Consciousness and Special Relativity?

[Nuno Amiar]

My question to you is as follows?
1. Are you conscious? (Conscious as defined in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness)
2. If yes to 1 then in what component of your body does this consciousness take place?
3. If the answer to the above is the brain then what activity in the brain is responsible for it?
4. How is that activity distributed over space and time and what's its relationship to consciousness?

I would believe the answers of a Physicist would be along the lines:

1. Consciousness is not well defined. From a physical point of view, it is hard to describe reality as we experience as a consequence of moving structureless objects. I believe the understanding and the proper definition of consciousness is more on the realm of neuroscience, logic and computing than physics, at least, at this point in time.

2. The act of thought comes from your brain. Radiomagnetic imaging can be used to explore and proove the connection of our mind and the brain activity.

3. The activity responsible for the emergence of consciousness is most likely the result of a complex chain of quimical and electrical reactions that happen in our brain.

 

[fdesilva]

OK, you are welcome to your opinion. The problem is that as you said above "this alteration will not be detectable from within the 4 Dimensions". That means that yours is a non-falsifiable premise and therefore it is outside of the realm of science (e.g. like intelligent design). I have long since decided that it is pointless to argue about non-falsifiable theories. Believe this one if you choose, no evidence will contradict it.

It is falsifiable. Further it is not detectable, however it can be inferred. Just as the expansion of the universe is inferred and not detectable. Let me explain with regards to the universe first. How do we infer that the universe is expanding? By the fact that distant galaxies are moving away from each other. However, can we detect new space-time getting created? No. In fact the expansion takes place at every point in the universe uniformly, so it is taking place around each of us, yet this cannot be detected directly but only inferred. Do you agree?
In this same way, It can be inferred and experiments done, that either falsify or prove these ideas. With regards to these experiments, that is the link I gave before and here it is again.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/pdfs/presentiment.pdf
Have you heard of Libet’s experiments? Anyway here is one experiment that I specifically designed based on the above that will falsify what I am saying . Think about it carefully.
This is the experiments it is simple.
1. A red light is flashed at random
2. An independent observer who has no idea when the light is going to flash is asked to press a button, when the light flashes. He/She is wired to an EKG devise as in the above experiments
3. Expected results according to me. There will be a change in his/her neural activity prior to the light flash.
Now how could his/her brain know prior to the light that it is going to flash? Please note that this change is only prior to the random light flashes and not at any other time, so you cannot put it to anticipation.

 

[Nuno Amiar]

I'm sorry but our eyes cannot detect a photon before it hits the optic nerves.

 

[Dale]

This is the experiments it is simple.
1. A red light is flashed at random
2. An independent observer who has no idea when the light is going to flash is asked to press a button, when the light flashes. He/She is wired to an EKG devise as in the above experiments
3. Expected results according to me. There will be a change in his/her neural activity prior to the light flash.

How would that be even remotely construed as evidence that a "thought" has changed the past?

 

[fdesilva]

How would that be even remotely construed as evidence that a "thought" has changed the past?

Let me relate this to what I said in the start of the thread.
Statement 1. In our conscious experience we observe a 4 Dimensional object.

Reason for statement 1. When we listen to music or sound we must be aware across time as sound or music will not make sense over 0 seconds.

Question
Now given that we can observe 4 Dimensionally, could it well be, that all actions including observation change the events in the brain in a 4 Dimensional way?

(What is changing something in a 4 Dimensional way mean? It would mean that it would change something not only at a given instant t=0 but also for t< 0 and t> 0 that is to the past and the future around the point of interest)

Read this paper.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/pdfs/presentiment.pdf

In it you will find that you have this random photos shown to a subject, the brain changes prior to the photo differs. How could it as the person has no idea what the photo is going to be?
So what I am saying is when he sees the photo it changes his past brain activity, which is detectable.

 

[Dale]

So what I am saying is when he sees the photo it changes his past brain activity, which is detectable.

That is exactly the opposite of what you were claiming above that a thought can not only directly cause a change, but can actually cause a change in the past.

Also, I read the article and it seemed pretty sketchy to me. The source is not peer-reviewed, and the references were largely from known crank journals. Without independent corroboration I would strongly suspect experimental error.

 

[ValenceE]

Hello all,

I also started reading the article, but stopped at ;

' The anomaly consists therein that the anticipatory physiological signal is larger for subsequent emotional stimuli than for subsequent neutral stimuli. These stimuli were randomized with replacement so that each trial is completely independent of the previous ones and the subject has no way to ‘foresee’ what the future stimulus will be. '

Here's my take on it;

I think that this could be explained by QM…

if you project yourself into the QM realm, everything becomes of an order of magnitude that allows for a different means of information gathering (however it may work) that could very well include the fact that you could, at a glance, envision the entirety of the experiment, including subject, apparatus and of course the different pictures to be presented.

And, as the ‘randomized choosing process’ is happening, this information could then already be available to the ‘not yet aware’ macro mind thus, some time later, generating a response which would in fact just truly be a normal response but represented as a so called anomaly in the macro world… not related to any of this business about changing the past.

Regards,

VE

 

[petm1]

2 An independent observer who has no idea when the light is going to flash is asked to press a button, when the light flashes. He/She is wired to an EKG devise as in the above experiments

Why wired to an "EKG devise" ?

 

[fdesilva]

That is exactly the opposite of what you were claiming above that a thought can not only directly cause a change, but can actually cause a change in the past.

Also, I read the article and it seemed pretty sketchy to me. The source is not peer-reviewed, and the references were largely from known crank journals. Without independent corroboration I would strongly suspect experimental error.

Also, I read the article and it seemed pretty sketchy to me. The source is not peer-reviewed, and the references were largely from known crank journals. Without independent corroboration I would strongly suspect experimental error.

I agree it needs to be verified. I did do a search a long time back, and did find further papers. Will try and find more links as time permits.

That is exactly the opposite of what you were claiming above that a thought can not only directly cause a change, but can actually cause a change in the past.
.

why is this not the same as

So what I am saying is when he sees the photo it changes his past brain activity, which is detectable

 

[Nuno Amiar]

fdesilva, how confortable are you with Special and General Relativity?

 

[fdesilva]

fdesilva, how confortable are you with Special and General Relativity?

very well in the past, a bit rusty now but still ok.

 

[Nuno Amiar]

very well in the past, a bit rusty now but still ok.

Are you seriously suggesting that the brain KNOWS that a photon is coming its way before the photon actually hits the eyes nerve cells? You certainly know that it is a violation of the constancy of light speed in vacuum right? Unless you call for "new age science" I can't see how this experiment is valid unless all the GR physical laws we've been using in the past years are violated at human-like energies.

 

[fdesilva]

Are you seriously suggesting that the brain KNOWS that a photon is coming its way before the photon actually hits the eyes nerve cells? You certainly know that it is a violation of the constancy of light speed in vacuum right? Unless you call for "new age science" I can't see how this experiment is valid unless all the GR physical laws we've been using in the past years are violated at human-like energies.

Hi thanks for you interest

Are you seriously suggesting that the brain KNOWS that a photon is coming its way before the photon actually hits the eyes nerve cells?

This is not what I am saying.

If you can find the time please answer the following.
1. Given that a change of Shape to a 3 Dimensional object can affect all 3 Dimensions Do you agree a change in shape to a 4 Dimensional object can affect all 4 Dimensions?
2. Do you agree that the universe has 4 Dimensions?
3. If you agree to 2 then Do you agree that the objects that make up the universe is also 4D ?
If you agree with the above then what is happening is simply this, the change in shape caused by the interaction of the eye, Conscioussness and the photons take place in a all 4 Dimensions. That is it effects the past as well as the future of that event.

 

[Dale]

a thought can not only directly cause a change, but can actually cause a change in the past.

why is this not the same as

So what I am saying is when he sees the photo it changes his past brain activity, which is detectable.

In the first case the world changes initially and then the thought changes later, and in the second case the thought changes initially and then the world changes later. They are exact opposites. Your suggestion that your cited "evidence" showing the second supports your "theory" claiming the first is just obviously wrong.

 

[fdesilva]

In the first case the world changes initially and then the thought changes later, and in the second case the thought changes initially and then the world changes later. They are exact opposites. Your suggestion that your cited "evidence" showing the second supports your "theory" claiming the first is just obviously wrong.

In the experiment what is observed is a change in neural activity prior to the observation.
The question is how could there be a change prior to observation?
What I am saying is that the observation makes a 4Dimensional change in the brain as such you detect a coincidental change prior to observation.

Its as follows Consider a change of state of the brain over time as A1-> A2-> A3->A4
In a 4 Dimensional change a Change of A3 to say B3 will result in A1->B2->B3->B4
Thus the past (A2 to B2), the present (A3 to B3) and the Future ( A4 to B4 ) due to a single change in the present of A3 to B3.
Hope that clarifies what is to be expected with a 4D Change of shape

 

[Nuno Amiar]

Ok I have a very simple explanation for this phenomena. My assumption is that when we are expecting a certain sensory input, it is natural for the brain to anticipate it (ever played soccer and noticed that you close your eyes before the ball actually hits you in the head?), thus the results of that experiment.
This assumes that if the subject has no reason to expect something to happen, you shouldn't observe a brain pattern corresponding to that something. This should be a simple way to test this hypotheses.

 

[Dale]

That is the explanation I expect to be correct also. Since this data has not been independently replicated (AFAIK) and since MRI in general is notoriously non-quantitative I do not expect that the observation has any real significance.

 

[Nuno Amiar]

Me neither. I was just surprised how could someone question GR from this, supposed legit experiment, without proposing a simpler explanation without having to take into account the spacetime fabric.

 

[Dale]

What I am saying is that the observation makes a 4Dimensional change in the brain as such you detect a coincidental change prior to observation.

In most of the subforums you are not allowed to present personal theories at all. So far you have presented three separate personal theories in a single thread. I am sure that is some sort of a forum record.

You first proposed that consciousness violates SR because it requires spacelike connections. Then you changed your mind and proposed that consciousness violates SR because it can directly cause a change in the past. Now you are proposing that consciousness violates SR because it can be changed by events in the future.

I am truly impressed by your ability to come up with new personal theories on the spur of the moment, but I don't particularly feel the need to debate someone who is so capable of debating themselves.

 

[Nuno Amiar]

Thank dog I am not the only who noticed this. I was about to delete my account from this forum.

 

[Math Is Hard]

I've been pretty generous with letting this thread go on because, it was my understanding this is based off a published work. However, it has begun to slip and slide into areas that are too speculative for the PF membership to consider and respond to. At this point, I think it is best to bring this to a close.