Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:31 pm





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average. 
Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

 Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 085105.htm

I recall a debate in which a scientist and his following laughed at Stuart H explain his theory.

Amazing



Last edited by ant on Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:26 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Hoarder

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2106
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Thanks: 81
Thanked: 788 times in 610 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
I guess we'll see if the paradigm shifts...



Sat Jan 18, 2014 2:32 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7075
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1080
Thanked: 2077 times in 1666 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
I don't see why further complexity is needed to understand consciousness. Aren't neurons enough to produce such an emergent phenomenon? I would think it's as simple as that, with the complexity being in the arrangement.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:06 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
god forbid we discover an incorporeal element of consciouness
lets be satisfied with partial explanatory power here
long live the paradigm!!



Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:41 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7075
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1080
Thanked: 2077 times in 1666 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
Quote:
lets be satisfied with partial explanatory power here


I see the same issue with microtubules. Consciousness is still an emergent phenomenon. What we can't explain, due to the complexity, is how the individual neurons collectively result in consciousness. How does the rival theory provide any insight? I saw nothing that explained how quantum vibrations within microtubules results in consciousness. In both cases it's an emergent phenomenon.

Quote:
god forbid we discover an incorporeal element of consciouness


Incorporeal? Why did you use that word? Physics is at play in both cases, as far as I can tell. I have no resistance to the idea of quantum vibrations, other than it doesn't seem necessary. Ockham's razor. But I know so little about it that it's just layman opinion.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
johnson1010
Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:50 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Tenured Professor


Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 3564
Location: Michigan
Thanks: 1321
Thanked: 1150 times in 843 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
to be sure, there's nothing incorporeal about quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics IS what the world is made of. Everything from the solidity of matter, to fire, to the colors we see in everyday objects is a quantum effect.

People tend to only associate quantum mechanics with the more bizare things that we aren't accustomed to dealing with, like antimatter creation/annihilation, or electron spin, or quantum tunneling, but the fact that your pants are blue is also a quantum effect.


_________________
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Have you tried that? Looking for answers?
Or have you been content to be terrified of a thing you know nothing about?

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?

Confidence being an expectation built on past experience, evidence and extrapolation to the future. Faith being an expectation held in defiance of past experience and evidence.


Sat Jan 18, 2014 4:47 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
Quote:
incorporeal? Why did you use that word? Physics is at play in both cases, as far as I can tell. I have no resistance to the idea of quantum vibrations, other than it doesn't seem necessary. Ockham's razor. But I know so little about it that it's just layman opinion.


this

http://phys.org/news/2013-07-flat-worms ... ation.html

and this..,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holonomic_brain_theory

may have a relationship.

in early stages of course but if the brain acts as both a receiver and stores non locally, it will give cause to rethink our current paradigm.



Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:09 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7075
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1080
Thanked: 2077 times in 1666 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
Both of those links imply mechanisms that are corporeal, natural, and subject to the laws of physics.


You'll have to explain in layman's terms what it means for storage to be non-local. Is that the same thing as distributed storage? How is that different from the current understanding of how we store information?


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:58 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
Interbane wrote:
Both of those links imply mechanisms that are corporeal, natural, and subject to the laws of physics.


You'll have to explain in layman's terms what it means for storage to be non-local. Is that the same thing as distributed storage? How is that different from the current understanding of how we store information?



Innocent question here:

If memory/consciousness is stored in both a local and non-local states (as hypothesized) how are you attributing the non locality of consciousness to the brain?
Remember, it may be both (ie the double slit experiment).

Are the laws of quantum physics subject to the laws of physics that govern large material bodies (not just human bodies)?

I'd think if quantum laws (which we have, to my knowledge, not defined with certainty) are involved in consciousness, it's rather premature to speak with certainty that they are strictly governed by physical laws as we understand them in relation to matter.

Also, where was memory stored in the flatworm? In it's tail?
Has memory storage in the brain been located? That's not to say it won't be. Nevertheless, the wiki article is an interesting conjecture.

Clarify your thinking for me on this, please. I know we are both armatures here.

BTW,
Have you read the wiki article yet?
Interesting stuff.

Thanks



Last edited by ant on Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:12 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7075
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1080
Thanked: 2077 times in 1666 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
Quote:
If memory/consciousness is stored in both a local and non-local states (as hypothesized) how are you attributing the non locality of consciousness to the brain?
Remember, it may be both (ie the double slit experiment).


I don't see how information can be stored in what is considered a "local" manner. Across all different mediums that information is stored on or within, the storage is more or less distributed, depending on how much information there is. It's not as if "bits" are stored within neurons. It is the configuration and strength of dendritic connections that determines the information, which is necessarily distributed.

I think attempts to find consciousness anywhere else than in the aggregate activity of neurons is missing the forest for the trees. In only a very rough comparison, we know that information can be stored by the aggregate of simply functioning independent parts - transistors. Hypothesizing additional mechanisms does nothing in helping us unravel the real issue, which is how the sum of neurons leads to the emergent phenomenon of consciousness.

Quote:
Also, where was memory stored in the flatworm? In it's tail?
Has memory storage in the brain been located?


The tendency to avoid or not avoid light could be explained by phenotypic plasticity, no neurons required.

Short term memory in the brain is stored in the pre-frontal lobe. Long term memory is somewhere else, but I couldn't tell you without googling it. Why?


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:32 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7075
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1080
Thanked: 2077 times in 1666 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
I don't think we can get to the heart of where we might disagree unless I put my understanding out there. I'm aware my understanding might be wrong, but here it is.

A disclaimer first. I know the comparison between computers and brains fails on many levels, but it's also a useful comparison, to draw associations. I think talking about electronic principles is the easiest place to start.

When I was in the Air Force learning about electronics, I remember having a breakthrough moment while studying how a group of precisely arranged transistors worked together to 'count' upward. I followed the individual logic from one component to the next, and eventually got to the point where I could hold a bunch of them in my head and envision the final output. Which was counting to the number 4. Super simple, yet amazing how simple components could manipulate information.

We went on to study more advanced components, such as receivers and transmitters. I couldn't hold all the components in my head, by a long shot. And the components were simple, and the function was simple. These components manipulated information, and that's the key association to what a brain does, manipulate information.

When you consider an advanced AI program, it is impossible to hold even a fraction of cause and effect in your head from the component level. That's the case even for those brilliant engineers who design such programs. They can approach it in a linear fashion, bit by bit, but the entire thing is like an emergent phenomenon. If alien computers were to drop from the sky back in the year 1940, they would appear as magical as the human brain does today. There is no way to go from a component understanding to a full understanding of the end function.

I don't see consciousness as something magical. It might be something we don't yet understand, but that doesn't mean it isn't understandable. We can't possibly understand it in whole, however. Only piece by piece, and that isn't enough for the certainty that we require at a gut level to say we understand something.

That's how I see the human brain. We have an idea of the mechanisms, but we will never hold the entire function in our heads. It's like using a computer program to run a simulation of another computer. It needs to be 64 times more powerful than the computer it's attempting to simulate(from the transistor level).

Consciousness is amazing and not fully understood, but that doesn't mean it isn't an emergent phenomenon resulting from the arrangement and firing of neurons. It's the explanation that most neurobiologists ascribe to, and for good reason. Proposing even more complex mechanisms seems to go against parsimony. Why make it more complex than necessary? Let's continue making progress in mapping the logic of neural connections and attempting to simulate larger and larger neural nets.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Thu Jan 30, 2014 11:12 pm
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Official Newbie!


Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2
Thanks: 12
Thanked: 2 times in 1 post
Gender: None specified
Country: United Kingdom (uk)

Post Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness
Whilst slightly off topic, this might be relevant to the discussion of memories and locality/non-locality.

einstein.yu.edu/news/releases/968/watch ... -memories/

Quote:
January 23, 2014­­ – (BRONX, NY) – In two studies in the January 24 issue of Science, researchers at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University used advanced imaging techniques to provide a window into how the brain makes memories. These insights into the molecular basis of memory were made possible by a technological tour de force never before achieved in animals: a mouse model developed at Einstein in which molecules crucial to making memories were given fluorescent "tags" so they could be observed traveling in real time in living brain cells.



Fri Jan 31, 2014 7:10 am
Profile Email
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average. 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
How To Promote Your Book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2019. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank