Page 1 of 2

Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:26 pm
by ant
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

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 2:32 pm
by LanDroid
I guess we'll see if the paradigm shifts...

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:06 pm
by Interbane
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.

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:41 pm
by ant
god forbid we discover an incorporeal element of consciouness
lets be satisfied with partial explanatory power here
long live the paradigm!!

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:50 pm
by Interbane
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.
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.

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2014 4:47 pm
by johnson1010
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.

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:09 pm
by ant
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.

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:58 pm
by Interbane
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?

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:12 pm
by ant
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

Re: Evidence for once controversial theory of Consciousness

Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 5:32 pm
by Interbane
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.
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?