Why Physicists are Saying Consciousness Is A State of Matter; Like a Solid, a Liquid, or a Gas

m3lh4d0

Interesting. I like it. The rules: a conscious system must be able to store information in a memory, retrieve it efficiently and process the information; and the system must contain error-correcting codes that allow any subset of information to be reconstructed from the rest.

1 word: hologram. If you cut a hologram in half, you can still see the piece missing, the only difference is the resolution of the image has decreased from the original. But you are still able to recognize what you are seeing.

Hmm. Interesting. This implies that the stored data is comparable to a solution. Whatever information you find in one sector, you find in all sectors. Every value is spread equally throughout the entire package.

I think the important things for consciousness is constant data input, from outside the conscious entity (senses, sensation that can be digitized and stored as information of varying kinds), imagination (where that information can be compared according to its different classifications and subtleties and nuances, though who knows if micro conscious organisms have thoughts like see in images but I guess they must in some capacity), also I think a key ingredient is an intimate melding of software and hardware blurred to the point of them being each other. When a child is born it has the potential hardware to retain information, and view that information and do novel things with it, we program ourselves, with language and physical learning of cause and effect, logic. The biggest thing we dont know, I think, is what is it that can see information and control information 'it self' that is the problem, the self part, the I, the conscious 'being'. We are pretty much a video camera that can see what it is recording, and edit what it is recording to infinite degrees. How do we build one of those.

I like the thought processes behind it.

It will be interesting to see where all of the following research goes. I think that tying it in with the quantum is a good step in beginning to understand new things about the universe. Along with some other areas that are making some cool headway, I think we are living in quite an interesting time.

Regardless of how "wrong" these scientists may, or may not, be is not too important. The idea that they are willing to scientifically pursue consciousness in the first place is a big step! Generally accepted science will undoubtedly be "wrong" for a while in such uncharted territory. Neat stuff.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I'm not a physicist, but it seems clear to me the link Sofi brought up clearly destroys your reasoning on what matter and energy is.

You do realize that the term, "energy" is qualified differently depending on the context of how it's used, specifically towards what field of study?

I'm on the fence of what exactly consciousness is, and the majority of highly intelligent scientists seem to be so as well, due to pure humility and a lack of knowledge on what it is we're dealing with. For you to say with assurity that consciousness is this or that, and arises from this or that, makes me think you don't really have a clue what you're talking about.

Forgive my lack of will to provide a few links to act like I know what I'm talking about. I see too many possibilities, and don't have the proper education to do much but wonder, and wait until, perhaps, we get a clue sometime later this century. Until then, thanks for the chuckles!

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I understand that now. I hadn't thought of that because of the number of logical errors it takes to get to that conclusion.

I don't believe anything of substance is needed for a vessel of consciousness. I don't disbelieve it, either. No, I have no measurements of a consciousness outside of my own. I guess I can imply yours and everyone elses....but there is no proof that any of you exist. Only evidence to imply it.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We know that consciousness exists (or we can reasonably imply it until otherwise proven false). But we do not know the confines of what consciousness is and/or operates in. That is the purpose of this thread: discussing what consciousness is, and how it operates. It is reasonably assumed that the body is nothing but an organism meant to feed consciousness information.

reply to post by m3lh4d0


Yes a hologram, but you ignored my little joke:

Reminds me of fractals, and explains the origins of hypocrisy.

Is there something wrong with me? Is that really not funny?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

I hadn't thought of that because of the number of logical errors it takes to get to that conclusion.

Me neither.





roflmao

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


When you speak of 'vessels' for consciousness, you gave me a point to ponder. Do you think it is rational to assume 'all' living things (life forms) are conscious, even if they do not have a brain? Because down to the smallest living organism, they all struggle for this 'existence' or 'life'. To Live.

It reminds me of an article that I don't have the link to, (I'm sure one could find some research on it easily enough), it was referring to how other organs in the body can store memories, among other data. Like the coincidences in mentality of heart donations, the donor's skills, language, or 'conscious' memories inherited into the patient.

I am sure there are many other oddities to consider on consciousness. Like you guys, I am hoping we make some science proper headway into better knowledge of what's really going on. These kinds of articles give me hope!

Thanks everyone who have been contributing, it's been a fantastic read and great viewpoints from all of you! I hope to add more to the thread as I research, and I hope I can learn more from you guys as well.

reply to post by Amarri

...reminds me of an article that I don't have the link to, (I'm sure one could find some research on it easily enough), it was referring to how other organs in the body can store memories, among other data.

Not quite what you're talking about but definitely related - scratched my cornea years ago, the specialist warned me that the cells would retain the memory of the injury for 2-3 years, and might revert to the injured state after healing even without another injury. [Suggests injured cells retain memory of healthy state too.]

Thanks for the thread. Fun stuff.

reply to post by soficrow


Wow, great example! Yes, it is quite similar. Your's was with your own tissue 'memory', and the other cases were with complete strangers, but still the 'similar' outcome. Some of it gets really detailed, like the man who received a heart transplant from a donor who had shot himself. 3 or so years later, approx. this guy shoots himself on the same day that the original donor had ended his life. Or the girl who suddenly had a talent for playing the violin after having a transplant from a musician. From what I understand the donor's personal information is kept confidential, so this is really amazing and extraordinary stuff. As skeptical as I am, it's still kind of difficult to ignore.

Thank you for sharing that Soficrow, it's given me even more positive reinforcement of what I am considering. Great insight on the subject!

I think it would turn out rather surprising that it isn't just our brains responsible for 'all' of our conscious or subconscious activities. This may also lead into further research of AI Technologies, and the missing links for emotions and other 'humanistic' qualities. No matter how much they tend to the brain, there could be other important catalysts going on, that we're not really aware of yet. IMO.

reply to post by ImaFungi

I think the important things for consciousness is constant data input...

The Kogi are an isolated pre-Columbian tribe in the Andes who call themselves the "Elder Brothers." Their Shamans are trained from birth and kept in the dark in caves til they are adolescent. If you're interested, it's worth researching (focus on the BBC doc) - and suggests that extremely sophisticated consciousness results from an apparent lack of data input.

reply to post by Amarri


Both "consciousness" and "matter" are ill-defined concepts. Chomsky raises some great challenges for both physicalists and consciousness advocates, implying that both the terms are virtually vacuous in meaning.

soficrow
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

I think the important things for consciousness is constant data input...

The Kogi are an isolated pre-Columbian tribe in the Andes who call themselves the "Elder Brothers." Their Shamans are trained from birth and kept in the dark in caves til they are adolescent. If you're interested, it's worth researching (focus on the BBC doc) - and suggests that extremely sophisticated consciousness results from an apparent lack of data input.

You gave it away when you said they are 'trained' from birth. That is data input. Without 'training' if you put a tabula rasa baby in a cave and leave it there the odds arent in its favor of developing decent to any consciousness.

reply to post by ImaFungi


I agree in general - but I still think the Kogi and their Shamans are astounding, amazing and totally awesome. Also, as I recall, the limited sensory input is a bit like a 'sensory deprivation' chamber and has the effect of forcing the "other senses" to develop. Thus leading to a consideration of just what those "other senses" might be and perhaps, expanding the notion of consciousness.

Or not.

reply to post by soficrow


I did this as a child. Was too sensitive and would get overwhelmed from interacting with people at school all day. Would crawl into the top shelf of a closet after school, close the door, put my hands over ears, and close my eyes curled into a ball.

Had some pretty amazing experiences. Basically mind-hacked my brain into consciously dreaming. Didn't much care to analyze the experience as a child, just enjoyed it.

Pretty sure the explanation is straight forward:

The human brain is easily hackable, because it operates via conservation of energy. It's a pattern scavengering fool, that is constantly trying to orient itself via the senses when conscious. You give it a lack of input, and it'll seek elsewhere to fill in the gaps. That means entering into the dreamscape, just to satisfy our egos need for stability.

I'm sure there's a more scientific reason for it, but the above suffices for the time being.

soficrow
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

I agree in general - but I still think the Kogi and their Shamans are astounding, amazing and totally awesome. Also, as I recall, the limited sensory input is a bit like a 'sensory deprivation' chamber and has the effect of forcing the "other senses" to develop. Thus leading to a consideration of just what those "other senses" might be and perhaps, expanding the notion of consciousness.

Or not.

edit on 18/1/14 by soficrow because: expl wd

I think the human consciousness has accomplished more impressive feats then that sort of thing, though I used to be into that sort of thing, I now realize that things like airplanes, submarines, nuclear power planets, energy grid, computers/internet, sky scrapers and bridges and brain surgery are more worthy and worthwhile and astonishing uses of consciousness then anything a shaman has ever done, not to diss the shaman, im just stating my opinion.

ImaFungi

I think the human consciousness has accomplished more impressive feats then that sort of thing, though I used to be into that sort of thing, I now realize that things like airplanes, submarines, nuclear power planets, energy grid, computers/internet, sky scrapers and bridges and brain surgery are more worthy and worthwhile and astonishing uses of consciousness then anything a shaman has ever done, not to diss the shaman, im just stating my opinion.

Those are astonishing uses of consciousness indeed. But what if the inspiration behind them and the inspiration behind a shaman figuring out how to, say, brew ayahuasca from various plants in a maze of Amazon plants are one-in-the-same?

What if, say, the Wright Brothers had a moment of 'shamanic inspiration' that went unrecognized? What if Einstein's biography revealed a 'shamanic crack-up' in his youth?

deleted

reply to post by webedoomed

...You give it [the mind] a lack of input, and it'll seek elsewhere to fill in the gaps. That means entering into the dreamscape, just to satisfy our egos need for stability.

Hmm. It's just an internal dreamscape? You're absolutely certain about that?

reply to post by ImaFungi

I think the human consciousness has accomplished more impressive feats then that sort of thing

What sort of thing? Are you assuming we share the same perception of what a shaman is and does? ...I actually go more with BlueMule on this one.