Consciousness

[jeffl]

I should add, wrt brain function, that it's not just vortecies of neurotransmitter concentration running coplanar with the layers of neurons in the neocortex; it is also, perhaps more importantly, a flash of neural activity running perpendicular to those layers of neurons. I'd suggest a brain pacemaker in the hippocampus, or something like that. When the flash runs uninhibited through the brain then nothing is demanding your attention.

[Starboy]

Quote by: jeffl When i say 'Truth' i mean that aspect of reality that persist in harmony past the end of time. When i say 'truth' i mean reality as it is understandably and reasonably perceived by the relivant conscious aspect.

Based on that definition, at this time right now, how can you know the "truth"?

Yes, but in order to proceed i've had to make certain assumptions. I will assume you are an honest and reasonable person, atleast to start.

And I also make assumptions about you.

It's a test.

Test, expermiment, is there a difference?

It's an awesome execution of justice; in which the conscious aspect is all of judge, jury, executioner, victim, and criminal.

Now you just ramble. You might as well say it is also a can opener.

Perhaps. I've done a bit of school; read Penrose's 'The Emperor's New Mind'. I've been thinking alot about ambient (extracellular) neurotransmitter concentrations and dendritic spine formation. And lately about Glial cells and how they might affect ambient nt concentrations. I get the feeling that emotional states might be mediated by glial cells, at least in part. I think consciousness has more to do with vortecies of nt concentrations, interacting within and across layers of neurons; than it does with some quantum ordering of water around the microtubules.

Great, then perhaps you can tell me how "ambient (extracellular) neurotransmitter concentrations and dendritic spine formation" directly relates to conciousness? So how do hormones play into emotion then? That last bit about vortices of nt concentrations looks like some BS you made up or copied from some place. And that bit about quantum ordering of water around the microtubules is too much. You forgot to add the quantum entangled states between the phospholipid molecule structure and the mitochondria RNA.

Whaddayathink?

I think that Sarfatti has paranoramally projected nt vorticies in your head and they have sucked your brains out.

This says if far better than I ever could:

http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/pq/pq.htm
http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/sar.html

Starboy

[MerlinsByte]

(by jeffl) Consciousness requires memory; self-consciousness requires an internal representation of self. It is not clear that the experiential aspect of being requires any of that; it is possible that everything feels pain, but pain at the prospect of death, a dissociation from the Truth.

Cut and paste from Merlin:(this author explains my take on self awarness H link at end of post)

confusing memory with consciousness.
Memory as a persistence of vision is certainly needed to discuss consciousness, but it is very different from the experience itself. We can and do experienced consciousness with no trace of memory. Our memories are abstraction and condensations of our conscious moments. Few if any of us have memories so clear that we can relive a single conscious moment. Instead, we can recall being conscious, but not the consciousness itself. Awareness is limited to a moment in time. It is always now. We can recall other moments, but we are not conscious of them in the same was as we are of the now.

http://www.artofwarplus.com/Gagliard...about_self.htm

[jeffl]

Quote by: Starboy Based on that definition, at this time right now, how can you know the "truth"?

Based on that definition of 'truth,' i can't help but know it, though i might deny it.

And I also make assumptions about you.

So what.

Test, expermiment, is there a difference?

For you they are the same?

Now you just ramble. You might as well say it is also a can opener.

And justice is a can opener?

Great, then perhaps you can tell me how "ambient (extracellular) neurotransmitter concentrations and dendritic spine formation" directly relates to conciousness?

You have demonstrated that there is not point in trying to explain things to you.

So how do hormones play into emotion then?

The obvious suggestion would be that they affect the rate of neurotransmitter uptake by glial cells.

That last bit about vortices of nt concentrations looks like some BS you made up or copied from some place.

Very productive comment.

And that bit about quantum ordering of water around the microtubules is too much.

That one is from Roger Penrose's book. Maybe someone could tell Starboy here who Roger Penrose is?

You forgot to add the quantum entangled states between the phospholipid molecule structure and the mitochondria RNA.

Why would i?

I think that Sarfatti has paranoramally projected nt vorticies in your head and they have sucked your brains out.

Another very productive comment. Please, don't let me interrupt the Oom-pa-pa band in your head.

This says if far better than I ever could:

You should learn to speak (or whatever) for yourself.

[jeffl]

Quote by: MerlinsByte Memory as a persistence of vision is certainly needed to discuss consciousness, but it is very different from the experience itself.

That's what i'm saying. The persistence of vision probably applies to all levels of consciously present abstraction.

We can and do experienced consciousness with no trace of memory. Our memories are abstraction and condensations of our conscious moments.

Yes, a different, more complex kind of memory; allowing for more complex levels of conscious abstraction, all the way to an image of self.

Few if any of us have memories so clear that we can relive a single conscious moment.

Yes, smell is a good trigger; consider 'odors pleasing to the Lord.'

Instead, we can recall being conscious, but not the consciousness itself.

Yes, the deluded self.

Awareness is limited to a moment in time. It is always now. We can recall other moments, but we are not conscious of them in the same was as we are of the now.

Yes, that's what i mean by 'experience.'

[Starboy]

Quote by: jeffl That one is from Roger Penrose's book. Maybe someone could tell Starboy here who Roger Penrose is?

I am aware of Penrose. What exactly do you think Penrose said? He essentially said that because brains are made of neurons and neurons are cells and cells have membranes and membranes are made of molecules and molecules are described quantum mechanically that conciousness must be related to quantum mechanics. Duh! Everything is related to quantum mechanics. But it is not as if Penrose if offering any kind of a research program into exactly how quantum mechanics creates consiousness.

Starboy

[jeffl]

Quote by: Starboy What exactly do you think Penrose said? Starboy

I will take the time to explain once i am confident that there exists a civil manner between us.

He essentially said that because brains are made of neurons and neurons are cells and cells have membranes and membranes are made of molecules and molecules are described quantum mechanically that conciousness must be related to quantum mechanics. Duh! Everything is related to quantum mechanics. But it is not as if Penrose if offering any kind of a research program into exactly how quantum mechanics creates consiousness.

Wow, even a 'Duh' for Roger; alittle overconfident, perhaps?

O.K., i'll give it a go. He said that consiousness isn't just simple computing because we can apparently solve problems that are just not computable in the traditional sense. He's suggested that quantum computation might get around this difficulty, by virtue of the superposition of what are normally mutually exclusive possibilities. Further, he's suggested that quantum computation may be instanciated by the superposition of quantum states of the tubulin dimers making up the microtubules in the cell; and to pique one's interest, he's pointed out that a biochemist associate of his is considering the possibility of ordered water around the microtubules. I would suggest that this might be a little ahead of the game, and that the interaction of vortecies of neurotransmitter might provide a mechanism for human logic, and that the computational power of these vortex dynamics might be different than traditional computing.

[MerlinsByte]

by jeffl....... that's what i'm saying. The persistence of vision probably applies to all levels of consciously present abstraction.

Swirling electronic mirlinsbyte writes....... I am not sure that I understand your terminology! Please define (1) "consciously present abstraction"
In basic layman terms, so I may communicate with you in an accurate manner and not waste time by misunderstanding terms.

Each sciencetific discipine, like math has unique terms. In some of the replies that you made to other members, there were some terms that I didn't understand as well. I will ask for some more term definitions, as we establish a dialogue.

Upon scanning some of your previous posts, I see that we do agree on a few points, especially the Quantum brain functions. I am interested in what you interpret as Quantum entanglement. I don't subscribe to the this interpretation of the state but it is interesting (and possible). May I ask what is your religious orientation?

mb

[jeffl]

Quote by: MerlinsByte "consciously present abstraction"

You are aware of your senses, sight and the rest; they are consciously present. Ya know? You can consider them in their basic forms, closer to pure experience; or you can consider them in progressively more complex levels of abstraction. Know what i mean? In any case, the binding problem, the sense of self, the persistence of being can be explain by the perhaps monadic form of memory to which you originally refered.

I am interested in what you interpret as Quantum entanglement.

It's cool, and demonstrates our lack of perception in some sense. We're definately missing something.

May I ask what is your religious orientation?

A real jew; a christkrishnaite?

[MerlinsByte]

by Jeffl;........ You are aware of your senses, sight and the rest; they are consciously present. Ya know? You can consider them in their basic forms, closer to pure experience; or you can consider them in progressively more complex levels of abstraction. Know what i mean? In any case, the binding problem, the sense of self, the persistence of being can be explain by the perhaps monadic form of memory to which you originally refered.

Merlin writes....Yes, I am aware of the teachings of Wilhelm (middle name only) who was a great thinker. I would agree that "monadic memory" (not a real term but understandable) may, while not accurately describe my take on the conscious and self awareness, it does at least give you an idea of the mental frame work that we need to understand each other. Translation ...Yes I believe that GOD or an ID can explain the particulars of our consciousness and our reality including our universal destiny and perception of all reality.

by jeffel.....(reponding to Quantum entanglement) It's cool, and demonstrates our lack of perception in some sense. We're definately missing something.

Merlin writes............Its obvious that we cannot perceive GOD(s) or the ID intent, or are able to preceive a different universe or a fluid state of being. Note...ID =intelligent designer, who I believe is an observer in the universe as a closed system, and we are self aware beings as sub observers). It is my belief that state know as superposition, is a real state applicable to macro systems as well as micro systems. How the ("faster than light"information) exchange "happens" is not as important as why it does (happen).

by Jeffel .............A real jew; a christkrishnaite?

Merlin writes..... I like that you are playful, so some of your beliefs are based on the kalabala? A wise and wonderful read. I am just starting to study it.

And this last question is strictly voluntary but will help me understand your thinking process more clearly are you male or female? It doesnt matter either way I have a weird way of thinking.

mb

[jeffl]

Quote by: MerlinsByte I would agree that "monadic memory" (not a real term but understandable) may, while not accurately describe my take on the conscious and self awareness, it does at least give you an idea of the mental frame work that we need to understand each other.

Good. To be more clear, i'm imagining an harmonic polling of the state of the neurons in the neocortex, either from the inside of the brain outward or from the surface of the brain inward; the monadic memory comes from the duration of time between samples, not necessarily from any real percistence of conscious being on the part of the neurons themselves.

Translation ...Yes I believe that GOD or an ID can explain the particulars of our consciousness and our reality including our universal destiny and perception of all reality.

Yes, i think He did express the fullness of Being in both the scriptural and scientific records. The allegorical representation of certain evolutionary truths is common in all grounded spiritual perspectives; to explain by example, Rumi is grounded and Vergil is not.

Merlin writes............Its obvious that we cannot perceive GOD(s) or the ID intent, or are able to preceive a different universe or a fluid state of being.

I've suggested to myself that electromagnetism itself is purely symmetrical wrt electricity and magnetism, and it is our perception that makes the two slightly askew

It is my belief that state know as superposition, is a real state applicable to macro systems as well as micro systems. How the ("faster than light"information) exchange "happens" is not as important as why it does (happen).

The Truth, the coherence of light, and entanglement are all related somehow; i have the feeling.

Merlin writes..... I like that you are playful, so some of your beliefs are based on the kalabala? A wise and wonderful read. I am just starting to study it.

I had the good fortune of doing an ajun(sp?) with a rabbi in Calgary.

[MerlinsByte]

Good. To be more clear, i'm imagining an harmonic polling of the state of the neurons in the neocortex, either from the inside of the brain outward or from the surface of the brain inward; the monadic memory comes from the duration of time between samples, not necessarily from any real percistence of conscious being on the part of the neurons themselves.

Merlin writes......Harmonic polling isn't a neurobiology term or an neuroscience term, however, do you mean that the all neurons are somehow asked (polling) ,about the state (which exact states are you speaking of?) Or are did you mean something like harmonic progression? And then you are saying that the "duration of the time" between the "samples" is where the modic memory (God or the mind of God and or metaphysical events) is located?

Until we reach an understanding about "harmonic polling" I won't comment on the first part. However we may be close to agreement about the "duration time between samples."

These are very abstract terms, but I don't think there is any "time" between samples. The "Time" between samples is the superposition phase (of QM) and this information exchange happens instantly, i.e., faster than light. (at the wave function collapse) .Also, while in this state (superposition) we are connected casually to all other universes by entanglement or another method, (non local).It seems to me the neurons cannot "contain" memory because they are only the generators of the signal not the storage area for memory. Or if they are a storage area they may be a lower functioning network not related to the higher monadic memory.

This is the fundamental mind/brain Quantum interface,(the state of superposition) where the mind playing the observer, and the natural brain being the experiment. As in a classic double slit experiment, or cat in the box thought experiment. So while we do not agree on most points we agree on at least one in the first paragraph of your response.

Yes, i think He did express the fullness of Being in both the scriptural and scientific records. The allegorical representation of certain evolutionary truths is common in all grounded spiritual perspectives

Merlin writes............I agree somwhat

(by Jeffl)...... suggested to myself that electromagnetism itself is purely symmetrical wrt electricity and magnetism, and it is our perception that makes the two slightly askew

Merlin writes........I feel that of course, electromagnetism, electricity, and natural magnetism are all bound together with the other forces. This is off topic but I believe gravity is linked with changes in velocity. So gravity maynever be linked in a TOE or a GUT. Oh well to, summarize ; general electromagnetism, electricity and magnetism doesn't have much if anything to do with the higher levels of conscious thought. QM does.

mb

[jeffl]

Quote by: MerlinsByte do you mean that the all neurons are somehow asked (polling) ,about the state (which exact states are you speaking of?)

Just wether or not the neuron is ready to fire when the wave of excitation sweeps past. That depends on all of the other neurons it's connected to. I say 'harmonic' because any one neuron will be compelled to fire at a particular frequency; and from a digital signal processing perspective you have to consider how long it takes for a neuron to get ready to fire again, how frequently it is asked to fire by the sampling function; all of these frequencies have to be considered wrt what sort of logic might be possible, i think, maybe.

And then you are saying that the "duration of the time" between the "samples" is where the modic memory (God or the mind of God and or metaphysical events) is located?

I wouldn't say God or the mind of God; only that the persistence of vision is possibly a result of how the sampling function (this cyclic region of excitation traveling through the neocortex) is effected by the visual region of the neocortex itself, and how the function is read by the other parts of the brain i suppose. My faith in God, on the other hand, comes from the fact of conscious meaning itself, that things are structured as they are.

It seems to me the neurons cannot "contain" memory because they are only the generators of the signal not the storage area for memory. Or if they are a storage area they may be a lower functioning network not related to the higher monadic memory.

I'm not understanding this. To me, 'monadic memory' would be a good way to refer to what someone in the digital signal processing (DSP) field might call a Nyquist effect (any DSPers out there?). I beg to differ wrt where memory is located; clearly in the network of neural connections and the nature of the particular neural responses, aswell as glial cell function.

This is the fundamental mind/brain Quantum interface,(the state of superposition) where the mind playing the observer, and the natural brain being the experiment. As in a classic double slit experiment, or cat in the box thought experiment. So while we do not agree on most points we agree on at least one in the first paragraph of your response.

Again, i'm not so sure we're understanding each other. Quantum effects are very difficult to measure, and while they might play a central role in the experiential nature of Being, i don't thing they are necessarily directly relivent to the human experience of consciousness. I think we are almost epiphenomenal; only by faith in meaning do we affect real spiritual change; which is to say, our relm of influence is the macro, not the micro.

This is off topic but I believe gravity is linked with changes in velocity.

I've thought about that; why don't we achieve the speed of light at...3 X 10*7 seconds of age?

[MerlinsByte]

Merlin wrote......This is off topic but I believe gravity is linked with changes in velocity.

I've thought about that; why don't we achieve the speed of light at...3 X 10*7 seconds of age?

Mrelin might say...."We well could, but don' t sweat it Jeffel ! Thats the excape velocity to exit this universe (or to infinity) and enter into another universe....then to another universe...ad infintumin. !"

mb

[MerlinsByte]

(partial quote from Jeffel; and from a digital signal processing perspective you have to consider how long it takes for a neuron to get ready to fire again, how frequently it is asked to fire by the sampling function; all of these frequencies have to be considered wrt

Merlin writes...I have found our nemesis (I hope). I do not think that one (I) can use a digital processing perspective unless it is an pure analogy. I have no experience in formal computer science. Perhaps we should indicate when we use terms from a certain discipline? That or discuss even complex subjects with common language, then if clarification is needed advance to progressively detailed explanations?

As to the above post , I understand the broad principles involved, but do not due to terminology , understand the details of your thinking method , or conclusion of how “harmonic processing” relates to memory = self awareness. I do not think memory is needed for self awarness. In addition self awarness is impossible to prove.

mb

[jeffl]

Quote by: MerlinsByte ...or conclusion of how “harmonic processing” relates to memory = self awareness.

If 'you' are fundamentaly related to the functioning of the brain, then as the region of exicted function moves along, it only 'remembers' what it ('you,' the region of excited function) last 'saw' of the relivant regions of the neocortex, as it moved through that region and became modified by how the experience of the organism had structure 'there' 'then.' Until 'you' return to the visual cortex, 'you' will assume it is structured as it was; perhaps that is the essence of the monadic memory that permits awareness generally. Self awareness is a whole nother topic after, and monadic experience a whole nother topic before.

I do not think memory is needed for self awarness.

I will write this off to a semantic issue; perhaps you're talking about experience.

In addition self awarness is impossible to prove. mb

This is a problem. If you deny self awareness then there is no point continuing this. By your own existence you prove it; and if your powers of perception cannot discern your own existance, then how can we engage reasonable discorse about experiment? Look; i'll acknowledge that individual consciousness is delusional, but it is not a trivial delusion. Your Life, the validity of your delusion, stands or falls on how it, how you, respect the Truth.

[MerlinsByte]

To Jeffel or other interested john doe


monadic


1....An indivisible, impenetrable unit of substance viewed as the basic constituent element of physical reality in the metaphysics of Leibnitz.


2....An atom or a radical with valence 1.

3....programming unary, when describing an operator or
function. The term is part of the dyadic, niladic
sequence. (Ta Da!!!! mb ta da)

Jeffel, to save time in the future lets be more precise when explaning terms. Most of the time that I was trying to decypher (hell I was a encryption speciliast in the army! ) your posts I thought you were using philsolicial terms. monadic could apply to all three above, there is even a moniac bioloigial defitination (a one celled bug I think) All the this time you were speaking in computer science terms as in (3)?

I would read one sentence and scratch my head. Even then the terms were a construct. I like the way you think but we must learn to comminicuate! This would save time and whats the use of a debate when we are talking about two different subjects? (by mistake).

I mix and match QM terms. From now own I will indicate (i do now when I catch myself) at the bottom of my posts with notes. (when I use a vague term or term from a strict discipline),or put it into layman soundbytes, please do the same if possible! Also I feel that others in this forum would enjoy that we debate in clearer terms, than the cryptic debate we are now engaging in now. We can start minimally, then progress to complex to explain details if needed?

mb.


ps

by jeffel To me, 'monadic memory' would be a good way to refer to what someone in the digital signal processing (DSP) field might call a Nyquist effect (any DSPers out there?). I beg to differ wrt where memory is located; clearly in the network of neural...

The above is a good start. It was the key, the Rosetta Stone stone, that allowed me to understand most of your other posts! Now I do think we have huge differences in theory but on the most important one I feel that we agree. I would assume that by being cryptic in answers, that you (as I) have received some negativity by laymen and the general science population at large?

and again this changes everything (smile)....mb

[MerlinsByte]

Now I do think we have huge differences in theory but on the most important one I feel that we agree.

By merlin.........Oh! the most important agreement? God exists.

mb

[jeffl]

Quote by: MerlinsByte 1....An indivisible, impenetrable unit of substance viewed as the basic constituent element of physical reality in the metaphysics of Leibnitz.

I'm liking this one. 'Impenitrable ' is a little strong; not for Leibnitz, for me naturally. It looks like the monad comes from how the region of neural excitation moves information from one region of the brain through the others, and back to where it was initially; simply by being the shape it is morphed into.

3....programming unary, when describing an operator or function. The term is part of the dyadic, niladic sequence. (Ta Da!!!! mb ta da)

No, i mean more like one whole cycle of a polling function; i guess that's why it's not impenitrable. There's opportunity for feed foward mechanisms, for example.

to save time in the future lets be more precise when explaning terms.

I very much appreciate being directed in said explaination; usually it is my manner that is critiqued, and that's all.

Most of the time that I was trying to decypher (hell I was a encryption speciliast in the army! ) your posts I thought you were using philsolicial terms.

You were correct, sir.

...we must learn to comminicuate!

I certainly hope we will.

This would save time and whats the use of a debate when we are talking about two different subjects? (by mistake).

God only knows

From now own I will indicate (i do now when I catch myself) at the bottom of my posts with notes.

Relax; if you are so moved, certainly do so. i will ask if i don't understand, and i want to.

or put it into layman soundbytes, please do the same if possible!

Generally i try; i like to get others involved as i find i learn alot.

Also I feel that others in this forum would enjoy that we debate in clearer terms, than the cryptic debate we are now engaging in now.

I,m sorry, to everyone, for how cryptic i've been. I promise you i'm not trying to be. Please, ask :eek:

I say 'Nyquist effect' because in digital signal processing there's this guy, Nyquist, who figured that in order to digitize a signal accurately you had to sample it at a frequency at least twice as high as the highest pitch of the signal itself.

[MerlinsByte]

Merlin writes.....Jeffel, you are a kind, and very interesting individual. I look foward on reading your opinions on other subjects. Gods Speed to you

mb