Subjective Experiences of Space and Time: Self, Sensation, and Phenomenal Time

The investigation of subjective experiences (SEs) of space and time is at the core of consciousness research. The term ‘space’ includes the subject and objects. The SE of subject, I-ness, is defined as ‘Self’. The SEs of objects, subject’s external body, and subject’s internal states such as feelings, thoughts, and so on can be investigated using the proto-experience (PE)-SE framework. The SE of time is defined as ‘phenomenal time’ (which includes past, present and future) and the SE of space as ‘phenomenal space’. The three non-experiential materialistic models are as follows: (I) The quantum-dissipation model [25] can connect the discrete neural signals to classical electromagnetic field to ‘quantum field theory and chaos theory’ for explaining memory. (II) The soliton-catalytic model [8] hypothesizes that all living processes including micro- and macro-processes can be explained by catalysis process. (III) The ‘sensation from evolution of action’ model [13] proposes that SEs are internalized during evolution. All these models can address to some extent the function of structures, such as perception. They cannot address explanatory gap. The complementary experiential PE-SE framework [37] addresses this psycho-physical gap and elucidates the SEs of space and time

Can biological quantum networks solve NP-hard problems?

There is a widespread view that the human brain is so complex that it cannot be efficiently simulated by universal Turing machines. During the last decades the question has therefore been raised whether we need to consider quantum effects to explain the imagined cognitive power of a conscious mind. This paper presents a personal view of several fields of philosophy and computational neurobiology in an attempt to suggest a realistic picture of how the brain might work as a basis for perception, consciousness and cognition. The purpose is to be able to identify and evaluate instances where quantum effects might play a significant role in cognitive processes. Not surprisingly, the conclusion is that quantum-enhanced cognition and intelligence are very unlikely to be found in biological brains. Quantum effects may certainly influence the functionality of various components and signalling pathways at the molecular level in the brain network, like ion ports, synapses, sensors, and enzymes. This might evidently influence the functionality of some nodes and perhaps even the overall intelligence of the brain network, but hardly give it any dramatically enhanced functionality. So, the conclusion is that biological quantum networks can only approximately solve small instances of NP-hard problems. On the other hand, artificial intelligence and machine learning implemented in complex dynamical systems based on genuine quantum networks can certainly be expected to show enhanced performance and quantum advantage compared with classical networks. Nevertheless, even quantum networks can only be expected to efficiently solve NP-hard problems approximately. In the end it is a question of precision - Nature is approximate.Comment: 38 page

The Hard Problem: A Quantum Approach

Contents: 1. Introduction: Philosophical Setting 2. Quantum Model of the Mind/Brain 3. Person and Self 4. Meeting Baars's Criteria for Consciousness 5. Qualia 6. Free-WillComment: 28 pages, no figures, latexed, uses math_macros.tex that can be found on Archive, this paper was submitted in 5/95 and this is a revised version full postscript available from http://theor1.lbl.gov/www/theorygroup/papers/37163rev.p

A Preliminar Evidence of Quantum Like Behavior in Measurements of Mental States

Experimental results presented in this paper supports the hypothesis on quantum-like statistical behaviour of cognitive systems (at least human beings). Our quantum-like approach gives the possibility to represent mental states by Hilbert space vectors (complex amplitudes). Such a representation induces huge reduction of information about a mental state. We realize an approach that has no direct relation with reductionist quantum models and we are not interested in statistical behavior of micro systems forming the macro system of the brain. We describe only probabilistic features of cognitive measurements. Our quantum-like approach describes statistics of measurements of cognitive systems with the aim to ascertain if cognitive systems behave as quantum-like systems where here quantum-like cognitive behavior means that cognitive systems result to be very sensitive to changes of the context with regard to the complex of the mental conditions

A macroscopic violation of no-signaling in time inequalities? How to test temporal entanglement with behavioral observables

In this paper we applied for the \ufb01rst time the no-signaling in time (NSIT) formalism discussed by Ko\ufb02er and Brukner (2013) to investigate temporal entanglement between binary human behavioral unconscious choices at t1 with binary random outcomes at t2. NSIT consists of a set of inequalities and represents mathematical conditions for macro-realism which require only two measurements in time. The analyses of three independent experiments show a strong violation of NSIT in two out of three of them, suggesting the hypothesis of a quantum-like temporal entanglement between human choices at t1 with binary random outcomes at t2. We discuss the potentialities of using NSIT to test temporal entanglement with behavioral measures