Your brain on the edge of chaos
No news to me. I’ve always suspected that. Now, seriously:
Though much of the time it [the brain] runs in an orderly and stable way, every now and again it suddenly and unpredictably lurches into a blizzard of noise.
Neuroscientists have long suspected as much. Only recently, however, have they come up with proof that brains work this way. Now they are trying to work out why. Some believe that near-chaotic states may be crucial to memory, and could explain why some people are smarter than others.
Read whole article by the New Scientist magazine:
July 10, 2009 at 9:23 am
Hi Christine,
Thanks for pointing to this most interesting post. Like you I’m not at all shocked to to discover the brain works in such a way. The thing they are not clear on is if they have any suspicion from where this randomness originates that triggers these cascades that they speak of. It is tempting to think with such behaviour it relate to be a quantum phenomena and process. I would then not be surprised it be found that as we struggle to develop a quantum computer that nature long ago has beat us to the punch. Of course nature has had much more time and utilized random even here as part of that process. Who knows, Penrose may yet be vindicated in the end for the views for which he was so widely criticized. One thing they do state clearly here, is the brain and a computer in this aspect operates completely differently.
Best,
Phil
July 10, 2009 at 9:47 am
Hi Phil,
Oh, yes, interesting that you mention Penrose in that context. I also wonder about Prigogine’s theory of self-organization in non-equilibrium systems, specially a quantum version of it, and its possible role in the functioning of the brain. Even though I wonder how far the brain is away from equilibrium in order that Prigogine’s theory would have any possible support for such an application.
Best,
Christine
July 11, 2009 at 7:33 pm
Hi Christine,
Yes you and I are having similar thought about this. With the model that’s been presented the brain is something like a conventional computer that’s being driven between chaos and order by a random trigger. To tell you the truth when it comes to the word random in the quantum mechanical sense I’ve never thought that’s the best way to express it. The key reason of course since it also coexists with the other main aspect of the quantum being entanglement or holism. This has always suggested to me that it more relates to a state where nature is in someway cloaking knowledge rather then it not being there. It’s like a shield of some sort reality requires to avoid logical paradox.
Anyway, it’s all interesting to speculate, yet it would be even more astounding if it’s found consciousness (self awareness) is actually tied to such things originating from quantum process. It would also raise some interesting ethical issues if efforts ever succeed to develop quantum computing; not to mention the limit of reliability of such devices if with self awareness you inescapably get free will. I can see George Bush’s answer to such a delemia would be to insist the computer be waterboarded on a regular basis. Needless to say that wasn’t intended to be a joke.
Anyway Christine if nothing else this would make a good plot line for a science fiction novel. Oh yes I forgot it’s been done countless times already with the most iconic of them all being the HAL 9000 asking Dave to stop as it’s afraid.
Best,
Phil
July 11, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Hi Phil,
I was thinking about this post and what you wrote, and I have realized that the subject of quantum processes and chaos in the brain vis-à-vis the emergence of consciousness makes a good matter for philosophers concerning the old question of free will, as you mention, but perhaps now with new ingredients to ponder about.
Best,
Christine
July 11, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Hi Christine,
Well to some degree David Albert in his book “Quantum Mechanics and Experiences” has already broached half of this question. That in as fare as it relates to free will being perhaps a requirement of some types of interpretations, with primarily the Bohmian approach being the one most suggestive of this(now you knew that was coming
). However, as this was written some 20 years ago the quantum computing aspect was not on the radar at the time, as even Feynman himself , the initial driving force in suggesting such a thing may be possible. If anyone could address this issue it would be Albert, that is if he hasn’t already done it. He is actually a philosopher of science rather than a theorist and has given all this a lot of consideration. I truly felt sorry for him when he unwittingly became a spokesperson for those charlatans producing that infamous “what the bleep” so called documentary.
Best,
Phil