Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

arXiv blog

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Email Subscription

Recently on the arXiv blog...

Recent comments on the arXivblog

  • Mr CP : Wow!  These games are almost as fun as throwing a real ball around!  Almost.  :)
  • scoubidoo : I suggest you visit the NooJ website: http://www.nooj4nlp.net/pages/nooj.htmland discover the...
  • coolmike : The other issue that is being overlooked is the type of prepaid service, and how the cost impacts...
  • jhertzberg : I checked the date as I read this (nope, not April 1st). How long until we start using...
  • jtempere : Both yttrium barium copper oxide and the family of bismuth strontium calcium copper oxides have...
  • sleeprun : We read a Wharton study of doctors influencing new treatment adoption.  It was not the most...
  • ZephirAWT : isn't completelly new in this context, as the simmilar concept was proposed by Mark Hucko in 1985...
  • ZephirAWT : If I understood it well, by your theory matter universe is surrounded by antimatter universe and...
  • matt_s : Couldn't we theoretically save the earth from the eventual expansion of the sun in it's...
  • ... : This is not about the originators of ideas, but about how the ideas spread. A well connected...
  • debu : Please read my ether-gravity or theory of gravitoethertons which explains many aspects of quantum...
  • ms : So is AMSC selling superconducting wire that doesn't exist?
  • shazl : I believe the results are not only because of somebody being post-paid or pre-paid. It's...
  • ... : I am surprised no one is addressing an immediate need for energy here on earth, and what this...
  • IXANTI666 : THE NEXT STEP HUMAN TELEPORTATION.SINCE WE ARE MADE UP OF QUATUM MATTER TO BEGIN WITH TO BORROW...
  • 020648 : try www.prisonplanet.tv
  • ZephirAWT : And what prohibits scientists in ATTEMPT to replicate J.F.Prins experiments? Are they so...
  • ... : Make me some 90K Tc superconductor and I'll finish my PhD in a month! How's this for a conspiracy...
  • sfrysfry : For ideas on entangling larger structures, I introduce the conjecture of Nicholas Greaves, an...
  • snedunuri : This might explain how UFOs get the energy they need to travel interstellar distances. Either...
Advertisement
Monday, July 27, 2009

Kauffman on the Philosophy of Mind

The theoretical biologist, Stuart Kauffman, argues that quantum physics can explain the existence of free will.

Stuart Kauffman is a theoretical biologist and author from the University of Calgary in Canada who has pioneered the study of complexity in relation to biological systems.

As a theoretical biologist, it must be hard to avoid the biggest outstanding problem of them all: what is the nature of consciousness? And today, Kauffman takes a crack at it along with five others related to the philosophy of mind.

He begins by mapping out his territory: "If mind depends upon the specific physics of the mind-brains system, mind is, in part, a matter for physicists." Fair enough.

He then lists the questions he hopes to tackle:

  1. How does mind act on matter?

  2. If mind does not act on matter is mind a mere epiphenomenon?

  3. What might be the source of free will?

  4. What might be the source of a responsible free will?

  5. Why might it have been selectively advantageous to evolve consciousness?

  6. What "is" consciousness?

That's an ambitious list. The gist of his answers is that mind is a quantum phenomenon that produces a classical output that Kauffman says is the source of free will. He adds that this classical output is nonrandom and yet cannot be described by the laws of physics because, as the quantum system decoheres, information is lost in a way that can never be retrieved.

If true, that's important because "if the quantum-classical boundary can be non-random yet lawless, then no algorithmic simulation of the world or ourselves can calculate the real world, hence the evolutionary selective advantages for evolving consciousness
to "know" it may be great".

In other words, consciousness is very useful for making sense of the world which is why evolution selects for it.

He also says this means we are not machines, although how he reaches this conclusion isn't clear. A more reasonable conclusion would be that we are machines that span the quantum-classical divide.

In any case, that clears up questions 1 to 5.

As for the biggie, he says: "I make no progress on problem 6"

An honest answer for sure; but then why include it in the essay in the first place?

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0907.2494: Physics and Five Problems in the Philosophy of Mind


Comments

  • More interesting than...
    '...if the quantum-classical boundary can be non-random yet lawless, then no algorithmic simulation of the world or ourselves can calculate the real world...'

    Someone - Paul Valery? - wrote that 'The world is always more interesting than any of our ideas about it.'

    Somehow that encompasses all of questions 1-5 and far more. As to question 6, mind 'is' that which discovers - and invents - 'ideas about it'.

    Bob Tyson
    Turin
    Rate this comment: 12345

    lkrndu
    07/27/2009
    Posts:24
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
    • Re: world is always more interesting than any of our ideas
      "UniVerse" term is insintrically inconsistent by itself. The "version" part assumes multiple instance of something, while "uni" means, such instance can be only one - so it's not instance at all. With such ambivalent denomination of subject we can never get some final answer about it.

      By AWT observable reality appears like nested system of density fluctuations (or space-time curvatures if you want) of inertial chaotic environment aka Aether. The only thing, which we can be perfectly sure here is, Universe is more extensive, then every part of it. It means, IF we are such part too, here should be an infinite number of nested levels of density fluctuations both above, both bellow human scale.

      We can deduce from this assumption, why Universe appears always curved into itself in convex way, while particle bellow human scale are curved in concave way and why their symmetry remains always violated, and so on. It's a geometrical model, which we can handle in predictable way.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      ZephirAWT
      07/27/2009
      Posts:158
      Avg Rating:
      2/5
    • Re: More interesting than...
      Well said.  It can reduce us to contemplation.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      mobp
      07/30/2009
      Posts:1
      Avg Rating:
      5/5
  • Mind games
    L Ron Hubbard solved this puzzle 50 years ago and the answer is not only a lot easier to understand than this and previous theories about the subject but can be personally tested and experienced. 
    Rate this comment: 12345

    Archie
    07/27/2009
    Posts:13
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
    • Re: Mind games
      Which testable prediction Mr. Hubbard's theory proposes, for example?
      Rate this comment: 12345

      ZephirAWT
      07/27/2009
      Posts:158
      Avg Rating:
      2/5
  • Quantum thinking
    Human brain consist of 10 - 100 billions of neurons - it's enough to explain even subtleties of woman thinking without any quantum mechanics involved..

    After all, even trivial system of few neurons behaves quite randomly in computer simulations. Here's no direct experimental support for involvement of QM at atomic level.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    ZephirAWT
    07/27/2009
    Posts:158
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • [no subject]
    Explaining consciousness by invoking quantum mechanics has already been attempted by Roger Penrose 10 years ago (see his book "The Emperor's New Mind").

    Max Tegmark debunked this idea (see "The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes" quant-ph/9907009, Phys. Rev. E, 61, 4194-4206).
    Rate this comment: 12345

    wcoenen
    07/27/2009
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    • Re: Human brain is quantum reality simulator
      In my opinion human brain is simulator of Aether foam, which exhibits a soliton mechanism of energy spreading (photons, bosons) and it leads to quantum mechanic behavior. The whole trick here is, the vacuum serves as an environment, whose mass density is proportional to energy density in each moment, in another words, vacuum foam gets more dense under introduction of energy like soap foam under shaking - so that every energy wave with wavelength above CMB spreads through it like self reinforcing wave packet.

      But such foamy behavior is emulated by human brain at slightly higher supramolecular level, then common quantum mechanics allows. It uses a neural membranes for spreading of electrochemical solitons mediated by sound waves in their critical state, where they're behaving like liquid crystals or elastic foam. In this way, whole length of nerve cell is serving like active environment for soliton spreading. Its foamy structure represented by microtubules is serving only for realization of hidden dimensions (foamy elasticity of environment), which every soliton requires for its spreading in simmilar way, like modern hollow-core optical cables for example (which can spread light in selfreinforcing waves, too).

      In such a way, both Sir Penrose/Hameroff, both Tegmark have their parts of truth.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      ZephirAWT
      07/27/2009
      Posts:158
      Avg Rating:
      2/5
    • Re:
      Kauffman's article cites Roger Penrose, but according to Kauffman his approach is different.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      rkomatsu
      07/27/2009
      Posts:19
      Avg Rating:
      4/5
  • We are not machines
    I think Kauffman speaks of machines in the formalized mathematical sense of a Turing machine, or something that can be isomorphically captured in a Universal Turing Machine. Isomorphically in the sense of execution time also - you can simulate a quantum system on a UTM, but not efficiently. It would take millions of years to simulate one second, but the simulated mind within would not know that.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    rkomatsu
    07/27/2009
    Posts:19
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
  • Kauffman's quantum tunneling through scientific method.
    This is all very fanciful and would make for good science fiction. This conjecture doesn't address the "hard problem" of consciousness, although it is beguiling.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    bpertum
    07/27/2009
    Posts:4
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    • Re: Kauffman's quantum tunneling through scientific method.
      The assumption, human brain doesn't use photon solitons at quantum scale defined by Planck constant doesn't exclude a long-distance entanglement phenomena, based on Aharamov-Bohm effect and quantum tunneling - on the contrary. Just because many electrochemical ions are involved in organized collective motion, we can face a long distance phenomena typical for QM systems (telepathy, telekinesis and other psychic phenomena), but at macroscopic level. Try to imagine, what will happen, if billions of ions confined to neural cell membrane will start to undulate in collective manner - such process is virtually impossible to emulate in bulk phase of solution, where the collective motion is destroyed by Brownian motion.

      Such multidimensional mesh/foam could radiate "scalar" waves of high energy density without macroscopic EM effect, still being able to induce the analogous motion of ions in another multidimensional mesh/foam at distance. Such collective motion and exchange of energy could be modelled by collective motion of ions on the surface of water clusters or maybe inside of ball lighning and related phenomena.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      ZephirAWT
      07/27/2009
      Posts:158
      Avg Rating:
      2/5
  • Nature of consciousness
    From AWT follows, even simplest soliton spreading through foam exhibits a rudimentary consciousness, because it behaves like tiny less or more stable animal, which follows the more dense place of foam like channels due the Hamilton/Lagrange mechanics, it avoids obstacles, it can conjugate and exchange energy with another solitons so it can grow like rogue wave at ocean surface from another solitons, which it uses like food. In another way, it's intelligent organism and the intelligence of human brain is just a collective intelligence of civilization of these tiny creatures, wildly moving inside of our brain like sort of condensate of consciousness elements or like nest of ants, which manifests emergent character of reality: a large society of tiny ants is more intelligent, then each ant by itself. The point here is, the density fluctuations of collective flow of solitons are behaving like new level of more intelligent solitons, i.e. like memes in human society. Which means, consciousness itself has a character of nested foam, thus reflecting fractal character of causual foam, which is forming our spacetime and we can describe it by the same principles and physical laws.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    ZephirAWT
    07/27/2009
    Posts:158
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • Old unserious debate.
    .
    Rate this comment: 12345

    ylicht
    07/27/2009
    Posts:1
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
  • How does mind act on matter?
    The answer can be just as exact, as exactly the concepts of "mind" and "matter" are defined. Is mind a physical stuff? If yes, then it can affect matter in physical way. If not, then sorry (only similar or analogous concepts can interact mutually in causual way)... 

    General problem of free thinkers is, they want to find an exact answers to vague questions, i.e. without exact definitions of terms used. In certain sense, the main task of contemporary philosophy is to define subjects, which exact science can handle in formal way, after then.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    ZephirAWT
    07/27/2009
    Posts:158
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • and even if,...derivative product of human consciousness
    Abstractions that overwhelm real world measurable
    quantum mechanics...
    And, if and when, algorithmic simulations of human
    mind could be a possibility,how more realistic would
    affecting,or effecting classical determinant
    parametric phenomena into achieving more refined
    real world positive derivative product(s) of
    'free will' like human conscience for
    an improved human co-existence and society. ??
    Rate this comment: 12345

    martinaatayo
    07/28/2009
    Posts:45
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
  • No reductionism?
    What exactly does it mean to say, "reductionism is inadequate?"  The entire scientific worldview is based on reductionism.  You can't throw it away without owning up to some thorny questions.  For starters: If the mind is not a physical system, then where does a chimp fall on the "physical system" vs. "mind-stuff" dichotomy?  A salamander?  A nematode with 20 neurons?  A single neuron?  The nucleus of a single neuron?  Where precisely is the delineation between "mind-stuff" and the physical world?  Unless you are prepared to answer questions like these, there is no theory.  Occam's Razor has cut you apart.

    I for one am not in favor of ditching reductionism because Stuart Kauffman cannot accept the fact that he is a physical system.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    stuntmonkey
    07/28/2009
    Posts:2
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
    • Re: No reductionism?
      /*..where does a chimp fall on the "physical system" vs. "mind-stuff" dichotomy..*/
      In AWT the mind stuff is a soliton wave packet, spreading along neural cell, which is material stuff here. It's size corresponds the CMB scale, which the neural system is adopted on by evolution, i.e. it's a bit smaller, then average neural cell.
      Rate this comment: 12345

      ZephirAWT
      07/29/2009
      Posts:158
      Avg Rating:
      2/5
  • How does the mind act on matter?
    The mind would act on matter only by creating electrical impulses in the brain. So, the mind acts on matter electrically. The source of free will would be our counsciousness, which is our awareness & what I consider to be our soul. Consciousness is a collaboration of neurological & electrical impulses in our brains & as we die, it as energy continues on w/ out the confinement of our physical bodies...
    Rate this comment: 12345

    magdala
    07/29/2009
    Posts:8
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • The Evolution of Consciousness
    I believe that all living things have some sort of conscious awareness, however, the first living humans would have had a greater conscious ability than any other life form. The evolution of conscious came through the trial and error of learning and fortunately continues evolving as we learn as a society and tackle questions such as these which have existed in the minds of men throughout history.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    magdala
    07/29/2009
    Posts:8
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • The Source of a Responsible Free Will
    The source of a responsible free will is our conscious. As we learn through trial and error, we begin to understand cause and effect. Once we gain enough life expierience and understand which actions (cause) trigger either good or bad effects, we learn to know the differnce and our free will, if we choose to do right, becomes responsible.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    magdala
    07/29/2009
    Posts:8
    Avg Rating:
    2/5

  • ZephirAWT
    07/31/2009
    Posts:158
    Avg Rating:
    2/5
  • BS
    I like Kaufman's ideas in general, but I think this is BS. Having worked in AI for years, I'm guessing we can create robots/brains that function in the world at or superior to humans in any task.  When working on robots, you quickly bump up against the need for "consciousness": The robot needs to simulate itself.  That alone is not consciousness, but it is a form of self-awareness.

    To get to consciousness, you continue on and need to simulate others to guage their intentions and potential reactions.  Still not consciousnes.  Now, finally, apply that simulation of others to yourself.  That, I believe, is consciousness and if I'm correct, it's a byproduct of this need to simulate others and is not primary (not selected for directly) itself. I don't see any need for quantum mysticism in any of this.

    Go figure.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    GaryB
    08/20/2009
    Posts:71
    Avg Rating:
    4/5
Advertisement

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review January/February 2010

Current Issue

Security in the Ether
Information technology's next grand challenge will be to secure the cloud--and prove we can trust it.
•  Subscribe
Save 36%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
» Gift Subscription
» Digital Subscription
» Reprints, Back Issues
» Subscribe
» Table of Contents
» MIT News

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2010 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.