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.

 

A Quantum Walk to Consciousness

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
There's growing evidence that we have a Quantum Mind. It's amazing that materialist have been telling us for years that evolution and natural selection can do all things. Now we see that quantum features can be found in biological systems they want to limit what evolution and natural selection can do and try to prohibit the brain from using these quantum features. There's no reason why a quantum mind wouldn't evolve to give a species a huge advantage and that's exactly what happened.

We see Penrose/Hameroff with confirmation of quantum vibrations in microtubules.

Quantum Vibrations

We see quantum walks in nature and there's no reason why our species didn't evolve quantum circuitry to give our species a HUGE advantage. Here's M.I.T. Professor Seth Lloyd on the emerging field of Quantum Biology.


By zapping complexes of photosynthetic molecules with lasers, the authors of the paper were able to show that the excitons use quantum mechanics to make their journey through the photocomplex more efficient. The experimental evidence was strong and compelling. The authors also speculated that the excitons were performing a particular quantum computation algorithm called a quantum search, in which the wave-like nature of propagation allows the excitons to zero in on their target. As it turns out, the excitons were performing a different kind of quantum algorithm called a quantum walk, but the “crackpot” fact remained: Quantum computation was helping the bacteria move energy from point A to point B.

How could tiny bacteria be performing the kind of sophisticated quantum manipulations that it takes human beings a room full of equipment to perform?


www.pbs.org...

A paper was published that said true artificial intelligence will need to be equipped with quantum circuitry in order to do quantum walks.


Your Android phone (or iPhone, if that's how you roll) is an impressive machine, with computing speeds and storage capacities thousands of times those of desktop PCs from only years ago. If Moore's Law holds up, your smart watch may outshine today's phones the way today's phones eclipse old PCs.

But no matter how powerful these machines become, they may never develop true intelligence if we continue to rely on conventional computing technology. According to the authors of a paper published in the journal Physical Review X last July, however, adding a dash of quantum mechanics could do the trick.

Quantum walks, on the other hand, describe a walker who doesn't exist at one spot at a time, but instead is distributed over many locations with varying probability of being at any one of them. Instead of taking a random step to the left or right for example, the quantum walker has taken both steps. There is some probability that you will find the walker in one place or the other, but until you make a measurement the walker exists in both.

That's not to say you'd need to make a full-blown quantum computer to build a truly intelligent machine - only part of an otherwise classical computer would need to be supplemented with a bit of quantum circuitry. That's good because progress toward developing a stand-alone quantum computer has been about as slow as the progress toward artificial intelligence. Combining artificial intelligence systems with quantum circuitry could be the recipe we need to build the HAL 9000s and R. Daneel Olivaws of the future.


physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com...

The problem occurs because people don't understand decoherence. Like Seth Lloyd said, nature has figured out how to do these things efficiently. The fact is, decoherence doesn't destroy superposition in all bases so you still can have superposition and entanglement even after decoherence time or a system has reached equilibrium.

This is because of a weak coupling to the environment say in the energy bases which doesn't destroy superposition and entanglement in the computational bases. Here's a post at D Wave on this:

Decoherence: myths and realities


It is therefore not correct to assume all superpositions are destroyed after the decoherence time. One needs to clearly specify in what basis the environment acts and what is its influence in other bases. We usually care about superposition in the computation basis, where useful interferences happen. Below, a few simple examples with more details are provided. Some understanding of density matrix theory is required to follow the details.

Decoherence is a process through which quantum superposition in a system is washed out due to coupling to an environment. It is a basis-dependent phenomenon, therefore, decoherence in one basis does not necessarily destroy superposition in another basis. In the weak coupling limit, when the Hamiltonian of the system is dominant and the environment is a perturbation, decoherence happens in the energy basis. In the strong coupling limit decoherence may destroy superposition in other bases.


dwave.wordpress.com...

Very interesting post. Here's a published paper that showed the same thing occurs in photosynthesis and you can still have superpositions even at room temperature.

Quantum entanglement in photosynthetic light-harvesting complexes


Light-harvesting components of photosynthetic organisms are complex, coupled, many-body quantum systems, in which electronic coherence has recently been shown to survive for relatively long timescales, despite the decohering effects of their environments. Here, we analyse entanglement in multichromophoric light-harvesting complexes, and establish methods for quantification of entanglement by describing necessary and sufficient conditions for entanglement and by deriving a measure of global entanglement. These methods are then applied to the Fenna–Matthews–Olson protein to extract the initial state and temperature dependencies of entanglement. We show that, although the Fenna–Matthews–Olson protein in natural conditions largely contains bipartite entanglement between dimerized chromophores, a small amount of long-range and multipartite entanglement should exist even at physiological temperatures. This constitutes the first rigorous quantification of entanglement in a biological system. Finally, we discuss the practical use of entanglement in densely packed molecular aggregates such as light-harvesting complexes.


www.nature.com...-information

One of the reasons there's this objection is because a Quantum Mind explains all features of consciousness even what we call paranormal. So because of things like entanglement, superposition and non locality, you have to accept things like life after death, near death experiences, psychics, ESP, telepathy and more.




posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Science continues and will always put itself to shame as it doggedly searches this way and that for THE answer that some of us discover with nothing more than meditation.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

Then you can provide objective evidence if you have the answers, no?



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 02:07 PM
link   


So because of things like entanglement, superposition and non locality, you have to accept things like life after death, near death experiences, psychics, ESP, telepathy and more.


With these above abilities being probable to some, I couldn't help asking myself while reading, why the hell do we care? What are we doing with our lives? I seek this information incessantly, but to what end? No matter what we think we know, we can't possibly prove sh!t. We can only believe what we, as individuals, perceive. And even that is questionable at very best. We have got to get off this roller coaster.....aaaaarg.



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


You need a video to explain the quantum photosynthesis.


eta: except I don't buy the narrator's last sentence. "Evolution's trial and error " Something really occurred to me after watching this video. It's the chicken or egg thing. How, can a plant or even a basic chlorophyll molecule via "trial and error" develop a system to move photons down every possible path if it never existed??? There is no trial, only error, once. See what I'm getting at? It would have to be correct first shot and this to me begs a HUGE question which leads to me to only one possible conclusion. What came first, the quantum system to move photons or the plant? The quantum system did. It MADE the plant. dun dun dun duuuuun
edit on 16-8-2015 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo

Thanks for the video, it explained the process really well!

Though it seems you took offence to the word "evolution"... above the amazing processes at work in this awesome discovery.

You're thinking in terms of a single plant having to "trial and error" all future possibilities itself, and get it right first time... that's not how evolution works... because it wasn't "one plant" that had to luck onto the ability... it was a beneficial trait that revealed itself as a more efficient system than the rest of the population when it occurred.

It is life filling all the nooks and crannies of the physical laws of the universe. It's about efficiency...

Out of billions of organisms in an algae population, which were already managing to survive based on less efficient systems (where your video showed that in the evolved system of passing electrons through its cells, much energy was being lost, but obviously still enough was still getting through for survival based on pure chance), that one mutation allowed a previously untapped resource of Quantum Walk to provide more energy to the organism, giving it a greater chance of survival than its peers by utilising available resources more efficiently. Once evolution had found that particular niche, over the following generations, that trait was naturally selected in the population over the still viable, but less efficient previous system.

That’s what was meant by “evolution’s trial and error”… and obviously it’s exactly what happened, because it exists today… how very awesome that biology can utilise such complex physical properties in its constant struggle for survival.

It will be interesting to see how this is applied not only to manufactured solar cells, but may be possible to utilise in biological computing!

Once someone figures out how to apply it, even Google searches will seem slow, as we will be able to search all possibilities at once, and receive search results almost instantly across vast data sets!



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   
god i love science!!! quantum mechanics is some weird sh*t, like the stuff of fantasy, the only thing that is slightly disturbing when it comes to the "quauntum walk" and A.I is probably as close to creating some kind of consciousness that we as humans experience, if we were to create A.I with this type of capability, is it possible that we would be creating the conditions of our own demise? and where do we draw the line?

S+F



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: puzzlesphere




You're thinking in terms of a single plant having to "trial and error" all future possibilities itself, and get it right first time... that's not how evolution works... because it wasn't "one plant" that had to luck onto the ability... it was a beneficial trait that revealed itself as a more efficient system than the rest of the population when it occurred.


I understand this is the typical understanding of evolution, moving from one lesser system to a better one over time but I think we're missing something in our assumption. A photon of light only has a nano second to reach the reactor before it decays. Yes there are trillions per second but the life form of whatever it was before evolving to a full on plant was already "alive". Meaning it had an efficient system compared to a primitive version of the quantum system. Follow? So, if natural selection runs it's course, why would an efficient system move to a lesser system? What you're saying is, the plant transitioned into a quantum walk because it's more efficient than the previous system that sustained its life in the first place. This argument would work except it would have to mean the quantum system was already flawless. Otherwise, it would be a genetic blunder trying to create a new quantum system via "trial and error" when it already had a successful one.

Also, not only did one species of plant discover the quantum walk, but so did every other species which evolved simultaneously. From ocean kelp to grass on the ground, they all "coincidentally" and randomly made a shift to include the exact same principles of quantum? Reminds me of the 100th monkey scenario or the first appearance of petroglyphs globally at the same time.

I'm not denying evolution as I believe in it. However, I'm questioning how it works and why. I certainly don't believe evolution or natural selection started out as a process of elimination.




t will be interesting to see how this is applied not only to manufactured solar cells, but may be possible to utilise in biological computing!


Or this. A quantum computer that can actually predict the future based on all possibilities at the same time. Say for example, you want a desired outcome of an event but are unsure of how to proceed. We've all been there. You tell it what you want and it computes your possibilities as odds based on what actions you take. It can't tell you how to do it, but it can tell you if you're getting warmer. So, there is still some level of free will involved. Who knows, perhaps it can calculate a direct path to your goal.

eta: man my brain is working overtime about this. IS it not possible yet, with conventional computers to develop a program to calculate the amount of time for something random to become a full functional system? Surely someone has tried. For example, how many years would it take for a junk yard with all the correct scrap parts among others, to be a fully functional 747 in a tornado? Because basically, thats what "they" want us to believe where we came from
edit on 16-8-2015 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: neoholographic


You need a video to explain the quantum photosynthesis.


eta: except I don't buy the narrator's last sentence. "Evolution's trial and error " Something really occurred to me after watching this video. It's the chicken or egg thing. How, can a plant or even a basic chlorophyll molecule via "trial and error" develop a system to move photons down every possible path if it never existed??? There is no trial, only error, once. See what I'm getting at? It would have to be correct first shot and this to me begs a HUGE question which leads to me to only one possible conclusion. What came first, the quantum system to move photons or the plant? The quantum system did. It MADE the plant. dun dun dun duuuuun



In relation to Evolutionary Theory the term "Niche" is very relevant. In context an environment can dictate conditions resulting in positive development and extinction if the organism does not comply, with those conditions.

Given the conclusion that an adherence to Quantum Mechanics is a condition to survival, then the conditions of a "Niche", would be inclusive of Quantum Mechanics.


Any thoughts?
edit on 16-8-2015 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Kashai

Niche as in an octopus's ability to camouflage itself into the environment?



posted on Aug, 16 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: FlySolo

It is also an expression of why Humans have developed to our current extent.



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Here's another paper if people want to check it out.

Quantum Walks in Brain Microtubules—A Biomolecular Basis for Quantum Cognition?


Cognitive decisions are best described by quantum mathematics. Do quantum information devices operate in the brain? What would they look like? Fuss and Navarro (2013) describe quantum lattice registers in which quantum superpositioned pathways interact (compute/integrate) as ‘quantum walks’ akin to Feynman's path integral in a lattice (e.g. the ‘Feynman quantum chessboard’). Simultaneous alternate pathways eventually reduce (collapse), selecting one particular pathway in a cognitive decision, or choice. This paper describes how quantum walks in a Feynman chessboard are conceptually identical to ‘topological qubits’ in brain neuronal microtubules, as described in the Penrose-Hameroff 'Orch OR' theory of consciousness.


onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Again, these quantum walks keep coming up.

Think about it. Consciousness can be reduced to the Quantum mind taking a quantum walk instead convoluted non explanations that it must have emerged.

So if I'm going to Burger King or Mr. Hero my quantum mind calculates both states(quantum walk) and then I take a classical walk to one or the other.

This might also explain some of the brain activity that occurs before decisions enter consciousness. This occurs in places like the prefrontal cortex the same area Hameroff talks about with microtubules and the quantum mind.
edit on 17-8-2015 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   
This type and quality of OP and thread is like the meat of ATS. Nice work. I am smarter than I was a couple of minutes ago (and will be smarter still when I come back to take my time with this one).



posted on Aug, 17 2015 @ 07:28 PM
link   


A review and update of a controversial 20-year-old theory of consciousness published in Physics of Life Reviews claims that consciousness derives from deeper level, finer scale activities inside brain neurons. The recent discovery of quantum vibrations in "microtubules" inside brain neurons corroborates this theory, according to review authors Stuart Hameroff and Sir Roger Penrose. They suggest that EEG rhythms (brain waves) also derive from deeper level microtubule vibrations, and that from a practical standpoint, treating brain microtubule vibrations could benefit a host of mental, neurological, and cognitive conditions.


Source

Any thoughts?



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Kashai

yeah, I already covered this last Jan if you want to look.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
very nice reads in the op, thanks for sharing.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 06:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
One of the reasons there's this objection is because a Quantum Mind explains all features of consciousness even what we call paranormal. So because of things like entanglement, superposition and non locality, you have to accept things like life after death, near death experiences, psychics, ESP, telepathy and more.


This one pulled me in (that, and the fact I don't 'fully' understand the rest). Can you ellaborate on this, primarily on life ofter death? In layman's terms please.



posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

The human brain uses only 10 percent of its capability, this alone renders us humans still infants in the scale of evolution, can you imagine if we can use more?

Then we will know the meaning of life and our earthy existence, trials and hardships will be no more.




posted on Aug, 24 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

Unfortuneately the "10% of the brain thing" is totally bogus... for many reasons.

10% of the Brain Myth

Look it up, there are lots of great articles about it, but basically we generally use almost all of our brains all the time. Bits of it can be more active at different times, but generally most of it is doing something most of the time, it just fluctuates with leveles of activity. Increased brain activity is more like overclocking your computer rather than tapping into unused capacity, and generally needs to rest after prolonged periods of increases in activity.

That’s why we get “brain tired”. ;-)

edit on 24-8-2015 by puzzlesphere because: (no reason given)







 
11

log in

join