kennyc wrote:Teuton wrote:SpeedOfSound wrote:Yes I am well aware of of the good ole boy status quo philosophical bullshit on this issue. The ideas that have gotten us NO-WHERE in hundreds of years. My advice is that you now forget everything you think you know about this.
It is an undeniable fact that subjective phenomenal knowledge (to know what it's like, how it appears/feels) is not inferrable from objective neurophysical knowledge. ,,,,,
Wrong.
We've been over this any number of times. It's quite simple. If we could monitor and know exactly the state and operation of each neuron and synapse in a brain, then it is not only inferrable, but measurable.
You have apparently bought in to the philosophical bs. As SOS said, forget it, let the scientists work.
Templeton gave us
this linkMyelin is not simply an insulating material. If you are looking for the physical correlation with consciousness you will have to deal with more than just the firings between neurons. You have to deal with the vast complexities of myelination and also the communications between microtubules, the quantum effects in the tubulin that makes up the microtubules, the gamma synchronicity within the neurons explained in the Hameroff video I linked to.
On top of this there is the recently revealed complexity of the synapses themselves:
Brain more complex than previously thought, research reveals, By Chris Talbot, 3 December 2010Attempting to explain the incredible complexity of the brain that is revealed, Smith said, “One synapse, by itself, is more like a microprocessor—with both memory-storage and information-processing elements—than a mere on/off switch. In fact, one synapse may contain on the order of 1,000 molecular-scale switches. A single human brain has more switches than all the computers and routers and Internet connections on Earth,” he said.
This is without considering the internal processing I mentioned above.
More on myelin:
From
Science daily:
Finding turns neuroanatomy on its head: Researchers present new view of myelin
Date:
April 18, 2014
Source:
Harvard University
What this means, Arlotta says, is that the higher in the cerebral cortex one looks -- the closer to the top of the brain, which is its most evolved region -- the less myelin one finds. Not only that, but "neurons in this part of the brain display a brand new way of positioning myelin along their axons that has not been previously seen. They have 'intermittent myelin' with long axon tracts that lack myelin interspersed among myelin-rich segments.
Arlotta continues: "contrary to the common assumptions that neurons use a universal profile of myelin distribution on their axons, the work indicate that different neurons choose to myelinate their axons differently. In classic neurobiology textbooks myelin is represented on axons as a sequence of myelinated segments separated by very short nodes that lack myelin. This distribution of myelin was tacitly assumed to be always the same, on every neuron, from the beginning to the end of the axon. This new work finds this not to be the case."...
It is possible, said Tomassy, that these profiles of myelination "may be giving neurons an opportunity to branch out and 'talk' to neighboring neurons." For example, because axons cannot make synaptic contacts when they are myelinated, a possibility is that these long myelin gaps may be needed to increase neuronal communication and synchronize responses across different neurons.
Perhaps, he and Arlotta postulate, the intermittent myelin is intended to fine-tune the electrical impulses traveling along the axons, in order to allow the emergence of highly complex neuronal behaviors.
Do they realise what their words imply? Does Chris Talbot realise what their words imply? Obviously not.
Here are some problems pointed out by Hameroff in the video:
- Problems with neurocomputation 1 to 4.jpg (243.92 KiB) Viewed 1407 times
- Problems with neurocomputation 5.jpg (173.7 KiB) Viewed 1407 times
So here is a question for you. How do you do your measurements, taking account of quantum entanglement and quantum coherence, without taking consciousness into account? Consciousness is the very thing you say can be measured.
You have made the unjustified assumption that matter is more primal than consciousness.
Here is Hameroff's view of brain capacity taking microtubules into accout:
- brain capacity.jpg (147.04 KiB) Viewed 1407 times
by 
