How does consciousness interact with the brain?

[George-ananda]

Exactly so. What I mean is that in the double slit experiment it is the electron wave function interacting with an atom in the detector screen that causes detection at one spot rather than another. It is not because a conscious observer is watching it.

I have had this double-slit experiment discussion with other materialists before and I'm sure it's not going to end in agreement this time either.

Let me ask you this. Why do you think the double-slit experiment results are considered counter-intuitive by the great minds involved in this? Are you going to say they just don't see the obvious?

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Quantum mechanics does though suggest and allow for this possibility

How so?

This is a misunderstanding. Consciousness in this theory is not held to be a product of quantum mechanics. Consciousness is something fundamental and mysterious. Its interaction with the material will just look to us as quantum mechanical behavior.

If it looks like QM behavior then why not conclude that it is QM behavior?

And their thinking dovetails with the teachings of what I independently have come to believe are the teachings of those who have delved deepest into the ultimate nature of reality (Advaita Vedanta philosophy; and this predates quantum mechanics by a thousand years).

Their thinking amounts to an argument from ignorance. They are stating quite clearly that they don't know what consciousness is.

 

[George-ananda]

How so?



If it looks like QM behavior then why not conclude that it is QM behavior?



Their thinking amounts to an argument from ignorance. They are stating quite clearly that they don't know what consciousness is.

Well I happen to be interested in metaphysics. And I also consider other wisdom traditions (not just material science) in forming my personal worldview.

I hold consciousness to be a mystery to us. The best analogy I heard is that we are like sight trying to see the eyeball directly.

I also believe there are great masters adept at stilling the active mind and that they can then experience expanded consciousness. We can learn from them through the limited ability of words to describe. It is an argument from experience and not ignorance.

 

[exchemist]

I have had this double-slit experiment discussion with other materialists before and I'm sure it's not going to end in agreement this time either.

Let me ask you this. Why do you think the double-slit experiment results are considered counter-intuitive by the great minds involved in this? Are you going to say they just don't see the obvious?

It is not considered surprising by people who have studied QM, because it is what the theory predicts. It is only counterintuitive in the sense that our standard macroscopic analogies, of "particles" or "waves", have trouble expressing it visually. So I do not think the "great minds" are unduly troubled by it. It is, however, a great way to teach 6th form science students about what QM implies.

The electron or photon "wave" travels through both slits, even though only one "particle's worth" of material passes through, and it is detected at a location on the screen, with a probability that reflects the interference fringes built up by the wave. So that as successive electrons or photons pass through, the pattern of dots eventually builds up into the expected interference pattern with peaks and troughs of "particle" density. Obviously therefore, pictorially, you need both the wave idea and the particle idea to express what happens.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Well I happen to be interested in metaphysics. And I also consider other wisdom traditions (not just material science) in forming my personal worldview.

There is a difference between considering them and believing them.

I hold consciousness to be a mystery to us.

No, you don't. You are saying that you know where consciousness comes from, that it comes from some higher realm. You can't say that consciousness comes from some non-material realm one moment and then say it is a mystery the next.

The best analogy I heard is that we are like sight trying to see the eyeball directly.

Use a mirror, a camera, or look at someone else's eyeball.

I also believe there are great masters adept at stilling the active mind and that they can then experience expanded consciousness. We can learn from them through the limited ability of words to describe. It is an argument from experience and not ignorance.

There have been a lot of people fooled by their experiences.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes, I have no doubt that there is a tight correlation between the functioning of the neural network and the subjective experience of consciousness. But I have trouble believing that consciousness is nothing more than this.

I think conscious and the mind reside in the spiritual realm and is triggered when the brain enters the right state. And there is two way communication, but I can discover no mechanism for this communication between mind and body. So sad.

And what is that right state, please?
Regards

 

[Polymath257]

I have had this double-slit experiment discussion with other materialists before and I'm sure it's not going to end in agreement this time either.

Let me ask you this. Why do you think the double-slit experiment results are considered counter-intuitive by the great minds involved in this? Are you going to say they just don't see the obvious?

Because it shows that electrons (for example) are neither classical particles nor classical waves.

For classical waves, there are interference patterns, but the intensity can be arbitrarily small.

For classical particles, there is a minimum intensity (one particle), but no interference pattern emerges.

But in the *real world* double slit experiment, there is a minimum intensity (single spots on the screen, all the same size), while also showing an interference pattern. So, electrons share characteristics of both classical waves and classical particles while being neither one.

 

[1137]

How does consciousness interact with the brain?

Assuming dualism; that consciousness is not merely an illusion created by brain complexity, nor an emergent property caused by the neural network.

Seems there is two way communication:

1. From brain to consciousness: after receiving sensory information and preprocessing it.
2. From consciousness to brain: to command the brain to trigger bodily activity, or thought, or whatever.

I'm hoping to locate a specific mechanism for the communication, perhaps something involving quantum mechanics.

Also, should we consider not merely conscious activity but also unconscious mental activity since this occurs without being conscious?

My best guess is that the brain acts as a reciever for consciousness. That's what the science and philosophy we're currently at most suggest by far. Just like you have to time in to specific radio waves to hear a certain tune, it seems certain biological beings evolved in such a way that allowed us access to consciosness.

 

[George-ananda]

Because it shows that electrons (for example) are neither classical particles nor classical waves.

For classical waves, there are interference patterns, but the intensity can be arbitrarily small.

For classical particles, there is a minimum intensity (one particle), but no interference pattern emerges.

But in the *real world* double slit experiment, there is a minimum intensity (single spots on the screen, all the same size), while also showing an interference pattern. So, electrons share characteristics of both classical waves and classical particles while being neither one.

The part you probably don’t accept is the claim that adding a conscious passive observer is what makes the wave behave as a particle.

I have heard this from some pretty smart physicists.

Why passive observation should matter is counter-intuitive.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

My best guess is that the brain acts as a reciever for consciousness.

What process allows the brain to receive something from the consciousness?

Just like you have to time in to specific radio waves to hear a certain tune, it seems certain biological beings evolved in such a way that allowed us access to consciosness.

But we can show how a radio receiver works. How does the brain do the same thing?

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

The part you probably don’t accept is the claim that adding a conscious passive observer is what makes the wave behave as a particle.

Why would we accept something that isn't true? The piece of film on the other side of the double slit is not a conscious passive observer, yet it causes the collapse of the wave function.

 

[Polymath257]

The part you probably don’t accept is the claim that adding a conscious passive observer is what makes the wave behave as a particle.

I have heard this from some pretty smart physicists.

Why passive observation should matter is counter-intuitive.

I don't accept it because it isn't true. The wave properties *and* the particle properties are both aspects of ALL quantum particles. The wave determines the probabilities of observing the properties of the particle (position, momentum, energy, etc). Furthermore, both the wave and the particle properties show up and can be recorded even if no conscious observer is around.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I have had this double-slit experiment discussion with other materialists before and I'm sure it's not going to end in agreement this time either.

Let me ask you this. Why do you think the double-slit experiment results are considered counter-intuitive by the great minds involved in this? Are you going to say they just don't see the obvious?

I'm wondering if you're talking about Captain Quantum with the double slit experiment in the pseudoscience documentary, "What the Bleep".

 

[Polymath257]

I'm wondering if you're talking about Captain Quantum with the double slit experiment in the pseudoscience documentary, "What the Bleep".

Oh, I hope not. I remember one time watching that with my (then) girlfriend (who is also in physics) and losing count of how many *basic* errors there were in the first 15 minutes. We started out thinking it could be a drinking game, but gave up. We just didn't want to get that drunk.

 

[shunyadragon]

How does consciousness interact with the brain?

Assuming dualism; that consciousness is not merely an illusion created by brain complexity, nor an emergent property caused by the neural network.

Seems there is two way communication:

1. From brain to consciousness: after receiving sensory information and preprocessing it.
2. From consciousness to brain: to command the brain to trigger bodily activity, or thought, or whatever.

I'm hoping to locate a specific mechanism for the communication, perhaps something involving quantum mechanics.

Also, should we consider not merely conscious activity but also unconscious mental activity since this occurs without being conscious?

I do not believe the consciousness interacts with the brain. The consciousness is a product of the brain and interacts with other forms of consciousness.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I do not believe the consciousness interacts with the brain. The consciousness is a product of the brain and interacts with other forms of consciousness.

I am curious to see if they can come up with some sort of workable scientific principle that explains how a separate consciousness could communicate with the brain irrespective of the actual separate existence of that consciousness.

 

[Polymath257]

I am curious to see if they can come up with some sort of workable scientific principle that explains how a separate consciousness could communicate with the brain irrespective of the actual separate existence of that consciousness.

There's also the issue of the mechanism for consciousness on the 'other side'. Exactly how does it work? How does it send signals to the brain? How does it receive signals from the brain? What is the physics of thoughts?

 

[shunyadragon]

↑
I have had this double-slit experiment discussion with other materialists before and I'm sure it's not going to end in agreement this time either.

Let me ask you this. Why do you think the double-slit experiment results are considered counter-intuitive by the great minds involved in this? Are you going to say they just don't see the obvious?

I am not a materialist, but the double-slit experiment being counter intuitive has nothing to do with the issue of consciousness. Just because various aspects of Quantum behavior appear counter intuitive is simply a case of the limits of our intuition and intellect to explain Quantum Mechanics without relying the matter of fact scientific results of the research concerning Quantum Mechanics.

It is best not consider anything about Quantum Mechanics as intuitive, or conforming to our conventional expectations.

Theists often generate controversy where there is none simply because we do not have a complete understanding of Quantum Mechanics. Careful of the 'argument from ignorance.' to justify a religious agenda.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How does consciousness interact with the brain?

Assuming dualism; that consciousness is not merely an illusion created by brain complexity, nor an emergent property caused by the neural network.

Seems there is two way communication:

1. From brain to consciousness: after receiving sensory information and preprocessing it.
2. From consciousness to brain: to command the brain to trigger bodily activity, or thought, or whatever.

I'm hoping to locate a specific mechanism for the communication, perhaps something involving quantum mechanics.

Also, should we consider not merely conscious activity but also unconscious mental activity since this occurs without being conscious?

Id think consciousness is the awareness of brain activity to which the brain neurons picks up info in senses ans we translate what we experience into language already stored in the brain. I guess we are aware in our unconscious given the brain still processes info in forms of dreams. However, the consciousness I think of is self awareness to which we need to be awake to experience it beyond raw functionings of the body.

Mechanics would be neurons, senses, and proccessing thereof.

1/2 is more

Stimuli-->Brain->consciousness to process and add on to whats already in our conscious-->to filter and use via our senses-->to influence and manipulate external stimuli or use to control thoughts

How does consciousness interact with the brain?

Assuming dualism; that consciousness is not merely an illusion created by brain complexity, nor an emergent property caused by the neural network.

Seems there is two way communication:

1. From brain to consciousness: after receiving sensory information and preprocessing it.
2. From consciousness to brain: to command the brain to trigger bodily activity, or thought, or whatever.

I'm hoping to locate a specific mechanism for the communication, perhaps something involving quantum mechanics.

Also, should we consider not merely conscious activity but also unconscious mental activity since this occurs without being conscious?

 

[shunyadragon]

I am curious to see if they can come up with some sort of workable scientific principle that explains how a separate consciousness could communicate with the brain irrespective of the actual separate existence of that consciousness.

Outside the obvious communication through conventional means between forms of consciousness there is some evidence for communication between individual consciousness by unconventional or unknown means and this remains an unresolved open question. The science behind this has come up with no explanation so far. I believe there is potentially a spiritual explanation for the existence of the soul, but this remains far from any form scientific explanation.

Some stretch this to evidence of reincarnation, but I just consider it, at present, just evidence of communication between souls.