Consciousness Does Not Compute (and Never Will), Says Korean Scientist

<3

I agree.

That's the most sane scientific summary I've read in a long time, probably forever.

Thanks for sharing!

I object.

Blessings
~ND

Full paper:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu...mp;rep=rep1&type=pdf

Very cool, and I completely agree. I think that rather than computers replacing us, they will remain dependent on us for consciousness but in return support us (growing our food, provide shelter, entertainment etc.), just like we are dependent on plants for our consciousness and we in turn support them (CO2, seed disperal, fertilizers etc.).

Very interesting. It seems legit to me, from my background in CS. It is important to note that this only applies to quantum interactions, as the author says (section 7).

Disclaimer: I’m neither a physicist nor a mathematician, so take what I say with a grain of salt!

Although I like his hypothesis and agree with the suggested conclusion that consciousness does not arise from physical processes, I don’t think there’s anything very unique here.

First of all, I think there are lots of physical phenomena that are not computable. (The n-body problem is a simple example.) Being unable to precisely describe a physical process with mathematics doesn’t mean the process isn’t physical – it just means the process can’t be described with mathematics.

Secondly, I have yet to hear a satisfying definition of consciousness, so there’s no way of knowing what the author even means by “consciousness”. His “proof” that human consciousness cannot be computed is dependent on his definition of consciousness.

When it comes to consciousness, I’d much rather hear what a philosopher or a poet or an artist has to say rather than a biologist, physicist, or mathematician.

This author is making a HUGE leap when he generalizes quantum-scale phenomena to consciousness. As far as I know, there is very little compelling evidence that quantum mechanics is involved with our phenomenological experience of consciousness (Roger Penrose disagrees with me on this, but whatever).

The definition of consciousness used her is extremely vague, the author only makes reference to 'self awareness,' but even that is a load term. Are we talking about having a defined identity? Are we talking about the experience of being separate from the universe? Are we talking about simple self referential information processing? I'm not a physicist, so the answer may be buried in all that notation, but I missed it.

Blessings
~ND

I feel the same.



Imo, just because you were able to mathematically represent a 'conscious moment' within a 'certain situation' doesn't necessarily mean that that represents consciousness in it's entirety. Why did it have to be a 'certain situation' in order for mathematics to be made? Why not at any given moment under any circumstances. I just think this falls short.

But im no physicist or scientist, so don't take what I say too seriously. Just thoughts.

I mainly disagree with this:

The way I see it, the brain is a computing device, so the above statement is a priori wrong.

Secondly, the article is sloppy in its expressions. It equates mathematical representability to computability, which I disagree with. As Gibran and others already pointed out, even mathematical problems without closed-form solutions can have numerically approximated solutions to whatever precision computer capacity allows. That's the beauty of computing: A simple algorithm can calculate a result that otherwise transcends closed-form symbolic expression. min(x,y), for example, is easy to construct as a coded function but impossible(?) to construct as a mathematical symbolic function of x and y.

I'm just gonna shoot straight on my opinion, just an opinion, but is not the brain the best quantum computer ever evolved? Or created? Able to feel? react with chemicals and feelings? Even shoot electronic pulses through it? Sometimes a part activates that triggers another part without any interactions, Its a hard thing to figure out.. Iv seen some docs on how this happens and its very interesting..