scholarly journals The Meta-Dynamic Nature of Consciousness

Author(s):  
John Barnden

How, if at all, consciousness can be part of the physical universe remains a baffling problem. This article outlines a new, developing philosophical theory of how it could do so, and offers a preliminary mathematical formulation of a physical grounding for key aspects of the theory. Because the philosophical side has radical elements, so does the physical-theory side. The philosophical side is radical, first, in proposing that the productivity or dynamism in the universe that many believe to be responsible for its systematic regularities is actually itself a physical constituent of the universe, along with more familiar entities. Indeed, it proposes that instances of dynamism can themselves take part in physical interactions with other entities, this interaction then being “meta-dynamism” (a type of meta-causation). Secondly, the theory is radical, and unique, in arguing that consciousness is necessarily partly constituted of meta-dynamic auto-sensitivity, in other words it must react via meta-dynamism to its own dynamism, and also in conjecturing that some specific form of this sensitivity is sufficient for and indeed constitutive of consciousness. The article proposes a way for physical laws to be modified to accommodate meta-dynamism, via the radical step of including elements that explicitly refer to dynamism itself. Additionally, laws become, explicitly, temporally non-local in referring directly to quantity values holding at times prior to a given instant of application of the law. The approach therefore implicitly brings in considerations about what information determines states. Because of the temporal non-locality, and also because of the deep connections between dynamism and time-flow, the approach also implicitly connects to the topic of entropy insofar as this is related to time.

Entropy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. 1433
Author(s):  
John A. Barnden

How, if at all, consciousness can be part of the physical universe remains a baffling problem. This article outlines a new, developing philosophical theory of how it could do so, and offers a preliminary mathematical formulation of a physical grounding for key aspects of the theory. Because the philosophical side has radical elements, so does the physical-theory side. The philosophical side is radical, first, in proposing that the productivity or dynamism in the universe that many believe to be responsible for its systematic regularities is actually itself a physical constituent of the universe, along with more familiar entities. Indeed, it proposes that instances of dynamism can themselves take part in physical interactions with other entities, this interaction then being “meta-dynamism” (a type of meta-causation). Secondly, the theory is radical, and unique, in arguing that consciousness is necessarily partly constituted of meta-dynamic auto-sensitivity, in other words it must react via meta-dynamism to its own dynamism, and also in conjecturing that some specific form of this sensitivity is sufficient for and indeed constitutive of consciousness. The article proposes a way for physical laws to be modified to accommodate meta-dynamism, via the radical step of including elements that explicitly refer to dynamism itself. Additionally, laws become, explicitly, temporally non-local in referring directly to quantity values holding at times prior to a given instant of application of the law. The approach therefore implicitly brings in considerations about what information determines states. Because of the temporal non-locality, and also because of the deep connections between dynamism and time-flow, the approach also implicitly connects to the topic of entropy insofar as this is related to time.


Author(s):  
John Barnden

How, if at all, consciousness can be part of the physical universe remains a baffling problem. This article outlines a new, developing philosophical theory of how it could do so, and offers a preliminary mathematical formulation of a physical grounding for key aspects of the theory. Because the philosophical side has radical elements, so does the physical-theory side. The philosophical side is radical, first, in proposing that the productivity or dynamism in the universe that many believe to be responsible for its systematic regularities is actually itself a physical constituent of the universe, along with more familiar entities. It also proposes that instances of dynamism can themselves take part in physical interactions with other entities, this interaction then being “meta-dynamism” (a type of metacausation). Secondly, the theory is radical, and unique, in arguing that consciousness is necessarily partly constituted of meta-dynamic auto-sensitivity, in other words it must react via meta-dynamism to its own dynamism, and also in conjecturing that some specific form of this sensitivity is sufficient for and indeed constitutive of consciousness. This leads to a proposal for how physical laws could be modified to accommodate meta-dynamism, via the radical step of including elements that explicitly refer to dynamism itself.


Author(s):  
John Barnden

How, if at all, consciousness can be part of the physical universe remains a baffling problem. This article outlines a new, developing philosophical theory of how it could do so, and offers a preliminary mathematical formulation of a physical grounding for key aspects of the theory. Because the philosophical side has radical elements, so does the physical-theory side. The philosophical side is radical, first, in proposing that the productivity or dynamism in the universe that many believe to be responsible for its systematic regularities is actually itself a physical constituent of the universe, along with more familiar entities. It also proposes that instances of dynamism can themselves take part in physical interactions with other entities, this interaction then being “meta-dynamism” (a type of metacausation). Secondly, the theory is radical, and unique, in arguing that consciousness is necessarily partly constituted of meta-dynamic auto-sensitivity, in other words it must react via meta-dynamism to its own dynamism, and also in conjecturing that some specific form of this sensitivity is sufficient for and indeed constitutive of consciousness. This leads to a proposal for how physical laws could be modified to accommodate meta-dynamism, via the radical step of including elements that explicitly refer to dynamism itself.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu

Physical interactions among any number of elementary particles (EPs) are governed by physical laws (e.g., the Schrodinger equation). Let’s call the superdeterministic state machine which is formed by the world lines of all EPs the destiny. To a human neural network, the reality is a snapshot of the destiny. What a neural network perceives/predicts, is not the destiny itself (but a mathematical model (MM) of the destiny), but it is incorrectly treated by this neural network as the destiny, when this neural network deals with everyday challenges. The subjective experience is actually the use of a MM by a neural network within its low-level calculation. For example, when a neural network uses its geometric model of the destiny (GMD), it feels like the subjective experience of being immersed within a topological structure. The GMD, which is a component of the mind, is a real-time representation of all the EPs within the universe; the GMD only includes the physical objects perceived in the mind. A naïve cognitive researcher might incorrectly treat her GMD as the real world. A neural network can use its GMD. Using the semantics of human language, the use of GMD is described as subjectively experiencing the GMD. It’s possible that a neural network can’t subjectively experience its GMD. Otherwise, its subjective experience shouldn’t be able to impact the actual world line of any EP within this universe.


Author(s):  
Steven French

Action at a distance is typically characterized in terms of some cause producing a spatially separated effect in the absence of any medium by which the causal interaction is transmitted. Historically it has been viewed with suspicion; Leibniz famously accused Newton of introducing ‘occult’ forces because according to his theory, gravity appeared to act at a distance. However, the grounds for ruling it out are not always so clear. One might insist that all forces are ‘contact forces’, but why should this be so? Alternatively, it could be argued that if action at a distance is accepted, then certain ‘facts’ about physical interactions would be left unexplained: the nature of Newton’s law of gravitation might be explicable if some underlying medium is presupposed, but otherwise it simply has to be accepted as a brute feature. But this assumes that the ‘nature’ of physical laws requires this sort of explanation. Finally, if it is acknowledged that such action at a distance cannot be instantaneous, on pain of violating Special Relativity, then it turns out that there are problems satisfying conservation of energy. Again, even this consequence can be side-stepped if one were to adopt an anti-realist view of energy. With the development of field theories and Einstein’s liberation of physics from the grip of the ether, it appeared that action at a distance had been pushed out of the picture by the beginning of the twentieth century. However, the non-local nature of quantum entanglement appears to have allowed it back in. Of course the form of this putative quantum action at a distance is very different from the classical kind: for one thing, it cannot be used instantaneously to send information and so there is still ‘peaceful co-existence’ with Special Relativity. Again, however, its acceptance depends on certain assumptions – on how one understands quantum entanglement, for example. Shifting the focus to violation of a form of ‘separability’ between systems, rather than locality, may allow us to accept quantum holism without having to swallow action at distance as well.


Author(s):  
Ehud Ahissar ◽  
Moshe Fried

Physics and neuroscience share overlapping objectives, the major of which is probably the attempt to reduce the observed universe to a set of rules. The approaches are complementary, attempting to find a reduced description of the universe or of the observer, respectively. We propose here that combining the two approaches within an observer-inclusive physical scheme, bears significant advantages. In such a scheme, the same set of rules applies to the universe and its observers, and the two descriptions are entangled. We show here that analyzing special relativity in an observer-inclusive framework can resolve its contradiction with the observed non-locality of physical interactions. The contradiction is resolved by reducing the universe (including the observer) to a dynamic distribution of closed strings (“ceons”) whose vibration waves travel at c. This ceons model is consistent with special and general relativity, non-locality and the holographic principle; it also eliminates Zeno’s motion paradoxes. Yet, the model entails several new empirical predictions. Finally, the ceons model suggests a fundamental physical implementation of active biological perception. Paraphrasing Torricelli, this paper suggests that we live submerged in a c of light.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu

Physical interactions among any number of elementary particles (EPs) are governed by physical laws (e.g., the Schrodinger equation). Let’s call the predetermined state machine which is formed by the predetermined world lines of all EPs the destiny. To a human neural network, the reality is a snapshot of the destiny. What a neural network perceives/predicts, is not the destiny itself (but a mathematical model (MM) of the destiny), but it is incorrectly treated by this neural network as the destiny, when this neural network deals with everyday challenges. The subjective experience is actually the use of a MM by a neural network within its low-level calculation. For example, when a neural network uses its geometric model of the destiny (GMD), it feels like the subjective experience of being immersed within a topological structure. The GMD, which is a component of the mind, is a real-time representation of all the EPs within the universe; the GMD only includes the physical objects perceived in the mind. A naïve cognitive researcher might incorrectly treat her GMD as the real world. A neural network can use its GMD. Using the semantics of human language, the use of GMD is described as subjectively experiencing the GMD. It’s possible that a neural network can’t subjectively experience its GMD. Otherwise, its subjective experience shouldn’t be able to impact the predetermined world line of any EP within this universe.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyang Yu

Physical interactions among any number of elementary particles (EPs) are governed by physical laws (e.g., the Schrodinger equation). Let’s call the predetermined state machine which is formed by the predetermined world lines of all EPs the destiny. To a human neural network, the reality is a snapshot of the destiny. What a neural network perceives/predicts, is not the destiny itself (but a mathematical model (MM) of the destiny), but it is incorrectly treated by this neural network as the destiny, when this neural network deals with everyday challenges. The subjective experience is actually the use of a MM by a neural network within its low-level calculation. For example, when a neural network uses its geometric model of the destiny (GMD), it feels like the subjective experience of being immersed within a geometric structure. The GMD, which is a component of the mind, is a real-time representation of all the EPs within the universe; the GMD only includes the physical objects perceived in the mind. A naïve cognitive researcher might incorrectly treat her GMD as the real world. A neural network can use its GMD. Using the semantics of human language, the use of GMD is described as subjectively experiencing the GMD. It’s possible that a neural network can’t subjectively experience its GMD. Otherwise, its subjective experience shouldn’t be able to impact the predetermined world line of any EP within this universe.


Author(s):  
Donald C. Williams

This chapter provides a fuller treatment of the pure manifold theory with an expanded discussion of competing doctrines. It is argued that competing doctrines fail to account for the extensive and/or transitory aspect(s) of time, or they do so at great theoretical cost. The pure manifold theory accounts for the extensive aspect of time because it admits a four-dimensional manifold and it accounts for the transitory aspect of time because it hypothesizes that the increase of entropy is the thing that is ‘felt’ in veridical cases of felt passage. A four-dimensionalist theory of time travel is outlined, along with a sketch of large-scale cosmological traits of the universe.


2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Wheatcroft

Abstract A scoring rule is a function of a probabilistic forecast and a corresponding outcome used to evaluate forecast performance. There is some debate as to which scoring rules are most appropriate for evaluating forecasts of sporting events. This paper focuses on forecasts of the outcomes of football matches. The ranked probability score (RPS) is often recommended since it is ‘sensitive to distance’, that is it takes into account the ordering in the outcomes (a home win is ‘closer’ to a draw than it is to an away win). In this paper, this reasoning is disputed on the basis that it adds nothing in terms of the usual aims of using scoring rules. A local scoring rule is one that only takes the probability placed on the outcome into consideration. Two simulation experiments are carried out to compare the performance of the RPS, which is non-local and sensitive to distance, the Brier score, which is non-local and insensitive to distance, and the Ignorance score, which is local and insensitive to distance. The Ignorance score outperforms both the RPS and the Brier score, casting doubt on the value of non-locality and sensitivity to distance as properties of scoring rules in this context.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document