Some scientists believe the universe is conscious

[Bear Wild]

It is not difficult to define consciousness at at all; It is far more than simply awareness. It is the interaction of the brain and the body, between others and the surrounding environment. This has been adequately explained by science despite unanswered question.

There is absolutely no evidence of a phenomenon without material substance except in your imagination.

Sorry but i am trying to understand your definition of consciousness. Can you explain your definition a little more clearly.

 

[ChristineM]

Informative article on scientists theorizing and attempting to show that the universe has consciousness.

Some Scientists Believe the Universe Is Conscious

Sounds like a bad trip ... but what if it's true?

www.popularmechanics.com

I cannot agree with these hypothesis of a conscious universe. The space between galaxies alone makes this a non starter.

Despite the similarities between the cosmic web and brain structure

Each point of light making up the cosmic web is a galaxy. The distance between galaxies averages about a million light years. Much to far for the information required to form a consciousness to travel in a way that is meaningful.

 

[Wandering Monk]

I cannot agree with these hypothesis of a conscious universe. The space between galaxies alone makes this a non starter.

Despite the similarities between the cosmic web and brain structure
View attachment 97579

Each point of light making up the cosmic web is a galaxy. The distance between galaxies averages about a million light years. Much to far for the information required to form a consciousness to travel in a way that is meaningful.

I mean, look at THIS resemblence:

or this:

 

[Audie]

Your linked article is for members only (not me).
To believe it as science, I'd expect them to define
consciousness, & to have tested the universe for it.
Has this been done? Or is it just belief without rigor?

What do you expect from pop mech mag

 

[Revoltingest]

What do you expect from pop mech mag

A paywall.

 

[Brickjectivity]

As a practical matter, it would have to be gazillion local consciousnesses, as communication over
all that volume would be a prob.

in the event, it’s nothing but the most idle sort of speculation.

withnall the real things to learn about it seems a waste.

Popular Mechanics should say "Some people who happen to be scientists posit unscientifically that they feel it could be there," but its not exciting enough. Popular Mechanics is not a science publication but is a magazine about technology that shows off new gadgets and speculates about fictional ideas.

 

[Bear Wild]

I mean, look at THIS resemblence:

View attachment 97580

or this:
View attachment 97581

Yes yes cauliflower talks to me

 

[Brickjectivity]

I remember reading a piece somewhere that if the universe is going to be akin with a larger macro organism that is conscious , of which we are 'inside' of we would need to identify some kind of neural network similar to a brain and or nervous system that would suggest a more complex form of consciousness exists much like ourselves where our cells can communicate enabling our consciousness utilizing an amazing means of collective communication.

Maybe someday that will happen. Maybe there will be no choice but for scientists to accept it.

 

[shunyadragon]

I remember reading a piece somewhere that if the universe is going to be akin with a larger macro organism that is conscious , of which we are 'inside' of we would need to identify some kind of neural network similar to a brain and or nervous system that would suggest a more complex form of consciousness exists much like ourselves where our cells can communicate enabling our consciousness utilizing an amazing means of collective communication.

See post #39.

 

[Bear Wild]

It is not difficult to define consciousness at at all; It is far more than simply awareness. It is the interaction of the brain and the body, between others and the surrounding environment. This has been adequately explained by science despite unanswered question.

There is absolutely no evidence of a phenomenon without material substance except in your imagination.

I ask for your definition because of the problem of defining experiential phenomena. We know that matter carries the capacity to generate consciousness because we experience it. If matter thus atoms have the capacity to generate it then there is all kinds of possibilities with one being the human experience. It is certainty percent in many mammals at some degree and emerging evidence in plants also. There may be different experiential patterns with humans as one example but the potential is throughout the world. So your definition would be helpful to know.

 

[shunyadragon]

I ask for your definition because of the problem of defining experiential phenomena. We know that matter carries the capacity to generate consciousness because we experience it. If matter thus atoms have the capacity to generate it then there is all kinds of possibilities with one being the human experience. It is certainty percent in many mammals at some degree and emerging evidence in plants also. There may be different experiential patterns with humans as one example but the potential is throughout the world. So your definition would be helpful to know.

Longer definition from a long article

Biology of Consciousness - PMC

The Dynamic Core and Global Workspace hypotheses were independently put forward to provide mechanistic and biologically plausible accounts of how brains generate conscious mental content. The Dynamic Core proposes that reentrant neural activity in ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Introduction​

Advances in neuroscience have now made it possible to study the biological basis of consciousness. Indeed, in recent years an increasing amount of attention has been directed to this subject (Crick and Koch, 2003; Edelman, 2003; Velmans and Schneider, 2007; Zelazo et al., 2007). Our own efforts to account for key aspects of consciousness at a biological level have taken two forms. The first involved the proposal of a neuroscientifically based global brain theory commonly referred to as Neural Darwinism (Edelman, 1978, 1987; Edelman and Tononi, 2000). This theory proposes the functioning of a Dynamic Core generated by a neural process, reentry, to link dispersed cortical and thalamic areas and account for the relation between perception and conscious memory. The second theory (Baars, 1988) was propounded mainly from a cognitive psychological point of view. This Global Workspace theory hypothesizes that a number of brain components constitute an integrative workspace that serves to reconcile the narrow momentary capacity of conscious contents with a widespread recruitment of unconscious brain functions, including long-term memory.

In the present account, we reconcile and expand on these early notions by considering consciousness as a biological phenomenon, one that is a product of both evolution and development. We believe that such a biological approach can address and even dispose of several concerns articulated by philosophers of mind and others. We propose that a biological account of consciousness does not require metaphysical proposals, mathematical reduction, or “strange physics.” We also maintain that previously argued categories such as selfhood and phenomenal experience can be explained biologically in terms of patterns of neural activity.

Conclusion and Extensions

Consciousness consists of a stream of unified mental constructs that arise spontaneously from a material structure, the Dynamic Core in the brain. Consciousness is a concomitant of dynamic patterns of reentrant signaling within complex, widely dispersed, interconnected neural networks constituting a Global Workspace.

The contents of consciousness, or qualia, are correlates of discriminations made within this neural system. These discriminations are made possible by perceptions, motor activity, and memories – all of which shape, and are shaped by, the activity-dependent modulations of neural connectivity and synaptic efficacies that occur as an animal interacts with its world.

The account given here can serve as a basis for formulating a number of unanswered critical questions concerning the regulation of the conscious process. A key question concerns the autonomous regulation of the content of consciousness. How does neural activity in the frontal cortex act to modulate attention (Fuster, 2008)? Are similar mechanisms employed to control motor output to yield behavior? What roles do subcortical neural structures play in these processes? Another set of questions concerns the relationship between consciousness and long-term episodic memories (Tulving, 1987). How can we explain the necessity of explicit prior conscious experience for the existence of such memories?

The mechanisms suggested in the present paper were formulated to account for primary consciousness. With the accession of semantic capability and, in our species, true language, higher-order consciousness emerged. By reference to linguistic tokens, humans can divorce themselves from the “remembered present” of primary consciousness (Edelman, 1989) without, of course, displacing that fundamental biological mechanism. What emerges as a result of the combination of primary and higher-order consciousness is a narrative capability encompassing past experience and future plans, as well as the ability to be conscious of being conscious. Inner speech can add its elaborations, contributing to what it is like to be human. Establishment of the neural bases of primary consciousness will surely engender new insights into this most challenging scientific domain.

 

[Audie]

A paywall.

And nothing on the other side?

 

[Colt]

Informative article on scientists theorizing and attempting to show that the universe has consciousness.

Some Scientists Believe the Universe Is Conscious

Sounds like a bad trip ... but what if it's true?

www.popularmechanics.com

IMOP It’s the Cosmic Mind.

 

[shunyadragon]

IMOP It’s the Cosmic Mind.

One name among many for hypothetical Conscious universe, without any supporting evidence,

 

[shunyadragon]

I cannot agree with these hypothesis of a conscious universe. The space between galaxies alone makes this a non starter.

Despite the similarities between the cosmic web and brain structure
View attachment 97579

Each point of light making up the cosmic web is a galaxy. The distance between galaxies averages about a million light years. Much to far for the information required to form a consciousness to travel in a way that is meaningful.

Similarity in appearance of form is common throughout nature based on the same Natural Laws and processes.

 

[Revoltingest]

And nothing on the other side?

Something I can't read.

 

[blü 2]

Informative article on scientists theorizing and attempting to show that the universe has consciousness.

Some Scientists Believe the Universe Is Conscious

Sounds like a bad trip ... but what if it's true?

www.popularmechanics.com

That's fun to read, but it's all notably fringey.

I read Penrose's The Emperor's New Mind shortly after it came out, and I thought his idea of brain functions relying on quantum interactions was completely unsupported by evidence, even if elements of it are ever shown to be correct. And perhaps worse, I thought he failed to show that any such extras were necessary, again even if it turns out they, or analogous notions, are.

And since I think consciousness involves both awareness of the external world and self-awareness, I assume self-awareness will turn out to be some kind of system feedback, rather than a FTL link to minds in other galaxies or other gods.

So I'll wait patiently and see what credible claims may emerge from the mists in my lifetime, not least as our understanding of human brain function grows and AI gets smarter'n smarter.

 

[Audie]

Something I can't read.

Looked like fuzzy bunch o nothing to me

 

[shunyadragon]

Looked like fuzzy bunch o nothing to me

. . . an inedible.

 

[RestlessSoul]

It is not difficult to define consciousness at at all; It is far more than simply awareness. It is the interaction of the brain and the body, between others and the surrounding environment. This has been adequately explained by science despite unanswered question.

There is absolutely no evidence of a phenomenon without material substance except in your imagination.

My imagination is a phenomenon without material substance. So is yours. Your definition of consciousness, on the other hand, is absolutely without substance. The brain is not the mind, correlates notwithstanding; the former is an organ of the body which can be weighed, measured, and examined objectively, the latter is an altogether subjective phenomenon.

Physicalism has it’s limits, and reducing consciousness to electro chemical activity in the brain, is akin to reducing a work by Caravaggio to pigments on canvas; you can do it, but not without losing the qualitative experience of standing before a masterpiece and wondering.