Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Nonlocal brain/mind

  1. Apr 22, 2006 #1
    If subatomic particles are "nonlocal" then our brains/mind and consciousness is nonlocal. Thid being the case, it would say a lot about the paradox of Schroedinger's Cat. What do you think?
    Thanks Rad
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 24, 2006 #2
  4. Apr 24, 2006 #3
  5. Apr 25, 2006 #4
    First I ask "by what mechanism does the quantum 'structure' - which appears unstructured with regard to what we know as "structure" - how does it support the emergence of such structures as are found in emergent phenomena?"

    This is looking at, as you say, "our brains/mind and consciousness" from the other end. What is going on on a quantum scale that has caused the emergent phenomena of "brains/minds/awareness"?

    Hypothetically speaking and relying on a very close knit group of physicists who write reports about their experiments, the whole damn planet has gone non-local, not just everyone's brains/thoughts.

    With this in mind, why aren't telepathy and ESP accepted as probable modes of communication given the physics surrounding the concepts?
  6. Apr 25, 2006 #5
    I cannot prove anything to you nor will I try. I can only tell you what I believe. I am an idealist. I believe all there is is consciousness so there is no need for "emergence" of it .

    I believe David Bohm's philosophy that the universe at its most basic level is structured holographically, each part containing the whole. This would mean that time and space is an illusion of the discriminating mind of man. If this is the case, one could say the whole universe is nonlocal.

    I don't know why ESP and telepathy isn't more prevelant in the world but it is a good question. Possibly the mind as we know it just isn't complex enough.

    The idea of nonlocal consciousness came to me in the book, "The Self Aware Univese" by physicist Amit Goswami. I have his e mail address if you wish to contact him with your questions.
  7. Apr 25, 2006 #6
    Cool dude:tongue2:
    I agree with the idea of a non-local awareness. It is in keeping with the idea of Cubism from Braques, Piccasso and Cezzan and many later artists like Marcel DuChampes. All the aspects of all things and events are happening simultanieously and Cubism attempts to cram them into one 2D canvas. This is an example of primitive, cybernetic holography.

    I also agree with your statement concerning "each part containing the whole." This concept would explain the impression we get of interconnected influences in nature and the expanding conductivity of effect that is explored by Chaos theorists.

    The brain is capable of handling the buzz of information going on all around us.... and it does. It's a simple physical survival mechanism that disallows this information from reaching one's immediate awareness.

    There are some who are able to tap into the perceptions created by ambient, prevailing information. These are the type of people who have stopped listening to the voice of the ego. They are open to the information offered by their experience rather than pre-emptively classifying the experience with pre-conceived notions of "what it will be like". This sort of behaviour does not allow one to be a part of the "Self Aware Universe".
  8. Apr 26, 2006 #7
    To Quantumcarl

    You have a very rich vocabulary and I can tell you are well read and very intelligent. I must admit that I was at first intimidated by you because I thought you were a materialist attacking my philosophy of idealism. I also must admit that I quite didn't understand the ideas you first posted and had to read it twice to get what I thought the ideas you were trying to communicate. Thanks for your agreeable response. RAD

    PS I can tell from your spelling that you are from Europe:approve:
  9. Apr 29, 2006 #8
    Actually, only from Canada, eh. Pity!

    It isn't my vocabulary that's rich... its the vocabulary I use that is rich.

    Ask not what your vocabulary can do for you but, what you can do for your vocabulary. (Dr. Kennedy the english teacher)
  10. May 1, 2006 #9
    I noticed you used the term "nonlocal awareness" instead of nonlocal consciousness. In your opinion is there a difference?
  11. May 1, 2006 #10
    Philosophy and physics of Amit Goswami

    http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DP5/goswami.htm [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  12. May 2, 2006 #11
    In my opinion "awareness" is better as a quantifiable term when measuring response to stimuli.

    "Consciousness", again in my opinion, is a term too widely associated with so many juxtopposing religions, practises and individual interpretations.

Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook