#consciousnessresearch

Every morning, I open the windows and the front door wide enough for the house itself to dissolve into the outside world.

Birdsongs from impossibly far away.

The Doppler shift of crows crossing the sky.

Warning calls from birds I cannot name.

I stand inside the harmony of it all, feeling as though some hidden law, some pattern beneath reality, is almost visible.

Almost.

And the frustration of not quite reaching it.

Sometimes I wonder if the world perceived through the illusion-machine called the brain is actually a gentle translation of the universe itself.

Source: scitechdaily.com

In a groundbreaking scientific endeavor spanning seven years, researchers have revealed findings that redefine the Origins of Consciousness. The large-scale study, involving 256 participants, compared two leading scientific theories: Integrated Information Theory (IIT) and Global Neuronal Workspace Theory (GNWT). Both theories attempt to explain how the brain generates conscious experience, yet differ greatly in their approach.

IIT proposes that consciousness arises from deeply interconnected systems of information within the brain, suggesting that awareness is produced when different brain areas operate as a single, unified whole. Conversely, GNWT argues that consciousness emerges when selected information is broadcast across a network of brain areas, particularly emphasizing the role of the brain’s frontal regions in spotlighting and distributing conscious content.

This rare head-to-head comparison was the product of an “adversarial collaboration”—a research model promoting cooperation between proponents of competing theories. The initiative was launched at a 2018 workshop at the Allen Institute and has been celebrated as a triumph of open science. Dr. Christof Koch, a leading figure at the Allen Institute, underscored the project’s importance, stating, “Unraveling this mystery is the passion of my entire life.”

Surprising Results: Rethinking Consciousness and Brain Function

The study’s findings have provided valuable insights into the Origins of Consciousness, especially how perception and cognition interact. Using a combination of brain imaging techniques that monitored blood flow and electrical activity, scientists observed participants as they responded to various visual stimuli. They discovered a notable connection between the brain’s early visual areas and frontal regions, suggesting that perception plays a more central role in consciousness than previously believed.

This challenges the traditional emphasis on the prefrontal cortex, which has long been associated with higher reasoning and executive functions. The research implies that consciousness may be more rooted in sensory processing than in complex thought. As Dr. Koch phrased it, “Intelligence is about doing, while consciousness is about being.”

These findings could have significant implications for medical science, particularly in diagnosing and understanding disorders of consciousness, such as comas or vegetative states. By pinpointing the brain areas most associated with conscious experience, researchers hope to identify cases of “covert consciousness”—a hidden awareness present in patients who appear unresponsive, a phenomenon occurring in roughly 25% of severe injury cases.

No Clear Winner, but Major Progress

The experiment aimed to explore the Origins of Consciousness by testing the validity of IIT and GNWT, but neither theory proved to be the definitive explanation. IIT’s emphasis on information integration within the back of the brain lacked strong supporting evidence, while GNWT’s focus on the frontal brain network also fell short. Dr. Anil Seth, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of Sussex, noted, “It was clear that no single experiment would decisively refute either theory.”

Despite the inconclusive verdict, researchers agree the study was a significant leap forward. The collaborative approach illuminated the strengths and limitations of both theories and helped map the brain regions where visual experiences can be decoded. The sheer scale and openness of the research have set a new benchmark for how deeply rooted scientific disagreements can be addressed productively.

As Dr. Koch concluded, “Adversarial collaborations are a powerful, though rarely used, method. They demand immense cooperation—but hold immense promise for scientific discovery.”

Nobel Laureate in Physics, Roger Penrose poses with his Nobel medalPOOL/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES Roger Penrose proposes a conscious observer doesn’t cause wave function collapse. A conscious observer is caused by wave function collapse. Source: Testing A Time-Jumping, Multiverse-Killing, Consciousness-Spawning Theory Of Reality Whoa, this piece of writing by Andréa Morris for Forbes Science is quite…

The Influence of Consciousness on Matter KOROTKOV The question of whether the human mind can directly, without some intermediate elements, influence the world around us has troubled mankind since ancient times. This effect is described in countless myths, legends and fairy tales of all peoples. In XX century this question arose on the new plane when the concept of the “observer” on whose conscious actions the outcome of subatomic events depended was introduced in quantum mechanics. Such interpretation is not universally accepted by physicists but it provides a theoretical foundation for study of these phenomena. It is interesting to note that in techniques, especially in computer sciences, there is a c o m m o n o p i n i o n t h a t t h e r e a r e experimenters in whose hands any instrument works, and there are people negatively affecting the equipment. The first were Lord Kelvin, Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla. The latter are usually theorists. A famous physicist George Gamow humorously describes the so-called “Pauli effect”7: “It is well known that theoretical physicists are very awkward in handling experimental apparatus; and furthermore, the level of physicist - theorist can be assessed by his ability to break a delicate instrument byt simply touching it. According to this criterion, Wolfgang Pauli was an outstanding theoretician; the equipment broke, fell, blocked or burned as soon as he entered the lab”. Naturally, this is a joke, and such influence is not exerted by all theorists, but as with every joke, there is a large element of truth there.

The Influence of Consciousness on Matter THE FIELD APPROACH According to the field concept, the particles i n v o l v e d i n a n y i n t e r a c t i o n ( e . g . , electromagnetic or gravitational), create at each point of the space around them a special state, a force field, which manifests itself in a force effect on other particles that are placed in some point of this space. Indeed, according to the relativity, the propagation velocity of any interaction can not exceed the velocity of light in vacuum. Therefore, in the system of interacting particles the force acting at this moment of time on a particle of the system is not determined by the arrangement of other particles at the same moment, i.e., the change of the position of one particle has an effect on another particle not at once but after a certain period of time. Thus interaction of particles whose relative velocity is comparable with the velocity of light can be described only through the fields created by them. A group of French researchers led by R. Peoc'h 10 carried out a series of amazing experiences. They designed a robot that could move around without bumping into obstacles. If the robot is programmed to move at random it is moving chaotically, accidentally turning in different directions. In the room tracking sensors are placed, and after some time the trajectory of the robot uniformly fills in all available space. After that several cages with chickens are placed into the room, and the light is turned off. Then the robot is switched on, a small bulb being mounted on it. The robot starts to randomly move around the room, but after a while it turns out that the trajectory of its motion shifts toward the cages with the chickens! That is, the chicks, stretching toward the light, seem to attract the robot by the force of their emotions! A similar phenomenon occurs when the robot is carried before the cage with the newly hatched chickens. They take it for mom, and are ready to obediently follow him. But when the freedom of movement is limited by the cage, they call the robot-mom with all the passion of their chicken heart. And the robot obeys! It responds and begins to walk close to chicken cages. Similar results have been repeatedly reproduced and described in detail in the scientific literature. Thus, emotions affect even an electronic machine. The question is: what is the mechanism of this influence? I am afraid that at this stage we are very far from the answer. Now our task is to accumulate experimental data and let us not hurry with conclusions.

The Influence of Consciousness on Matter QUANTUM BREAKTHROUGH As we know, the great Einstein until the end of his life could not accept quantum mechanics. It seemed to him a too formal simplification of reality. He lamented, “For fifty years Iʼve been thinking about what is a light quantum, and can not understand it, and now at the universities every Tom thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken”. Einstein could not accept the probabilistic principle being the basis of quantum mechanics. He did not want to lose the certainty and truth. “God does not play dice”, he said. Einstein called quantum mechanics absurd. He believed that physicists simply do not yet know the values of some hidden variables, which would allow escaping the uncertainty. Niels Bohr who opposed him believed that the probabilistic nature of the predictions of q u a n t u m m e c h a n i c s c a n n o t b e fundamentally eliminated.

Are there optical communication channels in the brain?

Parisa Zarkeshian, Sourabh Kumar, Jack Tuszynski, Paul Barclay, Christoph Simon (Submitted on 23 Aug 2017) Despite great progress in neuroscience, there are still fundamental unanswered questions about the brain, including the origin of subjective experience and consciousness. Some answers might rely on new physical mechanisms. Given that biophotons have been discovered in the brain, it is interesting to explore if neurons use photonic communication in addition to the well-studied electro-chemical signals. Such photonic communication in the brain would require waveguides. Here we review recent work suggesting that myelinated axons could serve as photonic waveguides. The light transmission in the myelinated axon was modeled, taking into account its realistic imperfections, and experiments were proposed both in-vivo and in-vitro to test this hypothesis. Potential implications for quantum biology are discussed. Comments:13 pages, 5 figures, review of arXiv:1607.02969 for Frontiers in Bioscience, updated figures, new references on existence of opsins in the brain and experimental effects of light on neuronsSubjects:Biological Physics (physics.bio-ph); Optics (physics.optics); Neurons and Cognition (q-bio.NC); Quantum Physics (quant-ph)Cite as:arXiv:1708.08887  (or arXiv:1708.08887v1  for this version)

Submission history

From: Parisa Zarkeshian  Wed, 23 Aug 2017 22:54:52 UTC (1,981 KB) 1. ABSTRACT Despite great progress in neuroscience, there are still fundamental unanswered questions about the brain, including the origin of subjective experience and consciousness. Some answers might rely on new physical mechanisms. Given that biophotons have been discovered in the brain, it is interesting to explore if neurons use photonic communication in addition to the well-studied electro-chemical signals. Such photonic communication in the brain would require waveguides. Here we review recent work suggesting that myelinated axons could serve as photonic waveguides. The light transmission in the myelinated axon was modeled, taking into account its realistic imperfections, and experiments were proposed both in vivo and in vitro to test this hypothesis. Potential implications for quantum biology are discussed. 2. INTRODUCTION Over the past decades a substantial number of facts has been discovered in the field of brain research. However, the fundamental question of how neurons, or more specifically all particles involved in the biological processes in the brain, contribute to mental abilities such as consciousness is still unanswered. The true explanation to this question might rely on physical processes other than those that have been discovered so far. One interesting candidate to focus on is biophotons, which might serve as supplementary information carriers in the brain in addition to the well established electro-chemical signals. Biophotons – which are photons ranging from near-IR to near-UV frequency and emitted without any enhancement or excitation– have been observed in many organisms such as bacteria (1), fungi (2), germinating seeds (3), plants (4), animal tissue cultures (5), and different parts of the human body (6–9), including the brain (10–15). These biophotons are produced by the decay of electronically excited species which are created chemically during oxidative metabolic processes (16, 17) and can contribute to communication between cells (18). Moreover, several experimental studies show the effects of light on neurons’ and, generally, the brain’s function (19–21). The existence of biophotons and their possible effects on the the brain along with the fact that photons are convenient carriers of information raises the question whether there could be optical communication in the brain. For the sources and detectors of the optical communication process in the brain, mitochondrial respiration (22, 23) or lipid oxidation (24), and centrosomes (25) or chromophores in the mitochondria (26) have been proposed, respectively. It has also been observed that opsins, photoreceptor protein molecules, exist in the brains of birds (27, 28), mammals (29–32), and more general vertebrates (33) and even in other parts of their bodies (34, 35) as well. Another essential element for this optical communication, which is not well established yet, is the existence of physical links to connect all of these spatially separated agents in a selective way. In the dense and (seemingly) disordered environment of the brain, waveguide channels for traveling photons would be the only viable way to achieve the targeted optical communication processes. Mitochondria and microtubules in neurons have been introduced as the candidates for such waveguides (36–39). How- ever, they are not suitable in reality due to their small and inhomogeneous structure for light guidance over proper distances in the brain. Ref. (40) proposed myelinated axons as potential biophoton waveguides in the brain. The proposal is supported by a theoretical model and numerical results taking into account real imperfections. Myelin sheath (formed in the central nervous system by a kind of glia cell called oligodendrocyte) is a lamellar structure surrounding the axon and has a higher refractive index (41) than both the inside of the axon and the interstitial fluid outside (see Fig. 1a) which let the myelin sheath to guide the light inside itself for optical communications. This compact sheath also increases the propagation speed of an action potential (via saltatory conduction) based on its insulating property (42). There has been a few indirect experimental evidence for light conduction by axons (12, 43, 44). Another related and interesting experiment has shown that a certain type of glia cells, known as Mu ̈ller cells, guide light in mammalian eyes (45, 46). Ref. (40) also proposed experiments to test the existence of the optical waveguides in the brain. One interesting property of optical communication channels is that they can also transmit quantum information. Quan- tum effects in biological systems are being studied in different areas such as photosynthesis (47, 48), avian magnetoreception (49, 50), and olfaction (51, 52). There is an increasing number of conjectures about the role of quintessential quantum features such as superposition and entanglement (53) in the brain (15, 38, 54–56). The greatest challenge when considering quantum effects in the brain or any biological system in general is environmentally induced decoherence (57), which leads to the suppression of these quantum phenomena. However, some biological processes can be fast and may show quantum features before they are destroyed by the environment. Moreover, nuclear spins can have coherence times of tens of milliseconds in the brain (58, 59). A recent proposal on “quantum cognition” suggests even longer coherence times of nuclear spins (56), but relies on quantum information transmission via molecule transport, which is very slow. In contrast, photons are the fastest and most robust carriers for quantum information over long distances, which is why currently man-made quantum networks rely on optical communication channels (typically optical fibers) between spins (60, 61). 3. Results To show that myelinated axons could serve as the waveguides for traveling biophotons in the brain, Ref. (40) solved the three dimensional electromagnetic field equations numerically in different conditions, using Lumerical’s software packages FDTD (Finite Difference Time Domain) Solutions and MODE Solutions. These software packages solve Maxwell’s equations numerically, allowing the optical properties of dielectric structures defined over a mesh with subwavelength resolution to be simulated. The refractive indices of the fluid outside of the axon, the axon, and the myelin sheath were taken close to 1.34, 1.38 and 1.44 respectively (see Fig. 1a), which are consistent with their typical values (41, 62, 63). These indexes let the myelin sheath guide the light inside itself. The ratio of the radius of the axon, r to the outer radius of the myelin sheath r′ (g-ratio) is taken equal to 0.6 for the most of the simulations, close to the experimental values (64). In reality, the radius of the myelinated axons in the brain changes from 0.2 microns to close to 10 microns (65). For the purpose of guiding light inside the myelin sheath, Ref. (40) considered the wavelength of the observed biophotons in the brain which is from 200 nm to 1300 nm. Since several proteins in the environment of the axons strongly absorb at wavelengths close to 300nm, a wavelength range of the transmitted light from the shortest permissible wavelength, λmin = 400nm, to the longest one, λmax, was chosen to avoid the absorption and confine the light well in the myelin sheath. λmax is chosen to the upper bound of the observed biophoton wavelength (1300 nm) or the thickness of the myelin sheath (denoted by d), whichever is smaller. Besides λmin and λmax, an intermediate wavelength was considered, denoted by λint , corresponding to the central permissible frequency (mid-frequency of the permissible frequency range) in the simulations. In the following section we discuss the guided modes in the myelinated axons and their transmissions in nodal and para- nodal regions and even in the presence of the imperfections such as bends, varying cross-sections, and non-circular cross-sections.

Optical communication channels in the brain Optical communication channels in the brain

See also: Consciousness Research, Human Light System, Biophotons