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.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger 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

Steve Dufourny: on 5/14/20 at 10:43am UTC, wrote I have answered this to the Professor Klingman about this consciousness. ...

Steve Dufourny: on 5/14/20 at 10:25am UTC, wrote Hi , all this is interesting in philosophy, I have read many books of...

Mihai Panoschi: on 5/13/20 at 20:56pm UTC, wrote Another approach is to start with Kant (1781, Critique of pure reason, 1st...

Steve Dufourny: on 5/13/20 at 18:11pm UTC, wrote Spinoza , Descartes, Kant , Godel, Cantor, Einstein , Borh, or others d say...

Steve Dufourny: on 5/13/20 at 18:09pm UTC, wrote Nobody can really prove the origin philosophical, mathematical or physical...

Mihai Panoschi: on 5/13/20 at 17:39pm UTC, wrote All this idle and empty talk about consciousness is hypothetical and...

Steve Dufourny: on 5/12/20 at 11:22am UTC, wrote All this becomes very philosophical and nobody can affirm the real secret...

Steve Dufourny: on 5/12/20 at 9:36am UTC, wrote This Hard problem of consciousness is indeed important and complex. Like...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

John Cox: "Dr. Agnew, This might be something you would find interesting, I ran..." in Answering Mermin’s...

Vesuvius Now: "Some proposals have too much philosophy for physicists and too much physics..." in The Nature of Time

Joe Nahhas: "Hacking Physical Reality Real Time Physics With Applications: The..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

John Cox: "Georgi, A principle problem that confronts efforts to model a realistic..." in Answering Mermin’s...

Robert McEachern: "I also "do not share the feeling that consciousness (whatever this means)..." in Understanding...

Carlo Rovelli: "Abstract: I do not share the feeling that consciousness (whatever this..." in Understanding...

Johannes Kleiner: "One classical approach to explaining a complex target phenomenon is to..." in Minimal Phenomenal...

Johannes Kleiner: "Quite recently, an argument has been proposed which aims to show that..." in Unfolding Argument -...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Time to Think
Philosopher Jenann Ismael invokes the thermodynamic arrow of time to explain how human intelligence emerged through culture.

Lockdown Lab Life
Grounded physicists are exploring the use of online and virtual-reality conferencing, and AI-controlled experiments, to maintain social distancing. Post-pandemic, these positive innovations could make science more accessible and environmentally-friendly.

Is Causality Fundamental?
Untangling how the human perception of cause-and-effect might arise from quantum physics, may help us understand the limits and the potential of AI.

Building Agency in the Biology Lab
Physicists are using optogenetics techniques to make a rudimentary agent, from cellular components, which can convert measurements into actions using light.

Think Quantum to Build Better AI
Investigating how quantum memory storage could aid machine learning and how quantum interactions with the environment may have played a role in evolution.


FQXi BLOGS
November 27, 2020

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Consciousness in the Physical World: Call for Proposals [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator David Sloan wrote on Dec. 28, 2019 @ 16:56 GMT
We're happy to announce that we are opening a call for proposals to focus on 'Consciousness in the Physical World'. Generously supported by the Fetzer Franklin Fund, we're looking for ideas coming from a broad range of scientists on the nature of consciousness and what makes for a conscious agent.

Following on from our calls on intelligence and agency, this time the focus on consciousness aims to promote the use of the large swath of recently developed tools and ideas to look for new insights.

The complete timeline is available, together with an FAQ and some examples of ideas and questions.

We have around $1.8 million in total funding available, so get your thoughts and ideas together, build a proposal and head over to the application form.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the forum administrator



Lorraine Ford wrote on Jan. 1, 2020 @ 22:36 GMT
So, where do you go when you die? Answer: nowhere. What has died is the higher-level organisation, not the particles, atoms and molecules. The consciousness has not died: only the higher-level organisation of consciousness that has extracted higher-level information by analysing masses of lower-level information. The lower-level information, i.e. the lower-level consciousness, is still there. There is necessarily a continuity of information from the lower levels (i.e. particles, atoms, molecules) to the higher levels (i.e. living things).

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Amelia smith smith wrote on Jan. 28, 2020 @ 05:57 GMT
nice

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Amrit Srecko Sorli wrote on Jan. 29, 2020 @ 15:37 GMT
This is a very good grant. I will send my proposal in a few days:

Integration of Life and Consciousness into Cosmology.

attachments: Integration_of_Life_and_Consciousness_into_Cosmology_.pdf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Agnew wrote on Mar. 24, 2020 @ 14:37 GMT
...oh well...might as well say it...

There is no such thing as consciousness since the word has no meaning other than a conscious state in the medical sense.

The very essence of consciousness is free choice since clearly, consciousness means first of all the freedom to choose an outcome based on feeling. Therefore, free choice is a very good definition for consciousness because free choice has a simple meaning as opposed to the many complex and contradictory meanings for consciousness.

Obviously, I am in a minority here...but someone has to say it...consciousness is without meaning...

Bookmark and Share
post approved
Lorraine Ford replied on Mar. 25, 2020 @ 00:58 GMT
Steve,

From whose point of view is "consciousness ... without meaning"?

To someone suffering from coronavirus, they are conscious of any discomfort they feel, so it has meaning to them.

From the point of view of an observer (you), you look at them and can't feel their suffering: their suffering means nothing to you. Cruel you.

The person's consciousness provides subjective information; free choice is based on this subjective information; and this subjective information is more accessible than a page of variables and numbers representing the information.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford replied on Mar. 25, 2020 @ 23:15 GMT
Philosopher David Chalmers’ example of:

1. A conscious person who knows information versus

2. A zombie, who doesn’t feel anything, but nevertheless knows information

is invalid because people only know information VIA feeling, where thoughts are just another type of feeling. Whether the information is about the person’s internal situation, or the person’s external situation, the only way to know information is via personally processing and feeling it.

So, written or spoken information is only known via personally processing and feeling the written or spoken symbols of information that arrive at the persons eyes and ears in light and sound waves.

The opposite of a person who feels is not a zombie. The opposite of a person who feels is an observer of the person who feels. The observer does not feel the person’s feelings.

Observers of a person can (roughly or accurately) measure the person, and communicate the results via written or spoken words and symbols. These written or spoken symbols of information only become actual felt information after a person has processed the written or spoken symbols of information that arrive at the persons eyes and ears as light and sound waves.

Personally feeling information is more accessible and efficient than presenting a person with a page of variables and numbers representing the same information: the person has to process the light waves from the page before acquiring the information. Once, there was no communication via spoken words and written symbols. Then, information was only known via personal feelings.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Kevin Pryor replied on Mar. 26, 2020 @ 17:33 GMT
I posted the following on Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True" blog as a comment last month. Most commentators thought it was a joke but I think it should be experimentally looked for -- because if it is true it will be like bringing Heaven to Earth -- death and pain will be rare and maybe we will have a much closer relationship and more communication with our Creator, the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Sue Lingo wrote on Mar. 27, 2020 @ 22:59 GMT
Dr. Sloan...

Although no longer temporally relevant, and I am not associated with any institution... i.e. I do not meet administrative requirements for an RFP grant... I was intrigued by your solicitation.

As an independent researcher with a bias for structural analysis, I have "rigorously" illustrated "What — exactly - is the connection between quantum mechanics and consciousness?".

REF: UQS Consciousness Investigation Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSConInv.php

Perhaps someone who does qualify for the grant, may be able to build on my work, and give it institutionalized credentials for a broader readership.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

UQS Matrix Mechanix

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Kevin Pryor wrote on Mar. 28, 2020 @ 21:20 GMT
My original radical panpsychism comment on "Why Evolution is True" blog

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate
Lorraine Ford replied on Mar. 28, 2020 @ 21:26 GMT
Kevin Pryor,

As I said in my above comment (Lorraine Ford replied on Mar. 28, 2020 @ 21:21 GMT), you should not be using the word “panpsychism” because you give particles, and "the Universe" high-level abilities that they can’t possibly have.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Kevin Pryor replied on Mar. 28, 2020 @ 22:04 GMT
I have only very massive particles or very massive molecules that are quantum coherent most of the time to have a high level of consciousness because they have a much higher time perception then low mass particles. Because of Planck's E=hf and Einstein's E=mc2, f=mc2/h for particles and for molecules only when they are completely quantum coherent which I postulate is proportional to subjective time perception for the particle.

A low mass particle that is one billionth the mass of a high mass particle is like a person going so close to the speed of light that time is slowed down a billion times compared to people on Earth. A billion years will seem like one year. The high mass particle can perceive and do a billion times more in the same time period making it a consciousness that is a billion times more high level than the low mass particle.

Given that a very massive particle or quantum coherent molecule is perceiving, thinking and acting a billion or trillion times faster than typical particles depending on the mass -- it is conceivable it could command a brain and therefore a body and be an homunculus because all the free will of the particles of the rest of the brain are so slowed down in comparison that they act like objects, not subjects and can be controlled like a machine.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford replied on Mar. 28, 2020 @ 22:39 GMT
Kevin,

Clearly, high-level consciousness is related to the ability of an entity to analyse and process low-level information coming from the entity's environment. This low-level information comes from interactions in the eyes, ears and nose with light and sound waves and scent molecules. The entity can only acquire high-level information after the low-level information is processed by the brain.

Particles, atoms and molecules don't have the structure i.e. they can't have much ability to process low-level information, i.e. they don't have much ability to acquire high-level information.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Kevin Pryor wrote on Mar. 29, 2020 @ 01:38 GMT
You are right that the particles would need a electromagnetic homuncular code to qualia decoder/encoder as well as many other computer like systems. The qualia is visual, audio and all other conscious experience.

The only way particles would have these computer like systems is if it evolved them over a very large number of generations. Universes raising particles that eventually become smart and wise enough to be reborn as a new universe. The computer like systems would not have to be completely machines like standard evolutionary theory but include intelligent free will inner particles that can fix the machine like parts of the system just by the particle thinking and inner particles responding to fix and improve the encoding/decoding/calculating/speculating systems.

It combines the power of evolutionary theory which only works on machines with the power of family, cultural, and also love and respect for the Creator inspired free will, to keep things not only maintained but usually improving as well.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate
Lorraine Ford replied on Mar. 29, 2020 @ 22:33 GMT
Re "You are right that....improving as well":

I HAVE NEVER SAID OR IMPLIED ANY SUCH THING.

I doubt that "Kevin Pryor" could be a real person: the set of ideas are too convoluted, bizarre and outlandish.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Kevin Pryor replied on Mar. 30, 2020 @ 01:25 GMT
If particle Alice wishes to speak to particle Bob or the Universe, she can do it with my idea of panpsychism. Not only are particles and the universe conscious with free will, they can communicate with sounds and images and eventually words.

But this high level communication is only for high energy, high mass particles or quantum coherent molecules. For low energy particles, free will actions are very rare, their actions are not under their control because a year to us feels like a second to them -- they are developing their minds by dreaming and virtual particles are controlling their external movements.

If high mass particle Alice wishes to speak to high mass particle Bob, she would need a code or language to send sounds, images, emotions, or words. She would probably only need to think about the Universe, her godparent, to communicate with the Universe but with Bob she needs a language or code.

That is the idea of the electromagnetic homuncular code, a language or code for high energy particles to send coded streams of photons to send sounds, images, ideas, emotions and other qualia to each other. A way also for a particle or quantum coherent molecule homunculus to communicate with its brain and vice versa.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Lorraine Ford wrote on Mar. 30, 2020 @ 21:28 GMT
Is a COVID-19 virus conscious?

A virus is seemingly somewhere between a large molecule and a living cell. If panpsychism is an appropriate way to understand the world, then it is appropriate to say that all things (particles, atoms, molecules, viruses, living things including cells) are conscious of their relative local situation in the world, to a greater or lesser degree. Here “are conscious of” means “experience information about”.

If one assumes that panpsychism is an appropriate way to understand the world, then how conscious is a COVID-19 virus?

One can assume that a virus could only experience relatively simple information because a virus has a relatively simple structure, and does relatively simple things, when compared with single and multi-celled living things. A COVID-19 virus is a relatively simple microorganism that seemingly could only experience relatively simple information about its immediate surroundings, and itself in relation to its immediate surroundings.

A COVID-19 virus cannot know about large scale world events because it does not have a structure which would allow it to read or hear the news on the internet, television or newspaper. For the same reason, a COVID-19 virus cannot know that there are such large-scale entities as pangolins and human beings. However, a COVID-19 virus can seemingly recognize an appropriate cell to invade.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Kevin Pryor replied on Mar. 31, 2020 @ 01:51 GMT
Quantum coherence of a molecule can be tested by the double slit test. A 60 carbon fullerene is one the biggest that passes because it so rigid.

A virus is probably too big and not rigid enough to pass but the many protein receptor crystals are perfect and that is all that is necessary.

Male birds often sing mating call songs to attract their mates. A conscious virus protein receptor crystal might sing its mating song when it is relaxed that gets expressed as a coded stream of photons. A conscious protein crystal receptor on the target cell might absorb the coded stream of photons and experience it as its mating song and start singing the callback song that gets expressed as another coded stream of photons that get absorbed by the virus receptors.

The virus receptors hearing their mating callback song starts towing the virus in unison toward their mate, they can do that because the virus is not that heavy and they are all pulling in the same direction.

If all that is true it might be like "Mars Attack" where a Slim Whitman song stops the invasion. Just flood the whole body with a coded electromagnetic stream that indicates to the receptors on the cell surface that there is danger so they won't sing the callback song. Or maybe flood the body with the electromagnetic song that the virus receptors experience as the callback song which prompts them to tow the virus in the wrong direction and they never reach the receptors they are looking for.

Panpsychism might have a lot of uses in so many fields besides just mostly ending death and pain by allowing artificial bodies that can be constantly improved and can be better than our natural bodies.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Lorraine Ford wrote on Mar. 31, 2020 @ 23:05 GMT
The thing about consciousness, as opposed to laws of nature, is that consciousness analyses situations (e.g. any situation facing any living thing at any point in time). This logical analysis is a thing that laws of nature can’t do:

Laws of nature are rules, i.e. relationships between variables; but situations are sets of variables with associated numbers. The number of variables is limited, but the number of situations is unlimited. What consciousness does is handle situations via logical analysis: in general, there is no such thing as logical rules for handling situations because the number of possible situations is unlimited, and unknown.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Lorraine Ford wrote on Apr. 1, 2020 @ 20:19 GMT
To many, consciousness doesn’t make sense: why isn’t the world a zombie world; why do living things experience the world? But have they ever considered that, quite apart from the non-zombie aspect, consciousness is filling a role that nothing else is doing?

If one looks at the basic content of consciousness, the basic content is the here and now; the basic content for individual living things is information about their here and now situation in the world; what matters to living things is what to do about their here and now situation in the world.

But the laws of nature are not about situations, they are about relationships: what physics aims to do is smooth out the pesky anomaly of individual situations and describe the world purely as a set of lawful relationships. But what if, in order to more accurately describe the world, one needs to take account of situations as well as relationships? In practice, physics does take account of individual situations (they are called “quantum” events), but these situations are thought to be anomalies that will eventually be explained away by lawful relationships.

There is no necessity to have information about one's here and now situation if laws of nature determine all aspects of outcomes. It is only necessary to have information about one's here and now situation if one can do something about one’s here and now situation.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on May. 12, 2020 @ 09:36 GMT
This Hard problem of consciousness is indeed important and complex. Like told me Edwin Eugene Klingman, it is great that now we can discuss about these things , because in the past it was more difficult. The ideas of The professor Klingman are interesting about a kind of field of consciousness at this quantum scale, correlated with probably geonetrodynamics and points or strings and geonetrical...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on May. 12, 2020 @ 11:22 GMT
All this becomes very philosophical and nobody can affirm the real secret of our universe and its origin, why we are, why we evolve, how we are created. I can understand that this sciences Community is divided and that all we are free to interpret like we want this physicality. A part consider that we come form an energy and a mathematical accident if I can say, others consider strings oscillating...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on May. 14, 2020 @ 10:43 GMT
I have answered this to the Professor Klingman about this consciousness.

Thanks Professor Klingman,

I agree also with your Words, all seems a question of deterministic convergences between maths, physics and philosophy after all it seems to me humbly.

The universe and its generality shows us maybe Concrete roads. A thing important for me is this evolution, and I have remarked...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Mihai Panoschi Panoschi wrote on May. 13, 2020 @ 17:39 GMT
All this idle and empty talk about consciousness is hypothetical and therefore a dead-end like it was in philosophy during the German romantic period and which culminated with the best book to date on it unsurpassed yet, Hegel’s Phenomenology of Mind (1807).

Unfortunately everything he wrote after that was politically motivated and went downhill and even though 100 years later, Husserl tried to breath new life into Hegel’s concept of consciousness, with his famous phenomenological method, Heigedder, initially a fan of Husserl, completely killed it in his ground-breaking and celebrated Being and Time (1927) even if the book was ironically dedicated to Husserl. Therefore, if there is gonna be a truly revolutionary project of resurrecting the idea of consciousness in a fruitful way, one might just as well start by digging in its grave, viz. Heidegger’s Being and Time and his subsequent contributions by going back to the pre-Socratic in order to unravel the meaning of Being, first and foremost.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on May. 13, 2020 @ 18:09 GMT
Nobody can really prove the origin philosophical, mathematical or physical of this consciousness. Nobody can affirm his general philosophy in fact , we have the same problem about the origin of our universe and about the foundamental objects at this planck scale. Why we exist, why we are, why this life exists and this evolution, why we are conscious and have a free will, why this matter and energy transformations? we don t know, we can just extrapolate with intuitions in accepting our limitations. It is not prohibited to Think fortunally and we discuss simply in accepting these limitations like humble thinkers,we can never affirm assumptions, we must prove but we cannot prove this consciousness and its origin. It is the same about God or about a mathematical accident from an energy to explain this physicality.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on May. 13, 2020 @ 18:11 GMT
Spinoza , Descartes, Kant , Godel, Cantor, Einstein , Borh, or others d say the same , we must accept these limitations in knowledges simply and try to complete this universal puzzle with determinism , we search answers...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Mihai Panoschi Panoschi wrote on May. 13, 2020 @ 20:56 GMT
Another approach is to start with Kant (1781, Critique of pure reason, 1st edition)and his understanding of self-consciousness as the transcendental unity of apperception, work your way up to Hegel’s Phenomenology of mind (1807)and all the way to Schelling’s reply to Hegel in his essay on Freedom, Good and Evil(1809)then through Schopenhauer (1818, The world as Will and representation) and Nietzsche’s irrationalism and hopefully after all this philosophical struggle of ideas is over to reach the scientific ‘Holy Grail’ with Freud’s discovery of unconscious and further up to Jung’s discovery of the collective unconscious, the theory of archetypes and the concept of synchronicity or the acausal connecting principle(1952, even worth reading are his speculations on the connection of his concept of synchronicity to I Ching...the Chinese old esoteric text, the Book of Changes)which ultimately can be linked to Quantum field theory (as Pauli with Jung tried to or Wigner), with mathematics(number and set theory, Marie-Louise Von Franz, Number and Time, 1974 )and to modern psychology (Herbart, Brentano, Wundt) and modern neurology and AI.

It’s just an idea of research program obviously not the easiest or the most straightforward one!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on May. 14, 2020 @ 10:25 GMT
Hi , all this is interesting in philosophy, I have read many books of philosophy, Nietsche , beyond the well and evil and others , Freud, Jung, Kant, Descartes, Spinoza, and many others, I searched anwers, but all this is philosophical and the main interest maybe is to try explaining this consciousness mathematically and physically, but we are limited unfortunally. We don t know its main cause. This philosophy permits us to see the philosophical generality of course but unfortunally in maths and physics it is more complex because we must be deterministic and prove it.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

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.