The Science and Mechanics of Free Will

[DBT]

Nothing forgotten. It doesn't support your claim. You didn't succeed with it the last time it was brought up. Sorry.

Do you not believe that QM has any effect on what the neurons do?

May do, but not in a way that makes rational decisions. You may be thinking of quantum computers.

A veto is a real thing; it is when people change their decision. I can't find any references supporting readiness potential for a veto.

I've explained what I mean by veto as a 'decision' to change a decision in the form of the normal course of information processing feeding new information into conscious activity.

 

[ryan]

Do you not believe that QM has any effect on what the neurons do?

May do, but not in a way that makes rational decisions. You may be thinking of quantum computers.

Quantum processing may be at the heart of the decision-making process.

A veto is a real thing; it is when people change their decision. I can't find any references supporting readiness potential for a veto.

I've explained what I mean by veto as a 'decision' to change a decision in the form of the normal course of information processing feeding new information into conscious activity.

Yes, you say this about the veto, but I need to see some research done on it.

 

[fromderinside]

Ryan, have you ever wondered why determinism works in macro physical theory hen there is always the small doing what it is doing?

Its because QM don't impact determination. An unstabe atom will always decay. First it is not decayed, has an energy level, then it is decayed, has a lower energy level. All that is in doubt is when. However state A always precedes state B.

Decision making process are fixed as macro-theory predicts. Nope, no weenie jumping up and becoming a genie.

 

[ryan]

Ryan, have you ever wondered why determinism works in macro physical theory hen there is always the small doing what it is doing?

Its because QM don't impact determination. An unstabe atom will always decay. First it is not decayed, has an energy level, then it is decayed, has a lower energy level. All that is in doubt is when. However state A always precedes state B.

Decision making process are fixed as macro-theory predicts. Nope, no weenie jumping up and becoming a genie.

This first part uses quantum theory to model decision-making (quantum cognition),

"Wang argues that our minds work the same way. Before we make a choice, our options are all superpositioned. Each possibility adds a whole new layer of dimensions, making the decision process even more complicated. Under conventional approaches to psychology, the process makes no sense, but under a quantum approach, Wang argues that the decision-making process suddenly becomes clear. It’s why people might make choices they know are against their own best interests.".

from https://www.inverse.com/article/6152-quantum-physics-explains-why-you-suck-at-making-decisions

A brief abstract of Wang's research is here, http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract .


This second part is a working model of quantum cognition, https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/users/mpaf/174.pdf ; especially read part 7 "Quantum processing with neurons".

 

[DBT]

May do, but not in a way that makes rational decisions. You may be thinking of quantum computers.

Quantum processing may be at the heart of the decision-making process.

We've gone into quantum microtubule scaffolding at length. Decision making is related to macro scale objects and events...to buy chocolate or vanilla ice cream, to sleep longer or get out of bed now, to buy this or that article or to save that money and so on and so forth, which is related to past experience interacting with inputs and the objects that are presented for sale or your current situation and plans. Quantum particles have no awareness of you or your needs or wants.

The claim you make does not stand up to the evidence.

Yes, you say this about the veto, but I need to see some research done on it.

Research what exactly? Some magical presence that monitors brain activity and steps in like a superhero to save you from making bad decisions? How does that work out?

 

[ryan]

Quantum processing may be at the heart of the decision-making process.

We've gone into quantum microtubule scaffolding at length. Decision making is related to macro scale objects and events...to buy chocolate or vanilla ice cream, to sleep longer or get out of bed now, to buy this or that article or to save that money and so on and so forth, which is related to past experience interacting with inputs and the objects that are presented for sale or your current situation and plans. Quantum particles have no awareness of you or your needs or wants.

The claim you make does not stand up to the evidence.

If you don't believe me, then read both parts below. The first part is only about using quantum theory to explain processes like the decision-making process, and part 2 is an actual working definition of quantum cognition.

Part 1:

Using quantum theory to model decision-making (quantum cognition),

"Wang argues that our minds work the same way. Before we make a choice, our options are all superpositioned. Each possibility adds a whole new layer of dimensions, making the decision process even more complicated. Under conventional approaches to psychology, the process makes no sense, but under a quantum approach, Wang argues that the decision-making process suddenly becomes clear. It’s why people might make choices they know are against their own best interests.". from https://www.inverse.com/article/6152-quantum-physics-explains-why-you-suck-at-making-decisions

A brief abstract of Wang's research is here, http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract .


Part 2:

Here is a working model of quantum cognition, https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/users/mpaf/174.pdf ; especially read part 7 "Quantum processing with neurons".

Yes, you say this about the veto, but I need to see some research done on it.

Research what exactly? Some magical presence that monitors brain activity and steps in like a superhero to save you from making bad decisions? How does that work out?

If nothing else make sure you read, from the third link, "Multiple entangled Posner molecules, triggering non-local quantum correlations of neuron firing rates, would provide the key mechanism for neural quantum processing."

and

"To be functionally relevant in the brain, the dynamics and quantum entanglement of the phosphorus nuclear spins must be capable of modulating the excitability and signaling of neurons—which we take as a working definition of ‘‘quantum cognition’’.".

 

[Juma]

We've gone into quantum microtubule scaffolding at length. Decision making is related to macro scale objects and events...to buy chocolate or vanilla ice cream, to sleep longer or get out of bed now, to buy this or that article or to save that money and so on and so forth, which is related to past experience interacting with inputs and the objects that are presented for sale or your current situation and plans. Quantum particles have no awareness of you or your needs or wants.

The claim you make does not stand up to the evidence.

If you don't believe me, then read both parts below. The first part is only about using quantum theory to explain processes like the decision-making process, and part 2 is an actual working definition of quantum cognition.

Part 1:

Using quantum theory to model decision-making (quantum cognition),

"Wang argues that our minds work the same way. Before we make a choice, our options are all superpositioned. Each possibility adds a whole new layer of dimensions, making the decision process even more complicated. Under conventional approaches to psychology, the process makes no sense, but under a quantum approach, Wang argues that the decision-making process suddenly becomes clear. It’s why people might make choices they know are against their own best interests.". from https://www.inverse.com/article/6152-quantum-physics-explains-why-you-suck-at-making-decisions

A brief abstract of Wang's research is here, http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract .


Part 2:

Here is a working model of quantum cognition, https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/users/mpaf/174.pdf ; especially read part 7 "Quantum processing with neurons".

Yes, you say this about the veto, but I need to see some research done on it.

Research what exactly? Some magical presence that monitors brain activity and steps in like a superhero to save you from making bad decisions? How does that work out?

If nothing else make sure you read, from the third link, "Multiple entangled Posner molecules, triggering non-local quantum correlations of neuron firing rates, would provide the key mechanism for neural quantum processing."

and

"To be functionally relevant in the brain, the dynamics and quantum entanglement of the phosphorus nuclear spins must be capable of modulating the excitability and signaling of neurons—which we take as a working definition of ‘‘quantum cognition’’.".

1) These texts you refer to are so full of if/could/would etc that really nothing is left when you remove them.

2) even if try is doesnt help your "free will".

 

[ryan]

1) These texts you refer to are so full of if/could/would etc that really nothing is left when you remove them.

Actually, quantum cognition explains the decision-making process much better than the next best theories.

2) even if try is doesnt help your "free will".

It absolutely does. It doesn't end the discussion, but it sure helps it and keeps it a possibility.

 

[Juma]

Actually, quantum cognition explains the decision-making process much better than the next best theories.

No, it doesnt. Neurons is a very low level structure, these molecules is on an even lower. The decision making we are talking on here is on a much higher level. We are talking about a few decisions per minute here. That would require the interaction of thousands of thousands of neurons.

2) even if try is doesnt help your "free will".

It absolutely does. It doesn't end the discussion, but it sure helps it and keeps it a possibility.

No it doesnt. Unless each of these molecules is a "mind". Which on the other hand would mean that mind had almost no input and thus cannot really maky any decisions.

 

[DBT]

We've gone into quantum microtubule scaffolding at length. Decision making is related to macro scale objects and events...to buy chocolate or vanilla ice cream, to sleep longer or get out of bed now, to buy this or that article or to save that money and so on and so forth, which is related to past experience interacting with inputs and the objects that are presented for sale or your current situation and plans. Quantum particles have no awareness of you or your needs or wants.

The claim you make does not stand up to the evidence.

If you don't believe me, then read both parts below. The first part is only about using quantum theory to explain processes like the decision-making process, and part 2 is an actual working definition of quantum cognition.

Part 1:

Using quantum theory to model decision-making (quantum cognition),

"Wang argues that our minds work the same way. Before we make a choice, our options are all superpositioned. Each possibility adds a whole new layer of dimensions, making the decision process even more complicated. Under conventional approaches to psychology, the process makes no sense, but under a quantum approach, Wang argues that the decision-making process suddenly becomes clear. It’s why people might make choices they know are against their own best interests.". from https://www.inverse.com/article/6152-quantum-physics-explains-why-you-suck-at-making-decisions

A brief abstract of Wang's research is here, http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract .


Part 2:

Here is a working model of quantum cognition, https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/users/mpaf/174.pdf ; especially read part 7 "Quantum processing with neurons".

Yes, you say this about the veto, but I need to see some research done on it.

Research what exactly? Some magical presence that monitors brain activity and steps in like a superhero to save you from making bad decisions? How does that work out?

If nothing else make sure you read, from the third link, "Multiple entangled Posner molecules, triggering non-local quantum correlations of neuron firing rates, would provide the key mechanism for neural quantum processing."

and

"To be functionally relevant in the brain, the dynamics and quantum entanglement of the phosphorus nuclear spins must be capable of modulating the excitability and signaling of neurons—which we take as a working definition of ‘‘quantum cognition’’.".

Neurons are virtually orders of scale above quantum particles. While microtubules are apparently a part of the scaffolding of neuronal structure, it is not quantum particles that process information, but the structure of the neuron as a whole and its connections to other neurons as a part of the function of the brain as a whole, as an information processor with senses able to detect information from the external world. Quantum particle/waves alone cannot perform that role.

It takes the whole structure of a brain, neurons, axons, dendrites, glial support cells, electrochemical activity, to process information and produce behaviour based on the brain's inputs and its architecture. A monkey brain generating monkey range of behaviours, a cat brain producing cat range of behaviours and so on.

Clutching at straws such as quantum effects at the most fundamental scale of the brain as an information processor does not help your contention at all.


The bottom line being, quantum states and whatever role they play in the architecture of the brain as a processor, these states or conditions are not subject to conscious choice, instead, it is the unchosen condition of the brain, including whatever quantum effects cells may utilise is the generator of conscious experience.

 

[ryan]

No, it doesnt. Neurons is a very low level structure, these molecules is on an even lower. The decision making we are talking on here is on a much higher level. We are talking about a few decisions per minute here. That would require the interaction of thousands of thousands of neurons.

Yes it does, "We present evidence showing how these two principles work together to provide a coherent explanation for many divergent and puzzling phenomena in psychology.".

from http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract

Or

"Quantum theory provides an alternative probabilistic framework for modelling decision making compared with classical probability theory,
and has been successfully used to address behaviour considered paradoxical or irrational from a classical point of view.".

from http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/jdmlab/papers/YearsleyJMP.pdf

It absolutely does. It doesn't end the discussion, but it sure helps it and keeps it a possibility.

No it doesnt. Unless each of these molecules is a "mind". Which on the other hand would mean that mind had almost no input and thus cannot really maky any decisions.

Read,

The crucial point about entanglement relevant to this book is that entangled systems cannot be validly decomposed and modelled as separate subsystems. This opens the door to developing quantum-like models of cognitive phenomena which are not decompositional in
nature.".

from http://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/11991/frontmatter/9781107011991_frontmatter.pdf

 

[ryan]

If you don't believe me, then read both parts below. The first part is only about using quantum theory to explain processes like the decision-making process, and part 2 is an actual working definition of quantum cognition.

Part 1:

Using quantum theory to model decision-making (quantum cognition),

"Wang argues that our minds work the same way. Before we make a choice, our options are all superpositioned. Each possibility adds a whole new layer of dimensions, making the decision process even more complicated. Under conventional approaches to psychology, the process makes no sense, but under a quantum approach, Wang argues that the decision-making process suddenly becomes clear. It’s why people might make choices they know are against their own best interests.". from https://www.inverse.com/article/6152-quantum-physics-explains-why-you-suck-at-making-decisions

A brief abstract of Wang's research is here, http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract .


Part 2:

Here is a working model of quantum cognition, https://www.kitp.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/users/mpaf/174.pdf ; especially read part 7 "Quantum processing with neurons".

Yes, you say this about the veto, but I need to see some research done on it.

Research what exactly? Some magical presence that monitors brain activity and steps in like a superhero to save you from making bad decisions? How does that work out?

If nothing else make sure you read, from the third link, "Multiple entangled Posner molecules, triggering non-local quantum correlations of neuron firing rates, would provide the key mechanism for neural quantum processing."

and

"To be functionally relevant in the brain, the dynamics and quantum entanglement of the phosphorus nuclear spins must be capable of modulating the excitability and signaling of neurons—which we take as a working definition of ‘‘quantum cognition’’.".

Neurons are virtually orders of scale above quantum particles. While microtubules are apparently a part of the scaffolding of neuronal structure, it is not quantum particles that process information, but the structure of the neuron as a whole and its connections to other neurons as a part of the function of the brain as a whole, as an information processor with senses able to detect information from the external world. Quantum particle/waves alone cannot perform that role.

It takes the whole structure of a brain, neurons, axons, dendrites, glial support cells, electrochemical activity, to process information and produce behaviour based on the brain's inputs and its architecture. A monkey brain generating monkey range of behaviours, a cat brain producing cat range of behaviours and so on.

Clutching at straws such as quantum effects at the most fundamental scale of the brain as an information processor does not help your contention at all.


The bottom line being, quantum states and whatever role they play in the architecture of the brain as a processor, these states or conditions are not subject to conscious choice, instead, it is the unchosen condition of the brain, including whatever quantum effects cells may utilise is the generator of conscious experience.

None of what I have in the post ever mentions microtubules. Please look closer at what I put if you want to understand my argument.

 

[Juma]

Yes it does, "We present evidence showing how these two principles work together to provide a coherent explanation for many divergent and puzzling phenomena in psychology.".

from http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/163.abstract

Or

"Quantum theory provides an alternative probabilistic framework for modelling decision making compared with classical probability theory,
and has been successfully used to address behaviour considered paradoxical or irrational from a classical point of view.".

from http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/jdmlab/papers/YearsleyJMP.pdf

It absolutely does. It doesn't end the discussion, but it sure helps it and keeps it a possibility.

No it doesnt. Unless each of these molecules is a "mind". Which on the other hand would mean that mind had almost no input and thus cannot really maky any decisions.

Read,

The crucial point about entanglement relevant to this book is that entangled systems cannot be validly decomposed and modelled as separate subsystems. This opens the door to developing quantum-like models of cognitive phenomena which are not decompositional in
nature.".

from http://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/11991/frontmatter/9781107011991_frontmatter.pdf

And where does this enable free will? It doesnt.

 

[ryan]

And where does this enable free will? It doesnt.

Just remember what the basis of what free will means: the ability to have chosen otherwise. Classical systems don't allow this, but undetermined QM does.

 

[Juma]

And where does this enable free will? It doesnt.

Just remember what the basis of what free will means: the ability to have chosen otherwise. Classical systems don't allow this, but undetermined QM does.

Doesnt realize that "could have chosen otherwise" is a useless concept: priceless.

 

[ryan]

Just remember what the basis of what free will means: the ability to have chosen otherwise. Classical systems don't allow this, but undetermined QM does.

Doesnt realize that "could have chosen otherwise" is a useless concept: priceless.

With classical mechanics, a person can not choose otherwise. With undeterminable QM, there is no reason why one couldn't have chosen otherwise.

For example, could the photon have shown up at a different position on the screen: QM yes, CM no.

 

[DBT]

None of what I have in the post ever mentions microtubules. Please look closer at what I put if you want to understand my argument.

Nice dodge, focus on a single comment and ignore everything else that I said. I made the comment because you raised the role of microtubules for your 'model' of free will in the past. If there is something to be found within your articles that you feel supports your case, provide the relevant parts.

From what you've shown so far, I see nothing that supports your argument.

The proposition, even if proven - ''Multiple entangled Posner molecules, triggering non-local quantum correlations of neuron firing rates, would provide the key mechanism for neural quantum processing" - is not consciously chosen or subject to your will, therefore not an example of 'free will' or its mechanism.

 

[DBT]

Doesnt realize that "could have chosen otherwise" is a useless concept: priceless.

With classical mechanics, a person can not choose otherwise. With undeterminable QM, there is no reason why one couldn't have chosen otherwise.

For example, could the photon have shown up at a different position on the screen: QM yes, CM no.

None of these states and conditions are subject to conscious choice.

 

[Juma]

Doesnt realize that "could have chosen otherwise" is a useless concept: priceless.

With classical mechanics, a person can not choose otherwise. With undeterminable QM, there is no reason why one couldn't have chosen otherwise.

For example, could the photon have shown up at a different position on the screen: QM yes, CM no.

So fucking what? "Could have chosen otherwise" isnt a valid concept anyway. If you doesnt have better control over your decision then you havent made a decision at all, you just randomized it.

 

[ryan]

None of what I have in the post ever mentions microtubules. Please look closer at what I put if you want to understand my argument.

Nice dodge, focus on a single comment and ignore everything else that I said. I made the comment because you raised the role of microtubules for your 'model' of free will in the past. If there is something to be found within your articles that you feel supports your case, provide the relevant parts.

How can you blame me; I haven't mentioned microtubules in a long time.

From what you've shown so far, I see nothing that supports your argument.

The proposition, even if proven - ''Multiple entangled Posner molecules, triggering non-local quantum correlations of neuron firing rates, would provide the key mechanism for neural quantum processing" - is not consciously chosen or subject to your will, therefore not an example of 'free will' or its mechanism.

Quantum cognition explains the decision-making process better than prior theories. If true, a person might be able to have chosen differently.

With classical mechanics, a person can not choose otherwise. With undeterminable QM, there is no reason why one couldn't have chosen otherwise.

For example, could the photon have shown up at a different position on the screen: QM yes, CM no.

None of these states and conditions are subject to conscious choice.

That's not what all of the information I have provided indicates.