Dear Ulla

I couldn't quite follow your reasoning in places but enjoyed reading your essay for the general direction you were heading. Your FB group sounds interesting can i join? i am very interested in quantum biology as i think the mind must interact with the brain through quantum physics.

My essay "From nothingness to value ethics" is not much about quantum biology, but I think you would find it interesting as it involves other ideas that may make this quantum approach workable. By the way we don't necessarily have to work with the standard 'disorder' approach to entropy. There is an alternative (and I think more correct) approach - you can read more about it at entropy site.oxy.edu

Regards

Gavin

    Decoherence of a state to form a new coherence is a fascinating topic I want to explore more. If you follow my used model here the decoherence is not total, maybe in Death alone, and we keep the old state to create a new one, partly, as the decoherence center is in sectors or CDs, quantum dots. Decoherence happen in one or some sectors only. This is the wonderful fact with it :)

    What exactly is created? A measurement of the Environment. Formation of new knowledge. It does not say much about exactly what consciousness is, only that it is linked to actions.

    If I interpret your eq. right I see an inverse wave, but it oscillate between real and inverse or imaginary state, this is why decoherence is not total :) The 1 and 0 are never quite reached. It is expressed as ratios in living matter, and that is a quantum charachter too :)

    Thanks for a nice comment. Ulla.

    Thanks.

    Can you explicitly Point out where you could not follow? I must admit it was a difficult task to only be able to use 25000 charachters, I had to delete and delete.... also stuff that was good. Kill the darling, ye.

    Also Prigogine had to go, even if what he found is very basic. The new view on decoherence was what I wanted to promote, and I am happy to have four different aspects compared here. Penrose and TGD has met much critic. The condensed matter view is maybe more accepted.

    This view maybe not directly say the Copenhagen model is excluded, the measurement can be both ways, and should be both ways, maybe. But the idea there should be something 'not real' must be seen as wrong.

    Thanks, I can add your name, but first we must become friends :)

    Ulla.

    Dear Ulla

    Well, for me there were quite a few points. You use a lot of terminology, and the writing doesn't flow - it is like you are trying to get all your bits of knowledge down on the page at the expense of leading your reader through the argument. This would be okay if the reader was well acquainted with this material, but trying to make sense of it as presented was difficult for me.

    I plan to examine some of your references for further enlightenment.

    Regards

    Gavin

    I try to use so Little terminology as possible. This is why my reference list is quite long too, so you can go there and read more.

    To be able to comment on it you could tell me more exactly what caused problems.

    As author of Mind Beyond Matter, which especially concentrates on what is sometimes termed "the cosmology of consciousness" and explores what the author regards as the differences between brain and mind, matter and energy, this should not cause problems, I Think. In a way my essay is also about 'the cosmology of consciousness'.

    Thanks.

    Dear Ulla Marianne Mattfolk,

    Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

    I merely wish to point out that "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

    Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

    The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

    A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

    Joe Fisher, Realist

    Yes, Einstein was a 'realist' too.

    We have made the decoherence a stumbling stone to biology, but here I show on a way out of that dilemma, and actually decoherence versus coherence are required for the 'informational hunt' of living organisms, even an amoeba. This follows exactly the phrase made of Einstein.

    Thanks, Joe Fisher, I look later. It seems to be many 'trolls' here now. It is regrettable they have an opportunity to spoil a good Contest.

    Ulla.

    Nice essay Dr Mattfolk,

    Your ideas and thinking are excellent like,

    1. One reason is the natural selection of evolution, another intentions, goals, purposes of living organisms = consciousness.

    2. Life has an aim to adapt to a changing environment using creativity. Lifetime is created and maximized. Living things adapt, survive and reproduce in the environment. Consciousness as evolutionary adaptation? Is Earth, Universe conscious?

    I am not a biologist but, at this point I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where ...............reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc...just have a look at my essay... "Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe" where UGF (Universal Gravitational force) acting on each and every mass, will create a direction and purpose of movement.....

    I think intension is inherited from Universe itself to all Biological systems

    For your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results. Here in Dynamic Universe Model Space is Space and time is time in cosmology level or in any level. In the classical general relativity, space and time are convertible in to each other.

    Many papers and books on Dynamic Universe Model were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example 'Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary' (1994) , 'Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe', About "SITA" simulations, 'Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required', "New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations", "Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background", "Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.", in 2015 'Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, 'Explaining Pioneer anomaly', 'Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets', 'Observation of super luminal neutrinos', 'Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up', "Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto" etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe.

    With axioms like... No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

    Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

    Have a look at my essay on Dynamic Universe Model and its blog also where all my books and papers are available for free downloading...

    http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

    Best wishes to your essay.

    For your blessings please................

    =snp. gupta

      there are neither states nor observables , as any position of a particle/photon/wave , could be distributed anywhere in the real domain between 0 and 1, where we choose where to cut time, dt, of imaginary space, called quantum space in order to fit observable paradigms! any 1^(-10000), or 0.0001, or whatever value towards an artificial constant as such as Plank scale we intend on comprehending serves towards data processing. Reality , both horizontal and vertical as well as invisible to coordinate of a chosen space-time exploration, cannot be specified due the fundamental paradox between 2D matter time and 2D space energy relative absoluteness of rooting down origins of life. Thus we approximate truth by taking chances of following rule based quantum open systems!

      Hi Rado,

      Draw the 0 and 1 on the Bloch sphere too. Quantum states are inside it as mixed states. Time evolution is seen as a rotation. and also maybe a spin flip is possible.

      Virtual states are infinitely many, as an cloud around. But when you perturb the sphere you see they are a mirror of ordinary matter.

      When you go from 2D to 3D you get problems :)

      I don't get this: the fundamental paradox between 2D matter time and 2D space energy relative absoluteness of rooting ...

      Open quantum systems contains interactions with Environment, and this is essential for what I advocate here. But the thermodynamics is a bit bothersome due to uncertain time evolution, because initial state is difficult to identify, and environmental interactions are complex. The information-theoretic process might give some clues.

      Thanks snp. gupta

      The essay was formed to suit the rules for the Contest :)

      You are right that intention is an important area of research, but so far we have very Little knowledge on it.

      The movement of masses must be seen as an effect, I Think. The goal is what makes them move.

      I will look at your paper, thank you. Good Luck!

      Ulla M.

      We have actually seen such spin flips many times during our history. What has been seen as good has turned bad, and also the other way. Good and bad must be depending on each others, a bit like 'mirror-images'. You cannot know what is good if you don't know the opposite etc.

      Revolutions are often a consequence of these flips.

      Today we need a big revolution. That is my last Words here about :)

      And you know that!

      We just have to change the rotation... and grow. But this is philosophy.

      12 days later

      Ulla,

      A fascinating and intuitive essay fresh and real in it's freedom from conservative blinkers, allowing both deeper and broader thinking and rationalisation. I fundamentally agree almost all your analysis, including that we can't solve the problem "..by differential equations for the evolutional systems and their integration."

      I also found; "Decoherence of a state to form a new coherence is a fascinating topic" long ago and tackled it. Indeed I think we may only differ in that I go further into the reality of 'state collapse' mechanisms to prove your views correct; classical nature not psuedoscience. I think your comment sums up the problem, for 100 years, very well: "something 'not real' must be seen as wrong."

      Your reference too Bloch spheres and that "Open quantum systems contains interactions with Environment" convince me you may understand and appreciate my own essay, which I think and hope may clarify some questions and offer some coherent answers, including a fully classical analogue of QM. (there's also a video if you have time, Classic QM as 3D dynamic evolutions can't be drawn well on paper!)

      Well done for yours. I must say I found it something of an inspiration and affirmation that not all are sold on the illogicalities and pseudoscience arising from incorrect initial assumptions, so are able to take a sensible overview. Unfortunately we are few and my work is eshewed, but what more can we do?

      Thank you. A good score coming!

      Best wishes

      Peter

        10 days later

        Hello Ulla,

        Thank you for your lovely note on my page, which I'll answer in a bit. I read your essay and I enjoyed your insights. It was refreshing to see a multiply-sourced argument that quantum mechanics creates possibilities for consciousness that otherwise would not exist. I too feel this is a possibility we must examine. It can be problematic for Physics folks to show strong advocacy for quantum mechanisms of consciousness, however. I myself am a Renaissance man or Polymath, but the world seems eager to take all such people to task.

        Even Penrose got a lot of flak for trying to use Physics principles to explain effects in Biology. You have to understand, though; most biologists are so steeped in the reductionist paradigm and the idea that everything can be reduced to Chemistry, that there is no room for them to admit a possible quantum mechanical element of choice involved. I like Penrose and Orch-OR, and I find the micro-tubules and tubulin connection plausible, but find it unfortunate they are judged together. Both ideas are worthy of investigation independent of the other.

        It is interesting though, that it connects back to quantum gravity theory, or that as you point out; quantum consciousness is favored in a scenario where gravity is fundamentally quantum mechanical. That is a unique insight, among all of the essays in this contest! But I think it was Physics career-suicide for Paola Zizzi when she wrote about how this could pertain through Cosmology to a connection with Universal Consciousness - the Big Wow Theory. She has made a comeback lately and I hope she is doing OK.

        More later,

        Jonathan

        Ulla,

        This is certainly a journey in non-conservative thinking. There is a staggering diffusion of wisdom encapsulated in this compact essay. Your metaphor of "The wet, warm, womb of Mother Nature," drew me in my comparison of the amniotic fluid of the placenta to the flow of matter in the universe modeled by physicists in this manner. The quantum coherence of photosynthesis my readings in quantum biology speak of gives the process a high level of efficiency quantum decoherence wouldn't bring. The macro world we usually don't associate with quantum coherence so you wonder what else we miss.

        Interesting concepts, too many to mentally bring together in my reading. Consciousness builds up intelligence and awareness? I hope so.

        Hope you get a chance to check out mine in this eleventh hour.

        Jim Hoover

        Dear Sirs!

        Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

        New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

        New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

        Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

        Sincerely,

        Dizhechko Boris

        Ulla,

        You asked on my blog; "Qualia from a Process!? how??"

        Fair question. The essay briefly answered it, but I responded, and re-post here;

        We must see through the fog & myths to what Qualia are; fine differences between memories, all interlinked. The smells of 5 different roses can be distinguished, each recalled on seeing a colour or form, hearing a name, even feeling a petal.

        Decoding half the quantum noise in a Shannon channel with Classic QM allows far more information storage and a 'more Intelligent' Bit or 'IQbit' (fqxi 2104), though, with last years (top scored) red & green (reversible) socks and now finding Cos2, only now complete. This may then allow multi trillions of memories/cm3 deep within our neural RAM architecture.

        Dan Dennett found he only needed trillions, and called qualia simply "the ways things seem to us". How could anything "seem" to be anything without being memories? Infinitely small distinguishable patterns. As a cosmologist I can conceive the enormous 'room at the top' we have, and as Wheeler said - there's also "plenty of room at the bottom"! Humanity finds that similarly hard to conceive (a bit like Classic QM!) but only as we have no memory of it!

        Peter