25 ms·

TBH, I don't really know what you're driving at with brain waves. They're not magic. I think you're trying to use "consciousness" to mean "high level brain acti

TBH, I don't really know what you're driving at with brain waves. They're not magic. I think you're trying to use "consciousness" to mean "high level brain activity", as opposed to something like the lizard brain? To which I say that you're making a distinction that isn't there. Your lizard brain is perfectly conscious of many things. It's just conscious of fewer things than your prefrontal cortex. I mention "unconscious" only to help disambiguate an overloaded word. It's used for both "this model includes something in its representation" as well as "this model is currently executing".

quantadev 2y ago
I just don't think Qualia emerges from computations. I think it's a wave phenomena, because all the neuroscience evidence indicates that. There's nothing magical about EM waves. Waves are a well understood physics with well understood mathematics governing their behaviors. People often just hear the phrase "brain waves" and immediately think of "woo woo spirituality" because all the spiritual crack pots are constantly talking about waves without even having a physics background.
- godelski 2y ago
  What you keep describing is computation. Or as best as I can tell because "brain waves" and "em waves" aren't that detailed of descriptions. Luckily computation is just as vague
  - quantadev 2y ago
    I'm actually leaning towards a postulate that Schrodinger Waves are the core of the dynamic we call qualia (which is quite different from EM field itself), but at some point it has to interact with EMF in order to be able to effect motor neurons and cause actions.
    - godelski 2y ago
      As a physicist, I've NEVER heard anyone say "Schrodinger Waves." Surely you mean "probability waves". How about picking up a physics textbook? The status quo for Quantum is Griffith's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. Might I also suggest his E&M book (again, a standard). If you're half as passionate as you portray, I'd also pick up Jackson. That's the standard graduate level E&M book (but a warning on this: to get through Chapter 1 you're going to need to be intimately familiar with PDEs and Green's Function. To get further, I sure hope you like Bessel functions). Take your passion and use it to drive you to prove. Don't just conjecture and don't try to derive things from first principles. You will get it wrong because you won't actually be working from first principles. Again, don't ignore humanity's greatest invention. It's so much easier to catch up than reinvent the wheel. Also, you should become familiar with Penrose. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.
      - quantadev 2y ago
        Stuart Hameroff's work in microtubules I think might be the one doing the closest work do discovering Quantum Effects in consciousness, and I tweet with him a lot on twitter. He hasn't yet been convinced that brains are entangled with PAST copies of themselves which is a core precept of my theory. The other person getting close to discovering the truth of my theory is Leroy Cronin, who has come up with `Assembly Theory` which is very reminiscent of my theory, but lacks the aspect of entangled negentropic structures being able to self-resonate. And also Michael Levin's work showing how he can get worms to have two heads even with the same exact DNA of the single headed ones (just as one example), is something I can derive directly from my theory. Since you're obsessed with my credentials: BS in Mech. Eng., been studying QM for decades, a software developer by profession since 1991, but thanks for the book recommendations, and most especially the genuine politeness.
        godelski 2y ago
        I'm not obsessed with your credentials, I can just tell you haven't read much of the literature.
        2y ago

quantadev 2y ago

I just don't think Qualia emerges from computations. I think it's a wave phenomena, because all the neuroscience evidence indicates that. There's nothing magical about EM waves. Waves are a well understood physics with well understood mathematics governing their behaviors. People often just hear the phrase "brain waves" and immediately think of "woo woo spirituality" because all the spiritual crack pots are constantly talking about waves without even having a physics background.

godelski 2y ago
What you keep describing is computation. Or as best as I can tell because "brain waves" and "em waves" aren't that detailed of descriptions. Luckily computation is just as vague
- quantadev 2y ago
  I'm actually leaning towards a postulate that Schrodinger Waves are the core of the dynamic we call qualia (which is quite different from EM field itself), but at some point it has to interact with EMF in order to be able to effect motor neurons and cause actions.
  - godelski 2y ago
    As a physicist, I've NEVER heard anyone say "Schrodinger Waves." Surely you mean "probability waves". How about picking up a physics textbook? The status quo for Quantum is Griffith's Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. Might I also suggest his E&M book (again, a standard). If you're half as passionate as you portray, I'd also pick up Jackson. That's the standard graduate level E&M book (but a warning on this: to get through Chapter 1 you're going to need to be intimately familiar with PDEs and Green's Function. To get further, I sure hope you like Bessel functions). Take your passion and use it to drive you to prove. Don't just conjecture and don't try to derive things from first principles. You will get it wrong because you won't actually be working from first principles. Again, don't ignore humanity's greatest invention. It's so much easier to catch up than reinvent the wheel. Also, you should become familiar with Penrose. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.
    - quantadev 2y ago
      Stuart Hameroff's work in microtubules I think might be the one doing the closest work do discovering Quantum Effects in consciousness, and I tweet with him a lot on twitter. He hasn't yet been convinced that brains are entangled with PAST copies of themselves which is a core precept of my theory. The other person getting close to discovering the truth of my theory is Leroy Cronin, who has come up with `Assembly Theory` which is very reminiscent of my theory, but lacks the aspect of entangled negentropic structures being able to self-resonate. And also Michael Levin's work showing how he can get worms to have two heads even with the same exact DNA of the single headed ones (just as one example), is something I can derive directly from my theory. Since you're obsessed with my credentials: BS in Mech. Eng., been studying QM for decades, a software developer by profession since 1991, but thanks for the book recommendations, and most especially the genuine politeness.
      - godelski 2y ago
        I'm not obsessed with your credentials, I can just tell you haven't read much of the literature.
        2y ago