fuck this.
My Final.
Time to go take a shower and sleep for a couple days.
Cognition and Reality, Our Infusion with the Space-Time Curvature
In the existence of critical analysis of the nature of reality as perceived in the limited ontology of the human mind, there have been many advancements to the nature of our world and to our utilitarian function. However, there are some problems that still exist that have yet to be solved in the advent of critical analysis. Many of these problems are difficult to conceptualize even in the light of their stunning simplicity. In my humble perception, one of the most intriguing issues that science, philosophy and religion have failed to adequately solve is that of (as Chalmers describes it) the "hard problem of consciousness." Its simplicity lies in the fact that it is easy to define consciousness. The most eloquent definition of consciousness that summarizes subjective experience was cultivated by none other than Descartes in his infamous statement cogito ergo sum I think therefore I am. Such a small sentence could slip by an unassuming reader without pause but when one attempts to gain a comprehensive understanding of what exactly that statement entails they are left perplexed.
What is the nature and composition of the things that I observe? I can doubt the truth in my perception of physical form, however, in doing so am I affirming that the only truth there is, is the absolution of my thinking mind? If that is the case what is the significance of the stuff that I interact with, and the stuff that comprises me? While skepticism is one of the fundamental tools of the progression of scientific advances in understanding and problem solving, it unfortunately leaves us with only half the equation. While in recent year’s philosophers, neurologists, theists, psychologists, cognitive scientists and many others have made commendable progress in their understanding of the nature of consciousness and the reality with which we interact, however, they are left with a chasm of information when it comes to describing such fundamental concepts as unification and the nature of subjective experience. While the thought that these questions have not been answered since the time of Socrates might be disparaging to some, I am optimistic.
You might ask, from where is this optimism derived, and my response would be one that hearkens to the integration of multiple collegiate disciplines. If we are to find or even to postulate about the nature of consciousness, there needs to be a convergence of intellectual disciplines that bridges superficial definition to create new ideas which integrate intimately subjective nature and objective analysis similar to what occurred in the age of the Renaissance. I find no better example of the emergence of such thought processes than has been outlined by The Physicists and anesthesiologist Stuart Hammeroff in his influential paper titled, " Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in fundamental Space Time Geometry."
Here Hammeroff implements his expertise in the field of physics while simultaneously making sure to include many questions raised and analyzed in the more subjective field of Philosophy. The result is a well balanced theory on the nature of consciousness and the human perception of linear time and reality.
In this paper I seek to provide a comprehensive explanation and exploration of a developing theory of consciousness which incorporates aspects of physics (i.e. quantum mechanics and space time geometry) as well as elements of neurobiology in a unified approach. While there have been a number of articles and collegiate papers published on this scientific topic, I will be mainly addressing the insights of Stuart Hammeroff derived from his influential paper Consciousness and Space-Time Geometry and attempt to provide a well balanced and objective analysis of the theory of consciousness in question.
As stated in the above paragraphs, it is obvious that Hammeroff is attempting to strike a difficult balance between the objective and imperial as compared to subjective postulation, and in this process Hammeroff wastes no time in incorporating the larger questions associated with the philosophy of mind. Before you reach the end of the first paragraph in the Hammeroff article, you come across articulations that relate to Emerginitism as well as functionalism which are reintroduced and distributed throughout the article. There is no better example of this than the opening statement, which reads "What is consciousness? Conventional approaches see it as an emergent property of complex interactions among individual neurons;" This statement seems to suggest that Emerginitism of whichever variety is the assumed standard model of the analysis of mind (to which I am certain some others would disagree). However, he follows this clause with the statement "…However, these approaches fail to address enigmatic features of consciousness.”While Emerginitism seems to me to be the most logical approach to the explanation of the phenomenal mind as related to the physical form, we are still left with that burning question, where does the nature of subjective experience lie? In Hammeroff paper, he seems to suggest that it in fact it lies in the subatomic composition and structure of reality itself, another topic of which the brightest minds in the world are attempting to gain some grasp of understanding.
When attempting to solve a problem such as the nature of external reality as related to cognition and self awareness, there are many creative theories that can be employed many of which we have covered thoroughly in class, be it the, Mysterinsts, the Constitutionalists, the Moanists or.. The physicalist, each with their own unique outlook on the interpretative representation of reality. Hammeroff chooses the observations of the process philosopher of the turn of the century, Alfred North Whitehead to create a beautifully detailed image of reality as being an "occasion of experience" with the subjective qualia that form conscious experience a inherent aspect of reality. That being said one may question what an occasion of experience may look like, in this case it is much like the flickering of frames experienced when one for instance watches a film at a slow speed. How could this be? This is not how we experience reality. To understand a process as it might relate to this description we will have to analyze things on a very small scale, as with the film analogy, we experience a smooth uninterrupted image of a realistic magnitude when the frames of a film are sped up to a certain threshold that creates an optical illusion, however logically we can reduce that a slower rendering would not be smooth but rather fractured with gaps between each frame. While this artful analogy provides us with a basis for visual understanding, there is in fact something further beyond it, that being the objective description of this form of reality through the language of quantum mechanics
To provide a comprehensive understanding of the principles outlined in Hammeroff's article it is essential to gain a strong understanding of the basic principles involved, as a result I will give definitions throughout this paper in an effort to strip the cryptic detail of these highly complex functions. The first definition I will provide is one of quantum dynamics which is as follows... "Main Entry: quantum mechanics Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction Date: 1922: A theory of matter that is based on the concept of the possession of wave properties by elementary particles, that affords a mathematical interpretation of the structure and interactions of matter on the basis of these properties, and that incorporates within it quantum theory and the uncertainty principle -called also wave mechanics." [2] This definition is helpful to some degree but leaves out the essential detail that quantum mechanics is applicable only at very small scales as opposed to the theory of relativity implemented by Einstein which deals with the universe at a large scale.
I should also mention that these theories (quantum mechanics and relativity) are not mathematically compatible and this is essentially the hard problem in the field of physics. Now that we have a general understanding of the basis of quantum dynamics I think it would be an advantageous time to correlate this to the occasion of experience as defined by the ORCH OR. The ORCH OR, or the Orchestrated Objective Reductions as articulated by the mathematical physicists Sir Rodger Penrose is defined as follows "The ORCH OR is a theory of consciousness, which is the joint work of theoretical physicist Sir Roger Penrose and anesthesiologist Stuart Hammeroff. A brief definition of organizational reduction is as follows: “Mainstream theories assume that consciousness emerges from the brain, and focus particularly on complex computation at connections known as synapses that allow communication between brain cells (neurons). Orch OR combines approaches to the problem of consciousness from the radically different angles of mathematics, physics and anesthesia.” [3] This definition could be further accentuated with the words of Hammeroff, who correlates an emergent theory of the mind with quantum collapsible states which are then applied to the construct of the "Occasion of Experience." He does so in the space of 2 very strongly constructed sentences which read, "Consider that consciousness occurs if an approximately organized system is able to develop and maintain quantum coherent superposition until a specific "objective" criterion (a threshold related to that of quantum gravity is reached; the coherent system them self reduces (objective reduction : ORCH OR.) We contend that this type of self collapse introduces non computability, an essential feature of consciousness which distinguishes out minds from classical computers." These two sentences have a multitude of implications; the first I will point out is the very strong correlation to the hierarchy of organizational invariance which I think applies beautifully to the first sentence. The other being the clarification that Hammeroff in the second sentence is not talking about reducibility as related to reductionism in the theory of mind, rather the reducibility of the wave functions in quantum collapsible states, and lastly the non-computation seems to suggest that reality is not predetermined but in fact forming instantaneously as each collapse occurs.
So far we have introduced quantum dynamics, and the concept of the ORCH OR as related to occasions of experience, which is interesting, but how exactly do these non tangible abstractions apply to our interactive perception as related to physical reality? Well, Hammeroff provides a theory entrenched in the discipline of neuroscience for this as well. Hammeroff postulates that the quantum-super imposed states (as related to quantum super position, which is a property of coexisting possibilities in a given space) reside in microtubule sub-units in the brain. A microtubulin is defined as follows: “Microtubules are one of the components of the cytoskeleton. They have a diameter of 25 nm and length varying from 200 nanometers to 25 micrometers. Microtubules serve as structural components within cells and are involved in many cellular processes including mitosis, cytokinesis, and vesicular transport.”
Now, Hammeroff suggests that the quantum super imposed states actually develop inside of these tublins and through a process that is inherent in quantum dynamics (though not defined exactly) after which a process of selection recruits more tublins until a critical mass of energy (as is described in quantum gravity) is reached. What does this mean? Well when a critical mass is reached in the context of super-imposed states a collapse or ORCH OR (orchestrated organizational reduction) occurs. If we take this process one step further we can complete the picture by stating that each collapse is applicable to its own array and each array (or wave function) has its own space time geometry. This goes for processes inside the mind as well as those which function outside of it, and these functions work in synonymous coordination with one another because they are essentially derived from the same basic wave states (in the form of an array). This means that each collapse represents an occasion of experience and forms our perception frame by frame instantaneously.
SPACE-TIME GEOMETRY
In order to gain a better understanding of exactly what is happening in this case I will provide an outline of space-time geometry. The behavior of particles in the quantum realm is very different than that of the behavior of particles in the classical realm. For instance, in the quantum realm as governed by a quantum wave function a singular object may exist in 2 or more states as the same exact object simultaneously. These objects comprise a wave function and the wave function exists within the bounds of quantum superposition. Wave functions as arrays can then collapse due to a number of events. Proximity can affect them, when the aspects of an array separate to a certain threshold they collapse. Density can affect them, as with when a certain mass density is reached within a given space. Measurement can also collapse quantum wave states; however, the most interesting thing of all is that the mere act of observation can collapse a wave state. I think that this fact could have broad implications in both the philosophy of mind and in other disciplines, if the mere subjective act of observation can collapse quantum wave states, what does that say about the effect consciousness has on the construction of reality?
To add another layer of complexity Hammeroff brings in the insight of Hugh Everett know as the “multiple worlds” view into play, in which there are fundamental splits in the universe, each their own reality, and applies them to each organizational reduction or wave function collapse by saying “Thus, according to this view, there exist an infinite number of parallel universes corresponding to an infinite number of super positions that have ever existed.” This being said you may wonder what an infinite number of parallel universes might look like or what it would be comprised of? Well, when one wishes to do analysis on such a minute level there needs to be a unit of measurement involved which can facilitate sizes of the infinitesimally small. This unit of measurement is the Planck scale. The Planck scale measuring at “(1033 centimeters, 1043 seconds)” [5] is a scale at which a lot of physical properties change, some physical facts of which are turned on their heads. One such example of this is the fact that at this level reality itself loses its smooth atomic structure, and the picture of reality through the lens of the Planck scale looks granular and almost not continuative as compared to what we perceive with the naked eye. The physics involved at the level of the Planck scale can be described in many ways, however considering the fact that Hammeroff essentially partners with Penrose in his study of quantum mechanics, he defines the Planck scales as Penrose might, considering the Planck scale to be set up in the form of a spin network. He articulates this by saying “Spin networks define spectra of discrete Planck scale volumes and configurations which dynamically evolve and define space time geometry. The amount of potential information in Planck scale spin networks is vast; each Planck scale or pixel of reality many be shaped by huge variability and non local interactions. Plus their sheer number is enormous-there are roughly 10107 Planck volumes in the volume of the human brain, this number is far greater than the number of particles in the universe.” [5]
In short, the theory of the universe that Hammeroff and Penrose adhere to is one which describes all matter and energy as being comprised of an infinite number of spin networks which interact with one another undulating, fluctuating, collapsing, and reforming instantaneously at all times in total synchrony relative to their position to one another. If we want to take this image one step further in the direction of application and visualization we can then break down these Planck scale interactions and correlate them back to the concept of quantum super position as articulated earlier in the paper. We can do this by reducing the 4-dimensional spatially-extended construct of spin networks into a 2-dimensional mathematical representational graph which employs space and time as it variables. If one does this one can see that space time itself is in fact curved as correlated to the laws of relativity. Hammeroff summarizes this point very eloquently by stating “Each mass density - each object particle - affects a space-time curvature. Consequently we can view any mass in one location as a space-time curvature in a particular direction and the location of the mass in a different location as a space-time curvature in another direction. Therefore quantum superposition of a particle in 2 locations may be considered simultaneous curvatures in opposite directions. As in the multiple worlds view, the space-time sheet separates into two opposing curvatures resulting in a bubble or a blister in the underlying reality” [6] This bubble is our conscious experience, with all objects incidentally rolling into our space-time bubble and fluctuating out as new objects manifest.
One may think, “All of this information about the way that spin networks function in relation to quantum super position is all fine and good, but what on earth does it have to do with conscious subjective experience?” Well, Hammeroff also has a few things to say in regard this topic as well. His stipulation on the nature of consciousness is that “Proto-consciousness qualia must be embedded in Planck scale spin networks (where else could they be embedded? Fundamental space-time geometry is all there is!) We can envision qualia as specific, non local distribution configurations of Planck scale spin networks” [7] These embedded qualia are then translated into experience through the advent of objective reduction to a specific time curvature and through the process of neural translation which begins at the proto-conscious state in the structure of the micro tublins, notifies other neurotransmitters of actions as related to an internal as well as external body states as related to reality defined by the collapse of infinite number of wave functions.
As one could imagine, this has vast applications when it comes to the nature of consciousness especially in our conscious perception of the passage of time as well as in regard to the problem of unified experience as related to neural synchrony. As far as the implications regarding time are concerned, conscious beings perceive linear time as a complex illusion that is inherent in the very process that governs our consciousness, if the multitude of arrays that exist collapse into only one bubble riding on a space time curvature, that curvature is all we experience frame by frame. This point is further substantiated with information on quantum states as outlined by Hammeroff which reads “Quantum state events such as objective reduction events may send information “backward in time,” [8] for example according to the Aharonov dual vector theory, time may simply be indeterminate in the quantum superposition phase.” He continues on to say “In the objective reduction approach, quantum information is “preconscious” or “subconscious information which becomes conscious at the “now” moment of objective reduction.” [4] Thus each moment of consciousness may incorporate quantum information from both the past and the future, as well as classical information from the past, (working memory, and the specious present.)” The most obvious implication of this stamen to me upon analysis is the conformation in my mind that the way in which we perceive linear time is a complex illusion determined by the very structural nature of everything that is inherent in the universe
REFLECTION:
When I first attended the class Consciousness and People, I was indifferent if not completely skeptical about the nature of free will and determinism, because of hardening my perspectives so adamantly with acquisition of knowledge as related to science, but after attending for an extended period of time I started asking myself questions that were very far outside the box as far as my relational thinking in regard to physics. All of the sudden, I saw an emergent network of correlative properties that sprung up, and I thought “Eureka! This all makes sense, perhaps if only a little more each day.” In reading this article by Hammeroff, I have had several experiences like that which have influenced my thoughts on the very fabric of reality can leading me down a path to this conclusion…
In the field of physics there is a debate raging on the topic of determinism, in which those who purport to the use of quantum mechanics tend to refute determinism, while the relativists tend to accept and cherish it, as Einstein did, however after discussion with peers and lengthy introspection sessions I am left with the opinion that free will computes quite logically with quantum mechanics. I say this in all audacity, suggesting that perhaps because the basis for all reality emerges from the same origin of fluctuation and collapse of wave functions that is infused with the very nature of our universe and the composition of minds in regard to quantum mechanics. I could make the case for an almost emergent Moanists functionalism, which appeals to one substance to which the universe is comprised that takes form or emerges in a sufficiently organized neurobiological structure that possesses certain hierarchal brain processes that interact with, determine, and oscillate between action and reaction and the theater of the self-conscious mind and inter subjectivity, thereby creating an integrated fabric of conscious experience that is unique to but not separate between people and experiences of physical reality.
BIBLOGRAPHY:
1. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." 1-7. 8 Dec 2008 .
2. "quantum mechanics ." Merriam-webster dictionary. 8 Dec 2008 .
3. "Microtuble." Wikipedia . 2008. Wikilpedia. 8 Dec 2008 .
4. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 5 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
5. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 3 paragraph 2 . 8 Dec 2008 .
6. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 2 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
7. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 2 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
8. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 3 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
Time to go take a shower and sleep for a couple days.
Cognition and Reality, Our Infusion with the Space-Time Curvature
In the existence of critical analysis of the nature of reality as perceived in the limited ontology of the human mind, there have been many advancements to the nature of our world and to our utilitarian function. However, there are some problems that still exist that have yet to be solved in the advent of critical analysis. Many of these problems are difficult to conceptualize even in the light of their stunning simplicity. In my humble perception, one of the most intriguing issues that science, philosophy and religion have failed to adequately solve is that of (as Chalmers describes it) the "hard problem of consciousness." Its simplicity lies in the fact that it is easy to define consciousness. The most eloquent definition of consciousness that summarizes subjective experience was cultivated by none other than Descartes in his infamous statement cogito ergo sum I think therefore I am. Such a small sentence could slip by an unassuming reader without pause but when one attempts to gain a comprehensive understanding of what exactly that statement entails they are left perplexed.
What is the nature and composition of the things that I observe? I can doubt the truth in my perception of physical form, however, in doing so am I affirming that the only truth there is, is the absolution of my thinking mind? If that is the case what is the significance of the stuff that I interact with, and the stuff that comprises me? While skepticism is one of the fundamental tools of the progression of scientific advances in understanding and problem solving, it unfortunately leaves us with only half the equation. While in recent year’s philosophers, neurologists, theists, psychologists, cognitive scientists and many others have made commendable progress in their understanding of the nature of consciousness and the reality with which we interact, however, they are left with a chasm of information when it comes to describing such fundamental concepts as unification and the nature of subjective experience. While the thought that these questions have not been answered since the time of Socrates might be disparaging to some, I am optimistic.
You might ask, from where is this optimism derived, and my response would be one that hearkens to the integration of multiple collegiate disciplines. If we are to find or even to postulate about the nature of consciousness, there needs to be a convergence of intellectual disciplines that bridges superficial definition to create new ideas which integrate intimately subjective nature and objective analysis similar to what occurred in the age of the Renaissance. I find no better example of the emergence of such thought processes than has been outlined by The Physicists and anesthesiologist Stuart Hammeroff in his influential paper titled, " Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in fundamental Space Time Geometry."
Here Hammeroff implements his expertise in the field of physics while simultaneously making sure to include many questions raised and analyzed in the more subjective field of Philosophy. The result is a well balanced theory on the nature of consciousness and the human perception of linear time and reality.
In this paper I seek to provide a comprehensive explanation and exploration of a developing theory of consciousness which incorporates aspects of physics (i.e. quantum mechanics and space time geometry) as well as elements of neurobiology in a unified approach. While there have been a number of articles and collegiate papers published on this scientific topic, I will be mainly addressing the insights of Stuart Hammeroff derived from his influential paper Consciousness and Space-Time Geometry and attempt to provide a well balanced and objective analysis of the theory of consciousness in question.
As stated in the above paragraphs, it is obvious that Hammeroff is attempting to strike a difficult balance between the objective and imperial as compared to subjective postulation, and in this process Hammeroff wastes no time in incorporating the larger questions associated with the philosophy of mind. Before you reach the end of the first paragraph in the Hammeroff article, you come across articulations that relate to Emerginitism as well as functionalism which are reintroduced and distributed throughout the article. There is no better example of this than the opening statement, which reads "What is consciousness? Conventional approaches see it as an emergent property of complex interactions among individual neurons;" This statement seems to suggest that Emerginitism of whichever variety is the assumed standard model of the analysis of mind (to which I am certain some others would disagree). However, he follows this clause with the statement "…However, these approaches fail to address enigmatic features of consciousness.”While Emerginitism seems to me to be the most logical approach to the explanation of the phenomenal mind as related to the physical form, we are still left with that burning question, where does the nature of subjective experience lie? In Hammeroff paper, he seems to suggest that it in fact it lies in the subatomic composition and structure of reality itself, another topic of which the brightest minds in the world are attempting to gain some grasp of understanding.
When attempting to solve a problem such as the nature of external reality as related to cognition and self awareness, there are many creative theories that can be employed many of which we have covered thoroughly in class, be it the, Mysterinsts, the Constitutionalists, the Moanists or.. The physicalist, each with their own unique outlook on the interpretative representation of reality. Hammeroff chooses the observations of the process philosopher of the turn of the century, Alfred North Whitehead to create a beautifully detailed image of reality as being an "occasion of experience" with the subjective qualia that form conscious experience a inherent aspect of reality. That being said one may question what an occasion of experience may look like, in this case it is much like the flickering of frames experienced when one for instance watches a film at a slow speed. How could this be? This is not how we experience reality. To understand a process as it might relate to this description we will have to analyze things on a very small scale, as with the film analogy, we experience a smooth uninterrupted image of a realistic magnitude when the frames of a film are sped up to a certain threshold that creates an optical illusion, however logically we can reduce that a slower rendering would not be smooth but rather fractured with gaps between each frame. While this artful analogy provides us with a basis for visual understanding, there is in fact something further beyond it, that being the objective description of this form of reality through the language of quantum mechanics
To provide a comprehensive understanding of the principles outlined in Hammeroff's article it is essential to gain a strong understanding of the basic principles involved, as a result I will give definitions throughout this paper in an effort to strip the cryptic detail of these highly complex functions. The first definition I will provide is one of quantum dynamics which is as follows... "Main Entry: quantum mechanics Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction Date: 1922: A theory of matter that is based on the concept of the possession of wave properties by elementary particles, that affords a mathematical interpretation of the structure and interactions of matter on the basis of these properties, and that incorporates within it quantum theory and the uncertainty principle -called also wave mechanics." [2] This definition is helpful to some degree but leaves out the essential detail that quantum mechanics is applicable only at very small scales as opposed to the theory of relativity implemented by Einstein which deals with the universe at a large scale.
I should also mention that these theories (quantum mechanics and relativity) are not mathematically compatible and this is essentially the hard problem in the field of physics. Now that we have a general understanding of the basis of quantum dynamics I think it would be an advantageous time to correlate this to the occasion of experience as defined by the ORCH OR. The ORCH OR, or the Orchestrated Objective Reductions as articulated by the mathematical physicists Sir Rodger Penrose is defined as follows "The ORCH OR is a theory of consciousness, which is the joint work of theoretical physicist Sir Roger Penrose and anesthesiologist Stuart Hammeroff. A brief definition of organizational reduction is as follows: “Mainstream theories assume that consciousness emerges from the brain, and focus particularly on complex computation at connections known as synapses that allow communication between brain cells (neurons). Orch OR combines approaches to the problem of consciousness from the radically different angles of mathematics, physics and anesthesia.” [3] This definition could be further accentuated with the words of Hammeroff, who correlates an emergent theory of the mind with quantum collapsible states which are then applied to the construct of the "Occasion of Experience." He does so in the space of 2 very strongly constructed sentences which read, "Consider that consciousness occurs if an approximately organized system is able to develop and maintain quantum coherent superposition until a specific "objective" criterion (a threshold related to that of quantum gravity is reached; the coherent system them self reduces (objective reduction : ORCH OR.) We contend that this type of self collapse introduces non computability, an essential feature of consciousness which distinguishes out minds from classical computers." These two sentences have a multitude of implications; the first I will point out is the very strong correlation to the hierarchy of organizational invariance which I think applies beautifully to the first sentence. The other being the clarification that Hammeroff in the second sentence is not talking about reducibility as related to reductionism in the theory of mind, rather the reducibility of the wave functions in quantum collapsible states, and lastly the non-computation seems to suggest that reality is not predetermined but in fact forming instantaneously as each collapse occurs.
So far we have introduced quantum dynamics, and the concept of the ORCH OR as related to occasions of experience, which is interesting, but how exactly do these non tangible abstractions apply to our interactive perception as related to physical reality? Well, Hammeroff provides a theory entrenched in the discipline of neuroscience for this as well. Hammeroff postulates that the quantum-super imposed states (as related to quantum super position, which is a property of coexisting possibilities in a given space) reside in microtubule sub-units in the brain. A microtubulin is defined as follows: “Microtubules are one of the components of the cytoskeleton. They have a diameter of 25 nm and length varying from 200 nanometers to 25 micrometers. Microtubules serve as structural components within cells and are involved in many cellular processes including mitosis, cytokinesis, and vesicular transport.”
Now, Hammeroff suggests that the quantum super imposed states actually develop inside of these tublins and through a process that is inherent in quantum dynamics (though not defined exactly) after which a process of selection recruits more tublins until a critical mass of energy (as is described in quantum gravity) is reached. What does this mean? Well when a critical mass is reached in the context of super-imposed states a collapse or ORCH OR (orchestrated organizational reduction) occurs. If we take this process one step further we can complete the picture by stating that each collapse is applicable to its own array and each array (or wave function) has its own space time geometry. This goes for processes inside the mind as well as those which function outside of it, and these functions work in synonymous coordination with one another because they are essentially derived from the same basic wave states (in the form of an array). This means that each collapse represents an occasion of experience and forms our perception frame by frame instantaneously.
SPACE-TIME GEOMETRY
In order to gain a better understanding of exactly what is happening in this case I will provide an outline of space-time geometry. The behavior of particles in the quantum realm is very different than that of the behavior of particles in the classical realm. For instance, in the quantum realm as governed by a quantum wave function a singular object may exist in 2 or more states as the same exact object simultaneously. These objects comprise a wave function and the wave function exists within the bounds of quantum superposition. Wave functions as arrays can then collapse due to a number of events. Proximity can affect them, when the aspects of an array separate to a certain threshold they collapse. Density can affect them, as with when a certain mass density is reached within a given space. Measurement can also collapse quantum wave states; however, the most interesting thing of all is that the mere act of observation can collapse a wave state. I think that this fact could have broad implications in both the philosophy of mind and in other disciplines, if the mere subjective act of observation can collapse quantum wave states, what does that say about the effect consciousness has on the construction of reality?
To add another layer of complexity Hammeroff brings in the insight of Hugh Everett know as the “multiple worlds” view into play, in which there are fundamental splits in the universe, each their own reality, and applies them to each organizational reduction or wave function collapse by saying “Thus, according to this view, there exist an infinite number of parallel universes corresponding to an infinite number of super positions that have ever existed.” This being said you may wonder what an infinite number of parallel universes might look like or what it would be comprised of? Well, when one wishes to do analysis on such a minute level there needs to be a unit of measurement involved which can facilitate sizes of the infinitesimally small. This unit of measurement is the Planck scale. The Planck scale measuring at “(1033 centimeters, 1043 seconds)” [5] is a scale at which a lot of physical properties change, some physical facts of which are turned on their heads. One such example of this is the fact that at this level reality itself loses its smooth atomic structure, and the picture of reality through the lens of the Planck scale looks granular and almost not continuative as compared to what we perceive with the naked eye. The physics involved at the level of the Planck scale can be described in many ways, however considering the fact that Hammeroff essentially partners with Penrose in his study of quantum mechanics, he defines the Planck scales as Penrose might, considering the Planck scale to be set up in the form of a spin network. He articulates this by saying “Spin networks define spectra of discrete Planck scale volumes and configurations which dynamically evolve and define space time geometry. The amount of potential information in Planck scale spin networks is vast; each Planck scale or pixel of reality many be shaped by huge variability and non local interactions. Plus their sheer number is enormous-there are roughly 10107 Planck volumes in the volume of the human brain, this number is far greater than the number of particles in the universe.” [5]
In short, the theory of the universe that Hammeroff and Penrose adhere to is one which describes all matter and energy as being comprised of an infinite number of spin networks which interact with one another undulating, fluctuating, collapsing, and reforming instantaneously at all times in total synchrony relative to their position to one another. If we want to take this image one step further in the direction of application and visualization we can then break down these Planck scale interactions and correlate them back to the concept of quantum super position as articulated earlier in the paper. We can do this by reducing the 4-dimensional spatially-extended construct of spin networks into a 2-dimensional mathematical representational graph which employs space and time as it variables. If one does this one can see that space time itself is in fact curved as correlated to the laws of relativity. Hammeroff summarizes this point very eloquently by stating “Each mass density - each object particle - affects a space-time curvature. Consequently we can view any mass in one location as a space-time curvature in a particular direction and the location of the mass in a different location as a space-time curvature in another direction. Therefore quantum superposition of a particle in 2 locations may be considered simultaneous curvatures in opposite directions. As in the multiple worlds view, the space-time sheet separates into two opposing curvatures resulting in a bubble or a blister in the underlying reality” [6] This bubble is our conscious experience, with all objects incidentally rolling into our space-time bubble and fluctuating out as new objects manifest.
One may think, “All of this information about the way that spin networks function in relation to quantum super position is all fine and good, but what on earth does it have to do with conscious subjective experience?” Well, Hammeroff also has a few things to say in regard this topic as well. His stipulation on the nature of consciousness is that “Proto-consciousness qualia must be embedded in Planck scale spin networks (where else could they be embedded? Fundamental space-time geometry is all there is!) We can envision qualia as specific, non local distribution configurations of Planck scale spin networks” [7] These embedded qualia are then translated into experience through the advent of objective reduction to a specific time curvature and through the process of neural translation which begins at the proto-conscious state in the structure of the micro tublins, notifies other neurotransmitters of actions as related to an internal as well as external body states as related to reality defined by the collapse of infinite number of wave functions.
As one could imagine, this has vast applications when it comes to the nature of consciousness especially in our conscious perception of the passage of time as well as in regard to the problem of unified experience as related to neural synchrony. As far as the implications regarding time are concerned, conscious beings perceive linear time as a complex illusion that is inherent in the very process that governs our consciousness, if the multitude of arrays that exist collapse into only one bubble riding on a space time curvature, that curvature is all we experience frame by frame. This point is further substantiated with information on quantum states as outlined by Hammeroff which reads “Quantum state events such as objective reduction events may send information “backward in time,” [8] for example according to the Aharonov dual vector theory, time may simply be indeterminate in the quantum superposition phase.” He continues on to say “In the objective reduction approach, quantum information is “preconscious” or “subconscious information which becomes conscious at the “now” moment of objective reduction.” [4] Thus each moment of consciousness may incorporate quantum information from both the past and the future, as well as classical information from the past, (working memory, and the specious present.)” The most obvious implication of this stamen to me upon analysis is the conformation in my mind that the way in which we perceive linear time is a complex illusion determined by the very structural nature of everything that is inherent in the universe
REFLECTION:
When I first attended the class Consciousness and People, I was indifferent if not completely skeptical about the nature of free will and determinism, because of hardening my perspectives so adamantly with acquisition of knowledge as related to science, but after attending for an extended period of time I started asking myself questions that were very far outside the box as far as my relational thinking in regard to physics. All of the sudden, I saw an emergent network of correlative properties that sprung up, and I thought “Eureka! This all makes sense, perhaps if only a little more each day.” In reading this article by Hammeroff, I have had several experiences like that which have influenced my thoughts on the very fabric of reality can leading me down a path to this conclusion…
In the field of physics there is a debate raging on the topic of determinism, in which those who purport to the use of quantum mechanics tend to refute determinism, while the relativists tend to accept and cherish it, as Einstein did, however after discussion with peers and lengthy introspection sessions I am left with the opinion that free will computes quite logically with quantum mechanics. I say this in all audacity, suggesting that perhaps because the basis for all reality emerges from the same origin of fluctuation and collapse of wave functions that is infused with the very nature of our universe and the composition of minds in regard to quantum mechanics. I could make the case for an almost emergent Moanists functionalism, which appeals to one substance to which the universe is comprised that takes form or emerges in a sufficiently organized neurobiological structure that possesses certain hierarchal brain processes that interact with, determine, and oscillate between action and reaction and the theater of the self-conscious mind and inter subjectivity, thereby creating an integrated fabric of conscious experience that is unique to but not separate between people and experiences of physical reality.
BIBLOGRAPHY:
1. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." 1-7. 8 Dec 2008 .
2. "quantum mechanics ." Merriam-webster dictionary. 8 Dec 2008 .
3. "Microtuble." Wikipedia . 2008. Wikilpedia. 8 Dec 2008 .
4. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 5 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
5. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 3 paragraph 2 . 8 Dec 2008 .
6. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 2 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
7. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 2 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .
8. Hammeroff , Stuart . "Time, Consciousness and Quantum Events in Fundamental Space Time Geometry." Page 3 paragraph 3. 8 Dec 2008 .