low enough in frequency to transmit through neural tissue. These waves may superposition with the brain’s atomic wavicle structure as they travel to produce hybrid, vibrating wavelengths entangled into at least millions of individual percepts. Combinatorial properties of wavelength might create the appearance of percepts, and vibrations the feel. Compound percept arrays would then likely be the substance of sensations, emotions and thoughts. If entangled superpositions emergent from basic quantum mechanisms synchronize via phase-locking and feedback loops as a functional coherence field in brains, this at least partly explains why the evolution of mind has constructed such a panoply of perceptual forms, for the building blocks of perception’s substance are an intrinsic facet of electromagnetic matter.

If coherence field theory is proven accurate, this has significance for many domains of knowledge. As an example we can consider medical treatment. Understanding mechanisms by which percepts emerge from biochemistry might enable us to better distinguish perceptual from affective states so that medications can directly target percept disorders as they manifest in the brain, without inducing sedative, stimulant, or systemic side effects. It could become possible to treat conditions such as many types of anosognosia in which the characteristics and awareness of one’s own perceptual field are impaired. Psychedelic substances change the shape or direction of flow in the brain’s electric field at a macroscopic level, instigating acute and temporarily incapacitating hallucinations, but medicine might gain the ability to micromanage a similar modifying of the perceptual field with cures or enhancements that do not include a period of nonfunctionality for the subject.

Coherence field theory may destine a reconstituted model of the atom. It seems to be the case that electrons and electromagnetic radiation are dual aspects of a unitary electromagnetic field, with light waves an undulation in this field caused by electron motion, and electrons in orbital arrangements not essentially particulate at all but rather a wavelike perturbation of the electromagnetic field by motion of nuclear fields that are coupled to it. In consort with additional known phenomena alongside mathematical formulations, it might prove possible to encompass the entire coherence concept utilizing a single wave-medium model, subsequently deriving new experiments and technologies that unite quantum matter’s statistical structure with fundamental attributes of its relatively stable or unstable, perpetually transformative motions, in the brain and elsewhere. Science could be on course to fashion a synthetic model of material and psychical substance, launching society into the next era of discoveries and towards a more actualized humanity.

As previously, you have provided a speculative, unsupported, and far-fetched idea with no evidence to back it up. It is not science, it's pseudo-science. — T Clark

I actually value this line of criticism (as long as I don't encounter a ton of harping) because it has made me careful to identify what is more hypothesis than fact when it comes to quantum neuroscience. The situation currently reduces to a few categories of investigation: factual evidence which admittedly can be scant at this stage, hypothesis, future possible observational methods, future possible experiments, and philosophy (the diverse Platonic forms of quantum physics' "interpretations"). I'd love to mess around with experimental setups and instrumentation, but need deeper familiarity with the math. Though I don't agree that what I'm into is pseudoscience (well-respected scientists discuss these ideas in similar terms), it's important to acknowledge the degree of speculativeness somewhere.

what does it mean “how brain chemistry is a percept, not merely correlated with it”? — Angelo Cannata

This is the difference between being able to say as we currently do that the visual cortex participates in vision vs. saying that some biochemical pathway or complex is a subjective color for instance. In the context of matter, moving beyond correlation to identity.

...nobody has an exact, detailed, coherent, clear, definition or idea of what consciousness is. — Angelo Cannata

I think of consciousness as the substance of awareness itself (mind) as opposed to the substance that produces awareness (matter). But they are really identical, we just don't know how in a mechanistic sense at this point, exactly as we didn't have a comprehension of neural network structure before neuroscience. That's the sort of idea I'm trying to work out.

You have just added your details that can be interesting to biologists. What is the philosophical value of the details you added? — Angelo Cannata

The significance is that, when I get around to it, my description will explain in a general way how brain chemistry is a percept, not merely correlated with it. These ideas have implications for foundations of science: convergence of atomic theory, quantum biology, neuroscience, psychology, philosophy of mind. Foundations are philosophical!

Chewing bears a close resemblance to the martial tactic of divide and conquer. — Agent Smith

As lll alluded to in a different thread, the consumption of ideas can be analogized to digestion: we parse them into bite-sized pieces so as to better grasp the whole. Likewise, efficient learning divvies up tasks into more digestible portions so we do not get overwhelmed, losing sight of the forest for the trees. Makes you wonder, what is the evolutionary relationship between feeding and part/whole conception? At a fundamental level, could mental contents have been shaped by the way we obtain and ingest a meal? Perhaps mastication is the foundation of mechanism.

Without a finite lightspeed there would be no cause and effect and mass could not exist. — EugeneW

I'm not well-schooled in matters of relativity, but I gather that as objects approach light speed the fixed energy or mass increases, and this has actually been measured in many settings such as experiments involving electrons. I think the phenomenon might actually occur in accelerators as particles reach huge speeds, unleashing massive amounts of energy and "relativistically" fusing into uncommonly large elementary particles upon collision, such as the Higgs boson.

If particles in the brain or elsewhere are made to spin or move in some manner near light speed, perhaps at the subatomic scale, they can gain mass along with radiating unexpectedly large amounts of relativistic energy in the form of light etc. Merely a conjecture, but this could in principle be measured and might be a signature of light superpositions associated with consciousness.

If you think about it, is it even possible for subatomic particles to have constant velocity? At the quantum scale as charges move around, all matter and energy might predominantly be either accelerating or decelerating.

Why do you think entanglement has a place in collective neuron currents? Entanglement has no causal power. — EugeneW

I have this idea that somewhat low frequency EM radiation generated from electric currents in neurons could be emitted through the skull, supervening on external light and matter to create a a sort of steady state, extremely heterogeneous photonic field with atomic/biomolecular nodes, all of which superpositions in some kind of complex way. If you've ever seen an infrared video of the head, a HUGE amount of thermal energy is produced, so the brain could be like a light emission factory.

Waves of EM radiation are fast enough that this might account for some synchronicity of consciousness within the brain/environment if neural or cellular mechanisms capable of registering certain spectra of light are discovered. But of course a speed limit still exists if this is the case, and then the issue becomes is it even conceivable that nonlocality amongst spatially distant biological structures could propagate faster than light as quantum entanglement experiments might suggest?

As far as I know, entanglement experiments have so far identified probabilistic correlations rather than direct causal linkage between particles as per the standard quantum mechanical model, so nonlocal hidden variables we don't much observe or understand scientifically must be involved as you mentioned. Does any evidence hint that nonlocal hidden variables can participate in some sort of collective or spiritual consciousness? If the light hypothesis is accurate, perhaps our entire concept of space will need to be revised so that light can supersede Newtonian physics by traveling through some kind of time-transcending hyperspace, and this might have an association with relativity.

Those are wild ideas, but not unreasonable to entertain I think considering how much of everybody's perception and experience of the world cannot be accounted for by classical pictures.

No one will say it is purple with pink polka dots. No one will say the bulldog in front of us is a Dachsund, or the Mack truck is Lamborghini or the cat is a horse and so on. — Janus

Not so sure about that lol Why we need to actively preserve subjectivity as an ethical privilege of being human, because we must have license to think, imagine, discourse, be in error whether or not the mind is deterministic, social conditions change, etc. The hard problem is the neuroscience facet of this dilemma: how do we maintain human dignity as we must mold our species' nature, precedents, minds to theory on a vast scale.

I'm not sure what you have in mind here: are you suggesting that experience may somehow cease to be qualitative in the future, or that science may somehow be able to quantify the qualitative? — Janus

Yes, subjectivity will change as objective reality evolves with scientific advance, but a domain of practical immediacy remains, and subjectivity as an aspect of what makes us human should be preserved for all individuals on principle, at least that's my opinion. The hard problem placed in pragmatic terminology is simply how to incorporate these new objectivities into culture, really not so enigmatic in its essentials.

I find it amazing that people cannot see that the so-called "Hard Problem" only arises when a third person account (science) is expected to be able somehow to capture the qualitative reality that is first person experience. It's simply a category error; a conflation of different arenas of sense. — Janus

Exactly, why is that a problem? It's only interesting if you try to predict how subjectivity and objectivity will be reshuffled with science of the future, which we don't really have to model in any precision way.

I don't think photons are superpositioned with electrons in orbitals. How do you envision this? — EugeneW

Look at my previous post on the second page for some more detail. The OP to my thread A Physical Explanation for Consciousness has way more detail still.

I'm under the impression that the role these particle interactions play are supplementary to the global structure of the brain. Have you discovered data that would suggest otherwise? — Garrett Travers

The data will come from experiments that can measure both the way light interacts with atoms and the structures in a brain that mediate this interaction to produce complex superpositions. It's new science, methods such as perhaps spectroscopy etc. have not yet been adapted for it.

The neuroscientific community doesn't even dispute that the brain is the source of consciousness. — Garrett Travers

I find it interesting that if photons (EM radiation) superposition with electrons (atomic orbitals) to form percepts, this does not necessarily have to happen only in a brain. Paves a way from physiology to the subjective experience of consciousness with which it has seemed so incompatible.