Consciousness is awareness. A subjective experience of internal and external phenomenal worlds. It defines our existence. But how and where does it exist? This is what scientists call ‘the hard problem of consciousness‘.

There is the ‘brain as a computer’ view that can account for non-conscious cognitive functions like control of our body functions and behavior. This is accomplished by many distributed mini-brain areas or what I call ‘zombie’ auto pilot modes.  In fact, my own personal view is that what we think of as the consciousness is really afterthoughts of a CEO in charge of a group of competing zombie sub brains.

However, even single celled protozoans exhibit cognitive behavior!  They can swim, find food and mates, learn and remember…all without a single brain cell or synaptic computation!

Its been experimentally demonstrated that brain activity corresponding to a stimulus often occurs after we’ve responded (seemingly consciously) to that stimulus. In other words, we think it before we think we thought it. This lends some credence to the idea that what we think of as our ‘consciousness moment’, is a epiphenomenal illusion.

The state of the art in consciousness research now lies not in the brain but within each cell! There is intelligent, organized activities accomplished by protein polymers called ‘microtubules’. They are self-assembling and combine in A-lattice patterns that match the Fibonacci series widely found in nature. This suggests large scale quantum processing! The ‘mind’ or consciousness may be a result of simultaneously analog (neural) and quantum processes in our brain running coherent excitations around 8MHZ.

It is theorized that it could only take as few as one hundred neurons, each containing 10E8 tubules, for a quantum conscious ‘moment’ to occur. However, at any given moment, 10,000 to 100,000 neurons are firing in ‘coherent sets’.

This concept of a hybrid quantum analog brain means 10E5 operations per second per neuron!!!  This is bad news for AI fans. That means potentially 10E26 operations per second!! If we were to somehow combine 1500 of the fastest supercomputers in existence today, that would only be only 10E18 calculations p/sec. That is such a huge difference that compared to the brain, our computers are just toys. Thus blowing away the idea of an ‘artificial brain’ AI for a long time to come.

But keep this in mind: according to Godel’s theorem, certain aspects of human consciousness, such as understanding, will forever be beyond the scope of ANY computational system… i.e. ‘noncomputable’.

SYNCHRONY SIDEBAR: In the human brain, neuronal synchrony i.e. gamma synchrony EEG, which is currently the best measurable correlate to consciousness, does not derive from neuronal firings. Interestingly, gamma synchrony has a frequency range of 30 to 90Hz.  Early Buddhist writings describe there being 6,460,000 ‘moments’ per day. Doing the math, this would average one ‘moment’ every 13.3 msec or a frequency of 75.19 Hz.

The hard problem is explaining how billions of neurons swapping chemicals give rise to such subjective experiences as consciousness, self-awareness, and awareness that others are conscious and self-aware; that is, not only the ability to wonder, but the ability to wonder why we wonder, and even wonder why others wonder why….”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. The “hard problem” is a good problem… the one we need to answer for a trillion trillion reasons. I think the answer is that what we perceive the world to be is merely an internal model of it, a simulation running in our brains. A simulation that assigns agency to all things – we anthropomorphize everything. In the simulation we see the outside world as it is relayed to us by our senses.

    Another big problem is that we never remember learning the model in the first place… we have no memories of learning how to remember.

  2. zebedee says:

    I too believe we create an internal model of ‘the world’ that is calibrated by our experiences. I think that when we understand something, we have a memory of a systemic pattern that can reliably be applied to data in multiple circumstances to predict/produce results – why couldnt a computer do that?
    I do like the analogy of a CEO in charge of competing sub brains – in my mind I am aware that a lot of my conscious thought is actually making judgement calls on potential ‘truths’ that are proposed by semi-independent sub-brains that are working continuously to provide possibly useful ‘ideas’. Where else would we get ‘notions’ – from reminders to do things, to inspired ideas that we have never conceived of before? Sometimes these ‘subconscious’ proposals are couched in words spoken in a voice that appears not to be our own, and if encouraged can lead to mental disorders. Like any good CEO, we need to use good management skills – co-operation can sometimes work a lot better than competition, and an overall atmosphere of positive support can work wonders…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s