Walling and Hicks make a direct assault on the "Everest" of scientific mysteries. The authors trace the first glimmerings of consciousness in evolution and during emergence from anesthesia. There are no formulae or equations; all the difficult concepts have been presented as allegories and pictures. Unlike many philosophical books about consciousness, they have evidence to back up their ideas. This book is also an attempt to bridge the chasm between science and religion which the authors believe to be largely unnecessary.

Consciousness

Anatomy of the SoulBy Peter T. Walling Kenneth N. Hicks

AuthorHouse

Copyright © 2009 Peter T. Walling & Kenneth N. Hicks
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4490-3440-5

Contents

Question 1. What Is Consciousness?.........................................1Question 2. What Are Dimensions And Fractals?..............................8Question 3. What Are Dynamics?.............................................17Question 4. Why do we have a brain?........................................25Question 5. How Did Consciousness Evolve?..................................31Question 6. How Do We Wake Up From Anesthesia?.............................43Question 7. Where Is Consciousness?........................................52Question 8. How Do We Sense Two Things At Once?............................60Question 9. Return to Flatland with a Honey Spoon?.........................69Question 10. How Is Consciousness Related To The Soul?.....................83Question 11. Whatever next?................................................90

Chapter One

Question 1.

What Is Consciousness?

Consciousness is the mental state we enjoy after arousal from a dreamless sleep, or those irritating periods between naps. The definitions used above are not meant to be flippant, but any attempt to describe the differences between consciousness, awareness, self-awareness and cognition, is beyond the scope of this book and could easily fill another one!

We have approached the subject of ordinary, everyday consciousness without worrying about the nuances mentioned above. The main problem with studying consciousness is that it is private. Blood pressure, pulse and temperature are measurable directly, but with consciousness, the signs are indirect, or second-hand. A popular scenario amongst the students of consciousness is the imaginary laboratory Zombie. Based upon the Voodoo Zombie of the Caribbean, but produced more hygienically than the Zombies of Haiti, the Zombie behaves like a normal person in every way except that he is not conscious of anything. The point is that it is almost impossible to distinguish LabZom from a Lab Tech using regular physiological metrics.

Instead of trying to measure consciousness directly, therefore, investigators look for correlates. These are measurable signs, specifically linked to the conscious state at the time of their collection. Neural correlates are the nerve tracts or areas of the brain which are active during consciousness. Local areas of active brain cells induce an increase in regional blood flow, the better to deliver extra oxygen and glucose, and remove carbon dioxide and heat. These active areas show up preferentially on certain scans, which then highlight the part of the brain that was active during the activity under investigation.

Access to nerve tracts is difficult, and scans are slow when it comes to understanding brain activity which may start and finish within 1/3rd of a second. We have concentrated upon the dynamics of the brain's electrical activity because measurements may be made non-invasively, and there is no significant delay in recordings. To try and make more sense of these changes, we went back to the very beginnings of nerve evolution and followed the dynamical clues up to the present day.

Regarding the big picture of consciousness study, some regard the brain parts as instruments in an orchestra; when played in harmonious synchrony, consciousness emerges, like music. The brain may be likened to a person in deep water; coordinated movements result in staying awake and in the swim, while thrashing about leads to sinking and oblivion. Some liken brain attractors to dishes that are swirling around on plate-spinners' poles. Consciousness results when sufficient spinning plates are in motion at the same time.

Is consciousness a thing, a process or an event? Who has the right to define it? At meetings on consciousness, most of the participants seem to be philosophers, followed by psychologists, neuroscientists, physicists and a handful of physicians. To keep up with the research, a student must be conversant with the hardest aspects of each discipline. I have read philosophical articles which I do not begin to understand. Some philosophers probably have trouble with some aspects of nonlinear dynamics. It would seem, therefore, that we require the skills of a, Neurophilosophicalmathematic obiologicalquantumnonlineardynamicaltheologian.

If nothing else, specialist language makes it hard for the uninitiated to understand what is going on. Here is an example from philosopher David Chalmers' excellent book, The Conscious Mind. In Search of a Fundamental Theory, writing on Strong Metaphysical Necessity:

"The two-dimensional analysis just discussed establishes that an invocation of Kripkean a posteriori necessity has no force against the argument from supervenience."

Moving to life sciences, Professor Walter Freeman, a towering figure in the dynamics of brain physiology, has this to say about the Hilbert Transform (HT):

"In summary, the HT gives analytic state variables that reveal cinematographic frames of cortical activity, with abrupt onset by phase resetting in the beta or gamma carrier wave [sup.SDx(t)], resynchronization [sup.Re(t)] of the new carrier wave [sup.[omega](t)], emergence and stabilization [sup.De(t)] of its spatial AM pattern [A.sup.2](t) then massive increase in power output [A.sup.2](t). A cluster of points in [sup.n]-space represents a brain state; a trajectory represents a state transition. The vector, [sup.[A.sup.2](t)], serves as both a state variable and an order parameter."

The quotes cited above are in no way intended to disparage the precise and economical language of these experts, but illustrate the difficulties for the man in the street who also yearns to understand how his own mind works.

And yet we all experience consciousness; we live in the answer to the problem. It is beginning to seem as though the way that neurons produce consciousness may be completely counterintuitive. The obvious answers have failed to satisfy; the low hanging fruit has gone. We may have to look in unexpected places, not because the usual answers are not well thought out, but because some of the features of the problem seem to be outside the realm of ordinary three-dimensional (3D) space and time. If the percept of the horse which you look at is not a physical object existing in physical space, it cannot be expected to have a physical location within the three pounds of pulsating neural tissue which resides between your ears. If the percept does not exist in physical space, surely, it must exist in non-physical space.

The time may have come to accept the impeccable logic of Mr. Sherlock Holmes. He addresses Watson in frustration: "You will not apply my precept," he said, shaking his head, "How often have I told you that when you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" The "improbable" truth is that consciousness must exist in non-physical space.

Our research has concentrated on brain dynamics because access to dynamics is possible easily and non-invasively through the intact skull. Dynamical processes unfold in a strange non-physical space and consciousness is so closely linked to dynamical brain changes that we believe that this is the kind of space in which consciousness must reside....