Re: Is Mind located in Wave Function?

From: Edward W. (atropine_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 12/28/04 

Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:56:25 GMT

Very Interesting.................... 

-- 
Edward W.
El Paso, TX
"Life is easy with eyes closed"
"Consc" <cons_cie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1104241298.637483.52010@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Early this year. I became very interested in the study of the
> brain and how it produces consciousness. I wanted to understand
> the neural correlates of consciousness (NCC as commonly known).
> Francis Crick in the 1990s made the study of consciousness a
> scientific problem. It's not a territory belonging to new age
> mumbo jumbo but one deserving a serious scientific study. This
> is especially true in quantum physics when consciousness may be
> involved in the very process or field so mastering neuroscience
> is a pre-requisite to quantum physics..
>
> The following gives just a very brief account of what is the
> main problem or the answer they are seeking in consciousness
> research. I'd continue after the paragraph by explaining what
> the wave function has to do with it.
>
> Susan Blackmore summarised it thus: "According to Chalmers, the
> easy problems are those that are susceptible to the standard
> methods of cognitive science, and might be solved, for example,
> by understanding the computational or neural mechanisms
> involved. They include the discrimination of stimuli, focusing
> of attention, accessing and reporting mental states, deliberate
> control of behavior, or differences between waking and sleep.
> All of these phenomena are in some way associated with the
> notion of consciousness, but they are not deeply myster ious. In
> principle (even though it may not really be "easy") we know how
> to set about answering them scientifically. The really hard
> problem, by contrast, is experience: what it is like to be an
> organism, or to be in a given mental state. "If any problem
> qualifies as the problem of consciousness," says Chalmers, "it
> is this one ... even when we have explained the performance of
> all the cognitive and behavioral functions in the vicinity of
> experience - perceptual discrimination, categorization, internal
> acce ss, verbal report-there may still remain a further
> unanswered question: Why is the performance of these functions
> accompanied by experience? ... Why doesn't all this
> information-processing go on "in the dark," free of any inner
> feel?(Chalmers, 1995a: 201-3) Stated at its most succinct "The
> hard problem ... is the question of how physical processes in
> the brain give rise to subjective experience" (Chalmers, 1995b:
> 63). This is the latest incarnation of the mysterious gap." "
> Back to James. We know that our brain is composed of modules
> imparting selective functions that give us overall experience.
> For example, the Amygdala is connected with the emotion such as
> fear and if you meet a woman without any amygdala, you can
> easily seduce her because she has lost all sense of fear or self
> preservation and you can just take her home the first time you
> tried by just telling her straight you want to take her home.
>
> The Hard Problem of neuroscience is what gives us this
> subjective experience or what gives us awareness of being aware
> as EL once put it. You may say that the brain itself is capable
> of giving us awareness of being aware. But it's not so simple.
> In our visual experience for example. There is no corresponding
> neural representation system that match our conscious experience
> content. This is what made researchers like O'Regan, Noe thought
> up about other mechanisms such as sensorimotor contingencies.
> But these still doesn't explain what gives us this subjective
> experience of awareness of being aware or Qualia. Debates in
> consciousness research are more intense than say in physics. A
> book that summarised them is all is Susan Blackmore's
> Consciousness: An Introduction in which all the researchers
> viewpoints are shared.
>
> Now why would I mention all this in this physics group. Well. It
> is because it may be related to quantum physics. The "Hard
> Problem" of consciousness research may be related to the "Hard
> Problem" of quantum physics (giving rise to Copenhagen/Bohm
> debates). The following is what I think tie them together.
>
> It may be related to Wave Functions. I think our mind is really
> located in the wave functions of our brain. You may say one can
> make wave functions of any object. The difference here is that
> in this wave function as mind, it has 2 way communication
> pathway. That is, the wave function of the brain can act on
> itself such as that the quantum probability clouds of the atoms
> that make up the neurons, etc. can be influenced resulting in
> the wave function able to influence the neurons. I believe this
> may be true because I have known "empaths" who can feel what
> others are feeling at this exact moment. For example, you want
> to know if someone is in love with you. He can enter that person
> brain via the non-local wave function and feel what that person
> is feeling. Of course you won't believe this.  But for me the
> mind existing as wave function or something like that is what I
> think makes it possible to influence the wave function of other
> humans or things such as measuring their body wave functions (or
> aura) or causing water crystals to form into select shape. In
> other words, this is the mechanism whereby we can affect the
> wave functions of atoms itself or the electron probability
> clouds of atoms in organic or inorganic matter.
>
> Of course, the above is just a hypothesis. It came across
> my mind a moment ago. If you have your own, pls share it.
> My favorite book about neuroscience is Damasio where
> he studies them in gross neurological details. But the
> mystery still remains what turns neural patterns into images as
> he put it. I think what turns neural patterns into images has to
> do with the bi-directional Wave functions information flow to
> the brain.
>
> Regards,
>
> James T. Lee
> Manila, Phils
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What does this have to do with electronics?
    ... >> 'consciousness', it seems unwise to draw conclusions of such ... >> responsibility for our ... > consciousness is required, for example, to collapse a wave function? ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Ghosts in Hilbert Space
    ... I emit a bohmian high frequency wave function ... So we have a large neural network, and that network, itself, is ... physicality, to the whole thing after all. ... Within that you have the reptilian part of the brain, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Subconsciousness and Quantum theory. Is it possible?
    ... Subconsciousness is not something developed, ... Developing brain is nothing to do with subconsciousness. ... Question does your consciousness give you intuition... ... and Bell's theorem in quantum physics for deeper insights. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Subconsciousness and Quantum theory. Is it possible?
    ... Subconsciousness is not something developed, ... Developing brain is nothing to do with subconsciousness. ... Question does your consciousness give you intuition... ... and Bell's theorem in quantum physics for deeper insights. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Ramification if Wave Function is Bohmian vs Copenhagen
    ... If wave function is bohmian, ... can be produced by the brain and become external to the ... a physical reality underlying the wave function and that this ...
    (sci.physics)