4 ms·

An attempt at defining consciousness based upon information, complexity theory

2 points by Trenthug 1y ago

Trenthug 1y ago
This paper proposes a formal, information-theoretic model of consciousness in which awareness is defined as the alignment between an observer’s beliefs and the objective description of an object. Consciousness is quantified as the ratio between the complexity of true beliefs and the complexity of the full inherent description of the object. The model introduces three distinct epistemic states: Consciousness (true beliefs), Schizo-Consciousness (false beliefs), and Unconsciousness (absence of belief). Object descriptions are expressed as structured sets of object–quality (O–Q) statements, and belief dynamics are governed by internal belief-updating functions (brain codes) and attentional codes that determine which beliefs are foregrounded at any given time. Crucially, the model treats internal states—such as emotions, memories, and thoughts—as objects with describable properties, allowing it to account for self-awareness, misbelief about oneself, and psychological distortion. This framework enables a unified treatment of external and internal contents of consciousness, supports the simulation of evolving belief structures, and provides a tool for comparative cognition, mental health modeling,and epistemic alignment in artificial agents.
Trenthug 1y ago
This is a theoretical framework I've been developing to define consciousness using principles from information theory and algorithmic complexity. The idea is to measure conscious states in terms of their information-processing structure — using bits rather than normalized entropy — and to distinguish between conscious, schizo-conscious, and unconscious states as formally different information objects. I’m especially interested in: Whether this aligns with or diverges from models like Integrated Information Theory or predictive coding. How this approach could interface with machine consciousness or computational neuroscience. Feedback — especially criticism or alternative formulations — is very welcome. I’m treating this as a living model open to revision.
overu589 1y ago
It isn’t. Arranging cards referring to each other does not become complex enough for “self awareness.” Consciousness is the potential of existential being inflecting upon “itself.” Our biotechnology leverages this feedback loop to cling to our “continuity of existential being” which would be our identity and sense of self survival. The substance of consciousness lies dormant in all things, and life is a technology which animates and extends this property. Modern information and complexity theory have some bottlenecks. Entropy for instance is the distribution of potential over negative potential. Through constructive and destructive interference state boundaries are created. The number of states is created by (“emerges from”) potential (in whatever form) interfering with itself. Thus entropy is potential distribution not number of states available. States available can change through perturbation and decay. The universe is not “information” the universe is potential resolving into information (state) through entropy in the moment of now. [for instance]
- Trenthug 1y ago
  The universe has a description of it's own, atleast that can be agreed upon(self evident truth) and that description can also be called the information about the universe , awareness of that is Consciousness,this seems agreeable (any counter thoughts?) and the model in the paper is just descriptive in nature
  - overu589 1y ago
    The universe does not have a description of its own. I too grew up with Douglas Adams and the old conjecture that from a piece of angel cake the workings of the world may be deduced or inferred… however it is wrong. The Universe is a zero dimensional point of potential (the “potential of existential being.) The universe and everything in it spins, vibrates, and is impermanent (through decay and interference.) This potential of existential being interferes with itself, giving rise to potential displacement (where things can and cannot be due to another thing doing something that would interfere.) David Deutch explains this in his book “fabric of reality”, though what I am explaining is a more evolved overall idea. All of hyperdimensional reality emerges from this interference of the underlying potential. We do not yet have all of the math and language to describe how this hyperdimensional emergence works, which creates our time/space (and therefore gravity.) Not all physicist/theorists agree there is a zero dimensional universal potential outside of (before) the emergence of time and space. Vibrating, spinning, and changing through decay and interference. Sound familiar? This universal potential is bound in discrete packets we know as matter. When something makes the discrete potential bound in matter change vibration, one might at a stretch call this elemental consciousness. Living systems are biotechnology which use this vibrational feedback mechanism as an echo chamber. That echo chamber (sustained as a continuity by the living system) is the basis for what we call “consciousness.” Awareness is a tiny part of consciousness. Consciousness includes the entire hyperdimensionality and extradimentionality of universal potential. Information is merely state. State may well infer more states beyond itself in a forensic way. That is a very interesting and worthy branch of information theory. Consciousness is the inflection upon the potential of existential being.
overu589 1y ago
This is a sad devolution and this ghost account negs me for my considerations. Truth is a purturbation of existential reality. Thoughts feelings and beliefs are shit. It may be good shit. It may be sublime shit. If it does not exist existentially it has no business being confused with Truth, it is exotic shit. I love my share of exotic shit. You don’t have to agree with me about consciousness What I say about Truth is self axiomatic and only refuted my a moron. A moron. An idiot. Someone stupid. These are objectively and imperically defined as one who confuses bullshit (shit) for Truth. Truth is a purturbation of existential reality. A “truth” in the human mind is a “meta” (symbolic), justifiable only by its unembellished consistency (not contradictory) to Truth. And Truth is a purturbation of existential reality. A purturbation of existential being. I have to say “Truth and Law is worth murdering another Man over. Bullshit, never.”
- Trenthug 1y ago
  You're making an elegant but brutal distinction between existence and symbol, Truth and justification. I respect the urge to treat reality as sacred and thought as ornamental. But even your statement — 'Truth is a perturbation of existential reality' — is itself a symbolic construct. So the paradox remains: to speak of Truth, one must enter the realm of exotic shit. Where do you draw the line between a symbol that reflects a perturbation, and one that merely pretends to? Or is the line unknowable?" The argument would benefit from clarifying what “perturbation of existential reality” really entails. Is it sensory? Is it phenomenological? Is it measurable? That would move this from poetic metaphysics to rigorous ontology.
  - overu589 1y ago
    > brutal distinction True Truth is brutalist. > is itself a symbolic construct Only in the most obvious context that we are using a symbolic language communications strategy. Exotic shit is where mind grows. Objective existential reality, aka “true Truth” is as hard core straight edge as it comes. This word “integrity” is a gauge of consistency with true Truths. It means a representation which does not embellish or contradict any true Truth. This can be creatively or crudely articulated (expressed) yet the “do or die” imperative remains, this must accurately represent an occurrence in existential reality. OR IT IS A LIE! Those other things which confuse you, such as how dreams logic or poetry can be not Truths thus must be threatened as LIES are your apprehension. We are complex creatures who approximate for our successes. Beat the averages and you’re doing better than most others. By definition. Our “truths” only need to be good enough to get us by, even if they are more convenient than correct. Most of all when they are pleasant. This is a part of humanity. When it comes time for someone to die for lying, remember: True Truth is a “perturbation” of existential reality (that’s what the stack of bibles is for right? In case only God knows.) Why someone did it or what they felt is not the true part of Truth however it may be a human truth to have such experiences. And perturbation is exactly what the English language word means. Any disturbance whatsoever is a manifest Truth of existential reality. Anything measurable whether or not anyone has the ability to measure or if it got measured at all. A disturbance of existential reality is what physicists are all very excited about. The Truth is it having occurred, and the “truth” is our best effort to approximate through discovery. If your “truth” is too wildly off you are incorrect, inexperienced, or a fraud. Keep practicing. All scientists do is worry about this very same question about perturbing existence. What is there to know, how do I find out? How do I interact with the phenomena? Does it make predictions? All questions about true Truth of objective existential reality, only knowable through perturbation. That is, some kind of reaction. Any kind, even not what was expected or clearly understood. And we all argue about every detail and context and interpretation and extrapolation and application and moral consequences and so on. This is the symbolic correlation bit. It also happens and is important to humans, however not to Truth! Truth don’t care. If Truth must suit the tastes, it is a sign of corruption. True Truth isn’t an ultimate answer, it is a happenstance in a long line of whatever comes of whatever goes. The forensic science of piecing that together only cares about existential being however interpretive the apparatus of our minds must be. Do not feel threatened that we all dwell in this in between place of quasi truths. Only be concerned with how you affect the world, for that is the truth of your Truth. Philosophically or otherwise. Every idea worth having develops in its own time. Truth is the hardest core. No bullshit.

2 points by Trenthug 1y ago

This paper proposes a formal, information-theoretic model of consciousness in which awareness is defined as the alignment between an observer’s beliefs and the objective description of an object. Consciousness is quantified as the ratio between the complexity of true beliefs and the complexity of the full inherent description of the object. The model introduces three distinct epistemic states: Consciousness (true beliefs), Schizo-Consciousness (false beliefs), and Unconsciousness (absence of belief). Object descriptions are expressed as structured sets of object–quality (O–Q) statements, and belief dynamics are governed by internal belief-updating functions (brain codes) and attentional codes that determine which beliefs are foregrounded at any given time. Crucially, the model treats internal states—such as emotions, memories, and thoughts—as objects with describable properties, allowing it to account for self-awareness, misbelief about oneself, and psychological distortion. This framework enables a unified treatment of external and internal contents of consciousness, supports the simulation of evolving belief structures, and provides a tool for comparative cognition, mental health modeling,and epistemic alignment in artificial agents.

Trenthug 1y ago

This is a theoretical framework I've been developing to define consciousness using principles from information theory and algorithmic complexity. The idea is to measure conscious states in terms of their information-processing structure — using bits rather than normalized entropy — and to distinguish between conscious, schizo-conscious, and unconscious states as formally different information objects. I’m especially interested in: Whether this aligns with or diverges from models like Integrated Information Theory or predictive coding. How this approach could interface with machine consciousness or computational neuroscience. Feedback — especially criticism or alternative formulations — is very welcome. I’m treating this as a living model open to revision.

overu589 1y ago

It isn’t. Arranging cards referring to each other does not become complex enough for “self awareness.” Consciousness is the potential of existential being inflecting upon “itself.” Our biotechnology leverages this feedback loop to cling to our “continuity of existential being” which would be our identity and sense of self survival. The substance of consciousness lies dormant in all things, and life is a technology which animates and extends this property. Modern information and complexity theory have some bottlenecks. Entropy for instance is the distribution of potential over negative potential. Through constructive and destructive interference state boundaries are created. The number of states is created by (“emerges from”) potential (in whatever form) interfering with itself. Thus entropy is potential distribution not number of states available. States available can change through perturbation and decay. The universe is not “information” the universe is potential resolving into information (state) through entropy in the moment of now. [for instance]

Trenthug 1y ago
The universe has a description of it's own, atleast that can be agreed upon(self evident truth) and that description can also be called the information about the universe , awareness of that is Consciousness,this seems agreeable (any counter thoughts?) and the model in the paper is just descriptive in nature
- overu589 1y ago
  The universe does not have a description of its own. I too grew up with Douglas Adams and the old conjecture that from a piece of angel cake the workings of the world may be deduced or inferred… however it is wrong. The Universe is a zero dimensional point of potential (the “potential of existential being.) The universe and everything in it spins, vibrates, and is impermanent (through decay and interference.) This potential of existential being interferes with itself, giving rise to potential displacement (where things can and cannot be due to another thing doing something that would interfere.) David Deutch explains this in his book “fabric of reality”, though what I am explaining is a more evolved overall idea. All of hyperdimensional reality emerges from this interference of the underlying potential. We do not yet have all of the math and language to describe how this hyperdimensional emergence works, which creates our time/space (and therefore gravity.) Not all physicist/theorists agree there is a zero dimensional universal potential outside of (before) the emergence of time and space. Vibrating, spinning, and changing through decay and interference. Sound familiar? This universal potential is bound in discrete packets we know as matter. When something makes the discrete potential bound in matter change vibration, one might at a stretch call this elemental consciousness. Living systems are biotechnology which use this vibrational feedback mechanism as an echo chamber. That echo chamber (sustained as a continuity by the living system) is the basis for what we call “consciousness.” Awareness is a tiny part of consciousness. Consciousness includes the entire hyperdimensionality and extradimentionality of universal potential. Information is merely state. State may well infer more states beyond itself in a forensic way. That is a very interesting and worthy branch of information theory. Consciousness is the inflection upon the potential of existential being.

overu589 1y ago

This is a sad devolution and this ghost account negs me for my considerations. Truth is a purturbation of existential reality. Thoughts feelings and beliefs are shit. It may be good shit. It may be sublime shit. If it does not exist existentially it has no business being confused with Truth, it is exotic shit. I love my share of exotic shit. You don’t have to agree with me about consciousness What I say about Truth is self axiomatic and only refuted my a moron. A moron. An idiot. Someone stupid. These are objectively and imperically defined as one who confuses bullshit (shit) for Truth. Truth is a purturbation of existential reality. A “truth” in the human mind is a “meta” (symbolic), justifiable only by its unembellished consistency (not contradictory) to Truth. And Truth is a purturbation of existential reality. A purturbation of existential being. I have to say “Truth and Law is worth murdering another Man over. Bullshit, never.”

Trenthug 1y ago
You're making an elegant but brutal distinction between existence and symbol, Truth and justification. I respect the urge to treat reality as sacred and thought as ornamental. But even your statement — 'Truth is a perturbation of existential reality' — is itself a symbolic construct. So the paradox remains: to speak of Truth, one must enter the realm of exotic shit. Where do you draw the line between a symbol that reflects a perturbation, and one that merely pretends to? Or is the line unknowable?" The argument would benefit from clarifying what “perturbation of existential reality” really entails. Is it sensory? Is it phenomenological? Is it measurable? That would move this from poetic metaphysics to rigorous ontology.
- overu589 1y ago
  > brutal distinction True Truth is brutalist. > is itself a symbolic construct Only in the most obvious context that we are using a symbolic language communications strategy. Exotic shit is where mind grows. Objective existential reality, aka “true Truth” is as hard core straight edge as it comes. This word “integrity” is a gauge of consistency with true Truths. It means a representation which does not embellish or contradict any true Truth. This can be creatively or crudely articulated (expressed) yet the “do or die” imperative remains, this must accurately represent an occurrence in existential reality. OR IT IS A LIE! Those other things which confuse you, such as how dreams logic or poetry can be not Truths thus must be threatened as LIES are your apprehension. We are complex creatures who approximate for our successes. Beat the averages and you’re doing better than most others. By definition. Our “truths” only need to be good enough to get us by, even if they are more convenient than correct. Most of all when they are pleasant. This is a part of humanity. When it comes time for someone to die for lying, remember: True Truth is a “perturbation” of existential reality (that’s what the stack of bibles is for right? In case only God knows.) Why someone did it or what they felt is not the true part of Truth however it may be a human truth to have such experiences. And perturbation is exactly what the English language word means. Any disturbance whatsoever is a manifest Truth of existential reality. Anything measurable whether or not anyone has the ability to measure or if it got measured at all. A disturbance of existential reality is what physicists are all very excited about. The Truth is it having occurred, and the “truth” is our best effort to approximate through discovery. If your “truth” is too wildly off you are incorrect, inexperienced, or a fraud. Keep practicing. All scientists do is worry about this very same question about perturbing existence. What is there to know, how do I find out? How do I interact with the phenomena? Does it make predictions? All questions about true Truth of objective existential reality, only knowable through perturbation. That is, some kind of reaction. Any kind, even not what was expected or clearly understood. And we all argue about every detail and context and interpretation and extrapolation and application and moral consequences and so on. This is the symbolic correlation bit. It also happens and is important to humans, however not to Truth! Truth don’t care. If Truth must suit the tastes, it is a sign of corruption. True Truth isn’t an ultimate answer, it is a happenstance in a long line of whatever comes of whatever goes. The forensic science of piecing that together only cares about existential being however interpretive the apparatus of our minds must be. Do not feel threatened that we all dwell in this in between place of quasi truths. Only be concerned with how you affect the world, for that is the truth of your Truth. Philosophically or otherwise. Every idea worth having develops in its own time. Truth is the hardest core. No bullshit.