The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness  (Read 6010 times)

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« on: 04/11/2009 14:51:47 »
The Sides of Consciousness

The science of consciousness has reached the point of boom within the last couple of years. Being one of the last unsolved physical problems, it has remained daunting to even consider the implications of computation of particles on the value they take within our brains, which consists of about 10^26 particles all in (average). These particles are arranged in such ways (guided by quantum decoherence and connectivity (1)) so that awareness and self of being can arise, that i call ''Me.'' The sense of ''I'' however has come under challenge. According to the quantum paradox, Wigners Friend, it challenges the idea of ultimate knowledge, and places contraints on when the wave function is determined, which for many, will entail the concept of what is called a collapse in the wave function, when only one set of observables remain real and with mathematical amplitude values of 1.  Three different physicists across the world independantly arrived at a conclusion that there is only one mind ever present.

Without the implications of who arrived to this conclusion or what the theory contends, it goes for sure that certain physicists are liking the idea of a unified framework of consciousness, and the foundation of all consciousness existing parallel as one mind only agrees well with this notion, as we did unifing the four fundamental forces (at least, this is our goal) to unite as the single force of quantum gravity, the fundamental force which pervaided within an instant of the big bang.

Understanding how there may be one consciousness however, becomes more incapable of description to certain individuals who cling to the idea that they are one - and any suggestion otherwise must be a mistake. Today, i have decided to give some insight into how consciousness can be arranged to being existent as one mind: This is achieved by having no arrangement at all.

What do i mean?

Well, i have began to study within myself why the idea is so hard to accept, and it really is down to the acceptance that we can exist seperately within our own lives, but not as a unified whole... We are arranged within ourselves in such a way that we arrange all conscious beings in exactly the same fashion: The contention that consciousness is only ever experienced by one individual and there is nothing more simpler than that.

It turns out it can be simpler. Much like how we arrange the fundamental forced into a unified framework, all parts of one side of a single object, is now how we must associate all consciousness to ultimately understand the ''One-Conscious Proposal''. Instead of saying that we experience consciousness and no other, it's best to say now that we experience consciousness but so does everyone else, and mine is no more superior. This means that someone elses consciousness is just as real and just as important as mine. But is it important enough to suggest they are the same?

Well - here's the rub. They are not the same. We are, again, arranged in such a way that there is a unique experience within our own minds. We (that is), each and every human on planet earth also experiences an individuality (unless there is a mental health problem involved, like schizophrenia) - in fact, some scientists have even proposed that the one-mind scenario may have an explanation for schoziphrenia and related illnesses. We may begin to think that consciousness has two meanings in the grand picture of a single-mind. There are, of course, conscious beings who (seem) to experience events, independant of one-another. And then there is the contention/theory that every conscious mind somehow ''connects'' as one consciousness only, and individuality (or how we arrange ourselves during our aware states) no longer applies. This means that order, or how we arrange ourselves as independant beings can no longer apply in a single conscious model which would transversely imply that awareness must be removed. This means that the one-mind model applies to a non-singular frame of time, but encompasses absolutely everything (2).

The material form of consciousness (which is the theories which work with a fundamental construction of particles for consciousness) is also a present time phenomena. If the one-mind model requires an encompassing of all-time, then it cannot be a material model itself. So essentially we cannot have awareness, nor can we have any definate matter. The idea that there is only one mind cannot then be mistaken to mean that what we experience is wrong. It just means that all that ''potential-self'' is just resident with the universe, afterall, is there not an individual wave function which describes our actions within the universe? We already have a state vector which describes not only entire galaxies but the whole universe and everything in it, so why not us? 
 
There may be one great field of information which we may call God (3), and that would mean that the order of consciousness and how we personally come about is all described within this field, as though written into space and time itself.

(1) - The term connectivity is really another way of saying ''particle coherence''; This is the study of the particle interactions.

(2) - By encompassing everything, i mean that consciousness in the one-mind scenario means that it is not restricted within the present time frame, but is itself ''something'' which permeates the field in which it exists, which may involve more than one conscious race in the universe.

(3) - Fred A. Wolf also came to a similar conclusion though i am not sure how he arrived at that conclusion, in ''Parallel Universes; the search for other worlds 1985''.

ref: Hermathena - The Mind of Wigners Friend, Ludvic Bass

(Here, Bass mathematically challenges the theory of measurement, and comes to the conclusion that only one mind existed!)
« Last Edit: 04/11/2009 15:02:57 by Mr. Scientist »


 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #1 on: 04/11/2009 16:33:02 »
The last time I checked, the study of how the brain works falls in the field of Biology, not quantum physics. Have you been watching "What the Bleep Do We Know" or something?
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #2 on: 04/11/2009 16:41:19 »
No.

The last time i checked is that quantum classical objects still follow the rules of non-classical behaviour.
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #3 on: 04/11/2009 16:41:49 »
And by the way... i've never seen 'What the Bleep.'
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #4 on: 04/11/2009 16:51:32 »
It takes particles much smaller than neurons for quantum mechanics to become significant. By 'consciousness' do you mean 'brain' or are you trying to suggest consciousness is different from brains?
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #5 on: 04/11/2009 16:56:20 »
Not really.

Quantum mechanics is a spectrum of importance, certainly not limited within the low-energy results of geometry (AND thus, molecules and atoms), and so physics has to deal with the wave function, including the elementary functions which even allow a structured position of one neutron, within a collection of many arrays of particles, cohering to the same tune.
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #6 on: 04/11/2009 17:25:51 »
Right. Whatever that means. Perhaps it is my lack of understanding of quantum mechanics, but I get the feeling that in many of your posts you just use the most confusing language possible to confund people in taking your word for it.

Can you show me some evidence and explanation as to how quantum mechanics is relevant at all to something on the scale of a biological cell?
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #7 on: 04/11/2009 18:04:40 »
I will let others decide. Obviously your determination is not absolute. And no - i cannot be bothered showing any more to you.
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #8 on: 04/11/2009 18:45:25 »
How convenient.
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #9 on: 04/11/2009 22:39:36 »
Convenient that i give up when you are being at your most stubborn?

Let us see whether my actions where in vain.
 

Offline demografx

  • Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8196
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #10 on: 07/11/2009 03:24:39 »

i cannot be bothered showing any more to you.


In a forum environment, clarification-based questions reasonably lead to knowledge-building replies, not condescension. You've been asked repeatedly to participate in a more constructive manner.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #11 on: 07/11/2009 18:35:53 »
Why would anyone post if they are unwilling to debate? Woops - sounds like I should start a new thread!
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #12 on: 08/11/2009 14:09:25 »
Why would anyone post if they are unwilling to debate? Woops - sounds like I should start a new thread!

Debate or argue? Because i will not entertain the latter.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #13 on: 08/11/2009 19:21:57 »
Debate or argue? Because i will not entertain the latter.

Er, well, there really is not much difference between the two. Arguments are presented during a debate (and sometimes they can be highly entertaining.)
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #14 on: 09/11/2009 13:02:34 »
Let's change the title to 'Explaining Bass brewery's model of Un-Consciousness'. :D

The English word 'argue' has become much misused these days. Now many people equate it with 'having a row', which is a shame!
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #15 on: 09/11/2009 14:44:52 »
lol
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #16 on: 09/11/2009 15:10:59 »
I always thought of an argument as that stuff that goes between the parenthesis in a software function call.  ;D

like:

int do_some_important_stuff(arguemnt_1, argument_2);
« Last Edit: 09/11/2009 15:13:13 by Vern »
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #17 on: 09/11/2009 15:29:27 »
:) heehee
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Explaining Bass' model of One Consciousness
« Reply #17 on: 09/11/2009 15:29:27 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums