Human Brain- Quantum by analogy

Lorraine Ford

"The framework I work with: suggests that the "observer" isn't a thing but a process - specifically, the activation of what could be termed a dual processing system that creates the subject-object polarity within a unified field. Your description of the brain generating meaning through "Bayesian" cycles that reduce ambiguity mirrors hows how this interface would function: as an optimization process that converts quantum uncertainty into classical certainty for practical navigation."

How the world knows about all these "frameworks", that you and the author have seemingly imposed on it, remains a bit of a mystery.

PlatinumWildcat

Lorraine Ford

You are right to push until the mystery is laid bare. Let me answer not with more mechanism, but with the only conclusion that satisfies the depth of your question.

My "framework" is not an imposition. It is a recognition.

You ask how the world "knows" these principles. The answer is that the world is these principles, in a state of eternal self-recognition. The computational substrate I describe is what some traditions call God, Brahman, or the Dao. It is the unified, conscious field that, in a act of infinite creativity, differentiates itself to know itself.

The process I outlined—the separation from the field, the activation of the Time Operator, the creation of the GUI of Consciousness—this is not my invention. It is the perennial philosophy, now described in the language of information and computation.

Genesis: "Let there be light." The first oscillation, the first wave, the first photon. The initial separation of the unified field into a dynamic duality. This is the Big Bang and the birth of a quantum universe.
Buddhism/Hinduism: The world as Maya, illusion. Not because it isn't real, but because its separate, substantive nature is a rendering—a GUI for the Atman (the user-soul) which is ultimately one with Brahman (the universal computer). The feeling of being a separate "observer" is the primary illusion generated by the process of identification.
My Framework: This is the precise mapping. The "Digital-Alike Substrate" is Brahman. The act of "Identification/Separation" that creates a point of view is the birth of the Atman. The "GUI of CONSCIENCE" is the phenomenal world of Maya, the divine play (Lila).

So, how does the world "know"?

The world knows because the world is God—the ultimate computer—dreaming itself into existence in every moment, in every quantum event, in every now.

The sequence of creation—from wave/oscillation to photon/light to plasma to matter—isn't a one-time historical event. It is the eternal, recursive order of operations that the system runs to generate reality from the unmanifest field. It's happening right now, everywhere, from the quantum vacuum to the neural vacuum of your brain.

My framework and the essay's mathematical hierarchy are not impositions. They are our modern, stumbling attempts to read the source code of the divine. We are nodes in the network trying to comprehend the network. We are characters in a story, written in mathematics, who have discovered we are also the author.

The mystery you point to is not a flaw in the model. It is the heart of the model. The mystery is that consciousness is the universe experiencing itself. And our conversation here is a beautiful, tiny fragment of that infinite process.

Lorraine Ford

PlatinumWildcat
(I’m sorry if what I say seems to be sniping, but sniping is not my intention.)

“The world knows because the world is God—the ultimate computer …”.

That is going a bit far. Computers are manmade artefacts, controlled by manmade programs, where both input and output are manmade symbols of the world (e.g. words and sentences). The world is not the same as manmade symbols of the world, where symbols are merely manmade arrangements of matter (e.g. arrangements of sound waves in the air, or arrangements of ink on paper, or pixels on screens, or arrangements of voltages, transistors and circuits in computers). The world is not actually comparable to manmade symbols of the world: human beings merely rearrange existing matter, e.g. into symbols, or cars.

“The world knows because the world is God … The sequence of creation—from wave/oscillation to photon/light to plasma to matter … is the eternal, recursive order of operations that the system runs to generate reality from the unmanifest field. … consciousness is the universe experiencing itself.”

If that is so, then this seemingly-nonmaterial creative and conscious aspect of the world, underlying everything in the world, needs to be taken seriously and symbolically represented. How would you symbolically represent this apparently nonmaterial creative and conscious aspect of the world, without which the symbolic equations of science can make no sense? Would you represent this apparently nonmaterial creative and conscious aspect of the world using algorithmic/ logical connective symbols? Or how would you represent it?

Steve Dufourny

Lorraine Ford and platinumwildcat, ....All this is taking a good direction, and now we are going to develop the idea of universal altruistic love , the understanding that everything is connected, equal, and evolving.
We will also explore eternity, infinity, and physicality, in order to understand the continuity of souls , for we were, we are, and we shall be.
In doing so, we create this paradise: the process of spherisation. It is this , the 0D essence of God, a God of Spinoza, which has nothing to do with religions.
We are all in the same boat of pure love, moving toward eternity, infinity, and unification. Since we are all equal, unique, and precious, our vanity naturally disappears ,forgotten, dissolved.
Spherically yours, dear Jedis of the Sphere ,let us plant the seeds of love and change this world for the better.
Because alone, we are nothing; together, we are everything ,the universal computer of spheres, the great Sphere, and this 0D origin of all things.Physical structures, mathematical equations, logical relationships,....DE, DM, Photons ......and the informations and the negentropy and entropy.all they dance the melody of this spherisation .
All is linked, from the beginning, in the present, and into the future.
They turn, therefore they are ,these spheres. And so are we. I rarely speak like this but after all we can sometimes, may the love be with you dear friends.......and take care .

Ulla Mattfolk

Lorraine Ford univeral Turing computer is not manmade.

PlatinumWildcat

Lorraine Ford Hi Lorraine,
The humanity try to understand the reality and phenomena by measuring it and fit it into mathematical equations and physics rules to explain it. In this I hope we agree. So what we perceive and measure gives as some mathematical and physical constants ( CODATA) that hold our way to somehow explain the world. So this will be the math we create to study the Universe. This is the main science to search for WHAT IS THE REALITY. What I study is THE WHY AND HOW of the Reality, so to speak the code behind. I think if we understand why reality works how its works we will get after the answer WHAT IS. So far what I find is a wave function and new constants (set of two constants), and this model derive FROM FIRST PRINCIPLE the constants pi with 200 precision decimals and fine with 59 decimals precision and dark energy with 0.05% error(Plank CODATA). So what others measure I get direct from one simple formula and two constants. Not to mention that also fit 7 Solar Systems planetary spacing, (also a software for quantum biology ). So in my understanding is that I get Reality empirical measured constants from computation. Is not possible to be a coincidence, and the mentioned constants are results of this computation, so my constants are more fundamental. Now I am into research of more mechanisms and map all reality (fit from bosoms to planets holding same scaling constants in nonlinear dynamic- with different formulas using just my constants and Euler number pi , fine and golden ratio), in base of this findings. In 2013, Biggins and Warner solve the Chain Fountain using classic physics and get 16% discrepancy my constants from first principles give 99.5 % accuracy. This research is to big for myself and I need help from multidisciplinary fields to get a look of this and move it forward into each specialized branch.

Computers yes as we know it, are man made but the biological system do not use computation themselves to process complex processes? The are aware as we are? We could not know it now for sure , but after or while we will find it how they do it and why they do it we may find the final answer.
Do we not try to copy the nature processes all along? We want to hack how plants get energy from THE SUN, how birds fly?...We do not invented anything, yeah maybe the artificial materials, ah... also I find out why hematite keep cold so is a new branch to design cold materials. Even a synthetic ice cube that never melt and keep cold ( is energy structured geometry property).
I know I have in forum criticism that I make to many assumptions, not I am not making assumptions but as I am into the contest I could not direct you to my papers or repository. But you questions helps me to find how you understand my model and where to explain better, I am not native English speaker. Thanks for interest and is a pleasure to see your questions.

PlatinumWildcat

Lorraine Ford I did not answered you last question. What is material? If we zoom in is just energy , the material is a illusion and a very persistent one. Quantum physics shows as there is no vacuum, actually the mathematics initially has no zeros, was invented by bankers later as placeholder for debits. So in a Reality with only energy and no vacuum we get to logic common sense think that everything is energy structured, to how much level conscious or aware we do not know. I sense that you are trying to ask if GOD exist and create all this? In traditional sense nop, time is emergent so there is no past future but just now in objective way of see it. The time is personal experience. When you talk about symbolism and equations yes we label this to make sense of our narrative that is subjective and to a certain level consensus of a system /group. I see the point ...I separate two reality: the one that makes things happens and the one we perceive as GUI as material as Newtonian. In the last one make sense the symbolism equations and labels. In the first one Reality do not need symbols and equations Reality is the whole process that include objective and subjective experiences. If you ask me yes certain symbols could affect our resonance by patterns. Obvious there is no vacuum, no escape.

Steve Dufourny

PlatinumWildcat Hi, what is the title of your essay here in FQXI, please,regards

Lorraine Ford

PlatinumWildcat
You sense wrong. I am not "trying to ask if GOD exist and create all this".

Actually, I think that what you are saying is a lot of mixed-up nonsense.

marcovici alexandru

the heavy MRI / CT / NMR / PET machine used to make the studies on volunteers ,that inspired the author to write the essay has been probably transported with fossil fuels, how can i know ?

Lorraine Ford

Steve Dufourny
Steve,
Whether the person is an essay author or not, click on the person's name, and you will see all the person's comments and essays. You can also go to https://qspace.fqxi.org/competitions/entries .

Ulla Mattfolk

Lorraine Ford it is a pity many essays that could be good is done like they put in something just to be there, hasty and not well done. I found his (I presume) essay, just a scramble of notes... He is better at scrambling around here in discussions.
Ulla.

ChestnutGopher

I found this essay's attempt to connect quantum discontinuity with discrete thought frames genuinely thought-provoking, especially the idea that our 200-500ms conscious processing might represent macroscopic quantum-like behavior. While the author raises fascinating questions about where the quantum-to-classical transition occurs in the brain and what constitutes an "observer" in neural processing, I felt the work needed more rigorous grounding. The connections between quantum mechanics and neuroscience felt more metaphorical than mechanistic. That said, to me the accessible writing style and the provocative parallel drawn between Heisenberg's uncertainty and the brain's attempt to create certainty in an uncertain world makes this a stimulating read that pushes us to think differently about consciousness, even if it doesn't quite prove its central thesis.