[https://twitter.com/AFornito/status/1577743997149511680 Untitled] [[On Connectome and Geometric Eigenmodes of Brain Activity: The Eigenbasis of the Mind?]([On Connectome and Geometric Eigenmodes of Brain Activity: The Eigenbasis of the Mind?]([On Connectome and Geometric Eigenmodes of Brain Activity: The Eigenbasis of the Mind?]([Qualia Research Institute](https://qri.org/)blog/eigenbasis-of-the-mind))) On Connectome and Geometric Eigenmodes of Brain Activity: The Eigenbasis of the Mind?] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Integrated information theory== [[Integrated information theory - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_information_theory) Integrated information theory - Wikipedia] [[Anil Seth: Neuroscience of Consciousness & The Self - YouTube]([Anil Seth: Neuroscience of Consciousness & The Self - YouTube](https://youtu.be/_hUEqXhDbVs)) Anil Seth: Neuroscience of Consciousness & The Self - YouTube] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Global workspace theory== [[Global workspace theory - Wikipedia]([Global workspace theory - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_workspace_theory)) Global workspace theory - Wikipedia] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Adaptive resonance theory== [[Adaptive resonance theory - Wikipedia]([Adaptive resonance theory - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_resonance_theory)) Adaptive resonance theory - Wikipedia] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Topological segmentation== [[Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness]([Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness]([Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness]([Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1233119/full)))) Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness] [[ActInf GuestStream 054.1 ~ A Gómez-Emilsson & C Percy ~ Electromagnetic Field Topology Consciousness - YouTube]([ActInf GuestStream 054.1 ~ A Gómez-Emilsson & C Percy ~ Electromagnetic Field Topology Consciousness - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhLPZaLmi2k)) ActInf GuestStream 054.1 ~ A Gómez-Emilsson & C Percy ~ Electromagnetic Field Topology Consciousness - YouTube] [[Electromagnetic Field Topology as a Solution to the Boundary Problem of Consciousness - YouTube]([Electromagnetic Field Topology as a Solution to the Boundary Problem of Consciousness - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX8b3ng37Nw)) Electromagnetic Field Topology as a Solution to the Boundary Problem of Consciousness - YouTube] [[Solving the Phenomenal Binding Problem: Topological Segmentation as the Correct Explanation Space - YouTube]([Solving the Phenomenal Binding Problem: Topological Segmentation as the Correct Explanation Space - YouTube]([Solving the Phenomenal Binding Problem: Topological Segmentation as the Correct Explanation Space - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0YID6XV-PQ))) Solving the Phenomenal Binding Problem: Topological Segmentation as the Correct Explanation Space - YouTube] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Higher-order theories of consciousness== [[Higher-order theories of consciousness - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher-order_theories_of_consciousness) Higher-order theories of consciousness - Wikipedia] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Reentry == [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753453/ Untitled] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Sensorimotor Theory== [[Sensorimotor theory of consciousness - Scholarpedia](http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Sensorimotor_theory_of_consciousness) Sensorimotor theory of consciousness - Scholarpedia] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Justin Riddle's Quantum Consciousness== [[Quantum Consciousness series - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLThyP2r9cqozvJuRYSnmz2doYm43SJWtH) Bevor Sie zu YouTube weitergehen] ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Unity== [[OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF](https://psyarxiv.com/6eqxh)))) Steps towards a minimal unifying model of consciousness: An integration of models of consciousness based on the free energy principle] [[Frontiers | An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness: Combining Integrated Information and Global Neuronal Workspace Theories With the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference Framework; Toward Solving the Hard Problem and Characterizing Agentic Causation]([Frontiers | An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness: Combining Integrated Information and Global Neuronal Workspace Theories With the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference Framework; Toward Solving the Hard Problem and Characterizing Agentic Causation]([Frontiers | An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness: Combining Integrated Information and Global Neuronal Workspace Theories With the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference Framework; Toward Solving the Hard Problem and Characterizing Agentic Causation]([Frontiers | An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness: Combining Integrated Information and Global Neuronal Workspace Theories With the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference Framework; Toward Solving the Hard Problem and Characterizing Agentic Causation](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2020.00030/full)))) Frontiers | An Integrated World Modeling Theory (IWMT) of Consciousness: Combining Integrated Information and Global Neuronal Workspace Theories With the Free Energy Principle and Active Inference Framework; Toward Solving the Hard Problem and Characterizing Agentic Causation] [[Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics - YouTube]([Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics - YouTube]([Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics - YouTube]([Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics - YouTube]([Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM9k1I3VPOg))))) Neural Field Annealing and Psychedelic Thermodynamics - YouTube] ===Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Unity -> Description in all concepts that is nonlinear, topdown=== Different models of consciousness approximate different causal relationships, structure, properties, functions of conscious systems. They have different advantages and disadvantages! I like them all together. From neural correlates of there being experience to information processing to higher order causal forces to to physically or informationally unified topological structure of neurophenomenology! [[Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness]([Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness]([Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness]([Frontiers | Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1233119/full)))) Don’t forget the boundary problem! How EM field topology can address the overlooked cousin to the binding problem for consciousness] Is consciousness reducible, approximately reducible, or irreducible? Does it even exist? No model will be a total understanding, since no consciousness and physics models are explaining everything and totally predictive. Really is so complex! Let's test under physicalism and empiricism? Some parts of the brain break down under anestesia or other unconsciousness, or do we need global breakdown of functional massage passing like in cessations under predictive coding? [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0079612322001984 Cessations of consciousness in meditation: Advancing a scientific understanding of nirodha samāpatti] We have this for IIT and GWT: [[Quanta Magazine]([Quanta Magazine](https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-a-contest-of-consciousness-theories-really-proved-20230824/)) What a Contest of Consciousness Theories Really Proved Quanta Magazine] [[Beyond Turing: A Solution to the Problem of Other Minds Using Mindmelding and Phenomenal Puzzles | Qualia Computing](https://qualiacomputing.com/2016/11/12/beyond-turing-a-solution-to-the-problem-of-other-minds-using-mindmelding-and-phenomenal-puzzles/) Beyond Turing: A Solution to the Problem of Other Minds Using Mindmelding and Phenomenal Puzzles | Qualia Computing] This still assumes nonconsious systems existing. Or that the other system suddenly didnt become conscious as we unified with it. What if nonconscious systems don't make sense from panpsychist perspective? Why is all physics by default not conscious? Can we trust our phenomenology, how linked is it mathematically to brain dynamics, or conscious physics in general? What if solipcism is actually true? Do these questions even make sense objectively, or is it all subjective philosophical play and possible confusion? We don't know! What if predictivity of models is really the only truth we can trust and everything else is arbitrary? We have to do so much testing! I like all approaches, but we know so little. What if really we need multiple of those mathametical conditions to be met for a system to posses consciousness? I don't know where to put my bayesin certainity to at all. The causal factors seem to be all over the place, from proposed theories to measurement attempts. Some tell us great stuff about how we process information. Some tell us stuff about biology. Some tell us stuff about underlying physics, classical, statistical, relativistic, quantum, some kind of unity... What if its really simple as just one brain region, lol. What if its so complex that we need to solve quantum gravity first, hah. What if both? What if we're doing something that's totally disconnected from reality, or all approaches make certain sense at the same time and we just need to unify big chunk of them? Why do we even ask this? [[The Meta-Problem of Consciousness with David Chalmers - YouTube]([The Meta-Problem of Consciousness with David Chalmers - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHTiQrrUhUA)) The Meta-Problem of Consciousness with David Chalmers - YouTube] Uncertainity! ==Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Unity -> Minimal model of physics of consciousness== ===Science -> Consciousness -> General models -> Unity -> Minimal model of physics of consciousness -> Description only in introduced language and concepts that is linear, bottomup=== Cognitive science knows we don’t construct experience as it actually is, but some apprimate representation of it, (indirect realism) we construct an internal world simulation, a generative model with all our beliefs. [[Predictive coding - Wikipedia]([Predictive coding - Wikipedia]([Predictive coding - Wikipedia]([Predictive coding - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictive_coding)))) Predictive coding - Wikipedia] Visual illusions show this the best. All of it can be analyzed using all sorts of methapors, intution or mathematics from physics and beyond. (neurophenomenology) Matrix is pretty close. Best methaphor is that we live inside a videogame engine that the brain tells itself that helps us survive. And we can do some many things with this simulation! Let’s deconstruct experience. [[File:WorldSketch.png|500px|Alt text]] What is your experience right now? That depends on lots of factors. Do you feel a stable sense of identity at all times? Do you tend to hyperfocus on a task so hard that you literally become the thing you’re focusing on? Most people feel like they’re some identity (their thoughts, conditionings, some source) behind their eyes,. This “me” source uses arrow of attention to pay attention to all sorts of objects – cats, this text, even thoughts. This “me” is the center in our experience, our actions happen from it from the inside to the outside, environmental factors and other forces happens to it from the outside. The “me” self model and “my thoughts” can be labelled as physical or beyond physics in some spiritual realm. (dualism vs monism) This me (physical part of it) lives inside some home, on top of some earth, in some universe with euclidian space with linear continuous time, in multiverses and so on. This universe is made of intuitiove ideas, less technical (things just happening and moving by their will or without their will) or more technical (classical mechanics of all sorts of things) or different ideas we have about physics (particles, fields, algorithms, information, strings,..), or out of consciousness, or combination, or something else, depending on how much you think about these topics in which direction. (physicalism vs idealism) And we assume we exist, or that there is in general some kind of existence. All of this can be played with. Normally you sit and see things around you, the beauty of nature and complexities of our social system. They’re things in your field of consciousness that move around and transform. We can make intutitive models trying to predict them, or use physics for it. As long as any mathematics used to model conscious experience resonate with someone’s experience, or can be simulated, or are connected or directly the models used in neuroscience from classical architectures to machinery from quantum field theory, they’re technically empirically valid. It becomes objective when big chunk of people resonate with the mathematics or/and when its directly empirically observed in the brain dynamics. The goal of neurophenomenology is to connect the mathematics of experience with the mathematics of the brain dynamics. Let’s build experience bottom up on top of assumptions, which can be dereified, transformed, dissolved, strenghtened, as they can be seen as bayesian priors in our cortical hiearchy, [[The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube]([The Bayesian Brain and Meditation - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg3cQXf4zSE))))))))))))))))) The Bayesian Brain and Meditation] [[OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF]([OSF](https://psyarxiv.com/zqh4b/)))))))))))))))))))) On the Varieties of Conscious Experiences: Altered Beliefs Under Psychedelics (ALBUS)] how can that be achieved I will write later. Let’s use the simplest language possible. Something exists. Some structure exists. Empty set. Let’s call it Existence = () This existence can be empty, which represents nothingness, or potentiality for anything, superposition of all possibilities. To fill this existence with something concrete, lets give it 3D space with contents that evolve in space and time. Existence = (Space*3(Contents), Time) Time can be a discrete or continuous number representing linear time. Space can have euclidian geometry, or hyperbolic geometry on DMT. We can use classical mechanics or choose to use more advanced math. In some math, space and time are inherently interlinked. In other math, spacetime doesn’t need to be fundamental at all. Contents are now an empty set, let’s fill them according to the top picture. Contents = Universe(Earth(Humanity(Self’s house(Self, Cat, Center = Self’s behind eyes, Attention(Center, Cat)))))) This is very simplified notion of encoding that inside universe (which can be some intuitive thing, physicalist notion, or field of consciousness) there is earth and on it humanity that includes self’s house which includes self, cat, center of experience located behind self’s eyes, and attention arrow currently looking from the center to the cat. Each thing can have many mathematical definitions, for example it can be modelleted as an arbitrary geometrical shape that satisfies certain properties (what our brain’s neural classifiers learned to pattern match as things in our experience), or a markov blanket. Most of these things are running in the subconscious for most people as most people don’t pay attention to modelling themselves inside a universe and just model themselves in their neighbour with no big models, such as for example: Contents = MyCountry(MyHouse(Me),BobsHouse(Bob), Friend(Me,Bob)) This person would be aware of spacetime with him in his house and bob in his house and their friendship relation. We can model decomposing all things into parts and atoms, or see things as wholes. Some functions of some systems cant be seen that much without considering the whole. In terms of meditation, we can start with: Contents = Universe(Earth(Humanity(Self’s house(Self, Center = Self’s behind eyes, Attention(Center, Self’s breath))))))