Role of Consciousness in reality

[Confused]

As the next generation of physicists are graduating from Universities and entering their respective fields, the concept of "New Physics" has come into focus. While hard-core materialism dominated 19th century physics, newer models have been replacing them by adding the mind into the equation of reality and the effects on physical events.

For debate:
Does the mind (consciousness) play an integral role in all physical events?
Does it affect reality or just how we perceive reality?

[alexiarose]

It isn't so much that I want to accept a supernatural explanation, rather it is that I despise unanswered questions.

Ah yes, the arrogance and certainty of youth! There are unanswered questions. Life would be rather boring without them. There may even be unanswerable questions.

It is better to accept the uncertainty and ambiguity of reality than to accept fabricated answers, no matter how pleasing they might be.

Hey, I thought I was doing a fairly good job trying not to be arrogant. Guess I still have to work on that.

Questions may not have answers now, but they may later. I accept the beliefs I have now, but hold on to the awareness that those beliefs are subject to change as evidence becomes available to either confirm or deny my belief.

I am not trying to dismiss reality. (well, maybe in some cases) But I do admit that I hold some beleifs right now that provide comfort rather than chaos. I don't know if accepted Christ is a fabricated answer. My motives for it may or may not be under false pretenses. But this is the best I can do for now.

[alexiarose]

The mass of the nucleus of a proton is what it is without anyone being conscious of it. The interactions of the strong, weak, electromagnetic forces and gravity likewise. I’d also say that quantum physics needs a clear definition of what is meant by “observation” to make a wave function collapse.

To Furrowed Brow: Does the facets of quantum physics you list with the addition of gravity interact as they do if one wasn't there to witness it?

This is really QED’s bag. So don’t be surprised if he tramples all over this.

The rest mass of the nucleus of the proton is a constant. It does not change no matter who or where you are measuring it or not measuring it. It is always 1836.152677...times greater than the rest mass of the electron. This ratio as far as we know never changes. The four fundamental forces I mention are not constant values like the rest of the proton, but they are physical forces which follow certain constant rules. Those rules apply without us looking.

The grey area is the behaviour of quantum systems. The behaviour of an electron around the nucleus of an atom would be an example of such a system. The behaviour of the electron is probabilistic. The math used is wave functions. The wave being a probability wave. To decide whether an electron is in one actual state over all the other possibilities requires a measurement that collapses the wave function - loosely put a decision is made as to the actual state of the electron. Some interpretations of quantum theory require a conscious observer to collapse a wave function. If true then conscious very much affects reality. But I don’t buy that.

QED could probably do this better than me.

Supposing these individual facets have their own state of consciousness?

Well I suppose a pantheist might equate the fundamental forces and constants with a universal consciousness or God.

Conscious and certainly self consciousness I’d say requires a degree of physical complexity e.g. a brain and nervous system, not possessed by quantum systems.

Ok, I am going to spend half of tonight on ask.com again, gee thanks. In the meantime, can you explain something a bit simpler:
Would you consider the Heisenberg principle a form of evidence that the role of consciousness does affect reality?

[Goat]

Ok, I am going to spend half of tonight on ask.com again, gee thanks. In the meantime, can you explain something a bit simpler:
Would you consider the Heisenberg principle a form of evidence that the role of consciousness does affect reality?

Two other effects I think will be a bit more confusing for you.

Look up the double slit experiment, and the zeno effect.

[Furrowed Brow]

However, there is a clear sense in which these values are not independent of the consciousness of observers.

Is it not the other around. If for argument sake one of the finely balanced values necessary for consciousness to exist is that the rest mass of the electron be 1836.132677 times smaller than the proton. Then this constant is necessary but falls short of being suffcient for consciousness. In this sense the state of reality is independent of consciousness, whilst consciousness is dependent on a unique state of reality. For this ratio not to be independent of the consciousness of observers requires that for all possible universe in which say the electron/proton ratio equals 1836.1526777.…there be conscious beings.

Your sensible observation is an anthropic one.

Well a bit. But does the fact we - conscious beings - are here play an integral role in those values being what they are? And I think the answer to that question depends on whether those values can exist without us.

[Confused]

alexiarose, there's surprising information for some of us in your post here! I hope Michelle is doing OK in Hospital.

Consciousness presents science with a difficult problem to solve. As something that is thought to be a result of unconscious bits & pieces it's hard to explain. That doesn't automatically make it supernatural (an all too easy explanation) but I think we can still talk about its relation to reality without understanding what it is.

However I would personally recommend Daniel Denett's book Consciousness Explained as a way of introducing the right kind of questions if not supplying all the correct answers. Roger Penrose wrote a book called The Emperor's New Mind in which he presents a Quantum Mechanical theory of consciousness. This also starts by setting out the puzzle before attempting to provide a solution.

I will get the book today. Achilles has ordered me to go on this stupid date tonight so I will start reading it to mom tommorrow morning. I tried the one from Pinkerton but I couldn't understand half the meaning so it is kind of hard to irritate someone with constant reading when I don't understand what I am reading. I have read the Schrodinger "What is Life" to her several times. She still looks dead. But she woke up enough last night to pull out the breathing tube, but then they made her go back to sleep and put it back in. I think she is going to be mad at me but that is ok. As long as she wakes up. I irritate her when I talk to much. Kind of like I am doing right now. But I have been trying to be better with my posts so that when she comes home she will be proud of me. But you and Furrowed Brow and McCulloch are really too smart. Mom told me to avoid you guys but of course I get into trouble to much so I didn't. My oops. But I am trying to be more mature. I probably shouldn't be putting this here but to many days without sleep probably isn't helping that much. The doctors say she can hear me so I have told her that otseng sends his prayers. I thought for sure that would get her up and annoyed, but she still didn't move. They didn't tell me they had her paralyzed at the time so I guess maybe I could repeat that. But I have read a lot of posts over the past week, not like I have anything else to do, no one is here but me. You have mentioned Dennett before. Now if I am lucky, I can read it without having to google as much as Achilles said I would have to to understand you. He is smart to. Ok, so now I am rambling a whole lot and mom said I wasnt allowed to go off topic, of course she isn't here to yell at me now so maybe I can tell her this to and she will wake up. I don't know. Maybe I could say I turned atheist. That would freak her out big time. Did you know she was atheist? I didn't know that. I knew she wasn't Christian, but I didn't know that at one point she had labeled herself atheist. I guess I can't blame her now, she will have to get better before I can argue with her. Ok, I am going to stop now because I am way off topic and I think the people with the green or orange names will yell at me.

Yes, for those of you who need to know why God rested on the 7th day, this should adequately explain it, LOL. Love you Barbara.

[Openmind]

Would you consider the Heisenberg principle a form of evidence that the role of consciousness does affect reality?

Not necessarily. What if a chance assemblage of machinery observed an electron during the double-split experiment. I think it is the act of observation (the interference via mechanical means), rather than the act of conscious observation, that changes reality here. Would a philosophical zombie record the same results as a self-aware human? Interesting question. Someone should get a robot to do the experiment.

I agree with much of the sentiment expressed here. Consciousness is a tough nut to crack, and most likely an impossible nut to crack. But I like that.

Some suggest that the mind has causal powers. That our awareness can influence neurons. I am not so convinced, though I hope that it can.

[Confused]

As the next generation of physicists are graduating from Universities and entering their respective fields, the concept of "New Physics" has come into focus. While hard-core materialism dominated 19th century physics, newer models have been replacing them by adding the mind into the equation of reality and the effects on physical events.

For debate:
Does the mind (consciousness) play an integral role in all physical events?
Does it affect reality or just how we perceive reality?

That is a good question. The intuitive answer is that the mind does not play a part. The hard core experiential data suggests that at least 'observation' can. The double slit experiment shows that observation effects the probabilities, and the zeno effect
demonstrates a watched quantum pot never boils

Do you need consciousness to effect the result, or merely instruments??

But the consciousness affects how we perceive the results, correct? Does not our perception of reality play a crucial role in the development of these instruments that are meant to record the data we cannot perceive? We develop technology to create or observe the things we hypothesize existing. Our perceptions are what guide our reality to a large extent.

On the more biological level, our perceptions of consciousness and our perceptions of reality shape ones self as an organism as well. We respond to the perceptions not only physically but mentally as well. Current society perceives an attractive woman as one who has a pleasant to look at face, a firm C size breasts, a waist that is smaller than her hips, etc.... If my consciousness doesn't perceive my body as being what is considered socially desirable, then I would try to adapt my body to coincide with the perceptions society has. I would diet, exercise, get breast implants, use more facial products to clear my skin, buy the most expensive make up to highlight the positive traits of my facial profile etc... My consciousness or perceptions would affect not only myself physically as a biological organisms but also mentally in terms of self-esteem etc... If one has a low self esteem, their conscious perceptions of "not fitting in" with the societal perception of the ideal physical woman, can lead to physical changes in neurochemicals and hormones to lead to depression etc...

I am still reviewing the application of this thought to the world of physics and elementary particles, so give me time to relate it to that discipline. In the mean time, i would welcome responses in regards to the philosophical/biological application or reality and consciousness.

[Beto]

But the consciousness affects how we perceive the results, correct?

Not sure. "Consciousness" seems, to me, to be the "instant perception". "Experience" might be that which affects the way the brain interprets signals, "results" being the end product of that interpretation, and I have absolutely no clue as to what I just said.

Does not our perception of reality play a crucial role in the development of these instruments that are meant to record the data we cannot perceive?

We develop technology to create or observe the things we hypothesize existing. Our perceptions are what guide our reality to a large extent.

Technology often reveals what wasn't expected or even hypothesized, doesn't it? At least I think it does... I can't remember anything right now.

On the more biological level, our perceptions of consciousness and our perceptions of reality shape ones self as an organism as well.

I can't handle "perceptions of consciousness", but if you'll indulge me and consider "consciousness" as the "instant perception", would you elaborate on how you think it helps "shape" an organism?

I am still reviewing the application of this thought to the world of physics and elementary particles, so give me time to relate it to that discipline. In the mean time, i would welcome responses in regards to the philosophical/biological application or reality and consciousness.

If you haven't been there yet, I think you're going to enjoy this website:

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/

Make sure you read about the orchestrated objective reduction model. It claims to bridge quantum consciousness theory with a biological mechanism. I'm buying it so far.