Search FQXi


If you have an idea for a blog post or a new forum thread, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org, with a summary of the topic and its source (e.g., an academic paper, conference talk, external blog post or news item).
Contests Home


Previous Contests

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Ulla Mattfolk: on 3/15/11 at 6:29am UTC, wrote Jonathan, Thanks. It is nice to know who has added what to Wikipedia :) I...

Jonathan Dickau: on 3/15/11 at 3:10am UTC, wrote Quite enjoyable Ulla, There was a lot to like, and in places where you...

Ulla Mattfolk: on 3/13/11 at 16:23pm UTC, wrote I just want to add a link about free will that in a splendid way highlights...

Ulla Mattfolk: on 3/11/11 at 15:27pm UTC, wrote More about the free will. In TGD, Matti say: State function reduction is...

Ulla Mattfolk: on 3/9/11 at 13:57pm UTC, wrote Peter, Thanks for your words. I already have quite a high rank:) I really...

Peter Jackson: on 3/8/11 at 18:49pm UTC, wrote Ulla I quite agree, yours is the very best essay here, with mention of...

Ulla Mattfolk: on 3/5/11 at 18:01pm UTC, wrote Quote. In the play between coherence and decoherence, how does the physical...

Ulla Mattfolk: on 3/5/11 at 16:38pm UTC, wrote Thanks,anonymous. I know my essay is dense. Still it is very surficial....


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Thomas Ray: "" ... finds a causal rationale ... One can rationalize anything, Peter;..." in The Quantum Pet Store:...

Steve Agnew: "It is true that the QM duality does make for a rather confusing description..." in Black Holes Do Not Exist,...

Steve Agnew: "It is truly amazing that you say these things. "Sound energy does not..." in Black Holes Do Not Exist,...

Steve Agnew: "I am just going by the numbers that I read in the vast majority of the very..." in The Quantum Pet Store:...

Steve Agnew: "Electrons scattered from a thread will behave either ballistically or..." in Pilot Wave Hydrodynamics

Pentcho Valev: "Fatal Acceleration in Einstein's Special Relativity ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS..." in Ripping Apart Einstein


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Life's Quantum Crystal Ball
Does the ability to predict the future—perhaps with quantum help—define the fundamental difference between living and inanimate matter?

The Quantum Truth Seeker
Watching particles fly through an interferometer might help to unveil higher-order weirdness behind quantum theory.

Quantifying Occam
Is the simplest answer always the best? Connecting Medieval monks to computational complexity, using the branch of mathematics known as category theory.

Heart of Darkness
An intrepid physicist attempts to climb into the core of black hole.

Why Quantum?
Entropy could explain why nature chose to play by quantum rules.


FQXi FORUM
October 24, 2014

CATEGORY: FQXi Essay Contest - Is Reality Digital or Analog? [back]
TOPIC: The Body-Mind Problem As a Play Between Coherence and Decoherence by Ulla Marianne Mattfolk [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Feb. 17, 2011 @ 08:28 GMT
Essay Abstract

Living matter results from mixed states of quantum and classical physics; the mind and the body. The life as a function from this depends on a digital state function, and the Schrödinger cat is ‘dead and alive’ at the same time. There is no total wave collapse, only partial with interference/superposition. In contrast to non-living systems, they don’t appear to optimize anything, but is intermediate, and reactive. Life uses noise or dissipation as a tool to create stability and coherence, through formation of decoherence and negentropic states. But life is indeed quantal entanglement, resonance and superposition, with also noise as perceptions from the surroundings, to keep up the quantal states. To be a living matter made of ordinary atoms and molecules the decoherence is needed, and thence we have two different selves, one that we might call the decoherent singular I, and one that we usually call 'the wise man', or 'the magnetic body' in TGD; that is one classic and one quantal self. The longstanding problems of stress, homeostasis and sleep would also get a reasonable understanding. Perceptions are also both classic, through bodily sensations and senses mostly, including thinking, and quantal in form of cognition, awareness, intention, qualia, and also OBE and paranormal events belonging to experiencies of our quantal self, the magnetic body. Paranormal events would then partly be explained in a simple way.

Author Bio

Ulla Mattfolk, MSc, Turku Akademy, Finland. Biologist, main interests in Chinese medicine, selfregeneration, reflexology, electromedicine and quantum biology. Studied physics on my own and in discussions with Matti Pitkänen mainly, Jerry Decker etc. so I am an amateur. The emphasis is laid on the biology, which is a real physical system. Pitkänens work suits biology very well,and it is interpreted in comparision with other physicists theories. This interpretation fits the selfregenerative capacity and the body-mind function very well. This can give way to a new understanding of living matter and its physical charachters.

Download Essay PDF File




Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 19, 2011 @ 03:51 GMT
Greetings Ulla,

I find your essay intriguing, so I have downloaded it for a thorough reading. It is likely you will find some common ground with my essay here. I also mix physics questons with cognitive explorations.

I greatly respect Matti and have had some thoughtful and productive interaction with him. I also note that you cite Jill Bolte Taylor's book, and I do also. In fact, I can report the great pleasure of having received a personal response to my e-mail from her, just this morning.

So we will probably have some interesting things to discuss, once I have read your essay from top to bottom.

Good Luck to you!

Regards,

Jonathan J. Dickau

report post as inappropriate


Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Feb. 19, 2011 @ 12:09 GMT
As Matti is controversial I have tried to have many links, so the controversy should not be so hard to accept. There are many famous scientists with about the same iseas, as Vitiello, which is a CERN physicist.

Mattis p-adic hierarchy is maybe most controversial of all, but still it gives a very nice solution to the hierarchy problem. I am not competent to valuate its correctness, but there are another essay here from Robert Paster dealing with this problem.

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/815

Matti is not alone with the thoughts of an hierarchy pf the Planck scales either.

http://www.galaxyzooforum.org/index.php?topic=272147.
0

The nature of living matter lies in its plasticity, complexity and reactiveness. It has an expanding - reduction (induction-deduction) of mass and energy, also seen in the redox-potentials and the creation of negentropy. This is the secret of why life is carbon-based too. Carbon is the only element that has 8 'configurations' (an octonion).

Theory of Carbon Signaling. Negentropy vs Entropy - Emergence of Self Propagated Biological Systems. Radoslav Sabev Bozov 650-154, WSEAS conference, February 23, 2011.

http://www.wseas.us/conferences/2011/cambridge/Cambridg
eProgram2.doc

I have discussed much with Radoslav.

It is interesting that even physicists begin to see clues for the Higgs boson in graphene.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44994

The plasticity is seen as instance in the brain. That is why we see mostly complexity and decoherence there, and learning and change. We must look twice to also see the coherence and quantum physics, explained by Huping Hu among others. This lies at the roots of what consciousness is. If we can accept this model of consciousness, much of the confuseness in theoretical physics of today is 'collapsed'.

I see forward to your questions.

Ulla Mattfolk.

report post as inappropriate

Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Feb. 20, 2011 @ 16:46 GMT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aj4Fo
zCSg8g

Partionic numbers. This video tells about l-adic math, revealing hidden periodic patterns depending on primes in our number system. These patterns are algebraic, what is most important to notice. Life lies in the intersection of reals and p-adic numbers as an island of rational/algebraic 'living' structure, says TGD.

With aid of the acidity you can zoom into the number tree pattern, like getting increasing resolution of a simple pattern,as with a fractal tree.

report post as inappropriate


Philip Gibbs wrote on Feb. 23, 2011 @ 16:46 GMT
Ulla, it is good to see you in the contest, good luck.

report post as inappropriate

Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Feb. 23, 2011 @ 20:00 GMT
Thanks.

I have no previous experience of this, and as biologist I must see me as an amateur in the contest.

Still I think my essay is the best :)

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Feb. 27, 2011 @ 23:07 GMT
Ulla can you say a few words about decoherence, how it arises in a deterministic clasic formalism supported by a foundation of quantum probabilities?

What physical limitation leads to decoherence of a non deterministic type?

In the play between coherence and decoherence, how does the physical decoherence controbute to the concept of biological Self, and the competition between Free Will and Destiny in decision makling?

Your essay is very good, but with very much packed into a small space.

report post as inappropriate

Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Mar. 5, 2011 @ 16:38 GMT
Thanks,anonymous.

I know my essay is dense. Still it is very surficial. The topic chosen makes it hard to write something nonsensical with so few words. I tried to incorporate some of the most essential questions to show the logical thinking behind.

Decoherence has been the major obstacle for a quantal approach on living matter. This from an interpretation in pure classical thinking...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Mar. 5, 2011 @ 18:01 GMT
Quote. In the play between coherence and decoherence, how does the physical decoherence controbute to the concept of biological Self, and the competition between Free Will and Destiny in decision makling?

This is a question I have thought much of. It is a very difficult one, especially free will and destiny. The Self is easier, so I start with it.

All matter is built of protons and...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Mar. 8, 2011 @ 18:49 GMT
Ulla

I quite agree, yours is the very best essay here, with mention of living organisms, which is very important. I've tended to forget that after slogging through all these mathematical essays. A well deserved top score coming your way. I particularly liked your straight to the point; "From what is spacetime emergent? Which bricks are used? What are the bricks of life? Can they be created?"

As a fellow amateur (well we both deal with much science, as do most humans I suppose!) and an Architect I tread that route straight to reality by necessity. I agree we are intermingled superposed energy waves, and of course created by the billion every nanosecond, and by us in propagation!

I hope you'll read my essay, (and score it!) It's very different in most ways, but deriving and falsifying a real solution with just logic. How are your visualisation skills? Most brains can't handle 3 dynamic variables at once, then compare them from different observer frames (states of motion). About 1 in 5 can, and I think you may be one - but don't try to read it too fast!

And see if you can spot the (lensed outline) toroid black hole in the ESO HH34 photo, which the ESO missed!!

Bravo

Hold on tight for the boost!

Peter

report post as inappropriate


Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Mar. 9, 2011 @ 13:57 GMT
Peter,

Thanks for your words. I already have quite a high rank:)

I really want to make things as straight as they ever can be. This complexity would otherwise be just a mess :)

There are about 100 different theories in quantum physics, someone told me, and I have no reason to doubt that? This only tells me that they have no clue themselves. Look at the mess LHC creates :)

So why can we not look at a real construction of Life and Physics? Living matter has stories to tell us. As instance today I read about the Carbon atom, it has % dimensions, 4 material and one time. So there are one dimension unknown, maybe a pair of time - quantum world? This would also explain the bosonic properties of Carbon (a quasiparticle)?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK6522/

Phy
sical laws also clearly tells that brain is both quantal and classic. Matter cannot exist without entanglement, and chemical orbital reactions is a kind of entanglement?

I shall read your essay, thank you. I think my brain has some capacity to handle with dimensions, but not so many at a time. I have a very visual way of working mostly.

Kindly

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate


Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Mar. 11, 2011 @ 15:27 GMT
More about the free will.

In TGD, Matti say: State function reduction is the obvious starting point when one tries to understand free will.

The basic question that make the solvation of free will hard, is the Schrödinger equations. In my essay we saw that they are perhaps wrongly interpreted, and can be replaced by the double slit experiment interference? There is no either, but all...

view entire post


report post as inappropriate


Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk wrote on Mar. 13, 2011 @ 16:23 GMT
I just want to add a link about free will that in a splendid way highlights my point.

http://brainblogger.com/2011/03/13/willpower-and-the-unconsc
ious-on-automatic-pilot/

"I came to see my conscious self as being the size of a person navigating on the high seas. There was me taking wind, currents, and sea-worthiness into account, and there was the vast ocean and atmosphere offering up enough detectable patterns that I could navigate toward a destination."

Splendid as seen in the Self against entropy :) I thinkeveryone recognizes themselves.

+ priming of self and goals.

Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2010). Goals, Attention, and (Un)Consciousness Annual Review of Psychology, 61 (1), 467-490 DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100445

report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Mar. 15, 2011 @ 03:10 GMT
Quite enjoyable Ulla,

There was a lot to like, and in places where you went out on a limb you took pains to show that you knew about the other side of things..

This ultimately strengthens your case. I don't need to agree on every point to say you did a fine job. I loved a lot of what you had to say, and I'll probably cite this paper - some time soon.

I note that I have recently done some revisions to Quantum decoherence on Wikipedia, which you use a reference. A reader of my essay went there and said it was incomprehensible. I thought it was a great technical article already, but it had been flagged as too technical. So I added a little content. Hopefully more will understand.

All the Best,

Jonathan

report post as inappropriate

Author Ulla Marianne Mattfolk replied on Mar. 15, 2011 @ 06:29 GMT
Jonathan,

Thanks. It is nice to know who has added what to Wikipedia :) I must confess I was surpriced to find it there so clearly said.

It is indeed very hard to take all sides along in such a short essay, and I tried to show on the obvious things, that everyone could agree on.

Good luck to you.

Ulla.

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.