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.

 

My View OnThe Brain/Mind/Counsiousness As A Quantum Computer

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Yes. That's what I was trying to convey to neoholgraphic a few months ago.

Back to reality:

Quantum mechanics is NOT a +5 Magic Bag of Woo Holding into which you can stuff any amount of fuzzy new age philo fluff!

It's a description of physics. There are quantitative calculations, simulations, dynamics and laws. It came out of experiment and calculations, just like all the rest of physics since Isaac F'ing Newton.

Nope, it's not intuitive. Nope, just because you don't intuitively get it, it doesn't mean anything else we don't understand can be duct-taped to it.

And one of the experimental results is that decoherence to classical physics in larger time and space scales is extremely robust and almost universal. Macroscopic quantum mechanical effects profoundly different from classical physics are very rare and require special preparation and usually cryogenically low temperatures. Why are there so many interesting solid state physics experiments cooled with liquid helium? Because heat destroys all sorts of complex quantum effects.


edit on 9-12-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-12-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord



we are quantum entangled with the entire universe


The entanglement theory is BS and little more than a circus trick but yes the brain does seem to work a bit like a strange computer that burns a memory in the more time it is used and is a bit like pumping steel to increase the size of your mussels.

Won't be long before nano-tec bots are used to connect wires from a socket in the back of your head to parts of the brain so that people can "Plug in" whilst playing computer games but after that it will all be about making us even bigger slaves to the system.

Yes sure they will say that the reseach is about helping people who are blind but you would have to be blind not to see where this is all going and I think we are talking more like 20 years than 100 years away but who knows.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

To save me from reading that paper, can you list like the handful of 'major contextual descriptors of quanta and its behavior' that denote it as 'quantum'?

Dechoherence, entanglement/superpositon, tunneling, particle/wave duality.

Are there any others?

So to be clear. Because you believe the mind does not incorporate any of those descriptors of physical behavior into its mechanisms, the mind cannot be referred to as a quantum system?

A follow up question; lets assume in the future humans will be able to create an artificial intelligence/consciousness/mind that can "think therefore it is". Do you think it is theoretically possible to incorporate quantum functions in an artificial mind? And if fundamentally, ALL THAT EXISTS IS THE QUANTUM, all existence 'larger' than the quantum, is nothing but the result of the quantum interacting in a gradient/spectrum of lesser and greater systems of stability and energy, how did nature avoid utilizing quantum functions when it created its consciousness/mind/intelligence system?



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ImaFungi
a reply to: Arbitrageur

To save me from reading that paper, can you list like the handful of 'major contextual descriptors of quanta and its behavior' that denote it as 'quantum'?
If you don't want to read the paper, then don't read it. I'm not going to summarize it for you any more than I already have by citing the summary.


So to be clear. Because you believe the mind does not incorporate any of those descriptors of physical behavior into its mechanisms, the mind cannot be referred to as a quantum system?

A follow up question; lets assume in the future humans will be able to create an artificial intelligence/consciousness/mind that can "think therefore it is". Do you think it is theoretically possible to incorporate quantum functions in an artificial mind? And if fundamentally, ALL THAT EXISTS IS THE QUANTUM, all existence 'larger' than the quantum, is nothing but the result of the quantum interacting in a gradient/spectrum of lesser and greater systems of stability and energy, how did nature avoid utilizing quantum functions when it created its consciousness/mind/intelligence system?
The quote I cited from Tegmark doesn't say quantum systems don't exist. It compares the relative time scales of decoherence and finds those to be over a million times shorter than needed to be relevant to claims of the brain as a quantum computer. The explanation should really be self-evident, but mbkennel elaborated in a way which sort of answered your question before you asked it:


originally posted by: mbkennel
And one of the experimental results is that decoherence to classical physics in larger time and space scales is extremely robust and almost universal. Macroscopic quantum mechanical effects profoundly different from classical physics are very rare and require special preparation and usually cryogenically low temperatures. Why are there so many interesting solid state physics experiments cooled with liquid helium? Because heat destroys all sorts of complex quantum effects.


Theoretically we can make quantum computers. Could we someday make quantum computers that do some of the same tasks a mind would do? Perhaps, but that's not really telling us anything about the brain. Computers already do all kinds of tasks that humans used to do, and they tell us little about the way humans used to do them, and in fact they are known to operate in binary transistors and memory circuits. Humans don't work to well in binary like computers do, for example what is 11010011 plus 10001001? We don't operate that way. Computers do. One of the potential advantages of future quantum computers is that they don't have to be binary, but if Tegmark is right and I suspect he is, that doesn't mean they will be operating like brains.

edit on 9-12-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   
So to the mods if you want this discussion in another forum by all means go ahead and change it to the forum you think is best.

The manner in which the brain works is remarkable it literaly recreates the entire universe in your mind just so we have the ability to see the world around us.

You experience this as dreams, you create everything then look at it from you singular point of view, simply amazing.


After that being said found this interesting 7 minute video of Penrose:


There is a current view that consciousness is something which arises from some complicated computation. So we have our computers, and people think that because they can do things amazingly fast, and they can calculate very quickly, and they can play chess extremely well, that they are superior to us even, and it is only some complicated aspect of this computational activity that somehow consciousness arises from that. Now my view is quite different from this. I think there is a lot of computational activity going on in the brain, but this is basically unconscious. So consciousness seems to me to be something quite different.
Sir Roger Penrose — The quantum nature of consciousness .

www.youtube.com...




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

You could have just attempted to answer my questions, so we can have an intelligent discussion.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Wouldnt it be quite rational to query, that; we have created classical systems computers of immense computation power and memory etc. Yet we still cant crack the consciousness code, even with all this computing power that can do more calculations and hold more information faster and better than any man; wouldnt it be rational to think that, maybe the missing link is quantum nature? That by incorporating smaller and smaller mechanisms, with greater elasticity, greater interconnectivity, and utilizing 'quantum' oddities, that that might be the best chance at replicating consciousness? What makes you think that is not the case?

I know we dont know all there is to know about the brain, but I am willing to bet it is composed of matter/energy and obeys the laws of physics, in theory than it can be built and at the very least understood how it works. You are saying, if we think that quantum is more difficult to work with, unpredictable, that it would have been easier, more natural, for nature to create consciousness while over stepping quantum phenomenon, creating systems and mechanisms which protect against the quantum functions, is that your argument and point? That nature could not and/or you know it did not, have fine grain enough fingers to control the chaotic power of the quantum and utilize its functions in its mysterious systems of consciousness?

Can you please just name some of the general functions of what is considered to be 'quantum'?

Is an electron a quantum mechanical object? Is EM radiation quantum mechanical?

If the brain/mind utilizes electrons and EM radiation it is not doing so quantum mechanically?



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   
The thought that we create the entire universe in our dreams and have to visualize and decode it in order to see the world around us is quite remarkable. Just think about how the entire universe is created and all the detail even countless people are created in our dreams, yet we see things from our own point of ourselves.


Found this lecture and its really a good listen:



Ever since quantum mechanics was discovered nearly a century ago, famous scientists from Eddington to Wigner to Compton to Eccles to Penrose have speculated about possible connections to the brain -- a quest often parodied as "quantum mechanics is mysterious, the brain is mysterious, ergo they must be related somehow." In this talk, I'll offer a critical survey of these ideas from the modern standpoint of quantum information theory, pointing out the huge conceptual and experimental problems that have plagued most concrete proposals. However, I'll also explain why I think some role for quantum mechanics in cognition is not yet excluded, and discuss what sorts of advances in neuroscience and physics might help settle the question.

Quantum information and the Brain

www.youtube.com...




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Found this tidbit of information on the nature of consciousness which I thought was well presented, I like what Dr. Stuart Hameroff has to say on the subject and believe we are just at the tip of the iceberg when it comes to understanding the workings of the human brain or any brain for that matter. Counsiousness itself is a very interesting field of study:



Conscious "free will" is problematic because brain mechanisms causing consciousness are unknown, measurable brain activity correlating with conscious perception apparently occurs too late for real-time conscious response, consciousness thus being considered "epiphenomenal illusion," and determinism, i.e., our actions and the world around us seem algorithmic and inevitable.


The Penrose-Hameroff theory of "orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR)" identifies discrete conscious moments with quantum computations in microtubules inside brain neurons, 40/s in concert with gamma synchrony EEG. Microtubules organize neuronal interiors and regulate synapses.

In Orch OR, microtubule quantum computations occur in integration phases in dendrites and cell bodies of integrate-and-fire brain neurons connected and synchronized by gap junctions, allowing entanglement of microtubules among many neurons.

Quantum computations in entangled microtubules terminate by Penrose "objective reduction (OR)," a proposal for quantum state reduction and conscious moments linked to fundamental spacetime geometry.

Each OR reduction selects microtubule states which can trigger axonal firings, and control behavior. The quantum computations are "orchestrated" by synaptic inputs and memory (thus "Orch OR").

If correct, Orch OR can account for conscious causal agency, resolving problem 1.

Regarding problem 2, Orch OR can cause temporal non-locality, sending quantum information backward in classical time, enabling conscious control of behavior. Three lines of evidence for brain backward time effects are presented.

Regarding problem 3, Penrose OR (and Orch OR) invokes non-computable influences from information embedded in spacetime geometry, potentially avoiding algorithmic determinism. In summary, Orch OR can account for real-time conscious causal agency, avoiding the need for consciousness to be seen as epiphenomenal illusion. Orch OR can rescue conscious free will.
www.quantumconsciousness.org...



This is a cool talk by Hameroff on the theory I just came across:




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 11:25 PM
link   
I wish someone could embed videos I just cant figure out how to do it.

Nice Fungi! I found this 2 minute vid of the brain thought it was simple and interesting.

www.youtube.com...


Doesn anyone have a vid on how the eyes see upside down and the brain decodes all the information and reassembles it so you can have an image of the world? I would imagine it does the same thing with taste touch and hearing as well.



posted on Dec, 20 2014 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Our civilization is slowly waking to the truth of non duality at the quantum level.
The truth of the interconnectedness of all things is slowly being realized reguardless of our own limited personal views on a the infinite universe. Our duality is illusionary and it is totally false.



This avi cut is from the movie "What the bleep do we know?!".
Everything is interconnected.
The whole Universe fundamentally, in a profound energy level is ONE

Quantum entanglement and the Power of Intention



edit on 20-12-2014 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Superposition in quantum physics pretty much verifies that the mind is like a quantum computer.




posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormcell
I don't think we could really understand all the tricks that evolution could have used.

There was once an experiment where hardware engineers used simulated evolution to build a new logic circuit to discriminate between two frequencies. They set up their design system to generate random logic circuits, evaluate them, sort them by performance, reject the worst 10%, and apply mutations to the best 10%. This was repeated until they were able to get the circuit to pass verification tests. Then the engineers built the real hardware logic. But the strange thing was that many of the components weren't connected together as you would expect from an engineer designed circuit. One of the problems with designing logic circuits is that "crosstalk" the electric fields generated by electrons moving along one wire, can induce signals in other adjacent wires. Avoiding this requires careful design. In the evolution designed circuits, the use of crosstalk was used heavily. Resonating magnetic fields would be generated whenever a matching frequency was detected and this would generate a signal.


The same type of thing happened when they used some type of A.I program to make a robot walk and the program logic output of the program was so strange that the original programmers could not understand how it worked.

I don't think we will be at the top of the food chain for much longer because we are building our own replacment but lets call it evoloution if we are so daft as to be the designers of our own downfall



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: VirusGuard

originally posted by: stormcell

I don't think we could really understand all the tricks that evolution could have used.



There was once an experiment where hardware engineers used simulated evolution to build a new logic circuit to discriminate between two frequencies. They set up their design system to generate random logic circuits, evaluate them, sort them by performance, reject the worst 10%, and apply mutations to the best 10%. This was repeated until they were able to get the circuit to pass verification tests. Then the engineers built the real hardware logic. But the strange thing was that many of the components weren't connected together as you would expect from an engineer designed circuit. One of the problems with designing logic circuits is that "crosstalk" the electric fields generated by electrons moving along one wire, can induce signals in other adjacent wires. Avoiding this requires careful design. In the evolution designed circuits, the use of crosstalk was used heavily. Resonating magnetic fields would be generated whenever a matching frequency was detected and this would generate a signal.




The same type of thing happened when they used some type of A.I program to make a robot walk and the program logic output of the program was so strange that the original programmers could not understand how it worked.



I don't think we will be at the top of the food chain for much longer because we are building our own replacment but lets call it evoloution if we are so daft as to be the designers of our own downfall


Ok robots wont be killing anyone period. People will be killing people thats the rub. You will die of old age and disease before any robot would ever kill anyone. Its never ever going to happen and taking the luddite the sky is falling view from advancing technology is just incorrect. The guns dont kill people, people using them do.





The progressive development of man is vitally dependent on invention… This is the difficult task of the inventor who is often misunderstood and unrewarded. But he finds ample compensation in the pleasing exercises of his powers and in the knowledge of being one of that exceptionally privileged class without whom the race would have long ago perished in the bitter struggle against pitiless elements. – Nikola Tesla, My Inventions


The New York Times profiled a significant technological breakthrough on Wednesday, and their commenters set immediately to demanding it be destroyed. There have been luddites fearing change and calling for stagnation for as long as there have been humans more intelligent than them trying out new things, but, call me crazy, it really seems the luddites all are getting louder.

We are just a year or two from charging our electronic devices wirelessly. The company working on the technology profiled, uBeam, has not only realized the dream of Nikola Tesla and developed a commercially-viable way to wirelessly charge electronic devices, they have also demonstrated that they can send information through sound, positioning us to develop entirely new ways of communicating with one another. The applications are surely numerous. But ignore the cool ass NYT article for a minute and look at the responses. Nick Bilton’s piece is an inadvertently perfect, terrifying study of the thing that could actually bring our modern society to its knees: dumb asses.

“These things should be banned,” writes Allen Braun. He goes on to cite high energy inefficiencies (which do not exist), as if a world without wires wouldn’t be worth the year or so it might take for technologists to tweak the problem (which is, again, not major). More importantly, why are we so obsessed with conservation of energy at all? If you live in the Western World you probably have fresh drinking water, which is increasingly something that poor people in poor countries do not have. This is not a technology problem. We know how to turn salt water into fresh water. What we lack is the energy to do it at scale. We don’t need to be conserving energy right now, we need to be using more of it. A lot more of it. And to do that, we need to develop new ways to produce a # ton of it. Hi, nuclear power. Care to dance? But oh right, the same people screaming at the top of their lungs about the horrors of global hunger refuse to allow our technologists the power it will take to build our way out of the problem.





thoughtcatalog.com...

edit on 30-12-2014 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 02:10 AM
link   


Here is an interesting video of Stuart Hameroff talking about the brain as a Quantum Computer, its a good listen.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   


Here is a nice short video on quantum physics and counsiousness. What we observe effects what we experience, how we percieve the world changes our experience of it.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 01:49 AM
link   
It amazes me how when we are awake and dream we have to recreate everything within our own minds just to experience our part in the play of counsiousness.


edit on 19-1-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2015 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: VirusGuard

originally posted by: stormcell

I don't think we could really understand all the tricks that evolution could have used.
There was once an experiment where hardware engineers used simulated evolution to build a new logic circuit to discriminate between two frequencies. They set up their design system to generate random logic circuits, evaluate them, sort them by performance, reject the worst 10%, and apply mutations to the best 10%. This was repeated until they were able to get the circuit to pass verification tests. Then the engineers built the real hardware logic. But the strange thing was that many of the components weren't connected together as you would expect from an engineer designed circuit. One of the problems with designing logic circuits is that "crosstalk" the electric fields generated by electrons moving along one wire, can induce signals in other adjacent wires. Avoiding this requires careful design. In the evolution designed circuits, the use of crosstalk was used heavily. Resonating magnetic fields would be generated whenever a matching frequency was detected and this would generate a signal.

The same type of thing happened when they used some type of A.I program to make a robot walk and the program logic output of the program was so strange that the original programmers could not understand how it worked.
I don't think we will be at the top of the food chain for much longer because we are building our own replacment but lets call it evoloution if we are so daft as to be the designers of our own downfall


Well when we think about it, we will most likely be replaced by superhumans of some sort, I got no problem with superhumans, I just hope to be one of them someday lolz. . . . .
edit on 20-1-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Here's a place where you can test your ideas - an online quantum computer which anyone can play with:

qcplayground.withgoogle.com...#/home

Quantum Computing Playground

Quantum Computing Playground is a browser-based WebGL Chrome Experiment. It features a GPU-accelerated quantum computer with a simple IDE interface, and its own scripting language with debugging and 3D quantum state visualization features. Quantum Computing Playground can efficiently simulate quantum registers up to 22 qubits, run Grover's and Shor's algorithms, and has a variety of quantum gates built into the scripting language itself.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phantom423
Here's a place where you can test your ideas - an online quantum computer which anyone can play with:



qcplayground.withgoogle.com...#/home



Quantum Computing Playground



Quantum Computing Playground is a browser-based WebGL Chrome Experiment. It features a GPU-accelerated quantum computer with a simple IDE interface, and its own scripting language with debugging and 3D quantum state visualization features. Quantum Computing Playground can efficiently simulate quantum registers up to 22 qubits, run Grover's and Shor's algorithms, and has a variety of quantum gates built into the scripting language itself.



Thanks for the link really interesting good stuff!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join