28 November 2015

Notes - literary friends / quantum thinking

         You have a quiet though dreary and damp Saturday morning. Carol is talking to Gayle on the phone and Jadah is readying herself for a nap. Spooky is presently unseen. Library quiet otherwise. – Amorella

         0954 hours. It is an ancient mariner, he stoppeth one in three . By thy long grey beard and glittering eye, Now wherefore stopp’st thou me?” 

I drift to the contents of Coleridge, Melville and Hawthorne. Such great and wonderful worlds are found within. 

And Heaven have mercy on us all – Presbyterians and Pagans alike – for we are all somehow dreadfully cracked about the head, and sadly need mending. 

This leaves Hawthorne to turn the corner up – 

Happiness is a butterfly, which when pursued, is always just beyond your grasp, but which, if you will sit down quietly, may alight upon you.” 

The Romantics bound in on such a gray late November day and I am one and at peace with my old literary friends’ words.

         So it is, boy. Post. - Amorella


         This has been a relaxing mostly do-nothing day for both of you. You did watch NBC News this evening on the DVR as well as “Blindspot” (the last episode until February) and “NCIS.LA”. Individual snack-suppers for you both; you had baked beans and wieners – one of your favorites. – Amorella

         2047 hours. I was just looking at Quora and a question came up relating to the 1989 book The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds and The Laws of Physics so I checked out Wikipedia.

** **
Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness is a 1994 book by mathematical physicist Roger Penrose, and serves as a followup to his 1989 book The Emperor’s New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds and The Laws of Physics.

Penrose hypothesizes that:
Human consciousness is non-algorithmic, and thus is not capable of being modelled by a conventional Turing machine-type of digital computer.
Quantum mechanics plays an essential role in the understanding of human consciousness, specifically, he believes that microtubules within neurons support quantum superpositions.
The objective collapse of the quantum wavefunction of the microtubules is critical for consciousness.
The collapse in question is physical behaviour that is non-algorithmic and transcends the limits of computability.
The human mind has abilities that no Turing machine could possess because of this mechanism of non-computable physics.

Mathematical thought

In 1931, the mathematician and logician Kurt Gödel proved his incompleteness theorems, showing that any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete. Further to that, for any consistent formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic truths, there is an arithmetical statement that is true, but not provable in the theory. The essence of Penrose's argument is that while a formal proof system cannot, because of the theorem, prove its own incompleteness, Gödel-type results are provable by human mathematicians. He takes this disparity to mean that human mathematicians are not describable as formal proof systems and are not running an algorithm, so that the computational theory of mind is false, and computational approaches to artificial general intelligence are unfounded. (The argument was first given by Penrose in The Emperor’s New Mind (1989) and is developed further in Shadows of The Mind. An earlier version of the argument was given by J. R. Lucas in 1959. For this reason, the argument is sometimes called the Penrose-Lucas argument).

Objective reduction

Penrose's theory of Objective Reduction is a prediction of Sir Roger Penrose about the relationship between quantum mechanics and general relativity. Penrose proposes that a quantum state remains in superposition until the difference in space-time curvature reaches a significant level. This idea is inspired by quantum gravity, because it uses both the physical constants. It is an alternative to the Copenhagen interpretation, which posits that superposition fails under observation, and the many-worlds hypothesis, which states that each alternative outcome of a superposition becomes real in a separate world.

Penrose's idea is a type of objective collapse theory. In these theories the wavefunction is a physical wave, which undergoes wave function collapse as a physical process, with observers playing no special role. Penrose theorises that the wave function cannot be sustained in superposition beyond a certain energy difference between the quantum states. He gives an approximate value for this difference: a Planck mass worth of matter, which he calls the "'one-graviton' level". He then hypothesizes that this energy difference causes the wave function to collapse to a single state, with a probability based on its amplitude in the original wave function, a procedure taken from standard quantum mechanics.

Orchestrated objective reduction

When he wrote his first consciousness book, The Emperor's New Mind in 1989, Penrose lacked a detailed proposal for how such quantum processes could be implemented in the brain. Subsequently, Hameroff read The Emperor's New Mind and suggested to Penrose that certain structures within brain cells (neurons) were suitable candidate sites for quantum processing and ultimately for consciousness. The Orch-OR theory arose from the co-operation of these two scientists and was developed in Penrose's second consciousness book Shadows of the Mind (1994).

Hameroff's contribution to the theory derived from studying brain cells (neurons). His interest centred on the cytoskeleton, which provides an internal supportive structure for neurons, and particularly on the microtubules, which are the important component of the cytoskeleton. As neuroscience has progressed, the role of the cytoskeleton and microtubules has assumed greater importance. In addition to providing a supportive structure for the cell, the known functions of the microtubules include transport of molecules, including neurotransmitter molecules bound for the synapses, and control of the cell's movement, growth and shape.

Criticism

Gödelian argument and nature of human thought

Penrose's views on the human thought process are not widely accepted in scientific circles (Drew McDermott, David Chalmers and others). According to Marvin Minsky, because people can construe false ideas to be factual, the process of thinking is not limited to formal logic. Further, Al programs can also conclude that false statements are true, so error is not unique to humans. Another dissenter, Charles Seife, has said: "Penrose, the Oxford mathematician famous for his work on tiling the plane with various shapes, is one of a handful of scientists who believe that the ephemeral nature of consciousness suggests a quantum process."

In May 1995, Stanford mathematician Solomon Feferman attacked Penrose's approach on multiple grounds, including the mathematical validity of his Gödelian argument and theoretical background. In 1996, Penrose offered a consolidated reply to many of the criticisms of "Shadows".

John Searle criticises Penrose's appeal to Gödel as resting on the fallacy that all computational algorithms must be capable of mathematical description. As a counter-example, Searle cites the assignment of license plate numbers to specific vehicle identification numbers, to register a vehicle. According to Searle, no mathematical function can be used to connect a known VIN with its LPN, but the process of assignment is quite simple—namely, "first come, first served"—and can be performed entirely by a computer.

Microtubule hypothesis

Penrose and Stuart Hameroff have constructed the Orch-OR theory in which human consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules. However, in 2000, Max Tegmark calculated in an article he published in Physical Review E that the time scale of neuron firing and excitations in microtubules is slower than the decoherence time by a factor of at least 10. Tegmark's article has been widely cited by critics of the Penrose-Hameroff hypothesis. The reception of the article is summed up by this statement in his support: "Physicists outside the fray, such as IBM's John Smolin, say the calculations confirm what they had suspected all along. 'We're not working with a brain that's near absolute zero. It's reasonably unlikely that the brain evolved quantum behavior', he says."

However, in 2007, Gregory S. Engel claimed that all arguments concerning the brain being "too warm and wet" have been dispelled, as multiple "warm and wet" quantum processes have been discovered.

Selected and edited from Wikipedia – Shadows of the Mind
** **

         2123 hours. This is good stuff. I particularly love the criticism above:

** **
Gödelian argument and nature of human thought

Penrose's views on the human thought process are not widely accepted in scientific circles (Drew McDermott, David Chalmers and others). According to Marvin Minsky, because people can construe false ideas to be factual, the process of thinking is not limited to formal logic. Further, Al programs can also conclude that false statements are true, so error is not unique to humans. Another dissenter, Charles Seife, has said: "Penrose, the Oxford mathematician famous for his work on tiling the plane with various shapes, is one of a handful of scientists who believe that the ephemeral nature of consciousness suggests a quantum process."

In May 1995, Stanford mathematician Solomon Feferman attacked Penrose's approach on multiple grounds, including the mathematical validity of his Gödelian argument and theoretical background. In 1996, Penrose offered a consolidated reply to many of the criticisms of "Shadows".

John Searle criticises Penrose's appeal to Gödel as resting on the fallacy that all computational algorithms must be capable of mathematical description. As a counter-example, Searle cites the assignment of license plate numbers to specific vehicle identification numbers, to register a vehicle. According to Searle, no mathematical function can be used to connect a known VIN with its LPN, but the process of assignment is quite simple—namely, "first come, first served"—and can be performed entirely by a computer.

** **
         2131 hours. This appears reasonable.

         Your problem, orndorff, is that even though an argument can appear reasonable it may be false, as you well know. – Amorella

         2133 hours. You are right, Amorella. It is always better to doubt even when there is no shadow of one, that’s my thinking, which serves to bring up the point. The above is the stone onto which one might build a foundation only to find it crumbling a generation later. Dark humor cements the stone and allows one a smile even if she or he is wrong in her or his thinking.

         Post. - Amorella





No comments:

Post a Comment