Home | Blog | About | Contact

The Star Larvae Hypothesis
Nature's Plan for Humankind
Part 2. Star Larvae

Quantum Gravity and the Physics of Consciousness

Science continues to map correlations between neurochemical and mental events. But subjectivity per se seems to originate at a different interface—the one between quantum and gravitational events.

Normal science has no coherent causal theory to account for the existence of conscious experience. Insofar as science attempts to say something coherent about subjectivity, it proposes that conscious experience somehow emerges from neurological systems when those systems cross a threshold of complexity. But such an assertion essentially concedes that consciousness is a miracle—it just happens. And nobody has figured out how to figure out where the threshold is.

Another approach denies consciousness all together. To this school, the word is just another name for certain neurophysiological processes. It does not signify anything distinct from the observable phenomena of the brain. Nothing else is occurring that warrants a separate term. It's not a scientific or a philosophical problem; it's a linguistic confusion.

It should be no surprise that a scientific fringe finds these responses unsatisfying and in response is turning from cell biology and neurochemistry to quantum physics in an attempt to better understand the relationship between the brain and felt experience.

The Physical and the Psychical

In the world of the quantum, the unexpected eclipses normal expectations. Quantum mechanics seems to allow subjectivity, including intent, to influence physical outcomes. The new physics seems to imply that mind has a role to play in translating indeterminate potentials into determinate actuals.

In the world of everyday objects, things occupy physical space. The objects that occupy space have measurable dimensions. A thing occurs physically if it has height, length, and depth. It actually is if it displays weight and age—or frequency and wavelength. This is normal positivist science.

Platonic philosophy sees the world differently. It sees the physical world as the observable expression of unobservable, underlying, metaphysical forms. These Platonic Forms exist outside of space and time. They have no dimensions. No height. No weight. No age. Nonetheless, they dictate the forms of matter and energy in space and time. This is normal Platonic metaphysics.

Platonic forms, or potentials, include mathematical forms. The laws of trigonometry, for example, describe quantitative relationships among the sides and angles of triangles. Platonism points out that the relationships operate independently of any particular triangle or set of triangles that one could draw or otherwise pinpoint in the physical world.

Metaphysical potentials also include qualitative forms, such as the concepts of "possible" and "opposite," which exist independently of any particular possibility or pair of opposites.

Investigators have been studying the emergence of actual existence from the Platonic dimension of potential existence by watching it happen—that is, by studying quanta. The quantum understanding of physical reality undercuts the classical "billiard ball" model of particles derived from the mechanics of Isaac Newton. The model of atoms as solid particles bouncing off each other in the void has its utility. But beyond a point it is subordinate to a model based on what goes on inside the billiard balls. And that science, quantum mechanics, describes subatomic particles as being very unbilliard-ball-like.

In the subatomic quantum world a thing can be here now and there then without ever passing through the intervening space. Quantum mechanics describes, for example, the "tunneling" of particles—their ability to leap over thermodynamic barriers and land upstream, against the flow of entropy, without ever occupying the intervening space. Quantum tunneling occurs, for example, in certain nuclear reactions inside stars.

A thing's location in the quantum world isn't specified until the thing, or quantum, interacts with its environment in a way that pins it down. Before that, it's smeared out, occupying an indeterminate spacetime position, or what is called a superposition. Each location that it might have carries a certain probability of the thing being found there. But where it actually turns up—where it appears as a measurable event in the determinate universe—might depend on where it decides to show up. Quanta are in this sense "organisms," as the philosopher Alfred North Whitehead used the term. Their state at any given time is dependent not only on the dictates of their environment, but also on their subjective prehensions of other organisms, past events, and the Platonic forms, or what Whitehead called "Eternal Objects."

The process by which an indeterminate quantum potential is reduced to an determinate event, the so-called collapse of the state vector, is a mysterious occurrence. Its outcome is noncomputable. It cannot be predicted with certainty, but only in terms of probabilities. So the question arises as to how nature translates its potentials—the set of possible events—into that subset of events that actually occurs.

In some instances, the answer might involve that other revolution in physics, relativity theory. Einstein’s breakthrough contributes its own brand of weirdness to the undermining of the billiard-ball model. The faster a thing moves, in Einstein’s general theory of relativity, the heavier it gets and the slower it ages; achieving the speed of light, an object has infinite mass and experiences no duration of time whatsoever (which is why it never happens—the only things that travel that fast are photons, "objects" that have no mass). In one model of Einstein’s theory, the masses of objects distort spacetime, the magnitude of the distortion serving as a measure of an object's mass, or gravity. In this way of visualizing the theory, the gravity of a black hole is so concentrated that it not only stretches spacetime, but punctures it.

As profoundly as quantum mechanics and relativity theory have expanded our understanding, these triumphs of twentieth-century physics have yet to be stitched together into a comprehensive model of nature.

The pursuit of such a Grand Unified Theory has taken a strange turn lately, as the eminent British mathematician Roger Penrose has proposed a model that accounts for subjective, conscious experience in terms of quantum-gravitational events. And the mechanism he proposes might characterize the inner workings of stars as well as the inner workings of brains.

In contrast to those who advocate emergent models, Penrose proposes that consciousness is fundamental to the physical world. Like the philosopher Whitehead, Penrose rejects the idea that consciousness per se is reducible to deterministic processes of biochemistry.

Noncomputability and Objective Reduction

In Penrose's physics of subjectivity, consciousness emerges from the complexity of brain activity only in the sense in which water emerges from the complexity of a well-digger's activity. Well digging doesn't reach a threshold of complexity beyond which water spontaneously appears. Diggers tap existing water and figure out how to bring it to the surface. Biological evolution has figured out how to tap consciousness and bring it to the surface.

The so-called Penrose-Hameroff model of consciousness, developed by Penrose in collaboration with University of Arizona anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff, grew out of Penrose's foray into the artificial intelligence (AI) debate. Proponents of "strong AI" propose that an arrangement of computer circuits sufficiently complex would acquire consciousness for the same reason that the complex circuitry of a human brain acquires consciousness. The strong AI argument regards consciousness as an emergent property of complex, high-speed computation.

Penrose dismisses in principle the argument that consciousness is reducible to computation, no matter how fast or complex. His argument hinges in part on the ability of human minds to discern the truth or falsity of certain mathematical propositions that cannot be proven true or false within the formal rules of mathematics. Presumably, a programmed computer, its program moving in lockstep with formalized rules of logic and mathematics, could not calculate, or apperceive, the truth or falsity of these types of mathematical statements. Their verification is noncomputable. They are not algorithmically verifiable. Therefore, if brains are complex computers, which is the model that currently dominates cognitive science, then mind must be more than brain. Or at least, mind must be more than the purely chemical activity of the brain, which constitutes the signal-processing circuitry that underlies the brain-as-computer model. Penrose concludes that quantum events, with their indeterminate character, rather than theoretically computable chemical events, are the more likely source of consciousness per se.

The Penrose-Hameroff model of consciousness, abbreviated OrchOR for Orchestrated Objective Reduction, is predicated on the existence of coherent quantum states that span arrays of neurons and persist long enough to attain a self-collapse threshold; they collapse under the influence of their own gravity. The sustained coherence of the indeterminate quantum state—the superposition—which in the Penrose-Hameroff model presages consciousness, is made possible, according to the model, by special conditions inside cellular structures called microtubules.

Biological cells use microtubules to accomplish various tasks. Unicellular organisms use them to form their flagella and cilia, the whip- and hairlike structures that the organisms use to move around. Microtubules also play a key role in cell division. In brain cells, or neurons, however, microtubules perform neither of these functions. Penrose and Hameroff argue that these tubular structures insulate their hollow interiors from outside influences, such as heat, adequately enough so that highly sensitive states of quantum superposition can grow within them until they self-collapse. This process, which Penrose and Hameroff call "objective reduction," is distinct from the reduction of quantum indeterminate states that occurs under the influence of environmental factors.

Gravitational self-collapse of a quantum indeterminacy that spans neurons is a determinate physical event, each collapse itself being the physical correlate of a particular subjective experience. In other words, in this model consciousness is quantized. It occurs as a sequence of discrete events in rapid succession. Instances of subjectivity can, in this model, vary by magnitude in proportion to the size of their originating quantum superpositions. The notion is similar to Whitehead's discrete occasion of experience.

This is a rough summary of the model proposed by Penrose and Hameroff. The model is controversial and continues to attract critics. Nonetheless, it is a promising candidate for a description of the interface between the physical and mental worlds. The model implies a scale of consciousness, from rudimentary forms of sensation that define the experience of simple organisms to the apprehensions of the sublime of which human minds are capable, the qualitative and quantitative differences between the extremes of mind being attributable to differences in the numbers of microtubules available to participate in the process of objective reduction. In the Penrose-Hameroff model, the magnitude of potential consciousness might not be directly proportional to brain size, but the two variables should correlate to some degree.

In this model, the particles that are given determinate existence by the collapse of the superposition are electrons associated with the molecular constituents of microtubules. But if particles more massive than electrons could be held in superposition long enough to undergo objective reduction, then the corresponding conscious experience would be proportionately further along the scale of magnitude. Implicit also in the Penrose-Hameroff model is the possibility of structures other than biological cells managing the process of objective reduction.

Researchers keep discovering more ways in which quantum processes play essential roles in biological systems. Quantum-mediated biological processes include photosynthesis, olfactory perceptions (smells), and some enzymatic reactions. DNA itself might exploit quantum effects. There no a priori reason to exclude quantum physics from possible mechanisms of consciousness. Research continues to suggest that biology is not only friendly toward, but might require, quantum effects.

Solar Consciousness

Philosopher Charles Hartshorne takes a conventional view, in Philosophers Speak of God, but veers into a creative conjecture:

"According to contemporary theories, the sun is wasting away its own matter. Above all, if the sun receives nothing in return from its effects, this is precisely because it is blind and unconscious; otherwise, the spectacle of life on Earth would mean an immense aesthetic content streaming back to the sun!"

Hartshorne might have been too eager to dismiss his own speculation.

Applied to the quantum tunneling of protons inside stars, the Penrose-Hameroff model provides a theoretical foundation for stellar consciousness. Considering the mass of a proton relative to that of an electron, a difference of more than 1000 to 1, and the number of protons available to participate in objective reduction inside stars, a (highly speculative) basis exists to suggest not only that stars might be conscious, but that they are superconscious. Stellar consciousness is a candidate for the sentience ascribed to the various grades of angels and religion's other astral entities.

A criticism of quantum models of consciousness points out that quantum superpositions in the brain would not be sustainable for the required durations because the brain is a warm, thermally "noisy" environment, and quantum coherence requires a relatively noiseless, cold environment. This criticism would seem to dampen the prospects for solar consciousness, unless stars, like refrigerators, are heat pumps that cool their interiors.

Recently, an active pumping mechanism has been identified in stars, or at least mechanisms have been proposed to explain what seems to be an active transport of energy from inside a star to its surface. In "The Paradox of the Sun’s Hot Corona" (Scientific American, June, 2001) authors Bhola Dwivedi and Kenneth J. H. Phillips describe research into the possible mechanisms behind an observed reversal of the sun’s heat gradient at the chromosphere. Moving outward from the chromosphere to the corona, increasingly far from the core, temperatures steadily rise, a paradox that suggests that the sun's metabolism actively pumps heat from its inner to its outer layers. Uncovering the responsible mechanisms would be a small step toward proving the existence of objective-reduction processes inside stars. But the paradox at least establishes that stellar metabolisms can support active pumping of energy from one place to another—that heat in stars is not transmitted only by the passive modes of conduction, convection, and radiation, but also by active transport. As the authors conclude, "Even as one mystery begins to yield to our concerted efforts, others appear. The sun and other stars, with their complex layering, magnetic fields, and effervescent dynamism, still manage to defy our understanding." (more recently [2011], researchers have identified spicules, jets of plasma, as the structures that transport heat from the sun's surface to its atmosphere. News release is HERE.)

A specific mechanism that could help cool stellar cores is the Ranque effect, in which a rotating gas heats up at its periphery while its interior cools along the axis of rotation. Researcher Renzo Boscoli describes this effect and applies it to stellar metabolism. It's a highly speculative application of the Ranque effect, but intriguing for its relevance to the prospect of stellar consciousness. Says Boscoli, ". . . due to a constant Ranque effect I see no reason why the centre [of a star] would not continue to cool towards absolute zero." If the effect can produce such extreme cold, so much the better are prospects for solar/stellar consciousness.

Like the Hawking process, the Penrose-Hameroff objective reduction process describes an interaction between quantum mechanics and gravity. The star larvae hypothesis leverages the Penrose-Hameroff model not only to suggest that stars are conscious, but also to lay the theoretical foundation for a proposed industry of proton manufacturing. Objective reduction has the potential to use the Hawking process to manufacture protons by exploiting the quantum peculiarity sometimes called called the observer effect. The effect has to do with the ability of human observers to influence the outcome of quantum reduction.

A quantum superposition potentially can collapse into an empirically determinate event by one of two routes, either by the proposed objective reduction process of the Penrose-Hameroff model or by the interference of external, environmental influences. A peculiarity of research in quantum physics is the discovery that human subjectivity seems capable of acting as such an environmental influence. It appears that, by selecting a particular mode or frequency of observation, an experimenter can influence the result of the collapse of quantum superpositions.

In one example, physicist Wayne Itano and colleagues at the National Institute of Standards and Technology placed a system of atoms in an irradiated environment that normally, after a given period of time, would have caused some of the atoms to move into an "excited" state by way of a quantum-mechanical process. However, by observing the system with sufficient frequency, they prevented any of the atoms from moving into the excited state. For any given observation, the probability was overwhelming that no atoms would have changed state, and by making observations frequently enough, the occurrence of at least some atoms transitioning was postponed potentially indefinitely. Each observation effectively sets the clock back to zero. This effect is known as the Quantum Zeno Effect.

In The Dreaming Universe, Physicist Fred Alan Wolf summarizes the implications of this and similar experiments, "Intent, through our powers of observation, actually modifies and alters the course of the physical world and causes things to occur that would not normally occur." This implies that conscious intent has some power to skew quantum events in desired directions. The observer effect seems to be the result of the focused concentration, or intent, or selective decision making of mind. And by such means, indeterminate, probabilistic, noncomputable quantum events, potentially including Hawking radiation, can in theory be influenced toward desired outcomes, such as the production of protons preferentially to other types of particles.

Late in his career the physicist Erwin Schroedinger turned his attention to issues of biology. In a small but influential book entitled What is life? he took a step toward a humanistic appropriation of the miraculous when he reasoned as follows:

"Let us see whether we cannot draw the correct non-contradictory conclusion from the following two premises:
(i) My body functions as a pure mechanism according to the Laws of Nature.
(ii) Yet I know, by incontrovertible direct experience, that I am directing my motions [. . .]
The only possible inference from these two facts is, I think, that I—I in the widest meaning of the word, that is to say, every conscious mind that has ever said or felt "I"—am the person, if any, that controls the 'motion of the atoms' according to the Laws of Nature."

So what developments await brains and minds in space that will enable them to direct the outcomes of quantum processes en masse toward preferred ends—according to the Laws of Nature?

NEXT > Space Migration, the Heavenly Ascent

Enter your search terms Submit search form   web starlarvae.org starlarvae.blogspot.com		Social Media = Social Mediocrity: rue or alse?

Text Copyright ©2004-2012 Advanced Theological Systems. All Rights Reserved.