Time isn't a consideration of the sensual responses sent to the brain but events are. Time is rather a consideration of the mind.
17th February, 2024: Update, to the above question and its description, here: Technical Report The Human Brain, Mind, and Consciousness: Unveiling the Enigma
The exploration of the human brain, mind, and consciousness reveals a complex relationship between the tangible and the intangible aspects of human cognition. This text distinguishes between the brain and the mind, drawing an analogy between them and computer hardware and software. While the brain serves as the physical organ associated with the body, the mind is portrayed as the realm of thoughts, emotions, and imagination. In everyday language, the terms "brain" and "mind" are often used interchangeably, despite their distinct roles. The brain acts as the biological foundation for mental activities, while the mind encompasses processes such as thought, perception, emotion, and memory. This text underscores the unique cognitive abilities of the human mind, including logical reasoning and problem-solving, enabling humans to interpret their environment and develop practical solutions. It highlights the essential role of the human mind in advancing scientific knowledge, replacing superstitions with empirical explanations for phenomena, including the causes of diseases. In short, this exploration deepens our understanding of the intricate interplay between the brain and the mind, affirming the mind's pivotal role in human cognition, scientific progress, and the evolution from superstition to knowledge.
Thank you very much Dr. Ahmed Shaker Alalaq this discussion is aimed to reinterpret known relativistic time.
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Our body needs to sleep after certain hours every day. Our eyes need to blink after almost every second . We can't hold breathing for more than 20 seconds generally.
Yes, events like sleeping, blinking, breathing, etc. do indeed invoke time.
Our eyes need rest or we sleep while the sun is providing light to the other half of the planet. The sun also seems to need rest🤔🤔 .but the sun never fails to rise again.
Well isn't brain faster then clocks? Brain is as fast as mirror in capturing objects.
Greetings
The brain works based on associated memories.
You can review an entire day's worth of memories at a glance.
Sometimes in a short dream of REM, you see many events. Or you may sleep for hours and have a very short dream.
Our perception of time is different at different ages.
The passage of time in the brain depends on the release of our neurotransmitters.
The bitter days of time pass more slowly.
Time is actually a creation of our mind, the brain senses time based on environmental changes but does not store it, because our memories are not dependent on the passage of time.
The changes in the wave function depending on each event are recorded in our minds.
Our brain is a quantum computer.
The wave function of every event has an extension in time and space. Time is a real dimension in our brains. Not an imagination...
Dear Dr. Seyed kazem Mousavi
At the outset, I would like to thank you and express my sincere appreciation for your valuable time to discuss the topic with detailed descriptions and examples.
What most reassures me in your response is "time as a creation of our minds, when the brain perceives time based on environmental changes, but does not store it, because our memories are not dependent on time." Whereas, physical science refers to 'environmental change' as events, and I explain events as invoking time.
Moreover, your description assures me that "memory works in the brain, and the description of small dreams." I understand it as a state of consciousness characterized by sensory, cognitive and emotional events during sleep when the dreamer loses control over the activation of content, visual images and memories. An action potential initiates "neurotransmitter release" in less than a millisecond.
Furthermore you describe, "Depending on 'each event' the changes in the wave function are recorded in our minds." This is consistent with my consensus that events invoke time.
Finally to your description, every event wave function has an extension in time and space. "Time is a real dimension in our brain." However, I have reasons to differ with this description, as I understand it, every wave function event occurs within an extension of time and space. Whereas the extension of time and space, the wave function is different in character with the event. Since time in mathematics is a mathematical parameter.
Overall, my statement expresses gratitude for discussing time perception and agrees with the response's viewpoint that time is a creation of the mind, perceived through environmental changes, without being stored in memory, and concludes that this specific description aligns entirely with my perspective.
Rumani Dey
The biological interpretation of time and the metaphorical interpretation of rest and the sun's cycles:
The description of the discussion focuses on a biological interpretation of time, while your response initially provides a metaphorical interpretation of rest and the sun's rising and setting, which offers a philosophical perspective on the cyclical nature of time.
Rumani Dey
Well isn't brain faster then clocks?
Although the brain processes sensory information incredibly well, the concept of time perception is more complex. The previous discussion highlighted that time is a mental construct based on events, not just speed of emotional response. Brain motion in processing sensory input does not negate the mind's role in organizing events into a temporal structure. It is about how the mind interprets and contextualizes these rapid sensory inputs in relation to events and experiences.
First thing, nothing is complex.
Second, thoughts happen to you. Sensory inputs like sight vary from sound inputs. Brain processes both. We perceive it in a timespan which we think is instantaneous. But you know when we are dreaming also mind is processing based on our emotional condition. Here consciousness comes into picture. Philosophy is a rational viewpoint derived out of experience, etc.
Rumani Dey
You are asking me, what is biology? :)
However, biology is a branch of science that deals with living organisms and their processes, its fields include botany, physiology, zoology, medicine, microbiology, molecular biology, etc.
None of us are identical. We are all different. We don't get viral fever like covid pneumonia. But medicine for fever is same for all blood groups and chromosomes. This is a statistical medical science where placebo effect works .
Rumani Dey
Your statement, "Statistical interpretation of life is medical science" is not scientifically valid. It oversimplifies a complex relationship and misunderstands the nature of medical science.
Rumani Dey Let us be specific and relevant to the original post.
Biology and time . What is biology ? Plants, animals, humans. Time and life? Clocks and life . You are asking me to relate my watch to my heartbeat. And then you call it complex process cause there are chemical reactions and bombastic scientific terms which some long paragraphs which you need to memorize and not understand.
Rumani Dey
This talk, "Biological Interpretations of Time:" presents an intriguing perspective on our understanding of time in the context of biology. This suggests that time perception is not entirely determined by sensory information received by the brain but is, in fact, a product of how the mind processes and interprets events.
The relevant points in this explanation are,
1. Sensory feedback, these are sensory inputs that our brain receives from the external world, including information about events, changes and processes in our environment.
2. Brain The brain, as the central processing unit, plays an important role in organizing and representing temporal information based on sensory inputs. It helps us to sequence events and understand their duration
3. Mind, the mind, here distinguished from the brain, represents the subjective and conscious side of our experience. It includes thinking, perception and interpretation. In this context, the mind is seen as an entity that interprets and perceives the temporal aspects of phenomena.
This perspective recognizes that while sensory input and neural processes are fundamental to time perception, the experience of time is also shaped by higher-level cognitive processes and conscious awareness. This suggests that our perception of time is not only a direct result of sensory data but is influenced by how events are subjectively understood and integrated by the mind.
It is important to note that this perspective contributes to a broader discussion of the complex interplay between biology and cognition in shaping our understanding of time. While this may not represent the only perspective on the subject, it highlights the dynamic and subjective nature of time perception in the context of biology.
Nobody has provided a single equation of photosynthesis yet in this discussion. Which book shall I read now? Nobody replied when I asked the chemical equations or reaction of paracetamol. I don't understand. There is a periodic table, i don't like to memorize. Knowledge is not money that we lose. What is the use of asking questions?
The rose blooms in the morning with the sun. I understand this much only about biology and time.
The dead body will never grow old. It only decomposes irrespective of age of the person.
Dr. R. Poznansky
I thank you for your response to my discussion post stated above, as I see your answer begins with, "The brain has experiential time, not relative time..."
So I summarized following points 1 and 2, which I understood from your answer.
1. Experiential time: How time is perceived and experienced by humans is closely related to our daily lives, is the way we measure time with clocks. And this can be interpreted by biological interpretation of time.
2. Relativistic time: Being a separate and distinct concept from experimental or fundamental time, cannot be interpreted directly by biological interpretation of time, nor can it be measured by clocks in the same way as experimental time or fundamental time is measured. Relativistic time is not experimental time or fundamental time,
So can I accept the above two consequences from the descriptions of your answer?
I thank you.
Humour !!
It's late ...
It's high time we do right.
Stop believing in death, and stop taking things for granted...
I believe that biological time is the time of different biological processes
Trying to prove each other wrong is not science. It must be language or literature. I don't understand literature.
Our mind can calculate cause we all have basic learning of numbers and money since childhood. Can the bird count ? Yes it can count it's eggs. We learn numbers, memorize addition but the bird knows it.
A day and night cycle is 24 hours.
But depending on the season, the creatures of the earth use the seasons to suit their lifestyles. So, in their way, they are interpreting time to do what comes naturally.
They may be hibernating, singing in the dawn chorus or, in the autumn, harvesting the fruits of summer to save for their winter food rations.
Interpreting time as their ancestors always did.
Dr. Mary C R Wilson
Thanks for your reply.
However, time is not the consideration of sensory responses sent to the brain but events are the consideration of the brain and the mind is the consideration of thought, whereas mind and brain are not substitutes.
Most animals on Earth respond to seasonal events due to their genetic predisposition.
Although animals and machines cannot think or reason like humans when learning causality through trial and error, non-human animals cannot fully understand the mental processes or processes of acquiring knowledge through thought, experience, and the senses.
For these reasons, obviously the discussion is specifically related to the human brain and mind, events and time.
@Soumendra Nath Thakur
Hope you found answers to your queries through this discussion. Use the answers in your academic or experimental research work. Good luck.
Physiologically, the time of living organisms is imposed by the reactions composing their metabolic activations (i.e. biochemical steps ) as responses to either external or internal triggers. This provides the necessary fragmentation of a continuous flow (sand in the hour glass or water in the clepsydra) to be measured. The biochemical reaction modifies somehow the state of the living structure during a certain time window in which the reactivity to another trigger will be affected.
I could not suggest more simple definition.
OK with you (RP) but the link with spatial and temporal scales is satisfied with the "ici & maintenant" possibly provided by the exemple of place unit
"as long as they are active, the answer to the question of space is confounded with being now.
It would take to much long to develop this here, and for me in an acceptable globish.
Somehow, time is a sequence of possibly superposed specific time windows
spent in a certain metabolic time.
.... i did not want to elaborate more in details. I am presently working on writing in french... more suitable to guide my thoughts while I try to express them. Sorry,
DR. R. Poznansky
The phrase 'time is a consideration of mind' is opinionated and therefore does not explain the biological explanation of time blurring across spatial scales, but expressing abstractions.
Rather, sensory responses are relevant to the brain. Physical explanations of time do not and cannot interfere with biological explanations. Such a biological interpretation is governed by biological institutions.
Well, Dr. R. Poznansky
I can certainly explain what written discussion means.
The biological interpretation of time underscores the contrast between the physical aspects of the brain and the abstract nature of the mind in relation to the concept of time. In this perspective, time is seen as distinct from the immediate sensory responses processed by the brain. Instead, it is regarded as a mental construct, shaped by the mind's intricate processes.
The physicality of the brain is grounded in its role as a complex organ that rapidly processes sensory inputs from the external world. It acts as a sort of "receiver" for sensory information, constantly taking in data about the environment. This aspect of the brain's function is firmly rooted in the tangible, physical realm.
In contrast, the mind is depicted as an abstract and non-physical entity responsible for interpreting and organizing the events processed by the brain into a coherent temporal framework. It doesn't rely solely on sensory input speed but rather engages in a more intricate, abstract process. This interpretation implies that the mind, being abstract, plays a pivotal role in shaping our perception of time, highlighting the complex interplay between the physical brain and the abstract mind in our understanding of temporal concepts.
Greetings
Time is a collection of memories of the mind.
A memoir is like a compressed pulse spike current. (wave function changes in quantum mechanics)
The brain constantly calls up the memory and compares the new pulses with the stored pulses.
Sometimes time passes quickly because this process activates the reward and error system and releases happy hormones.
Self-awareness itself and time are interdependent.
Self-awareness is basically our understanding of space and time.
Why do we not notice the passage of time in sleep?
Why do we not notice the passage of time during anesthesia?
The intracellular biological clock depends on variable metabolism.
As children, we had a different understanding of time.
Do not consume sugar, sucrose, alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, or theine for a month. The passage of time will change for you.
Your sleep will be deeper, faster and more enjoyable.
one question?
If we consider a creator for the universe that is independent of time, both in the past and in the future...does creation require planning and design or the passage of time?
I see God as a kid with a destructive hand. The creator learns every moment. And we are better than the creator because we invent machines which can work better than us and faster than us. So, is the matter with the creator. The creator creates us but we are faster and better than the creator. If creator is independent of time, still it is learning. Now the concept of creator being omnipresent is bit confusing to me currently
Mind is always learning. Once we learn that cube of 5 is 125, it stays with us. Languages stay with us as well. Now regarding what items I had for lunch on the year 2013's August 11, my mind doesn't remember that event. Why?
“…I can certainly explain what written discussion means.
The biological interpretation of time underscores the contrast between the physical aspects of the brain and the abstract nature of the mind in relation to the concept of time. In this perspective, time is seen as distinct from the immediate sensory responses processed by the brain. Instead, it is regarded as a mental construct, shaped by the mind's intricate processes.…”
- to state that above it is necessary before scientifically to define the main terms/notions, here what are “time”, “brain”, “mind” [correspondingly what is “mental construct” and for what reason and by what way some “mental constructs can be/are “shaped by the mind's intricate processes”]
All these notions cannot be scientifically defined in mainstream science [and so aren’t defined in the thread] because of that in the mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics and biology, all really fundamental phenomena/notions, first of all in this case “Matter”, “Consciousness”, “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, “Information”, are fundamentally completely transcendent/uncertain/irrational.
The fundamental phenomena/notions above can be, and are, really scientifically defined only in framework of the philosophical 2007 Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception, recent version of the basic paper see
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363645560_The_Information_as_Absolute_-_2022_ed
https://arxiv.org/abs/1004.3712
- including in the conception it is explained what are “Matter”; “Consciousness” {and so what is the “ Consciousness” version “consciousness on Earth”]; and “Life” [including what is “brain”, more see the SS&VT functional model of consciousness in https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329539892_The_Information_as_Absolute_conception_the_consciousness]
More see the linked papers, here only briefly:
- “Time” is absolutely objectively existent phenomenon [“Logos” set element] which is absolutely obligatorily actualized, as that every change happens absolutely obligatorily in a non-zero interval of/in the unique universal “time dimension”;
- the informational systems/versions of “Consciousness”, including “consciousness on Earth” and her version “homo-two sapiens consciousness”, are fundamentally non-material systems, including all living beings consciousnesses use the beings practically material organisms, including bodies and brains, only as a stable residence, power supply, and some auxiliary functional modules [say, brain is used as “hard disk” in long term memory mode of consciousness operation, not only, of course – see the links], while the main processes in consciousnesses proceed in non-material modules in consciousnesses space, and outside Matter’s space;
- at consciousness operation most of data processing happens “sub-consciously”, and only results of processing are downloaded/analyzed in the “mind mode” of the operation [what in mainstream is called “mind”] – like that happens in a computer, where only results of sometimes long and complex processing are downloaded on monitor;
- and, returning to the thread question – what is “time” see above, including, again, it exists absolutely objectively independently on any/everything, including independently on any interpretation of any “mind”, and on – there exist or no some minds at all, though.
SS posts in the thread https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_time11/8 are relevant to this thread question; to read at least last SS post in . https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_extraterrestrial_aliens_really_exists/157would be useful as well.
Cheers
Cite
2 Recommendations
Rumani Dey
Dayananda Sagar Institutions
What if , our mind cannot store any event as memory or harddisk? What if I call everything l remember to be kind of learning which I do remember cause some emotion was linked to the event. I am bad at memorizing or slow learner. What if , our brain does not store information? What if, our mind or soul ,which is consciousness is interpreting everything cause i remember a proverb by someone i can't recollect as, if you do things in a certain manner(some optimistic quality) , knowledge from the universe to our minds.
Cite
2 Recommendations
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
Events invoke time:
Dr. R. Poznansky
Yes indeed, my discussion post, by default, favours the relevant part in your comment, "I am suggesting that biological experiential time is a functional structure compatible with pan-experiential materialism."
Let me rephrase your statement this way, "a functional structure compatible with pan-experiential materialism" is called 'event', which invokes 'biological experiential time'.
Whereas, my discussion post suggests that events trigger sensory responses in the brain, as such, 'events invoke time' (as mentioned at www.researchgate.net/publication/372944912_Events_invoke_time).
Alternatively, the above statement could be presented as, 'effective functional structure,' as events, consistent with pan-experiential materialism, is what you call, "biological empirical time".
Events indeed invoke time, and so, my discussion post do not disagree with your concluding suggestion.
Cite
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
Biological Interpretation of time:
Sergey Shevchenko
I reply to your above comment that my discussion above actually described the post as a "biological interpretation of time": and physical 'events' and 'time', are being interpreted in biological terms such as 'sensual responses,' 'brain' and 'mind.' However, it is clear that the distinct uses and meanings of these biological terms are considered according to basic college level biology education. Therefore, no more unnecessary complications are invited to decide the original question as in the post.
Cite
1 Recommendation
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
R. Poznansky
My post considers biological interpretation of time, so let us remain within this domain than imposing relativity in biological interpretation.
However, if you insist me for the physical interpretation of time, then I will invite you to read this research paper, Preprint Relativistic effects on phaseshift in frequencies invalidate...
The reference for your insistance in final form, and I won't invite further discussion of physical interpretation of time in this biological interpretation of time discussion.
Cite
1 Recommendation
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
R. Poznansky
Your impugned Note: "In biology, the mind does not exist." And so your note is based on surmise, hence rejected.
Moreover, FYI, mentioned below is the a common definition of mind in biology. "The mind is often understood as a faculty that manifests itself in mental phenomena like sensation, perception, thinking, reasoning, memory, belief, desire, emotion and motivation. Mind or mentality is usually contrasted with body, matter or physicality."
We may conclude here.
Cite
1 Recommendation
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
"Mind or mentality is usually 'contrasted' with body, matter or physicality."
Cite
1 Recommendation
Rumani Dey
Dayananda Sagar Institutions
@R. Poznansky,
If you can see, feel experience something, it carries some science in it so biological interpretation of time must exist as well. If you can imagine something, it exists. Please don't discourage innovative attempts...
Cite
1 Recommendation
Seyed kazem Mousavi
Shahrekord Science and Technology Park
Mind, consciousness, brain, will, psyche, all and all do not exist without time.
As a result, time is a creation of the mind, it depends on the biological activity of the brain, and it originates from our psyche. Will and self-awareness, create time.
After and before, zero and one are our existential logic.
In all human ideologies, God is involved in time like a man, because the God that man creates is an image of himself.
With this valuable insight from Soumendra Nath Thakur, time takes on a new meaning.
For study (out of discussion):
The only religions in which God is independent of time and place are Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Quraan: Ar_Rum: "The whole matter rests with Allah before and after "
Or Fussilat_9: "˹Ask ˹them, O Prophet˺, “How can you disbelieve in the One Who created the earth in two Days? And how can you set up equals with Him? That is the Lord of all worlds."
Due to the complexity of the Arabic language, the word "yum" and time here has dozens of meanings.
Cite
4 Recommendations
Sergey Shevchenko
Institute of Physics of the National Academy of Science of Ukraine
Dear Soumendra Nath Thakur,
- to
“……Biological Interpretation of time:
Sergey Shevchenko I reply to your above comment that my discussion above actually described the post as a "biological interpretation of time": and physical 'events' and 'time', are being interpreted in biological terms such as 'sensual responses,' 'brain' and 'mind.' However, it is clear that the distinct uses and meanings of these biological terms are considered according to basic college level biology education. Therefore, no more unnecessary complications are invited to decide the original question as in the post….”
- again, see the SS post on page 5: to do something really scientific in science, including biology, it is necessary before to understand on essential level – what the phenomena/objects/events/processes that are elaborated/described/analyzed are, and so what corresponding terms/notions mean. Including, again, in this case what are “biology” that is science that studies Life, and so what is “Life”, “time”, “senses” and 'sensual responses”, “brain”, “mind”, etc.
- and , if we say about really science, the understanding should be more than if is considered according to basic college level biology education – and in mainstream biology at all, though, which, since again – all really fundamental phenomena/notions in the mainstream sciences, including biology, are fundamentally transcendent/uncertain/irrational, really has practically only transcendent knowledge that is written in some basic “subconscious”, i.e. outside the “conscious” “mind mode” consciousness operation mode, fixed consciousness functional modules “instincts”.
So, say, when a mainstream biologist says that humans “think”, “interpret”, “feel”, etc., in this case he really differ from even bacteria, which also obtain information at “feeling” by “senses”, analyzes it, i.e. thinks/interprets, etc. only in that a bacterium doesn’t know words “think”, “interpret”, “feel”, etc., however do all that since knows that instinctively – as, again, most of humans, including biologists.
Etc. - again, really scientific knowledge is possible only basing on the SS&VT “The Information as Absolute” conception, the links see SS post on page 5; and the SS posts are intended for those readers who really want to work in science well more than instinctively.
Cheers
Cite
1 Recommendation
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
Sergey Shevchenko Your repeat answer, to the discussion of biological Interpretation of time, contradicts The definition of mind:
The mind is often understood as a faculty that manifests itself in mental phenomena like sensation, perception, thinking, reasoning, memory, belief, desire, emotion and motivation. Mind or mentality is usually contrasted with body, matter or physicality.
The mind or psyche is usually the opposite with body, matter or physicality.
So there is no valid reason, so that I cannot accept your version on the post topic.
Cite
1 Recommendation
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
Seyed kazem Mousavi
I see your comprehensive statement and I thank you for the same.
However, I think two simple and solid foundations answer the biological explanation of time:
(1) Definition of mind:
It states, the mind is often understood as a faculty that manifests itself in mental phenomena such as sensation, perception, thinking, reasoning, memory, belief, desire, emotion, and motivation. Mind or mentality is usually contrasted with body, matter or physicality.
Mind or psyche is generally the opposite of body, matter or physicality.
(2) Events invoke time:
This means that events are prerequisites for the emergence of time. Time arises from events but cannot cause events.
Cite
2 Recommendations
Seyed kazem Mousavi
Shahrekord Science and Technology Park
Dear Soumendra Nath Thakur
Thank you for your kindness and attention
If you take a picture of an event with an open aperture, you will see a blurry and wave-like image.
Is there time in the photo?
Now that I am talking to you, the entire life of Enishin is over. He is both alive and dead, he is and he is not...
The only thing that matters in biological time is the present time.
Is there a present tense?
Or is it gone before we feel it?
Yours sincerely,
Cite
4 Recommendations
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
Dear Mr. R. Poznansky
Here is my reply to your last response 'Dualism is dead a long time.....'Technical Report The Human Brain, Mind, and Consciousness: Unveiling the Enigma
The exploration of the human brain, mind, and consciousness reveals a complex relationship between the tangible and the intangible aspects of human cognition. This text distinguishes between the brain and the mind, drawing an analogy between them and computer hardware and software. While the brain serves as the physical organ associated with the body, the mind is portrayed as the realm of thoughts, emotions, and imagination. In everyday language, the terms "brain" and "mind" are often used interchangeably, despite their distinct roles. The brain acts as the biological foundation for mental activities, while the mind encompasses processes such as thought, perception, emotion, and memory. This text underscores the unique cognitive abilities of the human mind, including logical reasoning and problem-solving, enabling humans to interpret their environment and develop practical solutions. It highlights the essential role of the human mind in advancing scientific knowledge, replacing superstitions with empirical explanations for phenomena, including the causes of diseases. In short, this exploration deepens our understanding of the intricate interplay between the brain and the mind, affirming the mind's pivotal role in human cognition, scientific progress, and the evolution from superstition to knowledge.Cite
2 Recommendations
Djaafar Zemali
El-Oued University
I believe that there is an internal biological clock in the body called the “sleep clock” or “internal biological clock,” which controls the cycles of sleep and wakefulness.
Cite
1 Recommendation
Christian G. Wolf
Independent Researcher
The scientifically both unprecedented as well as unexpected (even by myself!) derivation and proof of physical reality of a - the - quantum of time to be „just“ 1/6961 iSpaceSecond (in new iSpace-IQ unit system, able to do away with all human artefacts whatsoever) has changed the way we are able to physically perceive time once and for all:
Preprint Hubble constant H0 is derived from Newtonian gravitational c...
Preprint iSpace - Quantization of Time in iSpace-IQ Unit-System by 1/...
Conference Paper iSpace - Exact Symbolic Equations for Important Physical Con...
Or should have changed - as such is a very slow yet steady widening path of growing recognition among the by now much too conservative physical mainstream, mainly buried under the load of all their own as of now invented (mostly unphysical and only pseudo continuum based) math, while iSpace is able to show the beautiful first order multiplicative simplicity of constants of nature - and with this all of physics.
Cite
Jerzy Zbigniew Achimowicz
Warsaw Medical Academy
Simple experiment which everyone can do:
Look at the watch which secendns arm moves smootly
then concentrate on it and ask it politely :
plese slow down and stop for a while.
It will finally stop for a second which mean that you had stopped your biological time,
And your electric clock for sure was going at the same rate exectly in synchrony with the time crystal clock.
Cite
3 Recommendations
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Tagore's Electronic Lab.
Dear Mr. Jerzy Zbigniew Achimowicz,
Thank you for your response. I appreciate your input regarding the experiment involving a clock and its movement. However, I'd like to point out that your focus on a physical experiment with a clock doesn't directly address the biological interpretation of time, which was the topic of our discussion.
In my analysis, I highlighted that while the experiment demonstrates manipulation of the clock's movement, it doesn't directly address how humans perceive and interpret time on a biological level. Time perception in biological organisms, particularly humans, involves intricate neural processes and psychological factors that extend beyond the simple movement of clock hands.
It's essential to delve deeper into the cognitive and physiological mechanisms underlying our perception of time in a biological context to gain a comprehensive understanding. Therefore, your response doesn't seem to fully address the question about the biological interpretation of time.
While clocks provide a standardized and measurable scale of time, the concept of time isn't solely based on the movement of clock hands; it's more about the timing of external events. The movement of clock hands represents a consistent progression of time to correlate with other events, but these events may not occur at uniform changes.
Scientifically, time is a fundamental dimension that governs the sequence and duration of events in the universe. Clocks serve as calibrated instruments to measure time objectively, but the perception and measurement of time through clocks are relative to specific reference points or events in the natural world.
In summary, while clocks offer a uniform scale of time, external events to which we relate time may not always occur at regular intervals or in sync with the clock. The interpretation of time involves both objective measurements and subjective perceptions, highlighting the complexity of understanding time in a biological context.
For further exploration into the intricate workings of the human brain, mind, and consciousness, I invite you to read my research paper titled "The Human Brain, Mind, and Consciousness: Unveiling the Enigma," available at the following URL: Technical Report The Human Brain, Mind, and Consciousness: Unveiling the Enigma
Best Regards,
Soumendra Nath Thakur
Cite
2 Recommendations
Similar questions and discussions
WHAT IS THE MYSTERIOUS STUFF OF INFORMATION? A Short but Clear Definition
Discussion
3003 replies
- Raphael Neelamkavil
WHAT IS THE MYSTERIOUS STUFF OF INFORMATION?
Raphael Neelamkavil, Ph.D., Dr. phil.
Here I give a short description of a forthcoming book, titled: Cosmic Causality Code and Artificial Intelligence: Analytic Philosophy of Physics, Mind, and Virtual Worlds.
§1. Our Search: What Is the Mysterious Stuff of Information?: The most direct interpretations of the concept of information in both informatics and in the philosophy of informatics are, generally, either (1) that “information is nothing more than matter and energy themselves”, or (2) that “information is something mysterious, undefinable, and unidentifiable, but surprisingly it is different from matter and energy themselves”.
But if rightly not matter and energy, and if it is not anything mysteriously vacuous (and hence not existent like matter-energy, or pure matter, or pure energy), then how to explain ‘information’ in an all-inclusive and satisfying manner? Including only the humanly reached information does not suffice for this purpose. Nor can we limit ourselves to information outside of our brain-and-language context. Both the types need necessarily to be included in the definition and explanation.
§2. Our Search: What, in Fact, Can Exist?: First of all, what exist physically are matter and energy (I mean carrier wavicles of energy) themselves. In that case, information is not observable or quasi-observable like the things we see or like some of the “unobservables” which get proved later as quasi-observable. This is clearly because there are no separate energy wavicles that may be termed information particles / wavicles, say, “informatons”. I am subjectively sure that the time is not distant for a new mystery-monger theory of informatons will appear.
§3. Our Search: A Tentative General Definition: Secondly, since the above is the case with humanity at various apparently mysterious theoretical occasions, it is important to de-mystify information and find out what information is. ‘Information’ is a term to represent a causal group-effect of some matter-energy conglomerations or pure energy conglomerations, all of which (of each unit of information or units of information in each case) are in some way under relatively closely conglomerated motion, and together work out for a causal effect or effects on other matter-energy conglomerations or energy conglomerations.
§4. Our Search: In What Sense is Information Causal?: Thirdly, the causal effect being transferred is what we name a unit or units of information. Hence, in this roundabout sense, information too is causal. There may have been and may appear many claiming that information is something mysteriously different from matter-energy. Some of them have the intention of mystify consciousness in terms of information, or create a sort of soul out of immaterial and mysterious information conglomerations, and then create also an information-soul-ology. I believe that they will eventually fail.
§5. Our Search: Examples for Mystification: According to some theologians (whose namies avoid mentioning in order to avoid embarrassment) and New Age informaticians, God is the almighty totality of information, and human, animal, and vegetative souls are finite totalities of the same. Information for them is able to transmit itself without the medium of existent matter, energy, or matter-energy. Thus, their purpose would be served well! But such theories seem to have disappeared after the retirement of some of these theologians because there are not many takers for their theological stance. If they had not theologized on it, some in the scientific community would have lapped up such theories.
Hence, be sure that new, more sophisticated, and more radical ones will appear, because there will be more and more of others who do not want to directly put forth a theological agenda, and instead, would want to use the “mystery”-aspect of information as an instrument to create a cosmology or quantum cosmology in which the primary stuff of the cosmos is information and all matter and energy are just its expressions. Some concrete examples are the theories that (1) gravitation is not any effect carried by some wavicles (call them gravitons), but instead just a “vacuum effect”, (2) gravitation is another effect of electromagnetism that is different from its normal effects, etc.
§6. Why Such a Trend?: In my opinion, one reason for this trend is the false interpretation of causality by quantum physics and its manner of mystifying non-causality and statistical causality by use of spatialization and reification of mathematical concepts and effects as physical without any attempt to delimitation. There can be other reasons too.
§7. Our Attempt: All-Inclusive Definition of Information: Finally, my attempt above has been to take up a more general meaning of the notion ‘information’. For example, many speak of “units of information in informatics”, “information of types like in AI, internet, etc., that are stored in the internet in various repositories like the Cloud”, “information as the background ether of the universe (strangely and miraculously!)”, “loss of all information in the black hole”, “the quantum-cosmological re-cycling of information in the many worlds that get created (like mushrooms!) without any cause and without any matter-energy supply from anywhere, but merely by a (miraculously quantum-cosmological vacuum effect (!?)”, etc. We have been able to delve beyond the merely apparent in these notions.
Add to this list now also the humanly bound meanings of the notion of ‘information’ that we always know of. The human aspect of it is the conglomeration of various sorts of brain-level and language-level concatenations of universal notions (in the form of notions in the brain and nouns, verbs, etc. in language) with various other language-level and brain-level aspects which too have their origin in the brain.
In other words, these concatenations are the brain-level and language-level concatenative reflections of conglomerations of universals (which I call “ways of being of processes”) of existent physical processes (outside of us and inside us), which have their mental reflections as conceptual concatenations in brains and conceptual concatenations in language (which is always symbolic). Thus, by including this human brain-level and language-level aspect, we have a more general spectrum of the concept of information.
In view of this general sense of the term ‘information’, we need to broaden the definition of the source/s of information as something beyond the human use of the term that qualifies it as a symbolic instrument in language, and extend its source/s always to some causal conglomeration-effect that is already being carried out out-there in the physical world, in a manner that is not a mere construct of human minds without any amount of correspondence with the reality outside - here, considering also the stuff of the consciousness as something physically existent. That is, the causal source-aspect of anything happening as mental constructs (CUs and DUs) is a matter to be considered always as real beyond the CUs, DUs, and their concatenations. These out-there aspect consists of the Extension-Change-wise effects in existent physical processes, involving always and in each case OUs and their conglomerations.
§8. (1) Final Definitions: ‘Information’ in artificial intelligence is the “denotative” (see “denotative universals” below) name for any causally conglomerative effect in machine-coded matter-energy as the transfer agent of the said effects, and such effect is transferred in the manner of Extension-Change-wise (see below: always in finitely extended existence, always every part of the existent causing finite impacts inwards and outwards) existence and process by energy wavicles and/or matter-energy via machine-coded energy paths. The denotative name is formulated by means of connotation and denotation by minds and by machines together.
Information in biological mindsis the denotative name for any causally conglomerative effect in brain-type matter-energy and is transferred in the Extension-Change manner by brain-type matter-energy and/or energy wavicles. The denotative name here is formulated by means of connotation and denotation (see below) by minds and by symbolic-linguistic activities together.
Mind, in biologically coded information-based processes, is not the biological information alone or separately, but it is the very process in the brain and in the related body parts.
§9. (2) Summary: I summarize the present work now, beginning with a two-part thesis statement:
(a) Universal Causalityis the relation within every physically existent process and every part of it, by reason of which each of it has an Existence in which every non-vacuously extended (in Extension) part of each of it exerts a finite impact (in Change) on a finite number of other existents that are external and/or internal to the exerting part. (b) Machine coding and biological consciousness are non-interconvertible, because the space-time virtual information in both is non-interconvertible due to the non-interconvertibility of their information supports / carriers that are Categorially in Extension-Change-wise existence, i.e., in Universal Causality.
Do artificial and biological intelligences (AI, BI) converge and attain the same nature? Roger Penrose held so initially; Ray Kurzweil criticized it. Aeons of biological causation are not codified or codifiable by computer. Nor are virtual quantum worlds and modal worlds without physical properties to be taken as existent out there. According to the demands of existence, existents must be Extended and in Change. Hence, I develop a causal metaphysics, grounding AI and BI: Extension-Change-wise active-stable existence, equivalent to Universal Causality (Parts 2, 3).
Mathematical objects (numbers, points, … structures), other pure and natural characteristics, etc. yielding natural-coding information are ontological universals (OU) (generalities of natural kinds: qualities may be used as quantities) pertaining to processes. They do not exist like physical things. Connotative universals (CU) are vague conceptual reflections of OU, and exist as forms in minds. Words and terms are their formulations in discourse / language – called denotative universals (DU), based on CU and OU.
The mathematical objects of informatic coding (binaries, ternaries) are “as-if existent” OUs in symbolic CU and DU representation. Information-carriers exist, are non-vacuous, are extended, have parts, and are in the Category of Extension. Parts of existents move, make impact on others, and are in the Category of Change. Extension-Change-wise existence is Universal Causality, and is measured in CU-DU as space-time. Other qualities of existents are derivatives, pertain to existent processes, and hence, are real, not existents.
Properties are conglomerations of OUs. For example, glass has malleability, which is a property. Properties, as far as they are in consciousness, are as CUs’ concatenations, and in language they are as DUs’ concatenations. AI’s property-attributions are information, which in themselves are virtual constructs. The existent carriers of information are left aside in their concept. Scientists and philosophers misconceive them. AI and BI information networks are virtual, do not exist outside the conglomerations of their carriers, i.e., energy wavicles that exist in connection with matter, with which they are interconvertible.
Matter-energy evolution in AI and BI are of different classes. AI and BI are not in space-time, but in Extension-Change-level energy wavicles in physical and biological processes. Space-time do not exist, are absolute virtuals, and are epistemic and cognitive projections. Physical and biological causations are in Extension-Change, hence not interconvertible.
From the viewpoint of the purpose of creating an adequate theory of experience and information, for me the present work is a starting point to Universal-Causally investigate the primacy of mental and brain acts different from but foundational to thoughts and reasoning.
§10.(3) The Context of the Present Work: The reason why I wrote this little book deserves mention. Decades ago, Norbert Wiener said (See Chapter 1, Part 1) that information is nether matter nor energy but something else. What would have been his motive while positing information as such a mysterious mode of existence? I was surprised at this claim, because it would give rise to all kinds of sciences and philosophies of non-existent virtual stuff considered to arise from existent stuff or from nowhere!
In fact, such are what we experience in the various theories of quantum, quantum-cosmological, counterfactually possible, informatic, and other sorts of multiverses other than the probably existent multiverse that the infinite-content cosmos could be.
I searched for books and articles that deal with the stuff of information. I found hundreds of books and thousands of articles in the philosophical, ethical, informatically manipulation-oriented, mathematical, and on other aspects of the problem, but none on the question of information, as to whether information exists, etc. This surprised me further and this seemed to be a sign of scientocracy and technocracy.
I wanted to write a book that is a bit ferocious about the lack of works on the problem, given the fact that informatics is today much more wanted by all than physics, mathematics, biology, philosophy, etc., and of course the social sciences and human sciences.
For example, take the series to which belong the first two of the three books: (1) Harry Halpin e Alexandre Monnin, eds. [2014], Philosophical Engineering: Towards a Philosophy of the Web; (2) Patrick Allo, ed., Putting Information First: Luciano Floridi and the Philosophy of Information –both from Chichester: Wiley Blackwell; and (3) John von Neumann [1966], Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
These works do not treat of the fundamental question we have dealt with, and none of the other works that I have examined deals with it fundamentally – even the works by the best of informatics philosophers like Luciano Floridi. My intention in this work has not been making a good summary of the best works in the field and submitting some new connections or improvements, rather than offering something new.
Hence, I decided to develop a metaphysics of information and virtual worlds, which would be a fitting reply to Norbert Wiener, Saul Kripke, David Lewis, Jaakko Hintikka, and a few hundred other famous philosophers (let alone specialists in informatics, physics, cosmology, etc.), without turning the book into a thick volume full of quotes and evaluations related to the many authors on the topic.
Moreover, I have had experience of teaching and research in the philosophy of physics, analytic philosophy, phenomenology, process metaphysics, and in attempts to solve philosophical problems related to unobservables, possible worlds, multiverse, and cosmic vacuum energy that allegedly adds up to zero value and is still capable of creating an infinite number of worlds. Hence, I extended the metaphysics behind these realities that I have constructed (a new metaphysics) and developed it into the question of physically artificial and biological information, intelligence, etc.
The present work is a short metaphysical theory inherent in existents and non-existents, which will be useful not only for experts, but also for students, and well-educated and interested laypersons. What I have created in the present work is a new metaphysics of existent and non-existent objects.
Is there a reasonable alternative to the theory of the expanding universe?
Question
9156 answers
- Oscar Chavoya-Aceves
We know that our star, the Sun loses about 10^-14 of its mass per year as a result of electromagnetic radiation and particle emission. That reduction in mass should show up as a decreasing gravitational red shift. Same thing should happen to entire galaxies. But isn't it true that the galaxies we observe that are farther from Earth are also the younger we see (because light has taken millions of years more to come to us) and, as a consequence the more massive when we consider entire galaxies? (Because we cannot possibly see them as they are, but as they were millions of years ago.) Shouldn't we expect, correspondingly that the gravitational red shift of an observed galaxy will increase with its distance to Earth?
DOES CONSCIOUSNESS EXIST, OR IS IT LIKE INFORMATION? A Very Short Text for Discussion
Discussion
668 replies
- Raphael Neelamkavil
DOES CONSCIOUSNESS EXIST, OR IS IT LIKE INFORMATION? A Very Short Text for Discussion
Raphael Neelamkavil,
Ph. D. (Quantum Causality), Dr. phil. (Gravitational Coalescence Cosmology)
Non-causally Non-existent Consciousness?: (1) If consciousness is the totality of whatever happens mostly within the brain and thus causes impacts within and outward the brain, and if any part of consciousness is considered as non-causal, that part must be non-physical and non-existent for Categorial reasons based on the exhaustive implications of To Be (Extension and Change). If this “part” has some impact on other parts, then it must further be shown to be capable of causal and/or non-causal action on causally physical existents. This is what turns theories of non-causality in mind / consciousness into a fiction or false reasoning. The brain receives energy-inputs from phenomena, and has also energy-type activities and energy-type outputs. The totality of such energy-activities happens in the brain. It is not the same as the brain. Why not term the totality of such activites as consciousness? This is not the same as the specific “consciousness-of” being referred to when I refer to something to which my awareness tends. Any specific awareness or the totality of awarenesses is not consciousness, because awareness is awareness-of (consciousness-of), and consciousness as such is a totality of activities in the brain. It is not merely cognitive; it includes many other activities. Nor is consciousness merely a cognitive affair. Many other activities are contained in it; and all these activities together are not the brain. The brain has parts which do not belong to the consciousness per se.
Now, if one insists that consciousness is the same as information and that both are mutually interchangeable or one is part of the other, the following questions arise: (1) If they are the same, would one say that information is in fact in consciousness? (2) When AI transmits information, when we have various sorts of information other than that by way of AI, etc., are we in any manner receiving consciousness in place of information? If one says only that they are at least of the same nature and are not the same, then they have to be differentiated and at the same time connected to each other. But it is accepted by all that information is also in consciousness, and not vice versa. How then is this possible, if they are of the same nature and status?
Is the quantum entanglment the origin of our consciousness ?
Discussion
33 replies
- Jerzy Zbigniew Achimowicz
I got inspired by the lecture of Deepak Chopra, Jack Tuszynski et.al about the importance of quantum entaglment for understanding of consciousness.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tcf-011424-finding-better-worldview-deepak-chopra-md-official--w2pfc/
And then I had found the paper by George Rajna
https://vixra.org/pdf/1712.0129v1.pdf
What could be proof of consciousness?
Question
3513 answers
- Wilfried Musterle
Naseer Bhat asked "What is consciousness? What is its nature and origin?" We do not know. We can speculate about nature and origin but for what should this be good? I think there is a necessitiy in data processing which forced the evolutionary process to create this phenomenon. I am sure anticipation, association and social interaction are part in this process. May be the analyssis of wet brains will bring some light in this question, but we should follow this question step by step in bottom up manner asking what an organism needs to process the environmental and inner data. To decide if there is consciousness we need a significant prove method. This would be a much harder problem then creating a consciousness automata.
If every neuron in a human was accurately simulated in a computer, would it result in human consciousness?
Question
2533 answers
- Kirk MacGregor
Why or why not?
Related Publications
Brain and mind: Aaron's DNA: Biology and the bible
Article
- M. Spitzer
Creativity in Nature and in the Mind: Novelty in Biology and in the Biologist's Brain
Article
- Henri Atlan
The Mind and the Brain: A Multi-Aspect Interpretation. By Jack H. Ornstein. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 1972. Pp. ix, 174. Guilders 27.50 paper
Article
- James Ford
The Mind and the Brain: A Multi-Aspect Interpretation. By OrnsteinJack H.. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 1972. Pp. ix, 174. Guilders 27.50 paper. - Volume 15 Issue 3 - James Ford
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.
Join ResearchGate to find the people and research you need to help your work
- 25+ million members
- 160+ million publication pages
- 2.3+ billion citations
or
- Join for free
- LoginEmail Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login
PasswordForgot password?
Keep me logged inor
Continue with Google
Welcome back! Please log in.
Email · HintTip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login
PasswordForgot password?
Keep me logged in
or
Continue with Google
No account? Sign up
- Badges
- Science topic