Quantum Models of Consciousness an Introduction

Disclaimer:

Those who claim to understand Quantum Physics,

Certainly do not understand it (Niels Bohr)

Roadmap

Why Quantum Physics? The Measurement Problem. Stapp’s dualistic model + experiment Penrose’s ORCH OR model + exp. Transcendental aspects of Consciousness

Why Quantum Physics?

ASPECT NEWTONIAN QUANTUM

Free Will Deterministic Probalistic

Unity of C. Atomistic Holistic

Computation Sequential Parallel

Baars, Trends in Cognitive Science, 61, jan. 2002

Conscious processing differs from non-conscious processing by the widespread connectivity of brain regions involved.

Simultaneity of brain signals

Brain signals from quite different brain regions sometimes show no phase difference (< 1msec) …

A crash course in Quantum Physics

photon

Half transparent mirror

Classical Physics:

It is |a> OR |b>

|a>

|b>

Quantum physics: It is |a> AND |b> !!!!!!!!! (superposition)

Measurement ‘causes’ the ‘collapse

Fotondetector triggers sound b

Fotondetector triggers sound a

The Measurement Problem

Bell proved that ALL local realistic theories give the wrong results (QP is complete)

So the measurement really does ‘collapse’ the superposition of states to one observed state.

Non locally! (Einstein Podolsky Rosen)

Non local correlations

photon

Half transparent mirror

|b>

Venus

Mars|a> +

|b>|a> +

Mirror

So what constitutes a measurement?1. Subjective Reduction

Consciousness is the crucial measurement device. (Wigner, von Neumann, Walker, Stapp)

Photon |a>

Photon |b>

So what constitutes a measurement?2. Objective Reduction

Quantum gravity constitutes the objective reduction criterium. (Penrose)

Number of particles in superposition * time

Time

Collapse

Stapp: Consciousness causes the collapse?

von Neumann argued that all measurement devices are physical and should be described quantum physically thus should also be in superposition

Consciousness may be non-physical? A dualistic perspective (Stapp)

Hall et al, Foundations of Physics 7 (1977), pp. 759-67

Experimental Set Up

Quantum Process

Measurement equipment

First Observer

Second Observer

The pre-observer experiment

photon

Half transparent mirror

|a>

|b>mixer

delay

switch

PRE-OBSERVATION

None

Conscious

I was first

Results of Hall et al

Dependent variable: guess by second observer if there was an early observer

9 series, total number of guesses: 554 50% correct (exact!)

But: delay was 1 microsecond

And : dependent variable was a conscious measure

The pre-observer experiment

photon

Half transparent mirror

|a>

|b>mixer

delay

switch

PRE-OBSERVATION

Tape

None

Conscious Evoked potential

Hoped for ERP results

With pre-observation

Without pre-observation

Nonconscious processing Conscious processing

|a> |a>

(|a> + |b>) |a>

Penrose’s ORCH OR model

• Mathematcal insight is non-computable• Collapse is non-computable• This moment = a moment of consciousness• Between these ‘collapses’, quantum computation for

about 100 msecs goes on till quantum gravity causes the next collapse.

• Main stream physics: It’s Impossible in the brain • Hameroff: screening & errorcorrection by special

structures (micro tubulin)

Visual Consciousness

Woolf & Hameroff, Trends in Cognitive Science5-11, nov. 2001

Quantum decoherence times in Brain

Tegmark (Phys.Rev. E 61, 4194, 2000) calculates : 10-12 seconds.

Hagan et al (in press) calculates 10-4 seconds. Can we measure these times? Foton echo technique:

2 laser pulses on a quantum system First creates superposition Second results in echo if superposition still exists

Empirically: photon echo exp.

laseraom

Timing generator

Sampling oscilloscope

aom

Retina

Eyediffuser

detector

pinhole

Pulse 1: excitation of Rodopsin into superpositionPulse 2: generates an echo if superposition still exists

Hoped for Results

Any echo time > 10 -6 sec should be considered to be a strong support for Penrose- Hameroff’s theory.

Such a result should be an incentive to search for the brain mechanisms that screen off decoherence in order to build better quantum computers.

QuickTime™ and aCinepak decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Transcendental aspects of Consciousness?

• Some, so called paranormal, phenomena seem to transcend space and time.

• These are very controversial.

• Nonetheless there is rather strong empirical evidence for phenomena like Extra Sensory Perception and Psychokinesis.

• And how about pre-sentiment?

What is presentiment?

Ask Ian Thorpe,

The world record holder 100 meter sprint. He visited New York…….

It is sept. 11, around 9h00. Ian takes the elevator to the upper floor of the WTC building to take some pictures…….

Half way up he suddenly realizes he has forgotten his camera.

So goes down to return to his hotel. When he leaves the building he looks back. It just after nine now. …...

Thanks for your concern and support following the New York tragedy ……

From Thorpe’s website

Was Ian just lucky?

Ed Cox (1960)

Compared train ridership on days with and without a train accident.

He found that on accident days there were significant less people on trains.

(Note: Utts redid the analyses and found a smaller effect after correction for holidays)

1996:Presentiment experiment

Presentiment is reported as the apparent psycho-physiological effect of a future emotional ‘cause’.

Procedure Presentiment ‘trial’

Time

SubjectHitsButton

0 5

OrCalm

Blank screen

baseline

Random!!

Skin C

onductance

Results First Subject (Radin-1)stimulus

Presentiment?

Calm

Emotional

Results all Subjects (Radin-1)

Emotional

Calm

Presentiment!

This should be everywhere!

Main stream emotion research Measure baseline of dependent var Present an emotional / calm event Measure response of dependent var

baseline event response

time

What did we do?

Search for main stream databases that Measure a BaseLine for at least 4 seconds. Use strong emotional events For which Data can be obtained

What did we find?

Hamm group: on the speed with which fear arises in animal phobic patients

Damasio group: on implicit emotional learning during Gambling task

Procedure Animal fear studyS

kin

Con

duct

ance

Fixation stimulus

7000 msec

time

6850 msec

Blank Screen

150 msec

Results re-analysis Hamm’s data

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Samplenumber (0.1sec)

calmeroticanimals

STIMULUS

Animal FearStudyALL DATAPOOLED:N = 38 Erotic

Calmpresentiment

Damasio: gambling procedure

• Participant gets initially $2000

• Draws cards from one of 4 different decks

• Card is either winning or losing

time

Preparation

Draws cardFeedback: win or loss

Ski

n C

ondu

ctan

ce

Damasio dataset analyses

• Damasio-analysis P = f (type of deck) !!! Advantageous vs non-advantageous

• Our Re-analysis: P = f(type of Card) Winning vs Losing

Winning vs. Losing Cards:

Quote from: Bechara, Damasio et al, Science, 275, 28 February 97, 1293-1295

: ….. “the players have no way of predicting when a penalty will arise…”

Results re-analysis Gambling experiment

0.500.400.300.200.100.00

0.400.48

SCR before Good and Bad Cards

Pos. Cards

Neg. cards

• t = 1.634; df=117 ; p =0.053

• Presentiment effect : 20%!!!!

So What Next?

•Can we differentiate between different emotions?

• Can we exclude possible artefacts?

•Can we locate the source of this phenomenon?

Hersenen na een geweldadige stimulus

Plakje 12

Average activation (BOLD) for 3 conditions

Stimulus

Neutral

Erotic

Violentanticipation

What has this to do with QP

Hooft (Dutch journal of physics, 2000):

Causality is the cornerstone of our worldview. Data that suggest otherwise MUST be incorrect….

However

Spooky twins survive Einsteinian torture I.e in relativistic framework still non-local

correlations But one can not say that one observation is

earlier than the other. Thus statevector collapse has atemporal

aspects.

Conclusion 2

Some hitherto controversial anomalous phenomena (transcending space and time) might become less obscure in the light of quantum models of consciousness.