Quantum-Classical and Mind-Brain Connections; also quantum Zeno effect questions

MattusMaximus said:
Wow... where to start...
...
From what I've seen here, it sounds like a trip to Woo-ville to me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
LOL, I just noticed that the web site that gave me that impression of Stapp's ideas looks much "wooier" than that article. So don't take what I wrote above too seriously. Maybe I misrepresented Stapp's ideas there.
 
Last edited:
Yes, either immaterial consciousness collapses the quantum wave function, through Newton's third law of motion which states that; "there is an reaction to every action", in example; the wavefunction impinges upon the conscious mind, and the mind react back by collapse the wave function. Since all other things made up of matter obey the law of quantum mechanics, there is no other possibility than that! Or that proposition is false, there is no collapse, the wave function decohere when disturbed by something outside the system, and thus the many world's interpretation is truth, that is how I have undestood David Dutsch's book; The Fabric of Reality!
 
Last edited:
Quest for the Quantum Computer By Julian Brown Foreword by David Deutsch
MIT, IBM, Oxford University, and the University of California at Berkeley reported in 1998 that they had succeeded in building the first working computers based on quantum mechanics. In the early 1980s, Deutsch's proposed experiment (described more fully in Chapter 3) sounded like the stuff of science fiction. To test the existence of multiple universes, he envisaged the construction of a thinking, conscious artificial intelligence whose memory worked "at the quantum level." Such a machine, he claimed, could be asked to conduct a crucial experiment inside its own brain and report back to us whether Deutsch was indeed right to believe in the existence of parallel universes. The idea of assembling a conscious machine took some swallowing, but what exactly did Deutsch have in mind when he talked of "quantum memory"? Well, nearly 20 years later we have the answer because quantum computer memory is on the verge of becoming an experimental reality.
http://www.simonsays.com/content/book.cfm?tab=1&pid=411224&agid=2
Click to expand...


Soderqvist1: if that machine afterward reported about many paths, the many world interpretation is truth, or if that machine reported about one path, then there is evidence for consciousness as collapser of wave function is truth!
 
Last edited:
Firstly, is 'dynamical' a word? Why not 'dynamic'?

Second, I tried to read it but it felt like when one of my past students felt inclined to write an article taking the piss out of science (in a rather humorous way) by using as many science words as possible while avoiding making one iota of sense.

As far as I understand it, quantum rules just don't scale up. Period. The brain is a classical system, and so therefore trying to take quantum rules and scaling them up to comment on consciousness - a macroscopic phenomena - simply has no precedent in physics. As somebody said above, it's wishful thinking. In fact, I'd go so far as simply saying it's science fiction.

When quantum phenomena have observable, macroscopic ramifications, it might be worth asking if it plays a role in conscious thought. Until then, I see no reason to invoke it.

Athon
 
Peter Soderqvist said:
Soderqvist1: if that machine afterward reported about many paths, the many world interpretation is truth, or if that machine reported about one path, then there is evidence for consciousness as collapser of wave function is truth!
Click to expand...


Perhaps wave fonctions don't collapse, they remain wave functions the whole time. they intersect which gives an approximation of where they intersected but they are still wave functions regardless of what we call them.

An electron being pinged by a photon is not 'consciousness', atoms absorb and radiate without our percieving them.
 
Consciousness is hard to understand.

Quantum mechanics is hard to understand.

Therefore, consciousness must be quantum mechanical?
 
Okay, so I've been reading about this a bit more. Here is the Wiki article on the Quantum Zeno effect:

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

I don't get it. Let's assume for a moment that the QZE is real. It seems that something like particle decay can be suppressed by rapidly measuring the system in question. This keeps the wavefunction collapsed and disallows the decay.

But then here is what the article says about Stapp's idea:

Wiki said:
The quantum Zeno effect is becoming a central concept in the exploration of controversial and as-yet unproven theories of quantum mind consciousness within the discipline of cognitive science. In his book, "Mindful Universe" (2007) Henry Stapp, professor of quantum physics at UC Berkeley, claims that the quantum Zeno effect is the main method by which the mind holds a superposition of the state of the brain in the attention. He advances that this phenomenon is the principal method by which the conscious will effects change, a possible solution to the mind-body dichotomy.
Click to expand...
This sounds like the opposite effect to me. He's appealing to QZE to hold a superposition of states rather than collapsing the system.

Ignoring for a moment whether this is a crazy idea, can someone clear up my misunderstanding?

~~ Paul
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
This sounds like the opposite effect to me. He's appealing to QZE to hold a superposition of states rather than collapsing the system.

Ignoring for a moment whether this is a crazy idea, can someone clear up my misunderstanding?

~~ Paul
Click to expand...

It's pretty ambiguous from that brief description. But one thing to keep in mind about quantum mechanics is that a state is just a state. It is only a superposition if you choose a particular basis set with which to describe that state, and you can in principle take ANY quantum state and find a basis set for which it is a superposition of two or more basis states. You can also take any quantum state and use that state as one of your basis states. These choices are in principle arbitrary, although certain basis sets are in practice easier to work with. How this is relevant to his theory is unclear from that quote (and may not even make sense if his theory is whack), but the quote itself isn't actually a contradiction. It just doesn't really have useful information for evaluating the theory.
 
PixyMisa said:
Streater provides an excellent expansion on my "ugh" - basically, that macro-scale quantum explanations for consciousness are only viable if you ignore everything known about consciousness.
Click to expand...

Just what exactly is known about consciousness?

sol invictus said:
Consciousness is hard to understand.

Quantum mechanics is hard to understand.

Therefore, consciousness must be quantum mechanical?
Click to expand...

I think it would be more apt to say that since QM is supposedly a fundamental theory of physics and the brain/consciousness is based upon the laws of physics we may gain a better understanding of the brain/consciousness by looking at it in those terms

/shrug
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
“the empirical findings of close connections between conscious intentions and synchronous oscillations in well separated parts of the brain.”

Ok, but what results from non-synchronous oscillations, confusion or even an epileptic seizure?
Click to expand...

Desynchronization on EEG is one hallmark of the waking state. Synchronous activity of large brain areas or brain as a whole can be seen in sleep and in seizures -- obviously, in different ways.

I really have no idea what the author was talking about, unless he meant synchronization of a very small brain area; and we do not know that conscious intentions are closely connected to synchronous oscillations outside of something like the 40 Hz event related potential. Mostly we assume that this is the case.
 
Thanks for that clarification Ichneumonwasp, although I am not surprised that both the cited author and I got that association wrong. How about REM sleep, since one might perceive themselves as being awake, would that also be marked by large scale desynchronization or would it tend to be similarly synchronous as the other sleep phases?
 
The Man said:
Thanks for that clarification Ichneumonwasp, although I am not surprised that both the cited author and I got that association wrong. How about REM sleep, since one might perceive themselves as being awake, would that also be marked by large scale desynchronization or would it tend to be similarly synchronous as the other sleep phases?
Click to expand...

Desynchronization. It almost, but not quite, looks like the waking state on the EEG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom