What will quantum revolution say about consciousness?

[Paul Werbos]

Jack and I both agree that we are on the brink of a revolution or two in our understanding of quantum information, but the connection to consciousness is much trickier than some seem to believe.

Consider the questions:

1. Will the new physics tell us immediately how consciousness works (and when it emerges) on all the many levels from the lowest organism to the neural networks of the human brain, to levels like Astral or cosmic consciousness or  (arguably) the cosmos Itself? 

2. Will it tell us how civilizations rise and Fall?

3. Will it give us a precise model of climate change, including a probability distribution for how soon H2S in the atmosphere once again reaches levels high enough to kill all humans who breathe It?

Jack has said that "consciousness is a natural phenomenon so of course physics can explain it." But climate change is also a natural phenomenon.  For that matter, chemistry is a natural phenomenon. All chemists I have known would agree that chemistry can be explained in some sense in terms of physics, but a whole lot of approximation is needed, as well as additional models and empirical observations at a higher level of aggregation. Breakthroughs in physics do not translate directly into breakthroughs at the higher level. In a similar way, cell biology depends a lot on chemistry, mechanics and physics, but physics by itself does not replace it. The study of neuroscience, neural networks and the levels of consciousness and intelligence seen in vertebrate brains is another level above that. To claim that physics "explains" consciousness is like saying that it tells you how to write a constitution that will last for centuries. In my view, it is an example of what my former collaborator Walter Freeman called "category confusion."

At the same time, the level of intelligence one can build or understand DOES depend somewhat on key properties of the hardware or material substrate one is building on. Without a supply of free energy, one basically cannot build anything. My 2015 paper in Quantum Information Processing (posted at www.werbos.com/triphoton.pdf) explains how a new generation of quantum computing, AQC, including retrocausal and other capabilities, makes possible a higher level of intelligence or consciousness than is possible with classicsl, mundane neural networks. (Corollary: we could build computers which would rightly say that humans are "not conscious" because they are at a lower level. But in my view,

our collective consciousness is also at that higher level. We are challenged to manifest that higher level here and now.)

I hope we will grow to understand that higher level better, and manifest it more, without falling into the "Terminator" risks which could come even from trying to build it. We are walking a tricky tightrope, dependent on those people who act on the right motivations.

Best of luck,  Paul

[Joseph McCard]

Paul,

"Jack and I both agree that we are on the brink of a revolution or two in our understanding of quantum information, but the connection to consciousness is much trickier than some seem to believe."

yes, much trickier, more complicated than he thinks. Do you have a clue about the nature of consciousness, or not-a-clue, as a philosopher (Nagel) once concluded. If so, please share it. 

What are the building blocks of this universe? Quantum physics describes the world of the very small: atoms, electrons, light. Yet, there is smaller, atoms, electrons and light are composed of consciousness units.  You might think that the quantum world is strange. Quantum systems can be in multiple states at once. This is called a superposition. Consciousness systems exist in an infinite number of states, called All Possible Worlds, by some.

At any instant your mind creates a physical manifestation, it picks possible conscious patterns of objects, and your reality appears to you.  Measurement, meaning an interaction with all possible  worlds, causes a consciousness system to manifest a possibility, one of its component states.

Paul might say that normal information is stored in relatively large structures--books, text messages, DNA, computers. Quantum information is information stored in very small structures called qubits. However, information does NOT exist by itself, not on, or in, forever available banks of information, not in quibits, books, DNA, or computers. I suspect the author has his own ideas about what information actually is, and so he comes to the conclusions he has come to. Yet, a different conception of information, one centered on the nature of consciousness units as the building blocks of the world, leads to a different conclusion. Connected with the digits and quibits, books, DNA, and computer memory bits is the consciousness of all those who understand it, perceive it, originate it. There are no fixed records of forever available quibits,, molecular brain memory structures, digits, or computer memory bits, into which you tune. The consciousness of the quibits,, molecular brain memory structures, digits, or computer memory bits into which you tune are not objective. 

Data is composed of consciousness, patterns. Messages transmit information, but they are not the information itself. The consciousness of the data, the information itself, wants to move toward other consciousness. It is not dead or inert. It is not something you look up, it is something that wants to be grabbed, and so it gravitates to those who seek it. Paul is looking for information to answer certain questions. He has drawn this information I send him, to him. What he makes of that information is not objective. Paul's consciousness has attracted this consciousness that is already connected to his material. 

Because of the principle of superposition, qubits, unlike the “classical bits” in your computer, can be in both their possible states at once. Consciousness patterns are in all possible states, at once. 

"Consider the questions:"

"1. Will the new physics tell us immediately how consciousness works (and when it emerges) on all the many levels from the lowest organism to the neural networks of the human brain, to levels like Astral or cosmic consciousness or  (arguably) the cosmos Itself?"

If the "new physics" stops at quantum information, then no. 

"2. Will it tell us how civilizations rise and Fall?"

Because of the nature of consciousness, all possible civilizations are occurring now. You want to know HOW they occur, WHY they occur, you simply have to understand the relation between social, cultural, and personal beliefs and desires in the role they play in creating history. 

"3. Will it give us a precise model of climate change, including a probability distribution for how soon H2S in the atmosphere once again reaches levels high enough to kill all humans who breathe It?"

All possible scenarios are played out. Which possible world you occupy depends on what you desire, wish, to experience. You can even try them all out, and then decide. Due to the inherent nature of consciousness, being unpredictable, there are no precise, or even somewhat precise models available to us. Artists are often the first to understand these things, and so 2 movies, "The Butterfly Effect", and "Groundhog Day", express what I have been saying. One also thinks of the recent novel turned movie, "The Man In The High Castle". There are many other examples, movies that depict possible world events, events that have not occurred in this world. 

"Jack has said that "consciousness is a natural phenomenon so of course physics can explain it. But climate change is also a natural phenomenon.  For that matter, chemistry is a natural phenomenon. All chemists I have known would agree that chemistry can be explained in some sense in terms of physics, but a whole lot of approximation is needed, as well as additional models and empirical observations at a higher level of aggregation. 

Yes. Unpredictable. Think Heisenberg. 

"At the same time, the level of intelligence one can build or understand DOES depend somewhat on key properties of the hardware or material substrate one is building on."

And so you accept to believe that without understanding what consciousness is, or what it does. 

'Without a supply of free energy, one basically cannot build anything."

You would be wise, as I see it, to follow this idea, free energy, understand it more deeply. 

 "My 2015 paper in Quantum Information Processing (posted at www.werbos.com/triphoton.pdf) explains how a new generation of quantum computing, AQC, including retrocausal and other capabilities, makes possible a higher level of intelligence or consciousness than is possible with classicsl, mundane neural networks."

Yet there is no indication that you have a clue about consciousness, or even the nature of the intellect, which you seem to be entirely relying on.  

"(Corollary: we could build computers which would rightly say that humans are "not conscious" because they are at a lower level.

You can't know what not-consciousness is, until you know what consciousness is.

"But in my view, our collective consciousness is also at that higher level. We are challenged to manifest that higher level here and now.)"

And so, go ahead. This is one place to do it. 

"I hope we will grow to understand that higher level better, and manifest it more, without falling into the "Terminator" risks which could come even from trying to build it. We are walking a tricky tightrope, dependent on those people who act on the right motivations."

The universe is a safe place. There is no right or wrong, there is only what you desire to experience. There are no tricks. 

"Best of luck,  Paul"

Luck? Only if you believe in it, and only until you don't want to believe it any more.

Joseph  

[Chris Langan]

Jack Sarfatti: "Consciousness is a natural phenomenon so of course physics can explain it."

Analysis: If physics can explain everything that is natural, and physics itself is purported to be natural, then we may as well begin with a physical explanation of physics. 

Let's try it. "(1) Physics just exists. (2) Physics gives rise to consciousness, which supervenes on it. (3) Therefore, the scientific output of conscious physicists is just physics explaining itself."

Unfortunately, there are problems with steps 1 and 2. There is no evidence that physics can generate or sustain its own existence, or that consciousness is emergent from or causally supervenient on physics.

Conclusion: Someone with the initials "JS" badly needs to take a course on the philosophy of physics. ;)   

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CACLqmgcddv16Ge8gLiP2T38WXX-rbsWowTPcHgP%2BvBzRyvjH6g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Paul Werbos]

Thank you, Joe! 

At the moment I am at sea, literally, and reminded of the parallels between the ocean of comic consciousness and the Internet. Huge bandwidth, but with very limit4d time each day (less for Internet now than for the ocean)... there are timing issues.

I would like to get deeper into the important questions you raise, but with limited time I must be quick and, I apologize, superficial.

You make very strong statements about how I personally do not have any glimmer of understanding of consciousness, I would not be so quickly about your own understanding which is clearly your point of reference in making those statements, 

However, if you actually look at the paper from Quantum Information Processing, reposted at www.werbos.com/triphoton.pdf, you will see citations which address these issues in more detail.

In general, one test of a serious and competent true scientist or mystic is a certain sense of caution, not claiming certain knowledge beyond what he really has a right to claim. That discipline does not come naturally to any of us but it is important to cultivate it, in order to have any hope of moving forward at a decent pace.

Best of luck, Paul

--

----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/376b4761-8378-4197-9bf4-b74d8a98d149%40googlegroups.com.

[Alarik Arenander]

Here is a contribution toward understanding consciousness from it fundamental basis in mathematics expressions

enjoy

[Joseph McCard]

Paul,

I spent a few HOURS yesterday trying to respond, in a thoughtful way to your questions, and this is what I get, what amounts to an ad hominem attack on my character.  I am surprised the moderator let you post this. You must be someone really important. And believe me, these are not the first, second, or even third thoughts I have had about your response.

O.K. I understand you are skeptical. You do not believe it is possible for someone like me to understand consciousness, to teach you anything about consciousness. And now you want me to spend, as far as I can tell, at least another day or so reading and analyzing something else you have written. 

best of Luck, Paul? I say "Ha!". 

You want to understand consciousness? You figure it out? 

All my love, Joe

[Paul Werbos]

On Jul 4, 2017 8:55 AM, "Joseph McCard" <joseph....@gmail.com> wrote:

Paul,

I spent a few HOURS yesterday trying to respond, in a thoughtful way to your questions, and this is what I get, what amounts to an ad hominem attack on my character

Joe -- I apologized that I did not have hours at the time to read your long missive, because of limited Internet access.

In scanning that missive, i did see how you many times said my views are irrelevant in the end because I "haven't got a glimmer of an idea about consciousness." It was especially amusing to see your suggestion that  I should spend a little time learning what free energy is.

I certainly was not the one who started that kind of ad hominem rhetoric here, nor did I ever say anything as strong ABOUT YOUR understanding of consciousness or of free energy as you did about mine. Why don't you look at what you sent me and consider how YOU would have reacted if I had said about you personally what you said about me personally?  In any case, I see no reason to waste time on what became a matter of pure ego stuff.

I did scan the rest of this email from you, and I see no substantive content to reply to anyway.

I am surprised the moderator let you post this. You must be someone really important. And believe me, these are not the first, second, or even third thoughts I have had about your response.

O.K. I understand you are skeptical. You do not believe it is possible for someone like me to understand consciousness, to teach you anything about consciousness. And now you want me to spend, as far as I can tell, at least another day or so reading and analyzing something else you have written. 

best of Luck, Paul? I say "Ha!". 

You want to understand consciousness? You figure it out? 

All my love, Joe

--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
(All Indian residents are eligible for tax benefits for their contributions under section 80G of the Income Tax Act)
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/78fb5327-ecc2-4abe-a071-d131957a1125%40googlegroups.com.