Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com
MindPapers is now part of PhilPapers: online research in philosophy, a new service with many more features.
 
 Compiled by David Chalmers (Editor) & David Bourget (Assistant Editor), Australian National University. Submit an entry.
 
   
click here for help on how to search

8.3b. Quantum Mechanisms of Consciousness (Quantum Mechanisms of Consciousness on PhilPapers)

See also:
Amoroso, Richard L. (2004). Application of double-cusp catastrophe theory to the physical evolution of qualia: Implications for paradigm shift in medicine and psychology. Anticipative and Predictive Models in Systems Science 1 (1):19-26.   (Google)
Arecchi, F. Tito (2003). Chaotic neuron dynamics, synchronization, and feature binding: Quantum aspects. Mind and Matter 1 (1):15-43.   (Cited by 8 | Google | More links)
Abstract: A central issue of cognitive neuroscience is to understand how a large collection of coupled neurons combines external signals with internal memories into new coherent patterns of meaning. An external stimulus localized at some input spreads over a large assembly of coupled neurons, building up a collective state univocally corresponding to the stimulus. Thus, the synchronization of spike trains of many individual neurons is the basis of a coherent perception. Based on recent investigations of homoclinic chaotic systems and their synchronization, a novel conjecture for the dynamics of single neurons and, consequently, for neuron assemblies is formulated. Homoclinic chaos is proposed as a suitable way to code information in time by trains of equal spikes occurring at apparently erratic times. In order to classify the set of different perceptions, the percept space can be given a metric structure by introducing a distance measure between distinct percepts. The distance in percept space is conjugate to the duration of the perception in the sense that an uncertainty relation in percept space is associated with time-limited perceptions. This coding of different percepts by synchronized spike trains entails fundamental quantum features which are not restricted to microscopic phenomena. It is conjectured that they are related to the details of the perceptual chain rather than depending on Planck's action
Atmanspacher, Harald (2004). Quantum theory and consciousness: An overview with selected examples. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society 1:51-73.   (Cited by 4 | Google | More links)
Abstract: It is widely accepted that consciousness or, in other words, mental activity is in some way correlated to the behavior of the brain or, in other words, material brain activity. Since quantum theory is the most fundamental theory of matter that is currently available, it is a legitimate question to ask whether quantum theory can help us to understand consciousness. Several approaches answering this question a?rmatively, proposed in recent decades, will be surveyed. It will be pointed out that they make di?erent epistemological assumptions, refer to di?erent neurophysiological levels of description, and adopt quantum theory in di?erent ways. For each of the approaches discussed, these imply both..
Bass, Ludvik (1975). A quantum-mechanical mind-body interaction. Foundations of Physics 5:159-72.   (Cited by 9 | Google)
Beck, Friedrich & Eccles, John C. (1992). Quantum aspects of brain activity and the role of consciousness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 89:11357-61.   (Cited by 79 | Google | More links)
Beck, Friedrich (2001). Quantum brain dynamics and consciousness. In P. Van Loocke (ed.), The Physical Nature of Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 5 | Google)
Beck, Friedrich (1994). Quantum mechanics and consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 1 (2):253-255.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Beck, Friedrich & Eccles, John C. (2003). Quantum processes in the brain: A scientific basis of consciousness. In Naoyuki Osaka (ed.), Neural Basis of Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Beck, Friedrich (1998). Synaptic transmission, quantum-state selection, and consciousness. In Stuart R. Hameroff, Alfred W. Kaszniak & A. C. Scott (eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness II. MIT Press.   (Google)
Berezin, Alexander A. (1992). Correlated isotopic tunneling as a possible model for consciousness. Journal of Theoretical Biology 154:415-20.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Bieberich, Erhard, In search of a neuronal substrate of the human mind: New concepts from "topological neurochemistry".   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Neurochemistry is a powerful discipline of modern neuroscience based on a description of neuronal function in terms of molecular reaction and interaction. This study aims at a neurochemical approach to the "hard" philosophical mind-body problem: the search for the neuronal correlate of consciousness. The scattered pattern of remote areas in the human brain simultaneously busy with the computation of single perceptions has left us with the unanswered questions why, where, and how the neuronal activity gives rise to a unified conscious observation of the outer world in a space inside of the human brain. In this study, conscious perception of temporally and spatially distinct events by an inner observer, the self, is treated as a topological problem demanding for a correlation of the self with a particular orchestration of neuronal or neurochemical activity triggered by action potentials. According to a novel concept of "topological neurochemistry" it is assumed that three features of the human brain are necessary in order to generate consciousness: 1) A network of neurons with dendritic branching structure and re-entry signaling of action potentials. 2)A macromolecular lattice structure as part of the neuron which is excitable or modulated by action potentials. 3) A spatial superposition of action potentials which underlies conscious perception but reveals not necessarily the same topology as the space perceived in consciousness. Several molecular models for the generation of consciousness and the self will be discussed, and a new concept, the "fractal approach", will be introduced. Mathematical theory and experimental methods for investigation of human consciousness will be presented
Bourget, David (2004). Quantum leaps in philosophy of mind. Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (12):17--42.   (Google)
Abstract: I discuss the quantum mechanical theory of consciousness and freewill offered by Stapp (1993, 1995, 2000, 2004). First I show that decoherence-based arguments do not work against this theory. Then discuss a number of problems with the theory: Stapp's separate accounts of consciousness and freewill are incompatible, the interpretations of QM they are tied to are questionable, the Zeno effect could not enable freewill as he suggests because weakness of will would then be ubiquitous, and the holism of measurement in QM is not a good explanation of the unity of consciousness for essentially the same reason that local interactions may seem incapable to account for it
Clarke, Christopher J. S. (2007). The role of quantum physics in the theory of subjective consciousness. Mind and Matter 5 (1):45-81.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: I argue that a dual-aspect theory of consciousness, associated with a particular class of quantum states, can provide a consistent account of consciousness. I illustrate this with the use of coherent states as this class. The proposal meets Chalmers 'requirements of allowing a structural correspondence between consciousness and its physical correlate. It provides a means for consciousness to have an effect on the world (it is not an epiphenomenon, and can thus be selected by evolution) in a way that supplements and completes conventional physics, rather than interfering with it. I draw on the work of Hameroff and Penrose to explain the consistency of this proposal with decoherence, while adding details to this work. The proposal is open to extensive further research at both theoretical and experimental levels
Vimal, Ram Lakhan Pandey (2009). Dual Aspect Framework for Consciousness and Its Implications: West meets East for Sublimation Process. In G. Derfer, Z. Wang & M. Weber (eds.), The Roar of Awakening. A Whiteheadian Dialogue Between Western Psychotherapies and Eastern Worldviews. Ontos Verlag.   (Google)
Abstract: Previously (Vimal, 2009b) in Whitehead Psychology Nexus Studies, we discussed (i) the dual-aspect-dual-mode proto-experience (PE)-subjective experience (SE) framework of consciousness based on neuroscience, (ii) its implication in war, suffering, peace, and happiness, (iii) the process of sublimation for optimizing them and converting the negative aspects of seven groups of self-protective energy system (desire, anger, ego, greed, attachment, jealousy, and selfish-love) into their positive aspects from both western and eastern perspectives. In this article, we summarize the recent development since then as follows. (1) In (Vimal, 2009e), we rigorously investigated the classical and quantum matching and selection processes for precisely experiencing a specific SE in a specific neural-network. (2) In (Vimal, 2009i), we unpacked the quantum view of superposition related to the superposition-based hypothesis H1 of our framework in terms of subquantum dual-aspect primal entities (bhutatmas) and addressed the related explanatory gaps. (3) In, we developed alternative hypotheses of our framework, namely, the superposition-then-integration-emergence based H2, the integration-emergence based H3, the intelligent mechanism based H4, and the vacuum/Aether based H5. We concluded that our framework with H1 is the most optimal one because it has the least number of problems (Vimal, 2009j). (4) In, we found over 40 different but overlapping meanings attributed to the term ‘consciousness’ and suggested that authors must specify which aspect of consciousness they refer to when using this term to minimize confusion (Vimal, 2009f). (5) In, we proposed definitions of consciousness, qualia, mind, and awareness (Vimal, 2009h). (6) In, we investigated the necessary ingredients for access (reportable) consciousness: wakefulness, re-entry, attention, working memory and so on (Vimal, 2009g). (7) In, we discussed Nāgārjuna’s philosophy of dependent co-origination with respect to our PE-SE framework (Vimal, 2009a). (8) In, we linked dynamic systems theory and fractal catalytic theory with standard representation theory using our framework (Vimal, 2009d). (9) In, we introduce the PE-SE aspects of consciousness in theoretical classical and quantum physics including loop quantum gravity and string theory (Vimal, 2009k). (10) In (Vimal, 2009c), we proposed that the SE of subject or ‘self’ in self-related neural-network is tuned to the self-related SEs/PEs superposed in other innumerable entities during samadhi state via matching and selection processes. This leads to bliss, ecstasy, or exceptionally high degree of climax at samadhi state. We conclude that, so far, the dual-aspect-dual-mode PE-SE framework with hypothesis H1 is the most optimal framework for explaining our conventional reality because it has the least number of problems.
del Giudice, E. (2004). The psycho-emotional-physical unity of living organisms as an outcome of quantum physics. In Gordon G. Globus, Karl H. Pribram & Giuseppe Vitiello (eds.), Brain and Being. John Benjamins.   (Google)
De Silva, Frank (ms). Foundation of all Axioms the Axioms of Consciousness.   (Google)
Abstract: A description of consciousness leads to a contradiction with the postulation from special relativity that there can be no connections between simultaneous event. This contradiction points to consciousness involving quantum level mechanisms. The Quantum level description of the universe is re- evaluated in the light of what is observed in consciousness namely 4 Dimensional objects. A new improved interpretation of Quantum level observations is introduced. From this vantage point the following axioms of consciousness is presented. Consciousness consists of two distinct components, the observed U and the observer I. The observed U consist of all the events I is aware of. A vast majority of these occur simultaneously. Now if I were to be an entity within the space-time continuum, all of these events of U together with I would have to occur at one point in space-time. However, U is distributed over a definite region of space-time (region in brain). Thus, I is aware of a multitude of space-like separated events. It is seen that this awareness necessitates I to be an entity outside the space-time continuum. With I taken as such, a new concept called concept A is introduced. With the help of concept A a very important axiom of consciousness, namely Free Will is explained. Libet s Experiment which was originally seen to contradict Free will, in the light of Concept A is shown to support it. A variation to Libet s Experiment is suggested that will give conclusive proof for Concept A and Free Will.
Dyer, Michael G. (1994). Quantum physics and consciousness, creativity, computers: A commentary on Goswami's quantum-based theory of consciousness and free will. Journal of Mind and Behavior 15 (3):265-90.   (Google)
Eccles, John C. (1986). Do mental events cause neural events analogously to the probability fields of quantum mechanics? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 227:411-28.   (Cited by 37 | Google | More links)
Faro, Alberto & Giordano, Daniela (2007). An account of consciousness from the synergetics and quantum field theory perspectives. In Antonio Chella & Riccardo Manzotti (eds.), Artificial Consciousness. Imprint Academic.   (Google)
Flanagan, Brian (2003). Are perceptual fields quantum fields? Neuroquantology 3.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Gao, Shan (2003). A possible quantum basis of panpsychism. [Journal (Paginated)] 1 (1):4-9.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: We show that consciousness may violate the basic quantum principle, according to which the nonorthogonal quantum states can't be distinguished. This implies that the physical world is not causally closed without consciousness, and consciousness is a fundamental property of matter, thus provides a possible quantum basis for panpsychism
Gao, Mr Shan (ms). Quantum, consciousness and panpsychism: A solution to the hard problem.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: We analyze the results and implications of the combination of quantum and consciousness in terms of the recent QSC analysis. The quantum effect of consciousness is first explored. We show that the consciousness of the observer can help to distinguish the nonorthogonal states under some condition, while the usual physical measuring device without consciousness can’t. The result indicates that the causal efficacies of consciousness do exist when considering the basic quantum process. Based on this conclusion, we demonstrate that consciousness is not reducible or emergent, but a new fundamental property of matter. This provides a quantum basis for panpsychism. Furthermore, we argue that the conscious process is one kind of quantum computation process based on the analysis of consciousness time and combination problem. It is shown that a unified theory of matter and consciousness should include two parts: one is the complete quantum evolution of matter state, which includes the definite nonlinear evolution element introduced by consciousness, and the other is the psychophysical principle or corresponding principle between conscious content and matter state. Lastly, some experimental suggestions are presented to confirm the theoretical analysis of the paper
Georgiev, Danko (ms). Falsifications of Hameroff-Penrose orch OR model of consciousness and novel avenues for development of quantum mind theory.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: In this paper we try to make a clear distinction between quantum mysticism and quantum mind theory. Quackery always accompanies science especially in controversial and still under development areas and since the quantum mind theory is a science youngster it must clearly demarcate itself from the great stuff of pseudo-science currently patronized by the term "quantum mind". Quantum theory has attracted a big deal of attention and opened new avenues for building up a physical theory of mind because its principles and experimental foundations are as strange as the phenomenon of consciousness itself. Yet, the unwarranted recourse to paranormal phenomena as supporting the quantum mind theory plus the extremely bad biological mismodeling of brain physiology lead to great scepticism about the viability of the approach. We give as an example the Hameroff-Penrose Orch OR model with a list of twenty four problems not being repaired for a whole decade after the birth of the model in 1996. In the exposition we have tried not only to pesent critique of the spotted flaws, but to provide novel possibilities towards creation of neuroscientific quantum model of mind that incorporates all the available data from the basic disciplines (biochemistry, cell physiology, etc.) up to the clinical observations (neurology, neurosurgery, molecular psychiatry, etc.). Thus in a concise fashion we outline what can be done scientifically to improve the Q-mind theory and start a research programme (in Lakatos sense) that is independent on the particular flaws in some of the existing Q-mind models
Georgiev, Danko (2003). On the dynamic timescale of mind-brain interaction. In Proceedings Quantum Mind 2003 Conference: Consciousness, Quantum Physics and the Brain , Tucson, Arizona, USA.   (Cited by 3 | Google | More links)
Abstract: In neurophysiology it is widely assumed that our mind operates in millisecond timescale. This view might be wrong, because if consciousness is quantum coherent phenomenon at the level of protein assemblies, then its dynamic timescale can be picosecond one
Germine, M. (1991). Consciousness and synchronicity. Medical Hypotheses 36:277-83.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Globus, Gordon G. (1997). Nonlinear brain systems with nonlocal degrees of freedom. Journal of Mind and Behavior 18 (2-3):195-204.   (Google)
Globus, Gordon G. (2002). Ontological implications of quantum brain dynamics. In Kunio Yasue, Marj Jibu & Tarcisio Della Senta (eds.), No Matter, Never Mind. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Globus, Gordon G. (2003). Quantum Closures and Disclosures: Thinking-Together Postphenomenology and Quantum Brain Dynamics. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Globus, Gordon G. (1996). Quantum consciousness is cybernetic. Psyche 2 (21).   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Globus, Gordon G. (1998). Self, cognition, qualia, and world in quantum brain dynamics. Journal of Consciousness Studies 5 (1):34-52.   (Cited by 5 | Google)
Grush, Rick & Churchland, P. (1995). Gaps in Penrose's toiling. In Thomas Metzinger (ed.), Conscious Experience. Ferdinand Schoningh.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Using the Gödel Incompleteness Result for leverage, Roger Penrose has argued that the mechanism for consciousness involves quantum gravitational phenomena, acting through microtubules in neurons. We show that this hypothesis is implausible. First, the Gödel Result does not imply that human thought is in fact non algorithmic. Second, whether or not non algorithmic quantum gravitational phenomena actually exist, and if they did how that could conceivably implicate microtubules, and if microtubules were involved, how that could conceivably implicate consciousness, is entirely speculative. Third, cytoplasmic ions such as calcium and sodium are almost certainly present in the microtubule pore, barring the quantum mechanical effects Penrose envisages. Finally, physiological evidence indicates that consciousness does not directly depend on microtubule properties in any case, rendering doubtful any theory according to which consciousness is generated in the microtubules
Hameroff, Stuart R. & Scott, A. C. (1998). A sonoran afternoon: A dialogue on quantum mechanics and consciousness. In Stuart R. Hameroff, Alfred W. Kaszniak & A. C. Scott (eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness II. MIT Press.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Abstract: _Sonoran Desert, Stuart Hameroff and Alwyn Scott awoke from their_ _siestas to take margaritas in the shade of a ramada. On a nearby_ _table, a tape recorder had accidentally been left on and the following_ _is an unedited transcript of their conversation._
Hameroff, Stuart R. (2001). Biological feasibility of quantum approaches to consciousness: The Penrose-Hameroff 'orch or' model. In P. Van Loocke (ed.), The Physical Nature of Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Hameroff, Stuart R. & Penrose, Roger (1996). Conscious events as orchestrated space-time selections. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3 (1):36-53.   (Cited by 108 | Google | More links)
Hameroff, Stuart (2006). Consciousness, neurobiology and quantum mechanics: The case for a connection. In J. Tuszynski (ed.), The Emerging Physics of Consciousness. Springer-Verlag.   (Cited by 4 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Consciousness involves phenomenal experience, self-awareness, feelings, choices, control of actions, a model of the world, etc. But what _is_ _it?_ Is consciousness something specific, or merely a byproduct of information processing? Whatever it is, consciousness is a multi-faceted puzzle. Despite enormous strides in behavioral and brain science, essential features of consciousness continue to elude explanation. Unresolved problems include: 1) Neural correlates of conscious perception apparently occur too late—150 to 500 milliseconds (msec) after impingement on our sense organs—to have causal efficacy in seemingly conscious perceptions and willful actions, often initiated or completed within 100 msec after sensory impingement. For example in the
Hameroff, Stuart R. (2001). Consciousness, the brain, and space-time geometry. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 929:74-104.   (Google)
Hameroff, Stuart R. (online). Consciousness, Whitehead and quantum computation in the brain: Panprotopsychism meets the physics of fundamental spacetime geometry.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Abstract: _dualism_ (consciousness lies outside knowable science), _emergence_ (consciousness arises as a novel property from complex computational dynamics in the brain), and some form of _panpsychism_, _pan-protopsychism, or pan-experientialism_ (essential features or precursors of consciousness are fundamental components of reality which are accessed by brain processes). In addition to 1) the problem of subjective experience, other related enigmatic features of consciousness persist, defying technological and philosophical inroads. These include 2) the “binding problem”—how disparate brain activities give rise to a unified sense of “self” or unified conscious content. Temporal synchrony—brain-wide coherence of neural membrane electrical activities—is often assumed to accomplish binding, but _what_ is being synchronized? What is being coherently bound? Another enigmatic feature is 3) the transition from pre-conscious processes to consciousness itself. Most neuroscientists agree that consciousness is the “tip of an iceberg”, that the vast majority of brain activities is
Hameroff, Stuart R. (1998). "Funda-mentality": Is the conscious mind subtly linked to a basic level of the universe? [Journal (Paginated)] 2 (4):119-124.   (Cited by 52 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Age-old battle lines over the puzzling nature of mental experience are shaping a modern resurgence in the study of consciousness. On one side are the long-dominant "physicalists" who view consciousness as an emergent property of the brain's neural networks. On the alternative, rebellious side are those who see a necessary added ingredient: proto-conscious experience intrinsic to reality, perhaps understandable through modern physics (panpsychists, pan-experientialists, "funda-mentalists"). It is argued here that the physicalist premise alone is unable to solve completely the difficult issues of consciousness and that to do so will require supplemental panpsychist/pan-experiential philosophy expressed in modern physics. In one scheme proto-conscious experience is a basic property of physical reality accessible to a quantum process associated with brain activity. The proposed process is Roger Penrose's "objective reduction" (OR), a self-organizing "collapse" of the quantum wave function related to instability at the most basic level of space-time geometry. In the Penrose- Hameroff model of "orchestrated objective reduction" (Orch OR), OR quantum computation occurs in cytoskeletal microtubules within the brain's neurons. The basic thesis is that consciousness involves brain activities coupled to a self-organizing ripples in fundamental reality
Hameroff, Stuart R. (1998). More neural than thou (reply to churchland). In S. Ameroff, Alfred W. Kaszniak & A. C. Scott (eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness II: The 1996 Tucson Discussions and Debates. MIT Press.   (Google)
Abstract: In "Brainshy: Non-neural theories of conscious experience," (this volume) Patricia Churchland considers three "non-neural" approaches to the puzzle of consciousness: 1) Chalmers' fundamental information, 2) Searle's "intrinsic" property of brain, and 3) Penrose-Hameroff quantum phenomena in microtubules. In rejecting these ideas, Churchland flies the flag of "neuralism." She claims that conscious experience will be totally and completely explained by the dynamical complexity of properties at the level of neurons and neural networks. As far as consciousness goes, neural network firing patterns triggered by axon-to-dendrite synaptic chemical transmissions are the fundamental correlates of consciousness. There is no need to look elsewhere
Hameroff, Stuart R. & Penrose, Roger (1996). Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules: A model for consciousness. In Stuart R. Hameroff, Alfred W. Kaszniak & A. C. Scott (eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Cited by 143 | Google | More links)
Hameroff, Stuart R. & Woolf, Nancy J. (2003). Quantum consciousness: A cortical neural circuit. In Naoyuki Osaka (ed.), Neural Basis of Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Hameroff, Stuart R. (1994). Quantum coherence in microtubules: A neural basis for emergent consciousness? Journal of Consciousness Studies 1:91-118.   (Cited by 150 | Google | More links)
Hameroff, Stuart R. (2002). Quantum computation in brain microtubules. Physical Review E 65 (6).   (Cited by 11 | Google)
Abstract: Proposals for quantum computation rely on superposed states implementing multiple computations simultaneously, in parallel, according to quantum linear superposition (e.g., Benioff, 1982; Feynman, 1986; Deutsch, 1985, Deutsch and Josza, 1992). In principle, quantum computation is capable of specific applications beyond the reach of classical computing (e.g., Shor, 1994). A number of technological systems aimed at realizing these proposals have been suggested and are being evaluated as possible substrates for quantum computers (e.g. trapped ions, electron spins, quantum dots, nuclear spins, etc., see Table 1; Bennett, 1995; and Barenco, 1995). The main obstacle to realization of quantum computation is the problem of interfacing to the system (input, output) while also protecting the quantum state from environmental decoherence. If this problem can be overcome, then present day classical computers may evolve to quantum computers
Hameroff, Stuart R. (ms). The brain is both neurocomputer and quantum computer.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: _Figure 1. Dendrites and cell bodies of schematic neurons connected by dendritic-dendritic gap junctions form a laterally connected input_ _layer (“dendritic web”) within a neurocomputational architecture. Dendritic web dynamics are temporally coupled to gamma synchrony_ _EEG, and correspond with integration phases of “integrate and fire” cycles. Axonal firings provide input to, and output from, integration_ _phases (only one input, and three output axons are shown). Cell bodies/soma contain nuclei shown as black circles; microtubule networks_ _pervade the cytoplasm. According to the Orch OR theory, gamma EEG-synchronized integration phases include quantum computations in_ _microtubule networks which culminate with conscious moments. Insert closeup shows a gap junction through which microtubule quantum_ _states entangle among different neurons, enabling macroscopic quantum states in dendritic webs extending throughout cortex and other_ _brain regions._
Heelan, Patrick A. (2004). The phenomenological role of consciousness in measurement. Mind and Matter 2 (1):61-84.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: A structural analogy is pointed out between a check hermeneutically developed phenomenological description, based on Husserl, of the process of perceptual cognition on the one hand and quantum mechanical measurement on the other hand. In Husserl's analytic phase of the cognition process, the 'intentionality-structure' of the subject/object union prior to predication of a local object is an entangled symmetry-making state, and this entanglement is broken in the synthetic phase when the particular local object is constituted under the influence of an iota ('inner horizon') and the 'facticity' of the local world ('outer horizon'). Replacing 'perceptual cognition' by 'measurement' and 'subject' by 'expert subject using a measuring device' the analogy of a formal quantum structure is extended to the conscious structure of all empirical cognition. This is laid out in three theses: about perception, about classical measurement, and about quantum measurement. The results point to the need for research into the quantum structure of the physical embodiment of human cognition
Hiley, Basil J. & Pylkkanen, Paavo (2005). Can mind affect matter via active information? Mind and Matter 3 (2):8-27.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Mainstream cognitive neuroscience typically ignores the role of quantum physical effects in the neural processes underlying cogni¬tion and consciousness. However, many unsolved problems remain, suggesting the need to consider new approaches. We propose that quantum theory, especially through an ontological interpretation due to Bohm and Hiley, provides a fruitful framework for addressing the neural correlates of cognition and consciousness. In particular, the ontological interpretation suggests that a novel type of 'active information', connected with a novel type of 'quantum potential energy', plays a key role in quantum physical processes. After introducing the ontological interpretation we illustrate its value for cognitive neuroscience by discussing it in the light of a proposal by Beck and Eccles about how quantum tunneling could play a role in controlling the frequency of synaptic exocytosis. In this proposal, quantum tunneling would enable the 'self' to control its brain without violating the energy conservation law. We argue that the ontological interpretation provides a sharper picture of what actually could be taking place in quantum tunneling in general and in synaptic exocytosis in particular. Based on the notions of active information and quantum potential energy, we propose a coherent way of understanding how mental processes (understood as involving non-classical physical processes) can act on traditional, classically describable neural processes without violating the energy conservation law
Hiley, Basil J. & Pylkkanen, Paavo (2001). Naturalizing the mind in a quantum framework. In Paavo Pylkkanen & Tere Vaden (eds.), Dimensions of Conscious Experience. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Hodgson, David (2002). Quantum physics, consciousness, and free will. In Robert H. Kane (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 8 | Google)
Hunt, Harry T. (2001). Some perils of quantum consciousness - epistemological pan-experientialism and the emergence-submergence of consciousness. Journal Of Consciousness Studies 8 (9-10):35-45.   (Google)
Iii, Zaman & Frederick, L. (2002). Nature's psychogenic forces: Localized quantum consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 23 (4):351-374.   (Google)
Jahn, Robert G. & Dunne, Brenda J. (1986). On the quantum mechanics of consciousness, with application to anomalous phenomena. Foundations of Physics 16 (8):721-772.   (Cited by 50 | Google | More links)
Jahn, Robert G. (1993). The Complementarity of Consciousness. In K. R. Rao (ed.), Cultivating Consciousness for Enhancing Human Potential, Wellness, and Healing. Praeger.   (Cited by 8 | Google | More links)
Jibu, Marj & Yasue, Kunio (1997). Magic without magic: Meaning of quantum brain dynamics. Journal of Mind and Behavior.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Jibu, Marj & Yasue, Kunio (1995). Quantum Brain Dynamics and Consciousness: An Introduction. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 79 | Google | More links)
Abstract: The book is the first to give a systematic account, founded in fundamental quantum physical principles, of how the brain functions as a unified system.
Jibu, Marj & Yasue, Kunio (2004). Quantum brain dynamics and quantum field theory. In Gordon G. Globus, Karl H. Pribram & Giuseppe Vitiello (eds.), Brain and Being. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Kedar, Joshi (2002). The Quantum Conscious Mastermind and Unconscious Machines: With a Revolutionary NSTP (Non-Spatial Thinking Process) Theory. Pune: K Joshi.   (Google)
King, C. Daly (1997). Chaos, quantum mechanics, and the conscious brain. Journal of Mind and Behavior.   (Google)
Klein, Stanley (1995). Is quantum mechanics relevant to understanding consciousness? Psyche 2 (3).   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Lahav, Ran & Shanks, N. (1992). How to be a scientifically respectable 'property dualist'. Journal of Mind and Behavior 13 (3):211-32.   (Cited by 5 | Annotation | Google)
Ludwig, Kirk A. (1995). Why the difference between quantum and classical mechanics is irrelevant to the mind-body problem. Psyche 2 (16).   (Google)
Abstract: I argue that the logical difference between classical and quantum mechanics that Stapp (1995) claims shows quantum mechanics is more amenable to an account of consciousness than is classical mechanics is irrelevant to the problem
Marshall, I. N. (1989). Consciousness and Bose-Einstein condensates. New Ideas in Psychology 7:73-83.   (Cited by 46 | Google)
Marshall, I. N. (1995). Some phenomenological implications of a quantum model of consciousness. Minds and Machines 5 (4):609-20.   (Google | More links)
Abstract:   We contrast person-centered categories with objective categories related to physics: consciousness vs. mechanism, observer vs. observed, agency vs. event causation. semantics vs. syntax, beliefs and desires vs. dispositions. How are these two sets of categories related? This talk will discuss just one such dichotomy: consciousness vs. mechanism. Two extreme views are dualism and reductionism. An intermediate view is emergence. Here, consciousness is part of the natural order (as against dualism), but consciousness is not definable only in terms of physical mass, length, and time (as against reductionism). There are several detailed theories of emergence. One is based on the Great Chain of Being and on organic evolutionary hierarchy. The theory here is based instead on the concept of relational holism in quantum mechanics. The resulting brain model has two interacting systems: a computational system and a quantum system (a Bose-Einstein condensate), perhaps interacting via EEG waves. Thus, we need both person-centered and matter-centered categories to describe human beings. Some possible experimental tests are discussed
Marcer, P. & Mitchell, E. (2001). What is consciousness? An essay on the relativistic quantum holographic model of the brain/mind, working by phase conjugate adaptive resonance. In P. Van Loocke (ed.), The Physical Nature of Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Miranker, W. L. (2002). A quantum state model of consciousness. Journal Of Consciousness Studies 9 (3):3-14.   (Google)
Mohrhoff, Ulrich (online). Psychology all the way down.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Mohrhoff, Ulrich (ms). Quantum mechanics and consciousness: Fact and fiction.   (Cited by 2 | Google | More links)
Nakagomi, T. (2004). Quantum monadology and consciousness. In Gordon G. Globus, Karl H. Pribram & Giuseppe Vitiello (eds.), Brain and Being. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 25 | Google)
Atmanspacher, Harald (online). Quantum Approaches to Consciousness. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Abstract: It is widely accepted that consciousness or, more generally, mental activity is in some way correlated to the behavior of the material brain. Since quantum theory is the most fundamental theory of matter that is currently available, it is a legitimate question to ask whether quantum theory can help us to understand consciousness. Several approaches answering this question affirmatively, proposed in recent decades, will be surveyed. It will be pointed out that they make different epistemological assumptions, refer to different neurophysiological levels of description, and use quantum theory in different ways. For each of the approaches discussed, problematic and promising features will be equally highlighted
Oku, Takeo (2005). A study on consciousness and life energy based on quantum holographic cosmology. Journal of International Society of Life Information Science 23 (1):133-143.   (Google)
Penrose, Roger (2001). Consciousness, the brain, and spacetime geometry: An addendum: Some new developments on the orch OR model for consciousness. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 929:105-10.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Penrose, Roger (1994). Mechanisms, microtubules, and the mind. Journal of Consciousness Studies 1 (2):241-49.   (Cited by 12 | Google)
Penrose, Roger & Hameroff, Stuart (1996). Orchestrated objective reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules: The "orch OR" model for consciousness. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 40:453-480.   (Google)
Abstract: Features of consciousness difficult to understand in terms of conventional neuroscience have evoked application of quantum theory, which describes the fundamental behavior of matter and energy. In this paper we propose that aspects of quantum theory (e.g. quantum coherence) and of a newly proposed physical phenomenon of quantum wave function "self-collapse"(objective reduction: OR -Penrose, 1994) are essential for consciousness, and occur in cytoskeletal microtubules and other structures within each of the brain's neurons. The particular characteristics of microtubules suitable for quantum effects include their crystal-like lattice structure, hollow inner core, organization of cell function and capacity for information processing. We envisage that conformational states of microtubule subunits (tubulins) are coupled to internal quantum events, and cooperatively interact (compute) with other tubulins. We further assume that macroscopic coherent superposition of quantum-coupled tubulin conformational states occurs throughout significant brain volumes and provides the global binding essential to consciousness. We equate the emergence of the microtubule quantum coherence with pre-conscious processing which grows (for up to 500 milliseconds) until the mass-energy difference among the separated states of tubulins reaches a threshold related to quantum gravity. According to the arguments for OR put forth in Penrose (1994), superpositioned states each have their own space-time geometries. When the degree of coherent mass-energy difference leads to sufficient separation of space-time geometry, the system must choose and decay (reduce, collapse) to a single universe state. In this way, a transient superposition of slightly differing space-time geometries persists until an abrupt quantum classical reduction occurs. Unlike the random, "subjective reduction"( SR, or R) of standard quantum theory caused by observation or environmental entanglement, the OR we propose in microtubules is a self-collapse and it results in particular patterns of microtubule-tubulin conformational states that regulate neuronal activities including synaptic functions.
Penrose, Roger & Hameroff, Stuart R. (1995). What 'gaps'? Reply to Grush and Churchland. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (2).   (Cited by 30 | Google)
Abstract: Grush and Churchland (1995) attempt to address aspects of the proposal that we have been making concerning a possible physical mechanism underlying the phenomenon of consciousness. Unfortunately, they employ arguments that are highly misleading and, in some important respects, factually incorrect. Their article ‘Gaps in Penrose’s Toilings’ is addressed specifically at the writings of one of us (Penrose), but since the particular model they attack is one put forward by both of us (Hameroff and Penrose, 1995; 1996), it is appropriate that we both reply; but since our individual remarks refer to different aspects of their criticism we are commenting on their article separately. The logical arguments discussed by Grush and Churchland, and the related physics are answered in Part l by Penrose, largely by pointing out precisely where these arguments have already been treated in detail in Shadows of the Mind (Penrose, 1994). In Part 2, Hameroff replies to various points on the biological side, showing for example how they have seriously misunderstood what they refer to as ‘physiological evidence’ regarding to effects of the drug colchicine. The reply serves also to discuss aspects of our model ‘orchestrated objective reduction in brain microtubules – Orch OR’ which attempts to deal with the serious problems of consciousness more directly and completely than any previous theory
Persinger, M. A. & Koren, S. A. (2007). A theory of neurophysics and quantum neuroscience: Implications for brain function and the limits of consciousness. International Journal of Neuroscience 117 (2):157-175.   (Google | More links)
Perry, R. Michael (2006). Consciousness as computation: A defense of strong AI based on quantum-state functionalism. In Charles Tandy (ed.), Death and Anti-Death, Volume 4: Twenty Years After De Beauvoir, Thirty Years After Heidegger. Palo Alto: Ria University Press.   (Google)
Pereira, Alfredo (2003). The quantum mind/classical brain problem. Neuroquantology.   (Cited by 2 | Google)
Pessa, Eliano & Vitiello, Giuseppe (2003). Quantum noise, entanglement and chaos in the quantum field theory of mind/brain states. Mind and Matter 1 (1):59-79.   (Cited by 9 | Google | More links)
Abstract: We review the dissipative quantum model of the brain and present recent developments related to the role of entanglement, quantum noise and chaos in the model
Plotnitsky, Arkady (2004). The unthinkable: Nonclassical theory, the unconscious mind and the quantum brain. In Gordon G. Globus, Karl H. Pribram & Giuseppe Vitiello (eds.), Brain and Being. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Pribram, Karl H. (2002). Brain and quantum holography: Recent ruminations. In Kunio Yasue, Marj Jibu & Tarcisio Della Senta (eds.), No Matter, Never Mind. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Schwartz, Jeffrey M.; Stapp, Henry P. & Beauregard, Mario (2004). The volitional influence of the mind on the brain, with special reference to emotional self-regulation. In Mario Beauregard (ed.), Consciousness, Emotional Self-Regulation and the Brain. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Scott, A. C. (1996). On quantum theories of the mind. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3:484-91.   (Cited by 6 | Google)
Scott, A. C. (2003). On quantum theories of the mind. In Naoyuki Osaka (ed.), Neural Basis of Consciousness. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 6 | Google)
Shan, Gao (2004). A possible connection between self-consciousness and quantum. Axiomathes 14 (4):295-305.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: We study the possible connection between self-consciousness and quantum process. It is shown that the self-consciousness function can help to measure the collapse time of wave function under some condition, while the usual physical device without self-consciousness can't. Furthermore, we show that the observer with self-consciousness can distinguish the definite state and the superposition of definite states under some stronger condition. This provides a practical physical method to differentiate man and machine, and will also help to find the possible existence of self-consciousness in the animal kingdom. We finally give some further discussions about these new results
Shan, Gao (2004). Quantum collapse, consciousness and superluminal communication. Foundations Of Physics Letters 17 (2):167-182.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Abstract: The relation between quantum collapse, consciousness and superluminal communication is analyzed. As we know, quantum collapse, if exists, can result in the appearance of quantum nonlocality, and requires the existence of a pre- ferred Lorentz frame. This may permit the realization of quantum superluminal communication (QSC), which will no longer result in the usual causal loop in case of the existence of a preferred Lorentz frame. The possibility of the existence of QSC is further analyzed under the assumption that quantum collapse is a real process. We demonstrate that the combination of quantum collapse and the consciousness of the observer will permit the observer to distinguish nonorthogonal states in principle. This provides a possible way to realize QSC. Some implications of the existence of QSC are briefy discussed
Smith, Quentin (2003). Why cognitive scientists cannot ignore quantum mechanics. In Quentin Smith & Aleksandar Jokic (eds.), Consciousness: New Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford University Press.   (Cited by 3 | Google)
Stapp, Henry P. (1985). Consciousness and values in the quantum universe. Foundations of Physics 15:35-47.   (Cited by 4 | Google | More links)
Stapp, Henry P. (online). Chance, choice, and consciousness: A causal quantum theory of the mind/brain.   (Cited by 7 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Quantum mechanics unites epistemology and ontology: it brings human knowledge explicitly into physical theory, and ties this knowledge into brain dynamics in a causally efficacious way. This development in science provides the basis for a natural resolution of the dualist functionalist controversy, which arises within the classical approach to the mind brain system from the fact that the phenomenal aspects are not derivable from the principles of classical mechanics. A conceptually simple causal quantum mechanical theory of the mind/brain is described, and used to examine the necessity and function of consciousness in brain process
Stapp, Henry P. (2005). Commentary on Hodgson. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (1):69-75.   (Google)
Stapp, Henry P. (1999). On quantum theories of the mind. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (1):61-65.   (Cited by 1 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Replies are given to arguments advanced in this journal that claim to show that it is to nonlinear classical mechanics rather than quantum mechanics that one must look for the physical underpinnings of conscious ness..
Stapp, Henry P. (ms). Physics in neuroscience.   (Google)
Abstract: Classical physics is a theory of nature that originated with the work of Isaac Newton in the seventeenth century and was advanced by the contributions of James Clerk Maxwell and Albert Einstein. Newton based his theory on the work of Johannes Kepler, who found that the planets appeared to move in accordance with a simple mathematical law, and in ways wholly determined by their spatial relationships to other objects. Those motions were apparently independent of our human observations of them
Stapp, Henry P. (2005). Quantum approaches to consciousness. Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness.   (Cited by 4 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Quantum approaches to consciousness are sometimes said to be motivated simply by the idea that quantum theory is a mystery and consciousness is a mystery, so perhaps the two are related. That opinion betrays a profound misunderstanding of the nature of quantum mechanics, which consists fundamentally of a pragmatic scientific solution to the problem of the connection between mind and matter
Stapp, Henry P. (2006). Quantum interactive dualism, II: The Libet and Einstein-podolsky-Rosen causal anomalies. Erkenntnis 65 (1):117-142.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: b>: Replacing faulty nineteenth century physics by its orthodox quantum successor converts the earlier materialist conception of nature to a structure that does not enforce the principle of the causal closure of the physical. The quantum laws possess causal gaps, and these gaps are filled in actual scientific practice by inputs from our streams of consciousness. The form of the quantum laws permits and suggests the existence of an underlying reality that is built not on substances, but on psychophysical events, and on objective tendencies for these events to occur. These events constitute intrinsic mind-brain connections. They are fundamental links between brain processes described in physical terms and events in our streams of consciousness. This quantum ontology confers upon our conscious intentions the causal efficacy assigned to them in actual scientific practice, and creates a substance- free interactive dualism. This putative quantum ontology has previously been shown to have impressive explanatory power in both psychology and neuroscience. Here it is used to reconcile the existence of physically efficacious conscious free will with causal anomalies of both the Libet and Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky types
Stapp, Henry P. (2004). Quantum leaps in the philosophy of mind: Reply to Bourget's critique. Journal of Consciousness Studies 11 (12):43-49.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: David Bourget has raised some conceptual and technical objections to my development of von Neumann’s treatment of the Copenhagen idea that the purely physical process described by the Schrödinger equation must be supplemented by a psychophysical process called the choice of the experiment by Bohr and Process 1 by von Neumann. I answer here each of Bourget’s objections
Stapp, Henry P. (2005). Quantum physics in neuroscience and psychology: A neurophysical model of mind €“brain interaction. Philosophical Transactions-Royal Society of London. Biological Sciences 360 (1458):1309-1327.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: Neuropsychological research on the neural basis of behaviour generally posits that brain mechanisms will ultimately suffice to explain all psychologically described phenomena. This assumption stems from the idea that the brain is made up entirely of material particles and fields, and that all causal mechanisms relevant to neuroscience can therefore be formulated solely in terms of properties of these elements. Thus, terms having intrinsic mentalistic and/or experiential content (e.g. ‘feeling’, ‘knowing’ and ‘effort’) are not included as primary causal factors. This theoretical restriction is motivated primarily by ideas about the natural world that have been known to be fundamentally incorrect for more than three-quarters of a century. Contemporary basic physical theory differs profoundly from classic physics on the important matter of how the consciousness of human agents enters into the structure of empirical phenomena. The new principles contradict the older idea that local mechanical processes alone can account for the structure of all observed empirical data. Contemporary physical theory brings directly and irreducibly into the overall causal structure certain psychologically described choices made by human agents about how they will act. This key development in basic physical theory is applicable to neuroscience, and it provides neuroscientists and psychologists with an alternative conceptual framework for describing neural processes. Indeed, owing to certain structural features of ion channels critical to synaptic function, contemporary physical theory must in principle be used when analysing human brain dynamics. The new framework, unlike its classic-physics-based predecessor, is erected directly upon, and is compatible with, the prevailing principles of physics. It is able to represent more adequately than classic concepts the neuroplastic mechanisms relevant to the growing number of empirical studies of the capacity of directed attention and mental effort to systematically alter brain function..
Stapp, Henry P. (1997). Science of consciousness and the hard problem. Journal of Mind and Behavior 18 (2-3):171-93.   (Cited by 18 | Google | More links)
Abstract: Quantum theory can be regarded as a rationally coherent theory of the interaction of mind and matter and it allows our conscious thoughts to play a causally e cacious and necessary role in brain dynamics It therefore provides a natural basis created by scientists for the science of consciousness As an illustration it is explained how the interaction of brain and consciousness can speed up brain processing and thereby enhance the survival prospects of conscious organisms as compared to similar organisms that lack consciousness As a second illustration it is explained how within the quantum framework the consciously experi enced I directs the actions of a human being It is concluded that contemporary science already has an adequate framework for incorporat ing causally e cacious experiential events into the physical universe in a manner that puts the neural correlates of consciousness into the theory in a well de ned way explains in principle how the e ects of consciousness per se can enhance the survival prospects of organisms that possess it allows this survival e ect to feed into phylogenetic de velopment and explains how the consciously experienced I can direct human behaviour..
Stapp, Henry P. (1995). The hard problem: A quantum approach. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3 (3):194-210.   (Cited by 25 | Google | More links)
Stapp, Henry P. (1994). Theoretical model of a purported empirical violation of the predictions of quantum mechanics. Physical Review A 50:18-22.   (Google)
Stapp, Henry P. (online). The Quest for consciousness: A quantum neurobiological approach.   (Google | More links)
Abstract: _ Theoretical Physics Group_ _ Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory_ _ University of California_ _ Berkeley, California 94720_
Stenger, Victor (1992). The myth of quantum consciousness. The Humanist 53 (3).   (Cited by 1 | Google)
Vimal, Ram Lakhan Pandey (2009). Towards a Theory of Everything: Unification of Consciousness with Fundamental Forces in Theories of Physics. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research 1 (2).   (Google)
Abstract: Theory of everything must include consciousness. In this article, we focus on the subjective experiences component of consciousness. In Vimal (J Integrative Neuroscience, 2008: 7(1), 49-73), it was hypothesized that fundamental entities (strings or elementary particles: fermions and bosons) have two aspects: (i) material aspect such as mass, charge, spin, and space-time, and (ii) mental aspect, such as experiences. There are three competing hypotheses: superposition based H1, superposition-then-integration based H2, and integration based H3 where superposition is not required. In H1, the fundamental entities and inert matter are the carriers of superimposed fundamental subjective experiences (SEs)/proto-experiences (PEs). In H2, the fundamental entities and inert matter are the carriers of superimposed fundamental PEs (not SEs), which are integrated by neural-Darwinism (co-evolution, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning by the evolutionary process of adaptation and natural selection). There is a PE attached to every level of evolution (such as atomic-PE, molecular-PE, … genetic-PE, … bacterium-PE, … neural-PE, and neural-net-PE). In H3, a string has its own string-PE; a matter is not a carrier of PE(s) in superposed form as it is in H2, rather matter is a proto-experiential entity and has two aspects at every level; H3 is a dual-aspect panpsychism. These two aspects are rigorously integrated together by neural-Darwinism. One could argue for H3 that the PE keeps on transforming appropriately as matter evolves from elementary particles to atoms to molecules to eventually neural-networks. For example, when long wavelength light is presented to the V4/V8/VO neural-network, the neural-net PE takes the form of SE redness, in analogy to water takes the shape and color of the container. However, one has to unpack this mystery. In H1, a specific SE arises in a neural-net as follows: (i) there exist a virtual reservoir that stores all possible fundamental SEs/PEs, (ii) the interaction of stimulus-dependent feed-forward and feedback signals in the neural-net creates a specific neural-net state, (iii) this specific state is assigned to a specific SE from the virtual reservoir during neural Darwinism, (iv) this specific SE is embedded as a memory trace of neural-net-PE, and (v) when a specific stimulus is presented to the neural-net, the associated specific SE is selected by the matching and selection process and experienced by this net. In hypotheses H2 and H3, a specific SE emerges in a neural-net from the interaction of its constituent neural-PEs, such as in feed-forward stimulus-dependent neural signals and fronto-parietal feedback attentional signals, in analogy to water emerges from the interaction of hydrogen and oxygen. In all hypotheses, SEs occur when essential ingredients of SEs (such as wakefulness, attention, re-entry, working memory, stimulus at or above threshold level, and neural-net-PEs) are satisfied. We found that the followings in physics are invariant under the PE-SE transformation: Schrödinger equation, current, Dirac Lagrangian, electromagnetic strength tensor, electromagnetic stress-energy tensor, the Lagrangian for free gauge field, the Lagrangian for a charged self–interacting scalar field, electromagnetic theory (Maxwell's equations), Standard Model, Lagrangian for the electromagnetic interaction of a charged scalar field (Higgs Mechanism), Newtonian gravitational potential and field, special theory of Relativity and Lorentz transformation, geodesic equation, general theory of relativity and gravitational field, the metric gmn, Ricci curvature tensor Rmn, Ricci scalar curvature R, the cosmological constant L, the stress-energy tensor Tmn, the PE-SE transformation, Loop Quantum Gravity, and string theory. For H1 and H2, we quantitatively introduced the superposition of experiences (SEs/PEs) in the mental aspect of bosonic and fermionic strings using the Polyakov action. We conclude that experiences are independent of the time-like and space-like parameters (t,s). This is interpreted as a string is dual-aspect entity and all fundamental SEs/PEs superposed in the mental aspect of the string remains invariant with time and space. The introduction of mental aspect in this manner suggests that the mental aspect of string could be in all dimensions: both (3+1)D real dimensions and also in the hidden dimensions that are compactified (curled up). In addition, the Neumann and Dirichlet boundary conditions were also satisfied. These led us to conclude that the material aspect of the behavior of system in string theory remains invariant under the introduction of experiences in the mental aspect of strings as a function of experiences. For hypothesis H3, the equations of string theory remain the same; we simply need to acknowledge that a string has dual-aspect; its mental aspect is string-PE. We concluded that it is possible to unify consciousness with all four fundamental material forces by the introduction of (i) SEs/PEs (as in H1) or PEs (as in H2) in superposed form in bosonic and fermionic strings or (ii) the bosonic-string-PE and fermionic-string-PE based on integration principle (as in H3). This leads us towards the theory of everything.
Thompson, Ian J. (online). Quantum mechanics and consciousness: A causal correspondence theory.   (Google)
Abstract: Physics Department, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 5XH, U.K October, 1990. We may suspect that quantum mechanics and consciousness are related, but the details are not at all clear. In this paper, I suggest how the mind and brain might fit together intimately while still maintaining distinct identities. The connection is based on the correspondence of similar functions in both the mind and the quantum-mechanical brain. Accompanying material for a talk at The Second Mind and Brain Symposium held at the Institute of Psychiatry, Denmark Hill, London on 20th October, 1990
Triffet, T. & Green, H. S. (1996). Consciousness: Computing the uncomputable. Mathematical and Computational Modelling 24:37-56.   (Google)
Vaas, Ruediger (2001). Why quantum correlates of consciousness are fine, but not enough. Informacao E Cognicao 3 (3).   (Cited by 4 | Google)
Vitiello, Giuseppe (2002). Dissipative quantum brain dynamics. In Kunio Yasue, Marj Jibu & Tarcisio Della Senta (eds.), No Matter, Never Mind: Proceedings of Toward a Science of Consciousness: Fundamental Approaches (Tokyo '99). John Benjamins.   (Cited by 3 | Google)
Vitiello, Giuseppe (2001). My Double Unveiled: The Dissipative Quantum Model of Brain. John Benjamins.   (Cited by 56 | Google | More links)
Walker, Evan Harris (2000). The Physics of Consciousness. Perseus.   (Cited by 19 | Google | More links)
Werbos, P. (2002). What do neural nets and quantum theory tell us about mind and reality? In Kunio Yasue, Marj Jibu & Tarcisio Della Senta (eds.), No Matter, Never Mind: Proceedings of Toward a Science of Consciousness: Fundamental Approaches (Tokyo '99). John Benjamins.   (Cited by 5 | Google | More links)
Wolf, Fred Alan (1996). On the quantum mechanics of dreams and the emergence of self-awareness. In Stuart R. Hameroff, Alfred W. Kaszniak & A. C. Scott (eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Google)
Woolf, Nancy J. & Hameroff, Stuart R. (2001). A quantum approach to visual consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (11):472-478.   (Google)
Woolf, Nancy J. (1999). Dendritic encoding: An alternative to temporal synaptic coding of conscious experience. Consciousness and Cognition 8 (4):447-454.   (Cited by 5 | Google | More links)
Abstract: In this commentary, arguments are made for a dendritic code being preferable to a temporal synaptic code as a model of conscious experience. A temporal firing pattern is a product of an ongoing neural computation; hence, it is based on a neural algorithm and an algorithm may not provide the most suitable model for conscious experience. Reiteration of a temporal firing code as suggested in a preceding article (Helekar, 1999) does not necessarily improve the situation. The alternative model presented here is that certain synaptic activity patterns, possibly those possessing universal features as suggested by Helekar, can become encoded in the dendritic structure. Following dendritic encoding, quantum phenomena in those specific dendrite sets could illuminate the static image of that encoded synaptic activity. It is the activation of the static image that would be equivalent to conscious experience; thus, conscious awareness would not be directly affiliated with synaptic activity. This dendrite encoding model may go farther than other models to explain the gestalt nature of consciousness, insofar as quantum entanglement could produce an interconnectedness between specific sets of dendrites-an interconnectedness that need not be based on neural computation or neural connections
Yasue, Kunio; Jibu, Marj & Senta, Tarcisio Della (eds.) (2000). No Matter, Never Mind: Proceedings of Toward a Science of Consciousness: Fundamental Approaches, Tokyo 1999. John Benjamins.   (Google)
Zaman, L. Frederick Iii (2002). Nature's psychogenic forces: Localized quantum consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 23 (4):351-374.   (Google)
Zaman, L. Frederick (2002). Nature's psychogenic forces: Localized quantum consciousness. Journal of Mind and Behavior 23 (4):351-374.   (Google)
Zohar, D. (1995). A quantum-mechanical model of consciousness and the emgerence of 'I'. Minds and Machines 5 (4):597-607.   (Google | More links)
Abstract:   There have been suggestions that the unity of consciousness may be related to the kind of holism depicted only in quantum physics. This argument will be clarified and strengthened. It requires the brain to contain a quantum system with the right properties — a Bose-Einstein condensate. It probably does contain one such system, as both theory and experiment have indicated. In fact, we cannot pay full attention to a quantum whole and its parts simultaneously, though we may oscillate between the two. In a quantum theory of consciousness, emergent meanings arise as an inevitable consequence of Heisenberg''s Uncertainty Principle
Zohar, D. (1996). Consciousness and Bose-Einstein condensates. In Stuart R. Hameroff, Alfred W. Kaszniak & A. C. Scott (eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness. MIT Press.   (Cited by 2 | Google)