Electromagnetic theories of consciousness
Electromagnetic theories of consciousness propose that
Overview
Theorists differ in how they relate consciousness to electromagnetism. Electromagnetic field theories (or "EM field theories") of consciousness propose that consciousness results when a brain produces an electromagnetic field with specific characteristics. Susan Pockett[1][2] and Johnjoe McFadden[3] have proposed EM field theories; William Uttal[4] has criticized McFadden's and other field theories.
In general, quantum mind theories do not treat consciousness as an electromagnetic phenomenon, with a few exceptions.[5][6]
AR Liboff has proposed that "incorporating EM field-mediated communication into models of brain function has the potential to reframe discussions surrounding consciousness".[7]
Also related are E. Roy John's work and Andrew and Alexander Fingelkurts theory "Operational Architectonics framework of brain-mind functioning".[8]
Cemi theory
The starting point for McFadden and Pockett's theory is the fact that every time a neuron fires to generate an action potential, and a postsynaptic potential in the next neuron down the line, it also generates a disturbance in the surrounding electromagnetic field. McFadden has proposed that the brain's electromagnetic field creates a representation of the information in the neurons. Studies undertaken towards the end of the 20th century are argued to have shown that conscious experience correlates not with the number of neurons firing, but with the synchrony of that firing.[9] McFadden views the brain's electromagnetic field as arising from the induced EM field of neurons. The synchronous firing of neurons is, in this theory, argued to amplify the influence of the brain's EM field fluctuations to a much greater extent than would be possible with the unsynchronized firing of neurons.
McFadden thinks that the EM field could influence the brain in a number of ways. Redistribution of ions could modulate neuronal activity, given that voltage-gated ion channels are a key element in the progress of axon spikes. Neuronal firing is argued to be sensitive to the variation of as little as one millivolt across the cell membrane, or the involvement of a single extra ion channel. Transcranial magnetic stimulation is similarly argued to have demonstrated that weak EM fields can influence brain activity.[citation needed]
McFadden proposes that the digital information from neurons is integrated to form a conscious electromagnetic information (cemi) field in the brain.
McFadden's view of free will is deterministic. Neurons generate patterns in the EM field, which in turn modulate the firing of particular neurons. There is only conscious agency in the sense that the field or its download to neurons is conscious, but the processes of the brain themselves are driven by deterministic electromagnetic interactions. The feel of subjective experience or qualia corresponds to a particular configuration of the cemi field. This field representation is in this theory argued to integrate parts into a whole that has meaning, so a face is not seen as a random collection of features, but as somebody's face. The integration of information in the field is also suggested to resolve the binding/combination problem.
In 2013, McFadden published two updates to the theory. In the first, 'The CEMI Field Theory: Closing the Loop'[10] McFadden cites recent experiments in the laboratories of Christof Koch[11] and David McCormick[12] which demonstrate that external EM fields, that simulate the brain's endogenous EM fields, influence neuronal firing patterns within brain slices. The findings are consistent with a prediction of the cemi field theory that the brain's endogenous EM field - consciousness - influences brain function. In the second, 'The CEMI Field Theory Gestalt Information and the Meaning of Meaning',[13] McFadden claims that the cemi field theory provides a solution to the binding problem of how complex information is unified within ideas to provide meaning: the brain's EM field unifies the information encoded in millions of disparate neurons.
Susan Pockett
Quantum brain dynamics
The concepts underlying this theory derive from the physicists,
The proponents of QBD differ somewhat as to the way in which consciousness arises in this system. Jibu and Yasue suggest that the interaction between the energy quanta (corticons) of the quantum field and the biomolecular waves of the neuronal network produces consciousness. However, another theorist, Giuseppe Vitiello, proposes that the quantum states produce two poles, a subjective representation of the external world and also the internal self.[citation needed]
Objections
In a circa-2002 publication of The Journal of Consciousness Studies, the electromagnetic theory of consciousness faced an uphill battle for acceptance among cognitive scientists.
"No serious researcher I know believes in an electromagnetic theory of consciousness",
McFadden acknowledges that his theory, which he calls the "cemi field theory", is far from proven but he argues that it is certainly a legitimate line of scientific inquiry. His article underwent peer review before publication. In fact, Baars is on the editorial board of the journal that published it.
The field theories of consciousness do not appear to have been as widely discussed as other quantum consciousness theories, such as those of
- Dobson, et al. (2000): 1.8 millitesla = 18,000 mG[26]
- Thomas, et al. (2007): 400 microtesla = 4000 milligauss[27]
- Huesser, et al. (1997): 0.1 millitesla = 1000 mG[28]
- Bell, et al. (2007) 0.78 Gauss = 780 mG[29]
- Marino, et al. (2004): 1 Gauss = 1000 mG[29]
- Carrubba, et al. (2008): 1 Gauss = 1000 mG[30]
- Jacobson (1994): 5 picotesla = 0.00005 mG[31]
- Sandyk (1999): Picotesla range[32]
In April 2022, the results of two related experiments at the University of Alberta and Princeton University were announced at The Science of Consciousness conference, providing further evidence to support quantum processes operating within microtubules. In a study Stuart Hameroff was part of, Jack Tuszyński of the University of Alberta demonstrated that anesthetics hasten the duration of a process called delayed luminescence, in which microtubules and tubulins re-emit trapped light. Tuszyński suspects that the phenomenon has a quantum origin, with superradiance being investigated as one possibility. In the second experiment, Gregory D. Scholes and Aarat Kalra of Princeton University used lasers to excite molecules within tubulins, causing a prolonged excitation to diffuse through microtubules further than expected, which did not occur when repeated under anesthesia.[33][34] However, diffusion results have to be interpreted carefully, since even classical diffusion can be very complex due to the wide range of length scales in the fluid filled extracellular space.[35] Nevertheless, University of Oxford quantum physicist Vlatko Vedral told that this connection with consciousness is a really long shot.
Also in 2022, a group of Italian physicists conducted several experiments that failed to provide evidence in support of a gravity-related quantum collapse model of consciousness, weakening the possibility of a quantum explanation for consciousness.[36][37]
Advantages
Locating
Influence on brain function
The different EM field theories disagree as to the role of the proposed conscious EM field on brain function. In McFadden's cemi field theory, as well as in Drs Fingelkurts' Brain-Mind Operational Architectonics theory, the brain's global EM field modifies the electric charges across neural membranes, and thereby influences the probability that particular neurons will fire, providing a feed-back loop that drives free will. However, in the theories of Susan Pockett and E. Roy John, there is no necessary causal link between the conscious EM field and our consciously willed actions.
References to "Mag Lag" also known as the subtle effect on cognitive processes of MRI machine operators who sometimes have to go into the scanner room to check the patients and deal with issues that occur during the scan could suggest a link between magnetic fields and consciousness. Memory loss and delays in information processing have been reported, in some cases several hours after exposure.[39]
One hypothesis is that magnetic fields in the 0.5-9 Tesla range can affect the ion permeability of neural membranes, in fact this could account for a lot of the issues seen as this would affect many different brain functions.
Implications for artificial intelligence
If true, the theory has major implications for efforts to design consciousness into
See also
References
- ^ ISBN 978-0-595-12215-8.
- ^ Pockett, Susan (2012). "The electromagnetic field theory of consciousness: a testable hypothesis about the characteristics of conscious as opposed to non-conscious fields". Journal of Consciousness Studies. 19 (11–12): 191–223.
- ISBN 978-3-540-23890-4.
- ISBN 978-0-8058-5484-8.
- ISBN 978-1-55619-183-1.
- ISBN 978-1-58811-076-3.
- S2CID 32635627.
There is no question that incorporating EM field-mediated communication into models of brain function has the potential to reframe discussions surrounding consciousness. However, to the best of our knowledge, all previous discussions concerning this possibility only focused on traditional electrophysiological parameters, with no recognition of the role likely played by the magnetic field.
- ^ Sources for Fingelkurts:
- Andrew A. Fingelkurts and Alexander A. Fingelkurts, Mapping of the Brain Operational Architectonics, published in: Chen, F. J. (ed.) Focus on Brain Mapping Research, Nova Science Publishers, 2005 pp. 59-98
- Fingelkurts A, Fingelkurts A (2001). "Operational architectonics of the human brain biopotential field: Towards solving the mind-brain problem" (PDF). Brain and Mind. 2 (3): 261–296. S2CID 16125062.
- Fingelkurts Andrew A.; Fingelkurts Alexander A. (2004). "Making complexity simpler: Multivariability and metastability in the brain" (PDF). International Journal of Neuroscience. 114 (7): 843–862. S2CID 11376883. Archived from the original(PDF) on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 22 June 2009.
- Fingelkurts Andrew A.; Fingelkurts Alexander A. (2006). "Timing in cognition and EEG brain dynamics: discreteness versus continuity" (PDF). Cognitive Processing. 7 (3): 135–162. S2CID 2228893.
- Fingelkurts Andrew A.; Fingelkurts Alexander A.; Neves Carlos F.H. (2009). "Phenomenological architecture of a mind and Operational Architectonics of the brain: the unified metastable continuum" (PDF). Journal of New Mathematics and Natural Computing. 5 (1): 221–244. .
- PMID 9356513.
- ^ McFadden, J. (2013). "The CEMI Field Theory Closing the Loop" (PDF). Journal of Consciousness Studies. 20: 153–168.
- S2CID 7836328.
- PMID 20624597.
- ^ McFadden, J. (2013). "The CEMI Field Theory Gestalt Information and the Meaning of Meaning" (PDF). Journal of Consciousness Studies. 20: 153–168. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 May 2016. Retrieved 22 December 2014.
- ^ Hiroomi Umezawa. Advanced Field Theory: Micro, Macro and Thermal Physics (1993). American Institute of Physics.
- .
- ^ a b "Consciousness Based on Wireless?". Wired. 21 May 2002. Archived from the original on 29 June 2011.
- S2CID 12399940.
- ISBN 978-0-19-510553-7.
- )
- ^ David J. Chalmers (1995). "Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness". Journal of Consciousness Studies. 2 (3): 200–219.
- ISBN 978-0-19-511789-9.
- ISBN 978-0-19-510553-7.
- ISBN 978-0-19-510553-7.
- PMID 12810802.
- ISBN 978-0-19-852090-0.
- PMID 10653619.
- PMID 18080043.
- S2CID 22753522.
- ^ PMID 1281085.
- S2CID 4848049.
- PMID 7603740.
- PMID 10372649.
- ^ Lewton, Thomas (18 April 2022). "Quantum experiments add weight to a fringe theory of consciousness". New Scientist. Retrieved 23 April 2022.
- ^ Tangermann, Victor. "Experiment Suggests That Consciousness May Be Rooted in Quantum Physics". www.futurism.com. Camden Media Inc. Retrieved 24 April 2022.
- S2CID 248620292.
- ^ "Collapsing a leading theory for the quantum origin of consciousness". phys.org. 13 June 2022.
- S2CID 248868080.
- ^ Crick, Francis (1995). Astonishing hypothesis: The scientific search for the soul. Simon and Schuster.
- ^ "Occupational hazard? Working in MRI and the potential impact of EU PAD (EMF)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 February 2014. Retrieved 22 January 2014.
- ^ Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts, Brain and mind Operational Architectonics and man-made "machine" consciousness. Cognitive Processing (2009) 10(2):105-111.
- S2CID 221971224.