I parse "panprotopsychist" as : all + before + mind. But "proto" could also mean "earliest or most primitive form". If so, are you proposing some element of reality that is even more fundamental than Energy & Natural Laws? — Gnomon

What I mean by panprotopsychism is that fundamental matter is not conscious, but percept constituents that compose consciousness are material and form at very basic levels of emergence, the quantum scale of molecular interactions with EM radiation. Biomolecules interact with light to form integrated energy fields complex enough to produce all of the image and feel percepts we experience insofar as they arise from the brain and body.

Infrared radiation is plentiful in the body and this portion of the spectrum might be broadened by accelerating electric currents which fluctuating ion concentrations around membranes modulate and sustain. So the ion channel anatomy of neurons and additional cells suggests that many percepts may be closely related to heat and consequent vibrational properties of molecules. Brain temperature generally increases while involved in the experience of awareness and decreases upon habituation (relative unconsciousness) in relation to a stimulus, so more macrolevel data seems to support this hypothesis as well.

The visual cortex is an exception, for it actually reduces in temperature during activation and corresponding focused awareness, implying that the infrared field could be somewhat shifted into an EM wavelength range less prone to cause vibrations in molecules, possibly transformed by interactions with neural structure into constituting a complex field of visible light. At least some color in the mind might be a visible light field of the brain, for the visible spectrum is much more prone to transmit through the aqueous solution of cells than infrared, so its capacity to integrate is much larger.

Anyway, that's not proven at this point, but plausible.

Although the Information in your mind is abstract, in the sense of leaving behind the material flesh, it is metaphorically concrete, in that your mental images are skeletal representations of physical objects, as perceived by the physical senses. The abstract image in your mind is like the logical bones of a physical object. They can only be "seen" by Reason, not by the eyes. — Gnomon

This is an introspective insight that fits well with my model. The image "seen" by reason could be at least partly a coherent and vibrational light/molecular field that the brain participates in generating, and the logicality or "abstract" nature of the image might be a product of neural architecture coordinated with this energy field, so that the experience "makes sense".

So, the "important aspect" of Information that you are not grasping is the Meta-Physical element. I use the term "metaphysical" in the Aristotelian sense of "non-physical" : meaning "mental", "imaginary", "psychological", "philosophical". These aspects of our world are not subject to cyclotron splitting by physicists, or laboratory dissection by biologists. They must be experienced as conscious feelings or impressions. — Gnomon

Perhaps my model of light/molecular percepts can explain these metaphysical properties in terms of matter, so that mind itself will have a triune nature, with each facet equally valid and comprehensive: the matter/energy field it is composed of, the way it is directly experienced, and its quantifiable data-form. Substance, experience and information.

What I mean by panprotopsychism is that fundamental matter is not conscious, but percept constituents that compose consciousness are material and form at very basic levels of emergence, — Enrique

Yes. Obviously "fundamental matter is not conscious" (dumb as a rock). But some foundational element of Nature must at least have the Potential for percepts & concepts. Otherwise, consciousness would have to be super-natural or alien.

Not all percepts are conscious (e.g. blind sight), but concepts (knowledge) are the essence of Consciousness. So, if anything physical is responsible for the emergence of consciousness, I'd nominate Energy (EnFormAction in my thesis). These natural forces are not just inert clay to be manipulated, but are causal, acting upon material nature to change its form. And Form (information) is the essence of Meaning to the human mind. :cool:

Consciousness :
Literally : to know with. To be aware of the world subjectively (self-knowledge) and objectively (other knowing). Humans know Quanta via physical senses & analysis, and Qualia via meta-physical reasoning & synthesis. In the Enformationism thesis, Consciousness is viewed as an emergent form of basic mathematical Information.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page12.html

This is an introspective insight that fits well with my model. The image "seen" by reason could be at least partly a coherent and vibrational light/molecular field that the brain participates in generating, and the logicality or "abstract" nature of the image might be a product of neural architecture coordinated with this energy field, so that the experience "makes sense". — Enrique

I have toyed with the notion that the human brain comes equipped with "templates", abstract images, that we apply to percepts in order to "make sense" of them. For example, the male of our species may not be aware of how they came to be aroused, but somehow certain percepts (e.g. curvy shapes) are interpreted as a possible instance of the typical female form. Those templates may not be physically embedded in the brain architecture. But neural processes seem to direct conscious attention to those hypothetical templates, which may be mathematical instead of material. :nerd:

PS__In constructed architecture there are two kinds of "structure". The kind seen by the Eye is physical objects, such as arches, beams & columns. But the kind that is seen by Reason (ideal templates for comparison to actual things) is the abstract proportions, which indicate the balanced flow of forces in the building; and which we interpret as stability and beauty.

Template : an abstract (e.g. geometric) pattern that exemplifies an ideal form, which the perceiving mind wants to reproduce, or to recognize (know again).

I have toyed with the notion that the human brain comes equipped with "templates", abstract images, that we apply to percepts in order to "make sense" of them. For example, the male of our species may not be aware of how they came to be aroused, but somehow certain percepts (e.g. curvy shapes) are interpreted as a possible instance of the typical female form. Those templates may not be physically embedded in the brain architecture. But neural processes seem to direct conscious attention to those hypothetical templates, which may be mathematical instead of material. — Gnomon

I completely support this idea, a hybrid of Platonic form, Kantian category of the understanding and Jungian archetype. Reason can be aesthetic, I infer that my female templates should be material/real and not merely mathematical/virtual. Not even curvy shapes arouse but simply the fractionally-formed thought, amazing how humans are preprogrammed in some ways. I like how you put that, the perceiving mind wants to reproduce, duplicate the ideal image. This could be related to what I think is perhaps the most basic function of cognition, to prime an organism for future experiences.

You can comment more on that or whatever else you regard as interesting, but I was thinking we've addressed the physics of consciousness issue as specifically as possible at the current stage of science, so unless anyone else at this site has something to add (which they don't seem particularly inclined to), let's move on to delusions of grandeur, a comprehensive philosophy of cognition! What do you think, @Gnomon, of the following categorical organization of cognitive function?

Universal faculties of basic intelligence:

Perception, the qualitative endowment of sensation (exteroception), qualia, proprioception and affect, a general profile which humanity shares with the majority of species, but of course our own incarnation has its modicum of uniqueness.

Structural protologicality, intuitive notions of particularized form that allow numerous species to more potently harness perceptual states for utility’s means and ends, with our genus achieving a sophisticated level as it grew more technology-oriented.

Linear protologicality grants all kinds of organisms the proficiency to execute reasoning sequences, enriched in humans by ties with evolving vocal communication into an autobiographical, self-defining introspectiveness and bent for analytically inferencing at length.

The human synesthesias that integrate these domains are no doubt complicated, but quite subjected to the self’s intentional thinking, which in turn organizes and directs disparate cognitive processes towards particular goals streamlined by behavioral traditionalizing in consort with environments. The pragmatisms of studious observation and thought as born upon by evolutionary circumstance tend to exert selection pressures on parsing and recombining physiological centers of perception, structural protologicality and linear protologicality towards three gravitational poles of functional synthesis parameterizing the spectrum of intentional thought, altogether the three main types of conception.

Categories of civilized intelligence as modern human conception:

Perception and structural protologicality conjoin in structural conception, the mentality that envisions how phenomena fit together for humanity’s elementary technological purposes.

Perceptual and linear protologicality conjoin in expressive conception, the employment of phenomenal content to convey intentions as a sort of narrative generated or embedded in the world around us. Its human form originated from out of spoken communication’s nonliteral facets, language’s multiple layers of meaning contained in imagery, metaphor, and symbolism of expression generally.

Structural and linear protologicality conjoin in iterative conception, the means by which humans inference extrapolatively and interpolatively, reasoning from particulars towards generality that is not affixed to the particulars themselves as their latticed discreteness makes its appearance in nature or otherwise manifests to the mind, a cognitive process we commonly call ‘abstraction’. This is a kind of thinking that deduces within the realm of infinite possible form, permitting us to manipulate concretions far beyond the constraints of immediate perception, a cognition-centric palpability of pure ideas and their instantiations in hypothesizing.

The most eminent human feats employ structural, expressive and iterative thinking all at once, but usually with more emphasis on one or two of these three types of conception.

Categories of formal reasoning:

Intrastructural reasoning: visual/spatial thinking
Inferential reasoning: logical/symbolic thinking

Categories of formal knowledge:

Substance as matter/energy fields
Experience as immediate awareness
Information as quantifiable data-forms

Categories of applied knowledge:

Compositional material
Evolutionary ecosystem
Psychological mind


And of course the most profound inquiry of all: why do my categories tend to come in groups of three?

RE: The Role of Light/Molecular Interactions in Producing a Perceptual Coherence Field Within the Brain
SUBTOPIC: Spectral Detection
※→ Enrique, Gnomon, Enrique, Sherlock Holmes, et al,

I find the idea of a "physics of consciousness" specious. — Sherlock Holmes

(COMMENT)

It is obvious (in most cases) when an animal is"conscious." A response is observed to stimuli of one or more of the senses. It is generally agreed that it is possible to recognize and respond to a visual stimulus within 300-500 milliseconds (msec). (Martin Tovee, How Fast is the Speed of Thought?):

"[E]vidence suggests that sensory information is processed much faster than was previously thought and that individual neurons need to be active for only twenty to thirty milliseconds to mediate perception." (© Current Biology 1994, Vol 4 No 12 pp 1125)

There are at least two or three synapses, in the various findings generally reveal a consistent synaptic latency of 10-15 ms in transmission between the various synaptic exchanges in a chain. Granted, the human body, as well as most other animal lifeforms, generates an electromagnetic field (EMF) of some sort. The presence of an EMF.

(COMMENT)

At some point, further on down the road, someone will be recognized for their achievement in stitching these various unstandardized tests, evaluations, and experimental outcomes together into a more understandable model. I have a difficult time with just keeping what little I understand straight in the relationships between how one measures the magnitude of power (current x voltage) it takes to generate "consciousness" - and what the unit of measurement "consciousness" is scaled. And, we have not even mentioned the need in understanding the synaptic noise floor, the necessary duration a stimulus needs to be before it is recognized or synaptically significant.

(COMMENT)

The concept that some fundamental physical entities have mental states is a derivative of what line of logic? How do fundamental physical entities place into memory the various changes in state? And the view that fundamental entities have a proto-conscious state is distinguished by what type of marker (a change in the pulse repetition rate), center frequency, a change in bandwidth or - what? I have a hard enough time determining how my Apple Magic Keyboard retains memory or changes that memory.


Most Respectfully,
R

The concept that some fundamental physical entities have mental states is a derivative of what line of logic? How do fundamental physical entities place into memory the various changes in state? And the view that fundamental entities have a proto-conscious state is distinguished by what type of marker (a change in the pulse repetition rate), center frequency, a change in bandwidth or - what? I have a hard enough time determining how my Apple Magic Keyboard retains memory or changes that memory. — Rocco Rosano

I'll summarize the main points of my OP as they relate to your comments.

A well-established signature of conscious awareness is oscillation in the brain's electromagnetic field (brain waves). We know these brain waves are produced by phase-locking within neural networks as well as larger scale feedback loops, together synchronizing neural tissues and brain regions into macroscopic functional units that work in tandem.

The most comprehensive account of neural anatomy indicates that electrical "coherence" currents in cellular solution, flowing through electron density contours or roughly "orbitals" of adjacent atoms in similarity to a copper wire, are what is at base being synchronized. These currents are accelerated by periodic increases in charge differential (voltage) due to fluctuations in ion concentration, and probably travel at very roughly 50% the speed of light. Coherence currents decelerate when charge is constant as it is in internodal space, so the flow of ions into and out of the cell at nodes repeatedly boosts the coherence current signal as I described in the OP, allowing it to in principle travel any distance. Fluctuations in ion concentration are the limiting factor in how fast a neuron can transmit its electrical signal, why milliseconds rather than near-instantaneous.

Electric current transmission in cellular solution is accompanied by an electromagnetic field fluctuation called an LFP (local field potential) that propagates at the speed of magnetism, which is also the speed of light. This EM field blip is probably the trigger for ion channels to open or close as a coherence current initiates past a particular location in the neuron. Each coherence current's LFP perturbation extends near-instantaneously to multiple cells, thus forming a synchronous neural grid integrated by EM field overlap. This seems to be the basic physical unit of a brain wave.

My hypothesis is that, due to the mass/energy dynamics of moderately relativistic speeds, steady acceleration of electric currents, especially in the soma (cell body) and around the synapse (perhaps also in nonneuronal cells to some extent), modifies the spectrum of EM radiation emission to somewhat longer infrared wavelengths, perhaps 1-10 micrometers. This broadened infrared spectrum interacts with and binds molecules to produce a host of varying vibration signatures (frequencies), and these are the substance of most percepts: sound, touch, taste, smell, interoception, in all their more or less subjective incarnations (insofar as they arise from the body). Interactions with molecules may shift the EM wavelength spectrum somewhat in certain tissues, perhaps into the visible range, and resultant light fields might be the cause of image perception insofar as it arises from the body. Influence of EM radiation in the brain is effectively instantaneous, as light can circle the planet nine times per second.

I have called this entire complex of coherence currents, EM field integration, EM radiation as produced by accelerating coherence currents, vibration induced by infrared radiation, and visible light fields a "coherence field", and it is almost fundamentally perceptual.

More "nonlocal", nonelectromagnetic coherence also occurs, and this is even less well-understood scientifically. Quantum coherence seems to be the form a coherence field adopts within physiological contexts, but coherence in general exceeds boundaries of the body and fluctuates faster than the speed of light. This can perhaps eventually account for more paranormal aspects of consciousness.

Memory is simply the inducement of a particular type of coherence field in conjunction with neural architecture. As @Gnomon and I were beginning to discuss, the high level of organization is what causes the form of experience to "make sense" as it unfolds in physiological time and space.

Assuming this model will be proven generally accurate, the local properties of a perceptual coherence field at any given point are an untapped area of research.

Perhaps no more complex in principle than your Apple Magic Keyboard.

This could be related to what I think is perhaps the most basic function of cognition, to prime an organism for future experiences. — Enrique

In sci-fi movies, AI robots, such as the Terminator, are represented as recognizing a target person by rapidly overlaying templates, until a match is found. That match evokes recorded data ; which, among other things, allows the AI to anticipate what the target will do next. The template includes, not just physical shape geometry, but other properties & qualities that may be relevant to an encounter with the target.

Structural protologicality, intuitive notions of particularized form . . .
Linear protologicality grants all kinds of organisms the proficiency to execute reasoning sequences, — Enrique

Again, I'm afraid you are way above my pay grade in the technical aspects of cognition. I had to look-up "protologicality" to confirm that it means what I guessed from the Latin : primitive forms of logic. Apparently, its a non-symbolic (non-conceptual) logic closer to mathematical relationships, than to formal philosophical reasoning. That may be what I was implying, when I defined Logic as "Geometry with words"*1. Seems that may be better equipped to delve deeply into your theories. :nerd:

*1. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/725311