The Mathematics of Consciousness

In this video I talk about a few approaches to mathematically describe consciousness and their shortcomings. I also briefly talk about what such studies could one day be good for. You can watch the talks from the workshop that I mention (and many more!!) here:

#Science #Mathematics #Consciousness

0:00 Intro
0:48 Integrated Information Theory
4:02 The Penrose-Hameroff microtubules conjecture
5:19 Palmer's Quantum Creativity
6:26 Erra's Optimal Synchronization
7:23 Mason's Information Maximization
8:52 What is it good for?
9:39 Sponsor Message

[phillipneal]

At time 4:17 in the video I laughed for 2 minutes !! Great talk ! Thank you

[polifemo]

Her showmanship has improved a lot! Her first videos were clear and informative, but now she is entertaining as well! keep up the good work : )

[collativelearning]

I cringed when I saw the title, but was pleased when you identified how far we are from understanding this subject. One thing I like about Physicists is they are often very willing to explore and entertain ideas that fall outside of perceived mathematical rules of reality. Biology on the other hand tends to block out the idea of consciousness, some in the field openly arguing that consciousness doesn't exist or even that life doesn't exist - that we're just chemical accidents of the universe who exercise no real choice in our existence. Think about that, they are conscious of the idea that consciousness doesn't exist.

Unfortunately, I think there's also a motivational conflict from those who view consciousness as not existing. A lot of "science" is underpinned by the desire to control reality rather than actually understand it. And so there tends to be great pathological resistance to the idea that there may be aspects to reality that cannot be explained or controlled by mathematics. But the mere existence of the universe and consciousness continue to evade satisfactory mathematical explanation. The failure of AI further illustrates the point. Even the most complex and advanced computers and software in the world are no more conscious or alive than a household toaster. They're just automation, incapable of doing anything other than what the conscious minds who created them have specified in the program.

[grizcuz]

I was reading Roger Penrose's 'The Emperor's New Mind' as an undergraduate in the late 80's. A graduate neuroscience researcher noticed me reading it at lunch one day and asked what I thought of it. I replied that I didn't know enough to form an opinion one way or the other. He said that whilst he found the book interesting, he couldn't help feeling that because consciousness is weird and quantum mechanics is also weird. Then people may form a theory that they're somehow linked only because they are both weird.

[thomasbriggs]

I read Penrose’s book way back when and was struck with the lack of a rigorous concept of how quantum states in microtubules had any bearing on consciousness. It was just posited that microtubules were where it happened. It felt like a god of the gaps argument .

[badspecimen]

Sabine is a science educational superstar. I love her skepticism and skeptical humor. She is a treasure.

[GreenyX]

It's simple: Consciousness Particle. Says so in the mathematics, just need to build a $1 trillion collider to find it.

[lukelukeaurelio]

What an episode. It is so intriguing. I appreciate that you also share your opinion about the different theories. One big problem is the meaning of the word consciousness itself. How can we achieve a logical interpretation of this phenomenon?

[the_primal_instinct]

"Your Phi is small" is gonna be my new "you're dumb" insult

[ChrisHoppe-wordmeme]

There are some comments claiming the two reaction shots of Sabine as being disrespectful. I think skepticism is appropriate to unproven theory, even if I admire Penrose as the author. She gets to make the video she wants to, opinions and all! 🤯👍👍

[stuntmonkey]

A classic read on consciousness: Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid - Douglas Hofstadter. Also the follow-up, I Am a Strange Loop.

[oznerriznick]

Great video!
Seems like entropy minimization is a common feature of all of the cosmos, especially where intellect and consciousness are found.
Amazingly you can look in any direction in a 360° sphere and see beauty and organization everywhere. Near and far, from chaos comes complex ordered patterns. What force perpetuates it?
It's awsome!

[dicktaylor]

You are the most consistently interesting popular scientist on YouTube. Thankyou.

[krisspkriss]

"too warm and wiggly environment" was challenged in a paper
Quantum computation in brain microtubules: Decoherence and biological feasibility
S. Hagan, S. R. Hameroff, and J. A. Tuszyński
Phys. Rev. E 65, 061901 – Published 10 June 2002

Worth the read.

[thygrrr]

Well obviously, for the conscious brain, Φ = 42.

This answer matches the estimated calculation time very well!

[RogerValor]

I always had the feeling consciousness might rely on entropy, as some emergent virtual system. I fall into these thoughts, when I try to create proper simulations, that have emergent qualities. A game which would be fun to explore, like procedural programming, but without the feeling, that you can realize it being created, by you, and with dynamics that marvel you. It always feels like the only true way to create artificial consciousness however seems somehow like trying to reach and understand something, that is infinitely far away. Like a narrator that tells you a new and truly engaging story, which you never actually wrote, and can't even comprehend, how your simulation reached that conclusion, somehow being the only way, that you truly would believe you have finally created it.
Programming itself already shows, that creating an artificial simulation on very basic hardware can get emergent qualities, like in artificial worlds, like game of life. But finding systems that have these interesting qualities is hard enough, so I am not surprised some are trying to explain creativity as well in this realm. We have to face the possibility however, that we cannot mathematically explain consciousness, but learn very much by trying to do so, trying to explain ourselves, maybe even animate it to evolve in our collective whatever we are doing right now.

[billwesley]

As a philosopher I would also ask the reverse question, what is the nature of unconsciousness and how can we know what is unconscious?
If all energy is conscious as I suspect then all mass would be unconscious, change would be consciousnesses, stability would be unconciousness
The brain might be that mass which CONFINES individual consciousness so that we are NOT aware of the general consciousness which after all does not relate to OUR survival, there is ample evidence that the brain is primarily an EXCLUSIONARY device, it filters OUT unnecessary irrelevant awareness!
Energy connectivity would suggest connectivity of consciousness, the relative energy independence of living things with respect to the environment such as the ability to maintain needed internal states despite external threats would suggest a certain energy independence, which could also suggest independence of consciousness for living things.
Life forms might then be characterized as separated from the general consciousness rather than the only example of consciousness. Its as if in a life form a fragment of the general consciousness is walled off and isolated temporarily in each cell, including brain cells.
Each person is unaware of nearly everything in some characteristic manner which leaves behind a PERSONALITY, the totality of our deficits as individuals is who we are to others, the characteristic unconsciousness is different for every individual but unconscious quirks are usually how other individuals differentiate them.
I assume every cell is conscious and that they can share that consciousness just as when two humans interact they influence each others consciousness., the simplest assumption is that the self is a result of that kind of sharing, conversations are break downs in the isolation of energy/information

[robwatson]

Very interesting. It seems there needs to be an agreed definition of consciousness for consistent measuring. For example, it may be an incorrect assumption (made in at least two of the theories presented) that consciousness should decrease or vanish in deep sleep or under anesthesia. In Eastern thinking it is the thinking mind that disappears but not consciousness itself as there is a distinction between mind and awareness that does not exists in western psychology or neurophysiology.

[Stret]

Phi shrinking and growing sounds are the cutest. Also Sabrine reactions to tubules hypothesis is a gif waiting to be born. Also that phi doesnt decrease during sleep seems to me like the conscientiousness parts of brain are still active just performing the waste disposal task, but to mind-matrix it looks like dreaming hehe

[vdlzts.]

Super nice talk !! I like too see Physicist that care to argument their own pov's, with that much elocuence only makes it better!