Quantum Physics and the Multiplicity Of Mind

[Alexander1304]

Hello All,

Recently I've read this article about quantum physics and the multiplicity of mind: split-brains,fragmented minds,dissociation,quantum consciousness :

 

http://journalofcosmology.com/QuantumConsciousness102.html

 

Here are few outlines:
Preface:
"
Quantum physics and Einstein's theory of relativity make assumptions about the nature of the mind which is assumed to be a singularity. In the Copenhagen model of physics, the process of observing is believed to effect reality by the act of perception and knowing which creates abstractions and a collapse function thereby inducing discontinuity into the continuum of the quantum state. This gives rise to the uncertainty principle. Yet neither the mind or the brain is a singularity, but a multiplicity which include two dominant streams of consciousness and awareness associated with the left and right hemisphere, as demonstrated by patients whose brains have been split, and which are superimposed on yet other mental realms maintained by the brainstem, thalamus, limbic system, and the occipital, temporal, parietal, and frontal lobes. Like the quantum state, each of these minds may also become discontinuous from each other and each mental realm may perceive their own reality."


"Like the Copenhagen school, Von Neumann's formulation of quantum mechanics (1932, 1937), fails to recognize or understand the multiple nature of mind and reality."

What do You guys think?Does that mean that Copenhagen is disproved by that simple observation?Or it is speculation?

[swansont]

I wouldn't take anything they publish at face value

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Cosmology

 

That said, the HUP is not the same as the observer effect, so this work appears to be invalid, right from its premise.

[DrP]

Pretty much every ounce of that new age claptrap has always turned out to be complete rubbish. The people that pedal it come across as really nice people.... which means they are either really stupid (as they believe their own crap) or just con artists (being nice to con you)..

[Alexander1304]

Thanks for the responses.I tried to discuss it on the most prestige forum - physics forum,but it was removed shortly after it was published.The reason - the website I was referring to is known as promoting pseudoscience...

[swansont]

Thanks for the responses.I tried to discuss it on the most prestige forum - physics forum,but it was removed shortly after it was published.The reason - the website I was referring to is known as promoting pseudoscience...

 

They're not wrong.

[PeterJ]

You'll find that there is no need to believe in mutliple minds, and for me that stuff about split brains is irrrelevant. What we see is multiple egoic consciousnesses, but we have not yet shown that they do not emerge from a singularity, and mysticism would state that they do. Indeed, it is said that we can verify that they do.

[MonDie]

Pseudoscience aside, the duplicity of consciousness is fascinating. People with dissociative identity disorder, who exhibit what are sometimes called the "compartmentalizing" dissociative symptoms, usually also experience the detachment dissociative symptoms, depersonalization and derealization. Depersonalization typically refers to experiencing the world in third person, as though watching oneself, while derealization refers to perceiving the world as dream-like. It would be interesting if these related symptoms could provide insight into how consciousness becomes integrated. For example, -- and this is just my own interpretation of it -- but I happened upon this research paper:

hierarchical clustering of brain activity during human nonrapid eye movement sleep sleep

Of course that's NREM, whereas REM is where we dream.

Edited October 26, 2015 by MonDie

[TJ McCaustland]

Ok what the heck is this? Our brains are our brains, they are clusters of neurons and receptors. That's it.

Edited October 27, 2015 by TJ McCaustland

[PeterJ]

“The reason why our sentient, percipient, and thinking ego is met nowhere within our scientific world picture can be easily indicated in seven words: because it is itself that world picture. It is identical with the whole and therefore cannot be contained in it as part of it. But of course, here we knock against the arithmetical paradox; there appears to be a great multitude of these conscious egos, the world, however, is only one. This comes from the fashion in which the world-concept produces itself. The several domains of “private” consciousness overlap. The region common to us all where they all overlap is the construct of the “real world around us.” With all that an uncomfortable feeling remains, prompting such questions as; is my world really the same as yours? Is there one real world to be distinguished from its pictures introjected by way of perception into every one of us? And if so, are these pictures like unto the real world or is the latter, the world “in itself,” perhaps very different from the one we perceive?

Such questions are ingenious, but, in my opinion, very apt to confuse the issue. They have no adequate answers. They are all, or lead to, antimonies springing from the one source, which I called the arithmetical paradox; the many conscious egos from whose mental experiences the one world is concocted.

… There are two way out of the number paradox, both appearing rather lunatic from the point of view of present scientific thought (based on ancient Greek thought and thus thoroughly “Western”). One way out is the multiplication of the world in Leibnitz’s fearful doctrine of monads: every monad to be a world by itself, no communication between them; the monad “has no windows,” it is “incommunicado.” That they all agree with each other is called “pre-established harmony”.

… There is obviously only one alternative, namely the unification of minds or consciousnesses. Their multiplicity is only apparent, in truth, there is only one mind. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads. And not only the Upanishads. The mystically experienced union with God regularly entails this attitude unless it is opposed by strong existing prejudices;…”

Erwin Schrödinger

The Oneness of Mind

[BlackSunGod]

Ok what the heck is this? Our brains are our brains, they are clusters of neurons and receptors. That's it.

Yeah sure, And our Universe is a collection of gas and hard balls spinning around each other. That's it.

 

To the OP, if you're interested in split brain and alternative approaches to neuroscience maybe you can take a look at David Bohm and Karl Pribram Holonomic Brain Theory and also to the theory of the Bicameral Man. The Holonomic Brain theory basically states that the brain works with spatio temporal signals as well as in frequency domain. In the paradigm of this theory one hemisphere is probably more efficient at processing spatial signals and the other hemisphere more efficient at processing frequency signals. This could explain some things as the duplicity of consciousness in cases of split brain, differences between right handed and left handed people and even things that usually are closer to pseudoscience like out of body experiences and such.

 

To put it with an example:

 

1. You watch a video.

2. Your brain translates the spatio temporal information into its component frequencies in order to storage the information efficiently, via Fourier Transform (this is the great question of this theory, how the brain or the matter itself performs it).

3. If you want to remember the video, your brain takes the frequency components and via Inverse Fourier Transform gives you back the original spatial signal.

 

Of course this process would have some added noise.

 

I just don't know how all of David Bohm's amazing theories have been rejected... It makes me sad how science sometimes is more similar to a popularity contest than to a search for truth and coherence.

Edited October 31, 2015 by BlackSunGod

[TJ McCaustland]

Yeah sure, And our Universe is a collection of gas and hard balls spinning around each other. That's it.

 

To the OP, if you're interested in split brain and alternative approaches to neuroscience maybe you can take a look at David Bohm and Karl Pribram Holonomic Brain Theory and also to the theory of the Bicameral Man. The Holonomic Brain theory basically states that the brain works with spatio temporal signals as well as in frequency domain. In the paradigm of this theory one hemisphere is probably more efficient at processing spatial signals and the other hemisphere more efficient at processing frequency signals. This could explain some things as the duplicity of consciousness in cases of split brain, differences between right handed and left handed people and even things that usually are closer to pseudoscience like out of body experiences and such.

 

To put it with an example:

 

1. You watch a video.

2. Your brain translates the spatio temporal information into its component frequencies in order to storage the information efficiently, via Fourier Transform (this is the great question of this theory, how the brain or the matter itself performs it).

3. If you want to remember the video, your brain takes the frequency components and via Inverse Fourier Transform gives you back the original spatial signal.

 

Of course this process would have some added noise.

 

I just don't know how all of David Bohm's amazing theories have been rejected... It makes me sad how science sometimes is more similar to a popularity contest than to a search for truth and coherence.

You know why? Because he is probably just as crackpotty as every other scientist who thinks he's onto something when he's only come across a metaphorical pile of rotten eggs. The question is can those rotten eggs become unrotten?