It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Human consciousness is simply a state of matter, like a solid or liquid – but quantum

page: 1
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   


Thanks to the work of a small group neuroscientists and theoretical physicists over the last few years, we may finally have found a way of analyzing the mysterious, metaphysical realm of consciousness in a scientific manner. The latest breakthrough in this new field, published by Max Tegmark of MIT, postulates that consciousness is actually a state of matter. “Just as there are many types of liquids, there are many types of consciousness,” he says. With this new model, Tegmark says that consciousness can be described in terms of quantum mechanics and information theory, allowing us to scientifically tackle murky topics such as self awareness, and why we perceive the world in classical three-dimensional terms.

Human consciousness is simply a state of matter, like a solid or liquid – but quantum




I have always been fascinated by consciousness, what is it, and how did we attain such a state of mind? Is it unique to the human condition? Does it even exist outwith our own perception? The questions are numerous and mind numbing regarding the subject and any attempt to ascertain its origins and or purpose certainly has my admiration and attention!


So what do you think ATS, your thoughts on the subject please?
edit on 24-4-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Basically saying that the aggregate data housed separate is greater than the sum of it parts, and that the measurable sum of the separate data gives rise to consciousness in a quantum state (perceptronium).

I've read up on Giulio Tononi work a bit, it is one explanation for Consciousness that is at the early stages, and has practical application in future attempts of computer consciousness an A.I.

To put it in a physical form, enough networked computers, with enough data, with the proper programming, would be able to give rise to an observable intelligence, etc.
edit on 24-4-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
It seems like perceptronium fills a niche like 'ether' did in the late 1800's physics theories.

Someday it may be verified as real, or replaced by whatever is discovered to actually exist.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: benrl

So Skynet is just around the corner? I don't see any self emerging AI being too chuffed with its creators. Que the ICBMs launching, release the MK-1 Terminators scenario would surely follow unless we could somehow make it follow Asimov's 3 rules or does that only work with robots?
edit on 24-4-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: benrl

So Skynet is just around the corner? I don't see any self emerging AI being too chuffed with its creators. Que the ICBMs launching, release the MK1 Terminators scenario would surely follow unless we could somehow make it follow Asimov's 3 rules or does that only work with robots?



Again, it is explaining how consciousness occurs, that was an analogue of its potential future use.

It is using current models of physics to quantify something, the math, and theories involved are beyond me, that is its most simplistic form I can summarize it as.

If consciousness can be explained by the aggregate sum of data, there is no need for things like the Soul, or anything special beyond what science can explain.

Even in the abstract it says its a first step in explaining, even the physics involved are not fully understood, and is proposing this quantum material state to explain it.

Like dark Mater, if its quantifiable, its testable, observable, and would hence be the first step to understanding.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Maybe this will answer some questions, but they're have to key in how yogi's can think of something for a split second, and it happens in their personal universe, so they learn how "not to think".



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aleister
a reply to: andy06shake

Maybe this will answer some questions, but they're have to key in how yogi's can think of something for a split second, and it happens in their personal universe, so they learn how "not to think".



Taking the computer analog a step further, All that would be is software learning how to manipulate hardware.

Look at it, as eventually leading to the step that would let us explain how the Yogi does that with math.

Its actually intriguing if you take the thought that everything we are can be calculated with science on some basic fundamental level.

If it exist, math and science can explain it.

Lends to further things like simulation theory as well.

Lets say we understand consciousness enough to model it, its foreseeable that with in the next 50 years we could be capable of fully modeling a civilization complete with thinking individuals.

Thats if this all pans out.

Could be we are incapable of explaining.


ETA:

From the article.


Tegmark’s paper doesn’t get to the point where we can suddenly say what causes or creates consciousness, but it does go some way towards proving that consciousness is governed by the same laws of physics that govern the rest of the universe — that there isn’t some kind of “secret sauce,” as postulated by mystics and religious types since time immemorial. As far as science is concerned, that’s a rather big relief.


No biases at all...
edit on 24-4-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Not sure if perceptronium is the right theory (who does?), but I too am rooting for a quantum explanation for consciousness. For instance, decoherence would seem to have some impact on our perceptions as our minds collapse the many possibilities of a quantum state into the single reality of the classical consciousness we experience. However, whether it's quantifiable or repeatable would depend on whether other aspects of quantum theory, such as relational quantum mechanics, retrocausality or other exotic interpretations of quantum theory hold true.

In the 1980's there was a popularization of the isolation tank, which could separate consciousness from perceptive inputs, inducing a lucid waking state. Another interesting experiment separating the mind from body was the Avatar Machine. That we are merely avatar denizens of a quantum computer simulated universe makes the most sense to me, but is also the most terrifying.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chronon
simulated universe makes the most sense to me, but is also the most terrifying.


I had a terrifying thought while watching cosmos.

The seemingly random jumps an electron makes when returning to higher or lower orbits, where proof of Pixelization caused by simulation theory.

ETA:

As in the smallest of matter simply traversing over a seam in the fabric of reality, pixelation at the very smallest level.
edit on 24-4-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Consciousness could be merely another abstraction of the human organism, an entity science has yet to fully understand.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: benrl


To put it in a physical form, enough networked computers, with enough data, with the proper programming, would be able to give rise to an observable intelligence, etc.


Yes, I'm stuck between that being where consciousness comes from, arising as a higher order out of massive amounts of data, or that consciousness came first and matter arose around that... The more I learn I lean to the first idea, which is the same as your idea about computers.

What I really wonder is that once consciousness is formed via a physical body, does it then rely on said physical body to retain it's "shape" (existence). What if we have to use our bodies as much as possible to extract as much data as we can before we die in order to carry on after?

Interesting times for sure.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: benrl


I had a terrifying thought while watching cosmos.

The seemingly random jumps an electron makes when returning to higher or lower orbits, where proof of Pixelization caused by simulation theory.

ETA:

As in the smallest of matter simply traversing over a seam in the fabric of reality, pixelation at the very smallest level.


I see what you mean but I don't think that's what is happening.. The size of the orbits doesn't stay the same distance apart at each next electron shell, so I think it relates to something else. Maybe a clue for unified field?

That same part stuck out to me too. I've heard it all before, but watching it and really imagining it, makes atoms seem all the more strange. I'm still trying to figure that one out. Warping to me means that electrons are more like shaped pieces of current rather than individual objects. They seem to represent an energy level rather than actually existing.

Could point to the higher dimensions, so that the electron is still traveling and existing, just not here now..



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
I usually look at thread titles and am usually pretty good at spotting thread titles by ATS member neoholographic, but you fooled me with this one, but here's why neoholographic probably doesn't want anything to do with this specific article (from the OP source):


there isn’t some kind of “secret sauce,” as postulated by mystics and religious types since time immemorial. As far as science is concerned, that’s a rather big relief.
Neoholographic threads usually seem to be pushing this mystical "secret sauce" concept.

My opinion is that if you look at our understanding of electricity in 1800 which was very rudimentary, that is approximately equivalent to our understanding of consciousness today which is also very rudimentary. From 1800 it took over a century to understand electricity and develop first Maxwell's equations then quantum electrodynamics (QED).

Realistically I think we are likely about a century away from understanding consciousness if we apply such a parallel analog. The OP source admits we still have a long way to go in our understanding:


Tegmark’s paper doesn’t get to the point where we can suddenly say what causes or creates consciousness, but it does go some way towards proving that consciousness is governed by the same laws of physics that govern the rest of the universe
Well if we don't know what causes or creates it, we don't know much about it, but our understanding of electricity was like this in the beginning too, where we didn't really understand what caused or created it. I suspect consciousness will be even more difficult to understand so it could take more than a century.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: KnightLight


Could point to the higher dimensions, so that the electron is still traveling and existing, just not here now..


I am of the belief that by default, being 4 d beings, experiencing in 3d, a reallity that could have a host of higher dimensions, well, its entirely possible we are in capable of a true unified theory.

At least not until true quantum computing and A.I. come into play.

Consciousness being quantified in science, is a step in that direction.

as to the electron, its that the motion of not mechanism that causes, that would be the proof of the pixelation. It is the nature of the size of the electron, and the type of motion that made me think it could be showing pixelation.

Also, I had the thought, that if its matter projected (say hologram theory as well as simulation) than the pixelation would only be tangible in the material or mater the projection is stored on, and by result only the "effect of it" is seen in the projection.

That matter where it is stored, would qualify as a higher dimension.


The more steps (like this op) we take forward in knowledge, seems to lead credence to the very least a universe that could easily be a simulation, or modeled as one.

Does that mean we are one, Who knows, but every step forward seems to not negate that possibility.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: benrl

I think we are quite obviously in a simulation, but I don't mean that in a way that there was ever anything outside of simulation.. Or in another way everything is real that you notice.

I think it's all layers of dreams a lot like inception, and maybe there is a base reality that exists, but it wouldn't be a place I would EVER visit. I don't think it's a "technological" hologram either. Well not technological like we think of it. At a certain point in time Nature IS technology.

It's funny how the closer we think we are getting to figuring out the big bang or god or something we realize there are 17 more steps in between.

The world got so small as I grew out of childhood, but with all the new scientific advances it's finally growing again, big enough now to contain my wonder even.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: KnightLight

"I think we are quite obviously in a simulation"

There is actually rather a lot of emerging evidence that suggests exactly that. Certainly a notion worthy of our entertainment.


en.wikipedia.org...

www.independent.co.uk...

www.telegraph.co.uk...

edit on 24-4-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake
The latest theory on consciousness is "Consciousness is a state of matter".
I disagree, for what is it that the new theory states is matter?
Consciousness IS matter.



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: BDBinc

So we are consciousness, etc, etc? If so we need to upgrade our Broadband because not everyone is able to communicate just yet.


A unified world opinion could and should be up there with the invention of the wheel as a goal, but corruption will always fail us and there lies the problem. The singularity will never be reached until human nature is changed for the better.

"i think therefore i am" just doesn't cut the mustard anymore. Humanity would probably gain from following Asimov's three laws themselves. After all even viruses mutate, we are supposed to be good at adapting, just like them.

But what do I know, im I even here? It certainly seems to hurt, then again that's life.

edit on 24-4-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake


So what do you think ATS, your thoughts on the subject please?


I already knew this to be true. Give me a nobel prize.
edit on 24-4-2014 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-4-2014 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2014 @ 06:46 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

What does the new theory say 'matter' is?


What is it that hurts?
Its not life.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join