If Consciousness Is A Function Of Neurons ?

[Foghorn]

But will we like round numbers when WE create a universe.

 

It actually happens when ever we make any yes/no decisions.

 

Will come a day though, when we actually design one.

[LeRepteux]

Hi everybody!

 

How about consciousness being due to neurons resisting to change their frequency?

Edited November 4, 2014 by LeRepteux

[Eclogite]

How are you defining the frequency of a neuron? And, having defined it, in what way do you think resistance could generate consciousness?

[LeRepteux]

Hi Eclogite,

 

Brain waves are observed because bunch of neurons fire at the same frequency for a certain time, and they do so because they all obey to the same rule, which is to fire when they get the right amount of energy from the other neurons, and this amount is the same for all the neurons that fire at the same time because they are interconnected. So, how about defining this frequency as the frequency of our brain waves?

 

This frequency is constant when nothing happens, and it changes if something changes around us, or if something changes in our mind. When it happens outside, we become conscious of what is happening, and we do so only because a change cannot be handled by our automatisms, thus subconsciously. Resistance is the only way to handle a change, and it is so because it takes more time and it is more risky to change than to continue as usual. Resistance is a universal response to a change, for instance, we cannot change places without our body resisting to that change, whether the change comes from us or from an outside event.

 

When we execute our automatisms, there is not enough change for them to attract our attention, so we do not have to be conscious of what we do, but when a change happens that they cannot handle, we automatically get conscious of it, and that change happens to the neurons, which can only change the frequency of their impulses. This is for changes that come from outside of the brain, but we are also conscious of what happens in it, and I believe that it is also change that we are conscious of, but what kind of change since memories are not supposed to change?

Edited November 7, 2014 by LeRepteux

[HydrogenBond]

Consciousness appears because of the way neurons are designed. Neurons expend up to 90% of their energy pumping and exchanging sodium and potassium cations to create a membrane potential. While the segregation of these two cations, on each side of the membrane, creates a concentration gradient and therefore an entropy potential; potential to increase entropy. The cations would prefer increase entropy and blend back to a uniform solution on both sides of the membrane. The segregation lowers the entropy and sets a potential for change. 

 

As such, neuron memory differs from computer memory in that neurons, at rest, are at their highest potential. Computer memory is designed for stability and therefore rest memory is at lowest potential.   The value of the neuron design is this type of memory is an accident waiting to happen because of starting out with such high free energy. If computer memory was designed this way, it would spontaneously change as entropy tries to increase and the energy tries to lower. This flux of spontaneous energy release and change (entropy increase) is the foundation for consciousness. 

 

Picture a water fountain pumping water to a height. At the top of the water's path is analogous to the rest neuron. This potential energy will need to lower and the order in the pumped stream will need to disperse as it cascades down to lower potential and higher entropy. 

 

Computer memory is too stable and can't spontaneously depart from programming. The programmer will try to trick the eye with a magic trick to simulate this. Conscious is type of program, with neuron design creating a hardware wildcard, so the cascade us able to depart and find new paths. Neurotransmitters impact the ability of the neurons to fire or not fire by tweaking the membrane, thereby funneling the cascade in preferred directions. 

 

There is more too consciousness than this, but neuron design is the foundation due to a constant stream of energy release and entropy increase until the never ending potential is gone. Neurons constantly restore the free energy; fountain is allows pumping.

 

Humans are at the top of the food chain because our brain pumps the highest potential, while also offering the most entropy flux; free will. The higher entropy allows free will via a flux of entropy increase departure, from the preferred pathways of instincts. 

 

 

[LeRepteux]

Hi HB,

 

With your principle of consciousness, how would you explain our acquired automatisms, which are subconscious by definition, but which have to be acquired out of a conscious process?

Edited November 7, 2014 by LeRepteux

[zazz54]

What interests me is the fact that our 'automatisms' and the neurons that seems be the functioning element of brain activity, is what I would say, determines 'consciousness.' The question is, would it ever be possible to understand the defining mechanism that these automatisms and neuron functions operate under?

 

It seems the best we could do is replicate the 'electrical systems' but never really know what the inherent instructions were. Just a thought.

[LeRepteux]

Hi Jazz

 

If consciousness is about change, to me, it is about randomness, because I think that nothing could change without a random process to permit it. For a specie to be forced to change, it must face a change in its environment, and that change happens by chance. For the same specie to be able to change, it must carry mutations, and these mutations must, by chance, happen at the right place and at the right moment. If this random process works for a specie, why wouldn't it work for the mind? This way, we could acquire our automatisms out of a trial and error process, and we could change them the same way, the cause for conscience being the resistance to change anything instantly in the mind. By the way, to me, jazz is issued from a random process: is it to you, Jazz?

Edited November 13, 2014 by LeRepteux

[zazz54]

I'd worry about this 'trial and error' process; if we sent the wrong "instructions" who knows what would happen; a Jazz player named Zazz, could suddenly begin playing rap with a Led Zeppelin mix.

[LeRepteux]

To me, improvisation is about sending voluntarily a possibly wrong information, and manage to be able to catch up with it afterwards. The farthest the information is from usual, the more it will be difficult to catch up after. If you introduce some rap and Led Zeppelin into a jam session, and you are able to catch up with the theme and the rhythm, then it should look great, no?

[zazz54]

LeRepteux; Sure, why not. I suppose we could mix just about anything, and eventually smooth it out - at least in music. But, considering creating a being with consciousness is another matter. EinsteinDevotee wrote above, something about "hardware" being different in each individual, thusly making it nearly impossible to recreate its functions in another - or I would add, in an AI.

 

I believe we will, and most likely have created something close, but does it have a soul, or consciousness? I don't see how it could. Because in my opinion, since the soul comes from GOD, the instructions given initially, were so complex - to the brain, and its subsequent operations; neurons, synapses, etc.,that duplication is beyond man's reach.

 

We'll try though, because man has a hard time accepting the fact that a spirit, created by an omnipotent Being - GOD, exists.

[LeRepteux]

If you take for granted that consciousness is supernatural, it will be difficult to convince you that it could be natural. Could you consider for a while that God has given us a natural conscience ?

[zazz54]

Natural, meaning that it is operated by neurons and electrical impulses; I have no doubt. But I maintain that as one goes about to duplicate the operations of a conscience, one would have to have the "operators manual." We may figure out the brain, in its entirety, and realize that without it, we have no consciousness, but to determine what the conscience consists of - in its entirety, would mean having the knowledge of - well, of GOD.

 

But for sake of argument, let's say it is possible to make an AI that can do everything a human being can do. Will it love? Will it ever even understand the concept? Do we? Will it ever know what is right from wrong. inherently or otherwise, other than the impulses we program into it? This is what we are talking about, are we not?

 

I have no doubt that we will "create" an AI that can touch, smell, feel, decide for itself the correct responses in just about every situation, but it will still be a machine. And if this is the only goal, which it may be; to create a machine that will take care of our every need, and that it will develop because it can "think" for itself, how soon will it be before it decides humanity is a worthless entity?

Edited November 17, 2014 by zazz54

[LeRepteux]

You probably think this way because you see no other way of producing AI than a computer, which would be programmed to think as we do, but electronics can do other things. For instance, what if memory was due to our cerebral waves, and what if we were able to make artificial neurons and artificial synapses that could produce cerebral waves. A wave has memory, light carries galaxies' memory for billions of years. If cerebral waves are making loops in the brain, they can carry our memories endlessly. The benefit of artificial humans in space is evident, and the duration might be more important too, being easier to repair.

 

If this kind of AI worked the same as human brain, why wouldn't it have the same feelings, the same emotions, the same imagination, the same subconscience, and the same conscience?

[zazz54]

Well that's thought provoking; carrying our memories with it in an endless loop.

 

Okay, so we create a machine/human-like entity that can endure in space; that will operate controls and nearly duplicate the response of a human as close as it can get - I won't go so far as to say, emotions, because I believe emotions, though they may be part of memories, might be elicited more by present circumstance; I.e., say the awe of a galaxy sighted in the distance, then what? Will this entity carry that emotion back in its memory core, to be passed on to "offspring" or will it be more like passing on photos, such as NASA does?

 

As I suggested earlier, what is the goal? To create a machine that will duplicate a human being, or a near perfect machine that will operate in space and in other circumstances? Still, it will not have a soul/spirit/conscience/awareness of something outside; beyond our understanding. And again, I say, why would we want to? What is the obsession with man to create a human being - other than the ability to utilize his components/organs?

Edited November 18, 2014 by zazz54

[zazz54]

You say we may be able to duplicate neurons and synapses, from the cerebral waves, but I'm not sure how you can say those artificial waves will "feel" the same as we do. I cannot agree that cerebral waves is all we are.

[pgrmdave]

I'm not sure how you can say those artificial waves will "feel" the same as we do.

 I'm not sure how I can say that I "feel" the same as you do.  What evidence do you have to support the idea that different people "feel" the same way that you couldn't see in an artificial brain?