Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Michael Helland: on 8/8/13 at 0:18am UTC, wrote Hello, I like reading your thoughts on consciousness. I rate you a ten. I...

Janko Kokosar: on 8/7/13 at 22:59pm UTC, wrote Dear Paul I partially agree with your ideas, and I also think before about...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 20:31pm UTC, wrote Dear Janko, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

Sreenath N: on 7/31/13 at 15:35pm UTC, wrote Dear Janko, Regarding your essay I want to make following comments. You,...

George Kirakosyan: on 7/30/13 at 8:39am UTC, wrote Hai Janko, I have read and rate your work that I see as an unique approach...

basudeba mishra: on 7/28/13 at 12:10pm UTC, wrote Dear Sir, This is our post to Dr. Wiliam Mc Harris in his thread. We...

Sreenath N: on 7/26/13 at 10:09am UTC, wrote Dear Janko, I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it....

Than Tin: on 7/26/13 at 5:21am UTC, wrote Hello Janko Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech ...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Ian, I've been thinking about choice of carrot or pepper. Behaving in a..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Lorraine Ford: "(continued) 3. “…so this is what defines a free choice : the Zeta..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Georgina Woodward: "What is happening in material reality provides the connection to inertia...." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

Georgina Woodward: ""We saw early on that as conformed by countless experiment, there is no..." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

andrea gonzalez: "Interesting stuff to read. Keep it up. If want to collect free gift card..." in Memory, Causality and...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in First Things First: The...

Poker Online: "https://www.jakartapoker.net/" in Downward causation:...

Enquire us: "Your Ro system desires regular maintenance to confirm it’s continually in..." in Agency in the Physical...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi FORUM
August 25, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Proposal for Quantum Consciousness by Janko Kokosar [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Janko Kokosar wrote on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 16:42 GMT
Essay Abstract

As first, a mechanism how quantum coherence in the brain can last long enough is shown. This mechanism is based on very light elementary particles. Then the arguments follow as why consciousness should be a quantum phenomenon, and how such introduction of quantum consciousness modifies the formalism of quantum mechanics. This can also be tested by an experiment. Without use of quantum mechanics it is shown how to relativize ego, to atomize consciousness, how to improve the Tononi's model, how to explain the Libet experiment, and why location of feeling of consciousness is an important paradox. It is also shown that panpsychism is an answer to many questions about consciousness. The author claims that consciousness and free will are physically so fundamental that they are not a result of some complex phenomena, but they are so fundamental as quantum physics and space-time. But, he denies dualism, and claims that connections between consciousness and physics are movement and quantum randomness. Thus, research of consciousness can tell a lot of about fundamental physics. Besides, the quantum mechanics and its interpretation are not perfect, because they do not explain quantum gravity and consciousness.

Author Bio

In young age, the author had obtained some prizes in the country level competitions in mathematics, physics, and chess. He graduated in Physics in 1989 and then he has been working in steel industry. He developed some theories in fundamental physics and theories of consciousness. He found some formulae for the elementary particles masses, offers an explanation of three space dimensions, he developed one step toward quantization of gravity, and generalized the uncertainty principle. He also tries to simplify explanations of the fundamental theories of physics. He is waiting for the valuation of his theories.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 02:13 GMT
Dear Janko

Interestingly essay, wish you success and a good review instead of greetings.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Reed wrote on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 05:28 GMT
Janko

Consciousness, the operation of the senses, or anything else that is going on in the brains/processing faculty of any sentient organism has nothing whatsoever to do with the physical circumstance. It does not affect it in any way. All it does is enable the possessor thereof to be aware of a physical input, the output being a perception of that input. That input, whilst being physically existent is not what occurred, but a representation thereof, the most obvious example being light. And that is only affected in so far as upon receipt ie being sensed)it ceases. What occurred has already occurred.

Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Janko Kokosar replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 12:13 GMT
When you consciously decided to write this essay, your consciousness changed the world around you.

If I decides to break a stick and doing this, my consciousness changes physical world around me.

Bookmark and Share


Paul Reed replied on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 05:53 GMT
Janko

Incorrect. The 'world around you' had either already occurred, was occurring (including you action), or had not yet occurred. Any action just alters what would have otherwise occurred, there is no pre-determined 'future'. Which is a statement of the obvious, ie a definition of cause and effect. Any given reality is a function of its predecessor.

Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Janko Kokosar replied on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 07:27 GMT
Paul,

Any given reality is a function of its predecessor and (!) at least of Conway's "free will". (Conway's reference is in my essay.)

Please be more specific: do you believe, that we are only observers of our bodies without free will? (On this point we can ignore my claim that humans's free will is the same, as Conway's one, let us say that they are different.) If we have free will, we influence on world around us. Do you think that we have free will and despite of this consciousness does not influence on a world around us.

Please be specific, that we can talk further.

Bookmark and Share



Manuel S Morales wrote on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 06:50 GMT
Janko,

You have an interesting approach well worth consideration.

You might find of interest the evidence I have obtained that serve to unify gravity with the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces as one super-deterministc force. I invite you to review my findings and rate my essay when you get the chance:

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1809

Good luck with your entry.

Regards,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Koorosh Shahdaei wrote on Jun. 25, 2013 @ 10:00 GMT
Mr. Kokosar,

Consciousness is interesting subject with regards to physics, and agree that little attention has been paid to that from physicists. Although brain activities are electrical signaling in the background of our consciousness, do you mean the consciousness itself has such nature?

Regards

Koorosh

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jun. 26, 2013 @ 09:26 GMT
Dear Janko,

Just to commend your bold atomization policy, even extending it to something like consciousness!

On this policy, is space atomized? If so, what separates the atoms of space, since space cannot be the same thing separating itself?

Then you say, "...because everything what exists in physics is movement"

If something annihilates (disappears) to nothing has it moved? Likewise, if something that was not there emerges from nothing, has motion taken place?

Good luck in the contest,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Janko Kokosar replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 12:26 GMT
Akinbo,

Annihilation to nothing and vice versa are virtual processes. They are caused by uncertainty principle and they are very small part of (partially) not moving processes among others. It is too small part, that we can say that this process is something special and different in physics.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 19:57 GMT
Janko,

Are you saying that all matter has consciousness and that consciousness is not a product of number of neurons or neuron connections? Certainly among anthropic principle advocates, consciousness is not analyzed enough, explaining where it was at the time of the Big Bang, if that is proposed.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Janko Kokosar replied on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 20:16 GMT
Jim,

In the essay, I claim that our consciousness is a product of memory, which is supported by neurons and neuron connections. But this consciousness is built up from the primitive consciousness, which is everywhere.

I do not follow your opinion about consciousness at Big Bang?

Bookmark and Share


Paul Reed replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 05:03 GMT
Janko

And physically, what is this consciousness which is everywhere?

Paul

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Janko Kokosar replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 12:20 GMT
Paul,

As I wrote in section 1, the foundation of physical world are dimensionless masses of elementary particles. These are also information. Physical world around us is virtual reality (VR). This VR is also qualia. More primitive qualia is also in unicellular organisms and in non-living matter. Qualia are the only reality.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 00:34 GMT
Dear Kokosar

Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon.

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The main stream community people want magic from science...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Marcus Arvan wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 02:33 GMT
Janko: I agree with you that consciousness is fundamental, but I don't see how panpsychism alone explains quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is entirely probabilistic. But consciousness seems very different. Our conscious choices *determine* our actions; they are not simply random.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author Janko Kokosar replied on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 12:54 GMT
Marcus,

This is a very important question. I wrote about this in my last section. But, because I am not sure about everything, I proposed two options:

1. Inclusion of consciousness changes formalism of QM, but it is not measured at all quantum measurements until now. And every decision is primarily influenced by past experiences for living beings, but not for quantum phenomena in non-living world.

2. Inclusion of consciousness does not change formalism of QM, and every decision is primarily not influenced by past experiences.

If you will read this section and will ask, I will answer more clearly.

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 04:47 GMT
Send to all of you

THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT

To change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you , I will add a reply to you :

1 . THE...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 11:53 GMT
Hello, Janko!

A very interesting essay and sweeping conclusions for inclusion of consciousness into a coherent picture of the world and building a "model of self-aware of the Universe" (philosopher and mathematician Basil Nalimov). Good luck! Regards, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 16:00 GMT
Hello Janko,

Consciousness is a good starting point when it comes to information, as we are observers of both Bit and It. My essay sets about utilising observation too. Hope you take a look.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Chidi Idika replied on Jul. 1, 2013 @ 02:20 GMT
Dear Janko,

I agree with you that "consciousness and free will are physically so fundamental that they are not a result of some complex phenomena". And I actually have found sort of a number to define the conscious/unconscious as a physically measurable parameter which i call the "observer".

You may find time to see how it corroborates your position: http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1850

Idika

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Janko Kokosar wrote on Jul. 1, 2013 @ 16:28 GMT
Dear commentators below my essay.

I will try to answer you and to read your essays as soon as possible, although it is a lot of pages.

I think that arguments and anti-arguments give new knowledge and feeling how to formulate our thoughts. Arguments and anti-arguments also help to change our belief. Also from these reasons, I do not like scores without comments. So, as further, I hope that you will not give scores without comments.

Bookmark and Share



Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 22:44 GMT
I really enjoyed your essay as mentioned above. Certainly worth a higher score so delighted to assist in my rating now.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


basudeba mishra wrote on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 00:24 GMT
Dear Sir,

Your essay is unique in the areas it has covered and we thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Though we broadly agree with your views, there are some differences in detail that we are discussing.

You are correct that consciousness is a physical phenomenon. But mathematics including Tononi’s model, cannot explain conscious actions. Mathematics explains only “how much” one...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Than Tin wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 05:21 GMT
Hello Janko

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech

(http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19
65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 10:09 GMT
Dear Janko,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Sreenath B N replied on Jul. 31, 2013 @ 15:35 GMT
Dear Janko,

Regarding your essay I want to make following comments. You, like me, have based ‘consciousness’ at the fundamental level and have analyzed its role in the field of human ontology as well as in in the field of physics and biology. I stress you to go through the biology section of my essay (http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827) and see the role played by mind and consciousness in the development of epistemology and of science in general. You have rightly recognized the fact that consciousness and free-will play important role in the quantum world. In support of your claims you have illustrated experiments. You have based your essay on logical arguments and proofs. For this I am going to give high rating. Please go through my essay and express your comments on it in my thread.

Best regards,

Sreenath

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


basudeba mishra wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 12:10 GMT
Dear Sir,

This is our post to Dr. Wiliam Mc Harris in his thread. We thought it may be of interest to you.

Mathematics is the science of accumulation and reduction of similars or partly similars. The former is linear and the later non-linear. Because of the high degree of interdependence and interconnectedness, it is no surprise that everything in the Universe is mostly non-linear....

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 08:39 GMT
Hai Janko,

I have read and rate your work that I see as an unique approach to solving global problems. Meantime I don't want to say that I am fully agree with your interpretation. I think however it is normal situation - I can't rate any work as ,,worse,, because of the approach is different from my! I see your work on proper level and interesting to read. And who is right more it can be defined within time. I hope my work also can deserve to your attention (I mean mainly the references on my work which related to your examined questions - link text) Hope hearing you in my forum.

Best wishes in contest,

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 20:31 GMT
Dear Janko,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author Janko Kokosar wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:59 GMT
Dear Paul

I partially agree with your ideas, and I also think before about such idea.

One important "postulate" of physics for me is Ockham razor. Such additional sub-time is against Ockham.

But, all model of physics are allowed, which are mathematically correct, because they better visualize physics. So also your model does.

Time inside quantum coherence is really symmetric.

It is interesting that quantum computer can be much faster than classical computer or faster than stochastic one. Can you explain this with your model?

You deserve and will get good score.

P.S you have good editors. Are you on university, that they find time for you.

Bookmark and Share



Michael Helland wrote on Aug. 8, 2013 @ 00:18 GMT
Hello,

I like reading your thoughts on consciousness. I rate you a ten.

I hope you enjoy my essay as well

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1616

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.