TPF : Physics of Consciousness

[Gnomon]

But this is exactly what the people I have referenced are doing successfully. They are using standard scientific methods to study the "basic building block of Mind." apokrisis has suggested looking at mind from point of view of function rather than of process. I think that's similar to what you are proposing - a more holistic understanding. I'm still working on my response to him. — T Clark

Yes. I think of Mind as the "function" of the brain : what it does instead of what it is. In that case, the "basic building block" of mind will be an action instead of an object. That's why standard (reductive) scientific methods have given way to the novel (holistic) methods of Systems Theory, which is more like ancient theoretical & speculative Philosophy than classical empirical & factual Science.

Essentially, I view Mind as more closely related to causal Energy than to malleable Matter. Maybe the atom of Mind is an Erg (unit of work). But, I have coined my own philosophical terms, to describe Mind's relationship to Information, and the power to Enform (to cause change). However, I will follow your thread to see where it leads.

Systems Theory is the interdisciplinary study of systems, i.e. cohesive [holistic] groups of interrelated, interdependent components that can be natural or human-made. ___Wikipedia
22 hours ago

[Gnomon]

I was clear. This is a discussion about mind from a scientific point of view, so there is no door open to "metaphysical philosophical concepts" unless they have specific, direct scientific consequences. — T Clark

Ironically, the "scientific point of view" has changed since the 20th century, in order to grapple with the non-classical & counter-intuitive aspects of Quantum & Information theory. For example, "quantum mechanics" is a misnomer, because that sub-atomic realm is neither quantized nor mechanical. Instead, it seems to be fuzzy & acausal. Hence, more amenable to philosophical methods.

[Gnomon]

If you have specific, credible, referenced, scientific information that describes or explains mental processes, please post it. That's what this thread is about. — T Clark

Since I'm not a practicing scientist, I don't presume to provide "specific, credible, referenced, scientific information". So, as an amateur philosopher, on a philosophy forum, I have to limit my posts to philosophical theorizing & speculation.

However, in my blog posts, I do include copious references to the informed opinions of professional scientists. And Information Theory is on the cutting edge of Mind research. I thought that might be relevant to a thread on the underlying causes of mental processes. But I now see that the OP assumes a narrow definition of what constitutes Science. So, I'll tune out.

[Gnomon]

What I mean by panprotopsychism is that fundamental matter is not conscious, but percept constituents that compose consciousness are material and form at very basic levels of emergence, — Enrique

Yes. Obviously "fundamental matter is not conscious" (dumb as a rock). But some foundational element of Nature must at least have the Potential for percepts & concepts. Otherwise, consciousness would have to be super-natural or alien.

Not all percepts are conscious (e.g. blind sight), but concepts (knowledge) are the essence of Consciousness. So, if anything physical is responsible for the emergence of consciousness, I'd nominate Energy (EnFormAction in my thesis). These natural forces are not just inert clay to be manipulated, but are causal, acting upon material nature to change its form. And Form (information) is the essence of Meaning to the human mind.

Consciousness :
Literally : to know with. To be aware of the world subjectively (self-knowledge) and objectively (other knowing). Humans know Quanta via physical senses & analysis, and Qualia via meta-physical reasoning & synthesis. In the Enformationism thesis, Consciousness is viewed as an emergent form of basic mathematical Information.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page12.html

[Gnomon]

This is an introspective insight that fits well with my model. The image "seen" by reason could be at least partly a coherent and vibrational light/molecular field that the brain participates in generating, and the logicality or "abstract" nature of the image might be a product of neural architecture coordinated with this energy field, so that the experience "makes sense". — Enrique

I have toyed with the notion that the human brain comes equipped with "templates", abstract images, that we apply to percepts in order to "make sense" of them. For example, the male of our species may not be aware of how they came to be aroused, but somehow certain percepts (e.g. curvy shapes) are interpreted as a possible instance of the typical female form. Those templates may not be physically embedded in the brain architecture. But neural processes seem to direct conscious attention to those hypothetical templates, which may be mathematical instead of material.

PS__In constructed architecture there are two kinds of "structure". The kind seen by the Eye is physical objects, such as arches, beams & columns. But the kind that is seen by Reason (ideal templates for comparison to actual things) is the abstract proportions, which indicate the balanced flow of forces in the building; and which we interpret as stability and beauty.

Template : an abstract (e.g. geometric) pattern that exemplifies an ideal form, which the perceiving mind wants to reproduce, or to recognize (know again).

Female-Body-Anatomy-Geometry-Line-Art-Image-for-Sale-Product-Image.jpg

[Gnomon]

This could be related to what I think is perhaps the most basic function of cognition, to prime an organism for future experiences. — Enrique

In sci-fi movies, AI robots, such as the Terminator, are represented as recognizing a target person by rapidly overlaying templates, until a match is found. That match evokes recorded data ; which, among other things, allows the AI to anticipate what the target will do next. The template includes, not just physical shape geometry, but other properties & qualities that may be relevant to an encounter with the target.

Structural protologicality, intuitive notions of particularized form . . .
Linear protologicality grants all kinds of organisms the proficiency to execute reasoning sequences, — Enrique

Again, I'm afraid you are way above my pay grade in the technical aspects of cognition. I had to look-up "protologicality" to confirm that it means what I guessed from the Latin : primitive forms of logic. Apparently, its a non-symbolic (non-conceptual) logic closer to mathematical relationships, than to formal philosophical reasoning. That may be what I was implying, when I defined Logic as "Geometry with words"*1. Seems that ↪Rocco Rosano may be better equipped to delve deeply into your theories.

*1. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/725311


ai-facial-recognition-887x488.jpg

[Gnomon]

As a parallel investigation, 20th and 21st century physics have come to rely on the concept of a field: matter is not fundamentally solid and stable, but rather a vast array of ripples or disturbances in a sort of fluid medium characterized by perpetual motion, with relatively persistent focal points of these perturbations being what we observe and model in the form of particles. — Enrique


Your proposed model of Consciousness is way over my head. And my brain is still smoking, from scanning another extensive & elaborate internet-theory-of-everything that may, or may not, be related to your description of matter fields quoted above. I don't want to knock you off course. But I'm just curious about how both of these unorthodox postulations might relate to my own avante garde model of reality. Due to the century-old state of Quantum Uncertainty, I remain open-minded -- though skeptical -- about alternative views of Reality.

This space-wave theory of the structure of physical reality might be genius, merely eccentric, or possibly crackpot. It's based on a mathematical reinterpretation of quantum theory – by Geoff Haselhurst et al -- proposing A> the Wave Structure of Matter, and B> that the “fluid medium” for those waves is the Aristotelian Substance we call “Space”. It sounds similar to some early quantum hypotheses of intangible-yet-fluid Aether as the medium of quantum waves. Consciousness is only one of many applications of this novel concept of Space and Matter. I'm not competent to critique the Wave Structure theory. But it piques my curiosity about the fundamental relationship between Physics & Metaphysics, and my own Information-based worldview.

On Quora Forum, I asked Haselhurst for a synopsis of his long & winding theory. I'd specifically like to know how Consciousness could arise from wave interactions in fluid space. So far, I haven't gotten a response. As far as I can tell, few professional physicists are aware of this re-re-interpretation of the role of empty space in reality. This theory is not specifically about Consciousness, so If it seems off-topic to you, I'll understand. But it could put your own Mind/Matter concept into a new context -- even farther beyond Classical Physics than Relativity and Quantum theories..

On Truth & Reality
The Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) in Space
The Dynamic Unity of Reality
https://www.spaceandmotion.com/

THE FOCAL POINT IS NOT A PARTICLE
spherical-wave-animated2.gif

Spherical-Standing-Wave-An.gif

[Gnomon]

When you get into phenomenology of physics the vast possibility is hard to get a grip on and concepts haven't progressed far at this point. I read a book by a Nobel laureate who imagined aether as a multicolored, multilayered superconductor, with electromagnetic matter an impurity in the aether. — Enrique

Yes. The Nobel Laureate you mentioned might be Frank Wilczek, whose 2008 book, The Lightness of Being, introduced the notion of space as a super-conductor. That's way above my pay grade, but the general concept of Space as an Aether Field makes some sense to me, especially as it dovetails with some of the woo-woo implications of quantum theory.

Other physicists are beginning to take the Aether concept seriously again, in order to make sense of Maxwell's electromagnetic "field", and Einstein's references to the "fabric" of space, and the 'wave function" of quantum physics. I'm not sure what Aether has to do with Consciousness, but some thinkers view it in terms of a Mind-Field. However, any notion of a matterless Field of influence is a spooky non-classical kind of phenomenon.


Aether as a physical Field :
"Under a surface of vociferous denying and pointing to flawed experiments there is a general acceptance even among modern physicists and Nobel Laureates that there is a physical strata that plays fundamentally the role of an Aether, although the term is so laden with philosophical prejudices that no one really dares to commit to the name Aether and all sorts of alternative and rather silly sounding denotations are invented: “quantum foam”, “quantum fluid” for instance or this “field” or that field”, where nobody ever can point out what kind of physical species a field IS. There are at best vague ideas what a field DOES." ___Michael Brenner
www.quora.com/Does-Aether-exist-accordi ... rn-physics

[Gnomon]

to bind matter into a percept — Enrique

It's that binding force that I have difficulty understanding. Philosophically, I can see how energy (physical causation) could be related to human intention (cultural causation). But the mechanics of that transformation from physics to percepts are beyond my comprehension. Perhaps it's like a physical Phase Change (e.g. liquid water to solid ice), in which the intermediate steps are blurry. It seems to be merely a re-arrangement of links between atoms. But what magic makes that new pattern of inter-connection emerge into consciousness as a Percept or Concept? I can only guess that the Potential for Perception is inherent in the direction of causation : a metaphor for Aboutness.

Aboutness : https://www.informationphilosopher.com/ ... ts/deacon/

[Gnomon]

Awareness is simply an emergent byproduct of this energy field's organization. — Enrique

Yes. That is generally how I see the relationship between physical structure and mental logic. But it's the steps in-between Energy and Intention that are still hard to imagine. There is still a gaping gap between quantum mechanics and spooky mysticism*1. That's why my own theory of EnFormAction requires an intentional First Cause to set Nature on a course from Material Mechanics to Mental Motives*2.

I suppose, proposing a hypothetical conscious First Cause*3, could be dismissed as a god-of-the-gaps solution to the emergence of consciousness conundrum. But, I see no viable alternative, except to just assume -- on faith in mechanical Materialism -- that there is no gap, from which purposeful Life & Mind mysteriously emerged out of inert Matter & aimless Energy.

*1. Quantum Mind :
The quantum mind or quantum consciousness is a group of hypotheses proposing that classical mechanics alone cannot explain consciousness, positing instead that quantum-mechanical phenomena, such as entanglement and superposition, may play an important part in the brain's function and could explain critical aspects of consciousness. These scientific hypotheses are as yet untested, and can overlap with quantum mysticism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind

*2. EnFormAction :
Ententional Causation. A proposed metaphysical law of the universe that causes random interactions between forces and particles to produce novel & stable arrangements of matter & energy. It’s the creative force (aka : Divine Will) of the axiomatic eternal deity that, for unknown reasons, programmed a Singularity to suddenly burst into our reality from an infinite source of possibility. AKA : The creative potential of Evolution; the power to enform; organizing Logos; directional Change.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html

*3. Isaac Newton's First Cause :
God is the same God, always and everywhere. He is omnipresent not virtually only, but also substantially, for virtue cannot subsist without substance. We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.
https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/isaac-newton-quotes
Note -- "Virtue", in this case, is creative power, and "Substance" is the creation
Note -- Newton mathematicized celestial mechanics : the logic of Change