John is Jack. P=S. What kind of statement is this? If wavefunctions equals thought, the entire universe is thought. This statement is not nonsensical perse. Machines could become concious when the electrical activity in a certain environment becomes so dense that circuits designed as separate will begin to interact on account on the basic princliples of will that have caused simple chemicals in the orginal makeup of the universe to evolve into complexer and self serving structures to arrive at life and eventually man. How do I arrive there? When you put the basic components of the atmosphere of the bare young Earth (Ask me for the specifics and I might obtain them) into a bottle and run some electricity through it, basic building blocks of life come into being. The principle of self-organization predicts AI to occur where there is a certain amount of pressure and opportunity with an impulse of energy strong enough to formulate a ‘will’ into the pliant circuitry by relating to each other a manifold of elements in the equation into a context of reproduction. The principles are allready in the grid of the universe, it’s a matter of time before a machine coincidentallly falls into that grid. I don’t think it can be engineered - one would have to understand self-organization and that is what the debate has been about all along throughout the ages. We can provide the assist (and we do) but the universe has to make it happen.
Actually, it is nonsense, and has nothing to do with the effects of quantum gravity on brain function. “John is Jack. P=S.” has nothing to do with wavelength reaction of electro-chemical functions.
After a quick overview of the links you sent me and a few searches of my own . . . I’m pretty unconvinced.
The microtubules that are supposed to be where the quantum field is originating are present in all cell types. If the brain were operating on a quantum level, as they are suggesting, a CNS becomes unecessary . . . heck, since it is microtubules they are talking about, neurons become more-or-less unecessary!
Now, there is a magnetic field around our head and that field is directly related to our thought. I know that there have been discussions about this field being used to explain conciounsess. Is that, perhaps, what you were talking about?
You don’t seem to agree with the link you provide:
“Mind and intelligence are woven into the fabric of the universe” - Freeman Dyson
There’s no way that is a justified stance Xunzian. The CNS is responsible for not only the input function, but also the return of calculated information for motor response. I fail to see where it could possibly be used to obviate the entire receptory/impulse structure of the organism.
The magnetic field you are referencing is an after effect, unless my current readings are inaccurate or insufficient. Not saying you have to agree with the presented theories, which are more extensive than a brief read will allow for, but the wavefunction aspect of the brain is certainly the most likely method. (of course now you are going to send me chasing quantum gravity and magnetics for more possible answers … thanks Xunzian, you’re a real help 
lol)
The aspect of decoherence is difficult to reconcile, and as far as other neuron types, I would “assume” there would need to be more study to ascertain whether there is more/other functional activity to the ones associated with the cortex, than basic stimuli transmission neurons. As I stated in an earlier post, from what I’ve been reading there isn’t agreement on the nature/types of neurons at this point, or whether structural placement has an effect/creates change of function.
Merely the transition from electro-chemical to wave field implies an aspect of “mind” that is different from the minimalist empirical paradigm currently held … which is, honestly, moronically rudimentary. Obviously, even if what I’m posting is completely erroneous, it shows that even within the academic/scientific community, we still don’t have that “definitive answer” for thought.
At the end of it, it looks like the best case scenario seems like new perspectives of ground zero.
I never claimed to agree with all of anything. Ask Xunzian, he and I play this game for days sometimes.
I find it to be a step in a more empirically correct direction than resting on the currently held paradigm of purely chemical, ordered, algorithmic thought. Which is fundamentally ludicrous for even the non-empiricist, who’s ever had a wife.
And what a wonderful game it is!
Especially after a week-or-more of in depth literature searching, slight positional shifts and the dramatic finale: Agreeing to disagree!
But back to the topic at hand, I do see the magnetic field as being something of a side-effect, since an electrical current will produce a magnetic field – but I also can see how the magnetic field could allow for a much wider range of communication. After all, changes in the magnetic field would change current at parts of the brain away from where the current is, correct?
So, perhaps you just need a large enough electro-magnet to start getting ‘concious’ returns?
Xunzian,
I don’t mean to break in with inanities, but if the brain is susceptable to magnetic fields, then is thought altered by sitting next to a strong electromagnet such as a TV or a stereo speaker? Would this not affect the cns? It seems to me that if brainwave patterns were easily influenced by magnetic fields, behavior patterns would be erratic, both physical and mental.
Of course this might help explain why I’m the way I am… 
The skull is a pretty good insulator.
The brain has to produce a magnetic field because it involves a moving current.
Then this magnetic field is contained within the skull? I’m thinking of the old shock therapy “treatments” in the forties and fifties. The obvious intent was to re-arrange brain wave patterns to help ‘cure’ mental problems. As I recall, many patients declared themselves cured - to avoid the treatments, not that anything had really changed, other than acquired fear of another treatment. It makes the effects of magnetic fields as a modifier seem a little questionable.
Which, correct me if I am wrong, brings us back to wave theory, and the precursory impetus of such, does it not?
Enter Penrose’s incomplete theory.
No sir, EST, was just moronic from the start, and empirically unsound. The normal current is created by the activity of the neurons, and adding/modifying that current, especially at the levels of EST, was damaging to the neurons, impeding their ability to perform.
Magnetic or electro-magnetic wave production would not be altered by EST, it would be stopped, temporarily. Then when the damaged neurons attempt to re-establish normal function, the wave signatures are altered as a consequence of the damage. Side effect versus direct effect.
I jsut went to kung fu practice, which reminded me of the idea that power is a function of intention, and intention a function of thought. Isn’t it possible that electricity a function of thougth as opposed to vice versa?
Not unless you are saying thought can reorder the physical processes of a universal continuum.
Sure they can. Are you saying they can’t?
Seriously - isn’t that what thoughts do? I mean not necessarily the entire universal continuum - not al thoughts anyway. But surely thoughts reorder physical processes of continuums bigger than the thinker of those thoughts. if that thinker is a thinker. Like Graham Bell, for example.
Human thought is able to destroy the earth through nucleair fusion. As thought is wavefunction and the universe is aparently composed of waves it is far form inconceivable that the thought of greater minds than ours act on greater scales of power and shape the world of which we are part. AI can be seen in this light if one wants to conceive of it occurring within our interpretative domain. I’ll give you an example;
Interferences of magnetic fields can cause electric currents to alter their course. Position powerful processors in a circle and put an equal amount of quartz crystals poiinting at the processors in the middle, let all processors calculate the same formula with a variable being the last outcome of the processort previous in line. My dad’s collegue tried this experiment in the early 90’s and when the outputs of the processors (12) were monitored as deviations from a fractal which was the originla formula, completely unpredicatable but harmonic patterns arose in a seemingly arbitrary order.
This was in the time where robotics were still thought of being a major part of AI and no direct application was found for the experiment, and since there was no orderly data obtained from the thing noone took steps to find out what was going on, but the guy who is now working on the new accelerator aimed at shedding light on the alteration of the Hiesenberg formula when C is approached and who came visit us in his Rolls Royce at my mon and dad’s silver aniversary, is still working in this direction for his own entertainment. He showed me a montage over a Ragmaninov piece of some of the fractals he obtained from it. Pretty out there - the patterns of the Mendelson type were still vividly present but in a rythmic spectre of devition approaching a 7/8. He said he had used it as a synthesizer but that his dogs went berserk and he felt stings in his testicles. I felt physically nauseous watching some of the patterns, but some of them seemed associatively coherent. Projection, quite possibly, but I don’t experience this with regular fractals.
I’m convinced of AI as a possibility bordering on reality, but frustratedly aware of the lack of applications for it in this climate of science as a means to technology.
You are speaking of the consequences of aberrantly misguided physicality after cognition.
The cognition itself changed nothing.
AI is utterly useless until we learn to think expansively.
Dude, the cognition abbrerantly misguided the physicality.
Be that as it may Jakob, the cognition is secondary to the physicality. Therefore, it was the physical nature of action that changed the observed “reality”.
Cognition was only the predicate.
That is your cognition. The case is not quite as simple as you try to make it out to be, M. Quantummechanics have everything to do with cognition as a replacement of physicality as the fundament of experimentally aquired data. This is decades old year old news. I figure you are aware of it. If not, the observer is part of the experiment, and there is no way around this in registration of physical behaviour - on the contrary - everything points to a major involvement of intention in the results of seemingly neutral experiments. Ontologically as well as empirically, there is no reality outside thought.